Archive for October 8, 2008

Hannity Gets Owned (Again)

A while back we linked to a video showing how Sean Hannity, shortly after claiming that the Bush economy was a success, was utterly decimated by a Democratic economist, and then by the forces of history, as the news from the stock market started rolling in the next week. Now, it’s my pleasure to bring you a new video of him being destroyed by Barack Obama’s communication’s director (posted at the old thread). Enjoy.

Ahoy Hoy: Carnival of the Elitist Bastards (and Liberals to Boot!)

Without prejudice to the other gatherings of articles I participate in, I have to say that Dana Hunter’s “Carnival of the Elitist Bastards” is far and away the most consistently well-written, with the most consistently interesting articles. This latest edition is no exception. For those of you new to the site (and there are a lot of you, I’m happy to say!), CotEB analyzes America’s worrying flirtation with anti-intellectualism, from science denialism (creationism, anti-global warming, vaccine demagogues, etc.) to the embrace of the mediocre in our politics. As John Stewart – and many previous CotEB officers – have said, shouldn’t we want our leaders to be the best and the brightest, instead of condescendingly reminding us of our inadequacies? I for one am pretty jazzed about having a former constitutional law professor as a President (God willing, it’s starting to look that way): call me a sneering lib’rul, but I prefer that to a fellow who views the Constitution as a hurdle to be surmounted.

In addition, please take a look at the latest Carnival of the Liberals: billed by some as a partially somber affair, what with McCain’s traumatic race to the bottom and the dire straits in which we now find our economy, this assembly of posts is in fact a bright point, owing to interesting coverage of off-the-beaten-path topics, and the highlighting of some excellent writing (hey, I’m on there too!).

That One…?

I’m always excited to see a backlash against John McCain, but this minor fraças is one that I cannot join in on. McCain’s reference to Barack Obama as “that one” has been taken by some as racist, others as condescending, and still more as just… mean. I cannot agree with either. Perhaps this flows from my low expectations of McCain’s campaign, given the background racism against which this alleged “gaffe” occurred, rather than any abiding respect for the man, but the Pronoun Heard ‘Round the World just does not seem that out of step with normal campaign discourse.

Someone Explain Litigation to TexasDarlin

Yesterday, TexasDarlin wondered aloud why Obama and the DNC have attempted to stall discovery in Philip Berg’s ridiculous, nonjusticiable suit claiming that Obama is ineligible for the presidency. Hint to TexasDarlin: that’s what lawyers do. Ratchet up transaction costs to bring things to a favorable end without a big, publicized trial. One could try in vain to read something from standard litigation practice, but all you’re going to get is, “your opponent wants to cost you money,” which is not that remarkable.

Keith Olbermann Destroys Sarah Palin

Olbermann may, perhaps, be accused of being the liberal version of Sean Hannity/Bill O’Reilly. But he doesn’t go astray in this indictment of Palin’s “pallin’ around with secessionists.”

I’m Calling It; and, the Consequences of Victory (Part One)

No, not the debate, the election. John McCain needed a game-changing debate, or a strong performance to remind the American people that he stands for more than just opposing Barack Obama. He did not deliver it (transcript). Barack Obama maintained a statesmanlike presence and, except when the Republican dropped some of the more egregious misstatements of the night, declined John McCain the pleasure of combat, which had the effect of making McCain look like he was talking past Obama… and not in the good way.

McCain’s opener – that it was nice to meet Obama “in a town hall meeting” – highlighted two themes of the night. First, that this was supposed to be where McCain would shine, and second, that McCain’s nastiest attacks against Obama would come in the form of subtle digs befitting a snubbed middle schooler (the Obama campaign immediately jumped on the “that one” line). McCain did not excel on his own ground, and CNN insta-polls suggested a shockingly negative reaction to his attempts to conjure Palin’s folksy charm. Every time McCain dropped the “my friends” line – more than twenty times – voter reactions shot down. And the digs, the attempts at laugh lines at his opponent’s expense (“did we hear the size of the fine?”) fell remarkably flat. As one pundit put it, “I’m not sure this was a good night for Barack Obama, but I think it was a bad night for John McCain.”

All of this leads to one simple conclusion: barring a foreign-policy related, game-changing event… say, a terrorist attack… a major flub on Obama’s part, or a serious case of voting booth racism, the election is his to lose. Nate Silver’s optimistic projection of an Obama win (probability hovering at 90%) begins to seem credible, though as I type this I’m knocking on wood and momentarily shunning my otherwise adorable black cat.

Ahem. That does NOT mean “don’t vote.” It means “vote,” but feel good that you’re on the right side (the left!).

As the future starts to look clearer, we need to start considering what the transition to power will look like. No less, perhaps, than John Adams’ to Thomas Jefferson’s, any “regime change” in Obama’s favor come January will result in a cross-spectrum transfer of power. In this eventuality, we as Democrats must acknowledge in victory the virtues, the absence of which we decried in defeat. Precisely, we must work to build a bipartisan consensus around the new President, and avoid the wedge politics that doomed the Bush presidency’s legacy. I take this as a corollary to what my friend, Progressive Conservative of “The Big Stick,” is calling “the Wendell Willkie Pledge”: namely, the duty of every American dissatisfied with the election’s eventual outcome to form a loyal opposition. While it is every American’s duty to acknowledge the President’s legitimacy, while perhaps opposing individual policies, we as victors must never stigmatize dissent as unpatriotic, and (should it come to that) we as a defeated opposition must never let our differences eclipse our similarities. Bipartisanship, after all, is a two-way street. There is no place in America for Brennus’ cry, vae victis (woe to the conquered), nor is there any half-step between refusing to acknowledge the result of an election, and civil war.

UPDATE: