Okay, I admit I enjoyed this very much:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/9/24/6746/25825#c70But once the euphoria faded, everyone began to wonder: why is this neocon rag doing this? A couple of theories:
The Weekly Standard's bait and switch (2+ / 0-)
Recommended by: Luam, myrealname
repeatedly. I'm a big fan of Webb, a big fan of Lowkell and a staunch foe of racist Republican night-rider George Allen.
The substance of the WS piece is: yes, Allen should be re-elected as Senator; yes, Allen has done great work for Virginia and for Republican causes; yes, Allen is a staunch and faithful Republican annointed by his associations with Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.
And that Allen is an oaf and out of touch with the future of the Republican party.
Hardly fatal shortcomings in Republican circles.
The Weekly Standard is far more interested in resheeting George Allen than preparing the way for Allen's Presidential run. Indeed, the WS would likely wish someone like McCain to get the nod.
The WS wants folks to laugh at Allen the boob, rather than examine closely the racist links Republicans maintain with white supremacists on the fringe and the mainstream.
The WS asserts that Allen is not a racist and that his "macaca" remarks cannot be linked to his love of "heritage" symbols.
The WS will gladly listen to Allen the oaf stories, if it means the racist story-line goes away.
It's tough to write against a diarist I respect, but on this count I'd say we stay with Allen the racist and kill the Allen the oaf meme dead.
The torture debacle should remind every Dem that we pay a price for letting Repubs define any issue or any candidate.
Allen is a racist, and only incidentally an asshole.
His asshole behavior to his sister is essentially family business and none of our concern.
Allen's racism and his close links to white supremacists must be the only issue we focus on.
Laugh all you want.
Global AIDS Action
by kidneystones on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 04:53:11 AM PDT
< Reply to This |Recommend Troll >
And, here is another theory (which I tend to concur with):
And this shows why the GOP loves Reagan (2+ / 0-)
Recommended by: Luam, beachmom
so much: he was a good enough actor to pull off their bait and switch. I think the Weekly Standard is just trashing Allen because he's not capable of quick judgment and better acting. It has nothing to do with his politics. He doesn't have what it takes to pull the wool over the eyes of the electorate when the probing questions replace the softballs. He's a bully and a dimwit who has relied on his good ol' boy friends to lift him into high places, but, once there, he's an example of the Peter Principle. The GOP has n othing at all against bullies and dimwits as long as they can also act and stick with the prescribed scripted talking points. But if they can't keep their real agenda hidden, and can't think on their feet fast enough to keep up the likeable facade, they can't help the GOP in its stealth campaign. That's why Allen has to go: he's endangering the GOP's image and giving a peak behind the curtain.
oil=Lebensraum
by Halcyon on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 05:34:54 AM PDT
< Reply to This |Recommend Troll >
Thoughts, anyone?