I'm still going with yesterday's idea that Karl Rove is being rolled out as a Republican uber pundit for the 2008 election, a one-man guardian of the Bush legacy. From the White House point of view, Rove will show the American people what a wonder place the Bush White House is, cheer on the Republican candidates for keeping the cause alive, and make the Democrats pay for their criticisms.
And Karl Rove will be a big help in defeating Hillary Clinton in 2008.
But let's go back to the real world.
In the real world, the American public doesn't care whether Karl Rove was happy in the White House, hasn't been impressed by the legendary reading contest waged by Rove and Bush while Iraq was falling apart in 2006, and believes that George Bush is a disaster as president.
Moreover, rolling out Republican anti-Hillary attack lines in 2007 isn't going to help the GOP presidential candidate in 2008. The attack lines will be stale by that time.
More important, Rove's attack lines on Hillary are so weak they'll probably be popping up on Protein Wisdom pretty soon. To boil down Rove's views, he's criticizing Clinton for opposing the Bush administration's political agenda of the surge, medical savings accounts, and warrantless wiretapping.
In the real world, Bush is among the least popular and least respected presidents in American history and Hillary's opposition to the Bush agenda is going to be a plus for her in the general election.
As I've said before, Karl Rove's a genius. But he's yesterday's genius and Rove's roll out as a pundit is going to blow up in his face like most of his other current schemes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
21 comments:
Rove's attack lines on Hillary are so weak they'll probably be popping up on Protein Wisdom
If that's the criteria, I suppose PW could just borrow this whole post.
Fuck what Rove thinks, what do you think about a woman who would put up with the mental abuse and public humiliation Hillary has put up with our of Bill for all these years? Is this really the kind of person you want going to bat for you in the ideological battles to come? Someone who is willing to suffer apparently almost any humiliation to forward their own personal agenda?
Any evidence of mental abuse?
B Moe, nice rejoinder on PW. "Retarded" You sure must be smart ot arrive at such witticisms!
Professor, I'm not sure you should post on PW. Obviously, it's up to you, but this Jeff guy is a bit unstable. Note the threat he made against me in his last post. I'm unsure if it's a physical threat, but apparently Mr. Goldstein and the woman who "tormented" him have a lot more in common than I thought.
I'm unsure what the nature of the threat is, as I mentioned, but I have recorded it in case I need to initiate my own legal proceedings against Mr. Goldstein.
Anyway, Professor, I just wanted you to note the vitriol with which he eventually attacks people who disagree with him. I would unsurprised if he attempts to attack you at your work in an attempt to get you fired or something.
As for you, "mike", I'm sure Hillary is the only woman on the planet whose husband strayed...I guess she just plop down on the sofa and stay at home. Big mistake going back to work after a personal setback.
Maybe Dems should nominate more shrinking violets, so you can them liars and traitors?
If I remember correctly, the gist of my last comment on PW is that the Jeff would do better if he didn't take things so personally.
But I am sympathetic with Goldstein about his stalker issue. It's a severe problem and any reasonable person in our (very violent) society would be worried about the kind of stalker problem Goldstein is experiencing. I'd prefer it if you did not use the stalker issue to dig at Goldstein personally and I'd especially prefer it if you did not do so in your comments here. Otherwise, your comments are very welcome and well-formulated.
A fair request and one I will honor, as soon as I defend myself. You'll fins that Jeff tends to blow personal attacks out of proportion. This is a prime example. Her "blogs" are impossible to find, unless you are looking very hard for her. His latest attempt at retirement, apparently precipitated by her, occurs because he and some other guy that hates her are the only people who read her. He is insane and a bit threatening.
With that said...
Nice. One last kick, then you'll quit. Way to "honor" that request.
class > you
This was the comment I want to see on this particular point.
You clowns are really sad.
Yeah, Jd, your mentor, the man (if I may quote you from bloodyscot) "whose writing made me a better informed person," has threatened twice now to beat me up (and who knows what else that threat means). He has called me names, threatened me, and warned me not to reply. His slanders and calumny against posters and other bloggers, his whining about every name he has ever been called, and his martyrdom about the travails of his personal life (not getting traffic or links, not having the influence he desires, not being allowed on a "blogger's forum" for the Denver Post) are just evidence of the reason I can't stand him. I liked debating the PW regulars, but he always scared and put me off with his hair trigger temper and faux-masculinity.
In other words, JD, if it is not apparent, I could care less about his politics (my entire family is evangelical Christian Republicans), it's him I don't like and the deference he received from people I liked debating.
This is the man whose "insight" you value: a bully and a whiner. Yet, I'm a clown?
Yes. Should you not be able to see that your comments about Professor Frisch were over the line, that is all on you. Given the history that he has with that topic, and his prior warnings to you in regards to same, it was shocking to see you melt down and throw that out there. Having read your posts since, I guess it was not that shocking.
As usual, you have it wrong.
Jeff first told me I was a homophobe, because I did not accept (at face value) the word of a former prostitute over a serving American soldier. When I pointed out, reasonably, and with a smile, that I had no problem with the former whore being gay, my problem was with the credibility of said former whore, and also being lectured about being a "homophobe" by a man who doesn't even support gay rights was the height of irony, he went off (do you need links, JD, because they are available) and swore at me and told me not to return.
Finally, tired of his hissy fit throwing ways, I responded with my actual thoughts of him and retired from PW (so I thought).
In answer to comments he made here, I again went off on him and, later BJ excerpted the supposedly offensive line (which makes a play on his ability to play the victim).
I do not, did not, and have not defended the woman in question. Further, this ain't ancient Israel, I can actually say forbidden names on OTHER websites, JD.
In the process of slandering me yet again on the pub, he then threatens to physically harm me and, well, I'm not sure what else.
Do you remember the elements of Assault from Torts 101, JD? Right now, I have a threat that can be carried out and which I believe would harm me. All I need is imminence for the lawsuit. Why don't you ask the brave professor when and if he intends to fly here, so I can file the papers.
To paraphrase Billy Joel, I didn't start the fire. If you want to be blinded by the infantile claim of foul over a pretty harmless reference (from the rest of what is a fine dissection of a fraud's character), then you go ahead. Me, I saved it on my blog, so I would always be able to read it. It is a fine take down.
Further, if you think mentioning someone's name on another forum is worth threatening the mentioner's physical safety and the revelation of what he thinks he knows of my personal identity, then let's just say you aren't the kind of guy I thought you were.
I think we've exhausted this subject, unless you want those links to his ridiculous and petty tirade
need those links, JD?
Thought not. Can blow up that monument you erected in your mind. Make sure you toe the line, though, because he could threaten you next.
If you feel better about the manner in which you acted, then by all means, carry on. I would be embarassed to have written what you did.
How is this a rational response to anything?
If I ever see timmy in person, and I’ve invited him to meet me (don’t know why he’d avoid me: English majors aren’t known for their braun, he reminds us), I will be less than gracious in greeting him.
He threatening to physically accost me? How is that a response of a person you admire? If you think I'm embarrassed about making fun of him, then you seem to miss that i don't exactly owe anything with the way he treated me.
This exchange between JD and I was evidently passed on to Jeff, showing JD is an ?, like I suspected, and showing how far he will go to defend his brethren.
My favorite part is the how he backs down so quickly after JD gives him a heads up about assault. Now, he's just saying I would be afraid of, not I should be afraid. Unfortunately for Jeff, fear is a reasonable person standard and this restraining order followed by a lawsuit could survive the 12(b)(6), as many reasonable people would see these words as "inciting."
Oh well, spin is nice too.
Actually, timmah, it was noted that you were lying about being threatened by Jeff at other sites, and I noted that you were doing the same here. As a result of you claiming to have been threatened at multiple places, apparently Jeff felt it worthy of a response, a copy of which is attached below, since you have shown your propensity to copy and paste only that which fits your narrative.
Here’s me threatening to beat timmah up (in response to his having called me a pussy, essentially, for going the law enforcement route with Frisch. Ironic, isn’t it? Because all I can gather from that is that, to Timmy’s way of thinking, a REAL MAN would have…what? Ignored it entirely? Or gone all Death Wish on her?)
First, here’s timmy’s comment:
Quick, Jeff, I think D*b Fr***h just thought about you! Call the attorney, a reporter, BRIT HUME!!!!”
– which was brought to my attention by another commenter.
My response:
timmy actually brought up Frisch?
What a no class little turdlette.
If I ever meet him in person, we’ll discuss that breach of etiquette.
Funny, though, how when they get in high dudgeon, what they always say was an objectively horrific experience for my family becomes the first thing they turn to when they need to taunt.
I didn’t call a lawyer for me, timmy. I called a lawyer because taking the law into your own hands is frowned upon, particularly when you have a family to consider.
I wouldn’t wish Frisch on my worst enemy. That you would try to use her that way is a testament to the grubbiness in your heart.
Congrats!
Now don’t post here again.
This, after asking him on at least 4 prior occasions not to post again.
Then there’s this that I wrote:
Timmy is a pussy. He wouldn’t say word one were he forced to actually debate someone in person.
The context of that? That Timmy wouldn’t be calling me a racist or a homophobe in person — not because I’d beat his ass for it, but rather because he’d fear that I might. Because he’s a coward.
Timmy — having been asked now on at least 5 occasions not to post anymore, responds:
So, your manly taunt is “you wanna take it outside.” Since English professors are roundly noted as being studly fighting men, I’m sure I have a lot to fear.
Is this all, then?
This is all you have?
After the scary prose, the “well-considered” political treatises, the “defensible” partisan political positions, the great Jonathon Winters joke, the “devastating sarcasm”, the personal attacks…
…at the core of all that is Nelson Muntz-esque bully with an improbable copy of O’Connor’s Wise Blood tucked into the waistband of his jeans?
In the words of Monty Python: Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
Now. Did I say “you wanna take it outside?” No. I just noted that timmah would likely not say such things to my face. Because he’s essentially a pussy. Otherwise he would never have brought up the Frisch thing — and again, certainly not in front of me.
To prove this, I posted an email from him commiserating. Showing that not only was timmy a pussy, but he’s a pussy of the two-faced, phony, ass kissing variety.
My response:
Don’t post here again, timmy. I’ve asked you now several times.
Pretty soon you’ll no longer be timmy to me. You’ll be Tim Burns — the Tim Burns who will be sorry he didn’t accept my invitation to go away quietly.
Now, given my proclivity for using law enforcement to keep persistent stalkers away — as Timmy himself noted, and mocked — why on earth would he see this as a physical threat?
Here’s the text of timmy’s email, re: Frisch. Keep in mind that this is one of the many many emails he sent, all of them in the same tenor: that of a world-class kiss up:
I think you misunderstood that last post. I was expressing my opinion that JD and your readers do not have a legal option. You certainly do and your counsel seems to be doing a fine job. The joke about enemy combatants was just that — a tweak at my fellow readers.
At any rate, good luck getting back on track and, since I certainly never meant to offend you, I wanted to offer my apology.
Personally, I have trouble understanding why that warrant can’t be served.
Whether you welcome me back or not as a result of this e-mail, I just wanted to let you know that piling on to someone’s personal problems is not my modus operandi, especially when one is being tormented. For that reason, I wanted to make sure you did not misunderstand me. You, personally, have allowed me to comment at your site, even though are political opinions are divergent, and that is amazingly commendable.
[realizing how long he rambled] Anyway, good luck to you, your family, and PW.
And then my final comment on the matter:
If people knew how much time I spent saving screenshots and documenting abuses and talking to lawyers, etc., they wouldn’t be so quick to open their ignorant mouths.
Then, in between, I’m supposed to throw up happy posts about unrelated news items, after having read vile shit about my little boy all morning.
If I ever see timmy in person, and I’ve invited him to meet me (don’t know why he’d avoid me: English majors aren’t known for their braun, he reminds us), I will be less than gracious in greeting him.
I will be less than gracious in greeting him.
Why, it’s practically Clint Eastwood-esque in its hypermasculinist threateningness!
I’ll say it again. Timmy is a pussy. That he’s now running around whining that I threatened to kick his ass, looking for a likeminded crowd to join up with so as to beat on mean old pasty, is a pretty fair indicator of what a cypher this guy really is.
Call me, timmy! We’ll do lunch!
You were saying ?
"threaten" is in the eye of the reasonable person, counselor.
And you are not reasonable, or at least, in this thread, you have not shown the propensity to utilize reason.
Look, you told him you wouldn't talk to me and we are at an impasse. Normally, we will disagree on most things, but we tend to do it internet style, i.e. a lot more sarcasm and contempt but not a ton of personal rancor.
Let's just close this thread: you have your insane allegation that I "lied" and I have you bowing to Goldstein "I will not address ...blah, blah." Let's just drop it.
PS I will admit though, it is humorous to me to see the level you will go to stay in his good graces...mercy that was like Igor from Frankenstein.
Oh, by the way, since I said you, you can finish off this thread with some nice disdain and we will meet upstream where we can speak civilly? What you say?
As you wish ...
Post a Comment