Why Scott Walker Won and the Democrats in Wisconsin lost

I was going to try avoid writing about this, but I am seeing some rather silly stuff being written about this win; So, I thought I would offer my thoughts as a former Democratic Party voter. Update: Greg Sargent over at The Washington Post hits the post a bit, but fails, as most progressives do; to see the full picture.

Putting it plain and simple, The Democrats in Wisconsin picked a fight that they could not win. — They were outspent, out-organized, and out-boxed; the Democrats had zero chance of winning this recall election at all. But yet, they still decided to fight for a recall election. They should have taken their cues from Michigan and left well enough alone. The Democrats in Michigan tried unsuccessfully to get Governor Snyder recalled here twice and both times they failed horribly. This is because residents of Michigan knew that the former Governor of Michigan was a incompetent moron who could not Govern worth a damn and they did not want a Democrat back in office again. Thus, the Democrats wisely dropped the issue and decided to try and win the 2012 election.  Wisconsin should have followed their lead, but they did not and decided to try and force their hand and failed.

Mother Jones has some good ideas as well:

1) Campaign Money is King

Walker crushed his Democratic opponent, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, in the political money wars. The governor raised $30.5 million while Barrett pulled in $3.9 million—a nearly 8-to-1 advantage in candidate fundraising. Walker banked on in- and out-of-state donors, including heavyweight GOP contributors such as Houston homebuilder Bob Perry and Amway heir Dick Devos. Walker was able to raise so much money because of a quirk in state law that lets candidates potentially facing a recall raise unlimited funds for their defense. (The normal limit for individual donors in $10,000.) Barrett did not get to raise unlimited funds in his recall campaign—which placed him at a great disadvantage.

All that money helped Walker pound Barrett in the ad wars. An analysis by Hotline On Call found that Walker and his GOP allies outspent Barrett and his backers 3-to-1 on TV ad buys in the three months before Tuesday’s recall. The dark-money-peddling Republican Governors Association itself spent $9.4 million to keep Walker in office.

Just as the political money advantage proved crucial to labor’s win last year in repealing Ohio’s anti-union SB 5 law, campaign cash appears to have played a pivotal role in the GOP’s Wisconsin wins .

2) The Candidate

Filing nearly one million signatures to trigger a recall election, Democrats and union leaders and members had their sights trained on the governor. The recall election’s Democratic primary forced them to take their eyes off the prize. A primary fight between Barrett and former Dane County executive Kathleen Falk splintered the labor movement. The major unions endorsed Falk early on, sometimes over the opposition of their own rank-and-file. Several other unions held out until late March, when Barrett entered the race, and then endorsed the mayor. This primary drama knocked the anti-Walker effort off course for weeks, if not a month, in a race where every single day counts. It divided a unified movement into Barrett supporters and Falk supporters.

3) No New Ground

Democrats and labor unions touted their massive get-out-the-vote operation, which was supposed to tip the scales in their favor. Turn-out was way up in the elections, at 2.4 million, but the left failed to win over the types of people who elected Walker in 2010. As the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelnotes, Walker’s Tuesday win is a mirror image of his 2010 victory—just with more voters. He won men and lost women; won independents and lost moderates; and won suburban and rural voters but not urban voters.

More notably, Walker won 38 percent of votes from union households—an increase of 1 percent from 2010. Remember, union members or their spouses didn’t know in 2012 that Walker planned to target them after the election with his anti-union “budget repair” bill curbing collective bargaining rights. Yet 16 months after Walker launched his attack on unions, just as many people in union households voted for him. The unions failed to rally their own ranks.

My thoughts on the Unions — One of the main reasons why the unions failed; not because of a lack of members or money. The unions failed because for the following:

  1. They over played their hand, by storming the capital building and occupying it. This made them look like total buffoons in the eyes of the people, not mention the heavy handed tactics that were on par with communist gulags.
  2. The second reason is a rather simple one; not all union members are on board with the progressive movement, just because someone has a union card, does not necessarily make him a Democrat. Some union members are free thinkers and some of them resent being culled in together with the socialist crowd.
  3. The last reason is this; some union members are just not happy with the Democratic Party and with Obama. I believe Obama fatigue played a big part in the loss in Wisconsin. I believe it will also play out in November as well.

Needless to say, Scott Walker won big and the Unions and Democrats lost big. The results of this will be far-reaching and the Democrats in Wisconsin would be wise to lay low and try to hang on in 2012. But if they do not, they should learn the lessons of the massive over-reach that took place in Wisconsin and with the Democratic Party as a whole. However, knowing Democrats like I do; they will not learn a thing from this.

 

Leftist MSNBC Host Chris Hayes is apologizing for saying what he truly feels

Remember this idiot? Well, now that the heat is on him, he is apologizing for saying what he really feels.

On Sunday, in discussing the uses of the word “hero” to describe those members of the armed forces who have given their lives, I don’t think I lived up to the standards of rigor, respect and empathy for those affected by the issues we discuss that I’ve set for myself. I am deeply sorry for that.

As many have rightly pointed out, it’s very easy for me, a TV host, to opine about the people who fight our wars, having never dodged a bullet or guarded a post or walked a mile in their boots. Of course, that is true of the overwhelming majority of our nation’s citizens as a whole. One of the points made during Sunday’s show was just how removed most Americans are from the wars we fight, how small a percentage of our population is asked to shoulder the entire burden and how easy it becomes to never read the names of those who are wounded and fight and die, to not ask questions about the direction of our strategy in Afghanistan, and to assuage our own collective guilt about this disconnect with a pro-forma ritual that we observe briefly before returning to our barbecues.

But in seeking to discuss the civilian-military divide and the social distance between those who fight and those who don’t, I ended up reinforcing it, conforming to a stereotype of a removed pundit whose views are not anchored in the very real and very wrenching experience of this long decade of war. And for that I am truly sorry.

via Chris Hayes Apologizes For Saying He Feels ‘Uncomfortable’ Calling Killed Soldiers ‘Heroes’ (VIDEO).

That is not an apology, sorry; that is a explanation and self-justification for what he said with a “Oh, by the way, I’m sorry if you didn’t like it.” Which is typical of the elitist limo liberals of his ilk. Screw them, screw them hard. 😡

UPDATED: This is a textbook reason why I stopped voting Democratic Party for good

Back before I ran my old blog, which was called “Political Byline”; I used to run a blog called “The Populist.” Well, that blog was hacked, either by some people, who call themselves Conservatives or by foreign entities. I suspect the former, but I tend to think it was the latter. Either way, by the time all that happened; I had become totally disillusioned with the Democratic Party. To be fair to myself; I never much did care for the Democratic Party establishment, this especially after the idiotic Clinton Administration’s nonsense. especially during his second term. Plus, as a Christian; I had not forgotten about the Waco incident.

Anyhow, one of reasons for this disillusionment was the Democrat Party’s treatment of our Military. It has been tepid at best. Proof of this, can be seen right here: (H/T NewsBusters)

Quoting this tool:

CHRIS HAYES: Thinking today and observing Memorial Day, that’ll be happening tomorrow.  Just talked with Lt. Col. Steve Burke [sic, actually Beck], who was a casualty officer with the Marines and had to tell people [inaudible].  Um, I, I, ah, back sorry, um, I think it’s interesting because I think it is very difficult to talk about the war dead and the fallen without invoking valor, without invoking the words “heroes.” Um, and, ah, ah, why do I feel so comfortable [sic] about the word “hero”?  I feel comfortable, ah, uncomfortable, about the word because it seems to me that it is so rhetorically proximate to justifications for more war. Um, and, I don’t want to obviously desecrate or disrespect memory of anyone that’s fallen, and obviously there are individual circumstances in which there is genuine, tremendous heroism: hail of gunfire, rescuing fellow soldiers and things like that. But it seems to me that we marshal this word in a way that is problematic. But maybe I’m wrong about that. 

I don’t write this to trash Chris Hayes, but to pose a question to the Conservative Democrats that actually read this blog and yes, I happen to know that a few of you that do, in fact, read here. Could you imagine a Democrat President giving a speech like this here?:

Not only can I not see a Democratic Party President giving a speech like this; but I would tend to believe that FDR would be chased out of the Democratic Party as a warmonger today! This is my issue with the modern-day Democratic Party; it is as if they are “Brothers-in-arms” with those who crashed those planes into the trade center buildings in 2001. The Liberal Democrats in this country have the attitude that the United States of America is the “great capitalist Satan” of the world and somehow or another deserved the attacks on 9/11. Who else has this attitude about America? oh yes! It is the Islāmic terrorists!

This is the reason Chris Hayes cannot call our Military dead Heroic men and women. Because it goes against his entire leftist DNA. Because the left hates our Military, hates the values that our Military stands for and quite frankly hates this Country for what it truly is.

That is the Democratic Party of the 21 century and I want zero to do with it, at all. 😡

The really sad thing is; is that Ron Paul and most, if not all, of the Paleo-Conservative right agree with this guy and his furry Progressive friends.  Which is why Ron Paul never, ever be President of the United States.  Ron Paul and the Paleoconservatives want to take us back to prior to World War 2 and leave the Jews to Hitler and put the WASP’s back in charge. Sorry guys, we lost that battle. We have to come to the 21 century. The quicker the better, I say.

Others Covering: Wizbang, Right Wing News, Booman Tribune, The Right Scoop, The Daily Caller, American Power, Examiner, The Gateway Pundit and Fire Andrea Mitchell! — via memeorandum

Update: This liberal blogger comes right out and says it. Hey, at least he is honest about it. Although, I tend to suspect that the irony of what he wrote is lost on him. It is because of the deaths of soldiers past; on battlefields domestic and abroad, he is free to even write that sort of tripe. Again, just another perfect example of why I told the Democratic Party to piss off and voted my principles — and no, I do not mean Republican either. Hell, the Republican Party has not been a true, small Government Conservative Party since Reagan left office and the Neoconservatives took power. Even Reagan was not truly a small Government Conservative either. He believed in small Government; when it was convenient.

Update #2: Chris Hayes has given a half-assed, non-apology apology.

Jeeez, no wonder Keith Olbermann left Current TV!

Looks like ol’ Keith made a bit of a mistake:

Keith Olbermann wanted out of Current TV well before he was fired yesterday because he felt the network was mismanaged and wouldn’t be around much longer … sources close to Keith tell TMZ.

As TMZ first reported, Keith is planning on filing a lawsuit against the network for his unceremonious dumping yesterday. He released a statement that said in part, “It goes almost without saying that the claims against me implied in Current’s statement are untrue and will be proved so in the legal actions I will be filing against them presently.”

According to our sources, Keith felt the network was a “ragtag operation” that was disorganized and felt thrown together. We’re told Keith felt the entire place was mismanaged … right down to the office supplies.

On one such occasion, we’re told the staff couldn’t use one of the printers because it was out of toner and they had none in supply. In a staff-wide email obtained by TMZ, a production administrator told the staff, “We expect to have replacement toner in tomorrow and will have a better stock on hand for the future. Sorry for the inconvenience.”

via Keith Olbermann — Planning His Exit Long Before He Was Fired | TMZ.com.

Then there is this:

To Keith’s point … they couldn’t even fire him without a giant mistake. In Current TV’s press release to announce that Eliot Spitzer would be taking over for Olbermann, they provided a Twitter account for Spitzer that is not his. The real Eliot Spitzer doesn’t have a Twitter account.

Heh. D’oh! 😀  Sounds like management problems to me and maybe even money problems. I thought that Keith was brought on as a partner and had a stake in the Company? I guess not. 😯

 

Keith Olbermann and Current TV part ways

Nothing like a bit of interesting news to bring a burned-out blogger out of his funk.

Keith Olbermann and Current TV have parted ways.

NYT’s Media Decoder has the story:

For nearly a year now, Al Gore and Joel Hyatt have been building their liberal cable news channel, Current TV, with the mercurial television anchorman Keith Olbermann at its center.

This week, the center collapsed.

Current said on Friday afternoon that it had fired Mr. Olbermann — one of the nation’s most prominent progressive speakers — just a year into his five-year, $50 million contract. It was the culmination of months of murky disputes between Mr. Olbermann and the channel that he was supposed to save from the throes of ratings oblivion.

Yet as inevitable as it might have seemed to some in the television business who know the long history of antipathy between Mr. Olbermann and his employers, it was nonetheless shocking to his fans, to his detractors and to staff members at Current when the announcement was made.

Current TV’s Statement:

To the Viewers of Current:

We created Current to give voice to those Americans who refuse to rely on corporate-controlled media and are seeking an authentic progressive outlet.  We are more committed to those goals today than ever before.

Current was also founded on the values of respect, openness, collegiality, and loyalty to our viewers. Unfortunately these values are no longer reflected in our relationship with Keith Olbermann and we have ended it.  

We are moving ahead by honoring Current’s values. Current has a fundamental obligation to deliver news programming with a progressive perspective that our viewers can count on being available daily — especially now, during the presidential election campaign. Current exists because our audience desires the kind of perspective, insight and commentary that is not easily found elsewhere in this time of big media consolidation.

Keith Olbermann’s Statement:

My full statement:

I’d like to apologize to my viewers and my staff for the failure of Current TV.

Editorially, Countdown had never been better. But for more than a year I have been imploring Al Gore and Joel Hyatt to resolve our issues internally, while I’ve been not publicizing my complaints, and keeping the show alive for the sake of its loyal viewers and even more loyal staff. Nevertheless, Mr. Gore and Mr. Hyatt, instead of abiding by their promises and obligations and investing in a quality news program, finally thought it was more economical to try to get out of my contract.

It goes almost without saying that the claims against me implied in Current’s statement are untrue and will be proved so in the legal actions I will be filing against them presently. To understand Mr. Hyatt’s “values of respect, openness, collegiality and loyalty,” I encourage you to read of a previous occasion Mr. Hyatt found himself in court for having unjustly fired an employee. That employee’s name was Clarence B. Cain. http://nyti.ms/HueZsa

In due course, the truth of the ethics of Mr. Gore and Mr. Hyatt will come out. For now, it is important only to again acknowledge that joining them was a sincere and well-intentioned gesture on my part, but in retrospect a foolish one. That lack of judgment is mine and mine alone, and I apologize again for it.

I have a personal opinion as to why things did not work out. This is not snark, humor or whatnot; it is truly my feelings. I believe that Keith just was not happy with this setup. I believe that Keith was not a good a “Democrat” enough for these people. Keith always said on his show, that he did not vote. I believe he is a political liberal. But I do not believe him an establishment figure. This was proven during Keith’s time at MSNBC, when he would criticize Obama.

I was doing some reading on some of the progressive sites out there; and I do notice that not everyone is sad to see him go. This is because Keith went into the tank for Obama, and went after Hillary, this did not sit well with some of the liberal left. To think, the thanks he got for all of his bombast and over the top verbalization, for all that tank diving he did for Obama — was a suck job at a third-rate network. Obama must be proud. The loudest voice of criticism on the left of Obama is now silent.

I will give some unsolicited advice to Al Gore and his partner at Current TV; give Keith the money for his contract, settle the as quickly as you possibly can. Because if you two do not think that Keith will not dish on what he knows about what happened in 2008 and with the inner workings of the liberal media — you are crazy.  Furthermore, let me just say it; when it comes to lawsuits, discovery is a bitch. I would get this out of the headlines as quickly as I could. Because if Keith starts dishing, you think the left is in disarray now? You wait till that starts happening.

Either way, it would be a blog traffic goldmine.

Blogs covering: Gawker, tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com, The Daily Caller, The Moderate Voice, DownWithTyranny!, The Raw Story, CANNONFIRE, protein wisdom, Show Tracker, National Review, Hot Air, Business Insider, Outside the Beltway, Washington Post, Ed Driscoll, Weasel Zippers, New York Magazine, Conservatives4Palin, Althouse, Jammie Wearing Fools, Politico, TalkLeft, The Huffington Post, Hollywood Reporter, Business Insider, Mediaite, Conservative Hideout 2.0, NewsBusters.org, Stinque, TMZ.comTVbytheNumbers and Weasel Zippers, Liberal Values, Guardian, Gothamist and dallasmorningviewsblog …,

Mediagazer has more here  and  here Here

 

UPDATED: Pat Buchanan is right and wrong

I will give him credit, Mr. Buchanan makes a very good point:

Is it now hate speech to restate traditional Catholic beliefs?

Documented in the 488 pages and 1,500 footnotes of “Suicide of a Superpower” is my thesis that America is Balkanizing, breaking down along the lines of religion, race, ethnicity, culture and ideology, and that Western peoples are facing demographic death by century’s end.

Are such subjects taboo? Are they unfit for national debate?

So it would seem. MSNBC President Phil Griffin told reporters, “I don’t think the ideas that (Buchanan) put forth (in his book) are appropriate for the national dialogue, much less on MSNBC.”

In the 10 years I have been at MSNBC, the network has taken heat for what I have written, and faithfully honored our contract.

Yet my four-months’ absence from MSNBC and now my departure represent an undeniable victory for the blacklisters.

The modus operandi of these thought police at Color of Change and ADL is to brand as racists and anti-Semites any writer who dares to venture outside the narrow corral in which they seek to confine debate.

All the while prattling about their love of dissent and devotion to the First Amendment, they seek systematically to silence and censor dissent.

Without a hearing, they smear and stigmatize as racist, homophobic or anti-Semitic any who contradict what George Orwell once called their “smelly little orthodoxies.” They then demand that the heretic recant, grovel, apologize, and pledge to go forth and sin no more.

Defy them, and they will go after the network where you work, the newspapers that carry your column, the conventions that invite you to speak. If all else fails, they go after the advertisers.

I know these blacklisters. They operate behind closed doors, with phone calls, mailed threats and off-the-record meetings. They work in the dark because, as Al Smith said, nothing un-American can live in the sunlight.

via The New Blacklist by Pat Buchanan.

At the risk of sounding like a snarky old coot, I will simply say this; When Barack Obama was elected President of the United States, Mr. Buchanan should have seen that the writing was on the wall and left MSNBC.  Actually, the hard swerve to the hard life and its intolerance for Conservative thought, of any sort; started after Tim Russert passed away.  It went into hyper-overdrive, when it was clear that Obama was going to win the election in 2008. The only person to blame for Pat Buchanan’s troubles is Pat Buchanan; the man stayed on much long after the political winds had shifted around him.

For all of the political traits that liberals and Paleoconservatives share, there happen to be some traits that they do not.  Paleoconservatives and liberals share the disdain of war and Wilsonian foreign policy.  Paleoconservatives and Liberals however do not share the same ideas on freedom of speech, or the sharing of ideas outside of what they, the liberals, consider mainstream.  While President George W. Bush was in office, Pat Buchanan’s outside of the Conservative mainstream ideas were perfect for the progressive, anti-Bush tone that the network was taking at the time.

However, as President Bush began to fade from the relevant political discussion and when the Democrats saw that, they had someone that could actually challenge the Republican’s candidate, things changed around MSNBC and not for the good either.  Without getting into rehashing of a good deal of history, I will just simply say that pretty much after 2008, Pat Buchanan began to stick out like a sore thumb and should be seen that and left for better climates; like Tucker Carlson did around the same time.

As for Mr. Buchanan’s assessment of homosexuality and the decline of the white Anglo-Saxon protestant class of people, I have one thing to say — I concur.  The fact that MSNBC fired Mr. Buchanan over his positions on these two subjects is living proof that the far-leftists have overtaken the political discourse in the Democratic Party and in the progressive movement as a whole.  Furthermore, the imbecilic notion that Mr. Buchanan’s assessment of the current state of the Anglo-Saxon protestant class of Americans is somehow an indication of hostility on Mr. Buchanan’s part towards Blacks, Jews or any other class of persons is moronic at best.

As for Mr. Buchanan’s Roman Catholic beliefs, which are Christian in origin, I also concur.  The Holy Bible, which contains the Holy Scriptures given to us by the Almighty God Himself; is clear, in both testaments — old and new —- that the practice of homosexuality is a forbidden thing.  It is the sodomite lifestyle, it is repugnant in the eyes of a Holy and Righteous God, and Christians are forbidden to partake in it, and are commanded by God Himself not to have associations with those who do.  Yes, there is a good deal of Holy Scripture to back those statements up and I will provide them to anyone who doubts what I have written.

Lastly, I feel that as a libertarian-minded Conservative it is important to point out to Mr. Buchanan the following: No privately owned network is obligated to allow you to appear on their network.  Free speech in this case, is not applicable.  MSNBC is a privately owned network, which is backed by advertisements from private companies.  Contract or not contract, MSNBC, does reserve the right to remove someone, if said companies who buy advertisements are not comfortable being associated with said person.  While it might seem a bit rude for MSNBC to just drop Mr. Buchanan and void his contract, MSNBC does have the right to act in its best interests.  Now, if the Government moved to silence him, I would say, sound the alarms.  However, MSNBC is not the Government; they are a private media outlet.  Therefore, the howling of “repression of freedom of speech” is a bit much to be honest.  One thing to remember, the only place that you can be truly free to express your opinions, regardless of the content, is a site that you personally own.  Nobody else is ever obligated to cater to you whims.  Some people forget that, and shout, “Freedom of speech!”  When, in fact, that argument is not even a valid one.

Update: This is now a Memeorandum Thread.

Update #2: Buchanan is defended by Jazz Shaw, Tim Stanley, and Andrew Sullivan?!?!?!

Pat Buchanan is a fine American

Furthermore, anyone who opposes his views, when it comes to foreign policy, trade, and fiscal policy are anti-American, a liberal or a Neoconservative.

(AP)  PASADENA, Calif. — MSNBC’s top executive said Saturday that he hasn’t decided whether conservative commentator and author Pat Buchanan will be allowed back on the network.

Buchanan, a former GOP presidential candidate and a paid MSNBC contributor, hasn’t been on the network since the publication of his book “Suicide of a Superpower” last October. The book has chapters titled “The End of White America” and “The Death of Christian America” and its author argues that the United States is in the “Indian summer of our civilization.”

“When Pat was on his book tour, because of the content of the book, I didn’t think it should be part of the national dialogue much less part of the dialogue on MSNBC,” said MSNBC President Phil Griffin. The minority advocacy group Color of Change has circulated a petition urging MSNBC to fire Buchanan.

Buchanan did appear for an interview about his book in October on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” where host Sean Hannity said, “welcome out of exile.”

Griffin would not discuss the length of Buchanan’s contract with MSNBC or whether it would be renewed. — Via MSNBC chief: No decision on Pat Buchanan’s return – CBS News

Pat Buchanan is a rare person, who speaks candidly about racial realism in America. The Marxist tools at MSNBC and the Marxist tools on the right who oppose him are not worthy enough —- to tie his shoes. I feel the way, about this man, the way Ron Paul’s people feel about him.

Buy ALL of Pat Buchanan’s books right here:

You say, “I thought you didn’t support Antisemitism or Racism?” I don’t. But, I do support those who dare to tell the truth about those who support Wilsonian foreign policy and internationalist Democrats and Republican Globalists; who are selling America’s birthright right out from under us everyday. Further more, I support someone who calls these Neoconservative warmonger’s for what they are; warmongers who would drive American into bankruptcy to support a Nation, who views we, the American people as useful idiots. Further more, Israel is much capable of handling its own affairs and does not need the United States meddling in them. Israel’s President said that himself, during a joint session of Congress.

So, all this silliness about racism and Antisemitism is nothing more than the liberal and neoconservative establishment protecting their turf. Kinda like these idiots below:

Little Green Footballs, Outside the Beltway, The Impolitic and The Raw Story

Pat Buchanan’s website is here

Update: Now, obviously, I do not agree with Mr. Buchanan on his views about World War 2. However, it is a fact that Germany did not attack America on December 7, 1941; Japan did.  However, I am mindful that the Germans did sink some of our private vessels off the coasts of California, Texas and New York.  Having said that, why is it, that the Neoconservative and liberal establishments wish to silence this man? It is simply a form of soft-fascism; something the left invented long ago and it seems that the right likes to play that game too. I know it too well, I have taken so controversial stances myself in the past and have challenged  some of the so-called “Darlings” of the Neoconservative establishment and I have been banished to pariah status in the Blogosphere because of it.

Video: Former Gov. Sununu and Chris Matthews holler at each other about Romney

This was posted over at The Right Scoop under the headline, “Former Gov. Sununu scolds Matthews and crew on-air.”  Between you and me; I didn’t really see this as a scolding or anything. I just saw this as two old people having a discussion really.

Anyhow, here is the video:(H/T HotAir Headlines)

Only thing I saw in this video worth noting it as a scolding, is the fact that Sununu told Matthew’s that he was an agenda. Something that Matthew’s did not really deny! I saw it as a good old fashinioned political sparring. They were nice about it; they hollered at each other and were friendly about it in the end.

You know it is a slow news day, when the blogging world calls this, of all things, a saber match! 😉 😛 😀

Kudos to Joe Scarborough

Two Cheers to Joe Scarborough for putting this liberal’s feet to the fire! (H/T to Jazz Shaw)

Via Mediaite:

Quote:

In a remarkably heated back-and-forth on Friday’s Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough grilled MSNBC contributor Eugene Robinson over his controversial comments — calling Rick Santorum‘s handling of the death of his newborn “weird.”

“Do you think you may have gone overboard a little bit in your criticisms of Santorum?” Scarborough asked. “We haven’t talked about it. I’m not setting you up for anything. I was taken aback by what you said. My wife likes you very much, couldn’t believe you said it.”

“That was obviously not the right way to say what I was trying to express,” Robinson acknowledged.

“I certainly didn’t mean to offend anybody, especially Mr. Santorum,” Robinson added. “But it was in a discussion of his views, and, you know, which I consider extreme, and Santorum himself who is a cultural — culture warrior extraordinaire, whose faith — and we all appreciate someone of deep faith — but it is — it is extremely deep, and it’s a kind of faith that some people, I think, are going be… if not surprised by… at least want to know more about.”…

“It is a personal decision,” Robinson noted. “And I’ve certainly been educated on the subject since — in the past day, so I do understand that — that this is not — it’s not something that’s in any way beyond the pale or considered inadvisable and that many grief counselors do advise a period of saying good-bye to a child who tragically dies in that way.”…

“Do you wish you hadn’t said it?” Scarborough clarified. “You can see how prepared I am.”

“I wish I hadn’t said it that way, Joe. You know, I — we had — had this sort of discussion when I wrote about Chris Christie‘s weight, and I do think that a columnist has an obligation to — to write what he or she thinks and write what he or she sees, but obviously I did it in the wrong way. Or in a way that rubs people the wrong way, and that’s not what I intended.”

 

I think that it is good for Joe for to put Mr. Roberson through the wringer for his rather idiotic comment.  What was said by this douche-nozzle and Alan Colmes was over the top and out of bounds.  Just to put this very simply, if we are going to have a standard — that all President’s and Presidential candidates children are off-limits, we have to hold everyone and I do mean everyone to that standard.  This is not about Freedom of Speech, this about what is morally right.  I do not give two flying figs about ANY of the Presidential candidate’s children at all.  Just like, I do not care about Obama’s children.  What makes this little incident here, along with the previous one so insidious is this — Liberals are slamming a man — who chose to take his dead child home, so that the he and his family could grieve over him.

Also too, as much as I hate having to do this — But I must — could you even remotely imagine the howls of outrage from the left, if someone on the right — anywhere on the right — had made a similar comment about Obama’s kids or any other Democrat’s kids — of this sort of a nature?  The outrage from the liberal community, the black community, and the chattering class would be deafening.  However, because this is a liberal black man popping off about a white Conservative, it is seen as just perfectly fine.  How ironic is that in the so-called post-racial America?  I also find it quite ironic that the left has been largely silent about both of these people making these comments.  There are exceptions, but for the most part, the silence is deafening. Maybe it is because they see children or in this case — babies as an unneeded inconvenience or maybe it is because they are afraid of offending their “Dear Leader.”  Either way, it speaks too, in this writer’s opinion, of the moral decay that has taken over that once great party.

Liberal Tool of the Day: Eugene Robinson

(H/T HotAir)

There’s phrase that comes to mind to describe this man.

….and it is not “Smart Liberal Black Man” either.

Click the picture to watch the video:

That is about all I can truly say about this little incident. I made a promise that I would keep it out of the gutter on this new blog. I’m gonna try to stick to it.

Only other thing I will truly say is this; if the Democrats actually think this sort of tripe is going to help thier cause; they are very highly mistaken. Insulting the parents of a dead child, yeah you boys keep on plucking that little chicken and see what it gets you.

I’ll keep the rest of my thoughts to myself. 😡 …..least I get accused of being a racist, a Klansman or whatever else those mentally depraved buffoons call people like me. (blanco)

Others: Stop The ACLU, NewsBusters.org blogs, Whiskey Fire, Pundit & Pundette, The Daily Caller, Weasel Zippers, National Review, nation.foxnews.com, Big Journalism, Mercatornet, Big Journalism, Patterico’s Pontifications, Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion and Ed Driscoll