Posts Tagged ‘don’t be drinking when you read this’

…after this first rate piece:

The Great Recession has done wonders for the Republican Party. Two years after being tossed out of power at every level, it’s about to waltz right back in, kicking aside the corpses of Democrats foolish enough to go along with the designs of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. This is good news for most conservatives. It’s slightly worse news for a smaller group of conservatives—namely, the ones who spent the end of the ’00s explaining why a Republican comeback like this was not really possible.

This piece is absolutely classic as all those like Sam Tanenhaus who’s book did so good on Amazon but somehow can’t wrap their head around what has happened.

Of course, to the horror of the smart set, this is exactly what is happening. The conservative base looked at any attempt to answer the Democrats on policy as a cave-in to socialism. When they’re making the case for their research, Douthat and Salam acknowledge that reality. But they argue that Republicans have been using their key insights anyway and that the hot rhetoric of the GOP obscures what actually happened.

Yup all those tea party people had nothing to do with it.

Read the whole thing, but don’t be drinking while you do.

…you come for all of us faculty at the University of Illinois:

In a proposed resolution, highly-regarded professor Elliott Kaufman suggested that the Faculty Senate ask the board to reconsider its decision, one he said was a conflict-of-interest and “inappropriately influenced by personal and political comments.”

He urged board members to “adhere to the ethical constraints that normally govern their meetings.”

“Isn’t this the new, squeaky-clean, highly-ethical board of trustees? What happened? It is worth airing the laundry here,” said Kaufman, who retired last year after serving in numerous faculty leadership positions, in an interview with the Tribune.

“The chair had a conflict of interest and he put the other trustees in an impossible position,” Kaufman said. “He drew a dotted line between the assassination of the Kennedy brothers and giving Bill Ayers emeritus status. The result is what we got and I just don’t think it was a fair way to do it.”

Jim Hoff cuts to the chase:

So, let’s see. A guy that has a history of despising the United States and committing armed insurrection against her, a guy that advocated for the violent deaths of any number of her citizens, a guy who, with his wife, actually participated in at least one bombing where a police officer was killed, a guy that has never expressed any remorse for his actions, and a guy that has never paid a price for his treasonous and murderous actions is just the sort of guy that the faculty of a prestigious university would go to the mat for? Is that what we have here?

Yep, it appears that terrorist William Ayers is just the kind of creep that university professors love.

Because nothing says “Emeritus status” more to University of Illinois professors than dedicating your book to the murderer of Robert Kennedy.

All I can think of is the Lion King: “You like him, he likes you, but he likes the Murderer of RFK…and everyone is OK with this?”

Q: What is the difference between a candidate the National Republican shuns and the National Republican party embraces:

Before anyone becomes carried away by the beauty of it all, it should be said that the developments are not really a Kumbaya moment. GOP officials have been astounded by the amount of money — $1 million — that O’Donnell has raised in the hours since her surprise primary victory over Republican Rep. Mike Castle. As much as anything, it is O’Donnell’s fundraising bonanza that is warming hearts at the NRSC. “We have 45 days until the election,” the source said. “We need to be united.”

How many thousands of $10 & $20 & $100 dollar donations did that include. How many voters does that add up to that you don’t want to get angry and hope to hit up for contributions later.

When you have one million in the bank it isn’t hard to get a date is it?

Update: Make sure you aren’t drinking when you read this quote from Karl “I was with her all the time” Rove:

I Endorsed O’Donnell the Other Night… I Helped Her Raise That $750,000

I’m surprised Jim (Gateway Pundit) Hoff was able to type it out, he must have been cracking up at the sight of it.
(Video)

You know it’s pretty sad that Jane Harman wanted to buy this magazine when it puts out stuff like this:

September 11 was a shock to the American psyche and the American system. As a result, we overreacted.

I get a feeling they might have overpaid for the rag. As you might guess it’s Christmas in September on the right side of the ‘sphere on this stuff:

Powerline…agrees on the overplaying line and says:

Zakaria tries to dispose of this point in a subordinate clause conceding the efficacy of “serious countermeasures.” Zakaria decries a number of countermeasures that are supposedly excessive, but he nowhere bothers to make the case that they have not contributed to the prevention of another successful attack. He simply assumes the conclusion.

Patterico… has a long memory:

Remember when the New York Times expressed its puzzlement that the prison population was increasing “despite” the drop in crime?

I do. As I observed at the time:

This is like saying “Joe Blow has been continuing to exercise despite the fact that he has been getting in much better shape.”

Fareed Zakaria today has the terrorism equivalent of this idiocy: decrying our proactive anti-terrorist measures — which we have taken despite the fact that Al Qaeda hasn’t hit us with another 9/11.

You know if I’m Mattie Fein I point to this article and declare: “This is the magazine that the Harman’s bought to preserve this editorial slant.”

memeorandum thread here