In the political preview discussions before the FIRST Republican presidential debate, I listened to the talking heads on MSNBC suggesting where the various candidates would base their campaign strategy.  I particularly noted the belief that Rudy Giuliani would be strongest if he declared himself to be a "clone" of Ronald Reagan and shrouded himself in that president's "HOPE FOR AMERICA" message.

No sooner did Chris Mathews introduce the candidates then he turns to Rudy Giuliani and lobs this softball at him, AND ONLY HIM, right down the middle...

Moderator (Chris Mathews): "In the NBC-Wall Street Journal poll, just 22 percent believe this country is on the right track.

Mayor Giuliani, how do we get back to Ronald Reagan's morning in America?"

"Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani: "We get back to it with optimism. The same situation that I faced in New York City; when I became mayor of New York City, 65, 70 percent thought New York City was going on the wrong track. And what I did was, I set policies and programs of growth, of moving people toward prosperity, security, safety."

"And what we can borrow from Ronald Reagan, since we are in his library, is that great sense of optimism that he had. He led by building on the strengths of America, not running America down."

"And we're a country that people love to come to, they want to come to this country with a shining city on the hill. So we should solve our immigration issue, including illegal immigration, from our strengths, not our weaknesses."

"We're a country that has the greatest health care system in the world. It's flawed, it needs to be fixed, but we should fix it from our strengths. We shouldn't turn it into socialized medicine."

"Those are the things that Ronald Reagan taught us: You lead from optimism."

"You will lead from hope, and we should never retreat in the face of terrorism. Terrible mistake."

With those splendid words, Rudy finished his response to his first question.  Mathews then proceeded to ask McCain a question about IRAQ.

This sounded, to me, exactly like Mathews had already advised the good Mayor as to what he was going to ask him, and the Mayor had prepared his answer accordingly.  Very neat!

If this isn't a "fix" then I don't know what is!

I don't think the debate was fixed so much as I think the GOP really wants Giuliani. He's a garden variety fascist.  So was Ronald Reagan.  All that other "optimism" stuff is just filler.  The GOP might be realizing it no longer needs the Christian Right now that they've got this "War on Terror," which will give them as much mileage as the American people allow. 

Probably the best GOP ticket would be Giuliani/Thompson.  Fred Thompson, that is. 

Yes, Chris Matthews defintely has a h#rd-on for Giuliani. 

Matthews' smugness is insufferable.

But the King of Smug just died...Jerry Falwell.  I never saw anyone do smug as well as Unca Jerry!
::)

Incidentally, there will never be another Ronald Reagan.  We don't have another treasury to squander or another middle class to smash.  Sunset in America.
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/icon_biggrin.gif

When isn't a Republican debate fixed?  That crap is supposed to work like clock-work, nothing left to chance.  I find it so interesting how Rudy has come close to apologizing for his viewpoints quite a few times.

the most interesting thing about the republican debate is how it put ron paul on the map. as a long time conspiracy buff i've known about ron paul for a long time, and i've always liked him -- but in that problematic way i often find pat robertson sympathetic, love what he says about empire and railing against corruption but his xenophobia goes down pretty hard. ditto ron paul.

anyway, it's interesting how they did a poll after the debate and -- oops! -- ron paul polled as winning. so now there are news stories all over the airwaves about how ron paul is a flash in the pan, his rise to popularity is never going to last, when people learn what he really believes they'll lose interest, etc. it really smacked of, okay, this guy is outside the mainstream so we have to shoot him down. and in the process of doing it, we have to make it sound like he's been shot down already.

and my beloved NPR totally got on the bandwagon. they did a really insidious piece on ron paul.

the most interesting thing about the republican debate is how it put ron paul on the map. as a long time conspiracy buff i've known about ron paul for a long time, and i've always liked him -- but in that problematic way i often find pat robertson sympathetic, love what he says about empire and railing against corruption but his xenophobia goes down pretty hard. ditto ron paul.

anyway, it's interesting how they did a poll after the debate and -- oops! -- ron paul polled as winning. so now there are news stories all over the airwaves about how ron paul is a flash in the pan, his rise to popularity is never going to last, when people learn what he really believes they'll lose interest, etc. it really smacked of, okay, this guy is outside the mainstream so we have to shoot him down. and in the process of doing it, we have to make it sound like he's been shot down already.

and my beloved NPR totally got on the bandwagon. they did a really insidious piece on ron paul.

I missed that.  What did National Petroleum Radio say about Ron Paul?
It's weird.  I don't think I'd vote for Paul, but I'd vote for him before I'd vote for Hillary!

I missed that.  What did National Petroleum Radio say about Ron Paul?
It's weird.  I don't think I'd vote for Paul, but I'd vote for him before I'd vote for Hillary!
they were talking about how even though he wasn't getting much attention on the mainstream press a lot of internet activists were drawing a bunch of attention to him. which helps explain his positive poll numbers as somehow the work of a small but devoted group of activists rather than just people watching these debates and seeing that he was one of the few, if not the only person using bland standardized talking points. then they basically say, paul will learn that this flash of popularity is just that... a flash in the pan. i forget the exact wording but they basically were saying, you better be careful what you say or else you won't be popular anymore. and whatever, it's not like he was ever popular before, like i say, i've known about him for a while and he's always been pretty obscure, sorta the kucinich of the right. it struck me as odd, like they're trying to compartmentalize, manage, sorta neutralize him.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10275845

i think this might get you to the story.

they were talking about how even though he wasn't getting much attention on the mainstream press a lot of internet activists were drawing a bunch of attention to him. which helps explain his positive poll numbers as somehow the work of a small but devoted group of activists rather than just people watching these debates and seeing that he was one of the few, if not the only person using bland standardized talking points. then they basically say, paul will learn that this flash of popularity is just that... a flash in the pan. i forget the exact wording but they basically were saying, you better be careful what you say or else you won't be popular anymore. and whatever, it's not like he was ever popular before, like i say, i've known about him for a while and he's always been pretty obscure, sorta the kucinich of the right. it struck me as odd, like they're trying to compartmentalize, manage, sorta neutralize him.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10275845

i think this might get you to the story.

I'll check that out at home.  This terminal has no soundcard.

National Pussy Radio.
I like them less and less all the time.

I'll check that out at home.  This terminal has no soundcard.

National Pussy Radio.
I like them less and less all the time.
i would like them less, but democracy now is totally irritating to me, and the people who scold NPR are always trying to lead me there.

i dunno, i think NPR does a lot of wonderful stuff, but you just have to pick and choose. and that's true of every journalist source.

well, except the weekly world news. everything they say is 100% accurate. they do a great service for america.

the most interesting thing about the republican debate is how it put ron paul on the map. as a long time conspiracy buff i've known about ron paul for a long time, and i've always liked him -- but in that problematic way i often find pat robertson sympathetic, love what he says about empire and railing against corruption but his xenophobia goes down pretty hard. ditto ron paul.

anyway, it's interesting how they did a poll after the debate and -- oops! -- ron paul polled as winning. so now there are news stories all over the airwaves about how ron paul is a flash in the pan, his rise to popularity is never going to last, when people learn what he really believes they'll lose interest, etc. it really smacked of, okay, this guy is outside the mainstream so we have to shoot him down. and in the process of doing it, we have to make it sound like he's been shot down already.

and my beloved NPR totally got on the bandwagon. they did a really insidious piece on ron paul.


We didn't watch the debate because most of those guys just make me sick. I saw Ron Paul on CNN after the debate. He did mention how he scored higher than Rudy but no one was mentioning that. I must confess that I never heard of him before but I was shocked that I agreed with what he was saying-a Republican!  :o :o :o  Shortly after that interview, we turned on Faux News and sure enough, they said that Rudy won the debate. Hmmmm. Veeeeerrrrrryyyyy Interesting.


Weren't these the same guys who said that Dubya won the debates with Kerry?  ???



Cat

i would like them less, but democracy now is totally irritating to me, and the people who scold NPR are always trying to lead me there.

i dunno, i think NPR does a lot of wonderful stuff, but you just have to pick and choose. and that's true of every journalist source.

well, except the weekly world news. everything they say is 100% accurate. they do a great service for america.


Amy Goodman has a specific human rights agenda.  It's a noble agenda, but it's narrow.  She won't touch 9/11 or the heist of the presidential elections.  There's lots of stuff she won't cover.  I also find DN rather bleeding heart and lacking in humor.  A sense of humor and irony is vital for anybody taking a stand.  It prevents blind fanaticism.  That's why I had to turn my back on the Progressive Labor Party.  They referred to "Comrade Stalin" with a straight face...in 1991!
:D

that's so funny, cuz yeah, when i think democracy now, humorlessness is pretty much exactly the first thing that comes to mind. she's sorta like this mirror image of britt hume, who i've also never known to say anything funny.

and yeah, the whole socialist undercurrent is sorta off-putting. just gives the red-baiters ammunition.

that's so funny, cuz yeah, when i think democracy now, humorlessness is pretty much exactly the first thing that comes to mind. she's sorta like this mirror image of britt hume, who i've also never known to say anything funny.

and yeah, the whole socialist undercurrent is sorta off-putting. just gives the red-baiters ammunition.

Well, the Progressive Labor Party wasn't "progressive," it was hard-left reactionary (Comrade Stalin, my skinny white azz!), and as for labor, most of the membership seemed to be neurotic grad students and malcontents from the professional classes (college professors, architects, software engineers, etc.)  Our rallies tended to be in Harvard Square or Downtown Crossing.  Try and hand out those "Workers Must Unite to Smash Fascist Bosses' Racism"* out to the dock workers and get belted right in the kisser!  But that's been a problem for the far Left for  75 years! 
"The middle-class I.L.P.‘er and the bearded fruit-juice drinker are all for a classless society so long as they see the proletariat through the wrong end of the telescope; force them into any real contact with a proletarian—let them get into a fight with a drunken fish-porter on Saturday night, for instance—and they are capable of swinging back to the most ordinary middle-class snobbishness."

--George Orwell
The Road to Wigan Pier

*OR, "Workers Must Unite to Smash Racist Bosses' Fascism!"
That was the other boilerplate at the "Challenge" newspaper.
:D

Now, Brit Hume tries to funny, but falls on his face because---all together now:
The Right understands humor like a potted plant understands the theory of relativity!