Morning Round Em Up

Filed in National by on May 27, 2010

——————
Gail Collins in the New York Times:

Pretend you’re the Republican leadership in a smallish state with an open United States Senate seat. The opposition is running a popular, longtime officeholder whose sense of inevitability was shaken by recent revelations that he had referred to himself as a Vietnam War veteran when he isn’t one.

Your own options are:

A) A well regarded former congressman who is a decorated Vietnam War veteran.

B) A political novice who made her fortune building up an entertainment business that specialized in blood, seminaked women and scripted subplots featuring rape, adultery and familial violence. In which the candidate, her husband and children played themselves. Also, the family yacht is named Sexy Bitch.

Well, obviously, you go for the yacht owner.

Indeed, a new Quinnipiac poll shows Richard Blumenthal (D) leads Linda McMahon (R) by 25 points in the U.S. Senare race, 56% to 31%. Yeah, this is a safe Democratic seat.

——————

David Anderson (and it was him, this time I checked) actually makes sense:

The International Red Cross is a non-partisan, non-sectarian, impartial humanitarian organization. They were established to bring humanitarian aid to all nations. There is some controversy about the fact that they taught first aid to the Taliban terrorists recently. First Aid training is not some secret that changes the war. It is available to everyone. The International Red Cross has always helped people who were injured on both sides of the battlefield. It has helped people in disasters in almost every nation. […] I do not understand the controversy.

There has always been a certain naivete in David about how truly insane the Insane Right is. Because, deep down, David Anderson is a religious man, which I respect him for, and I think he believes all conservatives come to their conservative opinions like he has. But I don’t think he realizes that some on his side truly want to kill all Muslims everywhere on this planet, no matter if they are actually terrorists or not. And if they don’t want to kill them, they want to deprive them of all human dignity and all rights. And if they don’t want to do that, then they certainly view all Muslims as terrorists, and thus, the enemy. Couple that with a lack of compassion, a belief that the Geneva Convention is a quaint little thing, a belief that war crimes are not war crimes if America commits them, a belief that torture is American, and you get those who feel it is a controversial for the International Red Cross to train the Taliban to treat their wounded.

——————

I actually like this idea:

The state’s driver’s education program is now being examined for what it costs taxpayers. State Sen. Michael Katz has proposed using the money spent on teaching high-schoolers how to drive on other teaching activities. Let the school tax dollars be used for math, science and other topics.

We agree. But we don’t think driver’s education should be cut. It is the most efficient way to teach teenagers how to drive safely, an important goal for all of us. Why not move the funding from taxes to a fee? Having safer teenage drivers lowers everyone’s car insurance rates. Why not use the insurance system to pay for driver’s education? Add a small amount to every car insurance bill to pay for all students — in public and nonpublic schools — can learn to drive safely. The General Assembly should authorize a study of the proposal. If it is doable, then the state can save the program.

——————

And now the walk back begins. Larry Sabato:

“Unlike some analysts, we have never once predicted that Republicans would win enough new House seats to take control of the chamber. They may well do so in November due to the factors with which we’re all familiar (a bad economy, sagging presidential popularity, public concern over spending and debt, and so on). But in our eyes, there has been and still is insufficient data to suggest an impending turnover.”

About the Author ()

Comments (9)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Jason330 says:

    I never like pro wrestling, but I liked the trash talking interviews that set up the plotlnes for the upcoming matches. I guess CT Republicans were looking for some of that.

    Thank you nutmeg state teabaggers!

  2. RSmitty says:

    It was a tad too late for your morning roundup, but I just posted a SPSA (Smitty Public Service Announcement) on Delaware’s 2010 Election Season. There have been some changes that any election-politics wonk may want to made aware.

    The Phillies losers of 4 straight?
    Let alone shutouts two games in a row. Marble mouth Charlie needs to take a bat to the buffet table in the lockerroom. This is where his laid-back approach isn’t so good. Then there were all the Met Tweets last night. GAG!

  3. anon says:

    If PT Barnum were alive today, he would be either a professional wrestling promoter, or a US Senator.

    I love pro wrestling, not that I watch it much, but I find the jargon and storylines really compelling. It is a classic 19th century carny tradition like vaudeville or the circus.

    Check out the pro wrestling glossary for some of the terms. Wikipedia has a lot of inside detail on pro wrestling.

    McMahon had a problem: Blumenthal was a “face” (short for “babyface,” which in WWE jargon means the audience perceives him as a “good guy.” )

    And she needed to “turn him heel.” (“heel” is a villain in WWE-speak).

    This is a storyline McMahon has performed thousands of times in her career:

    Typically, matches are staged between a protagonist (historically an audience favorite, known as a babyface, or “the good guy”) and an antagonist (historically a villain with arrogance, a tendency to break rules, or other unlikable qualities, called a heel)…

    At times a character may “turn”, altering their face/heel alignment. This may be an abrupt, surprising event, or it may slowly build up over time. It almost always is accomplished with a markable change in behavior on the part of the character. Some turns become defining points in a wrestler’s career, as was the case when Hulk Hogan turned heel after being a top face for over a decade. Others may have no noticeable effect on the character’s status. If a character repeatedly switches between being a face and heel, this lessens the effect of such turns, and may result in apathy from the audience. Vince McMahon is a good example of having more heel and face turns than anyone in WWE history.

  4. MJ says:

    My only problem with the IRC is that they continually refuse to recognize and admit Magen David Adom (Red Star of David in Israel) for full membership using their chosen symbol, yet they have included all of the Red Crescent groups from the Arab countries. The IRC continues to politicize humanitarian aid for some reason. MDA is forced to use the “red crystal.”

  5. MJ, on that we agree.

  6. Another Mike says:

    I have seen nothing in our local paper of record, but I found this today: Wilmington Trust Corporation announced that Michele M. Rollins, a director in its Class of 2013, resigned on May 17, 2010 in order to run for the United States House of Representatives.

    The DCCC has already issued a press release attacking Rollins for bailing on the Wilmington Trust gig after she made out handsomely while the company has not paid back its TARP funds.

    Source of the news is philly.citybizlist.com/YourCityBizNews/detail.aspx?id=79001.

  7. Another Mike says:

    Maybe the Connecticut GOP could replace Linda McMahon with her son-in-law, Triple H. He could debate Blumenthal and end the debate by dropping Blumenthal with a pedigree. Then he could pick up his sledgehammer, Hornswoggle would emerge from under the podium and the two of them would walk up the ramp and out of camera range.

  8. pandora says:

    The choice of McMahon demonstrates one of the Tea Party’s major flaws. Their ideology is one size fits all. Their candidates fit their beliefs, but not the state or district. They insist on running the same candidate in Alabama and Connecticut.

    They will lose this seat – and quite a few others – and how they handle those defeats doesn’t bode well. Unless… someone sees a situation where, instead of flipping and getting crazier, they reexamine their strategy.

  9. A note on a soldier’s difficulty referencing the nature of his/her service to this country during the Vietnam War era:

    This was not a declared war. There are all sorts of individuals who served the war effort and did duty during the war era who aren’t actually veterans of a foreign war.

    My BBF, the late Tom Daniels, was in the Army and later the reserves through the 60’s. Tom never set foot on foreign soil but he was elisted in active service throughout. Yet Tom wasn’t eligible to be a member of the VFW because of how the US ‘considered’ the war effort.

    In fact, because of his long-haired, WWJD attitude, they used to run him out of the bar down at the Newark VFW while I was down below in Auxilliary meetings (I am a gold star sister of a Marine who did fight –and became an MIA– in Nam). But no vet of that era can join a VFW unless they join as a social member.

    This is to say how screwed up the whole situation is and how hard it is to not see yourself as a veteran of that war if you were on active duty during its course.