Chapter One: In which I mouth off to Andrew Sullivan (Send More Japs!)

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

Mister Sullivan, who has never made a correct prediction on any topic to my knowledge, posted the following:

Have you noticed National Review's pledge drive theme? It would be useful when calculating Senator Clinton's fundraising achievements to include the amount of money she has helped raise for the GOP. Maybe someone could do the research and find how often she is included prominently on far right fund-raising materials. Lately, she's been driving traffic to Drudge and the New York Post.

It becomes increasingly clear to me that there is only one candidate who can unite the GOP and win the coming election for the Republicans. And she's ahead in the polls.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/10/shes-already-fu.html

Though I have no doubt Sully has my email address designated as spam by now, I felt obliged to reply:

Andrew,

In his memoir of his service in the Pacific War, William Manchester reserved
special contempt for the propaganda story about the marines wiring
headquarters, "Send more Japs." He said that no combat soldier in the
Pacific wanted "more Japs," and that it didn't boast morale to pretend
otherwise. But here we are... republicans have had such an easy time
defeating the Clinton machine time and again that they're just itching to
beat more Clinton ass. "Send Hillary!"

Do you really expect that an unprecedented torrent of ugly, republican
hatred will endear independents to the Republican nominee in 2008? Will
suburban moms warm to the republicans when they start calling Hillary a
loud-mouthed bitch? (And they will... you've seen how these folks operate.)
Will Americans believe Hillary will surrender to Osama Bin Laden (assuming
they still even care about that) while code pink ladies storm her rallies
with "war-monger" placards?

The standard republican cognitive-dissonance campaign won't work this time.
Everyone in America knows what it would mean to put a Clinton in the
Whitehouse. Calm, centrist rule, heavy on the double-talk. That's what
Americans always want.

I think Hillary is off-putting, but America does not think anything of the
sort. I know you read papers, so you must have read the Washington Post's
front pager today about Hillary being easily the most popular and among the
least polarizing figure in the field from either party. Do you know that
other than Gallup, every other national poll since July has her negatives
below 40%?

Yet you disregard that polling, and the mountains of confirming polling, in
favor of a combination of your gut feelings and what some knuckleheads at
the NRO think--the same knuckleheads who knew the Republicans would hold
congress in 2006 because everyone they talked to at the water-cooler at the
National frigging Review "knew" that the American people secretly loved the
Iraq War.

Running against Hillary will be another post-rational republican
"cake-walk."

[redqueen]

1. Well if she wins the nod... I hope to God you're right. n/t

[AX10]

2. Sullivan, Hitchens (the drunk sot), Matthews, and the rest of the...

punditry have blind hatred for the Clinton's for various reasons. Yet they have all been relatively soft on Bush and the thugs running for the Republican nomination.

Sullivan is another establishment mule, a self-loathing conservative gay, who is deeply conflicted about who he really is. After all, how can he subscribe to an ideology that preaches hate against him? :wtf:

[truebrit71]

3. Unfortunately he's right....

Nobody will mobilize the GOP base more than HRC...

[redqueen]

4. It gives me no pleasure at all to say that I see it the same way.

They've got NOTHING to energize their base right now. REAL Hillary-hatred (the kind right-wingers have... not the criticism you see here that people start wetting themselves over) would give them a hell of a boost.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

5. Which republicans would fire up our base? Which ones wouldn't?

Do you think republicans spend a lot of time trying to pick the candidate dmocrats don't hate?

That's a heck of a way to run a campaign...

[redqueen]

9. Of course they don't, because they own the media. n/t

[Hell Hath No Fury]

12. I truly believe that as well.

I think a HRC nomination is a republican wetdream. None of their candidates excites them. There is no single, strong issue to drive them to the polls, though they are working the illegal immigrant propaganda hard. They need something for GOP of all stripes to respond to.

The spectre of Bill Clinton back in the White House with his lesbian, murderous, harpy wife in charge is just what the GOP doctor ordered. All the Clinton greatest hits from the 90s get to be resurrected and orgasmically parroted by Rush and Michael and Faux -- Vince Foster, Whitewater, the Lincoln bedroom, and, the best of all, MONICA. Every single day, the GOP sheeple will get a lurid reminder of just why they spend 8 years hating the Clintons. And it will enflame them. It will inspire them. It will give them a hard-on so enormous the only relief they will get is from pulling the lever for the republican presidential candidate -- any republican candidate. If voting in Ron Paul for President keeps Bill and Hillary Clinton from disgracing the White House with their fetid presence, they will do it.

Yup. A GOP wetdream....

[redqueen]

14. Well, if things continue on as they are,

we may get to see for ourselves how it pans out.

That said, remember how things went for the front-runner last time around, once the voting got started.

[zeemike]

6. The voters will believe whatever they are given

Over and over by the media. Big lies published over and over become truths in the mind of too many of us.
They will use that laugh in commercials to make her seem crazy as a bat.
They will raise the Lesbian charges. and that will be reinforced with a manufactured "Gay agenda incident" or two. They will have fundraiser scandals and by the time they are through with her she will be in a face too close to call against her Rethug opponent (which I personally think will be John McCain because he was promised it for his kissing the ass of Der Fer-ur).
But what the hell we have survived the last 8 years of deception and betrayal so there is no reason to think we will not survive this one too.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

17. What's with the lesbian thing today? That's the stupidest non-issue ever, and sure to backfire.

[zeemike]

18. Sure it is a stupid non issue.

But it works well with the evangelical christian crowd which is the republican base. And they will need to get them out in large numbers to win.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. Remember When "Everybody" Was Saying The Pugs Would Lose Congress And Rove Said "They" Were Wrong

Because He Had The "Numbers"

Same deal...

"Yet you disregard that polling, and the mountains of confirming polling, in
favor of a combination of your gut feelings and what some knuckleheads at
the NRO think--the same knuckleheads who knew the Republicans would hold
congress in 2006 because everyone they talked to at the water-cooler at the
National frigging Review "knew" that the American people secretly loved the
Iraq War."


Hillary Clinton will rip the bark off Rudy Guliani and make Bernie Keirik his running mate...

[AX10]

8. Hillary is a fighter and Sully is afraid of that.

That's why he is trying to get us to back away from Clinton.

[Forrest Greene]

10. Why Is

...referring to Senator Clinton by her first name not considered condescension?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

11. It is practical, since her husband is the most famous man in the world

(On edit: GW Bush is probably even more famous, but you know what I mean.)

Her supporters call her Hillary, so it's not like it's a slap. It;s like Madonna or Cher. Brand name... friendly.

[Forrest Greene]

13. Manufactured

[Forrest Greene]

15. Sorry, Didn't Mean To Be So Short

I've had a long day.

The "Hillary" thing really does puzzle me, as it seems many people would consider it a form of infantilizing or condescension, especially in the context of a political campaign. I haven't noticed any of the male candidates being referred to similarly.

"Branding," especially as "friendly," raises concerns. You may recall GW Bush was also branded as friendly. "The guy you'd like to have a beer with." Turned out, when we had our beers, GW played a lot of crap on the jukebox, vomited on our Hush Puppies, left with the waitress, & stuck us with the tab.

So I'm a bit twice burned, three times shy about all that.

I don't want a friend as the President, I want a competent administrator with a functional human soul. Some will no doubt say "Then vote for Hillary," but FWIW, personally, I don't think she qualifies.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

16. Not to worry, nobody wants to have a beer with Hillary! (she needs all the softening she can get)