If I May Rebut Davy and Nash

Have you guys ever given consideration to the fact that people are leaving the Democrat party these days because the guys in charge are such a bunch of obnoxious jerks?

You've got the Speekah, Samson, the Godfather...not to mention the leadership of the Black Caucus, who are about as polite as a rabid wolverine and as helpful as the IRS. And we haven't even gotten to the Golden Boy, who might not be able to get elected the most popular guy in a phone booth. Maybe Nash and Davy should look at that factor before they bash anyone for leaving the party.

I Seem to Remember

Last year, Jere Nash chided Andy Taggart for bringing up the "Russian Boogeyman" in a blog post, because the only way Republicans win is by scaring people.

My question for Jere today is: Are the Russians scaring you yet? Because the people in Georgia are absolutely terrified.

Since Andy Taggart Started It

Here's another thing GWB is responsible for, Andy: John Edwards' love child.*

Mr. Rove wants us to pass this along: Shampoo When Wet Cleans Hair. This is all.

* Alleged. He is a lawyer after all.

Nash and Savage (A Contrarianism)

Jere Nash, pundit and Democrat operative, thinks that Michael Savage did damage to the conservative cause every time he opened his mouth.

Personally, I thought he did more damage when he gave money to Jerry Brown. You remember Jerry Brown-he of the far-left views and former California governor, later mayor of Oakland and commune resident, and current California attorney general. Savage gave Brown money for his campaign for AG last year. Folks, if you think Samson is bad, imagine a guy who is not afraid to tell people he has Socialist leanings having the power of the state behind him.

Savage is a poser, who had no real thought-out conservative position. Frankly, to me he came off as a guy imitating what he thought a conservative here in flyover country would sound like. He did a good job of it, but what position does he ever flesh out? Nothing. Just screaming into the microphone. And he makes money off of it. It's very American, but that doesn't make it any less put-on to me.

Another Universe Heard From

Jere Nash is blaming the Bush administration for the economy. I suppose that's as surprising as me having a headache on Saturday morning.

He puts the president at fault for the IndyMac bank closing. And I guess, when you live in one of Jackson's trendy liberal enclaves, you miss all of this stuff:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121581435073947103.html?mod=hps_us_whats_news

I find this quote very interesting, Jere:

In a written statement, the Office of Thrift Supervision, which regulated IndyMac, said "the immediate cause" of the failure was statements made by Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat. Mr. Schumer in late June publicly raised concerns about the bank's solvency.

"Although this institution was already in distress, I am troubled by any interference in the regulatory process," said OTS Director John Reich.

Did ya catch that, Jere? A little Democratic grandstanding is OK, though, right? It's all to stop the corrupt and inept Bush administration, right?

I really hope somebody will post that quote on Jere's blog.

Maybe this is the Problem, Jere...

The Medicare one, that is.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121556116413437535.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries

And look, it's by one of those Bush appointees who have 'mismanaged' a chronically mismanaged and bloated program. Oh, the price of liberalism-but they had such great intentions!

A Note on Nash

The Supreme Commander El Rushbo has a saying about the mainstream media, and to paraphrase it, it goes something like this:

When the media believes the Republicans are at fault, they blame the Republicans. And when the media believes that the Democrats are at fault, they blame both Republicans and Democrats.

It was kind of a surprise to see Jere Nash do the same thing today in his blog about Medicaid. Jere would love to say that the Democrats (those who believe that the only good Republican is a dead one) in the House are wrong, but he just can't bring himself to do it (after all, he is one).

What he'd love to say is that the issue is a political loser for the House (after all, they didn't make a bit of headway against Barbour/Bryant last year trying to make cigarette taxes a wedge issue).

All he can really squeeze out, and after much effort, I'm sure, is the need for compromise. What he leaves off, as Rep. Greg Snowden has noted on his blog, is that the House has refused compromise and is now ready to play chicken with the governor.

I love watching 'em squirm, I really do.

Cue Nash, Defending Whiplash

Far be it from anyone to ask Congressman Whiplash to, I don't know, put his money where his mouth is on energy. You can't blame Iraq forever, and you can't run on a phantom record when you're the incumbent. Eventually, people are going to look for more results than faxed statements from Baghdad and you pointing out that you're not living in the Memphis suburbs.

It's such a shame that President Bush wasn't calling for more drilling eight years ago when running for president the first time. Oh, nuts, he was, wasn't he? And it's too bad that drilling in ANWR has been verboten to the Democratic party ever since they allied themselves with the enviro-wacky left in the late '60s. Face it, Jere, to you, the price of gas is a political issue. It's something you can use to hammer the incumbent party, and you know that your coalition doesn't give a damn, because the Obamessiah only thinks it's a problem that gas went up too fast and The Al Gore thinks that higher gas prices are just great (just read his book!) because it'll save the world. To me, it's a real problem-I don't have people lining up bundling millions of dollars for my travel expenses.

I laugh at Nash sometimes. It's like he fell asleep in 1999 and woke up in 2007. I laugh at his and Hampton's complete ignorance of the principles of supply (which we don't have enough of) and demand (of which there is a great increase due to the developing world). And I laugh at all the 'well, it'll be five years' talk when drilling comes up-because if we'd done it eight years ago, we might not be in this situation!

Edited to add: All of a sudden, "War for Oil" doesn't sound so bad, doesn't it?

And Nash Forgets Something Today

About the Clinton wins 1992 and 1996, which were won without those 'hard-working white folks.' Let me remind you with a visual aid, Jere.



Clinton took 43% of the vote in 1992; he took 49% in 1996. In 1996, at the height of his popularity, Clinton took Kentucky (full of hard working white folks) by less than 1%, Nevada by just over 1%. He took Arizona by 2.2%, and Tennessee (home of Al Gore, his running mate) by 2.4. He won Missouri, where Perot ran strong, 47-41. He won Louisiana and Arkansas, also with a large number of working class whites.

Perot took 8% in KY; 9% in NV; 8% in AZ; 5% in TN; 10% in MO; Perot took another 9% in FL (Clinton 48), 10% in OH (Clinton 47), 9% in PA (Clinton 49), and 9% in NH (Clinton 49). And remember, Perot's share in 1992 was more than double his share in 1996. Are there enough favorable minority groups and eggheads in any of those states to swing them to Obama without a third-party candidate to hamstring McCain like Bush 41 and Dole? And keep in mind, Jere, that Obama tanks just as badly among Hispanics as he does whites, judging by the results in Texas and the Mountain West.

I guess this is where my math fails me, but doesn't Bill Clinton owe more to Perot and his oil billions than he does any particular aggrieved community? No Democrat has been elected twice without a third party challenge to his Republican opponent since Franklin Roosevelt. Before him, you have to go back to Grover Cleveland. And they also have not won without West Virginia since 1916.

I Do So Love It When They Talk This Way

I was sitting at lunch the other day, minding my own business, when two people sat down in the booth next to me. One of them was wearing a candidate's sticker on his shirt. The candidate was a Democrat; evidently, the two people were big supporters. One of the gists of their conversation-which resonated throughout the eating establishment, of course, as they had little use for either privacy or the considerations of their fellow customers-was that in the coming years, they would elect 'real Democrats' to office here in Mississippi and across the country.

Naturally, days before I heard this, Jere Nash had made the same argument about two tenured Democrats who were treated poorly by his political party for basically the same reason-that they were Democrats in Name Only.

After November's elections, when the front of the herd was thinned, it kind of became inevitable that the rest of the flock would get thinned eventually. I figured it would take a few more years before the Legislature looked more like the Executive Branch. Of course, there's a certain segment of the state that's going to vote Republican most every time out (Desoto, Rankin, Madison, Tupelo, the 49-10 corridor), and a certain segment that's going to vote Democratic (the Delta and Jackson). Then there's northeast Mississippi, which, as Sid Salter once put it, is the last place in the state where it's as ok to be a conservative white Democrat as it is to be a Republican. God forbid someone whose political party showed him all the loyalty of Elliot Spitzer at a brothel on half-off night feel unwanted.

My question (after the run-around) is: Do these idiots actually want to win an election?

Let's be honest here: John Kerry couldn't win an election for dog catcher in Mississippi. Neither could the Al Gore, allegedly from neighboring Tennessee. Barry Obamessiah will not win Mississippi in November without some help from the graveyards. Being a 'real Democrat' here is akin to sitting inside your car with the garage door closed. Bennie Thompson makes it by demogoguery and pork, and Gene Taylor by occasionally publically butting heads with his party's leadership. Ronnie Musgrove got hung out to dry by Al Gore and the DNC.

I want to drink whatever kool-aid these people are sipping on when they say and write this stuff. I suppose the 'real Democrats' are those guys who never have to make a deal with a Republican, or court Republican voters, or maybe, just maybe, zig where the national party zags. Maybe that's why there was a lot of glee when a 'real Democrat' got 41% of the vote last fall (and, sometimes, those 'real Democrats' have to, I don't know, vote 65,000 elderly off of public assistance). It's because those 'real Democrats' eventually do have to try to actually win elections. Frankly, I hope those 'real Democrats' that I sat next to enjoy being 'real Democrats'. Meanwhile, the Republicans will be focused on building a political party instead of tearing one down.

If I May Channel My Personal Hero, Ricky Bobby...

Dear 8 pound 11 ounce baby Jesus...

Please, please, please let the Golden Boy successfully obtain the state Democratic Chairmanship.

There is nothing I'd love better than to watch Jere Nash, the Kossacks, the JFP, Howard Dean, and the national Democratic party squirm as Jamie Franks screams, pounds, threatens, and spikes the podium for them for a term. After all, the Clarion-Ledger comments section has already begun filling with Democrats (strategically?) questioning his Democratic bona fides due to his (purely hyperbolic) statements on God, guns and gays.

Folks, there is no one more Democrat than Jamie Franks. He is loyal to the Democrats to a fault. He passionately hates the Republican party, everything it stands for and everyone in it. And that's about the end of his positives for them. He's combative, mean, short-tempered, and an easy target for folks like me who love to point out the differences between his public persona and his personal actions. There's his diarrhea of the mouth, and his penchant for threatening to whip the ass of anyone who gets in his way. Plus, he won't go on Gallo. He absolutely refuses to, which is a positive of Wayne Dowdy. At least he gave us a view of life on whatever Fantasy Island he was living on twice a month.

It seems that he just can't get out of Bill Wheeler's shadow, as well. If you'll remember, Wheeler was pounded by Roger Wicker in the 1994 election to replace Jamie Whitten. Following that, he left House District 19 (where his successor was-shocking!-his current law partner, one James R. Franks Jr.) and became the state Democratic party chairman.

We here at the Spot certainly welcome the effort of Mr. Franks to lead the Democratic party. We're sure it'll be a train wreck on the level of...well, his disasterous campaign for Lt. Governor, in which he proved that he has a political tin ear and a lack of polish, not to mention falling for the 'crime issue' rope-a-dope that our current Lt. Governor put on him. Politics ain't checkers, it's chess.

So good luck. I'm waiting with baited breath for this one. I feel a claim of the day revival coming on...

Way to Go Nash

Jere Nash has said on his blog what every Dem who wants to open the floodgates for potential Democratic voters, I mean, undocumented workers, really wants to say in their heart of hearts: that enforcing the law in regards to immigration is WRONG. Glad to know he's gotten that out of the way. Damage control post followed, of course.

Advice to Jere: Think before you blog. Somewhere, Gregg Harper is smiling.