James Fallows: O’Donnell more dangerous than Palin
Two-thirds of the way into O’Donnell’s debate with Coons last night, it occurred to James Fallows that she could be more dangerous than Sarah Palin. Why? Because:
…she has the idiot bravado of the talk show regular.
To echo Bob Schieffer in another context, is that the best Fallows can do to critique her performance? If so, she must have been pretty articulate.
Fallows’ critique is correct but misdirected. A couple of editorial changes point it at the proper target:
Anybody that has to ask who the proper target is probably wouldn’t agree with the answer.
Well, that fell flat. I’d have sworn I struck the ‘s’ from the ‘she’ but it didn’t show up in the post.
Neo, I’ll join the commenter(s) that said a preview feature would be nice.
O’Donnell is – they say – 20 points down. Not sure I buy it.
For one, I heard Obama is going to campaign for Coons. Why bring him in if this one is already decided?
For two, I now take it as a given fact of reality that anyone the left goes out of its way to demonize and demean in the worst ways possible is
a) someone they fear more than anything. They can take truckloads full of McConnells, Boehners and John McCains. Those lukewarm leaches are no threat. Palin, O’Donnell, Miller, et al? Big, big, big, major threats. Biggest, Hugest, Most Enormous threat of all???? Normal, regular people. What do the above have in common? They are normal regular people, with all the good and bad. The Left loves monsters, Repub or Dem. They hate the normal and the good.
b) someone who might actually win. They think O’Donnell might win. They know something they aren’t saying. They are scared to death a person like her might just be one of 100 elite Senators in just a few months. That prospect sends them barking mad.
We’ll have to see come 11/2.
Former speechwriters for Carter–well, there you go.
Anybody on the Right who’s assertive and unwilling to accept the liberal narrative is uppity or an idiot to the left. I wonder how long before the ropes and big crosses get taken out of the Democrats’ sheds.
Christine is the girl
Who ignored James Fallows
Back when he cared
O’Donnell is likely toast, but she did end the career of a life long RINO. That will concentrate the minds of many current Republican lifers.
The people of Delaware are heavily Democrat and liberal. Any conservative Republican would be a long shot. If the people of Delaware want smaller government and less spending, they can be confident how O’Donnell will vote. With RINO’s you just don’t know.
Limbaugh played quite a few excerpts from the debate–particularly parts in which Blitzer and the other Inquisitor, I mean moderator, was going after her tooth and nail.
I thought she was very impressive. If she could hire Blitzer, and/or that woman shill, to attack her face to face on a regular basis she might just pull it off.
I hope she wins.
A lefty I know posted on his Facebook page that O’Donnell referred to “when we were fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 80s,” and was howling in derision at this alleged gaffe.
But we were fighting them, through our Afghan guerrilla proxies.
I saw a bit of the debate. It was like watching Dobermans go after a cornered cat (the emotion of it, I mean). They’re bullies, and I’ve come to detest them.
I like dangerous conservative women.
Just wish I knew one personally… 🙂
Beverly Says:
October 14th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
We were fighting the Soviets all over the world by proxy. It was called the Cold War, and lasted about 45 years. Some people have short memories.
All O’Donnell has to do is pull significantly more votes than expected. I believe she will do that and such a result will help a Palin candidacy.
“More dangerous” says it all. They are frightened, very frightened, that their golden cakewalk might end, requiring them to find shovel-ready jobs. But wait! They’ve been shoveling this sh*t at us their whole lives.
I’ve sent O’Donnell money and will send some more. The Left buys votes all the damn time, so let’s get going! Stop shrugging.
Fallows was once young and clever — wrote a decent book on National Defense back in the 70s. Now he’s older but no longer clever, and definitely not wiser. He’s worth listening to on pc software and impressionistic travel reports from China, but not much else. Shame.
I was once young and clever, too. But if he worked for the odious and smarmy J Carter in the ’70s, I kinda doubt his defense book was decent.
Fallows was one of the only journalists who wrote in doubt of the Palestinian “narrative” that Israeli soldiers had shot al Durah. He looked at the ballistic evidence, and although he stopped short of saying al Durah was a hoax (he wrote the article in the Atlantic in June of 2003, the relatively early days), it took a certain amount of courage even to go as far as he did.
“is that the best Fallows can do to critique her performance?”
I think your missing that this is a big insult when speaking to other like minded lefties.
The idea that the public in general, but more specially the tea partiers, are poorly educated fools who don’t realize they don’t know what the highly educated lefty experts know… is a major plank in their narrative of what’s going on now.
I think its bs if not the reverse of the truth (the public has a better clue as to what is going on than the primarily city based, corporate / education working, lefties). Many of the leftist types work in jobs that are not connected to reality. They either work with ideas or do paperwork that is mandated / not based around profit generating areas of the business they work for…
When you’re ‘so smart’ you think central planning and government control will make things better and cost less… you’ve gone full circle to idiot.
Beverly Says:
“But we were fighting them, through our Afghan guerrilla proxies.”
We probably even had a few advisors who went into battles… you don’t just hand out stinger missiles to people on the ‘pok-iston’ side of the border and use hand motions of helicopters and ‘boom’ noises as training…
But regardless, yeah we not only fought them in a proxy war in Afghanistan… we won… and it was a huge blow to the USSR, in several different ways, that helped bring it down.
That idiot ignorant leftists can laugh at someone’s imagined ignorance by stating this factually true thing is just par for course…
Think of what you’re saying about Fallows, Neo. The ballistics of the matter are objective; they are facts: distances, angles, velocities, bullet weights and calibers. It takes “A certain amount of courage” to deal with the facts? Whooee.
http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/14/pat-caddell-furious-over-%E2%80%98hypocrites-in-the-white-house-unloads-on-obama/
Baklava provided an example of Democratic courage for us yesterday, above.
Tom: It did at that point in time, 2003. It was before there was a lot of publicity about the ballistics. He took up the cause early on, when it did take a certain amount of courage to stem the tide. Later on he dropped it and would go no further than saying the Israelis didn’t kill the boy. That took a certain amount of cowardice. But initially he was courageous, especially compared to others in the MSM.
MSM Mission accomplished: take the focus off Coons.
An interesting thing about the media and Chris Coons: he’s treated just like they treated Barack Obama in regards to Rev. Wright, Ayers, Black Liberation Theology, James Marshall Davis etc.
They’re downplaying Coon’s college article: “Chris Coons: The Making of a Bearded Marxist” by accepting Coon’s implausible explanation “it was a joke” and making light of anyone who questions their assessment.
Because the MSM never includes the full article please read it and judge for yourselves.
Fallows book on National Defense was pretty good because his sources were pretty good: the great John Boyd, Chuck Spinney (before he got out of analysis and into radical politics), Pierre Sprey (before he got in jazz and left-wing talking points), and Bill Lind (I think, before he got into paleoconservative politics). I met them all back in the day, including Fallows. I was mainly a lefty then, though patriotic; hence I didn’t stay a lefty for long. In my defense, Newt was a big admirer of their work, too.
Spinney and were very good at systems analysis; foreign policy game theory is something different altogether. The guy I thought was a genius on that front was Edward Luttwak, who wrote in 1981 that the point of Reagan’s strategic programs was to provoke an economic crisis in the Soviet Union, He has a new book on the grand strategy of the Byzantine Empire. Maybe Mrs. Oblio will give it to me for Christmas.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3624831/Civil-war-the-only-way-to-bring-peace-to-Iraq.html