Apparently the anti-O’Donnell vote was so large that Delaware’s House seat has flipped to the Democrats.
Contentions
0 Responses to “LIVE BLOG: More on Delaware”
May 2013
-
Articles
-
"My Negro Problem-and Ours" at 50
Norman Podhoretz -
Gay Marriage, the Court, and Federalism
Tara Helfman -
The Spirit of '75?
Algis ValiunasAn audacious, and wrong, argument about the American Revolution.
-
In Praise of Sheryl Sandberg
Christine RosenThe controversial Facebook executive's book is exactly the right kind of self-help.
Fiction
-
Onto a Good Thing
Joseph Epstein
Politics & Ideas
-
The Bureaucrat-Driven Life
Heather Wilhelm -
The Making of an Education Reformer
Sohrab Ahmari -
Bork's Watergate
James Rosen -
Dear Prudence
Paul O. Carrese -
Whose Accomplishments?
Mona Charen
Culture & Civilization
-
The Parenting Trap
Dana Mack -
George Saunders, Anti-Minimalist
Fernanda Moore -
A Chekhov in Training
Terry Teachout -
What Ailes the Liberal Media?
Andrew Ferguson
John Podhoretz
-
Taking Obama's Foreign Policy Seriously
John Podhoretz
Threat Assessment
-
More Genocide Threats from Iran
Jonathan S. Tobin
Letters
-
Denying Jewish Peoplehood-and Reality
Our ReadersResponses to Robert S. Wistrich's "The Changing Face of Anti-Semitism"
-
Gun Laws, Crime, and Freedom
Our ReadersResponses to Benjamin Domenech's "The Truth About Mass Shootings and Gun Control"
-
Don't Confuse Principle and Pose
Our ReadersResponses to Matthew Continetti's "Poseur Politics in the Era of Obama"
-
Jews and Sports
Our Readers
Enter Laughing
-
Get Our Free Newsletter
This woman is no conservative! This election for one has expose some many so-called conservative pundits as what they really are, subversives looking to move the GOP to the left from within. This is what Powell essentially said when he said the Palin pick signalled the GOP was taking a turn to the right. So Parker is no conservative and a McCain/Palin victory will finally rid us of their unhelpful critiques on what conservatism and the GOP should be.
If Parker is so proud of her writing, why does she use a pseudonym? Palin wasn’t allowed such luxury and she’ll be suffering for years as the moron media tries to destroy her.
Parker nailed it. And America gets it, even if you pretend not to. I wouldn’t say conservatism is dead, but hopefully after this election, the bigoted brand of conservatism espoused by Commentary/NationalReview/Weekly Standard will be.
I just have one word to say about this…. Polaroids. Somebody somewhere has Polaroids of some of these Conservatives who are backing Obama. They have lost all logic, their arguments stink and their support of him falls into one of two categories:
A) He speaks well and makes me feel good about what he will do.
B) I hope that he doesn’t do many of the things he says he will do.
So even though they feel good when he speaks, they disagree with what he has to say and are hoping he is lying. Great. The left hopes he is lying too, about any of his positions that are temporarily toward the center.
He is either lying to the right or he is lying to the left. Based on his past record, I think we can be assured he is lying to the right.
JRub — thanks for this well-crafted takedown. I’m sorry to see Parker going off the deep end. I’ve enjoyed her writing in the past. This campaign is certainly shining a spotlight on a lot of people.
I don’t know who will be leading the GOP into the future after 2008 (not McCain, even if he gets elected). But there’s a growing list of people we know it will NOT be.
In the meantime, Barack Obama gets to blame our decision to invade Iraq on the “personal agendas” of Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz — would anyone care to parse the hidden import of these words?
Of course not. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Kathleen Parker and her $500 Gucci bag can both go to hell.
I have always enjoyed Kathleen Parker’s columns, and actually it did not bother me when she called for Palin to step down from the ticket. I think that was an awful idea, but if Parker sees it differently, fine. Life goes on.
But the “Ugliness” column dated Oct. 22nd is really weak.
#6 — Don’t know where KP gets her handbags or at what price, but even if they are $500 Guccis, would that be a problem for you?
Who cares what Parker says? She is a minor internet columnist with no following. Far below the significance of an Andrew Sullivan (who also should be ignored).
Note: $500 would be really, really cheap for a Gucci bag. Unless it’s an auction result on eBay, or you bought it from a street vendor in the Philippines (wink, nudge).
This kind of analysis represents the victory of the post-modernist education so many of these commentators imbibed in college. There, rhetorical of a given subject is tortured until it finally confessed to whatever the analyst sought to prove. The proof that this kind of thinking now pervades political commentary from every point in the spectrum can be found in recent punditry. Palin’s white dress, McCain’s criticism of ACORN, Republicans’ accusation that Obama is advocating socialism are all denounced as racist and “proved” by resort to bizarre rationales whose underlying dynamics are extracted straight from the likes of Derrida.
This kind of political post-modernism has its cadres of mystagogues to interpret its “hidden” meanings. Thus does intellectual corruption hide in plain sight.
I was just going to write what “On the Right” wrote in #7.
I loved her article on Obama after his race speech in March, calling it for what it was – a typical political ploy.
I also thought the call for Palin was strange but this article seems to cross the line for the reasons Jennifer points out.
Trust Fund Jenny pushed the self-defeating Ayers™ tactic that pushed the Republican message completely off track. Rubin really thinks that middle America cares about who sat on what Chicago board with who at a time when their jobs and health insurance are on the line. Even with such an elderly candidate, reviving the 1960s culture clash was not going to work in 2008, it didn’t even work in 1992.
Trust Fund Jenny also thought that throwing around the insults she learned to spout at UC Berkeley, like “terrorist” “socialist” “not the real America” etc., was going to attract middle America instead of repulsing independent voters. Now McCain looks like the divisive radical and Obama like a steady grown up, great job.
Maybe Commentary is engaged in some kind of Trostkyite plot to get McCain defeated?
Sarah Palin really does make some people nuts, doesn’t she? I said this on Chicagoboyz the other day, but, it’s kind of like lefty campus politics writ large, this election. You scream bloody murder at your opponent and hope they get so knocked off their stride they offer you an apology for, well, nothing, actually.
Dear conservatives, this is the tactic that loses us so much – the shocked contrite reaction to such lunacy, I mean. Just say what you think, and if that makes someone else angry, well, that’s not really your problem. So, it’s a terrible smear to say Sen. Obama has worked, in the past, with a domestic terrorist, but one dummy at a McCain campaign rally calls Sen Obama an Arab terrorist and all conservatives everywhere are horrible racists. Projection, anyone?
What difference does it make if Jenny has a Trust Fund? Why smear? I have no idea whether it is a fact or why it matters, but I’m sure we all wish we had trust funds and could leave them to our kids. I’m all for attacking the moronic, simplistic ideas of conservatives, but ad hominem attacks are weak.
I don’t have a problem with Gucci bags other than I think Prada bags are much nicer.
#15: For “trust fund Jenny” substitute “rich, money-grubbing jew” and you will understand what bothers #13 so much about Ms. Rubin.
“but one dummy at a McCain campaign rally calls Sen Obama an Arab terrorist” — MD
Yeah, because it was only “one” dummy. I can point you to YouTube videos of whole lines of McCain-Palin supporters making similar comments. Clearly, you don’t have the gene that allows you to perceive racism in the Wright attacks and other associations stories. That’s the charitable reading.
#13, Jennifer Rubin has a Ph.D in political sciences from Cambridge. How you change “Dr. Rubin” into “trust fund jenny” speaks more to your hang-ups than to any shorcomings of Dr. Rubin. And with that, I shall henceforth not feed the trolls.
A must-read from Jamie Kirchick:
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/10/21/2008-10-21_who_are_leftwing_haters_to_point_fingers-2.html?page=0
@ #18 (and others)
See? My point is very nicely made (yes, there are stupid people and racists on the right, Jack, and some on the left, too. As a person of color, as the saying goes, I think I get that)
Jack – Do your genes allow you to tell whether calling Barry an “Arab terrorist” is anti-Arab racism or anti-black racism?
Parker needs professional help. She is mentally sick. IF she still thinks she is conservative than it is paranoia, otherwise it is a dual personality. No matter what is her disease, she should not be published in respectful media. I would suggest National Enquirer but recently it became too good for her. In fact besides Fox News the National Enquirer is the only fair and balanced major outlet.
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/sen_joe_biden_coverup_accused_/celebrity/65619
It seems to me that Parker has been in a snit fit ever since the Saddleback Church forum. Religion in politics disturbs her. She may be conservative on a lot of issues, but like George Will and some others on the Right (such as David Brooks), she is a secularist. Secularists hate Sarah Palin for her strong Christian faith.
George WIll a secularist? Every third column he writes is about how Episcopalians have lost their way. He even chastised Fred Thomson for not going to church….
OK, maybe Will is just a religious snob. He went after Mike Huckabee for daring to question evolution (Huck is a Baptist and they are not our type of person, dear). Palin is or was Pentecostal … and we don’t take sherry with them, dear.
Richard F, as a product myself of that very post-modern education (at an Ivy League in the mid eighties), I could not agree with you more. Your comment is spot on. The end result of that education is Barack Obama. Although I don’t know him personally (but I did go to school with his wife), I’ve been surrounded by people like him most of my life. They were my very closest friends. I was one of them myself. But for some unknown reason, I started to see through the charade of deconstructionism as a student, even as I immersed myself in it, and ultimately rejected it. I think that explains my gradual political awakening (which took far longer), but which never happened for most of my friends. I wish I could figure out why I had that moment of clarity, when others didn’t. It would give me hope for the future.
Again, I wish it was a simple as the statement, “secularists hate Sarah Palin.” I’m a secularist, and an agnostic, and Sarah Palin doesn’t disturb me one whit. If I didn’t do my research and only listened to the MSM, I would be horrified by her. If I learned that she really wanted to make creationism part of the public school curriculum, that would rule her out for me. But she doesn’t. It only takes a modicum of effort to get the facts. Kathleen Parker is well able to do this, so are George Will and Peggy Noonan. They are either being willfully ignorant, or they are lying. It’s not secularism that is to blame. On the contrary, if they look too carefully at Sarah Palin, their self-constructed identities start to crumble, so they can’t and instead lash out in transparently ridiculous ways.
#19: Let us be very, very careful: a doctorate in polisci from the Apostolary on the Cam may be thought to be much more of a discredit than a mere trust fund.