The Superior Shamelessness

You know Barack Obama's head-pounding hypocrisy in McCarthyistically going after the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for pouring "foreign money" (note: first time I've ever heard this White House even USE the word "foreign" without the word "policy" coming directly after it) in the 2010 midterm campaign?  Compared to this, that's ancient history:

Democratic leaders in the House and Senate criticizing GOP groups for allegedly funneling foreign money into campaign ads have seen their party raise more than $1 million from political action committees affiliated with foreign companies.

House and Senate Democrats have received approximately $1.02 million this cycle from such PACs, according to an analysis compiled for The Hill by the Center for Responsive Politics. House and Senate GOP leaders have taken almost $510,000 from PACs on the same list.

Hey, Democrats?  SHUT THE !#$% UP!  Talk about all your "accomplishments" y'all were so proud of not so very long ago.

Oh, that's right - you can't, can ya?:

Take Betsy Markey of Colorado's 4th Congressional District, who in 2008 beat a Republican who seemed fixated on the same-sex marriage issue. Markey cast a late-in-the-roll-call no in November, then publicly switched to yes in the week before the March 21 roll call. She's currently trailing Republican Cory Gardiner by an average of 44%-39% in three polls. Her Web site links to a video she cut the week after the vote saying she had "the honor" to vote for the bill. But otherwise it seems to be silent on the issue.

Or consider John Boccieri of Ohio's 16th District, who switched from no to yes in a TV press conference in which he said the bill would do great things for his constituents. Boccieri's district was represented by Republicans for fifty-eight years until he was elected in 2008.

It looks like it will be again next year. In three polls Republican Jim Renacci leads Boccieri by an average of 46%-36% percent. Boccieri's Web site links to a recent interview in which he defends Obamacare and challenges opponents to say which provisions they'd give up.

Then there is Suzanne Kosmas, a longtime real estate agent who beat a Republican with an ethics issue in 2008 for Florida's 24th District seat. She announced her switch from no to yes late in the week before the roll call. She's now running behind Republican Sandy Adams by an average of 47%-40% in three recent polls.

To put these numbers in perspective, it's highly unusual for an incumbent House member to trail a challenger in any poll or to run significantly below 50%. But these three Democrats are running five to ten points behind Republican challengers and none tops 40%.

Let's tally this up: Their "accomplishments" are radioactive, their smears are all duds, so what's left?  That's right, ape the Republican midterm campaign strategy from 2006:

As if embattled Congressional Democrats did not have enough on their hands, some are opening up a new front in their fight to save their seats — against Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House and a leader of their own party.

Georgians at the debate on Thursday made their views known on Ms. Pelosi, and equated her with Mr. Marshall, who was first elected in 2002.

Representative Jim Marshall, a Democrat here in central Georgia, spent much of a debate on Thursday night renouncing Ms. Pelosi, whose liberal views and San Francisco district have always been anathema to this region.

“Pelosi was never my choice for speaker,” Mr. Marshall said, eliciting boos from a skeptical audience in an arena here at the Georgia National Fair. Mr. Marshall actually voted for Ms. Pelosi as speaker but said he had not wanted her for the job and would not vote for her again.

Who does Marshall think he's fooling?  If Crazy Nancy wasn't his choice for Speaker, why didn't he vote for, say, Steny Hoyer instead?  Or just pay tribute to the new president and vote "present"?  And since he did vote for Granny Wrinkly McFunbags, on what possible grounds should anybody believe that he wouldn't do so again?

Of course, there's a gaping unspoken truth about that Pelosi Scarecrow strategy: It didn't work for the GOP four years ago.  The fresh problem with it this time is that it's yet another steaming load:

And they have Mrs. Pelosi’s blessing.

“I just want them to win,” Mrs. Pelosi said in a recent interview on NewsHour on PBS when asked about the defectors.

“They know their districts,” she added. “They are great communicators, very eloquent communicators to their own constituents.”

"Communicators" = "liars".  The effect of which is more or less totally spoiled by her publicly okey-dokeying the spreading of this fertilizer all over the midterm back forty.  Or does she implicitly understand how audienceless PBS really is?

Now, to be fair, not every Democrat is wallowing in a swamp of cynical prevarications.  Some Dems give every indication of absolutely and sincerely believing the dog mess they're slinging at their Republican betters.  We took a look at one yesterday.  Last night his Republican opponent went all Joseph Welch on his candy ass:

Not the sort of red meat histrionics you were probably hoping for, but this probably strikes the right emotional chord.  Paul sounds more disappointed in Jack Conway than angry with him.

You might have thought the GOP frontrunner indulged in a little hypocrisy in symbolically refusing to forgive Conway by refusing to shake his hand after the debate.  But not after application of the first rule of biblical hermaneutics - put everything in context:

“Jack, you should be ashamed of yourself,” said Paul, who described himself as a “pro-life Christian” and refused to shake Conway’s hand after the debate. “Have you no decency? Have you no shame?”

During the debate at the University of Louisville, Conway defended his attacks, which stemmed from published allegations about Paul’s time at Baylor, and refused to apologize.

“Why did he freely join a group known for mocking, for making fun of people with faith?” Conway asked. “And … when is it ever a good idea to tie up a woman and ask her to kneel before a false idol, your god, which you call Aqua Buddha?”

Looks to me like Dr. Paul "sh[ook] the dust off [his] feet when [he] le[ft] that [stage]. He t[old] [us] the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for [Jack Conway on Election Day]." 

Dude, He's already struck you dumb; just not in the way the rest of us wanted.

Seriously, folks, picture yourself in that audience, the country slowly strangling economically under the oppressive occupation of a lawless, rampaging authoritarian regime, double-digit unemployment the "New Normal," crippling debt crushing generations yet unborn, and this motherfrakker is issuing fatwas against thirty-year old frat initiation props?

Frontpage headlines this morning: "Why does Rand Paul hate Buddhists?"

Another reason Dr. Paul was prudent to eschew Jack Conway's sweaty digital embrace: the latter would probably have slapped him:

Did I just see what I just saw?  A white Jackass take a swing at a black Republican?  Looks like The Slap Heard 'Round The World to me.

"Dirty Harry" Reid isn't quite as rabidly violent as Ed Perlmutter; he'd have just flipped off Sharron Angle instead.  Or said something stupid:

That's right, Pencilneck, Barack Obama is JUST LIKE THOSE CHILEAN MINERS.  Other than the fact that his giant Talosion brain would never have fit going DOWN the mine shaft, let alone coming back up.  Or that if the miners had been non-union, he'd have ordered the mine entrance dynamited closed and entombed the f'ing scabs alive.

BTW, is that a Nazi salute Reid is delivering in the still shot?  I think his arm needs to be straighter.

We know his party's excuses need to be better.  They're not even outlasting the inevitable boomerang effect anymore.

C'mon, Dems, come clean.  Admit it: you f'd up by nominating Red Barry, and it's devastated your party for years and years to come.  The truth shall set you free.

Maybe if Jack Conway grovels long enough, Senator Paul will put in a good word with Aqua Buddha for y'all.