She Has Her Beans to Spill

21 03 2013

And I’ve got mine. Remember, I have not yet spilled the biggest bag.

Yeah, I heard.  Claire McCaskill is writing a tell all about 2012, blah blah blah.  I almost literally have 87 different calls, e-mails and text messages from people telling me so.  Ordinarily, I would ignore, but because of the subject matter and who you know she’ll spend most of the book talking about, and because of who I am (or was) in relation to that subject matter, I guess I’m going to be semi-obliged to read the damned thing.

If that link is any indication, she’s giving herself all the credit for our primary win.  Yes, she can take a little bit of it, but she can’t take all of it.  See?  I’ve already debunked one distortion in her book before she even started writing it.

And also…will she be nice enough to use the occasion of this book to answer these questions for me and the world — From what I hear, there was more open verbal vituperative and personal hate directed at her by the women on her own staff than there was from everyone in our camp, Steelman’s camp and Brunner’s camp combined.  One, is that true, and two, why?


You Wonder Why

21 02 2013

Suburban St. Louis

All you need is the headline from this P-D piece to know where this is headed, or rather, about whom this article is largely focused.

St. Louis a tale of extremes in U.S. House rankings

And you wonder why I set out to use this space to engage in what I term an unsolicited unofficial public relations campaign on behalf of my ex-boss after things turned out the way they did.  Really, though, once you get past the headline, the text of the article is decent.

I’m surprised Todd bothered to respond to the P-D at all.  I think this is his first quasi public appearance since election night.

Somebody Started a Rumor That Todd Akin Is Out of Money

7 09 2012

Town and Country

And by “somebody,” I mean Karl Roverrated.

Pure psyops.

The P-D Editorial Board Must Have No Institutional Memory

4 09 2012


They endorsed Todd Akin before the primary precisely because he didn’t have much money, had the least money and support from non-Missouri concerns, and ran the most issues-based campaign.  They endorsed Akin because they wanted money out of the process as much as possible and the fall campaign between himself and Claire McCaskill to be as much about issues as possible.

Now, this very same editorial board now uses Todd Akin’s victory in the primary, which they wanted, as an example of the failure of partisan politics.  One of their recommended “fixes” is already law in Missouri, in the sense that there is no party registration and any voter can choose any party ballot on primary day.  Too, Louisiana recently changed from its French-style apartisan top two then subsequent runoff system to standard primaries and caucuses for Federal offices.

This editoral also calls for a more “non-partisan” fashion in drawing Congressional boundaries.  The problem is, if this comes to pass, the NAACP will take any such map to court because it very likely wouldn’t be drawn to guarantee black Congressmen from St. Louis and Kansas City, and the P-D editorial board would be cheering the NAACP on.

Newt and Todd

3 09 2012

Meet The Press

I’m not a Newt Gingrich fan.  But his quasi-endorsement will help.  Even people on the right who despise Newt stop and pay attention when he speaks.  Even left-wingers will stop and pay attention.  Even I pay attention.  He’s one of the rare people in public political life today who can make you stop everything you’re doing and just watch and listen.  His RNC speech was a dud, though — The zany Newt who wants human colonies on Pluto and cites the day as an anniversary of some semi-significant political or military event that nobody but Newt cares about was nowhere to be found.  Instead, he showed up with the same wife he had during his Presidential campaign, which must be a record for him in terms of marital longevity.

And, he really took it to Karl Roverrated.

Something’s wrong with this video, though:  We have four men and two women on a panel about women’s issues and women voters, and the two women hardly say anything.

Illegitimate Rape

3 09 2012

Town and Country

Todd Akin should be prepared for a line of attack from Claire McCaskill that sounds something like this, and be ready to respond to it:

I have no problem with you admitting your mistake.  Everybody makes mistakes.  My problem is that you even believed it at all, and believed it as a man halfway through your seventh decade of life, not some wet-behind-the-ears college freshman.  I’m a lawyer, and we’re trained to draw a conclusion then find evidence to convince people in general or a jury in particular of our conclusion.  By contrast, you’re an engineer, trained to gather all evidence first then come to a conclusion.  In thinking what you thought until August 19 of this year, you behaved far more like a lawyer and far less like an engineer.  The reason you believed what you did is because both you and a very controversial doctor started with a conclusion, that abortion in the case of rape is wrong, and then fit small out-of-context bits and pieces of medical science behind it.  By the way, doctors are another group of people who should wait to draw conclusions until they have all the facts.  We’re all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts.  The fact is, the fertile human female does not have the kind of effective biological mechanism like Dr. Wilkie claims, because some 32,000 times a year in the United States, the rape of a woman results in a pregnancy.  You don’t have the judgment to be in the United States Senate if you for even one moment believed such foolishness in spite of your profession and your age, and in spite of pure common sense.  It makes me and it should make the voters of this state wonder what other inane non-sensical things you believe.

Don’t accuse me of handing McCaskill a grenade to use against us.  I’m sure someone in her camp, if not McCaskill herself, has already thought of this.


30 08 2012

Town and Country

Joseph Farah’s latest column suggest that Todd Akin essentially run a campaign of “me against the Republocratic world,” now that most of GOP Inc. have thrown down against him, and most Democrats have turned his name into a cuss word.

Depending on how it’s done, it could be a very good or a very risky thing.  If the Akin campaign does this but comes off as whiny and whoa-is-me and and petulant in the process, it will fail big time.  If they find a way to do this in the context of issues, running a solid issues-based campaign against both Democrat evil and Republican lassitude, it will pay off.