Right Wing Nut House

UPDATE: 5:10 Central Time

Success! As of now, our Blogburst for Fred has helped the campaign raise almost $254,000 which is more than enough to keep Fred on the air throught the Caucuses. A strong showing there will almost certainly rekindle interest in the campaign from some GOP whales who may have questioned whether Fred could go the distance. That should ease some of the financial crunch and allow the campaign to go forward in a competitive posture.

You did it guys. Without you, this effort would have been stillborn. If you’re going out tonight, tip one back for yourself - and for Fred. You both deserve it.

I sent the following email to some of the conservative bloggers who are participating in the Blogburst for Fred Thompson:

As of 6:00 AM central, the amount raised toward funding the campaign’s ad buy in Iowa stands at $145,000. This is about $104,000 short of the announced goal of $248,800 which must be raised by 6:00 PM tonight.

Rick Moran

If you gave during yesterday’s Blogburst for Fred, there’s no law that says you can’t give again today - unless you’re maxed out at $2300 for the year in which case you can make the donation in the name of your spouse (ask her first, please).

If you didn’t give yesterday, please do so today. Or do you want President Huckabee apologizing whenever some al-Qaeda nutcase offs a world leader? Or President Hillary announcing how much she “feels the pain” of the rest of the world when tragedy strikes?

Or maybe you want an adult in charge:

FRED THOMPSON: It is a tragedy, of course. It reminds us that things can happen in faraway places of the world that can affect the United States. I think this should be of great concern to us. It is almost a perfect storm in a very bad sense because two forces are operating against each other that are both desirable. One is democracy: they were making progress in that regard in that country. Former prime minister Bhutto was an important part of that process. But the other is stability. Pakistan is a nuclear country, and we cannot afford to let nukes fall into the hands of dangerous Muslim radicals. We are hoping those two things can be balanced out. We can see the continued progress toward a democratic society but also maintain stability in the country, which seems to be very much in doubt right now.

FAULKNER: I know you are running for the White House, so I don’t want to put you in a position to second guess the president. But I’m interested in your opinion. President Bush is due to talk with Pervez Musharraf shortly. What do you anticipate that conversation should be like?

THOMPSON: Those two things that I mention probably would be high on the agenda. What could be done to not impose martial law, to not crack down, but be mindful of the fact that there are radical elements in that country, and perhaps even within the government, that would like to see instability and chaos and see those weapons fall into the wrong hands. This is part of a bigger problem. We need to understand that this is not a criminal investigation any more - so we find the bad guys and bring them to justice - it’s a war.

This proves again the mindset of the radical elements that we are dealing with. We are seeing this all across Northern Africa and various places. We’re seeing it across the Middle East and in parts of Asia including Indonesia and other places. We have to come to terms with that and do the things necessary to prevail. One of the things we need to be talking about is what Musharraf can do, additionally, to crack down on the Taliban. I think they have been insufficient in that respect.

Calm, measured, and solid. The other candidates talking about the crisis yesterday didn’t come close.

A man like this deserves the second look that Iowans are giving him. Doesn’t he deserve your support as well?

This article originally appears in The American Thinker

My name is Rick and I am an inveterate grouser.

I grouse about everything. If my peas inadvertently mix with my potatoes, I grouse about it. If it rains, I grouse about it. If the Bears lose, I grouse about it all week.

You get the picture. I am an absolute joy to live with.

But it is politics where my grousing truly reaches its zenith and sets me apart from your average, everyday, ordinary curmudgeon. If they had an Olympic event dedicated to the political grouse, I would be a gold medal winner every time. The Super Bowl, the World Series, the World Wrestling Federation Tag Team Championship - if they were dedicated to grousing about politics, I would be a legend in my own time.

Don’t believe me? Mention a Republican candidate for president and I can find 6 things wrong with him before you draw your next breath. I am that good. The sneering adjectives pour off my tongue like acid rain, covering the candidate with an invective designed to illuminate how utterly preposterous the notion that they are worthy of consideration for high office.

Some candidates are easier to grouse about than others. Mike Huckabee, for example:

A perfect choice - if we were going to elect a Preacher in Chief. His notions about creationism and gays are an excellent fit - for the 17th century. A man with a name that, if he were to be elected president, would make us the laughing stock of the civilized world. And a man whose views on issues like taxes, global warming, and foreign policy make him a favorite to go all the way to the convention - the Democratic Convention, that is.

Others are more difficult to find something to grouse about only because they are able to mask their deficiencies by employing the oldest political trick in the book; they coat their positions on the issues with a sheen of soothing platitudes and unctuous reassurances - all to mask the fact that a few years ago, they gave soothing platitudes and reassurances to describe the exact opposite position on the same issues.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Mitt Romney circa 1994 during his campaign for the Senate against Ted Kennedy:

“As a result of our discussions and other interactions with gay and lesbian voters across the state, I am more convinced than ever before that as we seek to establish full equality for America’s gays and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than my opponent,” Romney wrote in the letter.

During that same campaign, Romney also stated his personal opposition to abortion, but said he would not seek to change state abortion laws. As proof, he cited his mother’s own 1970 candidacy for the U.S. Senate as an abortion rights supporter.

Romney also took the opportunity as governor to sign almost 200 waivers to allow ordinary people to marry gay couples:

Romney, who has cast himself as the staunchest Republican defender of traditional marriage, reportedly signed off on almost 200 one-day certificates allowing gay and lesbian couples to use unlicensed friends to preside over their weddings. Under an obscure state law, the certificates can be granted only to couples that get approval from the governor’s office.

Now, of course, Mitt has reinvented himself as a social conservative, casting himself in the starring role of anti-abortion champion and gay marriage abhorrer. This coating of fish oil smeared on his stands on the social issues of abortion and gay marriage make it extremely difficult for me to grab hold of the slippery flip-flopper and get specific in my grousing. So, I am left with the kind of general grouse that allows the candidate to slide through relatively unscathed while leaving a queasy feeling in the pit of my stomach that somehow, I’ve missed my target - or perhaps the candidate himself leaves me feeling nauseous.

Rudy, John, Fred, Duncan, (don’t get me started on Mr. Two First Names) all leave me feeling as if the Republican party has benched the first team out of pique and deliberately started the reserves and walkons in the championship game. Compare these candidates to the candidates Republicans fielded in 1980.

That field featured 2 future presidents (Reagan and Bush), 2 genuine intellectuals (Phil Crane and John Anderson), a future GOP presidential nominee (Dole), a Senate Majority Leader (Howard Baker) and one of the most charismatic politicians of his generation (John Connally).

Yeah, but this current group has Mike Huckabee - a man who never tires of mentioning that he “beat the Clinton political machine twice” while governor of Arkansas. All that proves is that what the Clinton political machine needed more than anything to win was, well, Bill Clinton. Now, if the Huckster had run twice against the Philanderer in Chief and won, that would be something to write home about. Instead, he walked into the governorship following Jim Guy Tucker’s conviction in a Whitewater related matter and then won two elections, including the race in 2002 where he ran against another Democrat with three names Jimmie Lou Fisher, barely winning with 53% of the vote.

Not exactly a powerhouse political record. In fact, most of the GOP candidates seemed to have run many of their campaigns against weak or damaged opponents. Rudy had a landslide victory against Manhattan Borough President Ruth Messinger who eked out a primary victory against Al Sharpton.

Not exactly the stuff of political legend.

Of course, the Democrats are no better. If the best they can do is Hillary Clinton - a woman whose negatives are more pronounced than her husband’s voracious appetite for the spotlight - you know the other party also suffers from a dearth of talent at the highest levels. I would mention Barack Obama but until someone shows up to fill out the suit he purportedly wears, I will forgo any grousing against him.

What I really need is a 12 step program to curb my grousing. Something like Politics Anonymous where you acknowledge your sins and resolve to correct the error of your ways. Here are a couple of steps I offer as suggestions:

Step I: I admit I am powerless to stop grousing about how bad GOP political candidates are and that my writing has become incredibly boring because of it.

Step II: I have come to believe that there will be no intervention by a higher power to supply us with candidates we can enthusiastically support - unless there’s a brokered convention and General Petreaus agrees to run for president which for me, would be incontrovertible proof of the existence of God.

Step IV: Made a searching and fearless inventory of all the faults of the candidates and came to the conclusion there wasn’t a damn thing I could do about it.

Step VII: Humbly acknowledge my inability to adequately describe how truly awful all the Republican candidates are and resolve to be less critical and more understanding of their shortcomings.

You can see as with any 12 step program, the process gets harder as you go along. As for my last suggestion, I would probably need some additional therapy in order to forgo the pleasure of skewering the candidates - about 10 years of additional individual couch work ought to do it, I think.

Two Hundred and Thirty One years ago yesterday, a barefoot, ill-clad army of 2,000 men crossed the ice choked Delaware River to surprise the Hessians at Trenton, giving George Washington his most important victory in the cause of American independence.

The story of how that victory came about is instructive to the cause of Fred Thompson’s campaign for the presidency and the reason for this blogburst today. Not because Fred resembles George Washington in any way or that a Thompson presidency would be as significant an event in history as the American revolution. But because when the chips were down and the cause all but lost, a very small group of Americans helped make the difference between victory and defeat.

Consider if you will the circumstances. Washington had been pushed out of New York by the British in a series of battles during the summer and fall where the Continentals had suffered one humiliating defeat after another. The Americans were levered out of New Jersey and forced to cross the Delaware to the Pennsylvania side of the river. There they waited grimly for the British to attempt a crossing and finish them off.

Patriots in New York and New Jersey began to lose heart, giving their oaths of allegiance to the King so they could trade and buy food for their families. The Congress fled Philadelphia for Baltimore which made Washington not only head of the military but titular head of the government as well. There was no food, no clothing, little in the way of arms and powder, no money, and no credit.

And to make matters worse, Washington’s army was set to disband after the first of the year. A last minute appeal to patriotism by Washington (as pitiful a missive ever written by the Great Man) salvaged the situation with a little more than half the army agreeing to re-up.

In short, things couldn’t get any worse for the patriot cause. Both friend and foe believed that American independence was a lost cause. But then two events were to occur that changed the fortunes of the war and turned the tide inevitably toward success.

The first fortunate happenstance occurred on December 23, 1776 when the first of Tom Paine’s “Crisis” essays hit the streets of America. “These are the times that try men’s souls…” had an electric effect on the citizens and the army. The second event was Washington’s audacious attack on Trenton, as unlikely and impossible a victory as has ever been recorded.

Washington devised a complex plan involving three separate columns crossing the river at three points and converging on Trenton by dawn on Christmas day. One of the columns failed to cross but the other two made it safely through the ice floes and stinging sleet and arrived on the New Jersey side of the Delaware - late but intact. It was madness crossing the river in the middle of an ice storm. But Washington had the perfect bunch to attempt the impossible; the seafaring men of the 14th Continental Regiment.

Better known to us as “The Marblehead Regiment,” these were the hard cases of the American army - a group of swaggering, swearing, spitting fishermen and common seamen led by a remarkable Brigadier by the name of John Glover. Under the guns of the British on Long Island, they ferried 10,000 men and horses across the East River in one night and part of a morning (aided by a heavy fog that obscured the retreat from prying British eyes). This movement forever earned them the gratitude of Washington who liked the spirit and pluck of the sailors as well as their fighting abilities; they held off the British singlehandedly at Pelham, New York in October once again aiding the escape of the bulk of the army.

But that Christmas night in 1776, they truly earned their spurs as they tirelessly rowed time and again across the river and back again, making their way through the ice choked waters in the worst conditions imaginable. Rain mixed with sleet and ice later turning to snow, the waves on the Delaware crashing over the bow covering the rowers with a sheet of clinging ice, the gunwales sometimes perilously close to tipping into the water and capsizing the boats - a certain death in a matter of minutes given the temperature of the water.

The fate of American independence rested with those 400 hardy souls who manned the oars that blustery night. And herein lies the reason for my little historical digression and an illustration of why, if you support Fred Thompson for President, this is the time to get the hell off the sidelines and start rowing the damn boat.

To be brutally frank in appraising the situation realistically, Fred Thompson’s chances of winning the nomination are not good. I will not attempt to snow you, gentle readers, with the idea that the Thompson campaign is anything but a hope and a prayer at this point. But where there is a will to fight, so there is a will to win. It doesn’t matter how many pundits, pollsters, and assorted “experts” have written off Fred Thompson. What matters is that there is still a chance, still life in the campaign, and still a belief that the race can be won. Your support is absolutely crucial to propel the campaign forward, to build on the momentum generated by Thompson’s bus tour through Iowa by giving as much as you possibly can.

The campaign has set a goal of raising $248,000 by sundown on Friday so that they can run a new ad in Iowa. This ad could make the difference and allow Thompson to make a surprise showing in the Iowa Caucuses a week from tomorrow. Exceeding expectations is the game now and this media buy could very well put Fred in a very strong position coming out of Iowa.

So climb aboard and grab an oar. Join the Marbleheaders for Fred and contribute as much as you possibly can to make this Blogburst a big success. Use the widget below or go directly to the contributions page here.

Via Allah, we get a real potential roadblock for Huckabee - something that would even cause his most ardent supporters to look twice at.

Apparently, the Huckster isn’t very concerned about from where some of his money comes, including taking speaking fees from a company - Norvo Ordisk - that conducted embryonic stem cell research.

Here’s Norvo’s stem cell policy:

Novo Nordisk, along with the majority of the scientists working within the field of stem cell research, finds that it is essential at this time to proceed with research in both adult and embryonic stem cells in parallel, partly to gain basic knowledge about the normal cell maturation processes and partly to clarify the potentials of the two cell types. Cell nucleus transfer and therapeutic cloning do not presently offer any advantages that in any way outweigh both the inherent scientific risks and the ethical dilemmas.

Research in human embryonic stem cells has evoked an important ethical debate and Novo Nordisk wishes to contribute to an open dialogue and an ethical and political clarification regarding the use of human embryonic stem cells. In Europe large differences exist between the different countries with regard to the legislation and control of research on human embryonic stem cells. This is a cause for concern and Novo Nordisk therefore urges all countries to establish legislation that will ensure that this important research is adequately regulated and controlled.

(Hat Tip: Dan Reihl)

The problem with Huckabee running a not so subtle “I’m the best Christian in the race” campaign is that any hint of hypocrisy is magnified a hundredfold.

And this certainly qualifies as hypocritical. To profit by taking money from a company engaged in research that he considers akin to murder reveals a dishonesty in the man that seems to be emerging the more opponents attack him.

Is there anyone who believes that the cross in his “Christmas message” commercial (that excluded non-Christians in its sentiments) was an optical illusion or an “accident” as Huckabee claims? To believe so means that he’s got the most incompetent political admen in Christendom. Nothing goes on television in the form of an ad that isn’t scrutinized minutely for what is in the foreground and background.

For Huckabee to lie through his teeth about that ad was disturbing. Now he is caught taking money from murderers (by his lights) and one begins to wonder what else might be in his past that gives the lie to his pious pronouncements.

At the very least, controversies like this blunt the Preacher Man’s momentum in Iowa and elsewhere. And with the GOP electorate already antsy about their choices, many could now give other candidates a second look.

Note: We’re going to play a little counterfactual game today based on the following input: Suppose the primaries end and no GOP candidate has achieved a majority of delegates? In that case, the role of the Republican convention will revert to what such conclaves used to be about; a venue where nominees were actually chosen rather than the idiotic beauty pageants and love fests they’ve become today.

Following are some excerpts from my blog posts from the time I arrived in Minneapolis on August 30, 2008 to the end of the convention.

(I will update this post for the next few days) Part 1 is here. Part 2 is here.

*******************************************************

September 2, 11:00 AM

The adventure at “Ed Morrissey’s Happy Bottom Riding Club and Flop House” continued this morning when several dozen of us wanted to take a shower and shave. Cleanliness may be next to Godliness but that didn’t stop the First Mate from standing outside the bathroom with an egg timer, giving everyone exactly 2 minutes to shower. If someone dared go over she would immediately threaten to send Ed in with a wet towel to snap the offending guest on the rump - regardless of the sex of the bather. It worked. All but a few of us had hot water although I have about 5 nicks on my face from shaving so fast. Ed gave me a palmfull of Brut to rub on the cuts so now I not only look like Scarface but I smell like a gigolo.

Arriving at the Excel Center, you immediately notice the prevalence of social cons in the crowds milling outside. They’ve come for the big floor fight this morning over the anti-gay marriage amendment or, as some refer to it, the “unnaturally offensive amendment.” That’s because of this passage that the social cons are fighting to keep in the plank:

“We believe that marriage should be defined as a union between a man and a woman and should be preserved and protected from unnatural alterations.”

Such an amendment would make sense - if we were talking about preventing men from marrying sheep or women from marrying goats. But the social cons want their pound of flesh (and an expression of their nauseating bigotry) so there was no compromising in meetings leading up to the convention.

As an aside, I believe there is a secular case that can be made against gay marriage. I am less and less swayed by it but people of good conscience and character can disagree.

But no purpose is served by referring to gay marriage as “unnatural.” Therein lies the rank bigotry that makes many of us secular conservatives ashamed of that ideological label.

It’s almost as if the social cons are bringing on this fight to deliberately anger the rest of the party. They made it clear in no uncertain terms that the savaging of Mike Huckabee during the primary campaign was just about the last straw.

James Dobson’s reviving his dark mutterings of setting up a third party following the bruising March 4 Texas primary where religion played such a huge role and where Romney’s campaign was resurrected after his month long series of attacks on Huckabee’s supposed “hypocrisy.” The Huckster had it coming after calling himself the only “real” Christian in the race - a gaffe he has yet to live down. It shattered his momentum and put Romney right back in the ballgame with a strong second place showing to Giuliani. That and his big win in Ohio on the same day (and Fred’s surprising second place) assured Romney that he would be in the field until the end.

To placate the social cons, the Platform Committee gave in to most of their demands on the anti-abortion plank, the “Faith in the Public Square” plank which called on the party to defend people of faith (Christians) from attacks of the godless secularists, and the homeschooling plank which called on Republicans to acknowledge the contribution of home schooling to the education of children.

But the Committee and much of the party wouldn’t budge on the unnaturally offensive amendment, thus, the floor fight.

And a fight it is with the social cons doing all the punching. It’s as if all the years of frustration spent in the background have been unleashed - the bitterness and what they consider “betrayal” bubbling and frothing at the surface.

Most of the speakers this morning have been pro-Amendment - many of them preachers from this group or that one. Much biblical quoting, usually passages involving the devil (libertarian conservatives), demons (liberals), and “Judas” (the rest of us). Their over the top rhetoric is being met with roars of approval by supporters in the half full convention hall.

At times, the place takes on the aura of a revival meeting with shouts of “Hallelujah!” and “Amen!” coming from the colorful array of characters dotting the convention floor. Political conventions are famous for their weird and wonderful individuals dressed in funny clothes, wearing funny hats. Christians are no different except their funny hats are festooned with crosses. Once and a while, you catch a glimpse of a bunch of people standing around in a circle with linked arms. They appear to be in deep thought but then you realize that they are praying.

I would not mind one bit of that was the face of the Republican party - people united in faith, sharing that faith with one another in peace and harmony. But that is not the face of the party on display on stage. It is a face I don’t recognize nor do I want to associate with. It is the face of anger, of exclusion, of resentment that has burst forth from the frustrations and slights endured by social conservatives for many years and is pouring out in a rush on national television.

This will go on for another 2 hours at least. Dobson will speak in about 1/2 an hour. I’ve been told that they expect an almost full house for his speech which Fox News reported is going to be very tough on the party and on secular conservatives.

So a very tense, angry crowd appears to be in no mood to compromise. And what was all love and roses last night is now fire and brimstone. How many will sympathize with the social cons and support them in their platform fight is one question. How many would be willing to vote for Mike Huckabee in a fractured, broken convention is quite another.

I’ll be back in a couple of hours with the climax of this fight.

UPDATE: 3:00 PM

Well, that cuts it.

The fix was in on this one all along. There was no way the party was going to commit suicide and present a blatantly bigoted party platform to the American people so basically, they “disappeared” the amendment down a rabbit hole and rammed through another one that simply reiterated what was said about marriage in the 2004 platform.

It’s the power of the chair that can make this kind of thing happen and there isn’t a damn thing you can do about it. But it wasn’t a pretty sight and it may very well have fractured the party once and for all.

Dobson’s speech was like throwing nitroglycerin on a fire. In a nutshell, he believes the party has come under the influence of “evil forces.” (I guess he thinks himself too sophisticated to just come out say that the Devil has a hold of us.) He talked about intolerance of Christians. He spoke of the years that Christians have suffered in silence as their concerns have been given short shrift. He said that the party was in mortal danger of losing its soul unless it acknowledged that love between two people of the same sex was “unnatural.” Of course he didn’t actually say that but a five year old could grasp his meaning.

Meanwhile, the crowd was going nuts. Many were weeping. Many had both hands in the air drinking in “the spirit.” The ovation after he was done was long and heartfelt. And then, the railroading.

Before anyone knew what was happening, the chair recognized the delegate from New Jersey who asked that the amendment be tabled (or killed). No debate, no discussion, the chairman asked for the yeas and nays. The tactic caught the social cons by complete surprise. Even though there were plenty more “nays” shouted out than “yeas,” the chair announced that the ayes had it and the motion was tabled.

The pro-amendment crowd still didn’t know what was happening. They were only vaguely aware that they had just had the legs cut out from underneath them.

At this point, it is the custom for someone from the opposing side to ask for a roll call. It wouldn’t matter if that had happened because the chair relentlessly continued. Screaming into the microphone over the wailing objections from a dozen delegations, he recognized a delegate from Wyoming who asked for unanimous consent that the language in the 2004 platform on marriage be offered as a substitute. “Without objection, it is so ordered,” he shouted - despite the fact that not only was there objection but there was a danger right then and there of things exploding out of control.

These kind of strong arm tactics by the chair are not unknown to political conventions.But watching it happen in front of you is something else entirely. The chair gaveled the afternoon session to a close as at least 20 very angry people were screaming into their microphones for recognition and delegates in the aisles were pushing and shoving, trying to make their way to the stage. I saw many delegates sitting in chairs, looking lost and forlorn. They had been steamrolled and never had a chance.

Now what? The fallout from this will be grim. And whoever ends up the nominee, I don’t envy him the task of putting this party back together.

Back later with more.

UPDATE: 4:30 PM

As expected, there are many calls from the evangelical right to walk out of the convention. But not many from leaders like Dobson or Pat Robertson, who showed up on ABC and graciously forgave us our folly.

The reason a walkout won’t do anything that already hasn’t been done is because of alternate delegates who will simply take the place of the walkouts. The convention will go on, the damage already inflicted.

But there is much seething and anger is not far below the surface. Anything is possible.

Whatever happens is going to happen later. Allowing a few hours for passions to cool, the convention will now not reconvene until 7:00 PM tonight where the first order of business will be the speech by Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska. She’s the “anti-Hillary” face of the party and I understand is quite an effective speaker. Then the President of the United States will speak. The place will be packed with Bush partisans so I’m sure it will be a rouser.

And now for a change of pace - a little levity in the midst of the tenseness and emotion.

I’ve learned that conventions are fertile ground for all kinds of rumors. Earlier this afternoon, word was flying around the convention floor that Jeb Bush was going to announce his candidacy and that the President would deliver the nominating speech while George Bush #41 delivered the seconding speech. The idea was to stampede the convention to Jeb and give him a second ballot victory.

Apparently, CNN tracked down Jeb Bush who laughed a lot but didn’t deny it outright. Well that set the rumor mill churning even more until finally, George H.W. Bush granted Carl Cameron of Fox News an interview and squelched the idea right there. He denied everything and that was that.

Still, there’s a nagging thought at the back of my mind that the rumor could very well have been some kind of trial balloon. Perhaps not offered by the Bush’s directly but it is not impossible to think they weren’t aware of it. What feedback they got was pretty discouraging. People are pretty tired of the Bush’s right now and the prospect of another one at the head of the party doesn’t excite too many people.

I’ll have a short summary of the speeches later.

UPDATE: 11:00 PM

Back at home base - a considerably less crowded place. Evidently a dozen or more boarders at Ed’s place have found alternate housing. Good for them. Maybe I’ll find some floor space tonight to rest my weary head.

With Sarah Palin, I think you’ll agree with me that a star was born last night. She charmed the delegates with her humor and wit while uplifting the entire convention with her stirring stories of triumph by individuals over long odds. If it wasn’t likely that one of the Fab Five was going to be selected as Veep, that speech might have pushed Palin’s name toward the top of the list. As it is, she is definitely a rising star and someone to keep an eye on.

President George Bush came home last night. His approval ratings still only in the 30’s, the future of the economy uncertain, Iraq still taking two steps forward and one back - but it didn’t matter. He’s a Republican president and for many, that is enough. A covention trip is often a reward for party loyalty and the hall was full of party regulars and Bush loyalists.

One more night in the sun.

Indeed, he was interrupted by applause 19 times in a 45 minute speech. He mainly talked about the importance of a unified party, mixing in a defense of his policies. He was effective, as he has been in all his major addresses.

But for many of us, we were like ships passing in the night. Bush - for better or worse - is now part of history. His legacy will be a mixed one (certainly better than his unhinged critics give him credit for and not as good as his shameless apologists say it should be). He is handing his successor a plateful of problems - some of his own making. I don’t envy the guy who emerges from this scrum.

As the balloons came down signalling the end of the evening and the entire Bush clan stood on the stage basking in the warmth of the crowd’s applause, there were many of us, I’m sure, who were breathing a sigh of relief. The father-son Bush dynasty was not unique in American history; the Adams’ John and John Quincy preceded them. But there was 25 years between the two Adams Admininstrations while 8 short years seperated the two Bushs’. And crowded into the 20 years of a Bush presidency was perhaps more history than a country can bear to live through. The end of the cold war, the Gulf war, recession, the Clintons, 9/11, Iraq, and now a brokered convention.

I feel like we’ve been cursed with the old saw “May you live in interesting times.”

I realize that my legions of devoted followers have been sitting on the edge of their seats for days wondering when I was going to make a formal endorsement for a Republican candidate for President.

Not wanting to deprive you, my gentle readers, of an adequate oxygen supply any longer, you may now stop holding your breaths; it’s Fred.

No surprise to readers of this site but I think even my most devoted House Nuts didn’t understand the dilemma I was in. You see, I’m endorsing Fred Thompson despite the fact that I don’t think he can win, that a miracle would have to strike for Fred to capture the nomination.

“Don’t believe the polls!” is the battle cry of politicians who are way behind. This is pure sophistry when you consider the fact that many candidates have their own internal polls telling them pretty much what the public polls are saying; you’re behind and you don’t have much of a chance of winning. In Fred’s case, the polls reflect a very sobering reality; he’s got too much ground to make up and not enough time to do it.

He’s doing exactly the right thing by abandoning any thought of campaigning anywhere else except Iowa. It is in the Hawkeye state - the first in the nation test of strength - that Thompson must show himself a viable candidate. His own expectations are for third place. This is probably doable except for one thing; finishing third with 10-12% of the vote (which is where he’s at now) is not going to excite anyone anywhere. I think the only way Fred will be able to realistically continue the campaign is if he shocks the world and finishes second. This also is possible although the absolute latest from Iowa shows McCain in second with 20% and Romney 3rd with 17%. The important thing is that Romney is tanking. That leaves an opening for Thompson.

Where do you suppose McCain is most vulnerable? If you said immigration, you win a cookie. And who is the strongest candidate on immigration left in the field now that Tom Tancredo has exited the race? If you guessed Fred Thompson you get nothing because everyone knows that.

With Romney slipping, Thompson has a whisper of a chance at second place if he can hammer McCain between now and January 3 on immigration. This will probably end up helping Huckaduck also but that can’t be helped. A second in Iowa keeps the campaign alive at least through South Carolina.

But enough of the strategy, why endorse Fred now if I don’t think he can win? A simple matter of standing up for your guy when the chips are down and he’s at his lowest explains it. The most recent polls in Florida and South Carolina have Fred in 5th place and in single digits. If ever Fred needed a boost, it is from those of us who have liked what he stands for but held back from endorsing him for one reason or another. In my case, it was between Fred and Romney. But today’s news about Romney backpedaling on his contention that Governor George Romney marched with Martin Luther King during the civil rights era is the straw that broke the camel’s back. It never happened and his campaign disingenuously came out with a statement saying that Mitt was “speaking figuratively” not “literally.”

Well, figuratively speaking, I’m a fine figure of a man, devilishly handsome, and have women three at a time when I’m not battling terrorists and making liberal’s heads explode.

On the other hand, if you want to be “literal” about it, I’m 50 pounds overweight, devilishly cute, haven’t spoken to another woman since I met my Zsu-Zsu, and I write long, logical, cogent articles against terrorism while making liberal’s heads explode.

I don’t trust a man who speaks “figuratively” as an adjunct to using plain English. Romney speaks “figuratively” fluently - on abortion, gay marriage, immigration, and other issues. I can’t abide politicians who find it necessary to shade, color, or otherwise try to obscure their positions on issues. It smacks of pandering which is not only dishonest but reveals an inconstant character and someone without any core principles or beliefs.

Fred Thompson has no such weakness as far as I can determine. He is a man who knows his mind and has the intellectual heft to flesh out his ideas in an impressive, rational, and completely logical way. He knows government, knows the Congress, and knows what he believes. As a communicator, he may lack passion. But he makes up for it by speaking clearly and concisely about issues he cares deeply about.

Fred is real - what you see is what you get. In a way, he reminds me more of Eisenhower than Reagan. Not a simple man but a transparent one. There is little subterfuge or guile and his direct, no Mickey Mouse style of speaking and campaigning is a breath of fresh air when placed against his blow-dried rivals Romney and The Huckster.

In short, Fred Thompson is head and shoulders the better man when compared to any other Republican candidate. He may not be the best speaker. He may not shine on the campaign trail. But just who or what are we electing next November? The guy with the pretty smile and easy joke? Or are we trying to elect someone with the penetrating mind and the Iron will to go to Washington and really try and change things while being able to stand tall for America as we face the many serious threats against us in a very uncertain world.

So I would say to my fellow bloggers who, like me, know our endorsement means very little as far as the big picture of the campaign is concerned, that our collective voices, if shouted loud enough, just might do some good. The time is now to stand up for Fred if you support him. He needs our help desperately. Give as much money as you can spare. Write about the campaign often between now and January 3.

Go Fred!

UPDATE

Michelle Malkin commenting on Tom Tancredo’s coming departure from the campaign, offers a list of attributes she would like to see in a nominee:

Where do conservatives who take homeland security seriously turn?

I don’t need a candidate with whom I agree on 100 percent of the issues. At the very least, however, I’d like a candidate who doesn’t share the Left’s utter contempt for, apathy, or sheer condescension toward grass-roots Republicans and immigration enforcement activists. Character counts. Steadfastness counts. A spine would help. So would genuine passion and energy.

I would guess that her last criteria - “genuine passion and energy” - was probably a dig at Fred. I don’t necessarily disagree. Just go to Fred’s YouTube page and watch some of his early speeches and talks before small groups.

Deadly boring.

Does this mean Thompson lacks passion? Or “energy?” I think it means that Fred tries to engage people on an intellectual rather than emotional level. In politics, that doesn’t work very well. His recent performances are much more focused and yes, more energized. But being able to reach out and touch a voter’s soul may not be one of his strong points.

Other than that, Malkin was describing Fred Thompson to a “T.”

Note: We’re going to play a little counterfactual game today based on the following input: Suppose the primaries end and no GOP candidate has achieved a majority of delegates? In that case, the role of the Republican convention will revert to what such conclaves used to be about; a venue where nominees were actually chosen rather than the idiotic beauty pageants and love fests they’ve become today.

Following are some excerpts from my blog posts from the time I arrived in Minneapolis on August 30, 2008 to the end of the convention.

(I will update this post for the next few days) Part 1 is here.

********************************************************

September 1: 8:00 AM

Got up early this morning thanks to Fausta falling out one of the hammocks Ed had strung up in the living room. Apparently, the poor dear fell right on top of Frank of Political Vindication who yowled in protest. This caused his partner Shane to wake up with a start and hit his head on the underside of the First Mate’s 18th century walnut Louis the XVI Gilded Trumeau, the poor guy forgetting he had fallen asleep underneath it.

Shane didn’t cause too much damage and I’m sure after applying a little Super Glue and chewing gum, the priceless antique will be as right as rain.

At any rate, the opening of the convention isn’t scheduled for another two hours but there’s big news coming out of the closed door meeting of the Rules Committee this morning.

According to Rule 16 (f), there is no appeal of the sanctions applied by the RNC to the 5 states who violated party rules by holding their primaries before February 5. But when did rules ever stop politicians? The deal worked out involves suspending the rules and seating the delegates anyway. This will be accomplished by the chair recognizing Florida and Governor Charlie Crist asking for the suspension of rules regarding infractions. The other 4 states will second the motion while a 5th state - probably New York - will also second thus fulfilling the rules requirement that 5 delegations be in favor of the rules suspension. The chair will put it to a voice vote where the “ayes” will have it.

Thus, a bloodbath is avoided - temporarily. It seems with the whole world watching, everyone so far has seen it in their own interest to try and maintain some semblance of decorum and unity. As Samuel Johnson said (or maybe it was Ben Franklin), “The prospect of being hung in the morning concentrates the mind wonderfully.”

Indeed.

A couple of notes on speakers. As you know, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal will be the keynote speaker tonight. The speech is being billed as a plea for unity (duh) and a call to defend America from all enemies both here and abroad. I would hope that Governor Jindal has a few words of comfort for Democrats who may not be able to stomach voting for Hillary. There are certainly enough of them and reaching out to centrist Democrats would be a good idea politically.

Also, CNN is reporting that James Dobson is upset at his being slotted tomorrow afternoon. Did the guy think he rated a prime time shot? Pretty arrogant considering the fact that he’s still threatening to bolt the party if Rudy gets the nomination.

Finally, President Bush’s speech tomorrow night will probably begin around 9:00 PM local time (10:00 PM eastern). There was some thought given to shortening Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin’s speech but in the end, it was decided that the “anti-Hillary” concept was too important to shortchange.

Mostly boring rules debates this morning. Senator Coleman’s speech tonight is probably the next bit of news so I will update this post after he’s done.

UPDATE: 1:00 PM

Just got handed this press release from Mark Sanford’s people:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
(No Embargo)

Governor Sanford will address several southern delegations later this afternoon in an effort to garner support for his campaign…

Not entirely unexpected. Sanford mulled running this year but held off, smartly in my opinion. The tip-off to this move came when he failed to endorse McCain last January (after endorsing him in 2000) following the Arizonian’s shocking win in New Hampshire. It was at that point that talk of an up-for-grabs convention really started to become more than idle curiosity and perhaps Sanford saw a possible opportunity.

Regardless of what he says, he is, in fact, a “favorite son” candidate - and a regional one at that. His goal is to force the number of ballots go beyond 4 or 5. At that point, if he has a pocketful of delegates, he could probably name his own price in a Thompson administration (most observers see him leaning toward Fred). If Fred has retired at that point, he may offer himself as Romney’s Vice President.

How many delegates could he realistically hope for? A nice round figure would be 100. And in a close race where every single head is being counted, 100 votes is a huge number.

Sanford is a very capable and attracive politician - a man whose time may be in the near future. Is there any scenario where the convention could stampede his way? I would think only if the delegates were exhausted and had no where else to go would they consider someone outside of the Fab Five who are already here.

One humorous note: There’s a rumor that Rudy’s people are hopping mad at the order in which the candidates will be nominated on Wednesday night. Each candidate will be allowed one nominating speech and one seconding speech lasting no more than 5 minutes. They have also limited the “demonstrations” of support to no more than 15 minutes.

The Giuliani people are upset that since they are going first the speeches and demonstration for Rudy will begin before prime time - around 5:30 eastern. The order was determined by lots so I don’t exactly know what Rudy’s people think the RNC could do about it. The rules require that the voting begin immediately after the nominating speeches are over. Since it’s already likely to be a long night, I think the RNC is doing well to get the speechifying and demonstrations over by 8:00 eastern so at least people can see a little of the drama of how this convention will play out in prime time.

More after Coleman’s speech.

UPDATE II

And so ends Day I of what is proving so far to be something of a love fest. The two speakers tonight acquitted themselves well. Norm Coleman’s welcoming speech was short, sweet, and funny. The bit about Minnesota being in the midst of an Al Gore caused heat wave was priceless.

Everyone was interested to see Bobby Jindal, Louisiana’s new governor and someone many believe might make a run some day for president. As keynote speaker, his job was to hit the themes of the convention and inspire some optimism about the future. An impossible task given the circumstances. Still, he also did pretty well. I think they could have gotten a better speaker (Alaska governor Sarah Palin would, in my opinion, have been a better choice) but Jindal wasn’t a disaster.

Debate on the platform began this afternoon and surprisingly, the social cons were holding their fire. Of course, the real controversy comes tomorrow when the convention takes up the controversial plank on gay marriage.

Given that no one wants to alienate anyone else’s supporters, there haven’t been the bruising fights on the platform this year as there has been in the past. Almost all the major disagreements were worked out in the last two weeks behind closed doors in the Platform Committee.

But the libertarians are not going to sit still for the Huckabee-inpsired amendment on gay marriage which goes far beyond the 2004 GOP platform which didn’t mention gays, only “that legal recognition and the accompanying benefits afforded couples should be preserved for that unique and special union of one man and one woman which has historically been called marriage.”

Huckabee’s swipe at homosexuals to include the word “unnatural” in the plank has set off a firestorm. This morning, the debate hits the floor with James Dobson taking the stage to defend the wording. It will be interesting to see how the party wriggles out of this one.

Back to the Morrissey Hotel for a couple of hours sleep.

Note: We’re going to play a little counterfactual game today based on the following input: Suppose the primaries end and no GOP candidate has achieved a majority of delegates? In that case, the role of the Republican convention will revert to what such conclaves used to be about; a venue where nominees were actually chosen rather than the idiotic beauty pageants and love fests they’ve become today.

Following are some excerpts from my blog posts from the time I arrived in Minneapolis on August 30, 2008 to the end of the convention.

(I will update this post for the next few days)

***********************************************************

August 31 - 11:00 AM

I’m sitting in Ed Morrissey’s home office trying to get comfortable on the floor. Every available seat has been taken up by one of the 50 or so bloggers Ed graciously agreed to put up during the convention. It’s not as crowded as you might think although internet access is, as you can guess, at a premium. The only really bad thing about it is the bathroom situation. Ed partially fixed the problem by setting up a couple of port-o-potties in his backyard next to the circus tent where a couple of dozen bloggers are sleeping but it hasn’t helped much - at least judging by how quickly the flowers in his garden are wilting as a result of people who just can’t hold their water long enough.

But we’re here anyway -witnesses to what most observers are saying is going to be the most exciting convention in 100 years. Five candidates have arrived with enough delegates to challenge for the Republican nomination for president - the result of an extraordinary primary season that saw no candidate receive the 1191 delegates necessary to claim the nomination.

As a refresher, here’s where we stand:

1. Guiliani - 712 pledged delegates and superdelegates
2. Mitt Romney - 633 pledged delegates and superdelegates
3. Mike Huckabee - 502 pledged delegates and superdelegates
4. Fred Thompson - 278 pledged delegates and superdelegates
5. John McCain - 255 pledged delegates and superdelegates

(About 135 of the superdelegates have made it known that they are committed to their candidate for the first ballot only.)

And to give you an idea of how contested this convention is going to be, even the number of delegates it takes to win is up in the air. That’s because the current number of delegates who are to be seated may change when the rules are discussed at tomorrow’s session.

Back in November 2007, the GOP National Committee decided to punish Florida, New Hampshire, Michigan, South Carolina, and Wyoming by taking away half their delegates because they held their primary or caucus before February 5, thus violating Party Rule 16. That’s an extra 136 delegates that each of the winning candidate in those states would dearly love to add to their total. If the rules challenges are successful, the magic number rises to 1259.

So tomorrow will have a lot of blood on the floor. That’s because in their infinite wisdom, the rules committee, meeting last week, decided to take up the challenges to Rule 16 on a state by state basis rather than en masse. This has assured a bloodbath as individual candidates will seek to deny the others the full fruits of their caucus or primary victories.

(There’s already a rumor that Florida is going to seat its entire delegation regardless of the outcome of the rules vote. The imagination has not been invented that can conjure up a more horrific scenario.)

All the candidates sound confident. Thompson thinks he’s a third or 4th ballot shoe in. Romney is banking on disaffected Guiliani delegates from the northeast to put him within spitting distance of a majority after the second ballot where switches will then be allowed. Rudy has the same strategy only grabbing disaffected Romney delegates. Huckabee says he’s doing a lot of praying. And McCain doesn’t think he has much of a chance but came to Minneapolis to honor the commitment of his supporters.

An ABC delegate canvass that ended yesterday shows that Giuliani has a chance for a second ballot win - if the rule 16 fight goes his way in Florida where he edged Huckabee in late January. But there are so many uncommitted superdelegates that it’s just too hard to be definitive about anything - as ABC points out.

I’ll update this entry later if any news breaks.

UPDATE: 11:00 PM

Got a few minutes before the scramble starts to find a place to sleep. I see where Jon Swift has taken the entire dining room table, the lucky sot. And I can’t be sure but I think Ace deliberately chowed down on raw garlic so he could have the sofa all to himself.

The First Mate is being a good sport about everything except I think I overheard her talking to a lawyer. Something about “extreme cruelty” although I couldn’t be absolutely sure.

At any rate, I just watched a Charlie Gibson interview with Mike Huckabee who seemed imbued with the spirit throughout. As near as I can tell, the Huckster is looking for a compromise on Rule 16 that would guarantee all delegates being seated after the 2nd ballot is over. This would seem to help Giuliani but I think the governor believes the goodwill engendered will buy him some delegates when the Chairman calls for switches following the second ballot. And if he can keep Rudy from going over the top, that third ballot should be the wildest convention scene since the Democrats in Chicago in 1968.

Meanwhile, ABC is also reporting that Mitt Romney met with representatives of Thompson late this evening. No one is saying anything but the speculation has been that if Thompson can’t get any closer to the frontrunners following the second ballot, that he may throw his support to Romney.

And yes, you can bet that the Veep spot will be discussed. It is thought that Rudy’s negative ad campaign against Thompson in Florida, hinting that his health problems may return, soured the Tennessean on Giuliani to the point he would never accept the second spot from him. But Fred has no problems with Mitt although he went after him for flip flopping in South Carolina - one of the 6 states he won. But this is September and the convention where bygones will be bygones - as long as the Veep spot is in play.

One last morsel of info. The National Committee is thinking of putting Haley Barbour in the Chair for the rules fight tomorrow. Haley is an old hand and could probably maintain control as well as anyone.

Off to bed. I wonder if the dog would mind if I slept in his basket…

Radio Iowa has the perplexing details on Representative Steve King’s endorsement of Fred Thompson for President.

Let’s just say that King didn’t cover himself in any glory with his announcement:

“So I’m down to, of course, Romney and Thompson and in the end I have to come down on the side of this — who am I most comfortable with on the issues that I believe in….When I se someone who believes in their core….when they make a decision, if they’re where I am philosophically….so after really, I didn’t sleep last night but I come here to the podium to tell you that I have great respect for all the candidates.”

King now veers into a discussion of faith — an apparent reference to Romney’s Mormonism. King suggests no one should be denied the presidency because of their personal faith.

Now, he’s talking about “fire in his belly” and concludes with this, calling his pick, “the person who I believe destiny has called to be the president of the United States. I will be working for…Fred Thompson for president.”

He was questioned about the “fire in the belly” comment.

“I’m kind of an antidote for that,” King said.

After the event, I asked King if he had made up his mind on the spot as he was speaking this morning.

“You have great intuition,” King replied.

Romney’s people must have received some kind of heads up because they were at the press conference in force. A couple of the press in the room - most notably Mark Murray from MSNBC’s First Read - actually reported that Romney had the nod.

And the endorsements keep coming… Congressman Steve King (R), one of Iowa’s most strident critics of illegal immigration and a champion of the state’s rural conservatives, has endorsed Romney.

With a mere 17 days until the Iowa caucuses, King’s endorsement may resonate with conservatives in the western part of the state. King had fostered a close relationship with longshot candidate Tom Tancredo, who shares his strong anti-illegal immigration views. But speculation yesterday was that the much-revered (in some circles) congressman wanted to make a splash by endorsing one of the race’s front-runners.

King’s endorsement of Romney could serve to further the Massachusetts governor’s case against Huckabee, whom Team Romney hopes to paint as weak on immigration.

Then, the embarrassing update:

King just announced that he’s supporting Thompson. Team Romney is in the back of the room looking bewildered. They were all here, leading all the press to conclude that it was an endorsement for Romney.

I can’t believe that King made up his mind on the spot as RI reports. That’s got to be a joke, although given the confusion, not a very good one.

So realistically what does this do for Fred in Iowa? For one thing, it maintains the momentum he has enjoyed from the debate (Fred wasn’t expected to get the Des Moines Register endorsement anyway). For another, King has some clout in the western part of the state and among some very influential groups including anti-abortion and anti-illegal immigration interests.

But with 17 days to go and Fred facing an uphill fight to exceed expectations, it may be too little too late. His numbers have barely budged in the Rassmussen daily tracking poll since the debate. But starting today, Thompson begins the kind of retail campaigning that has been lacking in his Iowa and New Hampshire efforts previously. He will start a town by town bus tour from now until the Caucuses on January 3.

This is the kind of thing that voters in New Hampshire and Iowa demand of the candidates. The fact that Thompson has failed to do something similar in New Hampshire explains his dismal showing there - garnering less than 5% in all the polls now. It’s only half a joke when you can say that New Hampshirites won’t consider voting for a candidate unless they’ve shaken his hand at least twice. Iowans aren’t quite as bad but also revel in the attention of the candidates.

Right now unless lightening strikes the race and things go topsy-turvy, it appears that Fred has an excellent chance of finishing 3rd in Iowa and no higher. As much as I’d like to see Thompson in the race for a while, I just don’t think that’s going to give him the kind of boost he needs to win in South Carolina and make Florida a competitive venue for him. In short, I think it probable that Fred exits the stage probably immediately after Super Tuesday. He will be out of money and most likely in 4th or even 5th place in the delegate hunt and virtually mathematically eliminated from getting enough delegates to win.

While admittedly much can happen in a month in this race, the comeback kid at this point would appear to be McCain. He has a real shot at winning New Hampshire if he can get the independents and conservative Democrats to cross over and vote for him. And it appears that he is also starting to make a move in South Carolina - home of many active duty military and veterans. Two such victories would probably make him competitive on Super Tuesday - especially in the south and some of the larger states. In short, McCain’s potential delegate haul at this point far exceeds the possibilities for Fred. The arithmetic just isn’t there for the Tennessean.

Fred has got to hope that Romney continues his slide in Iowa and that he can somehow sneak past him for second place. That would be the kind of shocker that could turn his campaign around and give him a boost that would help in fundraising as well as his poll numbers. But he has a huge amount of ground to make up - at least 15 points in most polls - which makes a second place finish unlikely as of today.

Any way it turns out, Fred has done a service to the party by offering his articulated positions on several important issues. They are a good starting point for any candidate if they wish to be taken seriously by conservatives next November.

UPDATE

Malkin thinks that Romney’s Meet the Press performance where he was less than forthright on his immigration flip flops was a determining factor for King:

As I mentioned, Rep. King has been one of the strongest proponents of strict immigration enforcement. Looks like Mitt Romney’s Meet The Press performance yesterday–go back and read his Clintonian answer on amnesty–didn’t help. Like I said yesterday, the endorsement promises to carry much more weight with grass-roots conservatives than the left-leaning Des Moines Register’s.

For your amusement, I offer the following from Digby:

A Democratic president, no matter who it is, is going to pay for the Republicans’ sins. But it won’t be just because the Republicans and Blue Dogs in congress suddenly “realize” they have co-equal power. I predict that the right wing noise machine will shout far and wide that the election was stolen (probably with the help of “illegal aliens.”) The new president will not be allowed to weed out even one right wing plant anywhere in the executive branch without being accused of politicizing it. There will be no executive privilege as the courts rediscover their “responsibilities.” Scientists and experts will all be accused of being shills for the liberal special interests. The president will be accused of violating Americans’ civil liberties and destroying the constitution. There will be widespread accusations of fraud and corruption and non-stop investigations.

A “stolen” election? The 2006 election came and went and not a peep from Republicans or any sane conservative blogger that the election was “stolen.” Republicans, generally acting like adults about most things, don’t engage in the fantastical and uproariously funny conspiracy theories indulged in by our leftist friends about dark doings at Diebold or after midnight vote stealing. Perhaps Digby was projecting.

In fact, that entire paragraph is an amazing summary of exactly what Democrats have done to Republicans over the last 7 years. And what’s more important, it was done for exactly the reason that Digby is accusing the GOP of in his nightmare future; pure, unadulterated politics.

What Digby is worried about is that when the Democratic president exercises the same kind of executive authority used by the Bush Administration, that she is going to have to support it thus making her out to be the rank hypocrite she has always been. In short, on this and all other issues she mentions above, she wants immunity from charges of being a hypocrite just because she has posited this outrageous scenario. Every time a Democratic president does something that Bush was criticized for, you can bet that Digby and her friends will be whining about the Republican noise machine and dark forces arrayed against them while giving that action their unquestioned support.

It’s a “Get out of being called a Hypocrite Card” he wants and she’s not going to get it.

Sorry, it won’t wash. First of all, don’t worry about Republican charges of stealing the election. It ain’t going to be that close. Secondly, the simple act of projecting all these Republican sins and admitting that Democrats will be doing something similar proves that their criticism has been driven by ideology and politics, not concern over “shredding the constitution” or any other nonsense the left has been spouting these last years.

And yes, the “Republican Noise Machine” is going to be in high gear everytime a Democratic president does something that Bush has been raked over the coals for. If I were Digby, I would examine my archives pretty carefully and delete posts that will come back to haunt her after a Democrat is elected president. Just use the criteria she set out above to cleanse the record because sister, you and your compatriot’s feet are going to be held to the fire when it comes to criticisms you have made of this president that you then turn around and praise and support when a Democrat is in power.

Preemptive absolution isn’t going to do you any good. Trust me when I tell you that all of the clever invective you and other liberals have used over the past 7 years to tell us how how close the country is to a dictatorship and how evil the Republicans have been will be thrown in your face whenever a Democrat dares to go beyond the “Greenwald Line” of exercising executive authority.

No deal on hypocrisy immunity. You will be sentenced to experience the next 4-8 years exactly as you fear; one example of sanctimony exposed after another.

UPDATE

Thanks to commenters who pointed out Digby is a woman. Pronouns changed accordingly.