Clinton v Nutroots

Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Not satisfied with the effort put forward by Martin Peretz yesterday, the Wall Street Journal has granted commentary space to Lanny Davis, a Clinton sycophant rivaled only by Sidney Blumenthal in sheer vileness and willingness to engage in the Clinton's speciality of attack without regard to decency. Davis' attacks on the women who justifiably accused Clinton of serial sexual predation are unforgettable - and unforgiveable. The Wall Street Journal demeans itself by allowing him the space.

It is totally unsurprising that a Clinton mouthpiece should resort to the level of name calling in which Davis engages in this piece. Miz Clinton is rightfully afraid of the Moveon, ANSWER sponsored movement whose sole purpose is to impede America's war effort. Her carefully constructed straddle of this particular barbed wire fence is going to be very painful with a bunch of Soros funded punks pulling hard on one side. It might even interfere with the '08 strategy that Emmanuel is pursuing in throwing a disproportionate share of DCCC money at Miz Clinton's Emily List slate of code pinko (if not Code Pink) feminists who she hopes are destined to become her voice in the House in the altogether unlikely event that she ever again enters the Oval Office except by invitation.

Davis is correct in his description of the scurrilous tactics in which the Kosola Kidz so readily engage. He should be correct because, after all, they learned those same tactics from him, Blumenthal and the rest of the cast of Clinton clones. He and Miz Clinton have earned every bit of what is headed their way - and so has the Democratic Party.

Go Neddy!!!


CT Secretary of State results for primary.

The CT site doesn't function well.

Loner suggests this site.

This site seems to to be functioning well.

GA Secretary of State results (McKinney).


vnjagvet said...

I guess Lanny is shocked, shocked that netrootiness is going on in the Nutmeg State.

David Thomson said...

“He should be correct because, after all, they learned those same tactics from him...”

Lanny Davis is indeed an unwitting parent to the Daily Kos type radicals. They are, however, ratcheting up the vileness to another level. Davis always preferred to be able to say “some of my best friends are Republicans.” At the end of the day, he wanted to be able to share a drink and a laugh with a member of the opposition. The Daily Kos folks could care less. Destroying the so-called scum bag Republicans and moderate Democrats is an all consuming passion. Lastly, Davis never thought his original tactics would ever be employed against the "respectable" liberal establishment. The Lieberman crisis is blowing is mind.

The Internet changed everything. It allows the Daily Kos crowd to easily communicate with each other---and raise a sizable amount of money. The Democratic establishment can no longer effectively marginalize these individuals. They can only watch in utter shock while the Kos radicals bring down the down the house around their heads.

Rick Ballard said...


I thought that you would be up in GA-4 helping Hank Johnson with his spot removal campaign today. Does he have it so well in hand that no help is necessary?


I wonder if Davis is regretting not having read the directions carefully before letting the genie out?

Neither he nor Miz Clinton can quite figure out what to do - if Joe wins, he's the default "conscience of the moderates" - and Miz Clinton is sitting in the back seat. If Joe loses, then the nutroots stay on the front porch and Miz Clinton's '08 schemes and dreams go up in smoke. What clever people.

vnjagvet said...


I share your view about Lanny's wanting to "share a drink" at the end of the day with the gang on the other side.

Much like Carville and Matalin, at a certain level, that was possible even during the Clinton days.

You are right though that the i/n has "changed everything", and thatd that Lanny and crew have sewn the seeds of the Kossites behavior. After all, they devised many of the tactics the Kossites now use against their perceived enemies, even though they are otherwise on the same side.

The i/n group picked up only the fighting tools and tactics and not the camaraderie over drinks at the end of the day.

Indeed, they take themselves so seriously, they believe their own bullshit.

terrye said...

Hoisted on their own petard.

Knucklehead said...

Just in passing note how Lanny Davis uses "right-wing" and "far right" juxtaposed with "liberal" rather than "left-wing" or "far left". Just sayin'.

On to the more important point.

Lanny Davis is neither spring chicken nor dummy. The only bio I could find for him quickly says he recieved his JD from Yale Law School in 1970 and graduated cum laude from Yale with his BA (presumably circa 1967).

That makes him approximately 60 yrs. old.

And yet this man who was not born yesterday and is no idiot brings us, via the WSJ, this little tidbit: dad used to tell me, comes only from the right wing--in his day from people such as the late Sen. Joseph McCarthy, with his tirades against "communists and their fellow travelers." The word "McCarthyism" became a red flag for liberals, signifying the far right's fascistic tactics of labeling anyone a "communist" or "socialist" who favored an active federal government to help the middle class and the poor, and to level the playing field.

Is there any hope that "liberals" such as Lanny Davis will ever move on beyond "McCarthyism"? McCarthy died in 1957!!! That's a half freakin' century ago, Lanny! Even you were a child back then.

How 'bout we (or rather you, Mr. Davis) have a look at what's happened just a bit more recently. (Eegads these "liberals" can be ponderous!)

I came to believe that we liberals couldn't possibly be so intolerant and hateful, because our ideology was famous for ACLU-type commitments to free speech, dissent and, especially, tolerance for those who differed with us.

Ummm... Lanny, dear, you were at Yale in the mid-60s. Your "liberal" peers were not exactly the world's most perfect practioners of tolerance. I remember those days and even I, still a child, remember well wondering why so many of those campus grabbing, spittle-flecked "peaceniks" seemed so damned intolerant and hateful.

Did you ever pick your head up from your books, Lanny?

And in recent years--with the deadly combination of sanctimony and vitriol displayed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Michael Savage--I held on to the view that the left was inherently more tolerant and less hateful than the right.

I guess you weren't reading or listening to many of the sanctimonious, vitriolic blatherings of your "liberal" pundits, were you?

Now, in the closing days of the Lieberman primary campaign, I have reluctantly concluded that I was wrong. The far right does not have a monopoly on bigotry and hatred and sanctimony.

Well, Lanny, I don't what to tell you. I'm considerably younger than you (although I am no spring chicken either) but it was obvious, without even paying much attention, that the "liberals" you've apparently been duped in to believing are so tolerant have been anything but tolerant for, oh, Idunno, at least 30 years or so.

If you were to examine the, ummm..., "left-wing" or the "far left", Lanny, I think you might find there's been a good deal of intolerance and hatefulness among them since, oh, Russeau was pitching his brats onto sidewalks outside of orphanages.

But you go right on believing you beloved "liberals" aren't intolerant or hateful, Lanny. Those of us who have been paying more attention these past few decades have learned to keep a sharp eye out for the approach of the intolerant and hateful "liberals". We don't want to be victims of your propensity to violence.

CF said...

Ah, but Lanny was oilier and slicker than Kos, wasn't he in his prime?(Sid's another matter.Too crude. Too crazy. After revealing that NSA is providing Israel with information, I doubt Hillary would dare embrace him publicly again.)

Fresh Air said...


I think it's just degrees of viscosity. 20W vs 10W-50.

vnjagvet said...


Alas, I am in Fulton County, therefore in GA-5. Only about 1000 feet from the border.

loner said...

He and Miz Clinton have earned every bit of what is headed their way - and so has the Democratic Party.

What? Victory?

Newt Gingrich and then C-SPAN came to the House of Representatives in 1979. Who knew? Who even guessed? Apocalypse Now was finally released later in that year.

I love the smell of napalm in the morning. You know, one time we had a hill bombed, for 12 hours. When it was all over, I walked up. We didn't find one of 'em, not one stinkin' dink body. The smell, you know that gasoline smell, the whole hill. Smelled like... victory. Someday this war's gonna end...

Gales of laughter for old time's sake.

Rick Ballard said...

"What? Victory?"

Sure. Humphrey won the nomination in '68 and McGovern won it in '72. No reason why Miz Clinton shouldn't win it in '08. She's as strong a candidate as either one.

loner said...

And, and, and... mustn't ever, ever, ever forget...'ll be historic, historic, historic I say!

The answer is: 49 - 54 + 5 = 0.

What's the question?

Rick Ballard said...

Who cares?

loner said...


loner said...

This seems to be a much better site for CT results:

terrye said...

Last I heard it is Lamont by 6, but it is not over.

Sad really, if Lieberman had just promised to cut and run and been more of an ass in general he might be doing better.

If he loses, will he run as an Independent. Some people say that is disloyal but I would say he has every right to do it.

Rick Ballard said...


Lamont by 3.5% with 80% counted - 10PM Eastern.

terrye said...


Just goes to show those polls were not right.

terrye said...

Drudge is calling it for Lamont. Boy, am I glad I don't read the lefty blogs. They finally won one..God knows what they might do. Sacrfice a small animal in thanks to election God or something.

Luther McLeod said...

Ha, well said Terrye, but alas, no sacrifice of small animals, peta would be most displeased.

My op, the more solidly lamont wins, the more the dem's, in general, lose. At the least, the more we define the divide, the clearer the line. Does that help? I have no idea. But at least we know where we stand.