New possibility for Tea Party campaign song, especially given the latest Christine O’Donnell revelations, based on Bill Maher’s boffo tape from O’Donnell’s appearance on Politically Incorrect in 1999:
O’DONNELL: I dabbled into witchcraft — I never joined a coven. But I did, I did. … I dabbled into witchcraft. I hung around people who were doing these things. I’m not making this stuff up. I know what they told me they do. [...]
One of my first dates with a witch was on a satanic altar, and I didn’t know it. I mean, there’s little blood there and stuff like that. … We went to a movie and then had a midnight picnic on a satanic altar.
Politically Very Incorrect. Possibly explains O’Donnell’s sudden cancellation of scheduled appearances on Face The Nation and even Fox.
Let me just state for the record that I sympathize with O’Donnell’s dalliance with the weird, just as I sympathize with her financial difficulties (though there may be more fire under that smoke). It’s not really too much of a stretch for me to see her side on dabbling with the Evil One, or on her once-upon-a-time anti-masturbation campaigning, or even on what she was trying to get at when she said she didn’t believe God would ever force her to lie. Yet even I, naturally flexible as I am, find myself getting a bit sore here. I don’t know how cool and stretchable the voters of Delaware are. And O’D may fail for other reasons – just from overall comes-across-as-weird-lightweight-ness, not any particular attention-grabber.
In other news, Sarah Palin has suggested that she might just be ready to give 2012 a shot, but only if the audience claps as hard as it can. Picking up on the day’s political themes with unusual aplomb, the DNC rushed out the following video:
well…..delaware has the second highest proportion of scientists and engineers per 1k citizens in the nation….i think they would vote for a witch before they would vote for a Young Earth Creationist.
.
@ strangelet:
Hey, strange – long time, no see. Hope you had a witchin Summer.
Yep, the YEC stuff is just more weight to test one’s non-judgmentalness… ness. It was 1996. She’s tried a blanket “I said a lot of things when I was new and ardent in my faith” that I’m inclined on principle to accept. Unfortunately, even if you’re willing to wipe the slate clean on the ’90s, say, that still leaves the little problem of WTF she’s saying now, and stands for.
You’ve got to pick up every stitch.
Twas the title, Tsar, you invoked the strange one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tV6u97beANs
no Donovan.
And they still voted for Joe Biden, even after his double plagiarism, the last from Kinnock,?? was revealed, after his Homer Simpsonish way of
dialog, after flubbing every major issue for the last forty years from the original pipeline to the break up of Iraq. Yes CREW, the folks who petitioned that Sarah’s wardrobe be audited, and they found nothing of note, is on her case. big woop,
@ miguel cervantes:
CREW fabricated video from Politically Correct and is blackmailing Bill Maher into releasing it? Interesting!
Your good buddy at Powerline thinks she’s oh-vah:
Christine O’Donnell’s Career, RIP
No, the other matter, which you are alleging, not the video tapes, although I would like to have seen what the panel discussion was like
in that instance. We’ve seen enough of Max Blumenthal’s and the Winner’s handiwork not to trust the end product.lNow you really have gone ‘Naavi’ over the last year, Colin, next think you know your icon will be blue. The Clean Toga boys, are rather disappointing in their willing to abandon a candidate like the Eskimos on a ice floe. I guess
you have to willing to at least consider a ‘a pointless and futile’ gesture’ in order to topple the state’s leading patriarch,
miguel cervantes wrote:
If burning O’Donnell as a witch is bad for the patriarchy, let’s give it due consideration.
miguel cervantes wrote:
I have a feeling you wouldn’t. Look – I could say a lot about her and why she’s not “senatorial,” but the bottom line is that if she were a lefty, and had done and said equivalent left-world things on the ideological side, had behaved similarly in regard to finances and media access, you’d be ALL OVER HER. She’d be a typical sick stupid corrupt lying conspiracy machine evil ruling class clone dimwit to you. And you know it.
Curiousity having gotten the best of me, I actually watched the clip, she in with Clive Barker, the master of Grand Guignol horror, on a
Halloween themed show by the timeline, ah the vapors from the folks
at Powerline, Steyn’s reaction should be choice, as will Lileks.
Now back in the real world, we have the fellow who got a cottage from the Countrywide folks, in Ireland, writing the financial regulatory
bill, on one end, and one fellow with a very close understanding of subprime financing in the other. The chairman of the tax writing committee was reelected despite having a million dollars in undeclared property. So color me ‘shocked, that gambling is going
on here’
@ miguel cervantes:
Great arguments for Christine O’Donnell to be the next Senator from Delaware. Let’s add some amateur criminal idiots to complement the professional criminal idiots! Too bad we can’t call it “progress.” Maybe if we put a three-corner hat on it we can call it “restoring honor.”
No, I’m making a point, CK, most everything has been said or written about her since Tuesday and even earlier was slightly skewed, She did earn her degree, she just didn’t have the funds, she sold her house legally, yet she was audited anyways, Rove who has never had any issues of this kind, was right as rain,
she was a little too frank about her sentiments when she was just starting out. The Marmalards and the Niedermeyers of the party, really deserve their comeuppance
@ strangelet:
The strongest evidence against creationism is found in the Bible, as I said on Zombie ages ago:
http://ckmac.com/thewholething/2009/11/05/creationism/
The strongest evidence against evolution is the existence of homosexuality, as I said on Zombie a bit more recently:
http://zombiecontentions.com/2010/08/05/homosexuality-supports-creationism/
miguel cervantes wrote:
It’s kinda quaint to see you getting hot and bothered on behalf of someone you like, someone on your side, being subjected to the kind of character assassination that is your delight when applied to those you don’t like and who are on the other side.
What’s toxic for the goose is toxic for the gander. I’m all in favor, within reason, of setting aside the long-ago – even merely days ago – nonsense and suspicious associations of public figures, including bloggers and pundits, in favor of discussion of what they are actually saying and actually mean to represent.
CK MacLeod wrote:
heigh and ho and hey hey hey gel
@ Fuster:
Well I knew that that expression was subject to certain recently observed provisos.
BUT – What COD “means to represent” – a popularly driven deconstruction of the progressivist state – is to me more interestingly criticizeable than her televised table-talk about dabbling in witchcraft. There is a moment at which the latter can be thought to function within the former, but the TPers don’t typically want to “own” that moment, or confront its implications.
Why cannot we go back, not the whole way back to Constitutional principles. are we that far removed like Marcus Aurelius’s Rome in Gladiator, from the Republic, there aren’t enough gardens in the world
to accomodate the tulips that have sprung up
miguel cervantes wrote:
whole buncha reasons… taken literally, it’s an impossibility… put into practice could mean so many different things that literally almost anything could be justified as a partial going back to some constitutional principle or another.