Sunday, November 13, 2011

It's that time of the week...

Time for my Sunday morning breakfast of pique and mortification: The Sunday morning rerun of Hardball Weekend. Thirty minutes of that smug waterhead smirking out of my TV screen gets the heart rate up better than an hour on the Stairmaster.

Today he was all puffed up with tongue-clucking, head-shaking indignation, sanctimoniously condemning the way that Herman Cain mistreated... I'm sorry, I mean allegedly mistreated those poor, poor women...

...and without missing a beat, segued into pimping his JFK biography, because the Kennedy presidency was an, and I quote, "heroic time in America", and he wanted to help us remember those days.

Quick, somebody alert the Secretary of Irony.

Ah, yes, that heroic time, those heady days, before the sexual harassment lawsuit had been invented and a president could swap girlfriends with his attorney general like they were baseball cards! I'm sorry, Chris, I meant allegedly.

27 comments:

Matt G said...

I didn't care about Clinton's trysts; I cared that he lied to grand jury.

I don't care about Kennedy's liasons with Monroe; I care about the etrenchments he dragged us into.

I don't care about W's various intoxications back in the day; I care that he kept us on Iraq and captained the mortgage bailout.

Let's ditch personal and social issues, and be constitutionally and fiscally responsible, please.

In their spare time they can hold bunga-bunga parties, for all I care.

westofthewest said...

"Quick, somebody alert the Secretary of Irony."

... and before the blood even appeared, the blade was back in it's scabbard.

Anonymous said...

Is all of the "color-blind" MSNBC crowd still all atwitter the "a black man was sexually aggressive with a white woman," a (shudder) "BLONDE white woman?"
Their projection of their desires to lynch Herman Cain onto the Republican party is observable proof of their own racism and psychological disorder.
Just as they project their desires to murder onto gun owners, they project their racism onto the Republican party.
Shame we can't get them to take their medications.

the pawnbroker said...

How a man conducts his personal life and how he views social issues certainly are indicators of his character and how he might respond to internal or external pressure, so yeah, it's an issue.

To the degree that Kennedy, or Clinton, or Cain were willing to embezzle their positions to get laid, they cannot be trusted with those positions to conduct any business legitimately...character does matter.

That said, and as I said in an earlier comment, I'd take Cain or even Slick Willie in preference to the vanilla candidate that MSM decided long ago would be their chosen opposition to the One.

Say what you will about the demise and impotence of old media; their concerted effort to control the campaigns of all comers has been masterful and effective...witness: election 2012, Obama v. Romney.

They win either way.

Alan J. said...

Wow, talk about the power of advertising. I've never watched Hardball Weekend, and yet as soon as I read "...smug waterhead smirking out of my TV screen..." I thought, "Huh, must be Chris Matthews she'd talking about."

Anonymous said...

I always wonder, just what would a liberal find 'heroic' about Kennedy's presidency?

Expanded our committment in Vietnam.

Brought the country to the brink of nuclear war in a showdown with Khruschev.

Launched a half-baked invasion of Cuba that redefined "farcical."

Any Republican with a similar list of 'accomplishments' would be universally referred to as The Worst President Ever in all media accounts.

Alath
Carmel IN

Matt G said...

There is a line of thought, to which I largely subscribe, which theorizes that a man's drive to become powerful often comes from the same drive that causes him to seek out more female conquests. Thus we should hardly be surprised when our governmental leaders, who were evaluated at least partly by their robust, vital appearance (remember how hard Geo. H.W. Bush had to fight that "wimp" characterization?), turn out to be horn dogs, dabbling in the inevitible offerings made to them.

the pawnbroker said...

And yet the misuse of power to obtain personal gain is vilified or even criminal in every other guise.

All depends on your definition of "inevitable offerings" I guess. We know how JFK and WJC defined it; unknown so far as to Cain's...but if he has crossed the line to physical aggression, he is lucky he hasn't sought a "conquest" of a woman who subscribes to the tag line at the top of VFTP.

Regardless, I'd rather have a CEO who isn't led around by his dick no matter how alpha he may consider his maleness or how many whores toss their panties at him; if his personal drive trumps what is right or wrong as to the use of his power to get laid, he is far less likely to exclude his own or his handlers' vested interests in more critical matters of state.

In crude microcosm that should make my concerns clear to anyone in a position of gov-backed power over others, the old cop adage "Badge'll get you pussy, pussy'll get your badge" says it pretty well.

I'd cancel my subscription to that "line of thought", Matt. Also to the one that considers politicians or any other gov employee "leaders". They're my fucking employees, and if I come to believe that they put their own interests ahead of mine and the "company's", I'll fire their ignorant ass first chance I get.

TBeck said...

I have a rule about philandering politicians; if your spouse can't trust you, then neither can I.

Bubblehead Les. said...

Dear Leg Tingler: "Happy Birthday, Mr. President.." ring a bell? Or doesn't that fit into your "Revisionist History Meme?"

Tam said...

Bubblehead Les,

"Dear Leg Tingler: "Happy Birthday, Mr. President.." ring a bell?"

Didn't he sing that to Barack?

Anonymous said...

Reading all of the above, it is clear that many agree with the media viewpoint:
Republicans are guilty until and after being proven innocent
and Democrats are innocent until proven guilty and then excused for being guilty.

Tam said...

"Reading all of the above, it is clear that many agree with the media viewpoint:"

[Citation needed]

Kristopher said...

[Citation needed]

The 2008 election results?

Justthisguy said...

Jack Kennedy famously said either to Anthony Eden or Harold MacMillan, I forget which, that he just didn't feel right if he had to go more than an hour without having a woman.

There have always been perfectly honest, decent, respectable Irish people in this country. Why, then, did we have to suffer the Kennedy infestation?

P.s. Oh it's quite true that old Joe Kennedy never left a tip. My Dad observed that personally at least once.

Zendo Deb said...

"Thirty minutes of that smug waterhead smirking out of my TV screen gets the heart rate up better than an hour on the Stairmaster."

Why do people watch TV that is A) not very good, and B) upsets them?

Life is too short.

Tam said...

Zendo Deb,

To get blogfodder?

phlegmfatale said...

I came here to breathlessly utter happy birthday, mr. pwesident and someone had beaten me to it. How about the allegations that some Kennedy or other had something to do with the snuffing of the candle in the wind? How about LBJ manhandling random women who came to dinner, etc? The line that will eternally Yup: two totally separate sets of rules here.

It's insulting to me that womens' organizations are selective in their indignation. I always say that they were effectively neutered and de-fanged when they got in bed with a political party, and thus holds true for any movement or group who allow themselves to be co-opted.

Anonymous said...

Citation?
It just seemed that Cain was assumed guilty...

Tam said...

Anon 7:33,

I see one commenter, Pawnbroker, whose remarks read that way.

Tam said...

And, by the way, Anonymous, neither you nor I know whether he is guilty or not.

JimB said...

Doncha know...JFK died for our sins...That's why the left made him a saint.

the pawnbroker said...

"I see one commenter, Pawnbroker, whose remarks read that way."

Show me where I said that.

"Anonymous, neither you nor I know whether he is guilty or not."

Nor I, as I actually did say. Always a good idea to actually read comments before referencing them.

Anonymous said...

Having given it a little thought, I don't care a fig whether or not he is guilty of anything.
Baring indictment and conviction for something more serious than perjury, neither "Thrill up my leg" nor any other liberal has any right to question Cain's fitness to serve. He currently exceeds the liberal standard for ethical behavior for president.

Tam said...

PB,

"Show me where I said that."

I said "read that way".
cf. "To the degree that Kennedy, or Clinton, or Cain were willing to embezzle their positions to get laid..."


Anon 3:59,

"He currently exceeds the liberal standard for ethical behavior for president."

Uh, that was kinda the point of my post...

the pawnbroker said...

"We know how JFK and WJC defined it(idolatry sex, or what MattG calls "inevitable offerings"); unknown so far as to Cain's (definition)..."

To consider whether one is "guilty" of something, it's important to know of what. So do dalliances occur because these alphas exude some irresistible pheromone, or because their position/power/money/fame does?

If it is the former, and mutual, consensual, and innocent nastiness ensues, it's no concern of mine. But if it is the latter, and I submit that it is, then it is incumbent upon the alphas to deflect it to protect the integrity of their position. If instead they allow it, then their judgement is highly suspect. But if they actively exploit their position to attract it, then they certainly are guilty of abusing their power and the public trust, and are not worthy of a badge, or a position of management, and sure as hell not the office of President.

So yeah, it's a matter of degree.

markm said...

"He currently exceeds the liberal standard for ethical behavior for president."

So the liberals should shut up - but he isn't losing any liberal votes, since he never had any. The question is there will be enough proof behind these allegations to be believed by conservatives, who will not vote for an adulterer.