Clinton Takes a Hit in Nevada | Main | Update: As Anti-War Groups Surrender On Funding, Surprise!, The NYT Editorial Page Embraces the Idea, Too
January 17, 2008

Coulter Vs. Rush on Romney

Coulter endorses Romney, which surprises me, as I got the feeling from her earlier she was a Giuliani girl but didn't want to admit it.

Meanwhile, Rush says women who support Romney are "Mittens" who support him due to his capacity to sexually arouse them.

Silly. Mitt's handsome but in that nonthreatening, uninteresting way. He may play well with women (actually, he doesn't, but whatever), but I really doubt it's because so many women want to get with him.

As Allah says (and I've said myself before), you're going to say silly stuff when you have three hours to fill. You just can't afford an internal editor.

Bonus: Huckabee's Latest Misstep: I'm sure he doesn't really mean this; he just said it without thinking about it. But that's a frequent problem with the Huckster -- he plainly hasn't thought about very much at all so many of his statements are just first-time-I-even-considered-this gibberish.

Confronted with the fact that his supporters are push-polling, he says he wants to outlaw all negative campaigning against candidates, unless the candidate being criticized approves of the negative ad.


Again, I don't think he means it. I don't think he's thought about this long enough to mean it.

But just like with his tax-hiking ways, he seeks to immunize himself by being more Catholic than the pope on taxes and promising to abolish the IRS; stung by criticisms that he's soft on illegals, he plagiarizes most of Mark Krikorian's plan for immigration.

And now, confronted with his supporters engaging in illegal and sleazy push-polling, he suddenly endorses making all negative ads illegal.

Whenever something unsavory or undesirable about him pops up, he lurches suddenly and wildly in the exact opposite direction, sometimes with comical results (he still wants to reform the INS, which doesn't actually exist anymore) and sometimes frightening ones (pass a law making it illegal to criticize politicians without their express written consent).

This guy is seriously not ready for prime time.

After every debate people say "Well, he really answered the religion question well." Well, no friggin' duh. He's a preacher. But how about his answers regarding actual policy?

Clarification: Prarie Wind explains what Huck almost certainly meant:

What he meant is others should not be allowed to do negative campaigning on behalf of a candidate unless that candidate approves. I guess he means "official" approval.

I know it doesn't help what he said much but there is a slight distinction. I wonder if Huck Boy has ever read the Bill of Rights. I know most of the Democrats haven't but I expect better from Republicans.

Well there's a big distinction, and that does make sense... in broad outline. The problem is that it couldn't be implemented, because a group would just claim "We don't support the candidate we obviously support, we just don't like the rest of these guys," etc. These groups would just claim to be nonpartisan.

Admittedly, though, this interpretation makes his remarks non-crazy.

But still not terribly well thought through. Still off-the-cuff, first-time-this-occurred-to-me crap.

digg this
posted by Ace at 06:30 PM

| Access Comments

Recent Comments
notsothoreau: "Oklahoma has managed to filter out most of the Lef ..."

X-ray: "In the 70s weren't we also headed for a new Ice Ag ..."

sharon: "Whoopie is nothing but a old ugly fat grease MONKE ..."

Bandersnatch: "[i]According to the '70s, global cooling and a new ..."

notsothoreau: "Yeah AG Fergie is a real piece of work. We heard t ..."

junior: "What are the odds that at some point Putin asked T ..."

Ray Van Dune: "715 26 Whoopi? I'd hit it. Hell yes, with a well ..."

Alberta Oil Peon: "The price of gas is too damn high The keystone a ..."

TheQuietMan: " In the 70s "the experts" were warning us of anot ..."

eleven: "Those killer bees really pussed out. ..."

Calm Mentor: "The hole in the ozone layer. We're all gonna die f ..."

t-bird: "[i] funded by Russia, "interfering" in our domesti ..."

Recent Entries

Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64