Politics: January 2006 Archives

Talk radio host and blogger Kevin McCullough watched Ted Kennedy's performance during last week's Judiciary Committee hearing for Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito. Kevin thinks Ted needs straightening out:

"Ted Kennedy needs a beating."

Let me be clear, I don't mean some "pansy slap" on the wrist. I mean a bona fide beating!

This was supposed to have been Kevin's latest column for World Net Daily, but it was spiked as too extreme. I read it, and I don't think so -- but you have to read the whole thing. Go see for yourself. Kevin invites your comments.

UPDATE: Just in case you've not bothered to click the link and read the article, Kevin isn't calling for physical violence against the senior senator from Massachusetts.

This item by Karol about NY Governor George Pataki's presidential ambitions is brilliant for a couple of reasons.

First, there's this observation:

New York Governor George Pataki mentioned ethanol in his State of the State speech last week. Of course, that means he's running for president.

She links "running for president" to a Google search for ethanol+subsidies+Iowa. The only reason a pol from outside Iowa would boost ethanol is to lay groundwork for a good showing in the Iowa caucuses.

Karol goes on to wonder why Pataki's advisers don't tell him he's a no-hoper, and some of her commenters have it pegged. Sean writes:

He won't win, he hasn't got a shot, but that doesn't mean that his "advisers" and "consultants" won't sign contracts for $16,000/month in the process of failing miserably.

Commenter Jay comes close to nailing it:

The "Producers" motivation for running for president. Raise a lot of campaign funds, tank miserably, pocket the remainder.

That's a reference to the 1968 Mel Brooks film, in which a failed theatrical impresario and his accountant realize there's a pile of money to be made in a play that closes on opening night. As Karol points out, though, candidates can't pocket any remaining campaign funds.

But Pataki isn't Bialystock or Bloom, as Jay and others seem to suggest. Pataki is "Springtime for Hitler" -- the sure-fire flop -- and his political consultants are the producers. They'll butter him up, appeal to his vanity, and convince him to run. They'll get him to raise a pile of money, which won't be tough for the governor of a large and wealthy state, and they'll spend it for him over the course of '07 and early '08. They can make all sorts of promises in the course of raising money, because they know the candidate will never be in a position to keep those commitments. They'll setup fundraisers, mass mailings, and media buys, and add a percentage to each one, in addition to their monthly consulting fees. When the campaign falters, no one will blame the consultants, who, after all, didn't have much to work with, and they will live to consult again.

There is no shortage of unscrupulous political consultants who will flatter a candidate into running, preferably a candidate who is wealthy enough to self-finance. For this sort of consultant, a successful campaign is one in which the check clears.

So from henceforth, let's refer to consultant-driven no-hope election bids as "Springtime for Hitler" campaigns. We've seen plenty at the state and local level, and there are sure to be more before 2008 comes along.