Skip to content

Month: March 2012

Palin’s moment: Frum on “Game Change”

Palin’s moment

by digby

Ok, I guess I have to watch Game Change on HBO. David Frum’s review makes it sound irresistable. I have reservations because I found the book to be rather breathlessly patronizing and cruel toward all the women in the 2008 campaign, from Clinton to Elizabeth Edwards to Palin. It was just too much to take in the wake of that intense campaign and I put it away half way through and and haven’t picked it up since. Maybe I should.

My criticisms of the coverage of Palin in general were not so much about her intelligence, which I agreed was egregiously inadequate to the task, but rather the creepy stories about her running around in a bath towel in her hotel room and the unnecessary discussions of her pregnancy and “mothering” habits. As much as I loathe her as a politician and political figure, that stuff was too much for me. But Frum highlights something more interesting in the film which I think is well worth exploring:

By luck or by some deep political instinct, Palin launched her attack on the credentialed urban elite at exactly the hour that this elite was discrediting itself as at no time since the urban crisis of the 1960s.

It was the mighty brains of Wall Street who first enabled the financial crisis—and then escaped scot-free from the disaster, even as ordinary Americans lost their jobs, homes, and savings. Palin was speaking to and for constituencies who had steadily lost ground through the previous decade—and who now confronted personal and national disaster. Meanwhile, the people asking for bailouts—and the people deciding whether to grant bailouts—boasted résumés that looked a lot like Obama’s private school/Columbia/Harvard Law School pedigree. That is, when they weren’t outright Obama supporters and donors.

And at the same time, the position of America in the world—and of the white majority within America—seemed in question as never before. There, too, Obama could be made to represent every frightening trend: the flow of immigrants (12 million of them between 2000 and 2008, half of them illegal); the rise of non-Western powers like China and India; the deadly threat of terrorism emanating from people with names like “Barack,” “Hussein,” and—give or take a consonant—“Obama.”

Game Change shows Palin gleefully exciting all these fears—and a dismayed McCain overwhelmed by them. “Who is the real Barack Obama?” McCain, as played by Ed Harris, asks a campaign crowd. “A terrorist,” shouts a man in a red gimme cap. Later, other voices from the crowd shout in reply to that same question: “A Muslim! A socialist! He hangs out with people who hate our country! Kill him! Send him back to Africa!” McCain recoils—but Palin is shown leading angry crowds in chants of “U.S.A., U.S.A.”

“This is not the campaign I wanted to run,” Harris’s McCain wistfully laments. But it’s too late.

Now that’s interesting and if the films captures some of it, it will be worth watching.

Also, too, this:

The professionals soon discover their mistake. “I don’t even like to say this, but has it occurred to you guys that she might be mentally unstable?” asks one staffer about the woman the McCain campaign proposed to put next in line to America’s nuclear codes. As they come to know Palin, the campaign professionals begin to feel an awakening of conscience: first qualms, then fears, and finally revulsion—not for the campaign, not for their careers, but for their country. They supported McCain because they saw him, in Schmidt’s words, as a statesman and national hero running against a celebrity with no major life accomplishments. In hopes of reversing adverse poll numbers, they yoked a great man to a running mate who was not merely unworthy, but dangerous.

Some of the best acting in the film is in the looks of unspoken dread that flit about the faces of Sarah Paulson’s Wallace and Harrelson’s Schmidt as they react to Palin’s wilder and wilder provocations. What have they done? And if this campaign somehow wins—and Palin is put within reach of the presidency—what might they have done?

In the end, Wallace confesses she could not bring herself to vote for the ticket—and Schmidt is left to wrestle with his conscience before the 60 Minutes cameras, gallantly casting aside all self-excuse and self-deception. “You don’t get do-overs in life,” he says in the anguished voice of a man who wished one did.

It’s hard to believe now that Palin was once considered the frontrunner for the GOP nomination in 2012. And I’m not entirely convinced she couldn’t have competed quite well against the clown show ended up with if she had even the slightest ambition to be a real politician. Her status should have been everyone’s first clue that the GOP had already flown over the cliff.

Frum’s review discusses the huge costs to the Republican party and the country of her special brand of resentment politics. But she’s not the progenitor of them — there have been a slew of attractive right wing women selling that message for years.

He should look to Roger Ailes, the man behind the GOP Girls Gone Wild Fox culture. He didn’t personally groom Palin. But he certainly created the prototype.

.

Panchito in the Snowe: running hard for Broder’s chair

Panchito in the Snowe

by digby

It’s a fierce competition these days for who is going to win the Joseph Kraft/David Broder chair at Village U, but clearly Frank Bruni is in the running:

BACK in 1999, when I covered Congress, I had a kind of crush on Olympia Snowe.

She moved, dressed and treated people — even reporters, and even when we hounded her through the hallways of the Capitol — with an unforced, uncommon graciousness. She spoke with intelligence and almost never with vitriol.

But those weren’t the main reasons we had such soft spots for her. We liked her best for her disobedience. Unlike the majority of her colleagues in the Senate, be they Democrats or, like her, Republicans, she dared to disagree with her party. Often. And she did it publicly, with her votes and her forthright explanations of them.

Even then, in times that were a bit less harshly partisan, this was unusual, and she had limited company, though it included Susan Collins, Maine’s other senator, also a Republican and also one of our heroes. Snowe and Collins offered proof and reassurance: just because you identified yourself principally with one side in the ceaseless fight, wearing an R or a D, it didn’t mean you signed on automatically to everything it championed, to each plank in its sprawling (and often suffocating) platform. These two senators validated the fact that a person’s values, philosophy and priorities are more complex than a political tribe’s often tyrannical orthodoxy. And that the tribe’s package of positions isn’t necessarily coherent, each fitting naturally with the others. Snowe and Collins made human sense. Their peers usually didn’t. Those dutiful foot soldiers marched in dreary lock step with their given generals, infrequently demonstrating any real individuality, any rebel spunk.

That was around the time Bruni was also following Bush around like a faithful hound running madly with his long ears flapping every time he whistled for Panchito. Here’s an example:

[Bush] not only slaps reporters’ backs but also rubs the tops of their heads and, in a few instances, pinches their cheeks. It is the tactile equivalent of the nicknames he doles out to many of them and belongs to a teasing style of interpersonal relationship that undoubtedly harks back to his fraternity days…Late one afternoon, a reporter who was trying to get some work done had to implore Mr. Bush to retreat to his seat in the first row of first class so the chatter would cease.Mr. Bush flashed a wounded expression, quickly replaced by a smile, and talked on, a reminder of the adage that when God is in a mood to punish, he simply answers people’s prayers.

Let’s just say he had a lot of crushes.

As for the column about Snowe, it’s a perfect example of Villager twaddle about bipartisanship and “independence” which always seems to come down to a couple of corporate shills getting together to thwart the will of the people of both parties. All it lacks is a reference to Tip and Ronnie getting shitfaced together on the White House lawn every night. (Or something like that …)

.

The Consequences of Hate by @DavidOAtkins

The Consequences of Hate

by David Atkins

DailyKos diarist beantown mom writes:

You see, my 16 year old daughter came home from school on Friday in tears and has been in a state of utter despair since. She was told, in no uncertain terms, that she is a slut, a prostitute, a horny piece of trash that is out to sleep with every guy in school! The horrid little monsters who started harassing my daughter had the audacity to tell her their mothers were the ones who labeled her with these despicable opinions- they were just “telling it like it is, you know, like that guy on the radio! The one who isn’t afraid to tell the truth!”

Here is the note that one of the hatemonger classmates who attends her school gave her:

Little miss innocent, huh? Whatever slut- you take birth control pills so you can f*&# every guy in school! What a joke- u are nothin but a whore! Pretty bad when some guy on the radio who isn’t afraid to tell the truth has to break it down for everybody- if u on the Pill u are nothing but a skank ass ho! My mom said girls on the pill are tramps who just wanna get laid and don’t care about nothin- is that how u are?

This is the consequence of the hate being peddled by Rush Limbaugh and his ilk. It’s not just “entertainment” or “humor” as he and his defenders like to claim. The bullying these folks do on the airwaves trickles down to bullying in the workplace and in the schoolyard. It has very real, very negative consequences to people’s lives–including to these “mean girls” bullies themselves, who are at significantly higher risk of teen pregnancy and doomed shotgun weddings due to a learned prejudice against basic birth control.

Now, I might also point out that this woman’s daughter is taking the pill to address horrible cramps. But while that clarification might matter to the pearl-clutching prudes, the fact is that it doesn’t matter at all. If she’s taking them because she needs birth control, then good for her. That’s her decision to make, and hers alone.

This is also, incidentally, why I’m a big proponent of liberal homeschooling for those with the capability to do so. If it were up to me, every kid who engaged in this sort of horrid behavior would be subject to significant suspension and/or expulsion. There should be a zero-tolerance policy for this sort of behavior, and it should be rigorously enforced. If this ever happened to any daughter of mine at a public school, I would first have the heads of the principals and the administrators, then the kids’ parents would get a personal visit, then my kid would get yanked out of the school. I would encourage as many parents of her friends to do likewise as possible, and then I’d get an op-ed and letter-to-the-editor campaign in every local newspaper. Either the parents of these bullies would be humiliated in the community, or I would find a different community in which to live.

But then, I’m an activist like that.

.

I gotcher religious liberty for ya right *heah*: Part II:

I gotcher religious liberty for ya right heah Part II

by digby


An atheist group is putting up signs that say God is “a myth” — and they’re making sure that Jews and Muslims will see them.

American Atheists announced on their website that two signs, one in Hebrew and one in Arabic, will go up in Brooklyn and Paterson, New Jersey, this Monday.

The Hebrew sign will go up near the Williamsburg Bridge, where there is a large orthodox Jewish community, CNN reported. The other, written in Arabic and English, will go up just a few blocks from a Paterson mosque, the Islamic Center of Passaic County.

The signs feature each faith’s word for God in large lettering next to the message “You know it’s a myth… and you have a choice.”

I was somewhat unpopular for defending the Danish cartoonists and Madonna’s allegedly “sacreligious” stage number (which happened at roughly the same time) against censorship. I realize that these sorts of provocations make people angry and are often unnecessary. (Certainly, when one is occupying a country in which burning their sacred book is considered to be a unparalleled insult, it’s extremely bad policy for government agents to do such a thing.) But in America there is no more obvious test of our willingness to apply the Bill of Rights without prejudice to all comers. It’s fundamental to our civic culture.

At a time when the right is pushing a new definition of religious liberty — insisting that the right to religious freedom belongs to institutions, not the individual believers — it’s a good idea to keep this sort of thing out here. It’s not comfortable for anyone, but the Religious Right needs to understand that the whole point is that they don’t get to decide which religions apply — or whether any religion applies. Social conservatives have a very hard time in general with the definition of freedom — they think it means they have the freedom to require others to adhere to their beliefs. But they need to be challenged with things like this, no matter how provocative, so they understand that their beliefs aren’t universal — and that the constitution protects people who believe different things than they do.

.

Just don’t call it climate change

Just don’t call it climate change

by digby

Al Gore was very fat yesterday and it’s horrifying. Are we going to be living with more and more of this?

36 people were killed and many dozens injured.

But I’m sure there’s nothing to worry about:

.

Lovin’ Rush: The village sees him as one of their own

Lovin’ Rush



Before we let Rush off the hook with his phony little apology, I think it’s a good idea to take one more look at his rather … vivid … sexual imagination:

CALLER: Just to keep you with the season, I want to wish you a Happy Abu Ghraib. And I apologize that I didn’t get my Abu Ghraib present in the mail. I was wondering what I could get you for Abu Ghraib this year and how are you going to decorate your Abu Ghraib tree sir?

RUSH: You want to know what to get me for Abu Ghraib? You know what? That is a good question. I don’t really want anything for Abu Ghraib. The Democrats, that is who we need to get presents for. One thing, have you thought about handcuffs? Those have multiple uses for Democrats. A whip. You know, to go along with the handcuffs. Dawn says a good present would be to give a Democrat a digital camera so that he or she can document their own atrocities. All you have to take it to a Madonna concert. You got the whips, and the handcuffs and chains right there on stage and people are paying for this.

CALLER: They may have military intelligence, Rush. Who knows?

RUSH: That is a great question. What kind of gift to give Democrats here on the anniversary of Abu Ghraib. I’m glad you called, Christopher.

We’ll think of more as they, as they come up. You know, you might give them a little pyramid game, something that is in the shape of a pyramid. Wire tap kit. Could borrow that. Ted, actually could borrow one from Raymond Reggie, a wire tap kit. What else? Autographed picture of Mary Mapes. Boy, if you could score, come up with an autograph of Mary Mapes, she’s the mother of the Abu Ghraib scandal. Jumper cables. A pair of jumper cables—superb idea, Mr. Maimone. And these are things we all have lying around the house, folks. Just get rid of it. It is junk. Give them a German shepherd. Oh, yeah, a German shepherd dog, little German shepherd puppy. You can train yourself.

This sociopath has been sharing his psycho-sexual depravity on the air five days a week, for years. There is nothing new in this — if anything, his comments about Sandra Fluke were bland by comparison. And only a few cranky liberals have complained and they were shot down repeatedly for being “politically correct”.

HOWARD KURTZ: Has Tom Daschle lost a couple of screws?

Did the normally mild-mannered senator accuse Rush Limbaugh of inciting violence?

He came pretty darn close. There were cameras there. You can watch the replay.

We can understand that Daschle is down, just having lost his majority leader’s job and absorbed plenty of blame for this month’s Democratic debacle.

What we can’t understand is how the South Dakotan can suggest that a mainstream conservative with a huge radio following is somehow whipping up wackos to threaten Daschle and his family.

Has the senator listened to Rush lately? Sure, he aggressively pokes fun at Democrats and lionizes Republicans, but mainly about policy. He’s so mainstream that those right-wingers Tom Brokaw and Tim Russert had him on their Election Night coverage.

I’m glad he got pressured by an advertising boycott (or his employer’s owner Bain Capital) to attempt to shut down the recent controversy. But let’s not pretend it’s all about Rush. It’s about every member of the Republican Party who kissed his ring (and that means all of them) and every Villager who shrugged his degenerate commentary off as some sort of harmless joke. They should all apologize too.

“People who don’t have money, don’t understand the stress”

“People who don’t have money, don’t understand the stress”

by digby

Well, this is a big relief:

In 2010, average real income per family grew by 2.3% (Table 1) but the
gains were very uneven. Top 1% incomes grew by 11.6% while bottom 99%
incomes grew only by 0.2%. Hence, the top 1% captured 93% of the income
gains in the first year of recovery. Such an uneven recovery can help explain
the recent public demonstrations against inequality. It is likely that this uneven
recovery has continued in 2011 as the stock market has continued to recover.
National Accounts statistics show that corporate profits and dividends
distributed have grown strongly in 2011 while wage and salary accruals have
only grown only modestly. Unemployment and non-employment have
remained high in 2011.
This suggests that the Great Recession will only depress top income
shares temporarily and will not undo any of the dramatic increase in top
income shares that has taken place since the 1970s.

Thank Goodness. With all the whining getting even louder, I thought the bottom must have dropped out again:

“I’m not Zen at all, and when I’m freaking out about the situation, where I’m stuck like a rat in a trap on a highway with no way to get out, it’s very hard,” Schiff, director of marketing for broker-dealer Euro Pacific Capital Inc., said in an interview.

Schiff, 46, is facing another kind of jam this year: Paid a lower bonus, he said the $350,000 he earns, enough to put him in the country’s top 1 percent by income, doesn’t cover his family’s private-school tuition, a Kent, Connecticut, summer rental and the upgrade they would like from their 1,200-square- foot Brooklyn duplex.

“I feel stuck,” Schiff said. “The New York that I wanted to have is still just beyond my reach.”

The smaller bonus checks that hit accounts across the financial-services industry this month are making it difficult to maintain the lifestyles that Wall Street workers expect, according to interviews with bankers and their accountants, therapists, advisers and headhunters.

“People who don’t have money don’t understand the stress,” said Alan Dlugash, a partner at accounting firm Marks Paneth & Shron LLP in New York who specializes in financial planning for the wealthy. “Could you imagine what it’s like to say I got three kids in private school, I have to think about pulling them out? How do you do that?”

Hang in there buddy. It’s getting better all the time. For you.

The good news is that as even more money flows back into the upper 1%, there will be more and more vastly wealthy plutocrats who have so many extra millions that they can afford to play the political system like they do the market and ensure that the government looks after their class interests. It’ll be fine.

.

Sunday Classical Music Fun by @DavidOAtkins

Sunday Classical Music Fun

by David Atkins

Now that Rush Limbaugh has apologized (not really), and all is right with the world again (definitely not), go ahead and enjoy this bit of Sunday morning fun, courtesy Aleksey Igudesman, Sebastian Gürtler and the Upper Austrian Youth Orchestra (because, really, why not?)

For the uninitiated, the piece they’re riffing on is Mozart’s gorgeous 40th symphony in G minor.

.

Saturday Night At The Movies — Motel money murder madness “Rampart”

Saturday Night At the Movies



Motel money murder madness
By Dennis Hartley













Dirty Harrelson: Rampart
In a 1995 interview, hard-boiled scribe James Ellroy said of the protagonists in his (then) current novel, American Tabloid: “…I want to see these bad, bad, bad, bad men come to grips with their humanity.” Anyone who has read any number of his books will glean this as an ongoing theme in his work. Later in the interview, Ellroy confides that he “…would like to provide ambiguous responses in my readers.” If those were his primary intentions in the screenplay that drives Oren Moverman’s gripping and unsettling new film Rampart (co-written with the director), I would say that he has succeeded mightily on both counts.
And there is, indeed, a very bad, bad, bad, bad man at the heart of this story, and he is veteran LAPD Sgt. Dave “Date Rape” Brown (Woody Harrelson), who earned his charming nickname in the wake of an incident that resulted in the fatal shooting of a suspected serial date rapist. This is another Ellroy trademark; I was reminded of a scene from L.A. Confidential, wherein Lt. Edmund Exley (Guy Pearce) is cheerfully christened “Shotgun Ed” by the chief after gunning down several suspects. As there is a 50-year gap that separates Lt. Exley’s era (the 1950s) from Sgt. Brown’s (his story is set in 1999), perhaps this is Ellroy’s way of telegraphing that the more things change, the more they stay the same…at least regarding those who “serve and protect” the City of Lost Angels.
Based on job description, Dave Brown may be a public servant who “protects”, but the more we get to know him, the more obvious it is that he “serves” no one but himself. Despite a career-long propensity for generally disregarding most of the ethical standards one would expect an officer of the law to uphold, Brown has somehow managed to hang on to his badge. While he embodies many defining characteristics of that noir staple known as the “rogue cop”, he is not quite so in the same sense as, say, Clint Eastwood’s “Dirty” Harry Callahan (who may be a fascist…but at least he’s a fascist with principles). Nor is he a “conflicted cop”, wrestling with his conscience, because he doesn’t have one. He does have a Code, of sorts; he may be racist, sexist and homophobic (again, a typical Ellroy protagonist) but as he helpfully qualifies at one point, “I hate everyone…equally.”
However, Brown’s karma is catching up with him, particularly after he flies off the handle when his police cruiser is struck by another motorist (who may or may not be a “fleeing suspect”). His subsequent beatdown of said motorist is caught on camera, resulting in a Rodney King-sized public relations nightmare for the department that puts Brown at odds with a no-nonsense D.A. (Sigourney Weaver) and an Internal Affairs investigator (Ice Cube). We see an interesting side to Brown in the course of these grilling sessions; he is quite the silver-tongued devil, articulating his viewpoint with a cool intelligence and developed vocabulary that belies his otherwise thuggish demeanor. Regardless, the reality sets in that he needs to scare up serious coin for a defense lawyer, so he reaches out to a crooked ex-LAPD officer (Ned Beatty) who tips him to an “easy” cash grab, which of course goes horribly wrong, putting Brown into an even deeper hole.
In the meantime, Brown is becoming more and more alienated from his fellow cops, and (more significantly) his family. His family situation is odd, to say the least. He lives with his two ex-wives (Anne Heche and Cynthia Nixon), who are sisters. He has two daughters (Brie Larson and Sammy Boyarsky), one by each. After witnessing Brown’s on-the-job behavior, I was bracing myself for what I anticipated to be inevitable and horrifying scenes of domestic abuse, but interestingly, they never “go there”. In fact, with the exception of his youngest daughter, who is likely too naïve to see through his bullshit, he is treated by the exes and eldest daughter like a housecat who keeps getting underfoot at the most inconvenient times. And whenever he’s told to fuck off (which is often), he dutifully slinks away to sulk in the corner. It appears that Brown needs his family much more than they need him; because it is only after they finally boot him out for good that he really begins circling the drain in earnest, embarking on a thoroughly debauched sex, drug and alcohol-fueled midnight alley roam (a la Nicholas Cage in Leaving Las Vegas).
Curiously, despite the film’s title (and 1999 time frame), the story has little to do with the infamous Rampart police scandal of the late 1990s, in which over 70 officers assigned to the division’s anti-gang unit were implicated in a shocking laundry list of misdeeds ranging from frame-ups and perjury to bank robbery and murder. There are a few perfunctory references, but I don’t believe that the intention here was to do a docudrama. Also, the cops involved in the Rampart scandal seemed to operate from a mindless mob mentality; essentially co-opting the gang culture they were supposed to be countering. Brown is a lone wolf, perhaps an anachronism; a sort of “last holdout” to the old school of LAPD corruption that permeates Ellroy’s “L.A. Quartet”, a series of four novels that spans the late 40s through the late 50s (including the aforementioned L.A. Confidential).
This is the second collaboration between director, leading man and the film’s co-producer, actor Ben Foster (virtually unrecognizable here in a minor supporting role as a homeless, wheelchair-bound Vietnam vet). Moverman, Harrelson and Foster teamed up in 2009 for the outstanding drama, The Messenger . In my review of that film, I noted:

…there is a lot about this film that reminds me of those episodic, naturalistic character studies that directors like Hal Ashby and Bob Rafaelson used to turn out back in the 70s; giving their actors plenty of room to breathe and inhabit their characters in a very real and believable manner.

The same can be said for Moverman’s latest project as well. Some viewers may find this approach a little too episodic, especially if one is expecting standard crime thriller tropes. So if you’re seeking car chases, shootouts and a neatly wrapped ending tied with a bow-look elsewhere. Like those classic 70s character studies, the film just sort of…starts (no opening credits, no musical cues), shit happens, and then it sort of…stops (no big finale). It’s what’s inside this sandwich that matters, namely the fearless and outstanding performance from a gaunt and haunted Harrelson. Larson (as his eldest daughter) is a standout, as is the always excellent Robin Wright (as a burned out, self-loathing defense lawyer), who nearly steals all her scenes with Harrelson. So, does Harrelson’s bad, bad character ever manage to “come to grips” with his humanity? It may be too little, too late, but he does. It is expressed in an extraordinary, wordless exchange between him and his daughter. Both actors play it beautifully; and it’s so ephemeral that you might miss it if you blink. So don’t blink. Because by the time it registers, Brown has crawled back into the dark urban shadows that spawned him, just another lost angel in the city of night.
Bad cop, worst cop: Dark Blue, Cop, The Black Dahlia, True Confessions, Serpico, Prince of the City, Training Day, Internal Affairs, Q & A, Cop Land, The Departed, Tightrope, Bad Lieutenant, The French Connection, The Choirboys, The Big Easy, Night Falls on Manhattan, China Moon, The Godfather, Unlawful Entry, The Seven-Ups, Romeo Is Bleeding, Magnum Force, Fort Apache the Bronx, Touch of Evil, Where the Sidewalk Ends, Shield for Murder, I Wake Up Screaming, The Prowler, Pushover, Private Hell 36, Detective Story, The Big Heat, On Dangerous Ground.
Previous posts with related themes:
The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call-New OrleansThe Killer Inside MeAmerican Gangster/Tough Guys Don’t DanceTribute to Sidney Lumet
.

Rush back to serious business

Rush back to serious business

by digby

So Rush apologized. Sort of. Well, not really.

But I particularly loved this:

Rush: I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress…In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone’s bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.

Yes, Rush thinks it’s absurd when we are “discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of congress.”

Here’s the very pious Rick Santorum’s statement when he voted for impeachment:

White House Counsel argues that the President did not deny before the grand jury that he had contact with Ms. Lewinsky in a manner included in the Jones definition of sexual relations. Rather, Counsel asserts that such contact did not fully satisfy the Jones definition, which requires the intent to arouse or gratify sexual desire. It is unfathomable, as a matter of common sense, White House Counsel’s assertion that such physical contact occurred without any component of intent as defined under the Jones definition. Further, the President’s testimony before the grand jury undermines Counsel’s defense in that he actually denies any such contact during the following exchange:

Q: So touching, in your view then and now – the person being deposed touching or kissing the breast of another person would fall within the definition?A: That’s correct sir.Q: And you testified that you didn’t have sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky in the Jones deposition, under that definition, correct?A: Yes, sir.

Therefore, I find that the President lied before the federal grand jury when he stated that he did not have certain physical contact with Ms. Lewinsky. This lie was material to the grand jury investigation into this relationship and, therefore, constitutes perjury.

And the breathless, heaving Starr Report itself, about which Rush drooled and groaned for months:

According to Ms. Lewinsky, she and the President kissed. She unbuttoned her jacket; either she unhooked her bra or he lifted her bra up; and he touched her breasts with his hands and mouth. Ms. Lewinsky testified: “I believe he took a phone call . . . and so we moved from the hallway into the back office . . . . [H]e put his hand down my pants and stimulated me manually in the genital area.” While the President continued talking on the phone (Ms. Lewinsky understood that the caller was a Member of Congress or a Senator), she performed oral sex on him. He finished his call, and, a moment later, told Ms. Lewinsky to stop. In her recollection: “I told him that I wanted . . . to complete that. And he said . . . that he needed to wait until he trusted me more. And then I think he made a joke . . . that he hadn’t had that in a long time.”

Yeah, Rush thinks it’s absurd:

The White House crisis has breathed new life into the programs of Rush Limbaugh and other conservative mainstays of talk radio just at a moment when the industry had been worrying that ratings for political talk shows were sagging.

“I cannot tell you how much Rush appreciates Monica Lewinsky,” Limbaugh’s boss, Jacor Communications Chief Executive Randy Michaels, said recently. “Although we don’t have the ratings yet for ‘Zippergate,’ the number of people calling and saying, ‘Hey, what’s ‘ditto’ mean?’ tells you how much new audience we’ve got on that show.”

Yes, Rush is always offended by sexual talk in politics. Hates it — just hates it.

Update: Remember this?


Rush: Starting in Arlington Virginia this is Seth. Welcome sir, nice to have you on the EIB network, hello.

“Seth”: Thank you Rush. I’m lookin’ at this and I’m seeing two adults exchanging … well, actually seven if there were six women … exchanging pictures in a consentual way. And i guess it’s none of my business. It was none of the reporter’s business. It’s none of anybody else’s business. How is this different … I mean you’re talking about how “smart” everybody is, you talk about how smart you are every day … but, how is this different from you going to, you know the sexual tourist destination of Dominican Republic with a bottle of viagra and having that sprayed all over the headlines? How did you like that? Why is this different?

Rush: Well, but … what you describe about me isn’t true. And I guess what you’re suggesting here is that getting caught having sex affairs is only stupid when Republicans do it.

“Seth”: No, what I said ..

Rush (who by now has killed Seth’s call): No, this … you know you are, you’re repeating internet rumors based in hatred and misinformation and typical brainlessness on the left. NONE of that took place. But it’s people like you who present the rest of us with the greatest challenge we have in saving the country. Because general, glittering jewels of collosol ignorance like you, and your hate-filled partisanship are primarily responsible. People just like you are primarily responsible for the precarious poisition this great nation finds itself in. Because you can’t be counted on for genuine, decent citizenship. You can’t be counted on to protect this country when it’s under assault internally. You seek your jollies in false victories over your political enemies while your country is in the process of going down in flames. Its people like you that try to make excuses for reprobates like Weiner, and Clinton and so forth while immersing yourself in lies to make yourself feel good that present a problem for the rest of us. Feel sorry for ya. You’re probably capable of much more than you’re immersing yourself in. I gotta take a brief time out, we’ll come back, we’ll continue … right after this.

.