Is Meg Whitman A Whore? A Whore? A WHORE?

Posted by on October 8, 2010 at 4:57 pm. 2 Comments :

Reports have surfaced today that a member of Jerry Brown’s campaign staff inquired as to whether their opponent, Meg Whitman, could be portrayed as a “whore” due to her doling out positions in exchange for endorsements. The comment about Meg Whitman being a whore came during a voice mail that somehow continued to record after Brown thought the phone call was disconnected.

The recording picked up a private conversation about whether Meg Whitman could be regarded as a whore due to her promising a police union official that she would protect pension benefits if he threw the union’s support to her campaign. This is how the Brown campaign addressed the whore subject:

BROWN: I have been warned if I crack down on pensions, I will be – that they’ll go to Whitman, and that’s where they’ll go because they know Whitman will give them, will cut them a deal, but I won’t.
AIDE: What about saying she’s a whore?
BROWN: Well, I’m going to use that. It proves you’ve cut a secret deal to protect the pensions.

The acknowledgment by Brown that he might use Whitman’s willingness to sell her positions for an endorsement (i.e. be a political whore) has generated significant buzz in the media. It also generated a response from Whitman’s camp who were critical of Brown for not repudiating the staffer who suggested calling Whitman a whore:

“The use of the term ‘whore‘ is an insult to both Meg Whitman and to the women of California,” said Sarah Pompei, a campaign spokeswoman. “This is an appalling and unforgivable smear against Meg Whitman.”

Of course everyone knows that Whitman isn’t really a whore, but this dialog can’t do her much good. For it’s part, the Brown campaign apologized for the use of the term whore:

“This was a jumbled and often inaudible recording of a private conversation,” Steven Glazer, Brown’s campaign manager, said in a statement. “We apologize to Ms. Whitman and anyone who may have been offended.”

Whitman may be justified in complaining about the language used by Brown’s aide. I’m sure she doesn’t like being characterized as a whore. However, in context, the conversation showed that Whitman was indeed offering a special treat in exchange for something of value – an endorsement. It also showed Brown acting with integrity in that he was unwilling to waver in his position with regard to the union pension just to win their support.

It seems to me that if Whitman continues to harp on the slur of having been called a whore, she will only be reinforcing the notion that she is a whore. Every time her campaign complains about being called a whore the voters will be reminded that she offered up her position on union pensions for a “fee.”

Does Whitman really want to cement the notion into the public mind that she can be had for a price? Because that’s exactly what she will be doing if she prolongs this controversy over a candid campaign discussion that just happened to wonder if her being a whore could be used to their political advantage.

If I were her I would drop the whore business ASAP. She already asked for and received an apology. The only thing she can accomplish now by pursuing it is to make sure that people continue to associate her with being a whore. And since it isn’t much of a stretch to regard any politician as a whore, it can’t possibly do her any good.

p.s. I apologizing for using the word “whore” eighteen times in this article. That’s a whore lot more than I should have.

p.p.s. Make that twenty times. Although that last one may have been a typo.

Bonus From the Archives: This may be a good time to revisit the Motor City Jackass and Tea Party hero Ted Nugent, who said:

“I was in Chicago last week I said, ‘Hey Obama, you might want to suck on one of these, you punk?’ Obama, he’s a piece of shit and I told him to suck on one of my machine guns. Let’s hear it for them. I was in New York and I said, ‘Hey Hillary, you might want to ride one of these into the sunset you worthless bitch.’ Since I’m in California, I’m gonna find Barbara Boxer she might wanna suck on my machine guns. Hey, Dianne Feinstein, ride one of these you worthless whore.“

Funny…I don’t think I’ve heard Meg Whitman, the GOP, or any of the conservative establishment repudiate these remarks. Yet Nugent continues to be invited to Republican and Tea Party affairs.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Rupert Murdoch Epitomizes Hidebound Culture

Posted by on October 8, 2010 at 1:23 pm. 1 Comments :

Dateline: Wall Street Journal, October 8,2010.
If Schools Were Like ‘American Idol’ . . .
BY RUPERT MURDOCH

Over the past few years, I have often complained about a hidebound culture that prevents many newspapers from responding to the challenges of new technology. There is, however, another hidebound American institution that is also finding it difficult to respond to new challenges: our big-city schools.

Is that so? Rupert Murdoch’s op-ed in today’s Wall Street Journal is apparently his prescription for improving America’s ailing schools. Unfortunately, he has locked up his own opinion behind a paywall that prevents anyone who has not subscribed to his service from reading it. All you get is two paragraphs that contribute nothing to the public discourse on education.

The irony is that while he is complaining about a hidebound culture, he is simultaneously demonstrating it. The concept of erecting paywalls to secure content online is firmly rooted in the past. Modern media theory recognizes that certain types of information cannot be corralled and apportioned for fees. That is particularly true for news which no entity can own.

What Murdoch has succeeded in proving here is that his paywall not only fails to produce revenue, it suppresses the information he intends to distribute. And he ties it to the success of his own American Idol, a television program that, unlike his newspapers, can be received entirely free of charge. The result of this illogic is that he is making himself less prosperous and less influential at the same time. And he is doing nothing to help our educational system or the young people who rely upon it. Nice work, Rupert.


Fox News Reporter Charles Leaf Arrested For Sexual Assault

Posted by on October 8, 2010 at 9:52 am. 5 Comments :


Alleged Child Molester Identified as Charles Leaf, Alleged Reporter for Fox News

Charles Leaf of Fox News is being held in New Jersey on charges of aggravated sexual assault on a four year old girl. He has been an investigative reporter with WNYW/Fox5 in New York and has also been featured on the Fox News Channel.

This is not the first time Leaf has been accused of assault. He was previously alleged to have assaulted a councilwoman in Mobile, Alabama, where he was working at the time for a local news outlet. There were no criminal charges filed in that case, but there was reportedly a substantial settlement paid by the station.

I profiled Leaf in September in an article titled, “Charles Leaf: The New Most Repulsive Fox News Reporter.” The article details his aggressive, dishonest, and unprofessional behavior in covering real estate developers associated with the Park51 project in Manhattan (the non-mosque that is not at ground zero). The coverage, featured prominently on Megyn Kelly’s Fox News program (as well as The O’Reilly Factor, The Fox Report, Fox & Friends, On the Record, and Geraldo at Large) was based entirely on innuendo and unsupported, sensationalist, allegations. I described his reports at the time as not even providing enough evidence to start a rumor:

First Leaf conducted an ambush interview on real estate developer, Sharif El-Gamal, that yielded nothing to support his contention that El-Gamal was corrupt. Leaf merely insinuated that something must be wrong because El-Gamal was a waiter eight years prior to investing in the Park51 project. The implication being that anyone who starts a small business, works hard for nearly a decade, and achieves success, is deserving of suspicion.

Then Leaf turned his focus to investor Hisham Elzanaty. Again, Leaf ambushed Elzanaty without acquiring any usable information. The only purpose for Leaf’s ambushes is to suggest something sinister when the target declines to talk to him. To that end Leaf made wild accusations about Elzanaty’s contribution to a Muslim charity. As it turns out, the charity, the Holy Land Foundation, was later investigated for ties to Hamas. But that wasn’t until two years after Elzanaty’s donation, and the feds acknowledged that contributors would not have known about the organization’s relationship with Hamas as it was deliberately concealed.

Both of these reports failed completely to produce evidence of any wrongdoing. They were exercises in insipidness and their only purpose was to insinuate and intimidate. They were utterly unprofessional and potentially libelous. Yet Leaf exalted himself as if he had exposed Watergate. And Fox News (particularly Megyn Kelly) went along by broadcasting Leaf’s empty innuendos and affirming the unsupported conclusions.

Megyn Kelly hosted Leaf on several occasions despite never having a verifiable story to report. This is further evidence of my contention that Kelly is at least as bad as Glenn Beck. It will be interesting to see if Kelly, or anyone at Fox, follows up on their new star reporter by covering his arrest. So far, the only comment from Fox is from a spokesman at the local Fox5 station who said that they are aware of the situation and are reviewing it.

Other Fox News perverts include Bill O’Reilly who paid a multimillion dollar settlement to a former producer whom he sexually harassed, and Dick Morris who was caught sucking the toes of a prostitute whom he let listen in on phone calls to President Clinton.

Is anyone taking odds on when Glenn Beck’s mug shot will rocket through the blogosphere?



The Art Critics Of The American Taliban

Posted by on October 7, 2010 at 1:08 pm. 7 Comments :

Taliban Art CriticAt the Loveland Museum Gallery in Colorado a controversial work of art was attacked and damaged by a woman offended by the content. The work that incited Montana resident Kathleen Folden to travel to Colorado to deface the art contained a representation of Jesus who appears to be receiving oral sex. What do these extremists want? At least he wasn’t engaging in intercourse, and Christine O’Donnell would be pleased to know that he wasn’t masturbating either.

Stanford University professor Enrique Chagoya created the work entitled “The Misadventures of Romantic Cannibals.” He described the piece as a statement about religious and political institutions, not beliefs. But that didn’t assuage Folden who was arrested after she took a crowbar to the piece, shattered the glass frame, and ripped the print, while shouting, “How can you desecrate my Lord?”

Islamic jihadis around the world could be heard celebrating Folden’s act of intolerance. Her behavior was perfectly in sync with Sharia law which forbids the depiction of God. Perhaps she was inspired the Taliban, who destroyed several historic sculptures of Buddha after they assumed power in Afghanistan.

The only people praising Folden more fervently are the American Taliban of the Christian Right, along with the censorious denizens of the Fox Nation and other rightist web bunkers and culture warriors. It’s ironic because these are the same people who are so vocally defensive about the Constitution and the freedom it provides. It is these hardcore conservatives that always pretend to be so concerned about freedom of speech and religion, and the protection of private property. They are the first to condemn the censorship of artists who portray the Islamic prophet Mohammad. They say they want smaller government, but they want it to remain big enough to suppress thought and actions that they disapprove of.

Another irony is that Folden, the art mauler, was wearing a t-shirt that reads: “My Savior is Tougher Than Nails,” with a reference to Revelations 1:18. Apparently nails are no match for her savior, but paper hanging on a wall is a mortal threat.

Folden’s ill-conceived vandalism is not going to further her cause. More likely it will make a media star of Mr. Chagoya, and enhance the demand for his work. (I wish some nutcase would slash up some of my work). Furthermore, her disgraceful intolerance serves as a case study for what we can expect if we allow that brand of fundamentalism to become entwined in our cultural and legal institutions.

So thank you, Ms. Folden, for demonstrating so clearly the sort of repressive, small mindedness our nation seeks to avoid. Thank you for being a repulsive and ignorant jerk whose stupidity will set back the efforts of other neanderthals like yourself. Thank you for helping an obscure artist gain some much needed attention. Your court-ordered compensation to the artist and the gallery will also be welcome, I’m sure. And no doubt society will benefit from your incarceration. Thanks again, goodbye, and good riddance.


Glenn Beck Says Glenn Beck Devalues Humankind

Posted by on October 6, 2010 at 5:56 pm. 6 Comments :

In an epic rant about how progressives are plotting to engage in all manner of mischief if they don’t get what they want, Glenn Beck revealed something about himself that is far more enlightening than his routine delusional obsession with left-wing radicals.


Beck was rolling along in his customary panic-addled fashion, disinforming his viewers about environmentalists, whom he portrayed as so desperate to enact their planet-saving agenda that they would do anything, no matter how grotesque, to protect the Earth. The end justifies the means…Saul Alinsky…collapse the system…kill babies. Beck employed every scare tactic he has used in the past year for this one subject in order to imply that these treehuggers would stop at nothing.

Climate Change has been affirmed by hundreds of reputable scientists around the world. The evidence is voluminous. And the only opponents are those with political or business affiliations and other conflicts of interest. It is imperative that we alter our relationship with this planet if we hope to continue living on it. The reality of that perspective resulted in the production of some hard-hitting public service announcements in England that have sparked Beck’s outrage.

Whether or not these ads exceed the bounds of good taste is something people can decide for themselves. But Beck seems to be convinced that they represent a literal method of dealing with Climate Change deniers. He thinks the eco-terrorists are actually coming to blow you up. His fear of this leads him to castigate all environmentalists as murderous thugs whose extremism will necessarily result in atrocities.

BECK: If you literally believe the world is doomed unless we act, then you’ve devalued humankind.

Really? You mean like…..

“I don’t need to convince you that there are people intentionally destroying our country.”

“The rain is coming. I think you feel it in your gut. It is time to build an Ark. It is time to prepare yourself for some tough times.”

“You’re gonna see a black and white world, man, that is nothing but destruction and ugly.”

“Please, please America, don’t debate, don’t compromise on these things. […] They’re building a machine and they’re about to turn the darn thing on. You don’t compromise on your destruction.”

“Find the exit closest to you and prepare for a crash landing, because this plane is coming down, because the pilot is intentionally steering it into the trees. […] They are taking you to a place to be slaughtered.”

“It is the eve of destruction in America.”

“If we don’t face the truth right now, we’ll be dead in five years; this country can’t survive.”

“This is about man’s freedom. This is it, gang. If we fail here the world is plunged into global darkness.”

These are just a few examples of Glenn Beck expressing his demented view that the world is doomed unless we act. He very specifically declares that destruction is on the horizon and that we must not only act, but we must do so without compromise. Therefore, by his own definition, he is devaluing humankind. And it should also be noted that the video above is an allegorical tale, while Beck’s admonitions of doom are delivered with utter seriousness.

The absurdity of Beck accusing others of fear mongering exposes a severe malfunction in his psychological profile. But to specifically criticize them for inventing doomsday scenarios of the very sort he has been mass producing for years goes beyond the scope of modern psychiatry to understand.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Poll: Tea Party Is Wildly Out Of Touch With America

Posted by on October 5, 2010 at 3:23 pm. 5 Comments :

Fox/GOP Tea PartyA new poll (pdf) by the Public Religion Research Institute reveals what most conscious observers already knew: The views of the Tea Party are wholly removed from those of the rest of the American people.

The differences between the Tea Party and everyone else are so stark that it should give pause to any media outlet that contemplates treating the so-called movement as if it has any relevancy to current public affairs. The survey identifies a number of examples of what has been considered conventional wisdom and blasts them out of the water.

The first example of note is the notion that the Tea Party itself represents a significant segment of society. The truth is that there are just 11% of Americans who identify themselves as Tea Partiers. Only 24% say that a Tea Party affiliation would make them more likely to vote for a candidate, while 31% say it would make them less likely to give that candidate their vote.

Another example is the belief that Tea Partiers have an independent, Libertarian point of view. The survey shows that that is not the case. The Tea Partiers are predominantly Christian, social conservatives who oppose abortion and gay rights. And they are also far more likely to vote Republican (83%).

Tea Party views on public figures are also outside the mainstream. Seventy-five percent have an unfavorable view of Obama (25% favorable), while the rest of us view Obama favorably by 58% (40% unfavorable). On Sarah Palin the Tea Partiers are 80% favorable (14% unfavorable), compared to 52% unfavorable (40% favorable) for the rest of the country.

A couple of other interesting results in the poll that are not widely recognized: A majority of voters (54%) say they would be more likely to vote for a candidate who supported health care reform. And nearly 6-in-10 (58%) Americans favor a policy that provides a future path to citizenship to undocumented immigrants who have been in the U.S. for several years. On that subject, 64% of Tea Partiers think that immigrants are a burden on society, while only 48% of Americans overall have that view.

Some things we already knew, or could reasonably guess, about the Tea Party were affirmed in the survey. They are overwhelmingly white: 80%, compared to 69% of the population at large. They are concentrated in the south with 43% of their numbers residing there. And they are glued to Fox News. While only 23% of Americans overall regard Fox as their most trusted news source (about the same as CNN and the broadcast networks), two and a half times that many (57%) Tea Partiers do. That’s an even higher number than Republicans (48%) or Christian conservatives (39%).

The conclusion that is abundantly clear is that the Tea Party is a fringe cadre of extremists who have little in common with average Americans. So why do they get so much attention in the press? Well, partly because the press loves controversy, even if they have to invent it. And partly because the Republican Party is anxious to hitch its wagon to the Tea Party express in hopes of enhancing their electoral prospects.

But the main reason the Tea Party gets so much attention in the press is because they have their own press (i.e. Fox News, talk radio, etc.) that pours out their propaganda in a flood of fury, fear, and foreboding.

In the face of that Apocalyptic onslaught, it is comforting to see that majorities of Americans have not bought the snake oil being peddled by the Grand Old/Tea Party. And there is obviously still hope that the American people will surprise the media lackeys who would rather stir the pot than tell the truth.


James O’Keefe Defends Being A Loathsome, Cretinous, Scumbag

Posted by on October 4, 2010 at 3:47 pm. 4 Comments :

Fox News James O'KeefeIt’s been five days since the Fox News pimp, James O’Keefe, was caught trying to “seduce” CNN reporter Abbie Boudreau. He has finally come out with a statement on the web site of his mentor, Andrew Breitbart. And, as would be expected, it is a thoroughly dishonest exercise in self-justification.

But before we get to O’Keefe’s comments, let’s take a look at what Breitbart had to say about him:

“From what I’ve read about this script, though not executed, it is patently gross and offensive.”

That’s the view of the man who supported O’Keefe through his equally offensive escapades as a pimp. Now Breitbart thinks O’Keef’e antics are gross. He even denied in a tweet that he was associated with O’Keefe. However, he still gave him a platform to publish his response. And in that response O’Keefe begins by acknowledging the low level of ethics he and his comrades have:

“If you were to roam through my personal emails there are many outrageous plans, some parts of which I may approve of in principal [sic] with an ‘I like it’ in an email thread. But I may well object to a host of things about the plan, though I like the objective.”

Taken at his word, O’Keefe is admitting that he liked the objective of the CNN Caper. But this is someone who can never be taken at his word. He is a compulsive liar whose word has no value. Here is how he soft-peddled his version of the the plot against Boudreau:

“She would have had to consent before being filmed and she was not going to be faux ‘seduced’ unless she wanted to be.”

That is utterly false. He never sought the consent of his previous video victims. Why should we accept his assertion that he was going to start seeking consent now? If he was going to seek her consent, then why did the plan call for hidden cameras at the scene? And what would make him think that she would ever grant such consent to be filmed on his boat? And can anyone even tell me what he means by suggesting that the faux seduction would not have occurred “unless she wanted” it? What an arrogant and disgusting remark.

He goes on to assert that he was repulsed by parts of the plan and had no intention of going through with it. He offers as proof of this the fact that none of the things that were described in the script actually took place. Of course, the reason they didn’t take place is because his plan was foiled in advance by an accomplice with integrity pangs. This would be like the failed shoe bomber insisting that he never intended to blow up the plane by saying, “See? The plane isn’t blown up.”

To offer as a defense his assertion, after the plot fell apart, that he didn’t really plan to do it, is laughably absurd. He still needs to explain why his accomplice, Izzy Santa, was in the house, right where the script called for her to be, and he was still on the boat, right where the script called for him to be, and right where Santa was supposed to direct Boudreau. The plot was obviously in effect when Santa decided to pull the plug and O’Keefe cannot credibly claim otherwise.

The fact that it took O’Keefe five days to come up with an excuse this lame tells us a lot about what an ignorant slob he is. And if any media outlet gives this twerp a passing mention for whatever BS he produces in the future they should lose their license to broadcast.


Is Rupert Murdoch Funding Al Qaeda?

Posted by on October 4, 2010 at 12:01 pm. 7 Comments :

A couple of recent revelations regarding the charitable proclivities of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp are now raising chilling questions for which there has been no answer to date.

It was widely reported a few weeks ago that News Corp made a $1 million donation to the Republican Governor’s Association. Reaction to that report was swift and damning. The notion that News Corp, parent company of Fox News, is bankrolling the campaigns of people they are also purporting to cover in their newspapers and on their TV networks, is appalling and unprecedented. To make matters worse, Fox continues to give positively biased coverage to GOP candidates without disclosing their contributions.

Last week another story emerged that revealed another $1 million contribution by News Corp, this time to the pro-GOP US Chamber of Commerce. This has the same potential for conflict of interest as the gift to the GOP governors and, again, Fox puts a muzzle on its reporters to suppress the story.

Now Ben Smith at Politico reports what may be the worst part of this scandal of all. Responding to a query as to why News Corp would make these donations that overtly contradict their claims to fairness and balance, and further damage their already mutilated journalistic credibility, Smith reports that…

“A person close to News Corp. told me this week the company didn’t realize its $1 million to the RGA would become public. And the $1 million to Chamber of Commerce was supposed to be secret as well.”

That explains a lot. If Murdoch never believed that these donations would become public he would have no reason to be concerned about the blowback. But what is even more troubling is this: If Murdoch made these donations with the expectation that they would be kept secret, what other donations might he have made whose secrecy has actually been preserved?

Could Murdoch have contributed to the Tea Party Express or other AstroTurfers like FreedomWorks? Could he be bankrolling the operations of Sarah Palin’s PAC or Glenn Beck’s Holy Rollover Revue? Since the Citizen’s United decision by the Supreme Court earlier this year, the ability of corporations to sink unlimited resources into politics has been greatly enhanced. It created an open door for multinational corporations to influence American elections

Murdoch’s business connections have deep roots in many financial and political matters around the world. He is closely tied with Saudi oil and media barons and billionaires like Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal. Alwaleed is a backer of the Park51 project to build a Muslim community center a couple of blocks from ground zero in Lower Manhattan.

What other Muslim initiatives might Murdoch be connected to? Could he have an interest in the affairs of Al Qaeda? There is presently reporting on Fox News about the escalated terror alerts in Europe. Murdoch could be seen as being a beneficiary of this because it could reflect badly on President Obama’s national security policies. And Murdoch is always happy to see this President in decline. What contributions might he have made to bring about this or any other event that accrues to his benefit?

Seriously, the problem here is that we have no way of knowing what sort of enterprises Murdoch (or any other corporate baron) is financing. If we only find out by accident, there is a very real prospect that there are far worse things that have not yet been revealed. And the new legal interpretations make it harder, if not impossible, to acquire this information.

Is Rupert Murdoch funding Al Qaeda. Probably not. But that’s not the point. Who is he funding (besides the GOP governors and the Chamber of Commerce) that is still being kept secret from us? His scope of influence, due to his position and wealth, makes him a significant figure on the political landscape. The fact that he runs an international media empire makes his political contributions relevant to his readers and viewers. And the fact that he is making donations that he presumed would be secret suggests that he may have made others that still are.

Murdoch needs to either come clean about his political largesse or stop making contributions altogether. He cannot operate a media enterprise that he asserts is unbiased without greater transparency, especially in light of what has become known already. And the rest of the media must stop treating Fox News and other News Corp operations as if they were legitimate journalists. Fox News is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican Party. Their partisan reporting has made that more than clear, and their financial activities prove it again and again.


One Nation Working Together Till Election Day And Beyond

Posted by on October 3, 2010 at 3:47 pm. 16 Comments :

One NationWith the massive One Nation rally in DC over, the post-game analyses have been flying furiously around the media and Webosphere. It was clearly a successful event that served to energize progressive activists and demonstrate that the left is not cowering under the national basement.

However, most of the press is making the mistake of comparing One Nation to Glenn Beck’s Acute Paranoia Holy Rollover Revue. This is typical of the horse race mindset of the media that is incapable of putting information in context and making relevant evaluations.

Let me make this crystal clear: The purpose of One Nation was NOT to draw more people than BeckFest. That would have been a shallow and unproductive goal. The purpose was to motivate the activists and organizers who attended, as well as those who watched from afar, so that they would be more effective and engaged in these crucial final weeks before the midterm elections. It was also intended to demonstrate the commitment of progressives to maintaining the course of the past couple of election cycles and to show the media that not everyone out there is a Tea Bagger. There were several reasons why attendance was never meant to be the yardstick by which this event would be measured.

First of all, One Nation did not have the benefit of the highest rated cable “news” network (Fox News) pumping out promotions for the event day in and day out for six months. They didn’t even have the second highest rated cable news network (MSNBC). Only Ed Schultz made much of an effort to promote One Nation. And while he is a popular radio and TV talk show host, recent surveys show that 70% of the country have never heard of him. It would be absurd to suggest that he would have the same impact on marketing that Glenn Beck, Inc. would have (despite what Ed says about himself).

Secondly, the demographics of the audiences are not remotely similar. Beck’s audience is a much older and more affluent crowd. In fact, he has one of the oldest skewing programs in all of cable news, including a high percentage of retirees. That’s partially how he manages to produce such high ratings in the middle of the day when normal people are at work. His viewers as a group are far better able to afford a trip to the nation’s capitol. They also are more likely to have the spare time available for outings like these. The folks attending One Nation are more likely to be working people who cannot just take time off from their jobs and their families, and sink scarce funds into traveling.

Fox News GOP Tea PartyThirdly, the incentive to attend a rally often hinges on the celebrity star power of the event. While the speakers at One Nation were all fine people who are dedicated to positive change, there was no one with the fan base of Glenn Beck. His devotees regard him as a prophet whom they must follow with unquestioning allegiance. Plus he had help from the Queen Tea, Sarah Palin, who has her own bevy of believers. Can anyone honestly say that 8/28 would have drawn more than a handful of garden-clubbers in a Dodge Caravan if someone like Newt Gingrich was the headliner? For evidence of this look no further than the second annual 9/12 rally a couple of weeks ago that featured teen idols Dick Armey and Andrew Breitbart. They drew a crowd that barely exceed a triple-a ballgame, and far fewer than One Nation.

On a side note, Beck’s fabled popularity may have peaked. A report from New Jersey yesterday reveals that his appearance at the first of his “Restoring America” gigs was filled to only 10% of capacity. Perhaps the $50.00 tickets (or $125.00 for “VIP privileges”) suppressed demand enough to allow 90% of the seats to go unfilled.

The above notwithstanding, One Nation can be considered a roaring success if it achieves its goal of invigorating the electorate, recruiting volunteers, and turning out voters. The right has become fully invested in an outcome that requires them to take majority control of the House and Senate. If they do not, they can only be regarded as failures. That is their projection, not mine. It’s all they’ve talked about for weeks. Now they must be prepared to be judged by the standard they set.

The past few weeks have seen momentum shifting in the election nationwide. The right may be played out. The left are just getting warmed up. In order to close the deal we need to insure extraordinary turnout. So get involved and make the demagogues on the right eat substantial portions of crow. Organizations like MoveOn and Democracy for America are presently recruiting people for their GOTV projects. Call them, or a local Democratic campaign office, and be a part of something positive.