Eh, I think it's possible that Marshall, Reynolds, Sullivan, and Postrel all thought for themselves and made their own decisions based on what their consciences tell them. But if you want to condescend to see them as patsies, I guess that's your call. Seems awful patronizing, though.
Richard Bennett
· 7 years ago
Marshall had direct orders from Blumenthal and Carville, and clearly didn't act on his own conscience, because he doesn't have one. The others acted in good faith, not realizing they were manipulated by Carville and Blumenthal.
It's not patronizing to trace the arc of the deliberate manipulation on the part of Democratic Party operatives - it's realism.
R. Alex
· 7 years ago
While I'm no Reynolds or Sullivan, I was one of the Republican bloggers that came out against Lott pretty early and even knowing what I know now, I don't regret it at all nor feel like I've been played a fool.
John Jenkins
· 6 years ago
Who cares what Marshall thinks? He's the enemy, in case no one noticed. I'm a happy conservative Republican and I am swooning with joy because Trent Lott is no longer the Majority Leader. Not to break anyone's heart, but the Republican leadership in both the House and the Senate is largely ineffective at articulating the conservative platform. Replacing that old time-server with someone that demonstrates an occasional sign of life is a good thing.
Anyone who thinks that removing Lott was driven by the Democrats has to think again. Keeping Lott would have been a gold mine for them. The best thing that happened was that he left, doing the honorable thing in the end. He was able to put the Republican Party and the country ahead of himself.
Gary Utter
· 6 years ago
Better up your anti-paranoia meds there, buddy. Or did the black helicopters intercept your shipment.
Kevin McGehee
· 6 years ago
"Anyone who thinks that removing Lott was driven by the Democrats has to think again. Keeping Lott would have been a gold mine for them."
Except that Sid Vicious and The James didn't know that. They're dumber than they say Dubya is.
Doug Levene
· 6 years ago
I agree completely that this will all play out to the Republicans' advantage. Consider this: the public face of the Republicans in the Senate is now a heart surgeon, and the public face of the Democrats in the Senate is now an ambulance chaser. Karl Rove could not have written a better script.
Hugh Jorgen
· 6 years ago
What?!?!?!? I was under direct orders from Carville and Blumenthal? And I didn't get paid for this subjugation? Damn, I acted in good faith, too.
That's it. I'm through with them.
How much will Rove pay? I'll still follow orders for the right price, ya know.
Bruce Hayden
· 6 years ago
I think that the Democrats gambled and lost here, in particular in light of Frist's actions that probably saved a couple lives yesterday. The Democrats were salivating on the possibility that they could get Lott to resign from the Senate over this and regain control.
Lott never really should have been the face of the Republican party. For 100 years, the Democratic Party was the party of racism. Both Lott and Strom were Democrats at the time they avowed racism, and note that the outgoing President Pro Tem of the Senate was an active Klan member.
Any number of conservatives were pushing for Lott to resign from majority leader for the right reasons - that a racist face was not appropriate for the party founded to abolish slavery.
Jack Straw
· 6 years ago
Mr. Bennett, I don't read your blog often enough to know your style of writing or how you think. But I do read an enormous amount of what Reynolds and Sullivan put out, and have been doing so for three years or so now. Day in and out they are putting out well formulated articles, great analysis, and a lot of great writing. To declare they are the puppets of another, largely lesser, mind, is a pretty nice insult.
But even worse, it is the style of thinking that is rampant among small thinkers. What easier example than Saudi Arabia. Instead of questioning their own society and culture which could produce mass killers, they somehow blame it on Israel, believe the Saudi Arabians killed were all set up by the CIA, and that fundamentalist Islamic faith had nothing to do with it.
Examples of failure to think by blaming conspiracies abound. Inner city populations blame the drug trade on the CIA and the President. Hilary Clinton blames her husband's wayward antics on a right-wing conspiracy. Its all a piece of the same failure to think clearly and reasonably.
So who ordered you to write this article, Falwell or Nader?
Richard Bennett
· 6 years ago
Some of the most bizarre (and hilarious) comments ever posted to this blog came in over the last few days in response to Glenn Reynolds' Carville denial. The facts of the story are pretty straightforward, and supported by Kausfiles and NRO: Lott sucked-up to Strom Thurmond for years about his failed presidential bid, but it wasn't news until Sid Blumenthal, James Carville, Josh Marshall, and Gene Lyons (Clinton operatives one and all) made it news through an e-mail and CNN campaign. So the bloggers who made the Lott Pandergate story a big deal in Blogistan were in fact doing Carville's bidding, although, as I've already said, they didn't know it at the time. Nobody wants to be made out to be an unwitting dupe of a clever cabal of operatives, so Reynolds wants to position this revelation as something odd. This is really silly, of course.
The only interesting questions about Carville's Pandergate fiasco have to do with what the hoped-for goal was, and whether it's really backfired. The obvious theory is that he was shooting for Lott's resignation from the Senate, which would have created a 50/50 split once again. According to this scenario, the episode backfired, because Lottt didn't step down and the Reeps reacted with honor, etc, etc. But Carville is a devious bastard, and he's got a history of reaching out to the racist, Southern voter in creative ways: during Clinton's '92 campaign, the KKK outreach took the form of the infamous Sistah Souljah speech, the shunning of long-time Clinton bud Jesse Jackson, and highlighting welfare reform as a central campaign issue.
Alongside Poppa Bush, this strategy made him the clearly Klan-friendly candidate. Now that Lott has been badly treated by his party, according this scenario, KKK and CCC-oriented voters will once again return to the Democratic Party fold.
If this sounds paranoid to you, you don't know how campaign managers think. One such person of my personal acquaintance once managed to secure an NRA endorsement for a candidate in a race in a very touchy-feely district in order to drive voters to her opponent; this sort of reverse-dunk thinking is actually commonplace. All it takes to pull it off is a few naifs who believe politics is about principle rather than counting votes, and Blogistan is full of such characters.
In future campaigns, the ability to manipulate Blogistan will become an important predictor of political success.
dave
· 6 years ago
Typical load of wingnut bullshit...
Ravenhurst
· 6 years ago
Richard Bennett wrote: "Marshall had direct orders from Blumenthal and Carville, and clearly didn't act on his own conscience, because he doesn't have one. The others acted in good faith, not realizing they were manipulated by Carville and Blumenthal."
Give me a f*cking break!
Cowboy Kahlil
· 6 years ago
Carville and Blumenthal took down Lott? I coulda sworn it was that shifless pair, Amos 'n Andy.
blnd_n_dngrus
· 6 years ago
Sometimes paranoia is warranted, sometimes it's just paranoia. I also pushed for Lott to step down, not because of any racism I percieved in him, but because of his multiple about faces on core conservative issues, as well as his clumsy apologies afterward. I respect anyone who can stand by their principles in spite of the odds, liberal or conservative. Lott did not deserve a defense from his fellow conservatives. His remark was stupid at best and his subsequent actions made clear that he would do or say anything in order to retain power. We don't need stupid people in leadership positions who are only concerned with their own quest for power.
All Comments
It's not patronizing to trace the arc of the deliberate manipulation on the part of Democratic Party operatives - it's realism.
Anyone who thinks that removing Lott was driven by the Democrats has to think again. Keeping Lott would have been a gold mine for them. The best thing that happened was that he left, doing the honorable thing in the end. He was able to put the Republican Party and the country ahead of himself.
Except that Sid Vicious and The James didn't know that. They're dumber than they say Dubya is.
That's it. I'm through with them.
How much will Rove pay? I'll still follow orders for the right price, ya know.
Lott never really should have been the face of the Republican party. For 100 years, the Democratic Party was the party of racism. Both Lott and Strom were Democrats at the time they avowed racism, and note that the outgoing President Pro Tem of the Senate was an active Klan member.
Any number of conservatives were pushing for Lott to resign from majority leader for the right reasons - that a racist face was not appropriate for the party founded to abolish slavery.
But even worse, it is the style of thinking that is rampant among small thinkers. What easier example than Saudi Arabia. Instead of questioning their own society and culture which could produce mass killers, they somehow blame it on Israel, believe the Saudi Arabians killed were all set up by the CIA, and that fundamentalist Islamic faith had nothing to do with it.
Examples of failure to think by blaming conspiracies abound. Inner city populations blame the drug trade on the CIA and the President. Hilary Clinton blames her husband's wayward antics on a right-wing conspiracy. Its all a piece of the same failure to think clearly and reasonably.
So who ordered you to write this article, Falwell or Nader?
The only interesting questions about Carville's Pandergate fiasco have to do with what the hoped-for goal was, and whether it's really backfired. The obvious theory is that he was shooting for Lott's resignation from the Senate, which would have created a 50/50 split once again. According to this scenario, the episode backfired, because Lottt didn't step down and the Reeps reacted with honor, etc, etc. But Carville is a devious bastard, and he's got a history of reaching out to the racist, Southern voter in creative ways: during Clinton's '92 campaign, the KKK outreach took the form of the infamous Sistah Souljah speech, the shunning of long-time Clinton bud Jesse Jackson, and highlighting welfare reform as a central campaign issue.
Alongside Poppa Bush, this strategy made him the clearly Klan-friendly candidate. Now that Lott has been badly treated by his party, according this scenario, KKK and CCC-oriented voters will once again return to the Democratic Party fold.
If this sounds paranoid to you, you don't know how campaign managers think. One such person of my personal acquaintance once managed to secure an NRA endorsement for a candidate in a race in a very touchy-feely district in order to drive voters to her opponent; this sort of reverse-dunk thinking is actually commonplace. All it takes to pull it off is a few naifs who believe politics is about principle rather than counting votes, and Blogistan is full of such characters.
In future campaigns, the ability to manipulate Blogistan will become an important predictor of political success.
Give me a f*cking break!
I also pushed for Lott to step down, not because of any racism I percieved in him, but because of his multiple about faces on core conservative issues, as well as his clumsy apologies afterward.
I respect anyone who can stand by their principles in spite of the odds, liberal or conservative. Lott did not deserve a defense from his fellow conservatives. His remark was stupid at best and his subsequent actions made clear that he would do or say anything in order to retain power. We don't need stupid people in leadership positions who are only concerned with their own quest for power.