Midyear snapshots of our glorious two-party system: (2) The R's in the wilderness (which they're gonna kill if their polluters don't do it first)

MINNESOTA UPDATE: Franken wins, Pawlenty will sign! [see below]

•

Is it Princess Sarah's turn to watch gasoline being poured

on her 2012 presidential campaign?

by Ken

As we continue our snapshots of our glorious two-part system at work, moving on from the Dems, it's not entirely clear that the Republicans ought to be included. Do you call that "work"? Here's what Republicans do now: Whatever happens, if it comes from a Democrat, they Just Say No. O perhaps I should say they Just Scream No.

From a certain vantage point, we could just sit back and enjoy the spectacle of the Republicans in the wilderness, after eight years of consolidation of all federal government power in the hands of the Permanent Republican Majority (pat. pending). Ha ha!

In theory, being out of power should be right up the right-wing loons' alley. Opposition is what they're traditionally good at, probably the only thing they're good at. They're sure as hell no good at governing. If we learned anything in the eight years of the Bush regime -- and mind you, it's not at all clear that a lot of the country did learn anything -- it's that turning actual governance over to these crackpots can be a recipe for catastrophe, especially when the particular crackpots harbor megalomaniacal delusions.

Unfortunately, for the moment the wingnuts seems to have lost their touch. Oh, they remember the joys of opposition, all right, they've just come to think "opposition" consists of saying "Fuck no, fuck no" all day long, intermixed with the occasional "yo mama wears sweatsox." Now I don't at all underestimate the disruptive potential of the Republican campaign of nonstop obstruction and obfuscation, all greased with the now-standard policy of "all lies, all the time," so carefully nurtured during the 2008 presidential campaign. And people will grow impatient, even though they kept claiming last fall to understand that it would take time to haul the economy out of the deep trench in which the Bush regime buried it.

Still, it's kind of a limited message, and there are signs that it hasn't escaped the country's notice that the R's have given up any pretense of interest in constructive participation in the governing process. Meanwhile, somehow they just don't seem to have regained the flair they exhibited in the Clinton years for nuclear opposition, though they do seem to have become rather good at the meltdown part.

I don't have the heart to jump ugly any more on poor South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, the conservatives' conservative. Besides, apart from the question of whether he will resign, a question he doesn't seem much interested in, the principal question under discussion is, who done him in? And since the list of his enemies seems to include most everyone in South Carolina, this could take awhile.

[UPDATE: Oops! In breaking news, it appears that the number of encounters with his Argentine love goddess admitted by Governor Sanford has jumped from four to seven. The guy does appear to have this small problem with how he's, like, a pathological liar. Is it any wonder that he was so highly regarded by die-hard movement conservatives as such a steadfast man of principle?]

Then, has anything been heard from Nevada Sen. John Ensign since his Senate colleagues welcomed him back last week, accepting his apology?

It all seems to be enough to throw a scare into card-carrying wingnut loon Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who seems to be showing unexpected signs of sanity, indicating the other day that he might be prepared to sign Sen.-elect Al Franken's election certificate if the state's Supreme Court were to rule that way (as it has just done) -- heresy for the wingnut conspiracy headed by Texas Sen. John Cornyn to keep that seat open as long as possible rather than allow Franken to be seated.

[UPDATE: Governor Tim says he will indeed sign. The only thing is, that followed a full-fledged confession from Norm Coleman. So I'm not sure how many grains of sanity he gets credit for, considering that at this point he really had no alternative.]


NOW IT APPEARS TO BE THE TURN OF THE
SWEETHEART OF THE FAR, FAR RIGHT

Is it America's Princess' turn to watch gasoline being poured on her 2012 campaign? New York Daily News political correspondent Michael Saul offers this preview of a piece upcoming in Vanity Fair:

Sarah Palin trashed by members of John McCain's campaign team in Vanity Fair

Alaska's lipstick-wearing pit-bull is a "Little Shop of Horrors."

That's how one longtime friend and campaign trail companion of John McCain, the vanquished 2008 GOP presidential nominee, described veep nominee Sarah Palin.

In an expansive story in the August edition of Vanity Fair, a slew of senior members of McCain's campaign team told reporter Todd S. Purdum that they suffer a kind of survivor's guilt following the 2008 presidential election.

"They can't quite believe that for two frantic months last fall, caught in a Bermuda Triangle of a campaign, they worked their tails off to try to elect as vice president of the United States someone who, by mid-October, they believed for certain was nowhere near ready for the job, and might never be," Vanity Fair reports.

During the campaign, there were reports of anonymous McCain aides describing Palin, the governor of Alaska, as a "diva" and a "whack job."

The Vanity Fair article recounts how strained Palin's relationship was with the McCain advisers. She maintained "only the barest level of civil discourse" with Tucker Eskew, the operative assigned to be her chief minder, the magazine reports.

She believed Steve Schmidt, McCain's top strategist, had lied to her about conducting polling in Alaska - that was a "belief she conveyed to anyone who would listen," the magazine reported.

As previously reported, Palin was so intent on delivering her own concession speech on Election Night that she wouldn't accept advisers telling her that McCain had decided he would be the only one to speak. She took the issue up with McCain himself, discussing it on the walk from his hotel suite to the farewell rally.

Palin did not speak on Election Night. Only McCain addressed the crowd and the nation.

One McCain aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said he "always wanted to tell myself the best-case story about her."

"I think, as I've evaluated it, I think some of my worst fears…the after-election events have confirmed that her more negative aspects my have been there…."

As his voice trailed off, he said, "I saw her as a raw talent. Raw, but a talent. I hoped she could become better."

Palin refused to comment for Vanity Fair.

THERE MAY NOT BE A SANTA CLAUS, BUT
THERE'LL ALWAYS BE A WILLARD (SIGH)

Here's our Willard burbling about the Sanford Affair:

“Seeing this family become healed is our highest priority,” Romney said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

“At the same time, and not commenting particularly on Governor Sanford, … people in public life ought to be held to a higher standard. … I heard one … former governor say, ‘Well, everybody makes mistakes.’ Well, that’s true.

“But not all mistakes are the same. And not everybody is a governor or a senator or a president. And we expect [those] people to live by a higher standard, because what they do is going to be magnified, their families are going to be hurt more by what they do, the things they care about will be hurt, and the culture of the nation and the people who follow them will be hurt.”

Does the man have a silver tongue, or what?

"Not everybody is a governor or a senator or a president." Check! Should we perhaps have exact figures on this? It seems to be important. A rough percentage, at least? Let's see, there are 50 governors, and, um, 99 senators (thanks, Norm Coleman and John Cornyn!), and one president . . . so we add that, and divide by the entire population, and . . .


YOUR TWO-PARTY SYSTEM AT WORK: REP. JEFF
FLAKE (R-AZ) STEPS TO THE PLATE ON ACES

We used the Waxman-Markey "climate" bill as a sort of test case for how the Dems are functioning at midyear 2009. How about the R's? Let's consider the case of Jeff Flake (AZ-06).

Naturally Congressman Flake, as a Republican, opposes ACES. His website reports:

“The last thing a fragile economy needs is a new energy tax, yet that’s essentially what this cap and trade bill is,” said Flake. “This bill is more about generating revenue for the federal government than it is about addressing climate change.”

So we know for darn sure that the congressman voted his conscience Friday night, right? Um, not exactly. The website report continues:

Unfortunately, Congressman Flake was unable to vote on the bill due to a family obligation. Congressman Flake’s daughter was Arizona’s representative in the America’s Junior Miss scholarship program, and Congressman Flake and his wife were there supporting her.

“Obviously, it was a tough decision to miss voting against the cap and trade bill. But I’ve let my daughter down enough over the years, and I felt I just couldn’t let her down again.”

Had he been able to vote, he would have voted against the bill. Unless it is changed substantially, Congressman Flake will vote against the cap and trade conference report when it comes back to the House.

Whatta guy! I'm sure the fact that the congressman will vote against the bill later was of great assurance to his ideological comrades as they did battle in the vote Friday night.

#