Posted by
rycK on Tuesday, July 01, 2008 12:16:15 PM
Huffington Huffs, Puffs and Soars Far Left and Out of Sight.
We are indebted to Arianna Huffington for her ongoing precise analysis of the current political scene and her trendy advice to the politically squalid. There are few accurate and prophetic analysts who can probe the darkness and see the glow of political success as she can. Today, she blesses us with her analysis about how Obama is erring by trending to the middle.
Here is her latest theme:
“Last Friday afternoon, the guests taking part in Sunday's roundtable discussion on This Week had a pre-show call with George Stephanopoulos. One of the topics he raised was Obama's perceived move to the center, and what it means. Thus began my weekend obsession. If you were within shouting distance of me, odds are we talked about it.”-- Memo to Obama: Moving to the Middle is for Losers by Arianna Huffington.[1] [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.] This link references all quotes in this essay unless otherwise noted.
Yes. It doesn’t take much to light her Greek Fire and launch a new revolutionary counter revolution. She alerts us to the danger with her customary breed of noisy signals that there is an impending disastrous misdirection in the prime compulsory political vector of the left. There is nothing in the centre for the left.[2] Following Lenin, and others, it is clear that tolerating or accommodating even the slightest wishes or nostrums of the nonbelievers is a violation of the sacred tenets of any strict political movement. And, this makes sense as she explains:
“…I can unequivocally say: the Obama campaign is making a very serious mistake. Tacking to the center is a losing strategy. And don't let the latest head-to-head poll numbers lull you the way they lulled Hillary Clinton in December.”
And, she backs this up, conically, with history:
“In 2004, the Kerry campaign's obsession with undecided voters -- voters so easily swayed that 46 percent of them found credible the Swift Boaters' charges that Kerry might have faked his war wounds to earn a Purple Heart -- allowed the race to devolve from a referendum on the future of the country into a petty squabble over whether Kerry had bled enough to warrant his medals.”
This is true. However, there is his early exit from the war theatre [only served 4 months? I served 12 in the same brown waters] , his emotional and far leftist false testimony before Congress, his book on the new soldier where he advocates the UN controlling our forces and his flip-flopping on numerous issues while voting against nearly all military weapons spending bills in his terms. Those didn’t affect the vote? We also need to realize that his fellow officers called him out for his antics in Viet Nam—not some paper pusher in a right-wing think tank. The officers and men at Swift Vets and POWs for Truth [3] have detailed Kerry [Vinegar John [4]] and his lies [5] have shown his actions and comments to be untruthful and strictly political. But, I digress. Frequently the facts must be set aside to emphasize a political truth. She did make her point: he lost. No other evidence is necessary. Blame the right.
Arianna could have mentioned Ronald Reagan, who never budged a millimeter in his eternal war against Communism, and all this effort is detailed in a book entitle Reagan’s War.[6] He is still the eternal target of the anti-anti Communists. [7]There is much to be learned about keeping faith with your views and many politicians seem to still believe that they can shift and bob and weave and tell the suckers who vote ‘what they want to hear.’ Kerry and Dukakis flip flopped too much and were seen as phony and lost. But, Ronnie won! Did Dukakis get too close to the middle with his tank pictures?
Arianna could have mentioned Al Gore, the eternal EcoNazi[8] who never budged from his leftist grubbing for money from Asian Communists, as his father did in a similar way with the assistance of Armand Hammer[9] and his Soviet allies, and his eternal quest for tax hikes. Al actually succeeded in winning the popular vote and would have won the White House if only he had carried his own state. Ralph Nader did his small bit in sharing votes from fellow EcoNazis, a political problem that Al failed to solve. Al’s presidency was clearly stolen as the ‘people spoke’ and the Supreme Court torpedoed his good work. Blame the right.
But, then, Arianna could also have mentioned George McGovern, the ultimate experiment in stressing tautological ideologies who carried only one state and Washington, DC. George, like Ronald Reagan, never swayed from his narrow political path. There is a lesson there, but we must omit it in this discussion. One would have thought that his $10,000 guaranteed income, per person, could have carried the day over a rabid anti-Communist like Nixon with all the starving and abused lying around in the streets moaning. But, we need to drop the details and salient points if we are to appreciate Huffington and her logic.
But, also, before refining her politics in the Huffington Post she had fashioned a website called Ariannaonline.com. [10]Here, she attacked our plurality President Bill Clinton, called for his resignations[ plural since Hillary was a 2-fer] and created a cabal of determined conservatives who opposed Clinton. That didn’t work. Her marriage fell apart as well. This was not a miscalculation on her part we can be assured. Blame the right.
It is interesting that she maneuvers as a Juno-style revenge artist and can flip flop from one political pole to the opposite without missing even one bongo beat or a single slice of salmon sushi. She is consistent and compelling when she haunts the lunatic fringe of whichever political party, because she appeals to those extremists described by Eric Hoffer. [11] His research, unique and novel, showed that mass movements are not created by individuals but the leaders of such activities merely fall in front of the rushing crowd. Arianna senses the rush of the crowd and wants to lead the charge.
But, enough with reason and analysis because we can get back to basics:
“Throughout the primary, Obama referred to himself as an "unlikely candidate." Which he certainly was -- and still is. And one of the things that turned him from "unlikely" upstart to presidential frontrunner is his ability to expand the electorate by convincing unlikely voters -- some of the 83 million eligible voters who didn't turn out in 2004 -- to engage in the system.
“… Barack Obama in February of 2007, announcing his run for the White House. "I know I haven't spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington," he said that day, "but I've been there long enough to know that the ways of Washington must change."
We can speculate and wonder how Jeremiah Wright fits into this scenario in terms of ‘change.’ Since racism is the central underpinning of liberalism[12], Obama must have miscalculated in distancing himself from his pastor. Racism has given him more than 90% of the black vote. This is a change [??]and he is supposed to change other things. Is a change-back a change at all if you were right left the first time? Would Arianna wish Obama to get back to the base tenets of Black Liberation Theology and denounce Amerika as KKK Kountry? I wonder if Huffy thinks he should ‘change-back to his leftist theology. That does tend to keep the middle types at bay.
But, consistency or facts are never valid points of criticism for the left and particularly those of Greek Origin. Aristotle guessed on everything and got everything wrong with the possible exception of the political arena so she is safe so far. If Obama loses the election then other factors, aside from Mz. Huffington’s political analysis, must be sought or synthesized to explain her discrepancy. She can always blame the right.
So, Arianna Huffs and Puffs and patently offers everlasting advice to Obama. We can all hope he listens to her and gets back to the far left aisle where he is at least comfortable with the rhetoric and logic. He is uncomfortable in the middle.
She ends with an obvious element of logic:
“Realpolitik is one thing. Realstupidpolitik is quite another.”
We can all agree on that. Thanx Arianna!
rycK
Comments: ryckki@gmail.com
[3] http://www.swiftvets.com/index.php
[5] On June 6, 1971, John Kerry described the work of the Swift boats to the Washington Star as follows:
"We established an American presence in most cases by showing the flag and firing at sampans and villages along the banks. Those were our instructions, but they seemed so out of line that we finally began to go ashore, against our orders, and investigate the villages that were supposed to be our targets. We discovered we were butchering a lot of innocent people, and morale became so low among the officers on those 'swift boats' that we were called back to Saigon for special instructions from Gen. Abrams. He told us we were doing the right thing. He said our efforts would help win the war in the long run. That's when I realized I could never remain silent about the realities of the war in Vietnam."-- John Kerry described the work of the Swift boats to the Washington Star On June 6, 1971. http://www.swiftvets.com/index.php?topic=WarCrimes
[6] Reagan's War: The Epic Story of His Forty Year Struggle and Final Triumph Over Communism (ISBN: 0385504713) Peter Schweizer.
[7] Let us hate the commie haters.
[9] Arm and Hammer—get it??
[11] http://www.erichoffer.net/.