Hurl-Blogging The Inaugur-A-Palooza, Iranian Edition
It’s an Iranian detergent. Barf means snow. Snow is forecast for Sunday in DC. To get fashionably multi-cultural about it, there’s a 30 percent chance of barf as Bono, The Boss, Beyonce, etal, kickoff the Inaugur-a-palooza Sunday at the Lincoln Memorial. Chance of barf could be higher elsewhere. Never mind the warmal irony, that’s also more or less what the mullahs plan to due all over Obama’s Iranian peace overtures.
Speaking of snow, the best icon-O-clasty to date has to be from Kate at Small Dead Animals, as she hopes up her own logo up in the Great White North:
Here’s a laugh at the ground. Jonathan Chait at the New Republic on why libs “aren’t outraged” that Obama broke bread with con columnists. They shouldn’t be. No harm in a charm offensive. But Chait explains libs feel secure about their guy meeting with the dread cons because they know the Messiah, if he can’t quite cure them, won’t be tainted by the lepers:
… imagine this counterfactual: George W. Bush (or maybe a victorious John McCain) sat down before his first inauguration with Paul Krugman, E.J. Dionne, and Frank Foer. Would conservatives have reacted with the same equanimity? No, I think they’d have gone nuts. And the reason is that they wouldn’t have confidence in Bush or McCain to be surrounded by liberal ideas without being deeply influenced by them. I don’t think they’d have reacted this way if, say, a President Mitt Romney did the same thing.
And that’s why liberals aren’t having a cow. They know that Obama understands far more about policy than any of his right-wing dinner companions, is used to being exposed to opposing ideas, and won’t come out of that dinner telling his staff, “Hey, did you know we cut half the capital gains tax and raise more revenue?”
A separate issue is why Obama didn’t pick some conservatives with a bit more intellectual integrity than, say, Kristol and Krauthammer. The problem, of course, is conservatives like that tend not to rise to positions of high influence.
The “understands far more about policy” part is interesting. Chait neglects to explain whether His Obamitude picked the all-knowingness as a community organizer, as a state senator, or in campaign trail spoonfeedings. Chait also neglects to mention that Obama looks like he’s picking up large parts of the Bush admin and its policies wholesale, and the libs have been squawking about that quite a bit.
In the news, Fox: Gay America prepares to party. Apparently gay Americans are over the Rick Warren thing. Article documents Christian right’s dyspepsia.
Columbia Law prof hails the ascendancy of a black man to the presidency, The New Statesman: Hope Cuts Across Barriers, but cautions that’s no reason to dispense with racial preference policies. I guess Patricia Williams has a point, if you consider the election of an underqualified, underscrutinized black candidate to have been a nationwide execrise in affirmative action.
It’s a “Technauguration.”
They are the World: Obama’s British stepmom enroute, to join the Kenyan grandmother, who’s journey to America was noted in yesterday’s hurl. The Aunti Zeituni watch is still on. Google news search results:
Your search - aunti zeituni inauguration - did not match any documents.
Huh. Let’s try that another way.
Your search - aunti zeituni immigration - did not match any documents.
That’s odd.
Newsbusters: AP’s ‘05 inaugu-rage over Bush’s $40 million extravaganza gives way to inaugu-enthusiasm over Obama’s $45 million historic national oneness fest. Depends how you count. Daily Mail puts in at $145 million.
Malkin … “you don’t want it to look like a schlock affair” … like some common Republican, do you? Also, via Malkin, more pay-as-we-say-not-as-we-do Dem taxation news.
Hate to talk shop during this national celebration of togetherly oneness, but Gateway’s got more on Geithner and other i$$ues$ you can look forward to.
UPDATE: Theo Spark has fun with Photoshop
Previously:
Hurl-Blogging the Inaugur-a-palooza
Hurl-Blogging the Inaugur-a-palooza, Reflux
Hurl-Blogging the Inaugur-a-palooza, the Dry Heaves
UPDATE:
Power-Outage Blogging the Inaugur-a-palooza
Topics: Obama
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 6:36 am on Thursday, January 15, 2009
5 Responses to “Hurl-Blogging The Inaugur-A-Palooza, Iranian Edition”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
January 15th, 2009 at 9:34 am
OK. I don’t get it. The “hope” poster, that is.
January 15th, 2009 at 11:14 am
Chait’s self-delusion is amusing. Particularly when he snarks about Krauthammer and Kristol’s supposed lack of “intellectual integrity.” Coming from the author of a “economic” book sourced almost entirely on news articles and his own opinions (”The Big Con”) and a senior editor at the scandal ridden TNR, that’s rich.
January 15th, 2009 at 11:33 am
Yes, that Chait quote is absolutely hilarious. Total self-parody.
I didn’t get the poster at first, either (giant squid? underside of a shark?) but if you click through you can see it’s the small dead animal from that site’s logo. (I don’t get that, either, but, whatever!)
January 15th, 2009 at 11:38 am
What’s with the instant step-mom? In what sense is she Obama’s stepmother if she was married to his father before he married Obama’s mother??
January 15th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
“They know that Obama understands far more about policy than any of his right-wing dinner companions, is used to being exposed to opposing ideas, and won’t come out of that dinner telling his staff, “Hey, did you know we cut half the capital gains tax and raise more revenue?””
Sure, because Obama already knows it’s true. He’s rejected it as a policy that he will adopt because it’s “unfair” to the working class.
What scares the hell out of liberals is that politicians might actually start thinking for themselves instead of spouting party rhetoric, commit the unforgivable sin of believing the irrefutable data that conservative ideas succeed and liberal ones consistently fail (for example, capital gains tax reductions actually DO raise more revenue - something even the detestable MSM has had to admit is true) or, God forbid, actually give a damn about working class people (instead of Karl Marx’s supposed proletariat who needed to suckle unremittingly at the state breast to live happily ever after) and free them to succeed without government interference.