z’Cuda, the Weiner and bears

George Will, Charles Krauthammer and David Brooks trying to figure out what to do about Sarah Palin. 


I was gradually filling up a(nother) piece about z’Cuda as I, along with the rest of Palin Nation, wait for her to announce that yes, she is going to run for POTUS.

[My money’s on 7/4 weekend fwiw. /brex]

Then, I started thinking about the Anthony Weiner funniness going on this weekend and couldn’t help but draw the one comparison that I think will forever separate the media from Conservatives – when it comes to Conservatives, the media will forever assume the worst, and when it comes to Liberals, they will forever be innocent until proven guilty.

I’m not going to dwell on the Weiner thing except to say this: how many Republicans careers have been ruined over less? Larry Craig? Chris Hill? The former was guilty of a “wide stance,” and the latter was guilty of stupidly posting a half-naked pic of himself on Craigslist even though he’s married. As noted yesterday, I don’t care about these people’s sex lives. I don’t – srsly.

Anthony Weiner is not as high profile as Sarah Palin (there are maybe a half-dozen people in the English-speaking world who are as high profile as Sarah Palin, and that’s being too generous), so I won’t compare the two. Yet, consider the non-troversies the media has tried to sink z’Cuda with, from the despicable Trig Truthers to the perpetually-dismissed ethics complaints to the quitter meme and on down the line – they have tried everything to ruin this woman, and now resort to the beyond-cynical “she’s in it for the money” routine.

Newsflash: The only thing lower than questioning a person’s motives because your politics differ is questioning their belief or lack thereof in god when it differs from yours.

The same AP that used 18 fact-checkers to do detective work on Going Rogue has zero interest in the Weiner story, and this man – politics aside – is a rising star who isn’t afraid to share screen-time with guests and hosts who disagree with him. Camera shy he ain’t.

Maybe the story is truly a hoax – when the hell has that ever stopped the media from going after a Republican, or worse, a Conservative? For years, Bob Packwood screwed and harassed scores of women, but since he was staunchly pro-choice … nothing. See – a Good Republican, that Packwood. Like Packwood, Weiner is a power player in good-standing, so the media will be dragged across the line and into this story only when it becomes Too Big to Ignore.

To wit, whining never got anyone elected to anything, and other than taking repeated shots at “the lamestream media” z’Cuda has long since accepted the fact that she will never, ever get a benefit of the doubt.


You can tell how freaked about establishment Conservatives are that Gov. Palin won’t go away. When everyone complains that the field is boring, Palinistas say “ah, but she is anything but boring and what a crowd she can draw,” and that catches on, then next thing you know, pieces start popping up that the GOP needs a boring candidate.

David Brooks recently noted that he thinks Mitt, T-Paw or Huntsman will be the GOP nominee. This is how out of touch Brooks and so many like him are – John Huntsman has as much of a chance of winning the GOP nomination as I do, which is zero chance.

We do not want Mitt or Huntsman – T-Paw will be fine for me, but that’s missing the point: thus far, there are two people running or thinking of running who excite the base: Gov. Palin and Herman Cain. I find it curious that so many ECs are hung up on these boring white men, and I can only conclude that the likes of David Brooks, George Will, Charles Krauthammer and others of varying influence clearly hate women and black people. I don’t know why they’re bigots, but apparently they are. Two women with -R next to their name, and they get nothing but scorn and contempt from ECs. Herman Cain blew the roof off the first GOP debate, and he barely gets a mention.

Why do these men hate women and black people? No idea.

George Will went so far to express concern about letting Gov. Palin have access to nuclear weapons, thus bringing to mind this clip above.

Having fought this rhetorical war for the better part of three years, my attempts to convince others of Gov. Palin’s self-evident competencies long ago ran dry, yet it’s the absurd notion that not only would they not vote for her, but that she’s somehow awful, duplictous, untrustworthy, incompetent and stupid is what irks me. What really grinds z’gears is what it actually hides: talking heads who are self-described Conservatives hate the middle class. Yes, we’re useful, but they hate us. Not as much as Democrats hate us (Donkeys try to exploit the middle class so they can destroy the middle class – see also Marx, Karl), but they hate us just the same. The same reasons for hating Rush Limbaugh are used in hating Sarah Palin – they are people who can clearly and effectively communicate with the middle class, and they resonate with the middle class.

Long live z’Cuda!


About godsowncrunk
I'm King B, the originator of the Jellywhite lyrical style and god's own crunk.

4 Responses to z’Cuda, the Weiner and bears

  1. Eric says:

    “Why do these men hate women and black people? No idea.”

    I know you meant this tounge-in-cheek, but to some degree I think notions that are arguably (not solidly) sexist and racist do play a role in thier popularity with some on the right. I think many conservatives find themselves having an internal dialogue that goes something like this, “If Palin were an ugly white guy, would she be this popular, and what does it mean if the answer is ‘of course not’?” or “If a Democrat with Herman Cain’s resume ran for POTUS, wouldn’t we accuse him of using his race to hide behind the fact that he’s unqualified for the position?”

    These are, of course, completely impractical questions to be asking, but I think a lot of people spend a lot of time silently kicking them around in the deep dark recesses of their conscience, and I think they cause a lot of conservatives to withhold or muffle their support.

    I’ve said a bunch of times that I support Pawlenty becasue I think he is the most conservative candidate who has a shot at winning. I like both Palin and Cain, but unless Obama’s ratings drop by double digits between now and 2012 (which would also insure a Pawlenty win), I just don’t see the pathto victory for either of them (Palin because everybody other than ideological and cutlural conservatives like her less then more she speaks, Cain because by historical standards he is completely unqualified to be POTUS and the Dems will succesfully exploit the hell out of this).

    I won’t talk bad about Palin or Cain on any kind of personal level becasue I genuinely like both of them, and I think either of them have a good shot at winning the primary (which, unfortunately, still appears to be MItt’s to lose). But I think their ascendency is likely to cause some inner turmoil for many of the boring white movement conservative males who will come to the primaries asking the question, “What am I, chopped liver?”

  2. godsowncrunk says:

    Personally, I prefer to kick them around out in the open (the notions you speak of). I’ll be perfectly honest – I’m tired of the boring white men we have in the GOP. I’m with you – I like T-Paw, and I like some of the dust he’s kicking up. However (and I’ve repeated this) these white men have no nuts and I think they will neuter themselves the first time they’re accused of doing something racist once the head-to-head with Fred-6 gets rolling – and the media will accuse every effective tactic they use of being racist. They have to be able to hit back, and hit back fucking hard as stone.

    As a rule, I don’t trust women in power and rare is the day I will get behind an XX in the manner I’ve expressed my support for Sarah Palin. I like Bachmann and I adore Liz Cheney, but most women who seek power have Big Sis tattooed on their forehead or creeping in their genes. My support for Sarah Palin has zero to do with her looks or her plumbing – show me a fat white guy who’s done what she’s done in the last two years, and I’ll show you someone I adore.

    See also: Limbaugh, Rush.

    That’s it – that’s the vocal opposition. When Palin was getting smeared for AZ and something she had nothing to do with, where were the principled castratos TPaw, Huck, Newt, Mitch, Mitt and the rest of those cowards? I’ll tell you where – they were hiding in little holes where little rats hide and praying to god that the episode would end Palin’s career. I love T-Paw and I’ll vote for him, but for that cowardly non-display, he’s a rat in my book, no better than the rest of them.

    Fuck The 11th Commandment – it only seems to apply to people who aren’t Sarah Palin, Herman Cain or other true blue Conservatives. I want a fighter – if TPaw will demonstrate he can fight and Palin bows and Cain fades, I’m behind him. While that Affirmative Action thing might hold true for some people (ie not wanting a white male candidate for the reasons you illustrated), it doesn’t hold true for me – it just so happens that the toughest fighters we have aren’t white guys (POTUS-talking, anyway), and the white guys are, in my view at this moment, pussies, every last one of them.


  3. Eric says:

    FWIW, I absolutely know your support for Palin is based on her record and not her cup size.

    I dunno though… I may be one of the forementioned boring white pussies because I think Palin’s agressiveness is one of the major factors that will cost her the election. Weve been round and round on this, but it is so easy to attack Obama’s policies and point out their inherent problems without stirring up pointless controversy that turns away desperately needed voters. Crosshairs on political brochures are a perfect example. I don’t for a second believe they had anything to do with Giffords being shot, but at the same time if I were politician running a campaign, even in southeastern Oklahoma, and found out one of my staffers had published such an ad, I’d fire them on the spot and kill the ad, because it is all downside and no upside. Pawlenty’s statements about Palin said as much (I believe he said something along the lines of, “That sort of thing isn’t my style but there’s no reason to think it had anything to do with the shooting.). I thought it was a good enough answer to a question that had no business being asked.

    But regarding the balls of white male politicios, and specifically T-Paw, I don’t think it is a pussy move to go to Iowa and talk about the need to end corn ethanol subsidies. I don’t think it is a pussy move to go to Florida and talk about means testing social security and raising the retirement age. Those are concrete ideas that 9 out of 10 conservative politicians would avoid talking about in those settings, and they are also the exact kind of things Americans need to be hearing from somebody who wants to be President. To me, that approach takes more politcal chutzpah than riding into D.C. on a Harley for a rah rah session while having some sporting fun with the media (NTTAWWT).

    And again, I’m not in the bag for T-Paw, or anyone at this point. I could easily change my mind about who I support when the candidates start dropping policy proposals. I just can’t help but wonder if Pawlenty had the same mannerisms, track record, and ideas, but instead was a hot female latina lesbian, if he wouldn’t be the frontrunner right now… and I find it kind of depressing that I think he probably would be.

  4. godsowncrunk says:

    I agree completely re TPaw/IA/ethanol subsidies, fwiw, and TPaw is the boring whiteman horse I’ll be backing should ‘Cuda and Cain fade.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: