Nope, there was no doubt in my mind she would run. So when Rachel announced the “breaking” news last night my first thought was, Oh joy, another stupid tea partier who doesn’t know her ass from a hole in the ground, thinks she is capable of being POTUS.
My second thought was, Crap, when will the sexism start? Please don’t make me have to defend her from misogyny, please, please, PLEASE!
I assumed it would not be a matter of if, but a matter of when. I didn’t have to wait long. Less than 12 hours, it appears. Peter Daou’s tweet showed up on my Facebook page at 5:10 a.m.:
So I clicked through the tiny url to find this to the WaPo RSS feed. And yep, that was the title of Milbank’s column. Or so it appeared.
I popped over to the Washington Post Opinion page and there it was again on the front page.
But when I clicked through to the actual Milbank column, this is what I saw:
Huh. So, either Dana Milbank changed his original headline, or some other doofus at the Washington Post just had to sex it up a bit.
When I read Milbank’s actual column, it is free of sexism. Basically, the circus that was the Republican debate last night had plenty of inanity to go around. And Milbank does an excellent job pointing it out.
King treated viewers to a peculiar game, asking each candidate a “this or that” question. Does Bachmann favor Elvis or Johnny Cash? (Answer: both.) Does Santorum prefer Leno or Conan? (Neither.) Further questioning revealed that Pawlenty prefers Coke to Pepsi, Romney likes his wings spicy, Cain enjoys deep-dish pizza, and Paul prefers his BlackBerry to the iPhone.
You know, when that young person asked Bill Clinton, “Boxers or briefs?” I didn’t think that “professional” debate moderators would adopt him as their journalistic role-model.
She served Tea Partyers all their favorites: “I want to announce tonight President Obama is a one-term president. . . . I will not rest until I repeal Obamacare. . . . There is no other agency like the EPA. It should really be renamed the job-killing organization of America. . . . I fought behind closed doors against my own party on TARP.”
Actually, Bachmann didn’t have much of a role in the Troubled Asset Relief Program, but nobody was keeping score. They were too busy counting kids. “I have five sons. . . 16 grandkids,” Romney reported.
“Karen and I are the parents of seven,” Santorum boasted.
“I’m the father of two,” said Pawlenty.
“Father of two, grandfather of three,” contributed Cain.
But none could compete with Bachmann: “I’ve had five children, and we are the proud foster parents of 23 great children.” She mentioned that last statistic twice more during the debate.
Nope, not a drop of sexism in Milbank’s column. So why the sexist teaser? Did he choose those words, or some nameless editor at the WaPo? The other OpEd teasers seem pretty straightforward.
Robinson’s OpEd reflects his teaser.
Normally, we’d expect the rest of the field to make an issue of every crazy, intemperate thing the leading candidate has ever said or done. This year, however, the pack is assailing Romney with documented examples of chronic, blatant, incorrigible moderation. Even — shudder — pragmatism.
Oh, the humanity.
At Monday night’s debate in New Hampshire, none of the other candidates would say to Romney’s face what they’ve been saying behind his back. But the offstage Mitt-bashing surely will continue. The truth is that Romney is basically an ideological conservative who believes in tax cuts as a panacea and is content to watch the American middle class continue its long, sad decline. But in today’s Republican Party, merely positioning oneself to the right of Ronald Reagan isn’t enough. Apparently, it’s also necessary to eschew all reason.
E.J. Dionne’s column does as well.
I didn’t expect to think that Michele Bachmann would be the big winner of tonight’s Republican debate in New Hampshire, but that seemed the obvious conclusion. She was at ease and forceful without looking at all crazy or out-of-control. It’s a sign of how far to the right the Republican Party has moved that she didn’t stand out for her extreme views.
Rubin’s tease matches the content of her column as well.
So, I’m puzzled by the Milbank teaser. His idea? Or someone else’s?