Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
October 5, 2006
WB: Ten Thousand Years

Billmon:

The objective here isn’t to convince the public, much less the corporate media, that the GOP House leadership is the victim of a fiendishly clever Jewish . . .um, I mean, liberal conspiracy. Rove isn’t that stupid. This is about getting the conservative faithful to go out and die for their emperor (but not before they help with the GOTV drive in November).

It’s very familiar technique: You try to convince the troops (if they aren’t convinced already) that the enemy is a foul, subhuman brute who will rape and kill your women, then skin your children and eat them alive. Better to die on your feet than your knees, etc. This, roughly, is the persona the wingnut sphere has created for Soros.

Ten Thousand Years

Comments

Posted this in the wrong place below. I meant to put it here. Sorry.
The question now is whether the troops are willing to go over the top. I’m convinced many will not be. This scandal has hit a Republican sweet spot – the tender bit of flesh somewhere between the breastplate and the grieves.
The Republicans win by being the party of intolerance. If that’s your angle, then you damn well better be intolerant. But if there’s one thing this scandal has made clear its that the Republican leadership – and I’m including the Religious Right leadership – is not intolerant enough for its base. That gay-baiting crap is for the rubes, apparently. At the very least, Hastert et al knew Foley was gay and it didn’t take him down a peg in their eyes. Being “overly friendly” with 16-year-old boys also didn’t tarnish him any. The base may understand expedience, but on this scale? I’m not sure. The RR isn’t voting just to keep Denny Hastert in filet mignon. They want some red meat for themselves. Is this crew delivering for them? Remember, they threw Ralph Reed under the bus two months ago for far less.

Posted by: NickM | Oct 5 2006 18:28 utc | 1

c’mon Billmon
quit the day job. put out the tip jar, this stuff is way more interesting than any corporate work.

Posted by: dan of steele | Oct 5 2006 18:28 utc | 2

Is there a conclusive, reasonable account on the market of exactly how Foleygate erupted with a giant, wonderfully timed splash? And does the account include why it didn’t for three long years until it did? Just because Jewboy George probably didn’t spring this one doesn’t mean noone else did.

Posted by: Guthman Bey | Oct 5 2006 18:38 utc | 3

“Is there a conclusive, reasonable account on the market of exactly how Foleygate erupted with a giant, wonderfully timed splash?”
The main part of the spectacle is all Republican-created. I mean, in addition to the initial story. The utter incompetence of the response, with revelations coming day-by-day. Snow calling Foley’s e-mails “naughty”. Hastert contradicting Boehner, Boehner contradicting Hastert, Boehner contradicting himself, Reynolds staging a presser on this in front of a group of children, staffers outing each other in the press, etc. Everyone angling to be the next Speaker. The Dems couldn’t have engineered this, make no mistake. A competent response would have starved a lot of oxygen from this story. For the incompetence, yet again, the Republicans have no ones to blame but themselves – or their leaders. They went from circle jerk to circular firing squad less than 24 hours.

Posted by: Anonymous | Oct 5 2006 18:57 utc | 4

@GB – this is my recollection – The emails were turned over to CREW by a Republican aide in July and some Florida papers also had the emails in July as had ABC. Only after a mysterious blog came up with the IMs, and ABC had hands on them, there was enough to blow this up.
Doesn´t really look like intended election timing. As Billmon says – too early.

Posted by: b | Oct 5 2006 18:57 utc | 5

I am not so sure about the timing. It has kept the Republican spin machine from defining the election around national security. The word that GWB proncounces as “terrrrrrrrrr” is not the centerpiece this time. Just as “they” defined Kerry early in 2004, “they” are being defined here early on as a bunch of icky perverts.
But then my deranged and twisted theory has been for a while that the top echelon Republicans want to be rid of political responsibilty and are going for gridlock instead. But that’s just my conspiratorial conjecture du jour and I’ll be glad to let it go as soon as I get something more lurid to obsess about.

Posted by: Guthman Bey | Oct 5 2006 19:22 utc | 6

That was my suspicion too, Guthman. I thought someone with money and connections and gotten the IM’s from AOL or another ISP and assembled the whole package to explode at once. But I have been assured by a major blogger who’s followed it closely that the recipients furnished the IM records. That is confirmed by an interview with an ABC person who said that they had the emails for a while and their hand was forced when they found out CREW or someone else had them. Then the IM’s surfaced from recipients who were saw the email story.
Most of the public heard about both sets of messages at the same time, so they think Hastert saw the whole barfy record and decided to cover it up. That has the look of a slick, efficient ratfuck operation. But sometimes unaided reality administers a swift, mean ratfuck.

Posted by: Roger Bigod | Oct 5 2006 19:34 utc | 7

my deranged and twisted theory has been for a while that the top echelon Republicans want to be rid of political responsibilty and are going for gridlock instead.

I think it’s Colonel Scowcroft (and the rest of Bush I’s crew and the remaining non-insane general staff) in the library with the monkey wrench, trying to throw whatever they can in front of the bus to Iran, myself.

Posted by: Jimmy Jazz | Oct 5 2006 19:37 utc | 8

b,
That “mysterious blog” is kind of an understatement. Reading it left me seriously baffled. Is it a poor astroturfing or just poorly written? How on Earth did they get the IMs?

Posted by: Rowan | Oct 5 2006 19:48 utc | 9

even though the whole thing is much less than it seems, I get immense schadenfreude watching the wingnuts spin what they know is pedophilia into something not so bad, usually by saying Clinton did it too or that there just has to be a whole bunch of democrats that are just as guilty.
One thing that will get folks all riled up is sex with children, fortunately that still shocks and outrages people. I doubt that this was planned and talk of a misterious site is probably just that. There are thousands of sites where you can find or read anything you can imagine and some stuff you can’t imagine. This seems to be more a coincidence and has exploded simply because it was not managed from the start and the republican slime machine was caught off guard.
Foley probably screwed everything up by resigning so quickly. As Billmon pointed out earlier these guys never admit mistakes and act like cornered rats when they get into trouble. To have one of their own admit guilt messes up the game plan.

Posted by: dan of steele | Oct 5 2006 19:58 utc | 10

Well, said smartass, as usual, we shall see what we shall see, but won’t see what we can’t see.

Posted by: Guthman Bey | Oct 5 2006 20:12 utc | 11

Running a thread behind, as usual. While everyone was discussing here, I was posting back at Call of the Wild thread. Seems to fit here.
Radar blog, with which I am unfamiliar, has some curious comments about the blogsite that first mentioned Foley’s emailing habits. Anyone else familiar with Radar’s raison d’etre?

If its time/date stamps are to be trusted (like most free blogware, Blogger allows its users to backdate posts), the pervert-outing anony-site was set up on July 28 as a “clearing house for the public to report sex predators and as a resource for concerned citizens.”
One early post, headlined The Sickening Six, naming and shaming the “kinds of sick people who hunt minors for their own sick purposes,” is basically an amalgam of plagiarized entries from Crimelibrary, Wikipedia, and Answers.com.
After running just six posts over the summer, the site picked up steam on September 21 when its author wrote, “the blog has been noticed and some shocking emails have been received!!!!” and posted four emails purportedly from “interns” outraged by the heretofore unmentioned Foley and his penchant for teenage boys. . . .
Three days later, the blogger posted the now infamous “Emails from Congressman Foley to 16 Year Old Page!!!!”, claiming they’d been sent in by a reader (despite the fact that they appeared to be scans of faxed printouts). Persons unknown then seeded the link to various political sites—including Wonkette, which initially dismissed them as fakes. . . .
Whoever promoted the story on DailyKos did so only 12 minutes after the fateful post went live at 11:06 a.m.:
“Check this out. Congressman Mark Foley has crossed the line.
http://www.stopsexpredators.blogspot
by WHInternNow onSun Sep 24, 2006 at 11:18:14 PDT”

Interesting posting name, WHInternNow.
Radar suggests that whoever is behind stop-predator has a good sense of the news cycle. As billmon points out, the timing is a little early, if the intent is simply to torpedo Republican election chances. On the other hand, we aren’t talking much about habeus corpus, torture, the NIE, or Woodward’s portrait of incompetence and dissumulation, all of which stories also broke last week.
Life is certainly full of coincidence, but in this very tough game in campaign season, I’m not so sure. Cui bono?

Posted by: small coke | Oct 5 2006 21:59 utc | 12

I know, wrong thread.
Lavender Bund? The Lavender Hill Mob would have been too gay?

Posted by: Porco Rosso | Oct 5 2006 22:39 utc | 13

The more I read “stopsexpredators” the more I’m convinced it’s a fake. The author has posted two “reader” e-mails which use almost exactly the writing style, too-correct punctuation, and capitalization of key words as his or her own. The “WHInternNow” who immediately linked to it on Daily Kos uses a similar stilted style, although since he or she only has that one post on DKos so it’s difficult to say (although that in and of itself is extremely suspicious.)
To me, it reads like a clear hit job on Foley, probably by a thinks-he’s-clever intern/page who had been the object of Foley’s attention. Without knowing more, I’m not going to read too much into the precise timing of the delivery of the hit – it seems personal. The entire universe doesn’t revolve around American midterm elections.

Posted by: Rowan | Oct 5 2006 23:17 utc | 14

Something queer is going on all right but at least nobody’s talking about nuking Iran these days.

Posted by: pb | Oct 6 2006 1:14 utc | 15

“The entire universe doesn’t revolve around American midterm elections.”
No, but if Bush loses congress on Nov 7, those of us left will be talking about 11/9 instead of 9/11. Thats the day he sets the universe on fire.
At present he doesn’t have to ask Congress no matter who has the majority.

Posted by: pb | Oct 6 2006 1:30 utc | 16

Guthman Bey:
Jewboy George?! The words seem so happy to roll of your tongue. I must be mistaken.
Jimmy Jazz :
I agree. It may well be that they’re working behind a “contract” of sorts, but I think they’re ready to operate through the likes of Clinton and Kerry and Webb at this point. Unlike the folks they’re playing with this gay bashing smear, they understand that their own interests are not those of the cabal.

Posted by: John Francis Lee | Oct 6 2006 1:40 utc | 17

Something queer is going on all right but at least nobody’s talking about nuking Iran these days.
Just because they’re not talking about it, doesn’t mean they’re not getting ready to do it. This Foley thing actually helps in that regard, by diverting attention from the growing signs — like the deployments to the Gulf.
Which, of course, creates an opening for some rather paranoid conspiracy theories.

Posted by: billmon | Oct 6 2006 2:51 utc | 18

nuking iran by this point would require assertion of accumulated executive authority trumping all the usual protocol. an act of complete madness.
I can’t believe it. I also can’t believe I would now support an american military junta.

Posted by: slothrop | Oct 6 2006 3:48 utc | 19

This whole Foley thang has me quite disturbed. It may indeed take down the GOP, but it’s still a colossal distraction. What million other dirty little things are they doing while we’re busy gawking at this bloody car crash of a scandal?
Hannah: Please God, can’t we stop now?
(The Night Of The Iguana)

Posted by: Dr. Wellington Yueh | Oct 6 2006 3:51 utc | 20

Anyone else think Hastert is looking, physically and career-wise, more and more like Tip O’Neil?
Is there a pool going on the date and time Rove gets named in this affair? If I were a small-time player like Hastert, I would have consulted a pro fixer like Rove pretty quickly.

Posted by: biklett | Oct 6 2006 4:11 utc | 21

“What million other dirty little things are they doing while we’re busy gawking at this bloody car crash of a scandal?”
Her’s some ‘dirt’ to ponder:
Bill Davis at Commondreams.

Posted by: pb | Oct 6 2006 4:29 utc | 22

Something queer is going on all right but at least nobody’s talking about nuking Iran these days.
………………………..
Senator Warner, just back from Iraq, warns Iraq is moving “sideways” and “if this thing has’nt come to fruitation and this level of violence is not under control, I think it’s a responsability of our government to determine: is there a change of course we should take?”
………………………..
Dan Murphy reports on Condi’s current trip to client U.S. nations, redefining (in effect) democracy as “moderate” states, aka interests outside Iran’s sphere of interest:
Rice has also adopted a new rhetorical approach on this trip, in which America’s allies in the region are cast as moderates, and its enemies as extremists, something she said was demonstrated by the war in Lebanon.
“When Lebanon happened … [we] got in very stark relief a clear indication that there are extremist forces and moderate forces” in the region, she told reporters. “The countries that we are meeting … is a group that you would expect to support the emerging moderate forces in Lebanon, in Iraq, and in the Palestinian territories.”
“The President isn’t going to stop pressing for democracy because he believes that ultimately it’s the force that will stabilize the Middle East most,” Rice said. “But it does not mean that even if states … are not yet transformed to democracy that we’re not going to have relations with them and that we’re not going to work together to resist extremist forces in the region.”
Stacher says her comments at the start of her trip make the current administration policy on the region look similar to those of past
administrations, when the stability and support of allies was more important than promoting change. “The Bush administration has redesigned policy toward the region. Nondemocratic states that are friendly are being painted as moderates and unfriendly undemocratic states are being branded as extremists. The rhetoric is about to reflect reality”
None of the Arab countries Rice is talking to on this trip – Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Oman – are democracies, and most severely limit free speech and political organization.
…………………………..
The Eisenhower naval strike flotilla, under WH orders steams toward the Persian Gulf.
…………………………..
So, currently the Iraq Study Group, headed by Bush “fixer” James Baker is going to break the news, and tell chief clearing brush that the gig is up. That the Maliki government can’t, even if it wanted to, or was allowed to, dismantle the militia structure in Iraq — that they see the U.S. getting tired, and so are holding up any Production Sharing Agreements, in the oil industry, from being signed anytime soon. And furthermore, that (Kissinger style) Shiite power in Iraq cannot be trusted, being as it is’nt, but it is, in the shadow of Iran. The deal in Iraq has been compromised and profited on by the old nemisis Iran, costing a cool 2 billion a week with nothing to show. So, in order to save the deal in Iraq, you change the enemy, call them “extremists”, of the Iranian persuasion — forcing the Iraqi government into the position of being identified, because of its tacid support of its own “extremists” militias, which being now “extremists”, must be under “Iranian” control. The question then becomes for the Iraqi government, to either throw off the “extremists” “Iranian controled” militias, or face a U.S. sponcored coup of some Allawi/Sunni variety. And just to drive the point home James A Baker may offer Maliki either the lead or the silver — by a proxie demonstration, before the election, in Iran — and call it “clearing brush” to the chief himself.

Posted by: anna missed | Oct 6 2006 8:27 utc | 23

@anna missed
by george, I think your on to something, jolly good show, mate.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Oct 6 2006 10:42 utc | 24

@jfl
A scene of bucolic bliss: albino Guthman is sitting with bloodshot eyes in his moldy underground bunker in Idaho, surrounded by rats and Nazi paraphernalia, and throws darts at a faded George Soros poster on the wall. The preludes by Liszt are playing in the background.

Posted by: Guthman Bey | Oct 6 2006 11:19 utc | 25

My guess is that the blog referred to was set up for the express purpose of publishing the IM’s. (don’t know all the dates, etc.)
As for the timing – outing, whistleblowing, attacking someone with dirt to good effect – these stories have a rhythm of their own, dependent on a multiplicity of tiny events that aren’t in the control of anyone in particular, specially not that of the potential outer. At some point, the time has come, some ‘facts’ cannot be ignored, interest around it congeals, other parties perceive a stake, etc.
The taint of ‘pedophilia’ (the association made, independently of whether it is legitimate or not) is terrible news for the Republicans. Deathly. Adult homosexuality (e.g. Gannon), adult ‘regular’ prostitution, is absolutely trivial in comparison.
Some seem to think this scandal represents an opportunity for the Democrats – they should run with it or whatever. That is probably a mistake. In the mind of Joe Public, more pointedly Jane Public, simply belonging to the political class is enough to condemn them too, in this case. I’d be very surprised if this was a Democratic ‘plot’. I see it like Rowan – someone, somewhere, had it in for Foley.
And everyone ignores that Condi Rice has been shown to have lied – again.
(9/ 11)

Posted by: Noirette | Oct 6 2006 23:04 utc | 26

And everyone ignores that Condi Rice has been shown to have lied – again.
(9/ 11)

foley sure diminished the fallout from woodward’s book, a suspicion of mine all along
nice wrap anna missed

Posted by: annie | Oct 7 2006 0:43 utc | 27

Guthman Bey :
I was afraid of that. Do you live near Hailey? I’d read that Ezra Pound was to have been buried there, his birthplace, but I read all the headstones in the cemetary there and could not find his.

Posted by: John Francis Lee | Oct 7 2006 2:37 utc | 28

Was’nt it James Baker who said of the Iraq/Iran war – “we do’nt have a dog in this fight”
And the Iranians (who lost a million people in that war) probably can’t wait to tell him the same.

Posted by: jony_b_cool | Oct 7 2006 4:00 utc | 29