Zell “‘I am a Democrat because we are the party of hope'”:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3600710.stm Miller says John Kerry has been “more wrong, more weak and more wobbly than any other national figure”:http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/9557575.htm. Except maybe that guy who delivered Clinton’s keynote a decade or so ago and is delivering Bush’s now. What’s his name again?
Miller could have used some bits of the “Bush Twins Speech”:http://www.slate.com/id/2106067/ to better effect than they did. “And as to my fifty year career in the Democratic Party … Well, when I was young and irresponsible, I was young and irresponsible!” Would’ve played much better.
Anyway, all in all a ringing endorsement of the the cardinal conservative virtues of steadfastness, loyalty, constancy and, in the words of “another well-known Democrat”:http://www.andrewsullivan.com/index.php?dish_inc=archives/2004_08_29_dish_archive.html#109409968493733425 a “partisan,” “crude” and “gob-smackingly vile” effort “jammed with bald lies, straw men, and hateful rhetoric.” Vote for Bush because _Zell Miller_ told you Kerry flip-flops and we shouldn’t “change horses in midstream”:http://www.buzzflash.com/filmfan/04/08/fil04002.html.
{ 22 comments }
jdw 09.02.04 at 6:39 am
Careful. You’re liable to get yourself shot.
(Seriously, I’ve kinda thought this for awhile, and now regret that I didn’t say anything, since it certainly would’ve looked prescient: Is Zell Miller maybe a couple of years senile? It doesn’t look any better for Republicans that they’ve embraced him, but that certainly looks to me like the easiest way to explain Miller’s behavior.)
robbo 09.02.04 at 6:49 am
Watch your back if Zigzag Zell ever calls you a “good friend”:
From http://miller.senate.gov/speeches/030101jjdinner.htm
Introduction of Senator John Kerry
Democratic Party of Georgia’s
Jefferson-Jackson Dinner
March 1, 2001
My job tonight is an easy one: to present to you one of this nation’s authentic heroes, one of this party’s best-known and greatest leaders – and a good friend.
He was once a lieutenant governor – but he didn’t stay in that office 16 years, like someone else I know. It just took two years before the people of Massachusetts moved him into the United States Senate in 1984.
In his 16 years in the Senate, John Kerry has fought against government waste and worked hard to bring some accountability to Washington.
Early in his Senate career in 1986, John signed on to the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Deficit Reduction Bill, and he fought for balanced budgets before it was considered politically correct for Democrats to do so.
John has worked to strengthen our military, reform public education, boost the economy and protect the environment. Business Week magazine named him one of the top pro-technology legislators and made him a member of its “Digital Dozen.”
John was re-elected in 1990 and again in 1996 – when he defeated popular Republican Governor William Weld in the most closely watched Senate race in the country.
John is a graduate of Yale University and was a gunboat officer in the Navy. He received a Silver Star, Bronze Star and three awards of the Purple Heart for combat duty in Vietnam. He later co-founded the Vietnam Veterans of America.
praktike 09.02.04 at 7:10 am
Kieran, you missed the part where Miller challenged Chris Matthews to a duel.
paul 09.02.04 at 7:15 am
I am having a hard time getting my mind around this Zell Miller since I lived in Georgia when he was Governor (back when he was young and irresponsible, ie a Democrat) and I find myself wondering what I missed. Was he a whackjob then? Or did that happen when he changed teams?
Shai 09.02.04 at 7:30 am
that hardball interview was hilarious. i dont think he heard anything after he thought chris mathews accused him of calling kerry a supporter of starving babies.
bad Jim 09.02.04 at 9:46 am
Look upon the face of compassionate conservatism and despair.
Or not.
Shai 09.02.04 at 12:34 pm
judging by their web pages, you’ll notice in the page 1 story the major newspapers are mostly presenting the “barrage” at kerry and a duplication of quotations from the speech with nothing really critical inbetween. generally he said she said sort of stuff. this includes the new york times, asociated press, etc.
there were a lot of critical comments about obvious inconsistencies on cnn the television station, but you wouldn’t know that looking at their web page. obvious inconsistencies pointed out by pundits do find their way into the “hard” news stories, but it’s about 20 talking points per 1 contradiction or alternative characterization
some of this other stuff is eventually picked up, but it should be obvious that several news cycles is enough to run with anything, whatever eventual correction.
Matt 09.02.04 at 12:47 pm
I liked that he claimed that Kerry would be bad in the war on terror becuase he’d not supported boondoggle like the B-1 or the partriot missle, or the F-14 (when? when we thought it might be needed, or now, when it has no mission?) Note, of course, that none of these has any role at all in the “war on terror” and that the B-1, especially, was never an effective wepon. (I’m quoting from Bainbridge’s account here, so I may have it wrong.)
raj 09.02.04 at 1:00 pm
Don’t forget, Miller is the senator from a welfare state. That is Georgia gets more money from the US gov’t than it pays in taxes. Miller is nothing more than a number of the welfare queens that people like him try to denigrate.
Phedre 09.02.04 at 1:55 pm
Last night’s convention was a hatefilled bitterfest and Zell was the King’s Wazir whipping the mob to frenzy. What were they swilling?
Then Zell went on to Chris Mathews and I felt a slippage and reality skewed and everything became fauxreal.
lazyman 09.02.04 at 2:04 pm
matt, don’t forget that the Patriot missile of the Gulf War I era was revealed to have been far less effective than it seemed at the time (10% success rate).
Moreover, the Patriot c. “Gulf War II-The Vengeance For What Those Different People Did” was responsible for shooting down one friendly (British Tornado) and had another battery shot at
by a friendly (US F-16) upon which it had locked.
(see : 60 Minutes report from earlier this year.)
Opposing weapons systems that (a) don’t work right in one case and (b) place friendlies in further danger after they are updated is probably a position that’s supported by most people, except those who really *do* hate the troops ;)
I also don’t see where he came down hard on Bush’s SecDef who canned a high-profile weapons system.
The fearmongering and mindless rah-rah boosterism of weapons systems is bad enough, but the lack of commitment to truth and standards of evidence is appalling in its own right.
billyfrombelfast 09.02.04 at 2:15 pm
Yeah, that speech was the most disgusting spittle-flecked spectacle I’ve seen in a while. It was sick. And then his insane appearance with Chris Matthews. I’m at a loss.
Peter Murphy 09.02.04 at 2:47 pm
The episode gave Daily Kos a kick FARKwise. Yes, Senator Miller does LOOK like Senator Palpatine.
Justin @ RSR 09.02.04 at 4:06 pm
Here are 5 points why Zell’s speech will win Bush the election:
see here
geeno 09.02.04 at 4:19 pm
Huh!?
How about point 6 – undecided voters are now out of play for the GOP, just like after Buchanan’s speach in ’92.
Justin, I have to tell you that I was wondering at several points last night whether Zell Miller was a trojan horse that the Democrats sent to destroy the Republicans.
Kieran Healy 09.02.04 at 4:26 pm
Hey Justin –
I’m prepared to give the political reasons you “wrote about”:http://www.rightsideredux.com/archives/2004_09_01_archive.html#109413542292278229 a bit of consideration. But I have a question: How seriously should I take your analysis given that in “your previous post”:http://www.rightsideredux.com/archives/2004_09_01_archive.html#109404962446328828 you label Paul Krugman, John Galbraith and others “economic girly men” while citing as your authorities the likes of Donald “Stalker” Luskin and Jim “Dow 36,000” Glassman?
jdw 09.02.04 at 4:42 pm
_How about point 6 – undecided voters are now out of play for the GOP, just like after Buchanan’s speach in ‘92._
I don’t think so. To be an undecided voter after four years of Bush means that you are a profoundly, heroically stupid person. I mean, Republicans have an excuse — they’re motivated by hatred and bloodlust. Some very intelligent people have been motivated by hatred and bloodlust to do great things.
(Which is another thing — it’s not like it’s hard to think of popular political movements led by rabid maniacs shrieking for blood. Why do liberals assume that it won’t play in Peoria? I think this is a very clever move by Republicans, who have caught the Dems flatfooted yet again.)
Anyway, anyone who’s still undecided is probably undecided because whatever thought is in their head is the last thing that they heard. If they were watching last night, they probably thought “Hmm, he makes some good points. And I didn’t know John Kerry hated America.”
PG 09.02.04 at 5:48 pm
Actually, I think people who are undecided at this point are undecided because their issues are split. With the war in Iraq, both candidates are for it, so that’s no help. If this hypothetical undecided is anti-choice (Bush) but also anti-Federal Marriage Amendment (Kerry), social issues may be a wash. On the economy and education, she likes vouchers (Bush) but doesn’t like having a higher middle class tax burden (Kerry).
Undecideds aren’t stupid, but the image of the party can become important to them, and they’re less likely to approve of spittle-flecked rage.
Justin @ RSR 09.02.04 at 6:04 pm
K-
The point of my previous post was to identify who these “economic girlie men” are. Krugman and Galbaith are decidedly pessimistic about the current economy. I think you made my point about Glassman and others. His previous prognostication of Dow 36,000 is obviously not “girlie” on it’s face, Krugman’s doom and gloom is (according to Arnold).
rea 09.02.04 at 6:26 pm
So, I take it, Justin, that you think the Dow really did go to 36,000 and all us “girly men” just didn’t notice? Is strutting, posturing macho really the key to effective economic policy?
jif 09.02.04 at 7:58 pm
Well, strutting and postering seems to be par for the course on all policy in the current admin. And Zowie! it’s practically 1999 out there!
yabonn 09.02.04 at 9:45 pm
In all zell’s looniness, i pretty much like the duel idea.
Think about the new intellectual universes that facing real violence would open to our turgid, milifetish rightwingers!
Think about the effects on civility in politics! “Take that back, or take a sword!”
You know, it really works. The last political duel in france was in the ’70 iirc (first blood, but yet). The assembly was perceptibly quieter for a while afterwards.
Great idea i tell you.
Comments on this entry are closed.