Republicans

I love the need of David Brooks and others to portray the teabaggers as "populist" and anti-big-government when there was absolutely no invasion of our civil rights during the Bush Administration -- from imprisonment without trial to warrantless wiretaps -- that these people had problems with.

But if someone like Brooks is going to call these people populists, at the very least, you'd think he'd be under an obligation to show how their beliefs help working people and if he can't show that, then who exactly their beliefs do help.

What I can't understand is why these teabagging activities are news. I mean, just because Obama won the election didn't mean the loyal (cough, cough) opposition suddenly ceased to exist.

The fact that they're still around and that you can collect a bunch of them together thanks to their nationwide propaganda network is no big deal. They're always going to be against anything the Democrats do but they're also in the minority -- so not only is their reaction predictable but it's irrelevant as well.

Frankly, since the GOP has run away from the negotiating table, it really doesn't matter what they think. Not. One. Bit. Health care reform is going to pass no matter how hysterical they become. They've relegated themselves to irrelevance.

So the head of the RNC is going around bad-mouthing government. You got supporters running around with 'tree of liberty' tee-shirts and others talking about the perils of government access to online medical records.

It's hard then to explain their earlier confidence when government was detaining people without trial and bugging their phones without warrants. No problem there.

So my question is, what happened?

A couple of people have commented on Ross Douthat's piece in the New York Times eulogizing the "democratic ideal" supposedly represented by Sarah Palin because she became a "success" (such as it was) even though she hadn't gone to "Columbia and Harvard".

Frankly, if you spend all your time in office representing the interests of the rich and powerful, it really doesn't matter if you were were born to a bunch of sharecroppers and went to a one-room school house.

I was happy to see all the ads in the buses and El's for the 'Young Chicago Republican' Event that took place on Monday. It's always nice to see them supporting public transportation in this way.

The write-up of the event from the Huffington Post had something that caught my eye.

First:

Sounds like it's retirement-time for Mark Shields. Here's his latest whopper:

I don't think bipartisanship is dead. I think you'll see it on health care. I think the possibility of an overwhelming majority in the Senate passing and backing health care. I think you'll see it elsewhere, as well.

If you can't get Republicans to vote on a Stimulus Package, who in their right mind would expect an "overwhelming majority" with their help on health care?

From the party that gave us Joe McCarthy and Ken Starr, suddenly they're turning squeamish when it comes to investigations? They actually thought they could make the following a condition for approving designee (now Attorney General) Eric Holder in the U.S. Senate:

Shortly before the [confirmation] vote, the tone of the debate turned sharp as some Republicans pushed for a pledge from Mr. Holder not to prosecute intelligence agents for using harsh tactics during interrogations.

Blagojevich-Madigan Democrats?:

"Paid for by the Republican National Committee". The ad originally pointed to this page on GOP.com. As seen on Taegan Goddard's Political Wire (of all places).

Nice to hear George Bush waxing lyrical on all the things he'll miss once he's vacated the White House.

Not to fear however, there'll be plenty of investigations and indictments to keep him occupied.

The Bush Administration, famous for its incompetence, is sure to screw up its ultimate challenge: covering up its record of misdeeds while in power.