This is a repost of an attempted diary from last night* (see end of the diary). In that Diary I attempted to urge Daily Kos readers to call Race for the White House (212-790-2299) to ask David Gregory to explain why he thinks Obama needs to "lighten up" and MSNBC (212-664-7799)to lodge a protest over David Gregory's handling of this issue. What provoked the Rat? It might be the shallowness and artificiality of David Gregory's Race for the White House in general. Or it might be his sheer hypocrisy.  

For those of you who missed it, David Gregory suggested that Barack Obama needed to lighten up and laugh about The New Yorker Cartoon . On the same day, Maureen Dowd made a similar argument in the New York Times trying to resurrect (one can only presume) her stale jokes about Al Gore.  I still think it may be worth the while to call MSNBC just to make the point though the opportunity appears to be lost. Below the fold I explain what I tried to say last night

Last night, six local Obama supporters, including me and Mrs. Rat met in my living room in Clay township, a "suburb" of Portsmouth, Ohio to discuss what we can do for Obama. During the primaries, 60 people met in the local Irish Pub to coordinate plans for Obama here in Scioto County. Why 6 when we could have had 60? What does this say about Obama and Appalachian Ohio? And why should those of you who live in Columbus, Cleveland, or across the country in Colorado care about what goes on here in the region (Pike County, Adams County, Scioto County)? How hard is the Obama campaign willing to try here in Southern Ohio, home to mean Jean Schmidt?

This is Part II of a two part diary I began last night. Last night I discussed the history, definition and function of McCarthyism in American Politics. McCarthyism is the use of rumor, innuendo, false charges, smears, guilt by association (especially past association) to brand someone as a "Marxist" or a "Communist" in an effort to shut down debate on substantive issues. Interested readers are of course welcome to read Part I.

Today, I will devote some time to showing how "No Quarter" has adopted overt McCarthyist tactics, and mixed this tactic with racism. Unfortunately, writing this diary requires me to actually read "No Quarter" and to post some links to "No Quarter" to document my arguments (I leave it viewers discretion as tow whether or not to provide the site with traffic). Depending on response today, I may discuss the bizarre contradictions to the McCarthyist meme being pushed and the wild gyrations of the politics of "No Quarter".

This is Part I of what will be a two part Diary. Part II will be posted sometime tomorrow. Part I discusses McCarthyism, its role in American politics and explains why Obama is not a Marxist or any kind of leftist. Part II tomorrow will focus on the McCarthyist campaign of Larry Johnson and Susan UnPC against Obama.

In 1950, a relatively unknown (aside for his reputation of disregarding Senate rules) Senator from Wisconsin named Joe McCarthy made the following claim in a speech to the Women's Republican Club of Wheeling West Virginia:

"While I cannot take the time to name all the men in the State Department who have been named as members of the Communist Party and members of a spy ring, I have here in my hand a list of 205."

McCarthy's name later became synonymous with the practice of discrediting people who voiced criticism of capitalism or the U.S. by making unsubstantiated allegations of being a "communist."

There is, at present, in the pro-Hillary blogosphere (No Quarter, Talk Left, Hillbuzz, hillaryis44) a continuing, and in some cases heightened effort to deliberately destroy Obama's campaign. These sites (especially No Quarter and Hillbuzz) have made it clear that they are not interested in Democratic victory. It's unclear they are even interested in a Clinton victory. What their official connection to the Clinton campaign is is unclear, though it does appear that some of them are more closely tied to Clinton's official campaign than the DailyKos or Huffington Post is to the Obama campaign. There is also a clear difference in the kinds of attacks promoted. The official agenda of these sites now appears to be that of deliberately trying to elect McCain, so as to make the Democrats and Obama "pay" for dissing Hillary.

Normally, when I attribute words to someone and it is possible, I try to link directly to what they are saying. I won't do that in this diary because I now am against giving any web traffic at all to either Hillbuzz or Larry Johnson's No Quarter.

They have both now passed the point of despicable. These are not people to be reasoned with, mollified or placated in any size, shape or form. I don't pretend to know their motives or their real politics.

I will say this: their tactics, their smears and their lies are all evocative of the same tactics used by Old far right organizations such as the John Birch Society when it tried to portray Martin Luther King as a communist.

First, I realize this has been blogged and yes, I could have posted it as a comment. However, after thinking it through, I think it merits particular note.

As many on DKos know (especially if you Booman) Larry Johnson made This promise yesterday

New and dramatic developments. This is a heads up. I’ll post the news Monday morning by 0900 hours. Now I know why people who have seen the videotape say it is stunning. Barack’s headaches are only starting.

Glen Beck , at CNN, has written one of the strangest pieces I have ever seen on higher ed. It is largely incoherent and contradictory. When he does make a valid point it is  plainly wrong headed. And it is also mostly deliberate misrepresentation (not even Glenn Beck can be stupid enough to believe Harvard's faculty control its endowment).

Guess who Glenn Beck thinks is holding back what he calls Greater Shrewsbury Liberal Arts Community Technical College for Women (GSLACTCW)? Would you believe that the people who control Harvard's endowment are wantonly spending that money on left wing college professors? Would you believe that Harvard's faculty somehow decides what Harvard does with its endowment?

Booman has an interesting diary where he challenges posters to provide specific instances of sexism. Over at shakesville a blogger by the name of Melissa McKewan provides what she says are 93 examples of sexist and misogynistic attacks on Hillary Clinton. The current front page picture says a lot about what I think is wrong with many (not all) the accusations of sexism and misogyny against Clinton. It shows a photo of Hillary leaving a building after a campaign event through the service entrance. The implication being that Reuters (the news organization that took the photo) is trying to portray Clinton in a subservient role.

Below the fold, I try to explain why I think these people just have it wrong.

The short answer is no. The longer answer is it that econ stats are widely misunderstood and easily abused for political purposes. So it really does pay to understand them.

First of all, this is likely to be a pretty dry, boring diary. Few subjects have the lack of zing as National Income Accounting. Even bringing up the subject raises images of Ben Stein droning on about "Fiscal and Monetary Policy". So, Ferris, you are excused. The rest of you-if I can beg your indulgence and your patience-you might find this be worth the time and effort it takes to understand this issue.

If you want to self educate go to The BLS website which does a good job of explaining many complex issues.

In the midst of a war against extremist followers of Islam the rhetoric of Rod Parsley is both particulary disturbing and dangerous (my thanks to Roxpert for the link). If you watch the video, you will note how Parsley quite inaccurately mischaracterizes the history of US policy towards Islam. One wonders how this kind of footage will play in the capitals of some of our potential allies in the "war on terror" such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and even with Al Maliki.

More below

In a surprising move today that caused some surprise among both Democratic and Republican voters, former media celebrity Don Imus publicly announced his support of Hillary Clinton. Well known Clinton surrogate James Carville welcomed his support and pointed to his own previous defense of Don Imus. Carville indicated that this latest endorsement by Imus vindicated his past defense of Imus.

Correction below:

This diary started off as a reply Tibor75's diary on feminism and was derailed by server problem. As I thought about it, it occurred to me that my comments might deserve a diary, and so led me with a bit of wariness to try to address this issue in more detail than I could in a short comment.

This diary will be a short (and I hope clear) exposition of why nearly every economist thinks that eliminating the gas tax for three months is more than just cheal pandering-it's also a bad idea. I'll also talk a little about what is wrong with health care mandates. But before I get started, I thought I would share some shocking new photos of Bill and Hillary Doing what they do best.

This diary will be shorter than is normally required. But here I think is a chance to hit back at CNN. So please consider recommending and taking five minutes to send CNN an e-mail on  This hit piece on Obama and his connection to Reverend Wright.

Updated: Also write to verdict@msnbc.com to complain about Dan Abram's hour long non-story on Wright and Obama.

As I listened to Reverend Wright's Sunday night speech to the ACLU, his speech and later Q and A to the National Press Club, it struck me that on many particulars, he is not actually wrong. Some of his points are well founded and deserve to be part of the national discourse. The fact that they are not tells us a great deal about the national media. Because most of us on Daily Kos already take it for granted that Hagee is at least as bad(far, far worse IMO) I'll dispense with the normal gratuituous swipes at Tweety Bird and the rest of the corporate media (for now). Below, I try to put some context to Wright's remarks.

If like me, you get e-mails from both the Obama and Clinton campaign, you probably got an e-mail from "info@hillary.com" thanking you for your support. I don't believe anyone will read the reply I sent back, but I post it below.

No-once again you're wrong. you didn't win because of me, you won in spite of me. And during this evening's MSNBC coverage I learned one important thing from Chris Matthews,  your new found pet parrot (otherwise known as tweety bird).

The Clintons believe it is their party and they can do what they want to.

In this diary I want to make several points more clearly than I appear to have done on several other occasions. I have however, one overarching theme: the path to Democratic Victory does not lie in feeding the meme that Democrats lose elections for being "elitist" or "out of touch." Rather, the path to Democratic Victory lies in confronting and dispelling the meme, and redefining the vital center of American politics. I have issues with both Obama and Clinton, but on balance, I believe Obama is our best hope for achieving this end.