Serious Journalist Mark “Just The Facts” Halperin:
Things McCain can do when running against Obama that Clinton has been unable to do well or at all: [...]
6. Allow some supporters to risk being accused of using the race card when criticizing Obama. [...]
11. Emphasize Barack Hussein Obama’s unusual name and exotic background through a Manchurian Candidate prism.
Referring to how McCain should treat Michelle Obama’s gaffes, Halperin calls for “unrestricted censure.”
Sauce. Goose. Gander. A little unrestricted censure is probably just what Halperin’s little soul could use right now.
Seems to me like Halperin needs a trip to Shusterville. Two weeks should be just about long enough to remind him, and others, not to go there again.
Update from Halperin and/or Time:
Note: This is analysis, not advice.
You need to go fuck yourself. This is both.
February 26, 2008 at 10:40 am
[...] I think The Editors put it best in their response to Halperin’s “plausible deniability” update (Halperin wrote in [...]
February 26, 2008 at 10:59 am
So Cindy McCain’s drug addiction and thievery, fair game, nicht wahr?
McCain’s Keating 5 problem?
McCain’s extensive ties to lobbyists?
McCain’s years-long confinement in a place that would drive any sane man crazy?
Crazy old man?
Gooks?
The 100 Years War?
Tax cuts, for’em, against ‘em, both?
Older than fucking dirt?
Cheating on first wife?
Cheating on second wife?
Visits to gay bathhouse?
Killed a man in Reno just to watch him die?
Black baby, black baby, blackomexislamofascist baby!
February 26, 2008 at 11:22 am
“Whether John McCain is a hypocritical loose cannon who cannot fly a Navy jet without crashing it and selling our brave boys out at the Hanoi Hilton for sex favors is a debate I am glad to have…”
February 26, 2008 at 11:26 am
6. Allow some supporters to risk being accused of using the race card when criticizing Obama. […]
Mr. Halprin, after talking this over with Haldiman, Erlichman, Mitchell and Rebozo, the feeling around the table was unanimous that we want to welcome you to join the Nixon team the very second you arrive down here.
February 26, 2008 at 11:32 am
Let me add to the above:
“I cannot emphasize enough, how much respect I have for John McCain, his 100 years of service, and his lobbyist lady friend, but whether John McCain is a hypocritical loose cannon who cannot fly a Navy jet without crashing it and selling our brave boys out at the Hanoi Hilton for sex favors is a debate I am glad to have…”
February 26, 2008 at 11:34 am
Yes, sorry about that, I missed the essential preamble.
February 26, 2008 at 11:38 am
“Some say John McCain is a man who, given half a chance to prostitute himself repeatedly to gain the Republican nomination, would also sell his mother and ex-wife/wives for that chance. But *I* have too much respect for him to consider saying that, no matter how true it may be!”
February 26, 2008 at 11:42 am
So what is the deal with him being “Halperin” in the quoted material and “Halprin” in the rest of the post. Confederate Yankee, is that you???????
February 26, 2008 at 11:46 am
D’oh!
February 26, 2008 at 12:42 pm
[...] too, hope this. Na ga ha pa. [...]
February 26, 2008 at 12:46 pm
I am also disgusted by the reports that John McCain was in the pocket of his campaign ocntributors. I believe that a man with 125 years of service to our great nation, and a man with a lovely lobbyist lady friend, has more discretion than to perform political favors for campaign contributors.
My candidacy is about moving beyond partisan accusations that John McCain granted political favors in exchange for sexual favors from his lobbyist lady friend.
February 26, 2008 at 12:46 pm
This is fun!
February 26, 2008 at 1:06 pm
You need to go fuck yourself. This is both.
And this is poetry.
February 26, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Who could forget this classic Halperin moment?
February 26, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Mark Halperin: for those who can’t handle the raw, unapologetic iconoclasm of Cokie Roberts.
What a fuckin’ tool. And what’s with the inverse relationship between the self-regard evident in one’s smirk and the justification for said self-regard?