Morning Constitutional

.
My fellow Americans,

One of the things I find most fascinating about political strategy is it's apparent paradoxical nature.  In almost every case, the more transparently mendacious, outrageously slanderous, and obviously patronizing a political accusation or statement is, the more likely it will be accepted by the orthogonians as being honest and sincere.  I've always intuitively known that and my instinct was confirmed in my first campaign back in 1946 agasint incumbent John Voorhis, in which I blatantly lied about his communist sympathies.  The more extreme my accusations were, the more the voters believed them. Needless to say, I won.

So, when I see as utterly ridiculous a stunt as the new tea-people in congress opening the session by reading the constitution, I have to applaud.  This is something even the most depraved Hollywood PR agent couldn't have dreamed up.  It's elegance lies in it's simplicity. On the surface, it seems innocent enough.  What could be more American than starting congress by reading the seminal document in American history?

And therein lies the pearl of aggressive genius.  By not only reading the constitution, but making it clear that it's never been done before in the entire history of the US government, it politicizes the act and allows the tea people to claim ownership of the constitution.  And so, ispo facto, they must be the only ones who are dedicated to it and to protecting America's freedoms and liberty.  The implication is clear: if the left truly believed in and supported the constitution, they would have done this a long time ago.  But they didn't.  Why?  The answer is obvious.  The left must consist of anti-American barbarians dedicated to overthrowing our freedoms.  After all, the devil doesn't read the bible.

The problem for the tea-people who want to adhere to a strict interpretation of the constitution is twofold.  First, there are the embarrassing little bits and pieces such as Article 1, section 2 and a few other not-very-flattering parts. Secondly, they also run the risk that reading the constitution in full may begin to awaken some curiosity in the minds of the public and spark the realization that some of their stated positions may not adhere to the spirit of the document (particularly in regards to application of the 1st, 4th, 8th, 11th, 14th, and 16th amendments).  However, it's a pretty safe bet for the tea people that most Americans won't see through this clumsy stunt. The Great Silent Majority out there is far more interested in the sizzle than the steak.  Packaging, illusion, style over substance, hype - whatever you want to call it, the rubes in the heartland are persuaded by perception rather than reality, and by and large they are far too drunk or lazy to actually try and figure something out for themselves.  In that way the orthogonians are quite passive and will rarely question whether a pig is wearing lipstick or that someone is pissing on their shoes while calling it sweet summer rain. 

The only sad point in all of this is that no matter how hard they try, the tea-people will never be able to do as good a dramatic reading of the constitution as Capt. Kirk.

Nixon Approves

Bewitched

.
My fellow Americans,

It seems that even after an election, candidates (even losers) can still face slander, character assassination, and political attacks.  Christine O'Donnell, the simpleton, teabag senatorial candidate from Delaware (and who is not a witch), is being investigated by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) for misappropriation of campaign funds, and using the money for personal expenses.  It’s a serious charge, and one that takes me back to my time as a young, brash candidate facing a similar problem.

In 1952, as candidate for Vice President, I was blindsided by some rumors and whispers coming from Adlai Stevenson’s camp regarding some funny business with my campaign funds.  Let me be perfectly clear: these were completely false, and so of course I denied it.  But the pinkos in the press were out to crucify me and they just wouldn't let up.  Soon even Ike was starting to doubt me.

Now, you have to understand that painting a candidate with a brush of corruption is a political strategy as old as time itself. While I preferred attacking patriotism and character, I also occasionally used the spectre of financial shenanigans.   And even if done in a clumsy manner, say the way the republicans tried to smear the Clintons with Whitewater in the 90's, it is effective.

For the person targeted by these accusations, the trick is in how to combat it. One way is to take the high-road; ignore the charges and hope that doing so denies them any legitimacy and they go away.  The alternative is the aggressive approach in which one vigorously denies them to prove themselves innocent.  In ’52 I first tried the former.  However, ignoring the charge didn’t work because the press kept the accusations alive.  As a result, the pressure mounted and so I was forced into the latter and had to publicly defend myself.

I had to make my case, convince the public and Ike that I was innocent and exonerate myself, or resign as Ike's running mate.  Since I have never been a quitter, and leaving before the election is completed is abhorrent to every instinct in my body, I had no choice. So I demanded and got 30 minutes of TV time to refute the charges.  I knew that this was a one-shot deal. 

When the red-light on the television camera turned on, I began.  I artfully laid out my finances, warts and all, for scrutiny.  I accounted for every cent, showing both the origin and destination of my personal income, and showed where the campaign funds were allocated.  I pointed out how I owned an average car, had a mortgage, and how my wife didn’t have a mink coat but a respectable republican cloth coat.  In other words, I showed that I was just like the Joe Sixpacks and Sally Lunchpails out there watching me: an average Orthogonian being unfairly attacked by privileged Franklins.  Then, as a coup de grace, I admitted to one potentially slight violation of campaign contributions: I mentioned how a donor gave my family a dog, and I stood up with as much fire and grit as I could, choking back emotion, and defiantly stated that since my girls seemed to like it, we were keeping him.  And that dog saved my ass.

Although it was the most effective speech I ever gave and the response was overwhelmingly positive, it was the most humiliating experience of my life.  Easily the bitterest pill I've ever had to swallow - even worse than getting out-schemed by that damned Kennedy in '60 or being mocked by the press in my California gubernatorial defeat in '62. I would have much preferred to have the rumor die quietly.

But Ms. O’Donnell doesn’t seem to be bothering with trying to ignore things.  When news of the investigation broke out, she immediately took the offensive and vehemently denied any wrongdoing by issuing a statement saying the charges are politically motivated.  She’s adopting a scattergun defense, taking aim at everyone from her own campaign workers to Vice President Joe Biden, accusing them all of targeting her in some liberal conspiracy to bring her down, stating,

"You have to look at this whole thug-politic tactic for what it is [...] Given that the king of the Delaware political establishment just so happens to be the vice president of the most liberal presidential administration in U.S. history, it is no surprise that misuse and abuse of the FBI would not be off the table"

Now, on the surface it would seem that Ms. O’Donnell is doing exactly what I did nearly 60 years ago - bravely facing down the charges. Except that her defense isn't one.  Unlike me, she hasn't offered any evidence or facts to prove her innocence.  No financial records or proof of income.  In fact, all she's done is accuse others of ganging up on her.  It's a risky tactic because it's far too transparent and stinks of a guilty person desperately trying to deflect the truth.  

Not only that, but her victimization claim seems shaky. Back in '52 when it happened to me I was an active candidate for Vice President addressing an assault during a hotly contested campaign. O'Donnell has already lost her campaign, having been stomped and publicly exposed as a lightweight, and is fading into the obscurity of being a political asterix.  She’s no more than a punch line to a joke about embarrassing American political campaigns, and has about as much relevance as a half-eaten egg salad sandwich left on a bench in some rural bus depot.

In other words, her claiming to be some sort of victim of a cabal run by evolutionists, masturbators, and papists simply doesn’t make any sense.  A "conspiracy" defense only works for people who are already (or potentially) in a position of power.

Sure, it's completely absurd and makes her seem more of a paranoid nincompoop than she already is.  But, bless her dimwitted heart, at least she’s fighting.  Who cares if she’s doesn't have the capacity to understand that the idea she’s being targeted is ludicrous?  She’s going down swinging and sticking to her pig-ignorance.  Does it matter that she's already admitted guilt by confirming that she spent campaign funds on her rent since she claimed her home doubled as her headquarters?  Not in the least. We already knew she was completely stupid, but at least now we also know the little dullard has guts.  And that’s got to count for something.

My advice to Ms. O'Donnell is to get a dog.   Preferably a Cocker Spaniel.

Nixon Approves

Extreme Justice

.
My fellow Americans,

Many of you may not be aware of a significant decision by the US Supreme Court today. In United States vs Comstock, the Supreme Court voted 7 -2 (with Justices Thomas and Scalia dissenting) that the federal government has the right to hold a person convicted of a federal sexual offense beyond the completion of their prison term if they are deemed to be a still be "sexually dangerous." According to the Justice Breyer (writing in the majority opinion),

[Congress has the right to enact laws] to punish [sexual criminals'] violation, to imprison violators, to provide appropriately for those imprisoned and to maintain the security of those who are not imprisoned by who may be affected by the federal imprisonment of others.

In other words, the federal government can keep someone in prison for as long as they want. Provided they claim he is still a danger.

Now, much of the legal gibberish in the actual decision involves requiring the federal authorities prove that the individual is still a threat and that releasing him would cause a threat to the community. On the surface, that seems to be in agreement with the spirit of the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th amendments (all of which cover laws and legal rights).  But let's be real.  For all practical purposes what it does is allow the government to accuse, try, and convict a person of a crime they haven't yet done but may commit.  It's pre-emptive justice: you will be sentenced to an indefinite extension of your prison term because it is likely you will commit a crime in the future.

It's beautiful.  A sublime act of Orwellian philosophical gymnastics. The government will proactively convict people on their potential to commit crime in order to protect the innocent rubes out there. Oh sure, some of the liberals may yowl about freedom, due process, and fascism, but nobody will take them seriously.  The Orthogonians will support it because it's about protecting them from sex-crazed perverts looking to repeatedly sodomize their children and use them for other unspeakable pleasures of the flesh.  Oppression is easy if you can sell it as protection.  Remember, the nazis didn't come into power by the muzzle of a gun, they did so by exploiting fear.

The more I think about this ruling the more I like it. And I mean I like it a lot.  It's a good Nixon ruling, and I only wish this would have been decided back in '68.  Think of what I could have done. I could have used the DOJ as my own personal hit-squad ensuring compliance of the press and keeping the radicals on the left in line by tossing them in the hoosgow because of the problems they might cause. My enemies list would have become a court docket for immediate prosecution. It's the exact system the Soviets and the Chinese had at their disposal to keep their people in line.  And it worked.  Hell, all I would have needed is a couple of shrewd Jew lawyers to help out John Dean, and we could have really cleaned house, throwing the radical hippies, treacherous intellectuals, and militant negroes in jail simply by showing they could commit crimes.  There would have been no Watergate hoopla because we wouldn't have been forced to go underground to take care of the problem.  All we'd have needed to do was grab Woodward & Bernstein, a few of those pinkos in congress, and other rabble-rousers and put them away.

Oh, if only I was born 40 years later.

Nixon Approves

Mexican Standoff

.
My fellow Americans,

As the protests and reactions to anti-Illegal Immigrant legislation in Arizona continue to swirl the lawyers are now getting ready to argue whether or not the law is constitutional.  If you stop and think about it, the fact that a law making illegal immigrants illegal may itself be illegal is kind of ironic.

The actual legislation has plenty of problems, and is most likely going to be struck down by the courts. Not only does it appear that it will encourage institutionalized racial profiling, but the provision mandating investigation of immigration status seems to violate the protection against unwarranted search and seizure guaranteed by the 4th amendment, quite probably rendering the law unconstitutional.

But let’s be honest with ourselves.  This law was never really about addressing Illegal Immigration.  There are already more than enough laws about illegal immigration on the books. This law is about whipping the flag-sucking dunderheads into a frenzy by telling them that it’s necessary to protect our sovereignty.  It’s just a shiny piece of foil dangled in front of a group of retards.  It plays on their latent fears and draws their attention while letting them raise a righteous anger and drape themselves in patriotic slogans.  More than that, it assures them that things are not their fault.  It’s because of the other guy.  In other words, it’s another ploy to make the Orthogonians feel like they are being victimized.

And it’s as old as time itself.  The ancient Hittites would constantly complain about those un-cultured Assyrians.  The Romans used the Gauls as their whipping boy.  The Soviets would scapegoat the filthy and lazy Uzbeks.  And back in the 1800's we had the Irish and the Italians.  And now we have the Mexicans.

It’s a subtle political strategy I used throughout my political life. I knew that the boogeyman of communism is fine, but it’s a conceptual threat.  It’s not real. Not tangible.  So, I also used real scapegoats, like hippies and civil rights activists.  Real threats that the Silent Majority can see, hear, and smell.  And just like hippies and civil rights activists, Mexicans are a good release for the inherent Prejudice and Fear of the Orthogonians.  Someone real on whom we can blame all our problems.  The economy stinks?  Well it’s because the Mexicans are taking all the jobs.  Healthcare is broken?  It’s because the Mexicans are flooding the emergency rooms without paying.  Too many drugs?  It’s because the Mexicans are pushing dope.  Teen pregnancy?  Those hot-blooded Mexicans are sexing up our daughters.  Traffic? All the damn Mexicans on the roads.  Global warming?  Well, Mexicans eat a lot of beans, which causes them to fart, which increased greenhouse gasses.

You get the picture.

And it works. We conservatives have always been able to solidify our base by manufacturing a common enemy, then using it as a way to scare the feeble-minded into supporting us. It’s the political analogy of the second law of thermodynamics. In physics kinetic energy increases in proportion to entropy.  In politics, power increases in proportion with fear.

Which brings us back to the Arizona law.  This law was written with the 2010 mid-term elections in mind, and was intentionally designed to fail.  The Orthogonians out there waving their flags and shouting patriotic platitudes are just sheep, bleating along in their willful ignorance as they’re herded by the GOP.  And when this law is overturned the republicans intend to convert the anger of the rubes into votes against the liberals who coddle  immigrants.

Manipulation never goes out of style.  Because there will never be a shortage of nincompoops out there.

Nixon Approves

Sen. Jim Bunning: A Profile In Courage

.
My fellow Americans,

It isn't often that we get to witness a lone man display extreme tenacity in the face of adversity.  Particularly not in the world of politics, where one's integrity is often compromised several times in an hour in order to help expedite a lunch order.

Happily, today we get to see a supreme example of a man who absolutely does not care about anything but himself.  A man whose narcissism and delusion are so grand that it defies description. A man who perfectly exemplifies the attitude of "I don't care about you.  Fuck you."

Senator Jim Bunning, (R. KY) is nothing if not a giant middle finger to every American who is struggling during this long recession.  By single-handedly holding up the passage of a bill to extend unemployment and COBRA benefits to more than a million needy Americans, Sen. Bunning is showing a level of disdain and contempt for the common man not seen since Marie Antoinette.

 

This is the world's smallest violin playing just 

for the unemployed slobs out there.

And why should Sen. Bunning give a wet rat's ass about you, your kids, or that guy down the street who lost his job? Sure, it's easy to simply categorize him (as the Democrats and liberal press are doing) as a heartless a man who has nothing but hatred and scorn for people out of work. And my comment about that is, so what?  I applaud Jim Bunning for standing up for himself.  Whether his cause is right or not doesn't matter.  Every now and then a politician has to stand up and remain strong, regardless of what the issue is.  Even if it means dragging the country through prolonged agony.

However, the most delightful aspect of all is when Sen. Bunning read a letter from "Robert in Louisville" who is supposedly out of work, but supportive of Bunning's stalling the unemployment assistance bill.  It's one of the oldest lies in the book (and one I used with great success in my Checkers speech): you fabricate some poor slob without two nickles to rub together to represent all those working class Joes who will get screwed by your policy, and claim they wrote you to say that even though you're making them suffer, they support you and will sacrifice for you because you're doing The Right Thing.  And the rubes buy it every time. It's sublime.  It's elegant.  It's the Nixon way. 

Of course, ultimately Sen. Bunning will lose his crusade, and the bill will pass.  And he'll slink back to the hills of Kentucky, where he'll dream of the good old days of lounging on a porch, sipping Juleps while listening to the dulcet sounds of the darkies working the fields, and dreaming of spending half an hour in the dusky embrace of his octaroon housekeeper.  But in the mean time, Jim Bunning has reminded us all of what America once was.  A nation of God Fearing White Christians who could do what they wanted without concern over sacrificing the poor, the colored, or the immigrants, and who could have any who disagreed labeled a communist and thrown in jail.

Ah, nostalgia!

Nixon Approves

Slap-Fight in the GOP

.

My fellow Americans,

As you could probably tell, my mood of late hasn’t been good, what with the shenanigans of that dingbat from Alaska and her family, and my ex-Chief of Staff sliding into the great beyond. It’s felt like the summer of 1974 all over again, only this time without the solace of sycophants like Henry, Tex, and the Bobs to help me out. Thank god for bourbon and anti-depressants. 

But there is a bit of light peeking through the clouds.  There is nothing that can bring me out of my doldrums quicker than a good old fashioned political slap-fight . The deceit, duplicity, degradation, and depravity that comes when politicians start calling one another’s character into question is like slamming pure, uncut bliss.

Unfortunately, it’s the republican party which is apparently undergoing a bit of an identity crisis.  Tempers are rising and egos getting bruised as the hacks, misanthropes, ward-heelers, waterheads, and dopes all start pointing fingers, making accusations, and claim the mantle of top conservative. And in doing so, they’ll eventually need to look back to how we used to do it back in the day.  Bring out the big guns.  Political campaign is nothing but controlled slander, and the one who does it the best usually wins.   

The trick is to be completely unrestrained and uninhibited about how you assassinate the character of your competitor. I know it sounds absurd, but the more unbelievable, bold, and shameless your attacks, the more the rubes will buy it. It’s an art form, and one that the republicans, sadly, seem to have forgotten.  Look at 2008.  The McCain campaign made a few minor assaults on Obama’s integrity and allegiance (mainly in the form of clumsy and uninspired speeches), but they were so feeble, it was clear they were lies. Now compare that with my first campaign in 1946, when I mercilessly slandered Jerry Voorhis by calling him a communist.  Of course he wasn’t a communist, and of course the people knew he wasn’t.  But my brave strategy of calling him one paid off, and I whipped him like a runaway slave.  Why?  Because the outrageous and contemptible lies fed the public’s desire to believe.  Truth, like compassion, has no place in politics.

The sad thing is that none of the current crop of dimwits in the republican party know what a real conservative is anyway.  Now, Barry Goldwater, there was a real conservative.  I knew Barry Goldwater.  I served my country with Barry Goldwater.  Barry Goldwater was a friend of mine. And I can say with complete confidence that Rush Limbaugh is no Barry Goldwater.

Nixon: Approves