The snazzy power and gossip site Politico gives us strange coverage of Sen. Marco Rubio’s State of the Union response. In case you’d missed it, the young senator was to offer a devastating counter to the President’s lengthy and probably un-constitutional Tuesday address.

What he delivered was Mitt Romney utterly without any polish. At one point the Senator’s nerves got so bad he had to step aside for a water bottle to wet his mouth. This was the bizarre highlight of an address gorged with the same bluster and falsehoods that careened Mittmentum into the permanent ditch of early 2012.

Politico witnessed the disaster. Being a responsible and political entity, it knew it had a job to do. How bad is this for Marco Rubio?

General consensus: Rubio water flap shall pass
Maggie Haberman | Politico

…“The water moment did not bother me,” said Republican strategist Bruce Haynes, of Purple Strategies. “I thought it made him human.”

When you have to gather a “General consensus,” you really need Republicans. GOP strategists and operatives, the more the better.

Alex Castellanos, another Republican operative at Purple, said, “I think it was great first step for Marco Rubio and a great first step for the Republican party.”

It was great? Twitter convulsing in hails of derision is generally awesome. If the scenery had collapsed in on him it would have been Reaganesque.

“Whatever they wanted out of it, I’m not sure they got,” said one Republican operative.

This is nearly sane. But no, Marco didn’t want to be a punchline (‘aqualunge’). Then again given how difficult it is to speak feet from a freshwater source, I’d say he managed fairly well.

“Response to the State of the Union is always one of the most difficult speaking engagements an elected official faces, with the klieg lights hammering down and no ability to get a water break or a breath because there is no audience reaction to allow for a break in the action,” said conservative strategist Greg Mueller.

As Congress tittered at one of the President’s comments, no one noticed him urinate in a bucket onstage. But for Greg Mueller.

“While the reach for water might be fodder for some late night comedians to have some fun with as they do all key politicians, bottom line is the heart-warming delivery of the speech wins out,” Mueller added.

How in the world did Gunga Din play the bugle in a hot desert? Far smaller grudges held he than a love for his fellow man. And that’s how you end up in a Kipling poem, sniff.

The Republican operative [Castellanos] said the water sip amounts little more than a media-driven distraction. The bigger takeaway is “a new generation of Republican that walked out on the stage last night.”

Havana Mittens. He comes equipped with the new ethnic but without the decades of suit raids and spit shining. The New Bungler, without an accomplishment to his name.

Why can’t conservatives understand comedy? No one knows. Yet they continue to make these weird, puzzling political cartoons. It’s mysterious. These things don’t make sense. They are misspelled. They are badly drawn. And still, I get the feeling your typical wingnut sees one of these and blows snot bubbles on himself. Why? The gods know.

As always, the first slot goes to Eric Allie.

His name is Todd Akin. I figure these sprites don’t actually like politics, they just like to draw pictures. Badly.

A political cartoonist’s life, how hard can it be? Take the controversy of the day, slap it with a “racist” sticker. Go to Starbucks, take another nap.

Chuck Asay takes a stand. Big Bird should starve. Or he’s an ethnic, take your pick.

In Chuck’s world, hippies run around and say pot smoking should be “safe, legal and rare.” Or they never do that, but marijuana is as bad as abortion. I don’t know.

A Republican president would jump in Israel’s tide of violence. And look at poor Bibi, drowning while America films a Tampax commercial. Makes you want to start a war, doesn’t it?

Continue Reading »

Charles Krauthammer writing in the Boston herald on the Benghazi attack: “An epic collapse of foreign policy.” Oh dear.

In the week following 9/11/12 something big happened: the collapse of the Cairo Doctrine, the centerpiece of President Barack Obama’s foreign policy. It was to reset the very course of post-9/11 America, creating, after the (allegedly) brutal depredations of the Bush years, a profound rapprochement with the Islamic world.

Chuck looked at all this and sneered that the “President must live in a world of his own.” That’s a funny charge coming from a crank who wholly invented the “Cairo Doctrine” at his darkened desk. And made it up it solely for the purpose of ripping his perceived enemy, the President. Feel free to criticize him for your haircut too, Chuck. And good luck getting a decent view of China or France through the lens of Egypt.

Chuck is an angry man with an agenda. Like many other wingnuts this election season, he’s got a plan. He’d like to wipe the President off the political map using this Benghazi tragedy.

The Islamic world is convulsed with an explosion of anti-Americanism. From Tunisia to Lebanon, American schools, businesses and diplomatic facilities set ablaze. A U.S. ambassador and three others murdered in Benghazi. The black flag of Salafism, of which al-Qaeda is a prominent element, raised over our embassies in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and Sudan.

The administration, staggered and confused, blames it all on a 14-minute trailer for a film no one has seen and may not even exist.

But he’s an idiot. Look at this picture of people in Lebanon protesting that non-existent scapegoat film:

Half a million citizens, buddy. Much as it hurts the Chucks to admit it, regular old peace-loving Muslims across the world have been insulted by the “Innocence of Muslims” clip. And one Muslim-bashing American is to blame for it all.

Why point this out? Because yesterday the wingnuts sought to turn the same Islamophobia to their own larger aims. Republicans held a congressional grandstander for the purposes of scoring cheap political points during an election. They sought to call the reaction to Benghazi a cover-up, as if the administration’s original thinking that the attack resulted from the protests was corrupt politics. It couldn’t be a mistake, they swore to themselves, and everyone else. Obama loves the Muslims too dangerously much.

So they gaveled a snipe hunt. They sought to tie Obama to Al Qaeda through an appeasement foreign policy. The President compromised national security by being nice to Muslims, they’d say, and now people are dead. But look what happened:

Through their outbursts, cryptic language and boneheaded questioning of State Department officials, the committee members left little doubt that one of the two compounds at which the Americans were killed, described by the administration as a “consulate” and a nearby “annex,” was a CIA base.

They exposed a CIA installation.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) was the first to unmask the spooks. “Point of order! Point of order!” he called out as a State Department security official, seated in front of an aerial photo of the U.S. facilities in Benghazi, described the chaotic night of the attack. “We’re getting into classified issues that deal with sources and methods that would be totally inappropriate in an open forum such as this.”

Thank you Rep. Chaffetz.

A State Department official assured him that the material was “entirely unclassified” and that the photo was from a commercial satellite. “I totally object to the use of that photo,” Chaffetz continued. He went on to say that “I was told specifically while I was in Libya I could not and should not ever talk about what you’re showing here today.”

When you freak out over a routine photo of an American installation, you give up the game. The hanging party so worried about national security compromised the country’s national security.

Roger Simon:

For over forty years now, the Watergate scandal — the June 1972 break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters and the subsequent cover-up by the Nixon administration — has been the sine qua non of American political malfeasance. It has been followed by myriad other “gates” affecting both parties but has never been superseded.

Until now. Benghazi or Benghazigate, as some call it, is worse. Far worse. Incomparably worse.

This idea is being passed around like a virus between the snotty kindergartners on the right. Mike Huckabee, Marsha Blackburn and Sean Hannity are all suggesting President Obama be impeached.

I’m having a hard time getting it. The argument escapes me. President Reagan can fail to protect 241 military personnel in Beirut, and shit happens. Got it. President Bush can fail to protect 3000 civilians on American soil, and that’s a tragedy. Check. But when President Obama fails to protect 4 people in Benghazi, he must be removed from office.

The high crimes and misdemeanors come from where?

. . the terrorist murder (not an electorally irrelevant burglary) of government officials, their reckless endangerment, the undermining of the Bill of Rights and free speech by our own administration in response to Islamist threats, and, ultimately, the complicity of that same administration, consciously or unconsciously, in the downfall of Western civilization.

I see no reason to graffiti a question mark over the facts. The President is conspiring with the Eastern hemisphere to take the Western one down. After that, you should know the end begins in Benghazi. With any luck.

. . quote When America Became an Islamic Republic unquote. That’s what it says. This can’t be news, I’d have memories of the constitutional convention. There would have been highlights. A Bill O’Reilly filibuster that fell on deaf ears, after which Rush Limbaugh set himself afire. We did allow him to burn, out of deep respect. No, the sweeping Islam did not happen. It’s just Pajamas Media.

. . author Salman Rushdie . . holed up to a life of seclusion, secure in the knowledge that while the Middle East’s mullahs wanted to kill him, the might of the United States would protect him and his freedom of speech.

Dutch parliamentarian Ayaan Hirsi Ali . . applied for asylum to the United States. Ali has lived in the US ever since, secure in the knowledge that American might would protect her and her freedom to speak out.

Paragraph one, paragraph two, the heroes. Paragraph three, the traitors.

. . Nakoula found himself taken into questioning at midnight a few days after the attacks, and subjected to a perp walk media photo op . . Already a resident of the United States, Nakoula has nowhere else to run and no assurances that American might will be used in his defense. It has already been used to expose and intimidate him, and anyone else who dares criticize Islam.

Poor Nakoula, the meth-dealing convict and bigoted serial prison rat. Just like our intellectuals and parliamentarians, he insults Muslims for the sheer fuck you in it. I don’t know why America doesn’t like this guy, he’s a hero. Free speech we revere not because it may be substantive but because it may be incendiary. Who better to illustrate that? No one better than this guy, with all the dead bodies to his credit. Mister Rogers doesn’t have the balls, sport. That’s what makes for icons, at least when you’re Pajamas Media. But the President is going to assassinate Nakoula and therefore hot tears:

Shortly before 4 a.m. Monday, officers from the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department escorted members of Nakoula’s family, who had their faces covered, out of the house and into police vehicles so they could rejoin Nakoula at an undisclosed location.

“They decided they would be safer where they could move about and live a normal life,” said Steve Whitmore, a spokesman for the Sheriff’s Department. “All we did was pick them up and reunite them with Mr. Nakoula.”

They taunted the Nakoulas with Muslim insults the whole ride. “My camel sits on your grandmother’s back,” the Deputy said. “It’s the only thing she ever shaves,” the Sheriff chimed in. The Bataan Death March featured likewise cruelty. This was less a security detail than it was a war crime.

Lessons in bad punditry, episode number 17,356. David Brooks has got his talking points loaded and no begging for civility will dissuade him from pulling the trigger.

For some context, let’s go back to 2009. Brooks made a case for shunning modern individualism. Narcissists (you) take heed, there are better ways to live your life:

In this way of living, to borrow an old phrase, we are not defined by what we ask of life. We are defined by what life asks of us. As we go through life, we travel through institutions — first family and school, then the institutions of a profession or a craft.

Each of these institutions comes with certain rules and obligations that tell us how to do what we’re supposed to do. Journalism imposes habits that help reporters keep a mental distance from those they cover. Scientists have obligations to the community of researchers. In the process of absorbing the rules of the institutions we inhabit, we become who we are.

And that’s how you become a civilized American. No more rock stars, thanks. Please join some institution greater than yourself, and then do its will.

Well, now, here we are, back to modern modern life. Back to the Aurora mass shooting and yesterday’s round of very concerned talking heads. Even though David Gregory turns to David Brooks with a practical question, Brooks has his gauzy genius points ready and here they come:

DAVID BROOKS: Right. Well, the theme of the show so far has been, do we focus on the guns or do we focus on the person? And I think the candidates are going to have to figure that one out. I personally think the focus should be on the person. There are two hundred and fifty million guns in this country. If somebody wants to get their hold on a– their hands on a gun they’re going to be able to do it. It’s just not that practical.

There’s your warm up. Gun control is impossible. Now the pitch:

But we also have the situation where we have a lot of 20-year-olds who are living in this under-institutionalized world, lonely, not a lot of people dealing with them. At the same time a tremendous hunger for fame. And you see the rise of these spectacle killings. And I’d like to see a debate about that. There’s not an obvious political solution, but as some of the people like Mister Bratton said there’s a civil society solution where we all look out for people who are just drifting between the cracks.

Now that the bodies have cooled, what should we do? Applying Brooks’ philosophy (since Brooks won’t), we should surely create more institutions. That way the lonely 20 somethings won’t fall through the cracks, or chase fame with predictable spree killing. James Holmes, the Ph.D. candidate in Neuroscience, could have better spent his time in a rigorous, civilizing entity. Like a graduate school. That’s how Holmes could have Brooksified his life, by dedicating himself to, say, studying a hard science. The brain is a Byzantine doo-hickey to understand, for instance.

Of course when the institutions fail somebody this educated, we’re right back to square one. Unless you’re the type to wonder what the 100 FBI agents are doing in some neighbor’s yard, and why they can’t get past the explosive Rubik’s Cubes rigged to the windows and doors. Good one, David.

President Obama campaigning in 2012:

Forward with Obama, Mao and Lenin
Posted by Daniel Greenfield

The Obama slogan for 2012 is in and it’s “Forward.” . . Before MSNBC had “Lean Forward,” Mao had the Great Leap Forward, which killed some 40 million people, far more people than MSNBC can ever dream of tuning in to their programs. When Lenin wanted to launch his own newspaper, he called it, “Vperod” or “Forward” . .

Picking “Forward” as his campaign slogan puts Obama in good company with Lenin and Mao, and it sounds positive until you stop and realize that it’s meant more as an order than a suggestion. There’s a reason leftist newspapers with that name add an exclamation mark at the end of it. It’s not a proposal, it’s a command. Lean forward, march forward, live forward and then die forward.

President Reagan campaigning in 1986:

. . tell your volunteers and your contributors that the President said that they’re needed now as never before, that the crucial hour is approaching, that the choice before the American people this year is of overwhelming importance: whether to hand the government back to the liberals or move forward with the conservative agenda into the 1990s.

. . they must choose this year between those who are enemies of big government and the friends of the freedom fighters and, on the other hand, those who are advocates of Federal power and a foreign policy of illusion. So, let the choice be clear. Will it be “blame America first,” or will it be “On to Democracy” and “Forward for Freedom“?

Forward for red Chinese glory and cultural greatness Chairman Mao Rae Gong.
Ching chong, commie bastard.

He should ask questions. None of this has been fair after all. Women always get the easy pass in life. Never receiving the kinds of ridicule or scrutiny that we do, yet there they are in business, in government, at the Old Towne Mall. They’re everywhere. It’s as if the tender of equality weren’t fairness, but say *burp,* or the scrimshaw of slaves.

We should do something. You know what we should do? Even the score. Let’s get someone to subject women to criticism. I’m spitballing here, but Rush Limbaugh maybe? He could be interested.

What is Hillary doing at the Time ’100 Most Influential’ bash? Exactly how influential is Hillary Clinton? What has she ever accomplished as Secretary of State?

What the hell has she done? Two wars, getting out of one, trying to extract ourselves from the other, the Egypt thing, the Qaddafi thing, the Arab Spring and getting it right over and again but, what c’mon? Hang on, Rush. Gordon Liddy and Chuck Colson (retd.) and Ollie North and Alberto Gonzales and Laurita Doan and Scooter Libby and Harriet Miers and government criminals and brain-disableds by the bushels you call ‘friends’ will drop by so you can altogether laugh at Hillary. Sixteen times the most admired woman in America. They don’t make losers like that. Do they?

And now Hillary has reached the pinnacle, and all she is is a secretary. She’s the Secretary of Defense – State, whatever. But still a secretary. I don’t know. The left has the strangest definitions of success.

Why this reminds me of a story. Once upon a time a warthog was invited to dinner. A dinner so special, he blogged it from his Excellence In Digital Slop trough:

American Exceptionalism Still on Display at Horatio Alger Dinner
April 12, 2010 | The Rush Limbaugh Show

RUSH: I have to tell you what I did over the weekend. I was invited to attend the Horatio Alger Association dinner on Friday night at Constitution Hall in Washington.

What made it so ptew! ptew! special? The featured guests. Their towering American achievements before the face of impossible odds made them figures of mythical stature. Like each was some crazy successful guy, from a silly story, that never existed. Except they did exist. Oh, yes, friends, they *sniff* very did:

I was overwhelmed, and I have to tell you why. Condoleezza Rice was inducted this year. There were a number of people — in fact, all of them, every one of this year’s honorees — stood up and spoke of this country in ways I haven’t heard a government official speak of this country in years . .

. . and you look at the commemorative something or menu, and there she is. Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State. You can just imagine goodlord where she must have started from if becoming all of a secretary made Limbaugh weep and pee his pigtail. Maybe sleeping on a steam grate all deaf and dumb with an empty bottle of Thunderbird for a wubbie.

Joice, then re-joice. Both the House and Senate in Tennessee have passed versions of Sen. Bo Watson’s anti-science “Monkey Bill.” Get your cameras ready for the celebratory chest-pounding and slinging of leafy branches.

. . SB 893 permits teachers “to help students understand, analyze, critique and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories.” Subjects that might invite such debate, according to the bill, include “biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming and human cloning.”

If the Sons of Breitbart can vet the President, Tennessee surely can double-check science. By all means, let’s have educators engage teens in serious discourse on the scientific strengths and weaknesses of “human cloning.” To be fair, maybe they could invite an expert “cloning” technician to defend the field.

“Mr. Johnson-Honson, have you become aware of any strengths or weaknesses in your cloning of Jeffrey Dahmer?”

“Well, Jeffie just started kindergarten, and he’s eaten the teacher’s hands.”

“Thus, ‘strength’ . .”

(fascinated crowd:) “. . rhubarb-rhubarb. .”

We’re adults here. Let’s us take Tennessee seriously, ‘cuz this is serious grown-up lawmaking. These legislators, who so care for evolution, are trying to make it better. They’d encourage every butt-scratching teen and Jesus yahoo to throw things at it, just to see what sticks. Once it’s a hundred-foot ball of wadded Epistles and jock spit, teachers should locate it in a practical place for everyone to laugh at. This is how public education makes sense of a complex subject.

Imagine if you encouraged the same of mathematics education.

“The distance, class, between Town A and Town B is 100 miles. If a train is traveling from A to B at 40 miles an hour, how long will it take . . ”

“Harry Potter could do it. I saw him walk through this shimmering blargh, and he went to another place. That’s, like, zero hours. Is zero a possible answer?”

“Oh No . . (*pulls legal binder from desk, checks Apples-and-Oranges law*) . . crap. Off the top of my head, Timmy, there are perhaps three metaphysical ways that zero is possible, and one thousand ninety-nine reality ways it’s unlikely. None of this will be on the test, class, so the rest of you can sleep or fart, or what have you.”

(all:) “Yay!” *poot*

This is the destruction of science by rendering it a cloud of nonsense. When students by the tens of thousands can graduate thinking that science accommodates any and all thinking, it becomes as random as anything else. Soap operas, pop culture, greyhound racing.

Science accommodates only the narrowest of thoughts: scientific ones. It’s supposed to be that way. To the uninitiated, it is a vicious, uncaring discipline, but thank Jehu. That’s how it has managed to be so productive — by throwing out anything that stinks even remotely of laziness and stupidity. And look at the results: human beings live far better today than they did even fifty years ago.

But Tennessee wants to break it down, make it more accepting of the Bible, and funny notions, and ‘What if Superman had been on the side of the Nazis?’ This is tragic and brutally stupid.

Hopefully, good Science teachers will save their classes by seeing the scientific in the bill’s “scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses” language. That’s its Achilles heel. Because there’s not a molecule of “Creation Science” or “Intelligent Design” that is scientific, in any way, by any perspective, by any means, for all time. Thus, a proper classroom discussion, even after the bill is amended and passed, goes this way:

“Umm, Mrs, Vance? About that thing with the finches. Creation scientists say their beaks were meant to. .”

“Timmy, I can only discuss the scientific strengths and weaknesses of evolutionary theory. As Creationism builds a system of thought around an unobservable assertion — that a rational god exists — it is a system of mythology. Please refrain from violating Tennessee law by bringing it up again.”

And that’s that.

Believe it or not, this is good news. Whatever messaging Fox News is engaging in usually indicates what’s going on with the collective right-wing psyche. And the psyche apparently feels threatened. This was Sean Hannity talking election strategy with Frank Luntz on Tuesday night:

“They’ve got a foreign policy that shows a lot of weakness,” Hannity said. “I know the President will say they got bin Laden, putting that aside.”

Ha. I know the President complains about being skinny, but putting that aside. We can attack his obesity, I think. Just wait, it gets better:

“And the public gives him credit for that,” Luntz interjected.

A reluctant Hannity replied, “But it wouldn’t have happened if he had his way, and I think that could be proven as well on tapes.”

What? Bwah ha ha. I know, you’re thinking, “How does a president — A PRESIDENT FOR MORON’S SAKE — defy the wisdom of many of his advisers, including his Vice President, and order a Navy Seal operation to kill Osama bin Laden, BUT oppose it?” I don’t know. Maybe Hannity’s brain is being directed by the same hacks who used to write for “Dallas”?

“Frank — my sources tell me that Bin Laden is not dead.”

“Really?”

“They tell me that Obama has only been issuing press releases from his dreams.”

“You don’t say?”

“Arugula is not the new Irish stew. Chicago doesn’t have a chocolate city hall. And Bobby Ewing is as alive as you or me.”

“What the HELL?”

Hullooo, Sean. And all this mess, whatever way you fantasize it, will be on tape, you say? That I’d like to see.

“Alright, people. I’ve had enough advice. I’ve decided, instead, to authorize the attack to proceed. Tell Navy Commander Jones to alert and authorize Seal Team 6. That’s an order.”

“Yes sir.”

“Oh — and Bobby? The nearest video camera?”

“Uhh . . upper right, mounted on the wall, sir.”

“ . . 2 . . 1 . . *ahem* . . NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!”

Sean Hannity must be the single stupidest man who ever lived. Yes, putting that aside, they don’t call it ‘Fox’ for nothing. These are tactics invented by Karl Rove. You take an opponent’s strength and try to turn it upside down. Rove pulled this on John Kerry, unfortunately and successfully.

That’s how the former senior officer on a swift boat in Vietnam became a knee-knocking draft dodger. Kerry once had to shoot a young Vietnamese point blank and kill him. He was awarded a Silver Star, a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts for his service. But by the time Bush-era shitstormers were done with him, Kerry might as well have been a spineless little coward. You know, somebody like Karl Rove.

That’s why Hannity looks even more idiotic than usual. Because Republicans are terrified of Obama’s foreign policy record. This is good news.

Jim Hoft blogs the filthy faggot Occupy shamble:

He may not be as intelligent as we once thought. For three.

The end of the line approaching the Cain Train:

November 27, 2011
Cain: Confusion has led to drop in support
Kevin Liptak | CNN

Herman Cain ascribed his recent drop in the polls to false sexual harassment allegations and voter confusion about his positions on abortion and foreign policy, saying Sunday that some of his remarks over the past month had been taken out of context.

“Obviously false accusations and confusion about some of my positions has [sic] contributed to it,” Cain said on CNN’s “State of the Union” . .

“That was to be expected. In terms of the campaign itself, nothing has gone wrong in terms of our strategy of spending time in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida,” Cain added. “So in terms of the mechanics of the campaign, nothing’s gone wrong.”

HUH?

Nothing’s gone wrong, everything’s great, the campaign is dying, this was to be expected. Can Herman Cain say ‘Good morning!’ without it sounding like ‘Meta-fistulae Interpol sammiches’? His tongue has Chevy Chase’s brain. The minute someone asks a question of him, it starts looking for the nearest flight of stairs to throw itself down.

November 27, 2011
Cain Wants Illegal Immigration Issue Shifted to States
Katrina Trinko | NRO

“The way I would deal with those that are already here, which has been my stated position: empower the states to deal with the illegals that are already here, not some, big, grandiose, national one size fit-all. I believe that the states should be empowered to deal with the illegals that are already here” . .

Okay, fine. You’d leave it to the states. That’s totally crazy, maybe unconstitutional, but it’s your position. Anything to add?

In response to whether that meant the states could allow illegal immigrants to “be put on a path toward legalization and toward citizenship,” Cain answered, “It would be up to the states as long as they did not break the federal law.”

Federalism, you mean? Where everything is “up to the states as long as they did not break the federal law.” So you’d actually change . . nothing. Fine. Anything else?

“Secure the border for real. Promote the path to citizenship that’s already there, and the path to citizenship that’s already there doesn’t say anything about amnesty. Thirdly, enforce the laws that are already there, but make it easier for companies to be able to enforce the laws. And fourth, empower the states. Don’t give the states any special things to do, just empower them to do within the law what the federal government is not doing.”

. . did everybody get that? Promote the paths for companies to empower states making it easier for laws to do what the federal government isn’t. That should solve it, as long as ‘it’ is a pro-active perpetual motion lettuce-picking hologram.

People are sick of this crap. Herman Cain doesn’t have a clue, and everybody knows it. The candidate reeks. Herman can’t recall anyone making sexual harassment allegations, but there are probably more of them out there so beware. He doesn’t know what or where Libya is, but it’s full of the Taliban so watch out. He won’t tolerate people who defile the Constitution, but his bold proposals arrive D.O.A. because they’re usually — boing – unconstitutional.

He wants a mandatory 2/3 vote to overturn 9-9-9? If gay marriage is legal, he’ll overturn the Supreme Court? With what, a 150-ton skiploader? Middle schoolers know better than Herman Cain. College kids wonder what’s wrong with the guy. There’s something seriously wrong with the guy.

I don’t know if it’s senility or businessman’s bluster or what. But it’s ridiculous.

This morning the Cain campaign blasted out a fundraising e-mail that included these passages:

“I am excited to share a recent Rasmussen (conducted November 21-22) which shows me retaking the lead nationally with 26 percent support. I am leading Governor Romney and Speaker Gingrich by 3 and 12 percent respectively. …

“Please donate $25, $50, $100, $500, $1000 or more today to my campaign for President.”

You did not re-take the lead, Herman. The “recent” poll:

The campaign:

A Cain aide acknowledged the error, but regarding whether a correction or any other action would be taken, e-mailed, “We don’t plan any further action.”

Get it right? Why?