Takin' It To The Streets
Sister Toldjah is good on the assertion by the wife of producer Norman Lear that
If for whatever reason we don’t win back Congress in November the only real answer will be to take to the streets.
However, the Blue Crabs are funnier.
I can only contribute this - if you take it to the streets this November, walk carefully.

"This prediction left me reaching for some Fernet Branca".
This the ladies version of the Glock 16?
My vote for phrase of the year "Mired in gridlock".
Posted by: PeterUK | October 21, 2006 at 03:23 PM
Ah, where is my Car Wars?
"If you don't like the way I drive get off the street...
The sidewalk...
The lawn..."
If its marching season, what's the bag limit?
Posted by: ajacksonian | October 21, 2006 at 03:31 PM
Yeah, but really, what does one wear to a street protest nowadays?
Now, the men can wear one of these, I suppose: Cheap shot? Tell it to Olbermann, I say
SMG
Posted by: SteveMG | October 21, 2006 at 03:46 PM
SMG
Skortman is hilarious.
--They're breezy, they're sexy and they're easy to wear!---
Posted by: topsecretk9 | October 21, 2006 at 03:51 PM
PUK
--"This prediction left me reaching for some Fernet Branca".--
I am not sure if I wanted to puke that she was relating all her "street " analysis from Gore Vidal at a dinner party, but your selected quote is the biggest gag with a giant silver elitist spoon ever!
Posted by: topsecretk9 | October 21, 2006 at 03:58 PM
Skortman is hilarious.
Notice that he's not on the motorcycle itself? Standing next to it?
I want to see him riding the motorcycle wearing that thing.
Well, not really but......
SMG
Posted by: SteveMG | October 21, 2006 at 03:58 PM
Posted by: Cecil Turner | October 21, 2006 at 04:33 PM
Time to stock up on the Birkenstocks
Posted by: PeterUK | October 21, 2006 at 04:39 PM
"If for whatever reason we don’t win back Congress in November the only real answer will be to take to the streets".
With her money and Bush tax cuts,why would she nned to go on the streets,is she,er,trying to work the base?
Posted by: PeterUK | October 21, 2006 at 04:41 PM
Considering the parade of luggage-topped Mercedes I watched fleeing Bel Air and Beverly Hills during the '91 riots like so many Kuwaiti refugees, I'll take my chances.
Posted by: richard mcenroe | October 21, 2006 at 04:46 PM
Heh, You're talking about the wife of am eco-nut who owns a 26 car garage in Malibu. You aren't looking for consistency are you?
Posted by: clarice | October 21, 2006 at 04:46 PM
That's a good question aj... plus I hate catch and release!
Posted by: Bob | October 21, 2006 at 05:00 PM
OT Humor
I was sitting next to a friend of mine at my son's football game. One of the members of our team is a Korean exachange student. Last year, he and his sister were living with a family from our school. So, I asked Julie:
"Julie, where are Seung-Hoon and his sister living this year? Are they with the same family?"
Julie replies: "No, they are living with a retired librarian. She keeps Korean kids in her basement."
SHE KEEPS KOREAN KIDS IN HER BASEMENT!!!!
Is that a great title for a Halloween horror flick or what? Maybe Lyn Davis could use some Korean kids, in her basement even. I seem to recall they fiercely defend their territory during riots in LA.
Posted by: Lesley | October 21, 2006 at 05:10 PM
Clarice,
Yes but,street walking.
Posted by: PeterUK | October 21, 2006 at 05:11 PM
Yeah right, they are going to take it to the streets.
Puhleaze, these people do not clean up after themselves, or raise their own children or wash their cars or do anything else that the little people do. Perhaps they should say that they will get drunk, do drugs, act stupid, insult a police officer and get bailed out of jail by their high powered attorney who will promptly ship them off to rehab.
Now that I would believe.
Posted by: Terrye | October 21, 2006 at 05:52 PM
SHE KEEPS KOREAN KIDS IN HER BASEMENT!!!!
LOL!
I just watched the author of 'Screwed' or how the Republicans are ruining the middle class and our country or something like that.
I thought I'd be polite and listen, when one of them started talking about how Reps steal elections I turned it off.
These guys think all they have to do is shout and people will agree with them.
They think America's democracy is in shambles because they're not in power.
Not THAT is Hubris and Denial!
Posted by: Syl | October 21, 2006 at 06:14 PM
I want to see him riding the motorcycle wearing that thing.
Well, not really but......
SMG
Posted by: SteveMG | October 21, 2006 at 12:58 PM
I just wanna see him stop off in one of the local biker bars here for a little refreshement > evil grin <
Posted by: SlimGuy | October 21, 2006 at 06:16 PM
I agree that some on the left are too quick to suspect election rigging.
I am not particularly impressed with Sister Toldjah's post, however. She writes:
Please. Is anyone suggesting that Bush himself has been using his computer expertise to hack into the Diebold voting machines or otherwise managing the technical details of an election fraud operation? There are many problems with the theory that recent elections have been rigged, but inconsistency with the belief that Bush isn't especially bright is not one of them.
And then there's this:
???
Democrats won the Presidency and picked up seats in the House in '96 (while losing 2 in the Senate), and they picked up more seats in the House in '98 and maintained the status quo in the Senate. Not to mention getting the Senate back to 50-50 in 2000. Losing big since '94? That's a pretty lazy generalization.
Posted by: Foo Bar | October 21, 2006 at 06:17 PM
Barron's, via Drudge, reporting that their studies show Republican's holding both Houses of Congress.
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash7.htm
Is conventional wisdom wrong, again?
Posted by: Mark | October 21, 2006 at 06:32 PM
Is conventional wisdom wrong, again?
Posted by: Mark | October 21, 2006 at 03:32 PM
No but the conventional spin is.
Posted by: SlimGuy | October 21, 2006 at 06:38 PM
Be real careful. You got close to using wisdom and the media in the same sentence. Surely you know that those two dont go together.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | October 21, 2006 at 06:48 PM
Foo Bear:
Democrats have been losing ground in other elections. Governorships, state houses, etc. Not all of our government is federal.
I know a lot of people who really do not consider themselves Republican but vote that way because they think the Democrats sound like idiots.
Posted by: Terrye | October 21, 2006 at 06:58 PM
but inconsistency with the belief that Bush isn't especially bright is not one of them.
No, of course not. However, no one has explained to me, satisfactorily, how Shrub's daddy's friends stole him the election without explaining why Shrub's daddy's friends didn't steal the election for daddy. That is inconsistency. The left doesn't need solid reasoning, not with the group they are working with.
Posted by: Sue | October 21, 2006 at 07:00 PM
If for whatever reason we don’t win back Congress in November the only real answer will be to take to the streets.
My question is has she ever been on the streets? Other than Rodeo Drive?
I would be willing to give her the streets, if she really wants to take them. The homeless can move into one of her mansions.
Posted by: Sue | October 21, 2006 at 07:03 PM
I am sure she also claims she was at Woodstock. An old burn out who really was at Woodstock once told me that he is certain that the number of folks who claim to have been at Woodstock number in the multimillions. He said Max Yasgur's farm must have been bigger than he remembered it to be. It was so chic to claim to be there and many of these uber libs are really arrested development hippies, so it fits. Where is Jerry Rubin?
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | October 21, 2006 at 07:24 PM
I disagree that the Democrats haven't laid out their vision if they are given power...but I think the RNC and the Congress/White House have done a terrible job of educating the public.
They could easily lay out the Democrats strategy:
AND HERE IS THE DEMOCRATS 5 POINT PLAN:
1. Democrats will not treat terrorist attacks as warfare, but rather criminal acts requiring law enforcement.
2. Democrats will not treat terrorists as illegal combatants, or even as POW/EPW, but will treat them as US citizens with all rights under the Constitution.
3. Democrats will treat foriegn terrorists as US citizens when it comes to intelligence gathering to include electronic surveillance, interrogation and
confinement.
4. Democrats when they finally do convict a terrorist in court will give them light sentences as a Cliton judge just did in New York. Though the prosecutor asked for 30 years, the Clinton appointee meated out a stiff 28 month sentence and they are allowed to be free while appealing the conviction.
5. Democrats, when they finally do convict a terrorist will give them pardons when politically helpful to their campaigns. As Clinon did with previous terrorists that attacked on American soil.
The RNC could easily put together an ad outlining all these positions which are in fact acurate and can be documented with proven instances from Reno/Gorelicks wall to Clinton stating we should not overreact to a bombing of the World Trade Center.
Posted by: Patton | October 21, 2006 at 07:32 PM
However, no one has explained to me, satisfactorily, how Shrub's daddy's friends stole him the election without explaining why Shrub's daddy's friends didn't steal the election for daddy. That is inconsistency
Well, for one thing, Karl Rove was fired from the '92 GHWB reelection campaign and even before that did not have the same kind of control he's had in GWB's campaigns. It's not as if precisely the same set of people were in charge in both cases.
Also, in '92 Clinton won pretty comfortably in terms of electoral votes. It's not so absurd to believe that a genuinely close election could be stolen but not one where the other candidate has a sizable lead.
Again, I haven't seen good evidence that any of the recent elections were rigged, but I don't think those theories can be dismissed solely on simple internal inconsistency grounds.
Posted by: Foo Bar | October 21, 2006 at 07:43 PM
I agree that some on the left are too quick to suspect election rigging.
I don't think the silliness over rigging is really the point (nor accusations of fraud, which are far more of a Dem staple than for the GOP). The bit highlighted in red is the issue, wherein the proper result is taken as an article of faith, as well as a call to revolt if they don't win. The utter lack of respect for the process is repelling, and the obvious word plays (e.g., "Democrats reject democracy") are just icing on the cake.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | October 21, 2006 at 08:01 PM
Cecil,
Democrats STOP Democracy.
Can anyone photoshop that?
Posted by: PeterUK | October 21, 2006 at 08:20 PM
Foobar:
Your boy Clinton never got over50% and his erstwhile wife won't either if she decides to run in 08. She finally admitted in a debate that she's thought about running. I can't wait for her to get reamed in the primaries. Kerry will have to decide about his Senate seat if he runs. My guess is he'll hold on to the sure thing.
Posted by: maryrose | October 21, 2006 at 08:23 PM
Again, I haven't seen good evidence that any of the recent elections were rigged, but I don't think those theories can be dismissed solely on simple internal inconsistency grounds.
Ahhh...finally, someone who came up with a satisfactory answer to the why daddy's friends didn't steal the election for him. The evil Karl Rove had not honed his skills just yet.
The only election that was actually stolen was the one where LBJ guaranteed Texas for Kennedy then proceeded to deliver. It isn't true that dead men aren't democrats. Actually, I think the Illinois democrats might have been just as dirty as the Texas democrats but not in the same election cycle.
Posted by: Sue | October 21, 2006 at 08:24 PM
Competing headlines at Drudge...
With Guarded Cheer, Democrats Dare to Believe This Is Their Time
Magazine Shock: Republicans Will Hold Congress
They can't both be right. ::grin::
Posted by: Sue | October 21, 2006 at 08:34 PM
MaryRose,
Joe Lieberman showed the true courage of his convictions by simultaneously running for the Senate and the Vice-Presidency in 2000. There is no reason why Brave Sir John won't do the same, even if he's shooting for the top slot.
What's really going to be interesting in the aftermath of this election is what will happen if the Dems pickup 12 seats and they are all moderates rather than lefties. I'm only counting two or three lefties who have a chance of coming on board so the split between the socialist caucus and the moderate caucus could see some fireworks. If you look really closely, the Pelosi/Harman fracas could actually be the beginning of a struggle for the minority leadership position. If so, it would strengthen the Dems significantly if Harman wins. The weight of the total lefty contingent is about the same as that of the Black Caucus in a Presidential year - just above zero.
The battleground states in '08 are definitely going to include WI, MI and MN in addition to OH and PA. The socialists are losing ground there at a significant rate.
I still consider the MI, MN and WI governor's races to be among the most significant this year. Particularly WI where that same day registration would finally be halted.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | October 21, 2006 at 08:45 PM
Actually, in my heart I believe there was so much vote fraud in Milwaukee and Racine in 2000 and 2004, the Reps did win there. Rick. When I was goriwng up there--and we had regular registration procedures--it was the cleanest state in the country.
Posted by: clarice | October 21, 2006 at 08:57 PM
The bit highlighted in red is the issue, wherein the proper result is taken as an article of faith, as well as a call to revolt if they don't win. The utter lack of respect for the process is repelling
I pretty much agree. She is wrong to advocate protests without hard evidence of election rigging.
Posted by: Foo Bar | October 21, 2006 at 09:01 PM
Some have may have heard about Hillarys performance last night in her debate which was mostly locally broadcast. Dick Morris has a negative view of her performance.
To judge for yourself
http://www.news10now.com/shared/videolists/buildasx.asp?vids=124&mswmext=.asx
Posted by: SlimGuy | October 21, 2006 at 09:15 PM
PUK
stop sign
Posted by: SunnyDay | October 21, 2006 at 09:49 PM
Sunny Day,
Excellent,make a very good T shirt.
Posted by: PeterUK | October 21, 2006 at 10:11 PM
Where is Jerry Rubin?
Died in '94 after being hit by a car. he was a friend of mine when he was living in Denver.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 21, 2006 at 11:06 PM
reporting that their studies show Republican's holding both Houses of Congress.
Damn those Diebold guys.
The only question left is .. which state will be labeled the pivotal state ? Previous winners include Florida and Ohio.
Posted by: Neo | October 21, 2006 at 11:37 PM
being hit by a car
reminded me of this joke ..
How do you find Malibu ?
Take the on Pacific Coast Highway North till you hit Ben Vereen.
Posted by: Neo | October 21, 2006 at 11:44 PM
Kerry will have to decide about his Senate seat if he runs.
A 2008 run for Kerry will put his Senatorial legislative legacy in jeopardy.
LOL
Posted by: Neo | October 21, 2006 at 11:52 PM
I attended a meet the candidate speech thingy tonight in my little ole home town.
We had our usual bbq/political get together to me the congressional candidates.
However, ours is just a little different than most.
Our meetup included two dems and two reps.
Oh yeah we got the fact the primaries are over with, but here is the oddball thing of this little town of about 19k population.
Our town is split about even with an east/west main street.
The way the congressional districts are drawn, if you live south of the main street you are in one congressional district and if you live north of the main street you are in another congressional district.
Only in america. LOL
Posted by: SlimGuy | October 22, 2006 at 12:11 AM
Just to give you an idea of how fair and balanced the congressional district maps are here.
This is the closeout data from 10 days ago when voter registration deadlines were passed in my state.
The district north of the main drag.
75,435 REP 227,675 DEMS
The district south of the main drag
203,000 REP 201,743 DEMS
Posted by: SlimGuy | October 22, 2006 at 12:41 AM
I received a fax earlier tonight that said one of those "say what" moments.
Seems there is a congressional district in another state that has some very interesting demographics.
The total number of census figure people in the district over the age of 18 is 1,842,654
The closeout books on registration are as follows
Rep 422,647 Dems 2,426,943
Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Posted by: SlimGuy | October 22, 2006 at 01:21 AM
Waiting for the fax correction that the first digit on the Dem side was an error, but you never know. LOL
Posted by: SlimGuy | October 22, 2006 at 01:23 AM
Lyn Mear halloween costume!
scary
Posted by: topsecretk9 | October 22, 2006 at 02:11 AM
Speaking of scary costumes, Skortman is frightening, but the one TM posted above of a clown (Bozo?, Ronald McDonald?) kept coming back to me as even more terrifying. Then it struck me; that clown is wearing the exact same colors as the baseball team that just whipped New York in the National League Playoffs.
This immediately brought to mind a key quote from the prior thread, "This may, in fact, be only coincidence, and simply 'Look Bad.' But coincidence, in this town, is rare."
Personally I suspect sombody just stopped off for a Big Mac on the way home from the Met's getting clobbered, but my good friend Sigmund Freud's got a couple questions for somebody's Id.
Posted by: Daddy | October 22, 2006 at 04:07 AM
A Good Morning Read:
Randall also told how he once wore Union Jack cufflinks to work but was rebuked with: 'You can't do that, that's like the National Front!'
Quoting a George Orwell observation, Randall said that the BBC was full of intellectuals who 'would rather steal from a poor box than stand to attention during God Save The King'.
Europe always brags that it's a few years ahead of America... let's hope our MSM finally admits it is bias too. If the NYT keeps losing money, hopefully we won't have to wait long!
Posted by: Bob | October 22, 2006 at 06:12 AM
ROSS PEROT and the BLOW JOB.
That's the answer to any Republican, moderate, sentrist or conservative Democrat thinking of staying home or voting for a Democrat.
You were suckered twice before into voting for Perot and we got Bill Clinton who got BJs spread through every grade school in America by having his adminstration lie and obstruct justice for 9 straight months.
Posted by: Patton | October 22, 2006 at 07:24 AM