Kick Whose What?

Strange headline of the day from Jane Hamsher:

Ha Ha. F**k You, Harry Reid. Kicking Your A** is Going To Be Fun.

Jane then highlights a Mason Dixon poll showing 2 Republicans beating Reid in a head to head matchup. Unless Jane became a Republican last night, how precisely is she proposing to to "kick Reid's A**?" Is she now a Sue Lowndes or Danny Tarkanian supporter? Or does she have a secret primary challenger we do not know about?

It's fun to write "Right now, Harry Reid is doing what he always intended to do — take the public option out of the bill. You’re just the last to know." But what does that mean for a** kicking?

I'm all for preemptive activism, but the structure of Hamsher's post does not make sense to me. Promise him hell if he betrays you - but do not predict he will betray so you can give him hell. I like my activists to be uncompromising. But I also like them to make sense. This post from Hamsher does not have logic on its side imo.

Speaking for me only

< Specter Fighting For The Public Option | Friday Afternoon Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    how is (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 02:10:58 PM EST
    Reid being replaced by a Republican a win? Who is that a win for? Yeah, I guess you could say that Reid would effectively be punished by being out of office but I don't certainly see a GOP win as a positive either. Heck, the whole situation could be called lose/lose IMO.

    I can think of two ideal candidates (none / 0) (#7)
    by andgarden on Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 02:37:09 PM EST
    to primary Reid, if they are so inclined. Shelley Berkley or Dina Titus: 2/3 NV Representatives. They would both make great Senators. I doubt either are inclined, though.

    Very odd ... (none / 0) (#1)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 01:39:03 PM EST
    I wish Hamsher would go back to movie producing.  That's where her real talents lie.

    As someone who works in the movie biz, I see the growing need for people like her every day.

    As for this blog post, I think she just slipped down a tunnel of her own rhetoric.  The title makes little sense.  But it doesn't have much to do with the content of the post.  So I'll give her a pass here.  It's Friday.

    Didn't you recently post a complaint (none / 0) (#2)
    by ChiTownDenny on Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 01:39:35 PM EST
    about another "activist blogger" disappointing you for caving?  Now you're complaining about Jane NOT caving?  Pick your battles, BTD!

    "Not caving" by celebrating (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 02:00:41 PM EST
    a GOP victory in Nevada I can do without.

    I prefer my "not caving" to have some connection to logic.


    Fire, feet; ya think? (none / 0) (#5)
    by ChiTownDenny on Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 02:11:26 PM EST
    Hmm (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 02:25:41 PM EST
    A primary challenge might do it.

    Cheering on the Republicans? Not so much.


    She needed to connect those dots (none / 0) (#8)
    by Cream City on Sat Dec 05, 2009 at 12:05:30 AM EST
    as she does, at the end, say to call Nevada Dems.

    Why call them to talk about Repubs winning?  The reason to call would be to say that these polls show the rationale for primarying Reid, if Dems want to keep the seat.

    Sorry, I'm grading her essay -- because I'm grading dozens of them now, and see so few that connect the dots to form coherent arguments.  Instead, I get sophomoric essays.  But then, they're sophomores.  Hamsher doesn't have that excuse. :-)