sisu

Armed and dangerous ...

"Let Facts be submitted to a candid world," from the archives July 4, 2008.

"There's a word for this kind of long-range, deep, subtle planning: Strategery"

The "Arab Spring" of 2010-11 — however bitter or sweet its fruits may grow in the fullness of time — didn't just happen. Bill Whittle makes a powerful case for GWB's foreign policy as a major catalyst in his latest YouTube sensation, "Memebusters! The Osama bin Laden Edition," where he asks "Why are all these Muslims in repressive regimes suddenly rising up for freedom and the right to vote? Why now, all of a sudden? That's why," he answers, pointing to the iconic image of a triumphant Iraqi woman who had just voted for the first time in her life in the wake of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

"You know, there's a word for this kind of long-range, deep, subtle planning. It's called 'strategery,'" says Professor-at-Large of Memebuster University Bill Whittle, turning the memetic Saturday Night Live putdown of GW's Iraq strategy on its head in a Geography 101 lesson about why the 43rd President sent our forces into both Afganistan and Iraq in the aftermath of 9/11: 

If you wanna know why there haven't been any large-scale attacks on the U.S. homeland since 9/11, 2001, just look at this map (below). Imagine if Mexico and Canada both became radical Muslim Nations like Iran or Saudi Arabia. Where do you think our attention would be? 

Armchair strategerist that we are, we'd noticed something similar — including the geographically strategic importance of Pakistan — way back in July of 2004 in "Between Iraq and a hard place":

"Could the President know something that the Media and the Left don't?" asks Speed of Thought (found 'em in our Site Meter stats). Iran is getting the squeeze as The Bush Doctrine makes slow but steady headway on the ground. The old board game of "Risk" comes to mind.

Something that the Media and the Left don't get. That's the larger subject of Bill Whittle's tutorial. Stumbling over their "all-about-oil" meme, BDS sufferers, then as now, missed the big picture:

Memes are cultural beliefs that were not [Ed note: Much thanks to Joy McCann aka Little Miss Atilla for typo correction] taught in school or in religion but that take on a life of their own because large numbers of people have emotional reasons for wanting them to be true …

My joy about hearing about the death of Osama bin Laden lasted for about 20 seconds until I turned on the TV to see Andrea Mitchell crowing about how this really was "Mission Accomplished," not the premature "Mission Accomplished" that Cowboy George Bush claimed during his speech on that aircraft carrier, which happened, coincidentally, eight years earlier to the day …

Only George Bush didn't claim "Mission Accomplished." In fact he said just the opposite.

"So, where did this meme come from?" asks Whittle:

Well, the press made it up out of whole cloth. They not only distorted, they actually reversed everything that George Bush said on the deck of that aircraft carrier …

"Now that day on the carrier, President Bush didn't say 'Mission Accomplished,'" but he did say this:

The advance of freedom is the surest strategy to undermine the appeal of terror in the world … Where freedom takes hold, hatred gives way to hope … When freedom takes hold, men and women turn to the peaceful pursuit of a better life … American values and American interests lead in the same direction: We stand for human liberty.

How ironic that even as American values are making inroads in distant lands where tyranny has long oppressed the huddled masses yearning to breathe free, a thuggish mindset worthy of any foreign tyrant — spawn of the insidious Gramscian march through the institutions — "has crept into our political life," as John of PowerLine explains in his must-read "The Politics of Personal Intimidation":

A disturbing new element has crept into our political life: organized efforts to intimidate private citizens who choose to support certain political causes or otherwise participate in civic affairs. This, as far as I know, is unprecedented in our modern history. Our democracy depends on citizen involvement, and until now, Americans have felt free to participate in public life and to support whatever causes, political and otherwise, they choose. But if the Left has its way, that may be about to change.

Update: Thank you, dear old friend Ed Driscoll, guest posting during Glenn's vacation, for the Instalanche!

Crossposted at Riehl World View and Liberty Pundits.

The Democrats' message? "FU America"

"Peace be upon you, screamed the headline in Arabic on Drudge this morning, linking to the story of a political war of words that refused to go peacefully into the Friday-afternoon bad-news dump": Mosque controversy swirls around Obama." Drudge is known for what Ann Althouse calls his "devious subliminal attacks," artful juxtapositions of words and images. By chance we caught a "Change It Back" t-shirt ad in our screengrab (above), adding insult to self-inflicted injury. The subheads tell the story: "Obama Strongly Backs Islam Center Near 9/11 Site … Controversy swells," "O FALLS TO NEW LOW AT GALLUP DAILY," "FED OFFICIAL WARNS OF 'DANGEROUS GAMBLE." "I'm dizzy from the shadenfreude," wrote twitterbuddy Kevin Whalen.

"The message? FU America," twittered Kevin Whalen — aka Pundit Review of Boston's WRKO — early morning in response to a House Democratic leadership aide's unwitting revelation of our political establishment's cravenness, responding to a Washington Post reporter's question about President Obama's waffling remarks regarding the appropriateness of what is now known in twitterspeak as #gzm (Ground Zero Mosque):

It's just another day off message. There've been a lot of days off message.

Fun finding from the Site Meter stats: A TripAdvisor New York City forum on "Ground Zero Noise" veers off into reality with two things of note (above): 1. An Aussie's total cluelessness about the meaning of the expression "Ground Zero" in the hearts and minds of everyday Americans like ourselves: "I think the term stops people being able to move on" and 2. A link to our own "Obama: 'Ground Zero is, indeed, hallowed ground, but.'"

The great unexamined issue of our time — how to acknowledge and engage in a reasoned debate about the role of Islam in the scourge of Islamist terrorism — is finally on the table thanks to #gzm (see above), yet our myopic friends on the left side of the aisle, those "vulnerable" Democrats looking towards November and not beyond, are obsessed with their President's being "off message." Our own Liberty Pundits Mama Grizzly Melissa Clouthier cleanses the palate of all who would continue to swallow the politically correct swill being peddled by the "religion of peace" snake-oil salesmen. A couple of excerpts, and then read the whole thing:

This is basic human psychology. Thank God the vast majority of Americans get it, while the Smarty Pants Set, including the President, once again talk in theory as if a real building a real block away from a real graveyard doesn’t exist.

Americans are not anti-Islam, but maybe they should be. They live and work with Muslims peacefully. They are pleased that Muslim women and children are getting educated and freed from the evil of totalitarian domination. They are happy that Saddam Hussein isn’t around to torture, kill and bury whole communities for some sadistic reason.

And the GOP is no more anti-Islam than the American people – which is to say they aren’t. They are being rational, though. They understand what’s happening in New York and finally, they’re fighting back against the political taboos – willing to stand and be outraged at the outrageous.

As for Islam. I suspect that the GOP and American people aren’t anti-Islam because they don’t know enough history.

Update: Michelle Malkin Buzzworthy link!

Crossposted at Riehl World View and Liberty Pundits.

NAACP and the Tea Party: Last throes of the fear-and-smear machine?

Screenshot of a prescient tweet from July 24, 2009. What a year of fear-and-smear it's been, and it all seems to be coming to a head a year later as JournoListas' leaked memos and Andrew Breitbart's video revelations emerge into the disinfectant light of day and the Tea Party strikes back.

"They got into a fight with the tea party, and all of this came out as a result of that,” Shirley Sherrod told CNN last night "in reference to the NAACP’s resolution last week accusing the tea party of having used 'racist' tactics," reports Politico this morning. NAACP "got into" a fight with "the" tea party? Puleeze. They tried to PICK a fight by throwing gratuitous accusations at no one in particular, hoping something would stick. There's no single Tea Party. It's not a monolith like the politically correct, JournoLista talking-points-of-the-day, police-state army of race mongers who would smear us as they unwittingly psychologically project their own modus operandi onto the grassroots Army of Davids that threatens their bitterly clinging grasp on power.

Tammy Bruce condensed the essence of Sherrodgate into one eloquent tweet last night.

If you'd followed and perhaps participated in the sausage-making process on blogs and Twitter last night, you would have seen in tooth and claw the life-and-death struggle between left and right to control the narrative. On the right, members of the Tea Party movement with modern-day muckraker Andrew Breitbart — that signature "take-no-prisoners" gleam in his eye — leading the charge. In the middle, calmer voices like War Correspondent The Anchoress, who argued for a measured approach. On the left, do-as-you're-told foot soldiers of the big-government, nanny-state army, determined to smear us with their racist mantra. Compare Sherrod's word choice — the passive "got into a fight" — with what actually happened. NAACP PICKED a fight, using the occasion of finding itself in the spotlight to hurl the absurd charge of racism at us. From Politico:

NAACP President Ben Jealous declared that the organization had been "snookered" into condemning [Sherrod, whose "abrupt firing" is now being "reconsidered" by her boss, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack] …

Jealous pointed to the NAACP’s recent conflict with the tea party, but blamed the “lengths to which extremist elements will go to discredit legitimate opposition” …

“Next time we are confronted by a racial controversy broken by Fox News or their allies in the tea party like Mr. Breitbart, we will consider the source and be more deliberate in responding. The tape of Ms. Sherrod’s speech at an NAACP banquet was deliberately edited to create a false impression of racial bias, and to create a controversy where none existed.”

"Twitter is like cable news on meth," Congressional Correspondent for the LA Times James Oliphant twittered around midnight last night. The excitement was visceral as the armies of the night clashed in the seemingly endless hours of tweet-to-tweet combat. When the dust settled next morning, twitterbuddy Jimmie of The Sundries Shack basked in the realization that something consequential had happened. Genie out of the bottle. Can't put it back.

Special Forces Commander Dan Riehl's thoughtful final report, "Breitbart's Landmark Video And A Genuinely Post-Racial America," is worth your time to put it all into perspective:

In both the full video and a 3 minute excerpt I produced, Sherrod labels the entire Republican Party racist, claiming they simply can't stand to see a black man in the White House. She also characterizes totally legitimate political opposition to ObamaCare from average citizens as mean and ultimately racist in the end. Had some previous Bush appointee called the Democrat Party a bunch of race-baiting hucksters, or poverty pimps - putting black citizens in that camp, too - there is no way said official would be able to keep their position. Yet, that is precisely what Sherrod did, only it was Republicans and her political opponents she so openly smeared …

I believe shouting back against the same old racially divisive politics of old is precisely what Andrew Breitbart did in releasing this recent video. And I'm proud to stand solidly by him in the fight. I only wish more good people on the Right had the judgment and vision to understand the larger dynamics and ultimate worthiness of an admittedly very difficult battle. I believe it's a worthwhile fight, one it seems America must have if we are ever to get to the genuinely post-racial future every American should want.

Update: Dana Loesch agrees with us.

Update II: Michelle Malkin "Buzzworthy" link!

Update III: Instalanche! How sweet it is.

Crossposted at Riehl World View and Liberty Pundits.

Tea Partiers pour it on: We'll start the war from right here!

The horned lizard popularly known as the horned toad [in beak of unidentified bird, above] has developed "an array of defense tactics depending upon each type of predator and whether that predator likes to swallow prey whole or chew it up." Our two favorite techniques are squirting blood from their eyelids and puffing themselves up with air to appear too big to eat. Too big to fail? "Your avatar of a bird about to have a toad for lunch = metaphor for twitterers speaking truth to power?" we twittered Rightone this morning. Or is it the other way around, the bird being the powers that be and we the lizard squirting blood from our eyelids?

“We’ll start the war from right here!” Stacy McCain quotes Brig. Gen. Theodore Roosevelt Jr. responding to conditions on the sand at Omaha Utah Beach [Thanks to Old Bull in the comments at RWV for the correction] June 6, 1944, making the point that when you're fighting for your life, you don't start equivocating "when you land on the wrong beach." Stacy's talking about disarray amongst tea-party-affiliated losers in last week's Republican primaries. You can catch the details at The Other McCain, but here's the bottom line:

At the end of the day, making your voice heard in politics — in any really effective way – requires winning elections. Winning elections at the level of a U.S. Senate race isn’t easy and depends on a lot of details that have nothing to do with national trends, so that the success or failure of any one campaign cannot automatically be taken as evidence of a trend.

Neverthless, if Kinnison and others cannot accept the nomination of Angle as legitimate, that’s a real problem. And if the Tea Party movement ends up encouraging people to be soreheads when they lose a primary, that’s a real problem, too.

Predatory members of the legacy press like the WaPo's Amy Gardner are trying to make out that "the [tea party] movement may be in danger of breaking apart before it ever really comes together," but we aren't buying. Inspired by that army of "articulate, brave and joyful conservative" women we toasted in our previous post, we're ready to start the war from right here! If you're with us, click here early and often to help Sharron Angle reap Harry Reid.

Update: Michelle Malkin "Buzzworthy" link!

Update II: Interesting historical note from lonetown in the comments at RWV:

Shades of Col John Parker: "Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here."  – Captain John Parker, 1775

Crossposted at Riehl World View and Liberty Pundits.

An army of "articulate, brave and joyful conservative" women is "changing the face of American politics"

"I've found it. The 2010 race about which I can get motivated the way I was motivated by Scott Brown v. Martha Coakley," writes Professor Jacobson. "The mainstream media and nutroots have made Sharron Angle target no. 1; that's all I needed. The Democrats have a strategy of crazy because their policies have been so disastrous and their rule so inept." Click here for Fox News report (above) and here to contribute. We sent along a little something this very morning.

"Michele Bachmann, another rising star in the Republican Party, is getting noticed precisely because she is an articulate, brave and joyful conservative," writes Bruce Walker in "The Year of the Conservative Woman" at American Thinker, driving home the point about this "Year of the Woman 2.0" that eludes our fellow opinionators of the legacy media caught in the amber of their postmodern feminism:

… but none of the dreary groups pretending to champion women is touting her for higher office, or even reelection.

The affable WaPo media reporter Howard Kurtz's attempt to make sense of it all is typical of the old media's failure to grasp the larger picture (although we credit him for seeking our old blogfriend Ed Morrissey's opinion):

When several Republican women won their primaries on Tuesday, I started thinking about whether the media would dub this another Year of the Woman. Conservative blogger Ed Morrissey said he doubted it, since in his view the mainstream press only likes to celebrate Democratic women, as in 1992.

"I don't agree with that, but I also couldn't shake the feeling that this year would not get such a label."

And why not? Kurtz mumbles something about Hillary and Palin as pioneers and then tosses the ball to colleague Anne Kornblut:

With victories by several prominent women in Tuesday's primary elections came the familiar declarations that a 'year of the woman' is underway. But in at least five races, something even more remarkable occurred: The candidates' gender never became much of an issue …

"That may be the most striking development," observes Kurtz, still not grasping the dynamics of what his lying eyes are telling him:

Once upon a time — 1984, actually — there was a huge discussion of how aggressive Vice President George H.W. Bush could afford to be in his debate against Geraldine Ferraro. Even in 2000, when Rick Lazio walked over to Hillary Clinton during a Senate debate, he was castigated for invading her space. Now, women punch back with the best of them — and that's a measure of equality.

In fact, they're so equal that they now have to fight off allegations of infidelity, if Nikki Haley's experience in the South Carolina governor's race is any indication.

We say bring 'em on! This newly energized conservative army of woman warriors, their hearts and minds not hobbled by postmodern feminism's identity-politics imperative, is unafraid to boldly go where too few women in this land of the free and home of the brave have gone before.

Crossposted at Riehl World View and Liberty Pundits.

McCain nails Obama: "The American people have figured it out"

Photoshopped version (above) of this morning's Drudge Report screaming headline (below). AP photo

"'Oh my,' McCain laughs, his voice dripping with jest," in a refreshingly candid NRO interview that suggests Sarah Palin is now in the driver's seat and her former running mate in the passenger seat of the jerry-built vehicle that started the two on a bumpy ride across the political landscape back in August of 2008, when Palin sprung onto the national scene full blown from McCain's forehead. She's been disintermediating the powers that be via the internet ever since, speaking directly to us and to the Leader of the Free World through Facebook, WSJ and WaPo op eds, talk radio and Fox News. Here's McCain, referencing the growing Sestak scandal headlined by Drudge:

"Can’t we just trust their words? I mean, what’s the matter with you? If Robert Gibbs says nothing untoward took place, then that, of course, satisfies any concerns I might have." More seriously: "All I can say is this: Imagine if this was the Bush administration. The media wolf pack would be in full cry. But this is something we’ve grown used to. We have a compliant media. The good thing is that the American people have figured it out. They’re not being guided by the views of the mainstream media. If they were, the president’s polls wouldn’t be where they are."

Meanwhile, having followed the legacy-media script, Rahm, Barack and Bubba find themselves front and center on Drudge this morning, first day of a three-day weekend when the White House no doubt hoped the nation would head out for the patio and not worry our pretty little heads about the big lie they dumped on us yesterday. Instead, it's all over talk radio, cable and the internet. Pajamas Media's take was particularly witty and astute [h/t Dan Collins at POWIP]:

Of course in the case of Sestak and his putative job offer, we have no idea what actually happened. But we do know the sleaze factor is high —  and not just because of the presence of Bill Clinton whose SQ (Sleaze Quotient) may be even higher than his IQ. Clinton is merely a product of "The Culture of Narcissism," Obama et al are the product of something worse – "The Culture of Chicago."

But the real issue now is not the “Deep Dish Sleazemeisters” from Chicago. They are who they are. Rod Blagojevich, Rahm Emanuel and Barack Obama are all cut from the same cloth.

The real issue is our media – the Fourth Estate that we all are supposed to depend on to vet these people.

Not to worry. As John McCain has figured out — thanks, perhaps, to the lady at the wheel — we may have a compliant media, but "the American people have figured it out."

Crossposted at Riehl World View and Liberty Pundits.

Dan Riehl: There needs to be outrage

Dan Riehl and Melissa Clouthier caught on Fox News camera during CPAC 2010 last month. "The youth are first and foremost among us in throwing off authority," writes Riehl. We agree with him that "McCain's progressivism does not represent any future for the GOP … Statism will never appeal to the silent majority of America's youth. In fact, libertarianism can. And the large presence of young political guns at CPAC demonstrated it."

Dan Riehl is a force of nature and a master of the agitator's art. The average person's reaction to news of Harry Reid's wife's and daughter's accident yesterday was to express sympathy and wishes for a speedy recovery. We were sort of there ourselves, trying to repress our visceral disgust with the Senate Majority Leader's totalitarianesque health-care-reform agenda in recognition of our common humanity when human suffering strikes. But not Riehl, who burst fearlessly center stage into the blogosphere this evening with a politically incorrect showstopper guaranteed to precipitate a social-network-a-lanche in the coming hours: 

Isn't it time to euthanize Reid's wife?

Vintage Riehl. Anyone who's been paying attention through the years knows the man has a heart of gold, but when it comes to defending this Shining City Upon a Hill, he takes no prisoners. His wilfully callous-sounding words had the usual suspects shocked, shocked at the insensitivity of it all. The point was that Democrats trying to ram Obamacare 2.0 — AKA socialized medicine, which always leads to long waits, rationing of treatment and, yes, death panels — down our throats have no intention of submitting themselves and their families to such substandard health regimes:

I'm not sure I quite understand this, given that cost is so important as a burden to taxpayers when it comes to health care. If Democrats want so badly to abort babies because of it, why are we bothering with someone who has a broken neck and back at 69? It sounds to me like she's pretty well used up and has probably been living off the taxpayers for plenty of years to begin with. Aren't we at least going to get a vote on it?

I realize her crook of a husband and his pals in Congress have excluded themselves from the mess they're going to compel everyone else to join, but we're still paying the bills, are we not? I don't see that she's worth it at this point, frankly. I can't recall her ever doing anything for me.

Come on, Harry — do your civic duty. The nation's broke and counting on you guy. Pull the plug and get back to work.

"A lot of people [are] pissed at Dan Riehl right now for saying what deserved to be said," writes Dan Cleary in a Twitter exchange among Dan, Melissa Clouthier, Leon Wolf and Cleary this evening:

Leon Wolf: I'd love to see where the people comdemning Dan Riehl right now got equally outraged at this.

Clouthier: It is taking the argument to the end, but most people won't read it that way.

Cleary: I say life's too short to waste on people who miss the quite obvious point of Riehl's post.

Clouthier: There will be outrage. Still, since Dems use the utilitarian argument, might as well use it back.

Riehl: Let them be outraged. Where's the outrage at their willingness to kill babies, many hispanic and black and they know it! There needs to be outrage, we have been civil for decades, only to lose more and more ground. When will people stand up?

Well, a "Call to action! March 16th, 2010 — Stop Obamacare 2.0," when tea-party-minded citizens from across the nation converge upon DC to speak with as many representatives as possible, encouraging them to just say no, should be a good start.

Update: Instalanche! Our secret is out:

FORCE OF NATURE? I think Sissy Willis kind of has a thing for Dan Riehl. At least a blog-crush, anyway …

Update II: A bit of advice to Gregory Koster and others in the comments:

You need to work on your sense of irony. As fellow commenter Filbert Rusco notes, your argument suggests you "probably thought Jonathan Swift really wanted to eat Irish babies too."

Neither Dan Riehl nor we are advocating death panels that would say one person's life is worth more or less than another's. Quite the opposite.

Update III: "I've always maintained that irony is the final proof of our transcendence beyond mere evolution," writes Joanofargghh in the comments:

Judging by the misguided outrage at Dan's splendid debating style, I'd say my observation stands up to the proofs.

Take that, primordial ooze!

Update IV: Joanofargghh links with a rousing "Dan Riehl: Man on Fire."

Update V: Little Miss Attila weighs in with a link: "Who doesn't have a thing for Dan Riehl?"

A Declaration of Independence: Art for freedom's sake

Bill Whittle, you may have put the nation on the road to recovery of the Founders' enlightened vision of freedom singlehandedly. Longhandedly, that is, as in writing out the Declaration of Independence longhand. We've completed the first part (three 8 1/2 x 11 sheets, above) and found the exercise a revelation. Two examples: 1. it was the united (l.c. "u") States of America (emphasis on individual states), not the United States. 2. The goal was to "effect" rather than "affect" the people's "Safety and Happiness," a positive intention rather than a vague hope (yes you, Hopenchangers). Also, bonus revelation, we can still write longhand!

"Bill Whittle has given me a new idea for an art project for my sixth graders," writes  blogbuddy and art teacher extraordinaire Laura Lee in the comments to our previous post. "I've just ordered new calligraphy pens and paper":

OBJECTIVE: The students will recover, evaluate, analyze and create an artwork by writing in longhand, with calligraphy pens, the Declaration of Independence.

I have a large copy of the Declaration hanging in a place of honor in my art room.

Detail of one of Laura Lee's student artworks. It looks to be a technique we remember from our own enchanted childhood, where you make a drawing with waxy crayons and then overwash with poster paint. The layered result evokes a pentimento, revealing something of the artist's thinking as the work progressed.

At her own blog in a must-read call to arms infused with the tea party spirit, Laura Lee expands on the theme of what's the matter with education today (see Gramscian march through the institutions) and her lonely fight to foster a richly-textured understanding and appreciation of the Shining City Upon a Hill that is at the heart of American exceptionalism:

Forget the NCAA tournament, the Iditarod, and the Academy Awards, it’s Art Season for me. Three art competitions in recent weeks have had me working day and night to prepare my “players” for their chance to shine.

"A must view" we wrote in our post Too Late to Apologize: Music video as history lesson. "Rousing music, sublime production values and compelling performances blend 18th- and 21st-century perspectives into the perfect historically-aware antidote to the 'ideas' of clueless North Carolina education 'leaders' who are proposing to revamp the state's 11th-grade curriculum by skipping the Revolution and Civil War and covering U.S.history only from 1877 onward.'"

"Why do I do it when most of the Arts establishment discourage competition in art? (and other areas)," she asks rhetorically:

The art establishment discourages competition in art just as educational elites frown upon any kind of competition in schools. Children are not being encouraged to compete or to strive to achieve in many schools in America, unfortunately.

Talent is the great equalizer; I’ve taught in high socio-economic schools as well as the low socio-economic school where I am teaching presently. I much prefer schools in poor neighborhoods. The children aren’t as distracted by ipods, video games and other prizes of the well off. Many of my students are immigrants and appreciate the education that our school is providing. Many, of course, not all, of the students who I taught who came from richer neighborhoods did not have aspirations to achieve.

"When life comes easy, achievements are few," observes Laura Lee:

What does the national art educational establishment consider important? Not achievement, nor excellence but social justice."

See what you've started, Bill Whittle? And while we're on the subject of re-enlightening that Shining City:

A "Call to action! March 16th, 2010 — Stop Obamacare 2.0" from Tabitha Hale of FreedomWorks:

We are calling everyone that is able to come to Washington, DC on March 16th, 2010 for one last push against Obamacare. We will meet at the Cannon building at 9 am and speak with as many representatives as possible, encouraging them to vote NO on this version of health care reform.

Hey, Heather J. You'll be in the area. How's about representing the clan for us? Field reports sought. You take pictures, we'll post 'em here.

"Think Scott Brown can't win? Here's why he can"

"If we allow more free enterprise and less government intrusion into our lives, we can create jobs here in Massachusetts," State Senator Scott P. Brown, winner of the Republican nomination for the Kennedy seat in yesterday's low-turnout Massachusetts primary, told local TV anchors this morning. Long-shot candidate Brown will face off with Democrat nominee Attorney General Martha M. Coakley in a January 19 special election. NSFW: Click on image to find out how Brown financed his Boston College Law School student career. (Fox25 News photo above)

"Oddly enough, the one media outlet seeing a potential victory path for Brown, if remote, is the New York Times," writes Brian Maloney of SaveWRKO.com on this wild and woolly wintry-mix morning in the aftermath of Massachusetts State Senator Scott Brown's primary victory in the race to fill the late Senator Ted Kennedy's seat. Brown's opponent in the January 19 special election, Democrat Attorney General Martha Coakley, is "the perfect candidate for the modern Massachusetts electorate," quips local political wag Howie Carr: "someone for rich, white lunatics to vote for if they still feel guilty, even after voting for Barack and Deval."

Brown talks with Boston's WBZ-TV early-morning anchors Paula Ebben and David Wade.

Our own Jules Crittenden — together with most commentators, local and national — sees the writing on the wall:

Given that (a) it’s Massachusetts, (b) the national GOP isn’t interested in even making a good showing for Ted Kennedy’s legacy seat, (c) the state GOP is a joke, it is all but a foregone conclusion that would require remarkable gaffes by Coakley, an extraordinary and deft effort by Brown, and probably external events such as a Democratic health-care debacle. Before we get to the not-inconsiderable potential for the latter, there are some other vulnerabilities, however.

In case you're not up to speed on Scott Brown and the Massachusetts electorate, a few helpful facts and figures from that NYT article:

Although this is the state’s first Senate race with no incumbent since 1984 — for a legendary seat that John F. Kennedy, Daniel Webster and John Quincy Adams held before Edward Kennedy — polling places reported strikingly low turnout.…

About 37 percent of the state’s 4.1 million registered voters are Democrats, and about 11 percent are Republicans, giving Ms. Coakley an advantage over Mr. Brown in the general election. Although Massachusetts has elected three Republican governors since 1990, it has not sent a Republican to the Senate in 37 years.

Mr. Brown, 50, is a lawyer and a lieutenant colonel in the Massachusetts National Guard who has served in the state legislature since 1996. He opposes same-sex marriage and the health care legislation being debated in Congress, and supports President Obama’s decision to send more troops to Afghanistan.

Winning unaffiliated voters, who make up half of the state’s electorate, will be crucial for Mr. Brown. He has emphasized his ability to work across party lines, while casting himself as the only candidate with conservative values.

Coakley "quickly came out against the amendment restricting abortion access in the House health care bill last month, saying, 'It’s personal with me, and it’s personal with every woman,'” reports the Times. Above at her primary election night victory event Tuesday in Boston she told fans "They said that women don't have much luck in MA politics, and we believed that it was quite possible that that luck was going to change, and change it did tonight!" (Elise Amendola/Associated Press photo)

Just for the fun of it, a little local color from WBZ-TV News Political Analyst Bob Kelleher:

Martha Coakley … ran a flawless campaign and put the old-boy network in its place with a blowout win on Tuesday night.

On the Republican side, Scott Brown had the best of both worlds, a cakewalk win, and an opponent who spent a bunch of dough reminding voters that Brown fits the template of the occasional Republican successes in this state, social moderation and fiscal conservatisn.

And more delicious prose from Jules Crittenden:

I liked the part, at the beginning of her victory speech last night, where she said voters indicated they want a new kind of leadership in Washington D.C. Flanked by U.S. Rep. Nikki Tsongas and U.S. Sen. John Kerry, apparently secure en route to a Democratic Senate seat in a Democratic Congress currently doing business with a Democratic White House, it was a somewhat enigmatic pronouncement.

"Think Brown can’t win? Here’s why he can," explains SaveWRKO.com's Maloney with a must-read rabble-rouser's roster of reasons not to wave the white flag just yet. A sampling:

With local media outlets already declaring Coakley our next senator, Martha’s infamous coasting will become even more pronounced. She will put next to nothing into her effort from here, saving campaign funds for future purposes …

Turnout on January 19 will be even lower than today’s. We could be well into single digits across the Commonwealth. Motivating your base, even one as small as the GOP’s, makes it possible to overcome that …

Make it clear: this is about the economy, jobs, and taxes. These are winnable positions for Republicans. Set the agenda, it’s not difficult, as Martha’s sole “issue” is her gender …

ABSOLUTELY go after Coakley EVERY SINGLE DAY. Make her life miserable for the next six weeks, that’s what campaigning is all about. And she most certainly deserves it! There’s no reason she should have a free ride simply because that pleases Margery Eagan and the others who failed to nominate Hillary Clinton in 2008.

Speaking of rabble-rousers, enter stage right the Tea Party Movement, Northeastern Massachusetts Branch. RNC Chair Michael Steele may not get it, but there's a Reynoldsian Army of Davids out here behind Taxachusetts enemy lines fixing to stand up and fight for this Shining City Upon a Hill: As Brown senior adviser Eric Fehrnstom says:

"I think the recent election in New Jersey and in the one in Virginia, which is a swing state, sent a very strong message that people are fed up with business as usual in Washington and they want to see the pendulum swing back in the direction of fiscal prudence."

Our very first foray into Tea Party activism was at a demonstration before City Hall organized by the Newburyport Republicans last March. Tomorrow the sub rosa group will celebrate a year of political reawakening at its annual Xmas Party to be held at the Amesbury Playhouse from 6:30 to 11 p.m. We have it from the horse's mouth — Newburyport's Voice blogger and Chairman of the Newburyport GOP, comrade in arms Larry Giunta — that Scott Brown himself will be there to meet and greet. Turns out his father, C. Bruce Brown, is a member of the Newburyport Republican City Committee and was on the City Council of this Northshore bedroom community for 18 years. "I know C. Bruce," says our imail correspondent, a city resident, "but had no idea he was a Republican." That says it all. One-party states like Massachusetts function as Fear-Lite societies.

Update: Maggie's links. Thanks, News Junkie!

Unpdate II: "Yes, yes, all politics are local. Except when they’re not, like in the case of being a deciding vote on fauxcare," writes Dana Loesch, who links.