"Jim Ogonowski. Pro: Good Stuff. Anti: Bad Stuff."

Matt Stoller has a serious reason for writing about this ad, for Republican Jim Ogonowski in the MA-05 special election. Me, I just want to point out how incredibly stupid it is. Look:

It's like an amalgam of every campaign-ad cliche in existence. "Washington is full of scary politicians who flash brightly over cacophonous music. But CANDIDATE isn't scary! CANDIDATE is a farmer and an awesome business-guy! Look what this local newspaper said about CANDIDATE! CANDIDATE walks in fields with anonymous people! CANDIDATE is like smiling Jesus!" Etc.

And I love that little quaver the announcer gets in his voice when he talks about spending cuts, as though he were so awestruck by Jim Ogonowski's generic moderate-Republican talking points that he almost can't keep his composure. Reading to a kindergarten class, this guy. "Big, strong Jim Ogonowski came, and with a slash of his mighty sword he SAVED THE PRINCESS..."

----SurveyUSA/WBZ has Ogonowski within 10 points of the Democrat, Niki Tsongas, in this normally safe blue district (encompassing Lowell, Methuen, Lawrence, Haverhill) -- he's competitive mostly off the strength of independent voters, who break for Ogonowski 46-39. I don't see any methodology info for this poll, though, so take it with a big grain of salt. Besides, if Ogonowski's campaign is really of this caliber, I don't think anyone will be staying up nights worrying about him...

Kansas' Grand Old Politburo

I thought I'd just add a comment on the hilarious news out of the Kansas Republic Politburo, err, Party. A lot of people that would otherwise probably be Democrats have signed on with the Republicans because for a long time the Republicans have been the only show in town; when you're almost sure that the Republicans are going to be the ones dispensing jobs and patronage, it makes sense to be on the winning team, whether or not your beliefs actually line up.

Kathleen Sebelius's election was facilitated by a split between moderates and hard-liners during the Republican primary. Now that Sebelius is one of the most popular governors in the country, and now that she's easily won re-election,  the Republicans aren't looking like the only show in town anymore. 

Obviously the move to shun Republicans who support Democrats is intended to keep people on the reservation, but I think it'll probably backfire and have the opposite effect. More Democrats are being elected at all level--we also kicked out Phill Kline, who used the Kansas AG's office to harass innocent women.

Not only did Nancy Boyda (whose been great so far this Congressional term, by the way) win an encouraging victory, but Todd Tiahrt, the Congressman for the Wichita area, is more vulnerable than he gets credit for.

In the last election, a no-name with no credentials and no campaign ended up with about 35% of the vote. It shouldn't be impossible to get that next 16% with a real candidate, plus an organization on the ground. Places like Wichita are where the 'Fifty State Strategy' can pay off, and of course it did pay off in Topeka/Lawrence in 2006. 

The Crimson Hits A New Low

I am going to be sick.

I would venture to guess that Gloria Steinem has never read Thucydides.

She and her ideological sisters at Ms. Magazine seem to have overlooked some particularly sound advice in the Athenian admiral’s account of Pericles’ “Funeral Oration.” In his speech, Pericles suggests that “not to be talked about for good or evil among men” is a woman’s “great glory.” His concern is not the limitation or restriction of women and their actions, but rather their ennoblement; he does not think they should be subject to gossip and rumor. Women want—and deserve— privacy, Pericles seems to be saying.

First of all, kudos to the genius headline writer that gave this the subtitle "Delusional feminists set the clock back on women’s rights", before allowing Chris Lacaria to cite as his example of the modern moral authority: Thucydides.

But really: I'm not sure whether this column offends me because it's so stunningly arrogant & paternalistic, or just because it's monumentally irrelevant. Where, by God, does Chris Lacaria get the authority to tell the women of Ms. Magazine what is and is not appropriate discourse -- and then, amazingly, to turn around and say that "Women deserve better"?

("Honey, quick, go back in the kitchen! There's SCARY FEMINISTS on the TV!")

I can't believe it's 2006 and we even have to deal with this crap. I thought all this was basically settled 30 years ago. Did I miss something? Have disco and the pet rock come back?

Or is the Crimson just hard-up for material, and resorted to scraping the bottom of the barrel?