Blogging for Bryant?
A friend emailed a link to a blog dedicated to advancing the level of spin from the Bryant camp.
This is a must read for anyone interested in revisionist history and watching sycophants in action. While it does not seem to be attracting much notice, there is a rumor going around that it is the brainchild of a Bryant staffer and a family member. Isn't that classy.
Bryant, for those of you that care to recall, was the prosecutor that allowed Monica Lewinsky to become a media sensation and allowed the left to characterize the Clinton Impeachment as nothing but a sex scandal. Ed may be a nice guy, but his inability to handle the situation properly dealt a major blow to the conservative movement -pun intended. He really botched that for us.
The Blogging for Bryant guys seem to be demanding Van Hilleary layout why he should be our next senator. Apparently these mental giants don't know that is what a campaign does and what Van, Ed Corker and presumably Beth Harwell are busy doing. With 18 months before the primary, I think everybody has time to make their case. Are these guys as freaked out about this as they seem?
My favorite brain fart from Team Bryant is the attempted slam on Hilleary that he lost the 2002 Gubernatorial race. Funny thing is, Bryant could not beat his opponent -uber moderate Lamar Alexander- in a Republican primary. If memory serves, Van won his primary contest and went on to to lose the closest gubernatorial race in history, thanks in large part to a bunch of moderate dunderheads that believed the Jim Henry/ Phil Bredesen spin that Harvard boy Phil would ride in and save Tenncare. That worked out great didn't it...
I've heard plenty of spin about Lamar being an political icon and that Bryant put up a massive fight in the face of overwhelming odds. That is a big load of BS. At the time, that simply wasn't true. He was a former, ex- had been politico with multiple failed attempts at higher office, from President on down. If Bryant could not overcome the moderate wing of the party against somebody- in a Republican Primary- with a very long track record of recent political failure what chance does he have now? Lamar has used his position well and has redeemed and glossed over many past insufficiencies. Now he is the icon, not then. Another weak argument from Ed.
Actually, I don't really think much of this stuff comes from Ed. I'm thinking it is the amateur team he has put together. It isn't their fault this is their first big race, but Ed should have loosened the purse strings and retained some professionals like Van and Bob. Even Beth had the sense to get Brian Kaegi early - a very smart move.
It is a beautiful day here in Music City- I'm off to the park.
This is a must read for anyone interested in revisionist history and watching sycophants in action. While it does not seem to be attracting much notice, there is a rumor going around that it is the brainchild of a Bryant staffer and a family member. Isn't that classy.
Bryant, for those of you that care to recall, was the prosecutor that allowed Monica Lewinsky to become a media sensation and allowed the left to characterize the Clinton Impeachment as nothing but a sex scandal. Ed may be a nice guy, but his inability to handle the situation properly dealt a major blow to the conservative movement -pun intended. He really botched that for us.
The Blogging for Bryant guys seem to be demanding Van Hilleary layout why he should be our next senator. Apparently these mental giants don't know that is what a campaign does and what Van, Ed Corker and presumably Beth Harwell are busy doing. With 18 months before the primary, I think everybody has time to make their case. Are these guys as freaked out about this as they seem?
My favorite brain fart from Team Bryant is the attempted slam on Hilleary that he lost the 2002 Gubernatorial race. Funny thing is, Bryant could not beat his opponent -uber moderate Lamar Alexander- in a Republican primary. If memory serves, Van won his primary contest and went on to to lose the closest gubernatorial race in history, thanks in large part to a bunch of moderate dunderheads that believed the Jim Henry/ Phil Bredesen spin that Harvard boy Phil would ride in and save Tenncare. That worked out great didn't it...
I've heard plenty of spin about Lamar being an political icon and that Bryant put up a massive fight in the face of overwhelming odds. That is a big load of BS. At the time, that simply wasn't true. He was a former, ex- had been politico with multiple failed attempts at higher office, from President on down. If Bryant could not overcome the moderate wing of the party against somebody- in a Republican Primary- with a very long track record of recent political failure what chance does he have now? Lamar has used his position well and has redeemed and glossed over many past insufficiencies. Now he is the icon, not then. Another weak argument from Ed.
Actually, I don't really think much of this stuff comes from Ed. I'm thinking it is the amateur team he has put together. It isn't their fault this is their first big race, but Ed should have loosened the purse strings and retained some professionals like Van and Bob. Even Beth had the sense to get Brian Kaegi early - a very smart move.
It is a beautiful day here in Music City- I'm off to the park.
posted by Chrystal at 9:28 AM
<< Home