Ave, Skippy!

As always, Skippy is your blogger when you want to know what's happening in the world of politics. At this point, I'd call him my favorite political commentator, despite (or maybe because of?) the typos. Skippy's current post on the Obama victory is definitely worth your time. His hilarious summation of Obama's electoral trajectory caught my eye:

from mortal rock star to dusky deity

Skippy would love to see a McCain-versus-Obama duel. I agree that would be interesting. The Republicans find themselves with a largely unpalatable menu to choose from because so many Republican voters seem unwilling to accept anything less than a classic party-liner. And who, among the current top-of-the-line GOP candidates, is such a party-liner? McCain, Giuliani, and Huckabee all suffer, to a greater or lesser degree, from RINO syndrome because they take certain uncomfortably pragmatic (from the GOPer standpoint, read: left-leaning) positions on issues ranging from gun control to immigration to economic and foreign policy.

Many months ago, Skippy, who despises Giuliani (for the record: I don't, and he's the guy I'd vote for if he became the GOP nominee, which I've never found likely), predicted that the Rude-meister would take a fall in January, and that seems to have happened. The moral of the story is: don't fuck with Skippy.

I suspect that, deep down, the Dems know that Hillary shouldn't be their nominee. They know that nothing will pull the currently-disarrayed GOP voting bloc together faster than having a Clinton on the ticket come November. The GOP bloc, meanwhile, apparently isn't aware that having Mike Huckabee come out on top isn't exactly going to increase GOP chances of keeping the White House. My impression of Huckabee is that he's a frigging fruit loop. He knows dick about foreign policy and will probably court the Bible-thumper vote, and little else, at the national level. I don't see Huckabee as the eventual GOP nominee. Once voters become more aware of his nearly Santorum-like social conservatism, they'll run from him in droves.

Obama also gets accused of inexperience, but to me it's obvious that, as a politician, he's a fast learner. He has, you must admit, engaged in only a minimum of mudslinging-- petty, wussy little barbs traded with fellow Dems, nothing to blacken the soul. His victory speech (check Mike Hurt's post for clip and commentary) hammered relentlessly on the issues of bipartisanship and the national need to transcend concepts of "blue state" and "red state." There was very little "I" and a lot of "we." That's a message I can appreciate. Having just watched Mike Huckabee's rather pedestrian (and "I"-filled) victory speech (see here), I can say that Obama comes off as by far the better orator (though it did help that he had such a high-energy crowd with him, too). My point is that, so far, Obama has shown himself to be in control of the tone and content of his message. He has certainly shown far more integrity than the protean Hillary, who morphs into whatever shape (and speaks with whatever accent) seems most likely to win the current crowd. The comparison of Hillary and Obama over time is striking: it has become quite obvious, over the course of several months, just which of the two possesses more actual sincerity. I find myself liking Obama, something I never thought I'd say about a politician. I doubt I'll ever agree with his views on Iraq and foreign policy in general, but he seems both personable and savvy as a politician. Whether he's naive-- e.g., on foreign policy matters-- is an open question. He's likely to be hammered on this issue by his GOP opponent, especially if his opponent is McCain or Giuliani.

Back to Skippy's post and why you should read it, though. Check out the opener:

Tonight Iowa proved that the impossible is possible. Tonight we learned that Hillary Clinton is more than capable of losing, and losing rather handily. A black guy from Chicago tore down the House of Clinton in one of the whitest, most rural places, not only in America, but in the motherfucking world, and he did it decisively.

Not only did Barack Obama kick Hillary's ass across the state, an insincere, faux hillbilly haircut like John Edwards did, too. It was a bad night to be Hillary Clinton, and I haven't seen her husband look that bad since his Grand Jury [appearance] of a decade ago.

If tonight repeats itself in New Hampshire next Tuesday - and I fully expect it to - Hillary is finished. Without New Hampshire, Clinton won't even carry New York or the 22 other states that she's from. I don't care what the numbers are now[;] New Yorkers and Californians will never support a proven loser. If you're interested in how that works, take a good look at Rudy Giuliani's national numbers. Rudy, by the way, lost to Ron fucking Paul by six points tonight.

Tonight knocked down all of Team Hillary's three key arguments: that she's inevitable, that blacks won't vote for Obama because whites won't, and that her experience trumps his message of "hope." Without those, not only will Hillary lose everywhere else, she has no rationale for a campaign at all other than the retarded and [un-American] notion of dynasty.

I loved the first President Bush will all of my heart and I still do. I think that he's a fantastic man and [a] highly underrated president, [whom] history will treat well. His son decided early on to demonstrate just how different he is from the old man. Well, he did just that, and hopefully it'll kill the idea of a hereditary presidency for as long as the failed Adams restoration did in the 19th century.

You didn't get 41 by voting for 43 and you won't get Bill by voting for Hillary. Not only does she not have his experience, she doesn't have anything close to his political skill. Furthermore, while she lies every bit as much as her husband, she doesn't do it with the joy that he does.

Go read your Skippy. No other political commentary is quite so satisfactory. Unfortunately, Skippy inserts no references to cunnilingus in this post, but I guess we can't expect him to be Superman, eh?


_