September 02, 2004

Zell Miller: Barking Mad

Is Zell Miller more or less barking mad than Pat Buchanan?

Searching for Zell Miller: Wonkette's Googlism operative writes: "As of 10:25 AM today, a Google for the phrases 'zell miller' and 'barking mad' turns up only 16 hits. . . But, as I said, it's only 10:25 AM."

Posted by DeLong at September 2, 2004 09:34 AM | TrackBack

This Anglophone gabble is never going to make it on Google.

Posted by: Max at September 2, 2004 09:42 AM

It was one of the most despicable, vicious, false characterizations of the Democratic ticket that I've ever heard.

As far as I am concerned, Zig Zag Zell can go to Hell.

Posted by: Brian at September 2, 2004 09:43 AM

While you are at it make it Zell Miller, Barking Mad, Compulsively Flip Flopping, Former Segregationist, Former Centrist Democrat, and currently Faux Fox Democrat and Right Wing Shill.

Posted by: llamajockey at September 2, 2004 09:51 AM

Remember how the Repugs SCREAMED, over and over, "Librul Hatefest! Librul Hatefest!"

Will his lies and raging "duel" meltdown get 1/1,000th the play of Dean's "scream"?

Note -- Al Franken sounds more pissed today than I've ever heard him before.

Posted by: MattB at September 2, 2004 09:51 AM

The transcript of Miller on Hardball. Miller's appearance is about halfway down the page. Truly barking mad:

Posted by: Dan at September 2, 2004 10:10 AM

Matthew Yglesias

Watching that speech from inside the hall, I was genuinely afraid at one or two points. The audience was so enthused by his frankly fascistic remarks that at any moment I thought the distinguished Senator might point up and say "see, there, right there is one of these unpatriotic liberal journalists busy abusing the freedoms our soldiers fight to protect -- he must be destroyed for the safety of the Republican" and that Matt Welch and I would need to fend for our lives against the onrushing hordes.

Of course it didn't quite come to that, but I don't believe I've ever heard a more disgusting speech delivered in the English language. The fact that I couldn't see a single person on the floor who seemed to feel anything less than the utmost enthusiasm for that lunacy was, well, a bit disturbing.

Posted by: anne at September 2, 2004 10:17 AM

Take a look at the links Google serves up. Virtually none of them have any relation to last night's speech.

Posted by: Charles Kinbote at September 2, 2004 10:17 AM

"Zell Miller" "Unhinged" is already at 249 results.

Posted by: Dan Ryan at September 2, 2004 10:28 AM

Zell Miller was suffering from battle fatigue.
Zell is a politician and can sniff the tidal wave. Everyone knows what's about to happen.

"If the work of the city is the remaking or translating of man into a more suitable form than his nomadic ancestors achieved, then might not our current translation of our entire lives into the spiritual form of information (in the media of television and Internet) seem to make of the entire globe, and of the human family, a single consciousness?" . . . (Marshall McLuhan)

Cheney had every prime time channel last night, and the 10 o'clock news, and they're replaying his speech again this morning. He's the perfect pitchman for BushCo, the lying dog that he is.

You notice how cleverly Cheney conflated Kerry with "the past", making Bush's AWOL time, and Kerry's Nam experience irrelevant (after Bush got prime time yesterday speiling his "concern" for vets); how carefully Cheney muddled Osama's isolated string of US government facilities attacks with a "global war on terrorism" (e.g. Endless Crusades for "Infinite Justice"); how firmly Cheney laid Kerry on the grave of Ronald Reagan, godfather of the Republican war cabal, deified "slayer of Communist-Socialist state," (even though none of Reagan's SDI initiatives ever saw the light and *twenty years* later SDI still doesn't work, still sucking up *$billion$* of our discretionary tax dollars).

Most importantly, how Cheney elevated GWBush to a demi-god, poo-pooing Kerry's reasoned posture against Bushs' barking-mad attack-dog Pentagon death mongering throughout the world: "George Bush doesn't need permission to defend America."
Brilliant. Terror and fear, and shock and awe.

If media is the "spiritual form of information, a single consciousness", then Kos is irrelevant (at 300,000 or 0.1% of US audience) and Bush/ Cheney becomes a Moses-parting-the-Red-Sea icon.

Well, you ever noticed in innocent times and ways, warnings to youth are always to shun the Devil and Vice; while in evil times and ruthless ways, like those we live in today, political posturing is always who is more closely aligned with God and Virtue, while evil and vice rules?

The good news? Teenage kids today are flocking behind Michael Moore's banner, holding Columbine and Roger and F 9/11 DVD parties late into the night, as you might expect. And they all laugh at the right places, which is encouraging.

Work with your kids! They understand the truth, and just need some sign from adults that adult society recognizes the truth, and hasn't become a zombified night of the living dead.

Posted by: John Worldpeace at September 2, 2004 10:48 AM

Zell Miller's speech last night was a bizarre and frightening display. As I watched his oration on MSNBC, the periodic cuts to close-ups of the faces of his listeners was chilling. Either Miller is a complete fanatic or this is one of the most subtle acts of sabotage I've ever seen. Neo-conservatives, hell--neo-fascists!

Posted by: jim48 at September 2, 2004 10:53 AM

More barking mad. He is standing on his porch somewhere in the Appalachians with a shotgun and a lantern, protecting his family's sleep from the raving hordes of Islamofascists...

Posted by: ch2 at September 2, 2004 10:54 AM

Try "zell miller" and "crazy" and you get a bit more than 7000 google hits. Not all of them identifying Zell miller as crazy, but certainly many.

Posted by: Andy at September 2, 2004 10:58 AM

Not one of these google links had anything to do with Miller's speach of last night. So what's Wonkette's point?

Posted by: Aaron Gurwitz at September 2, 2004 10:58 AM

As Yogi Berra once said,
"It's like 1939 all over again."

Posted by: Hesai Deshaid at September 2, 2004 10:59 AM

The real piece of analysis of the day: Richard Medley in the Financial Times.

The Democrats may have found their Willie Horton.

Kerry has lost control of his own campaign
By Richard Medley
Published: September 2 2004 03:00 | Last updated: September 2 2004 03:00

Imagine - a US campaign advertisement aired just before the November 3 US presidential election closes with the simple statement, "John Kerry: Liar, Traitor, Opportunist". Harsh? Excessive? Perhaps, but a series of historic mistakes by Mr Kerry's campaign has allowed the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the anti-Kerry war veterans, to change the course of the presidential race and set the Democratic challenger up for a barrage of such charges over the next month.

The real damage is not yet visible. Forget the current polls. George W. Bush was always going to pull even with Mr Kerry around the time of his convention. Campaign officials on both sides agree that the ads launched by the Swift Boat vets last month shaved only a couple points off Mr Kerry and that the race is a dead heat.

What hurts Mr Kerry is that he has lost control of the news cycle and the rhythm of this campaign. And that is a big problem for a challenger. Unseating an incumbent is always a two-step process. First, the incumbent has to make himself vulnerable. Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton were never going to lose their re-election ssbids; they had strong economies and no serious foreign policy humiliations to explain. Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush were vulnerable and paid the price. But vulnerability alone is not enough. The second step requires the challenger to "make the sale" with voters by convincing them he could do a better job on the defining issue of the campaign. The Bush campaign knew from late last year it was vulnerable and its planning was designed to keep whomever the Democrats nominated from sealing the deal with voters.

That is why the Bush team could hardly believe its luck when Mr Kerry took the stage at the Democratic convention in Boston and made national security and his military record the centrepiece of his campaign. Convincing voters that a Democrat would better protect America than a Republican is a tough sale. The devastatingly effective Swift Boat vets' media blitzkrieg - two weeks of lightly funded ads accelerated by a media feeding frenzy - made it nearly impossible. Indeed, the Swifties have handed Mr Bush control of the election dynamics for the first time this year. Unless Mr Kerry can regain the momentum, he will lose. Mr Bush is well aware of that and the Republicans have a simple strategy to stay in control until November. A second round of Swift Boat veteran ads is now under way - funded by a massive inflow of donations via the group's website. These ads use Mr Kerry's testimony to Congress accusing American soldiers of war crimes in

Vietnam. Whereas the earlier ads, while questioning Mr Kerry's integrity, were largely untrue, the new ones use Mr Kerry's own words to make him look a traitor. Sure, the Kerry campaign can complain that his words are taken out of context, but that does not convince voters and keeps Mr Kerry reacting rather than dictating the campaign news flow. Let local television stations interview veterans about how they feel about those ads, and this part of the strategy is complete.

With the contest moving into full swing, the formal Bush campaign can take over again. The Bush ads in coming weeks will reintroduce the already weakened Mr Kerry to voters as a senator so bereft of accomplishment in 20 years that he runs a campaign based on a few months in the jungle 30 years ago rather than on his record in Washington. This is Kerry the lightweight, unprincipled waffler and flip-flopper. These ads proved effective in the spring, keeping the contest close despite bad news from Iraq and the findings of the 9/11 Commission.

To escape this trap, Mr Kerry must regain control of the campaign dynamics before Mr Bush has finished defining him to voters. He can always hope that tomorrow's unemployment number is so damaging that the economy becomes the dominant theme. But life rarely works in that generous way. The Kerry campaign does have some blistering anti-Bush ads ready to run as the convention glow fades. Those will certainly guarantee that the campaign turns more personal and nasty than any in recent history; but can control of the campaign be wrested from an incumbent purely with negative advertisements? The record of that strategy is poor. All this makes it even more remarkable that the Kerry campaign failed to blunt the Swift Boat vets before their ads were launched last month. After all, the same bitter veterans have dogged Mr Kerry in every election for the last 30 years. Had Mr Kerry's ads tied the Swiftie attack to similar slander against John McCain in 2000, the press could have been locked and loaded to attack them as kooks. Then it would have been one more example of the "mean" face of George Bush.

Mr Kerry has always been a great campaigner in the final few weeks of an election. He has come from behind often and therefore cannot be written off. But he is in the toughest spot in his history and has only himself to blame for that. If he loses, his decision not to come out early and hard against the Swifties will go down in history as a blunder equal in size to the last Massachusetts Democrat to lose to a George Bush. And no one wants to be Michael Dukakis.

The writer is chairman and chief executive of Medley Global Advisors

Posted by: John at September 2, 2004 11:02 AM

All Bush needs to seal his
re-election is a Reichstag fire.

Posted by: Hesai Deshaid at September 2, 2004 11:06 AM

in re:

As Yogi Berra once said,
"It's like 1939 all over again."

“No other single person represents the symbol and the substance of *globalism* more than this *Hungarian-born descendant* of *Shylock.* He is the embodiment of the Merchant from Venice,” wrote GOPAC, an organization that helps elect GOP candidates, on its website last year.

In William Shakespeare’s “Merchant of Venice,” Shylock was the Jewish banker whose venality would not stop him from cutting human flesh to repay loans.

Posted by: Dan at September 2, 2004 11:27 AM


I’ve always thought it was a sad joke when the FemiNazi ManlyGirls belittle us middleclass, middleaged, white guys for “being afraid of powerful women.” Although I suppose I am sometimes afraid of the powerful women in my life – my Mom, Wife, Daughter and even my Mother-in-law, I certainly have never been afraid of the FNMGs.

Besides the wonderful women in my family, when I think of powerful women, I think of women like Barbara Bush, Laura Bush, Mary Matelin, Karen Hughes, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter and most especially, Condi Rice. These are truly extraordinary women.

Barbara Bush is one of only two women in history who managed both her husband and one son (so far) into the Presidency of the United States of America. I fell in love with her when I videotaped her speech and Raisa Gorbachev’s speech at Wellesley College some years ago. I think she is THE EXEMPLAR of the most powerful of all human forces – LOVE.

Laura Bush exemplifies the WIFE AS PARTNER IN LIFE model of female power. I’m very fortunate to have such a wife of my very own. Does anyone really think that “W” could have become president without her.

Mary Matelin, God bless her, is truly a saint for building a life with hubby Jim while being an important mover and shaker in Republican circles. I once had the opportunity to ask Dee Dee Myers what their relationship was like and she said, after an exaggerated eye roll, “They really love each other.”

Karen Hughes is the epitome of the type of “office wife” who wields incredible power in our Capitalist nation while advising powerful men and “really” running their enterprises.

Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter are extremely courageous, not to mention gorgeous and feminine women who have the balls to take on the received wisdom of popular left wing culture. These two women are HEROS OF THE UNITED STATES in my mind.

Now there’s Condi Rice. I pray to God that I can someday vote her to high office, even the Presidency. She is another courageous, gorgeous woman who blesses America by merely living here.

Finally, there is my own little nine year old. A year or so ago she told me she wanted to be the Mayor of Sacramento, CA when she grows up. When I asked why, she responded, “Because it’s the capital of the largest state.” She was serious then and she’s serious now in her intention to seek high office, yes even the Presidency.

What a lucky land we Republican men live in. We have powerful women who love masculine men.

Posted by: Adrian Spidle at September 2, 2004 11:28 AM

Brad, I beg you, please bounce Spindle's blog-whoring ass out of here. Enough is enough.

(Actual on-topic, non-blogwhoring posts excepted, of course. Both of them.)

Posted by: Doctor Memory at September 2, 2004 11:34 AM

And, of course, Adrian, let's not forget Lenora Fulani or Carol Moseley-Braun, or doesn't your Aryan universe recognize people of substance?

Posted by: Tante Aime at September 2, 2004 11:38 AM

1) Googling "'Zell Miller' rabid" gets 742 hits.

2) Shorter Adrian's glurge: it's OK to be a strong woman if you're a Republican. Otherwise, you're a FemiNazi.

There ain't enough rolleyes in the world for that.

Posted by: RT at September 2, 2004 11:45 AM

Is it just me or does anyone else hear the echo of early 1900's fascist anti-semitism in the GOPAC description of Soros. . . “the symbol and the substance of *globalism* , . . . *Hungarian-born descendant* of *Shylock.*”?

Posted by: Robin at September 2, 2004 11:49 AM

> Is it just me or does anyone else hear the echo of early 1900's fascist anti-semitism [in the reference to Shylock]?

Errm, echo? It sounded like unabashed anti-semitism to me. Is there some other way to read it that I missed?

From the movie _Barcelona_:

FRED: And one of the things that keeps popping up is this about "subtext." Plays, novels, songs--they all have a "subtext," which I take to mean a hidden message or import of some kind. So subtext we know. But what do you call the message or meaning that's right there on the surface, completely open and obvious? They never talk about that. What do you call what's above the subtext?

TED: The text.

FRED: OK, that's right, but they never talk about that.

Posted by: Paul Callahan at September 2, 2004 11:58 AM

funniest line so far:

"Zell's speech reads better in the original German."

Posted by: dan at September 2, 2004 12:41 PM

I poop too much and it makes me tired.

Posted by: Adrian Spidle at September 2, 2004 12:50 PM

I'm not sure if I agree with the FT op-ed above. The GOP may have crossed the line separating "effectively sowing doubts" and "going negative", and maybe over to "going crazy". If they have crossed the line into Buchanan territory, then they have not helped themselves.

After almost a month of this, the polls haven't moved very little -still overall it is a statistical tie.

And the GOP has not really defined Kerry. They are searching for a target for the slime to stick to. Is Kerry a
-wild eyed radical-liberal
-souless opportunist flip-flopper with no beliefs
-Gore style minor fibber
-pathological big liar
-psychologically damaged war vet who goes ballistic
-a girlie-man wimp?

They have trotted out each of these themes, even if some lasted only a day or two. They have to pick one or two and stick with it if they are to have proper target for their mud.

If the real point of this is limbic-system psycho-drama, it all operates on an almost subliminal level. And Dems have to trust that their candidate is a good enough at leadership to handle it well on that level.

Posted by: jml at September 2, 2004 01:06 PM

Recent Daily howler coverage of Zell:

Posted by: liberal at September 2, 2004 01:07 PM

After almost a month of this, the polls **have** moved very little -still overall it is a statistical tie.

Sorry, speed typing is not my strength.

Posted by: jml at September 2, 2004 01:08 PM

Hesai Deshaid wrote, "All Bush needs to seal his
re-election is a Reichstag fire."

That's very reminiscent of Krugman's claim in the intro to his _The Great Unravelling_ that the Republicans are a revolutionary power.

Posted by: liberal at September 2, 2004 01:08 PM

Re internet search hits: that was a JOKE, for those you looking through each hit.

Posted by: jml at September 2, 2004 01:09 PM

"Zell's speech reads better in the original German."

was originally a line that Molly Ivins used to describe Pat Buchanan's Culture War speech in '92.

Posted by: ch2 at September 2, 2004 01:20 PM

Wow, according to the rightwing spin, Miller "shredded" Chris Matthews. Search news on keywords zell duel:

I guess if you're conservative, just having a temper tantrum is enough to win a debate. On the the other hand, if you're liberal, registering the slightest objection to an obvious lie is referred to as "losing it."

Posted by: Paul Callahan at September 2, 2004 01:51 PM

Speaking of barking mad, that is a good description of the above comments. I can see that the feared spread of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) continues unabated.

Googling "Zell Miller" and:

Brilliant = 4,500 hits
Righteous = 1,800 hits
American = 65,000 hits
Patriot = 14,600 hits

Posted by: karlito at September 2, 2004 02:00 PM

Google hits for
Zell Miller &

crazy= 7060
crazy son of a = 1990

Posted by: ch2 at September 2, 2004 02:31 PM

And of course
Zell Miller and penile implant: 20 hits (go figure)

Posted by: ch2 at September 2, 2004 02:32 PM

"zell miller" and

mean 22,800
stupid 10,700
ass 8050
racist 4,870
tool 6610
horrible 3270
jackass 807
nut 1770
jerk 1780
moron 1620
useless 2100
zig 2140

Posted by: djs at September 2, 2004 02:34 PM

What about "Adrian Spidle" and "barking mad"?

Posted by: Anderson at September 2, 2004 02:51 PM

Scoff not. Sen. Miller turned out a lot of Republican votes last night, probably a good many of the first-time voters. The Republicans have finally realized what they have to do to turn out their stay-at-homes, and it is very simple. All they have to do is say in *public* what they have long been saying in *private*. By the turn of November, Zell Miller will sound like a purring kitten.

Posted by: Frank Wilhoit at September 2, 2004 03:06 PM

> All [Republicans] have to do is say in *public* what they have long been saying in *private*.

Eh? In public they've been saying things like "traitor", "girly man", and "f*** yourself." What part are they holding back?

Posted by: Paul Callahan at September 2, 2004 03:11 PM

Another instructive google search:

Definitions of fascism on the Web:

An extreme form of nationalism that played on fears of communism and rejected individual freedom, liberal individualism, democracy, and limitations on the state.

political philosophy or movement that places the nation or the race above the individual and that stands for highly centralized government led by a dictator; belief in militarism, racism, and nationalism; opposition to democracy and human rights.

An ideology that advocates extreme nationalism, with a heightened sense of national belonging or ethnic identity.

centralized authority regimenting commerce and people; citizens are allowed to hold a piece of paper (land title, business license, central bank note, birth certificate) fooling them into thinking they have property ownership, then the "owners" are heavily regulated and taxed.

Political philosophy that became predominant in Italy and then Germany during the 1920s and 1930s; attacked weakness of democracy, corruption of capitalism; promised vigorous foreign and military programs; undertook state control of economy to reduce social friction. (p. 870)

n. any political or social ideology which relies on a combination of psuedo-religious attitudes and the brutal use of force for getting and keeping power

form or practice of government where decisions are made in secrecy, which can be maintained by force or by a press entity with conflicting interests

A nationalist, anti-Communist and authoritarian political system evolved by Mussolini and his followers in Italy after 1922.

A political system that emphasizes nationalism, militarism, and anti- communist and totalitarian rule. Individuals are allowed to retain ownership of capital goods but are subject to centralized control.

a political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government (as opposed to democracy or liberalism)

Posted by: goethean at September 2, 2004 03:29 PM

Adrian Spidle:

Your respect and love for strong Republican women is noteworthy. However, women representation in our government has been decreasing, which I attribute to a general shift to the right in the whole population. At the same time, the Islamic countries have more male dominated governing bodies. What they deny by force, we deny by societal pressure. So it may be many years before you would ever see a female Republican president, or if so, that person would probably be at the extreme end of the right winger spectrum.

Off topic- but I wonder why, if Islamic and Eastern countries are supposedly so anti-woman, why they had female presidents long before we probably ever will.

Posted by: woodturtle at September 2, 2004 03:50 PM

Hesai Deshaid wrote, "All Bush needs to seal his
re-election is a Reichstag fire."

He already had it on 9/11/01.

Posted by: Brian Boru at September 2, 2004 09:12 PM

If I may have permission to make a snide comment,
thank you...
Adrian, Adrian, Adrian,
When speaking of Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin one is not to mention the word gorgeous precisely because their inner and outer beauty has been consumed by their venomous bile. No amount of makeup can cover that up and you should really get out more often my dear boy. That you describe them as women who have balls stands on its own.

Posted by: self at September 2, 2004 09:46 PM

Like Billy Graham with rabies.

Posted by: Steve at September 3, 2004 12:03 AM

Awww, you people just don't understand traditional southern political oratory. Go to a white Baptist church and see. Or turn on the PTL Club or something.

Posted by: paulo at September 3, 2004 07:37 AM

Ah, nothing like early-to-mid-1800's rhetoric to inflame the masses...

Posted by: agm at September 3, 2004 12:50 PM