Why do conservatives hate America? (part III)

OK, I know, it’s just some conservatives who’ve been exhibiting what they, in a different context, surely would describe as “Hanoi Jane” behavior. Others who haven’t taken leave of their political senses—and are familiar with the concept of manners—responded to President Barack Obama’s unexpected award with equanimity and even grace. Sen. John McCain, for example, offered his good-natured congratulations.

Some of Obama’s most strident critics, however, just can’t give it a rest. They use words like farce and travesty, as if there were always universal agreement on the worthiness of the Nobel peace laureate. Does anyone remember the controversy over Henry Kissinger or Yasser Arafat or F.W. de Klerk?

The problem for the addlebrained Obama-rejectionists is that the president, as far as they are concerned, couldn’t possibly do anything right, and thus is unworthy of any conceivable recognition. If Obama ended all hunger in the world, they’d accuse him of promoting obesity. If he solved global warming, they’d complain it was getting chilly. If he got Mahmoud Abbas and Benjamin Netanyahu to join him around the campfire in a chorus of “Kumbaya,” the rejectionists would claim that his singing was out of tune.

Let the rejectionists fulminate and sputter until they wear themselves out. Politically, they’re only bashing themselves. As Republican leaders—except RNC Chairman Michael Steele—are beginning to realize, “I’m With the Taliban Against America” is not likely to be a winning slogan.

...

What I really don’t understand is the view that somehow there’s a tremendous downside for Obama in the award. It raises expectations, these commentators say—as if expectations of any American president, and especially this one, were not already sky-high. Obama has taken on the rescue of the U.S. financial system and the long-term restructuring of the economy. He has launched historic initiatives to revolutionize health care, energy policy and the way we educate our children. He said flatly during the campaign that he wants to be remembered as a transformational president.

The only reasonable response is McCain’s: Congratulations. Nothing, not even the Nobel Peace Prize, can set the bar any higher for President Obama than he’s already set it for himself.

The Kay Bailey Watch

Three MSM political bloggers weighed on KBH's radio appearance today with three distinctly different observations. First, Anna Batheja at the Star-Telegram's PoliTex (emphasis is mine):

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison suggested on conservative radio host Mark Davis' show this morning that she might put off her resignation from the US Senate once again.

"I am going to leave," Hutchison told Davis on WBAP/820 AM. "I think it’s important that I do everything I can when there are such huge issues and I haven’t been able to set that deadline which I know is something a lot of people are looking at to determine what other possibilities there might be."

Davis asked if she might stay in her seat until the end of the year.

"I can’t say anything right now because I don’t know," Hutchison said. "Every day in Washington, some new bad thing is coming up."

Davis pushed further, asking if she might stay in the Senate through next year's March primary.

"Well, a lot of people are suggesting that," Hutchison said. "That’s not what I want to do. That’s not what I intend to do but... right now I want to just see what comes next. ..."

Hutchison announced in July, also on Davis' show, that she would step down from her Senate seat sometime in October or November in order to devote herself to her campaign for governor.

Todd Gilliam at the DMN's Trail Blazers mocked out Michael Burgess' re-endorsement:

The Hutchison for governor campaign is touting an endorsement today from U.S. Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Lewisville. Burgess joined the senator this morning on the Mark Davis show on WBAP to "announce" his support. Hmmm. Seems like I read that somewhere a couple weeks ago.

Oh yeah, here is it.

Lastly, RG Ratcliffe at the Chron's Texas Politics notes the senator's jabs at the governor, calling him a former Democrat, that he has "increased taxes", and that he is "so political and trying to protect his political base that he's not doing what's necessary to lower taxes, have good policies, to address the what's good for Texas in 20 years and not just tomorrow".

My reaction to these reactions is 1) so what -- KBH is saying one thing and doing another, again; 2) so what --Burgess is the pretty much the least freaky of Texas Republicans in Congress, he brings very little to the table she needs; and 3) ho hum -- Kay Bailey is shaving off a deli-thin slice of red meat and having one of her purse boys throw it to Rick Perry's 'political base'.

The only news here is her continuing lack of commitment to a deadline for withdrawal. At this point that probably means a special Senate election butting up against the March primary -- not what the governor wants, which is exactly why she's stalling.

And so we wait.

Update: Even the conservo-blogs express perplexity.