HOLD-YOUR-NOSE.COM: (X-beatjohnmccain.com) Inspired by Momma McCain: Obama speech analysis below: way ahead of media.

Well Mike Huckabee made his appearance du jour (that means "daily" for those of you educated in government schools) on MSNBC's Morning Joe again today...and of course this means his appearance is a better kept secret than missile technology during the Clinton administration. In fact, we think Sandy Burglar can spirit the entire MJ audience out of a building in his underwear...give or take a cigar here and there.

But this is lost on Huck, who continues to credit this show for his success while showing a stunning ignorance on the massive influence talk radio and the internet have on conservative voters. He and McCain also show a stunning ignorance on what it is we stand for too...which is the major problem in keeping the White House free of a man whose name can't be distinguished from many on a Guantanamo roster.

But why would Huck continue to brown nose shows with audiences roughly 1/100th of the Limbaugh show or 1/70th the Hannity show....while disparaging those hosts and audiences as greedy, power hungry and irrelevant? Maybe it's the bright lights of television. As we know, TV is all about emotion and radio is all about intellect...and certainly there has been much in this campaign that shall we say, de-emphasizes intellect. Now as a preacher Huck should know better. The Apostle Paul says something about faith and "things not seen"...but ever the televangelist...Huck likes that tiny audience that can see him over the masses who could otherwise hear him.

And then there's the inside the beltway factor. These cable news shows in the morning more or less just talk to each other and folks inside Washington. This puts a considerable dent into any claims of being an "outsider" that Huck makes....his cable fever indicates that he is just dying to be an insider (not to mention whatever it is that is driving his desire to stay in the race in the first place.)

CNBC (AND MSNBC AND NBC'S) JOHN HARWOOD just demonstrated more of the symptomatic formulaic idiocy of the mainstream media...stating that it is "good news for the Republicans" that NYC Mayor Bloomberg is not going to run for President. Bloomberg cites that he is happy with "the Maverick" getting the GOP nod and therefore does not see a need for him to save the nation.

Well thanks Bloomy. What a guy!

But back to Harwood. The analysis he reached can only be done with an inverted...and perverted..view of the electorate. Bloomberg is far more liberal than McCain and would only siphon off Republican votes in "blue state" America that no GOP candidate can win anyway. In Red states and swing states, Bloomberg would eat into the Democrat vote (more so if Hillary ran than Obama) and help the GOP. Net net? Bloomberg running would HELP the Republicans.

John Harwood....you need to "get out more."

It is a pretty consistent trend right now. Republican conservatives on the beat McCain train are a wide cross section of folks from just about everywhere....everywhere that is but Washington D.C. Led by talk show hosts and pundits, this would include Rush, Hannity, Ann Coulter, Boortz, Laura Ingraham and their callers, readers, followers in "fly over country." It also includes James Dobson, who in a refreshing twist has actually decided to investigate McCain's conservative cred with respect to family issues in addition to the very windy road the Straight Talk Express has travelled. (memo to Dr. Richard Land...you should "get out more.")

Conversely, the royal elitist in the GOP who are lecturing this great unwashed population on the fact that they should, among other things, "just calm down," are predictably all part of the Inside the Beltway crowd. This would include Bob Dole, who retired just in time for his wife to get a Senate seat...making the Dole family the longest term residents of D.C. this side of the Lincoln Memorial. Talk about being "on the dole." Throw in Bill Bennett, who continues to erode in his principals the longer he hangs around this media-political culture, serial campaigner Mark McKinnon, beltway pundits like Krystal and Barnes and a long littany of Jurassic Park Congress-a-sauruses still in office or in town as lobbyists.

These are the folks who are not just supporting McCain...but this is the crowd patronizing the anti McCain movement and trying to marginalize us. They think we need to calm down, shut up, be a nice little Republican and jump on board and be grateful for the opportunity.

What they don't realize is that this is far more than a normal primary spat. This is not just the prelude to a grand coming together cum-bah-yah (not being an anti war lib, I have no idea how to spell that) moment. A grand KMA moment maybe. But this inside the beltway crowd is totally out of touch with this thought process and the emotion behind it.

What they don't understand, in addition to what having a real job feels like, is the fact that we are capital C conservative...but small r republican. Without the principals, what's the point. A big government liberal is a big government liberal and the "R" on a registration card doesn't mean much to us.

BOUNS: just because I have to say it again...Mort Kondracke is an idiot. Last night he was going thru all kinds of angst trying to see how McCain could get the Republican base while still appealing to moderates. Like so many, he just doesn't remember that Reagan did it....by bringing THEM TO HIM and not vise versa. And sheesh...Kondracke is certainly OLD enough to remember that. How bout upping the omega 3's there Mort.

One of the more interesting dynamics in morning cable is to hear liberal co hosts Carl and Becky on CNBC's Squawk Box try and justify their obvious liberalism as they are surrounded by a bunch of investors and business people. In an election cycle, this is even more fun. This morning they were hip deep in fiscal conservatives, including Steve Forbes, Larry Kudlow and Dick Armey.

As Forbes struggled to justify his support of McKeynes...er....McCain...he said that the Arizona senator is "growing in his economic education" and was "coming around on taxes." Well fine. What the hell...he's only been in one or the other branch of congress for what, 30 years? They say he's just now focusing on these issues. He seemed plenty interested in money when he was taking sleazy contributions that landed him the ONLY "Republican seat" on the esteemed "Keating 5."

Kudlow then hammered Mac on his "Wall Street is greedy and should be punished" campaign stump speech by saying "Two out of every three voters owns stock....and Senator McCain is saying the wrong things....and sending the wrong message....and all I want is a little message straightening out."

HUH? Why I thought we were talking about the "Straight Talk Express" here. Yeah, right.

Armey then chimed in with a defense...of sorts...for McCain by saying this:"Politics is juvenile delinquency. They all talk like a bunch of damn fools...that's what they do. Unfortunately, the Democrats mean it. There's a litmus test to get in the Democrat party. You have to prove that you are an economic illiterate."

Way to go Dick! I agree...with this caveat....all too often the supposed "good guys" tend to mean what they are saying while in "damn fool" mode.

Are you listening Tammy Faye Huckaboo?

IF Chris Matthews is smiling....
THEN you can bet that nothing good is happening for conservatives and Republicans.
Guess what? Matthews IS smiling. Now he's got a guy named McCain right where he and the rest of the media want him. At the top of the Republican heap. Finally the guy who hates other Republicans, who has not a clue how Supply Side economics work (yes, I know Jack Kemp is a friend of his..but Kemp forgot this same stuff in 1996). He's a guy who is opposed to water boarding. (now it works, and is safe, but McCain is against it). He is a guy who will not appoint folks like Alito and Roberts, let alone Thomas and Scalia, to the court.
He is a guy who cannot possibly beat Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. He is a 1960s and 70s Republican. A guy who really isn't very principled about anything other than wanting credit for being principled. He's a loser. He's toothless (and at McCain's age, maybe literally).
This is the Democrat's Republican. He'll lose. And while he's doing it, he will trash a lot of what his party stands for. And when he does that, media mavens like Frank Luntz and Dick Morris will say he lost because "he was TOO conservative." And that will further erode our principals.

And THAT's the kind of Republican that Matthews and Tim Russert and CNN and the Dem's like. Hello?

So just what is it we are trying to do. We, those who believe in lower taxes and less regulation standing in the way of ordinary Americans doing extra-ordinary things. We who believe in a strong national defense and that means using whatever intelligence gathering means necessary to do the ONLY thing the constitution says government should do....protect us. We who believe that it is our prosperity and genius that can and will forge new frontiers in energy and technology based on growth...not based on greening ourselves back into the 1800s. What that WE are trying to do is have a government that will get out of the way and let this unfold.

And in that sense, the R or D beside a candidate's name is only important to a point. And that point is that the R in the last 50 years has stood for those principals while the D has stood for the opposite. But when our standard bearer wears the R and acts like a D....then the R by his name is of no real consequence. Actually...the R is a bad thing...because I don't want the R word or conservatism getting the blame for failed policies.

And this is what has happened with too much of the Bush family dynasty. Their new tone governance has helped give us 100 dollar oil and a lot of other problems now manifest in the economy...prompting wizards like Tim Russert to call the economic issues a "Republican scorecard." No, it's a scorecard put together by a coalition of R's who act like D's and the D's acting like themselves. But of course, we...who stand for NONE of that...will get the blame.

And now you want us to support McCain for more of the same? No thanks. He must be stopped.

Seems like John McCain is getting a lot of support, tepid though it may be, from the notion that he is the only one who can beat Hillary in November. Well....couple major flaws with this.
A: A national hypothetical poll like that is MEANINGLESS. A few months ago Rudy was the only one who could do that and McCain couldn't win Arizona. Mike Huckabee was so obscure that national media outlets only had file photo's from 120 pounds ago and Romney was unknown. In other words, a snapshot seven months out means nothing. (except that the media can prop up McCain with it.
B: Very good chance it won't be Hillary....
C: Going to the middle to pick a nominee never works...never has. GOP only wins with huge ideological chasm between the parties. Best way to get that is by making sure we are in the Reagan camp...since it's unlikely the Dems will nominate Dennis Kucinich or John Edwards.
D: What if McCain wins? We get a liberal administration and the damage is hung around the necks of Republicans and conservatives. NO THANKS.
(much more on these themes throughout site articles and archives)....

OK I get it now....in light of the fact that conservative policies work, liberal members of the media elite now have a new strategy for dealing with this inconvenience. That tactic is to trash the strategy unmercifully (ala Iraq Surge) until it works, THEN quietly say "it's pretty much done" and indicate that focusing on that issue is yesterday's news.

Take Joe Klein on the show Morning Joe (no relation). When talking about beating Al Queada, he said that we (I guess meaning the US Military, tho it's unusual for a lib to consider them we) "have pretty much done that now" and that all remaining is "some mop up work." HUH? How did we get from "General Betray-Us" to mop up? Quickly and quietly I guess...so as to insure that a GOP President and his supporters get aboslutely NO credit for it. Had Clinton done the surge, we'd have seen a ticker tape parade.

But it gets better. Now apparently the US should invest the resources it is spending in Iraq on get this..."BUILDING POWER FACILITIES" like China and Britain. Sounds like a big carbon footprint to me. And shhh...those would be "nuclear" facilities. Also sounds like some good conservative ideas. (a point totally lost on host Joe Scarborough...former conservative.)  Beam me up Scottie.... 

Tim Russert (and Brian Williams) are simply not nearly as intelligent as they think they are....and we are not nearly as stupid either.
Their pandering to John McCain and to some degree Mike Huckabee was obvious, childish, sophomoric and really nauseating. They sat there and fidgeted with their glasses and furrowed their brows and acted like they were going to such great lengths to be fair and balanced. Right. I think Russert stared so hard he froze up the botox in his system.
Those two self righteous clowns hit Romney and Giuliani with hardball and ridiculous questions based on liberal newspapers or out of context polls...while they hit McCain with things about his mommy. GIMME A BREAK!
The good news is I reduced my carbon footprint by totalling a couple TV's during the debate...and I guess these can be replaced by selling my carbon credits to Al Gore...or by withholding any donations to the RNC.(needs to be moved out of DC...but that's another subject altogether). Why the GOP establishment, be it RNC or Florida GOP, allow CERTAIN so-called journalists (Democrat shills)to do GOP debates is beyond me.
And in addition to bias, Russert and Williams obviously wanted to be the stars of the show...speechifying instead of asking questions.
BEST MOMENT: Mitt for asking America if they would like Bill Clinton in the White House with nothing to do. SECOND: Mitt for telling the truth...that when "Republicans act like Democrats, America loses" in response to a stupid Russert question on why Americans should keep Republicans in power with gas prices up, deficits up, unemployment up...etc..Mitt was really saying that we need Republicans who do NOT act like Democrats...(like say, John McCain)..and we sure as hell don't need DEMOCRATS who act like Democrats. How did that taste Russert? Of course Russert, who we've established as not as intelligent as he (or Don Imus) thinks he is...had that one go right over his head and Friday morning was bragging about that question with Joe Scarborough (who I think is carrying Russert's baby). Scarborough, who has inherited Imus' mantle as chief liberal brown noser on morning talk TV, pretended to miss it too even though he's pretty obviously a Mitt man now.
BIGGEST MISSED OPP: Rudy when slammed with a NY Times editorial....he did OK on the answer but that was a slam dunk opportunity.
MORE OF SAME: you would think that with a short book explaining the Fair Tax very well, that these high priced journalists and other candidates would eventually quit stepping in chinchilla chips with their very fundamental misconceptions. What was that Mr. Jefferson you said about an ignorant electorate? How 'bout ignorant reporters and candidates?
PREDICTABLE MEDIA MISS: when they are shocked that Thompson voters go to Mitt instead of Huckabee (based on monolithic religious right theory) or McCain (based on myth that voters give a damn who former candidates like personally). Watch and see.

Here is commentary you won't see anywhere else. This...today....the last couple months....IS a glimpse into the future of a McCain administration. THIS is McCainanomics. How so? TWO major reasons:

A: Can you say Keating Five? Does anyone remember the Keating Five? (does the Romney or Giuliani campaign remember the Keating Five?) The Keating 5 were 5 corrupt members of congress whose hands were slapped for their roles in the S and L crisis in the 80s. What was the crisis about? Phony monopoly money real esate loans. Sound familiar? Well, it should. BTW...the Keating 5? Four Democrats and an obscure Arizonan named John McCain. That's right....Mr. Straight Talk you know.

B: Energy prices out of control? Yes. Main reason? The misguided green movement in this country that insures our dependence on foreign oil. Insures our need to actually refine GASOLINE offshore and ship it in. Won't let us drill the gulf (but it will let OTHER nations drill our coast and sell us that oil) and won't let us drill Anwar. It won't let us develop nuclear power. In other words, everything the green movement does makes supply and demand work against us with energy prices.

Of course, the good news is that supply and demand will swing back when the greenies destroy our economy and we don't demand much any more. (and that's part of their plan too....).

Who is the chief Greenie among top Republicans? You got it....JOHN MCCAIN. And welcome today to McCainanomics. HOW DOES THAT TASTE?