Apparently it's confined to Massachusetts: "The lack of success of female candidates in Massachusetts compared with, say, nearby Maine, where both senators are women, is striking."
No it isn't. What it is, in fact, is that Martha Coakley had the misfortune to be running for a seat while Democrats were attempting to ram through a hugely unpopular bill...and the Democrats treated the entire thing as if it were a shoo-in. After all, she was the Democrat, running for a Senate seat held by a prototypical Democrat for 47 years, in a hard Democrat state. Coakley acted as if winning the primary was all that was required, and that after doing that, she was entitled to the seat.
But it's not so. Coakley never offered the voters of Massachusetts a reason to vote for her; and "save health care" is not enough when a majority of the voters are against it.
* * *
"Who is taking this the hardest?" asks Neal Boortz.
Look at what "fair and balanced" coverage means: "Compare the coverage of CNN, MSNBC and FoxNews. You'll notice that CNN and MSNBC didn't bother to air all of Scott Brown's victory speech, cutting him off early. FoxNews on the other hand aired the entirety of both speeches."
* * *
Apparently unemployment is rising again, and it was "unexpected". The Anchoress wonders why so many journalists are in love with the word "unexpected" these days?
I can explain why everything is "unexpected".
Let's revisit Steven Den Beste's wonderful piece on "Government By Wishful Thinking". A lot of these people are teleologist: they believe that good thoughts make it so.
They think that the bad economy was a Bush phenomenon, and that all that's required to fix it is to elect a Democrat. Obama's been in office a year now; the bad stuff is supposed to go away. It's supposed to go away because the wrong-thinking people are no longer in charge; it's supposed to go away because--by electing someone who cares--we're supposed to enter a time of healing.
One of Obama's most laughable campaign statements was when he said that his election would mean the lowering of sea levels. Remember that? That was Obama playing to teleologist thinking.
The continuing bad economic news is unexpected by these people because it doesn't fit their worldview. Of course the economy will get better now; we elected Obama!
Teleologist thinking is utterly impervious to facts, evidence, and history. You can't explain why Policy X always fails to a teleologist and expect him to understand; his response will be that the wrong people tried to implement Policy X, and that so-and-so is the right man to implement Policy X such that it will work this time!
But Policy X can't work; and so-and-so will make a botch of it. The teleologist will then explain that obviously so-and-so turned out to be the wrong guy after all, and that what's-his-face is the right man for the job.
We see this from the public education establishment all the damn time. The system--as it is constituted now--fails miserably and constantly. The word from the education establishment is a perennial cry for more money! George W. Bush signed the single largest expansion of federal education funding in US history, a bill which was basically written by Teddy Kennedy...and the ink was scarcely dry when Kennedy said, "This is all well and good, but it's not enough money."
So here we are in 2010. Obama's had the reins of power for a year. The economy is still in the shitter; no major reforms have been passed; the war continues; we've had a terror attack on US soil which failed only because the bomb wasn't built correctly; and people around the world are concerned that Obama is weak.
But it's not supposed to be like this! wail the teleologists. Obama is a Democrat! A liberal Democrat! Like us! He stands for all the right things!
...unfortunately, wishful thinking gets you nowhere.
* * *
This arrest should not have happened at all.
* * *
How do we know that this guy is not 100% serious and telling the unvarnished truth?
How do we know???