D.C. recap, part one

Now that I'm finally back online -- I got home last night from Tampa and almost immediately fell asleep -- I can share some observations (and pictures!) of the event(s) in Washington.

First of all, the Atriots with whom I spent the weekend swear like longshoremen, drink like Drunky McStagger, and are uniformly gorgeous/handsome, brilliant, hilarious, and fun. But then you knew that. Good times, indeed.

Next, the media coverage was poor at best. But then you knew that, too.

I'd say the crowd of "peace protestors" (an actual sign, as Thers has pointed out) probably was in the neighborhood of 30,000. This is based on some quasi-scientific counting by racy mind (estimating the number passing a given point per second and extrapolating therefrom for the length of the march); it certainly was more than the "several thousand" mentioned by the Washington Post, and it far exceeded the counterprotestors -- the "Gathering of Eagles" and Freeper "morans" -- who numbered perhaps 1,000 at best. (More on the media coverage shortly.)

I behaved myself fairly well. My best line, I think, was to an older Freeper type holding up a pink sign with a well-known picture of the guy with his head up his ass. It was meant to be a commentary on Code Pink, but of course I told him (yelled to him, really) that it was a great picture of George Bush. That seemed to make him and his colleagues mad, because they started telling me that I was Number One. (At least I think that's what they were saying ... I couldn't really hear them over the "You Were Lied To" chant we were doing.)

I did not have a chance to see, nor (therefore) to flip off, Ralph Nader. More's the pity.

I'll post pictures shortly. They are profound, moving, fun, and hopefully entertaining.

To be continued after a conference call ...

In which I get linked at Free Republic

Just when you thought the blogosphere couldn't get any weirder, I woke up this morning to discover that Blast Off! got a link from, of all places, Free Republic, home of the batshit craziest right-wing xenophobic mouth-breathers on the planet.

Naturally, I read the thread that linked to me, which was a Fred Thompson hagiography about how he's going to save the Republics from their inevitable and well-deserved landslide spanking in 2008. I suppose I've read FR maybe five times in three years, and I've never failed to be entertained by their absolute fealty to their cause no matter how much reality might differ from their perceptions. But, this time, reality is in an entirely different dimension from where some of these morons are.

First of all, nearly all of them are convinced that Hillary is the Devil Incarnate and definitely will be the Democratic nominee in 2008. I wouldn't necessarily disagree, but I find it curious, yet understandable, that as far as they are concerned, Hillary's a shoo-in. Not a single mention on that thread of Obama or Edwards or any of the others. On the other hand, to give their rantings a modicum of credibility, they recognize, as I do, that Rudy! doesn't have a prayer of winning the nomination. But their rectitude starts and ends there.

For one thing, the commenter who linked to me didn't even mention that the post to which he linked wasn't exactly a positive reflection on Fred. In fact, they even carried over the picture I used to demonstrate that he resembles nothing so much as a Crumpled Paper Bag. Nice work, Freepers.

But the funniest statements are unintentionally hilarious. One commenter actually defends the journalistic integrity of (get this!) NewsMax!! "Who does original reporting except for NYT and WP liberal spin stuff?," said the commenter. "Most news items are AP articles. What do you have against NewsMax?" Never mind that, if they ever were "liberal," the New York Times and Washington Post haven't been "liberal" for decades -- Watergate-era, maybe? Today, virtually no columnist at either paper gets even a column-inch without kissing the collective ass of the Bush crime syndicate.

Hold on -- it gets better. One person actually said:

I’m very bullish on Senator Thompson and have ignored the myriad of hit pieces the last few months we’ve all been subjected to ad nauseum. He will eclipse the bulky thighed bolshevik from Chicago and provide a focal point for a much needed conservative shift in the Republican party in my opinion.

Okay, I'll give them credit for spelling "Bolshevik" correctly, although it should have been capitalized. Also, it's "ad nauseam." Anyway, can you believe the "much needed conservative shift" line? It's like this person hasn't been paying attention for the last decade or so, as the Republic Party has shifted so far to the right, Nixon would be considered moderate. Hey, pal, you don't want conservative, you want fascist.

Well, go read the rest if you want a good laugh. And welcome to Blast Off!, Freepers. Stick around ... you might learn something.

Today's Daily Schadenfreude: FreeRepublic.com

It's been a while since I've done a Daily Schadenfreude -- don't ask me why, 'cause I don't know. But watching the Republic Party implode is really getting to be fun.

In case you missed it last week, the insane asylum our pals at FreeRepublic.com, known as "Freepers" (but not known as "tolerant" or "open-minded") are forming up the ol' circular firing squad over a purge of Rudy Giuliani supporters who no longer are permitted to post and comment there.

The fight began one month ago, when site founder Jim Robinson posted an anti-Giuliani manifesto titled: “Giuliani as the GOP presidential nominee would be a dagger in the heart of the conservative movement.” Then the virtual ax started to swing. Longtime posters to the freewheeling discussion threads, used to serious no-holds-barred web etiquette, were still stunned by the intensity of the anti-Rudy activity; conservative blogs buzzed with the development.

“Jim Robinson has been going on a tear demonizing Rudy Giuliani, because Rudy (agreeing with the vast majority of Americans), is personally opposed to abortions on a moral level…” complained a user on the GOPUSA Web site. “Anyone who posts any support for Giuliani at the site, if it's at all forceful, will be banned.”

(“Normally, we don't allow complaints about other conservative forums,” chided the moderator, but “…because it is being discussed all over the Internet, I'll make an exception.”)

Just a few months ago, Rudy Giuliani placed second in an early Free Republic straw poll; now, his support on the site has been virtually eliminated. “After the ‘April Purge,’ I don't think there are any Rudybots left around here,” noted Free Republic commenter “upchuck” in one recent post. “And if there are, they're not posting pro-Rudy stuff :).”

Wait a second ... isn't that the same Jim Robinson who banned supporters of Drunky McStagger back in 2000, then flip-flopped like a pinfish on a dock?

Why, as a matter of fact, it is!

Robinson, it should be noted, famously blasted George W. Bush’s presidential candidacy back in 2000, before a dramatic late-campaign about-face that saw him emerge as one of the GOP ticket’s biggest supporters. But whether or not Free Republic experiences a similar election-year shift this cycle, the site’s current campaign is spreading a dangerous primary-season meme of Rudy Giuliani as big-city liberal – and turning one of the most influential web forums in conservatism into an exclusive gathering place for those who share that view.

Thus, the Freepers maintain their lockstep, banishing all those who might disagree with the Gospel of JimRob. You don't suppose that maybe they're concerned because a pro-choice Republican is a serious contender for the GOP nomination in 2008, do you? Oh, dear Giuliani Freepers, never fear ... if your guy wins the nomination, Robinson will switch back quicker than Anne Heche post-Ellen.

Keep up the good work, Freepers. Like your candidates, you continue to make it easier and easier for the Democrats to sweep you out next year in a landslide of historic proportions. Oh, and congratulations, too, because today's Blast Off! Daily Schadenfreude is for you!