Subscribe via RSS Feed

“Also, Make Sure To Extensively Praise Whatever Dictator Whose Check I Just Cashed.”

[ 21 ] October 16, 2012 | Scott Lemieux

Shorter Lanny Davis: “President Obama — no matter what anybody else says, tonight you need to do what you did in your highly successful first debate performance, only more so. If you show any signs of life, Rick Perry will be happy to mix you a double of his famous Ambien and Tito’s Vodka cocktail.”

Comments (21)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Clark says:

    And reach out to Todd Akin on the rape issue . . .

  2. Holy shit:

    “For example, you could say you regret not making a greater effort to break the logjam of the supercommittee on dealing with the then $15 trillion debt. You could say you wished you had done more to reach out to the Senate and House Republicans on the committee and intend to do so in your next term — and to do a better job seeking the counsel of senior Republicans who are, in fact, interested in achieving solutions and bipartisan consensus, particularly on making real progress on reducing the nation’s unsustainable national debt, such as Sens. John McCain (Ariz.), Saxby Chambliss (Ga.) and Orrin Hatch (Utah).”

    The real comedy comes in the author description, though:

    “He currently serves as special counsel to Dilworth Paxson and is a partner with former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele in Purple Nation Solutions, a public affairs-strategic communications company.”

    And if you visit http://www.purplenationsolutions.com/ you’ll find that:

    “Rather than operating in the traditional model, Purple Nation Solutions takes a new multi-disciplinary approach to a client’s needs. We integrate law, media, and politics with our extensive bipartisan networks providing clients with a full service public affairs, lobbying, and crisis management firm. For those who need the privilege of legal counsel, we maintain a seamless strategic alliance with the law firm Lanny J. Davis & Associates.”

    It’s just one great big circle of grifting. Impressive, in its way.

    • Malaclypse says:

      “Rather than operating in the traditional model, Purple Nation Solutions takes a new multi-disciplinary approach to a client’s needs. We integrate law, media, and politics with our extensive bipartisan networks providing clients with a full service public affairs, lobbying, and crisis management firm. For those who need the privilege of legal counsel, we maintain a seamless strategic alliance with the law firm Lanny J. Davis & Associates.”

      They are really leveraging the synergies.

    • losgatosca says:

      In this case ‘multi-disciplinary’ clearly means able to reach into every pocket the client has and ‘seamlessly’ means reaching into all those pockets without the client waking up.

      • daveNYC says:

        Naw, ‘seamlessly’ means that all the cash goes directly into the pockets of Lanny J Davis and friends, without having to muck around with any referals or quid pro quo business arrangements with other firms and consultants.

        • STH says:

          Yeah, “multidisciplinary” means never having to share the money.

          • mpowell says:

            While this is true, I also imagine that they will deliver for their clients. The simple fact is that for many large businesses, paying a good lobbyists is one of the best investments you can make.

            Mock him as he deserves, but Davis appears to be good at his job.

        • Joshua says:

          I thought it meant that any crook or war criminal who wants to talk about their crimes just need to wait a few minutes until Lanny walks into the room.

  3. scott says:

    This is witless in two complementary ways. On the one hand, Obama is supposed to dial down his demeanor in order not to heighten the differences between the two sides, and on the other he’s supposed to adopt the counsel of senior Republicans on the merits. If that’s the advice to be followed, why not follow its logic to a more natural conclusion, ie, Obama should concede the election in a “respectful” way, leaving Romney to take over and adopt that sage counsel? What’s the point of an election if you don’t point out the differences between the two candidates and even get excited about it?

  4. actor212 says:

    I’m curious why Lanny Davis is even relevant anymore claiming that his advice and the advice of going after Romney harder are somehow independent and untenable together?

    After all, one can raise the 47% issue and do it both respectfully AND forcefully. Indeed, Obama’s done this with his comment (periphrased) “You can’t President half the country.” A gem of a comeback, and yet, it’s not condescending or harsh.

    As to admitting he’s made mistakes, Obama has and I’m sure he has no problem doing that in this format.

    Ultimately, I think the last debate caught him flatfooted, fresh off the nonsense in Libya and Romney’s baldfaced lying took advantage of that moment. Obama’s got the chops to take him apart and then make Romney make his own mistakes.

  5. the appearance of disrespect you conveyed in the first debate by looking down and taking notes

    Yeah, that was totally inappropriate. Taking notes and looking at your pad while you took notes. What were you thinking, Mr. President? Were you raised in a barn?

  6. Gosh, taking advice from supporters of your opponent! I can’t see a problem with THAT.

  7. M. Bouffant says:

    Here is the only useful thing Lanny Davis has ever done, outing G.W. (“Oedipal Issues”) Bush. Sadly, I seem to be the only person who noticed.

    But despite what you may have heard or read, George was not just frat-house party boy. One of my most vivid memories is this: A few of us were in the common room one night. It was 1965, I believe — my junior year, his sophomore. We were making our usual sarcastic commentaries on those who walked by us. A little nasty perhaps, but always with a touch of humor. On this occasion, however, someone we all believed to be gay walked by, although the word we used in those days was “queer.” Someone, I’m sorry to say, snidely used that word as he walked by.

    George heard it and, most uncharacteristically, snapped: “Shut up.” Then he said, in words I can remember almost verbatim: “Why don’t you try walking in his shoes for a while and see how it feels before you make a comment like that?”

    Remember, this was the 1960s — pre-Stonewall, before gay rights became a cause many of us (especially male college students) had thought much about. I remember thinking, “This guy is much deeper than I realized.”

    In light of that memory, I wondered last year why Bush chose to exploit the gay marriage issue in his campaign. I’m still not sure, but I think that’s what politics sometimes does to a person. Now he appears to be backing off, and I am not surprised. I hope it suggests a return to the “compassionate conservatism” I remember and that he practiced in his two terms as governor of Texas.

Leave a Reply




If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a Gravatar.

  • Switch to our mobile site