Today in the middle of a titanic struggle with a piece that just didn’t seem to be going places I took the time to enjoy Jay Nordlinger’s wonderful Impromptus and I noticed this bit.

I meant to write something more than a month ago: Rejoice over Cynthia Tucker, and say a little prayer of gratitude for what she did. She is an acclaimed columnist for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution — liberal, of course. And what she did was very hard. In fact, it’s one of the hardest things to do: She changed her mind about an important issue, and said so. What’s more, the issue has to do with race. What’s more, the columnist is black.

He goes on about how we should rejoice about both her column and her reversal on racial gerrymandering.

The political landscape has been transformed since the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965 and amended 17 years later. The election of a black president shows that American voters are willing to look beyond a candidate’s skin color. It’s time to give up racial gerrymandering, which turned out not to be quite so benign.

How big of her, how delightful, Nordlinger rejoices saying we should welcome Tucker “coming over to our side” her late conversion not withstanding on race. He also credits her with bravery for it.

Do you think this column was easy to write? I’m sure you don’t.

You know I’m often accused (rightly) of looking at the world with rose-colored glasses and being a sucker; but this time I hate to say Jay, it is you who are being the sucker and it is my duty to bring you to reality.

I think that column was incredibly easy for Cynthia Tucker to write. I think it has nothing to do with mea culpas or soul-searching and everything to do with stopping the tide of conservatism that the liberal media has been unable to check.

Take a closer look at the column, note what her actual argument is, you will find it is less Martin Amis than Al Sharpton:

Hemming most black voters into a few districts also had a deleterious effect on surrounding areas, now “bleached” of voters whose interests tend toward equality of opportunity.

Ah so they are “Hemming most black voters” and “bleaching” voters. Never mind that all we are talking about is drawing invisible district lines, the imagery is of slave pens and segregation of black voters displaced as if they were packed up and forced to move.

Believe it or not it actually gets worse (emphasis mine):

Their absence encourages pols in districts left overwhelmingly white to use the “Southern strategy” of playing to the resentments of white voters still uncomfortable with decades of social change.

So now it’s all about White voters “uncomfortable with social change”. What change would that be? The end of Jim crow? The End of Slavery perhaps? It would seem to me that Ms. Tucker is saying to liberals something like: The GOP is playing to a bunch of crackers who are still angry about drinking from the same water fountain as a black man.. Anyone who doubts that our liberal friends (particularly ones of color) are not getting that message from that sentence has never read the comment pages of liberal sites where such belief is Gospel.

It seems to be she hasn’t thrown away the race card, she just switched from Whist to Bridge because her trump isn’t taking the hand anymore. Tucker Again:

If black voters think they have made substantial gains simply by having more black representatives in Congress, they’re wrong. They’d have more influence if they were spread through several legislative districts, forcing more candidates to court them.

That’s true, but it is equally true that if Blacks were voting even 60-40 democratic there would be a whole lot less incentive for the GOP to gerrymander their districts in this fashion. The truth is if every Black voter in Georgia woke up white tomorrow the districts would still be drawn the same way because it’s not a question of pigmentation it’s a question of voting patterns. Uniform Black voting patterns simply make it easier to identify the Democratic voters to gerrymander.

Indeed if Black voters want to increase their influence perhaps they should reconsider voting 90-10 for a party that in 40 years decimated the black family in the name of compassion, emasculated public schools (how’s that system in Atlanta working out) and ignored their positions on social issues like gay marriage.

I don’t know what Jay was reading but I think that column is self-serving. It has nothing to do about ending racial divisions, it’s about bringing liberals back from the brink that the voters sent them. Note that she constantly quotes South Carolina Democratic party Chairman Richard Harpootlian on the evils of majority minority districts. The real evil Harpootlian sees is the election of Republicans. I suspect a more honest take on his position might read like this:

My paramount object is to restore democrats to power in congress and is not for or against majority-minority districts.

If I can elect democrats by keeping majority-minority districts I would do it, If I can elect democrats to congress by abolishing majority-minority districts I would do it, and if I can elect democrats to congress by eliminating majority-minority districts in some places while keeping them in others I would do that too.

If Jay thinks that any other goal is driving Ms. Tucker on this issue, he is sadly mistaken.

When Morning Joe finally got around to covering US news today, they pushed a New poll on the Debt Ceiling debacle.

They stressed that 38% of respondents wanted the debt ceiling raised up 10 points in three months. The story has this gem:

When told that failing to raise the debt ceiling could jeopardize payments to Social Security recipients and military personnel, 49 percent support increasing it.

Let look a little deeper directly in the poll language:

(Some/other) people say do NOT raise the debt ceiling because doing so will make it easier to increase spending and harder to reduce the deficit, and will increase the debt held by other countries and passed on to the next generation. Efforts to control the debt must begin now and the first step needs to be to not raise the debt ceiling.
…while….
(Other/some) people say RAISE the debt ceiling because failing to do so could stop the government from meeting its obligations, including payments to those on Social Security and in the military, and cause additional harm to the economy. Efforts to control debt should be comprehensive and long-term rather than artificial and short-term.

Look at those two statements and compare them. One talks about long terms problems the other screams no Social Security or Military checks, what do you this is going to move people? (I note they still didn’t manage to get 50% for the Democratic position even with this nonsense.)

Maybe it’s just me, but but when a poll result doesn’t go far enough your way and you try to “inform” or “educate” the person your polling telling them that their benefits to get a different result, isn’t that is what we would normally call a push poll?

Finally lets look at who they polled, they certainly can’t do worse than the CBS poll ,but they put in a good effort:

Look at those numbers. You not only have the GOP outnumbered by the Democrats 40-32 in the poll (and the 3/4 of that difference are STRONG democrats) but look at the number from the last election they are even better.

You have a 14 point difference between those who voted for Barack Obama and those who voted for McCain. Look at that number and roll it through your head. They poll 48% more Obama voters vs McCain voters and MSNBC is breathlessly reporting that the Republicans are losing the message war?

Even better they say that 47% approval is pretty good considering all that is going on. Hey if you are polling almost 3 Obama Voters for every two McCain voters and you are only getting 47% that is not pretty good, that is Disaster!

Can you imagine the numbers we would be seeing if we had anything even remotely resembling the actual split in the country? They can, and that’s why the polls are skewed like this. It means they are scared and when they are scared there is only one thing to do:

Ride right through them, they’re demoralized as hell

This sort of stuff can only sway people who are uninformed and in this internet age, one is uninformed only by choice.

Last night I fell asleep on the couch, when I woke up my son was sitting on the far cushion. As I turned over I asked him to put on Chanel 53 (MSNBC) hoping to see what Morning Joe had to say about the passage of Cut Cap and Balance in the house (with some Democratic votes), or what they have to say about the Gang of six plan (which even the Hill admits is short on specifics) Today I turned on Morning Joe before the 7 a.m. hour (about 6:45 a.m.) and found myself surprised. What I saw was the British Parliament debating the News of the World Stuff.

I then turned on CNN and the “Question time” debate from Parliament was being televised as well. I had to go to Fox to see anything resembling US news.

It wasn’t until 7:05 a.m. that MSNBC decided to go away from Parliament to switch to the debt ceiling issue with a promise to keep monitoring what is going on in England, and true enough at 7:22 they went back with a split screen to go to Martan Bashir who somehow used it as a connection to Michelle Bachmann and the GOP.

Now the scandal at News of the World is certainly a legit story, but why you might wonder are they giving this so much time with huge news going on here?

It’s very simple, MSNBC, CNN and the like have failed to defeat Fox in the ratings and more importantly have failed to control the news.

For example anyone with an internet connection knows about the Gunwalker scandal and the extent that the Obama Administration has withheld info that would contradict their official story even through it has not drawn any attention from MSNBC or CNN.

They see this scandal in England as a chance to discredit Fox in the US. It is watching a fire and hoping it spreads to a neighbor’s house that you hate.

The irony that MSNBC is crying about media moguls when it was until their purchase by Comcast owed by a corporation with connections with the current administration in White House that managed to avoid paying taxes last year is rather huge, but that doesn’t matter. It is all about the goal of once again being the gate-keepers of information that the public is allowed to see.

Update: At the 8 a.m. hour which usually repeats the 6 a.m. hour, it is all Rupert all the time. Of course!