Utterly Meaningless » Blog Archive » J.J. ROSS: PSYCHIC
  • J.J. ROSS: PSYCHIC

    Filed at 5:39 pm under by dcobranchi

    A couple weeks back J.J. tweaked the media for treating my man Mike Huckabee like he was a hick, just because he “eats squirrel cooked up in his double-wide’s popcorn popper.” I’ll never doubt her psychic abilities again.

    Just remember, JJ, with great power comes great responsibility.

    4 Responses to “J.J. ROSS: PSYCHIC”


    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    January 16th, 2008
    at 11:17 pm

    ROFL! — wish I had a clever comeback, maybe it’ll come to me if I just close my eyes. . .


    Comment by
    Jeanne
    January 17th, 2008
    at 12:06 pm

    She’s no psychic, she’s his speech writer.


    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    January 17th, 2008
    at 4:08 pm

    Thanks, Jeanne, just the line I was looking for! 😉


    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    January 18th, 2008
    at 12:59 pm

    And here’s my next prescient comment for HE&OS –
    Huckabee isn’t a throwback at all, but a highly sophisticated replacement model, an “evolving” evangelist being almost organically selected for survival of his species in rapidly changing geopolitical climes:

    Huck hasn’t given up on “taking back the country,” he’s joined a growing number of evangelical elites in recognizing that aim as a bigger, more complex, and longer-term project than previously understood.

    . . .Huckabee is in most regards more conservative than Bush, and not just on social issues. Yes, he cares about the poor; he also believes that “free markets” the engine of prosperity for the already-wealthy, are the best way to help them. Yes, he cares about the environment. He also believes the free market is the best way to protect it. Yes, he believes in the plight of working people. He also believes that presenting himself as among their number, an old political trick, is a great way to win votes.

    Is this “cosmopolitan,” as Lindsay puts it? “Populist,” as the New York Times suggests?

    Or is it just savvy, the growing sophistication of American fundamentalism?