GOP PAC Director Tells Reporter: "Shut Up And Listen"
Yesterday, the Albany Times-Union reported that an attack ad from the National Republican Trust PAC was pulled from the local NBC station. The station's general manager said the PAC didn't provide documentation of its claims against Democratic candidate Scott Murphy.
Now today, the Times-Union reporter Irene Jay Liu has posted an mp3 of a rather interesting phone call from last night with the PAC's executive director Scott Wheeler, insisting that the ad was never pulled -- that he did provide backup to NBC and it was accepted with almost no modification -- and defending the accuracy of the claims:
Wheeler repeatedly accused Liu of printing talking points from the Murphy campaign. "I'm sorry, you're speaking so loudly that I actually can't understand a word you're saying," said Liu. "I'm sorry, could you--"
Wheeler replied: "Well shut up and listen, and then you can hear."
The NBC general manager later reiterated to Liu that they haven't received documentation, and that they were told to pull the ad and a new version would be coming.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Why, this is unheard of!
March 17, 2009 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
"How dare you question the Great Oz when I'm making crazy stuff up! Pay no attention to the furtive little wiener behind the curtain!"
Classic authoritarian Republicanism.
March 17, 2009 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
1.) He would not talk like that to a guy, I would guess. He does not like having to deal with a woman in this situation.
2.) He did not know he was being recorded. Ouch.
3.) Manners, people. Comportment.
March 17, 2009 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
He probably would talk that way to anyone he thought he could brow beat...
Like most Rs these days, they don't realize the behavior that plays well to the base doesn't help the general public.
March 17, 2009 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Republicans really are dyspeptic ... and their shorts are too tight ... and in the end did he get his way ?
No. He did not.
March 17, 2009 5:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Based on US News & World Report, our "Obesity Belt" is basically exactly the same as the "Red States" in the last election. Combine that with Rush's kahuna-hood in the GOP, and it's really clear that the party's main demographic is hypertensive, combative and obese white guys. I mean, think about it. And think what comes with that: diabetes, strokes, and E.D. No wonder they're cranky.
March 17, 2009 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great theory - we should expand on this ... do any epidemiologists read TPM ?
Red-faced old white guys that yell at cashiers and tellers and blow their horns in traffic ... poor circulation probably a factor ... a tendency to acquire wives through mail-order from the third world ... habituated to alcohol and AM radio ... likely to believe ads for baldness cures, herbal viagra ... ads for 'pay zero income tax !' ... rarely if ever traveled outside the US ... unlikely to have learned a language other than english ...
It is a syndrome, for sure.
March 17, 2009 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Man, you nailed it. Good profile. Anybody else want to add to this pathology of Co-Morbid Republicanism?
March 17, 2009 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
impotence
even with a Viagra, Cilias, Levitra cocktail
March 17, 2009 11:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Republicans why the some in the press hates them.
March 17, 2009 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
The "leaders of the Republican party" are not necessarily de facto Republicans-- probably a misuse of de facto, whatevs. There are plenty of intelligent, albeit [imho] incongruous, conservative political views held by genuinely kind people. I'm not one of them (conservative), and I've even seen a few viewpoints change. Better to expose these assholes now, and let a reasonable one make her way to the front.
These "unsubs" are singular minded blowhards with tyrannical symptoms. They won't win the war of ideas, especially not if this economy starts going again. That's the sad thing. They're betting against the entrepreneur, academic, and internets.
March 17, 2009 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure if I understand your point, but (and I mean this respectfully) it sounds like you're describing the Republican Party of the early 1960's... when there was place in the tent for Nelson Rockefeller and Ed Brooke and so on. Today's Republican Party clearly has no place for any moderates, from what I've seen. Nixon started this self-destructive decline with his "southern strategy"... Reagan took advantage of it, and GWB rode it right into the ground. At this point, the GOP is just a regional party of the Deep South and that pancake-stack of states running from Texas to North Dakota... and, at this point, it's only going to get smaller.
March 17, 2009 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am actually in complete agreement with you that today's Republican party has "no place" for moderates. I'm honestly expecting a fracturing. The dogmatic right splits from the moderate conservative and centrist viewpoint (even if we concede there's little to no public figures broadcasting the viewpoint). Honestly, I was also thinking in the 18-30 age range, too. I guess that means if there's going to be reasonable moderates contributing to the process, it's going to take at least another 8 years. This is only good news for Dems if they are to the challenge.
Specifically, I was thinking about the voter when I set out to separate the blowhards from the "folk". For some reason, I cringe at including these folk (even if I would include them in the 'disease' diagnosis) with the 'leaders'. Anyway, no big point above. I just wanted to use "unsubs" to refer to these fat headed Republican 'ignotables'.
March 18, 2009 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink