Here is the latest:
I'm remembering the strange sensation I had in both '96 and '00, when men were anointed by a mysterious process and presented to the party faithful as a fait accompli, despite the fact that nobody seemed to want him (Dole) and nobody seemed to have heard of him (Bush) until the party moguls announced that all the political winds were blowing that way. One got the distinct impression that "voting" was a sort of rubber stamp ratifying what a small group of wealthy men had decided was fore-ordained.
I'd love to be wrong. But it looks pretty much like the same thing is happening again.
I am going to keep hammering on this conspiracy of millionnaires notion that Mark seems to seriously believe because, while not spiritually tainted the way that say, Robert Sungenis's stuff is, it is as much of a kook notion as anything that came out of the John Birch Society. If he seriously believed that American democracy is over and we are now ruled by a clique of millionnaires determined to kill off a sizeable number of the lower classes (this was basically the sentiment when he first broached the notion), one would think that you would be trying to do something more about it than just blogging away in frustration. Now granted, he holds out the possibility that he might be wrong here, but if he understood for a moment the full implications of what he is claiming he might want to sit back and think through the consequences of such a situation before just casually airing notions like this.
In answer to his questions, I didn't follow the 1996 election very well but if memory serves there was a fairly heated GOP primary fight before Dole ended up on top. Mark apparently doesn't remember the extremely nasty primary fight between Bush and McCain in 2000, which is odd because he blogged about it on Friday. The idea that Bush or Dole just magically appeared and won the presidential nominations is simply counter-factual by anyone who was paying attention at the time. Now to be fair, a lot of people weren't, and there is no shame in that. And some people still aren't if they are going to label Deroy Murdock a neocon when in fact he is a conservative libertarian.
UPDATE: He does it again.
In a funny way, stuff like this and Barack Obama viral ad gives me a certain amount of empathy for the Dem rank and file who, like us conservative types, feel a certain amount of bafflement at how their political masters (who are also basically a small number of rich guys) can just herd them around like cattle and say, "Now you will vote for Hillary, Now you will vote for Pelosi" and deliver such a disastrously low return on their investment. As the party elders on our side of the aisle condition the herd to vote for Rudy, I will think from time to time of the frustration that many Dems must likewise be feeling as Hillary is rammed down their throats and Pelosi stabs them in the back on the one issue that put her where she is.
I would be very interested for somebody to see if they can get him to explain who exactly these elites he continues to reference are. The answer, if nothing else, should prove to be an illuminating one.
And here in reference to Human Events's decision to print an editorial by Deroy Murdock that supported Giuliani:
This editorial is part of a meme that is being spread by a party that is fixing to anoint Rudy. It's what they do. That's how we got Dole and that's how we got Bush. A few oligarchs decide. We are presented with a done deal.
Now here again, I am willing to grant him a rhetorical flourish on some of this stuff, but the more this meme keeps popping up the more we keeping heading closer and closer into the "conspiracy of the elites" stuff that so typifies Larouche-esque thought. I'm not even going to get into his continued and increasingly absurd fear that the US is gearing up to invade Iran (with what troops, for God's sake) or his view that there is some kind of establishment candidate in a Republican primary that has no declared candidate, which is precisely why it is so contentious.