... to lift from Hitchens's assessment of religion. But they weren't talking deities at Democracy Alliance's annual gathering at the Chicago Ritz-Carlton this week. They were raising "more than $30 million for liberal groups," while, to paraphrase Politico's Ken Vogel, they were dodging, rejecting, or rationalizing their responses to "questions about the [Democratic] party’s split personality on the issue.... That is, when they weren’t met with recriminations or even gentle physical force."
Democracy Alliance staff chastised a reporter during an attempt to interview major donor Jonathan Soros [George's son] as he headed toward a panel on campaign finance reform. "Sir, you’re not allowed to go past here," said one staffer, as another grabbed this reporter’s arm to prevent him from walking with Soros.
You might be tempted to call such behavior inexpressibly dumb, but inexpressible it wasn't. Politico put it up as today's feature story, as anyone with even a dram of political sophistication would expect. After months of Democrats bashing the boorishly secretive Kochs and their sinister, ultraconservative networks of hidden cash, what do Democrats do? Why of course. They raise more than $30 million in and around closed-door meetings at the Ritz-Carlton. And with such grace!
Top Obama White House aide Valerie Jarrett, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and Kentucky Democratic Senate candidate Alison Lundergan Grimes [all in attendance] ignored questions about whether Democrats are hypocritical on big money.
Some readers have issues with Politico. Some see it as blatantly right-leaning, which is OK, since that sentiment is balanced by that of other readers who see it as unapologetically left-leaning. This is standard fare in PartisanWorld, not be taken too seriously. But I think it's fair to say that most readers see Ken Vogel, at least, as playing it straight down the middle; consequently the kind of arrogance shown to him at the Ritz-Carlton only justifies his uncommonly righteous editorializing in his piece: "The liberal strain of the [big money] argument is usually sprinkled with a heaping helping of moral superiority."
Moral superiority--less the old liberal than a newer progressive conceit. One would think they'd have the good sense not to strut it, along with insufferable aloofness, before members of the major political press. But such is the effect of big money.