Many have seen Joe the Plumber’s presumptive rise to political as some sort of cruel political joke; he is, after all, not trained in any political science or legal background, and his plain-spoken populism appears to be straight from the Sarah Palin school of political rhetoric. But that’s precisely why his political personality has resonated with many of his biggest fans.

Adding a reasoned recognition of the frustrations felt by many of the Occupy Wall Street protestors, when many right-of-center pundits and GOP candidates have been dismissive, only gives Wurzelbacher some indie cred; one can’t purely call him a puppet of the right when he is candidly sharing some (not a ton) of good will towards the protest movement.

What will be interesting to watch is how Wurzelbacher’s feelings towards the OWS movement will shift and evolve in the coming days, after handlers and respected advisers opine on how to best get elected. Until then, we can enjoy this moment when this hero to the Tea Party movement is actually recognizing some real frustrations with the OWS movement. Watch the clip below and see for yourself, courtesy of Fox News:

RELATED: Joe The Plumber To Lawrence O’Donnell: Are We Going To Talk About Me Or Herman Cain?

Mr. Schultz (“Ed is fine”) kicked things off by asking Wurzelbacher what, if anything, he’d do about the fact that wages among the top one percent of American have increased while those for the other ninety-nine have more or less flatlined. Wurzelbacher turned Schultz’s question back at him, asking what Democrats have done to “change the tax structure” in order to “level the playing field.”

“Keep It Simple, Stupid,” Wurzelbacher advised. “That’s the secret to life.” Plus, he added, it’s not productive to lay the brunt of blame on Republicans in Washington for their “coddling” (to borrow a term from Warren Buffett) of the wealthy where taxes are concerned:

When you sit there and say it’s the Republicans doing it and not the Democrats, that’s where you’re doing a disservice to the American people, because the Democrats are gettin’ their money from the very same people, you know. They have the same fund raisers. You know, essentially it seems they’re in cahoots.

His advice to people concerned with stagnant wages? “Get involved in your civic responsibility.”

Schultz seemed baffled that Wurzelbacher would be running as a Republican since they “protect” corporations and the wealthy. “So do Democrats,” he responded. Schultz seemed to want to get Wurzelbacher to somehow admit the right is solely to blame for stagnant wages, but Joe wasn’t about to budge, insisting instead that the problem lies in an overly complicated tax system and a lack of available American jobs.

Watch, via MSNBC:

RELATED: Joe The Plumber Is Back And Filing For A House Run In Ohio

The two kicked things off by talking about Herman Cain‘s 9-9-9 plan. O’Donnell asked Wurzelbacher (“I don’t mean it as a ‘gotcha’ question.”) whether he knew the median income in the district he would like to represent — which he did. O’Donnell followed up by noting that, under Cain’s plan, people making around the median annual income in that particular district — around $43,000 — would be paying 2 to 4 thousand dollars more in taxes. When asked whether this impacts Wurzelbacher’s support for the plan at all, he simply said that “experts” on either side are each saying different things.

Fair enough! So. Does he want to abolish Medicare and Social Security?

Are we going to talk about what I want to do with the Great Lakes or are we going to talk about Herman Cain? [Ed. note: Go Joe!] You can have him back on if you’d like, Mr. O’Donnell. [...] Do I want to? Is that what you’re asking me? No, God no. I want to protect Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid. Those promises have been made and they need to be kept.

Later, he said that one reason he’s running is “jobs, man.” “We have to have jobs in this area. Union, non-union alike, we need jobs,” before adding that he wants to “promote American people over party politics.”

Watch it all unfold, via MSNBC:

Co-host Gretchen Carlson also lamented how unfortunate it was that the man, Mark McKim, would “get a lot of publicity about this.”

Steve Doocy then blames the White House for the publicity that Fox and Friends is giving to Mr. McKim’s record, saying, “That’s very unfortunate, the guy with the DUI record, you would think that somebody would vet those people around the table. but apparently the vetter was busy that day.”

Brian Kilmeade then underscored what a terrible break it was for Mr. McKim that Fox and Friends was reporting on this, saying, “That’s not good for him. What he did in the past is now front and center, But I’m sure it was great to have a beer with the President.

Here’s the clip, from Fox and Friends:

The funny (not “ha-ha” funny) thing is, as of this morning, Fox and Friends is the only national program reporting on poor Mr. McKim, according to the TVEyes transcript database. All Fox and Friends had to do to keep from blowing Mark McKim up was to stop caring so much about making the White House look bad. The “news hook,” if you can even call it that,was that the White House supposedly didn’t “vet” the four guys who were having a beer with the President. Fox and Friends doesn’t say, but there appears to have been no effort made to confirm what involvement, if any, the White House had in selecting the men.

This is not to minimize the seriousness of driving under the influence, which is a potentially murderous act. It’s about the news value of the story. There is some superficial irony inherent in the story, of course, but it doesn’t look like anyone tried to put any flesh on those bones. Mr. McKim’s arrest was five years ago, so it’s unlikely that, as CNN and Redstate‘s Erick Erickson puts it, “Maybe that’s why he is unemployed.”

There could be an uplifting tale of redemption at the heart of this story, but since there’s a chance to score a petty point against a political foe, why bother? Mission already accomplished.

This has echoes of another media conflagration from the 2008 election cycle. When Joe the Plumber burst onto the national scene, thanks to his questioning of then-candidate Obama and John McCain’s constant debate night invocations of his name, conservatives were outraged that the media dared to look into his background. Mr. McKim is also a plumber, but unlike Joe, he didn’t invite the spotlight. I wonder if there will be similar outrage on his behalf.

For what it’s worth, that photo op and F&F’s report on it aren’t all people have to go on about Mark McKim. Here’s an interview with McKim by local Orlando TV station WESH 2:

RELATED: Remember Joe The Plumber? There Is A “90% Chance” He Will Run For Congress

He’ll be running as a Republican and will likely be able to capitalize on the notoriety he gained back in 2008, when he criticized Barack Obama’s small-business during a campaign stop in Ohio. Wurzelbacker, who is not actually a licensed plumber, was swiftly dubbed “Joe the Plumber” and held up by the McCain-Palin campaign as a representative of blue collar America’s struggles and frustrations.

h/t The Hill

While Wurzelbacher has mostly remained out of the spotlight for the past several years, it appears the Lucas County Republican Party in Ohio has its eye on him to take out the incumbent, who won reelection with 59% of the vote in 2010 and has been in her seat since 1983. The chairman of the county party, Jon Stainbrook, had nothing but effusive praise for Wurzelbacher, noting that the national party had a “high-level interest” in the former unlicensed plumber, but that he had not made any decision on the matter. According to the paper, one source gave Wurzelbacher a 90% chance of throwing his hat into the ring. Meanwhile, the candidate himself said only that it was an “interesting idea.”

So what has made Wurzelbacher, a media obsession during the last election cycle, so attractive to a segment of his local Republican Party? Stainbrook argued that it was his star power that made him a “fantastic candidate.” “He goes hunting with Sarah Palin. He’s friends with Ann Coulter,” Stainbrook argued, making the point that such connections would guarantee him a good place in fundraising. As Wurzelbacher has remained as coy about a Congressional run as his hunting buddy has been on a presidential bid, this one is still in the works, though could offer some entertaining political theater in the months to come.

[h/t]

That’s right, as a Reform Party presidential hopeful in 1999, Donald Trump made an economic proposal that would make Joe The Plumber snap his plunger like a twig. Trump proposed a one-time tax of 14.24% on those with a net worth exceeding $10 million, which Trump said, at the time, would personally cost him $750 million. From CNN:

Trump, whose own net worth is an estimated 5 billion, says the wealthy would not suffer if his economic plan were enacted.

“Personally this plan would cost me hundreds of millions of dollars, but in all honesty, its worth it,” Trump said.

Trump predicts his debt elimination combined with his tax cuts would trigger a 35 to 40 percent boost in economic activity, with more business startups, more jobs, and more prosperity.

“It is a win win for the American people, an idea no conventional politician would have the guts to put forward,” Trump said.

So, what happened between then and now? The New York Times‘ article on Trump’s plan provides a clue: (emphasis mine)

It also had the advantage of lessening any liability Mr. Trump might believe he could suffer because of his own reputation as a man of wealth. The developer put his own net worth at $5 billion, and said that under his plan, he would owe $750 million in taxes (though his estate would ultimately profit if another part of Mr. Trump’s plan were enacted: the repeal of the estate tax, which can be as high as 55 percent).

You see, folks, there was a time, in this country, when people kind of resented the way the rich stack the deck against everyone else, but through clever use of the catchphrase “class warfare” (which only ever seems to apply in one direction), that’s no longer the case.

According to the Times, Trump’s plan was called “serious wacko stuff” by his rival, and eventual victor, for the Reform Party nomination…Pat Buchanan.

It gets even better, though. It turns out that Trump’s plan is immortalized in the Congressional Record, as Rep. Major Owens (D-NY), a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, lauded the plan on the floor of the House, and read the entirety of the NYT piece about it into the record.

So, perhaps a Trump victory in 2012 wouldn’t be such a bad thing. Once elected, who knows where the shifting political wind will blow him?

h/t C&L

Kelly does a halfway decent job of calling “bullshit” on attempts to interpret Obama’s remark as a comparison to average Americans, but she lets slide, and even repeats, the lie that the Obama administration considers those who make $172,ooo a year “rich.”

It’s a pretty stunning oversight, especially given the way the $250k demarcation line was pounded into voters’ heads during the 2008 campaign, with a lot of help from Joe the Plumber. Without that canard, Kelly and Lewis really have nothing to talk about: (From Fox News)

First of all, of course the President was referring to Gibbs’ pay relative to a comparable job in the private sector. On that score, you also have to factor in that, as the Communications Director for President Obama’s campaign, Gibbs would be considered the very best in his field, the LeBron James of press secretaries.

You also have to remember that Obama was referring to Gibbs’ pay over the last 6 years, not just his current salary. Even then, let’s break that $172k down. That’s about $3300 a week, and even Megyn Kelly credits Gibbs with an 80-100 hour work week, in addition to being on-call 24/7. Even if you didn’t pay him overtime, Gibbs makes less per hour than a Registered Nurse, hardly a high-fallutin’ set.

What’s really a bit sickening, though, is that the same people who cried poverty over Joe the Plumber’s imaginary $250,000 a year salary are now trying to paint $172k Robert Gibbs as the Monopoly guy. What’s the common denominator? Shockingly, both presented opportunities to trash Barack Obama. There’s a word for that, one that conservatives applied to opponents of George W. Bush: deranged.

Conservative internet radio host MacRanger (who thinks “bling” means “vacation”) posts a hilarious series of self-contradictory updates  chronicling his trip through the Google:

UPDATE VI: According to the Kenai Peninsula Borough School District website there is no Kathleen Gustafson registered as a teacher in the district which includes Homer.

UPDATE VII: Actually there is. A Kathleen Gustafson does appear on this PDFfrom the district. According to the document she’s not a teacher but a “Theater Tech” at Homer High School. I wonder how the school district would feel about her misstating or more appropriately impersonating a teacher.

We’ll find out.

UPDATE VII: A couple of points to clarify. It appears that Kathleen Gustafson is more than what the media – or she – tried to portray. Secondly a “Theater Tech” can very well be a teacher although many times – such in the case of one reader email – it’s not.

This is exactly who should be criticizing the mainstream media. Update: No, it isn’t. Update II: Yes, it is! Update III: It puts the lotion in the basket.

He goes on to theorize that this was a radio stunt gone wrong. Gustafson is listed among “familiar faces” on a tiny Alaskan public radio website, so this must be true. She just forgot to bring any radio equipment at all, but had the foresight to line up that sweet camera-phone-totin’ bystander to capture the action. George Peppard would be proud of this plan.

Finally, he discovers that Gustafson is president of a family planning organization. Wow, you figured out, all by yourself, that her politics differ from Palin’s? The 30-foot “Worst Governor Ever” banner didn’t tip you off?

Gateway Pundit, meanwhile, is all hung up on what they say is Gustafson’s membership in a “drag queen band.” Except she clearly isn’t. Even the caption in their own photo identifies Gustafson as the director of a local production of a play, “Hedvig and the Angry Inch.” Still, we get the message, don’t we?

As was the case with Joe the Plumber, however, Palin didn’t know any of this when she approached Gustafson, or when she childishly played “Gotcha!” with her, or when her entourage bullied the man with the camera, and reportedly ripped the sign down.

Palin’s trying hard to re-cast this as some kind of microcosmic Lincoln-Douglas for the YouTube age, but this video remains bad optics for Palin, who already has a reputation for being thin-skinned. Gustafson could be a gay, communist, arugula-farming atheist, and it wouldn’t make Palin’s performance any better.

This won’t hurt Palin with her supporters, who would happily watch her skeet-shoot puppies, but I don’t see it playing well with anyone else.

Update: A Kathleen Gustafson has been a certified teacher in Alaska since 1990. (h/t Michi)

But he’s (marginally) back. The Associated Press reported that Joe, whose real name is Samuel Wurzelbacher, won a spot as a Republican committeeman in Lucas County, Ohio. Wurzelbacher won a hotly contested 38-23 vote (though this account says 38-24 – scandal!) to become “one of nearly 400 committee members who set the agenda and pick a chairman for the local party.”

As that description makes clear, this isn’t very heady stuff. NBC’s Domenico Montanaro had some fun with that fact, although maybe the most entertaining part of their coverage was the disconnect between the slogan of Firstread, the section of MSNBC’s site where the story ran (“The first place for key political news and analysis”), and the headline directly below about Joe the Plumber. To his credit, Montanaro does make a solid joke in wondering whether he can refer to Wurzelbacher as “Plumber” on second reference.

Montanaro also notes that NBC News last year labeled Wurzelbacher as the 2nd-most-overhyped story of the Aughts. He and the rest of the NBC political team surely realize that placing a story about an election with barely 60 votes cast – on an outlet for “key political news and analysis,” no less – contributes to such levels of hype, but in a way you can’t blame them. After all, if there’s one thing we proved as a nation during that 2008 election cycle, it’s that we can’t resist a good Everyman-sounding nickname. Time will tell if the Republican Party in northwest Ohio can’t, either.

On his last stop of a two-day tour though the Midwest, the President was speaking to a crowd of roughly 3,000 people in Quincy, Illinois, in which he discussed the recently passed health care reform bill and rallied support for financial regulation reform, which is no currently in congress. The “money quote” is as follows:

“We’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that’s fairly earned. I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money, but you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or you’re providing a good service.”

The graphics package used by producers in this particular segment screams the words “Caught on Tape,” and Luntz immediately opines “he’s outed himself.” The following clip cuts of early, but Luntz then goes on to reference an editorial post he’d just published at Huffington Post and lays the following claim:

But that kind of comment is why so many Americans are coming out against this financial services reform legislation. They realize that it isn’t just but Wall Street it is about punishing small financial institutions. it is about punishing average everyday workers.

Its worth pointing out that Obama immediately qualified his comment with “you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or you’re providing a good service,” appearing to point his ire at the category of bankers who are making billions of dollars without providing a good product or service, though that part of the comment will likely be lost to the edit room floor in the coming weeks.

Either way, we can probably expect to see this clip played repeatedly until early November.

During the interview, Mattera constantly interrupts Franken, calls him “Senator Smalley,” and attacks provisions of health care reform that support funding for schools and breastfeeding. At least Mattera wasn’t wearing a costume. Check it out after the jump.

Here’s the exchange with Franken:

Now, I only use the term “ambush interview” because that’s what people call an unplanned, impromptu on-camera exchange. I have absolutely no problem with the so-called “ambush interview,” as I’ve said before. For a journalist with a smaller outlet, or no outlet, it can be the only way to get any interviews at all.

I also have no problem with interrupting a subject who is evading or deflecting my questions.

Mattera wastes a golden opportunity here, as Franken actually sticks around and tries to answer Mattera. The problem is that Mattera’s not at all interested in getting answers to his questions, because his questions are complete crap. He’s done this before. He will take a doltish misreading of some sliver of legislation, hassle some legislator on camera about it, then enjoy the high-fives and dull exclamations of “Heh-heh. You said Senator Smalley” from his toadies.

In this case, he’s talking about Section 4201 of the health care reform law, which provides funding for a host of worthy programs. Saying that this funding is for “jungle gyms” is like saying that, because there are Hershey bars in some military rations, a defense appropriations bill is to buy “candy bars.”

Unfortunately, the joke is probably on him. Aside from his ardent fans, I think most people will find his attack on funding for playgrounds pretty hollow, and his attack on breastfeeding just bizarre. If he’s lucky, maybe the New York Times will unfairly accuse him of race-baiting again, and distract from his hostility toward women and children.

This style of gonzo interviewing is doubtless entertaining for Mattera’s audience, but it offers little in the way of influencing anyone else. Consistently, Mattera’s interviews find him winning on class-clown charm, and being pummeled on the substance. When he lets Franken talk, Al exposes the problem with Mattera’s “reasoning” in 2 seconds.

In another recent clip, Mattera makes his frat brothers chuckle by asking Press Secretary Robert Gibbs if he ever “feels dirty” (no, Jason, that was Joe the Plumber), but Gibbs completely destroys him on the substance:

Mattera’s interview style is of a piece with fellow journalactivistist James O’Keefe. Like O’Keefe, Mattera uses deception, each time professing admiration for his subject. Rather than search for the truth, both Mattera and O’Keefe seek to create truth. As entertainment, their value is open for debate. As journalism? Not so much.

Update: Mattera responds with homophobic insults.

Update: Jason Mattera responded to this article by calling me a “girl scout.” The Girl Scouts of America is a fine organization that doesn’t discriminate against LGBT people and produces awesome cookies. While I’m not qualified for membership, as Andrew Breitbart notes, the comparison is flattering. Mattera’s other insults, though, are just homophobic and creepy.

The article– his opening act– is fairly mild-mannered, though he never quite backs down from his words. Calling McCain an “honest-to- goodness, true blue American hero” and evoking the name of the Patron Saint of Conservatism, he explains that he regrets his wording:

“I broke Ronald Reagan’s “11th commandment” not to criticize fellow conservatives in public and the liberal mainstream media has had a field day with it. I regret that. I wish I had said it to his face and privately. I do honestly believe that John McCain’s service to our country as a courageous naval aviator and POW rightfully earned him nothing but respect. He has represented the epitome of honor, duty and unimaginable sacrifice. And for the record, he didn’t ruin my life. He and Barrack [sic] Obama sent me down a far different path than the one I was happily on–a new path that made me famous, notorious, sought after and vilified.”

“I wish I had said it to his face” isn’t exactly an apology, and his final zinger– “to fully answer the reporter who said that John McCain ‘made me’–I was made by my country, my faith and my family”– set the tone for his interview with Sean Hannity later that night, where he was on the offensive. Introduced by the host as “one of the McCain campaign’s deadliest weapons,” he clarified that the media had taken his quotes out of context by calling McCain “the lesser of two evils,” claiming he “doesn’t represent true conservatism,” and confirming that he doesn’t support him “at all.”

But, taking a page out of the Sarah Palin publicity handbook, the real villain in this story isn’t McCain– it’s the mainstream media. McCain didn’t “screw up” his life, he explains, but, rather, the media took away his livelihood. When he met Obama, he “was living the American dream,” but then “the media closed down [his] business for two months.” And, once again, the media takes the fall for spinning his words into their narrative, even though he doesn’t back down from them.

Hannity concludes the interview by getting Wurzelbacher to half-heartedly admit one of the most thinly veiled launches of a political career in recent memory: “You’re Joe the Plumber! Would you consider running [for office]?” Wurzelbacher admits he has considered it, creating a possible scenario that may outdo SNL‘s interpretation of a Palin/Glenn Beck win in 2012.

Watch Joe the Plumber on Hannity below:

Wurzelbacher is making waves in – where else? – the Tea Party circuit this year by endorsing candidates in the upcoming midterm elections. The Ohio native was visiting Pennsylvania to speak at a “Mobilize for Liberty” event organized by Republican gubernatorial candidate Sam Rohrer, one of five endorsements Wurzelbacher has given out of more than 200 solicitations. The article makes no mention of whether Wurzelbacher is being financially compensated for his endorsements, though if the five endorsements per 200+ requests ratio is true, it would speak to the contrary. While the fact that he is being solicited for endorsements and is apparently quite picky about them is a shock in and of itself, his words for the people that gave him the leverage to endorse at all come as an even greater surprise from this reluctant hero:

“I don’t owe [McCain] s—. He really screwed my life up, is how I look at it.”

Wurzelbacher said, “McCain was trying to use me. I happened to be the face of middle Americans. It was a ploy.”

So why’s he still milking the Joe the Plumber image, appearing at conservative events across the country? Wurzelbacher says it’s his duty to take advantage of the platform he’s been given. He wants to talk up the issues he cares about, and encourage the grassroots tea party movement.

Doing his “duty” instead of refusing to fade into obscurity like he claims to want to: it’s the George Washington card, the one he most likely learned to play from his benefactor Sarah Palin. But he’s turned against her, too! According to Detrow, “he said he doesn’t support Sarah Palin anymore. Why? Because she’s backing John McCain’s re-election effort. ‘John McCain is no public servant,’ he told the room, calling the 2008 Republican nominee a career politician.” Contrast this to his opinion of Barack Obama, who he defended from birther criticism (birthers, he said, “belittle and set back” the tea partiers), and almost complimented him at least for his honesty: “I think his ideology is un-American, but he’s one of the more honest politicians. At least he told us what he wanted to do.” For what it’s worth, “one of the more honest politicians” is certainly not something Wurzelbacher appeared to be comfortable saying about McCain or Palin.

The “face of Middle Americans” has gotten pretty dour since we last saw it, but welcome back to the spotlight anyway, Joe/Sam! Below, another example of Wurzelbacher “doing his duty” by joining Arkansas Senate candidate Col. Conrad Reynolds on a state tour:

“You’re not a celebrity,” the always outspoken Joy Behar said midway through her HLN interview with Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher, aka Joe the Plumber. That may be so, but “grass-roots activist” Wurzelbacher’s fifteen minutes haven’t run out yet.

He was back and at it again on Behar’s program on HLN last night, dishing out on the Republican Party, homosexuality, and the Tea Party movement.

Wurzelbacher was ostensibly on the show to stump for the Tea Party movement, but he had some choice words for the Republican Party. “I’m pretty much an enemy against the GOP,” he declared, saying “the Republican Party has lost its way.” Behar agreed.

She did not agree with his stance on homosexuality, however, pulling up this interview he gave with Christianity Today:

I personally still think it’s wrong. People don’t understand the dictionary—it’s called queer. Queer means strange and unusual. It’s not like a slur, like you would call a white person a honky or something like that. You know, God is pretty explicit in what we’re supposed to do—what man and woman are for.

He also said that he would not let homosexuals anywhere near his children and that homosexuality was “a choice.” Definitely not the positions to take when you’re up against a host like Behar, who doesn’t hold back her disapproval. She lectured an uncomfortable-looking Wurzelbacher on the psychological roots of pedophilia and the difference between gays and pedophiles, and picked his position apart.

Overall, Behar was friendly, but she didn’t hold back on her opinion that Wurzelbacher was a media sideshow rather than a legitimate pundit — which made one wonder what exactly he was doing on her show. In her tweet about his appearance the previous night, she took a little dig at her guest, writing “Joe the Plumber–remember him? He’s back and I’ll be talking to him tonight at 9.” On-air, she dismissed his claims that he didn’t search for celebrity, and even went so far as to ask him, “Do you identify with the balloon boy’s father at this point?” Joe the Plumber said no, he did not.

While there were some very funny moments, like his jab at now-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and his Glenn Beck-tweaking references to Marx and Trotsky, I had higher expectations for the heavily favored Goolsbee.  Even considering that his competition consisted of the likes of Joe the Plumber and Grover Norquist, he should have brought his “A” game.

Here’s Goolsbee’s winning performance, as introduced by Mediaite contributor Baratunde Thurston:

Photo by Remo Casilli, Reuters (via Vancouver Sun)

Two high-profile stories about the intersection of racism and the Republican Party are exploding all over the internet. The flap over comments at Free Republic and the Young Republicans’ election of a new president make for a sour cocktail this weekend.

Most of the heat is being generated by this Vancouver Sun story about the comments on a Free Republic article featuring 11 year-old Malia Obama:

“A typical street whore.” “A bunch of ghetto thugs.” “Ghetto street trash.” “Wonder when she will get her first abortion.”

These are a small selection of some of the racially-charged comments posted to the conservative ‘Free Republic’ blog Thursday, aimed at U.S. President Barack Obama’s 11-year-old daughter Malia after she was photographed wearing a t-shirt with a peace sign on the front.

You might think that this is the same as the lame attacks that Bill O’Reilly levels at commenters on DailyKos and/or Hot Air. There are key differences. The Sun report says that the offensive comments overwhelmingly outnumbered those critical of the vitriol, but the real problem is this:

After attention from other blogs, the thread was suppressed and placed under review, but before long it was returned to the site intact, and attracted a new series of racial slurs when the original complaint email was posted publicly to the site, with the sender’s email address intact.

So, they knew about the comments, put them back up, and apparently made the complainer a target for harassment. Very ugly. Eventually, they took it down again.

As disgusting as this story is, it didn’t stand to hurt Republicans that much on its own. Freepers are not exactly considered the bellwether of mainstream conservative thought.

Then, even after an impassioned plea by very young Republican Meghan McCain, the Young Republicans elected a new president with serious racism problems.

The Young Republicans faced a stark choice at their convention in Indianapolis yesterday as they chose their next leader: a center-right twentysomething interested in greater outreach, or a self-described “true conservative” who is almost 40 and spent last week dealing with Daily Beast reports about her beliefs, which are, at best, often hateful, and at worst, downright racist. The delegates, in a vote of 470 – 415, chose the latter.

Fair or not, the effect of these two stories is devastating. Already on Twitter, I’ve seen comparisons of the Freeper story to the Letterman/Palin feud, with liberals asking where the conservative denunciation is. The Young Republicans story serves to neutralize the “few bad apples” rationale on the Freeper story.

As a liberal with a lot of conservative friends, I hate to see conservatives get painted, en masse, with this brush. While this makes them understandably defensive on the subject, that defensiveness can lead to tone-deaf handling of these situations. While some liberals’ idea of the GOP as the Ivory Soap of racism is way off the mark, many conservatives are also in denial about their party’s race problems. The truth, as they say, lies somewhere in the middle.

On the issue of racism, the truth can be elusive. I think there’s always more racism, in general, than white people think there is. On the other hand, I think there’s a lot less of it in the Republican Party than most liberals think. Part of the perception problem that the GOP has today is that the Democrats have a black President. Where else are the racists supposed to go? Just because most of the racists belong to one party doesn’t mean that that party is mostly racists.

Still, when your party stands in opposition to policies that are seen as benefiting minorities, this kind of thing can really be damaging.

I’ll tell my liberal friends exactly what I told conservatives who asked me where the liberal outrage was on the Playboy story: Give it a minute. This story broke on a Saturday afternoon. Two of my conservative friends who write for very influential blogs just heard about it this morning, from me.

To my conservative friends, I hope their reactions, and those of the Republican leadership, veer away from the kind of persecution complex stuff that Newsbusters’ treatment portends, and closer to this. This story is already drawing attention from media heavy-hitters like Jake Tapper, Major Garrett, and David Shuster. The conservative response can be a big win.

As for the Young Republicans, I think Meghan McCain’s got their number.

Update: The plot thickens. Gawker reports that Chris Parry, the Vancouver Sun reporter who broke this story, was also a blogger for Daily Kos, and has suggested, in the past, posting hate speech and blaming it on conservatives (Gawker repeats this claim by the freepers, but I haven’t found anything in Parry’s DailyKos posts to back this up). This does little to change the facts in this story, as Parry could hardly have pulled, then reinstated, the offensive thread. It might mean a rough week for Parry, though. Parry responds here.