Switch-Hittin' Lindsey!

I've avoided talking about the exciting news of Lindsey Holmes' party switch until now because the two basic rules about not saying things: (1) the "Mom Rule" ("if you can't say anything nice ...") and (2) the "Blog Rule" ("if you can't say anything interesting ...").  There seemed nothing particularly interesting to say about such behavior. 

But I just couldn't let such idiotic drivel as this and more particularly this by her buddy Ivan Moore pass without comment.  Lindsey's apologia was really the most unconvincing, insincere, and vacuous piece of political writing (a category noted for its unconvincing and insincere vacuity) I have ever seen.  There was absolutely no reason for her to have written (if that verb - as opposed to something more excretory in nature - can be applied) it.  To the kind of people who care, it was just insulting - nothing thoughtful, nothing insightful, nothing new, just press release inanities and straw man arguments.

More significantly bilious, however, are the mewlings of Ivan Moore.  In truth, I can add little to the excellent takedown supplied by Bruce Farnsworth in the Alaska Dispatch. Moore supplies a classic example of the kind of catty, self-involved mindset that infects our politics.  He dresses it up with some manufactured outrage ("She's leading the revolt against the Les Gara Thought Police Juggernaught!"), but the meat of it was high schoolish payback ("Like, Kawasaki got a seat on finance instead of her, but then she, like, totally took Kawasaki's office! It was, like, so rad!"). 

So, bottom line: Lindsey, you did a crappy thing.  Don't bother denying that it was a crappy thing or come up with noble motivations for it.  If you're not going to apologize or be truly honest, then say as little as possible and hope (not without reason) that people have short memories and rely on the waning of passions.  More importantly, do not let Ivan Moore speak for you if you want to come across as anything but an immature, backstabbing, and callow buffoon.