You may be one of the, like, two people who read this post about a professional wrestler who called a politician out about his lies concerning the Internet Sales Tax. Well, after that story broke, people started circulating the rumor that Glenn Jacobs - better known to wrestling fans as Kane - was considering a bid for the Tennessee senate. While I really, really hoped this would be a thing (and I would've volunteered for that campaign faster than Rey Mysterio Jr. screws up his knee the minute he returns to the ring), Kane (because I refuse to call him by his mortal name) denied it.
Kane — we mean Glenn Jacobs — said Monday that he has “no plans on running for political office at this time” following a report late last week that he might be planning to take on U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander.
The World Wrestling Entertainment star said “things get a little carried away on the Internet sometimes” in response to a Reason magazine post that quoted an anonymous source as saying Jacobs is weighing a run.
I'm adding this from the same story because it was a rabbit hole I couldn't resist.
Perhaps Jacobs was the victim of an icy staredown from Alexander, who has been trying to intimidate potential tea party foes into staying out of the race. Or maybe Jacobs is just biding his time for now.
Hmm. That link in the quote looking interesting...
“I’m running a Colin Powell military operation,” Alexander says in an interview with Politico posted Sunday, “which is assemble an overwhelming force, focus on a single target and have the stomach to see it all the way through to the end.”
Politico fits Alexander’s strategy into a trend for the 2014 campaign cycle. The Washington political pub says veteran Republicans are flexing their muscle early to scare off any potential tea party challengers.
This strategy may offer an explanation to Alexander’s recent Obamacare-is-the-new-Iran-Contra talking point. Politico suggests it’s red meat for the conservative base.
You can click the interview with Politico if you want, but it's already an established fact that the Republican leadership dislikes the Tea Party a lot. I don't need that wonderfully unbiased and totally credible site to tell me that. The description of a "Colin Powell military operation" is hilarious, though, as Alexander, by taking this up, is violating the Powell Doctrine when he declares this kind of war.
- Is a vital national security interest threatened?
- Do we have a clear attainable objective?
- Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
- Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
- Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
- Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
- Is the action supported by the American people?
- Do we have genuine broad international support?
Alexander has No. 2. That's about it. I'm not going to go over every part of the Powell Doctrine, but if you fine-tune it for political campaigning... well, I'll let you be the judge. It appears I've gone far enough down the rabbit hole that I am staring a Jabberwocky in the eyes. And I forgot my sword.