Monday, January 30, 2012

Barbara Cegavske Channels Elizabeth Halseth in Ralston Face to Face Interview

Twitter seemed to be, well, atwitter with how bad Nevada State Senator Barbara Cegavske did on Jon Ralston's Face to Face. Archenemy Jim Rogers was especially gleeful at her, seemingly, universally panned performance.
I just finished watching Cegavske on Ralston. Whatever I have said about her in the past isn’t even a down payment on this clown’s stupidity. She has no knowledge and I mean no knowledge about anything. She’s so stupid she doesn’t even realize how stupid she is. She told my executive assistant this afternoon that she would be happy to appear on my show. I can’t wait. I won’t have to do anything except watch her self-destruct.
Even conservative activists, like Chuck Muth, winced at her lack of answers and tired use of talking points that fill the air but say nothing. In fact, the harshness of the reviews reminded me of the Elizabeth Halseth vs. Dennis Nolan debate Ralston did back in 2010. I don't think I've ever seen a more inexperienced and ill-prepared candidate. Her lack of knowledge on almost everything was a cringe-inducing mess. So, did Cegavske match Halseth in ineptitude?



Well, it wasn't the catastrophic train wreck Rogers had me envisioning. But, considering Cegavske's been a Carson City fixture for over 15 years, her zero-content responses may, in fact, be more egregious than Halseth's blatant stupidity (she was a newbie, after all). Although that didn't seem to stop Clark County SD-9 from voting Halseth in. (But we've all seen how that turned out.)

It is getting increasingly tiresome to hear deficit-hawks suddenly lose their zeal for fiscal responsibility when asked the obvious question "What would you cut?" (with the added implication of "and please, for the love of god, give me a specific item that actually cuts something besides a few damn pennies!!!") But, like virtually all conservatives before her, she mumbles something about looking at a variety of unnamed solutions before being pressed into a laughably small (and, therefore, politically safe) target. In Cegavske's case I think Ralston's badgering finally elicited something about Easter Seals handling children health issues. Yeah, it was ludicrous.

The real interesting question at this point is if Cegavske will follow through on her apparent commitment to appear on Rogers' show. Bowing out would look, well chicken, but if this is a typical performance, perhaps a "scheduling conflict" will suddenly appear. Either way, I'm sure fellow GOP CD-4 candidate Danny Tarkanian is smiling.

2 comments:

  1. Ralston: Why did you decide to run for Congress.

    Cegavske: Well, again, as you stated I'm term limited.


    That was the only time in the interview she seemed sure of her answer.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I've actually heard a few politicians use the term-limited excuse. As if there is no shame in being craven.

    Also, there should be a law automatically barring a candidate if they use the hackneyed "In-it-to-win-it" catchphrase. One time and you are on notice. Twice, you are disqualified. Cegavske is now banned.

    ReplyDelete