NY Times showers attention on a one-term Congressman, why, exactly?

The New York Times has an absolutely hysterical, might-actually-make-you-roll-on-the-floor-laughing-out-loud, funny article yesterday about our local lunatic quickly-retired Congressman Alan Grayson:

NY Times | Alan Grayson | Enter: Swinging. Exit: Much the Same Way.

...Representative Alan Grayson, a Democrat from Florida’s Eighth Congressional District, is leaving office on Wednesday much as he entered it two years ago — as the pugnaciously partisan, verbal-bomb-tossing, liberal folk hero of the 111th Congress.

But in a wide-ranging interview as his term drew to a close, he repeatedly aimed his artillery in an unexpected direction: toward his own party.

Not for overreaching, in this age of hand-wringing over big government and creeping “socialism,” or for ideological purism. Instead, while surveying the wreckage of the November elections that cost him his seat and looking to the Congressional term ahead, Mr. Grayson posits that many Democrats have not been acting Democratic enough.

Judging by the results of the midterm elections, it does not exactly seem to be a widespread sentiment.

"Not exactly a widespread sentiment?"  Yeah.  No kidding.  If by "not exactly a widespread sentiment" you mean, "got the snot beat out of him on November 2nd."

Alan Grayson, The One-Hit Wonder One-Term Blunder of Florida's Congressional Delegation.  Gah.  He's a scary looking dude.

My apologies for the photo of Alan Grayson.  Here's a picture of a fluffy puppy to help your eyes recover.  Awwwww.  (From CuteOverload.com)

The entire article has to be read to be believed. Enjoy these magical little gems:

Grayson gives Nancy Pelosi a "glowing assessment," and a grade of "A," "without reservation."  I'd give her an "A" too, for being a grade-A actress in the TV ads of every Republican Congressional candidate this past year.  She was wonderfully talented at conveying exactly why people should vote Republican.  Just seeing her face for a few seconds easily symbolized the whole "Congress is spending a crapload of your money, passing unconstitutional legislation, and ignoring all your attempts to make them listen to you" concept.

He calls incoming Speaker of the House John Boehner a "tool of special interest."  I wonder if he meant "of special interests." Or does he mean that Boehner is especially interesting? I can't tell. It is often difficult to translate Crazy into English.

He claims that the Tea Party is “bought and paid for by the enormously rich and the selfish.”  Oh, those evil corporations, paying all of us to make posters and go to rallies.  Hmmm, where's my check?  Maybe it will come in the mail tomorrow?  I can't wait!

...and of course, Grayson has some lovely words to congratulate his successor, calling Daniel Webster a "bizarre fundamentalist."   I'm so glad he thinks this way, because this hubris-driven idea is what led to the infamous "Taliban Dan" TV ad that sealed Grayson's fate.  This year, maybe Grayson can help the Humane Society place more pets for adoption by claiming that puppies and kittens are actually radioactive vampires.

There is a lot of online speculation about Grayson's next political move, including some humorous chatter about making a run at challenging Obama for the 2012 Democratic Presidential nomination.  Originally I was in favor of Grayson fading away into the background, but the more I think about it, I love the idea of him being front and center, representing the Loony Left in all its glory.  

The Democrats were dumb enough to keep Nancy Pelosi as their leader in Congress, even after the Republicans effectively used her as a straw man to wipe them out in vast numbers.  If they are willing to give a radical liberal like Grayson any sort of platform, I think it is positively fantastic.

The Republicans aren't going to get a free ride, they need to be very careful not to stray from the fiscal conservatism they promised us, but their path to 2012 is made a lot easier by the fact that most of the Democrats who lost in November were the more moderate "Blue Dogs."  

The Democrats who are left in Congress are the most stridently liberal of the bunch (with the exception of Grayson, natch).  I seriously doubt their ability to calm their more radical impulses or moderate their rhetoric in a way that appeals to the current mood of the voters.  The simple fact that they re-elected Pelosi, who polls only slightly better than Hitler lately, speaks volumes about their tone-deafness toward what the American people want.