You almost have to feel for the liberals at this point. They keep getting so close to that example of right-wing violence and hate that they're salivating over, and then Lucy keeps pulling away the football. It's like liberals have gotten so annoying, they've actually annoyed God, and now He is toying with them.
Frank J., in Right-Wing Viole– Oh, Never Mind, at IMAO
Prior to the Civil War, the usual usage when referring to the nation as a whole was "the United States are...."
Since the Civil War, "United States" has been treated linguistically as singular: "the United States is...."
Given the to-do over Arizona's immigration enforcement law, as well as the incipient revolt of a number of states over the health care individual mandate (among other things) I get the feeling that we're on the way to hearing more use of "the United States are...."
That's how it's registering in my thoughts, more and more. As it relates to the nature of state sovereignty within our federal republic, I'm fine with that usage.
Every single one. Remember this?
And I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase — not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital-gains taxes, not any of your taxes.
Right.
At Hot Air: Great news: Obama “firm pledge” on taxes now a “preference.”
On second thought, there's one promise he made that will come true, if Cap and Trade is ever enacted into law:
Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.
That's as much a threat as a promise.
The left has nothing in their quiver anymore; QUESTION AUTHORITY was all edgy ‘n’ stuff, but GIVE AUTHORITY A LOVING TONGUE BATH doesn’t give you the same rebel cred.
There was a bit of consternation yesterday due to an apparent ban on poles to which people might affix their signs and flags at today's Tea Party event at the state capitol in Raleigh.
There has, fortunately, been some resolution, and poles will be permitted. (Link via Instapundit.) It may have occurred to someone that Tea Partiers are the very essence of "peaceable assembly."
Because of my work schedule I cannot, unfortunately, make it to the capitol I guess I'll just have to review last year's photos, and perhaps listen to some music.
I get the distinct feeling most of the smart people have already left; idiots are in charge, and the majority of the populace appears to be moronic enough to keep them there.
John Hawkins of Right Wing News regularly conducts polls of bloggers on the right side of the political divide — yours truly included. I may not be a big shot, but I have been around the dextrosphere longer than most.
This week's poll: The Ultimate Like/Dislike Poll For Famous People On The Right.
I was not at all surprised by who came in as least popular on the "passion" index. I think the implicit lesson there for politicians and media figures is: your followers and fans can make as much of an impression about you as you do for yourself. Click over to see who I'm referring to, and you'll understand what I mean.
The top five most popular were:
#4 - Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh (tied)
#2 - Marco Rubio and Michelle Malkin (tied)
#1...
Well, you'll just have to head over to RWN to find out who is the most popular person among the right side of the blogosphere.
A very worthy choice.
Ann Coulter had, shall we say, a bit of difficulty getting her message out to college students in Ottawa earlier this week. The intolerance of the Left was on full display.
Fortunately, however, she had a full hour, free from rude interruptions or censorship, on Canadian TV with chat show host Michael Coren.* Smitty at The Other McCain points to the first of five parts, but the whole show is fun viewing if you like Coulter... and probably head-asplodingly infuriating if you don't.
Me, I liked it.
Part 2 — Part 3 —Part 4 — Part 5
* Smitty calls Coren "a cheap Canadian imitation of Bill O’Reilly." This is grossly unfair towards Coren. Bill O'Reilly is a pompous windbag, and a poor imitation of actual class acts like Michael Coren.
A few thoughts for the GOP, if they intend to retake and eventually retain majorities in the House and Senate:
1) "Repeal and replace" — that's a good first effort. Keep trying. Don't let the message get stale.
2) Emphasize our founding principles.
3) You might also consider somehow working "tar" and "feathers" into the messaging.
4) Take the message on the road. Face time beats screen time.
5) God bless Mitch McConnell, he is a great senator, and a great leader in the Senate, but the Senate Republican caucus desperately needs a different front man. McConnell has the facial expression and animation of a stroke victim who's sucked on a lemon. Get someone more photogenic out in front of the cameras.
6) Anything, anything at all, that smells even vaguely like what will be labelled by the Democrats and media (but I repeat myself...) as "corruption," maybe even "hypocrisy," needs to be cleaned out, root and branch. Never mind that Democrats (Rangel, Frank, Holder, et al.) routinely get away with behavior that any Republican would be roasted for. This cleaning might include such things as backing primary challengers of tainted incumbents up for re-election, or removing offenders from prime committee assignments. Egregious offenders ought to be removed from the caucus.
7) Once in the majority, enforce the law. Refer members of either party to the Ethics committee, or for criminal prosecution as necessary.
8) Commit utterly to ruthless fiscal discipline. No earmarks, no new programs, no accounting tricks.
That's all I've got for now.
I've often wondered, particularly since the Democrats in power in North Carolina killed off an entire sector of an industry by passing an incredibly short-sighted Amazon Tax, if there is any economic activity that can possibly go un-taxed? What is it about governments at all levels, from local to federal, that makes them feel compelled to tax every single aspect of our economic lives?
And more specifically, what gives the federal government the power to tax everything they see?
Well, I'm no legal scholar... but today David Kopel (an actual legal scholar!) discusses some of the very questions I've had on the taxation matter: Is the tax power infinite?
Good reading.
(Link via Instapundit)
Jim Treacher pithily rounds up Healthcare Reform commentary — do NOT miss what the inimitable Bill Whittle has to say on the matter:
These Marxist bastards have no idea what is coming for them. No idea.
Indeed not.
On the healthcare reform "Slaughter option":
We've gone from passing Bills w/out reading them to passing Bills w/out *voting* on them?
John Thune, on Twitter (via Michelle Malkin.) You'll see this one all around, I expect.
I have an extremely bad feeling that if this monstrosity of a bill passes in such a shady manner, there will be turmoil in this country that will make the Tea Parties look like a mere tempest in... well, in a teapot.
Last week, referring to the government healthcare takeover scheme, Nancy Pelosi infamously declared "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it."
Really.
Instead, I would suggest that we can get a much better view if we kill it and perform an autopsy.
At what point do we begin to see politicians hanging from lamp posts?
I don't know... but surely this [Flaming Skull alert is in effect] would take us one step closer.
Last night, on the news that Rush Limbaugh had been hospitalized, an old friend of mine who happens to reside on the liberal side of the aisle suggested that it was ironic that, after opposing socialized medicine, a.k.a. Obamacare, Limbaugh was initially treated by socialist healthcare ("government") paramedics.
I don't think this quite fits the definition of "ironic." Paramedic services are pretty much a "natural monopoly," as are fire and police departments, and don't necessarily have to be government-provided.
Here in my town, for instance, the EMT/ambulance service is privately operated. If you want to "subscribe," you can pay a modest annual fee, but if you are not a subscriber and they respond to a 911 call, you (or your insurance company) are going to pay a hefty charge.
Relying on a monopolized service isn't ironic.
On the other hand....
Would you call the following scenario ironic? Our country's most vocal proponent of socialized medicine, upon discovering a medical problem requiring expert care...
Yes, I'm talking about Ted Kennedy, whose treatment may have given him a few months of life, but which I am certain cost well into the 6-figure range.* Could not those resources have been better used elsewhere?
But no, that's not irony.
That's hypocrisy.
In any event, neither term applies to Limbaugh.
* As regular readers will recall, I'd earlier had the same neurosurgeon do my own brain surgery, and I know how much that cost. Boy, do I ever know.
Hot Air's Doctor Zero:
The Democrat Party is starting to look less like something you vote against, and more like something you overthrow.
via Twitter.
It's been brought to my attention that my referring to Press Secretary Robert Gibbs as "no more or less intelligent than a retarded howler monkey" might be considered to be offensive.
He is, in fact, no more or less intelligent than a retarded baboon.
I apologize for the error.
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs is no more or less intelligent than a retarded howler monkey.
On that, the science is settled.
I don't think I've ever made it a secret that I am not a fan of former Arkansas governor and GOP aspirant Mike Huckabee. He might be a decent, upstanding guy — I mostly believe him to be — but his executive judgement has always been questionable.
In the past, I opposed him because of his nanny-state tendencies. Though I would appear to fit squarely into his "base" demographic — protestant, evangelical, conservative, white male in the South — I am in fact rather more libertarian in my political leanings. More than once Huckabee has expressed a desire to use the power of government to intrude into peoples' lives in ways that are as obnoxious to a free society as is the currently proposed health care reform, and that's all I needed to know to oppose him. I am thoroughly antagonistic to that sort of government intrusion into the sphere of decisions which are inherently personal, whether it comes from the Left or from the Right.
What I was unfamiliar with before yesterday's horrific crime in Washington was his record as governor of Arkansas of issuing pardons and commutations, often against the advice of law enforcement officials. He took an admirable attitude — the Christian concept of forgiveness — entirely too far, applying it where it ought not to have been used. He failed to take justice into account.
For the Christian, forgiveness towards the person who has committed a crime against you isn't optional, it is commanded. But that does not remove the obligation to pursue justice for criminal actions, or for the criminal to pay the price for their crimes. Huckabee often let his personal feelings override his obligation as governor to see justice done.
Huckabee's response to the deaths does even more to call his judgement into question.
I'm only surprised that he hasn't tried to blame Mitt Romney and the Mormons.
His executive judgement is no longer a matter of speculation; I would no more trust him in the Oval Office than I trust Obama and his Chicago cabal. It was only a matter of time before his leniency would come around to bite him in the backside. I only wish it hadn't come at the cost of the lives of four police officers.
On Obama:
Right now he looks like a pretty desperate sort of beta male chasing an alpha chick who happens to... well, you know, if the alpha chick hated Jews and wanted nukes.
The always informative (and easy on the eyes) Mary Katherine Ham, on tonight's O'Reilly Factor — a program I would not normally be inclined to watch.
Other than that, yeah, I completely concur with Ace.
I find myself cussing at the TV screen more and more these days.
I'm operating on a total lack of sleep last night/this morning, so I'm not at my thinkin'est best... indeed, I'm a vitual zombie at this point.
I've been led to believe there have been some elections today; I hear the New Jersey governor's race is within the margin of fraud. I suppose I could turn the TV on to a news channel to find out more... but if I get bored and fall asleep right now, my body clock will be completely hosed for the work week ahead.
I think I have an episode of Top Gear on the DVR... that'll keep me awake for an hour. After that, we'll see.
I've been fortunate enough to be asked to participate in Right Wing News' most recent poll, Right-Of-Center Bloggers Select Their Least Favorite People On The Right (2009 Edition.)
It was an open ended question. I listed:
John McCain
Meghan McCain
David Brooks
David Frum
Ron Paul
Lindsey Graham
George Voinovich
Olympia Snowe
Susan Collins
Michael Savage
Bold indicate the ones that polled in the top 10. OK, so, Voinovich was a bit of a flyer — didn't make the list at all, not even an honorable mention.
Nevertheless, you may henceforth refer to me as a "conservative thought leader."
I'd have included Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs fame, but no one considers him to be on the Right anymore, do they?
Hitler's rants from the film Downfall have been fodder for hundreds of parodies.
My first-ever shot at making a humorous* video is a bit topical. I wondered last night how long it would be before someone did this... then reasoned that perhaps I ought to do it myself. It made for a longish evening.
So here goes.
I'm guessing they will end up out of the bunker and under the bus.
* Assuming one defines "humorous" broadly.
Update, 21Oct09: Philadelphia... LOL.
As I noted last year, when Ted Kennedy had brain surgery, I knew he had the best neurosurgeon in the world; that same surgeon was the one who had operated on me six months earlier.*
At the time, I sent the senator my best wishes, and I meant it. I'm not going to say that no one deserves to be killed by brain problems of whatever sort,† but even with all his well-documented failings Kennedy didn't fall into that class.
And now with his death, it's a certainty that the Left will use his legacy as a lever to try to inflict a government takeover of the medical industry on the nation. It was, after all, his "signature" issue over the years.
Here's the problem: under the scheme of government control of healthcare Kennedy advocated, a person in my shoes would not have had the same choices as Kennedy made for his own care, nor would care have been delivered as promptly as it was.
Let me be perfectly clear here. My condition, hydrocephalus, if left untreated, kills. Without timely diagnosis and treatment, permanent damage can result — a fact I have to live with every day now, and for the rest of my life. As regular and long-time readers may recall, in my case, diagnosis was difficult; there has been permanent damage, and now I cannot walk without a cane or crutches
I cannot tell you how glad I am not to have to wear adult diapers.
Kennedy spent his career fighting for a program under which, as in Canada, waiting times to see a specialist (like my neurologist) or to have a test (multiple MRIs and spinal taps) or to have surgery are vastly increased — time during which even more permanent damage than I have suffered would have happened to me.
In my case, a longer wait for treatment could have meant much much worse, and had Kennedy been forced to seek medical care under his own program,‡ he would not have lived as long as he did.
Clear?
So call it "socialized medicine" or "single payer" or "public option" or whatever you want. By any name, the system Kennedy spent his career pushing for would result in fewer doctors and nurses, rationed care, with longer waits for that care. And if you think it would be free, just wait until you see the tax bill.
I have a cousin in Nova Scotia who comes to the US annually to pay, out of her own pocket, for treatment for a chronic condition; she can't get that treatment under Canada's system. Under what conceivable circumstances would a sane nation want to inflict such a system, with evidence of its unworkability for all to see, upon itself?
If you really want to improve the medical system, let people have the same options that the Kennedys want for themselves: the right to choose their own doctor and seek medical care with whatever alacrity they desire, without government interference and without packs of ambulance chasers filing spurious malpractice lawsuits.
Which pretty much sounds like the system we already have, except for the tort reform.
* Not that my case required the best. My surgery, for the doctor in question, would have been like a miniature golf par 3 would be for Jack Nicklaus.
† I can think of a few people that really need to die in as horrible a manner as possible — bin Laden tops the list.
‡ Not that the political class in Washington will make themselves live by the rules they inflict on the rest of us, of course. If you think there won't be a "congressional exemption" from the rules, you haven't been paying attention.
I didn't think it would be long.
Sen. Edward Kennedy, the longtime, beloved lawmaker whose personal tragedies along with his professional triumphs and losses unfolded in the public eye, has died of brain cancer. He was 77.
Beloved by some, perhaps. Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment.
Me, I merely rue the fact that of the four Kennedy brothers, he was the only one to live a full life. I swear, there must be a curse on that family. The sins of the father....
And if you thought Paul Wellstone's funeral was a political circus, you ain't seen nothin' yet.
Christopher Taylor:
That squeaking sound at night isn't crickets. Its people scraping the Obama stickers off their bumpers.
In "Apologies, sans tilts."
Heh.
Years ago, immediately after I'd graduated from high school, I was an extra in an eminently forgettable movie. It was being filmed in my hometown, and they needed people who knew how to march and wear uniforms, so they approached our JROTC department and asked for volunteers.
Having nothing better to do, I and some of my fellow cadets signed on. It was interesting to see the "behind the scenes" working of a movie location shoot, and we all pocketed a few dollars for mostly sitting around and waiting.
But no, I never saw the movie; I heard it was really truly awful. I have no idea if I ever got any screen time.
Oh, you want to know the name of the movie? "Evilspeak."
Forward to today. The excruciatingly tedious Senator Harry Reid has described vocal town hall protesters as "evil-mongers."
Pelosi earlier this week called protesters un-American.
Not to point out the obvious, but it takes one to know one.
I used to subscribe to the notion that one should never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity. Now, I'm not so sure. I sense malice galore — malice towards and hatred of the principles on which this nation was built, the fundamentals which made this country what Lincoln rightly and presciently described as the "last best hope of earth."
Just how morally bankrupt does one have to be to suggest that people talking — or shouting, even — at their elected representatives is evil or un-American? Particularly when the one making the suggestion is one of those public servants?
Reid and Pelosi need to be reminded that they work for the people. (Given recent poll numbers, though, I suspect Reid won't be representing Nevada much longer.) They are employees, not our rulers. And they seem to have a moral blind spot you could drive a Peterbilt truck through.
Speaking up to your representatives is neither evil nor un-American.
Sending thugs to silence dissenting opinions is evil and un-American.
Forcing people into a medical care rationing system they neither need nor want is evil.
Denying people the opportunity to seek medical care because "it isn't worth it" is evil.
Lying about the content and effect of bills that you are trying to enact into law — that's evil and un-American.
Chattel slavery — the worst evil of the 19th century.
Statism — the worst evil of the 20th century.
And yet what Reid, Pelosi and Obama and their cohorts continue to press for is nothing less than the enslavement of the entirety of the population to the will and the whim of the State. The mere fact that this is now the 21st century changes the equation not one whit.
They call it "reform," an effort at equality, and a way to address social ills, but the equality one has under the yoke of the State is still slavery. And that is evil.
As, I believe, are its primary advocates — nothing more, nothing less. I ascribe no positive motives to any of them. Mere stupidity can explain some peoples' willingness to "sign on" to the program, but it very definitely cannot explain the depth and breadth of what the leaders of that movement are attempting to do to our health care system, to our economy, and to our liberty.
It is evil, and un-American.
Update: Please, flag me. I insist.
If the purpose of the Sotomayor [confirmation] hearing is to remind me how much I hate the Senate, it's working perfectly.
Red Eye's Andy Levy
South Carolina governor Mark Sanford, as everyone now knows, is back at home and work, after a mysterious disappearance of several days' duration. He claims to have had an affair.
I have an alternate theory.
Politicians can be outed as being gay, they can be busted on video doing drugs, they can be nailed in bribery scandals, they can even be caught having extramarital affairs... and yet all of these are politically survivable.*
But for a politician of any stripe with presidential aspirations, there's one thing that would be the kiss of death, and it would explain why he would claim to have had an affair:
Alien abduction.
Bear with me here. Think about it... what do we know about aliens?
1) They prefer kidnapping people from the South; given the incidence of abductions, their eventual nabbing of a sitting governor rather than a one-tooth-havin' moonshiner is a statistical certainty.
2) The governor flew in from Argentina. Aliens are notoriously inconsiderate as to where they drop off their abductees, so it's not entirely unanticipated that they might drop off the Governor somewhere away from home. He should count himself lucky that they dropped him in the Western hemisphere.
3) The most commonly reported aliens are known as "greys." Where better for them to pick up a human than the birthplace of the Confederacy, South Carolina? Confederate uniforms were — you guessed it — grey.
It makes perfect sense.
Any politician claiming to have been abducted by aliens can kiss his presidential hopes, and perhaps his entire career, goodbye.† Compared to that, marital infidelity can be thought of as an astute political move.
* Especially if you're a Democrat — the press has your back.
† Except for Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul.
[This post brought to you by the Andrew Sullivan School of Journalism. Prove me wrong.]
I certainly enjoyed former VP Dick Cheney's speech yesterday. I didn't bother listening to Obama's.
It continues to irk me that Obama would release details about interrogation methods used against captured terrorists, but won't, per Cheney's request, release any information about what results were yielded, what specific terrorist plots were thwarted. Heaven forfend that anyone begin to suspect that our intelligence methods might be effective.
This turns the entire notion of "classification" on its head. One of the very first things they teach everyone in the intelligence business is that things are classified based on sources and methods, not on the results achieved.
The way he's operating, I suspect that if Obama had been president in 1942, he'd have released the details about Magic, but not told the American people about the US victory at Midway.
I'm not entirely convinced that Obama has our best interests in mind.
As a new differently abled disabled handicapped cripple, I'm perhaps a bit more sensitive now to the issue when it comes up in public discourse.
I have not a lot of comment about this at Jules Crittenden's place, other than (1) complete agreement, and (2) to note that in a smackdown, I'll take Krauthammer with his physical disability over Klein with his clearly deficient thought processes.
Plus: I've always wanted an excuse to link this (language, violence, and hilarity alert): South Park: Cripple fight!!
There's one aspect of the the whole Nancy Pelosi "CIA lied to me" story that hasn't been, but needs to be, made clear.
It's the CIA's job to lie to America's enemies.
Just sayin'.
Senator Palpatine Arlen Specter has decided to switch to the Democrat side of the aisle, either because he is getting his ass handed to him in the PA GOP primaries, or simply to make his party affiliation match his voting record.
To be honest, I am surprised he ever wore the GOP label.
I liked him better when he had cancer; at least then I could feel something other than disgust for him.
I'm back from the Raleigh Tea Party, and have posted my photos with brief commentary below the fold.
Quite a crowd there today, which I would characterize as "politely rowdy." I would estimate there were 2500, perhaps 3000 people there, but that's just a guess on my part, using the "count 100 people and estimate how many hundreds are present" method. I could not see the entire crowd, which was composed of young and old alike.
It was a terrific turnout, hosted by Bill LuMaye of WPTF, opened by a stirring rendition of the national anthem and followed by a number of good speakers. I was, sadly, unable to get close enough to the rostrum to get any decent photos. Heck, I could hardly hear, what with all the passing vehicles honking and the crowd hollering in return.
[Update: here's a post (with video) from the Raleigh organizer, Melodye Aben. The police told her the attendance was 5-7000. Wow, was I way off.
So, apparently, was the Raleigh News & Observer... by a factor of at least 10. Typical.]
Lots of American flags. Not a single kaffiyeh in sight.
I saw exactly one identifiable loon, wearing a 911 Truther t-shirt. I guess the rest of the moonbats had already met their fascism quota for the day.
Photos and links below the fold.
There's a Tea Party in Raleigh tomorrow. I'll be attending, weather permitting. (Wet sidewalks are too risky for me.)
I'll have my camera and fresh batteries along. I hope to be able to post some decent pics. How hard it might be to use the camera while balancing on crutches, we'll see. (For an event of that duration, I'm not going to trust myself to just the cane.)
I'm really hoping to catch some moonbat counter-protesters/infiltrators.
I'm not outraged by the AIG bonuses. The bailout itself, yes, I'm a bit unhappy about. But with AIG remaining solvent thanks to you and me and future generations of taxpayers, I'm of the opinion that they should operate the way a business — not a government agency — should operate. Attracting and retaining talented individuals is part of the equation.
I saw some of the Congressional committee grilling of current AIG CEO Edward Liddy today, and it was clear to me that the only person in the room who knew the first thing about running a business was Liddy. Certainly none of the congressmen I saw had a clue how business works.
In fact, after seeing the verbal abuse he took today from Barney Frank & Co., if I were Liddy, I would tell Congress to get stuffed, and pay more bonuses to those AIG employees still on the payroll who are doing their jobs up to standard.
Outraged congresscritters' heads would likely proceed to do fair imitations of a MOAB.
The thought of which makes me smile.
If it takes a college full of law professors to tell us that when the Constitution says X, it really means Y, then I figure the odds are heavily in favor of the Founders having meant X, and very definitely not Y.
The Constitution was written for all of us, not just for the faculty at Harvard Law School.
Let me get this straight. AIG has (or had) some employees with whom it has (or had) contracts, in which was stipulated there would be a bonus payment of some kind.
AIG, still solvent thanks to the US taxpayer, complies with its contractual obligations and pays out the bonuses, some of them alleged to be enormous.
Outrage ensues.
Now, I can see how some people — the ones who don't understand the concept of "contractual obligation" — might be upset, but the hyperbole I'm seeing in the news is beyond rationality. Senator Chuck Grassley's (R-IA) suggestion that hara-kiri might be appropriate was stupid beyond belief.
But more to the point, the remedies some are proposing strike me as being plainly and patently unconstitutional.
The response from Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) struck me as most egregious. From CNN:
"My colleagues and I are sending a letter to [AIG CEO Edward] Liddy informing him that he can go right ahead and tell the employees that are scheduled to get bonuses that they should voluntarily return them," Sen. Charles Schumer said on the Senate floor. "Because if they don't, we plan to tax virtually all of [the money] ... so it is returned to its rightful owners, the taxpayers."
If Chuckie were so concerned about the taxpayers, he'd have opposed all of the recent spending. He's not really concerned about the taxpayers — he's concerned about his image. He doesn't want to be known as one of the passel of legislators who let this one get past them.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but legislation written now to tax bonuses already paid sounds a lot like an ex post facto law to me.
Legislation aimed specifically at the AIG employees who received bonuses sounds a lot to me like a bill of attainder.
What the Constitution has to say about both is quite plain, and (to this non-lawyer) quite beyond debate. Article I, Section 9 says, in part:
No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
Not, of course that that will stop The One and all his congressional Obam-automotons from enacting such legislation. Because of the outrage, you see.
Of course, I'm not a lawyer. I can only read the pretty plain English in which our Constitution was written. So perhaps I should turn to the thoughts of one of the men who actually wrote the Constitution, James Madison, in Federalist Number 44:
Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation.
I'd say the intent is pretty clear.
If politicians are so worked up about the results of the bailout laws they've passed, perhaps it would behoove them to actually read the bills they propose and vote on before passing them. Making laws plainly contrary to the black-letter words of the Constitution is a dangerous thing to do.
Interesting, via Instapundit: Amid AIG Furor, Dodd Tries to Undo Bonus Protections in the 'Dodd Amendment' Rules
I know Obama's probably not a Muslim, but his teleprompter is like the Koran: Every time he reads from it, a market blows up.
Instapundit notes the Obamessiah's difficulty in getting people into key positions, and offers links here and here today, as well as more in-depth linkage regarding one particular failed appointment.
Which brings to mind a joke I read/heard recently:
Q. What's the difference between Obama and Jesus?A. Jesus could assemble a cabinet.
I wish I could remember where I read that.
Mike Hendrix at Cold Fury:
Until Republican spokesmen reject the trap set for them by unscrupulous, forked-tongue propagandists who twist their beliefs, and their very words, into something that bears no resemblance to truth — until they discover the wherewithal to seize the initiative and voice this phrase directly to their blatherskite interlocutors on the Left — no useful discussion will, or can, occur.
I agree with Mike's premise.
At Hot Air: California grinds to a halt.
This was, of course, entirely predictable. Inevitable, even — if not this year, then next, or the next. And under normal circumstances, I'd say fine, let them sink.
The downside, though, is that my entire family and many of my friends are still there. As are several million other normal productive Americans.
For years, I've cajoled my family members to get out while the getting is good. I can understand their reluctance, though. My mom has a lifetime's worth of friends there. My brother's business is there. I'm not entirely sure why my sister stays.... And of course we're natives — unlike the vast majority of those who have done their utmost to entirely screw up the state.
It used to be such a great place. I loved growing up there. No longer. It is as if God had lifted the country up at the East Coast and all the human detritus rolled down and stopped in California.
If only the debris had gone another couple of hundred miles... out into the Pacific. That'd be one way of making sure the hippies had a bath.
As things stand now, though, I expect some very bad things will be happening in California. Confiscatory taxes on producers, property taxes on assets other than real estate, confiscation of personal assets on departure from the state (either by taxing real estate sales, or the death tax, or both) and so on, starting with the (for now) failed attempt by legislators to increase the tax burden by $14.4 billion — most of it going to feed the ravenous entitlements beast... and, it should be mentioned, the state's overgenerous underfunded employee pension funds, as Instapundit points out from time to time.
Add into the mix unchecked illegal immigration and voter fraud on a level that would make the late Richard Daley green with envy, and I have a bad feeling we're going to be seeing California turning into North Venezuela... or worse, West Zimbabwe.
Not too long ago, Victor Davis Hanson noted:
California is now a valuable touchstone to the country, a warning of what not to do. Rarely has a single generation inherited so much natural wealth and bounty from the investment and hard work of those more noble now resting in our cemeteries — and squandered that gift within a generation.
Sad, but as true as anything ever was.
Things are going to get ugly in California. The only question is, how ugly?
So far as I can tell, conservatives aren't going through anything like the grief/angst/outrage that Democrats went through after the 2000 and 2004 elections. There may be activists who would like to generate that kind of reaction, but most conservatives have got real lives -- jobs and families -- and don't go in for the sturm und drang stuff like those 28-year-old gay grad-student types who attach themselves to the Democratic Party like barnacles to a ship's hull.
In short, we aren't whiny, puling little bitches.
Yes, you read that right. Deal with it.
Just for the record, I'm not going to be hopping on the unicorn- and pegasus-drawn Unity Bandwagon of Hope, Change, Good Times, and Rock'n'Roll. Or whatever.
I would say I intend to cut Obama just as much slack as the Left did for Bush, that is to say, little or none, but I'm better than that. The Right, on the whole, tends to be better than that.
However, I do intend to blame Obama for the fact that I have not yet received my mid-month* paycheck.
I guess that makes me a racist.
* I get paid on the 5th and 20th of each month.
Steve H. Graham:
America didn’t want a leader who believed in tried and true ideas (not that John McCain fit this description well). America wanted a flashy rock star. And that’s what we got. We got a young man who thinks the young have all the answers and that the old are stupid. He’s wrong, and unless he changes his philosophy, we are going to reap a harvest of misery from the implementation of his bad, discredited leftist ideas.
At Tools of Renewal (formerly Hog on Ice)
Plus, an elaborate photographic tribute album, Yes We Can: Barack Obama’s History-Making Presidential Campaign. Inspirational photos from the campaign, with glowing blurbs from leading journalists.
Which is a fancy way of saying they merely copied a few dozen front page newspaper stories from 2008.
Instapundit cites a New York Times article on a serious allegation against congresscritter Charlie Rangel.
I note that Rangel's party affiliation isn't directly mentioned in the NYT article, though there's a passing reference to "fellow Democrats" in the sixth paragraph.
Sure, sure, those of us "in the know," politically, are well aware of Rangel's party affiliation, but when a majority or those polled after the November election believed, contrary to fact, that Republicans controlled Congress, I think it's reasonable to believe that a similar majority isn't going to know upon which side of the aisle Rangel sits.
A few things about the Blagojevich matter crossed my mind while I was doing my household chores this afternoon.
Does this face say anything to you other than "mobbed-up scumbag"?
I say that, of course, with no intention of insulting actual bags full of scum*, what with them working hard every day serving the useful purpose to society of containing scum for easy disposal.
Which, incidentally, is an apt description of the place where Blagojevich will be spending the next 20-years-to-life.
The soon-to-be-ex-Governor was in the news yesterday, trying to strong-arm Bank of America (which today gave in, somewhat.) This seems to me to be a small example of what got the economy into the mess it's in: Big Government mandating to businesses that they behave in ways that do not make good business sense, pretty much forcing the business to lose (or give away) money.
See also: CRA.
This is the political culture into which Barack Obama deliberately insinuated himself.
This is not a good thing to happen to a President-elect.
At least with Bill Clinton, we waited a few years before any of his cronies were imprisoned.
Illinois, Illinois, Illinois... we're going to have to revoke your statehood if you can't come up with anything better than this.
I think the last truly Great And Good Thing to happen in Illinois was the Great Hippie Beat-Down of 1968...
... although, Mayor Jane Byrne† was somewhat entertaining, for those of us who lived near Chicago in the early '80s. Cabrini Green!
... and I did date a wonderful girl while I was in college there.
OK, that wasn't so good for the country as a whole. But it was pretty good for me, while it lasted.
*sigh*
* Yes, I know. Dennis Miller. I don't think he'd mind me borrowing that turn of phrase.
† With whom I happen to share a birthday.
There is much chatter the past week or so about the run on gun stores — people buying up weapons and ammunition which is thought likely to be banned or made prohibitively expensive under an Obama administration.
The website for Classic Arms — one of my favorite purveyors of fine shootin' iron — tells the tale (I've cleaned up the HTML for readability) :
Let me give you some perspective. In the third quarter of this year, (July thru October) we sold the following:
7.62x39 ammo 361 cases AK 30 rd mags 783 AK rifles (all types ) 243 By comparison, in the 10 days since the election we have sold
7.62x39 ammo 1218 cases AK 30 rd mags 3855 AK rifles (all types ) 572 That is in addition to the AR rifles, Golani rifles, Tantals, and other firearms that have also sold like wildfire. Some of our larger dealer customers have been attempting to place orders for hundreds of firearms with us when we only had dozens in stock.
The traffic on the one and only "shooters" email list to which I am subscribed — a list populated by extremely intelligent/competent technical guys — is all about people stocking up while they can.
I happen to believe that the fears of these people are correct, that the incoming administration will in fact do everything in their power to make firearm ownership as burdensome as possible, and will restrict as much commerce in firearms as they can.
So here I am with a seemingly perfect reason to acquire more shootin' iron... but I have no need.
I'm maxed out. I'm over my limit of what, for health reasons, I can now put to use regularly at the range.
I already own ugly black plastic firearms that, for purely cosmetic reasons, are likely to be banned by this Congress and the new administration.*
Indeed, I've been considering selling off some of my small collection, simply because I can't make use of it any longer.
Sure, I could try stocking up on ammunition and high-capacity magazines before they're made either illegal or prohibitively expensive... but I already have plenty, and again, because of my new disability, I won't likely use it all in the foreseeable future.
I have a bad feeling that what more of us should really be stocking up on is cash.
And maybe canned food and bottled water.
* I have absolutely no confidence in the ability of the GOP portion of the Senate to maintain a filibuster. Not with useless tools like Snow or Specter there. I even doubt the willingness of the leadership to attempt a filibuster; a bunch of spineless weasels, most of them.
Subtitled "Joe Explains It All":
It is not your money.
Rep. Joe Knollenberg, Republican of Michigan, inadvertently explaining why the GOP lost big in 2006 and 2008.
It's time, I would say, for a RINO hunt.
(Via Hot Air.)
I've been a Gingrich fan for a couple of decades now; I thought Steele would have made a good RNC chairman last time the post was vacant.
It's a pity we can't have both: It’s on: Gingrich versus Michael Steele for RNC chair.
Either would be an excellent choice to steer the GOP past the recent defeat and onwards to a future governing majority. Each would be smart to work with the other, whoever is chosen.
If only we'd had equally smart people running for president this past time around. It's one thing to have plans; it's something altogether different to have a guiding philosophy and to be able to articulate it.
This is what happens when Republicans allow Democrats and Independants a role in selecting their nominee. Open primaries never made sense to me, and this only confirms my negative opinion of them.
Not, of course, that any other particular Republican would necessarily have won... but any of them would have run a better campaign.
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury."
Hence, Obama.
I figure the odds are 1 in 4 that Israel strikes Iran before the end of the year, while Bush is still Commander in Chief. They know they won't be able to count on any support from the new administration. If I were them, I'd be thinking of launching before the week is out.
No one can call the US a racist nation again. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are going to need to find honest work.
Yeah, right, who am I kidding.
I need to find a good hiding place for my rifles.
Obama has a lot of political debts to pay. Maybe he can use all those illegal offshore campaign contributions for that.
McCain ran on his character and record, both of which are clearly superior to Obama, but he never had a driving vision onto which people could latch.
This feels a lot like the Clinton/Gore win in 1992... which was followed, you'll recall, by the Republican congressional victories in 1994.
Palin/Jindal 2012!
I've voted.
I went to the polling place with a camera, just in case there was something there worth a snapshot. There wasn't.
Maybe that, in and of itself, is noteworthy.
My polling place — the local elementary school — was pretty quiet. No long lines, not a lot of vehicles in the parking lot.
My legs are a bit "off" today, and I wasn't at all keen on standing around for even five minutes, so despite the lack of crowds, I opted to use the curbside voting. I was assisted by a cute girl who looked like she was barely of voting age herself. The process took all of ten minutes.
I did not have to show an ID. That really pisses me off.
I voted for McCain, and I didn't even have to be roaring drunk to do so.
Now can we please stop with the phone calls and commercials?
I haven't seen one iota of polling here for the North Carolina Senate race between Republican incumbent Elizabeth Dole and Democrat challenger Kay Hagen. All I see are the TV ads... over and over and over and over and over and over again... and I have no idea where the race stands as election day approaches.
Via Hot Air, here are two new ads, from the Dole campaign and from the National Republican Senatorial Committee. These could be devastating, here in North Carolina.
It matters with whom one associates.
Unless, of course, it is The One doing the associating, in which case it will be decided for you whether it matters or not.
... and falls completely off.
Wow.
OK, we've sort of known all along that Obama is as far to the left as any major politician in recent memory. Even farther left in his voting record than Bernie Sanders, the Socialist from Vermont. The record speaks for itself.
The man speaking for himself, though... this is damning:
Excerpt:
... the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change.
Whether he's talking about general redistributionism, or a more nuanced and narrowly-tailored race-based reparations scheme, doesn't matter. Redistributionism is fundamentally and essentially un-American.
The only thing surprising about this "October Surprise" is that someone was actually able to pry the recording loose. There are skeletons in Obama's closet, and the press is busy jamming a chair under that closet doorknob.
Sarah Palin:
I guess the looming crisis that most worries the Obama campaign right now is Joe Biden’s next speaking engagement.
Just floating a random notion here. I've only had one cup of coffee so far, so maybe I'm not fully functional.... (Hey, give me a break. It's my day off, I slept late. So sue me.)
Biden said, "Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy...."
It occurred to me, in my pre-caffeinated condition, to wonder about that wording.
The cynic in me wonders if "generated" could equal "manufactured," as in a Canadian Bacon scenario, designed to boost support of an Obama presidency, particularly among those of us on the Right who stereotypically might be expected to toss aside partisan squabbles to support the nation's leadership in times of international crisis.
Would a foreign leader be willing to cooperate? I don't know. Sure, Obama has had a lot of support from overseas, but I think the real reason for that support is that a lot of people overseas would dearly love to see the U.S. weakened by an ineffectual president. They want us to be dragged down to their level — which is exactly what would result from the implementation of the Democrats' plans for America.
They envy America's greatness, are unwilling to emulate those qualities that made us great, and, like jackals around a lion, would love nothing more than for us to be brought low.
Maybe I should have another cup of coffee and something to eat.
Plus, the lathe beckons.
Update: Iowahawk brings the funny.
And there's now a Palin video at Hot Air.
A "Joe" moment at a McCain rally:
"I was born in Colombia, but I was made in the U.S.A."
McCain-supporting construction worker Tito Munoz, as reported by Byron York at National Review Online. Great article — read the whole thing.
Instead of bringing the funny (as is his wont) Iowahawk brings the righteous anger:
Joe simply had the temerity to speak truth (or, if you prefer, an uninformed opinion) to power, for which the politico-media axis apparently determined that he must be humiliated, harassed, smashed, destroyed. The viciousness and glee with which they set about the task ought to concern anyone who still cares about citizen participation, and freedom of speech, and all that old crap they taught in Civics class before politics turned into Narrative Deathrace 3000, and Web 2.0 turned into Berlin 1932.0.
Godwin's Law! you say? If the jackboot fits, wear it.
I'm one of the guys who keeps the internet running smoothly; I work nights and weekends so you can do your browsing, IMing and emailing any time you want. I'm at work now, in fact. As with plumbing, you don't notice what I do until something is broken. And no one ever calls me because everything is just fine, so thanks, great job.
I've never been to a cocktail party. I've worn tuxedos — rented — four times in my life: to weddings and proms.
I smoke too much and I drink coffee by the pot. I drive a bigdamn pickup truck. I try to spend my free time at the shooting range or in a garage full of power tools.
I have the remains of a sixpack of beer in the fridge, and bags of charcoal in the garage. I shop at Target. I'm a veteran, and proud of my country.
I'd rather have the press do its job, and our elected officials keep their noses out of my life and their hands off my wallet. And if I get the chance to ask a politician a question, I expect an answer, not an Inquisition.
I am Joe.
I'd really like someone to try to explain to me how, exactly,
I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, they've got a chance at success too. I think when you spread the wealth around it's good for everybody. *
can be differentiated in any meaningful sense from
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.*
I don't think it can be.
The past few days, I've had a number of hits from search engines, people searching on "Robin Hood" and either "socialism" or "socialist" — the searches leading to this scribbling of mine from 2003: Robin Hood Was Not a Socialist. The important bits:
I'll stand by that.
My brother flew to Cleveland today for a business meeting tomorrow.
I left him a message reminding him, while he's there, to register to vote.
Apparently, it's all the rage.
CY wonders who the biggest fools are.
The answer is "all of them."
McCain needs more like this — on TV, not just on the web.
If Bill Ayer's hands were any further up Barack Obama's backside, we'd have to change the Senator's name to Lambchop.
(Bumped.)
CNN clearly isn't keeping a tight enough leash on all its staff. I'm not sure how they let this slip through the cracks and onto the airwaves:
Whoa.
Any bets on if/when CNN willl try to have it yanked?
Via Flopping Aces.
John McCain takes off the gloves:
My opponent's touchiness every time he's questioned about his record should only make us more concerned. For a guy who's already authored two memoirs, he's not exactly an open book.
Today's campaign speech; video at Ace's.
. . . at Ace of Spades HQ.
The Anchoress: Why He’s Voting for McCain/Palin
Patterico: L.A. Times Distorts the Record on Responsibility for the Mortgage Crisis
Ed Morrissey, Hot Air: Israelis dispute pro-Obama video, plus (and it's about time) McCain blasts Obama, Democrats for Fannie Mae meltdown
Protein Wisdom: Obama and the Attempt to Destroy the Second Amendment
Cold Fury: Ayers America
IMAO: In My World: Guilt by Association
And some not-overtly-political stuff. . .
Castle Argghhh!: Like fingers of a hand: Four Soldiers, Sailor secure safe passage in Afghanistan
Hog on Ice: Finally, a Movie Where You're not the Villain
Lifehacker: DIY Skills You Know (and Don't)
Wizbang: The Knucklehead of the Day award
"Racist!" says the AP. "Up yours," says the McCain campaign:
Americans need to ask themselves if they’ve ever befriended an unrepentant terrorist, or had a convicted felon help them buy their house — because those aren’t smears, those are true facts about Barack Obama.
Tucker Bounds, McCain-Palin spokesman
OK, I lied when I said I'd watch some DVDs. Didn't get the opportunity. I did, however, catch some of the debate tonight during a slow period at work.
I think she beat Scowly McHairplugs Joe Biden like a rented red-haired bastard mule.
Oh, and Alan Colmes can go get bent. Dear lord, is there a more annoying person anywhere? Well, OK, the entirety of the MSNBC stable... but I never have to see them.
Dick Morris gives it to Colmes with both barrels:
Why do you insist on using segments with me to get reading practice on your talking points? Save that for a Republican.[crosstalk]
Hey Alan, are you going to have me talk, or have another guest on? If you're going to have me on, you're going to listen to what I have to say. As far as I'm concerned, in the last debate I said that I thought Obama won, and this debate I think she won, and I don't think that that objectivity and fairness deserves your just spewing the talking points you've been handed.
[Colmes spews.]
You're incredible Alan, you're absolutely incredible. Is it that you can't think, or that you only know how to read those talking points? Unbelievable performance tonight, Mr. Colmes. Unbelievable.
[Hannity talks.]
[Palin's performance] was unbelievable, and anybody with a brain looking at it would conclude that... which does not include [Colmes] I might add.
Wonderful. Brought a smile to my face.
Update: here's a (crappy) video capture of the exchange. The fun begins at 40 seconds in, and cuts off before the end. Hot Air has the good video.
I mean, sure, it's important. A completely unvetted, infanticide-supporting gun-grabbing socialist from the corrupt Daley/Chicago political machine, with ties to unrepentant terrorists and anti-American racial hatemongers, is running for the presidency as the candidate of one of the major parties, with the full support of the media.
"Nothing to see here, move along" seems to be the mantra of the major media.
His opponent would do well to point all this out — loud, long and often — but he seems to me to be more interested in collegiality than in defeating the most hardcore leftist ticket ever to have a chance at the White House.
Ronnie, where are you when we really need you?
I think I'm gonna watch DVDs for the rest of the day.
We already know the media are in the tank for Obama. Glenn Reynolds, the Instapundit:
A READER AT A MAJOR NEWSROOM EMAILS: "Off the record, every suspicion you have about MSM being in the tank for O is true. We have a team of 4 people going thru dumpsters in Alaska and 4 in arizona. Not a single one looking into Acorn, Ayers or Freddiemae. Editor refuses to publish anything that would jeopardize election for O, and betting you dollars to donuts same is true at NYT, others. People cheer when CNN or NBC run another Palin-mocking but raising any reasonable inquiry into obama is derided or flat out ignored. The fix is in, and its working." I asked permission to reprint without attribution and it was granted.
The abrogation of their responsibilities by the fourth estate does more than shock the sensibilities, it shatters any pretense they may have towards objectivity or even credibility.
Think back with me a few years. On the eve of the 2000 election, Fox News — the allegedly right-wing Fox News — broke the story of candidate Bush's 1976 DUI.
Would CNN or any of the broadcast networks do the same if Obama's transgressions were the story?
The answer is obviously a resounding "no."
On the plus side, that obviousness does lead those who are interested enough in the political news process to apply the appropriate skepticism. I stopped trusting most journalism a long time ago.
On the down side, most people aren't interested enough, and swallow whatever they're fed, even poison, if it comes with a spoonful of sugar.
(Via the Anchoress.)
The title of this post comes from a Tom Clancy novel, I think it was Clear and Present Danger
I just wish I was sure which book it was. I guess now I have to re-read them all.
Way to go, San Fran Nan. Work non-stop for days to build a colaition to get your important legislation passed, to make the crap sandwich palatable, then open your mouth and drive a wedge between the different factions you counted on for support.
Nancy Pelosi, soooooper genius.
I'm not an idiot, but neither am I an economist. So I talked with my brother (the finance executive) today and we chatted about the current news from Wall Street and Washington.
I still don't understand it all, but I have a better idea about what's going on.
I sent him the link to this video:
(Video via Ace.)
It makes sense to me, but I'm more interested in what my brother the banker has to say about it.
Who needs the kamikaze media anymore? I mean, other than those on the Left who enjoy hitting the talk show and cocktail circuit, being fawned over, sucked up to, and adored.
The new media of the Internet seems to be doing a pretty good job of reportage and analysis — one need only recall this to be reminded of the power of the web.
The latest effort from one of my favorite sites, The Jawa Report, is the kind of reporting that the media can no longer be relied upon to perform — especially when Democrats are involved.
To wit: Hope, Change, & Lies: Orchestrated "Grassroots" Smear Campaigns & the People that Run Them.
Devastating.
The above, which explores a smear of Sarah Palin — likely orchestrated by players in the Obama campaign — is a long, thoughtful, tech-savvy and well-researched investigative piece the likes of which you won't find in the press. Even when the target is a conservative, the press doesn't do things this thoroughly.
Kudos to Rusty Shackleford for his fine work. Maybe someone will sit up and take notice. Someone like, perhaps, the FEC.
FLAMING SKULL UPDATE [with the obligatory language alert] : Devastating, indeed. Ace notes that the videos in question have already been pulled from YouTube, minutes after Rusty's post. Good thing copies were made.
I see that the main YouTube account in question has been closed, too. The guilty flee....
Via Hot Air: Joe Biden, on the campaign trail, decided to reach out to clingy gun owners in Virginia.
In an out-of-nowhere attempt to reassure a southwestern Virginia labor crowd about gun owners' rights, Biden — who regularly scores "F" ratings from the National Rifle Association — warned Obama that if "he tries to fool with my Beretta, he's got a problem."
"I guarantee you Barack Obama ain't taking my shotguns, so don’t buy that malarkey," Biden said Saturday at the United Mine Workers of America's annual fish fry in Castlewood, Virginia. "Don't buy that malarkey. They're going to start peddling that to you."
Oh, it sounds good. But then he gave the game away:
Biden told the crowd that he himself is a gun owner. "I got two," Biden said, "if he tries to fool with my Beretta, he's got a problem. I like that little over and under, you know? I'm not bad with it. So give me a break. Give me a break."
Emphasis mine.
Knowledgeable gun owners know that a Beretta over/under shotgun can cost upwards of $7,000. Not exactly the firearm of your average gun-and-religion-clinging working stiff. Heck, I'm now doing a fair amount better than average, and I can't afford one of those. I'll stick with my $450 Remington.
Beretta shotguns are very nice firearms indeed, but way out of the reach of the average shooter. You have to be either a competitive shotgunner (skeet, trap, etc.) or a very dedicated enthusiast to lay out the kind of money it takes to have one. I wouldn't pay $1500 for a shotgun... and that's the extreme low end of the price range for a new Beretta over/under.
So what Biden is saying here is that yes, he owns a shotgun. An expensive top-of-the-line shotgun. Useful for a narrow set of hunting situations and certain types of competition.
But the record shows that what he and his ilk don't have is any desire for you or me to have our affordable semiautomatic rifles with politically incorrect cosmetic features like pistol grips or bayonet lugs. Or useful features like high-capacity magazines.
For some reason, this reminds me of a quick bit of South Park, in which a wealthy celeb advises the pleb on how to live his life:
Man: Look man, I work fourteen hours a day at the saw mill. I just got off work and I need to relax.
Rob Reiner: Well when I relax I just go to my vacation house in Hawaii!
Man: I ain't got a vacation house in Hawaii!
Rob Reiner: Your vacation house in Mexico, then, whatever it is!
People are flipping out over an interview Charlie Rangel (D-NY) gave:
The question was simple: Why are the Democrats so afraid of Palin and her popularity?The answer was astonishing.
"You got to be kind to the disabled," Rangel said.
Bear in mind here: though I'm still trying to wrap my head around the concept, the fact is that I'm disabled.
The exact language of the question would have helped here; "You got to be kind to the disabled" doesn't answer the question "Why are they afraid?"
On the other hand, why would Rangel — an undeniably astute politician — even think to use the word "disabled" in an answer about Sarah Palin?
Of course, he then went on towards full foot/mouth insertion:
That's right. The chairman of the powerful House Ways & Means Committee called Palin disabled — even when CBS 2 HD called him on it.CBS 2 HD: "You got to be kind to the disabled?"
Rangel: "Yes."
CBS 2 HD: "She's disabled?"Rangel: "There's no question about it politically. It's a nightmare to think that a person's foreign policy is based on their ability to look at Russia from where they live.
Rangel's criticism of Palin could have taken many forms, but here, he's just being incredibly stupid.
Stupidity is no excuse. Just ask Trent Lott.
So, rather than be outraged [major language alert] I'll just feel pity towards the stupid old man.
I noticed in the news today that Jamie Gorelick, of 9/11 Commission infamy, turns up again as a player in the Fannie Mae kerfuffle.
Which got me to thinking. . . a dangerous precedent, that, but it happens from time to time.
I can see the political campaign TV commercial now. . . .
The desperation of the Left is palpable: The latest Sarah Palin smear from the Left: teen molester.
I can't imagine what it must be like to be so filled with hate.
A document so innocuous that, even though it comes from CBS, I doubt it was faked . . . .Oh, snap!
At least, I think that's what the kids are saying these days.
First, but likely not the last.
Oh, stop whining.
On pragmatism:
For the Democrats, it's not about the welfare of the people but about keeping their jobs and about staying in line with their capricious candidate whose positions change with the wind--a wind so apparently strong that it ought to be considered an alternative energy source.Juliette "Baldilocks" Ochieng
The #1 song on the Billboard charts on the day I was born: Soldier Boy. Interesting. I was in the Army, as a matter of fact, though hardly a boy at the time.
The week my brother was born: It's My Party. Heh.
When my sister was born: Wild Thing. No comment.
Not that there's anything at all meaningful in any of those, of course.... But let's see who else comes to mind.
Sarah Palin: I Want To Hold Your Hand.
Indeed.
Barack Obama: Tossin' and Turnin'.
I bet he is.
The best essayist in the blogosphere, Bill Whittle, has a column up at National Review Online. Tagline:
For the first time, I feel like we deserve to win more than they deserve to lose.
Definitely worth the read.
The Obama camp claims — unconvincingly — that because he's been campaigning for the presidency, he is thus qualified to be President.
That sounds an awful lot to me like saying that filling out a job application and interviewing at a hospital is adequate qualification to be a surgeon.
Obambi more properly belongs on the unemployment rolls.
Short reaction after last night's speech by VP candidate Sarah Palin: I want to have her babies. OK, sure, I need to crack open a biology textbook. Still, the point applies.
I watched the speeches last night beginning with Mitt Romney, followed by Rudy Giuliani, and finishing with Sarah Palin.
Mitt wielded a rhetorical meat cleaver. He cut apart Obama and spread the red meat around the room.
Giuliani attacked with a verbal bowie knife. He stuck the knife in the democrats' guts and twisted, again and again.
Palin's speech was like a lunge with a rapier, hitting specific targets with finesse and accuracy, and driving deep to puncture the opponent.
She was en fuego. The media set a very low bar for her, with their attacks since the announcement of her candidacy, but even if they had set the bar high, she easily cleared it.
There is, of course, plenty of other reaction today to Palin's speech:
There's so much reaction out there, trying to get it all would be an exercise in futility.
Exit question: will anyone try to determine who gave the Code Pink fools press passes to get on the convention floor?
The answer to that question would be most interesting; I'd bet the passes came from someone at MSNBC.
Update, 5Sep08: Hmmmmmmmm....
I think we can stop using the terms "mainstream media" or "legacy media."
Faced with a loss of market share and influence, and the increasing influence of new online media, members of the Obama Press Corps are flinging themselves suicidally against Sarah Palin in an effort to sink the GOP campaign, and ruining the one thing that ought to be most precious to anyone in journalism: their own credibility.
They are now the kamikaze media.
For numerous examples, see the Anchoress' Running Sarah Palin Thread of Hate & Doooom, and see one type of backlash, from Michelle Malkin.
What is a "community organizer," exactly?
I can't help but think that it's a fancy way of saying "rabble rouser, on the payroll."
Sort of like using "sanitation engineer" instead of "garbageman."
So Palin's daughter is preggers. While this isn't something most people are glad to hear, they way it's being handled by the Palin family seems exactly right.
"Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support," the Palins said.Compare that to Obama's answer to a hypothetically similar situation:
Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old," he said. "I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby."Punished." That speaks volumes. He ought to be grateful his own mother didn't feel having him was a punishment.
About this kid who knocked up Palin's daughter, consider: she's the governor's daughter; her dad is as tough as men come. Fooling around with their daughter would have to have been an extreme act either of foolishness or dedication.
Either way, that boy must have brass cojones the size of Joe Biden's head.
And the child of such a union... I'll bet a dollar he ends up being named Kal-El.
Jackie and Dunlap discuss Sarah Palin.
"At the very least he prevented a grateful nation from having to learn anything at all about Tim Pawlenty." That's funny right there. (No offense to Gov. Pawlenty, of course.)
McCain's selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate has already had a number of effects on the campaign.
There are losers a-plenty after this.
However, the biggest loser to come out of the Palin candidacy is none other than our former North Carolina senator, John Edwards.
One claim he can make, accurately, would be to having the thinnest resumé of any VP candidate in recent history. Six years as our NC junior senator, with one of the highest absenteeism rates ever recorded, is nothing compared to Palin's record of leadership and accomplishment.
He certainly was of no help to the Kerry '04 campaign, which won neither Edwards' adopted home state of North Carolina, nor his actual home state, South Carolina. Not so much "favorite son" as "favorite SOB."
Plus, of course, had he not been the VP candidate, polling indicated that he would almost certainly have lost a 2004 senatorial reelection bid.
But I don't think he's quite dumb enough to brag about any of that.
9/3 update: See also The reason for the Palin bashing in the media.
Follow me on this. I know, it'll be a shock to you. It certainly was to me.
I don't think anyone's remarked on it, but you know that Sarah Palin? I was watching the news, and I noticed... if you get past the tough reformer, past the leadership and wild approval ratings, past her principles.... Come on — you know who I'm talking about? — Sarah Palin? Governor of Alaska? McCain's VP nominee?
You might want to sit down for this. And send the kids out of the room — this is that shocking.
.
.
.
That Sarah Palin... she's, uh... she's kind of hot, don't you think?
I know it's not obvious.
I don't think anyone's mentioned that so far. Thought I'd point it out.
It only just occured to me: with my two years as a squad leader in the Army, I have more executive experience than Obama does.
Sarah Palin's years as a decisive mayor and governor — and as a reformer — far outweigh Obama's history of "present" votes (or absenteeism) during his career as part of the — undeniably corrupt — Chicago political machine.
It's Palin. Thank you, God.
I've always thought the first women and minorities to be elected to the highest offices would be Republicans. Democrat women and minority politicians tend to be rather too far to the left, too far away from what most Americans, men or women of any color, believe in.
Well, here's our chance to put a woman into the vice presidency. Based on what I know about her, she could be a great President someday.
And, as Bob Owens says,
Unlike Dick Cheney, who shoots small birds with a 28-gauge shotgun, Sarah Palin hunts moose. When she shoots a lawyer, they'll stay down.Update: I just realized... she's younger than I am. This is a first for me.
And it does kind of make my life look like a turd sandwich.
Channelling Reynolds: "They said that if Bush were reelected, political speech that might tarnish the leader's image would be squelched, even outlawed — and they were right!"
Hence the effort to shout down noted writer Stanley Kurtz, who's been doing some research.
One female caller, when pressed about what precisely she objected to, simply replied, "We just want it to stop!"If that's what passes for political discourse, then we have either very little or a whole lot to worry about.
Of course, the efforts of the Obama camp are not meant to pass for discourse — they're merely pulling every lever they can to silence opposing voices.
They know that the Messiah's ties to unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, if widely publicized, would be a deal-breaker for the majority of the voting public.
And that simply cannot be allowed to happen.
On Hillary Clinton's appearance during the DNC roll call vote to nominate the Obamessiah:
She looks so happy she could s**t a chainsaw.The inimitable Ace.
Jonah Goldberg, on the Senator from Delaware, Joseph Biden:
The man loves his voice so much, you'd expect him to be following it around in a grey Buick, in defiance of restraining order, as it walks home from school.
Mr. Goldberg has additional thoughts on the Senator, in a post entitled "Biden's Brains." Worth reading.
[Originally posted 14Sept05.]
Nothing, absolutely nothing, must be allowed to stand in the way of Hopeiness and Changeitude™.*
Hence the Obama campaign's mob-like efforts to squelch this ad; it's got the potential to be the political kiss of death, and they know it.
If they want this to remain unseen, they'll have to do better than threaten.
Tell your friends.
More, from Mike Hendrix, on why Ayers matters.
* Or is that Changeiness and Hopeitude?
Obama hasn't taken a stand on the Surge; what he's really been doing is called posturing.
Those who were there might have something to say about that.
Via Hot Air.
Today's theme: campaign ads.
More to come.
Enjoy them while I'm shampooing the carpet.
[Bumped and promoted to quote of the month because... well, you'll know soon enough if you don't already.]
Gravitas isn't enough:
Biden is essentially a buffoon. He's quick on his feet. He's slick. He can put on a good dog and pony show. But if the answer to "who you gonna call" is "Joe Biden" you may be asking the wrong question. The truth is that a guy like Sam Nunn has pieces of guys like Joe Biden in his foreign policy stool.Jack M., at Ace of Spades HQ
8/23 addendum: Joe Biden couldn't carry my foreign policy jock.
Maybe it'll give Obama a chance to be competetive in Delaware.
I wonder: how will the PUMAs react?
More: Mickey Kaus: "He doesn't have gravitas. He has seniority."
Blog reactions at Stop the ACLU (STACLU).
Still more: discussing the Hillary! crowd reaction, Allahpundit provides a Quote of the Day:
The only way this could be more awesomely awesome is if it involved robots.
It is being reported that congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-OH, passed away today after suffering an aneurysm. I was no fan of her politics, but I can't think of any scandal associated with her name.
Young or old, rich or poor, famous or anonymous, ready or not: any one can go at any time. Be ready.
Condolences to the congresswoman's family and friends.
Update: doctors now say that she is still on life support, in critical condition.
Update 2: just (7:55pm) heard she's gone. Dunno why the reportorial confusion.
I know, it's late, but I finished work late, just had dinner, and now I've got the itch.
Via Instapundit, a bit on the U.S.News & World Report website:
One Nation, Under a New Obama SaluteBecause the Obamessiah veneration wasn't already creepy enough.
George Bush had his three-fingered W salute that supporters flashed when greeting him at presidential campaign events in 2000. And now, if a Los Angeles creative agency gets its way, Sen. Barack Obama will see fans meet him with his own salute like the one above.
"Our goal is to see a crowd of 75,000 people at Obama's nomination speech holding their hands above their heads, fingers laced together in support of a new direction for this country, a renewed hope, and acceptance of responsibility for our future," says Rick Husong, owner of The Loyalty Inc.A new direction? What, in a circle?
I can tell you one thing that goes in a circle, millions of times daily. Accompanied by a flushing sound.
On the plus side, as long as people are making that symbol, you know their fingers aren't in your wallet.
Husong tells me that he got the idea after seeing the famous Obama-Progress poster by artist Shepherd Fairey.Yeah, you know which poster — the one that looks like it came from a socialist agit-prop specialist.
OK, OK, the one that did come from a socialist agit-prop specialist.
I swear, the more I see of Obama the more I think he should have bypassed Berlin, saved a few steps and a lot of time, and given that "citizen of the world" speech at Nuremberg.
Coming soon: natty little armbands with the Obama logo.
Update: Michelle has more ideas for appropriate symbolism. And she beat me to the story, too. Dang.
Ace:
Sometimes "Never Again" just means "Not Until It's Our Turn."
I've said it before and I'll say it again: every time Nancy Pelosi opens her yap, potential voters have more reason to question the rationale for voting Democrat.
Finally, as Ace points out, the RNC is acting on that puzzlement.
Keep talking, Nancy. Don't bother looking at the polls that show you to be far less popular than President Bush. You know in your heart that you're right, and in tune with Americans — your own staff of fellow San Franciscans tell you so, right?
Keep talking, Nancy. When Jeanne Kirkpatrick coined the phrase "San Francisco Democrats," she was talking about you. Not just representatives from S.F. (though I'm sure that really boosts your image among working class Democrat voters in the heartland) but a party wrapped up in the most loopy left-wing values, blaming America (and, by extension, Americans) first for all the ills of the world.
Keep talking, Nancy.
And while you're at it, can we have a nice photo of you with Obama?
Finally, a Vision for America I can believe in.
I could have sworn that the Left was all about supporting the troops, but not their mission.
I guess that doesn't apply if the war has been over for nigh on 140 years, and if the supporter in question is a potential Vice Presidential candidate:
Barack Obama’s vice presidential vetting team will undoubtedly run across some quirky and potentially troublesome issues as it goes about the business of scouring the backgrounds of possible running mates. But it’s unlikely they’ll find one so curious as Virginia Democratic Sen. Jim Webb’s affinity for the cause of the Confederacy.Webb is no mere student of the Civil War era. He’s an author, too, and he’s left a trail of writings and statements about one of the rawest and most sensitive topics in American history.
He has suggested many times that while the Confederacy is a symbol to many of the racist legacy of slavery and segregation, for others it simply reflects Southern pride. In a June 1990 speech in front of the Confederate Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery, posted on his personal website, he lauded the rebels' "gallantry," which he said "is still misunderstood by most Americans."
I'd say that pretty much kills Webb's chances for future advancement in the Democrat party, the privileges afforded ex-Klansman Senator Byrd notwithstanding.
The problem, of course, is slavery. While the root cause for which the South fought was indeed states' rights, the fact that the specific right they were defending was the right to own slaves taints the Confederacy beyond the hope of recovery. Had the casus belli been the right of states to set their own tariffs, we'd be having a different discussion. The Civil War would be a much less "raw and sensitive" topic if the South had acted as suggested by Lt. General James Longstreet in the film Gettysburg
For the sake of argument, can we posit that there is no one (apart from some vanishingly small number of nanocephalic cranks) in this country who believes that chattel slavery is a good idea? That no one, not even Senator Webb, would like to see a restoration of the antebellum South?
Might it then be just possible for the millions of Americans whose ancestors fought for the South to take some degree of pride in the undeniable courage and sacrifice of those ancestors — the overwhelming majority of whom never owned a slave?
My own ancestors were Northerners, or still lived in the Netherlands in the 1860s, so I really don't have a dog in this fight, but as a student of history, I can recognize gallantry for what it is, or was; a great deal of it sprang from the South in the period 1861-1865.
More at Gateway Pundit, Protein Wisdom, Hot Air.
Ted Kennedy Diagnosed With Brain Tumor.
As much as I oppose pretty much every thing he stands for, I can't help but wish him and his family well in this time of trouble. This goes way beyond politics.
I know it entirely too well from my own recent experience: brain problems purely suck.
At Hot Air yesterday, Allahpundit noted:
A winning campaign slogan if ever there was one: You're going on a diet.Pitching his message to Oregon's environmentally-conscious voters, Obama called on the United States to "lead by example" on global warming, and develop new technologies at home which could be exported to developing countries."We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK," Obama said.
"That's not leadership. That's not going to happen," he added.
Obama wants us to tighten our belts, and overlooks the fact that the U.S. already leads by example, already develops new technologies. Only prosperous societies such as ours have the extra energy to spend on worrying about the environment. Subsistence-level farmers in, for instance, sub-Saharan Africa can't be bothered, when their main motivation is simply to avoid starving.
My question, however, is: who cares what other countries say? Since when do they get a veto over our lifestyle?
Obama apparently wishes that our way of life was more like that of other (read: poorer) countries. If he's given the reins of power, I've no doubt we'll get that opportunity.
In the meantime, I think today I'll go for a drive in my big-ass pickup truck, stop at Hardee's — it's only about 10 miles out of my way — for a monster burger, and when I get home I'll turn my thermostat down from 74 to 72, just to irk some other country. It's my patriotic duty.
The best thing about yesterday's NC primary elections?
No more Obamessiah or Hillary! ads.
At least, no more until October, I figure.
Some time early this morning, far earlier than I am accustomed to being awake, I was woken up by the cats yowling. A shudder ran down my spine, and I noted through the window that a dark cloud had settled over this normally placid little town.
The feline complaining eventually ceased, and I went back to sleep puzzled by what had happened. What could have transpired to upset our sleepy little hamlet?
Then this afternoon, I read this.
Former President Bill Clinton courted Wal-Mart Democrats today, telling them his wife was well prepared to lead the country."If you vote for her, you'll make her the next president," Clinton told about 400 people at an Apex community center.
Mystery solved.
Hot Air, Michelle Malkin, and Gateway Pundit (and undoubtedly scores of others) are all over the story of Nancy Pelosi's made-up Bible verses, which she trots out when she's trying to convince us clingy rubes that Earth Day is a biblical imperative. To wit:
The Bible tells us in the Old Testament, ‘To minister to the needs of God’s creation is an act of worship. To ignore those needs is to dishonor the God who made us.’
This, from a woman whose main base of support consists of people who are extremely unlikely to read, much less obey, God's word.
Query: what other verses has she made up to support her stands on:
"Blessed are those who visualize world peace, for it is better to visualize peace than to actually go and make the peace."
Meh.
Please make suggestions in the comments.
Update: This story got me thinking; I knew there was an appropriate real passage from the Bible that might address this topic. It took a while, but I found it, in Paul's letter to the Romans, chapter 1, verse 25:
They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator — who is forever praised. Amen.
That sounds precisely like what Pelosi is doing.
Barack, Barack, Barack... did you think no one would notice?
. . . they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment. . . .
The condescension is breathtaking.
Actually, I suspect that Snobama never gave it a thought at all. That, I suppose, is what comes of being a liberal elitist; it's second nature. It's not as if upper-class leftists could be expected to think any different:
They are things that I think in a liberal world sound totally normal, and outside of that world I don’t know that he appreciates how it sounds.
No kidding? And they think the South is insulated.
The Democrat primary campaigns are coming here to North Carolina. I can't wait to hear what Obama thinks about us.
If he wants to get in touch with the people, maybe after a night working on the backbone of the Internet, I could offer to fry him up a mess o' possum or squirrel, and we could sit around on the porch picking our remaining teeth, playing banjos, whittling and spitting, while making passes at our cousins and firing shotguns at any small animals or foreigners that happen to wander by.
'Cause, y'know, that's just how we roll in the small-town South.
The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary's history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther — and goes much deeper — than anyone realizes.Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy's chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation — one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman's 17-year career.
Done? Well, no, not really. Were she a Republican she would be finished, and she certainly ought to be through, but the Clintons have the most remarkable ability to brush past scandal, to have their flaws overlooked. I can't think of anyone (with the exception of Ted Kennedy) who has more personal baggage and yet retains political viability.
If the story ever breaks into the mainstream media in a big way (and there's certainly no guarantee of that happening; Google News has five, count them, five listings for "Zeifman Clinton" at this writing — though the Obama Fan Club mainstream media might break it open, I suppose) some small number of people will be convinced to not support her, and many more will have their notions of her character confirmed... but the Democrat race to the convention will go on. She may be a liar, but she's not a quitter.
It's probable that Hillary!'s defenders will either declare this story to be old news and not relevant, or will call her former boss Zeifman a liar. Both tactics have been successfully employed before, having been swallowed — hook, line and sinker — by the Clinton partisans.
If, by some miracle, she gains the nomination, we can expect the story to be buried, or the Democrats' allies in the media will go on the attack on Clinton's behalf.
But then, I'm not telling anyone anything they don't already know.
I feel a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible is happening near by.
Yeah, this would explain it.
Michelle Malkin tracks anarchist protest plans for the Democrat and Republican National Conventions coming up this summer.
For a long time I wondered why the GOP had a history of holding its conventions in cities known to be distinctly unfriendly to the party. I mean, wouldn’t you want to have a friendly local government siccing the police on the various protesters?
Then a couple of things occurred to me. One, if there are going to be big disruptive protests and/or riots generated by out-of-towners, wouldn’t it make sense to have them in unfriendly territory?
Two, no matter how things go outside the convention, it only serves to make our side look better. No riots? OK, you have a big crowd of GOPers having a good time and basically showing the denizens of the “unfriendly” town that we’re real people, too.
On the other hand, if there are problems with disturbances, the locals have to clean up the mess, and (should) get the inevitable bad press when the batons start swinging.
Me, I’m in favor of batons (and more) when the anarchists cross the line from peaceful protest to active disruption/destruction... but it never looks good in the papers.
Still… I’m put in mind of the line from Thank You For Smoking:
After watching the footage of the Kent State shootings, Bobby Jay, then seventeen, signed up for the National Guard so that he, too, could shoot college students.
Too harsh?
Eliot Spitzer announced his resignation today, his wife by his side. Surprise, surprise.
What is it about politicians' wives that compels them to stand by their men, regardless of their betrayals? We see it over and over. Remember Jim McGreevy (D-NJ), who famously resigned his governorship after a gay affair was discovered? Even his wife stood by his side while he announced that he was a "Gay-American" and had carried on with a male employee. Now, of course, the McGreeveys are separated and on their way to a divorce.
More to my liking is the mental image conjured up by something Dick Armey (R-TX) said during the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal:
If I were in the President's place I would not have gotten a chance to resign. I would be lying in a pool of my own blood, hearing Mrs. Armey standing over me saying, "How do I reload this damn thing?"
If only more politicians' wives were like that — there would undoubtedly be less misbehavior.
Update: Heh.
Every time I say the words "my cane," it comes out sounding like "McCain."
I have got to stop watching the news.
I saw this headline at Instapundit: "WELL, IT'S PROGRESS: Hillary picks up half a delegate."
My first thought was, "Max Cleland?"
I am a bad bad bad bad man.
Senator Joseph Lieberman (Ind-CT) on the Senate floor, on the passing of Buckley.
The media leftists sure do seem to want to paint their darling Obama as the next JFK, RFK and MLK all rolled up into one... and the fact that all three were assassinated hasn't escaped notice.
Dan at Protein Wisdom points to another example of the media's "Obama's gonna be assassinated" drek, and asks a vital question.
My guess: no one — he'll accidentally overdose while huffing changey hope-itude.
I've had a near lethal dose just from seeing the ongoing media reportage this campaign season.
More from Bluto at the Jawa Report.
I don't like John McCain a whole lot, but an unverified and unsourced NYT smear-job might just get me to support him. If they don't like him, there must be something worthwhile about his candidacy — the enemy of my enemy, etc., etc. I'm only surprised they didn't figure out how to hold the story until the Friday before the general election.
Just wondering... has anyone seen Dan Rather or Mary Mapes recently?
Shorter Ann Coulter: "Why pick the lesser of two evils?"
In the past, I've spent more than a little time working for Republican causes. My GOP bona fides can, I think, go unchallenged. I'm not a New York Times version of a "lifelong Republican."
But this year.... Let me put it this way: if Huckabee wins the nomination, I'm out. I won't vote for any of the Democrats, but there's no chance I'd vote for Huckabee. Zero. I won't lift a finger to help him.
We've already had one Jimmy Carter, and that was one too many.
We've already had one Arkansas governor in the White House, and that was one too many.
(See also: Frank J.)
If anyone else were to talk like this, family members would be shaking their heads and muttering about how maybe it was time to put grand-dad in a home.
But it's just a ranting loon Democrat congressman, so I guess it's par for the course.
On Hillary!'s propensity for gathering campaign funds:
The thing about donations from the Chinese is that no matter how much you get, you'll want more an hour later.The too-clever-for-his-own-good Frank J.
I believe the technical term for this is "making a silk purse out of a sow's ear."
Not, of course, that Limbaugh's comments that started the whole brouhaha could actually be classed as "sow's ear" by anyone who actually heard what he said at the outset.
Harry Reid, though, is just a self-serving opportunistic pig.
What does it say about you if someone "brave, honorable, and true" is a problem for you?
A modicum of sanity in Oregon, where charges of felonious butt-swatting against two 13-year-old boys have been dropped. I don't care who you are, butt-swatting when a 13-year-old should in no way mark you as a sex offender for life. Indeed, I can't think of too many things a 13-year-old can do that ought to label them for life. Are you the same person now that you were when you were 13?
Steve H. prognosticates. He may be on to something there. Me, I think we're looking at a major redefinition of the term "boob-tube."
Garofalo to join cast of "24." Fonzie to jump shark.
Louisiana Democrats attack Bobby Jindal's religion. (Isn't Louisiana a heavily Catholic state?) They once tried a whisper campaign about his ethnicity, so this really comes as no surprise. That they have to take his words out of context is not only unsurprising, it's pretty much the standard modus operandi for Democrats these days.
John Edwards: not so bright. Less bright: the people who ever voted for him for anything.
Breaking and entering? Illegal. Squatting? Not so much.
LOL, cat.
I've only commented once — and briefly, at that — on the Immigration bill mess.
Now it's dead, and I, along with others, dance on its grave.
What has puzzled me all along, what I can't figure out, is why Bush would have staked so much on such a wildly unpopular piece of legislation, one which has completely separated him from his base. Indeed, though I strongly backed him in 2000 and 2004 (including hundreds of hours of work on the Blogs For Bush website) I now no longer trust him on anything, except perhaps taxes and the war on terrorism.
Similarly, many GOP senators — McCain, Lott, et al. — ignored the voices of their constituents and backed the steaming pile of crap called Comprehensive Immigration Reform to the hilt.
Why would they do so much to anger their base? The only thing I can think is that either they are completely tone-deaf, or that Vincente Fox and Felipe Calderon have pictures of them all with dead Tijuana hookers.
Adm. Painter: What's his plan?
Jack Ryan: His plan?
Adm. Painter: Russians don't take a dump, son, without a plan.
The first time I ever heard of Fred Thompson was when he played Rear Admiral Painter in The Hunt for Red October
[The only thing that bugs me about Red October is that when Alec Baldwin is on screen I must forcibly restrain myself from throwing small dense objects at the TV... but when RADM Painter utters the line "you might consider cuttin' the kid a little slack," I am compelled to do so, and can watch the remainder of the movie in peace.]
Now that Fred Thompson is considering a presidential run (I could support him) the always insightful Frank J. has published a list to remind us of the sheer awesomeness that is Fred Thompson:
Quite a resumé, I would say.
In a multiply-updated post, Glenn Reynolds talks global warming and the effect thereupon of congressional "private" air travel.
In the course of the post, Reynolds cites this statistic from Tourjet (which, as the name implies, is an aircraft chartering agency catering to celebrities):
The typical American is responsible for 10 tons of CO2 emissions annually through their direct energy use of home, cars and air travel, and about 24 tons of CO2 including their purchases, activities and the other services we all share throughout the economy.By comparison, a Gulf Stream III business jet (10-12 passenger) from New York to Los Angeles will emit around 31 tons of CO2 during the 6 hour flight.
I'm no airplane expert (merely a well-informed hobbyist, you could say) but it seems to me that if a cross-country fight produces 31 tones of CO2, this means the aircraft would have to carry well over 31 tons of fuel, as not all the consumed fuel would be exhausted as CO2. I have a hard time believing that.
Turning to airliners.net we can see a bit of info on the weight of the Gulfstream III:
Empty 14,515kg (32,000lb), operating empty 17,235kg (38,000lb), max takeoff 31,615kg (69,700lb)
Quick math.... OK, so at the very most, the plane can carry 37,700 pounds (18.85 tons) of non-airplane weight.* That's passengers, luggage, cargo, and fuel. While that is a lot, it's not 31 tons, it's not all fuel weight, and not all of of the fuel would be used on a NY-LA flight, since the aircraft's range is something over 4,000 miles.
Unless, of course, there's more than one airplane called the Gulfstream III....**
It is hypocritical for "jet set" celebrities and politicians to blather about reducing greenhouse gas emissions while burning fuel by the ton, but accuracy counts, too. In this case, it's not quite as bad as it appears at first glance.
(So, I hope I got the numbers right....)
* It's just a guess on my part, but I think the difference between the "empty" weight and the "operating empty" weight might be the airplane plus a full fuel load, which would make the fuel capacity 6,000 pounds.
** Update: Errr... nevermind. I forgot all about the oxygen input into the chemical reaction, which would indeed boost the output CO2 mass to something rather higher than the carbon input into the equation. Good thing I don't make my living as a chemist.
I've been called many things before.
"Stretch," "Tiny" — classics. "Sasquatch," "Lurch" — a bit more creative. "Uncle Russ." My all-time favorite.
I won't get into the various insults.
But I don't think I have ever been called a "fine blogger."
It's not actually true. . . but I'll say thanks anyway to Jay Tea, who is 100% correct in the rest of his post on election dirty tricks. No one, but no one, gets a pass to mess with the integrity of our elections.
The truth can hurt.
Right now my ribs ache, having seen the greatest political advertisement ever.
I needed a laugh. I talked to my niece today; we're all still pretty "down" about Bubba's passing.
[This is a re-post, modified, from 9/11/2004]
One morning while working from home I turned on the TV in time to see one of the World Trade Towers burning. As I watched, an airliner slammed into the second tower; in that second, the world changed.
No, that's not right. The world didn't change — we all woke up.
As events unfolded, I could only think of the people trapped by the fire, and I wondered how the authorities would evacuate so many people. Helicopters on the roof, I figured.
Then the towers fell. A plane had crashed into the Pentagon, and everyone expected there would be more attacks.
Our "vacation from history" was over, and we were at war. Against whom didn't quite matter at that moment.
Remember the preliminary casualty estimates? Numbers upwards of 30,000 were cited that morning. The shock I felt could only have been the merest shade of the horror and despair felt by the families of the victims watching on TV, wondering if their loved ones had escaped... or wondering if the body falling from the tower was their family member.
Five years later, we count ourselves fortunate that "only" 3,000 died on 9/11.
From that day and in the years since, we have learned of acts of incredible courage and steadfastness, starting with Todd Beemer and his fellow passengers on Flight 93, continued by the people who stopped Richard Reid's potentially deadly shoe-bomb plot, carried on by men leaping into the darkness over Afghanistan, with leaders like GEN Tommy Franks, and continuing today with all our armed forces.
We are also fortunate that the man in the White House is a man of moral courage and intestinal fortitude, who knows that doing the right thing should not be subject to an opinion poll.
Since 9/11, the war on terrorists and terrorist states has gone very well overall, with few mistakes and a blessedly low casualty rate for our soldiers. We have also been lucky enough — and good enough — not to have suffered another attack approaching the magnitude of 9/11.
The lesson I take from all this is that we can never again allow ourselves to nap through history; it has a way of catching up with us, and when it does, it will take all our skill, intelligence and courage to face it down. The bad guys, present and future, may get lucky again some day, but real Americans are made of stern stuff. No matter the setbacks we may face in the future, we will ultimately win.
Part 1 of ABC's docudrama The Path to 9/11 airs tonight and, as Tigerhawk points out (h/t: Prof R) due to the Democrats' incessant blathering in every available media outlet about the unfairness of it all, it'll likely have a significantly larger audience than it would have, had the community of Clinton defenders simply pretended the miniseries didn't exist.
No one I know of is claiming that the miniseries is completely accurate, any more than The Longest Day was a 100% completely faithful account of the D-Day landings — but that movie is still a good way to learn about the Normandy invasion.
Perhaps this can be an object lesson for the Left on the difference between "reality" and "reality-based."
There's much chatter today about "assassination chic" as it relates to an upcoming film, in documentary style, about the imagined assassination of President Bush.
The real problem is not that such a film has been made. Jeff Goldstein mentions several other political thrillers which tend to fall into the category of what Jeff refers to as "ideological wish fulfillment."
No, the problem is that in the BDS-charged atmosphere of today's far Left, this new TV-movie is not going to be merely a docudrama.
It'll be a recruiting film.
John Kerry tosses his hat in the ring... again.
Following columnist Robert Novak's revelation earlier this week that the source for the "outing" of Valerie Plame was not in fact Vice President Cheney, Karl Rove, or any of the usual people lefties wish to see in handcuffs and shackles, Plame and her husband "Lying Joe" Wilson have filed a civil suit against those same people.
It seems that the very people who are not being prosecuted by the government for leaking are being sued for the damage their not-leaking may have done.
Suing people for damaging your reputation would be a legitimate thing to do, but in Joe Wilson's case, perhaps it might be best to disappear off the radar of publicity. The idea of such a suit is to gain back your reputation, but this case will almost certainly destroy Wilson's. If this suit ever goes to trial, old Joe is going to have his ass handed to him. There will undoubtedly be uncomfortable questions a-plenty.
Personally, I'd rather like to hear his explanation of how he could report one set of Niger facts to congress, and then publicly use a contradictory set of facts (read: "lie") in the NY Times in an attempt to damage the President. Now that is something that ought to be lawsuit-worthy....
Joe Wilson seems determined to go down in history as the man who put the "ass" in "ambassador."
Jeff Goldstein (the thinking man's Argus Hamilton), having had his family threatened, and subsequently having been the target of repeated Denial-of-Service attacks, has now achieved a status that in future will undoubtedly earn him great deference from the Left: he is now a victim.
To members of the political Left, being a victim is like having a Platinum AmEx card and never having to pay it off. It's like Chobham armor. It's as good as having a fusion-powered bullhorn.
Therefore:
It is henceforth forbidden to gainsay Jeff. He is a victim.
His opinions on all matters must be respected. He is a victim.
Those who criticize Jeff for any reason at all may be mere insensitive cretins, but odds are they're card-carrying Nazis. Because, of course, Jeff is a victim: blameless and praiseworthy.
. . . .
What's that you say? He's one of those "neo-cons"?
Never mind.
Update: Heh.
Almost three years ago, I suggested that the Racketeering, Influence and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statutes be used against the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, who line their pockets at our expense, for very little actual return.
Today at Captain's Quarters, Ed has some related news.
Thanks for coming. We have sampled your various cuisines. Lots of good food there. Thanks.
But now we have your recipes.
Your culinary contributions to America have been noted. Now go home.
Columnist George Will, not usually known for thinking the difficult isn't worth doing, says it would take "200,000 buses in a caravan stretching bumper-to-bumper from San Diego to Alaska" to deport all the illegal aliens currently in the country.
I say we'd better get started, then.
Not a bad speech, all in all. Pretty good, in fact. Maybe very good. I just have one small nit to pick....
Given that illegal immigration and border security is hugely on the minds of Americans, I was hoping there might have been some real red meat on the topic. Instead, we were served a bowl of weak broth and platitudes.
One might be tempted to think that Vincente Fox must have a photo of W with a dead Tijuana hooker.
Update: LaShawn Barber focused on illegal immigration during her liveblogging.
Since I'm off work on Mondays, I can watch the Alito confirmation hearings today.
I won't be live-blogging them (or even live-blogging the live-blogging) — I'll leave all that to:
and to whomever else I might happen to find, if I bother to look for more.
Congressman John Murtha (D-PA) made rather a big splash this past week by very publicly "changing" his mind about the course of the war in Iraq — changing it to the same position he's held since last year, if not earlier. We already know this, of course, from a number of reports.
Murtha served honorably in the Marines, initially on active duty, and retiring from the Reserves in 1990, and is often described as a hawkish Democrat.
From the congressman's biography, I note that he has been in the House since 1974. Hmmm.
Murtha had a total of 37 years in the Marines, active and reserve. He had some number of years on active duty — his bio doesn't make it clear, but let's call it 12 years. I have no doubt that his years in uniform were spent completely honorably, and we know he was awarded the Bronze Star for valor during his tour in Vietnam. His service to the country cannot and should not be denigrated.
On the other hand, he has been a full-time Democrat congressman for more than 30 years.
Murtha has spent perhaps twice as much time in a suit as in a uniform. Which wardrobe, do you then suppose, has had more influence on his public pronouncements about the war?
Last night while flipping through the on-screen TV guide, I noticed something on a channel I've not watched before: the Discovery Times channel, a cooperative effort of the Discovery Channel and the New York Times.
Showcasing the best in journalism from The New York Times,
This bit of.... No, no, no, it's just too easy. It just wouldn't be sporting of me.
... Discovery Times introduces NEW YORK TIMES REPORTING. Working with the newspaper's award-winning journalists from around the world, NEW YORK TIMES REPORTING will offer insight into some of the most important domestic and international stories in the world today.
Popular science plus shoddy journalism — finally, together in one neat package!
I wonder if Jayson Blair hosts any programs?
Back on topic... the program listing that caught my eye was "Why Intelligence Fails: Intelligence to Please," the description for which was:
Intelligence agencies receive pressure from governments to gather certain information.
Digging into the channel's website leads one to the online description of the program:
The mission of intelligence agencies is to gather information. In the United States, pressure on intelligence agencies to provide evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has become a flashpoint for political criticism.
Except, of course, we know that there was no such pressure. [Don't believe me — believe the Senate Intelligence committee. Go here, scroll down to Conclusion 83... y'know, where it says there was no pressure.] On the face of it, it looks like the Times is attempting to pass off an hour of BDS-laden historical revision as a documentary. And the media wonder why many on the right think they're a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party.
I recorded the last half of the program, and if I think my stomach can handle a production with which the NY Slimes was involved, I'll watch it later and report back.
Update, 3:15pm: I watched it, and I feel like throwing up. The only good things that can be said of the program are that it wasn't funded by my tax dollars, and that Discovery Times doesn't have many viewers at 2am.
For the first 40 minutes or so, the program documents other countries' intel failures and the disasters that followed therefrom. [Surprisingly, the NYT thinks the 1968 Soviet crushing of Czechoslovakia was a bad idea. Walter Duranty, call your office!] This is known as "the setup." The show then moved on to the Iraq war, attempting to prove that the administration pressured the CIA to arrive at its pre-war WMD conclusions.
I don't know about you, but if I'm pressured to agree with my boss, against my better judgement, I'm not going to be enthusiastic enough about it to use the expression "slam dunk."
Apart from David Kay, ADM Stansfield Turner and Frank Gaffney (the sole Bush/Cheney defender on the program), I didn't recognize any of the people interviewed for the program, but Google can be useful:
Bob Baer: former CIA agent, current CIA gadfly.
Thomas Powers: former CIA guy, author of "The Vanishing Case for War."
Karen Kwiatkowski: former USAF Lt.Colonel, LaRouche supporter, conspiracy theorist.
Ray McGovern: notable, if at all, for his claim that the Bush administration didn't merely misinterpret existing intelligence, but that it manufactured the intelligence.
Greg Thielmann: State Department analyst since the Carter administration. Notable mainly for his disagreements with (now UN Ambassador) John Bolton and for his public disagreement with the current administration.
In short, however, the entire thrust of the documentary (one which Michael Moore would no doubt have been proud to produce) was to assume that the only casus belli was WMD, and then to try to show that the Bush administration pressured the CIA into delivering the results the White House wanted with regard to Iraq's WMDs, with the inevitable conclusion from Thielmann being that the actions of the administration amounted to a "high crime."
Do you suppose those last words were carefully chosen? What do you think the people at the Times are trying to say?
In light of the need for the President to make another Supreme Court pick, I'd like to remind Mr. Bush: there's one more potential nominee who bears consideration.
It is clear now that no one in the White House is going to face up to reality and reconsider the decision to nominate Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. While I heartily disagree with the selection, I cannot fault the President for his loyalty to his associates. And we now know that Miers will not be withdrawing herself from consideration.
On the face of it, there is nothing wrong with her. I'm sure she has a squeaky-clean record, and her known accomplishments are real — though comparatively modest. The problem is that she just is not what those of us who voted for this President either wanted or expected: a Justice in the mold of Scalia or Thomas.
I've been perusing the historical record, looking for past examples of presidents' nominees who have withdrawn themselves from consideration for various positions. It occurs to me: it would be awfully convenient if Miers had in the past used illegal alien domestics — maids, gardeners, drivers, or even nannies (assuming, of course, that Miers actually has children, of course. Hey, I'm spitballing here. I don't have time to do elementary research.)
Faced with evidence that she had used such employees, she would surely have to stand aside.
In order for an illegal alien employee "tarbrushing" to succeed, the story would have to be credible eno
