I am an abstract artist, a concrete analyst, and a ruthless bookkeeper.Read the whole thing. Larwynmania to ensue . . .
Critics worldwide swoon over my original line of corduroy evening-wear.
I don’t perspire. . . . Last summer I toured New Jersey with a traveling centrifugal force demonstration.
I bat .400. My deft floral arrangements have earned me fame in international botany circles. Children trust me. . . .
Saturday, November 21, 2009
There are good reasons why I don't maniacally follow every blip of news about the legislative progress of ObamaCare. The main reason is that it's policy, and policy is the province of specialists -- the wonks -- who are forever arguing the arcane details of proposed legislation with their fellow specialists.
Having never craved a reputation for wonkery, I seldom even bother to discuss such things, which are by their nature beyond my expertise. But I am a conservative, and conservatism is the belief that liberalism is wrong. Liberals support ObamaCare, and therefore I oppose it with every fiber of my being. The rest is just details.
The politics of ObamaCare are another matter. Politics is about, "Do we have enough votes?" The supporters of ObamaCare say they have enough votes to prevent a filibuster, but whether they've got enough votes to guarantee passage is another matter.
The wily political types whose judgment I trust will tell you that the Democrats are now facing a basic question: "Do we want a bill or do we want an issue?"
That is to say, if Democrats can round up enough votes to pass the bill, they thereby forfeit the issue: Nevermore can they go to voters promising some nebulously wonderful "reform." On the day ObamaCare passes into law -- should it pass -- all the glittering generalities about more coverage and reduced costs become void, and the old Democratic "promise 'em anything" tactic will be permanently obsolete in regard to healthcare.
Whether ObamaCare could ever be repealed, once it were signed into law, is an interesting question. But I remain skeptical that Democrats will be able to muster enough votes for passage, if Senate Republicans can maintain party unity in opposition. (A mighty big "if.")
ObamaCare is a political liability for Democrats. Buried in that ungodly mishmash of legislative detail are enough stinkbombs to fuel a thousand different attack ads next fall, and if the Democrats don't see the danger, they're marching blind to their own destruction.
Schaeffer endeavors to convince readers that [Marvin] Olasky is a dangerous "far right" extremist, "who has been working to more or less turn America into a theocracy ever since the late 1980s and early 1990s," and whose work "was largely funded by far right banker" Howard Ahmanson. Generally speaking, I distrust any writer who, as Schaeffer does, insists on shoehorning three "far rights" into a single paragraph. Schaeffer earns compound interest on my distrust when, in support of his claim that Olasky is an advocate of "Bible-inspired totalitarianism/theocratic neofascism" (!) he cites Max Blumenthal, son of our old Clintonista acquaintance Sidney Blumenthal.Read the whole thing.
Most remarkably, Schaeffer does all this while posturing as a friend to Republicans and conservatives . . .
When "insider" tales about the operations of The Washington Times come out in the media, there's always an element of bias, as the news organizations publishing the reports are, at the very least, business competitors of the newspaper, if not indeed political adversaries. And because I was often mendaciously backstabbed by gossipy anonymous "inside sources," I know better than to accept at face value the stuff that gets leaked out of the Times newsroom.
However, a friendly fellow journalist recently asked me what I knew about the latest brouhaha at the newspaper, and I felt obliged to share what little I knew. Perhaps some good might be done by sharing with blog readers what I wrote to that friend:
Nearly all I know -- or think I know -- about the recent upheaval at The Washington Times is what has been reported in the media, and you know how badly misinformed such reports can be. I have talked to various sources, but they have conflicting tales, so there is not much in the way of "special insight" I can share with you. Keep those caveats in mind, then, as you read my summary of the situation as I understand it.Jonathan Slevin, recently named acting president and publisher of the Times, has published a note addressing some of the recent media reports. As to what happens next, I haven't the slightest clue, and would hesitate to offer any suggestions.
During Wes Pruden's long tenure as editor in chief, his most important role -- little understood by his detractors -- was to serve as a "firewall" between the newsroom and the Unification Church. It seems to me obvious that the Rev. Moon came to trust Mr. Pruden's judgment as a professional newsman, so that when the newspaper came under attack from various enemies (including certain disgruntled, disloyal and dishonest employees), it was Mr. Pruden's authority that preserved the independence of the news operation.
Over the past decade, as the Rev. Moon grew older, he gradually delegated responsibilities that he once undertook personally. As a result, it seems the internecine squabbles within the Unification Church became more troublesome than ever to the operations of the Times. After 2004, when it began to be rumored that Mr. Pruden would retire as editor in chief of the paper, there commenced a lot of jockeying for position and backstabbing within the newsroom, especially by Mr. Pruden's internal critics, who sought above all else to deny the editorship to Pruden's second-in-command, Francis Coombs.
The Rev. Moon has reportedly chosen his son, Preston, to succeed him as supervisory proprietor of the newspaper. I've never had any direct dealing with Preston Moon and have no cause to dislike him or to judge his abilities, although he has a Harvard MBA and is therefore to be presumed a shrewd businessman. However, it appears that Preston Moon allowed himself to be swayed by Mr. Pruden's critics, so that Coombs was passed over, given a generous severance deal, and John Solomon was hired from the Washington Post.
This past week, some have told me that, contrary to what has been widely reported, the real story behind the recent ouster of Solomon (and three executives at The Washington Times) was financial. Preston Moon had become concerned that Solomon was spending far too much on an ambitious "re-branding" of the Times. Preston was also reportedly concerned that, under Solomon, the paper was losing its once-formidable market position as the nation's premier conservative news-gathering organization.
Of course, my sources for that version of the story are second-hand at best, and I share this with you only by way of suggesting that the real story about this recent turmoil may be either more complex or more simple than most people suspect. And I trust you won't mind if share this message (without identifying its recipient) with my blog readers.
Rather than being satisfied and thankful that God has placed me in the position where He wants me to be right now, which just happens to involve some pretty mundane tasks, I want more. More responsibilities, more recognition, more, more, more. . . .You should read the whole thing. An ambitious young person's craving for "more, more, more" is a tendency to which an aged megalomaniac like me can relate, as I pursue this insane scheme to take over the entire freaking blogosphere.
We are all born with a God-shaped hole in our hearts, and it is a sinful but entirely commonplace error to attempt to fill that void with earthly things, including career status and achievement.
That Miss Logan should so earnestly resist that temptation is, to me, most remarkable. For I think there is nothing that an ugly man covets so much as beauty, with which Miss Logan has been so richly blessed. Plain and homely people often envy the beautiful -- how else to explain the unseemly viciousness with which Sarah Palin has been attacked? -- but envy is the most foolish emotion.
How many times have I been surprised to discover that someone whom I might have regarded enviously was, unbeknownst to me, enduring some secret and horrible pain in their life? After numerous repetitions of this pattern, I ought not be surprised any longer, yet I always am. We who are poor, obscure, weak and ugly always imagine how endlessly wonderful life is for the rich, famous, influential and beautiful.
That we somehow find comfort in this fantasy -- if only through the perverse rationalization of sour grapes -- says more about us than about the objects of our envy.
Are we moving into a new stage in the struggle for liberty?
We already knew that vast swaths the media were utterly useless propaganda organs. The Charles Johnson or whoever would break the story of rank deceit by somebody in possession of public trust.
- Giles and O'Keefe had to pose as people engaging in criminal activity and use a spy camera to expose a worse problem. Now, Andrew Breitbart is trying to use the possibility of further video releases to pressure the US Attorney General into...doing an AG's job?
- We have a break-in at a British school that exposing that a world-wide cabal of scientists may not have been...doing their job?
These were non-violent acts. One hopes that the reasonable, honest and sane can generate sufficient revolution at the ballot box to preclude worse.
Interesting News Items reports that the Senate Majority Leader and his 4-ream reaming of Americans are on the side of diabolical evil. What's worth noting is that the evil has condescended to notice the pitiful Senator from Nevada, and is nearly moved to offer consideration in return:
Leaning back against the wall of a strange, titanic temple constructed using non-Euclidean geometry, Cthulhu tugged thoughtfully at his facial tentacles. "But without getting all high and mighty, the healthcare argument doesn't really interest me. Once the stars align and we [Great Old Ones] return to rule earth, we're gonna crush everything and eat everybody, so get the government involved...or not. I roll either way."LOLthulhu provides an appropriate visualization:
The remaining question is whether this is Harry Reid singing on the following cut:
Update: Pat in Shreveport is liveblogging the eldritch parliamentary rituals and self-immolation as our elected officials bring hell closer.
This week's FMJRA is a shout of anger, a bellow of dismay, a scream of horror at the Congress That Shall Live in Infamy. If the legislation now oozing through the bowels of Congress was anything other than toxic sludge, they would speak boldly and with pride of the details, rather than hiding them. Reid and Pelosi's actions are all the indictment necessary.
Title disclaimer: the words were selected to fit the FMJRA form, and should not be taken as a derogatory remark about anyone named Juanita (I'm don't know any) or to imply specific knowledge of what's in the godforsaken legislation. My ignorance matches that of the jackasses voting it. The Federal government has no business doing anything but bare maintenance until the budget is balanced and a plan to work on the national debt is in progress.
Governor Sarah Palin:
She continues to disturb the left for some reason. She's been in the headlines a lot the last week. Has she done something?
- Reaganite Republican Resistance agrees with the suggestion of Dick Armey as an advisor to Sarah.
- Lead and Gold thinks the Left's anti-Palinism has to do with their...dysfunction.
- Rightofcourse offers a Newsreek cover roundup showing their anti-Palin bias.
- Monique Stewart concurs with Stacy on the Newsweak cover: "I agree with him on this one. Screw Newsweek! "
- American Glob announces ice in Hades because Media Matters attacked Newsleak for sexism. Don't get excited. The occasional outburst of intellectual honesty does not rehabilitation constitute.
- Frank Schaeffer opines that Sarah is America's Evita Perón, and lays down some beautiful projection:
The chief characteristic of Palin's book is her trashing of the old cautious and respectable William F. Buckley-style Republican Party in general and John McCain and his campaign in particular, an act of backstabbing right up there with the "Et tu Brute" assassination of Caesar. I should say it is actually the second characteristic, that comes a distant second to the building of a Sarah Palin cult of personality, wherein Jesus and Sarah will "take America back for God."
As a former Republican, religious right activist who saw the light, re-registered as an independent voter and then, in the last election cycle, worked hard to get then Senator Obama elected, and having been one of the instigators of what is now becoming the bomb-throwing wing of the former Republican Party -- now a far right fundamentalist cult -- I understand better than most that Palin's book is her bid to take over the Republican Party, something like Oprah's positioning herself as the doyen of publishing.
It's personality cult time, personality cult with an agenda. The agenda isn't about politics at all. This is about naked power.
Wow. It has the potential to be true, one must admit. However, Mr. Schaeffer, do you have the intellectual honesty to apply this same analysis to the same administration you worked so hard to bring about?
And who is standing between us and Sarah's burning desire to BE somebody? President Obama, that's who.What if it's not about Sarah at all, but rather about the principles upon which the country was founded? The principles that Progressive government-worshippers on either side of the aisle have increasingly rejected for the last century? No, you have religious certainty. You need criticize Progressivism as much as Anthropogenic Global Warming. Thanks for nothing, buddy.
Problem is President Obama has "friends" who seem more like enemies every day: the impatient juvenile left is already trumpeting his "failure" because he hasn't fixed everything in one whole year!
- Jules Crittenden notes this blog's commitment to Sullivan Scholarship and Dick Armey suggestion.
- Conservatives for Palin notes Stacy's American Spectator piece.
- Rhetorican gave us a shout.
- Dustbury noted the Newsweek photo, along with a URL pointing to bogus Sarah Palin quotes. That page, on supposes, could grow to megabytes as the Lefty worms dig in their...noses?
- Paco thinks Sullivan a demented entrepreneur:
What I find especially amusing is Sullivan's notion that he is in a position to demand an accounting from Sarah Palin on anything, particularly given his bizarre, embarrassing and highly vocal fascination with Trig Palin’s parentage. I believe he still styles himself a Catholic and a kind of "generalissimo" of "true" conservatism, but the last thing we need – and certainly, a thing we need never pay any serious attention to – is Francisco Franco in a pink uniform.
- The Camp of the Saints echoed the lament that Sarah was bottled up during the campaign, and also had highlights from the AmSpec piece.
- The Daley Gator suggests Stacy run Sarah's 2012 campaign.
Update: I can't quite figure out where this blog is from or what is their chief concern, but Texas for Sarah Palin gives us the linky-love we need:
I suppose if we could hook the arm playing the card to a generator, the country would be well on the way to regaining energy independence.
- Dixinet approved of the SPLC rebuttal.
- Carol's Closet, to Progressives: "So stop the projecting."
- Saberpoint notes that the latest tired, sad accuser is a Smith. I hang my head in shame at this news. Stogie then adds:
However, as one who actually observed McCain over a decade ago, arguing against racism and white supremacy, I know that the charges against McCain are irresponsible, unfounded smear.
- Legal Insurrection offers the succinct description of the problem:
How does one defend oneself against such charges? It's the age-old problem of self-publication. In order to defend oneself against defamatory accusations, one has to repeat the accusations as part of the defense. So McCain is put in the difficult position of having to defend himself while not self-publishing the accusations. "Ignore it or fight it" is a difficult choice, made all the more difficult by the rise of the internet, where smear merchants playing the race card abound.
- Bob Belvedere offered his usual stalwart support.
Oddly, that seems to have been the motive for founding the country initially.
- Paco finds Dodd's new ideas reassuring.
- Political Byline picked up the open question of whether BHO could be seeking impeachment.
- The Sundries Shack thinks BHO could be committing political suicide.
- American Glob hat tipped us for the Graham-flogs-Holder clip.
- Another Black Conservative picked us up, appreciating the background research.
- Carol's Closet: "My favorite saying is the golden oldie-don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining. Under the current administration, every day is monsoon season."
- The Blogprof went for the Fast Times angle.
- Obi's Sister linked us.
Stacy continues to blaze a mean trail, while I, riding shotgun, am in awe.
- Fischersville Mike gave us a shout.
- Troglopundit feels it necessary to trash Jerry Springer by comparing us to Jerry. What did Springer ever do to you, Trog?
The idea that Feminism would somehow escape The Iron Law is mildly laughable.
- Carol's Closet opines: "A narrow, small-minded cabal of women have hijacked feminism and redefined it in their anti-vibrant image. We have gone from "be all you can be" to "you can be all we tell you is acceptable." Thanks but no thanks. I'm just fine."
- Carol's Closet speaks wisdom:
Back in March, Stacy McCain wrote Mamas Don't Let Your Daughters Grow Up To Be Downloads. Well now that Carrie Prejean has become a download, who better to talk to drive home to our young people the message that "it can happen to you". The message to young people should be, if you think it is embarrassing for your ex-boyfriend to show his friends the nude pics of you now, how embarrassing would it be if ten years from now he sends them to your boss?
- So it Goes in Shereveport
- The Bolgprof Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday
- Fischersville Mike, and again here, cleverly wrapped in a song parody.
- Another Black Conservative
- Left Coast Rebel
- Adrienne's Catholic Corner
- Director Blue--fantastic title!
- Obi's Sister, emphasizing this weeks demonstrations of incompetence.
- No Sheeples Here--Palinoia edition
- The Daley Gator
- Fischersville Mike hat tips us on the BHO "Kick Me", and mentions us for the Weblog Awards. I, for one, remain mired in depression that my IowaHawk Steel Cage Art Death Match entry received such a drubbing. *sniff*
- Troglopundit is working hard to deny that this picture is of him on a bike. We'll allow him his devices.
- Paco picked up the Allen West post. That guy is teh r0x0rz.
- Makes My Brain Itch reveals that Scratcher is doing as well as Stacy in the offspring department.
- Political ByLine appreciated the attack on the comment trolls.
- Obi's Sister linked the hammering of Sullivan.
- Rightofcourse gathers news of the global warming scandal, linking us as well.
- Daley Gator hat tips us for a Sarah Palin quote.
Update: Jumping in Pools picked up the Advice for Trolls post after a discussion of LGF's Rush Limbaugh attack.
If anything, I would like to see the climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences.Via Tim Blair, who observes, "Of course, if change doesn’t happen, it won't prove that science was wrong. It'll prove that certain scientists were."
Fanatical certainty among misguided experts is by no means limited to the global-warming cultists. The field of psychology, for example, has been whipsawed by successive eruptions of the "expert consensus." There was the whole Freudian analytical couch-trip trend, pre-frontal lobotomies and eletroshock treatments, deinstitutionalization and so on, until today everything is attributed to neurochemistry. This latest consensus is probably wrong, too.
I'm eagerly awaiting the day when psychiatric practice comes full circle and the expert consensus declares that all mental illness is caused by masturbation, demon possession or both: "Nurse, bring the holy water, it's time for Mr. Sullivan's exorcism."
Friday, November 20, 2009
As thousands of Catholic parishes across the country prepare for the annual Catholic Campaign for Human Development collection Nov. 22, shocking new developments have launched a groundswell of protest from Catholics around the country.Well, Catholics can read the rest and decide what to do about it, if anything. Matthew Vadum points out that CCHD "only reluctantly cut off ACORN last year and continues to fund the equally radical community organizing group Industrial Areas Foundation that was founded by Saul Alinsky himself." Furthermore, as Vadum wrote earlier this week:
A coalition including American Life League, Human Life International and the Bellarmine Veritas Ministry have spent the last two months exposing CCHD's funding of organizations promoting abortion, homosexual marriage, birth control and sex education.
In the last year alone, CCHD has funneled at least $1.3 million to groups opposing Catholic Church teaching.CCHD describes itself as the "domestic anti-poverty, social justice program of the U.S. Catholic bishops."
The coalition’s latest discovery exposes 31 organizations partnered with Center for Community Change. CCC is a politically radical, anti-life, pro-homosexualist organization whose board members include Heather Booth, former consultant for the National Organization for Women and Sara Gould, President and CEO of pro-abortion Ms. Foundation for Women.
Through their "Generation Change" program CCC trains and develops staff as "community organizers" for their partner groups. CCC provides a resource library with books promoting "reproductive freedom and its "Movement Vision Lab" equates access to abortion and "reproductive justice" with seeking criminal justice. This project aims to build a "progressive movement" with a "coherent, compelling, shared vision — one that represents our values and dreams for society" according to the group. . . .
The charitable arm of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, CCHD has never provided direct relief to the poor. That's not its purpose.In other words, CCHD is not a charity. Catholics have been deceived into giving hundreds of millions of dollars to a left-wing group that works directly against the teachings of the church. And the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops defends this political swindle.
CCHD is an extreme left-wing political organization that was created to feed and foster radical groups, but most Catholics are blissfully unaware of its true mission.
Like I said, I'm a Protestant. It's a free country. Catholic readers can do whatever they want about CCHD.
Or do nothing. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
“That was an email from ten years ago. Can you remember the exact context of what you wrote ten years ago?"
-- Dr. Phil Jones, trying to explain the "hide the decline" e-mail in the massive scandal now known as ClimateGate
Thanks to Ace of Spades for catching that. Y'know, it's the darned irony that makes me smile about this.
It would seem that Dr. Jones is claiming that he's been smeared on the basis of somebody else's writing taken out of context. Terrible when things like that happen . . . right, Stogie?
First, you rip Sarah Palin for quoting Ronald Reagan on the Rush Limbaugh show.
Now, you hammer her for not being Ronald Regan.
So, if we can arrange for the woman to give birth to Ronald Reagan, might that satisfy both you and Andrew Sullivan?
Look at you go, Rick, emphasis mine:
It is an insult to the man to even hint at a comparison. Where Reagan used his gifts of communication to inspire his audience, Palin uses her considerable ability to connect emotionally with people to breed anger and resentment. Where Reagan was a veritable font of ideas, Palin is a pale echo of dozens of conservative pundits who rely on talking points and tired, cliched, 1980s-era solutions to our problems.No, those people were already bitter and clinging to their guns from the lefty ahead of you who smeared them.
Back at RWN, you close with:
The road to internet fame and riches is to agree with Palin, with the base, with big shot bloggers who get 10 times the traffic I do. So before questioning my integrity, you better have a damn sight more evidence than your idiotic, horse's ass opinion.Since you bring up the topic of idiotic, horse's ass opinions backed with no evidence, perhaps you could elaborate on the who/ what/ where/ when/ why/ how that Sarah has "bred anger and resentment". Was it
- Sarah on the Internet with the FaceBook page?
- Sarah in the Bookstore with Going Rogue?
- Rick Moran in the blog spouting the watered-down Pelosi-isms?
It has been a year since she burst onto the national scene and she has done little to rectify the huge gaps in knowledge and nuance that exposed her as an intellectually unserious person during the campaign. And by that I mean simply that she has failed to apply herself in any meaningful way to the process of learning what she needs to know in order to become a successful politician. Not an academic. Not a pointy-headed elite at some think tank, but rather a thoughtful citizen of the republic who knows enough about the issues facing America to serve effectively.Oh, it all comes together now. We'll just have Sarah schedule a little trip to the circus with you, Rick. Dr. Helen Smith can chaperone, and all of the Oedipal challenges, cotton candy requirements, and what-have-you can be treated. Getting at your coulrophobia make take a little while--heaven knows this congress/ administration fuels mine.
Until she proves me wrong, I will continue to celebrate her as a cotton candy conservative with no more heft than the confection’s wispy strands of caramelized sugar that look so delightful but have little taste beyond a vague, sickly sweetness.
Rick, you're an astute fellow. It should be obvious that Sarah Palin is keeping the powder dry. There just isn't any need for her to break out serious policy at this phase. If she gives the left anything that can be remotely turned into ammunition, then such will be used on her just as quickly as you can invent some failure of nuance therein.
Sarah can't stop a Congress stuck on stupid, and there really isn't any way to tell just how much legislative, economic, diplomatic, and military wreckage there will be by 2012. Little Miss Attila opines "I think she’s going to be an elder stateswoman." I don't foresee that. Real Americans are not going to sit passive while the loony left leads us into a Huxley/Orwell/Rand blend of hell.
We're also not going to be quick to chide with the kind of centrist, watered-down-Progressive, split-hairs-until-bald, vaguely academic, crypto-elitist fluff of the type spouted by some, whom the left like to label conservative, to a chorus of puking on the right. Or are you a Brooks fan?
I leave you with this, Rick:
"A good plan violently executed today is far and away better than a perfect plan tomorrow."The point is by no means to advocate violence. No, I want you to focus on the "far and away better than a perfect plan tomorrow" half. This is something that a an actual leader like Sarah grasps intuitively. Someone who is not a leader would sit back, ponder, weep, gnash the teeth, wring the hands, and so forth. And no, people will oscillate between these categories over time and subject. But ponder Patton. Your inability to grasp Sarah's plan and execution method is a good sign. It might mean that those who hate America and the liberty for which she stands fail to grasp Sarah's plan as well. But this does not constitute evidence that she has/ lacks a plan.
— General George S. Patton
We all await history's unfolding, and wish it was less "interesting".
Michael Graham has a listener who says Oprah is cancelling her talk show to run as VP on the 2012 ticket. Democratic party, presumably.
Bwahahahaha! Oprah is so much more competent as an executive that she'd crush BHO, even after another three years of him trying to figure out how to pick up the scatalogical legislation by the clean end and give it a polish.
I just can't foresee The Aura allowing itself to be diminished by The Oprah.
Update: Cynthia Yockey arrives at the point from a different angle: "Oprah picked Obama to be president and is surprised to be under the bus now that he doesn’t need her any more"
Anonymous said...This fool's reference to comments as a measure of a blog's success suggests that he is a devotee of a certain Mad King Charles, whose bizarre obsession with his blog's commenters became the source of an Epic Fail. The likelihood of the anonymous fool's LGF origin is further reinforced by his fanaticism in regard to evolution, to say nothing of the emptiness of his rhetoric.
You have just officially passed from "annoying nobody" into the realm of "demented a**hole/annoying nobody."
So glabal warming is a "conspiracy?" And I suppose you believe in creative design above evolution, too? You are an idiot. Period.
And, while you're at it, why don't you get a REAL job? You know you're not making any money doing this. Because NOBODY reads your blog, as evidenced by the ghost town of a comments section; that sh*t has tumbleweeds blowing across it.
Fri Nov 20, 12:08:00 PM
To explain briefly: I am a professional journalist who began full-time blogging here in March 2008 as an amusing way to maintain a full-time personal online presence between freelance assignments.
Believing that the whole point of writing is to communicate to readers, however, I did not relish the prospect of writing for nobody. Therefore, I began engaging in efforts to increase traffic. By the time the cumulative total of visitors cleared the 1-million mark -- on Feb. 13, 2009 -- I'd gleaned a few insights from the process which were humorously summarized as "How to Get a Million Hits On Your Blog in Less Than a Year."
In the ensuing nine months, the cumulative total has eclipsed the 3-million-visitor mark and, despite my status as a "demented a**hole/annoying nobody," there is good reason to hope that by next March, I'll be ready to write "How to Get Five Million Hits On Your Blog in Less Than a Year." Rule 6 might well be: Smash the Holy Crap Out of Trolls.
Shortly before this anonymous troll made his comment, there was another anonymous comment -- on the Spectator gala post, featuring the lovely Mrs. Other McCain -- and that comment began, "Your wife is a pig . . ."
The intelligent reader sees what is going on here. The LGFers, not content to have turned that once widely-read blog into a morass of totalitarian idiocy -- banning anyone who refused to kowtow to Mad King Charles and his henchpeople -- endeavor to harass me By Any Means Necessary. Why? Because it was I who, by my forceful response to Charles Johnson's bullying in September, compelled him to admit the truth: He is not a conservative, and never has been a conservative.
The result is that Johnson and his crew (Sharmuta, Trout, et al.) have lost any ability to influence conservatives with their insidious attacks on Pamela Geller, the Tea Party movement, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, etc. This renders LGF an exercise in futility, politically as inert as argon.
Johnson is now operating a second-rate imitation of DKos or Democratic Underground, a product for which there is no market and no real prospect for growth. His opportunism in hopping aboard the post-9/11 war-on-terror GOP bandwagon has been exposed as hypocritically cynical; liberal Democrats have no reason to trust Johnson as he desperately tries to rehabilitate himself as a "progressive." (The Left already has a surfeit of lousy writers with bad judgment.)
Unlike LGF, this blog has never aspired to be an exclusive members-only club. I have no time and no desire to emulate Charles Johnson's third-grade playground-clique mentality. But the comments here have always been moderated. Anyone can comment -- and liberals like Young4Eyes do so frequently -- but you can't hijack the comments as a weapon to attack the blog or to call my wife a "pig." That's when the "reject" and "delete" buttons come in handy.
As to this troll's idiotic question -- "why don't you get a REAL job?" -- just subscribe to the American Spectator. When the December issue arrives, turn to page 69 to see my 1,400-word article about NY23, "Battle Cry in the North Country," which I filed from the Buffalo airport two weeks ago.
Being a national political correspondent may not be "a REAL job," but it's better than being a stupid troll. And my advice to you, "Anonymous," is to stay over there at LGF, in the cloistered zone of up-dings and down-dings, until at last you fall victim to the dreaded Banning Stick, at which point the utter uselessness of your existence may become as apparent to you as it is to the rest of us.
That supposed scientific "consensus" about global warming may actually be a conspiracy. E-mails from a British climate-research organization -- obtained by an Australian magazine, Investigate -- disclose scientists discussing a statistical "trick" to "hide the decline" of global temperatures in their data.More reaction at Memeorandum.
UPDATE I: Before we go any further, let's understand why this is so important. There have always been scientists who have disputed the "consensus" about global warming. Many of the alleged "experts" whose authority has been cited on behalf of this consensus are not, in fact. especially qualified in the field of meteorology, and some of the most prominent spokesmen on the topic of climate change -- e.g., Al Gore -- are no more qualified than you or I to speak as experts.
With the assistance of a pliant media establishment, the global-warming crowd has created the impression that all qualified experts agree with their theory, and that all skeptics are either biased or unqualified. The consensus-mongers have arrogated to themselves the authority to decide who is or is not an expert, and what does and does not qualify as evidence. Once this was Jedi mind-trick was accomplished, it was predictable that any data contradicting the "consensus" would be ignored or suppressed.
Remember this, the next time you hear some media elitist carping about "anti-intellectualism."
UPDATE II: Ed Morrissey quotes extensively from the Climate Research Unite e-mails, and comments:
Do scientists use data to test theories, or do they use theories to test data? . . . [H]ere we have scientists who cling to the theory so tightly that they reject the data. That’s not science; it’s religious belief.Kind of like economists who think the Obama/Pelosi agenda will lead to recovery.
Expect further updates . . .
Thursday, November 19, 2009
The effort to bring some transparency to the Federal Reserve (why on earth is this hard?) could bear some fruit.
A U.S. House committee advanced a proposal to remove a three-decade ban on congressional audits of Federal Reserve interest-rate decisions, a measure backed by a lawmaker who has called for the abolition of the central bank.Hey Ben: get bent. You and your ilk have really [verbed] the [direct object] for decades. It's time for your unholy reign to end.
The House Financial Services Committee today, in a 43-26 vote and a second voice vote, attached the amendment for a broad audit of the Fed to legislation creating a council of regulators to monitor systemic risk. The proposal was offered by Representative Ron Paul, a Republican from Texas, and based on a bill with more than 300 co-sponsors.
Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke has opposed the Paul legislation, saying it may result in interference with monetary policy.
While I wouldn't go so far as to think ACORN flat-out stole the 2008 election (conspiracies scale poorly) I'm wondering if we should maybe chip in for a new tinfoil hat for Dan. His analysis in McCain/Palin: What Really Went Wrong? seems to think the McCain campaign was as clean and un-rigged as the stock market.
McCain was "Dead Man Walking" in 2007. Then he "magically" came back from the abyss in 2008, just as Michigan and Florida were magically removed from the Democratic primary equation,
and both John Sydney and Hillary step aside for the charismatic Chicagoan.
Other than Joe the Plumber, Sarah Palin was the only real shot of adrenalin for McCain. I'm speculating his coma was either:
- The result of being left on the bus overnight one too many times, or
- Sarah was his Jeremiah Denton moment, only truly un-scripted piece, where he could lay the foundation for a resurgence he was incapable of leading.
The people who know the most about McCain/Palin 2008 aren't the people willing to go on record for the media. While the top political players have their respective careers, for better or worse - for most on the campaign, to talk now would be a career ender. So all we are getting is two of the most polarized views from the top. In my experience, that never is where the real story rests. But it's all that we've got. Make of it what you will, I'd suggest not too much.Are the people within the beltway really so removed from the economic realities? Do they really think there is a career left to save amidst the economic disaster and ideological drift currently afoot? I've met some of these people, and they don't seem quite that stupid. At some point, doing the Right Thing becomes as much a matter of simple pragmatism as an appeal to Altruism.
Maybe Sarah's book tour will and increasing popularity will be a driver. At some inflection point, the career wonks will realize that, if they can't ingratiate themselves with the potential newcomer, they'd better grab their book deal.
A pile of cheap, tawdry, dirt laundry awaits.
The Rick Roll
Every attempt of the mainstream media to shoot the conservative messenger proves to be a Rick Roll:
Klavan is rather gentle with his mockery. While the Loony Left has had a good run, the American Margaret Thatcher looms large today. Super Colossal, in fact.So the question boils down to a watered down Star Wars scenario. Will the autocratic, socialist Chicago Empire, with its Debt Star
I happen to think that 1/3 of a million book sales on the first day answers the mail on that one. Also, keeping it mellow is desirable. Without going full-on Rick Moran (a Rick Roll of another sort), let me help The Blog Prof walk back on the Fort Bragg excitement. It's a good thing if the Army throws a wet blanket on a private citizen on a base tour.
Even if the POTUS is something of a wreck (which this blog has explored in ways others haven't dared), three years remain until the next election. Suck it up, America. But know two things:
- BHO is as much a reflection of an asleep-at-the-switch electorate in the Roaring 20th Century as he is anything else. Those of us who voted Ross Perot and then took the wrong lesson from Bill Clinton, continuing to vote GOP instead of realizing what a Progressive enabler the GOP has been since Reagan own our own tiny piece of the blame. (I-told-you-so from Kn@ppster in 3...2..1...)
- Personality politics plays to Alinsky. Admire Sarah for her political platform more than her platform soles. It's disgusting and horrible that Eric Holder has politicized the DoJ. Let us not support politicizing the military by having a media frenzy at Fort Bragg. The military has sufficient angst about the current administration and congress, and their non-command of the Constitution as it is. The mission is to hold everything together until the next election. Having Sarah stir the pot isn't helping anyone.
Speaking of Rick Moran, "PALIN AND HER SUPPORTERS IN A TIME WARP" recalls a Stacy-ism:
Just because you don't know what Sarah Palin is doing doesn't mean that she doesn't know what she's doing.Let's enumerate:
- Sarah goes on Rush Limbaugh.
- Sarah describes the current economic situation in guarded terms, coloring very well within the lines in a straight Ronald Reagan play for her presecriptions.
- You declare she's "living in a dream world - or time warp - if you believe that a little Reagan-like tax cutting will lift all boats."
In total, I would have to say that the Sarah Palin phenomenon is poison for conservatism and deadly to the Republican party. But blinded by an inexplicable attraction to this polarizing, ill-informed, political Svengali, it is quite possible that the movement and the party will go down to defeat to the sound of thunderous applause.OK, so let's wonder what would have happened if she's have said that BHO's economic policy has the appeal of a George Armstrong Custer battle plan? Had she offered more than modest and historically-founded proposals, she's have been open to attack for being inflammatory and gunning for BHO. The fake quotes would have had her seeing economic recovery from her house, just past Russia. And, when the un-baked numbers reveal the economy is in worse shape than she outlined, they'd give her a drubbing for not having analyzed things properly.
Sarah's position is that of Fabius Maximus. She puts out a book to introduce herself, goes on a tour, pockets some cash for the legal expenses, and lets BHO metaphorically consult the ropemaker's daughter for flying lessons. She has everything to gain and nothing to lose by her current course of action. And you know that. It's perfectly valid note with alarm the conservatives who're engaging more with hormones than intellect on topic of Sarah Palin. It's quite another to fail to give credit where due. Devil's advocate is a fine role, when played on substantial grounds, Mr. Moran. But when you say:
I fully realize my opinion of Sarah Palin is not that of a majority of true conservatives. But then, it appears that the majority would rather go down in flames with Palin than take down Obama in 2012.I must reply that moderation has been caught swapping spit with Progressivism, which has put us $12 trillion in the hole. You can argue that correlation is not causation, and I'll sell you that argument for $12 trillion and a balanced budget. The most that moderation is going to buy us is a slight amount of time, tacitly asserting that it's not Already Too Late.
So, I don't care what name you slap on things. Doug Hoffman, fine. I don't care if the person just rolled out of the Star Wars convention sporting port and starboard hair-danishes. I just want some leaders who understand that a Federalist approach is likely the only thing that will preserve this country in any traditional fashion.
My wife was out in the backyard feeding the chickens. We eat brown eggs for breakfast here, and my wife looks good in her blue jeans, feeding the chickens.
Just got back from Sheetz, where I bought a couple of chili-kraut-cheese dogs, a small bag of fries and a frozen mocha. Wanted to have something to eat before my wife and I left for a little cocktail reception this evening in D.C.
Sullivan's melting down, Doug Hoffman's still fighting in NY23, and Barbara Espinosa's improving her blog-fu.
Sometimes survival is victory, and I'm doing a little bit better than surviving these days. Still, you really ought to hit the tip jar. Smitty's in charge for the evening, so e-mail him with news tips, etc.
Meanwhile, I previously overlooked the latest not-to-be-missed Ace beatdown on Sully's latest excursion to insanity. And Michelle Malkin is moved to mercy:
Perhaps the publisher and editors of the august Atlantic magazine should consider giving the man an extended sick leave.About three bottles of Zyprexa ought to do the trick, if washed down with enough whiskey. Mercy.
Or at least some Zyprexa.
My own source suggested last week that it is unlikely that Hoffman's margin in those absentee ballots would be enough to erase the 3,026-vote gap. However, the need to ensure an accurate count, and to expose any potential illegalities, is still very important. If anyone has committed criminal wrongdoing in this upstate New York district, they need to be identified and prosecuted.Read the whole thing. (Hat-tip: Memeorandum.)
Furthermore, the narrowing of the gap by more than 2,300 votes between the reported results on Election Night and the actual vote tally shows how misreporting can affect political outcomes. If the reported margin had been narrower -- and especially if the tallies in Oswego and Jefferson had been accurately reported -- Hoffman never would have conceded that night.
Most of all, the discovery of the errors (or "mischief") in the vote-count makes it a near-certainty that Hoffman will challenge Owens in NY23 in 2010.
This Dish will resume as normal tomorrow morning. We apologize for the lacuna. . . .(Also we apologize for the "hiatus," but too many non-Harvard types know that word and "wankathon" is a bit too specific, so "lacuna" it is!)
And I suppose some will say we've gotten this book and the issues it raises out of perspective. But since the last campaign, we have raised many questions about Palin to which we have been given no incontestable answers (and still haven't) and the only real evidence we have are news stories, interviews and now, critically this book.(Her uterus! She has a uterus! And she doesn't include a single sonogram of her uterus in the book! What is she trying to hide? Shriek! Shriek!)
In his hagiography of Palin, Matt Continetti accuses yours truly of earnestness about all this. I am grateful for his not accusing me of cynicism."Earnestness"? You complain about being accused of earnestness, you demented poofter? After you've spent more than 15 months pushing that lunatic Trig Truther nonsense?
You are a dope-smoking, contagion-spreading menace to society, Andrew Sullivan, and you ought to be immediately deported. I think even Tom Tancredo, Pat Buchanan and Peter Brimelow would agree that your deportation is a matter of national security far more important than sending ICE to hassle a few hundred illegal Mexican poultry-plant workers in North Carolina.
Let me tell you, Sully, I've got in-laws in Columbus, Ohio, who are hoping to go to Sarah's book event there Friday (6 p.m. at Borders), and if I have anything to do with it, they'll be waving a big sign for the cameras:
DEPORT ANDREW SULLIVAN!You sick freak.
UPDATE: Welcome, Conservatives For Palin, where our British friend David Riddick warns you should "be prepared to blush." Ah, but Mr. Riddick of South Godstone doesn't realize that British idioms like "wank" and "poofter" don't quite have the same shock-value over here in the colonies. And there is no need to explain why the Fleet Street tabloid fellows enjoy writing headlines about Bristol for the benefit of their poetic Cockney readers, eh?
One of the grand pleasures of my career is the occasional opportunity to indulge my schoolboy love of the double-entendre, or to allude to some cultural obscurity like the scene in which the instructor chastises young Watson: "What's wrong with a kiss, boy? Hmm? Why not start her off with a nice kiss?"
No ignorant reader could be offended, while the informed reader is wiping coffee-spew off his laptop. But the same cannot be said for the ribald work of that notorious Irish scoundrel, Patrick O'Leary Gallagher McCain, a distant kinsman who guest-blogged here on St. Patrick's Day. You have been warned . . .
UPDATE II: Unlike the Other McCain, the Atlantic Monthly is a journal devoted to serious issues. And, as Professor Douglas points out, Andrew Sullivan certainly has serious issues.
With breathless anticipation, the blogosphere now awaits the reaction of Ace of Spades. Brace yourself for a classic, my friends. BTW, we've now got a Memeorandum thread, so our blogging buddies should feel free to indulge some Rule 3/Rule 2 action.
UPDATE III: Dan Riehl sympathetically opposes Sully's deportation. As an aside, while awaiting the coffee-spew classic from Ace, I'll say that despite my complete disdain of Freudianism, one of the commenters references the Lovecraftian horror that Sully exhibits toward the Cthulu-like aspect of womanhood. Just sayin' . . .
Another Black Conservative points out that Davis. a Democrat, is trying to become the first black governor of Alabama. And my Alabama sources tell me that Davis' Democratic primary opponent, Ron Sparks, is slamming Davis for voting against health care. Sparks is white.
Jesse Jackson, by siding with Sparks, is basically trying to prevent Artur Davis from making history. You might say Jesse's standing in the Statehouse door down in Alabama.
Maybe Davis turn this to his advantage. A new ad campaign slogan: "Artur Davis: Jesse Jackson hates him, so he's OK. Vote for Davis -- a Cracker Just Like You!"
Kind of a crossover appeal. It could work.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Lindsey Graham may be a squish on a number of issues, but this flogging of Eric Holder is very well done:And why is the flogging delivered with authority?
Military serviceSo, unlike our nation's top lawyer, Graham has a clue about the Law of War.
Graham decided to join the United States Air Force in 1982, and served on active duty until 1988. Following his departure he stayed in the military, joining the South Carolina Air National Guard and the U.S. Air Force Reserves. During the Gulf War, he was recalled to active duty, serving as a Judge Advocate at McEntire Air National Guard Station in Eastover, South Carolina, where he helped brief departing pilots on the laws of war.
There would be no sin in Eric Holder just admitting that he's inexperienced in the topic, and seeking advice from people who know more. Senator Graham, for example.
This business of just Making Crap Up, when there is so much at stake, is dereliction of duty. Holder, if it's your own private concern, and you want to try something you read in a comic book, that's your prerogative. But you've a sworn obligation to do The Right Thing, in a job where you have systematically demonstrated cluelessness. This business of mixing civil law with the Law of War makes exactly as much sense as mixing domestic policy with international diplomacy. Holder, you're either are living in a unified-world-government fantasy land, or the least competent boob to occupy your office since its inception.
This country would be better served by Denny Crane as Attorney General. Do us all a favor, Holder, and RESIGN.
Update: Power Line
Palin comes out of the bus, clad in a red and black jacket and black skirt and carrying her son Trig. She tells the people gathered outside that she was thrilled to be back in Michigan.Notice that Palin is actually good at handling "random questions from the media," which goes back to the idiotic decision of Team Maverick to seal her inside a bubble during the campaign. When I first went to see her on the campaign trail in Ohio ("Sweetheart of the Heartland," American Spectator, Sept. 10, 2008) everybody in the press corps was asking, "Will there be an availability?" -- which is campaign lingo for a candidate press conference -- and we were told no.
"Alaska and Michigan have so much in common with the huntin' and the fishin' and the hockey moms," she said "This is the heart of industry in America."
She also answered random questions from the media as she made her way from the outside stage to the bookstore. She said she thought the new mammogram guidelines set a dangerous precedent.
And she also said that the Newsweek cover photo of her in a pair of shorts was "quite cheesy. I never would have posed for Newsweek like that."
That decision made no sense whatsoever. I went out three times to cover Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail, and on two of those occasions -- Greensburgh, Pa., and Shepherdstown, W.Va., there was a press availability.
Why GOP operatives try that stupid "hide the candidate" game, I don't know. It's supposed to be about "message discipline," but it always seems to backfire by turning the media against the candidate. My theory: Most GOP "media strategists" have never worked a day as a reporter, and thus can't see things from the reporter's perspective.
It's very difficult for reporters to cover a campaign if all they get are press releases, scripted speeches and statements from campaign staffers. If they never have a chance to get spontaneous fresh quotes from the candidate, reporters begin to resent the campaign they're covering and that resentment will inevitably come out in their coverage.
At any rate, if and when Palin next goes on the campaign trail, I hope she'll make sure to avoid the "bubble" approach.
Palin positions herself as a populist, but her populism is entirely cultural. . . .And I wouldn't begrudge Dreher his pompous douchebaggery quite so much if he actually knew anything about economics, but he doesn't.
A little of that goes a long way, and I wouldn't begrudge Palin a bit of it if her populism had any economic substance.
(Hat-tips: Riehl World View; Memeorandum.)
And no, it isn't "playing the victim" to expose their bigotry.Without naming me, she evidently refers to my post yesterday:
It’s calling them out.
Grant that the editors of Newsweek hate Sarah Palin. We have every reason to believe that the choice of photo of Palin in shorts represented an attempt to diminish and belittle Palin, to portray her as a cheesecake bimbo, the political equivalent of Lindsay Lohan. . . .Given that I don't like it when people tell me how to frame my response to attacks on me, I suppose that I shouldn't be telling others how to frame their responses to attacks on them. The Golden Rule, in other words.
That this is "sexist," OK. Gotcha. But does Sarah Palin want to assume a feminist victimhood posture, to say that she is being oppressed by the patriarchy?
So if I'm correct that The Boss was aiming that elbow at me, I acknowledge the fault was mine. Mea culpa.
The old rule in the Washington Time newsroom was, "When in doubt, blame McCain." When I resigned last year, I wondered how they'd get along without having me around as the reliable scapegoat.
Answer? Not too good. Not too good at all.
URGENT! BREAKING! Andrew Sullivan announces plan for 'rigorous and careful' analysis of Sarah Palin's
She's still driving 'em crazy -- or, in the case of Andrew Sullivan, crazier. Today the Palin-obsessed Sullivan tells readers he's "gone silent" because he and his team of "rigorous and careful" analysts are busy poring over Going Rogue. In a single 440-word post, Sullivan manages to call Palin a "delusional fantasist," a "deeply disturbed person" with an "unhinged grip on reality" who is peddling "lies," "fabrications and delusions" in a book that is a "work of fiction." Oh, and also, "We want to be fair to her, and to her family."Read the rest, where I predict how the MSM will cover Palin's blockbuster book tour.
Thank goodness for that! We look forward to Andrew Sullivan's next book, Inside Sarah Palin's Uterus: The Most Shocking Scandal Ever. Bet they'll be standing in line for that one . . .
The battle against global warming could be helped if the world slowed population growth by making free condoms and family planning advice more widely available, the U.N. Population Fund said Wednesday.(Hat-tip: Michelle Malkin.) My wife and I have six kids. Sarah Palin has five kids. If liberals are trying to wipe out opposition via population control, they're clearly losing -- and it's easy to see what their problem is. Conservatives have manly men and womanly women. Liberals have Barney Frank, Andrew Sullivan, Rosie O'Donnell and Rachel Maddow.
The agency did not recommend countries set limits on how many children people should have, but said: "Women with access to reproductive health services . . . have lower fertility rates that contribute to slower growth in greenhouse gas emissions."
NTTAWWT, but not exactly a formula for demographic success.
The Victory Through Breeding Fund: Contribute now!
We are all quite familiar with the Bernie Madoff case which devastated many people here in South Florida, quite a few in Florida Congressional district 22. So many people placed their trust in what we now know was an elaborate “ponzi scheme”. The life savings of countless individuals was lost.Read the whole thing. You can also visit the Allen West campaign site. I first interviewed Col. West last year for the American Spectator. Given my notorious Hayekian tendencies, I was a fan as soon as the colonel started quoting Frederic Bastiat.
Just recently we have experienced another such case in the Ft Lauderdale area with a local lawyer named Scott Rothstein. The dollar amounts are not in the same strata as Madoff, only $1Billion, but that is still a pretty substantial number. One would think that we would be more attuned after the realization of what Madoff had executed.
But on an even greater scale we see the future and legacy of our Republic being stolen away by those who truly are our inferiors, impostors. . . .
Last year's failure of the NRCC to spot West as a potential superstar -- they actually tried to recruit other candidates to run against him in the FL22 primary in 2008 -- was a harbinger of the problems that subsequently developed in NY23 this year. Small wonder that West singled out Doug Hoffman for praise:
The candidacy of Doug Hoffman in NY-23 portends the direction the elections of 2010, a true conservative providing an answer to the wasteful, arrogant spending of the Democrats in charge of Congress.Fortunately, the NRCC has now awakened to the "Go West" phenomenon, so maybe things are moving in the right direction.
(Cross-posted at Hot Air Greenroom.)
People were lining up early in Grand Rapids for their chance to meet former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. . . .People lining up hours before the book signing? "Packed house"? Gee, you'd almost get the idea that Palin was popular or something.
She's kicking off her book signing tour Wednesday at Woodland Mall in Grand Rapids.
It is expected to be a packed house at Barnes and Noble in Grand Rapids and if you want in on the action workers say you'll want to be there early.
Meanwhile, William Jacobson notes that flying pigs have been spotted near the offices of Media Matters.
Palin fans in Indiana and Ohio might want to grab your sleeping bags and start camping out now in front of bookstores. Hoosiers will get their dose of Palin-mania Thursday when Sarah comes to in Fort Wayne (noon) and Noblesville (6 p.m.), while Buckeyes can catch the fever Friday in Cincinnati (noon) and Columbus (6 p.m.).
UPDATE: Detroit Free Press reports that 500 camped out overnight in the freezing cold, and there were 1,500 in line at 7 a.m. when the Barnes & Noble staff started handing out wrist bands. ("What is this, a Phish concert?") Ed Morrissey at Hot Air:
Most authors would be pleased to get 1500 people in total to show up for a book tour. (Heck, most authors would kill to sell 1500 books.) Even the Lord of the Rings openings didn’t attract 1500 fans for a 7 am show. Star Wars didn’t get this kind of response.Her popularity drives the media crazy.
UPDATE II: The Blogprof observes that the MSM seem reluctant to show photos of the crowd in Grand Rapids. Fortunately, my Twitter friend Insider7 is on the scene: But . . . Palin is so unpopular! The MSM have polls that say so! In related news, Dan Riehl says he wouldn't camp out all night to date an 18-year-old cheerleader. (But they'd camp out for a date with Dan.)
While most people attending Tea Party events claim they harbor no extreme views, many of the ideas they promote fall outside the mainstream, especially the more conspiratorial ones. Angry protesters have frequently made claims ranging from proclaiming Obama’s “socialist” intentions to making explicit Nazi comparisons to suggesting that the President is defying or even subverting the Constitution.Got that? If you think Obama's policies are "socialist" or if you think the Cult of Personality aspect of his leadership has totalitarian overtones, this makes you a potential menace to society, according to the ADL. Ditto, if you took part in the "Town Hall Meeting Disruptions":
These meetings became a fertile ground for anti-Obama protests and stunts. Various conservative and far-right organizations encouraged people to attend the town hall meetings. Protesters expressed rage at elected officials and many of the meetings erupted into chaos. In some cases, police were called to eject people who were disrupting the events.If you were expecting the ADL to take notice of the brownshirt tactics of Obama's supporters -- like the SEIU goons who beat Kenneth Gladney -- you would be sadly mistaken.
The ADL's "No Enemies On The Left" posture means that it blindly supports Obama and recklessly smears Obama's opponents in the name of "anti-defamation." I believe the appropriate word for this is shanda.
Buffeted by weeks of negative press and a newly threatening rival from the right, FL Gov. Charlie Crist's (R) campaign will step up direct engagements with his opponent, insiders tell OnCall.So this is what your NRSC donations are paying for: Republican attacks on Marco Rubio, one of the most promising young Republican leaders in Florida.
Crist will attack former FL House Speaker Marco Rubio (R), citing his rival's failure to advance some conservative causes while leading the state House, for spending excessively while in the Speaker's office and for dragging his feet on immigration legislation that many Republicans favored.
"We're now running a campaign, and it's one where this campaign will aggressively talk about the governor and his record and his vision heading to Washington as a candidate for the Senate, and we will aggressively talk to voters about our opponent's record, a record that was eight years in the state legislature, a record that has not been discussed to date," said Eric Eikenberg, Crist's new campaign manager.
NOT ONE RED CENT!
UPDATE: Pat Austin notes that Crist's new campaign manager has a predictable habit:
According to The Buzz, Rubio isn't worried about the addition of Eikenberg to the Crist team. Rubio supporters point to his work on the campaigns for both Clay Shaw and George LeMieux. They both lost.More at Memeorandum.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Jumping in Pools interviews Matthew Berry, who is exploring candidacy for the GOP nomination in VA-8.
He'll be running against this piece of work:"We have been guided by a Republican administration who believes in this simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it, and they have an antipathy towards means of redistributing wealth."
You darn right we do, clown-boy Jim:
- Private property == good
- Theft == bad