The Other McCain

WE'VE MOVED!

2010-01-02T04:28:00.000-05:00

TheOtherMcCain.com

How Carlsonism Was Averted, or The Making of TheOtherMcCain.com

2010-01-01T23:33:00.000-05:00

After Thanksgiving, in response to constant nagging -- from Jimmie Bise, Paleo Pat and Cynthia Yockey, among others -- I finally resolved to switch the blog to a custom WordPress platform, and promised to do so by Jan. 1, 2010.

However, the technical wizardry involved was beyond the power of a primitive unfrozen caveman blogger. This project would require Smitty getting his geek on. Our first stab at the project rolled out in rough Beta mode on Christmas Eve using the free version of WordPress but we were informed, sadly, that this would not do -- no advertising permitted for freebie moochers.

Further complications developed and, as Smitty said a couple days before New Year's Eve, he was afraid that we were on the verge of Carlsonism -- replicating the repeatedly delayed debut of a certain site, now due to appear in all its glorious majesty 10 days hence, and it had better not suck.

Despite all hindrances and obstacles, Smitty remained determined and undaunted. Carol at No Sheeples Here worked on the new logo and, with the aid of Silver Logic and Forward Focus Media, success was achieved.

By 5 p.m. on New Year's Day, TheOtherMcCain.com was minimally copacetic. Smitty has told his tale, and now we have produced a stunning video documentary, Behind of The Making of TheOtherMcCain.com.

Happy New Year! Roll Tide! Hit the Tip Jar!

New Site for a New Year: We're Now LIVE at TheOtherMcCain.com

2010-01-01T00:01:00.002-05:00

Yes that's right, as of Jan. 1, 2010, Smitty and I have relocated our glorious blogospheric action to TheOtherMcCain.com.

Same wonderful content, new groovalicious WordPress format.

Tweet of the Year Decade Millennium: My Quest for the Ultimate Re-Tweet

2009-12-31T13:11:00.000-05:00

Your quest to get re-tweeted by @Alyssa_Milano is the best non-porn thing about the internet.
-- Dave Weigel

She's the ultimate celebrity Tweep, with more than 500,000 followers but, as of noon today, was only following 499 people, whereas I've got about 2,700 followers and am following nearly 1,300 people.

This illustrates an enormous status disparity and ever since October, when Alyssa re-Tweeted a Slate column by Mickey Kaus -- who has about 1,700 followers -- I've been trying to reverse-engineer the Kaus magic: "Why Does Alyssa Milano Hate Me?"

Alyssa is to Twitter what Matt Drudge is to news, and what Professor Glenn Reynolds is to blogging. (On Twitter, Drudge has 46,000 followers and Instapundit has about 6,000 followers.) People tell me that my quest is hopeless, but as Vince Lombardi said, "A quitter never wins, and a winner never quits."

In addition to Lombardi's maxim, there's also the inspiration of my role model, Pepe Le Pew:

The wonderful thing about Pepe is that he cannot conceive that anyone would not love him.

Guys often ask how a homely guy like me got such a beautiful wife like Mrs. Other McCain. It's not just the Speedo-worthy physique, my friends. It's also the Pepe Le Pew persistence, the irresistible ardor of the relentless suitor.

That's how I am when I set my mind on a goal. I'm Pepe Le Pew, and the object of my desire is that cat who accidentally got a white stripe painted on her back. Excuse me if you're creeped-out by that analogy, but that's just how I roll.

Speaking of rolling, I've already booked my flight for Pasadena so I can go cover Alabama winning the national championship next week in the Rose Bowl.

Hit the tip jar! ROLL TIDE! Re-Tweet me, Alyssa!

2009 Year in Review: March

2009-12-31T10:23:00.005-05:00

February's first stirrings of populist opposition to the Obama agenda gave way in March to an intellectual backlash against Rush Limbaugh, whose CPAC speech was denounced by Rod Dreher, spurring me to recall Thucydides' account of the siege of Plataea (my faulty memory was corrected by a homeschool mom in the comments field). During Rush's nationally televised CPAC speech, I found myself hanging out with Dittohead cab driver Wally Onakoya.

The contrast between Dreher's hostility and Onakoya's admiration for Limbaugh illustrates, I think, the extent to which Rush's popularity incites the envy of intellectuals. It isn't just that they disagree with Limbaugh -- I don't always agree with him, either -- but rather that they resent his lucrative success in reaching such a large audience. From my perspective, Rush's success is a phenomenon to be praised and celebrated, as I explained in March:

Whatever Limbaugh's faults, he has that one redeeming value: Courage to speak out, even when speaking out makes him the target of vicious personal smears.
One of the basic principles of military strategy is to reinforce success. If you see a man who fights and wins, give him reinforcements, and bid others to emulate his success.

March was also notable for Smitty's debut as co-blogger here, including his first 'Lanche-worthy post, "Where Did the Pleasant Cthulhu Go?" Among other March highlights:

The appearance of the "Going John Galt" meme.
The inauguration of David Brooks Fisking Day: "Brooks is a classic example of The Writerly Delusion: The journalistic belief that one's aptitude for written articulation is the same thing as being knowledgeable about a subject."
"Mamas, Don't Let Your Daughters Grow Up to Be Downloads" -- very good advice. In related news, a chat-room pervert convinced an 11-year-old girl to send him nude photos of herself.
St. Patrick's Day was celebrated by guest-blogger Patrick O'Leary Gallagher McCain.
Conservative lesbian Cynthia Yockey joined the "Wolverines" resistance.
Economic News: A trillion here and a trillion there and pretty soon you're talking real money.
Economic News II: "Top Hayekian public intellectual."

Of course, as they say at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Ala., "Once you go Hayekian, you never go back." NTTAWWT. IYKWIMAITYD.

2009 Year in Review: February

2009-12-31T10:22:00.000-05:00

The endless bummers of January continued into February, which meant that something had to be done to lighten the gloom. Ergo, a very special Cabinet post for Chris Dodd:

As Secretary of the Department of Unicorns and Rainbows, Dodd will face "daunting challenges in this time of crisis," the president said, referring to the distinguished silver-haired senator as "one of our nation's most visionary leaders."

Other insightful political commentary from February:

"There is a marked tendency for heterosexual men to be interested in women."
The low ebb for Republicans came when the House GOP could muster only 135 votes against the S-CHIP expansion.
February was the month of stimulus: 1,434 pages, $789 billion and not a red cent for me.
Exactly what did Obamanomics mean? Reinflating the bubble and the Fiscal Trap of Hope.
MEGA-BLOGGER: "How to Get a Million Hits."
Ace of Spades: Hanging with Hitch in Beirut.
The first-ever Rule 5 Sunday.
CPAC! CPAC! CPAC!

February also saw the beginning of the Tea Party movement, which sparked the beginning of a long-running argument with Rick Moran:

Rick doesn't seem to believe that opposition to Obamanomics could ever become a decisive groundswell. And he is entitled to that opinion. But to say that such opposition is not now a groundswell does not mean it will never become one.

Wow, did I call that one, or what? I followed up with a long post entitled "Tea Parties, Defeatism and Wolverines" -- the first of what became an informal series with a populist theme -- and quoted Jennifer Rubin: "The opposition party must oppose."

2009 Year in Review: January

2009-12-31T10:21:00.000-05:00

Looking back through the archives, I note that this annus horriblis began with the sad realization that we were going to have to get used to saying those three dreadful words: Senator Al Franken. Which, of course, prompts three more words: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

Exactly what is wrong with the Republican Party that it can't even beat a clown like Franken? I attempted to answer that question in a long post titled, "Fear and Loathing: Sarah Palin and the Conservative Intellectuals":

Just as the conservative intellectuals once projected their hopes onto Dubya, now they project their disappointments onto Sarah. But the fault is theirs, not hers.

It is a very long post, but I think it got to the nub of some very important issues that are fundamental to understanding how the GOP reached its ebb in 2008. Some other highlights and lowlights of the month:

January 2009 saw Israel at war with Palestinians, which prompted my reflection "Sonny Corleone in Gaza."
Natalie Dylan offered her virginity online and was offered $3.7 million.
Of course, January marked the official onset of the Obama Nation, which was inaugurated with puddles of hope. I compared it to the experience of taking my daughter to Bush's 2001 inauguration.
The biggest problem of the new administration was its economic agenda: Unicorns, rainbows and wasteful neo-Keynesian nonsense.
I covered the RNC meeting that culminated in the election of Michael Steele as chairman.
January also brought news of the Hindenburg-at-Lakehurst implosion of Culture 11, a not-unexpected disaster that could be explained in two words: David Kuo. Or perhaps, Conor Friedersdorf.

You see, then, that January was in some ways a precursor of much that was to come in the months ahead.

Blog titles worthy of framing

2009-12-31T10:08:00.002-05:00

by Smitty

The assertion that Christianity teaches Socialism is elegantly refuted here:

It isn’t generosity when you give away the money of others

The next step after this is to realize that the Gospels are equally a foreign policy tract, which is to say, not even slightly.

Blogging for 'The Cause'? Nonsense! I Write for Money

2009-12-31T09:37:00.001-05:00

You're a conservative, and what is conservatism? The belief that liberalism is wrong. Very simple, and you don't really need anybody to explain that to you. Given that Democrats are the party of liberalism, you oppose Democrats generally and specifically, both in terms of politics and policy, which is also pretty much self-explanatory.

Things are a bit more . . . nuanced for Booman's buddies in the progressive netroots community:

If you are doing full-time political blogging, something is motivating you. For most of us, that motivation was originally outrage at what the Bush administration and the Republicans in Congress were doing. . . .
What brought people together into progressive blogging communities and networks was related to policy (the invasion of Iraq, torture, illegal surveillance, regressive taxation, bad environmental policy) but also other things (a one-sided corporate media, incompetent government, and lack of meaningful and effective resistance by the Democrats). . . .

OK, with a set-up like that, perhaps you're starting to get an inkling of what comes next:

If we got into blogging and political activism to put the Democrats in power, should we not be focusing on helping them pass their agenda and stay in power? . . .
[I]f you are waking each morning to blog about what a bunch of corporate whores the Democrats and the president are, you haven't really adjusted your style to the new situation in Washington. . . . Is this first thing you do in the morning to look for ways to talk about how the president has disappointed you? How Congress sucks? Then you aren't interested in keeping the Republicans out of power any more. You are fighting a different battle. . . . No one is compelled to support the Democrats over the Republicans or to support policies they disagree with. But we should call this kind of blogging what it is, which is anti-Obama, and anti-Democratic Party . . . and anti-government, really.

Hmmmm. Wonder who that was aimed at? Jane Hamsher, perhaps? Three weeks after the 2008 election, I wrote about "Future Ex-Democrats." And it's important to keep in mind that the backlash against the Age of Obama won't be limited to moderates repulsed by the administration's radicalism. There will also be many sincere progressives repulsed by the cynicism and hypocrisy of Democrats in power.

I, Chump
Speaking as an ex-Democrat myself, I always tell my "cradle Republican" friends that Democratic disillusionment can happen in the most surprising ways. If you intervene at the right moment, you might find that your fiercest opponent today could be your staunchest ally in the future. When conservatives see the "progressive netroots community" issuing these calls for solidarity and threatening to excommunicate heretics -- "We must support the Democrats, no matter what they do!" -- you are being alerted to an opportunity.

For me, believe it or not, one of the breakthroughs was reading William Greider's Who Will Tell The People?, a left-wing critique of the Clinton administration's economic policies. (Remember that I actively supported Clinton in 1992.)

Having campaigned on promises of a "middle-class tax cut" and an economic "stimulus package," the Clintonistas abandoned those plans between Election Day and Inauguration Day. In part, this was a recognition of fiscal reality. In part, it was a sellout to the Clinton campaign's corporate sponsors.

It's hard to overstate the impact of Greider's revelation that the Clintons weren't really sincere about their class-warfare campaign promises. It was all just convenient political rhetoric, motivated by focus-group studies, and they were just as sold-out to "corporate America" as the Republicans. Once you cease to swallow liberal rhetoric as gospel and begin to examine the Democrats from a cynical perspective (i.e., "What's in it for them?"), you acquire a certain contempt for the kind of naive chump you used to be.

"Chump" is a very tough self-judgment to accept. And once a Democrat realizes he's been hoodwinked, bamboozled, sold out, backstabbed and betrayed -- do you hear me, Jane Hamsher? -- a revolutionary change in worldview becomes possible.

'Who Is John Galt?'
What happened to me was that friends and co-workers encouraged my second thoughts. One of my editors turned me on to The Freeman, the monthly magazine of the Foundation for Economic Education, a publication full of Austrian School economic insights. And then, in a heated argument one day with a Dittohead co-worker, I said, "Have you read Who Will Tell the People?"

"No," he said. "Have you read Atlas Shrugged?"

Heh. I hadn't. Personal pride in my own erudition was ruffled, and I was embarrassed by this literary one-upsmanship from my Dittohead friend. So I went out, bought Atlas Shrugged and spent a weekend reading it.

Thus I became one of millions converted to the capitalist cause by Rand's radical classic. I'm constantly amazed at how common that experience is, just as I'm amazed to discover how many "cradle Republicans" have never bothered to read it, nor even to read Leonard Read's brilliant free-market essay, "I, Pencil." How can you defend entrepreneurism and free markets if you haven't read these classics?

Once you understand that capitalism is not actually evil -- do you hear me, Jane Hamsher? -- then the fundamental corruption of the Democratic Party becomes transparently obvious: They gain money and power by hypocritically claiming to oppose money and power.

Screw the Democratic Party and all their cynical lies. Stop "blogging for The Cause" and come on over to the side of shameless greed. I Write For Money. There is no conflict of interest between my advocacy of capitalism and my practice of capitalism. So please hit the tip jar!

White House plays Flight 253 blame game

2009-12-31T06:29:00.001-05:00

The Prowler reports at the American Spectator:

[A]s it became clear internally that the Administration had suffered perhaps its most embarrassing failure in the area of national security, senior Obama White House aides, including chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod and new White House counsel Robert Bauer, ordered staff to begin researching similar breakdowns -- if any -- from the Bush Administration. "The idea was that we'd show that the Bush Administration had had far worse missteps than we ever could," says a staffer in the counsel's office. "We were told that classified material involving anything related to al Qaeda operating in Yemen or Nigeria was fair game and that we'd declassify it if necessary."
The White House, according to the source, is in full defensive spin mode. Other administration sources also say a flurry of memos were generated on December 26th, 27th, and 28th, which developed talking points about how Obama's decision to effectively shut down the Homeland Security Council (it was merged earlier this year into the National Security Council, run by National Security Adviser James Jones) had nothing to do with what Obama called a "catastrophic" failure on Christmas Day.
"This White House doesn't view the Northwest [Airlines] failure as one of national security, it's a political issue," says the White House source. "That's why Axelrod and Emanuel are driving the issue." . . .

Read the whole thing. Disgusting.

UPDATE: "White House to Critics: Stop Blaming Us While We Look For a Way To Blame Bush."

When passengers become heroes

2009-12-31T06:10:00.001-05:00

RiShawn Biddle at The American Spectator compares Jasper Schuringa to the passengers who stopped the Flight 93 terrorists:

[B]oth events prove once again that government alone cannot ensure security and freedom for Americans or citizens in other countries. Ultimately, it depends on ordinary people to rise to an occasion, even at the expense of their own lives.

Read the whole thing. RiShawn is editor of the education site Dropout Nation.

Rush Limbaugh reported 'resting comfortably' in Hawaii hospital

2009-12-31T05:55:00.000-05:00

This seemed very serious when it was first reported, but it now appears to be a more or less routine health scare for a 58-year-old:

Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh is resting comfortably in a Hawaii hospital after suffering chest pains while on vacation, his radio program says.
"Rush appreciates your prayers and well wishes and will keep you updated via rushlimbaugh.com and on his radio program," the program said in a statement late Wednesday night.
Limbaugh was rushed for medical treatment earlier in the day. The statement said "Rush was admitted to and is resting comfortably in a Honolulu hospital today after suffering chest pains."
Kit Carson, Limbaugh's chief of staff, told The Associated Press that he had no further information on Limbaugh's condition.
He said the 58-year-old left for his usual Christmas vacation on Dec. 23 and is due to return to his show on Jan. 4.

No new updates yet from RushLimbaugh.com but we can expect to hear more at noon ET.

VIDEO: 'A fat man flying!'

2009-12-31T00:08:00.002-05:00

In Boston in 1773, Molly Far saw a horrifying vision:

From the Pasadena Tea Party Patriots and, in case you didn't recognize the actress playing Molly, it's SNL alumna Victoria Jackson. Molly's prophetic vision of the bounteous land of fruit turned into a barren wilderness on account of a smelt is, alas, all too real.

No, Jennings hasn't been fired yet

2009-12-30T23:06:00.003-05:00

by Smitty

Sorry, Nice Deb, you're still paying for a degenerate to influence school children.

After all, if the Administration can blow off the ACORN scandal with impunity, then why should peddling smut to minors trigger so much as the batting of an eye?

The solution: more demonstrations for the Community Organizer in Chief.

How to handle historical grievances

2009-12-30T22:30:00.002-05:00

by Smitty (h/t USNI Blog)

This incident is less than a century old, but it contains a lesson.

SYDNEY (Reuters) - An Australian hospital ship torpedoed by the Japanese during World War Two with the loss of 268 lives has been located in waters off the coast of the northern state of Queensland, the government said on Sunday.

The loss of the Centaur in 1943 while sailing to Port Moresby in Papua New Guinea was one of Australia's great wartime disasters. Survivors and their relatives have long pressed for the wreck to be found, fearing salvagers would reach it first.

As USNI notes:

I-177’s captain was never tried for the sinking, but was convicted on other war crimes by the Allies. The attack has long been a sore subject for the Japanese, who only acknowledged in 1979 that I-177 did indeed sink the hospital ship, after denying involvement since 1943. Furthermore, Tokyo claims it never ordered the attack, a fact if false would likely lead to Australian pressure for additional war crime charges. In a statement on the search for AHS Centaur, Japan said it "made the greatest efforts for world peace and prosperity as a responsible member of the international community and has also developed a close relationship with Australia." To their credit, the Centaur Association, the RSL, and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade have all made statements that Japan does not need to apology[sic] for the sinking of AHS Centaur. Apparently 66 years of good relations is enough time for some countries to let history be history.

Certainly, the Centaur pales in time, space, and body count to the Israeli/Palestinian situation.

Nevertheless, a positive example of two peoples coming to grips with a historical tragedy could prove a handy lesson.

Him who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Advice to Juicebox Mafia: surrender

2009-12-30T21:13:00.003-05:00

by Smitty

Uncle Jimbo is not your natural enemy. Rather, he is somebody you want to befriend, carry a notebook whenever he condescends to share space with you, and take take copious notes the whole time. Jimbo introduces the JM (adding some formatting):

The Juicebox Mafia is a bunch of young, liberal pundits so-named by Eli Lake of the Wash Times including
Ezra Klein,
Spencer Ackerman,
Matthew Why-Glesias[sic] and
today's target Tim Fernholz.
I know a couple of them now and have proffered a challenge to debate a number of issues i.e. The Socialization of the America. I have received an acceptance of the gauntlet, and will advise as to a time and place for the inaugural debate between the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy & the Juicebox Mafia.

Uncle Jimbo's inaugural bludgeoning is: "Kill the filibuster".

Rule 4 at its finest. About the only thing Uncle Jimbo doesn't do is estimate the number of years (I'll say 20) between the time they remove the filibuster and the US Senate, like the Roman Senate after Julius Caesar, devolves into a mere decoration, like a hot water faucet in a third-world country.

A look at Stacy's CA trip

2009-12-30T20:44:00.005-05:00

by Smitty (h/t Dodgeblogium)

Just a little peep at how much fun Stacy will be having at the airport while making his way west to see Alabama play:

The clip is from David Zucker's An American Carol. The screening for that flick in Arlington, VA is where I first met Stacy McCain, ~16 months and a few lifetimes ago.

Props to the readers who've supported his westward venture.
Update: Diversity Lane piling on,

Susan B. Anthony List: Winning

2009-12-30T18:29:00.001-05:00

An interesting article in National Journal shows that, while pro-choice political groups generally raise far more money than pro-life groups, the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List stomps the crap out of the pro-choice National Organization for Women:

National Journal also features video stories including interviews with SBA List Chairwoman Marjorie Dannenfelser:

Tea Party Express official says liberal media used TPM's 'totally bogus story'

2009-12-30T16:34:00.003-05:00

E-mail from Joe Wierzbicki of the Tea Party Express:

What's disgusting about the TPM Muckracker hit on us is that it's a totally bogus story - and the author knows it.
The $800,000 they cite was NOT paid to Russo Marsh + Associates. The vast majority of that money was to reimburse Russo Marsh + Associates for the efforts where we fronted the money in our capacity as the organizers of the Tea Party Express. . . .
And then Rachel Maddow of MSNBC last night (and the CBS blog, and dozens of other liberal blogs) have run with the story. I'm not sure how much these people in the secondary chain of this viral promotion understand that their advancing a bogus story. Maybe some of them do and they don't care.
What seems obvious is that the only reason someone would advance a bogus story like this if they knew it to be bogus, would solely be to try to take a shot at the tea party movement in general, and smear the Tea Party Express in particular. . . .

Read the rest at The American Spectator.

'Wingnut hysteria!'

2009-12-30T16:00:00.000-05:00

Right. A Nigerian jihadist tries to blow up a Detroit-bound flight on Christmas Day, but if you think al-Qaeda was involved, you're a creationist neo-fascist ultra-nationalist nirther. (Safe non-LGF link.)

And we're the kooks, you understand. Me, you, Pamela Geller, Dan Collins, Mike Hendrix, Robert Spencer -- just a bunch of extremist wingnuts.

(Via Memeorandum.)

Because there are no coincidences

2009-12-30T15:08:00.001-05:00

No sooner had I used a homecoming queen's friendly C-cup smile as a political metaphor than the bodaciously curvaceous Samantha of Day-by-Day makes a not-entirely-unrelated point. And at the same time we behold Shelby Steele touching, as it were, the hem of a garment that is not there:

America's primary race problem today is our new "sophistication" around racial matters. Political correctness is a compendium of sophistications in which we join ourselves to obvious falsehoods ("diversity") and refuse to see obvious realities (the irrelevance of diversity to minority development). I would argue further that Barack Obama's election to the presidency of the United States was essentially an American sophistication, a national exercise in seeing what was not there and a refusal to see what was there—all to escape the stigma not of stupidity but of racism.
Barack Obama, elegant and professorially articulate, was an invitation to sophistication that America simply could not bring itself to turn down. . . .

You should read the whole thing and also visit Day by Day, where Samantha has been known occasionally to appear as naked as the emperor in his new clothes. (Don't hate Samantha. It's not her fault she's as melanin-deficient as Molly Ringwald. Or, uh, Lindsay Lohan.)

What parents worry about

2009-12-30T13:39:00.000-05:00

Today I went upstairs for a cup of coffee and noticed daughter Reagan watching the Disney Channel in rapt attention. When I came back downstairs, I posted a message on Twitter:

My 7yo daughter now watching "Parent Trap" starring young Lindsay Lohan. Considering how Lindsay turned out, should I be worried?

To which question the only answer is, "Of course, you should be worried." Every halfway decent parent perpetually worries about how their kids will turn out. Even though I know my eldest daughter -- recently engaged to the Argentine Romeo -- watched and re-watched her VHS of The Parent Trap when she was about 10 without succumbing to moral corruption, I still worry about her baby sister.

My wife is worried about how we'll pay for the eldest's wedding, while I'm worried about whether the Pasadena trip will result in financial disaster. So, despite accusations of "whining," I'm still rattling the tip jar -- $5 or $10 might help soothe the parental jitters. Being a Dad is scary, when you consider that tabloid-trashy Lindsay Lohan (who has apparently rejoined the hetero squad and is on Twitter, BTW) was once so sweet and innocent:

P.S.: The photo at the top was found on a blog post by journalist Daniel Lehman:

Ask a Casting Director: What advice do you have for parents of child actors?

My answer: Don't let them become child actors! Your kid might turn out to be the next Lindsay Lohan or -- Heaven forbid -- Danny Bonaduce. (My 11-year-old redheaded son plays drums. That's got to be worth $20 in worry.)

Tea Party Leadership

2009-12-30T12:39:00.000-05:00

by Smitty

Warner Todd Huston at Big Government is worried about the leadership question, emphasis mine:

The nature of the Tea Party movement was unusual at the outset. Regardless of what the half-wits on the extreme left said about them — whackjobs like your Keith Olbermanns or Rachel Maddows — the Tea Party movement was not orchestrated behind the scenes by some grand, right-wing conspiracy. They happened spontaneously spearheaded by all sorts of different groups, hundreds of them in fact. And to use the hackneyed old expression, trying to organize them into a single, national power will be like herding cats.

And therein lies the soon to be revealed mistake. Unless we are able to foresee this limitation of the Tea Party movement and take concrete measures to prevent it we will see the passion and engagement of these millions of Americans frittered away until just cynicism is left.

Passion about politics is great and likely the fervor of Tea Party participants will help fuel a 2010 resurgence of Republicans in the midterm elections. But what after that? In fact, what during it?

Here’s the problem and, as I see it, it’s a problem that is actually sort of built right into the Tea Party movement from its inception. That would be its essentially leaderless nature. Certainly this leaderless nature has suited the tastes of those suspicious of government, tired of failed party machinations, and the preternaturally aloof folks that populated them. Perhaps the gatherings could have occurred no other way and are born of this peculiar instant of political sensibility. Nonetheless Tea Parties have been disparate, unfocused, leaderless, and might prove to be pointless in the end.

There was no unifying single goal of the Tea Partiers and no agency or party directing them. This means that the raw power behind them just might go untapped because there will be no way to translate the passion to power. Every transformative movement has been led by a single man and his small group of powerful adherents but the Tea Party movement has no such leader and might just find that its passion will dissipate until there is nothing left but disgruntled followers.

Don’t get me wrong, I love the passion and was thrilled by the hundreds of Tea Parties with their millions of participants as it happened across this land in 2009. I was heartened that so many Americans were standing up to the anti-American left like that. But how do we channel that passion into something that can lead to positive change?

Without question powerful change needs a leader. Unfortunately, unless a leader steps forward that can gather all those many Tea Party strings into a single strong rope, it is likely that the whole thing will just pass away and be left a footnote in history. And what will this do to those yearning for change? What else could it do but cause them to become even more cynical going out than when they came in, leaving them thinking that nothing can be done and that we are doomed? This could lead to even worse societal strife down the road as frustrations build.

Considering history, I'd offer two things:

Human nature is constant, favoring hierarchy.
Technology is variable, with a positive slope, and has no affection for hierarchy.

Huston's argument favors (1), and I'll agree with him substantially. But pay attention to (2). Contrasting the Tea Party movement of today with that of the 1700s, bloggers are the pamphleteers. Sure, a George Washington wound up as the general in charge, courageously leading the army, serving as President, and scoring the accolades.

George Washington had decades of buildup, and the support of a variety of people. The Revolution was not about "George Washington", but the 2008 election was all about "Barack Obama".

Technology ought to be about de-emphasis of the individual in the government. Yes, somebody has to sign the legislation. Sure, there must be a name on the ballot. As with George Washington, let the person and the magic squiggle on the paper be more about the historical necessity than the personal ego.

Ways to bring about the destruction of the Tea Party spirit from within:

Put a libertarian extremist in charge. No matter how much you like small government ideas, anything workable has to solve the "Y'all can't get there from here" problem. Declaring entitlements un-Constitutional does nothing about the millions of people and the decades spent growing these fiscal dragons. Slay them, sure, but ensure a good plan for butchering the dragon carcass.
Put a Progressive in charge. Someone who will advocate that we swap out the current slate of degenerates for more of same. Continue to treat the Constitution as a historical relic, a navigation hazard around which to maneuver with fine verbal ballet.
Put an apparatchik in charge, who, despite making all of the proper anti-Washington noises, knows who the backers are and where the political correctness lines are drawn.

I'd contend that the final threat is the worst. The line between invariant principles and areas where reasonable people can disagree agreeably is the among the more challenging aspects of discussion.

Jumping in Pools says "The battering and blaming of the Republicans has to stop." Mr. Kat, when those GOP windbags threaten the invariant principles in, for example, the Constitution, then they are a tumor, albeit a benign one. The most you're buying from a RINO is time. The RINO's non-command of principles will feed the Progressive decline, albeit more slowly than a Democrat's. In a way, the Democrat is more admirable, because he's not blowing any sunshine up the public bottom about his task.

In summary, the Tea Party will shake itself out just fine. Keep the pamphleteering up on the blogs. Keep emailing the blog posts to those who don't read the blogs. The Tea Parties will produce a name for the ballot. However, by focusing on the invariant principles at stake, and letting the technology drive the communication, the name that lands on the ballot will understand that (s)he is blessed to serve an informed electorate, and steer the ship of state on a less perilous course.

If Obama's lost Maureen Dowd . . .

2009-12-30T12:06:00.000-05:00

. . . he's doomed beyond Hope:

If we can’t catch a Nigerian with a powerful explosive powder in his oddly feminine-looking underpants and a syringe full of acid, a man whose own father had alerted the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, a traveler whose ticket was paid for in cash and who didn’t check bags, whose visa renewal had been denied by the British, who had studied Arabic in Al Qaeda sanctuary Yemen, whose name was on a counterterrorism watch list, who can we catch? . . .
Before he left for vacation, Obama tried to shed his Spock mien and juice up the empathy quotient on jobs. But in his usual inspiring/listless cycle, he once more appeared chilly in his response to the chilling episode on Flight 253, issuing bulletins through his press secretary and hitting the links. At least you have to seem concerned. . . .

Once Modo starts eyeing the exit of the Obama bandwagon, what next? Will David Brooks espy an un-meritocratic wrinkle in the president's pants?

Political moralism and the self-defeating impulse toward totalitarian 'purity'

2009-12-30T10:53:00.004-05:00

Carl Milsted on a meaningful distinction:

Liberty. Some love it because it provides wealth, opportunity, and other good things. Others declare that any denial of liberty is unacceptably evil, that liberty is a fundamental right of man. Both call themselves libertarians, and so they gather together at political conventions, seminars, and blog forums -- to call each other nasty names and do battle over the meaning of a word.

Read the rest, which is from the December issue of Liberty, which has been advertising on the sidebar for a couple of weeks.

Milsted makes a distinction between what he calls "consequential" libertarians and "moralist" libertarians, a distinction that replicates itself everywhere in politics. Some people are just natural-born fanatics who turn to politics in a search for totalitarian purity.

Fanatical demands for ideological purity in politics represent a totalitarian impulse, and are the bane of any really practical program for political action in a democratic system. To gain an effective governing majority requires the building of a coalition organized on fundamental principles and shared interests.

Zealous fanaticism can be useful in politics, boiling issues down to their stark fundamentals. I still remember the evening in 1995 when, having slipped the moorings of my Democratic upbringing, I sat down to dinner with a Republican Party official and the conversation turned to abortion. I mentioned my (small-L) libertarian opposition to taxpayer-funded abortion -- why should Catholics, for example, be taxed to pay for what is contrary to their expressed doctrine? -- and my host responded bluntly: "Abortion is murder and it ought to be against the law."

The Litmus-Test Trap
That statement has the virtue of simplicity, and has radical implications. Those who agree with it have a clear mandate for political involvement and it is thus scarcely surprising that pro-lifers remain the unbreakable backbone of the GOP today. Nothing makes me more furious than those "sophisticated" Republicans who sneer at pro-lifers. Without hard-core pro-lifers, there might never have been a Reagan presidency or a 1994 "Republican Revolution."

Yet the tendency toward fanaticism -- the radical certainty of the True Believer -- can have disastrous consequences in politics. There are many pro-lifers who make that issue a litmus test in such a way that it compels them to vote for bad politicians.

A perfect example of this problem is Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson, the "pro-life" Democrat whose sellout cinched the Senate vote for ObamaCare. Many pro-lifers in Nebraska told themselves they could vote for Nelson because his partisan allegiance was negated by his declared pro-life principles.

Of course, many Republicans elected on the strength of their pro-life bona fides have proved incompetent, corrupt or politically untrustworty, which creates the environment within which the election of pro-life Democrats becomes likely. And it is the single-issue litmus-test approach of the True Believers that is both cause and effect in such a scenario: They elect a bad Republican because he's "right" on their single issue and then, when he disappoints them, they replace him with a Democrat who is clever enough to position himself as pro-life. Whether this pattern ever actually results in the enactment of pro-life policies . . . well, that's an interesting question, isn't it?

'Anarchy Next Wednesday'
Let us return, now, to Carl Milsted's attempt to deal with libertarian fanatics, in which he describes a platform fight at the 2006 Libertarian Party convention:

At the time I was leading a major effort to reform the LP (the Libertarian Reform Caucus) to widen the LP's definition of "libertarian" so as to include a large fraction of voters who say they support both personal liberties and economic liberties, and to soften the party's platform away from its call for anarchy next Wednesday.

If you've ever attended a Libertarian Party gathering, you either smile at that description or become enraged by it. There are some Libertarians who oppose even the mildest concesion to pragmatism. They want an LP that is fanatically pure and, as an inevitable result, politically impotent.

Purity is one of those ideas that have consequences and I made a reference to LP fanatics when describing those consequences after the November 2008 election:

LGF -- which lately has been trying to purge Pam Geller as a Nazi (!) sympathizer -- doesn't mind saying "we blew it." And I agree: You blew it. And in fact, you still blow. Purge-happy partisan fanatics! Purge the Buchananites! Purge the libertarians! Purge the creationists! Purge the pro-lifers! Bobby Jindal is "political suicide!"
Purge, purge, purge, until the Republican Party is only you, and then maybe people will understand that this was your objective from the very beginning, you intolerant assholes. I am reminded of Bob Barr's description of the more fanatical Libertarian purists -- they don't want to belong to the Libertarian Party, they want to belong to the Libertarian Club.
Let these purging purists have their way, and you can plan to hold the 2012 Republican convention in Charles Johnson's living room. And I'll vote Libertarian again.

In the end, of course, CJ purged himself, but the fundamental point remains. It's this "club" mentality, the desire to act as membership chairmans of an exclusive sect composed entirely of one's fellow True Believers, that makes the fanatical quest for purity such a disastrous impulse in politics.

Big Boobs and Big Tents
Successful politics requires a gregarious attitude, what we might call the Sheila Mosely Principle. In fall 1976, Sheila was a candidate for homecoming queen at Lithia Springs (Ga.) High School. Sheila was a popular cheerleader with an impressive C-cup rack, but there were other popular cheerleaders running for homecoming queen, one of whom was at least a D-cup.

So one day a couple weeks before homecoming, I was walking down the hall and encountered Sheila, who flashed a friendly smile and said, "Hi, Stacy." Maybe that wasn't the first time Sheila had ever spoken to me, but it was certainly the friendliest she'd ever been, and it made an impression.

Of course, I knew this unexpected gesture was politically motivated, but it was nonethless impressive that Sheila had condescended to solicit the support of a stoner hoodlum like me. Impressive -- more impressive even than Kim Cantrell's D-cups -- and therefore Sheila got my vote.

Sheila understood that every vote counts. She wasn't going to let my stoner hoodlum status be an obstacle to her quest for homecoming queen. And that gregarious impulse, that willingness to solicit support from outside one's own social or political niche, was what made Ronald Reagan such an unequaled success in politics.

Reagan's "Big Tent" approach has been misunderstood and misapplied by many of his would-be successors, who have used it as an excuse for Clintonesque "triangulation," the politics of pre-emptive compromise. But Reagan was an unapologetic conservative, who did not feel the need to talk about being "kinder and gentler" or employ defensive modifiers like "compassionate."

From C-Cups to Tea Parties
Never renouncing his firm belief that liberalism was wrong -- a sound fundamental principle -- Reagan could nonetheless work with liberals and solicit their support for his agenda (rather than cooperating in a "kinder gentler" pursuit of the liberal agenda) because he had the same kind of winning self-confidence that permitted Sheila Moseley to smile and say "hi" to a hoodlum stoner.

The problem of fanatics who insist on purity is that their intolerance of dissent betrays a lack of confidence. If your ideas are so self-evidently true, what explains your totalitarian impulse to purge the impure?

Winners understand teamwork, and thus exhibit a cooperative, gregarious tendency in politics that rightly ought to be called populism. When I see intellectual idiots denouncing the Tea Party movement as "populist," I understand that they mean the term as a pejorative, a synonym for angry ignorance. But while Tea Party crowds are indeed angry about the current direction of policy in Washington, as individuals they are some of the most cheerful, friendly people you'd ever want to meet -- and certainly far less ignorant than their critics would have you believe.

Furthermore, the Tea Party people exhibit a very Reaganesque "Big Tent" attitude. Go to these rallies, and you'll find hard-core evangelical pro-lifers and libertarian bikers in happy coexistence, united by opposition to the big-government menace of Leviathan-on-the-Potomac. This is what I've called "Libertarian Populism" and -- despite the dismissive snobbery of Julian Sanchez -- it is wrong to suppose that such hostility toward the elite is mere ressentiment., when a two-decade bipartisan succession of Ivy-educated White House occupants (Yale, Yale Law, Yale/Harvard MBA, Columbia/Harvard Law) have led the nation to its current predicament.

If elitists can get over their fears of the populist mob, and if libertarians can get over their purist demand for "anarchy next Wednesday," there is a glimmer of hope for a real breakthrough. But we're not going to get there unless people start thinking like Sheila Mosely, whose friendly smile was enough to triumph even over a D-cup rack.

P.S.: Don't forget to visit Liberty magazine. If they're smart enough to advertise here, they must be geniuses!

Cartoons that leave a mark

2009-12-30T08:53:00.002-05:00

by Smitty (h/t Anorak)

And the latter would be on the Endangered Species list, if...

America loves a fighter

2009-12-30T00:45:00.004-05:00

While I'm not sure I agree 100% with SusanAnne Hiller's lengthy post at Red State -- taking on Byron York, of all people -- she's clearly on to something here:

The GOP should have called out the media, rather than retreating into a corner so as not to be branded as racists, obstructionists, the party of no, or worse, conservatives.
Again, it was at this time that the MSM started its ground assault of the Bush administration and mauling of the GOP. And the GOP never fought back. Bush never fought back.
With this defeatist attitude, the MSM reshaped conservative thought to hate Bush, creating apathy and division in the Republican party, and ultimately causing Republicans to vote Democrat or stay home on election day in 2008.
In reality, the American people crave a party to take on the media, Democrats, and corruption. Just look at Joe Wilson, Sarah Palin, Michelle Malkin, Andrew Breitbart, Rush, Hannity, Beck, Tea Partiers, and our own Erick Erickson. Look at Fox's sky-high ratings. All signs of the American people's thirst for knowledge and someone --anyone -- to stand up against Obama, Congress, the media, and the left. And those who do get major support from the GOP base.

Read the whole thing and make up your own mind. The point which strikes me most strongly is SusanAnne's emphasis on the courage to fight, which requires the willingness to become a target. Americans love a fighter.

The reason I'm not sure I agree 100% with SusanAnne is because Byron York also makes very good points. When York says Republicans are to blame for their own woes, I believe he means the GOP establishment (elected office-holders, party officials, staffers, consultants, etc.) rather than Republican voters.

That's an important distinction. The rank-and-file of the party -- the ordinary GOP voter in Iowa or Oklahoma or Ohio -- have too often been ignored and ill-represented by the people they've elected. You can't really blame ordinary Republican voters for the Abramoff scandal or the Bush administration's lack of a workable plan for post-war Iraq.

So both York and SusanAnne are onto something, and I'd be willing to bet that York probably agrees with most of what she says. BTW, SusanAnne is on Twitter. and is also a contributor to BigGovernment.com.

Update: (Smitty)
Dan Riehl:

But other than some scolding for what has long been known and already widely discussed, I'm not sure York's item says much at all. Net net, the GOP has to find a way to bond with the base and the American people as a whole. They shouldn't think they're going to win any election prizes simply for not being Democrats.

I'm not sure, Dan. Didn't BHO win by saying he would not be Bush? You know Progressivism is killing the country. The real danger would seem to be fragmentation, as voting for 20 different "not being Democrats" effectively elects the Democrat. So the principles should always trump the personality, in a thinking electorate. Oops.

Collective Bargaining for Screeners?

2009-12-30T00:25:00.002-05:00

by Smitty (h/t Hot Air)

Senator Jim DeMint connects the nomination of Eroll Southers to head the TSA, and the likelihood of screeners coming under collective bargaining.

I understand the historical context in which unions were born. As someone who's served in the Navy, however, the modern union seems a mutiny awaiting its moment. In the absence of acute, legitimate issues of worker exploitation, unions offer chronic problems in all directions. They are the Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy written across the base of the organization chart.

Unions: frequently a cure worse than the disease.

CBS totally objective about 'teabaggers'

2009-12-29T22:56:00.000-05:00

In the sense that Andrew Sullivan is totally objective about Sarah Palin's uterus, I mean. And I'm not complaining about getting linked by a major news organization, but see if you can guess CBSNews.com editor Charles Cooper's agenda:

All through the spring and summer of 2009, Tea Party media hands portrayed their anti-government - and anti-Obama - protests as the voice of a genuine grass roots movement. Now it's clear that any retelling of that story also must include a discussion of the Republican operatives who were whispering play calls behind the scenes. What with so many folks out and about for the holidays, this TPM Muckraker piece failed to garner wider attention.

That would be the same TPM article I linked earlier, the one which asserted that because the Tea Party Express PAC paid $800,000 to the public relations firm which organized the tour, something foul was afoot. Anyway, Cooper linked my post, and it wasn't hard to discover that he was also the author of this August headline:

Teabaggers Shout Down Tampa Bay Town Hall

OK, it's free country, and Cooper is free to seek readers from the HuffPo/MSNBC axis. But I've covered the Tea Party movement pretty extensively and actually met Sal Russo, the former Reagan campaign aide who is accused by Cooper of "whispering play calls," whatever that means.

As a matter of fact, my good friend Barbara Espinosa interviewed Sal Russo in Orlando. Far from being a furtive, nefarious figure, he's a nice guy. I'm sure his skills -- organizing, fundraising, communication, management -- were very helpful to the Tea Party movement.

Why is Russo's involvement being used to insinuate that the protests are not "a genuine grass roots movement"? I've heard the same argument made about FreedomWorks, Americans for Prosperity, Campaign for Liberty and various other free-market organizations that have supported the Tea Party movement.

The Left and Democrats coordinate their activities through scores of individuals and organizations (George Soros, ACORN, SEIU, NARAL, GLSEN, etc.) and any conservative who sees a pattern there is denounced as a conspiracy-theory kook. But let mainstream political organizations on the Right become involved in . . . uh, mainstream politics, and liberals insist there must be something shady going on.

Anyway, thanks for the link, Charles Cooper. If CBS News ever decides to hire anyone who isn't a liberal, please send me a press release. That would be a huge story!

A. They spent everything trying to put in the fix for Charlie Crist in Florida

2009-12-29T20:59:00.002-05:00

Q. Where is the national GOP in the Massachusetts special election?

Well, supposing Ed Morrissey actually wanted an answer to his question, it's obvious enough: The national GOP only spends money in an election when the party establishment sees a Dede Scozzafava-type opportunity to screw over conservatives.

If Scott Brown were a corrupt closet homosexual running against a pro-life conservative with grassroots support, John Cornyn would spend every cent in the NRSC budget in an effort to defeat the conservative.

NOT ONE RED CENT for NRSC!

UPDATE: Leo Pusateri at Blogs for Victory says:

Having just gotten off a blogger conference call with Mr. Brown, I can categorically state that Brown denies any lack of support for his campaign by the RNC. . . .
It would appear that the story from the Boston Herald was designed not to report on the status of, but rather to outright sabotage the momentum of Brown’s Senate campaign.

Pusateri says give directly to Scott Brown's campaign, and who can argue with that?

UPDATE II: Professor William Jacobson details the strong blogger support for Brown.

The Tea Party Express non-scandal

2009-12-29T15:41:00.000-05:00

Zachary Roth of liberal TPM tries to make the relationship between the Tea Party Express and its organizers look sleazy:

The political action committee behind the Tea Party Express (TPE) -- which already has been slammed as inauthentic and corporate-controlled by rival factions in the Tea Party movement -- directed almost two thirds of its spending during a recent reporting period back to the Republican consulting firm that created the PAC in the first place.
Our Country Deserves Better (OCDB) spent around $1.33 million from July through November, according to FEC filings examined by TPMmuckraker. Of that sum, a total of $857,122 went to Sacramento-based GOP political consulting firm Russo, Marsh, and Associates, or people associated with it. . . .

Well, duh. All this means is that the consulting firm used its own personnel, and paid the bills, to organize the Tea Party Express tour -- which, BTW, was a huge success. The people who worked on the tour got a paycheck from Russo Marsh, which functioned somewhat in the same role that the promoter of a rock-music concert tour would do.

There is no scandal here. No crime is alleged, and there is nothing fraudulent or shady involved. TPM is being disingenuous to insinuate otherwise.

Pasadena, Here I Come!

2009-12-29T13:31:00.004-05:00

Just booked my flight to cover next week's BCS Championship Game between the No. 1 Alabama Crimson Tide and whatever second-rate outfit they've scheduled as 'Bama's opponent at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena.

My request for media credentials is still being processed, but I'm sure Gina and Stephanie in the Rose Bowl press relations office will understand the publicity value of my presence at this event, providing neutral objective coverage of the Tide's glorious triumph.

Talked to Donald Douglas of American Power blog about my travel plans, and I understand Little Miss Attila may also be interested in hanging out in Pasadena next week. I haven't booked a hotel yet, so L.A.-area readers interested in having a notorious blogger sleep on your sofa should be sure to drop me an e-mail.

UPDATE: The Tide will be practicing at Orange Coast College in Costa Mesa, which is 52 miles from the Burbank Airport, a 2-hour drive in traffic. So figuring 100 miles round-trip at 20 cents per mile, that's $20 for me to go hang out with the team (and the cheerleaders).

That doesn't include the $7 pack of smokes and coffee (4 cups at $2 per cup = $8) I'll consume on that trip, not to mention $55 a day for a rental car. Just called a hotel in Costa Mesa, and it's $139.40 (including tax) for one night. So if you haven't hit the tip jar yet, here's your chance. Roll Tide!

Ethics, schmethics

2009-12-29T11:03:00.003-05:00

The New York Times is under fire again. Synopsis: Trying to go cheap on a technology and business column, the paper hired a Harvard professor who took a free trip from the 3M company and then wrote about it for her column. This amuses Virginia Postrel, who turned down that same NYT columnist gig:

I am, in fact, ethically ineligible to write about innovation for the NYT.
I occasionally do paid speaking for companies that might conceivably be sources for a column on innovation. (Those speaking engagements generally pay quite a bit better than writing for the Times.) As an old journalism pro, I naturally know enough not to take a speaking gig and then turn it into an article, at least not without getting my editor's OK and disclosing any potential conflict to readers. But that's no longer enough for the Times. Its ethics guidelines now prohibit freelancers from taking honoraria or even travel expenses from anyone who might, in some theoretical future state of the world, be a source.

Read the whole thing. This goes back to my basic beef with the Grand Poobahs of Journalism Ethics. Their standards -- including their hostility to press junkets, free food and other "conflicts of interest" -- always favored the big media outlets, which can afford to pay expenses for travel, meals, etc., that smaller operations can't afford.

Back in the day when big newspapers and magazines were rolling in ad revenue, a staffer for Time or the Washington Post could go where the action was, put the whole thing on his AmEx card and get reimbursed for all expenses. You couldn't do that if you were working for a smaller paper.

The ability to pay correspondents to go trotting off to Rio and Riyadh was a basic element of the prestige of major news organizations, and the Grand Poobahs of Journalism Ethics codified the rules to protect the status quo. A clever racket, and if you let the big boys set the rules, don't be surprised that the rules favor the big boys so decisively that you never get a scoop.

Well, now the big boys' budgets are getting tight, see? And they're discovering that Journalism Ethics was actually a luxury item that they can no longer afford.

Screw 'em. I forfeited all claim to "Journalism Ethics" more than two decades ago, when I was a small-town sportswriter scarfing up all the free chili dogs I could get from the ladies at the Gordon Central High School Band Boosters concession stand. And I recall some good advice from my Old School editors: "Just get the facts right and you're OK."

Or, as I once remarked to Bob Barr, "Ethics, schmethics." We were walking to a seafood restaurant in Orlando called Fish On Fire, and if you think I was going to pay for supper, you're nuts. If I'd been worried about tithing the mint and cumin of "ethics," I wouldn't even have been on that trip. A reporter's job is to get the facts. How I get the facts is my own business, and if the facts are in Orlando, let's not clutter up the story with a lot of "full disclosure" crap about my travel arrangements, OK?

Open mockery of "Journalism Ethics" is not going to win you any friends at the New York Times, but what kind of self-respecting gonzo journalist cares about making friends at the New York Times?

The facts are the facts, and the fact is that the Grand Poobahs of Journalism Ethics have been running a racket for years. Now they're running out of money and having to rely on Harvard professors to do the job, which is a sure sign of desperation.

Meanwhile, it's about time for me to book my flight to Pasadena for the BCS Championship Game -- Roll Tide! -- so please hit the tip jar. While Mrs. Other McCain doesn't worry too much about Journalism Ethics, she is kind of worried about certain neutral objective facts we can't avoid, including the heating bill.

(Via Memeorandum and Professor Glenn Reynolds, who went to law school at Yale, not Harvard, and whose bias against the University of Alabama does not require "full disclosure.")

UPDATE: Just booked my flight for Pasadena, if you're interested.

Bristol Palin seeks full custody; no comment from 'Ricky Hollywood'

2009-12-29T09:20:00.001-05:00

Juicy details about Levi "Sex on Skates" Johnston:

Relations between the Palins and Johnston and his family have frequently been strained since the couple broke off their engagement after their son was born in late December 2008.
Johnston denies in court documents that he has avoided his responsibilities. He is seeking shared custody. . . .
Bristol Palin's custody petition calls Johnston's recent nude photo shoot with Playgirl magazine "risque."
The document also notes that Levi's mother, Sherry Johnston, should not be allowed unsupervised visits with the baby following her drug arrest. Sherry Johnston, who is serving out most of her three-year sentence under home confinement, was sentenced last month on a guilty plea to one count of possession with intent to deliver the painkiller OxyContin.
Palin's custody petition also suggested Levi Johnston may have his own issues with substance abuse, saying he made statements about seeking "weed" on Twitter.
Johnston denies making such a statement, saying the Twitter account "is a fraud" and that he doesn't have an account on the popular online social networking site.

Hey, Bristol, look on the bright side: At least Levi didn't put a knife to your throat. Yet. In a related development, Andrew Sullivan is reportedly seeking custody of Sarah Palin's uterus.

Speaking of gay, if Bristol gets custody, will the judge be investigated for homophobic bias? After all, Levi is so proud to be a gay icon.

Celebrity scumbag update: Charlie Sheen put a knife to her throat, wife says

2009-12-29T08:40:00.000-05:00

What a sweetheart!

Charlie Sheen's wife told police the actor pinned her on a bed, put a knife to her throat and threatened to kill her in a Christmas Day fight in Aspen that began when she said she wanted a divorce.
An arrest warrant affidavit released yesterday quotes Brooke Mueller Sheen as saying that the actor straddled her on the bed with one hand grasping her neck and the other holding the knife. She said Sheen told her, "You better be in fear. If you tell anybody, I'll kill you."
He also warned, "Your mother's money means nothing. I have ex-police I can hire who know how to get the job done and they won't leave any trace," according to the affidavit. . . .

I'm thinking this bit of news might put a kibosh on Charlie's plans to meet with Obama and discuss his 9/11 Truther theories, eh?

Adventures of the Anti-Semitism Czar

2009-12-28T22:25:00.001-05:00

Actually, Hannah Rosenthal is the Anti-Anti-Semitism Czar, according to Jeffrey Goldberg, who finds himself squabbling with Atlantic Monthly colleague Andrew Sullivan:

Why is an American diplomat criticizing a foreign ambassador for his choice of speaking engagements in America? I asked three people who currently work in the State Department if they could recall an instance in which an official of their department ever criticized a foreign ambassador for such a thing -- or for anything -- and they said no. In fact, the State Department is fairly upset at Rosenthal for speaking at all about the alleged political proclivities of a foreign ambassador, not about her specific criticism.

What this is about: Barely a month after being appointed to a State Department post, Rosenthal slammed Israeli ambassador Michael Oren for turning down an invitation to speak to the liberal Jewish group J Street.

Why Sully stuck his nose into this argument: ?????

My suggestion to Jeffrey Goldberg: Ignore Sully. It's a lot easier than you may think.

UPDATE: Sammy at Yid With Lid has background on the Rosenthal dust-up. Anybody surprised to learn that J Street got its start with funding from . . . George Soros?

Armageddon alert? Israelis convene meeting of diplomatic corps

2009-12-28T17:26:00.000-05:00

Readers of Middle East tea leaves will want to pay close attention to Kenny Solomon's post at Red State:

Nothing like this has ever happened before with Israel . . . Sure, they called home an ambassador or two for odd expense accounting, a chief of mission for offending some peace-lover via a newspaper quote and maybe even had real problems with a few of the folks they thought were on the side of their own homeland . . . They even had all European ambassadors back a few times for conferences on the Lisbon thing. Every nation holds "home field" events with their foreign staff members.
But nothing like this meeting that started today . . .

He's talking about a conference now in progress where "Israel's ambassadors and consuls general serving throughout the world will discuss broad diplomatic and strategic issues." Every top Israeli diplomat -- all of them.

That which is unprecedented is never routine and seldom insignificant. If the current unrest in Iran doesn't overthrow the Ahmadinejad regime . . . Well, put it this way: If you're the night watchman at an Iranian nuclear facility, make sure you don't miss a payment on your insurance premiums.

The possibility of an IDF strike in the near future? Perhaps more real than we imagine. I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but when you see something like this, however, the line between paranoid and realistic becomes blurred.

Thanks to my good friend Nathan Cossey for the heads-up.

'Redhead Roundup'

2009-12-28T17:00:00.002-05:00

You know that Lincoln City, Oregon, has got their "targeted marketing" program down to a science when I get an e-mail from the city's Visitor and Convention Bureau informing me that they will host a "Redhead Roundup" Feb. 5-15.

I talked to Nichole Le Sage of the Visitor and Convention Bureau, who explained that "Redhead Roundup" used to be a major annual event in Lincoln City, bringing as many as 60,000 visitors, and now they're bringing it back.

Among other things, they'll have "favorite redheaded celebrity" contest. I'd probably vote for Molly Ringwald, which is not to take anything away from Ann Margaret.

While I'm currently rattling the tip-jar for the Pasadena trip, I'd be willing to consider going to Oregon for "Redhead Roundup," but only on condition that the lovely brunette Mrs. Other McCain got to make the trip, too.

This is a mission too dangerous to do alone. Me? In a town full of redheads? That would be like sending serious conservative commentator Dan Collins to a gathering of cute chubbettes.

UPDATE: Here are front and back of the "Redhead Roundup" promotional postcard sent out by the Lincoln City Visitor and Conventions Bureau:

UPDATE II: Aleister at American Glob calls my attention to a site about Roodharigen, "Redhead Day" in the Dutch city of Breda:

Roodharigen: It's like Mardi Gras for the melanin-deficient!

Roman Polanski 'overwhelmed by . . . messages of support and sympathy'

2009-12-28T12:12:00.001-05:00

Mostly from Charlie Sheen I'd guess:

My dear Bernard-Henri Lévy, what you have said in the Swiss press is true -- I have been overwhelmed by the number of messages of support and sympathy I have received in Winterthur prison, and that I continue to receive here, in my chalet in Gstaad, where I am spending the holidays with my wife and my children. . . .

Nick Gillespie -- whose libertarianism evidently doesn't encompass the right of award-winning film directors to anally rape Qaalude-dosed 13-year-olds -- notes the reaction of the Feminist Majority Foundation: "It's bad a person was raped. But . . ."

Bite Me! Comics Presents: The Green Lizard

2009-12-28T11:05:00.001-05:00

Don't know how I missed this one earlier, but it's brilliant beyond words. A few choice panels:

Meanwhile, Noemie Emery -- say, doesn't "Noemie" sound vaguely Belgian? -- reports on the rise of Johnsonoid mind-reading in the Obama era:

"Hate" is no longer what you do or say, but what a liberal says that you think and projects on to you. You are punished for what someone else claims you were thinking. It hardly makes sense, but it does serve a political purpose. You could call it Secondhand Hate. . . .
Why have a routine tug of war over taxes when you can replay a great moral drama, casting yourselves as the just and the righteous, and your foes as the ignorant and benighted rabble you know in your hearts that they are?

Read the whole thing. Meanwhile, notorious neo-fascist ultra-nationalist Darleen Click sees Obama as a "mood ring" and cites the latest eruption from Andrea Mitchell, comparing Sarah Palin to . . . wait for it . . . George Wallace.

Liberals terrorized by Americans

2009-12-28T08:15:00.002-05:00

My latest American Spectator column:

When Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab tried to detonate an explosive aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on Christmas Day, liberals were quick to warn against the clear and present danger.
It wasn't the threat of al Qaeda-trained bombers blowing up Detroit-bound planes that concerned them. Rather, liberals feared that Americans might blame the Obama administration for failing to protect them from terrorists or -- perhaps even worse -- demand action against the violent extremists who want to kill us all . . .

Read the whole thing. Today, Janet Napolitano admitted that the system failed:

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says the aviation security system failed when a young man on a watch list with a U.S. visa in his pocket and a powerful explosive hidden on his body was allowed to board a fight from Amsterdam to Detroit.
A day after saying the system worked, Napolitano said her words had been taken out of context. She said Monday on NBC's "Today" show that "our system did not work in this instance."

Meanwhile, Napolitano's assertion that this was not "part of anything larger" gets an asterisk in Memphis:

On Christmas Eve, Mohamed Ibrahim was arrested by police in Memphis, TN after allegedly making bomb threats in several local businesses. Witnesses told police that he told them he was a Muslim and that he was starting a jihad.

Robert Spencer sees the Abdulmutallab case as evidence of an epic fail:

Educated at the British International School in Lome, Togo, he was a classic recipient of Western largesse designed to win over the loyalties of Muslims. Yet his encounter with kindly non-Muslim Westerners spending their lives to educate him and his peers did not blunt the fervor of his jihadist fanaticism. . . .

Read the rest.

'2009' out, '2010' in

2009-12-28T04:46:00.000-05:00

by Smitty

JibJab gets their Scott Joplin on, with hilarious results (h/t Political Byline):

Try JibJab Sendables® eCards today!

Don't forget to support Scott Brown for Senate, if you live in Mass. That 19Jan election for Chappaquiddick Ted's Senate seat could prove lively, if the State that started the Revolution cares to remember its bona fides.

Immediately following will be the State of the Union address. Stay tuned to this blog. We'll echo any protest word we hear.

After that, the next major outing of which I'm aware will be the Tea Party Express III, which culminates in Washington DC on Tax Day.

Yeah. Heck yeah.

Celebrity scumbag update

2009-12-27T22:17:00.000-05:00

Charlie Sheen and his third wife are just a couple of lovebirds who had too much holiday cheer:

Charlie Sheen and wife Brooke Mueller are planning to undergo counseling after a heated fight at a dinner party in Aspen, Colo., that landed Charlie in jail on domestic violence charges Friday morning.
"They were fighting at a dinner in a friend’s house and it continued until the next morning," a source close to Mueller tells PEOPLE. "Both of them were drinking and neither was supposed to be. They both have histories of alcohol abuse and have made every effort to stop. But things got out of hand." . . .
The actor's Colorado-based attorney Richard Cummins tells PEOPLE, "They have two children together and they love one another and they’re going to work through what is a difficult time and they’re going to do that together and as privately as possible."

The fact that Charlie is a notorious scumbag who got dumped by Denise Richards? Irrelevant! That time he "accidentally" shot Kelly Preston? Irrelevant! His lifelong habit of hiring hookers? Irrelevant!

The only thing that matters is that Charlie gets $825,000 per episode of his TV show and he and Brooke really love each other.

For people in Hollywood, it's important to pretend that they don't know how this story ends.

Good Jennifer Rubin Analysis

2009-12-27T19:46:00.005-05:00

by Smitty (h/t Ed Driscoll)

Jennifer Rubin makes some good points at Commentary. RTWT, but let me summarize:

...this president showed no inclination or talent to engage in the nitty-gritty business of lawmaking.
...the Obami ran Left, even beyond the tolerance of their own party.
Obama himself did not inspire or persuade the public in the way his followers imagined he would.

The final point about persuasive power is most interesting. The 0th Rule of Alinsky would seem to be "Get the fix in before the opponent catches on."

Nothing in Alinsky's wisdom seems to capture what to do once the target becomes aware they are such. If an Alinsky stage magician is up there doing his thing, but the audience loses faith, things may go pear-shaped:

The loss of faith has been technology-driven. It's too easy to get on YouTube and see clips of Barack Obama contradicting himself over time. On the one hand, an argument can be made that people should modulate ideas as more facts are available. On the other hand, the inability to differentiate between invariant core values that are non-negotiable, like integrity, and the variable details where compromise makes sense, succeeds in demolishing public confidence. That leadership capital is precious, dear, and hard to recoup. Aside: Mr. President, don't leave the Iranian dissidents hanging out to dry. Again.

The loss of faith has been contextually driven. After a century of Progressivism, the country realizes that this Progressive dog don't hunt. Who cares how high-minded the social justice program is? We're financially exhausted. Whatever system you want to implement must first and foremost be a stable one. If our fiscal profile is 'bankrupt', then fixing that has to take priority. Additionally, making the Constitution explicitly include these social justice items will lend them legitimacy. The Progressive dog don't hunt. The dog looks for a government hunting program, with policy and procedure to ensure a fair hunting experience for the whole world. Yet that never arrives.

Is it possible for Barack to restore the faith? Is this Administration doomed to another three years of Greek tragedy? Unfortunately, yes. Even if BHO drifted so far Left as to achieve an Austrian breakthrough, he can't do it convincingly enough to
(a) survive the retribution of his backers,
(b) convince sufficient numbers on the right that he's serious.

No, the prediction from The Porch, sad though it will be, is that there will be further political delaying tactics in early 2010, followed by a raucous campaign, culminating in an electoral Cannae for the Democratic Party in November 2010. At that point, Barack will become a bitter, clinging little bobble-head, and continue to blame Bush and raaaaacism for his agenda's impotence.

The strategic question is whether the country learns anything from this. Occasionally people assert the United States is a Christian nation. Christians purportedly adhere to the Bible, i.e. both testaments. Yet where is our grasp of this:

Only if thou carefully hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all these commandments which I command thee this day.
For the LORD thy God blesseth thee, as he promised thee: and thou shalt lend unto many nations, but thou shalt not borrow; and thou shalt reign over many nations, but they shall not reign over thee.
Deuteronomy 15:5,6

If the budget deficit, and the national debt it feeds, are not The Issue of the century, then Barack's inability to "inspire or persuade the public" really don't matter. The Progressives can just throw another series of bodies into the Oval Office, continue to jack up the debt, and let's see where that leads us. Metaphorically, we will all be bricklayers working on a large pyramid of debt.

Update: Related Dan Riehl: "Does America Have A President Right Now?"

For better or worse, our best and most notable presidents tend to be leaders. They tend to be out front, not simply for the cameras, but on the difficult questions and issues of the day. One can fault former President Bush all they want, some criticism is fair, but one could never question where, ultimately, the buck stopped. We all knew it stopped with him. With Obama, it sometimes seems as if we're chasing him down for a bad loan.

Sorry, Dan. We've another three year slog ahead, and that bad loan is called our national debt.

Another Lutheran Belgian Nigerian arrested aboard Detroit-bound plane UPDATE: 'Nonserious,' FBI says

2009-12-27T15:00:00.002-05:00

Probably just a random coincidence:

A second Nigerian man was been taken into custody aboard a jetliner in Detroit after locking himself in the airliner's bathroom, The Associated Press reported.
A law enforcement official told the AP that the incident took place aboard the same Northwest flight that was attacked on Christmas Day.

But remember there is "no indication that it is part of anything larger," according to Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Red Noses and Floppy Shoes. Meanwhile, Michelle Malkin takes a close look at the myth of the "poor oppressed terrorist victim."

UPDATE: Reuters reports the second Nigerian passenger appears to have been merely ill:

The man went to the bathroom repeatedly and did not respond to flight attendants' direction an hour before landing.
"The Joint Terrorism Task Force investigated and the investigation shows that this is a nonserious incident and all is clear at this point," said Detroit FBI spokeswoman Sandra Berchtolv.

Meanwhile, Ivana Trump's reign of terror continues.

Malkin vindicated: 'Lone nut card' played by Napolitano in NWA terror case

2009-12-27T12:52:00.004-05:00

When Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was arrested after attempting to detonate an explosive aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253, Michelle Malkin ended her Christmas Day post with a prediction:

Victim card/lone nut card in 3, 2, 1 . . .

The administration has evidently decided to go with the "lone nut" angle:

The U.S. has "no indication" that an attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight was part of a larger plot by a terrorist group, a top Obama administration official said.
"Right now we have no indication that it is part of anything larger, but obviously the investigation continues," Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said on CNN's "State of the Union" program on Sunday.

Right. But what of the connections to al-Qaeda in Yemen?

Authorities say the 23-year-old suspect spent months in Yemen being trained for the Christmas Day suicide mission.
Investigators believe Abdulmutallab was connected to al Qaeda by the same radical imam, American-born Anwar Awlaki, who is linked to the American Army major accused of opening fire at Fort Hood in November.
According to investigators, the bomb . . . was built in Yemen by a top al Qaeda bomb maker. . . .

This is incompatible with Napolitano's claim on CNN that this was not "part of anything larger." One cannot train with al-Qaeda under the influence of a radical imam, and utilize an exploisve designed by al-Qaeda, without being part of something larger.

So far, I've seen no evidence of the "victim card" being played on behalf of Abdulmutallab, but this Associated Press biographical profile of the suspect portrays him as having had a "saintly aura" as a student in England. Give the media time, though. Their best spinmeisters are still on holiday.

UPDATE: Further evidence (as if we needed more) that Janet Napolitano is a useless dimwit:

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said that the thwarting of the attempt to blow up the Amsterdam-Detroit flight this week demonstrated that "the system worked."
Asked by CNN's Candy Crowley on "State of the Union" how that could be possible when the young Nigerian who sought to set off the bomb was able to smuggle explosive liquid onto the flight, Napolitano responded: "We're asking the same questions.”
Napolitano added that there was "no suggestion that [the bomber] was improperly screened."

(Hat-tip: Blogmocracy 2.0.) If failure to keep a bomber off a plane means "the system worked," then obviously this means no changes to the system are necessary, right? Wrong. The al-Qaeda-trained "lone nut" has just given the Transportation Security Administration the excuse it needed to make commercial air travel even more miserable. My libertarian friend Radley Balko observes:

TSA will apparently adopt a new policy prohibiting passengers from moving during the last hour of a flight. Also, no pillows or blankets during that last hour.
In addition to keeping with its usually tradition of making policy on a reactionary basis, this one wouldn’t even have done anything to prevent the attempt over the weekend.

No doubt, the TSA will also enhance its policy of conducting random searches of elderly women from rural Minnesota in order to prevent CAIR from accusing them of "profiling."

TSA: Protecting You From Olga Swenson!

UPDATE II: Ed Morrissey calls this Napolitano's "Chip Diller moment," and Mary Katharine Ham Tweets:

"The system worked." Jasper Schuringa is "the system," apparently.

The "bring your own Dutchman" approach to airline safety.

UPDATE III: And now The Boss weighs in on the clueless nitwit in charge of DHS:

Beginning with her embrace of the impotent euphemism "man-caused disasters" to the hit job on conservatives and veterans that she was forced to apologize for, to her assertion that crossing the border illegally "isn't a crime per se," to her boneheaded claim that 9/11 terrorists came in through the Canadian border, Ja-No has confirmed time and again that she's not ready for prime time.

Yes, but you've got to give Janet Napolitano credit for preventing terrorist attacks by those right-wing extremists, not to mention her perfect record against the Olga Swenson menace. Just imagine what carnage might have been wrought by elderly Lutheran ladies, if not for the vigilance of DHS!

UPDATE IV: Another anti-terror success for TSA:

Police say Ivana Trump has been escorted off a plane in Florida after she became belligerent when children were running and screaming in the aisles.
Authorities say the first ex-wife of billionaire Donald Trump cursed at the children Saturday, and when flight attendants on the New York-bound plane tried to calm her, she became even more aggravated.

No word yet on whether Ivana's attack was part of a larger terrorist conspiracy by rich divorcees.

Rule 5 Sunday

2009-12-27T09:13:00.002-05:00

by Smitty

Rule 5 Sunday, (my Senator is a) Ho Ho Ho Edition. Actually, we're eschewing politics here. The man of the day is Jasper Schuringa, who may not have actually saved the Amsterdam-Detroit flight per se, but rather demonstrated the kind of un-Progressive derring-do to which all should aspire.

Atlas Shrugs had the first Jasper Schuringa pic in my Google Reader. That guy is wired for life.
Rule 5 madman Bob Belvedere is owed an apology. He dutifully sent in his FMJRA links, but the clone bots managing the Inbox whisked his FMJRA links to the Rule 5 label, to be discovered late Saturday night by an abashed Smitty. Technology is a many-edged suppository.
The Blogprof leads off the somber Rule 5 remembrance of Brittany Murphy,
Left Coast Rebel had follow-up on the poor waif.
Makes My Brain Itch serves up some Pamela Anderson Action, as well as fuax-nekkid protesters.
That's Right has a mystery Tea Party babe, along with others, but hopes some of our regular readers can help. This challenge recalls a Love and Rockets track:

Yankee Phil links to a clip for plus-sized beauty contest. Obligatory AC/DC.
Dustbury exposes the darker side of the Danica cult, and has important Kylie Minogue reporting.
House of Eratosthenes gives us a target for all of the new firearms Santa delivered: mantyhose. Back to the Alphabet of Beauty, this week's installment includes Torrey DeVitto and Urmila Matadonkar.
Troglopundit kept up with other Danica news.
Three Beers Later had a Denise Milani video, and another Juliana Moreira installment. He reaches back for Dorothy Malone.
Manolo the Shoe Blogger featured Judy Garland.
Proof Positive found some Lucy Pinder.
Fischersville Mike featured Colts cheerleader Sara.
Jeffords reports that Katee Sackhoff joins "24".
Power Line had Kristin Chenoweth.
A Conservative Shemale featured Brad Pitt and Catherine Zeta Jones. From Wikipedia: "Zeta-Jones is married to actor Michael Douglas, sharing the same birthday, making him exactly 25 years her senior. She claims that when they met, he used the line 'I'd like to father your children.'" Rule 5 regrets the delay in passing on this critical information. Try this the next time you're single and beset with such beauty. The 1st Amendment should still keep most of us out of prison.
Paco Enterprises features Lane Truesdale singing the popular ‘40s novelty song, “Who’s Yehudi?”
The Classic Liberal coaxes from Linsday Loah an explanation of inflation.
Trainwife1962 brings Jon Voight, as both George Washington and the Pope. Versatile actor, Jon.
Here's My Thing submitted several: Rose McGowan, tennis girls, Christina/MJ Hart/Mariah, Hilary Duff, [NSFW] Kate Hudson.
Smash Mouth Politics features Lauren Graham, for all I despise that Bad Santa flick. The only nice thing I can say is that, like Pulp Fiction, its title represents truth in labeling.
Makes My Brain Itch has the scoop on Keira Knightley.
Serr8d's Cutting Edge brings you the photoshop lesson featuring Stormy Daniels.
Gahrie's Grumbles and Groans takes Rule 5 where it has never gone before: World of Warcraft. No wedgies, dudes: this is a friendly post.
Point of a Gun brings the Fox News babes. Rule 5 envies Bill O'Reilly every time he gets chewed out by Megyn Kelly.

That's your Rule 5 wrap. Until next Sunday, keep it lovely, people.

The Financial Rape Will Continue...

2009-12-26T23:35:00.001-05:00

by Smitty (h/t Hot Air)

...until the 10th Amendment is interpreted to preclude Federal involvement with individual citizens, e.g. through mortgages.

The only surprise about the Federal thuggery in lifting the Fannie/Freddie caps is that anyone is surprised. Power will be (ab)used.

States should be a blast shield between the Federal beast and citizens. Both citizens and the Federal beast should watch the states.

Political candidates making bleating noises about "reforming" Fanny and Freddie will be ridiculed remorselessly. These Federal vampires need nothing less than stakes in their hearts.

Even at the one year mark, he nailed the decade

2009-12-26T21:47:00.005-05:00

by Smitty

President Obama as Prevaricator of the Year? Don't sell the man short. In my opinion he's blown by his predecessor with flying pastel rainbow colors.

But I wouldn't say BHO thinks himself a liar. Allow me to paraphrase a review of al-Sahaf, emphasis mine:

"In an age of spin, [BHO] offers feeling and authenticity. His message is consistent -- unshakeable, in fact, no matter the evidence -- but he commands daily attention by his on-the-spot, invective-rich variations on the theme. His lunatic counterfactual art is more appealing than the banal awfulness of the Reliable Sources. He is a Method actor in a production that will close in a couple of days. He stands superior to truth."

-- Jean-Pierre McGarrigle

Another Black Conservative Unmoved By Kwanzaa

2009-12-26T20:50:00.000-05:00

by Smitty

ABC just doesn't seem keen on the idea:

In my entire life I have only known one black person who celebrated Kwanzaa. She was a teacher of African American studies and a flaming liberal. Although born and raised in Atlanta like her folks, this young lady fell hook line and sinker for the whole Kwanzaa is African scam.

Seasonal Traffic Suckage Syndrome leads to Shameless Tip-Jar Rattling Disorder

2009-12-26T19:19:00.000-05:00

One of the obvious reasons for doing the changeover to the WordPress site during the holidays is that blog traffic sucks this time of year, so time spent on the changeover doesn't really subtract from the overall blog ecology. What's the point of doing a dozen posts on Christmas Day, if nobody's reading it anyway?

For similar reasons, some bloggers don't blog much on weekends -- when blog readership decreases by 30% or more -- but we've never really observed that custom here. Smitty reports that a relative paucity of Rule 2 linkage made for a much shorter FMJRA this week, which is to be expected, although we hope there won't be a similar shortage of babe-blogging for Rule 5 Sunday.

One of the things about Seasonal Traffic Suckage Syndrome (STSS) is not to take it personally. Traffic here is demonstrably down for December -- currently about 160K visits for the month, after four consecutive months of >220K -- but when compared year-to-year, we've gained about 80% over December 2008. And so you have to have a certain amount of perspective when you realize that on Christmas Day we recorded our worst weekday traffic in recent memory.

Because routine headline+link+snark formula blogging would be kind of a waste of time during the holidays, I've taken advantage of the situation to do some long-form stuff. First there was "Don't Fear the People," a retrospective on my coverage of the populist grassroots revival -- the first substantive post at the new site -- and then there was today's post about Washington's Christmas crossing of the Delaware.

Another thing to do during periods of slow traffic is to blog about totally silly stuff, like the Christmas Day arrest of celebrity scumbag Charlie Sheen. Why not? Do you really expect us to constantly monitor Memeorandum for the latest breaking news on the Nigerian terrorist? On a day when we're averaging less than 200 visits an hour?

Let's face it: We could post a completely random photo of an impressively endowed chubby chick -- hey, more to love -- and not get any complaints, because nobody's reading us this weekend anyway. (Folks, don't worry that we're corrupting your kids. If your teenage son got a computer for Christmas, do you really think he'll be cruising political blogs for chubbettes?)

Would a serious political commentator -- say, for example, Dan Collins -- link something so irresponsibly exploitative as a post with photos of random topless fat chicks? Of course he would. Because at least it's fun, and if traffic sucks anyway, you might as well have fun.

However, there are more useful things bloggers can do with the readerless holiday hours when we're afflicted with Seasonal Traffic Suckage Syndrome (STSS). Therefore, while Smitty toils away on the technical geekery of the WordPress changeover, I've been writing thank-you e-mails to the tip-jar hitters.

We're about halfway to our $2,000 goal for the Pasadena trip, which was a double-dog-dare-ya scheme promoted by Dan Collins. As I said at the time, I didn't think I could possibly rattle the tip-jar hard enough to make this trip happen and yet . . .

Well, as of yesterday, 34 people had hit the tip jar for an average of $30 each during December. And today I got a Christmas card from Barbara Espinosa of American Freedom blog, with a gift incentive for the trip. I checked Travelocity and can make a flight to LAX departing next weekend for about $450 if I booked it today.

Mrs. Other McCain is, of course, worried about the bills. If I make this trip, will it clear enough cash to break even and still pay the bills? Does that 1990 photo of Mrs. Other McCain looking hot in her bikini encourage you to ease her mind with an extra $10 or $20? Would you rather see more photos of fat chicks? Is anybody actually reading this?

The point is, I can roll either way: Fat chicks, celebrity scumbags, historical inspiration, or up-to-the minute breaking news about John Kerry and other terrorists. But I don't want to have to choose between (a) paying the bills and (b) going to Pasadena to provide neutral, objective coverage of the Alabama Crimson Tide's spectacular triumph in the BCS Championship.

As I explained to one of the tip-jar hitters in an e-mail exchange, I'm planning to take a look at the tip jar situation Monday before booking my flight, probably departing Jan. 2 or 3. Every little bit will help me convince Mrs. Other McCain that this is ~~a good idea~~ not evidence of incipient psychosis.

Maybe you're feeling that Roll Tide spirit to the tune of $20. Or maybe you just figure it would be worth $10 to read about me racing around Southern California in a rental car, interviewing hawwwtt University of Alabama cheerleaders and buying $7 gin-and-tonics for Little Miss Attila during Happy Hour at one of her favorite L.A. dive bars.

Fear and Loathing in Pasadena could be the wildest scene since I covered the Libertarian Party national convention in Denver last year. Surely the true story of Rose Bowl decadence and debauchery has got to be worth $5 to readers who have nothing better to do this weekend than to read a political blog.

Carol at No Sheeples Here is also an Alabama fan trying to hustle her way to Pasadena, so if you've already hit my tip jar, you should think about throwing Carol some action, too. Besides, if I help her make it Pasadena, maybe I can get her to do a free logo for the new WordPress site -- with or without naked fat chicks. 'Cause I can roll either way . . .

Just hit the tip jar!

Britney and K-Fed, then Jon and Kate, now . . . Ace and Allah splitsville?

2009-12-26T18:35:00.000-05:00

Little Miss Attila brings us rumors of the latest celebrity breakup. Before Christmas, Ace of Spades trashed Mitch McConnell as a sellout bastard. Allahpundit responded with a contemptuous sneer.

Next: Ace loads up to .13 on Valu-Rite vodka, gets slapped around like Mrs. Charlie Sheen. Then Allahpundit hires publicist Stan Rosenfield to say, in effect, "that bitch Ace deserved it."

Fake hate and C-SPAN trolls

2009-12-26T13:51:00.001-05:00

Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit and HotAir Pundit have a great story about an anti-GOP hoax caller to C-SPAN, demonstrated in this fascinating video:

Reaganite Republican shows that this is part of a pattern, relating it to the story of Chris Parry of the Vancouver Sun, who smeared Free Republic by similar tactics.

Charlie Sheen is out of jail

2009-12-26T12:27:00.001-05:00

And doesn't that worry you, America?

Charlie Sheen has now been released from Pitkin County Jail, according to Aspen Police. He posted an $8,500 bond (with standard domestic violence bond conditions) and was released Friday night at about 7 p.m. . . .
The 44-year-old star of Two and a Half Men spent most of Friday in jail after being arrested on domestic violence charges following a 911 call at 8:34 a.m. Friday. The victim’s name still has not been released.

If there's one reason Tiger Woods isn't really in the running for the World's Biggest Loser Award, it's Charlie Sheen.

Here's a guy with all the advantages -- rich, good-looking, famous name -- who is a complete failure in his personal life. He got dumped by Denise Richards because of his porn habit. The conventions of journalism require me to say alleged porn habit, but let's be honest here.

We're talking about Charlie Sheen, who by his own sworn testimony spent much of his 20s banging Heidi Fleiss's Hollywood hookers. He is a notorious poonhound, in the habit of changing women as often as most guys change their socks, and even being married to a fabulous hottie like Denise Richards couldn't change his ways.

When a guy gets used to treating women as disposable commodities, we really shouldn't be surprised that he seeks out trashy women and treats them like crap:

RadarOnline.com reported that Sheen tried to choke his wife, Brooke Mueller, who was renting an Aspen home for about three months while Sheen remained in Los Angeles.
Sheen flew to be with his wife on Christmas despite their differences, and they began arguing right away, the site reported.
But TMZ reported that Mueller was legally drunk -- registering a .13 blood-alcohol level -- while Sheen registered a .04 on tests conducted by police.
Sheen's publicist Stan Rosenfield released a statement saying, "It would benefit everyone not to jump to any conclusion."
The two married last year, and this year Mueller gave birth to twin boys
Sheen was arrested in 1996 and charged with attacking a girlfriend at his home. He pleaded no contest and was placed on two years' probation.

See the pattern here? It's the Rake's Progress. Having botched his marriage to Denise Richards -- who seemed like a relatively decent human being, by Hollywood standards -- Charlie's next wife is the kind of woman who blows a .13 Breathalyzer test on Christmas Day.

Charlie has no respect for his wife, and who can blame him? We're talking about a woman with such low self-esteem that she married Charlie Sheen. She hates herself, or else she wouldn't be with him, and we aren't really surprised to learn she decided to spend Christmas Day drinking herself into a violent stupor in her Aspen exile.

Charlie Sheen is just a rich, famous loser.

UPDATE: Let we forget, Charlie is a lefty who likes to impart his political wisdom for our benefit:

He has also said that the 9-11 terrorist attack was an inside job, and wants President Obama to further investigate.

Famous loser, famous liberal -- the only real difference between Charlie Sheen and Michael Moore is about 200 pounds of ugly fat.

What a load of bunk

2009-12-26T12:01:00.002-05:00

by Smitty (h/t TigerHawk)

TigerHawk notes Andrew Breitbart's FaceBook status. As a result of the apparent botched terrorist attack yesterday, Breitbart notes, that:

Based upon my NPR listening sessions, I am fearful that reactionary Americans are going to go on a rampage against Nigerians tomorrow.

How many more non-recriminations do we require to get the American people off the hook?

I just discovered the other day while shoveling snow that the new next-door-neighbor is from Nigeria. He actually seemed the decent chap you would expect.

Thanks, NPR. Nothing makes me happier than paying via my taxes for wholly unfounded accusations.

Festivus 'Mas Joy Rings Around

2009-12-26T10:52:00.003-05:00

by Smitty

It's that time of the year when we celebrate our traditions in ways that hopefully don't alienate everyone else.
All of those readers with lives have been too busy to post or link us as much as we like, but we love them nonetheless.

The Nebraska Compromise:
As negative as everyone is about the whole steamer, except the lefty portion of the 111th Congressional Circus, its parade of bad ideas may not be over.

Jules Crittenden linked the Sobriety Cat post in a roundup.
The Classic Liberal picked up the Cheap Whore post.

We Don't Seriously Foresee the Union Disintegrating, but We're Closer to Such an Event:

South Texian picked up the Texas secession post about Ladd Ehlinger, with a technical correction.
Paco Enterprises joined the Sheldon Whitehouse foe club.
Jumping in Pools thinks that Texas cannot secede, but Montana Can. At a certain point, as with the Declaration of Independence, it's really not about what a piece of paper says, but rather about what you do.

Get Stacy That Malkin Award!
He's still in the running for [whatever it means] who lacks a radio and TV show.

The Sundries Shack has us wired. Vote now, vote Stacy.

Congratulations to Clan McCain Over Kennedy's Engagement Pour In:

Obi's Sister said 'Hi'.

Yes, The Other McCain is in Transition:
Stacy and I continue to make delightfully uncoordinated progress in a positive direction.

The Classic Liberal notes our efforts.
SI VIS PACEM also noted the motion.
Dustbury opines:
Not that I have any particular complaints about WordPress, which we’ve been using here now for over a year with little difficulty. But it seems to me that McCain, who specializes in high-value, low-cost reporting, really belongs on Blogger, which is to blogging what Walmart is to retail: you might claim to hate it yourself, but a lot of your friends like it just fine. (Or maybe you need new friends. Your mileage may vary.)

About Those Goreflakes:

Political Byline noted the hammering of Maryland.

Girl Culture:

Wombat Rampant gave us a shout while relating an occurrence similar to the Protein Wisdom/Patterico thing which is apparently, hopefully, finally, running out of gas.
American Power has also been dealing with its variation on the theme. Donald Douglas also noted Stacy while examining anti-Hamsherism. he then followed up with "A Theory of Racist Smears and the Case of Robert Stacy McCain". All I can say is that the notoriety looks better on him than me.
Stogie links us while asking "Is Charles Johnson (of LGF) a Transvestite Cross-Dresser?" Can I please retain my ignorance?
Rhetorican picked up Stacy's AmSpec piece about a possible Hamsher move to the right.

Other FMJRA outings:

The Seven Figure Club:

American Power reached one megahit. Keep up the good work, Donald!
The BlogProf linked us while congratulating DD.

Miscellaneous:

American Glob just laughed at my attempt to defend Harry Reid.
Stogie proved a non-fan of Jason Raimondo
Paco notes us in passing while congratulating Jim Treacher. He also noted the Dave Brooks flambé.

Enjoy the respite, everyone. Gather your strength. If 2010 is any weirder than 2009, we'll all be needing it.

'I think the game is pretty near up'

2009-12-26T02:39:00.001-05:00

The American army was defeated. Outnumbered and demoralized, the ragged soldiers had only escaped complete destruction by a desperate retreat. Some of the troops had deserted, and others we threatening to leave when their enlistments expired.

George Washington's patriot army had been beaten badly in the Battle of Long Island in August 1776, suffering more than 1,300 casualties before Washington could evacuate his troops to Manhattan. But the British commander, William Howe, had followed that by once more defeating the Americans at White Plains in October and again at Fort Washington in November, and Washington was forced to abandon New York.

Retreating across New Jersey, with Howe's Redcoats in pursuit, the only hope for the Americans was to reach Pennsylvania, putting the Delaware River between them and the enemy. Merely to accomplish this retreat was a difficult task. Heavy autumn rains fell, turning the dirt roads to quagmires. Teams of men and horses struggled to pull the army's artillery and wagons through the deep mud.

Yet even if they could escape the pursuing British, there was little hope the Americans could reverse the disasters that had befallen their cause in the five months since they had declared their independence. Many of the volunteer troops under Washington's command had signed up for short-term enlistments, which would expire at the end of the year. It was this gloomy prospect that caused Thomas Paine to write:

These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.

Many more desperate hours lay ahead in the long struggle for American independence, but as fall turned to winter in 1776, it seemed that the flame of liberty was doomed to flicker out forever. One depressed officer wrote home to a relative, "I think the game is pretty near up."

However, as long as there was anything left to fight with -- and anything to fight for -- George Washington would fight. And no sooner had he withdrawn his army into Pennsylvania than Washington began planning what remains arguably the most daring attack in American military history.

Howe believed, quite reasonably, that the colonial rebels had been so badly beated that they would go into winter quarters in Pennsylvania. So the British commander withdrew his main force to New York, and left a string of garrisons to keep an eye on Washington's battered army.

With only 2,400 men fit for duty, Washington issued three days rations and collected every boat available. At 3 p.m. on Christmas Day, the troops gathered on the banks of the Delaware River and prepared for the crossing. The river was icy. Sleet and snow began falling as the troops embarked. It took nearly 12 hours -- until 3 a.m. on December 26 -- to get the entire force across.

The watchword that night was "Victory or Death," and Washington showed his grim determination that morning during the pre-dawn march to Trenton. Maj. Gen. John Sullivan sent a courier to report Sullivan's concern that his men's gunpowder had become wet due to the storm. Washington replied to the courier: "Tell General Sullivan to use the bayonet. I am resolved to take Trenton."

Take it, he did. Shortly after daybreak, Washington's army attacked Trenton, overwhelming the garrison of Hessian mercenaries, cutting off their retreat and capturing nearly 900. Washington followed up, a little more than a week later, with another brilliant victory at Princeton, inflicting 450 casualties on the British.

This surprising reversal of fortune -- a beaten army that rallied to victory -- was a major turning point in the war. Although Trenton and Princeton were relatively minor battles in terms of the numbers engaged on each side, they gave hope to the patriot cause.

And whatever became of that depressed officer, who in a mood of despair wrote home that he feared "the game is pretty near up"?

Well, he went on to a quite remarkable career, both in the military and in politics. You see, that officer's name was none other than George Washington.

'Trust the people'

2009-12-25T22:44:00.001-05:00

"We who live in free market societies believe that growth, prosperity and ultimately human fulfillment, are created from the bottom up, not the government down. Only when the human spirit is allowed to invent and create, only when individuals are given a personal stake in deciding economic policies and benefiting from their success -- only then can societies remain economically alive, dynamic, progressive, and free. Trust the people. This is the one irrefutable lesson of the entire postwar period contradicting the notion that rigid government controls are essential to economic development."
-- Ronald Reagan, Sept. 29, 1981

Thanks to Noel for reminding us of Reagan's words in a comment on "Don't Fear the People," about the Tea Party movement and the rise of the populist "tsunami" at the new WordPress version of the site.

Videos: Christmas Morning

2009-12-25T15:41:00.000-05:00

Six kids plus our daughter's fiance' -- kind of hectic at The Other McCain household this morning.

Kennedy bought Rock Band for her siblings. In the second video, you'll hear me saying, "He'll see it." The 17-year-old twins Bob and Jim found a cool mini-bike at a yard sale, bought it and fixed it up for their 11-year-old brother, Jefferson. The mini-bike was in the kitchen, and Jeff hadn't seen it yet. It's not on video because the kitchen was a mess, and Mrs. Other McCain wouldn't let me video in there.

Merry Christmas to everyone!

Your Democratic Party Gift

2009-12-25T12:33:00.002-05:00

by Smitty

Krauthammer's take (I suppose this is Fox All Stars) is perhaps too tactical:

The problem is this: The Democrats over-read the mandate in the election of '08. They assumed it was for great change of American social policy and making America into a kind of European social democracy -- radical changes in health care, energy, and in education.

That was not what happened in '08. It was rejection of the Bush administration, a weariness of war, and the rejection of an administration at a time of economic collapse. It was nothing more. They [the Democrats] overreached. They have tried to push a centrist country to the left, and [therefore] they're going to lose a lot of seats in the November election.

I submit that, strategically, the Progressives are realizing that the national debt and technology are combining to make a mockery of the notion of vast power in the hands of few. We increasingly realize that the man behind the curtain is an emperor in the buff. They sort of grasp that, after expending tremendous resources in 2006 and 2008, they'd reached a now-or-never (or at least not soon) moment. The national debt situation, media control, mood and personalities will likely never be better for a full-on European statist coup in this country.

Thus, the Democratic party's over-reach is a left-handed gift of liberty, if we keep up the pressure and face the ugly realities that reform will entail.

In the nearer term, Merry Christmas from The Porch. I'm panhandling for gifts, as well. Please take a moment and stuff the Inbox stocking with URLs for tomorrow's FMJRA.

Merry Christmas!

2009-12-25T06:33:00.000-05:00

And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger. And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
-- Luke 2:8-14 (KJV)

Populist tsunami: Don't fear the people

2009-12-24T14:30:00.003-05:00

Pundette highlights this quote from Peter Wehner:

The populist, anti-Washington wave out there, which is already quite large, will only grow, and grow, and grow.

Peter Wehner. Does that name ring a bell? If you're a Glenn Beck fan, it certainly should. When a well-connected Bush administration insider like Wehner starts celebrating a populist "wave" that he and his Beltway GOP cronies had nothing to do with, it's time to remember how this all got started, and who made it happen:

The thing about a populist wave is that anybody can ride it, even the snobs who sneer at the people who made the tsunami happen. And I don't mean famous people like Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin. I mean Donna Scala of Beaver Falls, Pa., and Kell Gringa of Charlotte, N.C. I mean Rhonda Lee Welsch of New Smyrna Beach, Fla., Jenny Beth Martin of Atlanta, Ga., and Andrea Shea King of Cape Canaveral, Fla.
These are just a few of the Ordinary Americans I’ve met during the course of my travels over the past few months, people whose individual activism helped turn widespread public discontent into an organized movement that even Beltway Establishment elitists like Peter Wehner can no longer ignore. There are hundreds of thousands of you out there, far more numerous -- and ultimately far more important -- than the Washington insiders who look down their well-connected noses at you. . . .

That's posted over at RSMcCain.com, the new WordPress version of the blog that Smitty and I are trying to get ready for launch next month. The current sucky look of the new site is temporary, but the true history of this populist tsunami is something we need to make permanent, so please read the whole thing.

Merry Christmas to everyone, especially the people who hit the tip jar during this holiday season!

UPDATE: Michelle Malkin was stuck in an airport when the Senate finally passed ObamaCare, but appeared last night on Fox News to talk about how this swindle of the American taxpayers is part of the Culture of Corruption:

Michelle has consistently sided with the people against the bipartisan Big Government trend and she gets prominent mention in the "tsunami" post, so once more, please read the whole thing.

State AG communication: much good can come of this

2009-12-24T14:26:00.003-05:00

by Smitty

Ali Akbar on pointed me to Matt Lewis' post "Letter from Senators Graham & DeMint on Medicaid deals". The Nebraska Compromise for Senator Nelson is under fire.

My source indicates the attorney general has begun speaking with his colleagues from across the country, and plans to establish a working group of attorneys general to look into what action can be taken.

I realize it's unprecedented, but would it not be fantastic if such state-level AG collaboration evolved into a full-on Article V cram-down of truly Federalist proportions? The existential threat of the $12T+ debt and the quasi-parliamentary rule of this atrocious Congress make getting 35 States together for some house cleaning rather attractive. The possibilities for restoring sane, responsible, limited government are well worth the effort required to bring it to pass.

Bonus read: Senator Tom Coburn. May Fortune smile on that man.

Harry Reid's crooked math

2009-12-24T11:39:00.000-05:00

Jimmie Bise explains that the Senate health-care deal's cost projections were bogus, based on double-counting planned "savings" in Medicare.

If the federal government is actually capable of wringing $500 billion of "waste, fraud and abuse" out of Medicare, why not do that first?

Show us the "savings," and then we'll talk.

A slowing trend is not a 'reversal'

2009-12-24T11:01:00.000-05:00

noting that the recession has slowed migration to the Sunbelt, The New York Times gets it wrong:

More broadly, however, the recession that began in 2007 has significantly slowed the great American migration toward warmth and sun. It was a move, earlier in the decade, driven as much by quality of life as easy credit, according to demographers and economists. But the reversal is nearly as striking.

There has been no "reversal." Nevada and Florida have had a net outflow of residents in this recession, but the general trend -- population shifting southward and westward from the Northeast and Upper Midwest "Rust Belt" -- continues. Can't the people at the New York Times even read a press release?

Wyoming showed the largest percentage growth: its population climbed 2.12 percent to 544,270 between July 1, 2008, and July 1, 2009. Utah was next largest, growing 2.10 percent to 2.8 million. Texas ranked third, as its population climbed 1.97 percent to 24.8 million, with Colorado next (1.81 percent to 5 million).
The only three states to lose population over the period were Michigan (-0.33 percent), Maine (-0.11 percent) and Rhode Island (-0.03 percent). The latter two states had small population changes.

So if Michigan, Maine and Rhode Island are losing population, while Wyoming, Texas and Colorado are gaining, the alleged "reversal" of the trend is non-existent.

McCaskill draws 100 protesters

2009-12-24T10:30:00.000-05:00

Dana Loesch explains the outrage:

The overwhelming majority of Missouri (and national) voters oppose Harry Reid’s senate fauxcare bill, yet McCaskill is eager to play the part of the rubber stamp and help pass it in the senate -- and even complains about having to do so on Christmas. This is what she wanted!

This is what happens when people in Congress view their job as representing Washington special interests, rather than representing their constituents.

Intellectual fanboy David Brooks

2009-12-24T09:51:00.000-05:00

When he tries to talk about economics, he sounds even more like a clown than usual:

Economic change is fomenting intellectual change. When the economy was about stuff, economics resembled physics. When it's about ideas, economics comes to resemble psychology.

The economy is still about stuff, just as the economy was always about ideas. McCormick's reaper and Morse's telegraph were both ideas before they became stuff.

The Brooksian tendency toward breathlessness -- he's read yet another "important new book" about a subject he doesn't actually understand -- is balanced by his habitual petulance, as when he complains about economists being "excessively individualistic and rationalistic." He seems to be boning up on intellectual trends among economists to "get a complete view of where the debate is headed."

But "where the debate is headed" is not the same thing as where the economy is headed. Brooks prattles on like a Star Trek fanboy, a spectator getting a vicarious thrill. When you get through reading his column, you don't really know anything about his ostensible subject, Arnold Kling and Nick Schulz's new book, From Poverty to Prosperity. It may indeed be important, but Brooks' column does a piss-poor job of explaining why.

Contrast this, just for example, with Joseph Lawler's discussion of unemployment in the January issue of the American Spectator. Lawler explains that the "jobless recovery" problem is due mainly to the fact that recent changes in our economy are not cyclical, but structural, requiring the shifting of workers from one labor sector to another. In many cases, this will require that workers relocate, and policies that encourage them to stay put -- collecting unemployment in their hometown, waiting for something to come along after the local factory closes down -- actually make matters worse.

Lawler's discussion is lucid and informative, because he's actually trying to explain a real phenomenon, rather than playing the intellectual fanboy game.

One less Democratic voter

2009-12-24T09:14:00.001-05:00

Da Tech Guy's mother -- an 85-year-old lifelong Democrat from Massachusetts -- just declared she's going to city hall to re-register as a Republican because of this shabby health-care deal.

Speaking of hopeless geeks, check the legal beagles

2009-12-24T02:49:00.001-05:00

by Smitty

In my mis-spent youth, I used to think that there was a direct relationship between wisdom and rank. By the time you make Admiral, you must be admirable.

Later I realized that 'everything is easy, when you know how to do it'.

Currently, I'm realizing that 'most things that are apparently hard have been obfuscated by somebody with a business model to protect'.

The U.S. Constitution, as written and amended, is one of those things that isn't terribly magical. Read Amar's book. My takeaway is that the more Progressive your read of the Constitution, the less your feet are touching bottom. If the legal theories can't be explained in a straightforward way to a child, then there may be too much abstraction afoot.

In light of the recent Constitutional flap about Obamacare, Volokh has been a good read, up to this point. But I fear they may have blown a gasket over there discussing Orin Kerr's post "The Myth of an Expert Consensus on the Constitutionality of Anything":

Richard Epstein says:
Orin’s post is unconstitutional.

December 23, 2009, 7:24 pm

Orin Kerr says:
Richard Epstein is unconstitutional. So there!

December 23, 2009, 7:26 pm

Richard Epstein says:
Only if one accepts an untenably expansive view of the Commerce Clause can Orin be correct that my very existence is in gross violation of our Nation’s fundamental charter.

December 23, 2009, 7:33 pm

We will test these legal theories about ObamaCare in just over 10 months. The opinion from the American people will be a "No" with a four letter prefix starting with "F". My prediction for the Democratic Party is well stated by the G3, with a rare Satriani vocal:

(Satch sounds like Steve Miller, and has obviously spend more time honing the fingers than the vocal chords.)

The bummer about the election being this soon is that they'll not flip enough Democrats in the House to the Republican party for the Wicked Witch of the West to loser her position as speaker. Probably for the best. The schadenfreude backlash would leave a steep death toll amongst conservative political junkies.

Proof that MSNBC is not a business

2009-12-24T00:10:00.000-05:00

Say what you will about the pro-Republican bias of Fox News, the network is at least profitable, its commerical success evidence that there is a market for conservative news. MSNBC's ratings suck, chiefly because its programming decisions are transparently political rather than commercial.

In June, MSNBC debuted a mid-day medical show featuring Dr. Nancy Snyderman, who relentlessly shilled on behalf of the Democrats' health-care legislation (including taxpayer-funded abortion). "Dr. Nancy" got cancelled yesterday, and Ken Shepherd of Newsbusters remarks:

I can't help but thinking that Snyderman's program outlived its usefulness for MSNBC. Why else did Snyderman get to anchor an hour-long program but to push ObamaCare, supposedly with the gravitas that an M.D. can lend to the health care issue by virtue of profession alone.
Now that the bill is set to pass the Senate, Snyderman's program is of little marginal benefit to pushing the network's political agenda, particularly since she's a proven ratings loser.

Perfect proof that MSNBC's programming decisions are strictly a function of the Democratic Party's political agenda. And when the agenda focus shifts? Hasta la vista, Dr. Nancy!

It is so friggin' ON!

2009-12-24T00:09:00.000-05:00

by Smitty

Westwood Tea Party hosts: "It's Time For a Second Declaration of Independence!"

Calling all red blooded, Patriotic Americans!

It's time for another march on Washington DC.

On the date of the State of the Union address, January 20, 2010.

On this day, a joint session of Congress, the President of the United States, his entire cabinet, the Supreme Court and the Joint Chiefs of Staff...plus distinguished guests will be in attendance.

You want media coverage? All major broadcast and cable networks will be there to broadcast the event.

This is the most strategically advantageous opportunity for Patriotic Americans to hold a demonstration against an out of control government that's trashing our Constitution.

This march needs to dwarf the size of the crowd that showed up on 9/12/2009. We need to surround the Capitol Building.

Who's sick and tired of being ignored?

It's time for a second Declaration of Independence!

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

It's time for us to tell these Marxist bastards that we don't consent to what they're doing, and we therefore no longer recognize them as the legitimate government of We the People!

I'd further suggest that people make their own signs just saying "YOU LIE".

A specific goal of this outing could be to have a "you lie" chant during the speech that is sufficiently loud to be heard inside the Capitol during the SOU.

Might take a bunch of seriously irate Americans to achieve such a feat. I wonder if this is possible.

You might be a hopeless geek if . . .

2009-12-23T14:21:00.001-05:00

Having earlier noted Ross Douthat's waste of 773 words on Avatar, now I see National Review's Michael Potemra wasting words on something even more trivial:

I have over the past couple of months been watching DVDs of Star Trek: The Next Generation . . .

Potemra's conclusions about the values exemplified in the show -- which he subsequently elaborated -- evoke scoffing from the Left: Kevin Drum at Mother Jones weighs in, as does Steve Benen of Washington Monthly.

Yet they miss the more important point: Dude, Star Trek?

Of all the things you could do with your leisure hours, you're sitting around watching a sci-fi soap opera? Brittany Murphy is dead, Steven Tyler is in rehab, Tiger Woods is sailing to the Bahamas, and I'm a finalist for the Malkin Award.

All of these important news developments are happening here and now, in real time in the real world -- and you're debating the political significance of Captain Picard's imaginary adventures in the 24th century?

Some people need to get their priorities straight.

(Via Memeorandum and WeSmirch.)

UPDATE: Evidence of Potemra's blunder:

It must be nice to have a philosophy that thinks Jar-Jar Binks was a good idea.

When Pandagon gets to use a line like that against you, it's time to re-think the sci-fi fanboy trip.

Justin Raimondo is cool

2009-12-23T11:01:00.000-05:00

Libertarians of the Rothbardian type can be annoying, but they're usually annoying in colorful ways. If you spend much time in libertarian circles, you grow weary of the More Libertarian Than Thou gamesmanship. Rothbardians are not immune to this tendency, but they're seldom as humorlessly puritanical as, say, the hard-core Objectivists.

Justin Raimondo of Antiwar.com is a good example of this. He is a free-speech absolutist with a mirthful disdain of political correctness, and a consistent foe of the Welfare-Warfare State. This generally aligns him (and most other Rothbardians) with paleoconservatives: People of the Right who don't have much use for the GOP mainstream (cf., Bill Kauffman).

However, in his 2009 annual awards, Raimondo takes aim at the Spengler-type doomsaying tendency of some paleoconservatives:

The old ways are gone, and nothing can bring them back, they keen: we’re doomed! Doomed, I tell you! And no one of this tribe is gloomier than Daniel Larison, the Eeyore of the paleo-right.

Exactly. Larison's posture of radical despair amounts to nothing less than an argument for political inertia and irrelevance.

From what we might call the Larisonian perspective, the modern world -- and especially the average Republican voter -- is so hopelessly degenerate that no one who might possibly obtain political power could do anything to repair the breach. This is the politics of auto-marginalization, less of an ideology than a mood disorder.

However doomed we may actually be, persistent negativity is a self-fulfilling prophecy: "Can't never could," as my father always said. And even my neocon friends -- attention Pamela Geller -- can benefit by reading the rest of Justin Raimondo's column.

Repeal the 17th Amendment. Nuke the Federal Reserve.

2009-12-23T06:15:00.006-05:00

by Smitty (h/t Patriot Room)

The 17th Amendment's short-circuit of the chain of command, combined with the Federal Reserve's Cosmic Credit Card, are ruinous:

At first, Mr. Nelson defended his Medicaid buy-off as a service to his constituents, two-thirds of whom tell pollsters they oppose the overall bill. But the lucre was denounced by Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman and Republican Senator Mike Johanns.

"Nebraskans don't want a special deal," said Mr. Johanns. "The special deal for Nevada was wrong, the carve-outs for Louisiana, Vermont, and Massachusetts are wrong, and the same applies to the backroom deal for Nebraska. All of the special deals should be removed. If the bill cannot pass without carve-outs, what further evidence is needed that it is bad policy?"

The Senator should represent the interests of the individual State, and the funding for entitlements should be derived from a level of government exhibiting fiscal sobriety.

Entitlement programs that are not funded from a balanced budget are simply theft. It's a game of musical chairs where the participants, across time, stand still and rip the chair from the hands of the next generation.

This is an not an argument that there would be less corruption without Amendment 17. No, if you could measure it, the net corruption would be equal. However, instead of a positive feedback loop:

And, sure enough, Mr. Nelson admitted yesterday amid a defensive near-meltdown on the Senate floor that "Three Senators came up to me just now on the [Senate] floor and said, 'Now we understand what you did. We'll be seeking this funding too.'" Mr. Nelson now says "it's not a special deal for Nebraska. It is in fact an opportunity to get rid of an unfunded federal mandate."

...keeping the corruption at a State level would spare 95% of the country from outbursts of Nelsonism, and, possibly, allow federal oversight to review processes.

The vampire that is the Federal Reserve desperately needs a stake in the heart. However, the combination of the 17th Amendment and the Federal Reserve has us on the ropes. The Federal debt alcoholic will not give up the bottle. It will just keep chugging until the public liver explodes.

The Progressive Left seems to think this situation all jolly good. The Progressive Right joins in mute support of the problem. I would like to see Senator DeMint speak out for something along the lines of the Federalism Amendment. The status quo is an unsustainable crock of compost. While I applaud and support the tactical efforts with the Congress at hand, the strategic vacuum grows depressing.

Progressivism will wait, undead totalitarian zombie that it is, until the Tea Parties run out of gas, and just continue the economic warfare of using debt to kill this country. If the Tea Parties don't gel around reform ideas that remove the systemic drivers that have put us in this full Nelson, then the signs and the yelling and the blog posts and the slogans were all fun, but really just so many dying gasps of democracy.

Update: Blogprof, "We are now functioning under a parliamentary form of government"

Update II: Andy McCarthy says it well:

The Dems have already factored in that likelihood and are betting — over the long haul — that even if the GOP cuts deeply into Dem majorities or takes over Congress (and even takes over the White House in 2012), Republicans will lack the commitment (and perhaps the numbers) to roll back what the Left is accomplishing now.

That is, our guys are focused myopically on a battle the Democrats have already figured they can afford to lose. The real battle is: What do you do when you get back in power? Do you have a plan for how to undo what is being done? Do you frame the coming elections in a way that converts victory into a mandate not only to stop what Obama is doing but to undo what he has done?

I'm hearing a lot from our side about making big gains in the upcoming elections. That's not strategy or victory. You have to have a plan for what those gains would translate into. Democrats, by contrast, have a real plan for how what they're doing today will sustain Big Government, and themselves, over the long term, regardless of occasional electoral losses.

No kidding. Swapping out names is moot. If you haven't explained the strategy for restoring the three-branch/three-tier government, you haven't explained much. The Progressive GOP must destroy itself to preserve itself.

Failing that, let's just have a national Prozac entitlement. This 'Brave New World' is not why I have served my country these years.

Update III: Having said all that, Moe Lane rocks.

Have a ranting Christmas

2009-12-23T04:49:00.000-05:00

Julian Sanchez proves my point, not his. But I'm not in a mood to argue at length, for to do so would be as foolishly wasteful as a New York Times op-ed columnist devoting 773 words to the theological implications of Avatar.

Merry Christmas, Julian. (And in case you didn't hear, the science is settled: Avatar sucks.)

Palin as litmus test?

2009-12-23T00:56:00.000-05:00

Or perhaps Rorshach test would be the more accurate term. Pro-Palin blogger Joseph Sheppard argues that Sarah Palin's conservative admirers should, as a general policy, ignore anti-Palin bloggers.

Such a policy is wise where it is possible, and preferable to eternal flame-wars. And I say this not merely about the pro-Palin/anti-Palin feud, but as a general principle: If something irritates you, try to avoid it.

Take, as an example, Neil Young. His voice is lousy and he's a mediocre songwriter. As a guitarist, he's not bad, but not good enough to compensate for his deficits, especially as a singer, where he rivals Gordon Lightfoot for the Most Annoying Canadian Vocalist Lifetime Achievment Award. Therefore, whenever Neil Young comes on the radio, I change the station.

But there are occasions when I find myself trapped in a situation -- e.g., old buddies invite me to a dive bar with a jukebox -- where the avoidance strategy is impracticable, and the results can be tragic. Some idiot will drop a dollar in the jukebox and play "Ohio," and I find myself fighting the urge to begin loudly praising the National Guard and shouting imprecations against "hippie peacenik scum."

Is it just politics? No. Jackson Browne is somewhere left of Lenin, but he's a fine singer-songwriter. "Doctor My Eyes" and "The Load Out" are deservedly classics. Green Day are outright Marxists, but "Boulevard of Broken Dreams" is nevertheless a catchy tune. R.E.M. are also generally a left-wing outfit, yet they make marvelous music.

No, Neil Young sucks. And if you disagree, we'll just have to avoid talking about it, because you'll only aggravate me. Same thing with Ann Coulter being a Deadhead, or Smitty's inexplicable affection for '80s metal. De gustibus non est disputandum.

Sarah Palin is a potential contender for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. That fact should not be turning conservative friends into bitter enemies more than two years ahead of the 2012 Iowa caucus.

If you're a Palin fan and the very mention of Rick Moran makes the veins in your neck stand out, stop reading Rick Moran. If you're Andrew Sullivan and the very mention of Sarah Palin makes you start ranting like a madman . . . Well, I don't know. Smoke some dope or something.

Stop obsessing. Chill.

At any rate, Joseph Sheppard has made a useful suggestion. And don't get me started on Neil Young.

What are we on about for the State of the Union on 20Jan?

2009-12-22T18:10:00.004-05:00

by Smitty

Yeah, yeah: Christmas/Hanukkah/Quonset. I know. However, That's Right just tweeted me about the National Strike being called, concurrent with the State of the Union on 20Jan.

Also, not to put her on the spot or anything, but I've contacted another infamous "right wing extremist" sort of person who was at the Kill the Bill rally before the Cash for Cloture vote, to see if she's cooking up any sort of group love note for the good POTUS.

I, for one, think a few thousand patriots on the Mall with hand made signs all saying "YOU LIE" would be a message simple enough for even a slack-jawed Lefty.

ASIDE: the Wordpress changeover is in progress. Apologies in advance if some comments get orphaned. This blog's XML download is fat enough to be mistaken for...nah, picking on a woman whose name rhymes with Nosy Modonell would be beneath the dignity of this blog. We're waaay to classy for that sort of cheap shot, except on days ending in the letter 'y'.

Update: Insta-lanch
If you're needing a belly laugh, try:

OediPOTUS Wrecks

Waiting for O-Dough

Czar d'Oz

'Anti-science and anti-gay'

2009-12-22T15:13:00.000-05:00

Science and gayness go naturally together, see?

Why I Left the Right, Exhibit P for Pawlenty
Newsweek has an interview with Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, the very model of a modern GOP candidate, considered by many as a possible front runner for the Presidency in 2012: Anti-science and anti-gay.

What follows from that Charles Johnson introduction are quotes from Pawlenty's Newsweek interview, including this:

Well, you know I’m an evangelical Christian. I believe that God created everything and that he is who he says he was. The Bible says that he created man and woman; it doesn’t say that he created an amoeba and then they evolved into man and woman. But there are a lot of theologians who say that the ideas of evolution and creationism aren’t necessarily inconsistent; that he could have "created" human beings over time.

Tto which Johnson responds:

Pawlenty has no problem with teaching creationism as science, but he wants to protect children from cross-dressing elementary school teachers, whether they actually exist or not. And he wants to make sure that gay couples don't receive medical benefits -- a position he's reversed as the GOP has moved farther and farther to the right.

But the GOP has not "moved . . . right" on this issue. Was the Republican Party more in favor of same-sex marriage benefits (or cross-dressing school teachers) in 2004? Or 1994? Or 1984?

Certainly Charles Johnson is not the only one peddling this "hijacked by extremists" myth about the GOP -- Frank Schaeffer seems to be making a career of it -- but it simply doesn't square with the facts.

What's really more interesting about the Newsweek interview is why the reporter felt the need to interrogate Pawlenty about his religious beliefs. Maybe they want to be extra-careful for 2012, after getting burned on that Jeremiah Wright deal last time around . . .

How about a Department of Moon Pies?

2009-12-22T13:47:00.000-05:00

Fortunately, Harry Reid didn't need to bribe any Red State bubbas into voting for cloture, dashing our dream of a Department of Moon Pies. However, thanks to efforts of Illinois Sen. Roland Burris, the bill does create separate "Offices of Minority Health" in six separate health care agencies.

Look on the bright side: What kind of crap would be in the bill if Rod Blagojevich had gotten that Senate seat?

Sucky 3-D sci-fi flick = Oscar-bait?

2009-12-22T12:14:00.001-05:00

The science is settled: Avatar sucks. Don't tell that to Hollywood, though: It could get nine Oscar nominations!

Speaking of awards, don't forget to vote for me in the 2009 Malkin Awards. Last time I checked, I was in second place behind Glenn Beck.

'What. The. Hell.'

2009-12-22T11:57:00.000-05:00

Michelle Malkin reacts to the ObamaCare "provision requiring insurance plans that cover dependents to provide benefits to children up to age 26."

Twenty-six. Think about that. If you're 18 and really serious about getting health-care coverage, here's a suggestion: Join the Marine Corps.

Not only will the Marines provide you with health care, but you also get free food, free housing, free clothing and free travel to exotic countries where you can actually get paid to kill foreigners.

How cool is that, dude? Not to mention, chicks dig that whole muscular-guy-in-a-uniform thing.

So turn off your gaming console, get your lazy butt off the sofa, go to your nearest Marine Corps recruiting station and sign up today. If the taxpayers are going to give you slackers free health-care, at least you should earn it the old-fashioned way: Killing foreigners.

Now the bad news: We're not at war with Canada. Yet.

P.S.: Don't forget to vote for me in the 2009 Malkin Awards.

'Natural causes'? Ri-iiight

2009-12-22T11:06:00.000-05:00

Not since Elvis died while under the care of "Dr. Nick" has any celebrity's death been so suspicious as that of 32-year-old Brittany Murphy:

A shocking number of strong prescription meds were found on Brittany Murphy's bedroom nightstand before her sudden Dec. 20 death, according to notes from an investigator with the Los Angeles coroner's office.
According to the notes (obtained by TMZ.com), the medications included Topamax (anti-seizure meds also to prevent migraines), Methylprednisolone (anti-inflammatory), Fluoxetine (depression med), Klonopin (anxiety med), Carbamazepine (treats Diabetic symptoms and is also a bipolar med), Ativan (anxiety med), Vicoprofen (pain reliever), Propranolol (hypertension, used to prevent heart attacks), Biaxin (antibiotic), Hydrocodone (pain med) and miscellaneous vitamins. . . .
The notes state Murphy "had been complaining of shortness of breath and severe abdominal pain" for 7 to 10 days prior to her death. . . .

"Death by medicine" is not as rare as some would have you believe. A pill for this, a pill for that, pills to deal with side effects of other pills -- pretty soon, your system becomes so distorted by the chemical intake that it's hard to tell what's really wrong with you, if anything.

The question now is whether Brittany Murphy had any disease other than hypochondria.

Britain's anti-clitoris crime wave

2009-12-22T10:10:00.002-05:00

Prepare to be completely creeped out:

Hundreds of British schoolgirls are facing the terrifying prospect of female genital mutilation (FGM) over the Christmas holidays as experts warn the practice continues to flourish across the country. Parents typically take their daughters back to their country of origin for FGM during school holidays, but The Independent on Sunday has been told that "cutters" are being flown to the UK to carry out the mutilation at "parties" involving up to 20 girls to save money.
The police face growing criticism for failing to prosecute a single person for carrying out FGM in 25 years; new legislation from 2003 which prohibits taking a girl overseas for FGM has also failed to secure a conviction. . . .

"Cultural sensitivity" vs. the good kind of sensitivity? No need to tell you which side of that issue I'm on.

Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugged is also adamantly pro-clitoris. Perhaps President Obama will appoint a Clitoris Czar to lead U.S. efforts against genital mutilation. I hereby nominate Mark Steyn.

(Via Memeorandum.)

UPDATE: Commenter Elizabeth:

Who honestly thinks that this would be tolerated if someone was mutilating the genitals of little white girls?

Indeed. The Independent notes:

An estimated 70,000 women living in the UK have undergone FGM, and 20,000 girls remain at risk, according to Forward. The practice is common in 28 African countries, including Somalia, Sudan and Nigeria, as well as some Middle Eastern and Asian countries such as Malaysia and Yemen.

This is one of those situations whre "cultural sensitivity" becomes a synonym for racism.

Birthers, fanatics, right-wing militias . . .

2009-12-22T09:52:00.000-05:00

. . . and the Buffalo News editorial page:

Health reform was supposed to rein in the explosive costs of health care in this country, deliver better results and cover more people. It was always going to be difficult, but it wasn't impossible.
Instead, under current plans, Americans are likely to get a bill that drives unsustainable costs even higher, does not completely solve the problem of the uninsured and does little to improve the quality of medicine. And it won't kick in until as late as 2014. But taxes, mainly on the wealthy, would go up pronto.
This was supposed to be the moment for health care reform but, much as it pains us to say it, President Obama and Congress -- Democrats and Republicans -- have badly missed the opportunity. They need to start over. . . .
The problem is that this bill isn't even half a loaf. Not only is it insufficient, but it will almost certainly create a costly worse result. . . .

Maybe the Buffalo News is one of those "Aryan support groups" Sheldon Whitehouse warned us about.

Below his pay grade, I suppose

2009-12-22T08:41:00.000-05:00

Once you've been mayor of New York and run for president, the Senate is definitely a step down.

This is a perfect opportunity to poke more fun at all those sophisticated people who, in 2006-07, argued in all apparent seriousness that Rudy Giuliani could win the GOP presidential nomination. Dude spent $59 million and got . . . what?

Genius strategy: Bet the whole wad on Florida and finish third. Ron Paul got more delegates, which wasn't really that hard, seeing as how Rudy's delegate count was zero.

Exit question: What loser will Allahpundit support in 2012?

Decades Later...

2009-12-22T08:04:00.000-05:00

by Smitty (h/t Miss Cellania)

Decades later, surrounded by his goth grandchildren, Stacy could only look at the brood and know that his co-blogger, Smitty, was somehow responsible . . .

In Defense of Harry Reid

2009-12-21T22:21:00.004-05:00

by Smitty

Look, don't go picking on Harry just because he traded some horses to get his way. You may have thought that the Information Age would bring some wild blooming of transparency, integrity, mom, and apple pie.

It did nothing of the sort.

We now have the results of Way Too Much Power sitting in DC. It's been a century brewing, and your perfect storm of debt, incumbency, and incompetence has us all in a tizzy.

Harry Reid did very little that was particularly new or outrageous. Don't hate the playuh, hate the game. Hate it at your Tea Party. Hate it while you attend CPAC2010. Hate it while you write in Instapundit for POTUS, with Stacy McCain as VP. And me as 1st Porch Manqué.

Update: Stuff like this (email tip Rob Tornoe):

is completely unacceptable. Stop, or I will say 'Stop' again!

2009 Malkin Awards: I'm a FINALIST!

2009-12-21T20:46:00.001-05:00

Andrew Sullivan has nominated me four times for the prestigious "Malkin Award" and now I see that I am a finalist for the 2009 Malkin. The competition is tough -- I'm up against Erick Erickson, Michael Goldfarb and Glenn Beck, among other worthies -- but let's be honest: None of them can compete with the Greatest Hypothetical Evah!

"Swear to God, if they ever want a Gentile prime minister, my first order would be to deploy the IDF in a north-south line, facing east. My second order would be 'forward march' and the order to halt would not be given until it was time for the troops to rinse their bayonets in the Jordan. After a brief rest halt, the order 'about face' would be given, and the next halt would be at the Mediterranean coast."

Sully later made that hypothetical hyperbole the basis of accusing me of advocating genocide(!?!), which of course I was not. Peaceful by nature, I grew up a few miles from the ruins of New Manchester Mill -- burned by Stoneman's cavalry in 1864 -- and therefore have always had a keen understanding of what war really means (cf., Hiroshima).

Fatah, Hamas and Hezbollah recognize only one definition of "peace": Dead Jews. So when they start blowing up buses and firing rockets at civilians, these terrorist monsters are sending out an invitation to war, and they can't complain about getting an RSVP from the IDF.

Notice that this perspective doesn't require playing moral referee between Jews and Palestinians, or settling the historical grievances between them. Nevertheless, we cannot ignore the reality that more than 60 years after Israel declared its independence, her terrorist enemies don't even recognize Israel's right to existence, and endlessly foment hatred against Jews. Ergo, Sonny Corleone in Gaza.

However, you don't have to share my idiosyncratic view of geopolitics to vote for me in the Malkin Awards competition. Any accusation of bloodthirsty warmongering based on that particular quote is invalid under that widely recognized codicil of the Blog Ethics Code known as the Glenn Greenwald Rule:

Anything said while ridiculing Glenn Greenwald is OK, because he always deserves it.

Hurry up and vote for me in the Malkin Awards, and be sure to hit my tip jar, because you wouldn't want to get on the wrong side of Genesis 12:3.

Resolved: Barrett Brown is a putz

2009-12-21T19:15:00.001-05:00

Having noticed an earlier mention, the spokesman for The Godless Coalition e-mails to deny being an Avatar fan and added an "offer" to debate, to which I replied:

"Offer"? As if you were the soul of generosity, and I in need of your philanthropy. Do your work, do it well, collect your pay and knock it off with the humanitarian posturing. You've never done an unselfish act in your life, and by pretending otherwise, you undermine your own credibility. Better to be honestly selfish than to be falsely charitable.

As to the title of this post: William F. Buckley was once invited to debate British feminist Germaine Greer at the Oxford Union, but after an exhausting series of trans-Atlantic communications, they were unable to agree on the proposition to be debated. Finally, his patience exhausted by the annoyance, Buckley cabled back this offer: "Resolved: Give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile."

Barrett Brown and I have nothing to "debate." In October, while I was working on the Sparkman story in Kentucky, he jumped on the LGF bandwagon. He has since promised to include an entire chapter about me in his forthcoming book. This would be a bizarre non sequitur in a volume evidently otherwise devoted to assailing various prominent pro-Israel pundits -- Charles Krauthammer, Marty Peretz, etc. -- which is why I suggested his publisher rename the book, People That Barrett Brown Doesn't Like (Mainly Jews).

My friends are my friends and my job is my job. Which explains why, however harmful the effort of Charles Johnson and others to hang labels on me, there is no flinch reflex on my part. Because I don't flinch at their accusations, as they are accustomed to seeing people do in such circumstances, they become enraged and vengeful, misrepresenting my response (or non-response, whichever the case may be) as some sort of admission.

What this game comes down to, as any disinterested observer discerns, is a question of authority, their status as accuser. Whatever harm they do to me is mere collateral damage in their campaign of ambitious vanity, as they seek to enhance their own reputations at my expense. (Did I mention "vanity"? Yeah: Barrett's obviously got a Google-alert on his name, so he'll read this, too.)

As long as there is work I can do, I'll do it, even if I have to go back to driving a forklift (which was what I was doing before I landed my first newspaper job). Readers who wish to see me continue blogging should hit the tip jar.

Sheldon Whitehouse gets a memo from the Dept. of We Can Fact-Check Your Ass

2009-12-21T16:28:00.002-05:00

Kerry Pickett of The Washington Times does the kind of journalism conservatives supposedly don't do:

Video from Hot Air where Ed Morrissey has much more. Excuse me for saying that this elevated my mood from bleak despair to ecstatic hope.

Once I heard a preacher talk about the "God of the Valleys." When we are on top of the mountain, it is easy to suppose that our achievements are the result of our own excellence. But it is in that dark valley -- where we feel doomed and hopeless -- that we learn the true meaning of faith.

After you've cried out for help in the darkness of that valley, make a vow that if you should ever get to that sunny mountaintop, you will remember the God of the valleys, who delivered you from destruction when all seemed lost.

Most people won't see the relevance of that sermon to this Whitehouse video, but some people will. Remember: "It is history that teaches us to hope."

UPDATE: By way of exegesis, I worked for hours yesterday transcribing excerpts of Whitehouse's remarks and Jon Kyl's rebuttal. A congressional source had gotten me a rush transcript written in ALL CAPS, which meant that, in order to provide the text, I had to retype it all myself.

Tough work, but somebody's got to do it. Then I caught an hour's nap, so that I could file an 850-word column for the American Spectator immediately after the 1 a.m. cloture vote. Then I put up a post in the Hot Air Greenroom and a post here, linking both the Spectator column and the Greenroom post. All the while, I relentlessly promoted my work via Twitter and e-mail.

So you can imagine what a crushing embarrassment it was to discover that Ed Morrissey didn't even bother to link me in his 10:12 a.m. post at Hot Air. All that work, for nothing, you see? Add this terrible personal humilation -- "Why does Ed Morrissey hate me?" -- to the depressing reality of the 60-40 cloture vote, and I was feeling lower than a snake's belly.

Not only that, but a paycheck I'd expected in the mail didn't show up today, and the tip-jar contributions have slowed to zero the past two days, putting the Pasadena trip in jeopardy -- to say nothing of the fact that I can't even afford to buy my wife a Christmas gift.

Total and complete failure.

And then I saw Kerry's video, a hopeful omen at a moment of utter despair. "Angels unawares."

Meanwhile my blog buddy Jim Treacher just got a new job, and we congratulate him on his good fortune.

(Do you reckon ObamaCare will buy me dentures after I grind my teeth down to the gums?)

Christmas at the Other McCain home

2009-12-21T10:19:00.001-05:00

Our three youngest -- Jefferson, Emerson and Reagan -- help Mrs. Other McCain decorate the tree:

The video was recorded late Saturday afternoon, which is the subject of Reagan's comment at the end. Barring a miracle (hey, I could get lucky, maybe even tonight) seven-year-old Reagan will be the only one of our six children without a baby brother or sister. So we're hoping that the future Mrs. Nestares will provide Reagan with a niece or nephew in a couple of years.

How Not to Review a Movie

2009-12-21T09:52:00.000-05:00

Sunday, it was established by consensus -- because no sane man would argue with Debbie Schlussel -- that Avatar sucks. The science is settled. And yet liberals aren't content to leave it at that:

Annalee Newitz writes that "[w]hether Avatar is racist is a matter of debate," but it isn't: the film is racist. Its fundamental narrative logic is racist: it transposes the cultural politics of Westerns (in which the Native Americans are animists who belong to a more primitive race) onto an interplanetary conflict and then assuages the white guilt that accompanies acts of racial and cultural genocide by having a white man save the noble savages (who are also racists). . . .

Why bother deconstructing the racial subtext of a crappy 3-D sci-fi movie? It's like pondering the cultural significance of Scooby-Doo, or doing your Ph.D. dissertation on feminist themes as embodied by Veronica and Betty in "Archie" comics.

Don't you people have lives? Speaking of which, I'm told that Barrett Brown loved Avatar. Not that he's a racist. But he does suck. Be sure to look for his book, People That Barrett Brown Doesn't Like (Mainly Jews), coming soon to a clearance bin near you.

(Via Memeorandum.)

He serves, she sacrifices

2009-12-21T07:36:00.000-05:00

Christmas in Saudi Arabia? Air Force Maj. Steven Givler writes to Carol at No Sheeples Here:

If anyone deserves thanks (and a pension) it is my wife, who has served our country just as much as I. As she sometimes reminds me, I get to run around, see interesting places and practice my Arabic. She gets to stay home, fix bicycle tires, cook meals, and keep our house from falling down. I don’t know how she does it. . . .

You should read the whole thing.

'It's astounding. Time is fleeting . . .'

2009-12-21T05:29:00.004-05:00

". . . Madness takes its toll":

To Sen. [Sheldon] Whitehouse, "the rational pursuit of our well-being and safety" means ramming through a 2,000-page health-care bill before Christmas, by any means necessary, so that President Obama will have a major accomplishment to celebrate in his State of the Union Address next month. That is perfectly rational, according to Sen. Whitehouse and the Democrats, and therefore it is crazy to oppose them. . . .

That's from my Hot Air Greenroom post, which references the Rocky Horror Health Care Debate and links my latest American Spectator column:

Even before the Senate voted on cloture, the Democrats' health-care legislation was already delivering benefits in the form of a free mental-health screening delivered by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse: If you oppose this bill, you're a dangerous nut.
Such was the essence of Sunday's floor speech in which the junior senator from Rhode Island quoted at length from Richard Hofstadter's 1965 classic, The Paranoid Style in American Politics and offered it as a diagnosis of the health bill's opponents.
Whitehouse paraphrased Hofstadter's thesis, warning of "the dangers of an aggrieved right-wing minority with the power to create what [Hofstadter] called a political climate in which the rational pursuit of our well-being and safety would become impossible." . . .

Read the whole thing. I'm not exactly sure why those old lyrics from "The Time Warp" popped into my head in the wee hours. Probably because Sheldon Whitehouse is right: I'm crazy.

But you already knew that, didn't you? It's a pre-existing condition! We're all going to get free health care! And if you believe that, you're crazier than me . . .

UPDATE: Reaganite Republican:

You know, it takes one hell of a lot of nerve to ram deeply-unpopular spending down our throats . . . then engage in character assasination when we finally speak-up about it.

Yid With Lid is also on the case, linking Kerry Pickett, who actually interviewed the Yalie yutz:

I approached Senator Whitehouse following his speech on the floor, and his responses to my questions were puzzling, to say the say the least. Mr. Whitehouse said he stood by his speech, but would not admit that he was accusing anyone who was against the health care bill as racist. He did reiterate that birthers are part of the group that is against the bill and are attacking president.

Supporters of the bill include the SEIU thugs who beat up Kenneth Gladney, but nobody's blaming Sen. Whitehouse for that. Maybe they should.

More at Memeorandum., including commentary by Mark Steyn and Erick Erickson.

Little Late for Bleating, Senator McCain

2009-12-21T05:16:00.004-05:00

by Smitty (h/t Nice Deb)

Senator McCain: shut up!

The time to confront the Federal dragon was at the point where somebody empowered the Federal government to do this sort of crap. That was 100 years ago. We're coming up on the 100th anniversary of the 16th & 17th Amendments and the Federal Reserve act.

OK, props for the John Paul Jones reference. I guess you'd been sleeping below decks while decided it moral to have massive Federal debt, oh, your Entire Political Career, SIR.

If the goals of the "Not Yet Begun to Fight" movement are to scale back Federal power, then the fight is worth joining. Otherwise the bleating amounts to a fart in a thunderstorm, Senator.

Those 60 Senators who voted for cloture, including fellow USNA grad Jim Webb, may as well have been voting for their personal impeachment. That is how those 60 should be treated at the ballot box. I'm sure they figure we shall have forgotten, amidst the follow-on atrocities of this Congress.

And, if the people we have on the ballot in 2010 and 2012 are just another set of tools, gears and cogs to throw into the machine, then these 60 are correct: they're just doing their job. They are mere components in the machine. They will get consulting jobs, academic chairs, and think tank perches in support of the next 60 to follow.

Senator McCain, if you're sincere, and not merely offering a sop to the people whose Constitution has become a joke over the last century, a healthy chunk of which you've been an insider, then BE the John Paul Jones. Offer the insight, name the names. The sun has set on the genteel past of the Senate.

Forget the Bonhomme Richard. Here is an arguably more accurate image of the situation since the 2008 election:

Real leadership is going to entail as much sacrifice as you offered in Vietnam, Senator McCain. During the campaign, you still sounded the consummate insider. You could start by repudiating that insider shtick, and embracing Federalism.

If you rather sound like another beltway tool, then your rhetoric is mere bleating, Senator McCain. Which is why you didn't win the election.

Update: American Glob: "Liberty Died While You Slept"

Update II: HillBuzz: "Question of the Day: Is America Worth Fighting For?"

Democrat Senator says Nazi-like Republicans 'ruined' Christmas

2009-12-20T18:50:00.002-05:00

Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) is a piece of work:

"Far from appealing to the better angels of our nature, too many colleagues are embarked on a desperate no-holds-barred mission of propaganda, obstruction and fear. History cautions us of the excesses to which these malignant, vindictive passions can ultimately lead. Tumbrils have rolled through taunting crowds, broken glass has sparkled in darkened streets. Strange fruit has hung from Southern trees. Even this great institution of government that we share has cowered before a tail-gunner waving secret lists. . . .
"We see it in Christmases and holidays ruined by the Republicans for our loyal and professional Senate employees. It’s fine for me. It’s fine for the president. We signed up for the his job, but why ruin it for all the employees condemned by the Republicans to be here?” (Emphasis added.)

More at the American Spectator blog.

Update: (Smitty) (h/t Dana Loesch)
Great business opportunity for someone to produce an all-joker deck of cards once the Senatorial sodomy subsides. Claire McCaskill makes a demented start:

'Right-wing Leninism'? BUMPED: Senate debates before cloture

2009-12-20T15:02:00.008-05:00

UPDATE 3:56 p.m.: Dan at Sevens quotes Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Emagogue):

"Tumbrels have rolled through taunting crowds. Broken glass has sparkled in darkened streets. Strange fruit has hung from southern trees."

In other words, opponents of this bill are Jacobins, brownshirts and Klansmen. Some Republican Senator should make a point of order about this kind of rhetoric. It's one thing to throw around inflammatory metaphors on a blog or cable TV, but another thing entirely to bring it onto the floor of the Senate.

UPDATE 3:25 p.m.: If somebody's got video or a text of Whitehouse's speech, please let me know. That was one of the most villainous speeches I've ever heard by any Senator, and I hope to God that some of my friends who are Senate staffers will provide a Republican with a solid rebuttal to vile Adorno/Hofstadter psychoanalytic crap, which is no more valid today than when Buckley critiqued it in Up From Liberalism nearly 50 years ago.

UPDATE 3:03 p.m.: Sheldon Whitehouse is the Keith Olbermann of the Senate, and I mean that in the worst possible sense of "Keith Olbermann." The only good part of his speech? "Mr. President, I yield the floor." And not a moment too soon!

UPDATE 2:50 p.m.: For crying out loud, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) reads Richard Hofstadter on the Senate floor. In other words, if you oppose this bill, you're a neurotic suffering from status anxiety. There can be no rational opposition. Is Julian Sanchez ghost-writing speeches for Democrats now?

UPDATE 2:33 p.m.: Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) just said he's got relatives in Nebraska who are "embarrassed and ashamed" by Ben Nelson's "Cash for Cloture" sellout -- click that link, because The Boss is still fighting. She weighs less than 100 pounds, but it's all fight.

PREVIOUSLY 2:09 p.m.: C.K. MacLeod writes a lengthy defense of the radical worse-is-better approach to political opposition.

This idea was central to Vladimir Lenin's revolutionary vision: The worse real-life conditions became -- the more oppressive the czarist regime, the greater Russia's military disasters in World War I -- the greater likelihood of the kind of political upheaval in which the Bolsheviks could seize power.

Given its source and original meaning, Lenin's worse-is-better strategy is obviously not something any conservative would endorse. However, as MacLeod makes clear, that isn't the way he means it. What he is arguing is that a short-term "win" by the Democrats should not be viewed by their opponents as a demoralizing defeat, but rather as a springboard for future conservative victories. His is a message of hope, not despair:

This is a moment for sober judgment, and for confidence in one's own beliefs and analysis, whichever best keeps you in the fight. It's a moment to decide whether our message to the Obamaist progressives is going to be: "You win -- we give up" or "We're coming after you, and getting rid of your laughable, embarrassing, and repugnant health care bill (presuming you ever get around to passing it) will just be the beginning."

Indeed, and you should read the whole thing. Speaking of radical rhetoric, I notice that ~~King Herod~~ Harry Reid plans to kill the babies by Christmas.

Humor Update: (Smitty) 3:13PM
Whereas I read MacLeod's piece and thought of Coleridge, by way of the Monty Python. This legislation could prove both an albatross and a career opportunity for Dingy Harry, as seen in the clip:

As a bonus, Graham Chapman's humorless Colonel prefigures the tender, loving care that government health care will embody.

The gross, atrocious irresponsibility of this bill in all aspects will be a boon to Americans. Harry Reid gives us ammunition. We will return it to him with, bonus kinetic energy.

Feeble dawn of the WordPress changeover (Please excuse the temporary suckiness)

2009-12-20T11:12:00.001-05:00

As promised, we are beginning the changeover to a WordPress format:

The reason I stuck with Blogger as long as I did -- despite the constant pleading of fellow bloggers who are all about the superior coolness of WordPress -- is that Blogger is extremely user-friendly, has lots of built-in widgets, and is easily customized. While I've been a contributor at several blogs run with WordPress software . . . I've never been an admin on a WordPress site, and the learning curve is rather steep. . . .

You can read the whole thing, and please be sure to follow the instructions, IYKWIMAITYD.

Rule 5 Sunday

2009-12-20T09:09:00.003-05:00

by Smitty

Rule 5 Sunday, where I will not mention Political Stuff, which, thankfully, seems to have toned down the Tiger Woods reporting.

WyBlog kicks us off (why not?) with snow, bikinis, and Santa hats.
Bombs and Dollars has hotties on cots, and a look at future hospital food a la China. Then an Israeli-looking hottie with a rifle.
For the ladies, Mulieris Dignitatem had a roundup of proto-Stacy Clark Gable shots from GWTW.
Three Beers Later has Nicole Lloyd, his usual Juliana Moreira fix (have I been doing this post too long?), and The Women of Curling, who are a sight better than the odd-fingered Women of Noodling which we cannot show for reasons of taste.
The Classic Liberal has Denise Milani telling you about human rights.
Power Line Brings you great moments in near Rule 5-ery. And Miss Gibraltar getting a piece of the rawk.
Viral Footage has a Scottie hottie engaging in a bit of Chevy Chase-ism.
Paco Enterprises brings us Nan Wynn.
The Camp of the Saints, as usual, packs the heat:
SI VIS PACEM reaches for the Boris Vallejo.
Fischersville Mike brings the Christmas cheerleaders.
Rightofcourse sees the Christmas cheerleaders, and raises Villanova.
Yankee Phil reports that neither he, nor Jessica Simpson, had sex with Tiger.
Nation of Cowards has the seasonal take on matters.
Dustbury, long-time footwear aficionado, has Alyssa Milano, that un-Tweeting siren.
Point of a Gun reviews characters in Twilight, and then has an amusing dialogue between two of them.
Ace of Spades has Tricorner Hat Girl, of Tea Party fame.
We'll let the female readers (who may not give this post the attention it craves) weigh in on whether Flea is Rule 5 material. Even if Stacy would have visions of target practice were Flea to have courted his daughter, the guy plays a mean bass.

Three Beers Later notes the passing of Jennifer Jones.
Proof Positive nominates Lake Bell for Friday Night babe.
A Conservative Shemale clears up the Cory Everson mystery.
Jeffords brings the snow babes.
Smash Mouth Politics has the not-snow babes.

[Tiger Woods tear line]

Left Coast Rebel rounded up the hens after the divorce news. Can I say that? Is it sexist? Is it making light of a sordid situation? He featured Theresa Rogers, too.

That's your Rule 5 Sunday. It looks like the nor'easter may have put a blanket of snow on submissions this week. Keep the cheesecake coming, people.

Apparently, Avatar sucks, bad

2009-12-20T08:14:00.001-05:00

On Twitter last night, this new big-budget sci-fi flick was slagged mercilessly. Left Coast Rebel links to Debbie Schlussel's review:

Clocking in at nearly three hours, "Avatar" is an incredible waste of time. It's essentially a remake of "Dances With Wolves" and every other movie where we evil Americans terrorize the indigenous natives, kill them, take their land, and are just all around imperialistically wicked and inhumane. Oh, and we're destroying the environment, clearing precious giant trees and natural landscapes and killing rare animals and their habitats, in order to invade and harvest valuable substances under the ground. . . .
Smurf-like natives made to look like overgrown American Indians, complete with warpaint, mohawks, and long ponytails (that have computer-like USB cable tendrils in them, which can communicate with nature–ludicrous). Does that sound like earth-shattering stuff to you? They looked like Jar Jar Binks with arrowheads. . . .

"Jar Jar Binks? Ewwwwww. Read the whole thing. Meanwhile the much-hyped 3-D effects evidently underwhelm, as Ann Althouse quotes her 26-year-old son's iChat commentary:

just trying to look at the 3d and get it to look right was pretty much the entire experience of it. . . .
it never reaches the point of looking like reality, and looks less real than 2d. . . .

My inner English teacher wants to reply to Althouse's kid: "What's with the non-capitalizing?" Has technology rendered capitalization obsolete?

Never mind that, though. There was never a chance I'd go see something like Avatar -- I have a generalized aversion to science fiction -- but anyone tempted to pay money to see it, or to send their kids to see it, is hereby warned.

Update: (Smitty) House of Eratosthenes has a lengthy list of crap we don't want to see in movies.