Saturday, July 4, 2009

Sara Palin doesn't seem concerned

by Smitty

Politico has the story and the tepid review.
But asked exactly what stories the governor was criticizing, Palin spokeswoman Meg Stapleton said Palin wasn’t referring to any specific news or TV account but rather the speculation and questions about what may have been her motivation for resigning.
As for the “higher calling” Palin referred to, Stapleton said the governor was just generally referring to what she sees as a move up in public life.

Here is the full text, interspersed with commentary:
Happy 4th of July from Alaska!
Today at 4:55pm

On this Independence Day, I am so very proud of all those who have chosen to serve our great nation and I honor their selflessness and the sacrifices of their families, too.

If I may, I would like to take a moment to reflect on the last 24 hours and share my thoughts with you.

First, I want to thank you for your support and hard work on the values we share. Those values led me to the decision my family and I made. Yesterday, my family and I announced a decision that is in Alaska’s best interest and it always feels good to do what is right. We have accomplished more during this one term than most governors do in two – and I am proud of the great team that helped to build these wonderful successes. Energy independence and national security, fiscal restraint, smaller government, and local control have been my priorities and will remain my priorities.

For months now, I have consulted with friends and family, and with the Lieutenant Governor, about what is best for our wonderful state. I even made a few administrative changes over that course in time in preparation for yesterday. We have accomplished so much and there’s much more to do, but my family and I determined after prayerful consideration that sacrificing my title helps Alaska most. And once I decided not to run for re-election, my decision was that much easier – I’ve never been one to waste time or resources. Those who know me know this is the right decision and obvious decision at that, including Senator John McCain. I thank him for his kind, insightful comments.

OK, so it wasn't sudden, has no health overtones. If there is scandal afoot, you wouldn't expect a hint here. However, it does seem to hint at Big Plans.
The response in the main stream media has been most predictable, ironic, and as always, detached from the lives of ordinary Americans who are sick of the “politics of personal destruction”. How sad that Washington and the media will never understand; it’s about country. And though it's honorable for countless others to leave their positions for a higher calling and without finishing a term, of course we know by now, for some reason a different standard applies for the decisions I make. But every American understands what it takes to make a decision because it’s right for all, including your family.

Sarah: we can't mock BHO for singling out Hannity and Limbaugh if you condescend to notice the kneepad media. If you depart the high ground of George W. Bush, do so with faintly ironic humor: "My media chums," or "That swell Katie Couric." Let the use of Leave it to Beaver adjectives be a signal that you agree with us that the mainstream media are hardly qualified to sweep a floor.
I shared with you yesterday my heartfelt and candid reasons for this change; I’ve never thought I needed a title before one’s name to forge progress in America. I am now looking ahead and how we can advance this country together with our values of less government intervention, greater energy independence, stronger national security, and much-needed fiscal restraint. I hope you will join me. Now is the time to rebuild and help our nation achieve greatness!

Another "nobody asked me, but...": can we minimize the personal pronoun? A major component of the decadence of contemporary politics is the overemphasis on the personal. You can score a cosmic win if you drive the discussion away from Alinsky Rule 12. Yes, much is about you, for reasons of family and appearance. Yet the first woman elected POTUS shall have been metaphorically crucified a thousand times. Yes, it's highly personal, on the receive end, but please minimize making it personal on the transmit end.
John 15:18 "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.". Also, the sky is blue. Speaking truth makes you more, not less, hated.
God bless you! And I look forward to making a difference – with you!


As long as it's a Constitutional, Federalist difference, great, lady. Full support. It doesn't seem like this at all, but if it's merely trading one megalomaniac for one with longer hair, then it's a difference making little difference.
The country has to realize that there is only one party: Progressive, with its Democratic and Republican wings. One can admire the clever device of appearing to maintain two parties: the underlings are probably convinced they are in actual competition. But they're re-arranging the ore load on the Edmund Fitzgerald.
Make it about "We the People" and "50 States United", please.

Mike Lux is light on history

by Smitty

I was at the Woodbridge, VA Tea Party today. Surrounded by conservatives, in fact. So I peeked at the Google Reader during a lull on my cell phone. Here is a Huffington Post article by Mike Lux, pushing his book "The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America Came to Be".
His bio on the HuffComPost, empahsis mine:
Michael Lux is the co-founder and CEO of Progressive Strategies, L.L.C., a political consulting firm founded in 1999, focused on strategic political consulting for non-profits, labor unions, PACs and progressive donors. Previously, he was Senior Vice President for Political Action at People For the American Way (PFAW), and the PFAW Foundation, and served at the White House from January 1993 to mid-1995 as a Special Assistant to the President for Public Liaison. While at Progressive Strategies, Lux has founded, and currently chairs a number of new organizations and projects, including American Family Voices, the Progressive Donor Network, and Lux serves on the boards of several other organizations including the Arca Foundation, Americans United for Change, Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, Center for Progressive Leadership, Democratic Strategist, Grassroots Democrats, Progressive Majority and Women’s Voices/Women Vote.
In November of 2008, Mike was named to the Obama-Biden Transition Team. In that role, he served as an advisor to the Public Liaison on dealings with the progressive community and has helped shape the office of Public Liaison based on his past experience working on the Clinton-Gore Transition, as well as in the White House.

I, for one, am blown away by the authors chops as an historian. Back to his attempt to peddle his book:
progressives should take special pride in this holiday, for it was the ultimate achievement of progressive values that brought us this day.

Right. From Wikipedia, emphasis mine:
Progressivism is a political and social term that refers to ideologies and movements favoring or advocating changes or reform, usually in a statist or egalitarian direction for economic policies (government management) and liberal direction for social policies (personal choice). Progressivism is often viewed in opposition to conservative ideologies.
In the United States, the term progressive emerged in the late 19th century into the 20th century in reference to a more general response to the vast changes brought by industrialization.

As you watch the Obama Administration trainwreck pile up, the term "egalitarian" seems a jape, and "statist" seems to mean something akin to "banal Chicago thugocracy", as Scare Force One is followed by the IG-Gate is followed by the Imaginary Legislation (HR-2454), etc.
Interestingly, the Revolutionary War began in the 1770's, about 100 years ahead of the chronological birth of Progressivism.
Wikipedia also has a page specifically on Progressivism in the US. Let's peek at that, to guage what affinity the Declaration of Independence, American Revolution, and Constitution may have with Progressivism:
1 Tenets of early United States progressivism
  • 1.1 Democracy--"Progressives such as William U'Ren and Robert La Follette argued that the average person should have more control over their government."
  • 1.2 Municipal Administration--"There were many changes introduced into municipal administration during the Progressive Era in the 1880s and 1890's. These changes led to a more structured system, power that the centralized within the legislature would now be more locally focused."
  • 1.3 Efficiency
  • 1.4 Regulation of large corporations and monopolies
  • 1.5 Social justice
  • 1.6 Conservationism
1.1 and 1.2 are hilarious in the modern context. Average person having more control, or even...involvement? Look at what happens to someone with a Journalism degree from a Western school with the temerity to accept a Vice Presidential nomination. Locally focused? Where locally is defined to mean "within the Beltway", sure.
1.3, 1.4, and 1.6 were certainly not concerns of the 1770s. And Social Justice? Amar's book spends a great deal of time talking about the lengths to which the Constitutional language went to avoid the fact that its Social Justice aims were just a trifle narrow. Oh, I weasel-worded that! The Constitution enshrined slavery, front and center, with overtly farcical elements like the Three-Fifths Compromise. Social Justice waits the better part of a century, for Amendments 13-15 to acquire legal adequacy. Almost another century later, the Civil Rights Movement gets us most of the way there. There are still elements of DNA-based decision hanging around in the form of Affirmative Action. What can I say? Evil dies hard.
Back to Lux:
the Tories who opposed American independence were the conservatives of their day.
Does this mean that modern conservatives are Royalists, secretly plotting the restoration of the House of Windsor as American sovereigns?
Our progressive revolutionary founding fathers like Thomas Jefferson and Tom Paine argued that we should "make the world new again."
One is nearly tempted to waste time on this wretched book of Lux's to see him dance around Jefferson's slave ownership. Admire the man's achievements and contributions, but don't whitewash the truth and call him progressive just because he "felt bad" about being a slaveholder.
Oh, I think I perceive a counter-argument: your definition of Progressive has progressed to the point where it means "basically anything with which Mike Lux agrees at the moment".
And make no mistake: the ideas we take for granted today were truly radical in 1776.
Hey, check out this idea that was as radical in 1791 as it was in 2009:
Amendment 10: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Let me unveil a counter theory: American independence is about the freedom of the individual, and finding ways to delegate enough power at differing levels to differing branches of government to accomplish tasks with minimal risk of tyranny.
Progressivism, like labor unions, had an important historical place. However, organizational behavior has kicked in. The leadership of the country, Democratic and Republican Party alike, has quaffed this progressive kool-aid and quietly moved in the direction of aristocracy. If you don't know the proper people, have the proper accent, haven't attended the proper schools, and, perhaps most importantly, ponied up sufficient money, then you are nothing.
Lux tries to use the Declaration of Independence as a fig leaf:
deriving their just power from the consent of the governed
To which the Woodbridge, VA Tea Party replies:

(Sorry about the spelling error. Completely invalidates the point, no? And, clearly, we need a funding increase at the DOE to help Joe Teabag with his learnin'.)
This is one book where the one-star review is probably most accurate:
The author tries that old canard of equating modern liberals with classical liberals like the Founding Fathers. Never mind the fact that modern liberals are the exact opposite. He claims that progressives fought for things like the Declaration of Independence, against the Conservative Tories. However, most of the "progressive" things that we have today were exactly what the Tories supported and the more classical liberal citizens wanted. Most modern-day "progressives" despised the idea of "individual rights", hence famous progressives like John Dewey who absolutely despised homeschoolers. Let us not forget that throughout the twentieth century, many progressives looked starry-eyed on the Soviet Union as well. Many still do.

Teach piles on.

Friggin' Mind Just Reset Again

by Smitty

So, after the Friday fireworks of the Palin announcement, it seemed time to get to work on the FMJRA installment. It's the 4th of July, and a major Tea Party outing. Government spending is so crazy that economists will soon be forced into using logarithms to talk about deficits. Life seemed so much less chaotic back in the old GWOT days. Sarah really wiped out the right-o-sphere traffic. All other topics Palin comparison. (Stacy: put the bludgeon down.)

Speaking of soon-to-be-ex-Governor-Palin was the focus of about three major threads this week, which can't be organized coherently. They were, generally, children, Vanity Fair, and the abrupt departure from office. So here is a bundle of Palin joy:
  • rightofcourse links us, also pointing to a slightly pro-Palin blog that leaks her plan, in its entirety, shaming me for not having grasped its sublime simplicity straigtaway:
    1. Sarah steps down as Alaska's Governor
    2. ???
    3. President Palin 2013!
  • Carolyn Tackett had great analysis and linkage to Stacy's coverage of the Vanity Fair hitpiece that everyone seems to have forgotten.
  • The South Texian refers to her as future President of the United States.
  • Obi's Sister gave me a quote of the day link related to Krauthammer's "unready" analysis, editing my TLA in the process. Now, now, Obi's Sister: if you put anything naughty into that acronym, that's your business. I meant "Anatomically Fatigued, Ultimately." We are, of course, running a (mostly) clean blog here. She also speculated that the anti-Palin brake-screech in the 4th Estate might be an allusion to The Hunt for Red October. But that would imply Commie intent, and we've outgrown McCarthyism, so that's un-possible.
  • His Insty-ness linked Palinpalooza and followed up when Joyner joined the fray.
  • Pat in Shreveport apparently held down breakfast long enough to read Sullivan, and includes this:
    Yesterday, Andrew Sullivan blasted the MSM for failing to get the details on Trig Palin's birth. He concluded his post with "I believed then and I believe now that the MSM is too concerened with their own reputations and too deferent to power to even ask the questions. Which is another betrayal of their core purpose. And why they are dying. And deserve to."
    Theory: the Trig Palin fixation is an attempt to come manufacture a cosmic justification for the MSM's general abdication of responsibility WRT BHO. It's all good that BHO was unexamined; look at the lack of inquiry on the right. The trick to analyzing a Sullivan is to suspend standard rules of logic and proportion.
  • Of Palinpalooza, The Blogprof said "Stacy seriously must have trashed his keyboard over this one." He also picked up It Takes Small Men...
  • The Classic Liberal: "let the bottom-feeders go!"
  • Melissa Clouthier wants to blacklist all that old McCain staff.
  • Pundette notes that attacking Palin never gets old. Yet supporting her shall likely stay younger.
  • Teach at The Pirates Cove links. Sullivan's rants are "plainly insane, and makes the people who run The Atlantic look like morons". Paging McArdle...
  • Knappster goes for the NIN reference, and sounds as coherent as a Trent Reznor outing in describing his disdain for Sarah Palin. But let's wait and see if she lets the Left and the disgruntled Right scare her off. If not, when she's a declared candidate, then her national-level policy positions will be explored at length and in detail.
  • Thumb and Whip had a thorough deconstruction of the "It Take Small People" post.
  • Teach picks up the phone, as Stacy picks on Andy: "Someone get Milky Loads a waaaaaah!-mbulance as he gives RS McCain a Malkin Award"
  • Deuce at the Skepticrates blames Sarah Palin for borking his blog post about BHO in Russia. It's a fair cop.
  • ToM Athens correspondent Jesse Hathaway piles on the snark.
  • Kirbside on the "Small Men" post: "I am tired of how many of us on the right tap dance around the issues... R.S.McCain does not!"
  • Fishersville Mike noted that Todd Palin is a dude, not a piece of meat.
  • The Rhetorican also gives link.
  • Little Miss Attila thinks that the size of the post may have other connotations.
  • Donald Douglas was involved in some of the fray over the Palin children.
  • Bob Belvedere at The Camp of the Saints was had a good roundup.
Sarah also drowns a clown out of the media.
My take has been consistent on Governor took-a-wrong-turn-and-wound-up-in-Argentina. Why is he still in office? My respect for Jenny Sanford is as great as my not-respect for Mark.
  • Again, Carloyn Tacket appreciated my analysis in part of a larger round up.
  • Daley Gator on Sanford: "If Meghan McCain thinks he should stay, then that is evidence that I should go the opposite way." Yes, Meghan, begone with you and that Progressive kool-aid.
  • Now, Mrs. The Other McCain may be a tough cookie, but do give consideration to Mrs. TCotS. Yikes.
Also momentarily submerged, but possibly bubbling back to the surface is IG-Gate.
The Franken nail in the 111th Congressional Coffin caught some notice:
The NORC campaign has some traction in the face of the Imaginary Legislation That Will Eat The Economy:
  • Andrea at Radio Patriot introduces a cool Not One Red Cent graphic.
  • Whereas the Riehl World View is that such victories could turn pyrrhic. I dunno. Given the choice between death by capillary or arterial bleeding, I'll note that the latter has the virtue of being faster.
  • Winkydog (great name!) had some coverage, highlighting the 44 semi-conscious Dems in addition to the 8 RINOs.
  • Carol was graphic and unambiguous about the news at No Sheeples Here.
  • The Reaganite Republican Reseistance weighed in. Splendid Green Giant graphic.
  • In which Jules Crittenden trumps all the climate scientists: "I thought the global warming scare was caused by horseshit."
  • South Texian played the Judas card:
    Robert Stacy McCain has found out the likely reason one of those turncoats, John McHugh, voted for the bill: Barack Obama nominated him to be the new Secretary of the Army. Enjoy your thirty pieces of silver, Johnny.
  • Carol takes Vodkapundit's immortal Churchill riff and goes graphical.
  • Over at Paco, Seabiscuit registers disdain with a pose.
  • Bob at TCotS offers a thorough overview with follow-up.
On the topic of the species whose presence in high office requires substantial diminishing:
  • The Cranky Con hopes to cook the burgers well enough for his local laywer clutch.
  • Lindsay rogered up that it was a great lawyer rant.
  • Steynian gave linkage, though you have to get past the hilarious Barney Frank coverage to find it.
  • Bob at TCotS rogered up for this rant as well.
Oh, and did we say lawyers? The Ricci, or, "let's install clowns in all three branches of the Federal government", decision:
  • In noting the local impact of Ricci, the Blogprof linked us.
  • Linked by Conservative Political Report.
  • Seriously: what more do we need than "DNA-based decision making is false" any longer in our society?
The GOP ad that brought out the curmudgeon in me:
  • Sundries Shack was supportive.
  • It comes down to this: we have a Progressive party running things in the US, with a Democrat wing and a GOP wing. Only, that bird don't fly. I fact, that bird flips off the electorate every time it short-circuits the Federalism inherent in the Constitution, as it has since Woodrow Wilson. So if these clueless GOP hacks don't realize that (mostly due to Jonah Goldberg in my case) we're on to their crap, then doom on them.
Miscellaneous shouts:
Future publishing note from Bob at TCotS:
Bernard Goldberg is writing a sequel to his current book; it will be called A SLOBBERING LOVE AFFAIR II: THE OTHER MCCAIN, SMITTY, & THE SHAMELESS BLOGWHORING OF A MAN NAMED BELVEDERE. Pre-order it at AmazonWomen today.
So that's the wrap. Please email cheers and jeers to Smitty. On the Fourth of July, consider those who've gone before, the wisdom of the founding documents, and the foolishness of those attempting to hijack the most exceptional system of government in history.

Oh, that saucy Freeberg

by Smitty

The House of Eratosthenes, that ardent and eloquent supporter of Sarah Palin, has a thoughtful rumination on the lady, with a punch line that is so great as to out-Sullivan Sullivan.
Of course, some of this is trickery on my part, since I’ve been pretending not to know things I know. Got a call from Palin’s press secretary yesterday evening, in response to a private e-mail I sent the Governor. It was about yet another theory, one not yet explored by anyone. Bulls-eye, first try! And since this is The Blog That Nobody Reads, there is no damage involved in spilling the beans here.

I was right. Sarah Palin never

Very, very well done, sir.

Honduras Abandoned

by Smitty

Legal Insurrection has some excellent Honduras coverage, along with Fausta. LI points to a new blog, Honduras Abandoned written by an intrepid correspondent named Smith. Like the chap already.
What will the knee-pad media do about all of these actual reporters showing what chumps they are?

Friday, July 3, 2009

Most ludicrous Sarah Palin reaction

by Smitty

So Sarah Palin is stepping aside as Alaska Governor. Political junkies, and those that care about the future direction of the country, are just a bit tense. A two week wait to see what Sarah's next step will be is a couple of decades in Internet time.
So here is Rachel Sklar: "Sarah Palin, You Owe The Media An Apology"
Let's see if we can locate reasoning on HuffPo. Nope. The post seems to be a chronological series of perceived slights. Rachel concludes:
[Sarah Palin] swaggered onstage in front of the friendliest crowd ever, warmed up by Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee, and blasted the media for daring to want to know who she was, what she'd done and what she stood for. Well, now we know. And it turns out that ten months ago, she was full of it.
So, Sarah Palin, you owe the media an apology.

No, Rachel, she does not. Sarah Palin owes you and the media...wait...checking...nothing whatsoever. There are a few things she could offer you, but I don't think it tasteful to mention them. However momentarily satisfying, they would not look good on the police report.

I may have been too hasty to call this one. Donald Douglas has a roundup of far stupider stuff.

Really, General Powell

by Smitty (h/t Lucianne)

Per the Washington Times:
"I'm concerned at the number of programs that are being presented, the bills associated with these programs and the additional government that will be needed to execute them," Mr. Powell said in an excerpt of an interview with CNN's John King, released by the network Friday morning.

General Powell, your decades of service in uniform and as Secretary of State will always be to your credit. However, until you repent, at length and in detail, of the abject foolishness of your endorsement of BHO for POTUS, I'm afraid that I'll have to respectfully focus on your laurels when considering you.


by Smitty (h/t Rhetorican, also NTC News)

Politico has the details. Even if you're not a fan (really, let's see the caliber on the RINO rifle before we invest too much hope in her commitment to Federalism), picking up the 04 July momentum is a good idea. Maybe not a master stroke, but a journeyman stroke, anyway.
The big concern is that committing this early will have her fading out like a firework trail before 2012.
The DNC response could barely be heard over the sound of their collective sphincter slamming shut:
...her decision to abandon her post and the people of Alaska who elected her continues a pattern of bizarre behavior that more than anything else may explain the decision she made today.

Anyone on the Right should consider supporting Sarah Palin, if only from the enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend standpoint. Somebody has to catch the javelins in the battle against Cap-and-Trade, Obama-care, Card Check, and the rest of the larcenylegislation coming out of the Congress That Shall Live in Infamy. The DC RINO herd, featuring clowns like Christopher Henry Smith (my middle name is Lewis, FYI), cannot be relied upon.
So, let's grant the benefit of the doubt.
Maybe her policies will be Federalist in nature.
Maybe her staff won't leave her on the bus overnight:

John McCain Accidentally Left On Campaign Bus Overnight

Maybe the pack of foppish pseudo-conservative sniping girly men will understand the pyrrhic nature of all their handwringing and criticize constructively for a change.
And, since closing with a Heart video would be a lapse into cliché, how about some equally effective Benatar:

Allahpundit takes the completely opposite viewpoint.
Additional detail at Breitbart. I'm guessing that, once out of the governor's office, she's going to be a distraction for the Obama Administration that's most entertaining to observe. Or she could just settle for a talk show. Go for it, lady.

Update II:
Video at Gateway Pundit. Now, wouldn't it be a shock if she showed up in DC on 12 September? One certainty is that underwear sales inside the beltway would spike.

Update III:
Cynthia Yockey, chiding my measured response: Palin for President. But can you help Allahpundit come to the light?

Update IV:
The Anchoress wins the More Updated Than Thou competition.
Although Scrappleface has the Best Title: Palin Quits to Spend More Time with Couric, Gibson

Update IV:
I hope Allahpundit is trolling, emphasis mine:
I think she’s following more of a Nixonian strategy here. I.e. it could be she’s burned out on politics and dispirited by all the crap she’s put up with it and wants to get away at an opportune moment. If, as is likely, The One wins a second term, the GOP will be so dejected that it’ll happily give her a second look as a potential savior in 2016, much as it did with Nixon after he lost the 1960 presidential election and 1962 California gubernatorial race.

Dude, pay attention: if BHO wins a second term, Michelle will be POTUS 2016-2024, a Constitutionally suitable consort to the older Obama daughter will rule from 2024-2032, when we switch back to the Obama dynasty proper. I say that and pray that I am wrong on a variety of levels.

Update V:
Conservatives 4 Palin says she's "Crossed the Rubicon". Also, Mark Levin audio.

Update VI:
Faust inquires: Will Sarah Palin become the next Ross Perot?
to which I replied:
In no way.
Ross ran against an incumbent, split the conservative ticket (guilty) and helped usher in the Clintons.
If the RINO herd doesn’t get with the effing program and welcome her aboard, then far more than the 2012 election is lost.

The Senate will rock

by Smitty

Much has been made of the SNL career of Al Franken, but what about his early rock'n'roll career?

(OK, that may not be him...)

If BHO has lost JBJ, he's lost middle America

by Smitty (h/t Pat in Shreveport)

Pat links Jon Bon Jovi with a bunch of Iranian artists breathing unexpected meaning into a classic.

Why, exactly, BHO seems so comfortable with thuggish rulers is unclear. In fairness, the predecessor also tolerated some atrocious behavior in other countries. However, W. never offered support, either.

Sad, sad, sad, with a twist of disgusting.

A sad form of amusement

by Smitty

A sad form of amusement
  comes after the jig is done
    and someone pays the piper.

This rarely proves truly fun,
  more often an atonment:
    venting a nasty diaper.

How often under the gun,
  when everyone is hyper,
    is there any discernment?

The wise man seems a sniper:
  "Nothing new under the sun!"
    (not tactic'ly relevant).

And thus out comes the viper,
  spewing naught but excrement:
    "Taxation is redemption!"

Fleeing becomes evident.
  Wallets avoid the reaper.
    Economic destruction.

Foolishness is detriment.
  Kleptocracy is undone.
    Capitalism: keeper.

Did I ever mention . . .

. . . that Keynesian "pump priming" doesn't work?
[P]ressure is growing to do more to reverse job losses. In January, during the Obama transition, Council of Economic Advisers Chairman-designee Christina Romer and Obama economic adviser Jared Bernstein predicted in a report that with an $800 billion stimulus, the unemployment rate would be just about 7% by this time. Without the stimulus, the rate would be at 9%.
Instead, the jobless rate is now at 9.5%, despite the $787 billion stimulus passed earlier this year.
Read the whole thing. And you can read more on the economic meltdown at NTCNews.

This is classic: Now that their wrong-headed economic theories have made a bad situation much worse, the Obamanauts naturally think the problem is that they haven't done enough.

It Won't Work. The Fundamentals Suck. Weimar America.

Thursday, July 2, 2009

Another GOP swing and a miss

by Smitty (h/t HotAir)

As with John McCain in the presidential debate saying that the Treasury Department would work with the banks to help struggling home owners, here we have Boehner missing the ultimate point:

"stop runaway spending, and help small business", he concludes.
Memo to Boehner: WTF the States? Small businesses, it would seem, are likely not an inter-state commerce issue, right? Why don't you talk about how federalism will be restored, state governments will be less a laughing stock, and you'll seem less a Typical Washington Ignorant Tool (TWIT).

But Jimmie liked it, so maybe I should go lay by the dish with the dog.

Krauthammer thinks Governor Palin unqualified?

by Smitty (h/t HotAir)

This is a fascinating three minutes of your time.

K+ is completely correct on his point that the GOP has operated on a seniority system going back at least my four decades. Going unsaid in his remarks are the ringing non-triumphs of the Bush-41 1992, Dole 1996, and McCain 2008 campaigns.

Romney certainly sells a fine Progressive brand of snake oil, and can certainly give good speech, like BHO. Does anyone have advice on how to overlook the fact that the libertarian ideals of the Constitution are antithetical to the Progressive snake oil? The collectivist crap has only been bankrupting the country these 80-ish years or so. Mitt:
  • I can stare at the First Amendment and ignore theological differences with you.
  • I can admire your fine rhetoric and capacity to deliver a stirring speech: I joined in the standing ovation for you at CPAC with gusto. Great buildup, masterful delivery.
  • But if you're not in touch with the basic concepts of Federalism, then why bother, sir?
You'd be offering the same non-choice between Obama and McCain: "Vote for me, I say 'tomato' with a long 'a' in the middle."

The comment that Governor Palin has to do the homework is also well-founded. You can complain that BHO didn't, but that just underscores the point: "We the People" let an arguably unprepared, unexamined candidate into the office this time around. Possibly John McCain over-estimated the critical thinking with which the voters would come at the question. This "Vote for the groundbreaker, even if there are some weaknesses, FML" is not the precedent you want to reinforce.

The fact that Governor Palin would be the first female POTUS really needs to be a tangential point, or we're continuing the DNA-based decision making that marred the 2008 election cycle. "Anyone not voting for X is Y!". X goes Obama->Palin, Y goes racist->sexist. The scourge of Affirmative Action wasn't completely stomped out with the Ricci decision. Playing to Progressivism just to win an election on gender is playing into their fell hands.

In the credit where due department, HRC is nothing if not cunning. She's suddenly not going to Russia. Of course, it's entire too early to connect the dots with other (scroll down a bit) "Unwelcome Distractions". But it doesn't take a prophet to realize that, if BHO is AFU in 2012, HRC will come back with the fury of a cancer that's been in remission for a few years. Possibly I could have chosen a more pleasant metaphor, but as long as the electorate favors Beltway hangtime over Constitutional fidelity, the egalitarian oxymoron "political class" shall continue to weaken all you hold dear, tumor-like.

This is my worry about Governor Palin: there will be a legitimate argument made that her resume is relatively thin compared to Secretary Clinton's. A Palin/Romney ticket will be "too weak on foreign policy, which is our number one national concern." Understand, a magic unicorn shall have recovered the economy in time for the election. Or so the propaganda shall instruct us to think. How about that General Petraeus, anyway? Has he quaffed the Progressive kool-aid, one wonders?

Full circle, then, I appreciate that K+ is seemingly immune to Governor Palin's charms. Uncharmed thinking is a Good Thing. However, Romney needs a come-to-Beavis meeting where he unloads the Progressive baggage. Either way, don't count HRC out. Or, rather, do: you're likely helping her game.

Goldberg, also, seems to hope that Governor Palin can come through, while deliberately muting the enthusiasm.

Jenny Sanford on the moral high ground

by Smitty (h/t Lucianne)

The Post and Courier features Jenny Sanford playing a straightforward Christian hand with respect to the despicable cad husband.

If someone truly understands what the Almighty has forgiven them, on an individual basis, it becomes impossible not to pass on the savings. Forgiveness is about freedom from past wrongs. It's about saying "no" to emotional baggage.

Forgiveness is not about being a doormat. Jenny correctly identifies Mark's behavior itself as "inexcusable". [Cheap piling on goes here]. What's crucial to understand is that forgiveness with respect to the past is not an abandonment of the future. The Sanford case itself is their business, but, in general, I'm completely supportive of a spouse laying down heavy requirements for repentance. The wayward husband should show a substantial, demonstrable change of heart, or the wife is justified in divorcing the creep. Some might argue ventilating him is OK, too: but think about the rug.

In other words, divorce, while ugly, may be acceptable in the face of unrepentant behavior. That divorce would have nothing to do with being unforgiving about past sins, and everything to do with rejecting future unrighteousness.

Alabama, here I come!

Today I will be on the road, and Friday I'll be toiling to prepare the fireworks show for Saturday. (If you want to join the fun, here's a Google map.)

Thanks to everyone who has hit the tip jar the past few days -- hey, look at the gazongas on that redhead! -- and all who have celebrated the Ricci ruling. (Check out Michael Barone's column on that.)

In my absence, all blogwhores should e-mail Smitty. I'll try to get video of the Fourth of July show.

Team Maverick vs. Team Maverick

"As godawful as Barack Obama has been and will continue to be, it is very difficult to feel it is some great loss that these people didn't get a chance to help run the country."

Stand by for Homelessness by Fall

by Smitty

Bertha Lewis, national president of the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN), issued a news release yesterday repeating a claim she has previously made that "every 13 seconds another American family loses its home."
Household loss rate (1/13sec)0.076923077
seconds per year31556926
households in US105480101
seconds remaining of US housing8,113,853.923 sec (househods * loss rate)
years of housing left0.257118007 years, say 3 months (8,113,853.923 sec / 31,556,926 sec*year^-1)

This Fall, the entire country could be out on the streets. But I think I know somebody who may have a job opportunity:
"Hola, amigos! You say you want me to work on your senseless?"

Calvin Dodge correctly identifies the flaw in the comments.
So, am I an idiot, or is this post nothing but a troll, or both?

Satan, Attorney at Law

Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne . . .
-- Luke 11:46 (KJV)
Yesterday, I was required to spend more than an hour on the phone in order to get automobile insurance. Who is to blame for this harrowing nightmare? Lawyers.

Begin with "mandatory no-fault insurance" -- by state law, you must be insured before you can get a license. Damn lawyers.

Why mandatory insurance? Because the roads are full of illiterate submorons who can't drive. Why? Because it would be discriminatory to require 10th-grade literacy and/or a 80 IQ to be licensed. Driving has become a right, so that stupid people who can't read "merge" or comprehend the meaning of "yield" must be granted licenses, imperiling the lives and fortunes of us all.

Damn lawyers.

Adding insult to personal injury, as it were, the tort-bar vultures run TV ads -- illiterate submorons watch lots of TV, y'know -- encouraging everybody who has ever been in an accident to sue the bejeebers out somebody.

Damn lawyers.

All legislation is written by lawyers, for the exclusive benefit of lawyers. The paperwork must be approved by lawyers. The various disclaimers and questionaires and the valuable time wasted in complying with all this bureaucratic nonsense . . .

Damn lawyers.

How do you become a lawyer? By being the kind of goody-two-shoes apple-polishing teacher's pet who excels at homework, who complies happily with all the rules, who accumulates a perfect-attendance record and daily gold stars from kindergarten onward, cheerfully filling out application forms, becoming vice-president of various student clubs, and devoting every effort to writing admissions essays -- that is to say, by being the kind of obedient twerp universally despised by normal human beings.

You trod that twerpish path until you get a law degree and pass a bar exam and then -- presto! -- your fellow lawyers grant you the awesome power that you will then exercise to inflict punishment on the rest of mankind until that day (which won't come soon enough for me) when you die.

That hour of my life I just wasted on the phone jumping through those bureaucratic hoops? There is a God in heaven, who sees and knows your lawyerly evil, and he shall recompense in full measure. One day that trumpet will sound, and at the Last Judgment, the wicked shall be cast into the lake of fire, a white-hot fire fueled by the eternal incineration of thousands upon ten thousands of . . .

Damned lawyers.

Governor Rick Perry on states that don't suck, e.g. Texas

by Smitty

Texas adds an average of 1,000 people a day, and is running a budget surplus.
Governor Rick Perry explains that it's really simple, ableit not easy, on this Instavision installment.
The Dallas Tea Party has explicitely invited Janeane Garofalo to disabuse herself of the notion that the DTP is a bunch of "racist redneck teabaggers", or whatever noise escaped her.
Note to Bob McDonnell in VA: you are invited to crib from Governor Perry at length, and in detail.
Hint: subscribe. A) PJTV is performing a crucial service, and B) the advanced player has significantly better performance.
Another non-racist redneck teabagger would be Deroy Murdock

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Video: 'Fox & Friends' on IG-Gate

Sorry about having to use video from Media Matters, but watch it anyway:

The "Fox & Friends" people are actually mischaracterizing the situation, as I understand it. According to my sources, Amtrak IG Fred Wiederhold decided on his own to retire, during a meeting where he presented the report from Willkie, Farr & Gallagher.

As the situation was described to me, the hostile reaction at the June 18 meeting convinced Wiederhold that Amtrak was going to continue its interference with the IG's office. So he decided to retire rather than continue butting his head against the wall. Therefore, Wiederhold wasn't forced out, as the "Fox & Friends" crew suggest, although it certainly wasn't an amicable parting.

Notice something important here: Wiederhold hasn't gone running to the media with his side of the story. Nor will he. People will be subpoenaed and will testify under oath. The truth will come out -- or else.

Think about this. Sen. Grassley has asked Amtrak to make available for interviews four staffers from the inspector general's office. If Amtrak officials have illegally interfered with the IG's work -- and this is the allegation, at least -- then it is natural to expect some CYA by those officials. But when a federal investigation is underway, run-of-the-mill CYA can very easily become perjury, obstruction of justice and conspiracy.

And the same is also true in the AmeriCorps/Walpin case and the ITC/Gwynn case. As they say in Washington, it's not the crime, it's the cover-up. Which is why, of the four IG probes now underway, the "SIGTARP" case -- involving Neil Barofsky, who's still on the job as special inspector general for the TARP bailout -- probably presents the most explosive potential.

Barofsky has been scratching around on the AIG bonuses, and he's already reported that there has been all kinds of waste, fraud and abuse with the TARP bailout. As Dan Reihl was one of the first to notice, if you read between the lines, there seems to be some suspicion directed toward Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

The bailout was unpopular on a bipartisan basis, so if the SIGTARP situation heats up, there will be plenty of Democrats willing to vote to hold hearings so they can grill Geithner about taxpayer cash for "Wall Street fat cats." While Attorney General Eric Holder may get some scrutiny in the AmeriCorps IG case, it's the SIGTARP case that has the most potential to send a Cabinet member under the Obama bus. And trying to lie your way out of a scandal is a very dangerous thing, when it involves a federal investigation.

But that's just speculation. These investigations are now going forward regardless of what anybody says on TV, in the MSM, or on the blogosphere. No need to hype up right-wing "Fitzmas" fantasies. Just pay attention.

Dog on economy

by Smitty

The presidential dog, Bo, made some news today when he modeled the economy:

Fred Thompson fix

by Smitty

Get your Fred fix. If you only have time for one, the last is the most fun.
  • Lightning Round
    Topics on this edition of the Lightning Round include cheer leading and the Obama Press Corp, a wheel chair that reacts to brainwaves, GE being the biggest recipient of Bailout funds, The hack of Virginia’s prescription database, and the foreign policy we are using with Honduras.

  • Winners and Losers 7/1/09
    The Winners on this edition of Winners and Loser include, Pete Peterson, and Americans for Limited Government for urging the Senate to follow Senator Jim Inhofe’s call for an investigation into the EPA cover up of internal reports.
    The Losers for this edition are, is President Obama for comparing the health reform to starting a workout regimen, the other loser is Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, because of her explanation of President Obama not using the term “Global War on Terror”

  • Fred Thompson mock Interview with Al Franken
    This is a mock interview of Fred Thompson with now Senator Al Franken

Unlike 2008 . . .

"The Republican Party is going to have a hard time coming up with a strong presidential nominee in 2012."
-- Michael Barone, summarized by Instapundit

The short, bald, grouchy RINO loser the party nominated last year was, arguably, an even worse candidate than Bob Dole. And that's saying something.

A basic problem with the elite class of conservative commentators is that they cannot help but reflect the Beltway GOP's prejudices, including the sensibility that associates foreign policy/national security policy with prestige.

The domestic side of conservatism -- economic and social policy -- always suffers by comparison. A limited-government agenda is not going to get you invited on junkets funded by Raytheon and Boeing. Christian conservative stances on social policy aren't going to result in your becoming a regular on the Jim Lehrer show.

The Republican foreign-policy specialist, however, is going to get his share of guest shots on CNN whenever the situation in the Mideast goes sideways. His op-eds will be published by reputable newspapers. Democratic senators aren't going to shun the former GOP administration official who becomes a lobbyist for General Dynamic, when General Dynamic is contributing generously to the Democratic senator's campaign fund or leadership PAC.

This is why John McCain, who was never a real right-winger in his domestic policy commitments, was always such a darling of the MSM -- right up to the moment when they set him up as the Designated Republican Loser for 2008.

It was almost an exact repeat of what happened with Dole in 1996. Republicans never seem to learn: Your best candidate is always the one most hated by liberals.

Michelle Malkin Reports on IG-Gate

Michelle Malkin's syndicated column today moves the story forward substantially with this:

Sen. [Chuck] Grassley has requested that Amtrak supply information on [inspector general Fred] Weiderhold's unexpected retirement, as well as internal and personal materials related to his departure and the report on Amtrak managers' meddling. On the House side, Reps. Edolphus Towns (D.-N.Y.) and Darrell Issa (R.-Calif.) announced a probe Monday into Amtrak's actions. They zeroed in on Amtrak’s choice of Lorraine Green to replace "retired" IG Weiderhold. . . .
Who is Lorraine Green? She’s a former Amtrak human resources executive and faithful Democrat donor with no experience in the inspector general business. Her expertise? Managing "diversity initiatives" for the agency. Watchdog out. Lapdog in.

Read the whole thing. She gives me credit for pushing the story last week. I had mentioned this at The American Spectator blog:
The professional staff of the Amtrak IG office is reportedly now "terrified" about their job security, because Amtrak put their human resources director in charge of the IG staff.
Naming Lorraine Green and explaining her "diversity" specialty are important facts I didn't have. The Towns-Issa investigation is also news I hadn't heard. So Michelle is doing real reporting in her column.

One reason I get so infuriated about idiocies like the attacks on Sarah Palin is because that stuff distracts from more important things. The Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post had important stories, and I missed it. Now there will be more work to do next week, just to catch up.

Meanwhile, I've got figure out how to lay hands on an extra 200 feet of fuse, drive to Alabama, shoot off the fireworks . . .

GOP-HQ finally buys a clue!

"The financial crisis of 2008 had its roots primarily in ill-conceived government policies," reads the memo. It was prepared by Republican staffers to advise GOP members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on how to handle a recent hearing on the government's role in Bank of America's purchase of Merrill Lynch.
The memo attacks Bush's -- and Obama's -- bailout policies for exacerbating the crisis. "Given the role of government policies in creating the conditions for the housing bubble which caused the financial crisis, it is remarkable that the prescription of the Bush Administration and the Democratic Congress was more government intervention in the economy," it says. "The Obama administration has not missed a stride."
Somebody at GOP-HQ has finally got a clue to what Michelle Malkin -- and Heritage, and Cato, and Instapundit, and every other actual pro-market individual or institution in America -- has been saying for more than a year: Keynesian "pump-priming" does not work, and is not conservative.

Next, it may become safe to say what Bruce Barlett said in 2006: George W. Bush never was a conservative.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God almighty . . .


Just finished the Vanity Fair article by Todd Purdum (earlier comments: Part I, Part II, Part III) and discovered that Professor Glenn Reynolds had dubbed my recent blogging a "Palinpalooza." This would also include:To demonstrate the basic problem with Purdum's article -- and much other press treatment of the Alaska governor -- let's turn to Page 9:
More than once in my travels in Alaska, people brought up, without prompting, the question of Palin’s extravagant self-regard. Several told me, independently of one another, that they had consulted the definition of “narcissistic personality disorder” in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders—“a pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy”—and thought it fit her perfectly.
Right. Did Purdum ever write about the narcissism of Bill "Better Put Some Ice On That" Clinton? Of course not. Nor has Todd Purdum ever written about the extravagant self-regard of Crazy Cousin John, whose "pervasive pattern of grandiosity" involved the "fantasy or behavior" of his quixotic presidential campaign -- a campaign that, Purdum observes, involved the belated and impulsive choice of a running mate for whom "no serious vetting had been done."

Digression: Why can't anyone from Team Maverick ever take responsibility for their own failures? It could be argued, given the disastrous result of his campaign, that everyone who supported him in the Republican primaries was guilty of flawed judgment. (Purdum notes that, after McCain clinched the GOP nomination, Palin didn't publicly endorse him -- evidence of superior judgment on her part, I'd say.)

Yet Purdum wants to talk "grandiosity" about Palin, while Barack Obama believes he can suspend the laws of economics? (It Won't Work. The Fundamentals Suck. Economics Is Not a Popularity Contest. Weimar America.)

The problem with the MSM is not that it has no standards, but that it has two standards. Or perhaps -- considering how the MSM savaged Hillary Clinton in the primaries last year -- we can now say there are three standards: One for Republicans, one for Obama, and one for Democrats who get thrown under Obama's bus.

But back to the Vanity Fair article: If none of McCain's aides had the foresight to anticipate his selection of Palin -- which would explain the lack of "serious vetting" -- whose fault is that? And if choosing an unvetted running mate was a blunder, whose blunder was it?

This is what the Blame Sarah First crusade by McCain campaign staffers is about: Exculpating them for their own bad judgment, including their decisions to join the McCain campaign in the first place. Make her the scapegoat, so they can walk away pretending that they're perfect.

Of all the decisions for which Sarah Palin has been criticized, saying "yes" when asked to be Maverick's running mate was most clearly a misjudgment. I'm sure she sits home in Wasilla late some nights and thinks of the answer she should have given:
"Are you kidding me? That guy's nuts. Besides, he's going to get stomped in November. Why would I want to associate with a RINO loser like that?"
Well, hindsight is 20/20, eh? If Sarah Palin is reading this: Governor, please pay close attention to Part I of the Vanity Fair critique, which includes a very specific recommendation. (No, not the part about the hand grenade.) My 2008 American Spectator articles about Sarah Palin:UPDATE 11:27 a.m.: Sully's Jauvert-like determination -- "We must know the Truth!" -- gets linkage from Howie at Jawa Report, William Teach at Right Wing News, Pat in Shreveport, Professor William Jacobson and, most importantly (because she's a mother of seven) Pundette:
I've tried to avoid the disturbing weirdness from Andrew Sullivan about the birth of Trig Palin. You'd think ignoring it might make it go away, especially eight months after the election. But no. He's still beating on this ghost of a dead horse. There's something very unhealthy going on here.
Read the whole thing. Allow me once again to suggest that the "very unhealthy" part of what's going on involves a matter of identity. Sully self-consciously identifies as gay, and he identifies Gov. Palin as Mom.

Could anything be more simple? (Perhaps Dr. Helen will dare to weigh in. She's a mom, too.) The unnoted imbalance in the Sully-Palin grudge match is that Sully's gay identity is politically protected in contemporary America, while Palin's maternal identity is not.

The War Against Mom is one of the most hideous aspects of postmodern misogyny.

UPDATE 12:19 p.m.: Red State's Moe Lane advises to back away from the Sully-bomb. And I have tried to avoid it. Honestly, Ace of Spades has been doing an excellent job on the Bomb Squad, behind his Kevlar pseudonym.

It took a helluva lot of provocation -- Sully's accusation that I am an advocate of "genocide"(!) -- to make me finally take the risk of saying in my own name what Ace has been saying for months: Sully's got a problem that is not strictly political in nature.

One of the horrible realities of the Culture War is that in the past 30 years, the opportunistic political exploitation of the AIDS pandemic has converted the vibe of the gay community from Mardi Gras on Bourbon Street into the spirit of the 1934 Nuremberg Rally. The remorseless momentum of sexual politics has changed "gay" from a hedonistic personal proclivity -- Laissez les bon temps rouler -- into the totalitarian identity of the ubermenschen.

What is tragic about Andrew Sullivan's recent totalitarian turn is that he was one of the most famous victims of the brownshirt "outing" squad. Sully was forced out of the closet in the most vicious way possible and has evidently taken the wrong lesson from that experience. Rather than join forces with freedom-lovers like Tammy Bruce, who oppose the Ernst Rohms of the Official Gay Movement, Sullivan appears to have succumbed to a species of Stockholm Syndrome, adopting the mentality of his tormenters.

Sullivan seems to prosecute his crusade against Sarah Palin's privacy on the theory that, "If my sexuality cannot be private, no one's sexuality can be private." Thereby he advances the Orwellian specter in which all of us might as well post a YouTube video of our every sexual act, because there can be no privacy in the Big Brother state, where the personal is political -- and vice-versa.

It is not too late for Sullivan to renounce this evil, but he will not renounce it until he recognizes it as evil. Sorry that it took a "skilled attention whore" to point this out.

UPDATE 1:05 p.m.: "Shocking Crime Against Humanity"!

'Questions that any sane person would ask'

Dr. Andrew Sullivan, M.D., OBY-GYN, is an expert on these questions, you know.

Utterly lacking self-awareness, but yet still an expert on the care and treatment of pregnant Republicans. He is genuinely concerned about the health and well-being of pregnant Republicans and their children.

To quote the same eminent expert: "Words fail."

Via Memeorandum, more at American Power, Jammie Wearing Fool and Daley Gator.

This evening, my wife asked me to ride along while she drove to pick up our 16-year-old twin sons, who work on the grounds crew for the Hagerstown Suns baseball team.

The "how was your day" question is kind of weird for a blogger to explain, and I began by trying to describe Ken Layne's attack on Trig Palin -- quite stunning to my wife. Still, she disapproved of my use of a certain 10-letter compound word to describe Ken Layne. (Me, defending the word choice: "But I meant it literally.")

OK, so maybe Layne should be called Ace's "unobjectionable, family-friendly" phrase, rather than the offensive compound word. To-may-to, to-mah-to.

After more explanation to my wife, she wondered why Palin continues to be attacked in such a personal manner. Exactly. I erupted in exasperation: "What is it with these people? We're eight months past the election and more than three years away from the next one and yet, day after day, they find excuses to attack her!"

Speaking of "the questions that any sane person would ask": Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

There are many Palin-related questions to which I would like an answer. Among them: Why hasn't the horribly mutilated corpse of Levi Johnston been fed to the wolves?

Am I "any sane person"? Of course not. Neither is Sully. He is a victim of "MSM journalists [who] have devoted their efforts to demonizing any journalist who tries" to ask the questions that any sane person would ask.

The student of logic pictures the Venn diagram with two non-intersecting circles. Circle A represents a category including "MSM journalists" and Circle B includes "any sane person," i.e., people obsessed with the circumstances surrounding the birth of Trig Palin.

So you are crazy, while the Atlantic Monthly Memorial Hospital's chief resident in obstetrics, Dr. Andrew Sullivan M.D., OB-GYN, is perfectly sane. His opinions are a Rorshach test; if you look at the inkblot and see something other than Truth, you're nuts.

Amazingly simple, isn't it? His Venn diagram categories are beyond argument, because he is an expert.

As opposed to, say, Pundette. She's only given birth to seven children, what does she know? Pundette may look at the circumstances of Palin's pregnancy and come to different conclusions. Palin was a woman in her 40s, with a stressful job, pregnant with her fifth child, attending an event in a faraway state, begins leaking amniotic fluid . . .

Hey, Pundette, do you think maybe emotion was involved in the ensuing events? Do you think that actions by Palin which strike Dr. Sullivan as inexplicable might have seemed entirely appropriate to a woman in such difficult circumstances? And do you understand why maybe the governor doesn't wish to discuss those circumstances and her actions with a guy from the Anchorage Daily News?
"Governor, let's talk about your uterus . . ."
Pundette lacks the expertise necessary to discuss these matters with the authority of Dr. Sullivan.

And she probably wouldn't want to disagree with him, because if you disagree with Dr. Sullivan, you're crazy.

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

VF on Sarah Palin, Part III

Part I and Part II of my comments, and now I draw your attention to this on Page 8:
Palin's victory that November [2006, when she was elected governor of Alaska] was one of the flukiest successes in modern American politics.
But the victory of Barack Obama in 2008 -- when just four years earlier, he had been a mere state legislator in Illinois -- was destiny!

Utterly predictable 'news'

The rap magazine Vibe is going out of business.

Right. A form of entertainment produced by and for subliterate cretins, celebrating the criminality and misogyny of the worst elements of Da Thug Life. The biggest news about this form of entertainment is when riots break out at the awards ceremonies or one of the performers is the victim of a drive-by assassination.

Let's produce a monthly magazine about that . . . what could possibly go wrong?

Incidentally, I understand that times are also tough at Monster Truck and Tractor-Pull Weekly . . .

VF on Sarah Palin, Part II

Part I of my comments here, and now I've just picked up the article again. Once more on Page 4, read that "no serious vetting had been done" (and whose fault was that?) followed by assertion of Palin's "slipperiness," followed immediately by the statement that Palin was "unwilling, or simply unable" to prepare for the Couric interview.

This is clearly an effort to blame Palin for whatever went wrong in an interview that never should have been scheduled.

Palin would have been solid gold in any impromptu encounter with reporters on the campaign trail. Putting her into one-on-one interviews with the network anchors -- eager to draw blood with "gotcha" questions -- was a stupid blunder on the part of the campaign.

To schedule those interviews, and then to arrange sessions to "prepare" her for them, was to imply that she was incapable of handling the interviews without the "expert" assistance of the Team Maverick brain trust which, of course, had committed her to these interviews in the first place.

Am I the only one who sees that the problem with how Palin was "handled" had nothing to do with Palin and everything to do with the handlers? She is being made the scapegoat for the failures of others.

Put your name on it, a**hole

Just deleted a comment on an earlier thread in which the commenter asserted his professional expertise and then proceeded to lecture me about how horribly wrong I was, et cetera.

Nice try, Anonymous. Remind me to speak with Mr. Porsche M. Key about standards of comment moderation. No "expert" attacks from the conveniently anonymous who, for all we know, may be another of Glenn Greenwald's sock-puppets.

Surely there are genuine experts who would be willing to offer a critique of my writing ("pronounced grandiosity" . . . "expansive mood" . . . "suggestions of persecution") and will immediately begin proceedings to have me involuntarily committed for treatment . . .

Hey, didn't Ken Kesey write a book about that?

Franken and the future

by Smitty

NTCNews notes the Minnesota Supreme Court results adding another superstar of Roland Burris proportions to the US Senate.
The Minnesota blog of record, PowerLine, has the sober, mature review. A less sober, immature view of situtations like this is to be found here, [NSFW]:

What to do? Thoughts include:
  • Tea Party participation. Got plans?
  • Supporting Republican gubernatorial candidates in NJ and VA.
  • Going Galt on the economy.
  • Venting on effingconservatives as required. Unload your Tourettes impulses there in the comments with us.
  • Make Congresscritters sick of hearing from me.
I submit that there will never be a more critical period, and few equals, as the next 18 months of US history. Since we've now crossed the imaginary legislation horizon, we've a sewage-like stream of liberal nightmares moving towards us. That which we do or fail to do is going to have grave consequences. I submit that the seemingly empathetic twist with which shenanigans in Iran and Honduras are viewed by this administration may be a hound of ill omen for our own future.