- Home
- About Us
- Contributors
- Departments
- Topics
- Back Issues
- Weekly Archives
- AmSpecBlog
- Subscribe
- Newsletter
- Advertise
- Donate
- Contact Us
- Daily Digest
- Templeton Essays
- Jan 4–10 11–17 18–24 25–31
- Feb 1–7 8–14 15–21 22–28
- Mar 1–7 8–14 15–21 22–28 29–31
- Apr 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–30
- May 1–2 3–9 10–16 17–23 24–30 31
- Jun 1–6 7–13 14–20 21–27 28–30
- Jul 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–31
- Aug 1 2–8 9–15 16–22 23–29 30–31
- Sep 1–5 6–12 13–19 20–26 27–30
- Oct 1–3 4–10 11–17 18–24 25–31
- Nov 1–7 8–14 15–21
Saturday, September 5, 2009
Grist's David Roberts Defends Van Jones, Ward Churchill of the Greens
Posted by on 9.5.09 @ 6:45PM
The America-hating communist 9/11 "truther" Van Jones has an ally in his fellow Huffington Post writer David Roberts.
Roberts of Grist, a misanthropic far-left environmentalist webzine bankrolled by many of the same funders who have backed Van Jones's nonprofit ventures, is currently in contention to be the most shameless liar of the left-o-sphere.
We already know that Jones believes George W. Bush hates black people. Jones founded Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM) and the Ella Baker Center both of which participated in a vigil the day after Sept. 11, 2001, "mourning the victims of U.S. imperialism around the world."
Jones sounded like Ward Churchill when he released a statement Sept. 12, 2001, mourning only "the deaths of innocent working class people" and "those who would surely lose their lives in subsequent U.S. attacks overseas." It seems anyone who died in the terrorist attacks who wasn't working class deserved to die, according to Jones's own words.
Roberts, like his idol Van Jones, spews leftist hate from Grist and the Huffington Post on a regular basis.
In a recent post, he deliberately distorts evidence to falsely claim that green jobs czar (and Arianna Huffington pal) Van Jones renounced communism.
Roberts should win the Walter Duranty Prize for writing Sept. 2 that "Jones is not a black nationalist or a communist."
While it is true that Jones distanced himself from his past as a "rowdy black nationalist," he has NEVER renounced communism.
Roberts performs this sleight-of-hand by basing his argument on an interview in 2005 that Jones gave to an alternative newspaper called East Bay Express. Jones said that he came out of jail after the Rodney King riots and "spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary...I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," Jones said. "By August, I was a communist."
In the same interview Jones explained how he changed his public image Alinsky-style but retained his core radical beliefs. "I'm willing to forgo the cheap satisfaction of the radical pose for the deep satisfaction of radical ends," Jones said. The article also details the evolution of Jones as a coalition-builder and dealmaker but never indicates that his core beliefs have changed. More importantly, Jones himself has never indicated that his core beliefs changed.
The evidence that the now-mature community organizer Jones still believes in communism is EVERYWHERE. Google "communism" and "Van Jones" and the ever-expanding oceans of research from credible sources burst forth. Much of the evidence comes right out of Jones's own mouth.
Roberts's propaganda platform, Grist, is funded by some of the same extremist foundations that have funded Van Jones's revolutionary activism over the years. Grist took in $1 million from the Kendada Fund in 2008. It has also received $175,000 from the Tides Foundation since 2004.
According to philanthropy databases, Green for All, another Jones creation that is part of a cynical Obama administration effort to use 9/11 for political purposes, has received charitable contributions from the Kendada Fund ($1 million in 2008). A major donor to the Ella Baker Center is Tides Foundation ($891,168 since 2000).
Meanwhile, more America-hating radicals are speaking out in support of Van Jones. Useful idiot Josh Nelson announces that a website called StandWithVan.com has been created.
Obamanomics Apocalypse: FHA and the Next Mortgage Meltdown
Posted by on 9.5.09 @ 3:57PM
Readers impatient for the frightening news -- FHA delinquencies above 14% and the prospects of yet another mortgage catastrophe -- should feel free to click through and see for themselves. However, it may be worth a minute of your time to recall that it didn't take an economic expert to see this disaster coming:
- It Won't Work December 8, 2008
- Dept. of It Won't Work December 24, 2008
- CBO: 'It Won't Work' February 5, 2009
- It Still Won't Work February 9, 2009
- Got Malaise Yet? February 9, 2009
- The Fiscal Trap of Hope February 15, 2009
- Karl Rove: 'It Won't Work' March 6, 2009
- The Fundamentals Still Suck May 4, 2009
- Bank of America $35 Billion Short? May 6, 2009
- The Obamanomics Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test May 29, 2009
- Guess What? It's Not Working July 7, 2009
- Dr. Bernanke's Prescription July 13, 2009
- Goldman Sachs and the Next Bubble July 13, 2009
- U.S. Will Pay 'Long Time' For Bailout and Deficits, Says Author September 2, 2009
All of which is to say that the failure of the deficit-funded bailout-and-stimulus agenda of Obamanomics was clearly predictable from the outset. There was never a shortage of critics who warned that this neo-Keynesian approach to economic policy would fail, producing stagflation instead of recovery. Now we see that the unemployment rate is at 9.7% and even "prime" borrowers are feeling the mortgage crunch and -- as David Hogberg of Investors Business Daily was the first to report this week -- the Federal Housing Administration's effort to patch up the housing bubble has left taxpayers on the hook for what promises to be . . . The Mother of All Bailouts.
Don't say you weren't warned.
Liberal Challenge to Obama in 2012?
Posted by on 9.5.09 @ 11:18AM
Amazing. "The One" hasn't even been president for seven months and already the Left is talking about a primary challenge in 2012. According to Rasmussen Reports:
Leading liberals are already thinking the unthinkable: Challenging President Obama for the Democratic nomination in 2012.
According to a report on the left-leaning Huffington Post website, MSNBC host Keith Olbermann and Eugene Robinson, an African-American national columnist for The Washington Post, discussed just such a possibility Thursday night. Robinson said Obama needs to be careful how he handles the health care reform issue and the continuing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Olbermann said the president has "compromised on everything so far and as self-defeating as it may be, the progressive caucus and progressives would abandon him if necessary, if this was to be the policy of this administration into 2012. If it's necessary to find somebody to run against him, I think they'd do it, no matter how destructive that may seem."
Politics might just get more interesting, if that's possible!
Saving Money in the UK
Posted by on 9.5.09 @ 10:35AM
Most of the health reform dreamers look to the UK as a model of what we should be doing. Great Britain is about a decade ahead of us in moving toward national health information technology, comparative effectiveness research, and pay-for-performance. The results of these experiments are not encouraging. Here are some recent headlines:
'Cruel and neglectful' care of one million NHS patients exposed: One million NHS patients have been the victims of appalling care in hospitals across Britain, according to a major report released today.
Women heart attack victims 'are dying needlessly'
Sentenced to death on the NHS: Patients with terminal illnesses are being made to die prematurely under an NHS scheme to help end their lives, leading doctors have warned.
You get the drift. But, by golly, they’ve got costs under control, eh?
Big PhRMA: Doing What it is Supposed to Do
Posted by on 9.5.09 @ 8:07AM
The drugmakers are widely attacked, occasionally for good cause--such as when they spend millions of dollars promoting Obamacare. But when they are good, they are very good. Like looking for cancer cures.
Writes Andrew Pollack in the New York Times:
Virtually every large pharmaceutical company seems to have discovered cancer, and a substantial portion of the smaller biotechnology companies are focused on it as well. Together, the companies are pouring billions of dollars into developing cancer drugs.
Two industry trends are driving the push. Recent scientific discoveries have suggested new targets for cancer drug researchers to attack. And as drug companies see profits beginning to wane from mainstays like Lipitor, the high prices that cancer drugs can command have become an irresistible lure.
About 860 cancer drugs are being tested in clinical trials, according to the pharmaceutical industry's main trade group. That is more than twice the number of experimental drugs for heart disease and stroke combined, nearly twice as many as for AIDS and all other infectious diseases combined, and nearly twice as many as for Alzheimer's and all other neurological diseases combined.
But for all the industry's spending and effort, only a trickle of new cancer drugs make it to market. Last year there were two, and this year there has been only one.
And even some of those drugs offer only a few months at most of extra life or tumor stabilization despite prices that often reach thousands of dollars a month. The drug Tarceva, which costs about $3,500 a month, was approved as a treatment for pancreatic cancer because it improved survival by 12 days.
The battle to treat cancer has become, as a commentary in a leading journal put it, a "grinding war of the trenches."
Why? Experts say the same factors that attract drug companies to the cancer business help explain the slow progress.
Finding new drugs is expensive. The cost is not primarily that of production, but of discovery--including the expense of all the many dry holes drilled along the way. We all would prefer to pay less for drugs, but government price controls under whatever guise risk killing the golden goose, slowing the supply of new products which just might be the medicine which save our life, or that of a relative or friend.
Giving ObamaCare the Finger
Posted by on 9.5.09 @ 12:21AM
Sixty-five-year-old ObamaCare opponent William Rice
had his pinky bitten off by an irate supporter of the
Government-run healthcare option during a heated altercation at a
MoveOn.org rally in Thousand Oaks, California.
Giving ObamaCare the Finger
By Asher Embry
Bill Rice rejects ObamaCare with more than just a sign.
He had 10 fingers going in and now has only nine.
The culprit, from MoveOn.org, bit more than he could chew.
Their message: Cross Obama and they’ll do the same to you.
Old Bill can send a strong reply; it’s really quite a
zinger.
To show how much he really cares: Just give Barack the finger.
(You can read more of Asher Embry's Political Verse at www.politicalverse.com.)
Friday, September 4, 2009
Interdepartmental Cooperation Fails
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 5:27PM
In Jericho, Arkansas, a police officer has apparently taken a scrimmage between cops and fireman to the max: first the cops ticketed the fire chief for speeding twice in one day, and then when the chief complained in court he upped the ante by shooting him on the spot.
It's a story that really has to be read in full to be believed. It seems that this tiny town of 174 residents had a police force of seven that really stretched its mandate to the absolute limit.
"You can't even get them to answer a call because normally they're writing tickets," said Thomas Martin, chief investigator for the Crittenden County Sheriff's Department. "They're not providing a service to the citizens."
Now the police chief has disbanded his force "until things calm down," a judge has voided all outstanding police-issued citations and sheriff's deputies are asking where all the money from the tickets went.
That's right -- the police chief straight-up disbanded his police force. Is there any precedent for that?
Why Global Warming May be Good
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 4:33PM
If National Geographic is to be believed, global warming is helping hold off the next ice age:
Humans are putting the brakes on the next ice age, according to the most extensive study to date on Arctic climate change.
The Arctic is now warmer than it's been in the past 2,000 years-a trend that is reversing a natural cooling cycle dictated by a wobble in Earth's axis.
Previously, researchers had looked at Arctic temperature data that went back just 400 years. (See photos of how climate change is transforming the Arctic.)
That research showed a temperature spike in the 20th century, but it was unclear whether human-caused greenhouse gas emissions or natural variability was the culprit, noted study co-author Gifford Miller of the Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research at the University of Colorado, Boulder.
By looking even farther back in time, Miller and colleagues' newest study reveals that the 20th century's abrupt warming in fact interrupted millennia of steady cooling.
It's "pretty clear that the most reasonable explanation for that reversal is due to increasing greenhouse gases," Miller said.
The researchers' computer climate models dovetails with field data such as sediment cores and tree rings, which "really ... solidifies our understanding," he said.
Eventually Earth will slip again into the pattern of cyclical ice ages, Miller added, but it may be thousands of years before that happens.
Being hot sure beats freezing to death. Perhaps we should be trying to further warm up the earth.
Spread the word: global warming may be good!
Hat Tip to Blogometer
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 2:44PM
Regular readers of this site know that I try hard to give credit to other bloggers and journalists when they break stories or come up with interesting analyses. But when a site's whole purpose is not to break new stuff, there isn't much chance to give that site a hat tip for its work. Nevertheless, an essential site for a GREAT roundup of blog opinion, one who doesn't get much public thanks because of the very nature of his task, is the Hotline's blogometer, compiled by Ian Faerstein. I post this now for no particular reason other than just to pay well-earned regards to somebody who always is quite kind in noticing the Spectator. Every day at about 1 p.m. Ian posts his roundup, and it's always well worth a look. And no, he doesn't know I'm posting this.
Birthers, Ruffini and the Urge to Purge
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 1:52PM
Quin Hillyer is correct, as is his habit, in warning against the dangers the "pseudo-intellectual" tendency poses to conservatism. And certainly Patrick Ruffini is correct that the "Birther" conspiracy theorists are both wrong and a potential source of embarrassment to conservatives.
However, I disagree with Ruffini's nostalgic longing for a return to the days when William F. Buckley Jr. (allegedly) reigned as the sole arbiter of what was, and was not, conservative. Such rear-view mirror perspectives neglect the reality of changes in the political landscape.
In the mid-1950s, Buckley and a relative handful of others -- we might name Whittaker Chambers, Willmoore Kendall, Frank Meyer, Russell Kirk and Richard Weaver among them -- created an intellectual movement quite nearly from scratch. The engagement between that intellectual movement and real-world considerations of electoral politics was, for many years, quite indirect.
There were few if any institutions through which the relatively small clique of conservative intellectuals who orbited National Review could exercise political influence, and so such institutions were built from the ground up over the course of several decades. ISI and YAF, Regnery Publishing, the Heritage Foundation, talk radio, Fox News -- a few points on a sprawling graph tracing the growth of the conservative movement. A large, established, broad-based movement (Rush Limbaugh is estimated to reach as many as 20 million listeners weekly) does not function in the same way that it did when it began as a sort of intellectual rebellion in the 1950s.
Therefore, Ruffini's wish for a latter-day Buckley, who might purge the Birthers, is to a large degree impractical. The most influential people and institutions in the conservative movement have nothing to do with the Birthers, and if some others wish to consign themselves to an irrelevant conspiracy-theory cul-de-sac -- which is what Birtherism is -- the rest of us cannot stop them. There is no need to purge anyone; they've effectively purged themselves.
Yet Patrick Ruffini is not merely a conservative intellectual, pondering philosophical truths in a cloister. He is a professional Republican political entrepreneur, whose firm, EngageDC, describes itself thus:
We help innovative political and public affairs clients seize the high ground in a chaotic new media environment defined by the 24-hour news cycle, blogs, and YouTube.
Our team is distinguished by its work on the toughest battles in recent political history, with on-the-ground experience ranging from the 2004 Bush-Cheney campaign, the Republican National Committee, the 2008 Romney for President campaign, and serving dozens of Members of Congress. Led by Mindy Finn, a veteran eCampaign Strategist for two presidential campaigns, and Patrick Ruffini, a former RNC eCampaign Director and a pioneer of political blogging,
Straddling the worlds of politics, commerce and intellect in such a manner must surely be a challenging task, and Ruffini manages it admirably. Yet this biographical information about Ruffini -- he is young, savvy, and engaged with GOP political online operations at a high level -- illustrates the distance between him and grassroots activists like Barbara Espinosa.
Grassroots conservative activists are, by their very nature, not engaged in the political process as a career. They tend to be older, well-established in non-political occupations and less concerned about the Big Picture questions than in finding immediate, practical ways to oppose the menace of liberalism. The question one hears from the grassroots is not, "Whither conservatism?" but rather, "What can I do?"
The Tea Party movement -- which will host a major rally in Washington next weekend -- has given the grassroots something to do, so that joining en masse to voice their opposition to the Obama agenda, they are actively engaged in the political process.
However, grassroots activism has consequences. One of the consequences of a ressurgent conservative grassroots is that their concerns, beliefs and attitudes are sometimes not in sync with the concerns, beliefs and attitudes of smart young Republican activists like Patrick Ruffini.
We cannot deny evidence that some grassroots conservatives are sympathetic to the "Birther" meme. (To cite one bumper sticker slogan: "Kenya Called. They Want Their Marxist Back.") And those who are pushing that meme are diverting attention from more valid critiques of the Obama administration and its liberal policies. So they should be discouraged or ignored.
It is wrong, however, for Ruffini to long for a neo-Buckley to play the role of conservative pope and excommunicate the heretics. And it is also wrong for Ruffini to buy into liberal propaganda, to wit:
I still remember a time when success and intellectual achievement were more often than not conservative virtues, and I remember WFB looming large in this framework. Recent Democratic gains within the creative and educated classes have eroded this image, creating a media dynamic where intelligence is seen as aligning with the left within the Democratic Party, and the center within the Republican Party.
One might ponder the sources of those "recent Democratic gains within the creative class" without freaking out because WorldNetDaily publishes some article tending toward Birtherism. Considering myself both creative and educated, I do not suffer from any status insecurity about voting trends among my peers. And I do not think that a purge of Joseph Farah -- who was pioneering online media when Patrick Ruffini was still a schoolboy -- would be a net positive for conservatism.
You cannot build a movement by a process of subtraction.
'Keep Your Hands Out of the Cages, Children...'
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 1:51PM
...the exhibitionist dancer cages, that is.
Van Jones A Truther in 2002
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 12:58PM
News: Van Jones was there at the beginning of the Truther movement.
Bruce F. Webster over at And I Still Persist alerts that there is still more pouring forth about Van Jones. It seems that in January of 2002 - mere months after 9/11- Van Jones signed onto a statement calling for a march on the San Francisco office of Senator Dianne Feinstein. Read this...Mr. Webster's site will lead you appropriately to the original source, keyed to us all by the folks at Gateway Pundit. Here also is the direct link to the original posting in case efforts are made to "disappear" this now hot site.
This is truly nutty stuff from the outer precincts inhabited by the tin foil brigades, beginning with demands for an investigation into the ties between Osama bin Ladin and then-President Bush.
But our man Van was right there at the the Truther takeoff. Does the Obama White House understand that Jones will be detracting from the POTUS health care speech to Congress?
We'll see.
(R, MA)?
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 12:05PM
I would be interested in reading Jim Antle's thoughts on this CQ article on the possibility of a Republican successor to Ted Kennedy for the Massachusetts senate seat.
I am not an expert but I am skeptical of the idea that Massachusetts Republicans are capable of mounting an effective race. The CQ article references the 36 percent of Mass. voters who went for McCain in the last election in addition to a large block of independents, but the first step toward uniting those voters behind a candidate would be fielding a real candidate. Recent history suggests that might be a tall order...
The favorite at this point has to be Joe Kennedy.
I think Curt Schilling, who is profiled in the article, legitimately could have won a statewide race in November of 2004 or even 2007.
Thesis Writing 101
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 11:17AM
Thus the history of nations teaches us the necessity of the Union with Christ.
To be sure, even when we study the history of the individual and the nature of man, we always see a divine spark in his breast, an enthusiasm for the Good, a striving for perception, a longing for truth-but the sparks of the eternal are smothered by the flame of lust. The enthusiasm for virtue is stifled by the tempting voice of sin, which is made ridiculous when the full power of life is felt. The striving for perception is replaced by the inferior striving for worldly goods; the longing for truth is extinguished by the sweet-smiling power of the lie; and so man stands, the only creature that does not fulfill its goal, the only member in all Creation not worthy of the God that created him. But the benevolent Creator does not hate his handiwork; he wanted to elevate it to his own level and He sent us his Son, through whom He calls to us: "Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. Abide in me, and I in you [John 15:3-4].
Anyone want to guess who wrote those words? It was a youthful Karl Marx, writing for a pre-university religion class. A mere 13 years later, he would publish The Communist Manifesto, the work that would make him one of the most famous and influential atheists of all time.
It is uncommon for an individual's views not to change between the end of his or her education and establishment in the world. Formal education offers a chance to try on a number of ideas, write about them, and evaluate how truly they represent your own perspective.
That's why Bob McDonnell should be given a pass for the graduate thesis he wrote over two decades ago. Some of the conservative ideologies he expressed were extreme; some less so. His career since then has shown good judgment in discerning which ideas to embrace as policy, and which to leave alone. But if this attack on McDonnell from the Washington Post is unwarranted, it serves at least as a helpful reminder: unearth your old college term papers and destroy them.
Ruffini Mostly on Target
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 10:51AM
Patrick Ruffini has an extremely thoughtful and almost entirely on-the-mark essay at The Next Right about how the right needs to stop "wearing scorn as a badge of honor" and stop treating all intellectualism as if it is the equivalent of a lack of conservatism. To be sure, there is a lot of pseudo-intellectuallizing that goes on that treats either social conservatism or, less often, limited-government conservatism as if it is the province only of gap-toothed rubes (think Kathleen Parker and Mike Gerson, respectively). As a conservative on all thre levels -- fiscal, social, and defense -- I reject that pseudo-intellectualizing. But Ruffini does have a point in saying that far too many people on the right have such huge cultural chips on their shoulders that they see ANY attempt to apply formal logic and reason and learning as if it as an attack on conservatism itself and all they hold dear -- even if the attempt is itself in defense of conservatism. In short, Ruffini rightly says that we need to be open to new Buckleys, and he is right.
That said, I must offer one mild corrective to Patrick. He writes parenthetically that "It's true that Ronald Reagan was not a book learner..." No, it is not true. Not true at all. He was a tremendous book learner, an unbelievably avid reader. Bob Novak noted that fact in his memoir; I'll get the citation in a little while. Many,many others have attested to Reagan's voracious reading appetite. Not only that, but Reagan almost always was a straight-A student as well, except for one semester at college when he was struggling financially. IT does us no good to keep alive the myth that Reagan wasn't book smart. He was, and he was learned, and he was not at all an anti-intellectual.
Daily Must-Reads
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 10:30AM
- Murtha's federally-funded personal airport: $150 million in federal earmarks have been doled out for an airport that sees fewer than 30 people per day and only services trips to Washington, DC (Wall Street Journal)
- UN Relief and Works Agency backs down from teaching holocaust to Palestinians at its schools after Hamas complains and denies the atrocities took place. Apparently beggars can be delusional choosers (CNSNews)
- Obama's approval rating dips into the fifties in Illinois (Chicago Tribune)
- "Africentric" public school set to open this week in Toronto. Canada seems to be adopting separate-but-special (CBC.ca)
Failed Stimulus
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 10:22AM
If there were one thing that a stimulus package could do effectively, it would be preventing layoffs by state governments. State governments are required to balance their budgets, meaning that in downturns they exacerbate the panic in the private sphere by having to cut public jobs when tax receipts dry up. The federal government, however, facing no balanced-budget restriction, can give the states a countercyclical tool by transferring funds to keep state employees on the payrolls. This disrupts the deadly pro-cyclical effect of state budget shortfalls. Furthermore, it allows for results you can measure: unlike the Obama administration's nebulous "created or saved" metric, states could simply look at their budgets and see how much money they would have had to recoup by firing workers if not for the transfers. Bottom line: any well-planned stimulus package would ensure, before anything else, that state governments didn't shed massive amounts of jobs.
And yet today the Wall Street Journal shows just how quickly panicked states all around the country are laying off or furloughing workers.
Almost makes you think that the Obama administration and Congressional Democrats crafted their stimulus with considerations other than simple economics in mind.
Markets Brace for 'Fearsome Friday'
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 5:45AM
After four consecutive days of losses, Wall Street bounced up yesterday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average posting a 64-point gain. But today is, by all accounts, The Big Day of the week.
The Labor Department will issue its key jobs report -- August non-farm payroll numbers -- at 8:30 a.m. ET today, and market-watchers seem especially jittery. Yesterday saw a strong uptick in gold prices, a safety move in troubled times, and it was a precious-metals trader who dubbed today "Fearsome Friday."
Historically, September has been a bad month on Wall Street, and last fall, the Dow lost more than 3,000 points in eight weeks after Labor Day. Whether the market goes up or down on today's jobs report, the continued high rate of unemployment -- generally expected to be at reported at 9.5% by the Labor Department -- is undermining confidence about recovery prospects:
Even if the report were to show slowing job losses, it will not be enough to shake nagging doubts that a nascent U.S. economic recovery could fizzle, analysts said on Thursday.
"I'm not sure how much the data will tell us," said T.J. Marta, market strategist at Marta on the Markets in Scotch Plains, New Jersey. "We have a pretty big structural employment problem, and that's not going away."
Public Doesn't Like Direction of Congress
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 4:49AM
Another reason moderate Dems might want to be careful before voting to nationalize the health care system.
According to Rasmussen Reports:
Fifty-one percent (51%) of voters nationwide believe that Congress is too liberal while 22% hold the opposite view and say it is too conservative. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 14% say the ideological balance of Congress is about right and 12% are not sure.
Mr. O's Classroom
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 3:06AM
President Obama, our part time teacher-in-chief, is back in his element and not even pre-K toddlers are safe from his teachable moment.
Mr. O’s
Classroom
(apologies to the great Sam
Cooke)
By Asher Embry
Won’t learn much about history.
Won’t learn much biology.
But they’re gonna get ta hear a talk
From their Substitute, who’s named Barack,
‘Bout the wonderful world this could be.
Will he lecture on ObamaCare?
“Angry Mobs” of which kids should beware?
Spew some “facts” from climate savior Gore?
‘Splain his bringing Gitmo thugs ashore?
Should he show them what a trillion buys?
Will he teach them to apologize?
Judging lawsuits based on empathy?
Using words from Van’s vocab’lary?
How to demonize the CIA?
Ignore Iran and it will go away?
2 Tril. in deficits Obama missed;
Bet algebra’s not on his subject list.
If “O” teaches kids to scream and shout
When their Doc says “take those tonsils out,”
What a wonderful world this would be.
(You can read more of Asher Embry's Political Verse at www.politicalverse.com.)
A Spinetinglingly Horrifying Pledge
Posted by on 9.4.09 @ 1:50AM
Students of history suffer spinetingling horror from time to time.
This is such an occasion.
Although this pledge to Adolph Hitler...
...is clearly not tantamount to this pledge to Barack Obama...
MySpace Celebrity and Katalyst present The Presidential
Pledge
...it is not too far removed from this pledge to Barack Obama (at least in tone)...
...which raises the question, Why would any American pledge allegiance, or in this case "service," to any president?
Americans simply do not do that.
You have to wonder if the lemming-like Hollywood airheads in this MySpace presidential pledge video in the middle of the three videos above ever watched a movie about Nazis, who had to pledge unquestioning obedience to their leader.
Many of the pledges of community service they make in the MySpace video are innocent, trite, or platitudinous, but there are a few good ones.
One pledge maker in particular seems to reject the multiculturalist nonsense peddled by the left. Football player Michael Strahan admirably pledges "to consider myself an American, not an African-American," but despite the presence of this proud non-hyphenated American the video soon gets creepy with the on-screen personalities reciting a kind of loyalty oath to the president of the United States.
At the end of the MySpace video the beautiful hive-mind people say in unison, "I pledge to be a servant to our president and all mankind because together we can, together we are, and together we will be the change that we seek."
Of the pledge video, Noel Sheppard of NewsBusters writes, "I don't know about you, but I thought our elected officials were supposed to serve us. Isn't a form of government wherein citizens serve their leaders anything BUT a democracy?"
Incidentally, I have to wonder why the paramilitary Obama Youth shown in a separate video above are not attending healthcare townhall meetings? They do a better job of explaining ObamaCare than President Obama does.
And by the way, James Joyner put up a silly, snotty blog post yesterday in which he mocked Obama skeptics.
Obviously President Obama won't be able to use a Jedi mind trick to cast a spell on the nation's children but the more we learn about him the more we learn to be suspicious of his motives. He's the most overexposed president in the history of the Republic. He doesn't need a special audience with the nation's schoolchildren because the nation's schoolchildren hear him and see him and read him every single day. They cannot escape his reach.
Why give him yet another opportunity to indoctrinate the young?
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Re: Outrageous vs. Honduras
Posted by on 9.3.09 @ 9:01PM
After I posted the earlier note about Obama's morally bankrupt policies concerning Honduras, I was notified of this absolutely superb statement from one of the best members of the U.S. Senate, South Carolina's Jim DeMint, member of the Foreign Relations Committee and chairman of the Senate Steering Committee:
"This administration is playing politics with the lives of
ordinary Hondurans in order to return an aspiring dictator to
power. They are bullying one of the world's poorest nations and a
longtime ally of the U.S.," said DeMint.
"In response to my letter last month urging this administration
to support the rule of law in Honduras, the State Department said
that U.S. ‘policy and strategy for engagement is not based on
supporting any particular politician or individual.'
Unfortunately, today's termination of aid to Honduras proves just
the opposite. Cutting aid is a slap in the face to the Honduran
people and their brave fight for democracy against a would-be
tyrant," said DeMint. "Forcing Zelaya back on the Honduran people
could violate the Honduran Constitution and proves that President
Obama's doctrine of non-intervention only exists when the mood
suits him. It is very troubling that Secretary Clinton decision
to end all aid to Honduras just moments after meeting with
Zelaya."
Van Jones Thinks 9/11 Was A Republican Campaign Ad
Posted by on 9.3.09 @ 8:07PM
Truthers are stranger than fiction.
I've been reporting for a while about what a radical whackjob President Obama's green jobs czar Van Jones is --not was, is-- and then out of the blue we learn Jones thinks President Bush orchestrated the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Sweet.
Note: The linked Fox News article above is incorrect. It states:
"Jones has mellowed considerably since the '90s. In some respects, he is about as mainstream as environmentalists come -- with recognition streaming in from high places over the past few years."
That is categorically false. He has not mellowed. He has changed his public image. That's all. That's what radical community organizers like Van Jones do.
Stevens to Retire Next Year?
Posted by on 9.3.09 @ 7:34PM
There's been lots of speculation today that Justice John Paul Stevens will retire from the Supreme Court in 2010, based on his hiring: He usually hires all four of his clerks a year ahead of time, but has only hired one clerk (retired judges are permitted to hire one clerk) for the fall 2010 term. "I look forward to a Supreme Court confirmation battle on the eve of the 2010 elections," says Curt Levey of the Committee for Justice.
Outrageous vs. Honduras
Posted by on 9.3.09 @ 5:01PM
Not that Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton care what I think, but I think their treatment of Honduras borders on the criminal.
– The Obama administration on Thursday cut all non-humanitarian aid to Honduras over the ouster of President Manuel Zelaya, making permanent a temporary suspension of U.S. aid imposed after he was deposed in June.
That was from the AP account. And this: "In addition to the aid cut, he said the State Department would revoke the U.S. visas of an unspecified number of Honduran officials who are backing Micheletti. The department had previously revoked the visas of four Honduran officials."
I defer to the great Miguel Estrada on the constitutionality of Honduras' treatment of its thuggish former president. What is it about lefties like Obama and Clinton that make them think it is okay to throw their weight around trying to force an ally to ignore its own Constitution against an anti-American, authoritarian menace like Zelaya, but NOT okay to throw their weight around in support of real democratic protesters in Iran and elsewhere who are at least more favorably disposed toward the U.S. than are their corrupt, election-rigging rulers? Why it it okay to interfere in favor of a critic of the U.S. who is also acting extraconstitutionally (under a constitution actually republican in form), but not okay to interfere in favor of a critic of a U.S. enemy who holds power only through cheating, under a constitution that is republican in name only?
In the non-formal sense of the word, the Obama/Clinton policy is almost treasonous. (In other words, not legally "treason" against the United States, but, quoting Webster's New World Collegiate Dictionary, having to do with a "betrayal of trust or faith."
Forget this "none dare call it treason" stuff. It is treasonous. It betrays our faith that our national officials will act in the best interests of the United States and in support of AMerican values of constitutional republicanism. Obama keeps SAYING he intends to act in support of our "highest values." Whose values, kemosabe? Maybe Obama values tinpot leftist thugs who violate their own nation's constitution, but I sure don't.
How Did Economists Get it So Wrong?
Posted by on 9.3.09 @ 2:00PM
That's the title of Paul Krugman's long essay on the recession's impact on academic economics in the New York Times Magazine. This is self-recommending.
The thrust of the argument is that over the years economics (in particular the neoclassical Chicago school) lost sight of John Maynard Keynes's insights into the role of unpredictable behavior in financial crises. The "freshwater" economists took the upper hand in academia because their models, while useless for describing recessions, were beautiful and simple in their mathematics. The current recession, however, has jolted them as well as the complacent New Keynesians at "saltwater" schools (i.e. the Ivies, MIT, and Berkeley) out of their complacency and should lead to a renewed appreciation for Keynes.
The essay covers a lot of ground and there's a lot to say about it. For one thing, I think that the point about the most technical, mathematical models beating out less buttoned-down but more descriptive models says something about the state of higher education.
Sept. 8 Is National Skip School for Freedom Day
Posted by on 9.3.09 @ 1:53PM
Michelle Malkin issues a hallway pass so your kid can cut class during the Obama Mass Indoctrination on Tuesday.
Rather than merely skipping just that one period, however, Steve "VodkaPundit" Green advocates ditching the whole day -- an idea endorsed by a new ad hoc organization, Hoodlums for Homeschooling. Somehow, I suspect even Ferris Bueller's teacher might approve of this plan.
Confusion, Not Clarification
Posted by on 9.3.09 @ 11:53AM
Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer, the double-minded man on cap-and-tax, is continuing his high-stepping through the the hot coals of global warming policy prescriptions. In a Flathead Beacon article that attempts to assess the prospects of the national Waxman-Markey bill, the chairman of the Western Governors Association and the Democratic Governors Association is said to “clarify” his position on carbon emissions trading schemes, but in reality he only muddies further:
In an interview last week, Schweitzer clarified his position, saying he “categorically” believes gasses produced by humans, like methane and CO2, were causing climate change and the U.S. needs to take action to reduce emissions of these gasses. But then added: “Do I believe that the carbon cap-and-trade system is the best proposal? The answer is no.”
As for Waxman-Markey, Schweitzer said, “I have some concerns with it” and that he hasn’t “been able to find anyone who can understand” the bill.
But Schweitzer would not speculate on the political prospects of Waxman-Markey’s passage, saying only that the bill is sure to be altered by the Senate and eventual conference committees, which could result in a much different bill. Nor did the governor say he backed cap-and-dividend. Instead, he said he would like to see some type of policy mechanism where fees on carbon emissions were used to develop new technologies dedicated to a cleaner, more efficient energy system, encompassing everything from carbon capture, to new transmission grids, to wind and solar power. Such a system would allow the market to motivate companies to develop these technologies, whether a carbon cap is imposed or not.
“I don’t know that you need a hard cap if you send clear market signals that you need to decrease carbon dioxide emissions,” Schweitzer said.
So what does that mean for his state’s continued participation in the Western Climate Initiative’s cap-and-tax scheme, as the governor sees it? Your guess is as good as anyone’s, but he will probably be allowed to evade a straight answer as long as Montanans (and their media) let him.
Cross-posted at Globalwarming.org.
Health Care Links
Posted by on 9.3.09 @ 10:17AM
A few good reads on health care matters this morning. In National Review, Cato's Michael Cannon exposes some of the pro-government fallacies underlying the flaws in the current health care reform proposals. And in the American Nobelist Robert Vogel discusses the factors of increasing health care costs. An excerpt:
Why is it that although the average age of onset of disabilities has been delayed by ten years, and that these disabilities have become milder than they used to be, the share of GDP spent on health is rising? [...]
The main factor is that the long-term income elasticity of the demand for healthcare is 1.6-for every 1 percent increase in a family's income, the family wants to increase its expenditures on healthcare by 1.6 percent. This is not a new trend. Between 1875 and 1995, the share of family income spent on food, clothing, and shelter declined from 87 percent to just 30 percent, despite the fact that we eat more food, own more clothes, and have better and larger homes today than we had in 1875. [...]
Consequently, there is no need to suppress the demand for healthcare. Expenditures on healthcare are driven by demand, which is spurred by income and by advances in biotechnology that make health interventions increasingly effective.
And also from the American, James DeLong explains why we should spend more on health care, not less.
Daily Must-Reads
Posted by on 9.3.09 @ 10:04AM
- Apparently more comfortable on K Street than on Main Street, House leaders Pelosi and Boehner have each skipped face-to-face town halls with constituents (Washington Times)
- Senator Kerry says Arctic Ocean will be ice free by 2013, even Greenpeace concedes it probably won't happen by 2030 (Big Hollywood)
- Alpha Phi Alpha, Afghanistan Chapter: Contractors at U.S. embassy aren't exactly exhibiting diplomatic behavior (New York Daily News)
- No surrender, bailouts, or subsidies in the 4th quarter: Wall Street Journal profiles the Republican football coach.
I Also Pledge
Posted by on 9.3.09 @ 9:52AM
Service is one thing. Service to one's president as a person is another. In light of this otherwise semi-well-motivated video that turns into a disgustingly creepy piece of cult-of-personality pledge of allegiance to the person of Barack Obama, I too make a pledge. I pledge to do anything in my power to defeat, in the public square and in the hearts and mind of the people, the dangerous and radical cultural agenda of Barack Obama.
More Bad Medical News From Across the Pond
Posted by on 9.3.09 @ 2:38AM
There really are death panels. At least in Great Britain.
In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.
Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.
But this approach can also mask the signs that their condition is improving, the experts warn.
As a result the scheme is causing a "national crisis" in patient care, the letter states. It has been signed palliative care experts including Professor Peter Millard, Emeritus Professor of Geriatrics, University of London, Dr Peter Hargreaves, a consultant in Palliative Medicine at St Luke's cancer centre in Guildford, and four others.
"Forecasting death is an inexact science,"they say. Patients are being diagnosed as being close to death "without regard to the fact that the diagnosis could be wrong.
"As a result a national wave of discontent is building up, as family and friends witness the denial of fluids and food to patients."
The warning comes just a week after a report by the Patients Association estimated that up to one million patients had received poor or cruel care on the NHS.
Congress had better take several deep breaths before it passes anything. And it sure as heck needs to know what it is passing, instead of approving a 1000-page bill, sight unseen!
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Curt Schilling
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 5:42PM
Paul: Nothing like waving the bloody sock at the Democrats.
My Hero for Today
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 5:09PM
Rob of the Say Anything blog based in North Dakota, where he told how he booted the Minot city tax assessor off his property:
So I asked my wife to put me on the phone with the gentleman from the City of Minot. He got on the phone and said that he wanted to check through my house to see if my property taxes needed to be raised. I told him I wasn’t comfortable with him going through my house, and asked him why the City of Minot needs more property taxes. After all, didn’t we just get $300 million in property tax relief from the state legislature?
He told me that the state has actually been cutting spending (we’ve had a 54 percent increase in general fund spending over the last four years!) and that’s why the city needs to tax more/spend more.
My response to him was to say that he could remove himself from my property and assess my home’s value from the street.
Hat tip: Brett Narloch via Facebook.
A Republican Who Could Win Ted's Seat?
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 4:47PM
How about Curt Schilling? He's thinkin' 'bout it.
Re: Newsweek's Biggest Lie
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 4:41PM
What do you expect, with the Helen Thomas of science reporting on the story?
Newsweek's Biggest Lie About the Constitution
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 3:00PM
There is plenty of nonsense in this Newsweek dissection of the "top 5 lies" in the health care debate, but this one takes the cake: "But when fear and loathing hijack the brain, anything becomes believable-even that health-care reform is unconstitutional. To disprove that, check the commerce clause: Article I, Section 8."
Umm, what in Article I, Section 8 gives the federal government anything like the powers contained in Obamacare? Certainly the interstate commerce clause doesn't, since most medical transactions are actually intrastate. And even to the extent that health care does affect interstate commerce, does it do so more than slavery or the sale of alcoholic beverages -- both of which had to be banned by constitutional amendment rather than through the interstate commerce clause?
Of course, I understand that the doctrine of enumerated powers doesn't mean much to the people who make our laws or the people who write about politics. It hasn't meant much to them for some time. But give me a break.
Does High-Brow Conservatism Beget Low-Brow Conservatism?
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 2:30PM
Dan McCarthy argues that as the Republican Party more tightly embraces a weak-tea platform with little popular support, the more it relies on identity politics and liberal-bashing to turn out the base. And while high-brow conservatives chastise Sarah Palin, Joe the Plumber, and the birthers, the platform they advocate -- an expanded (but family-friendly!) welfare state at home plus the Great Society exported to the Middle East -- is so unpopular that Republicans have to cover it up with piles of red meat come election time.
I made a different but related argument when trying to explain why social conservatives are blamed for the Republican losses of 2006 and 2008 when their issues played a smaller role than in 2002 and 2004, when the GOP won. The GOP tends to treat social conservatism as red-state, silent-majority identity politics -- Real America! Drill baby, drill! Hockey moms! -- rather than a coherent defense of life, the family, and traditional values.
Postponing Cap and Tax
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 1:13PM
According to the Wall Street Journal, Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) are delaying the release of a cap and trade bill in the Senate. The reason is simple: they don't have the votes to pass it in the Senate. Why, given the nearly filibuster-proof Democratic majority? Because, as I reported on the main site earlier this week, too many Democrats oppose it.
NEA Caught in a Lie
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 1:01PM
My Washington Times colleague Kerry Picket caught Yosi Sergant of the National Endowment for the Arts in a major lie when she asked him about NEA's absurd politicization in favor of Obama. Read about it all here. In short, Sergant denied that he had anything to do with the infamous invitation described by artist Patirck Courrielche. These administration people are scary. They use the power of the state to push for more state power, and then they lie about it. Outrageous. Kudos to Kerry for her work documenting their lies.
Daily Must-Reads
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 12:59PM
- Gore's journalists admit they breached the border, but say the North Koreans arrested them in China (Reuters)
- FCC Diversity Czar Mark Lloyd claimed Chavez's Venezuela is having a "democratic revolution" (Human Events)
- Official documents claim that Prime Minister Brown wanted Lockerbie bomber to die a free man (TimesOnline)
- UN advocates teaching sex education to pre-schoolers (Examiner)
No Need to Be Coyne About It
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 12:35PM
Earlier this month I noted Jerry Coyne's New Republic review of Robert Wright's book The Evolution of God, mentioning at the time that an earlier, similar essay of Coyne's had provoked some interesting responses. Although it took a while, this one too has elicited what is really an evisceration from Jim Manzi. Manzi shows that Coyne, the scientist, has based his argument on a confused notion of randomness that in fact conflates several different meanings of the word random. Again, I think both the article and the response are well worth reading.
Obama's Special Ramadan Guest
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 12:20PM
The White House invited an ACLU attorney, who has built a career over the past six years of litigating against the United States in support of terrorists, to an official White House dinner last night to celebrate Ramadan with President Obama.
Jameel Jaffer, who runs the ACLU's "national security project," has filed lawsuits challenging the FBI's "national security letter" authority, the constitutionality of warrantless wiretaps, and has been a leader in pushing for the shut down of Guantánamo Bay, and providing legal rights to terrorists held by the United States overseas in such countries as Iraq and Afghanistan. His efforts enabled the leaking of "torture photos" out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and some sources inside the Central Intelligence Agency believe he was one of the lawyers who provided legal advice to the Department of Justice to pursue an investigation into enhanced interrogation techniques used by the CIA.
Jaffer, a Canadian citizen, was vetted for the dinner by White House staff. His invitation was approved by the White House Counsel's Office, as well as the Office of Political Affairs.
Jaffer also was a lead attorney attempting to have the 2004 visa ban lifted for Tariq Ramadan, who is often identified as a "Swiss Islamic academic." At the time of the controversy, Daniel Pipes wrote about Ramadan:
• [Ramadan] has praised the brutal Islamist policies of the Sudanese politician Hassan Al-Turabi. Mr. Turabi in turn called Mr. Ramadan the "future of Islam.
• Mr. Ramadan was banned from entering France in 1996 on suspicion of having links with an Algerian Islamist who had recently initiated a terrorist campaign in Paris.
• Ahmed Brahim, an Algerian indicted for Al-Qaeda activities, had "routine contacts" with Mr. Ramadan, according to a Spanish judge (Baltasar Garzón) in 1999.
• Djamel Beghal, leader of a group accused of planning to attack the American embassy in Paris, stated in his 2001 trial that he had studied with Mr. Ramadan.
• Along with nearly all Islamists, Mr. Ramadan has denied that there is "any certain proof" that Bin Laden was behind 9/11.
• He publicly refers to the Islamist atrocities of 9/11, Bali, and Madrid as "interventions," minimizing them to the point of near-endorsement.
And here are other reasons, dug up by Jean-Charles Brisard, a former French intelligence officer doing work for some of the 9/11 families, as reported in Le Parisien:
• Intelligence agencies suspect that Mr. Ramadan (along with his brother Hani) coordinated a meeting at the Hôtel Penta in Geneva for Ayman al-Zawahiri, deputy head of Al-Qaeda, and Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind sheikh, now in a Minnesota prison.
• Mr. Ramadan's address appears in a register of Al Taqwa Bank, an organization the State Department accuses of supporting Islamist terrorism.
"Great. Work hard to defend America and get a Department of Justice investigation that could ruin our careers. Work against America and get invited to the White House for dinner with the president," says a current CIA employee. "I can't tell you what kind of a signal this sends to us, not that we needed another one from this administration."
Republicans Widen Generic Ballot Edge
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 11:29AM
The 2010 election is still more than a year away, so anything can happen. But Democrats in Congress have to be getting nervous. According to Rasmussen Reports:
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 43% would vote for their district's Republican congressional candidate while 36% would opt for his or her Democratic opponent.
That represents the lowest level of support for Democrats in recent years, while Republicans have tied their highest level of support for the third straight week. The previous low for Democrats over the past year was 37%.
This summer, support for Republican candidates ranged from 41% to 43%, support for Democrats ranged from 37% to 39%. Looking back one year ago, support was strikingly different for the parties. Throughout the summer of 2008, support for Democratic congressional candidates ranged from 45% to 48%. Republican support ranged from 34% to 37%.
The More Congress Changes, the More it Stays the Same
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 8:40AM
Remember the new Democratic era? Well, it looks a lot like the old Democratic era.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) will let Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) keep his chairmanship despite his failing to report hundreds of thousands of dollars in assets on federal disclosure forms, according to Democratic aides.
The chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee's latest misstep has received strong media scrutiny and prompted good-government watchdog groups to call for a special counsel investigation.
Growing ethical turmoil surrounding Rangel has prompted calls for Pelosi to yank Rangel's gavel.
But Democratic aides say that Pelosi will not pressure Rangel to resign his post or censure him publicly unless the House ethics committee finds him guilty of misconduct or a prosecutor brings charges.
Clueless in South Carolina
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 6:25AM
South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford just doesn't get it. Reports the Washington Times:
Embattled South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford acknowledged Tuesday that he has been shaken by the failure of a single fellow Republican to back him in his fight to save his job, but vowed to fight on for conservative causes and for "what God wanted me to do with my life."
The governor, trying to survive a scandal involving a widely publicized extramarital affair, also compared a new ethics probe over his travel and personal expenses to what he called the baseless complaints brought against former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
"I think I now know what Sarah may have been feeling," Mr. Sanford told The Washington Times.
Well, I hesitate trying to speak for God. But I suspect he didn't want Gov. Sanford to cheat on his wife and pick up an Argentinian mistress. And he probably wants Mr. Sanford to concentrate on healing his family. As for fighting for conservative causes, well, as Charles DeGaulle once observed, cemeteries are filled with indispensable men. God will get along just fine if Gov. Sanford becomes Mr. Sanford.
U.S. Will Pay 'Long Time' For Bailout and Deficits, Says Author
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 5:40AM
The American economy will suffer "a long time" as a result of last year's federal bailout of the financial industry, according to Johan Norberg, author of a new book about the policies that caused the banking meltdown.
Politicians, regulators and central banks in several nations -- including the U.S. Federal Reserve -- helped create the crisis that led to last year's massive Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) bailout, Norberg said.
"They distorted all the incentives and inflated the bubble," the Cato Institute senior fellow explained in an interview Tuesday.
Norberg's book, Financial Fiasco: How America's Infatuation with Home Ownership and Easy Money Created the Economic Crisis, approaches the mortgage-driven crisis as "a crime story," he said.
"Who did it? It turns out, everybody did it."
A scholar and journalist from Sweden, Norberg spoke yesterday at a book forum at Cato and also appeared at an event hosted by the America’s Future Foundation.
Asked how the United States can get out of its current problems like high unemployment and rapidly growing federal debt, Norberg answered, "I'm not sure we do" get out of it.
"I'm afraid we're going to live with the consequences for a long time," he said. "The bailouts . . . the debts -- we won't be able to pay them back. We're going to pay for it for a long time. And it's not just what it costs, it's what we’re buying."
Norberg said the TARP bailout would have the perverse effect of encouraging lenders and other financial institutions to engage in the same kinds of risky behaviors that led to last year’s meltdown.
"If bankers make stupid mistakes and we bail them out, it encourages them to take big risks in order to make short-term gains, knowing that if they lose out, they can always send the bill to the taxpayers," Norberg said.
Norberg will appear today at a noon Capitol Hill briefing (Room 339, Rayburn House Office Building) along with Mark A. Calabria, Cato's director of financial regulation studies.
Senate Races Turning Towards GOP
Posted by on 9.2.09 @ 2:58AM
For a time it looked like the Democrats might expand their Senate majority in 2010. But the winds of politics have started to turn towards the Republicans. Reports National Journal:
The death of Edward Kennedy has given the Democrats a real -- if short-term -- look at life in the Senate without 60 votes. Given the worsening political environment for the party and President Obama, it looks more possible than ever that Republicans can keep Democrats under 60 in 2011-12 as well.
On paper, the GOP has more vulnerable seats on the table than do Democrats. They have to defend open seats in two states carried by Obama (Ohio and New Hampshire) and one in a state Obama barely lost (Missouri). Republicans breathed a sigh of relief when Sen. Jim Bunning, their most vulnerable incumbent, chose to retire. Even so, holding the seat isn't a slam dunk. Meanwhile, Democrats have just one open seat in real danger today (Illinois) and just one incumbent, Connecticut's Christopher Dodd, who has been running consistently behind his potential GOP opponents in polling. Both of those states, of course, are deep blue.
Yet it's also clear that as Obama's job approval ratings fall, it's taking a toll on Democratic incumbents who, earlier this year, were seen as relatively safe. New polls show Democratic Sens. Blanche Lincoln (Ark.), Michael Bennet (Colo.), Harry Reid (Nev.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) as vulnerable. A GOP poll released in late July showed popular North Dakota Gov. John Hoeven (R) handily beating Sen. Byron Dorgan (D).
It's still 14 months till the election. But President Barack Obama's increasing travails are likely to boost GOP fortunes.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
White House Has Secret Plan To Harvest Personal Data From Social Networking Websites
Posted by on 9.1.09 @ 7:46PM
It never ends. Every day a new outrage about the Obama administration comes to light. Each new outrage sounds like fiction. Who could dream up this stuff?
Now today we learn that the National Legal and Policy Center has "uncovered a plan by the White House New Media operation to hire a technology vendor to conduct a massive, secret effort to harvest personal information on millions of Americans from social networking websites."
The Obama administration plans to capture comments, tag lines, emails, audio, and video on websites including Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, YouTube, Flickr and others.
National Endowment for the Arts is Trying to Create a Cult of Obama
Posted by on 9.1.09 @ 6:48PM
Yes, we can! With tax dollars!
* * * * *
Patrick Courrielche reveals at Big Hollywood that he participated in a teleconference call in which the National Endowment for the Arts --the largest funder of the arts in the U.S.-- encouraged artists to create pro-Obama art:
I was invited by the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) to take part in a conference call that invited a group of rising artist and art community luminaries “to help lay a new foundation for growth, focusing on core areas of the recovery agenda - health care, energy and environment, safety and security, education, community renewal.”
Now admittedly, I’m a skeptic of BIG government. In my view, power tends to overreach whenever given the opportunity. It’s a law of human nature that has very few exceptions. That said, it felt to me that by providing issues as a cynosure for inspiration to a handpicked arts group - a group that played a key role in the President’s election as mentioned throughout the conference call - the National Endowment for the Arts was steering the art community toward creating art on the very issues that are currently under contentious national debate; those being health care reform and cap-and-trade legislation. Could the National Endowment for the Arts be looking to the art community to create an environment amenable to the administration’s positions? [...]
Courrielche writes that
Backed by the full weight of President Barack Obama’s call to service and the institutional weight of the NEA, the conference call was billed as an opportunity for those in the art community to inspire service in four key categories, and at the top of the list were “health care” and “energy and environment.” The service was to be attached to the President’s United We Serve campaign, a nationwide federal initiative to make service a way of life for all Americans.
It sounded, how should I phrase it…unusual, that the NEA would invite the art community to a meeting to discuss issues currently under vehement national debate. I decided to call in, and what I heard concerned me.
The people running the conference call and rallying the group to get active on these issues were Yosi Sergant, the Director of Communications for the National Endowment for the Arts; Buffy Wicks, Deputy Director of the White House Office of Public Engagement; Nell Abernathy, Director of Outreach for United We Serve; Thomas Bates, Vice President of Civic Engagement for Rock the Vote; and Michael Skolnik, Political Director for Russell Simmons.
We were encouraged to bring the same sense of enthusiasm to these “focus areas” as we had brought to Obama’s presidential campaign, and we were encouraged to create art and art initiatives that brought awareness to these issues. Throughout the conversation, we were reminded of our ability as artists and art professionals to “shape the lives” of those around us. The now famous Obama “Hope” poster, created by artist Shepard Fairey and promoted by many of those on the phone call, and will.i.am’s “Yes We Can” song and music video were presented as shining examples of our group’s clear role in the election. [...]
This is scary stuff. To paraphrase Courrielche from his appearance on the "Glenn Beck Program" today, whenever governments and artists collaborate on art, the results are never good.
Here is some Soviet taxpayer-funded art:
Here is some German taxpayer-funded art:
Courrielche discussed the issue a few days ago on Fox Business:
MoveOn.org Claims It Is "Winning" Healthcare Fight
Posted by on 9.1.09 @ 4:46PM
Sometimes leaders lie to their followers to improve morale. People will lie to a mortally wounded person and tell the person everything will be alright.
MoveOn.org, incredibly enough, is telling its supporters it is "winning" the fight to force government-run healthcare down the throats of Americans.
It also keeps pushing its push poll that falsely reports that Americans support the socialist public option.
Here is the group's latest email --filled with the usual lies and distortions about what the public wants-- to supporters:
Dear MoveOn member,
After a few weeks of health care craziness, there's good news: we're winning on the ground. Lots of town halls are now dominated by supporters of health care reform. The vast majority of Americans want the choice of a public plan.1 And a powerful bloc of progressives in the House is standing strong on real reform.
The really bad news? The media's still acting like President Obama's health care plan is on the skids.
If we don't turn the conventional wisdom around before Congress begins voting on health care, we could be in big trouble.
We've got a plan to make it happen. It starts tomorrow with major vigils across the country to bring the media's focus back to the real people suffering under the current health care system.
And then we'll shake up the media story again by going on the offensive against Republicans, with a new series of tough ads that call them out for their ties to the health insurance industry.
But to actually make a big splash, we need to raise $185,000 today—and that's going to take at least 50 donations from people in Washington. Can you chip in $20 right now to help out?
[LINK OMITTED]
Right now, Republicans in Congress think they can get away with viciously slandering President Obama's plan for a public health insurance option—even though 77% of Americans say they want to have the choice of a public plan.2
These Republicans need a reality check. Every member of Congress should know that opposing health care reform isn't just morally wrong—it's politically dangerous and unpopular.
That's why we're planning some very tough new TV ads. They'll let voters know exactly how much money their representatives have taken from the insurance industry, whose top goal this year is to kill the public option.
These ads are a surefire way to put Republicans on the defensive, and show that Americans want their representatives to stop siding with insurance companies by obstructing health care reform.
To hit our goal of $185,000 and get these ads on the air, we need at least 50 people in Washington to step up. Can you chip in $20 right now to help out?
Thanks for all you do.
–Nita, Kat, Stephen, Joan and the rest of the teamSource:
1, 2. "New Poll: 77 Percent Support 'Choice' Of Public Option," The Huffington Post, August 20, 2009. http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51799&id=17087-10523989-_Ao3JTx&t=5
Want to support our work? We're entirely funded by our 5 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here.
PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.
What Will Craven Crist's Senate Seatwarmer Do on Climate?
Posted by on 9.1.09 @ 4:31PM
That’s the question that Carbon Control News considers today in an article the publication has placed outside its subscriber wall, just for you special blogreaders! Unfortunately CCN’s reporter can draw no definitive conclusions:
(Florida Gov. Charlie Crist’s appointee) George LeMieux, who will be sworn in as Florida’s junior senator when Congress reconvenes next week, ran Crist’s successful 2006 campaign for governor and served as Crist’s chief of staff until the beginning of last year, when he returned to private practice at a Tallahassee law firm. As Crist’s top aide, LeMieux helped organize the governor’s first climate summit in 2007, during which activists, scientists and public officials from around the world gathered in Miami to consider the challenge presented by global warming and develop potential solutions.
As the Miami Herald reported (and I blogged about) last month, Crist has begun his run to replace quitting Sen. Mel Martinez by running with hair on fire from the no-longer-helpful global warming issue, after basking in media love the last two years when he hosted climate panic conferences featuring California Gov. Arnold Warmalarmer. This year Charlie says he may not hold another speech meet because of concern over the costs to sponsors (really!). But even though LeMeiux (”I am a Charlie Crist Republican”) will placehold, CCN says there’s no telling how he’ll vote on the Senate version of a cap-and-tax bill this year:
While environmentalists are encouraged by the appointment, LeMieux’s membership on the board of an industry organization that opposes cap-and-trade, combined with the potential pressure created by Crist’s conservative Republican primary opponent (that’s former Fla. House Speaker Marco Rubio), suggest his support for climate legislation is far from assured.
Because the two are so closely aligned, Crist likely will have to answer on the campaign trail for LeMieux’s votes on Senate legislation, which likely will include a cap-and-trade bill expected to be introduced by Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and John Kerry (D-MA) as soon as next month.
If the belief still exists that Crist is anything more than the Sunshiny State’s Specter of Arlen, then Orlando Sentinel columnist Mike Thomas squashes it like a malarial mosquito:
…Predicting Crist is simple. Simply do the political calculation.
He would easily beat any Democrat in the Senate race. All he has to worry about is Rubio in the primary. So the environmentalists are of little use to him now. They may grumble as he abandons them, but he knows they won’t publicly attack him because he is going to win. And they will need him in the future, if not for climate change then for Everglades funding.
Crist is on your side when there is something in it for him.
And when it comes to climate change, there is nothing in it for Crist anymore.
That is, until the political winds change again.
Cross-posted at Globalwarming.org.
Donuts for Democrats
Posted by on 9.1.09 @ 2:31PM
The Minnesota State Fair--the second largest state fair in the country--started a few days ago. It is a wonderful event full of Foot-long Hot Dogs, Fudge Puppies (chocolate-covered waffles on a stick: need I say more?) and Scotch Eggs on a stick to name a few (go ahead, look 'em up). Next to the hot dog though, mini donuts are a fair staple for many. But if you're a Republican attending this year, you may want to watch out where you get them.
The Grandstand Mini Donuts located near the grandstand not only have 54 calories per teeny, tiny, fried, sugary-goodness, but a portion of revenue per bag goes towards a PAC which helps to elect Democrats in the state. In 2008, that same PAC donated $45,000 among six different Democrat districts in MN. Isn't that just like Minnesota Democrats?
The donuts from Tom Thumb are better anyway.
Hat tip: True North and North Star Liberty.
When the merits just won't do
Posted by on 9.1.09 @ 12:36PM
First we hear the chorus of "do it for Teddy!" as the new new reason to legislate a government takeover of from anywhere from one seventh to one sixth of our economy that is the health care delivery system.
Now, for their other Big Idea, "cap-and-trade" - which effectively moves another one-sixth of the economy under state control - the cry from Senate Democratic leadership, specifically Majority Whip Dick Durbin (IL), is Senate Majority to Bloomberg Television, "The president has urged us to do this so that we'll have credibility at Copenhagen," referencing the December confab at which the U.S. is expected to sign a Kyoto II treaty.
So much for that "end of the world!" thingy, I guess. We've got a conference to show Europeans Obama's not George Bush, standing up for sovereignty and energy security and other whimsies.
Is It Too Late for the Jalalabad Intellectual Airdrop?
Posted by on 9.1.09 @ 12:24PM
George Freaking Will argues that the United States should abandon a war that has had bipartisan support from Day One. Which reminded me of a strategic plan for victory in Afghanistan that I first conceived last fall:
"The Air Force should load George Will and David Brooks into a C-130 and airdrop them, sans parachute, on a Taliban position in Afghanistan. They're useless as intellectuals, but perhaps they'll do some good as ordnance."
This is a modest proposal, don't you think? Let's just hope it's not too little, too late.
Cambodian Court Corruption
Posted by on 9.1.09 @ 11:17AM
One aspect about the trials of top officials in the despotic Khmer Rouge regime that I have not addressed so far are the problems of corruption and cronyism with the U.N. and Cambodians who put the court together. The reason for that is there has been limited reporting on the issue, so I don't understand it as well. But today in the Wall Street Journal's Asia edition, Killing Fields survivor Sophal Ear -- an assistant professor of national security affairs at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California -- explains:
I can no longer in good conscience sit back in silence and watch this theater of the absurd. As with so many other donor-financed projects, the Tribunal—set up in 2006 to bring justice to millions of Khmer Rouge victims—has been mired in an endless stream of corruption and mismanagement allegations.
The latest news came on August 11, when Uth Chhorn was named to the court as an independent counselor. Mr. Chhorn is Cambodia's auditor-general and heads the seven-year-old National Audit Authority, which is supposed to audit the government's activities. It has yet to make a single report public. His appointment was sanctioned by the United Nations, which manages the court alongside the Cambodian government.
Sophal goes on to list several other problems, including the hire of an Australian Marxist as head of the victims unit for the court. And there are also the standard kickbacks and run-of-the-mill corruption. Not surprising considering that many in the Cambodian government were once in the Khmer Rouge themselves.
Those awaiting trial are in their final years of life, and others who are culpable will finish out their lives without fear of punishment. After 30+ years since Pol Pot's reign, justice for the victims must be left in God's hands. There's just no other way around that.
Obama Wasn't 'Pushed'
Posted by on 9.1.09 @ 10:33AM
David Brooks makes some good points in this New York Times column, but his closing statement -- that events "have pushed Barack Obama off to the left" and now it's time "to rebalance" -- is bizarrely out of step with reality.
Nothing has pushed President Obama "off to the left." Just the reverse, in fact. Obama has used events to push the country to the left, at least policy-wise.
Consider that the White House has used the current economic turmoil as justification for nearly all of its sweeping liberal policies -- the stimulus bill, cash for clunkers, even a health-care overhaul, to name a few. Obama did not have to be "pushed" into these initiatives. He was eager to go there.
Rahm Emanuel let the cat out of the bag on that one earlier this year: "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before."
Daily Must-Reads
Posted by on 9.1.09 @ 10:11AM
- Seven most embarrassing town hall moments for the Democrats (Townhall)
- Bolton: Iran sanctions won't work (Wall Street Journal)
- Senator Schumer calls for sanctions against UK for releasing Lockerbie bomber (New York Post)
- Lockerbie bomber to be featured on Qaddafi's 40th anniversary TV special (TimesOnline)
Monday, August 31, 2009
Gored By Bull
Posted by on 8.31.09 @ 5:40PM
More and more shortcomings, and downright hazards, of compact
fluorescent light bulbs keep appearing (lighting designer Howard
Brandston relates some of the more annoying practical problems in
today’s Wall Street Journal). Rasmussen found a
whopping 18% of Americans think the government should tell us
what light bulbs to use; yet the Gore/Waxman/Markey push for more
government mandates in legislation and regulation marches
on. Al Gore is no Romeo, and Henry Waxman is certainly no
Juliet!
Gored By Bull
By Asher
Embry
What bulb in yonder fixture breaks?
The mercury inside it makes
A toxic mess upon your floor
Which you can simply not ignore.
So you must call the EPA,
To cart those deadly shards away.
And if you get the bulbs to work,
They may last minutes ‘cause a quirk
An engineer chose not to fix
Because the global politics
Demanded green bulbs way too fast
Regardless of how long they’d last.
The moral here is plain to see.
This climate change hypocrisy,
Imposing Al Gore’s twisted view
Of what we should and shouldn’t do.
Though claiming righteous benefit,
These bulbs don’t really save a whit.
Misguided legislation thrives.
It won’t improve our daily lives.
(You can read more of Asher Embry's Political Verse at www.politicalverse.com.)
Nearly a Third of Americans are Nuts
Posted by on 8.31.09 @ 5:16PM
According to Rasmussen Reports:
Two-out-of-three American voters (67%) lack confidence that Congress knows what it's doing when it comes to the economy.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 29% are at least somewhat confident in the economic wisdom of the legislature. Those figures include seven percent (7%) who are Very Confident that Congress knows what it's doing and 38% who are Not at All Confident.
Who are these 29 percent of the people? And the seven percent who are "very confident" in Congress must be border-line psychotic!
Enviros on the Run
Posted by on 8.31.09 @ 5:10PM
The environmental lobby isn't doing well. And, surprise, surprise!, the lobby says it's all the fault of industry. Reports the Washington Post:
It seems that environmentalists are struggling in a fight they have spent years setting up. They are making slow progress adapting a movement built for other goals -- building alarm over climate change, encouraging people to "green" their lives -- into a political hammer, pushing a complex proposal the last mile through a skeptical Senate.
Even now, these groups differ on whether to scare the public with predictions of heat waves or woo it with promises of green jobs. And they are facing an opposition with tycoon money and a gift for political stagecraft.
Well, actually, the enviros are losing because of substance, not money. They are losing the political debate. Fewer people believe climate alarmists today than did last year. And most people understand that wrecking the economy is not a good remedy for anything.
It's quite simple: follow the argument, and the environmental alarmists lose.
A Tough Sell in the Big Enchilada
Posted by on 8.31.09 @ 4:16PM
Liberal groups in California are fretting over whether to challenge the state's marriage amendment, known as Proposition 8, in 2010 or 2012. Earlier this month, Equality California announced that it would put off a ballot initiative legalizing gay marriage until ‘12 because it needed more time to gather support. But other liberal groups are bucking that and want to proceed in ‘10.
The political climate next year could influence the Left's fortunes on the issue. It's early days, but indications are that the midterms will be tough for Democrats. The Politico has some observations on that, pointing out that historic trends "point to Republican House gains ... particularly after facing two brutal election cycles where the party lost seats in every region and even in some of the most conservative states in the nation."
If de-stimulus, cap-and-trade, cash for clunkers, and a health-care takeover, et al., are enough to get out more conservative voters and peel away some independents and moderate Democrats, a ballot initiative legalizing gay marriage is going to be a tough sell in 2010, even in deep blue California.
Truth is, though, that marriage amendments typically defy electoral logic. Last year was a wipeout for Republicans and triumph for Democrats, yet California passed a marriage amendment by a comfortable margin, despite Barack Obama's name on the top of the ballot and a de-motivated Republican electorate. So, any way you slice it, homosexual marriage is still going to be a tough sell in the Big Enchilada, either next year or in 2012.
Scientific fraud
Posted by on 8.31.09 @ 2:39PM
It seems the UN reads AmSpec blog... and/or the Washington Times, National Review, maybe even ICECAP.US (great global warming site) or the Charlottesville Daily Progress. Or my filings with the EPA?
I say this because it was a month ago today that I began broadcasting in those fora that the UN's IPCC -- the "scientific body" to which Obama's EPA outsourced its decision as to whether Man-made carbon dioxide (plant food) poses an "endangerment" to the planet (really) -- has openly admitted for more than a decade that it "does not conduct any research nor does it monitor climate related data or parameters" (cached here).
Apparently someone finally decided that keeping this admission out there wasn't going to help the agenda (is there another possible reading?). So, they lied.
Sometime in the past three weeks, someone at the UN IPCC reinvented the group. Now, its web page states instead of the long-acknowledged truth, the falsehood that "The IPCC is a scientific body."
Well, no, it isn't, and changing a website can't change that fact. (Hint: its "chief scientist" and "chief climatologist", depending on which profile of him you read, is actually an economist and longtime UN functionary. Close enough for supragovernmental work). But, possibly this group funded in great part with U.S. taxpayer dollars might tell us when and how did this mission creep occur?
In the meantime, regardless what you say about yourself IPCC, you still perform no scientific research.
UPDATE: An emailer helpfully notes the following: "It appears they just fiddled around with their website (something that's not all that uncommon with organizations that have too much time on their hands). The admission is still there, but now it's under the organization tab."
The Card Check Is In the Mail
Posted by on 8.31.09 @ 1:54PM
The anti-Employee Free Choice Act Workplace Fairness Institute put out a statement today highlighting the sentencing of three former Teamsters officials for rigging union elections in light of proposals to solve the "card check" problem by allowing mail-in ballots. While they can be written off as rogue union activists, it does demonstrate the need to protect the integrity of union elections -- especially from officials who denigrate the secret ballot.
At the Teamsters, that denigration starts all the way at the top: "Since when is a secret ballot a basic tent of democracy?" asked Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa. "Town meetings in New England are as democratic as they come, and they don't use the secret ballot. Elections in the Soviet Union were by secret ballot, but those weren't democratic." Of course, the Soviet elections were not democratic because the secret ballots did not contain actual choices. And many town meetings in New England are actually representative town meetings, where the participants are elected by secret ballot, rather than open town meetings. Let me know when somebody is convicted of fraud for rigging the filling of a pothole in some small Western Massachusetts town.
Update on the Cultural Apocalypse
Posted by on 8.31.09 @ 1:08PM
The economic crisis and the advent of Obamaism seems to consume most of the oxygen in conservative discussion nowadays, but in case you haven't noticed, popular culture continues to circle the drain.
New toy for girls? Pole-Dance Stripper Doll!
Also, don't miss the nipple-tassle T-shirt for toddlers, the impending motherhood of Hef's ex-girlfriend, and other signs that the end is near:
Today's cultural forecast: Raging epidemics of abuse, perversion, disease and addiction, with a 40% chance of widely scattered fire and brimstone.
The revolution will not be televised. However, the apocalypse will be blogged.
Why David Brooks Hearts Obama
Posted by on 8.31.09 @ 10:49AM
It's all in this New Republic article. The article itself is interesting and though-provoking; Brooks's insights are not. It takes a strange and very selective reading of the evidence to conclude, as Brooks does, that President Obama "sees himself as a Burkean."
Daily Must-Reads
Posted by on 8.31.09 @ 10:48AM
- O'Grady: Obama is using hard-ball "thug" tactics to support Latin American leftists (Wall Street Journal)
- Venezuelans see Chavez as a dictator (Angus Reid)
- Obama's 10 year budget deficit estimates were low-balled by 25%, could be trillions worse than currently estimated if his legislation is passed (Weekly Standard)
- Liberal anti-war groups are struggling at confronting Obama's Afghanistan policy (New York Times)
The Kennedy Watch
Posted by on 8.31.09 @ 9:35AM
It now turns to Joe Kennedy, the former congressman and nephew of the late senator, to decide whether to keep Ted Kennedy's Senate seat in the family. The younger Kennedy has been out of the House for over a decade and decided to take a pass on two consecutive gubernatorial races (1998 and 2002) due to family problems. But he has kept a high public profile through his appearances in Citizens Energy commercials and he is of course a Kennedy. He would clear some fairly strong candidates out of the primary field, though the Boston Globe story linked above suggested Congressman Stephen Lynch of South Boston and Attorney General Martha Coakley would still run for the Democratic nomination anyway.
Ted Kennedy and Same-Sex Marriage
Posted by on 8.31.09 @ 9:27AM
On the main site, Dan Flynn has a piece looking at Ted Kennedy's complicated relationship with the Catholic Church. One example might be found in this Bay Windows article crediting Ted Kennedy with denying the people a vote on same-sex marriage in Massachusetts:
Our cause was lining up the votes to defeat an anti-gay constitutional amendment that would strip same-sex couples of the right to marry. A final vote was scheduled for July 14, 2007. Our opponents needed the votes of only 25 percent of the legislature to advance a citizen-led amendment to the ballot. We had lined up two-thirds of the legislature through fieldwork, lobbying, media, literally everything we could think of. But getting those last 15 legislators-those conservative Democrats from working class Massachusetts communities and a few libertarian-leaning Republicans-was very tough. We needed all hands on deck to keep a Massachusetts version of Proposition 8 off the ballot. We needed Ted Kennedy.
"Could you get me a list of your targets?" one of Kennedy's key staffers finally asked me. "Don't tell anyone I'm asking you for this," he said. He meant it, and I didn't.
A few days later, as I was doing my rounds in the State House, a bewildered conservative legislator stopped me. "You'll never guess who left me a message about gay marriage," he said. "Ted Kennedy." And then I started to hear similar refrains again and again. We'd get word that he'd spoken to the Governor, the Speaker of the House, the Senate President, the chair of the Democratic Party, asking for updates, strategizing, figuring out exactly what he could do and how he could be most helpful.
On July 14, the amendment failed. Now, this article may overstate Kennedy's role. Over the same period, Mitt Romney was replaced as governor by a supporter of same-sex marriage. House Speaker Tom Finneran had already been succeeded by a same-sex marriage supporter. So when Kennedy was lobbying for one side, there were no comparably big guns being pulled out by the other side. Except for Senator Kennedy's Catholic Church, in the form of the Archdiocese of Boston.
Capturing the Essence of Government-Run Medicine
Posted by on 8.31.09 @ 9:25AM
Dr. Alan Boyd of Vanderbilt University understands:
Probably the greatest benefit to socialized health care is the freedom inherent in having our vocation changed from a profession to a job. We'll no longer have to keep up on the latest medications, procedures and research in our field. Cutting-edge medicine will be reduced anyway, given that investigative medical pursuits will no longer be funded. As federal employees, the quality of our work will be irrelevant. It's not like we can get fired, and besides, where's the public going to turn? Canada?
Indeed, where will they turn? But then, ending private choice is the very purpose of imposing government control over the health care system.
Rewriting History: The Soviet Union in WWII
Posted by on 8.31.09 @ 6:56AM
Extraordinary. Tomorrow is the 70th anniversary of the greatest conflict in history. And who will be on hand in Poland to commemorate the date? Vladimir Putin!
Writes Stevan Wagstyl of the Financial Times:
Vladimir Putin is due in Poland on Tuesday to stand with Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, and Polish leaders to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the start of the second world war. But this show of unity belies deep divisions about the war, its causes and its consequences. Even today, the debate remains a fraught public issue, which politicians do not leave to historians - especially not in eastern Europe.
Germany has accepted responsibility for starting the war, so Angela Merkel's presence is appropriate. But Moscow continues to present itself (as the principal successor to the Soviet Union) as a victim. Tell that to the Poles. After all, the Soviets waited only a couple weeks while the Nazis destroyed the Polish military and then invaded from the east.
Also on the Soviet menu were Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, which the U.S.S.R. absorbed. And Finland, which was forced to yield part of its territory.
Right, a victim of aggression!
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Tiger Now is Human
Posted by on 8.30.09 @ 9:04PM
Bizarre. First Tiger Woods fails to hold a lead the lead at the PGA, AND his competitor (Yang) actually hits a career shot on 18 to nail down the victory. Then, today, Tiger did his usual amazing shot to within less than seven feet on the final hole to set up the inevitable birdie to tie for the lead anmd force the two co-leaders, Heath Slocum and Steve Stricker, to choke by making bogeys so Tiger can win... except that for maybe the only time ever, Tiger actually failed to convert an essential 72nd hole putt, AND then Slocum, 15 minutes later, faced with a 20 footer for par to beat Tiger by one...actually MADE IT. Suddenly, Tiger is human, and his competitors aren't totally flummoxed by him. All of which still probably is just a blip, because Tiger probably will win six or seven more major titles at least.
STILL, it does at least raise this thought: Tiger is at the age when a whole lot of all-time greats and near-greats suddenly lost their ability to close out major titles. Tiger must win four more professional majors to tie Jack Nicklaus's record. Woods will be 34 before the next Masters rolls around. Total number of majors won by all of the following golfers after age 34 -- COMBINED -- is... drum roll please... just three. This is the list who, all together, won just three majors after their 34th birthdays:
Lee Trevino
Arnold Palmer
Gene Sarazen
Tom Watson
Byron Nelson
Seve Ballesteros
... and Johnny Miller, Tom Weiskopf, Ernie Els (so far), Davis Love III, Fred Couples, John Daly, Gene Littler, Ken Venturi, Tony Jacklin, Jerry Pate, Hal Sutton, John Mahaffey and Lanny Wadkins.
Tiger Woods is incredibly good. To catch Nicklaus, he has to be better than Trevino, Palmer, Sarazen, Watson, Nelson, Ballesteros, and all the rest COMBINED. In a sense, that is. That's a pretty tall order. And it also is quite a testament to what Nicklaus accomplished (including six majors after age 34) and what Woods has accomplished already.
The People Ain't Happy With the President
Posted by on 8.30.09 @ 1:35PM
According to Rasmussen Reports:
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows that 32% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove. That's the highest level of Strong Disapproval yet recorded for this President and it gives Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -10 (see trends).
Sad to have so many people so unhappy with the Prez this early in his term, isn't it?
- ‘Call Fox’
- Breaking Fast With Bill Safire
- The Right of Conscience in the Age of Obama