- 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, October 17, 2009
The Incomparable Vaclav Klaus
Posted by on 10.17.09 @ 7:01AM
As Sally McNamara wrote yesterday, only one man stands in the way of the Eurocrats consolidating their power in Brussels against the wishes of many Europeans. The Guardian profiles Klaus, a stalwart for liberty and limited government:
For a man standing alone between Europe and its future, Vaclav Klaus is playing hard to get. Last week a trip to Albania, this week Russia; the Czech president has performed a vanishing act just when he has the rest of Europe dancing to his tune.
He relishes being at the centre of a showdown. But it appears he is currently more interested in selling copies of his tract on global warming denial.
Last week, as a panicky campaign was launched in Berlin, Paris, Brussels, Stockholm, and Prague to try to force Europe's biggest renegade into line, Klaus was dining by the Adriatic.
For five days he refused to return phone calls from Fredrik Reinfeldt, the Swedish prime minister and current EU president saddled with the Klaus emergency. Jan Fischer, the Czech Republic's caretaker prime minister, has an even less enviable task, as mediator between Klaus and the rest of Europe's leaders. But Klaus won't give him the time of day. Fischer admitted he had managed to get him briefly on the phone, but not to arrange a meeting.
If that wasn't enough to drive the usual suspects into near hysteria, Klaus also has campaigned against the global warming alarmists who are prepared to wreck the global economy in order to stop warming that so far is proving to be decidedly modest--even nonexistent over the past decade. In short, Klaus is not just un-PC. He is un-PC squared.
Perhaps we can draft Klaus to run here when he finishes his term as president of the Czech Republic. (Never mind that inconvenient constitutional language about the U.S. president being born in America!)
Will Someone Please Tell the President that Uncle Sam is Broke?
Posted by on 10.17.09 @ 3:36AM
Obviously, the president doesn't get it. He keeps proposing more spending. Now it is more money for seniors since inflation is down so there's no COLA increase for Social Security.
President Obama on Wednesday attempted to preempt the announcement that Social Security recipients will not get an increase in their benefit checks for the first time in three decades, encouraging Congress to provide a one-time payment of $250 to help seniors and disabled Americans weather the recession.
Uncle Sam ran a $1.4 trillion deficit in FY2009. Just where is the money for a new payment going to come from? Heck, there's no reason to stop with retirees. Why not just give everyone in America a million dollars? That should solve all of our problems.
Canadians Speak Out Against Socialized Medicine
Posted by on 10.17.09 @ 3:19AM
It is often said that Canadians are proud of their nationalized health care system, and many are. But there are many dissenting voices. The good folks at the Mackinac Institute--a Michigan-based think tank which does great work on behalf of limited government--have put together a series of videos on Canadians talking about the problems with their system.
The "Public Option" Ain't Dead
Posted by on 10.17.09 @ 3:17AM
The Baucus bill is bad enough. But the so-called "public option" isn't yet dead. Reports Politico:
The forces in favor of a public health insurance option roared back Thursday on Capitol Hill after weeks when their cause looked bleak.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) looked closer than ever to including a robust U.S. government-run insurance program in the House bill - saying recent attempts by the health insurance industry to undercut reform prove insurers can't be trusted.
And in the Senate, a weekly policy lunch turned into a heated debate when liberals went after the Senate Finance Committee bill and made clear they won't roll over for legislation that doesn't include a public option.
Reflecting deep divides within the caucus, the Senate luncheon turned tense, with voices elevated and senators venting. "In today's lunch, it even involved a little performance theater," Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) said, describing it as an "emotional catharsis."
In a week when the Senate Finance Committee passed a bill without a public option - raising questions about whether that would prove the public option's last gasp - progressives in both houses showed they won't go down without a fight.
As bad as the Baucus bill is, the end result still could be far worse.
Friday, October 16, 2009
NY-23 EXCLUSIVE PROFILE: Conservative Doug Hoffman: 'Citizen Who'sHad Enough'
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 9:00PM
"We've just been deluged with stuff," said Rob Ryan, media coordinator for Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman, whose congressional campaign in upstate New York's 23rd District has "surged" in recent days.
The most recent poll showed Hoffman gaining 7 points while establishment-backed GOP candidate Dede Scozzafava has lost 6 points. Ryan said, "Republicans are coming home to roost, and it's in the Conservative roost."
In the past week, the three-way contest in the Nov. 3 special election has suddenly become America's most-watched campaign this fall, generating massive attention from reporters and commentators nationwide. The Wall Street Journal, The Hill, Fox News, the Weekly Standard and scores of political blogs are following this campaign as a bellwether that could have major impact on the electoral landscape heading into the 2010 congressional mid-terms.
"This election is going to be a referendum on two things," Ryan said in a telephone interview Friday evening. "First, it's going to be a referendum on the first 10 months of the Obama administration. And second, it's going to be a referendum on the future of the Republican Party."
Given the district's history -- "It's been Republican since the Civil War," Ryan said -- many veteran observers have all but ignored the little-known Democratic candidate, Bill Owens, and are now focusing almost entirely on the battle between Hoffman and the liberal Republican, Scozzafava. That's a battle that Hoffman appears to be winning.
"Doug is a different kind of candidate," said Ryan, his voice hoarse from a long week of 14-hour workdays. "He's a citizen who's had enough."
The son of a single mom, Hoffman started work at age 14, pumping gas in his hometown of Saranac Lake, N.Y. He served for six years in the National Guard and Army Reserves, earned his way through college, became a CPA, and is now managing partner in a large accounting firm.
Hoffman is a lifelong resident of the 23rd District which, as
Ryan points out, covers a larger geographical area than any
other congressional district east of the Mississippi
River. The largely rural district covers 11
counties near the Canadian border, from Lake Ontario on
the west to the Vermont state line on the east. (Click image to
see full-size.)
Since 1993, the district was represented by Republican John McHugh, who had a 74% lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union and regularly won re-election by overwhelming margins -- 63% in 2006, and 65% in 2008, both bad years for the GOP.
Appointed by President Obama to be Secretary of the Army, McHugh saw his Senate confirmation delayed by Republicans until mid-September. New York's Democratic Gov. David Paterson didn't call for the special election until Sept. 29, by which time the three candidates were already lined up.
The Democrats' first-choice candidate begged off, leaving the party's nomination to Owens, a Plattsburgh lawyer. What shocked and angered many Republicans -- both in New York and nationwide -- was the way the state GOP leadership hand-picked Scozzafava, a state legislator so liberal as to be to the left of many Democrats in Congress. Conservative columnist Michelle Malkin described Scozzafava as an "ACORN-Friendly, Big Labor-Backing, Tax-and-Spend Radical in GOP Clothing."
Hoffman has explained that Scozzafava's connections with county GOP chairmen likely influenced the state party's decision to choose her over eight other candidates seeking the Republican nomination. "It was an anointment . . . The party bosses, the lords of the backroom, made this selection," Hoffman said Wednesday in an interview with reporters and bloggers.
While Hoffman blamed local political loyalties for the GOP's pick of Scozzafava, it has sparked bitter resentments on Capitol Hill, where GOP conservatives see the pick as the latest example of bungling by National Republican Congressional Committee staffers. As one Republican House member told The Prowler last week, he and his conservative colleagues "blame the NRCC staff for apparently not doing its job."
Ninety percent of House Republican members have reportedly refused to donate to the Scozzafava campaign, and House Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence of Indiana has notably refused to endorse her. When conservative Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling, under pressure from House GOP leadership, spoke up in support of Scozzafava, it caused a firestorm of criticism from conservatives.
Hammered by hard-hitting ads from Hoffman -- as well as from the free-market Club For Growth, which has backed the Conservative Party candidate -- Scozzafava's campaign was reportedly nearly broke earlier this week. But Friday, the Republican National Committee confirmed to Congressional Quarterly that it had made a "six-figure" transfer to the NRCC in order to fund the Scozzafava campaign -- producing yet another round of conservative denunciations of national GOP leadership. The grassroots outcry grew even louder when it was learned that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was also supporting Scozzafava.
Among Hoffman's supporters are Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, the political action committee of the ACU, conservative talk-radio host Fred Thompson, the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List, and the influential GOP conservative blog Red State.
This explains the "deluge of stuff" the Hoffman campaign has been dealing with this week, but the Conservative candidate's staff -- nearly all of them veteran Republican operatives, Ryan says -- are strongly optimistic about Hoffman's chances.
"Most people outside the state don't understand New York state politics," Ryan said, noting that no GOP candidate has won election to a statewide office in New York without the Conservative endorsement since 1974. "The Conservative Party is looked at as the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval by most Republican voters."
Another source close to the Hoffman campaign confirmed tonight that former House Majority Leader Dick Armey is expected to campaign for Hoffman next week. A Texan who is now chairman of the pro-market group Freedomworks, Armey was a key leader of fiscal conservatives in the House GOP during the "Contract With America" era of the 1990s.
Freedomworks was a main sponsor of last month's 9/12 March On DC, which drew a huge crowd to the Capitol as part of the Tea Party movement that began early this year and has sparked rallies nationwide. Hoffman has been endorsed by the 9/12 project, the political arm of the Tea Party movement. In an exclusive interview late Friday, the candidate said he hopes to have as many as 500 Tea Party volunteers nationwide assisting his campaign locally in the final week before the Nov. 3 election.
"They're getting excited about my campaign because I'm the Reagan conservative they're looking for," Hoffman said by telephone, shortly after attending the official opening of a new local campaign headquarters in Plattsburgh. "They're coming from around the country to help us out."
Top aides to the campaign say they expect the next poll -- from Quinnipiac, due out next week -- will show even more gains for the Conservative candidate. Stressing the need for more campaign cash to maintain his momentum, Hoffman predicted that Scozzafava's support will "continue dropping" while he focuses more on the Democrat, Owens.
"We're going to show that he supports the Pelosi agenda," Hoffman said. He said Owens has expressed support for both the Big Labor-backed "card check" legislation and for massive "stimulus" spending, policies that Hoffman says are unpopular with the 23rd District voters he's been meeting along the campaign trail.
"Everybody's concerned about the economy and the runaway government spending," he said.
UPDATE 10/18: Conservatives Ask, 'What Will Sarah Palin Do?'
NY-23: PREVIOUSLY IN THE AMERICAN SPECTATOR:
- The Great RINO Hunt in Upstate New York October 16, 2009
- UPDATE: Conservative Hoffman Gains in N.Y. Special Election October 15, 2009
- Huckabee and Hoffman October 15, 2009
- RINO 'On the Run' in NY23 Special Election October 14, 2009
- Losing It Over Scozzafava October 8, 2009
C'mon, Paul: Grow Up
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 6:05PM
Paul again trashes Juliet Eilperin's reporting below. But he makes this astonishing statment: "I have found that talking with them is a waste of my time (unlike a lot of my conservative, climate realist friends) and that they need to be exposed for what they are -- alarmists and hopelessly biased." That's absurd, Paul. Have you ever TRIED to talk not to "THEM," but specifically to Juliet? THis isn't a matter of "currying favor," as you put it; it's a simple matter of giving somebody a chance to prove their own fairness, and also of giving yourself a chance to be heard by the readership of the reporter in question. Refusing even to talk to somebody, until you have tried otherwise, is cutting off your nose to spite your whole existence. It's not effective advocacy. I repeat: Juliet is a pro. I know her to be one. She already has told me, in response to my earlier post, that she will gladly meet with me and Paul. So Paul, here's your chance to try to get your point of view actually heard. Only a fool would turn that down -- and I know, Paul, that you are no fool. You do great work, phenomenally important work. I have applauded your work repeatedly and will continue to do so. But your response is beneath you. You can do better than that, my friend.
Re: Juliet Eilperin is No Joke
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 5:57PM
My friend Quin is right as far as the way I phrased my blog post late yesterday: Juliet Eilperin is not a joke. She is a human being created in God's image, and I should know better, and for that I apologize to Ms. Eilperin.
Juliet Eilperin's reporting is a joke. In fact, it's not reporting. It's environmental activism, as my post yesterday explained, and as I noted with Marc Morano's documentation of her work. The reason it's a joke is that the Post, which considers itself an objective news organization, runs it in its news section when instead it should be run in the opinion section or not at all. If Eilperin wrote for, say, The Nation, Grist, or some other ideological publication, she wouldn't be the subject of a blog written by me. That she is the star of reporting workshops sponsored and hosted by the likes of the Center for American Progress (where Eilperin's husband, Andrew Light, is a fellow) proves my point.
That Eilperin did what Quin considers a bang-up job on the negatives of corn ethanol is meaningless to me, as many enviro-lefties are on that bandwagon. Maybe she's a nice person. Maybe she does listen and then spill out her environmentalism anyways. I don't really care. Her advocacy does not belong where it is being published.
And I don't buy into the "don't pick fights with those who buy ink by the barrel argument" either. Eilperin and the vast majority of the members of the Society of Environmentalist Journalists are activists -- plain and simple. I have found that talking with them is a waste of my time (unlike a lot of my conservative, climate realist friends) and that they need to be exposed for what they are -- alarmists and hopelessly biased. Trying to curry their favor is not the best use of my time when I can be writing, researching or doing something else more worthwhile. They can spill their ink and I'll use my keyboard.
If Quin would rather make the case that the Post's reporting -- at least on environmentalism -- is a joke instead of just Eilperin, I won't argue. After all, they let leftist Kari Lydersen do reporting for them also.
Re: Obama National Security Advisor
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 5:47PM
Phil's post below takes a shot at Salam al-Marayati, head of the Muslim Public Affairs Council. As a major and inveterate supporter of Israel and admirer of Binyamin Netanyahu, and as a major supporter of the Bush-Cheney war against terrorists, I perhaps am in a position to provide, in effect, this chance for Mr. al-Marayati a chance to respond, if something written in advance can be treated as a response. He did so, in effect, a month ago, with this column at JTA. Here is what he said to explain what truly, on its face, was an outrageous statement of his back in 2001: "On 9/11, just hours after the horrific terrorist attacks, I was interviewed on a local radio show in Los Angeles right after a guest “expert” stated that Islam was the prime suspect. In reacting to that awful stereotype, I made a mistake. I said that if we were going to look for suspects, then we should also put Israel on the list.
It was wrong and I apologized for it on the same radio show the very next day, as well as directly to Jewish leaders. It is a shame that people today continue to exploit that mistake and do not want to accept my apology."
I continue to cringe when Mr. Marayati insists on describing Israeli settlements as "occupation." I almost certainly disagree with him on far more issues related to the Middle East than those on which we agree (if there are any). And I admit that I have not done a painstaking job of research on Mr. Marayati's background. (By the way, is the proper address "Mr. al-Marayati"? I mean no offense if I do it wrong. So from now on I'll just refer to him as Salam.) So I am in no position to do a full-throated defense of Salam.
But I will say this: About 30 months ago, Salam was one of about eight people who went on a Pentagon-sponsored trip with me to the prison at Guantanamo Bay. I had plenty of time to talk to him on the plane. He has made a point of keeping up with me since then. And from what I've seen, I like him. I think he sincerely wants peace and sincerely loves the United States and sincerely abhors extremists and especially killers. I think Salam -- unlike, for instance, the leaders of CAIR -- is a responsible and essentially moderate voice, at least overall. I have heard him, in private settings and public, castigate extremists. And I have always had a knack for correctly adjudging sincerity -- and I do find Salam sincere.
What Reagan said about the Soviets should also be said about those like Salam who have a record of a few incendiary statements but a longer record of publicly opposing terrorism at every opportunity: Trust, but verify.
The Muslim Public Affairs Council gave its annual award this week to Iranian human rights activist Shirin Ebadi. She is clearly a brave lady, although from American eyes her record overall is a mixed one. Anyway, I attended the reception at which the award was presented, as an interested observer. I was going to write something about the reception, and Salam's group, anyway this weekend, after some more reflection and research. When Phil mentioned Salam, though, in his blog post, I thought it would be appropriate for me to jump in now. Unlike G. W. Bush, even when I have a high opinion of my ability to discern real sincerity, I do NOT let my personal impression override the need to do due diligence on that actual facts. You'll never catch me saying like Bush said of Putin that I know somebody is good because I think I can see into his soul. So I merely offer these impressions, NOT conclusions: 1) Salam seems to be a constructive actor. 2) Americans need to foster good relations with constructive actors in the Muslim community. 3) Salam is certainly and demonstrably far more moderate than CAIR.
I'll save my thoughts on Ms. Ebadi for later. But for now, with all the misgivings that stem from me being an inveterate supporter of Israel, and knowing that Salam probably will be aghast to know of my admiration for Netanyahu, let me just urge people not to write off Salam or MPAC on the basis of one or two bad statements. Dialogue is good. And Salam is good company.
SuperFreakonomics Freaking Out the Greens
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 5:02PM
SuperFreakonomics, the sequel to the pop economics mega-bestseller Freakonomics, is already generating a controversy on par with the controversies its predecessor caused -- except this time it's the left that is irate, over some of the book's dubious economics that downplay the threat posed by global warming.
The book, written by the University of Chicago econometrician Steve Levitt and the journalist Stephen Dubner, has the subtitle Global Cooling, Patriotic Prostitutes, and Why Suicide Bombers Should Buy Life Insurance. Clearly, it's meant to be provocative. The influential blogger and physicist Joe Romm read a review copy and strongly objected to the findings of the global warming chapter on his blog, faulting the economics and logic that lead Levitt and Dubner to conclude that geoengineering is a more promising method than carbon emissions reductions for countering global warming. Other left-wing blogs have quickly seconded the charges.
Paul Krugman, especially, called Romm's post "pretty damning," accusing Levitt and Dubner of "falling into the trap of counterintuitiveness." Krugman finishes,
Clever snark like this can get you a long way in career terms - but the trick is knowing when to stop.... if you're going to get into issues that are both important and the subject of serious study, like the fate of the planet, you'd better be very careful not to stray over the line between being counterintuitive and being just plain, unforgivably wrong.
It looks as if Superfreakonomics has gone way over that line.
The irony is rich. The whole point of the original Freakonomics was also to be counterintuitive in a provocative way. Famously, the most controversial claim in Freakonomics, repackaged from Levitt's doctoral dissertation, was that the legalization of abortion in the '70s led to decreased crime in the '90s. That findings of that study have been found over time to be less than robust. I would characterize abortion as an issue that is "both important and the subject of serious study."
If Levitt was "just plain, unforgivably wrong" on the abortion/crime findings, I haven't heard Krugman or anyone else on the left complain about it. But now that Levitt is applying that same questionable level of scholarship to the left's pet issue, suddenly he has fallen into the trap of counterintuitiveness, and is prioritizing shock value over academic rigor.
The Great RINO Hunt in Upstate New York
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 3:51PM
Well, if you've been following this story since my Wednesday report on Doug Hoffman, you know that the 3-way congressional special election in update New York's 23rd District has quickly become perhaps the biggest political story of the year.
"It's popping today," one highly placed source close to Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman told me in a brief phone interview. The campaign is "thrilled" by the latest poll that shows Hoffman "surging."
Despite little attention from the major media, Hoffman caught fire this week, and GOP Establishment-backed candidate Dede Scozzafava is melting like the Wicked RINO Witch -- there's even a suggestion she might switch parties.
Now the Hoffman campaign is reportedly preparing a major new ad rollout and it is rumored -- just a rumor at this point -- that FreedomWorks honcho Dick Armey may be coming to upstate New York next week to campaign for the Conservative candidate.
One little humorous item I got exclusively: Republican strategist Jeri Thompson (whose husband Fred has endorsed Hoffman) had been scheduled to appear today on the Neal Cavuto's Fox News show to discuss the race but got bumped in favor of "Balloon Boy" coverage!
Something else: In Wednesday's conference call, Hoffman said his campaign was very eager to get Glenn Beck's attention. I didn't report that earlier -- it seemed kind of a minor point -- but the Conservative candidate has the backing of at least one Fox News superstar: Michelle Malkin is definitely a Hoffman fan.
Obama National Security Adviser to Speak at Anti-Israel Conference
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 3:10PM
James Jones, President Obama's National Security Advisor, has agreed to be the keynote speaker at the anti-Israel group J Street's first annual conference in Washington next week. While the group bills itself as the "pro Israel" and "pro peace" alternative to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, in reality it is a liberal organization actively campaigning against Israel's right to defend itself. As Michael Goldfarb has noted, other speakers at the conference include Eli Pariser, the former director of Moveon.org, and Salam Al-Marayati, who was quoted in the New York Times in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks saying Israel should be considered a prime suspect:
''If we're going to look at suspects, we should look to the groups that benefit the most from these kinds of incidents, and I think we should put the state of Israel on the suspect list because I think this diverts attention from what's happening in the Palestinian territories so that they can go on with their aggression and occupation and apartheid policies.''
The announcement that Jones will speak comes as a growing number of Democratic members of Congress have announced they would drop out of participating in the conference, causing J Street to blame the Weekly Standard for employing a "classic 'swift boat' move" by publishing actual statements made by participants in the conference.
With each passing day, the outright contempt the Obama administration has for Israel becomes more apparent.
Goldfarb has more.
Notre Dame Can't Stay Out of the News
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 12:40PM
Some Notre Dame alumni, faculty, and students are again irate at the administration, this time for sponsoring the Progressive Student Alliance's participation in last week's gay pride march/protest here in D.C.
I wasn't going to comment on it because it seems like inside baseball and not a big deal. But today the Washington Times reported on the incident: Continue reading…
Hatch Blasts Democats' Health Care "Shell Game"
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 12:00PM
Sen. Orrin Hatch blasted Democrats on Friday for using "budget gimmicks" to obscure the true cost of health care legislation, which he said was well into the trillions of dollars.
As I reported yesterday, Sen. Harry Reid plans to rush through a bill next week that would prevent scheduled cuts to doctors payment rates in Medicare, at a cost of $247 billion, without any budgetary offsets.
"It’s a shell game,” Hatch said on a conference call.
By passing the bill separately, Democrats will try to claim that their larger health care bill costs less than $1 trillion and is deficit neutral. The so-called "doc fix" is aimed at preventing physicians from leaving Medicare because the program isn't paying them enough.
"It will be completely deficit financed," Hatch said. "And what’s important is that it’s going to be a lot more than $250 billion, because that’s in present worth."
When adjusted for expected inflation over the next 10 years, the actual cost is likely to be twice that, Hatch projected.
“President Obama promised deficit-neutral health care reform and the ‘doc fix’ is part of health care reform," he said. "So why is it being done separately?”
Hatch, who serves on the Finance Committee, also noted that the committee's bill delays most of its major provisions until 2014, so that the 10-year cost (measured by the Congressional Budget Office from 2010 to 2019) appears to be less. But, he said, the true 10-year cost once all the provisions are in acted is $1.8 trillion.
Beastly Miss Meghan Says, 'Don't Call Me a Slut!'
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 11:44AM
Meghan McCain would be well advised to stop exercising her First Amendment rights and instead invoke her Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, as determined under Miranda v. Arizona. Everything she says can and will be used against her in the court of public opinion.
The title of her latest column for Tina Brown's Daily Beast is "Don't Call Me a Slut." Well, one can't prove a negative, so if at this late point in her juvenile punditry career she has decided to stake her claim on a reputation for spotless chastity, perhaps she'll call character witnesses to attest her non-sluttishness. And good luck with that.
As to the other memorable claims of her Daily Beastliness, Ms. Meghan suggests that she is being criticized merely "because I have breasts," a trait she shares with 51% of adult humanity. This absurd assertion requires correction:
It was not Meghan's possession of large breasts, nor her display thereof, which has been the object of criticism. Rather, it was her childish online tantrum -- "getting the f**k off Twitter," she whined -- in reaction to online rudeness that enhanced her laughingstock status.
Excuse the asterisk-starred obscenity, but Ms. Meghan's online ouevre involves quite a copious output of epithets. Don't worry about those nasty blog commenters, sweetheart. I've warned them repeatedly: NO FAT JOKES!
And also, DON'T CALL HER A SLUT!
(Is it my fault they don't all obey me?)
Juliet Eilperin is No Joke
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 11:37AM
I must take issue, at least in part, with my friend Paul Chesser's attack on the Washington Post's Juliet Eilperin. I have known Juliet for some 15 years and know her to be a very hard-working journalist who tries very hard to be fair. More on that in a moment.
First, though: Yes, Juliet clearly leans left. And she clearly is convinced that man-made global warming is a dire threat to humanity -- and she is wrong on that, while Paul is right. I also seriously question the Post leaving her on a beat on which her own husband has such a direct professional interest. While it is NOT fair to say that a journalist should have to give up his or her job because of family relationships, it IS fair to say that if there is another beat for which the reporter is qualified, editors ought to move that reporter to a beat that doesn't put the reporter in the unenviable (and unfair to the reporter herself) position of reporting on a subject where somebody might question her (or his) objectivity, no matter how many pains the reporter takes to try to be fair. In this case, Juliet was a superb and fair-minded reporter on politics (on Congress). She may like the environmental beat better, but really, she has an obvious APPARENT conflict of interest on it even if she is scrupulously objective. If I were a Post editor, I would move her somewhere else -- with a promotion.
Also, it is worth noting that Juliet did a great job reporting early last year about two scientific studies showing that corn-based ethanol does more harm than good. Somebody overly wedded to environmentalist conventional wisdom would not have done such a good reporting job on that.
Now, it is always possible that somebody who wants to be fair could nevertheless let strong ideological predilections bias his reporting without being aware of it. I myself have read some of Juliet's environmental pieces and found that the underlying assumptions were those of the left. My question is, to what extent has Paul, or anybody else on the climate-change-skeptic side, tried to approach Juliet as if she is fair-minded and as if she will give the skeptic side a fair shake if provided enough info? Maybe Paul has done so; I don't know; I'm just asking. My own experience with Juliet when I worked for Rep. Bob Livingston and she wrote for Roll Call was that she was always willing to listen. I could tell even then when she was skeptical, philosophically, about what we were trying to do in limiting government. But I never once had a problem with her copy. Her reports were thorough and balanced. And I think that as a reporter she is a pro's pro. Unless I am wrong -- and I might be wrong, but I like to believe my judgment on Juliet is correct -- she will at least report the other side if given a chance. And she will do so without any deliberately derogatory terms.
To repeat, I think this whole idea of a crisis of man-made global warming is an absolute, irredeemable farce. I think Paul does spectacular work on the subject. It's just that I know that Juliet Eilperin is not a joke. And I would be more than willing to try to set up a meeting between Paul and Juliet if they haven't already met.
Michael Wilbon Endorses Racism in Rush Attack
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 11:02AM
Well, surprise surprise.
A sportswriter for the Washington Post has turned out to be one more liberal who loves to judge others by race. This morning this was apparent in a Michael Wilbon column on Rush Limbaugh.
Let's leave aside that when it comes to putting up examples of Rush's supposed racism, Wilbon says "I don't listen to his show" and "I'm not going to try and give specific examples of things he has said over the years; I screwed up already doing that, repeating a quote attributed to Limbaugh (about slavery) that he has told me he simply did not say and does not reflect his feelings. I take him at his word."
So we have established, according to Mr. Wilbon himself, that he doesn't listen to Rush, and has "screwed up" attributing racial remarks to him that Rush never said. A promising start.
Alas, not for long.
Wilbon than instantly goes off the track by referring to President Obama not as the president of the United States, which, the last time I checked, he was. No, he said this;
"But Limbaugh has long history of the same insults and race baiting, to the point of declaring he hoped the president of the United States, a black man, fails."
So. That's it. Those of us who view Barack Obama as (a) the President of the United States, and (b) a thorough-going left-winger whose policies are off-the-charts damaging to the country….. are race baiting? So when blacks wanted Nixon to fail they were race baiting? Got it. When they hated Hoover they were race baiting? When they voted for Jimmy Carter, who got to the White House after getting elected governor by courting every thorough-going white racist vermin in the state of Georgia, they were…what?
Apparently Mr. Wilbon is an enthusiastic supporter of Justice Clarence Thomas but just forgot to write a column trashing all those liberals who went after Thomas because of his race. Oops.
The hard fact and deeply unattractive fact seems to be that the race-baiter here is Mr. Wilbon. He is incapable of viewing the President, by his own admission, as The President. But as such, Barack Obama is the same in every way as the other 43 from Washington through Bush. Except to Wilbon. No, Wilbon's focus is on race. The President isn't president in Wilbon's eyes, he's the black man who is president. And the rest of us who want to treat this president the same way we treated all the others (on a scale, that covers everything from fainting in a swoon to hurling buckets of invective, the usual approach of Americans to their chief executives) are told that we have to judge Mr. Obama differently because of his skin color.
Mr. Wilbon is put forth to Post readers as a professional. A journalist. A sportswriter. He is also a black man. So what? Is that how Mr. Wilbon wants to be judged? As "Michael Wilbon, black sportswriter." rather than "Michael Wilbon, sportswriter"??
His approach to Rush Limbaugh in the end has nothing to do with Rush, who is, as those of us who do listen to his show are well familiar, a believer in a colorblind society. He makes fun of -- quite deservedly -- those like Wilbon who pretend to this when in fact they insist on judging people by skin color, by race.
Mr. Wilbon clearly lives his life on what some refer to as the liberal intellectual plantation.
It's time...way past time in American life...for Wilbon and others to cut the chains and walk off. And the next time they see the President of the United States...understand that he is that. Just that. And only that.
Anita Dunn: Mao Tse Tung Fan?
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 10:53AM
Here's a video from Glenn Beck which seems to show interim White House communications director Anita Dunn listing two of her "favorite political philosophers" in a speech: Mother Teresa and... Mao Tse Tung.
(Skip to 4:10 for the Anita Dunn clip)
Dunn initially juxtaposes the two to make it a joke. "Not often coupled with each other," she says, to a few laughs. Dave Weigel thinks the whole thing's a joke that everyone but Glenn Beck gets.
At that point in the video, it is clearly a joke. But then Dunn goes into a somewhat long history of Mao and Chiang Kai Shek in 1947 that's a little bit too bright, and a little too hagiographic. It suggests that she was in fact not joking that Mao is one of her favorite political philosophers. The joke was the juxtaposition between him and Mother Teresa, not her beliefs. Her love of Mao's political philosophy, unfortunately, doesn't seem to be one of the speech's jokes.
If Anita Dunn does not understand what is wrong with citing Mao as a favorite political philosopher, then she is out of her mind. Is there anything in her background to suggest that she is indeed this crazy? Or is this simply a clip taken out of context?
UPDATE:
Weigel notes in his blog post, and this Think Progress post expands on the point, that McCain and other right-wingers have also been quick to use some of Mao's sayings, e.g. "it's always darkest before it's totally black."
Of course there's an important distinction between reciting aphorisms that are fairly universal and anyone could have said, and drawing a lesson from the specific actions and thoughts of a mass murderer as they pertain to mass murder -- which is what Dunn does in the clip.
The more significant problem with interpreting this clip as evidence that Dunn is a revolutionary communist is that it lacks context. Beck played three or so full minutes of the clip on his show, but even so there are still possible mitigating circumstances.
For instance, it's possible that it's such a friendly and ideologically-attuned audience that Dunn thinks she can get away with making fine points about Mao without being questioned on the larger point that she deplores him as a communist dictatory. It's entirely possible -- I've certainly been at events where liberals feel comfortable enough with the audience to discuss the effiencies of communist health care systems without first bothering to disclaim communism's atrocities. Similarly, I've heard conservatives praise South American dictators for implementing certain free-market reforms without mentioning at the same time that they appreciate that the people they're talking about were in fact dictators.
The other problem is that, as far as I'm aware, there's no other information out there that suggests that Anita Dunn is the kind of person who would talk about Mao's achievements, let alone be a secret communist sympathizer.
Then again, she is the White House's communications director, and the bottom line is that she's supposed to communicate her political preferences a little better than this.
Daily Must-Reads
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 10:37AM
- Boot: Afghanistan run-off elections likely to be corrupt again, solution should be to bring other candidates into the government (Commentary)
- $1 million of stimulus funds being used to catch carp to save an endangered fish that only lives in one lake in Utah (AP)
- Chicago's economy, city jobs in big trouble after Olympic fail (Daily Herald)
- Taliban and Al-Qaeda are training 7-year-old boys as child soldiers (CBS News)
Che Guevara's Celebrity: 42 Years and Counting -- UPDATED
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 10:35AM
Just in time for fall! The Che Guevara replica jacket.
...a perfect replica of the one so famously worn by Ernesto Che Guevara on his legendary motorcycle journey across Latin America in the 1950s.
I'm sorry but... are you kidding me?
Where is the replica of Hitler's frock worn as a struggling artist? What about Pol Pot's replica boots from when he was a simple road builder in Yugoslavia? Surprisingly, the "before they were stars" collections of Lee Malvo, Timothy McVeigh, and Jim Jones haven't hit the stores... yet.
But I'm optimistic (and horrified).
I can't wait for the Che-people to get his fragrance out on the market. How about a name like Brutal Death to Thousands of Innocent People. Maybe that's too long. I'm sure they'll figure it out.
All I know is, 42 years ago this month, the vaunted "Che" was gunned down in Bolivia, and finally, we have another piece of cra... er, clothing to add to the icons pathetic (i.e., "legendary") iconography.
I wonder if he wore his jacket when he ended his romantic motorcycle ride and began his bloody rampage. Maybe the celebrated murderer of innocent men, women, and children liked to wear his jacket with the collar up. Maybe he wore it when he killed all of those people who had legitimate disagreements with his politics. Maybe he wore it when he killed all of those homosexuals. Or maybe he just wore it as he sat and pondered how to do all of that killing.
You would want/need a comfortable jacket for that.
So, if iconic murdering thugs are your kind of thing, your morals, your integrity, and your inner psychopath are just a purchase away!
UPDATE:
J-Crew has removed language referring to
...a perfect replica of the one so famously worn by Ernesto Che Guevara on his legendary motorcycle journey across Latin America in the 1950s.
J-Crew is now sold-out of the jacket (so they say) and they have
conspicuously removed the language mentioning that ol'
trouble-maker Che, replacing it with:
The epitome of rugged, authentic cool, the Trialmaster is as famous amongst serious motorcyclists as it is with fashion aficionados.
Might somebody be gaining a conscience?
Hmmm.
"We Did This For The Show"
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 9:50AM
"Balloon Boy" Falcon Henne (who I suppose should really be called "Attic Boy") created controversy on "Larry King Live" when he seemed to admit that yesterday's bizarre episode was an elaborate hoax. "We did this for show," the 6-year old said, though his father later angrily denied the suggestion that it was a publicity stunt. Yesterday, our resident Wife Swap expert Shawn Macomber wrote of the reality show the Henne's starred in, "trust me when I tell you that when you see either of this family's Wife Swap episodes, you will have absolutely no problem understanding how this happened."
Well, one of those episodes has now been posted on YouTube in five parts, and having scanned through them, I'd have to concur with Shawn. Interestingly, one sublot in the episode is the father's attempts to build a flying saucer. Here is part 1 of the show, you can click on if you want to watch more:
Remembering the Fall of the Wall
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 7:40AM
It's been two decades since the Berlin Wall fell. The road to freedom has been rocky, but it is hard to remember the awful world that once existed: dreary, brutal, repressive prison states extending from East Germany all the way to the Pacific.
It turns out that West German intelligence collected East German jokes as a measure of discontent behind the Wall. Laughter was an important form of resistance. The Daily Telegraph reports:
Among the jokes recorded in the files were:
Did East Germans originate from apes?
Impossible. Apes could never have survived on just two bananas a year.
What would happen if the desert became communist?
Nothing for a while - and then there would be a sand shortage!
How do you double the value of a Trabant?
Answer: Fill it up with petrol.
And the regime reacted accordingly. Explains the Daily Telegraph:
Thousands lost jobs, families and sometimes even their liberty for poking fun at the worker's paradise.
On November 9 we all should raise a glass in remembrance of the fall of the Wall.
Klaus and the Lisbon Treaty: No Need to Hurry
Posted by on 10.16.09 @ 6:45AM
While Britain will be a huge beneficiary if Czech President Vaclav Klaus delays ratification of the Lisbon Treaty and allows for a UK referendum, Klaus's defiant stance is one driven by care for the Czech Republic whose best interests he does and should have at heart.
David Cameron, leader of the British Conservative Party -- tipped by the polls to become Britain's next Prime Minister by next June at the latest -- has pledged to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty if it is not ratified before the next UK general election. President Klaus has practically taken on mythical status among British EU-skeptics since a referendum on Lisbon is a sure-fire way to kick-start the renegotiation of Britain's unsatisfactory relationship with the European Union.
However, the threats and pressure being leveled against President Klaus by Brussels' elites serve to remind him exactly why he is holding out for firm guarantees on Czech interests before ratifying. First of all French President Nicolas Sarkozy threatened Prague with unidentified but serious consequences of delaying ratification. Now, newly-reelected Commission President, Jose Manuel Barroso has threatened to cull the Czech's Commissioner (note that Barroso waited until after he secured Czech support for his reelection). In the absence of legally binding written guarantees, President Klaus should not trust vague assurances from people who clearly care nothing for the national interest of the Czech Republic.
As a matter of principle, safeguarding his nation's interests is nothing less than President Klaus's constitutional duty. And his concerns over the radical Charter of Fundamental Rights is valid. More a charter for fundamental socialism, it legalizes the right of collective bargaining and action among other questionable 'rights.' Klaus's concerns over the impact of property claims by ethnic Germans forced out of the Czech Sudeten region after World War II are equally valid. Until he can be confident that the Lisbon Treaty serves Prague's interest, there is no reason to rush ratification.
The EU started negotiating the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty in 2001 following the Laeken summit. Without a constitution, the EU has managed two rounds of expansion, two Euro-wide parliamentary elections and nearly two dozen EU security and defense missions (not to mention three resounding rejections of further European integration in referenda). There is absolutely no legitimate reason that President Klaus cannot wait a few more months to satisfy Czech interests. And with the highest approval ratings of all Czech politicians, he has the added bonus of popularity as well as principle on his side.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Juliet Eilperin is a Joke
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 6:35PM
Yet another template-follower from the Society of Environmentalist Journalists -- this time the Washington Post's Juliet Eilperin -- today delivered her latest advocacy piece for Red/Green causes. You need not read past her lede to understand where she's coming from:
More than a decade ago in the northeast corner of Bolivia, a group of polluters and environmentalists joined forces in the first large-scale experiment to curb climate change with a strategy that promised to suit their competing interests: compensating for greenhouse gas emissions by preserving forests.
Who are the so-called "polluters" in this story? You needn't be surprised that it's a "coalition of U.S. utility companies." So how do you like that -- a so-called objective journalist placing a negative value judgment on one of the subjects for her story? Making matters worse is that the alleged pollutant she is talking about is CO2, an invisible gas that is essential for life.
I've got some other ideas if this is how we're going to identify subjects in articles. Here are some possible alternatives for utility companies: "Massive job providers," "inexpensive energy producers," and "life-saving" or "life-extending energy producers."
Meanwhile, here are a few of my suggestions to identify what Eilperin innocuously calls "environmentalists:" "shakedown artists," "Gaia freaks," "rent-seekers," "people-haters," "Earth worshippers," and "economy busters."
Of course Eilperin doesn't stop there. She calls the Bolivian project an effort to keep a "biologically rich preserve of more than 6,000 square miles free from logging...," as though that was a good thing. What does "biologically rich" mean, anyway? Is this supposed to have some kind of wealth or abundance value that is meaningful to someone or something? If so, to whom, or to what? And why? As far as I'm concerned, keeping valuable timber off limits to use for human purposes, to improve their health and standard of living, is a bad thing. But in the warped, upside-down world of Eilperin and her fellow SEJ elites, it's all great!
Marc Morano at Climate Depot has kept up with Eilperin's work, and it is truly abysmal, especially if you believe in reasonably balanced reporting (she doesn't) and the value of human life over phony, manufactured environmental issues. A self-respecting news organization that calls itself objective would either put her on the opinion page or drop her, but that's not what the Post is.
Officials: "Balloon Boy" Found Safely at Home
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 6:12PM
On NBC, local police officials just announced that the boy was found, hiding in a box in the attic.
Those Aren't Just Any 'Wife Swap' Kids...
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 6:00PM
Those are super infamous Wife Swap kids. And the father is out of his mind--way, way out of his mind. Like crazy enough to wind up on the all-stars edition of the show, if I'm not mistaken. I am a huge fan of the show. It is almost always a surreal viewing experience. And, so, trust me when I tell you that when you see either of this family's Wife Swap episodes, you will have absolutely no problem understanding how this happened. All day I'm looking at these hot air balloon news stories thinking, 'Wow, this is insane.' Not anymore. It makes total sense now.
Reid Plans Monday Cloture Vote on $247 Billion Health Care Bill
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 5:00PM
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has scheduled a cloture vote for Monday on a $247 billion bill to avoid cuts in Medicare payments to doctors, according to a Senate GOP source.
As I reported earlier, when combined with the supposedly fiscally prudent Senate Finance Committee bill, Reid's proposal would bring the cost of health care legislation to above $1 trillion, and ensure that it creates deficits -- in violation of President Obama's pledge. By doing a smaller and separate $247 billion bill, it will be easier to claim that the larger health care bill they push is deficit neutral.
Reid is trying to rush this bill through, and today scheduled a cloture vote to break any hopes of a filibuster for 5:30 p.m. on Monday.
Earlier today, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Republicans supported pulling back the scheduled cuts to doctor reimbursement rates, but that they would offer ammendments to pay for it.
"I think virtually all of my members are in favor of fixing
this reimbursement problem, but we think there are ways to pay
for it," McConnell said. "And when it comes up in
the Senate, we're going to offer amendments that will give us an
opportunity to pay for an adjustment that most of us think ought
to be -- ought to be done. But this is so transparent. They're
taking this issue out of health care, suggesting that we spend a
quarter of a trillion dollars, not pay for it, so that they can
then argue, the very next week potentially, that this
trillion-dollar health care bill is paid for."
Balloon Boy Family Rap Video Mocked Over-Protective Parents
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 4:28PM
The "balloon boy" has now been identified as Falcon Henne, one of three boys in an family that appeared on the ABC series "Wife Swap" earlier this year. After doing a You Tube search, I unearthed this bizarre rap video recorded by the boys entitled, "Not Pussified." It mocks "over-protective parents." In light of what has gone on so far today, and given the family's history we should be skeptical about anything we hear from now on. All we know is that an eccentric family claims that one of their boys floated away in a balloon, but was not found in the balloon.
The Taliban and Al-Qaeda: All in the Family?
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 4:09PM
The Washington Post reported last week that members of the Obama administration are seeking to incorporate the Taliban into the Afghan government in a way similar to the way Hezbollah participates in the Lebanese government -- maintaining control over parts of the country and participating in the government as a minority faction. Witnesses testified this morning before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs against such a reported approach to dealing with the Taliban.
The Taliban and Al-Qaeda are "genetically and... ideologically mixed," said J. Alexander Thier, director of Afghanistan and Pakistan at the U.S. Institute of Peace. Thier cited the intermarriages between the Taliban and Al-Qaeda along with Al-Qaeda's support for the Taliban's rise to power in the 1990s. Frederick Kagan, who also testified this morning, strongly agreed, "it (a Taliban safe haven) would be almost certain to provide Al-Qaeda with a haven that we would not be able to access." Kagan and Thier also pointed out that leadership has become increasingly linked to Al-Qaeda during the current war against the Afghan government and the United States.
Some Democrats and a few Republicans do not want the United States to fight the Taliban, but rather wish only to fight Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. The implication is that fewer American forces would be needed, and troops would be used mainly in a more limited counter-terrorism strategy against Al-Qaeda. While the Taliban and Al-Qaeda are not identical, the former Taliban government housed Osama Bin Laden and has killed hundreds of American troops in the insurgency. Such an approach to co-op the Taliban seems like overly-wishful thinking.
Boy In Balloon UPDATE: Balloon Lands Without Boy
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 3:11PM
If you're near a television, currently a flying-saucer shaped helium balloon is floating outside of Denver, and is believed to be carrying a 6-year old boy. You can learn more here.
UPDATE: The balloon has landed, without a boy in it. And they haven't found him at home. Let's hope and pray that they locate him and that he's alive and well.
Oblivious Self-Parody
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 1:11PM
Michelle Malkin perfectly captures the fawning Obama-love of the magazine industry in her post today about, get this, an actual award for "Best Obama Magazine Cover." Amazing. Here is the explanation for the award, from the award-giver, the Magazine Publishers of America: The smile says it all. Photographer Peter Yang caught up with Barack Obama in Raleigh, North Carolina, just a few days after he had finally nailed down the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. Obama was exhausted, excited, relaxed, gracious, open–yet still somehow elusive. Hundreds of photographers have shot Obama over the past couple of years, but no one has quite caught his quiet charisma as Peter Yang did last June.
This is vomit-inducing. "Excited, relaxed, gracious, open, yet elusive"!! The only thing the text didn't say was something about Obama's supposedly great pecs. This puts Chris Matthews' "chill up [his] leg" to shame. It's like a 12 year-old schoolgirl writing in her diary about her first dream boy. Or like an onanistic Harry Hay writing about a man crush.
Bad Polls for Democrats
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 12:45PM
Brian Faughnan has the details. And the best thing about the report is that the numbers come from Carville and Greenberg! Do take a look at the link.
UPDATE: Conservative Hoffman Gains in N.Y. Special Election
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 12:18PM
New poll numbers in the Nov. 3 special election:
Bill Owens (D) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33%
Dede Scozzafava (R) . . . . . . . . . . 29%
Doug Hoffman (Conservative) . . . 23%
This is a huge gain for Hoffman. The liberal media are headlining the lead for Owens, but the more important point is Hoffman's momentum. He's gained 7 points in two weeks, while Scozzafava's lost 6. It shows how Scozzafava's support in this key three-way upstate New York congressional race has collapsed because of Hoffman's exposure of the RINO candidate's liberal voting record. The Hill reports:
Hoffman has surged in Oneida and Oswego, at the western end of the district. Hoffman takes 34 percent of the vote in one of the district's most populous areas, narrowly edging Owens by three points. Scozzafava, whose television advertising campaign has been far weaker than either Owens or Hoffman, trails with just 21 percent in those counties.
Press release from the Hoffman campaign:
"It's clear Dede Scozzafava is way too liberal for the 23rd CD. That's why she's dropping in the polls. Voters are seeing that the conservative Republican candidate, Doug Hoffman, will work to cut spending, cut taxes, and shrink the deficit and that's why he is surging in the poll. This poll was completed on Tuesday, just as our media buy was being ramped up. As more voters get to know Doug Hoffman, more voters will support Doug Hoffman. This is a race between two liberals and a conservative. Doug Hoffman is the conservative and that's why he will win."
As I reported yesterday, Hoffman says he has Scozzafava "on the run," and Red State is trying to raise more money to help push Hoffman over the top. Hoffman is endorsed by the Club for Growth, the Susan B. Anthony List and other conservative groups. Perhaps more importantly, Hoffman's got the endorsement of the 9/12 Project, which gives him the conservative grassroots Tea Party volunteers to run a strong ground campaign, but he's got to have more cash to keep running his hard-hitting TV campaign.
Harry Reid's $200 Billion Sleight of Hand UPDATE: $247 Billion
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 11:51AM
It turns out that Harry Reid picked up a few tricks in Las Vegas.
Last week's highly-publicized report by the Congressional Budget Office that estimated the Senate Finance Committee's health care bill would reduce federal deficits over time included this important caveat: "These projections assume that the proposals are enacted and remain unchanged throughout the next two decades, which is often not the case for major legislation." As an example, the CBO noted that lawmakers have never followed through on proposed cuts to Medicare's payments to doctors.
And as the Hill reports, they're at it again:
The Senate is poised to take action on a costly bill to hike Medicare payments to physicians just weeks before bringing a sweeping healthcare overhaul to the floor.
Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Wednesday morning quietly set in motion legislation that could cost more than $200 billion over 10 years – without cuts or revenue to offset the spending -- on a separate track from a larger healthcare bill that President Barack Obama and Senate Democratic leaders have vowed would not add to the budget deficit.
So, while loudly touting a CBO report that estimates one of the Democratic health care bills would cost $829 billion over 10 years and reduce deficits, Reid is working below the radar to restore $200 billion in Medicare funding that would bring the total cost of health care legislation to over $1 trillion, and add to deficits.
UPDATE: The Wall Street Journal reports that it will actually cost $247 billion, and Republicans are seeking offsets.
The "Public Option"? That's a Heavy Metal Band, Right?
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 10:04AM
While liberals have been boasting that a majority of Americans want a government-run health care plan to be included in final legislation, a new Pew poll finds that just 56 percent of Americans even know that it has something vaguely to do with health care. As for the rest of the public, 11 percent thinks it has to do with either banking regulation, unemployment, or energy policy -- and 33 percent wouldn't even wager a guess.
Via Political Wire.
Meghan McCain's Twitter Snit Fit (Please Don't Make Fat Jokes)
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 10:04AM
There are many important things to think about today -- what will President Obama do in Afghanistan? -- but for Meghan McCain no subject is ever more important than Meghan McCain.
Last
night, my young and quite distant cousin, daughter of
Republican
presidential loser John McCain, had what one blogger
called a "Twitter
breakdown," a public tantrum performed for the benefit
of the more than 50,000 people who subscribe to her Twitter
feed.
Having chronicled Meghan's hysterical Twitter snit on my own blog, there's no need to recount the laughable details here. Suffice it to say that she dishes it out -- vulgar put-downs of Michelle Malkin, smugly superior sarcasm toward Ann Coulter, etc. -- but can't take it. So, in a message last night, she promised that she is "getting the f***k off Twitter."
Ironically, her
egoistic episode began when Miss Meghan posted a photo of herself
holding a book about Andy Warhol, the pop artist whose best-known
aphorism was, "In the future, everyone will be world-famous for
15 minutes." Meghan's 15 minutes have long since expired and if
she is stupid enough to follow through on last night's impulsive
threat to quit Twittering -- 50,000 subscribers is an
enviable readership for online promotion -- the world will
have another laugh at her expense.
Whatever you do, however, don't make fun of Meghan for being chubby. That's the self-indulgent theme of her latest column at Tina Brown's Daily Beast. And this is one of the rare occasions when I agree with my pudgy young cousin, whose column boasts about her size-10 derriere.
Being a Southerner -- my kinship with the senatorial branch of the McCain family involves an 18th-century Carolinian ancestor -- I've never minded a gal "with a little meat on her bones," as we say down home. In fact, during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, I was the only conservative journalist in Washington who never made a fat joke at the expense of President Clinton's delightfully weighty mistress.
Like the concupiscent Arkansan, I found Miss Lewinsky's zaftig figure extraordinarily alluring and was quite grateful that it was Bubba, and not I, who was led into that particular temptation. Every time CNN showed Monica bouncing and jiggling out of the federal courthouse after her grand jury appearances, I'd let out a low whistle and mutter: "There, but for the grace of God, go I!"
Meghan McCain obviously has never aroused such guilty thoughts in my heart. No matter what people say about Southerners and their cousins, that's just a stereotype, like the unfair stereotypes about dumb blondes and spoiled rich girls. Still, I think Meg's bubbly chubbiness is quite fetching and only wish that everyone shared my downhome admiration for a gal who, by all appearances, isn't ashamed to ask for second helpings of barbecue and biscuits.
Therefore, I trust that American Spectator readers who wish to comment will show Miss Meghan the kind of respect she deserves, and that all comments on this subject will be appropriate and decorous. Please, I beg you: NO FAT JOKES!
Why Just Question Someone's Patriotism...
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 10:03AM
...when you can call them a bigot, too?
This seems to be the question Garrison Keillor could not quite find an answer to while writing his latest Salon column. But don't worry, all the usual re-tread unfunny jokes and faux modesty you've come to expect from A Prairie Home Companion is on display as well.
If any conservative commentator had written this same column about a liberal during the Bush years, Garrison would have keeled over in ostentatious outrage. Ah, yes, remember when criticizing the president wasn't tantamount to a treasonous, racist bet against America? Yeah, like roundabout nine months ago. Good times.
Now China Thwarts Obama on Iran
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 9:45AM
Yesterday, I noted how Russia had announced opposition to tougher sanctions against Iran, despite liberals' insistence that the Obama administration's conciliatory approach would get Russia onboard. The other key nation in this equation is China, which the Obama administration has also appeased, in part so that it will keep financing his deficit spending. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton refused to press China on its human rights abuses earlier this year, and more recently President Obama refused to meet the Dalai Lama when the Tibetan leader visited Washington. Unfortunately for Obama, his overtures to China were even less successful than his capitulation to Russia, as the Wall Street Journal reports:
BEIJING – China praised its growing energy and trade ties with Iran in remarks that further diminished hopes that China will support efforts by the U.S. and its allies to line up sanctions over Iran's nuclear program.
"The Sino-Iran relationship has witnessed rapid development, as the two countries' leaders have had frequent exchanges, and cooperation in trade and energy has widened and deepened," China's Premier Wen Jiabao said Thursday in a meeting with visiting Iranian Vice President Reza Rahimi, according to the state-controlled Xinhua news agency. Mr. Rahimi is in Beijing along with the heads of Russia and Central Asian countries who are members of the regional Shanghai Cooperation Organization.
Daily Must-Reads
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 9:28AM
- Taliban threatens to attack India after conquering Pakistan (Kronos)
- Anthropologist claims that Olympic medalists are weaklings compared to ancient times (Reuters)
- AP reports that top Afghan Al-Qaeda contacted suspected terrorist plotter Mustafa Abu al-Yazid.
- South Park satirizes ACORN, Butters starts a prostitution ring (Big Government)
The Importance of Doug Hoffman
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 9:09AM
So Democrats finally got a Republican to sign on to their health care bill that will saddle Americans taxpayers with more than $2.8 trillion in debt over the next 20 years. Don't take my word for it. That's the estimate of the Congressional Budget Office, which also estimates that the plan will add $1.8 trillion in new taxes over the next 20 years, as well as require $1.9 trillion to be pulled from Medicare and other programs.
With a political class in Washington that has set new highs for government spending and regulation, government debt, and a weak dollar that is now increasingly dependent on our "friends" the Chinese, should we be surprised that conservatives are looking for better options than the Republicans in Name Only who are helping dig our nation into what may be the worst period for our economy in more than a half century?
The best example of this is up in the special election to fill the House seat vacated by moderate Republican Rep. John McHugh. Republican Party bosses in upstate New York and the National Republican Congressional Committee may have thought it a good idea to put liberal state Rep. Dede Scozzafava on the Republican line. But as Politico reports, conservatives -- and even many Republicans -- aren't eating that dog food. A number of us are invested in the campaign of Doug Hoffman, who is challenging both the Republican and the Democrat in this race, because he represents something lacking in Washington right now: common sense when it comes to fiscal issues and the role of government in our daily lives. The fact that Republican Party leaders in NY-23 and the NRCC ignored just about everything that has taken place over the past six months -- the fight over the Obama stimulus package, the tea party rallies, the health care debate -- and put Scozzafava on the ballot, indicates that we need more, not less, common sense and conservative values in the Republican Party.
Hoffman represents conservatives' best chance to send a national message to the Republican Party that they are a force to be reckoned with, and that Hoffman appears to have the energy from the grassroots to pull off a win and help lay the groundwork for a successful 2010 election cycle. As one Hoffman supporter told me yesterday, "The feeling of momentum is palpable. The race is between Doug and the Democrat...we hope Dede won't be a spoiler for conservatives in this race."
The Day Ahead: October 15
Posted by on 10.15.09 @ 6:30AM
Today on the main site:
- Don't Ask, Then Tell, by George Neumayr
- Another Clinton Scandal, by R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
Comment of the Day:
Reader Ed on Marilia Duffles' The Business of Compassion:
Something very similar happened in 1992 when Hurricane Iniki hit the island of Kauaʻi in Hawaii. Aloha Airlines (now defunct) and a host of agencies, both private and government, flew into the island with relief supplies. My sister was living in Maui at the time, and her hotel (the Kaanapali Beach Hotel) sent Christmas gifts, turkeys, and hams to the residents. Aloha flew her and some other KBH employees, along with their gifts, to the island. She said she never forgot the look on the children's faces when they saw all of the stuff they had brought.
What to Watch For:
- The House of Representatives' Foreign Affairs Committee will assess U.S drug policy in the Americas.
Game of the Day:
Best of the Day:
People and Power: Black Sea Standoff:
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
RINO 'On the Run' in NY23 Special Election
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 6:25PM
As the Prowler reported last week, New York conservatives believe they have a big opportunity to defeat liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava in the Nov. 3 special congressional election in the upstate 23rd District. Scozzafava is reportedly running low on cash, while businessman Doug Hoffman -- running on the Conservative Party line in the three-way race -- has picked up key endorsements as well as support from "9/12" Tea Party activists.
The conservative blog Red State recently announced a $250,000 fundraising goal for the Hoffman campaign. Among the organizations endorsing Hoffman is the political action committee of the American Conservative Union, which today hosted a conference call for reporters and bloggers:
Doug Hoffman says his campaign in upstate New York's 23rd District is "squeezing" liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava in a three-way special election.
"There's only 20 days left . . . but we have her on the run," Hoffman told reporters, bloggers and conservative activists in a conference call Wednesday afternoon. . . .
"As a third-party candidate, I can win this race," Hoffman said, emphasizing that, with less than three weeks left until the election to succeed Rep. John McHugh in the 11-county district, fund-raising is essential. "We need to raise money to get the message out." . . .
Obamacare's Toll on the States
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 6:05PM
The Chattanooga Times reports that Democratic Gov. Phil Bredesen is concerned about the burden that Democratic health care proposals could put on Tennessee:
NASHVILLE - Gov. Phil Bredesen warned Tuesday that pending federal health care legislation could cost Tennessee far more than the $735 million "best estimate" his administration previously has cited.
The $735 million would stretch over five years, but "in addition, there are huge unknowns for the states in this reform," Gov. Bredesen said, estimating that those costs, if realized, could exceed another $3 billion from 2014 to 2019.
Among other things, Democratic bills call for a significant expansion of Medicaid, the cost or which would be partially borne by the states. In 1994, Tennessee expanded Medicaid coverage as part of a health care reform effort, but by 2003 its health care system was deemed "not financially viable" in an independent analysis by McKinsey & Co., and Bredesen was forced to rein in the program.
Meanwhile, in New Hampshire, the Union Leader informs us:
New Hampshire's business community would pay $215 million to $229 million to comply with a Democratic-sponsored health care reform bill that has advanced in the House of Representatives, a new study by two conservative economists says.
CBO: Cap and Trade Will Cost Jobs
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 5:25PM
First Doug Elmendorf undercut the Obama administration on health care. Now his Congressional Budget Office is going off message on cap and trade:
The CBO director added that although the risks of climate-related impacts on the economy were very difficult to quantify, "many economists believe that the right response to that kind of uncertainty is to take out some insurance, if you will, against some of the worst outcomes."
The CBO estimates that the House-passed climate legislation, a template for the Senate version, would reduce gross domestic product by up to 0.75% by 2020 and 3.5% by 2050.
"The net effect of that we think would likely be some decline in employment during the transition because labor markets don't move that fluidly," Mr. Elmendorf said, testifying before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee...
The country's politics might not move that fluidly either.
WH Says Obama Won't Insist on Paying for New $13 Bln Economic Aid Plan
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 5:15PM
President Obama will not insist to Congressional leaders that his proposal for a new $13 billion economic aid bill will be paid for, according to a senior White House official.
Earlier this afternoon, the White House announced a plan to give 57 million Americans already receiving Social Security or some other government benefits a $250 "Economic Recovery Payment," and insisted that Obama "is committed to ensuring that the $13 billion cost of the proposal does not reduce the solvency of Social Security or other social insurance programs."
Asked on a conference call about how Obama intends to accomplish this, a senior administration official said that the bill would be financed out of "general revenues" and not necessarily offset by either spending cuts or tax increases.
"We generally think proposals should be paid for, but in this case, we're providing temporary essential help to people as an extension to the Recovery Act," the official said. "We plan to work with Congress to discuss financing, but the President is not going to go into those discussions insisting that this be paid for."
The announcement comes a day before the Social Security Administration is set to announce its cost of living adjustment to beneficiaries. Last year, beneficiaries received a 5.8 percent boost because soaring energy costs pushed up consumer prices, but given the sagging prices in the currently weak economy, beneficiaries aren't going to receive any raise this year. The proposed $250 payments would represent a 2 percent increase to the typical beneficiary.
The official was quick to push back against the suggestion that this proposal -- likely to be financed through deficit spending -- represented a second stimulus package. Instead, the official argued that it was merely extending a provision of the $787 billion stimulus bill that is scheduled to expire at the end of the year.
In addition to the $250 subsidies, other elements of the stimulus package likely to be extended include unemployment assistance and subsidies to those receiving health insurance through COBRA.
More Maverick Thoughts
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 4:37PM
It would be nice if the label were more consistently applied to Republicans (or anyone really) who vote against bailouts, new unfunded entitlements, unconstitutional federal programs, and using our military for social work. Or who occasionally side against power. Or who don't leave me on hold during conference calls listening to instrumental versions of "Tears in Heaven."
Obama Announces New $13 Billion Economic Aid Package
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 4:00PM
The White House just announced a new $13 billion proposal to give 57 million Americans already receiving Social Security or some other government benefits a $250 "Economic Revovery Payment."
The statement reads:
"Even as we seek to bring about recovery, we must act on behalf of those hardest hit by this recession. That is why I am announcing my support for an additional $250 in emergency recovery assistance to seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities to help them make it through these difficult times. These payments will provide aid to more than 50 million people in the coming year, relief that will not only make a difference for them, but for our economy as a whole, complementing the tax cuts we've provided working families and small businesses through the Recovery Act," said President Obama. "This additional assistance will be especially important in the coming months, as countless seniors and others have seen their retirement accounts and home values decline as a result of this economic crisis. I want to compliment all the members of Congress who have been working to address these challenges, especially Senators Reid, Baucus, Sanders, and Lincoln, Speaker Pelosi, and Representatives Rangel, McCarthy, and DeFazio."
This is pretty clearly a way for Obama to push another mini-economic aid package to avoid the political blowback from pushing a full-fledged second stimulus bill.
According to the fact sheet, "The President is committed to ensuring that the $13 billion cost of the proposal does not reduce the solvency of Social Security or other social insurance programs." But in no way does it explain how that would be ensured.
Charlie's All-In
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 3:52PM
Here's an interesting note from college football: apparently Notre Dame head coach Charlie Weis has arranged for an unusual number of highly-touted high school recruits to make their official campus visits this weekend, for the showdown between the #25 Irish and the #6 USC Trojans.
The decision to have so many big-name recruits is notable on Weis's part because recently the annual USC game has been one to scare away potential Irish players: in the past two years Notre Dame has lost 38-0 and 38-3. Weis's struggles against USC -- he's 0-4 -- are a big part of his precarious status as head coach. After mediocre 3-9 and 7-6 seasons, and with no victories against high-caliber teams like USC in his five years, Weis's chances to prove that he can lead Notre Dame to the top might be all used up without a win this weekend against the Trojans.
So having all the recruits visit on this crucial gameday might be an indication that Charlie is going all-in and betting that he will win the game and in doing so convince a few top recruits to sign on with ND, at the risk of losing the game and consequently important recruits and... his job.
Weis is famous in college football and the NFL for risking games by going for it on fourth down. It's definitely within character for him to pin his Notre Dame legacy on a similar gamble.
Oooh, Look, Mavericks!
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 2:54PM
The media lovefest for liberal Republicans has begun. An earlier version of this story ran under the headline: "Palin who? Meet the real GOP mavericks." And then they regale us with all the stories of the usual Republicans who vote to bankrupt the whole country in order to win these kinds of headlines. "Mavericks" like Olympia Snowe and Lindsey Graham voted to rubberstamp every harebrained idea of the Bush administration, from the prescription drug benefit to exporting the Great Society to the Middle East, and now they are doing the same for every cockamamie Obama administration scheme.
These media lickspittles and bipartisan bloviators are supposed to be mavericks? Give me a friggin' break.
Controversial Obama Labor Nominee Withdrawn
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 2:20PM
Lorelei Boylan, Presidential Obama's controversial nominee to serve as the administrator of the Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division, has been withdrawn, according to the White House website.
During her time in the New York Labor Department, Boylan ran an initiative, devised by Patricia Smith -- another Obama appointee -- which tasked union members with policing the behavior of businesses. As Americans for Limited Government wrote in a report earlier this year (pdf):
The enforcement initiative essentially deputizes private entities, such as ACORN, to do enforcement work through "formal partnerships" with the state. Groups participating in this initiative are given a specific geographic zone to patrol, are provided with training and literature, and are assigned a designated contact person to which they provide "referrals" when they find what they decide are violations of wage and hour laws....
The vast majority of the groups participating in this initiative are either labor unions or labor union affiliated entities. The notion of labor bosses patrolling a beat instead of Labor Department officials has caused New York business groups to take note and express serious concern. A group of business associations made their concerns known stating, "To give quasi-enforcement capabilities to certain, seemingly hand-selected constituencies sets a troubling precedent that could spread among the spectrum of state agencies. We wonder how such an effort can create an atmosphere of anything other than vigilantism where every honest employer will have a legitimate concern for the preservation of his or her rights as a taxpaying business owner in the state of New York. The image painted by the Department in its January 26 release is of a posse of activists, duly deputized by the weighty imprimatur of the Department, demanding access to any employer in the state whom they have chosen either at random, by will, or by prejudice."
The nomination of Boylan's partner in the New York scheme, Patricia Smith, still remains intact. Smith was nominated to be Solicitor of Labor, the third highest official in the department, and the one who is in charge of offering legal advice. Sen. Mike Enzi has put a hold on the nomination, meaning 60 votes will be required to block a filibuster and get her confirmed.
Russia Thwarts Obama on Iran
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 1:54PM
So President Obama agreed to negotiate with the Iranians, and he agreed to abandon a missile shield in Eastern Europe. What did he get for all this good will? Bubkes, it turns out. The New York Times reports:
MOSCOW - Denting President Obama's hopes for a powerful ally in his campaign to press Iran on its nuclear program, Russia's foreign minister said Tuesday that threatening Tehran now with harsh new sanctions would be "counterproductive."
The minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, said after meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton here that diplomacy should be given a chance to work, particularly after a meeting in Geneva this month in which the Iranian government said it would allow United Nations inspectors to visit its clandestine nuclear enrichment site near the holy city of Qum.
"At the current stage, all forces should be thrown at supporting the negotiating process," he said. "Threats, sanctions and threats of pressure in the current situation, we are convinced, would be counterproductive."
UPDATE: Fox New reports that the Obama administration has reached an agreement to allow Russia to inspect U.S. nuclear sites, "the most intrusive weapons inspection program the U.S. has ever accepted."
The Recession Military
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 1:40PM
The Washington Post pointed out yesterday that the previously unannounced deployment of 13,000 support troops to Afghanistan "exacerbates the strain on the force." While the burdens on soldiers are still high, the recession economy has eased that strain to a large extent. The Washington Times this reported this morning that the U.S. Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force sent 169,000 new troops for training in the previous fiscal year. Of these, 96% are high school graduates.
Our own economic quagmire may prevent a military quagmire in Afghanistan if the president backs General McChrystal's request for more combat troops. The outcome of that request remains uncertain as the administration has recently made moves to downplay the national security threat poised by the Taliban. As the war has returned to the news, the American people have increasingly supported a fight against the Taliban, despite the administration's indecisiveness.
As If He Cared
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 1:36PM
Yet another poll (Rasmussen) shows U.S. voters believe global warming is due more to planetary alignment than human causes, and they see President Obama out of sync with Americans on the issue.
Jim Antle Reviews The End of Secularism
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 12:33PM
And he does it for the Washington Times. Thank you, Jim.
Money clip:
Early in "The End of Secularism," Hunter Baker of Houston Baptist University talks about his religious awakening. He came to believe that if the God of the Bible existed and was active in human affairs, that had implications for his life. It made no sense, Mr. Baker concluded, to have faith in God and Christianity in the abstract but to live as if there were no God in practice.
In this slim but compelling volume, Mr. Baker argues that this is precisely what secularism asks of us: to hold our abstract religious beliefs in private but live as if there is no God in our public lives together. Religion then becomes like sex in the Victorian era: something best done in private but seldom discussed, much less seen, in public lest someone scare the horses.
The argument for secularism is that it represents a kind of neutrality. Because none of us possesses absolute certainty in religious matters, a secular public culture restricts our political and moral debates to that which is universally accessible. The end result, according to this logic, is that no one's religion is privileged above anyone else's and every religion is treated fairly.
Mr. Baker counters that this argument is false - that secularism, in fact, privileges one very specific understanding of God and religion above everyone else's. It forces people who believe in an active God to pretend He does not exist when discussing matters of public import, and it rests on assumptions no more "neutral" or scientifically rigorous than most religious claims.
NFL Hypocrisy on Rush
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 12:29PM
There's more here than meets the eye on this business with Rush and the NFL.
The blatant hypocrisy of NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and Indianapolis Colts owner James Irsay would boggle the mind if one hadn't seen so much of this kind of nonsense.
We all know the drill by now. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson get to crusade for civil rights while being on the record anti-Semites. No problem. Feminists of all manner are apolplectic about Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill but silent as lambs about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick etc. etc. No problem. Democrats lecture Republicans about race but built their political party on racial issues -- from support of slavery to segregation to lynching to racial quotas. No big deal. The New York Times editorial board lectures the 48% minority New Haven Fire Department that it doesn't have enough minority representation -- and out of 17 editorial board members 15 out of the 17 are lily white. No problem.
Now you can add the NFL to this list of hypocrites. For the Commissioner and the owner of the Indianopolis Colts to be lecturing Rush Limbaugh -- or anyone -- about controversy when in fact they are slipping big bucks to the most controversial politicians in the land -- in Irsay's case both John Edwards and George W. Bush! -- is laughable. And on race? This is a man who, if these hypocrites paid the slightest attention, is possessed of friends, employees and guest hosts of his program who are -- gasp -- black!!!! Will the NFL be contacting these people for a discussion of Rush and race?
So let's rumble, if that's the desire. If so-called journalists -- liberals masquerading as sports reporters -- are determined to repeat made-up quotes -- also known as deliberate lies -- about Rush Limbaugh and airily purvey them as truths, if the NFL itself is going to pretend it is pure as the driven snow when in fact the Commissioner himself and a team owner are financially enabling the most divisive and controversial politicians in the land, then its time to look into the political activities of every owner and player in the league.
Let's just see who passes this test.
The Commissioner of the NFL and Mr. Irsay have just failed.
What a bunch of hypocrites.
Looks Like Arlen Made a Whoopsie
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 11:42AM
Specter's not getting much Pennsylvanian love post-party switch.
The Mao's Meow
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 11:36AM
Michael Goldfarb presents the ladies of the People's Liberation Army.
Ohio Teen Convert to Christianity...
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 11:19AM
...says Muslim father didn't get the "religion of peace" memo.
No We Can't
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 10:42AM
The National Republican Senatorial Committee is out with this new ad about President Obama backing off his promise to let the public read a bill online for five days. It's a well put together ad that highlights the lack of transparency on the Democrats' part, while tapping into the broader theme that Obama's actions as president are not consistent with his lofty campaign rhetoric. So while it makes perfect sense to hit Democrats on an issue that has strong non-ideological public support, there's also a danger of playing this up too much in the health care debate specifically. The problem is that it would be very easy for Demcorats to give in to allow the posting of the bill online for 72 hours -- and look like they're being conciliatory -- while still passing a really awful health care bill. A comparison I'd make is to the stimulus debate, when Republicans focused on the money going into pork barrel projects rather than focus their fire on the philosophy behind the stimulus itself. So, in the end, Democrats just stripped out a few egregious examples of government waste, deprived Republicans of those easy targets, and convinced the public that Republicans were "The Party of No." So, by all means, this is an issue worth raising, but it should not overwhelm arguments much more central to the health care debate.
Daily Must-Reads
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 10:35AM
- Americans now support a troop escalation in Afghanistan, but the recent support has mainly come from Republicans (Investors Business Daily)
- Washington Post: Don't expect Pakistan to fight the Taliban if we back out.
- An Afghan "Hezbollah" for the Taliban is not acceptable (Commentary)
- First Lady praises $373 million of stimulus money being spent on healthy vending machine food (Washington Examiner)
A Life of Accomplishments
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 9:50AM
What a life Richard W. Sonnenfeldt lived. He was a Jew who escaped the worst of Nazi Germany, traveled five continents until he arrived in the U.S. where he became a citizen, joined the Army and fought the Battle of the Bulge and helped liberate Dachau. Then he helped translate, then interrogate, war criminals including Hermann Goering. Afterward he became an electrical engineer, went to work for RCA, and helped develop color television. For pleasure, he crossed the Atlantic Ocean three times in his 45-foot sailboat.
The Day Ahead: October 14
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 6:30AM
Today on the main site:
- Ruination from Obama-Baucus, by Peter Ferrara
- Is Everybody Happy? by Jonathan Aitken
- The Friend of my Enemy is Who? by Lisa Fabrizio
Comment of the Day:
Reader Francoise on Joseph Harriss's Monsieur Sleaze:
A bit of a additional news on Frederic Mitterrand came from the French island of Reunion in the Indian Ocean... Mitterand sent a letter to a local judge with the letterhead of the French Academy in Rome, prestigious Villa Medicis.
In this letter, he vouches for the good character of that two young alleged rapists (since then condemned) on the French Island of Reunion (he now says for the good character of their parents, but how is that relevant then?) Not only did he write with the official letterhead of the Villa Medicis but he also promised free training and internships in Rome or Paris for those two thugs!
This with taxpayers' money.
What to Watch For:
Tuesday's Best:
Hear what the Russians have to say about Hillary Clinton's visit to Moscow:
'Nothing Goes Better With Fascistic Hatred!'
Posted by on 10.14.09 @ 1:19AM
That's Michelle Malkin reacting to Keith Olbermann's bizarro-world claim that she is a "big mashed up bag of meat with lipstick" -- and this is the super-clever stuff that guarantees Olby's appeal to those enlightened, sophisticated people, you see.
Olbermann compared Malkin to Fred "God Hates Fags" Phelps, for crying out loud! How else to explain it except as envy, the unpopular Olbermann spitefully abusing the popular Malkin? As I wrote Monday:
Without very much effort, I could grab a stack of business cards out of my desk drawer and give you the names of two dozen influential people in Washington as conservative as Michelle Malkin. But they're not TV-famous, you see, and so they're spared that kind of venom.
People who are TV-famous are attacked because, in the minds of the more idiotic viewers, they are not human beings, but rather symbols. . . .
Part of this, honestly, can only be understood as envy or sour grapes: "She's famous. I'm not. I hate her."
Envy is a phenomenon you encounter in all walks of life, at every level of society, but given that the entire economic agenda of the Left is based on envy, I suppose we shouldn't be surprised to find embittered twerps like Olbermann among the Left's most prominent spokesmen.
The sad thing about this particular episode is how it distorts who Malkin actually is. She isn't just another pundit. She is a businesswoman, an entrepreneur.
Go back to 2001, when Michelle Malkin was just one of a couple-dozen promising younger conservative commentators out there. She saw the opportunity of the blogosphere, invested her labor and resources into it, and has reaped the reward, combining the Internet, TV and print into something like a one-woman multimedia empire.
When ideological idiots like Olbermann look at Malkin, though, they don't see that Dagny Taggart factor. All they see is "successful Republican," and it's like doing a Rorshach inkblot test with Charles Manson. Which is exactly the way they react to . . . who?
Rush Limbaugh! Mark Steyn explains:
More to the point, when I began guest-hosting for Rush, I was amazed to discover that George Soros pays a team of stenographers, many of them called Zachary, to work their tippy-tappy fingers to the bone for three hours transcribing everything Rush or his fill-ins say in the hope that their efforts will one day be rewarded and he will deliver the big career-detonating soundbite. Among the afficionados of this service are, as I discovered recently, America's "newspaper of record," which faithfully follows the George Soros typing pool and dutifully plasters any potentially damaging bon mot on page one.
If Malkin is the Dagny Taggart of conservative New Media, then El Rushbo is John Galt. The man quite literally invented the medium of talk radio as we know it today. The use of "actualities" (sound bites), the rock "bumper" music, the personality monologue with listener call-ins (as opposed to the guest-interview format) -- none of that had ever been tried as a national radio format before Rush Limbaugh did it.
Now there are dozens of imitators who earn their livings paying tribute to the man who, after more than 20 years in national syndication, is still head-and-shoulders above the rest. Which is why the "George Soros typing pool" transcribes every word.
It ought to be the ambition of every young conservative in the communication business to emulate innovative media entrepreneurs like Malkin and Limbaugh, to become so successful as to compel liberal fat-cats to pay people just to keep track of your daily activities. And when the liberal stooges smear you, wear it as a badge of honor -- they hated Ronald Reagan the same way, you know.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Happy Birthday, Mrs. Thatcher
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 8:32PM
The great Margaret Thatcher turned 84 today.
Who Is Libeling Rush Limbaugh?
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 6:24PM
Rush Limbaugh hit back today on this racist business, put out there by leftists so blinded by racial issues that they will fight the colorblind America vision of conservatives with everything they have. They are claiming Rush said the following. Anyone who listens to Rush on a regular basis knows this is simply nuts, decidedly not Rush but the left-wing Rush stereotype. Here's the quote:
"Slavery built the South. I'm not saying we should bring it back. I'm just saying it had its merits. For one, the streets were safer after dark."
Liberals masquerading as "sports reporters" and "journalists" have been out there repeating this kind of garbage in the last few days. The goal: to keep Rush from buying an ownership stake in the St. Louis Rams.
It doesn't take a wizard to know the reason that this kind of thing (and a lot of other unprintable garbage) is routinely attributed not only to Rush but other conservative talk radio hosts. There is a point to it, as conservatives understand. Instead of engaging on the battlefield of ideas, liberals project a prejudice they picked up from the left's own culture of racism, a "progressive" culture that, as often noted in this space, has ranged over the centuries from support for slavery to segregation to lynching to racial quotas and identity politics. This is frequently noted here in this space, two examples of which can be found here and here.
And make no mistake:
Rush today, some other conservative tomorrow.
The Internet is a big place. A great place if you are going to defame somebody like Rush with a made up quote. First out of the box to get to the bottom of this is the great Brent Bozell over at the Media Research Center.
Surely other people will be looking to see who is repeating this lie as truth.
Stay tuned.
House Progressive Leader Says Government Plan "Vital" to Health Care Reform
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 5:59PM
Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva, co-chairman of the 80-member House Progessive Caucus, reiterated his position that any health care legislation needs to include a government plan to be meaningful.
Asked to react to the passage of the Senate Finanance Committee bill earlier today, Grijalva's office emailed me the following statement, attributed to the congressman:
"While I applaud the Finance Committee for completing its work on the bill, I remain concerned that it does not include a robust public option. I remain committed to getting the best bill in the House that we can get so that we have a strong negotiating position in conference. Today's Senate action does not reflect the country's high approval ratings for a public option, and I believe that any meaningful health care reform must include that vital element to increase access and bring down costs."
This raises a few questions. Could liberals insist that a House bill includes a government plan, but ultimately compromise when the bill is being reconciled with the Senate version? And will Blue Dogs stay united to block liberals from even being able to get a government plan passed in the House?
The Obama Iconography
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 5:45PM
A wonderful analysis by Bill Whittle of Pajamas Media.
ACORN Fires Founder’s Wife
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 5:22PM
ACORN boss Bertha Lewis has fired Beth Butler, common law wife of disgraced founder Wade Rathke, FOXNews.com is reporting.
According to FOXNews.com:
Butler said she was fired because she refused to fire members of a land trust board whom national ACORN leaders wanted ousted. She said ACORN national is "going out of business" and wanted the board gone to seize control of its funds and assets. She called the ordeal "all completely inappropriate and unethical."
I reported a full nine days ago that ACORN is shutting its headquarters in New Orleans. I reported a month and a half ago that ACORN was closing offices nationwide and laying off its employees.
Updated 9:30 p.m.: Michelle Malkin has a more detailed account of Butler getting the bum's rush from ACORN. I reported last year that ACORN was in the grips of a power struggle.
Snowe: Duping the Folks Back Home
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 3:43PM
Or one of them, at least. Tarren Bragdon, president of the Maine Heritage Policy Center, has written recently of assurances he received from Sen. Snowe about the conditions of her support for a health care reform bill. On Townhall.com he recounted:
While the "moderate" label is often used by the far right to protest Senator Snowe's actions - the left is about to learn a very important lesson from the moderate from Maine.
It is not an act. It is not something Senator Snowe does to get re-elected or to curry favor. She believes that there is middle ground and she looks for it. For her, middle ground means giving businesses the opportunity to join together and purchase health care - regardless of state lines. It involves tort reform, it involves ensuring folks have a skin in the game (not "free" government health care) and it involves truly bending the cost curve. The bottom line is that Democrats in Congress, and this President, have failed to find the middle ground in the health care debate. In fact, they have veered so far off the center that they will find no sympathy - behind the scenes or not - from Senator Snowe or her other moderate colleagues.
Then after Snowe voted in favor of a failed amendment for the Baucus bill, she said in a press release:
“The American people are rightly entitled to see what we are legislating and we should not be afraid of having a better and more complete understanding of exactly what we are doing,” said Senator Snowe, one of six committee members who worked to lay the foundation for bipartisan cooperation within Congress on health care reform. “The fact is words matter and so do the numbers. This amendment represents a common sense, practical, pragmatic, good government approach to understanding the totality and the collective impact of what we do. We want to be sure that we are absolutely confident in the integrity of the product that we are going to be voting on in the final analysis.”
Which fired up Bragdon:
Let me translate that statement for the Democrats on the Senate Finance Committee. You are skating on Potomac River ice in the middle of a Snowe storm. It's not going to end well. When she uses words like "common sense" "practical" and "pragmatic" in the same sentence - you might want to consult with your Senate colleagues on the Right. They learned to speak Moderate in the previous Administration. The grimace on their faces -followed by a Cheshire cat smile- should be translation enough.
I guess Tarren somehow missed Snowe's longstanding relationship with the Dems:
AP: Unions To Take Out Ad Opposing Baucus Bill
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 3:33PM
According to the AP, "about 30 unions will run a full-page ad in newspapers Wednesday announcing their opposition to the Senate Finance Committee's health overhaul bill."
A major sticking point for the unions has been the Finance Committee's proposal to tax high-end health insurance plans, which would affect many union workers.
A Tale of Two Rockefellers
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 3:21PM
Last month Sen. Jay Rockefeller made headlines when he declared unequivocally that he could not vote for Sen. Max Baucus's health care proposal without significant changes, most notably, if it didn't include a government plan. During the conference call in which he made the statement, Rockefeller also said that he made no distinction between voting a bill out of committee and voting for the final version on the Senate floor. Yet a short time ago, Rockefeller voted for the bill to pass through committee, even while claiming that it was "too sweet a deal for the insurance industry."
Rockefeller's vote is worth highlighting because it could foreshadow the actions of other liberal members of Congress as the process moves foward. It's pretty clear that there aren't the votes in the Senate to pass a bill with a government plan, yet liberals in the House insist that they have enough votes to block passage of any bill that does not include a government plan. The question has always been whether they would be willing to accept less when push comes to shove, and they're forced to choose between a bill without a government plan, or no bill at all. While Rockefeller does not speak for all liberals on this issue -- and cautioned that he hadn't made a decision on a final bill -- the fact that he folded today is a good reminder that when lawmakers make dramatic statements about drawing lines in the sand, in reality, those lines are a lot more negotiable. As Groucho Marx once quipped: "Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others." And that reality bodes well for President Obama's chances to sign some form of health care legislation along the lines of the Baucus bill.
Finance Committee Votes Health Care Bill Out By 14-9 Vote
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 2:53PM
The Finance Committe has just voted its version of health care legislation out of committee by a 14 to 9 vote, with Olympia Snowe joining with every Democrat on the committee.
Some form of a health care bill has now cleared all five relevant committees in both chambers of Congress, but now the difficult task begins of reconciling some significant differences.
Snowe Says She'll Vote Finance Bill Out of Committee
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 1:00PM
Sen. Olympia Snowe just ended months of speculation and agreed to vote the Senate Finance Committee's health care bill out of committee, allowing Demorcats to claim the support of at least one Republican -- for now.
In her statement, Snowe emphasized that this was merely one step in a long process, and that her vote today should not be used to forecast her final vote.
Now that passage out of the Finance Committee is all but official, the bill will have to be merged with the more liberal Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee bill. Snowe said that she'll want to see a CBO estimate of the final merged bill -- written in legislative language -- before determing whether or not to vote for it.
While expressing several reservations about the bill, she said, "When history calls, history calls."
This is a good headline for Democrats today, but it doesn't solve the underlying friction between moderate and liberal members of Congress. The ability to attract one Republican may stregthen Baucus's hand during negotiations with Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Chris Dodd (representing the HELP Committee) and embolden Blue Dogs to oppose the inclusion of a government-run plan in the House. Everything will hinge on whether House liberals cave in on their demand for a government plan, or dig in.
Obama's Hawk or Dove Moment
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 12:15PM
Andrew Bacevich argues it has arrived in Afghanistan.
Elmendorf Says CBO Score Does Not Measure Whether Bill Will Bend Cost Curve
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 11:48AM
While President Obama has made bending the health care cost curve central to his drive to overhaul the nation's health care system, Congressional Budget Office director Doug Elmendorf testified this morning that last week's much-touted analysis by the CBO did not measure whether the Senate Finance Committee would achieve this.
Under questioning by Sen. Mike Crapo during today's Finance Committee hearing, Elmendorf said that the CBO's analysis focused only on the bill's effects on the federal budget, but not on whether it would reduce national health care expenditures overall.
This is an important distinction. It's easy to achieve deficit reduction in a bill -- at least on paper -- if you simply raise taxes by more than you increasing spending. Because the Finance Committee bill raises taxes and promises cuts to Medicare that may never materialize, the CBO estimated that it would reduce the deficit by $81 billion over 10 years. But that doesn't mean it the CBO is saying it would decrease the overall amount that the nation is spending on health care, lower the cost of insurance premiums, or reduce health care spending as a percentage of GDP.
What Would Menachem Begin Do?
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 11:10AM
"What Would Begin Do?" Seth Lipsky asks, in a column on "seeing the Iranian nuclear threat through the lens of Osirak." It begins:
The latest disclosure in respect of Iran’s work on an atomic bomb -- the International Atomic Energy Agency says the mullahs have the technical data needed to make a weapon -- has me thinking about what happened in 1981, when Israel sent a flight of American-built warplanes to destroy a reactor that Iraq was building as part of a suspected program to manufacture a weapon. The thing that stands out from that episode is that it came out of the blue, not just literally but also politically. [Read more.]
The Nobel is a Harsh Mistress
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 10:48AM
What would Robert A. Heinlein thought of Big O's Big Prize? David Jones has some ideas.
The Cap and Trade Crack-Up Continues
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 10:43AM
There's a growing divide on cap and trade on the Senate, and it breaks down along regional more than partisan lines. Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), a liberal skeptic of the Waxman-Markey/Kerry-Boxer approach to federal climate change legislation, requested an EPA analysis that has Midwestern utilities companies crying foul. From the New York Times:
They say the assessment (pdf) reveals that states like California will receive a financial windfall under a global warming bill, while states like Wisconsin will not get enough help and will have to spike electricity rates as a result.
"The EPA document just confirms the formula will disadvantage Midwest states for decades to come while the coastal states will hit a 'federal jackpot' every year over the life of the new program," said Zachary Hill, senior manager of federal government affairs at Alliant Energy, a Wisconsin-based utility.
Environmental groups are sticking to their guns, rejecting the EPA analysis as methodologically flawed and tied to provisions in the House bill that could ultimately be changed by the Senate. But the already perilous path to passing cap and trade has just gotten trickier.
Daily Must-Reads
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 10:30AM
- CBO says Tort Reform could save $54 billion over ten years (Politics Daily)
- The price of free market authoritarianism -- China sentences six Xinjiang protesters to death (BBC News)
- Busted. US soldiers find alleged Iranian-bound ammunition on German freight ship (Spiegel)
- While baseball playoff games are getting snowed out, scientists report that Antarctic melting is the slowest it's been in three decades (Investor's Business Daily)
- Telegraph lists ten broken promises by Obama. If it were Saturday Night Live, CNN would fact check this list.
Who Do You Call in the Event of an Emergency?
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 9:30AM
If you're Hank Paulson and the emergency is the looming insolvency of the US financial system, you call candidate Barack Obama, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, and Robert Rubin.
Nomi Prins went through Paulson's phone records for the months of the financial crisis, and reports her findings in the Daily Beast. The most intriguing fact is the frighteningly small number of people Paulson talked to on the phone during the key moments of the crisis: Bush, Geithner, Bernanke, Obama, McCain, the big investment banks, and precious few others. And remember, Paulson does not use email, so other than face to face, his phone conversations were his only outside communication.
Is it any wonder that the financial industry crumbled, when such enormous power was concentrated in such a small and isolated group?
The Day Ahead: October 13
Posted by on 10.13.09 @ 6:30AM
Today on the main site:
- The Real Problem with Acorn, by William Tucker
- The Reagan Prize, by Jeffrey Lord
- The Neopagan Temptation, by Hal G.P Colebatch
Comment of the Day:
Reader KPT on James Bowman's The Invention of Lying:
Think about it: the absence of lying must also means the absense of morality. The fact that he couldn't go through with sleeping with the blond lady based on a lie means he didn't only invent lying but morality as well. But how could he have known morality without first kowing guilt, and how could he know guilt without first committing the sin and experienceing it's consequences, and without all of this how could he have had the foresight that the act would have been wrong before committing the act... It was all just too much of a stretch for me to make. I thought the movie was flawed, and ultimately those flaws proved fatal.
What to Watch for:
Best of the Day:
Monday, October 12, 2009
A Fox in the Jailhouse?
Posted by on 10.12.09 @ 8:45PM
The Obama Administration's overt attacks on Fox News just happen to come at the same time they're working to weaken a "media shield" law. Uh oh!
Calling Out Mark Salter
Posted by on 10.12.09 @ 5:36PM
Brian Faughnan has an interesting post about the potential primary challenge to the mercurial John McCain by conservative former Rep. J.D. Hayworth. It seems that McCain alter ego Mark Salter was not above some truly nasty political hardball against Hayworth back in 2006. Well, I hereby "call out" Salter. Mr. Salter: You sir, are a low-life, pompous windbag. Actually, you don't merit the honorific "sir." Your email to Rep. Hayworth was beneath contempt. It is one thing to criticize the policy proposals of somebody else, as Rep. Hayworth did re the immigration policy. It is another thing to use a position of political power, a senator's office, to threaten to spread stories that make it look as if an elected official (of your own party and state, at that) is involved in a scandal and potential illegality. What you did comes very close to blackmail. You are vermin.
Obama Aide Dunn Admits Media Is Ally
Posted by on 10.12.09 @ 4:41PM
Gee, I'm sure she's a nice person. But openly admitting that the Obama White House views the mainstream liberal media as a political ally is perhaps not the smartest way to go for Obama communications director Anita Dunn.
Says Dunn in the New York Times:
"We're going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent," said Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, in a telephone interview on Sunday. "As they are undertaking a war against Barack Obama and the White House, we don't need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave."
So, perforce, if Fox is "an opponent," this means the rest of the so-called "mainstream media" is, in the eyes of Dunn and the Obama White House, the opposite. To wit: a supporter. An ally.
Oops.
Give Ms. Dunn points for honesty. Or at least unintentioned candor.
A Slender Reid to Lean On
Posted by on 10.12.09 @ 2:01PM
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is increasingly looking like one of the most vulnerable Senate Democrats in the 2010 election cycle. A new Mason-Dixon poll shows both Republican challengers (former state party official Sue Lowden and real estate developer Danny Tarkanian) beating Reid in hypothetical matchups:
In one general election scenario, 49 percent of respondents picked Lowden and 39 percent chose Reid. In another, 48 percent picked Tarkanian to 43 percent for Reid. That poll, which surveyed 500 voters Tuesday through Thursday, has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.
The primary electorate is closely divided on who they want to challenge Reid, with 23 for Lowden, 21 percent for Tarkanian and 44 percent undecided.
My President Is...A Guy Who Loves Jay Z?
Posted by on 10.12.09 @ 1:43PM
Of all the silly things attributed to the Obama administration, by Joe Biden or anybody else, the Obama-reformed-rap-music meme has got to be one of the dumbest. I'm not really in a position to refute it, but Friend of AmSpec Karol sure is, and she does so ably.
On a less divisive note, Obama and Karol's Itunes party shuffle might be more similar than you'd suppose.
A Nobel Bounce?
Posted by on 10.12.09 @ 1:28PM
In the first Gallup daily tracking poll to include three days of interviews following the news that President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize, his approval rating has shot up to 56 percent, with just 36 percent disapproving. This is the best net approval number for him in the poll since July. Before the Nobel announcement, his ratings stood at 53 percent approving and 40 percent disapproving -- meaning there's been a net swing of 7 points since Friday.
In late September, Obama's ratings had reached as bad as 50 precent approval and 42 percent disapproval.
Extreme Irony Alert! (Or, Springtime for Potok and Irony)
Posted by on 10.12.09 @ 1:13PM
Your head might explode if you consider the source of this quote:
"Completely false allegations incubate in the fringe and jump within days to the mainstream, distorting any debate or progress we can have as a society."
That's Mark Potok, quoted in today's Washington Post. Considering that Potok has spent more than a decade trying to convince gullible liberals that everyone to the right of Joe Biden is a crypto-fascist goose-stepper, your coffee-spewing laughter is understandable.
Potok covered the 1992-93 Waco standoff and the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing for USA Today. That experience apparently convinced him that when you scratch a Republican, a dangerously violent militia crackpot bleeds. Potok's paranoia landed him a job at the Southern Poverty Law Center, the $170 million outfit that smart liberals recognize as a flimsy scam to frighten stupid liberals out of their money.
The SPLC began when Morris Dees recognized the lucrative potential of the '72 McGovern campaign's mailing list. Exactly when the SPLC jumped the shark has long been a subject of debate, but it was certainly at some point prior to their identification of columnist Don Feder (!) as a menace to society.
Potok's ironic quote appears in a story that portrays Michelle Malkin as a menace to society, and reasonable people have begun to notice the Potokian pattern. Basically, if you're a conservative and you haven't been denounced by Mark Potok yet, you need to stop goofing off and get to work. I've been on Potok's Menace To Society List since May 2000, when I published a feature article based on an interview with Kanas author Laird Wilcox:
"There is an anti-racist industry entrenched in the United States that has attracted bullying, moralizing fanatics, whose identity and livelihood depend upon growth and expansion of their particular kind of victimization."
That quote is from Wilcox's book, The Watchdogs, which among other things explains what he describes as the "links-and-ties" method by which the SPLC and similar outfits create the false impression of ironclad connections between groups and individuals based on incidental associations.
Wilcox is himself a veteran researcher of extremist "fringe" movements, whose records comprise The Wilcox Collection On Contemporary Political Movements at the University of Kansas Library. Unlike Morris Dees, however, Wilcox doesn't have the McGovern donor list or an ax-grinding agenda against Republicans, so he never gets quoted by the Washington Post.
Clash of the Titans
Posted by on 10.12.09 @ 1:07PM
The Tennesse Titans have fallen to 0-5. Realistically, they would probably need to win out to make the playoffs even via a wildcard berth. Their best case scenario is to lose only three more to limp to 8-8. They next play a New England Patriots team that has been rusty and uneven, but is better than some of the teams that have beaten Tennesse. (I'd argue that they are better than some of the teams that have beaten New England, but that's another argument for another day.)
So this is going to end up being a rebuilding season fairly soon. So the question is: Do you bench Kerry Collins, put in Vince Young, and see whether he can do anything? See if he can light a spark? See if there is even any value to keeping him on the roster? Or do you let Collins the pocket passer soldier on, ending the season with dignity, especially since Young hasn't exactly covered himself in glory of late?
Young is definitely a huge risk. But if the Titans fall to 0-6, there's not much left to lose.
Happy to Be Wrong
Posted by on 10.12.09 @ 12:05PM
Wow, if these are the results every time I predict that the team or player for whom I root will lose, then I will start predicting disaster at every step of the way! To review, I foolishly predicted this about the President's Cup in golf: "I see the International squad, a big underdog, winning a close battle. Woods and Stricker are exhausted, Mickelson's back is hurting, Kenny Perry's mother just died, and Hunter Mahan can't seem to actually win a tourney and can't possibly be as good for a third straight team competition as he was in his first two." Uh, wrong. Woods went 5-0, Mickelson 4-0-1, and Stricker 4-1. The U.S. romped. Hunter Mahan and Kenny Perry played perfectly fine, as well.The Americans won big. I hereby eat verbal crow. (I add, as Maxwell Smart would say: "...and loving it!")
Actually, you see, it was reverse psychology. I knew all along that our American guys would win.... Well, would you believe I had an inkling we might pull it out by the skin of our teeth?... Or would you believe I had a hunch our guys wouldn't fall into San Francisco Bay as a result of an earthquake?
I missed it by this much. Or maybe by a lot. Sorry about that, chief. That was the second biggest predicting error I've ever made.....
And I am so, so glad. Congratulations, American squad!
Gallows Humor in Post-Constitutional America
Posted by on 10.12.09 @ 11:32AM
Here's a Twitter and Facebook update that's making the conservative, libertarian, and constitutionalist rounds: "Cato's pocket Constitution makes WaPo bestseller list! But appears to have been mistakenly filed under 'nonfiction.'"
Gay Fury Rising
Posted by on 10.12.09 @ 10:53AM
Homosexual activists are angry — and getting angrier by the day — over the perceived lack of action by the Obama administration on their issues. The angst was typified by a march yesterday in Washington, D.C., that the Los Angeles Times gleefully described as "festive" and "boisterous" but that was really more anger-ridden than anything else.
Obama has said he supports repealing the federal Defense of Marriage Act, signed into law by our last Democratic president, Bill Clinton, in 1996. He's also pledged to repeal the military's don't ask, don't tell policy prohibiting homosexuals from serving openly in the military. But similar to the rationale for his Nobel award, Obama has garnered kudos from the homosexual activist lobby exclusively for his rhetoric, not his actions — because, quite frankly, he's done nothing.
The fact of the matter, though, is that he doesn't have to. And he knows it. Voters who place the homosexual agenda high on their list of policy objectives are decidedly left-wing and reliably Democrat in their voting patterns. The Democratic Party establishment, including Obama, knows this. Similarly, the Republican Party establishment knows that it can count on the evangelical Christian vote, provided it pays enough lip service to issues such as abortion and homosexual marriage.
So, in many ways, the homosexual rights coalition is becoming the evangelical Christian community of the left — a reliabe voting pool that the Democrats can take for granted. Could it backfire? Maybe, but I doubt it. Similar to evangelicals, homosexual activists have no other viable third party option. They're stuck. So they make a lot of noise and hope the establishment listens.
Study: Baucus Bill Would Drive Up Cost of Insurance
Posted by on 10.12.09 @ 10:30AM
The Senate Finance Committee's health care bill would increase the cost of an average family's insurance policy by $4,000 more than it would rise to if we were to maintain the status quo, according to a study by PricewaterhouseCoopers, which was commissioned by insurance industry lobbyist America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP).
The report highlighted four elements of the bill likely to increase premiums: requirements that insurers cover everybody with preexisting conditions; a tax on high-end health plans; cuts to Medicare that will cause cost-shifting onto private plans; and new taxes on medical device makers, drug manufacturers and insurance companies.
The cost of private insurance, according to the study, will rise, "79 percent between 2009 and 2019 under the current system and during this same period if these four provisions are implemented." In dollar terms, the report projects that by 2019, an average family policy would cost $25,900 annually, as opposed to $21,900 if we did nothing. For an individual policy, those numbers would be $9,700 and $8,200, respectively.
Given that study was commissioned by the insurance industry, it should be taken in with a grain of salt, especially because it also argues that costs will increase because there isn't a stronger individual mandate -- a goal of insurers. I'd take issue with this, because for a young and healthy individual who chooses not to purchase insurance, their annual premiums are currently $0 and merely being forced to purchase insurance would increase their costs dramatically.
Liberal health care journalist Jonathan Cohn also questions a number of assumptions in the report and asks, "Is the Insurance Industry Declaring War?" One of the stories of the health care debate has been that in contrast to 1993/94, until this point AHIP has been either cooperative or muted in its criticism of the bills, deciding instead to try to get the best deal that they could out of the government. But now that they felt betrayed in many ways by Max Baucus Finance Committee bill, they may be poised to take a more combative role.
The Day Ahead: October 12th
Posted by on 10.12.09 @ 6:30AM
Today, on the main site:
- Big Labor, Green Jobs, by Max Schulz
- Can Hamas Make Sesame Street Now? by Brooke M. Goldstein
The best "school choice" would be all private schools. Parents of K-12 students should vote with their feet by taking their kids out of public schools. If there are not enough private schools, private education companies would be happy to provide them. About 50% of state and local taxes are for schools, and that money would be returned to the free enterprise world. Competition creates more choices, higher quality, and lower prices when government gets out of the way.
What to Watch For:
Game of the Day:
- Feeding the Beast
- No Freedom Left Behind
- Obama's Vision Through History