A new poll shows John McCain actually leading Barack Obama:
"In a sharp turnaround, Republican John McCain has opened a 5-point lead on Democrat Barack Obama in the U.S. presidential race and is seen as a stronger manager of the economy, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday. McCain leads Obama among likely U.S. voters by 46 percent to 41 percent, wiping out Obama's solid 7-point advantage in July and taking his first lead in the monthly Reuters/Zogby poll."
It's important not to get carried away--this poll may be an "outlier"; that is, a poll that due to some unusual circumstances doesn't really reflect reality. I think it just shows this is a very close race, that could go either way. Another possibility: have you been watching the Olympics coverage on NBC and all its associated cable channels? Have you noticed all the McCain ads running? I have. Maybe others have, too.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Still no sign of game-changing
Barack Obama is set to announce, soon, his vice-presidential pick.
By all accounts, he's mainly considering Kaine, Biden, and Bayh.
All very safe, relatively conservative, picks.
Which will work out okay for Sen. Obama if in fact this race is his to lose, he's ahead, and so the right thing to do is to play it safe.
But if this is going to be a different race than that, then he may regret this apparently booo-ring pick.
By all accounts, he's mainly considering Kaine, Biden, and Bayh.
All very safe, relatively conservative, picks.
Which will work out okay for Sen. Obama if in fact this race is his to lose, he's ahead, and so the right thing to do is to play it safe.
But if this is going to be a different race than that, then he may regret this apparently booo-ring pick.
Celeb watch: the definition of narcissism
Jennifer Lopez doesn't think 8 gold medals mean much:
"Lopez, who appeared on "Good Morning America" Aug. 18 to discuss her preparations for the Malibu Triathlon, was overheard saying after the segment that she “couldn’t understand why everyone is talking about that swimmer,” according to a GMA source. “She couldn’t come up with (eight-time gold-medal winner Michael) Phelps’ name, and then she yammered on about how she was the one training for a triathlon just six months after giving birth, and how that was the big story right now, not ‘the swimmer.’ ”
Maybe her mirror broke.
"Lopez, who appeared on "Good Morning America" Aug. 18 to discuss her preparations for the Malibu Triathlon, was overheard saying after the segment that she “couldn’t understand why everyone is talking about that swimmer,” according to a GMA source. “She couldn’t come up with (eight-time gold-medal winner Michael) Phelps’ name, and then she yammered on about how she was the one training for a triathlon just six months after giving birth, and how that was the big story right now, not ‘the swimmer.’ ”
Maybe her mirror broke.
Monday, August 18, 2008
The national security gap
McCain now polls much better than does Barack Obama on who would be better able to handle the job of commander in chief.
Partly, this explains why McCain and Obama continue to be neck and neck in the polls.
I think Obama was also hurt by some of his earlier statements, too--for example, that he would talk and negotiate with anyone, anywhere (even with Holocaust-denying Iran). I think this raised questions concerning his toughness and naivete, and I think conservatives should continue to hammer Obama on these points.
Partly, this explains why McCain and Obama continue to be neck and neck in the polls.
I think Obama was also hurt by some of his earlier statements, too--for example, that he would talk and negotiate with anyone, anywhere (even with Holocaust-denying Iran). I think this raised questions concerning his toughness and naivete, and I think conservatives should continue to hammer Obama on these points.
At the sports desk: NFL updates
The Chicago Bears have decided: Kyle Orton will be their starting QB.
Rex Grossman to be the backup. I don't completely blame Bears brass--I watched Grossman's performance vs Seattle a couple of days ago, and he didn't look good. But all this shows is that the Bears at the QB position still have issues; because Orton, in that same game, didn't look much better. Look for the Bears to lack explosiveness (to say the least!) in the passing game again this season.
And everyone's talking about Peyton Manning's knee, and will he be ready for week 1.
But note that Tom Brady has a bit of a leg injury too, and it's unclear if he'll play in this week's pre-season game (he has yet to play in a pre-season game).
Hmmm....
Rex Grossman to be the backup. I don't completely blame Bears brass--I watched Grossman's performance vs Seattle a couple of days ago, and he didn't look good. But all this shows is that the Bears at the QB position still have issues; because Orton, in that same game, didn't look much better. Look for the Bears to lack explosiveness (to say the least!) in the passing game again this season.
And everyone's talking about Peyton Manning's knee, and will he be ready for week 1.
But note that Tom Brady has a bit of a leg injury too, and it's unclear if he'll play in this week's pre-season game (he has yet to play in a pre-season game).
Hmmm....
Beware of the bear
The other day, it looked like there was a cease-fire agreement in place between Russia and Georgia. But remember what we said here--they key for determining whether this agreement was any good was simple: would the Russians actually withdraw.
Today there's evidence there's in fact no withdrawal.
My suspicion is that the Russians are trying to intimidate not only the Georgians, but other eastern European states as well, trying to keep them from drawing closer to the West.
President Bush will have to continue to take a tough line.
Today there's evidence there's in fact no withdrawal.
My suspicion is that the Russians are trying to intimidate not only the Georgians, but other eastern European states as well, trying to keep them from drawing closer to the West.
President Bush will have to continue to take a tough line.
The face of a dictatorship (Chinese version)
The Chinese authorities, prior to the Olympics, said that sure, there can be protests--but you have to apply for a permit, and protest only in certain designated areas.
So--so far, there have been 77 protest applications. None of them have been approved.
Update: the Chinese government is also reported to be confiscating Bibles from incoming missionaries.
Perhaps the Chinese decided that, since they're displaying their dictatorial ways, they might as well go all the way and show their lack of commitment to religious freedom, too.
So--so far, there have been 77 protest applications. None of them have been approved.
Update: the Chinese government is also reported to be confiscating Bibles from incoming missionaries.
Perhaps the Chinese decided that, since they're displaying their dictatorial ways, they might as well go all the way and show their lack of commitment to religious freedom, too.
At the sports desk: their season is over
Detroit Tigers fans begin leaving yesterday's game en masse after 5 innings.
And why not--the Tigers and their pitching were getting bombed again by the Orioles; the team once again played under .500 ball on this home stand; any hopes of a miracle run for the playoffs are gone.
It pains me to say it as a Tigers fan, but--this year, this team is about the biggest bust in baseball.
And why not--the Tigers and their pitching were getting bombed again by the Orioles; the team once again played under .500 ball on this home stand; any hopes of a miracle run for the playoffs are gone.
It pains me to say it as a Tigers fan, but--this year, this team is about the biggest bust in baseball.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Misplaced confidence?
David Broder reports today that the Obama campaign team is a "well-oiled machine" (according to the Post's headline writer, anyway) and very, very confident:
"The Obama people believe that McCain has squandered an opportunity to make a positive case for his own election in the many months since he secured the votes for the Republican nomination. David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, argues that McCain is already feeling a backlash to his "negative attacks" and that the resulting skepticism may undercut any potential benefit he derives from the debates this fall."
Hmmm. Really? Several weeks ago, Barack Obama led John McCain by some 5-10 points in the polls; some had it even a bigger spread. Now, today, Gallup for example has the race even.
As I report elsewhere here today, many in the Democratic Party are critical of the Obama campaign, for being too passive.
There's confidence, and there's...overconfidence.
"The Obama people believe that McCain has squandered an opportunity to make a positive case for his own election in the many months since he secured the votes for the Republican nomination. David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, argues that McCain is already feeling a backlash to his "negative attacks" and that the resulting skepticism may undercut any potential benefit he derives from the debates this fall."
Hmmm. Really? Several weeks ago, Barack Obama led John McCain by some 5-10 points in the polls; some had it even a bigger spread. Now, today, Gallup for example has the race even.
As I report elsewhere here today, many in the Democratic Party are critical of the Obama campaign, for being too passive.
There's confidence, and there's...overconfidence.
Sunday update
Senator Evan Bayh jumps at the chance to attack John McCain on one of the Sunday shows.
Why? Not simply because Democrats had wondered if he had the fortitude to go after McCain; but because he wants the vice-presidential nomination from Senator Obama, and is auditioning for it.
So why hasn't the prosecutor in the case, or Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, been able to broker a deal with embattled Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick? Simple--Kilpatrick seeks a "deal" in which he gets off almost scot-free, and has very little penalty. Details here.
And good for Michigan officials for not caving in to the corrupt Mr. Kilpatrick. Sometimes people are eager to "move on" from a crisis such as this, that they'll accept almost any deal. But in this no deal is better than a bad one.
And what is there left to be said about Michael Phelps? 8 for 8 in gold medals.
It took 36 years, then, for someone to equal and surpass Mark Spitz (who earned 7 golds in 1972). I suspect it will take much longer than that for anyone to match Phelps--which tells you how monumental is his accomplishment.
Some Democrats are definitely nervous about how Barack Obama is doing right now in the presidential race. "Gov. Phil Bredesen, Democrat of Tennessee: “Instead of giving big speeches at big stadiums, he needs to give straight-up 10-word answers to people at Wal-Mart about how he would improve their lives.” Think about this--is there one issue, that you can think of, about which you can immediately summon up the notion of what Obama would do about it? (example--back in 1980, when people thought of Reagan, they knew--"cut taxes; tougher on defense.") Nope, I can't think of one either.
Brett Favre looks good in his pre-season debut with the New York Jets.
I recorded this from the NFL Network, and it watched it a bit ago; and he did look good. His passes had zip, he moved the chains, and while he was in there he got the Jets in and out of the huddle, no false starts, etc. Not bad for a guy only with the team a week.
Why? Not simply because Democrats had wondered if he had the fortitude to go after McCain; but because he wants the vice-presidential nomination from Senator Obama, and is auditioning for it.
So why hasn't the prosecutor in the case, or Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, been able to broker a deal with embattled Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick? Simple--Kilpatrick seeks a "deal" in which he gets off almost scot-free, and has very little penalty. Details here.
And good for Michigan officials for not caving in to the corrupt Mr. Kilpatrick. Sometimes people are eager to "move on" from a crisis such as this, that they'll accept almost any deal. But in this no deal is better than a bad one.
And what is there left to be said about Michael Phelps? 8 for 8 in gold medals.
It took 36 years, then, for someone to equal and surpass Mark Spitz (who earned 7 golds in 1972). I suspect it will take much longer than that for anyone to match Phelps--which tells you how monumental is his accomplishment.
Some Democrats are definitely nervous about how Barack Obama is doing right now in the presidential race. "Gov. Phil Bredesen, Democrat of Tennessee: “Instead of giving big speeches at big stadiums, he needs to give straight-up 10-word answers to people at Wal-Mart about how he would improve their lives.” Think about this--is there one issue, that you can think of, about which you can immediately summon up the notion of what Obama would do about it? (example--back in 1980, when people thought of Reagan, they knew--"cut taxes; tougher on defense.") Nope, I can't think of one either.
Brett Favre looks good in his pre-season debut with the New York Jets.
I recorded this from the NFL Network, and it watched it a bit ago; and he did look good. His passes had zip, he moved the chains, and while he was in there he got the Jets in and out of the huddle, no false starts, etc. Not bad for a guy only with the team a week.
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Sloppy thinking alert
From an article in today's Washington Post, in which one of its liberal reporters writes happily about young evangelicals perhaps not voting so Republican this time:
"I went to school with a lot of agnostic people and after Bush, they were like 'no' " to religion, said Brittany Kelley, 22, who recently graduated from Savannah College of Art and Design. She is leaning toward McCain because she shares his economic views and is afraid that Obama will raise taxes. But in a lowered voice she said she does not feel the way some of the other young evangelicals do when it comes to all social issues. "I have a lot of friends who are homosexual, and if they wanted to get married, that's okay," Kelley said. "They are not going to stop it because it is illegal."
Hmmm. Well, I assume this young lady is opposed to abortion--most evangelicals are.
I imagine then that she has some friends who might seek abortions, too.
Are those "okay", too, then? Because you're not likely to stop them completely, either--even if you make them illegal.
See the problem with that thinking?
"I went to school with a lot of agnostic people and after Bush, they were like 'no' " to religion, said Brittany Kelley, 22, who recently graduated from Savannah College of Art and Design. She is leaning toward McCain because she shares his economic views and is afraid that Obama will raise taxes. But in a lowered voice she said she does not feel the way some of the other young evangelicals do when it comes to all social issues. "I have a lot of friends who are homosexual, and if they wanted to get married, that's okay," Kelley said. "They are not going to stop it because it is illegal."
Hmmm. Well, I assume this young lady is opposed to abortion--most evangelicals are.
I imagine then that she has some friends who might seek abortions, too.
Are those "okay", too, then? Because you're not likely to stop them completely, either--even if you make them illegal.
See the problem with that thinking?
Weekend update
Russia and Georgia appear to have a cease-fire deal in place.
But the key is this: will Russian troops actually withdraw.
The Georgia Bulldogs have college football's pre-season # 1 ranking.
But beware--frequently, the team ranked #1 before the season starts...doesn't wind up there at the end.
A Georgian refugee says, "America is the only light left for Georgia."
So much for the notion of America lacking moral credibility, as many of my liberal acquaintances claim. People overseas know to whom to look for humanitarian aid; and they know they'll get it.
An Idaho child killer writes that he's driven by the "hatred" in his heart.
Yet some of our progressive friends claim everyone can be "rehabilitated."
Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean refers to the Republican Party as the "white" party.
And Democrats such as he try to claim their party as a vehicle of racial reconciliation. Yeah, right.
More Democratic Party "unity" watching--Democratic congresswoman Loretta Sanchez, on why she plans to vote for Hillary Clinton on the first ballot at the Democratic convention: “I believe there are a lot of supporters for Hillary among the superdelegates, especially now that they’ve agreed to place her name in nomination. I think half the House Democrats would probably be Hillary supporters, especially women. ... I felt she was the most experienced and the best candidate and I still feel that way.”
Speaking of the Yankees...they lose again, to the Royals no less, 4-3.
The playoffs seem further away than ever; former starter Melky Cabrera is sent to the minors.
But the key is this: will Russian troops actually withdraw.
The Georgia Bulldogs have college football's pre-season # 1 ranking.
But beware--frequently, the team ranked #1 before the season starts...doesn't wind up there at the end.
A Georgian refugee says, "America is the only light left for Georgia."
So much for the notion of America lacking moral credibility, as many of my liberal acquaintances claim. People overseas know to whom to look for humanitarian aid; and they know they'll get it.
An Idaho child killer writes that he's driven by the "hatred" in his heart.
Yet some of our progressive friends claim everyone can be "rehabilitated."
Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean refers to the Republican Party as the "white" party.
And Democrats such as he try to claim their party as a vehicle of racial reconciliation. Yeah, right.
More Democratic Party "unity" watching--Democratic congresswoman Loretta Sanchez, on why she plans to vote for Hillary Clinton on the first ballot at the Democratic convention: “I believe there are a lot of supporters for Hillary among the superdelegates, especially now that they’ve agreed to place her name in nomination. I think half the House Democrats would probably be Hillary supporters, especially women. ... I felt she was the most experienced and the best candidate and I still feel that way.”
Speaking of the Yankees...they lose again, to the Royals no less, 4-3.
The playoffs seem further away than ever; former starter Melky Cabrera is sent to the minors.
Friday, August 15, 2008
The nature of a dictatorship
Several protesters are arrested in Beijing for supposedly illegal demonstrations, displaying the Tibetan flag, etc. They are alternately given free KFC fried chicken and screamed at by cops. Eventually they are told to leave immediately, and that they must pay for their plane tickets themselves. The detainees refuse. And then:
"About seven hours after being picked up, Hocevar and five others were marched to a plane to New York. Although they also refused to purchase tickets, police simply took their wallets, extracted their bank and credit cards, and used them to complete the purchases. "I have reported my card stolen to the bank," Hocevar said. "I will contest the charges."
Good for him.
Dictatorships always find new ways to oppress. But it's good that the Olympics allow us, also, to have a little window into this Chinese version of a dictatorship. It reminds us of what totalitarianism is. We can never have too many reminders.
"About seven hours after being picked up, Hocevar and five others were marched to a plane to New York. Although they also refused to purchase tickets, police simply took their wallets, extracted their bank and credit cards, and used them to complete the purchases. "I have reported my card stolen to the bank," Hocevar said. "I will contest the charges."
Good for him.
Dictatorships always find new ways to oppress. But it's good that the Olympics allow us, also, to have a little window into this Chinese version of a dictatorship. It reminds us of what totalitarianism is. We can never have too many reminders.
Overseas watch: the divide in India
In India, there's a gap between rich and poor that remains simply astonishing:
"Step outside, and you see sedans reeking of new affluence. Inside are drivers, many of them asleep because they work 20-hour shifts, waking up at 6 a.m. to catch a train, taking the boss to and from work, then to his dinner, then to drinks, then dropping him off at home at 1 a.m. and catching a taxi to go back to the tenements. At 1 a.m. back in the boss’s apartment, the hallways are often littered with servants and sweepers who work inside by day but sleep outside by night. They learn to sleep on cold tile, with tenants stepping over them when returning from evenings out. India may be changing at a disorienting pace, but one thing remains stubbornly the same: a tendency to treat the hired help like chattel, to behave as though some humans were born to serve and others to be served. “Indians are perhaps the world’s most undemocratic people, living in the world’s largest and most plural democracy,” Sudhir Kakar and Katharina Kakar, two well-known scholars of Indian culture, wrote in a recent book, “The Indians: Portrait of a People.”
Remember this the next time our progressive friends denounce American "inequality."
And the situation in India today shouldn't surprise, in any case; remember, this is a nation with a culture in which there used to be rigid castes and divisions in society; a place where those labeled "untouchables" were simply forbidden to rise above the level of those holding the most menial jobs. Why? Simply because they were born into that caste. Things change slowly.
"Step outside, and you see sedans reeking of new affluence. Inside are drivers, many of them asleep because they work 20-hour shifts, waking up at 6 a.m. to catch a train, taking the boss to and from work, then to his dinner, then to drinks, then dropping him off at home at 1 a.m. and catching a taxi to go back to the tenements. At 1 a.m. back in the boss’s apartment, the hallways are often littered with servants and sweepers who work inside by day but sleep outside by night. They learn to sleep on cold tile, with tenants stepping over them when returning from evenings out. India may be changing at a disorienting pace, but one thing remains stubbornly the same: a tendency to treat the hired help like chattel, to behave as though some humans were born to serve and others to be served. “Indians are perhaps the world’s most undemocratic people, living in the world’s largest and most plural democracy,” Sudhir Kakar and Katharina Kakar, two well-known scholars of Indian culture, wrote in a recent book, “The Indians: Portrait of a People.”
Remember this the next time our progressive friends denounce American "inequality."
And the situation in India today shouldn't surprise, in any case; remember, this is a nation with a culture in which there used to be rigid castes and divisions in society; a place where those labeled "untouchables" were simply forbidden to rise above the level of those holding the most menial jobs. Why? Simply because they were born into that caste. Things change slowly.
At the sports desk: Yankees in trouble
The New York Yankees are seeking their 14th straight trip to the postseason, but it looks less likely every day; and a couple of interesting stats reflect the problem, reports the NY Times:
"The Yankees started Thursday six games behind Boston in the wild-card race after 121 games. According to the Elias Sports Bureau, they had never before been six games behind in that race at least 100 games into a season. By the end of the day they were six and a half games out because Boston defeated Texas, 10-0. Yet the wild card is the more realistic route to the playoffs, because the deficit in the American League East is even worse. The Yankees started the day nine games behind Tampa Bay in the division, and the deficit grew to nine and a half when the Rays beat Oakland. According to Elias, it is the first time they have been that far out this late in a season since the morning of Sept. 7, 1997, when they trailed Baltimore by nine and a half."
The Yankees' long run earning postseason berths deserves respect.
I don't like the Yankees, believe me; far from it. But we Yankee-haters are in a unique position as we head towards the playoffs, aren't we? On the one hand, we love watching the Yankees...because we love to root against them. So it's been fun to watch them struggle this season, and it's fun to see them with a huge mountain to climb to make the playoffs.
On the other hand, when the playoffs come, and there are no Yankees--who will we root against???
Well, given the Bronx Bombers have been in the postseason for 13 straight years, certainly we can get along without them for one year, at least. Right?
"The Yankees started Thursday six games behind Boston in the wild-card race after 121 games. According to the Elias Sports Bureau, they had never before been six games behind in that race at least 100 games into a season. By the end of the day they were six and a half games out because Boston defeated Texas, 10-0. Yet the wild card is the more realistic route to the playoffs, because the deficit in the American League East is even worse. The Yankees started the day nine games behind Tampa Bay in the division, and the deficit grew to nine and a half when the Rays beat Oakland. According to Elias, it is the first time they have been that far out this late in a season since the morning of Sept. 7, 1997, when they trailed Baltimore by nine and a half."
The Yankees' long run earning postseason berths deserves respect.
I don't like the Yankees, believe me; far from it. But we Yankee-haters are in a unique position as we head towards the playoffs, aren't we? On the one hand, we love watching the Yankees...because we love to root against them. So it's been fun to watch them struggle this season, and it's fun to see them with a huge mountain to climb to make the playoffs.
On the other hand, when the playoffs come, and there are no Yankees--who will we root against???
Well, given the Bronx Bombers have been in the postseason for 13 straight years, certainly we can get along without them for one year, at least. Right?
Evading responsibility dept
The family of a gay teen slain by a classmate blames the school for his death. Why?
"The family of a gay teenager who was fatally shot in class blames the school district for allowing their son to wear makeup and feminine clothing to school — factors the family claims led to the death."
No word on what role mom and dad possessed concerning the clothes their son wore.
Fundamental: parents can't punt their familial responsibilities to schools, or to anyone else.
"The family of a gay teenager who was fatally shot in class blames the school district for allowing their son to wear makeup and feminine clothing to school — factors the family claims led to the death."
No word on what role mom and dad possessed concerning the clothes their son wore.
Fundamental: parents can't punt their familial responsibilities to schools, or to anyone else.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
What's really going on regarding Russia's invasion of Georgia?
I think Victor Davis Hanson on NRO the other day got at it quite well:
"The long-suffering Russian people resent the loss of global influence and empire, but not necessarily the Soviet Union and its gulags that once ensured such stature. The invasion restores a sense of Russian nationalism and power to its populace without the stink of Stalinism, and is indeed cloaked as a sort of humanitarian intervention on behalf of beleaguered Ossetians. There will be no Russian demonstrations about an “illegal war,” much less nonsense about “blood for oil,” but instead rejoicing at the payback of an uppity former province that felt its Western credentials somehow trumped Russian tanks. How ironic that the Western heartthrob, the old Marxist Mikhail Gorbachev, is now both lamenting Western encouragement of Georgian “aggression,” while simultaneously gloating over the return of Russian military daring."
Yep. Read the whole thing. Hanson points out that this crisis advertises, again, the weakness of NATO. True--and I think there's a simple reason for that (still): the end of the Cold War. NATO was a (necessary) invention of western anti-communism. It was very simple: an alliance designed to help keep in check Soviet expansionism. And it worked very well for over 40 years. But what function does it have if there ain't no USSR anymore? Russia today isn't communist; there's no agreement in the West on its aims, or on what threat it poses. Indeed, there's no agreement in the West, really, on just what NATO is supposed to do these days. And so, when crises erupt, NATO and its members tend to flail around a bit and accomplish little.
I am glad to see the Bush administration taking a stern line vs Mr. Putin and the Russians--let's hope it's effective.
"The long-suffering Russian people resent the loss of global influence and empire, but not necessarily the Soviet Union and its gulags that once ensured such stature. The invasion restores a sense of Russian nationalism and power to its populace without the stink of Stalinism, and is indeed cloaked as a sort of humanitarian intervention on behalf of beleaguered Ossetians. There will be no Russian demonstrations about an “illegal war,” much less nonsense about “blood for oil,” but instead rejoicing at the payback of an uppity former province that felt its Western credentials somehow trumped Russian tanks. How ironic that the Western heartthrob, the old Marxist Mikhail Gorbachev, is now both lamenting Western encouragement of Georgian “aggression,” while simultaneously gloating over the return of Russian military daring."
Yep. Read the whole thing. Hanson points out that this crisis advertises, again, the weakness of NATO. True--and I think there's a simple reason for that (still): the end of the Cold War. NATO was a (necessary) invention of western anti-communism. It was very simple: an alliance designed to help keep in check Soviet expansionism. And it worked very well for over 40 years. But what function does it have if there ain't no USSR anymore? Russia today isn't communist; there's no agreement in the West on its aims, or on what threat it poses. Indeed, there's no agreement in the West, really, on just what NATO is supposed to do these days. And so, when crises erupt, NATO and its members tend to flail around a bit and accomplish little.
I am glad to see the Bush administration taking a stern line vs Mr. Putin and the Russians--let's hope it's effective.
Hear, hear
You've probably all seen the headline today--population experts and census-studying types project that by 2042, white people in America will be in the minority. Well, big news, if the projections hold. But one NRO Cornerite had the best reaction to this news I've seen:
"...one conclusion ought to be this: In an America that is increasingly multiracial and multiethnic — and where, moreover, individual Americans are increasingly multiracial and multiethnic — it is simply untenable to have a legal regime that sorts and classifies U.S. citizens according to skin color and national origin and then treats some of us better and others of us worse on that basis. Now, more than ever, the national motto must be e pluribus unum. John McCain agrees with this. And Senator Obama?"
Indeed. And let's think about this, too: affirmative-action policies have been at work in America for nearly 40 years now. What exactly have they accomplished? Oh, well, but you don't understand, claim their defenders; such policies are needed to wipe out racism and end discrimination. And besides, they're only temporary, they add. Really? These "temporary" policies have been in effect now for nearly 4 decades. And the same people who claim AA is essential to combat racism need to figure out why they keep arguing with themselves--since they claim in their next breath that racism remains very, very strong in America and a constant threat. What? How can that be, after 40 years of affirmative action? The fact is that classifying Americans according to skin color and national origin and treating them differently on that basis makes racial hostilities worse, not better; and leads to continued discrimination, not less of it. Maybe some day the new racialists will grasp this.
"...one conclusion ought to be this: In an America that is increasingly multiracial and multiethnic — and where, moreover, individual Americans are increasingly multiracial and multiethnic — it is simply untenable to have a legal regime that sorts and classifies U.S. citizens according to skin color and national origin and then treats some of us better and others of us worse on that basis. Now, more than ever, the national motto must be e pluribus unum. John McCain agrees with this. And Senator Obama?"
Indeed. And let's think about this, too: affirmative-action policies have been at work in America for nearly 40 years now. What exactly have they accomplished? Oh, well, but you don't understand, claim their defenders; such policies are needed to wipe out racism and end discrimination. And besides, they're only temporary, they add. Really? These "temporary" policies have been in effect now for nearly 4 decades. And the same people who claim AA is essential to combat racism need to figure out why they keep arguing with themselves--since they claim in their next breath that racism remains very, very strong in America and a constant threat. What? How can that be, after 40 years of affirmative action? The fact is that classifying Americans according to skin color and national origin and treating them differently on that basis makes racial hostilities worse, not better; and leads to continued discrimination, not less of it. Maybe some day the new racialists will grasp this.
Democratic Party "unity" watch (contd)
Barack Obama has to make yet another concession to the Clinton forces:
"Hillary Clinton supporters will get their chance for catharsis at the Democratic National Convention in Denver as the New York senator’s name will be included in the nomination. A joint statement issued Thursday by Clinton and Barack Obama said Clinton will be included because they want to ensure that “the voices of all 35 million people who participated in this historic primary election are respected and heard in Denver.” “I am convinced that honoring Senator Clinton’s historic campaign in this way will help us celebrate this defining moment in our history and bring the party together in a strong united fashion,” Obama said."
Heh. This is only about two weeks after Obama told the press that he didn't really think there needed to be much "catharsis" at the convention. And only a few weeks after Clinton had indicated she wouldn't have her name placed in nomination...
But I suspect the Clintons have figured out that Sen. Obama can be rolled, and that he'll do a lot to "appease" them. How much more? We'll keep our eyes peeled.
"Hillary Clinton supporters will get their chance for catharsis at the Democratic National Convention in Denver as the New York senator’s name will be included in the nomination. A joint statement issued Thursday by Clinton and Barack Obama said Clinton will be included because they want to ensure that “the voices of all 35 million people who participated in this historic primary election are respected and heard in Denver.” “I am convinced that honoring Senator Clinton’s historic campaign in this way will help us celebrate this defining moment in our history and bring the party together in a strong united fashion,” Obama said."
Heh. This is only about two weeks after Obama told the press that he didn't really think there needed to be much "catharsis" at the convention. And only a few weeks after Clinton had indicated she wouldn't have her name placed in nomination...
But I suspect the Clintons have figured out that Sen. Obama can be rolled, and that he'll do a lot to "appease" them. How much more? We'll keep our eyes peeled.
Not that big of a deal
So John McCain would consider choosing the pro-choice Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania as his VP candidate.
Well. Of course, he's only considering him; he hasn't chosen him yet. No reason to get too excited about it yet. And I also noted this statement from McCain:
"I think it's a fundamental tenet of our party to be pro-life but that does not mean we exclude people from our party that are pro-choice," McCain said. He called the gap between the two sides a disagreement — "albeit strong."
As long as McCain in his actions stays within, and acts within, that principle, I don't think conservatives should be bothered too much. Of course, one problem is that McCain throughout his career has tended to stray from conservative principles. We'll have to watch and see what happens here, but I'm not that worried about this yet.
Well. Of course, he's only considering him; he hasn't chosen him yet. No reason to get too excited about it yet. And I also noted this statement from McCain:
"I think it's a fundamental tenet of our party to be pro-life but that does not mean we exclude people from our party that are pro-choice," McCain said. He called the gap between the two sides a disagreement — "albeit strong."
As long as McCain in his actions stays within, and acts within, that principle, I don't think conservatives should be bothered too much. Of course, one problem is that McCain throughout his career has tended to stray from conservative principles. We'll have to watch and see what happens here, but I'm not that worried about this yet.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Democratic Party "unity" watch (contd)
Maureen Dowd makes a persuasive case that Hillary and co. are trying to sabotage the upcoming Dem convention and Obama's big moment there:
"Now they’ve made Barry’s convention all about them — their dissatisfaction and revisionism and barely disguised desire to see him fail. Whatever insincere words of support the Clintons muster, their primal scream gets louder: He can’t win! He can’t close the deal! We told you so!"
Read the whole thing.
"Now they’ve made Barry’s convention all about them — their dissatisfaction and revisionism and barely disguised desire to see him fail. Whatever insincere words of support the Clintons muster, their primal scream gets louder: He can’t win! He can’t close the deal! We told you so!"
Read the whole thing.
So are there really a lot of pro-Obama Republicans?
Aha--I suspected as much. The answer appears to be "no." Aside from a tiny few high-profile, national Republicans such as Chuck Hagel or Susan Eisenhower, there aren't many "Obamacans"...and I sure haven't come across many ordinary Republicans going for Obama in my readings or travels.
Here's a quote from the linked article above:
"But are there enough rank-and-file Republicans whispering their support at Obama rallies to actually make a difference on Election Day? As I discovered from examination the last 18 months of head-to-head general election polls, the answer seems to be "no." In fact, John McCain's share of the Democratic vote has typically--and surprisingly--been larger than Obama's share of the Republican vote. In other words, it's not that the Rev. Jeremiah Wright scared the Obamacan masses off, as some pundits have theorized--it's that they never existed (in any unprecedented way) to begin with."
Read the whole thing--he presents solid evidence to back up his claim.
Or, put it this way--if one is going to write about Obama Republicans, it would be equally as valid to write about McCain Democrats--there are at least as many of them.
Here's a quote from the linked article above:
"But are there enough rank-and-file Republicans whispering their support at Obama rallies to actually make a difference on Election Day? As I discovered from examination the last 18 months of head-to-head general election polls, the answer seems to be "no." In fact, John McCain's share of the Democratic vote has typically--and surprisingly--been larger than Obama's share of the Republican vote. In other words, it's not that the Rev. Jeremiah Wright scared the Obamacan masses off, as some pundits have theorized--it's that they never existed (in any unprecedented way) to begin with."
Read the whole thing--he presents solid evidence to back up his claim.
Or, put it this way--if one is going to write about Obama Republicans, it would be equally as valid to write about McCain Democrats--there are at least as many of them.
At the sports desk: the NFL's Indy Colts gotta have Hart
So he set all kinds of rushing records playing high school football in New York state, and then in college at the University of Michigan. Yet the Wolverine's star running back Mike Hart was only a 6th round draft pick of the Indianapolis Colts this past spring.
But guess what--the Colts are glad they got him.
I'm not surprised. Mike Hart is an example of something enduring in sports. There are guys who, according to the stopwatch, don't run as fast as others; who aren't as tall as others. Hart has been hearing he's too small his entire life. But on the field, he's always gotten it done. And he'll continue to do so for the Colts. It sounds like he's on his way to making the team.
You know, Mike Hart was hurt a lot last year, in his senior season for the Maize and Blue. So was Chad Henne. This is not to make excuses; some of Michigan's stumbles last year (particularly vs Appalachian State) were inexcusable. But when the team came together and everyone was healthy, Michigan was a good football team. You saw that in last New Year's Day's Capital One Bowl, when the Wolverines beat a good Florida team with Heisman winner Tim Tebow. That was a game in which Florida was heavily favored. But Mike Hart had an excellent game...
Hart, you might say, provided a lot of heart...for Michigan. He'll do that for the Colts, too. Can't just look at 40 yard dash times etc, guys.
But guess what--the Colts are glad they got him.
I'm not surprised. Mike Hart is an example of something enduring in sports. There are guys who, according to the stopwatch, don't run as fast as others; who aren't as tall as others. Hart has been hearing he's too small his entire life. But on the field, he's always gotten it done. And he'll continue to do so for the Colts. It sounds like he's on his way to making the team.
You know, Mike Hart was hurt a lot last year, in his senior season for the Maize and Blue. So was Chad Henne. This is not to make excuses; some of Michigan's stumbles last year (particularly vs Appalachian State) were inexcusable. But when the team came together and everyone was healthy, Michigan was a good football team. You saw that in last New Year's Day's Capital One Bowl, when the Wolverines beat a good Florida team with Heisman winner Tim Tebow. That was a game in which Florida was heavily favored. But Mike Hart had an excellent game...
Hart, you might say, provided a lot of heart...for Michigan. He'll do that for the Colts, too. Can't just look at 40 yard dash times etc, guys.
Government waste, exhibit # 123,456 (or thereabouts)
The Gary, Indiana School Corporation is revoking credit cards issued to school administrators. Gee, how come? Well, in order to reduce spending. How will this help? See for yourself:
"A recent report by The Times of Munster found that administrators charged nearly $57,500 to credit cards between May 2007 and May 2008. School Superintendent Mary Steele-Agee charged the most during that period, nearly $16,000."
And say, what did Ms. Steele-Agee have to say about all those charges?
"She declined to comment following Tuesday's school board meeting."
"A recent report by The Times of Munster found that administrators charged nearly $57,500 to credit cards between May 2007 and May 2008. School Superintendent Mary Steele-Agee charged the most during that period, nearly $16,000."
And say, what did Ms. Steele-Agee have to say about all those charges?
"She declined to comment following Tuesday's school board meeting."
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Health nazidom's unintended consequences
We've talked about the new health regulations coming out of California government lately--the state government has banned the use of trans fats in restaurant and baked goods, south LA has put a one-year moratorium on the construction of new fast-food joints, and now San Francisco has banned drug-store chains such as Walgreen's from selling cigarettes. But what effect will all these new liberal we-know-what's-good-for-you regulations have? Reason magazine today points out a few:
"Not that anyone's taking the trans fat ban too hard; even the California Restaurant Association didn't put up much of a fight. Apparently, donuts fried in canola oil are just as tasty as their slightly more lethal counterparts fried in partially hydrogenated vegetable shortening, customers seem to like the idea of trans fat-free food, and making the transition to non-hydrogenated alternatives provides a great excuse to jack up prices. One Southern California hamburger joint told The New York Times it will have to increase the price of its fries from $1.75 to at least $2.75 because of the change. Similarly, the fact that there are already 400 or so fast-food outlets in the area of Los Angeles where the one-year moratorium will be enforced means a Happy Meal should still be easy to come by. Finally, banishing cigarettes from San Francisco pharmacies just means that smokers will be more likely to patronize liquor stores to get their nicotine fix—and anything that encourages addictive personalities to impulse-buy a quart of Jim Beam over an Odwalla Mo'Beta Smoothie can't be all bad for society, can it? Or to put it another way: These laws are getting passed not because they promise to radically change things, but rather because they aren't going to change things enough to truly inconvenience anyone. Which also suggests they won't have much impact on California's eating and smoking habits. Trans fats will still be available in packaged foods. In burger-plagued South Los Angeles, sit-down restaurants already outnumber fast-food outlets by more than 100, but the ready availability of slowly delivered fare has apparently done little to curb local appetites for fries and shakes."
Read the whole thing. Again, I point you all to an outstanding, classic conservative read--Friedrich von Hayek's The Road to Serfdom. It was he who pointed out that government regulation, especially of the economy, was bound to fail; planners could never gather all of the information they would need, they could never know enough about the economy and all of the economic actors involved, to understand all of the consequences their blueprints would have. Hence there would be all of these unintended (read: bad!) consequences...like we will surely see here. Again.
Maybe down the line Governor Ah-nuld will realize his mistakes. But don't count on it.
"Not that anyone's taking the trans fat ban too hard; even the California Restaurant Association didn't put up much of a fight. Apparently, donuts fried in canola oil are just as tasty as their slightly more lethal counterparts fried in partially hydrogenated vegetable shortening, customers seem to like the idea of trans fat-free food, and making the transition to non-hydrogenated alternatives provides a great excuse to jack up prices. One Southern California hamburger joint told The New York Times it will have to increase the price of its fries from $1.75 to at least $2.75 because of the change. Similarly, the fact that there are already 400 or so fast-food outlets in the area of Los Angeles where the one-year moratorium will be enforced means a Happy Meal should still be easy to come by. Finally, banishing cigarettes from San Francisco pharmacies just means that smokers will be more likely to patronize liquor stores to get their nicotine fix—and anything that encourages addictive personalities to impulse-buy a quart of Jim Beam over an Odwalla Mo'Beta Smoothie can't be all bad for society, can it? Or to put it another way: These laws are getting passed not because they promise to radically change things, but rather because they aren't going to change things enough to truly inconvenience anyone. Which also suggests they won't have much impact on California's eating and smoking habits. Trans fats will still be available in packaged foods. In burger-plagued South Los Angeles, sit-down restaurants already outnumber fast-food outlets by more than 100, but the ready availability of slowly delivered fare has apparently done little to curb local appetites for fries and shakes."
Read the whole thing. Again, I point you all to an outstanding, classic conservative read--Friedrich von Hayek's The Road to Serfdom. It was he who pointed out that government regulation, especially of the economy, was bound to fail; planners could never gather all of the information they would need, they could never know enough about the economy and all of the economic actors involved, to understand all of the consequences their blueprints would have. Hence there would be all of these unintended (read: bad!) consequences...like we will surely see here. Again.
Maybe down the line Governor Ah-nuld will realize his mistakes. But don't count on it.
Clinton campaign funeral watch (contd)
Many Democrats and observers argued during the recent primary battle within the Democratic Party that Hillary Clinton would have made a great president. But you sure wouldn't have known it from the way she ran her campaign:
"A key take-away from the article is that Clinton received a lot of accurate advice, including from Penn. He wrote a remarkably prescient memo in March 2007 about the importance of appealing to what he called “the Invisible Americans,” specifically “WOMEN, LOWER AND MIDDLE CLASS VOTERS” — exactly the groups that helped Clinton beat Obama in key states nearly a year later. But no one synthesized and acted on the good advice. “The anger and toxic obsessions overwhelmed even the most reserved Beltway wise men,” Green writes. “[H]er advisers couldn’t execute strategy; they routinely attacked and undermined each other, and Clinton never forced a resolution. ... [S]he never behaved like a chief executive, and her own staff proved to be her Achilles’ heel. “What is clear from the internal documents is that Clinton’s loss derived not from any specific decision she made but rather from the preponderance of the many she did not make.”
"A key take-away from the article is that Clinton received a lot of accurate advice, including from Penn. He wrote a remarkably prescient memo in March 2007 about the importance of appealing to what he called “the Invisible Americans,” specifically “WOMEN, LOWER AND MIDDLE CLASS VOTERS” — exactly the groups that helped Clinton beat Obama in key states nearly a year later. But no one synthesized and acted on the good advice. “The anger and toxic obsessions overwhelmed even the most reserved Beltway wise men,” Green writes. “[H]er advisers couldn’t execute strategy; they routinely attacked and undermined each other, and Clinton never forced a resolution. ... [S]he never behaved like a chief executive, and her own staff proved to be her Achilles’ heel. “What is clear from the internal documents is that Clinton’s loss derived not from any specific decision she made but rather from the preponderance of the many she did not make.”
Clinton campaign funeral watch (contd), part II
The Atlantic magazine obtained over 200 old Hillary Clinton campaign staff memos, and what emerges is the Clintonistas (and especially Mark Penn's) wonderful respect for love, diversity, and tolerance:
"Former chief strategist Mark Penn, who has taken so much heat in the race, lays out in an early 2007 memo the exact coalition that ended up giving Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton a winning streak toward the end. "We are the candidate of people with needs," Penn wrote in March of 2007. "We win women, lower classes and Democrats." In the same note, Penn laid out his ideas for attacking Obama over his "lack of American roots" -- a fierce approach that caused a great deal of strife inside the Clinton campaign, as others warned that Clinton needed to build herself up rather than tear the first viable African American candidate down. "All of these articles about his boyhood in Indonesia and his life in Hawaii are geared towards showing his background is diverse, multicultural and putting that in a new light," Penn wrote. "Save it for 2050."
"Former chief strategist Mark Penn, who has taken so much heat in the race, lays out in an early 2007 memo the exact coalition that ended up giving Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton a winning streak toward the end. "We are the candidate of people with needs," Penn wrote in March of 2007. "We win women, lower classes and Democrats." In the same note, Penn laid out his ideas for attacking Obama over his "lack of American roots" -- a fierce approach that caused a great deal of strife inside the Clinton campaign, as others warned that Clinton needed to build herself up rather than tear the first viable African American candidate down. "All of these articles about his boyhood in Indonesia and his life in Hawaii are geared towards showing his background is diverse, multicultural and putting that in a new light," Penn wrote. "Save it for 2050."
At the sports desk: briefly on Michael Phelps
NBC Sports asks, understandably enough, if Michael Phelps is the greatest athlete ever.
(Hey, wouldn't you want the guy people are calling the greatest appearing nightly on YOUR network for a couple of weeks?)
But what most impressed me about Phelps was what happened the other night. It didn't occur in one of his individual events. Instead, it was when he participated in that U.S. men's swimming medley relay team. The other night, the French team in that event was the overwhelming favorite. One of the French swimmers vowed that his group would "smash" the Americans. Well, they didn't--and did you see Phelps roaring and jumping for joy when the Americans won in an upset? He wasn't happy because he'd get another individual medal. Rather, he was happy his team and his country won. Indeed, I haven't seen him happier than in that moment. Good for him--a guy happy not only for his own accomplishments, but for his team's, too.
(Hey, wouldn't you want the guy people are calling the greatest appearing nightly on YOUR network for a couple of weeks?)
But what most impressed me about Phelps was what happened the other night. It didn't occur in one of his individual events. Instead, it was when he participated in that U.S. men's swimming medley relay team. The other night, the French team in that event was the overwhelming favorite. One of the French swimmers vowed that his group would "smash" the Americans. Well, they didn't--and did you see Phelps roaring and jumping for joy when the Americans won in an upset? He wasn't happy because he'd get another individual medal. Rather, he was happy his team and his country won. Indeed, I haven't seen him happier than in that moment. Good for him--a guy happy not only for his own accomplishments, but for his team's, too.
Sunday, August 10, 2008
The conservative argument on energy, further refined
No pun intended. Meanwhile, Michael Gerson in a recent column further explicated good, solid principles for conservatives to follow on energy policy; and it's good for the McCain campaign that they're pursuing them:
"...for McCain the energy issue has been a gift. There is perhaps no other topic in American politics today on which the public is angry, seeks action and agrees strongly with Republicans. McCain's approach is to do it all: drilling, nuclear, alternatives and conservation. Obama's approach has been reactive and irrelevant. What would his redistributed windfall profits tax do to produce energy or reduce the need for it? And Obama is hamstrung by a coalition that insists we will not drill our way out of this problem -- which is true but beside the point. No single approach will solve the problem in the short or medium term. And a nation in an energy crisis has every justification to extract its oil and natural gas while it pursues alternatives to oil and natural gas."
Exactly. And what's also interesting is that this shows that conservatives ARE pragmatic, flexible, adaptable, willing to think through flexible solutions to a crisis. It's amazing that Obama and many liberals are being so rigid in their opposition to common sense energy proposals.
"...for McCain the energy issue has been a gift. There is perhaps no other topic in American politics today on which the public is angry, seeks action and agrees strongly with Republicans. McCain's approach is to do it all: drilling, nuclear, alternatives and conservation. Obama's approach has been reactive and irrelevant. What would his redistributed windfall profits tax do to produce energy or reduce the need for it? And Obama is hamstrung by a coalition that insists we will not drill our way out of this problem -- which is true but beside the point. No single approach will solve the problem in the short or medium term. And a nation in an energy crisis has every justification to extract its oil and natural gas while it pursues alternatives to oil and natural gas."
Exactly. And what's also interesting is that this shows that conservatives ARE pragmatic, flexible, adaptable, willing to think through flexible solutions to a crisis. It's amazing that Obama and many liberals are being so rigid in their opposition to common sense energy proposals.
Saturday, August 9, 2008
Voices of moderation
Say, conservatives--when was the last time a liberal acquaintance of yours complained about conservative or Republican "extremism"?
Happens all the time, right? Well, funny thing is, it's out liberal friends who are often the most extreme. Here are two recent examples:
First, see what a Democratic congressman has to say about our government's Department of Homeland Security:
"You know who is in charge now? The Gestapo agents at [the Department of] Homeland Security. They are in charge."
Meanwhile, here Byron York of NRO reports that serious voices on the left are calling for "Nuremberg-style tribunals" by which to put on trial members of the Bush administration for "war crimes", should there be an Obama victory in November.
Wow.
Happens all the time, right? Well, funny thing is, it's out liberal friends who are often the most extreme. Here are two recent examples:
First, see what a Democratic congressman has to say about our government's Department of Homeland Security:
"You know who is in charge now? The Gestapo agents at [the Department of] Homeland Security. They are in charge."
Meanwhile, here Byron York of NRO reports that serious voices on the left are calling for "Nuremberg-style tribunals" by which to put on trial members of the Bush administration for "war crimes", should there be an Obama victory in November.
Wow.
Friday, August 8, 2008
The saga of John Edwards
He's admitted to indeed having an affair.
Though he denies fathering the woman's child.
Nothing can obscure the fact that he denied the affair for months.
He lied.
Democrats, now with both Elliott Spitzer and John Edwards in their corner, will have to be careful about charging Republicans as being the party of "corruption", immorality, etc.
Though he denies fathering the woman's child.
Nothing can obscure the fact that he denied the affair for months.
He lied.
Democrats, now with both Elliott Spitzer and John Edwards in their corner, will have to be careful about charging Republicans as being the party of "corruption", immorality, etc.
Democratic Party "unity" watch (contd)
The Obama and Clinton camps have a hard time negotiating a convention deal:
"Former president Bill Clinton is almost certain to play a role, perhaps on Wednesday, Aug. 27, advisers said, despite his lukewarm embrace so far of the Democratic candidate. His apparent reluctance to declare that Obama is qualified for the presidency in an interview with ABC this week left Obama aides rolling their eyes....some Clinton supporters and delegates are mobilizing to attempt to force a symbolic vote, or at least draw as much attention to the Clinton team as possible during the Denver events. Michele Thomas, 40, a photographer in Los Angeles, said she is helping organize delegates who think that only through a roll call can Clinton be properly honored. "If the party is speaking about unity, they [the Clinton delegates] believe the only way to unify the party is actually allowing them to vote," Thomas said in a phone interview yesterday. "Moving beyond the convention, if they were not allowed to vote there would be a lot of resentment."
If you have to keep saying how unified you are as a party, chances are you're not.
"Former president Bill Clinton is almost certain to play a role, perhaps on Wednesday, Aug. 27, advisers said, despite his lukewarm embrace so far of the Democratic candidate. His apparent reluctance to declare that Obama is qualified for the presidency in an interview with ABC this week left Obama aides rolling their eyes....some Clinton supporters and delegates are mobilizing to attempt to force a symbolic vote, or at least draw as much attention to the Clinton team as possible during the Denver events. Michele Thomas, 40, a photographer in Los Angeles, said she is helping organize delegates who think that only through a roll call can Clinton be properly honored. "If the party is speaking about unity, they [the Clinton delegates] believe the only way to unify the party is actually allowing them to vote," Thomas said in a phone interview yesterday. "Moving beyond the convention, if they were not allowed to vote there would be a lot of resentment."
If you have to keep saying how unified you are as a party, chances are you're not.
Voices of weakness
Random House publishers withdraw a novel dealing with Islam. Why?
"Random House deputy publisher Thomas Perry said in a statement the company received "cautionary advice not only that the publication of this book might be offensive to some in the Muslim community, but also that it could incite acts of violence by a small, radical segment." "In this instance we decided, after much deliberation, to postpone publication for the safety of the author, employees of Random House, booksellers and anyone else who would be involved in distribution and sale of the novel," Perry said."
Great. That should really discourage those Islamic extremists, and teach them that their threats of violence won't work...
"Random House deputy publisher Thomas Perry said in a statement the company received "cautionary advice not only that the publication of this book might be offensive to some in the Muslim community, but also that it could incite acts of violence by a small, radical segment." "In this instance we decided, after much deliberation, to postpone publication for the safety of the author, employees of Random House, booksellers and anyone else who would be involved in distribution and sale of the novel," Perry said."
Great. That should really discourage those Islamic extremists, and teach them that their threats of violence won't work...
At the sports desk: Brett Favre now a Jet
...and Mayor Bloomberg rolls out the red carpet for him, even getting him a Metrocard for the subway.
More seriously, who's the winner here? Many writers have claimed Favre is the loser in all this.
Some say his impact in NY will be limited.
Others point to the fact that he didn't get to go to Minnesota, like he wanted.
But I disagree. Favre wanted to play. Now he'll have the chance.
No, the Jets aren't yet Super Bowl material. But they'll have a shot at a wild-card playoff berth in the AFC...and Favre certainly has the stuff to take them there.
And tell me, now with Aaron Rodgers, who thinks the Green Bay Packers are still a Super Bowl contender? They may be lucky to scratch out a wild-card berth, too. When, with Favre, they could have made it to the big game this year.
That makes the Packers the loser, to me.
More seriously, who's the winner here? Many writers have claimed Favre is the loser in all this.
Some say his impact in NY will be limited.
Others point to the fact that he didn't get to go to Minnesota, like he wanted.
But I disagree. Favre wanted to play. Now he'll have the chance.
No, the Jets aren't yet Super Bowl material. But they'll have a shot at a wild-card playoff berth in the AFC...and Favre certainly has the stuff to take them there.
And tell me, now with Aaron Rodgers, who thinks the Green Bay Packers are still a Super Bowl contender? They may be lucky to scratch out a wild-card berth, too. When, with Favre, they could have made it to the big game this year.
That makes the Packers the loser, to me.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
An answer for Reyna Armendariz
A gang-rapist and killer is executed, and his cousin--along with the government of Mexico--is not happy:
"Mexico's government condemned Texas' execution of Jose Medellin despite a world court order to review the case, expressing concern for the rights of other Mexicans detained in the United States....Medellin was convicted of participating in the gang rape, beating and strangling of Elizabeth Pena, 16, and Jennifer Ertman, 14. He and five fellow gang members attacked the girls as they were walking home on a June night, raped and tortured them for an hour, then kicked and stomped them before using a belt and shoelaces to strangle them. In Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, where Medellin was born, a small group of his relatives condemned his execution. "Only God has the right to take a life," said Medellin's cousin Reyna Armendariz."
Well, Ms. Armendariz...
Your cousin Mr. Medellin didn't seem to agree with you.
And so he reaped what he sowed.
"Mexico's government condemned Texas' execution of Jose Medellin despite a world court order to review the case, expressing concern for the rights of other Mexicans detained in the United States....Medellin was convicted of participating in the gang rape, beating and strangling of Elizabeth Pena, 16, and Jennifer Ertman, 14. He and five fellow gang members attacked the girls as they were walking home on a June night, raped and tortured them for an hour, then kicked and stomped them before using a belt and shoelaces to strangle them. In Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, where Medellin was born, a small group of his relatives condemned his execution. "Only God has the right to take a life," said Medellin's cousin Reyna Armendariz."
Well, Ms. Armendariz...
Your cousin Mr. Medellin didn't seem to agree with you.
And so he reaped what he sowed.
Here comes the judge!
A round of applause, please, for Michigan's 36th District Court Judge Ronald Giles, who ordered embattled (and corrupt) Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick to jail for (again) violating his bond, saying:
"I don't in any way claim to have a good understanding of what your responsibilities are and what you do," he said. "I do understand you have to be under a tremendous amount of pressure and how that can affect you. But I have to look at how the system is run and is perceived by the public....I don't care what the media says about me. I really don't. I never have. I try to do what I think is right and fair...In this case, in the beginning, you were given every privilege that could be given to you in regards to travel, totally unrestricted initially. (Later) I felt you were abusing the privilege, and I modified the bond....If it was not Kwame Kilpatrick sitting in that seat, if it was John Six-Pack sitting in the seat, what would I do? That answers something. So I go back to my original, 'Keep it simple.'...That's what I have to do ... the court is revoking your bond, that all travel be suspended, and two, that you to be remanded to Wayne County Jail."
Good for him. Time for Mayor Kilpatrick, meanwhile, to resign.
"I don't in any way claim to have a good understanding of what your responsibilities are and what you do," he said. "I do understand you have to be under a tremendous amount of pressure and how that can affect you. But I have to look at how the system is run and is perceived by the public....I don't care what the media says about me. I really don't. I never have. I try to do what I think is right and fair...In this case, in the beginning, you were given every privilege that could be given to you in regards to travel, totally unrestricted initially. (Later) I felt you were abusing the privilege, and I modified the bond....If it was not Kwame Kilpatrick sitting in that seat, if it was John Six-Pack sitting in the seat, what would I do? That answers something. So I go back to my original, 'Keep it simple.'...That's what I have to do ... the court is revoking your bond, that all travel be suspended, and two, that you to be remanded to Wayne County Jail."
Good for him. Time for Mayor Kilpatrick, meanwhile, to resign.
More celebrities doing some good dept
This time we salute Jennifer Aniston:
"Us Weekly reports that Aniston on July 31 filmed a PSA for St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. The magazine reports that the actress cheered up kids on set, and smiled for pictures and signed autographs, even “after having sat through more than 40 takes and a shoot that went an hour longer than expected.”
Good for you.
Now, about your relationship with that goofy John Mayer...you're thinking what, again???
"Us Weekly reports that Aniston on July 31 filmed a PSA for St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. The magazine reports that the actress cheered up kids on set, and smiled for pictures and signed autographs, even “after having sat through more than 40 takes and a shoot that went an hour longer than expected.”
Good for you.
Now, about your relationship with that goofy John Mayer...you're thinking what, again???
Laugh of the day
The Chinese government, responding to President Bush's speech of yesterday:
"The Chinese government puts people first, and is dedicated to maintaining and promoting its citizens basic rights and freedom," Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said in response to Bush's speech. "Chinese citizens have freedom of religion. These are indisputable facts." He said China advocates discussions on differing views on human rights and religions on "a basis of mutual respect and equality," then indicated it didn't see Bush's criticism in that light. "We firmly oppose any words or acts that interfere in other countries' internal affairs, using human rights and religion and other issues," Qin said."
1] China's human rights record, available, to all, speaks volumes. 2] Furthermore, China's well-documented record of spying on the U.S. government and military makes a mockery of the notion that China opposes "interfering" in others' affairs.
By the way, we discussed Bush's speech of yesterday here.
"The Chinese government puts people first, and is dedicated to maintaining and promoting its citizens basic rights and freedom," Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said in response to Bush's speech. "Chinese citizens have freedom of religion. These are indisputable facts." He said China advocates discussions on differing views on human rights and religions on "a basis of mutual respect and equality," then indicated it didn't see Bush's criticism in that light. "We firmly oppose any words or acts that interfere in other countries' internal affairs, using human rights and religion and other issues," Qin said."
1] China's human rights record, available, to all, speaks volumes. 2] Furthermore, China's well-documented record of spying on the U.S. government and military makes a mockery of the notion that China opposes "interfering" in others' affairs.
By the way, we discussed Bush's speech of yesterday here.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Hollywood celebrities doing some good dept
By all accounts, Hollywood celeb Lauren Conrad's TV "reality" show, The Hills, is about as stupid and vacuous as these shows can get. (I've never seen it, but this coming season I may have to watch a couple of episodes, just for laughs).
But today it is reported that Miss Conrad has done a very good thing:
"....Conrad is being hailed by a young leukemia patient for her generosity at the Teen Choice Awards. Conrad met 13-year-old Pat Pedraja at the Do Something Awards the night before Teen Choice when she presented him with a $10,000 check for his work recruiting bone-marrow donors. Conrad surprised Pedraja the next day when she not only dedicated her Teen Choice Award to him, but also gave him her surfboard along with an iPod Touch loaded with all her favorite music. "Lauren didn't have to tell me that I was amazing," Pedraja writes in a post on the Do Something website. "She didn't have to go out of her way to give me a present and she'd have to dedicate her award to me, but SHE DID!" Pedraja went on, "I want to tell everyone that Lauren Conrad is an exceptional person, more than a reality TV star or fashion designer, but a person that I am proud to look up to."
Good for her.
But today it is reported that Miss Conrad has done a very good thing:
"....Conrad is being hailed by a young leukemia patient for her generosity at the Teen Choice Awards. Conrad met 13-year-old Pat Pedraja at the Do Something Awards the night before Teen Choice when she presented him with a $10,000 check for his work recruiting bone-marrow donors. Conrad surprised Pedraja the next day when she not only dedicated her Teen Choice Award to him, but also gave him her surfboard along with an iPod Touch loaded with all her favorite music. "Lauren didn't have to tell me that I was amazing," Pedraja writes in a post on the Do Something website. "She didn't have to go out of her way to give me a present and she'd have to dedicate her award to me, but SHE DID!" Pedraja went on, "I want to tell everyone that Lauren Conrad is an exceptional person, more than a reality TV star or fashion designer, but a person that I am proud to look up to."
Good for her.
Barack Obama and campaign finance
Take note of this story today--and remember the context: Barack Obama claims to be in favor of campaign finance reform. Indeed, in 2007 he said he'd go with public financing of his campaign. But he reneged on that. And now look what his campaign is doing:
"In an effort to cast himself as independent of the influence of money on politics, Senator Barack Obama often highlights the campaign contributions of $200 or less that have amounted to fully half of the $340 million he has collected so far. But records show that one-third of his record-breaking haul has come from donations of $1,000 or more: a total of $112 million, more than Senator John McCain, Mr. Obama’s Republican rival, or Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, his opponent in the Democratic primaries, raised in contributions of that size. Behind those larger donations is a phalanx of more than 500 Obama “bundlers,” fund-raisers who have each collected contributions totaling $50,000 or more. Many of the bundlers come from industries with critical interests in Washington. Nearly three dozen of the bundlers have raised more than $500,000 each, including more than a half-dozen who have passed the $1 million mark and one or two who have exceeded $2 million, according to interviews with fund-raisers."
So what do Obama's big fund-raisers say about this? Are they glad about the access they may have bought? From the article:
"His fund-raisers invariably say their support for him is not rooted in any kind of promise of access, but rather their belief in him. “This is about Barack Obama and changing the direction of our country,” said Jonathan B. Perdue, a business consultant in Mill Valley, Calif., who has raised more than $250,000 for Mr. Obama’s campaign."
Hah! That's hilarious. Why? Because that's exactly what corporation heads and other big money men say when it comes to their donations...to ANY political candidate or cause. And what do Obama folks say about that? They laugh. They claim such statements aren't to be believed.
But I imagine they'd claim such statements from their own donors ARE to be believed.
Fundamental: call them on this obvious inconsistency and departure from principle.
"In an effort to cast himself as independent of the influence of money on politics, Senator Barack Obama often highlights the campaign contributions of $200 or less that have amounted to fully half of the $340 million he has collected so far. But records show that one-third of his record-breaking haul has come from donations of $1,000 or more: a total of $112 million, more than Senator John McCain, Mr. Obama’s Republican rival, or Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, his opponent in the Democratic primaries, raised in contributions of that size. Behind those larger donations is a phalanx of more than 500 Obama “bundlers,” fund-raisers who have each collected contributions totaling $50,000 or more. Many of the bundlers come from industries with critical interests in Washington. Nearly three dozen of the bundlers have raised more than $500,000 each, including more than a half-dozen who have passed the $1 million mark and one or two who have exceeded $2 million, according to interviews with fund-raisers."
So what do Obama's big fund-raisers say about this? Are they glad about the access they may have bought? From the article:
"His fund-raisers invariably say their support for him is not rooted in any kind of promise of access, but rather their belief in him. “This is about Barack Obama and changing the direction of our country,” said Jonathan B. Perdue, a business consultant in Mill Valley, Calif., who has raised more than $250,000 for Mr. Obama’s campaign."
Hah! That's hilarious. Why? Because that's exactly what corporation heads and other big money men say when it comes to their donations...to ANY political candidate or cause. And what do Obama folks say about that? They laugh. They claim such statements aren't to be believed.
But I imagine they'd claim such statements from their own donors ARE to be believed.
Fundamental: call them on this obvious inconsistency and departure from principle.
Why we should support President Bush's visit to China
Some have said, over the past few months, that his visit to China for the opening of the Olympic Games was not a good idea, that perhaps he should have boycotted the Games in order to show opposition to China's dictatorship.
But as for me, I didn't think China's conduct rose to the level of, say, a Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (which triggered our last boycott, in 1980, of the Moscow Games). Boycotts must be used carefully; we shouldn't use sports boycotts against everything in other nations with which we disagree (if we did, we might not ever send our athletes anywhere). And in any case, President Bush was still free to speak out against Chinese abuses of human rights--which he has done, today:
"With all eyes on Beijing, President Bush bluntly told China that America stands in "firm opposition" to the way the communist government represses its own people, a rebuke delivered from the heart of Asia on the cusp of the Olympic Games. Bush balanced his chiding with praise for China's market reforms and hope that it will embrace freedom, reflecting the delicate balance that Bush seeks to strike with the potent U.S. rival. "We speak out for a free press, freedom of assembly, and labor rights not to antagonize China's leaders, but because trusting its people with greater freedom is the only way for China to develop its full potential," Bush said in perhaps his last major Asia address. "And we press for openness and justice not to impose our beliefs, but to allow the Chinese people to express theirs," the president said."
Well said.
But as for me, I didn't think China's conduct rose to the level of, say, a Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (which triggered our last boycott, in 1980, of the Moscow Games). Boycotts must be used carefully; we shouldn't use sports boycotts against everything in other nations with which we disagree (if we did, we might not ever send our athletes anywhere). And in any case, President Bush was still free to speak out against Chinese abuses of human rights--which he has done, today:
"With all eyes on Beijing, President Bush bluntly told China that America stands in "firm opposition" to the way the communist government represses its own people, a rebuke delivered from the heart of Asia on the cusp of the Olympic Games. Bush balanced his chiding with praise for China's market reforms and hope that it will embrace freedom, reflecting the delicate balance that Bush seeks to strike with the potent U.S. rival. "We speak out for a free press, freedom of assembly, and labor rights not to antagonize China's leaders, but because trusting its people with greater freedom is the only way for China to develop its full potential," Bush said in perhaps his last major Asia address. "And we press for openness and justice not to impose our beliefs, but to allow the Chinese people to express theirs," the president said."
Well said.
At the sports desk: is the Packers front office nuts?
In my view yes, given the way they're absolutely driving Brett Favre away from their team.
But then, maybe the whole team has gone batty--ESPN today reports that there's a big sigh of relief among the team and coaches today, now that they know Favre will be leaving.
Wow. Once again--yes, Favre waffled over his retirement. Yes, this has dragged on for a long time. Yes, I'm sure Favre said some things to Green Bay management that they didn't like, just as reports over the past couple days suggest that Packers' brass said and did things that Favre didn't like. Still: does anyone doubt that the Packers would be a better team this year with Favre than without him? How in the heck can it be so hard for Packers management to decide to have an open competition for the QB position? Aaron Rodgers would still have had a chance to win the starting job fair and square. Favre in his statements has given every indication that he would have accepted such an arrangement.
But no. And you know what? The whole thing makes me sad. It shouldn't. I grew up (and still am) a big Detroit Lions fan, being a native of Michigan. I always disliked the Pack; I wanted the Lions to beat 'em. No Favre gives the Lions a better chance. Right? But still...I also love the NFL, and the game...and Brett Favre to me IS the Green Bay Packers. He should end his career with them, just as Joe DiMaggio ended his career with the Yankees and Bill Russell ended his career with the Celtics. That's the way it should have been. It was right. This Favre "divorce" (as many media types are calling it) just isn't right. Favre won't look right in a Tampa Bay Bucs uniform. Will he?
What's going on here? What are the Packers doing? They're messing with karma here. And it's going to come back to bite them.
But then, maybe the whole team has gone batty--ESPN today reports that there's a big sigh of relief among the team and coaches today, now that they know Favre will be leaving.
Wow. Once again--yes, Favre waffled over his retirement. Yes, this has dragged on for a long time. Yes, I'm sure Favre said some things to Green Bay management that they didn't like, just as reports over the past couple days suggest that Packers' brass said and did things that Favre didn't like. Still: does anyone doubt that the Packers would be a better team this year with Favre than without him? How in the heck can it be so hard for Packers management to decide to have an open competition for the QB position? Aaron Rodgers would still have had a chance to win the starting job fair and square. Favre in his statements has given every indication that he would have accepted such an arrangement.
But no. And you know what? The whole thing makes me sad. It shouldn't. I grew up (and still am) a big Detroit Lions fan, being a native of Michigan. I always disliked the Pack; I wanted the Lions to beat 'em. No Favre gives the Lions a better chance. Right? But still...I also love the NFL, and the game...and Brett Favre to me IS the Green Bay Packers. He should end his career with them, just as Joe DiMaggio ended his career with the Yankees and Bill Russell ended his career with the Celtics. That's the way it should have been. It was right. This Favre "divorce" (as many media types are calling it) just isn't right. Favre won't look right in a Tampa Bay Bucs uniform. Will he?
What's going on here? What are the Packers doing? They're messing with karma here. And it's going to come back to bite them.
At tthe sports desk II: take note, Notre Dame hoops fans...
...and as I am one of them, a big one, I wanted to pass this nugget along concerning the upcoming basketball season:
"As expected, Notre Dame drew a familiar foe in the first round of the 2008 EA Sports Maui Invitational. The Irish open play Nov. 24 at the Lahaina Civic Center against Indiana, a team Notre Dame has faced 67 times in school history. It will be the first game between the teams since a 55-45 Irish victory in Bloomington on Dec. 8, 2004. ESPN2 will televise the game, which tips at 5:30 p.m. South Bend time (12:30 p.m. in Maui)."
That'll be must-see TV, given how long it's been since ND and Indiana have played each other in basketball. It was a great rivalry for a long time. It'll also be fascinating to see how IU looks, given their new coach, Tom Crean, all of their off-the-court troubles in the past year, all the players the Hoosiers lost off of last year's team...
And by the way, never mind the Irish football team--this year look for the ND hoops team to shine. Don't be surprised if they're ranked in the top 10 to start the season.
Don't look past them, Irish; when you play IU, you always have to "tend to your knittin'", as the legendary Keith Jackson once said...
"As expected, Notre Dame drew a familiar foe in the first round of the 2008 EA Sports Maui Invitational. The Irish open play Nov. 24 at the Lahaina Civic Center against Indiana, a team Notre Dame has faced 67 times in school history. It will be the first game between the teams since a 55-45 Irish victory in Bloomington on Dec. 8, 2004. ESPN2 will televise the game, which tips at 5:30 p.m. South Bend time (12:30 p.m. in Maui)."
That'll be must-see TV, given how long it's been since ND and Indiana have played each other in basketball. It was a great rivalry for a long time. It'll also be fascinating to see how IU looks, given their new coach, Tom Crean, all of their off-the-court troubles in the past year, all the players the Hoosiers lost off of last year's team...
And by the way, never mind the Irish football team--this year look for the ND hoops team to shine. Don't be surprised if they're ranked in the top 10 to start the season.
Don't look past them, Irish; when you play IU, you always have to "tend to your knittin'", as the legendary Keith Jackson once said...
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Lousy prediction
The New York Times' chic, internationalist, center-left columnist Roger Cohen was rhapsodizing a few weeks ago on Barack Obama, and how the adulation the senator received from many Europeans couldn't possibly hurt him politically:
"Four years ago, with post 9/11 nationalist sentiment still running high, John Kerry had to hide the fact he spoke French and had French relatives. Republicans liked to mock the then Democratic candidate by suggesting he began rallies with a “Bonjour.” That anti-Gallic, freedom-fries fever has run its course. It’s exhausted, as are many of the jingoistic elements of the conservative, Republican wave that has been the dominant force in U.S. politics since Nixon....What I think this means for Obama is that French or European adulation for him is no longer a political problem. It cannot be associated by the likes of Karl Rove with wimpy Euro appeasement and “socialism.” If anything, Americans are looking to European health care and environmental measures as possible models."
Really? I guess that explains Obama's rather dizzying drop in the presidential polls ever since he went to Europe!
We'll leave Cohen's dismissal of conservative concerns about Europeans and their views as "jingoistic" for another time (except to say that when Americans hold a foreign policy view that the liberal elites do not like, they always trot out the word "jingoistic." Guess it makes them feel better.)
"Four years ago, with post 9/11 nationalist sentiment still running high, John Kerry had to hide the fact he spoke French and had French relatives. Republicans liked to mock the then Democratic candidate by suggesting he began rallies with a “Bonjour.” That anti-Gallic, freedom-fries fever has run its course. It’s exhausted, as are many of the jingoistic elements of the conservative, Republican wave that has been the dominant force in U.S. politics since Nixon....What I think this means for Obama is that French or European adulation for him is no longer a political problem. It cannot be associated by the likes of Karl Rove with wimpy Euro appeasement and “socialism.” If anything, Americans are looking to European health care and environmental measures as possible models."
Really? I guess that explains Obama's rather dizzying drop in the presidential polls ever since he went to Europe!
We'll leave Cohen's dismissal of conservative concerns about Europeans and their views as "jingoistic" for another time (except to say that when Americans hold a foreign policy view that the liberal elites do not like, they always trot out the word "jingoistic." Guess it makes them feel better.)
The Second Coming approaches...
...or so some progressives would seem to think, given their gushing concerning Barack Obama.
Take for example liberal television/movie director and producer Rob Reiner, talking recently about how he thinks an Obama presidency would change things:
There'd be love and respect, but I think you'd have it even bigger than Clinton. With someone like Obama, I think the whole country, the whole world will coalesce. Every election is about change, and change takes a long time because there are big issues that can't be changed overnight. But the one thing that will change dramatically is how we're viewed around the world. Once Obama is in there, the world will view us in an entirely different light. And that, to me, is a good thing...
Did you get that? The "whole word will coalesce"! All because Obama was elected!!
Bosnian!! Serbian!! Palestinian!! Israeli!!! All those differences, I guess, will just magically disappear!!!!
Wow. Will Obamamaniacs ever get a grip?
Take for example liberal television/movie director and producer Rob Reiner, talking recently about how he thinks an Obama presidency would change things:
There'd be love and respect, but I think you'd have it even bigger than Clinton. With someone like Obama, I think the whole country, the whole world will coalesce. Every election is about change, and change takes a long time because there are big issues that can't be changed overnight. But the one thing that will change dramatically is how we're viewed around the world. Once Obama is in there, the world will view us in an entirely different light. And that, to me, is a good thing...
Did you get that? The "whole word will coalesce"! All because Obama was elected!!
Bosnian!! Serbian!! Palestinian!! Israeli!!! All those differences, I guess, will just magically disappear!!!!
Wow. Will Obamamaniacs ever get a grip?
Rush: 20 years on the air
Rush Limbaugh's radio show turned 20 last week.
National Review Online celebrates.
Rush is big everywhere. Get this:
"People all over, and of many types, listen to him and depend on him. I know a classical musician — get this — who listens to him on podcast in the Paris Metro. How do you like that?"
Indeed. And go to NRO's main page here...
...and scroll down towards the bottom of the page to see more good stuff on Mr. Limbaugh.
Perhaps he is indeed once again the "leader of the [conservative] opposition."
It's interesting--perhaps, looking back on it, some 40 years ago, especially after Barry Goldwater's defeat and before Ronald Reagan had quite hit the big time in politics, Bill Buckley and NR were the leaders of the opposition. Back then, the editor of a magazine, who occasionally appeared on TV, could be that type of leader. But now, in today's over-the-air/online age, maybe the movement really needed, and still needs, a Limbaugh--and note that not only does his empire reach 20 million per week via talk radio, but he also has an excellent website, too.
Keep on catching the Rush...to excellence.
National Review Online celebrates.
Rush is big everywhere. Get this:
"People all over, and of many types, listen to him and depend on him. I know a classical musician — get this — who listens to him on podcast in the Paris Metro. How do you like that?"
Indeed. And go to NRO's main page here...
...and scroll down towards the bottom of the page to see more good stuff on Mr. Limbaugh.
Perhaps he is indeed once again the "leader of the [conservative] opposition."
It's interesting--perhaps, looking back on it, some 40 years ago, especially after Barry Goldwater's defeat and before Ronald Reagan had quite hit the big time in politics, Bill Buckley and NR were the leaders of the opposition. Back then, the editor of a magazine, who occasionally appeared on TV, could be that type of leader. But now, in today's over-the-air/online age, maybe the movement really needed, and still needs, a Limbaugh--and note that not only does his empire reach 20 million per week via talk radio, but he also has an excellent website, too.
Keep on catching the Rush...to excellence.
Today's good news from Iraq
Is there even a war going on there anymore?
This writer for the Wall Street Journal argues, persuasively, no.
Note especially this:
Last month, American combat deaths in Iraq were: 5.
Compare to 1971 in Vietnam, when American involvement there was seriously winding down. Combat deaths per month then were: 115.
Note also that Francis Fukuyama, noted political writer and analyst, agrees that the war is pretty much done. He had said not long ago that there was no wway it would be by now.
This writer for the Wall Street Journal argues, persuasively, no.
Note especially this:
Last month, American combat deaths in Iraq were: 5.
Compare to 1971 in Vietnam, when American involvement there was seriously winding down. Combat deaths per month then were: 115.
Note also that Francis Fukuyama, noted political writer and analyst, agrees that the war is pretty much done. He had said not long ago that there was no wway it would be by now.
Democratic Party unity watch
Remember how earlier this summer, Democratic Party leaders kept saying, over and over again, that despite the fierce battle between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in the primaries, the party would unify, unify, unify, there was no question about it, etc etc etc?
In fact, just today we read Democratic Representative Barney Frank say:
"There does not seem to me to be any realistic chance that any of the strong Clinton supporters are going to hold back by the time the election comes," Frank said."
Well. Guess Bill Clinton didn't get the memo. And as we noted earlier this summer, parties which are truly unified don't have to keep saying how unified they are. And now there's more evidence of a lack of unity:
Bill Clinton in that ABC News interview of yesterday refused to say that Barack Obama was ready to be president.
The Clintons don't take losing very well.
In fact, just today we read Democratic Representative Barney Frank say:
"There does not seem to me to be any realistic chance that any of the strong Clinton supporters are going to hold back by the time the election comes," Frank said."
Well. Guess Bill Clinton didn't get the memo. And as we noted earlier this summer, parties which are truly unified don't have to keep saying how unified they are. And now there's more evidence of a lack of unity:
Bill Clinton in that ABC News interview of yesterday refused to say that Barack Obama was ready to be president.
The Clintons don't take losing very well.
Good idea
John McCain pushes today for more usage of nuclear power:
"John McCain's visit to a nuclear power plant, the first in recent history by a presidential candidate, highlights the promise and peril of a technology that is a key component of his sweeping plan to help the country overcome its energy crisis. The Fermi II nuclear plant near Monroe [Michigan], named for the first physicist to split the atom, is home to both an operating power plant and another reactor that had a partial meltdown in the 1960s. It was decommissioned in 1972, while its successor continues to operate. McCain, who is set to visit the plant Tuesday, is placing great stock in modern-day nuclear technology by calling for the construction of 45 nuclear power plants by 2030. The Republican argues that its carbon-free power generation is necessary to reduce the country's reliance on oil imports and part of any realistic energy program. And he says exposing its expanded use, as Democratic rival Barack Obama has suggested, shows naivete. "I am going to lead our nation to energy independence and I'm going to do it with a realistic and comprehensive 'all-of-the-above' approach that uses every resource available to finally solve this crisis," the Arizona senator said Monday."
It does appear that on this issue, he's listening to conservatives. That's good. Now, if only he can work on his immigration position...
UPDATE: By the way, how do we know that offshore drilling and policies to increase our energy supply are popular? Simple--we look at what Democrats, who can read polls as well as anyone else, are saying and doing, both publicly and privately. For example, see what The Politico is reporting today:
"California Democrat Nancy Pelosi may be trying to save the planet — but the rank and file in her party increasingly are just trying to save their political hides when it comes to gas prices as Republicans apply more and more rhetorical muscle. But what looks like intraparty tension on the surface is part of an intentional strategy in which Pelosi takes the heat on energy policy, while behind the scenes she’s encouraging vulnerable Democrats to express their independence if it helps them politically, according to Democratic aides on and off Capitol Hill."
Conservatives and Republicans must keep pounding away on this.
"John McCain's visit to a nuclear power plant, the first in recent history by a presidential candidate, highlights the promise and peril of a technology that is a key component of his sweeping plan to help the country overcome its energy crisis. The Fermi II nuclear plant near Monroe [Michigan], named for the first physicist to split the atom, is home to both an operating power plant and another reactor that had a partial meltdown in the 1960s. It was decommissioned in 1972, while its successor continues to operate. McCain, who is set to visit the plant Tuesday, is placing great stock in modern-day nuclear technology by calling for the construction of 45 nuclear power plants by 2030. The Republican argues that its carbon-free power generation is necessary to reduce the country's reliance on oil imports and part of any realistic energy program. And he says exposing its expanded use, as Democratic rival Barack Obama has suggested, shows naivete. "I am going to lead our nation to energy independence and I'm going to do it with a realistic and comprehensive 'all-of-the-above' approach that uses every resource available to finally solve this crisis," the Arizona senator said Monday."
It does appear that on this issue, he's listening to conservatives. That's good. Now, if only he can work on his immigration position...
UPDATE: By the way, how do we know that offshore drilling and policies to increase our energy supply are popular? Simple--we look at what Democrats, who can read polls as well as anyone else, are saying and doing, both publicly and privately. For example, see what The Politico is reporting today:
"California Democrat Nancy Pelosi may be trying to save the planet — but the rank and file in her party increasingly are just trying to save their political hides when it comes to gas prices as Republicans apply more and more rhetorical muscle. But what looks like intraparty tension on the surface is part of an intentional strategy in which Pelosi takes the heat on energy policy, while behind the scenes she’s encouraging vulnerable Democrats to express their independence if it helps them politically, according to Democratic aides on and off Capitol Hill."
Conservatives and Republicans must keep pounding away on this.
Monday, August 4, 2008
Still trying to freeze them out
Liberal publishing houses and mainstream news media outlets do it, that is--to conservative books, reports City Journal:
"...striking is the example of Syracuse professor Arthur C. Brooks’s Who Really Cares?, which showed that conservatives give a good deal more to charity than liberals do. With a surge of support from conservative media, including prized appearances on Rush Limbaugh’s and Bill O’Reilly’s shows, the book took off. Yet it was almost impossible to find a liberal who knew it existed, since it went unreviewed and unremarked upon by the New York Times and the Washington Post and was never covered on any network news program or NPR. “If we could have had a generalized debate in the culture—if CNN had been willing to cover the subject the way FOX did—the impact could have been so much greater,” says Brooks. “FOX was all over this like a cheap suit. But FOX is behind a firewall.” Meanwhile, Mark Steyn’s best-selling, enormously controversial America Alone similarly went unreviewed by the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Washington Post."
Read the whole thing. Very enlightening.
But don't be surprised. Historically speaking, this has been the case for decades. When I wrote my biography of National Review senior editor Frank Meyer (still available here, by the way!), a lot of my research had to do with the history of National Review magazine. And it was astonishing to see how, throughout much of NR's first ten years of existence, despite it being the flagship organ of modern American conservatism, it was simply and studiously ignored by most media and intellectual outlets back then (which were of course mainly run by liberals). It's the same thing at work here. On the other hand, as the article also points out, with the advent of Rush Limbaugh and other outlets, conservative thinking and writing cannot be suppressed...
"...striking is the example of Syracuse professor Arthur C. Brooks’s Who Really Cares?, which showed that conservatives give a good deal more to charity than liberals do. With a surge of support from conservative media, including prized appearances on Rush Limbaugh’s and Bill O’Reilly’s shows, the book took off. Yet it was almost impossible to find a liberal who knew it existed, since it went unreviewed and unremarked upon by the New York Times and the Washington Post and was never covered on any network news program or NPR. “If we could have had a generalized debate in the culture—if CNN had been willing to cover the subject the way FOX did—the impact could have been so much greater,” says Brooks. “FOX was all over this like a cheap suit. But FOX is behind a firewall.” Meanwhile, Mark Steyn’s best-selling, enormously controversial America Alone similarly went unreviewed by the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Washington Post."
Read the whole thing. Very enlightening.
But don't be surprised. Historically speaking, this has been the case for decades. When I wrote my biography of National Review senior editor Frank Meyer (still available here, by the way!), a lot of my research had to do with the history of National Review magazine. And it was astonishing to see how, throughout much of NR's first ten years of existence, despite it being the flagship organ of modern American conservatism, it was simply and studiously ignored by most media and intellectual outlets back then (which were of course mainly run by liberals). It's the same thing at work here. On the other hand, as the article also points out, with the advent of Rush Limbaugh and other outlets, conservative thinking and writing cannot be suppressed...
Offshore oil drilling--a change we can believe in
Both John McCain's and Republicans' in general focus recently on reducing fuel prices by opening up some areas offshore for oil drilling is helping, and will continue to help, the GOP this election year, argues Peter Brown today; and it will do so because it has the potential to resonate with voters in an interesting way:
"....$4 gasoline has forced voters to re-evaluate their view that more drilling for oil and natural gas in previously protected areas offshore or in Alaska is not worth potential environmental risks. They’ve shed that notion along with their previous reluctance to support expansion of nuclear power – long unpopular due to safety concerns — to produce electricity....Not only do voters agree with Sen. McCain about the need for drilling but also the issue offers an opportunity to make him the candidate of change while branding Sen. Obama as the captive of the status quo by catering to environmentalists over the national interest. If Sen. McCain can successfully make that case to the American people it might undercut the central theme of Sen. Obama’s campaign: that he is the candidate of the future who will make real change in Americans’ lives....what has changed is that high energy prices have apparently driven home the argument that the pro-drilling and nuclear power folks have been making for years: That renewable, alternative energy sources are decades from being able to significantly cut America’s need for fossil fuels. And the only way to bring down the high prices and avoid sending billions of dollars daily overseas is to increase domestic production of oil and natural gas."
And, even more importantly--McCain and Republicans are right on this issue.
"....$4 gasoline has forced voters to re-evaluate their view that more drilling for oil and natural gas in previously protected areas offshore or in Alaska is not worth potential environmental risks. They’ve shed that notion along with their previous reluctance to support expansion of nuclear power – long unpopular due to safety concerns — to produce electricity....Not only do voters agree with Sen. McCain about the need for drilling but also the issue offers an opportunity to make him the candidate of change while branding Sen. Obama as the captive of the status quo by catering to environmentalists over the national interest. If Sen. McCain can successfully make that case to the American people it might undercut the central theme of Sen. Obama’s campaign: that he is the candidate of the future who will make real change in Americans’ lives....what has changed is that high energy prices have apparently driven home the argument that the pro-drilling and nuclear power folks have been making for years: That renewable, alternative energy sources are decades from being able to significantly cut America’s need for fossil fuels. And the only way to bring down the high prices and avoid sending billions of dollars daily overseas is to increase domestic production of oil and natural gas."
And, even more importantly--McCain and Republicans are right on this issue.
Nancy Pelosi's leavin' on a jet plane...
...on a long trip to promote her book:
"Today, she’ll be in Boston MA. Tomorrow, she travels to Philadelphia. On Wednesday, she’ll be in Miami and the next day she’ll be in Michigan."
That's going to use up a heck of a lot of jet fuel, and leave a big carbon footprint.
And remember, this is the woman who, as House Speaker, won't even allow a vote on offshore oil drilling. House Republicans are right to keep pounding on this issue...
"Today, she’ll be in Boston MA. Tomorrow, she travels to Philadelphia. On Wednesday, she’ll be in Miami and the next day she’ll be in Michigan."
That's going to use up a heck of a lot of jet fuel, and leave a big carbon footprint.
And remember, this is the woman who, as House Speaker, won't even allow a vote on offshore oil drilling. House Republicans are right to keep pounding on this issue...
An act of domestic terrorism
It occurred yesterday in California, apparently perpetrated by animal rights zealots:
"The police and federal authorities are investigating firebombings at the homes of two researchers at the University of California, Santa Cruz. The attacks, which the university described as “antiscience violence,” occurred nearly simultaneously before dawn on Saturday, just days after the police in Santa Cruz discovered pamphlets in a coffee shop warning of attacks against “animal abusers everywhere.” The pamphlets included the names, addresses and other personal information of several researchers at the university, according to a news release put out on Friday by the university....The university described the attacks as the latest in a series of threats and provocations from those opposed to “biomedical research using animals,” including a February incident in which several masked intruders entered a researcher’s home. After a confrontation, the intruders fled. That incident followed harassing phone calls and vandalism of researchers’ homes, the university said."
Liberal acquaintances of mine, when domestic terrorism comes up, always want to point to anti-abortion violence. But lately, animal-rights extremists seem to be moving front and center when it comes to terror here at home. I hope the authorities are paying attention.
"The police and federal authorities are investigating firebombings at the homes of two researchers at the University of California, Santa Cruz. The attacks, which the university described as “antiscience violence,” occurred nearly simultaneously before dawn on Saturday, just days after the police in Santa Cruz discovered pamphlets in a coffee shop warning of attacks against “animal abusers everywhere.” The pamphlets included the names, addresses and other personal information of several researchers at the university, according to a news release put out on Friday by the university....The university described the attacks as the latest in a series of threats and provocations from those opposed to “biomedical research using animals,” including a February incident in which several masked intruders entered a researcher’s home. After a confrontation, the intruders fled. That incident followed harassing phone calls and vandalism of researchers’ homes, the university said."
Liberal acquaintances of mine, when domestic terrorism comes up, always want to point to anti-abortion violence. But lately, animal-rights extremists seem to be moving front and center when it comes to terror here at home. I hope the authorities are paying attention.
At the sports desk: Favre returns to a tentative Packer embrace
So, sure enough, Brett Favre returns to Green Bay:
"Quarterback Brett Favre rejoined the Green Bay Packers yesterday, ending his five-month retirement with plans to play this season and, apparently, a pledge from the team that he'll be given a chance to win back his starting job from would-be successor Aaron Rodgers."
Finally! My only questions: 1] What in the heck took the Packers so long? Favre gives them the best chance to win. Or, at least, I've gotta believe that's what this open competition will prove.
2] Why on earth did the Packers dig themselves such a hole, claiming they didn't want Favre? They've only made themselves look ridiculous. 3] How will this affect the Packer locker room? Don't get me wrong--there won't be division in there over Brett. The players want to win, and they know Favre gives them the best shot. They'll embrace him. But won't they have lost respect for the Packers' front office??? I sure have. 4] How will Aaron Rodgers handle all this? It will be fascinating to see how he does. I feel a little bit sorry for him. He never asked to be put in this position.
You think they'll be a few eyes watching Green Bay's first pre-season game???
"Quarterback Brett Favre rejoined the Green Bay Packers yesterday, ending his five-month retirement with plans to play this season and, apparently, a pledge from the team that he'll be given a chance to win back his starting job from would-be successor Aaron Rodgers."
Finally! My only questions: 1] What in the heck took the Packers so long? Favre gives them the best chance to win. Or, at least, I've gotta believe that's what this open competition will prove.
2] Why on earth did the Packers dig themselves such a hole, claiming they didn't want Favre? They've only made themselves look ridiculous. 3] How will this affect the Packer locker room? Don't get me wrong--there won't be division in there over Brett. The players want to win, and they know Favre gives them the best shot. They'll embrace him. But won't they have lost respect for the Packers' front office??? I sure have. 4] How will Aaron Rodgers handle all this? It will be fascinating to see how he does. I feel a little bit sorry for him. He never asked to be put in this position.
You think they'll be a few eyes watching Green Bay's first pre-season game???
Alexander Solzhenitsyn, RIP
He was a great defender of freedom and liberty, and spoke out courageously against totalitarianism. He has died, at the age of 89.
Mr. Solzhenitsyn never knew it, but he was a part of my political education. I can still remember, in my sophomore year of high school, reading his book One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. The book was so simple--it told of one day in the life of a prisoner in a Soviet concentration camp. Yet it was so stark, and told so well of the evils of Stalinism. It led me to read other books on the subject, as I'm Solzhenitsyn led millions of others to do with all of his books. RIP, o eloquent one.
Mr. Solzhenitsyn never knew it, but he was a part of my political education. I can still remember, in my sophomore year of high school, reading his book One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. The book was so simple--it told of one day in the life of a prisoner in a Soviet concentration camp. Yet it was so stark, and told so well of the evils of Stalinism. It led me to read other books on the subject, as I'm Solzhenitsyn led millions of others to do with all of his books. RIP, o eloquent one.
The problems with raising the federal minimum wage...
...can be felt in the smallest towns and the smallest fast-food joints:
"The new federal minimum wage is being felt by some Indiana workers, who are cashing slightly bigger paychecks since the 70-cent per hour increase took effect. Sarah Alden, 16, and Ashley Heiney, 14, said the wage hike had shown up in their paychecks at Frazier's Dairy Maid, where they're working part-time serving up ice cream treats.....The shop's owner, Brian Frazier, said the wage increase was clearly a win for workers, but he expects it will lead to higher prices, and not just for Frazier's popular turtle sundaes. He also expects that big retailers will be reacting to higher supply costs. "We can't take the full brunt of the increase," Frazier said. "It's kind of getting to the point where everything keeps going up and up and up."
Fundamental: one of the problems with government intervention is that it leads to unexpected (and often negative) consequences elsewhere in the economy, consequences that the do-gooders never anticipate. If you've never done so, read some of the works of conservative/libertarian author Friedrich von Hayek--this is one of the points he began driving home as early as the 1940s.
"The new federal minimum wage is being felt by some Indiana workers, who are cashing slightly bigger paychecks since the 70-cent per hour increase took effect. Sarah Alden, 16, and Ashley Heiney, 14, said the wage hike had shown up in their paychecks at Frazier's Dairy Maid, where they're working part-time serving up ice cream treats.....The shop's owner, Brian Frazier, said the wage increase was clearly a win for workers, but he expects it will lead to higher prices, and not just for Frazier's popular turtle sundaes. He also expects that big retailers will be reacting to higher supply costs. "We can't take the full brunt of the increase," Frazier said. "It's kind of getting to the point where everything keeps going up and up and up."
Fundamental: one of the problems with government intervention is that it leads to unexpected (and often negative) consequences elsewhere in the economy, consequences that the do-gooders never anticipate. If you've never done so, read some of the works of conservative/libertarian author Friedrich von Hayek--this is one of the points he began driving home as early as the 1940s.
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Obama-Republicans? (contd)
Are there really some Republicans favoring Barack Obama?
Well, yes, as the NY Times recently reported.
But WHY do they back Obama? Does their reasoning make any sense?
Well, let's ask one GOPer for Obama quoted in the link above, Susan Eisenhower.
Why are you for Obama?
“Obama seems like a leader who can deal with challenges that are highly complex, nuanced and interconnected,” Ms. Eisenhower said, “and he has the language and communication skills and temperament to engage a set of world leaders who are his generation.”
Because he's young. Because you think he sounds good. But not one reference to a specific policy position actually held by Senator Obama. Great thinking there, Ms. Eisenhower.
Your grandfather wouldn't be proud.
Well, yes, as the NY Times recently reported.
But WHY do they back Obama? Does their reasoning make any sense?
Well, let's ask one GOPer for Obama quoted in the link above, Susan Eisenhower.
Why are you for Obama?
“Obama seems like a leader who can deal with challenges that are highly complex, nuanced and interconnected,” Ms. Eisenhower said, “and he has the language and communication skills and temperament to engage a set of world leaders who are his generation.”
Because he's young. Because you think he sounds good. But not one reference to a specific policy position actually held by Senator Obama. Great thinking there, Ms. Eisenhower.
Your grandfather wouldn't be proud.
Expect a lot of this as we move closer to the fall...
...and that is suggestions that, if Americans don't embrace Barack Obama, well, it must be because of racial prejudice and "bias." Exhibit A today: Maureen Dowd (who else?) in the NY Times:
"Can Obama overcome his pride and Hyde Park hauteur and win America over? Can America overcome its prejudice to elect the first black president? And can it move past its biases to figure out if Obama’s supposed conceit is really just the protective shield and defense mechanism of someone who grew up half white and half black, a perpetual outsider whose father deserted him and whose mother, while loving, sometimes did so as well?"
She tries to cover herself by inserting some mild criticism of Obama in there as well. But her overall point is clear. And remember this fundamental: there are plenty of reasons to vote against Senator Obama. They have to do with his positions, not his race. We'll continue to outline those here...
"Can Obama overcome his pride and Hyde Park hauteur and win America over? Can America overcome its prejudice to elect the first black president? And can it move past its biases to figure out if Obama’s supposed conceit is really just the protective shield and defense mechanism of someone who grew up half white and half black, a perpetual outsider whose father deserted him and whose mother, while loving, sometimes did so as well?"
She tries to cover herself by inserting some mild criticism of Obama in there as well. But her overall point is clear. And remember this fundamental: there are plenty of reasons to vote against Senator Obama. They have to do with his positions, not his race. We'll continue to outline those here...
Liberal moral equivalence strikes again
From (of course) a sports writer trying to do politics (he's going to China to cover the Olympics, and trying to explain why he won't knock China's human rights record):
"China has suffered terrible human losses from two failed Communist Party imperatives of the past, the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. But we, too, have seen terrible acts committed by our leaders, many with the support of the people: slavery, the imprisonment of Japanese-Americans during World War II, the years of Jim Crow and the epic failure to help the Hurricane Katrina victims in New Orleans. We all have crosses to bear. Human rights were a big issue when the International Olympic Committee chose Beijing as the site for these Games, but we need to understand, there are different definitions of human rights in different parts of the world."
Please. The Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution were deliberate acts of government policy, which literally killed millions of people--acts for which the Chinese government has never apologized and about which they still won't speak with full openness. Meanwhile, this country fought a war to END slavery; and as for Japanese-Americans detained in World War II, we've both formally apologized AND provided restitution to the families of those kept in the relocation camps during the war.
If you don't want to write about China's human rights record, that's fine--you're a sports writer, not a political journalist. But please don't engage in this strange liberal moral equivalency we see so often, in which our friends on the other side of the aisle try to equate all political sins and suggest that no one can judge anyone or anything else (except liberals--they're always free to judge.)
"China has suffered terrible human losses from two failed Communist Party imperatives of the past, the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. But we, too, have seen terrible acts committed by our leaders, many with the support of the people: slavery, the imprisonment of Japanese-Americans during World War II, the years of Jim Crow and the epic failure to help the Hurricane Katrina victims in New Orleans. We all have crosses to bear. Human rights were a big issue when the International Olympic Committee chose Beijing as the site for these Games, but we need to understand, there are different definitions of human rights in different parts of the world."
Please. The Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution were deliberate acts of government policy, which literally killed millions of people--acts for which the Chinese government has never apologized and about which they still won't speak with full openness. Meanwhile, this country fought a war to END slavery; and as for Japanese-Americans detained in World War II, we've both formally apologized AND provided restitution to the families of those kept in the relocation camps during the war.
If you don't want to write about China's human rights record, that's fine--you're a sports writer, not a political journalist. But please don't engage in this strange liberal moral equivalency we see so often, in which our friends on the other side of the aisle try to equate all political sins and suggest that no one can judge anyone or anything else (except liberals--they're always free to judge.)
Saturday, August 2, 2008
The humorless left
Check out the angry response to the McCain camp's humorous Paris Hilton/Britney Spears ad:
"So, they didn't pick other big celebrities, who were either men, or black, or married. What they picked was two sexually available white women. But it must have been a coincidence, because we know John McCain wants to run an elevated campaign focusing on the serious issues that America faces."
Ah, yes--of course! The McCain people, to those on the left, can never be funny!!
Just racists...
Want more evidence? See also the NY Times' Bob Herbert today:
"...low-life political ads featuring tacky, sexually provocative white women who have no connection whatsoever to the black male candidates....trashing the opposition, Karl Rove-style....Now, from the hapless but increasingly venomous McCain campaign, comes the slimy Britney Spears and Paris Hilton ad....foul, poisonous and emanated from the upper reaches of the Republican Party....Mr. Obama has to endure these grotesque insults with a smile and heroic levels of equanimity. The reason he has to do this — the sole reason — is that he is black."
Sigh.....
"So, they didn't pick other big celebrities, who were either men, or black, or married. What they picked was two sexually available white women. But it must have been a coincidence, because we know John McCain wants to run an elevated campaign focusing on the serious issues that America faces."
Ah, yes--of course! The McCain people, to those on the left, can never be funny!!
Just racists...
Want more evidence? See also the NY Times' Bob Herbert today:
"...low-life political ads featuring tacky, sexually provocative white women who have no connection whatsoever to the black male candidates....trashing the opposition, Karl Rove-style....Now, from the hapless but increasingly venomous McCain campaign, comes the slimy Britney Spears and Paris Hilton ad....foul, poisonous and emanated from the upper reaches of the Republican Party....Mr. Obama has to endure these grotesque insults with a smile and heroic levels of equanimity. The reason he has to do this — the sole reason — is that he is black."
Sigh.....
Who's cynical?
The Obama campaign claims the McCain camp is "cynical."
But, speaking of cynicism, from the article above--look at who is shifting positions, again:
"Reporters questioned Obama about the issue of race as he campaigned for a second day in Florida, where offshore oil drilling was emerging as a top issue. The Illinois senator said he was willing to compromise his stand against further drilling along the U.S. coastline if other proposals were part of a plan for energy independence."
But, speaking of cynicism, from the article above--look at who is shifting positions, again:
"Reporters questioned Obama about the issue of race as he campaigned for a second day in Florida, where offshore oil drilling was emerging as a top issue. The Illinois senator said he was willing to compromise his stand against further drilling along the U.S. coastline if other proposals were part of a plan for energy independence."
Friday, August 1, 2008
I guess she didn't notice
Today Eleanor Clift, liberal Newsweek columnist and (of course) Obama sysmpathizer, wrote this concerning Democratic worries concerning the Obama campaign:
"Democrats are nervous that the Zen-like demeanor of the campaign is naive, but maybe it's just a way of calming everybody down. By not reacting to every groundless attack, Obama could be leading us into the new politics he promised."
Huh? "Not reacting"? In fact, in the last two days the Obama camp rushed out immediately to denounce McCain sallies---see their reaction the McCain anti-Obama ad featuring Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, not to mention Obama's furious reaction to McCain's denunciation of Obama playing the race card. Seems like they're very reactive--not that it's helping them much.
The mainstream media (like Clift)---not too plugged in, are they?
"Democrats are nervous that the Zen-like demeanor of the campaign is naive, but maybe it's just a way of calming everybody down. By not reacting to every groundless attack, Obama could be leading us into the new politics he promised."
Huh? "Not reacting"? In fact, in the last two days the Obama camp rushed out immediately to denounce McCain sallies---see their reaction the McCain anti-Obama ad featuring Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, not to mention Obama's furious reaction to McCain's denunciation of Obama playing the race card. Seems like they're very reactive--not that it's helping them much.
The mainstream media (like Clift)---not too plugged in, are they?
A theory on the tight presidential race
And tight it is, right now--the Gallup daily tracking poll today had the race tied.
And why is the race so close? Pundits have trotted out theory after theory--voters are uncertain about the inexperienced Obama; there's been a negative reaction to Obama's foreign trip and to his perceived arrogance as a president-in-waiting; McCain and Republicans have scored with their emphasis on the need for offshore oil drilling and Obama's opposition to it; etc.
Also, how about this? Have you noticed all the good-news-in-Iraq posts I've been able to put up lately? It's hard to avoid the good news lately--American casualties are down, Iraqi security is up, the Iraqi government is functioning much better, etc. I suspect Americans have noticed that too. Maybe Americans, now, see that we're winning in Iraq? And, instead of that freeing them up to vote Obama, perhaps they're thinking: wait--Obama has opposed this war, he's told us again and again we can't succeed there, he's told us again and again how the surge of 2007 wouldn't work and shouldn't be tried...and maybe he's wrong. Meanwhile, John McCain backed the war, said we could succeed, said we had to hang in there, change strategy (i.e. he suggested and backed the surge from its earliest point)...and he's looking to have been correct all along.
Might that not affect Americans' attitudes towards this presidential race? Just maybe.
Just think what McCain could do, if he'd listen more to his conservative base. He might actually be ahead in this race; and not merely close.
And why is the race so close? Pundits have trotted out theory after theory--voters are uncertain about the inexperienced Obama; there's been a negative reaction to Obama's foreign trip and to his perceived arrogance as a president-in-waiting; McCain and Republicans have scored with their emphasis on the need for offshore oil drilling and Obama's opposition to it; etc.
Also, how about this? Have you noticed all the good-news-in-Iraq posts I've been able to put up lately? It's hard to avoid the good news lately--American casualties are down, Iraqi security is up, the Iraqi government is functioning much better, etc. I suspect Americans have noticed that too. Maybe Americans, now, see that we're winning in Iraq? And, instead of that freeing them up to vote Obama, perhaps they're thinking: wait--Obama has opposed this war, he's told us again and again we can't succeed there, he's told us again and again how the surge of 2007 wouldn't work and shouldn't be tried...and maybe he's wrong. Meanwhile, John McCain backed the war, said we could succeed, said we had to hang in there, change strategy (i.e. he suggested and backed the surge from its earliest point)...and he's looking to have been correct all along.
Might that not affect Americans' attitudes towards this presidential race? Just maybe.
Just think what McCain could do, if he'd listen more to his conservative base. He might actually be ahead in this race; and not merely close.
The case for offshore oil drilling
We've talked about this a lot here--about what principles conservatives should espouse on energy, about increasing fuel production, about making fun of Nancy Pelosi for opposing conservative policies. Today, Charles Krauthammer shows that, furthermore, a case can be made for offshore drilling BOTH on the grounds that it will increase fuel production, AND on environmental grounds:
"Consider: 25 years ago, nearly 60 percent of U.S. petroleum was produced domestically. Today it's 25 percent. From its peak in 1970, U.S. production has declined a staggering 47 percent. The world consumes 86 million barrels a day; the United States, roughly 20 million. We need the stuff to run our cars and planes and economy....The United States has the highest technology to ensure the safest drilling. Today, directional drilling -- essentially drilling down, then sideways -- allows access to oil that in 1970 would have required a surface footprint more than three times as large. Additionally, the U.S. has one of the most extensive and least corrupt regulatory systems on the planet. Does Pelosi imagine that with so much of America declared off-limits, the planet is less injured as drilling shifts to Kazakhstan and Venezuela and Equatorial Guinea? That Russia will be more environmentally scrupulous than we in drilling in its Arctic? The net environmental effect of Pelosi's no-drilling willfulness is negative. Outsourcing U.S. oil production does nothing to lessen worldwide environmental despoliation. It simply exports it to more corrupt, less efficient, more unstable parts of the world -- thereby increasing net planetary damage."
Read the whole thing.
"Consider: 25 years ago, nearly 60 percent of U.S. petroleum was produced domestically. Today it's 25 percent. From its peak in 1970, U.S. production has declined a staggering 47 percent. The world consumes 86 million barrels a day; the United States, roughly 20 million. We need the stuff to run our cars and planes and economy....The United States has the highest technology to ensure the safest drilling. Today, directional drilling -- essentially drilling down, then sideways -- allows access to oil that in 1970 would have required a surface footprint more than three times as large. Additionally, the U.S. has one of the most extensive and least corrupt regulatory systems on the planet. Does Pelosi imagine that with so much of America declared off-limits, the planet is less injured as drilling shifts to Kazakhstan and Venezuela and Equatorial Guinea? That Russia will be more environmentally scrupulous than we in drilling in its Arctic? The net environmental effect of Pelosi's no-drilling willfulness is negative. Outsourcing U.S. oil production does nothing to lessen worldwide environmental despoliation. It simply exports it to more corrupt, less efficient, more unstable parts of the world -- thereby increasing net planetary damage."
Read the whole thing.
Clinton campaign funeral watch (contd)
The Hillary-for-veep campaign ain't lookin' too good:
"They were hoping for a dream ticket, but now it appears they will have to settle for a speech. The leaders of an online campaign to pressure Senator Barack Obama into picking Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as his running mate have ended their bid, saying all signs indicate that Mrs. Clinton is not in serious contention for the vice-presidential slot. Adam Parkhomenko and Sam Arora, both former Clinton aides and the founders of the Web site, VoteBoth.com, notified the more than 40,000 supporters who had signed a petition backing an Obama-Clinton ticket on Thursday. In an e-mail message shutting down the effort, the two men said Mr. Obama’s offer of a keynote address to Mrs. Clinton at the Democratic National Convention indicated that she would not be tapped to be his No. 2. It is expected that she will speak on Tuesday night, Aug. 26. “Because it seems that Senator Obama has made his decision to offer the slot on the ticket to another candidate,” the men wrote, “we believe that continuing to ask him to pick Hillary is no longer helpful to our party’s chances of winning in November.”
And what ARE the Hillaryites doing with all those Denver hotel rooms they booked way back when????
"They were hoping for a dream ticket, but now it appears they will have to settle for a speech. The leaders of an online campaign to pressure Senator Barack Obama into picking Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as his running mate have ended their bid, saying all signs indicate that Mrs. Clinton is not in serious contention for the vice-presidential slot. Adam Parkhomenko and Sam Arora, both former Clinton aides and the founders of the Web site, VoteBoth.com, notified the more than 40,000 supporters who had signed a petition backing an Obama-Clinton ticket on Thursday. In an e-mail message shutting down the effort, the two men said Mr. Obama’s offer of a keynote address to Mrs. Clinton at the Democratic National Convention indicated that she would not be tapped to be his No. 2. It is expected that she will speak on Tuesday night, Aug. 26. “Because it seems that Senator Obama has made his decision to offer the slot on the ticket to another candidate,” the men wrote, “we believe that continuing to ask him to pick Hillary is no longer helpful to our party’s chances of winning in November.”
And what ARE the Hillaryites doing with all those Denver hotel rooms they booked way back when????
Dictatorship speaks
Hu Jintao, chairman of the Chinese Communist Party and thus the strongman in charge of China's government, spoke directly today to the news media, in order to explain some of his government's crackdowns in advance of the Beijing Olympic games:
"We have one wish. It is to make the Beijing Olympic Games, a global sports gathering, a success," Mr. Hu said."
Yes. That was Adolf Hitler's wish, in advance of the 1936 Olympic Games held in Berlin. It's what dictatorships want--a showcase to make their regime look good. Nothing new here.
Read the whole article.
"We have one wish. It is to make the Beijing Olympic Games, a global sports gathering, a success," Mr. Hu said."
Yes. That was Adolf Hitler's wish, in advance of the 1936 Olympic Games held in Berlin. It's what dictatorships want--a showcase to make their regime look good. Nothing new here.
Read the whole article.
The saga of John Edwards (continued)
Remember the allegations of about a week ago, that possibly Edwards was having an affair?
They still linger--and what we see lately is that he's not exactly behaving as an innocent man.
Still, no solid proof yet. Stay tuned...
They still linger--and what we see lately is that he's not exactly behaving as an innocent man.
Still, no solid proof yet. Stay tuned...
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Reality competition show update
Well, let's see...
I very much enjoyed this season's The Next Food Network TV Star.
Only one problem--the winner. There's just no way Aaron McCargo, Jr. was either the best cook or best host among the contestants. And it was significant to me that, on the final episode, while we got to see the judges waxing poetic about how well each competitor had done in the final challenge, we DIDN'T see them discussing why they chose Aaron. Interesting. Lisa Garza should have won.
Meanwhile, last night's Shear Genius episode featured the judges ripping just about every contestant once the challenge--a difficult task to make selected models' hair styles look just like the three styles worn by "Charlie's Angels" stars back in the late 1970s AND at the same time to "modernize" those styles--was over. Seemed to me the judges had, in their minds, something they wanted from each contestant--something they neglected to even hint at to the contestants. Ease up, judges.
Meanwhile, this week the public has been voting for which of the two remaining HGTV Design Star contestants had the best design in their final challenge. Both Matt and Jennifer are nice, capable designers; but they have a long way to go to top last year's winner, Kim Myles.
And Project Runway is now well into its latest season, serving up wild, unpredictable clothing designers and witty (though sometimes cruel) one-liners from the judges. Overheard last night, as one judge panned a wild-looking dress: "It looked like a bunch of toilet paper in a windstorm."
I very much enjoyed this season's The Next Food Network TV Star.
Only one problem--the winner. There's just no way Aaron McCargo, Jr. was either the best cook or best host among the contestants. And it was significant to me that, on the final episode, while we got to see the judges waxing poetic about how well each competitor had done in the final challenge, we DIDN'T see them discussing why they chose Aaron. Interesting. Lisa Garza should have won.
Meanwhile, last night's Shear Genius episode featured the judges ripping just about every contestant once the challenge--a difficult task to make selected models' hair styles look just like the three styles worn by "Charlie's Angels" stars back in the late 1970s AND at the same time to "modernize" those styles--was over. Seemed to me the judges had, in their minds, something they wanted from each contestant--something they neglected to even hint at to the contestants. Ease up, judges.
Meanwhile, this week the public has been voting for which of the two remaining HGTV Design Star contestants had the best design in their final challenge. Both Matt and Jennifer are nice, capable designers; but they have a long way to go to top last year's winner, Kim Myles.
And Project Runway is now well into its latest season, serving up wild, unpredictable clothing designers and witty (though sometimes cruel) one-liners from the judges. Overheard last night, as one judge panned a wild-looking dress: "It looked like a bunch of toilet paper in a windstorm."
Tom Coburn, hero
Now here's a guy doing what conservatives in congress should be doing--blocking wild spending.
Perhaps you've heard, from many mainstream news media sites, about Coburn's "obstructionism" in the Senate? But there's another side to it:
"Frustrated by Tom Coburn's "unprecedented obstructionism," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid cobbled together a "Tomnibus" of 35 bills with "broad—virtually unanimous—bipartisan support" that Coburn had blocked. On Monday the Oklahoma Republican blocked them again. Unable to muster the 60 votes needed to overcome Coburn's opposition, Reid castigated the Republicans who had sided with the obstreperous obstetrician. "You go home and explain to...the next person you see in a wheelchair, 'I voted against you because Harry Reid was being a tyrannical guy in the Senate,'" the Nevada Democrat said. He also accused the Republicans of voting against victims of stroke, Lou Gehrig's disease, postpartum depression, and child pornography."I have never been a bully," Reid insisted while caricaturing his opponents as cripple kickers, mother haters, and molester lovers."
Read the whole thing. Note Reid's demagogy. Note that Coburn offered to stop blocking Reid's bill--IF Reid agreed to $45 billion in spending cuts, to avoid spending money we don't have. Reid never responded.
Perhaps you've heard, from many mainstream news media sites, about Coburn's "obstructionism" in the Senate? But there's another side to it:
"Frustrated by Tom Coburn's "unprecedented obstructionism," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid cobbled together a "Tomnibus" of 35 bills with "broad—virtually unanimous—bipartisan support" that Coburn had blocked. On Monday the Oklahoma Republican blocked them again. Unable to muster the 60 votes needed to overcome Coburn's opposition, Reid castigated the Republicans who had sided with the obstreperous obstetrician. "You go home and explain to...the next person you see in a wheelchair, 'I voted against you because Harry Reid was being a tyrannical guy in the Senate,'" the Nevada Democrat said. He also accused the Republicans of voting against victims of stroke, Lou Gehrig's disease, postpartum depression, and child pornography."I have never been a bully," Reid insisted while caricaturing his opponents as cripple kickers, mother haters, and molester lovers."
Read the whole thing. Note Reid's demagogy. Note that Coburn offered to stop blocking Reid's bill--IF Reid agreed to $45 billion in spending cuts, to avoid spending money we don't have. Reid never responded.
Are we in the same reality dept
Washington Post today, on the economy: "U.S. Economic Growth Improves Over First Quarter"
MSNBC: "Economy has slowed to a crawl, but at least it is crawling forward"
MSNBC: "Economy has slowed to a crawl, but at least it is crawling forward"
Pre-emptive labels of "racist"
Barack Obama tries to say, in effect: those Republicans are going to be racists, just you wait:
"“Nobody thinks that Bush and McCain have a real answer to the challenges we face. So what they’re going to try to do is make you scared of me,” Obama said. “You know, `he’s not patriotic enough, he’s got a funny name,’ you know, `he doesn’t look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills.”‘
The McCain campaign is rightly calling this what it is--playing the race card.
And look at the pathetic spin the Obama campaign tries to place on this:
“What Barack Obama was talking about was that he didn’t get here after spending decades in Washington,” Gibbs said. “There is nothing more to this than the fact that he was describing that he was new to the political scene. He was referring to the fact that he didn’t come into the race with the history of others. It is not about race.”
Right--Obama refers to his "look" compared to other presidents on dollar bills as a way of referring to his experience! Sure, right, that's real believable...
Obama wants to play the victim, and make it so that people believe that if you DON'T vote for Obama, one is a racist.
UPDATE: Don't forget, too, that Obama's angry response above is probably a response to John McCain's new ad out yesterday--the one featuring quick cameos of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton and portraying Obama as a celeb elitist. Many are criticizing McCain for this, claiming he's gone too negative. But in this case I think I'd defend McCain, and go along with Rich Lowry on NRO, who writes:
"McCain's not going to win without defining Obama in a negative way. He's just not. There are other ways to do it, but pumping Obama up as a celebrity—and pointing out how arrogant, gassy, and remote he is—is a pretty good frame that has the added advantage of being true."
"“Nobody thinks that Bush and McCain have a real answer to the challenges we face. So what they’re going to try to do is make you scared of me,” Obama said. “You know, `he’s not patriotic enough, he’s got a funny name,’ you know, `he doesn’t look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills.”‘
The McCain campaign is rightly calling this what it is--playing the race card.
And look at the pathetic spin the Obama campaign tries to place on this:
“What Barack Obama was talking about was that he didn’t get here after spending decades in Washington,” Gibbs said. “There is nothing more to this than the fact that he was describing that he was new to the political scene. He was referring to the fact that he didn’t come into the race with the history of others. It is not about race.”
Right--Obama refers to his "look" compared to other presidents on dollar bills as a way of referring to his experience! Sure, right, that's real believable...
Obama wants to play the victim, and make it so that people believe that if you DON'T vote for Obama, one is a racist.
UPDATE: Don't forget, too, that Obama's angry response above is probably a response to John McCain's new ad out yesterday--the one featuring quick cameos of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton and portraying Obama as a celeb elitist. Many are criticizing McCain for this, claiming he's gone too negative. But in this case I think I'd defend McCain, and go along with Rich Lowry on NRO, who writes:
"McCain's not going to win without defining Obama in a negative way. He's just not. There are other ways to do it, but pumping Obama up as a celebrity—and pointing out how arrogant, gassy, and remote he is—is a pretty good frame that has the added advantage of being true."
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
At the sports desk: whither the Patriots in 2008?
How do the New England Patriots get over their crushing, last-second Super Bowl loss to the New York Giants? Tom Curran of NBC Sports thinks they'll be just fine:
"The Patriots haven't gotten appreciably worse in this offseason. And none of the league's other 31 teams has gotten appreciably better. The edge the Patriots had over the rest of the league for 18 games, 58 minutes and 25 seconds hasn't been sufficiently diminished. Unfortunately for the rest of the league, the perceived vulnerability of the Patriots will inevitably turn up as a kind of motivation for the always-looking-for-disrespect Pats. If he hasn't already, Belichick will eventually seize on the notion that people don't think his team is mentally tough enough to recover from one loss. This he will pass onto his team, a team led by players like Bruschi, Brady, Richard Seymour and Rodney Harrison who know how to turn small slights in blunt-force attacks. The resolve to shut people up will build."
Hmmm. Well, granted, Belichick is a good motivator, and so the Patriots should have ample desire. But still, one wonders. New England had injuries in 2007, like any NFL team. But not a huge number of them, and none that put much of a crimp on the offensive side of the ball. The Patriots had so many things going right for them in 2007, too--during the regular season, so many close games wound up going their way, officials' calls broke in their favor (remember the close Sunday night game vs the Eagles [only a .500 team, playing their backup quarterback]? the Monday nighter against the Ravens, a game almost everyone agreed they should have lost?), they were healthy for the playoffs, they had home field throughout, in the Super Bowl they played the Giants, a wild-card playoff entrant and a team they'd already beaten in the regular season...
And yet the Pats still didn't win it all.
The ball might just be bouncing a different way this year. Oh, New England will win far more games than they lose and be in the playoffs. But can they be the machine they were last year, and be in the position they were as they entered last season's playoffs? I doubt it. We'll see.
"The Patriots haven't gotten appreciably worse in this offseason. And none of the league's other 31 teams has gotten appreciably better. The edge the Patriots had over the rest of the league for 18 games, 58 minutes and 25 seconds hasn't been sufficiently diminished. Unfortunately for the rest of the league, the perceived vulnerability of the Patriots will inevitably turn up as a kind of motivation for the always-looking-for-disrespect Pats. If he hasn't already, Belichick will eventually seize on the notion that people don't think his team is mentally tough enough to recover from one loss. This he will pass onto his team, a team led by players like Bruschi, Brady, Richard Seymour and Rodney Harrison who know how to turn small slights in blunt-force attacks. The resolve to shut people up will build."
Hmmm. Well, granted, Belichick is a good motivator, and so the Patriots should have ample desire. But still, one wonders. New England had injuries in 2007, like any NFL team. But not a huge number of them, and none that put much of a crimp on the offensive side of the ball. The Patriots had so many things going right for them in 2007, too--during the regular season, so many close games wound up going their way, officials' calls broke in their favor (remember the close Sunday night game vs the Eagles [only a .500 team, playing their backup quarterback]? the Monday nighter against the Ravens, a game almost everyone agreed they should have lost?), they were healthy for the playoffs, they had home field throughout, in the Super Bowl they played the Giants, a wild-card playoff entrant and a team they'd already beaten in the regular season...
And yet the Pats still didn't win it all.
The ball might just be bouncing a different way this year. Oh, New England will win far more games than they lose and be in the playoffs. But can they be the machine they were last year, and be in the position they were as they entered last season's playoffs? I doubt it. We'll see.
More deconstruction of Obama in Berlin
Senator Obama made a big deal out of being a "citizen of the world."
But as Rich Lowry shows today, there's no such thing--and thinking that there is suggests deeper flaws in the Senator's thought:
"In Berlin, Obama called himself, unironically, a “citizen of the world.” The world, however, issues no passports, nor does it have citizens. The world in the way Citizen Obama imagines it — as a global community to which we all belong — doesn’t exist. Only backpacking hippies, devotees of the Davos World Economic Forum and U.N. bureaucrats speak this way...He railed against “walls” of all kinds, even though walls are useful in dividing hostile communities (see, most recently, Israel and Iraq) and, in the form of borders, are the most basic stuff of nationhood. He addressed “people of the world” and told them “this is our moment, this is our time,” as if the impossibly disparate people of the world can ever have a common will."
And if you think "the world" does have that "will", then explain to us what the common will is of the Israelis and Palestinians.
This is why conservatives believe America's sovereignty is so important, and that it must be safeguarded. And why no leader of ours can ever allow "world opinion" to veto our actions--since no world consensus exists.
But as Rich Lowry shows today, there's no such thing--and thinking that there is suggests deeper flaws in the Senator's thought:
"In Berlin, Obama called himself, unironically, a “citizen of the world.” The world, however, issues no passports, nor does it have citizens. The world in the way Citizen Obama imagines it — as a global community to which we all belong — doesn’t exist. Only backpacking hippies, devotees of the Davos World Economic Forum and U.N. bureaucrats speak this way...He railed against “walls” of all kinds, even though walls are useful in dividing hostile communities (see, most recently, Israel and Iraq) and, in the form of borders, are the most basic stuff of nationhood. He addressed “people of the world” and told them “this is our moment, this is our time,” as if the impossibly disparate people of the world can ever have a common will."
And if you think "the world" does have that "will", then explain to us what the common will is of the Israelis and Palestinians.
This is why conservatives believe America's sovereignty is so important, and that it must be safeguarded. And why no leader of ours can ever allow "world opinion" to veto our actions--since no world consensus exists.
Clinton campaign funeral watch (contd)
Gosh--sounds like a bunch of swell people worked on that campaign. No hard feelings--right? Just ask Patty Solis Doyle:
"...here, in a small glass office on the 11th floor, at Obama's campaign headquarters on Michigan Avenue, she keeps her head down and tries to unravel the mysteries of 2008: why Clinton lost, why so many of her old friends have turned on her, why she is largely blamed for the campaign's dysfunction, and, most unsettling to her, why Clinton has distanced herself from her onetime closest confidant. In Washington, proximity to power is power, and on the February day Solis Doyle was replaced, she experienced one of the more rapid -- and extraordinary -- free falls in American politics. She was immediately shut out of the inner circle and cut loose. She was accused of squandering millions of campaign dollars, of being holed up in her corner office watching soap operas as the campaign collapsed, of being an imperious leader who perpetuated a tense and joyless atmosphere -- all of which she denies. "It's really sad and discouraging and revolting at times," Solis Doyle, 42, says over lunch one recent day. "I have to tell you, I was surprised by the vitriol towards me. I think I'm a good person." It is generally an unremarkable event when staffers for a defeated presidential candidate join the rival's campaign. At a certain moment, there is a clarion call for all hands on deck. But Clinton loyalists were enraged when Solis Doyle was named chief of staff for Obama's future vice presidential pick."
"...here, in a small glass office on the 11th floor, at Obama's campaign headquarters on Michigan Avenue, she keeps her head down and tries to unravel the mysteries of 2008: why Clinton lost, why so many of her old friends have turned on her, why she is largely blamed for the campaign's dysfunction, and, most unsettling to her, why Clinton has distanced herself from her onetime closest confidant. In Washington, proximity to power is power, and on the February day Solis Doyle was replaced, she experienced one of the more rapid -- and extraordinary -- free falls in American politics. She was immediately shut out of the inner circle and cut loose. She was accused of squandering millions of campaign dollars, of being holed up in her corner office watching soap operas as the campaign collapsed, of being an imperious leader who perpetuated a tense and joyless atmosphere -- all of which she denies. "It's really sad and discouraging and revolting at times," Solis Doyle, 42, says over lunch one recent day. "I have to tell you, I was surprised by the vitriol towards me. I think I'm a good person." It is generally an unremarkable event when staffers for a defeated presidential candidate join the rival's campaign. At a certain moment, there is a clarion call for all hands on deck. But Clinton loyalists were enraged when Solis Doyle was named chief of staff for Obama's future vice presidential pick."
Today's good news from Iraq
Again, we are winning in Iraq:
"The number of U.S. soldiers killed in combat in Iraq has dropped sharply this month, putting July on track to have the lowest casualties for the military since the U.S.-led invasion of the country in 2003. Five U.S. soldiers have been killed in combat in Iraq so far in July compared to 66 in the same month last year, according to the independent Web site icasualties.org, which keeps records of U.S. military casualties in the conflict. The drop underscores the dramatic fall in violence in Iraq to lows not seen since early 2004."
"The number of U.S. soldiers killed in combat in Iraq has dropped sharply this month, putting July on track to have the lowest casualties for the military since the U.S.-led invasion of the country in 2003. Five U.S. soldiers have been killed in combat in Iraq so far in July compared to 66 in the same month last year, according to the independent Web site icasualties.org, which keeps records of U.S. military casualties in the conflict. The drop underscores the dramatic fall in violence in Iraq to lows not seen since early 2004."
Why conservatives worry about John McCain dept (continued)
A few days ago Sen. McCain suggested he might be open to raising taxes.
But, well, today is a new day:
"After upsetting some conservatives by signaling an openness to higher payroll taxes for Social Security, Republican John McCain gave the simplest of answers when asked if he would raise taxes as president. "No," McCain said sternly when the question was put to him by a young girl at a meeting Tuesday in Sparks, Nevada."
Sounds nice, but how can we trust this?
I fear the damage is done.
But, well, today is a new day:
"After upsetting some conservatives by signaling an openness to higher payroll taxes for Social Security, Republican John McCain gave the simplest of answers when asked if he would raise taxes as president. "No," McCain said sternly when the question was put to him by a young girl at a meeting Tuesday in Sparks, Nevada."
Sounds nice, but how can we trust this?
I fear the damage is done.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Earning their keep
Inner city kids have to work to pay their own way in order to attend a private Catholic school--and its working:
"These start-ups are all committed to enrolling only low-income kids; network-wide, 72 percent of students qualify for the federal free or reduced-price lunch program. The schools are also committed to sending the vast majority of their graduates to college; of the 318 students who graduated from Cristo Rey Network schools in 2007, 316 were accepted to a two- or four-year college. That’s better than 99 percent. (Nationwide, just 67 percent of students who graduate from high school start college shortly thereafter, and in big cities that figure can be much lower."
The article reports that less than 20% of African-American and Hispanic adults in America have a high school degree. That's a horrible state of affairs. But there are ways out of the mess; and the way out doesn't require throwing money at the problem (we've tried that already; it doesn't work).
"These start-ups are all committed to enrolling only low-income kids; network-wide, 72 percent of students qualify for the federal free or reduced-price lunch program. The schools are also committed to sending the vast majority of their graduates to college; of the 318 students who graduated from Cristo Rey Network schools in 2007, 316 were accepted to a two- or four-year college. That’s better than 99 percent. (Nationwide, just 67 percent of students who graduate from high school start college shortly thereafter, and in big cities that figure can be much lower."
The article reports that less than 20% of African-American and Hispanic adults in America have a high school degree. That's a horrible state of affairs. But there are ways out of the mess; and the way out doesn't require throwing money at the problem (we've tried that already; it doesn't work).
The disciplined, organized Obama campaign dept
Again, taking on that conventional wisdom...
The Obama campaign is indeed very good at getting good TV pictures of their candidate speaking majestically before large crowds. And they've got many people convinced that this creates the image of a mighty movement, and...and this is key...that this imagery moves poll numbers Obama's way.
Only one problem--it doesn't move poll numbers.
As is explained here.
(Indeed, evidence is slowly growing that the European trip may have hurt Obama--see here for an interesting analysis by Gallup.)
The Obama campaign is indeed very good at getting good TV pictures of their candidate speaking majestically before large crowds. And they've got many people convinced that this creates the image of a mighty movement, and...and this is key...that this imagery moves poll numbers Obama's way.
Only one problem--it doesn't move poll numbers.
As is explained here.
(Indeed, evidence is slowly growing that the European trip may have hurt Obama--see here for an interesting analysis by Gallup.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)