Warren Buffet--who never seems to tire about telling he rest of us how under-taxed he is--seems a bit off-put by the President's zero-ing in on corporate jets as the new symbol of excess and wealth. Seems the Oracle of Omaha owns "Net-Jets", a company that leases out portions of jet use by the hour.
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Monday, July 18, 2011
Larry Summers? THE Larry Summers?
Setting aside the absurdity of the Washington Post giving this loser an opportunity to expatiate his discredited views, what is he saying? More control, more meddling in the credit markets, more more more of the tired old Keynesian intrusions that got us in trouble to start with.
Let's face it, people and institutions are going to be hurt, some ruined. But in Capitalism failures are as important as successes. Oh we can kicked the can down the road and attempt to re-inflate the bubble, but it only prolongs the inevitable. Let the bankers be bankers and do what they do best, loan money to good risks in order to make money. Let business adjust without all these artificial incentives that are costing us our prosperity and future. Let capitalism operate unencumbered and you may surprised, shocked even, at how fast we bounce back.
It's time for Mr. Summers and all who share his view to sit down and shut up...you've had your chance. It's time for the grown-ups to take over.
Sunday, July 17, 2011
The Conservative Wahoo Welcomes The Hammer
I've just sent the email through Blogger to The Hammer extending the invitation to him to join the blogging team here at the CW. Those few--those happy few--who tuned in to the radio program got to know The Hammer more deeply than one can from a comment made here and there on the blog, and I gained a serious appreciation for his views and his knowledge of the history/politics nexus. No doubt, this blog will never be the same--and I mean that in a good way.
Obama's Communications Gap
David Ignatius has a column in the WaPost in which he wonders aloud if Mr. Obama is as great a communicators as he was made out (by the Bought and Paid For Media) to be. Ignatius believes no. So far, so good.
Yet when one reads the article closely, one stumbles upon this whopper: "So Obama waited. His policy ideas, now that they’re public, look pretty solid."
What policy ideas? Which public? Has he put forward through his party in Congress any discernible program? Was there even a budget for FY12? Paul Ryan puts forward a plan of nearly 100 pages--Mr. Obama makes a speech--which according to CBO--cannot be scored.
One of the themes that keeps arising from the present mess is "exactly what would YOU do Mr. President?". So far, we don't have an answer. If not raising taxes was a good idea at the end of last year, EXACTLY why is doing so--when the economy is arguably NO BETTER--a good idea now?
The President loves to talk about Republican sacred cows--tax increases mostly. So then, what is Obamacare? Is it not also a $2T sacred cow?
If I don't watch it, I could become as deranged as the loony Dems did under GWB.....
HT--Instapundit
Yet when one reads the article closely, one stumbles upon this whopper: "So Obama waited. His policy ideas, now that they’re public, look pretty solid."
What policy ideas? Which public? Has he put forward through his party in Congress any discernible program? Was there even a budget for FY12? Paul Ryan puts forward a plan of nearly 100 pages--Mr. Obama makes a speech--which according to CBO--cannot be scored.
One of the themes that keeps arising from the present mess is "exactly what would YOU do Mr. President?". So far, we don't have an answer. If not raising taxes was a good idea at the end of last year, EXACTLY why is doing so--when the economy is arguably NO BETTER--a good idea now?
The President loves to talk about Republican sacred cows--tax increases mostly. So then, what is Obamacare? Is it not also a $2T sacred cow?
If I don't watch it, I could become as deranged as the loony Dems did under GWB.....
HT--Instapundit
Saturday, July 16, 2011
John Kerry, Profile in Courage
The senior senator from Massachusetts is on record stating that he'd forego his Congressional salary should a debt deal not be reached by August 2nd.
Congressional salary: $174,000. Kerry's net worth last year: $188 million.
Shared sacrifice, indeed.
Congressional salary: $174,000. Kerry's net worth last year: $188 million.
Shared sacrifice, indeed.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Some Debt Strategy from Dr. K
Charles Krauthammer has a great column in this morning's Post. A must read for those trying to figure out what the options are
Big Fat Friday Free For All
Here it is again, ladies and gentlemen, your chance to get it off your chest! Worried about a debt crisis getting in the way of your birthday plans? Think Iowa's got too much pull with too many zanies in the Presidential primary contest? Share, people share.
In the meantime, I'll enjoy New Orleans with Big Brother Tom. You shoulda been here, Mudge. You shoulda been here...
 |
| Tom, making friends with the locals in New Orleans |
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Tone Deafness on Steroids
Perhaps you've heard the economy is potentially going to crater on August 2nd.
This is not stopping our leader from celebrating his 50th birthday on August 3rd (a day before his actual birthday, for those who wanted to send a fruit basket). Nothing wrong with celebrating your birthday...but the fact that the birthday celebration is a fundraiser, with tickets ranging from $50 to $35,800 (the latter earns you a private dinner with O), is a bit tone-deaf with the threat of economic disaster hanging over the country.
Can you imagine the bad optics of this, if the debt doomsday scenario comes to fruition? The tone deafness is breathtaking.
This is not stopping our leader from celebrating his 50th birthday on August 3rd (a day before his actual birthday, for those who wanted to send a fruit basket). Nothing wrong with celebrating your birthday...but the fact that the birthday celebration is a fundraiser, with tickets ranging from $50 to $35,800 (the latter earns you a private dinner with O), is a bit tone-deaf with the threat of economic disaster hanging over the country.
Can you imagine the bad optics of this, if the debt doomsday scenario comes to fruition? The tone deafness is breathtaking.
Why Do House Republicans Need A Majority Leader?
One of the questions that keeps popping up in my head as the debt limit debate grinds on is why Republicans need three noses in the tent (McConnell, Boehner, and Cantor) when there are only two bodies of Congress? Don't get me wrong--I'm not here to rant against the tactics of Eric Cantor. But presumably, the Speaker of the House--who does not preside over the body ordinarily, who does not routinely even vote on legislation, and who generally does not serve on any committee--has both the time AND the mandate to "lead" the majority in the House. Clausewitz gave us "unity of command" for a reason...we should heed his prescription.
WSJ on the Debt Limit
Here's a pretty good summation (summary?) of the strength of relative positions on this matter. As much as folks on our side want things to go their way, they still have to get by the fact that the other side has the Presidency and the Senate. Best line in the whole article:
The tea party/talk-radio expectations for what Republicans can accomplish over the debt-limit showdown have always been unrealistic. As former Senator Phil Gramm once told us, never take a hostage you're not prepared to shoot. Republicans aren't prepared to stop a debt-limit increase because the political costs are unbearable. Republicans might have played this game better, but the truth is that Mr. Obama has more cards to play.
We may need one more election before we can get what we want--it may be too soon.
The tea party/talk-radio expectations for what Republicans can accomplish over the debt-limit showdown have always been unrealistic. As former Senator Phil Gramm once told us, never take a hostage you're not prepared to shoot. Republicans aren't prepared to stop a debt-limit increase because the political costs are unbearable. Republicans might have played this game better, but the truth is that Mr. Obama has more cards to play.
We may need one more election before we can get what we want--it may be too soon.
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Why does this bozo still have a job?
Eric Holder apparently has too much time on his hands, so he's launched a new crusade: getting banks to relax their mortage underwriting standards so that minorities with bad credit won't be turned down for a mortgage.
Banks in some instances have been required to post a notice that minorities cannot be turned down for a mortgage because they receive public assistance--food stamps, welfare or receiving unemployment.
Haven't we already seen how this movie ends?
Monday, July 11, 2011
How They Did It in 1997
Keith Hennessey has a great post up reminding us what ACTUAL compromise looks like in setting economic policy. The 1997 Bipartisan Budget Agreement cut spending enough to balance the budget AND cut taxes. Republicans this time--seek only not to RAISE any taxes.
If Bill Clinton and Trent Lott could do it, so can Barack Obama and John Boehner. Unless of course the President really IS what conservatives have suspected all along---a left-wing ideologue bent on reshaping the relationship of government and the governed....
If Bill Clinton and Trent Lott could do it, so can Barack Obama and John Boehner. Unless of course the President really IS what conservatives have suspected all along---a left-wing ideologue bent on reshaping the relationship of government and the governed....
Robert Samuelson Nails It
I do enjoy reading Mr. Samuelson's work, including this ditty from the morning WaPost in which he eviscerates both sides of the same coin--the increasingly marginal Grover Norquist who would take the country down in pursuit of the perfect and liberal Center for Budget and Policy Priorities which has never seen an entitlement it doesn't like.
As long as we live in a Democracy folks, in order to get things done we have to make compromises. Yes, I realize it is untidy and it makes things harder, but let's face it; ultimately, it is what separates us from the Chinese. As far as I'm concerned, the grander the bargain, the better. A slight course change only delays the trip into shoal water; we need to get back in the center of the channel, where the water is deep and wide. This is going to hurt--and the more people it hurts (as in, more KINDS of people), the better.
As long as we live in a Democracy folks, in order to get things done we have to make compromises. Yes, I realize it is untidy and it makes things harder, but let's face it; ultimately, it is what separates us from the Chinese. As far as I'm concerned, the grander the bargain, the better. A slight course change only delays the trip into shoal water; we need to get back in the center of the channel, where the water is deep and wide. This is going to hurt--and the more people it hurts (as in, more KINDS of people), the better.
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Kinsey Research Institute Confuses Researchers with Office "Opposite Day"
A recent report out of Kinsey Research Institute is making the news with its findings that women enjoy sex more than men and that men enjoy kissing and cuddling more than women. Additional findings:
men are more likely than women to:
-- enjoy watching Oprah
-- choose white wine spritzers over beer
-- scream at the sight of a spider
-- share their feelings with other men
-- call their buddies upon discovering a major shoe sale
-- put on their jammies and curl up in their chair with a good book and a cup of yummy hot cocoa
I haven't read all the other findings yet but I suspect there are LOTS more.
men are more likely than women to:
-- enjoy watching Oprah
-- choose white wine spritzers over beer
-- scream at the sight of a spider
-- share their feelings with other men
-- call their buddies upon discovering a major shoe sale
-- put on their jammies and curl up in their chair with a good book and a cup of yummy hot cocoa
I haven't read all the other findings yet but I suspect there are LOTS more.
Yuval Levin on the Welfare State
Yuval Levin is the Editor of National Affairs, which to my mind, is the finest journal of right-of-center domestic policy thinking anywhere. The writing is superb and the contributors are top notch, resulting in a must-read for anyone seriously interested in the rich field of intellectual conservatism.
In the issue currently on my coffee table (probably not the most recent), Levin provides an insightful, non-polemical look into the modern welfare state. Blending both history and analysis, the piece gives credit where credit is due (conservatives have to wrestle with the fact that our grand rise in power occurred at the same time as we created the welfare state) and makes some very sound policy suggestions to conclude it.
Here's a sample from the piece that made me sit back and nod my head:
"This was not the purpose of our welfare state, but it is among its many unintended consequences. As Irving Kristol put it in 1997, "The secular, social-democratic founders of the modern welfare state really did think that in the kind of welfare state we have today people would be more public-spirited, more high-minded, more humanly ‘fulfilled.'" They were wrong about this for the same reason that their expectations of the administrative state have proven misguided — because their understanding of the human person was far too shallow and emaciated. They assumed that moral problems were functions of material problems, so that addressing the latter would resolve the former, when the opposite is more often the case. And guided by the ethic of the modern left, they imagined that traditional institutions like the family, the church, and the local association were sources of division, prejudice, and backwardness, rather than essential pillars of our moral lives. The failure of the social-democratic vision is, in this sense, fundamentally a failure of moral wisdom.
That is not to say, of course, that it did not produce positive benefits along the way. Indeed, the era in which the social-democratic vision has dominated our politics has hardly been an age of decline for America — it has been, if anything, the American century. And it has been a time of diminishing poverty and rising standards of living. But it is now becoming apparent that this was achieved by our spending our capital (economic, moral, and human) without replenishing it, and that this failure, too, is a defining characteristic of the social-democratic vision."
Read the whole thing.
In the issue currently on my coffee table (probably not the most recent), Levin provides an insightful, non-polemical look into the modern welfare state. Blending both history and analysis, the piece gives credit where credit is due (conservatives have to wrestle with the fact that our grand rise in power occurred at the same time as we created the welfare state) and makes some very sound policy suggestions to conclude it.
Here's a sample from the piece that made me sit back and nod my head:
"This was not the purpose of our welfare state, but it is among its many unintended consequences. As Irving Kristol put it in 1997, "The secular, social-democratic founders of the modern welfare state really did think that in the kind of welfare state we have today people would be more public-spirited, more high-minded, more humanly ‘fulfilled.'" They were wrong about this for the same reason that their expectations of the administrative state have proven misguided — because their understanding of the human person was far too shallow and emaciated. They assumed that moral problems were functions of material problems, so that addressing the latter would resolve the former, when the opposite is more often the case. And guided by the ethic of the modern left, they imagined that traditional institutions like the family, the church, and the local association were sources of division, prejudice, and backwardness, rather than essential pillars of our moral lives. The failure of the social-democratic vision is, in this sense, fundamentally a failure of moral wisdom.
That is not to say, of course, that it did not produce positive benefits along the way. Indeed, the era in which the social-democratic vision has dominated our politics has hardly been an age of decline for America — it has been, if anything, the American century. And it has been a time of diminishing poverty and rising standards of living. But it is now becoming apparent that this was achieved by our spending our capital (economic, moral, and human) without replenishing it, and that this failure, too, is a defining characteristic of the social-democratic vision."
Read the whole thing.
Friday, July 8, 2011
2011: A Budget Odyssey
Via Allahpundit:
Hat tip: Iowahawk.
If Treasury were to decide to delay payments, it would need to re-program government computers that generate automatic payments as they fall due — a massive and difficult undertaking. Treasury makes about 3 million payments each day.
Hat tip: Iowahawk.
Information Dissemination Rocks!
Information Dissemination--where I do my Navy blogging--named one of the top 10 defense blogs. On a good day, I get 200 hits here. Most of what I write there gets 12,000....
How The Debt/Budget Crisis Will End
When the Republicans took the House back by storm, I predicted that it would increase Barack Obama's chances of being re-elected. My logic went went this way--Obama would have to tack toward (not to, but toward) the center to get anything done with the new Congress, and in the process, he would appear more reasonable to what had become an increasingly dissatisfied "muddled middle"--those who had voted for him in 2008, but who abandoned him in the mid-term Congressional election.
Fast forward to today, as we move slowly toward national default. Republicans have quite rightly seized the opportunity to use the crisis (hear that, Rahm?) to drive serious spending cuts into the mix. The Democrats have taken to their sedan chairs with a collective case of the vapors, telling all who will listen that the Republicans are going to starve the hungry, take money from the poor, and hasten the demise of the elderly. Some time in August, we will default on our national debt, and while I have little technical knowledge of what that would entail, I believe it will be--in the words of our hyper-eloquent Vice President--a "big f---ing deal".
So--how will it all end?
1. In the end, the President will be in a strengthened position for re-election. Democrats in Congress will be fuming, and Republicans in Congress will wonder if they've achieved a Pyrrhic victory.
2. The Tea Party will loudly trumpet both the success they've achieved in dramatic debt reduction AND complain about the lack of backbone of Republicans in Congress. They will be correct on both counts, and they will vote largely Republican in 2012.
3. There will be dramatic debt reduction ($3T or more), and there will be increases in total revenue (tax increases, loop-hole closures, etc). No one will be entirely happy with the outcome, but Congressional Democrats will be least happy of all.
Here's my logic. Barack Obama wants to be re-elected, and he wants it badly. He knows that his signature legislative achievement (Obamacare) is despised by large portions of the voting public, he realizes that his record on the economy is dismal, and he is certain that sticking close to Nancy Pelosi is what got him there (in addition to his own ideological bent). He must present himself as the great uniter, the man who brought everyone together to save the country from default. The only way to do that is to come down closer to what Republicans want than what Democrats want. Let's face it--the discussion right now isn't whether to cut spending, it is "by how much". To some extent, Republicans have already won.
Congressional Republicans? Well, they are in the driver's seat, but they must be careful not to overplay it. They can and will walk away from this debate with major spending cuts--if they are willing to treat those (laregly Tea Partiers) who would counsel "never surrender" with respect, but firmness. Perfect is a dismal enemy of good enough, and perfection is simply unattainable here.
I laid this line out for a few friends yesterday, and one offered that in order for the logic to hold up, Congressional Republicans have to actually WANT to solve this, rather than just weaken Mr. Obama politically. While that is definitely a possibility, it is one so incredibly craven that were I to realize that as their ACTUAL strategy, I would become a loud and instant critic of the Republican caucus. I simply cannot believe that they would hazard the full faith and credit of the country to score a dubious political victory.
But we shall see.....
UPDATE: Things look even bleaker for Mr. Obama--he will fold like a cheap suit.
Fast forward to today, as we move slowly toward national default. Republicans have quite rightly seized the opportunity to use the crisis (hear that, Rahm?) to drive serious spending cuts into the mix. The Democrats have taken to their sedan chairs with a collective case of the vapors, telling all who will listen that the Republicans are going to starve the hungry, take money from the poor, and hasten the demise of the elderly. Some time in August, we will default on our national debt, and while I have little technical knowledge of what that would entail, I believe it will be--in the words of our hyper-eloquent Vice President--a "big f---ing deal".
So--how will it all end?
1. In the end, the President will be in a strengthened position for re-election. Democrats in Congress will be fuming, and Republicans in Congress will wonder if they've achieved a Pyrrhic victory.
2. The Tea Party will loudly trumpet both the success they've achieved in dramatic debt reduction AND complain about the lack of backbone of Republicans in Congress. They will be correct on both counts, and they will vote largely Republican in 2012.
3. There will be dramatic debt reduction ($3T or more), and there will be increases in total revenue (tax increases, loop-hole closures, etc). No one will be entirely happy with the outcome, but Congressional Democrats will be least happy of all.
Here's my logic. Barack Obama wants to be re-elected, and he wants it badly. He knows that his signature legislative achievement (Obamacare) is despised by large portions of the voting public, he realizes that his record on the economy is dismal, and he is certain that sticking close to Nancy Pelosi is what got him there (in addition to his own ideological bent). He must present himself as the great uniter, the man who brought everyone together to save the country from default. The only way to do that is to come down closer to what Republicans want than what Democrats want. Let's face it--the discussion right now isn't whether to cut spending, it is "by how much". To some extent, Republicans have already won.
Congressional Republicans? Well, they are in the driver's seat, but they must be careful not to overplay it. They can and will walk away from this debate with major spending cuts--if they are willing to treat those (laregly Tea Partiers) who would counsel "never surrender" with respect, but firmness. Perfect is a dismal enemy of good enough, and perfection is simply unattainable here.
I laid this line out for a few friends yesterday, and one offered that in order for the logic to hold up, Congressional Republicans have to actually WANT to solve this, rather than just weaken Mr. Obama politically. While that is definitely a possibility, it is one so incredibly craven that were I to realize that as their ACTUAL strategy, I would become a loud and instant critic of the Republican caucus. I simply cannot believe that they would hazard the full faith and credit of the country to score a dubious political victory.
But we shall see.....
UPDATE: Things look even bleaker for Mr. Obama--he will fold like a cheap suit.
Hipster-in-Chief Twitter Town Hall
Yesterday, POTUS held a Twitter Town Hall in which his subjects could tweet their questions in hopes of receiving a personal answer from the President himself. Although it is difficult to say "Iowahawk" without its preceding "The Incomparable," you simply must read the tweets T.I. Iowahawk sent. A quick sampling of some of the better ones (but do visit the link):
"An $8 billion high speed train leaves Chicago for Iowa City at 8:15am at 40mph. Why?
If shovel-ready projects create jobs, wouldn't spoon-ready projects create even more jobs?
Subtract Malia's age from the number of states. Multiply the result by the number of jobs saved or created.
I let my Mexican drug lord license expire. Am I still eligible for the free machine gun program?
When you're visiting his volcano lair, does George Soros let you feed the laser sharks?
The staffer who suggested this Twitter Town Hall is fired, isn't he?
Why isn't your cabinet unionized?
If Joe Biden has a massive stroke, (a) do you have a replacement in mind, and (b) how would you tell?
When you said "days not weeks" did you mean Venusian days?
I understand you finally quit smoking. Do they make a patch for spending addicts too?
Is this question racist?
Why do you need permission to be clear, and not need permission to bomb Libya?
Are you in favor of gay marriage for Libyan bombing crews on Boeing planes made in South Carolina?
On behalf of the entire US population: dude, WTF?
Let's say instead of winning the future, we end up in a tie. Do we then go to sudden death overtime?
If we reneg on the debt, where's the best place to hide our stuff from the repo men?
If ATMs are so bad, why do you keep treating me like one?
Are strawmen cheaper when you buy them by the gross?
How much CO2 is created by a burning straw man?
This whole Twitter Town Hall thing is turning out to be another amateur disaster, isn't it?
If Eric Holder gets indicted in Operation Fast & Furious, should he get a civilian trial?
If we eat the rich, what do we get for dessert?
if punishing employers results in more employment, can you also punish beer makers?
Psst... got any spare tix for the 2016 Chicago Olympics?
Since you've doubled the number of wars, shouldn't you be getting another Nobel Peace Prize?
Does it bother you that your Twitter stunt worked out better for me than you?
Will you be my 10,000th follower?"
This guy (Iowahawk, not POTUS) is an absolute pro.
"An $8 billion high speed train leaves Chicago for Iowa City at 8:15am at 40mph. Why?
If shovel-ready projects create jobs, wouldn't spoon-ready projects create even more jobs?
Subtract Malia's age from the number of states. Multiply the result by the number of jobs saved or created.
I let my Mexican drug lord license expire. Am I still eligible for the free machine gun program?
When you're visiting his volcano lair, does George Soros let you feed the laser sharks?
The staffer who suggested this Twitter Town Hall is fired, isn't he?
Why isn't your cabinet unionized?
If Joe Biden has a massive stroke, (a) do you have a replacement in mind, and (b) how would you tell?
When you said "days not weeks" did you mean Venusian days?
I understand you finally quit smoking. Do they make a patch for spending addicts too?
Is this question racist?
Why do you need permission to be clear, and not need permission to bomb Libya?
Are you in favor of gay marriage for Libyan bombing crews on Boeing planes made in South Carolina?
On behalf of the entire US population: dude, WTF?
Let's say instead of winning the future, we end up in a tie. Do we then go to sudden death overtime?
If we reneg on the debt, where's the best place to hide our stuff from the repo men?
If ATMs are so bad, why do you keep treating me like one?
Are strawmen cheaper when you buy them by the gross?
How much CO2 is created by a burning straw man?
This whole Twitter Town Hall thing is turning out to be another amateur disaster, isn't it?
If Eric Holder gets indicted in Operation Fast & Furious, should he get a civilian trial?
If we eat the rich, what do we get for dessert?
if punishing employers results in more employment, can you also punish beer makers?
Psst... got any spare tix for the 2016 Chicago Olympics?
Since you've doubled the number of wars, shouldn't you be getting another Nobel Peace Prize?
Does it bother you that your Twitter stunt worked out better for me than you?
Will you be my 10,000th follower?"
This guy (Iowahawk, not POTUS) is an absolute pro.
Big Fat Friday Free For All
What's keeping you agitated, folks? Worried about the debt crisis? Casey Anthony got you down? Tired of watching little panty-waist David Brooks kick the Tea Party's ass? Let it all out, folks. Emote.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Hammer's Favorite Country Clubber Shoots the Tea Party in the Face
I came across this David Brooks editorial on Facebook, where Hammer posted it, closing with "what an ass-wipe". And while Mr. Brooks has disappointed me in the past now and then, I must depart company with my Facebook pal Hammer and applaud Mr. Brooks on this one.
Brooks has painted an unflattering portrait of the Tea Partiers, one they have earned in spades. They are becoming what Don Rumsfeld used to call the insurgents in Baghdad--"Dead-enders", folks who have no desire to negotiate, no ability to recognize incremental (and sizable) attainment of long sought after goals. The Tea Party is increasingly coming to mirror ideological libertarianism, interesting stuff to talk about in a dorm room but utterly incapable of serving as an actual approach to governing in anything but an autocracy.
As inconvenient as it is for Hammer and others, we live in a Democracy in which a sizable MAJORITY of the American public disagrees with the ideology of the Tea Party. Not a plurality, a MAJORITY. Not that there aren't wonderfully inspiring elements in that ideology, elements which have already shaped the debate in positive ways bound to put a spring in the step of any conservative. Far too many people disagree with far too much of what the Tea Party represents for its approach to be adopted in toto. Like "useful" libertarianism, Tea Party ideas will alloy with "country club" Republican ideas to form governing approaches that appeal to the "muddled middle", those who thought Mr. Obama gave a good speech but who now wonder whether there was any there, there. This alloyed Republican Party will be stronger and more successful at the ballot box than any singular Country Club or Tea Party approach would produce.
My advice to the Tea Party Dead-enders? Win first, then get cocky about your ideology. And by win, I mean win a big policy debate. And win it within the system, the system of public debate and legislative compromise. Join with the dreaded "Country Clubbers" to dramatically reduce the scope and whim of government. Show the American people what a new and idea-brimming Republican Party is all about. Take back the Senate. Defeat Barack Obama. Once we've reached this point, well then if the Tea Party wants to conduct a Stalinist purge of the David Brooks/Bryan McGrath wing of the party, so be it. I'll accept my fate.
UPDATE--here's a good interview with David Brooks from The Daily Caller in which he 'splains himself. Pretty straightforward stuff, from where I sit.
Brooks has painted an unflattering portrait of the Tea Partiers, one they have earned in spades. They are becoming what Don Rumsfeld used to call the insurgents in Baghdad--"Dead-enders", folks who have no desire to negotiate, no ability to recognize incremental (and sizable) attainment of long sought after goals. The Tea Party is increasingly coming to mirror ideological libertarianism, interesting stuff to talk about in a dorm room but utterly incapable of serving as an actual approach to governing in anything but an autocracy.
As inconvenient as it is for Hammer and others, we live in a Democracy in which a sizable MAJORITY of the American public disagrees with the ideology of the Tea Party. Not a plurality, a MAJORITY. Not that there aren't wonderfully inspiring elements in that ideology, elements which have already shaped the debate in positive ways bound to put a spring in the step of any conservative. Far too many people disagree with far too much of what the Tea Party represents for its approach to be adopted in toto. Like "useful" libertarianism, Tea Party ideas will alloy with "country club" Republican ideas to form governing approaches that appeal to the "muddled middle", those who thought Mr. Obama gave a good speech but who now wonder whether there was any there, there. This alloyed Republican Party will be stronger and more successful at the ballot box than any singular Country Club or Tea Party approach would produce.
My advice to the Tea Party Dead-enders? Win first, then get cocky about your ideology. And by win, I mean win a big policy debate. And win it within the system, the system of public debate and legislative compromise. Join with the dreaded "Country Clubbers" to dramatically reduce the scope and whim of government. Show the American people what a new and idea-brimming Republican Party is all about. Take back the Senate. Defeat Barack Obama. Once we've reached this point, well then if the Tea Party wants to conduct a Stalinist purge of the David Brooks/Bryan McGrath wing of the party, so be it. I'll accept my fate.
UPDATE--here's a good interview with David Brooks from The Daily Caller in which he 'splains himself. Pretty straightforward stuff, from where I sit.
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
The Bush/Obama War on Terror Continues
Where is the bought and paid for media with regard to the biggest story of the Obama Presidency--that the policies and practices of the Bush Administration--which he relentlessly criticized while on the stump--remain the policies and practices of the Obama Administration? Here's the story of a Somali miscreant captured in the Gulf of Aden and---wait-----held on a Navy ship for two months. Was he spirited to the loving arms of the Eric Holder justice system? Eh, no. Did we let him lawyer up with folks who haven't yet earned their spurs into the Holder Justice Department? Eh, no. We held him without warrant, we interrogated him without counsel, we treated him like the vermin he is and now--he'll be turned over to the Holder Justice Department, for trial.
When will the media hold this man accountable? When will Barack Obama have to answer for his over the top and irresponsible campaign rhetoric? When will he apologize to George Bush for the things he said about the way the Bush Administration pursued the war on terror?
When will the media hold this man accountable? When will Barack Obama have to answer for his over the top and irresponsible campaign rhetoric? When will he apologize to George Bush for the things he said about the way the Bush Administration pursued the war on terror?
Monday, July 4, 2011
Wisconsin Collective Bargaining Update
Let's hope the following is but one of hundreds of similar instances in the state of Wisconsin and around the country. Let's also hope that the BPFM starts to report on these little victories. Don't hold your breath, though.
In the past, Kaukauna's agreement with the teachers union required the school district to purchase health insurance coverage from something called WEA Trust -- a company created by the Wisconsin teachers union. "It was in the collective bargaining agreement that we could only negotiate with them," says Arnoldussen. "Well, you know what happens when you can only negotiate with one vendor." This year, WEA Trust told Kaukauna that it would face a significant increase in premiums.
Now, the collective bargaining agreement is gone, and the school district is free to shop around for coverage. And all of a sudden, WEA Trust has changed its position. "With these changes, the schools could go out for bids, and lo and behold, WEA Trust said, 'We can match the lowest bid,'" says Republican state Rep. Jim Steineke, who represents the area and supports the Walker changes. At least for the moment, Kaukauna is staying with WEA Trust, but saving substantial amounts of money.
Hat tip: Betsy's Page
Some Sound Thinking on Restraint
America needs to guard against "imperial over-reach". John R. Miller makes an excellent case here.
CW Turns 3
Well folks, the little blog project celebrated its 3rd anniversary last week. Thanks to everyone who makes it a part of their daily scan and to those who stumble across it during Google searches. Special thanks to Mudge, Goldwater's Ghost, Sally and Robert Thorn for their blog posts, and to Hammer for his commentary.
Annual Reading of the Declaration of Independence
I did it this morning.....did you?
The Unanimous Declaration
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.
He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.
He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.
He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:
For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing taxes on us without our consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:
For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:
For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:
For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:
For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.
We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.
New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
The Unanimous Declaration
of the Thirteen United States of America
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.
He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.
He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.
He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:
For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing taxes on us without our consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:
For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:
For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:
For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.
We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.
New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
Sunday, July 3, 2011
Friday, July 1, 2011
Big Fat Friday Free For All
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Renovation Progress
We are getting there....slowly but surely. And it is turning out more beautiful than I had imagined.
Efficient White House Scheduling
The President kills two birds with one stone today, as he hosts the Women's NBA champs and participates in an "LGBT" Pride event
Shared Sacrifice = Soak the Rich, Increase Taxes on Business
This is going to be an interesting summer. Clearly, we are headed toward some kind of epic budget impasse, driven by the need to raise the debt ceiling (something acknowledged by most in both parties) and the Republican desire to use that need as a lever to gain spending cuts.
Into the fray step Joe Lieberman and Tom Coburn with a plan to cut $600B in Medicare spending in the next decade, in no small part by raising the Medicare age to 67 from its current 65.
Democratic reaction was predictable. Here is Madame (Former) Speaker Pelosi: “It is unfair to ask seniors to get less in benefits and wait longer to get onto Medicare — all while Republicans back tax breaks for big oil and corporations that ship American jobs overseas,” Pelosi said. Yawn.
We have come to a lamentable place in the evolution of this country when a political party cannot bring itself to cut benefits for people who aren't even receiving them yet, or to delay benefits for people who do not qualify for them.
Every time I hear Pelosi talk about "tax breaks for big oil", I want to see statistics on the profit margins for companies operating in and near her district--you know, San Fran, Silicon Valley.....where margins DWARF those earned by the oil companies.
Into the fray step Joe Lieberman and Tom Coburn with a plan to cut $600B in Medicare spending in the next decade, in no small part by raising the Medicare age to 67 from its current 65.
Democratic reaction was predictable. Here is Madame (Former) Speaker Pelosi: “It is unfair to ask seniors to get less in benefits and wait longer to get onto Medicare — all while Republicans back tax breaks for big oil and corporations that ship American jobs overseas,” Pelosi said. Yawn.
We have come to a lamentable place in the evolution of this country when a political party cannot bring itself to cut benefits for people who aren't even receiving them yet, or to delay benefits for people who do not qualify for them.
Every time I hear Pelosi talk about "tax breaks for big oil", I want to see statistics on the profit margins for companies operating in and near her district--you know, San Fran, Silicon Valley.....where margins DWARF those earned by the oil companies.
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Monday, June 27, 2011
Gay Marriage in New York
In the first act of the Democratic primary season for 2016, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law a gay-marriage equality bill actually passed by both chambers of the state legislature (not imposed by the courts). Bully for New York for moving this through the political sphere rather than the judicial. Clearly, this is not a dead issue nationally, though.
Meanwhile, our Evolver-in-Chief continues to meander on the issue.
My thoughts? I've provided them many times here on the CW. Government has no place in marriage, gay or straight. Marriage should be a socio-religious issue with no legal emoluments flowing from one's marital status.
Meanwhile, our Evolver-in-Chief continues to meander on the issue.
My thoughts? I've provided them many times here on the CW. Government has no place in marriage, gay or straight. Marriage should be a socio-religious issue with no legal emoluments flowing from one's marital status.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Some Thoughts on The War Powers Act
I've got a post up at Information Dissemination in which I lay out some thoughts on the War Powers Act. The back and forth in the commentary is worth reading.
The Budget Talks Break Down
Word is that the Republicans have flown the coop on Joe Biden's debt confab, and that they are now "demanding" to meet with the President on the subject. While highlighting the President's distance from the process is helpful, the Republicans are playing this wrong. Don't "demand" anything. Wait them out. Make the President "demand" a meeting with you. Remember--he's got more to lose than you do.
Everything seems to revolve around Republicans' stand on taxes--that is, no tax increase will make it through the House, so don't even consider one. Here are two tax increases I'm willing to support:
1. The "Super-rich" tax. This would be 3% surcharge on all income--or capital gains--realized over the amount of $10M in any one year. Several facets of this tax appeal to me. The first is that it treats capital gains like income, which i believe it ought to be in the regular tax code. Secondly, my Spidey senses tell me that it will disproportionately impact liberals and Democrats, or at least those who are so rich that they have the luxury and time to "care" about issues like social justice, poverty, the environment, and public eduction without ever giving a crap about the consequences of their largess.
2. The creation of a "1% bracket". What does that mean? It means that the very first thing one would do on a tax return is figure out what 1% of one's taxable income is. That figure would then be THE FLOOR. Everyone earning a wage would AT LEAST pay 1% of their income to the continuing operations of a government from which they draw continuing succor and from which they continue to demand an increasing flow of benefits.
VP Biden had this bit of fatuity for our listening pleasure:
“The only way to make sure we begin to live within our means is by coming together behind a balanced approach that finds real savings across the budget — including domestic spending, defense spending, mandatory spending, and loopholes in the tax code,” Biden said in a statement. “We all need to make sacrifices, and that includes the most fortunate among us.”
All of us, Mr. Vice President? All of us? Then stop weeding out "the middle class" from consideration. Stop fencing off the elderly. If there truly is to be shared sacrifice then LET IT BE SHARED. This notion that we can get what we need by simply soaking the rich is loony.
Everything seems to revolve around Republicans' stand on taxes--that is, no tax increase will make it through the House, so don't even consider one. Here are two tax increases I'm willing to support:
1. The "Super-rich" tax. This would be 3% surcharge on all income--or capital gains--realized over the amount of $10M in any one year. Several facets of this tax appeal to me. The first is that it treats capital gains like income, which i believe it ought to be in the regular tax code. Secondly, my Spidey senses tell me that it will disproportionately impact liberals and Democrats, or at least those who are so rich that they have the luxury and time to "care" about issues like social justice, poverty, the environment, and public eduction without ever giving a crap about the consequences of their largess.
2. The creation of a "1% bracket". What does that mean? It means that the very first thing one would do on a tax return is figure out what 1% of one's taxable income is. That figure would then be THE FLOOR. Everyone earning a wage would AT LEAST pay 1% of their income to the continuing operations of a government from which they draw continuing succor and from which they continue to demand an increasing flow of benefits.
VP Biden had this bit of fatuity for our listening pleasure:
“The only way to make sure we begin to live within our means is by coming together behind a balanced approach that finds real savings across the budget — including domestic spending, defense spending, mandatory spending, and loopholes in the tax code,” Biden said in a statement. “We all need to make sacrifices, and that includes the most fortunate among us.”
All of us, Mr. Vice President? All of us? Then stop weeding out "the middle class" from consideration. Stop fencing off the elderly. If there truly is to be shared sacrifice then LET IT BE SHARED. This notion that we can get what we need by simply soaking the rich is loony.
Big Fat Friday Free For All
Well folks, not quite as fat as usual a BFFFFA...weighed in at 181.8 today, down just over 13 pounds.
So what's on your minds, folks? Afghanistan pull out too slow for you? Collapse of Joe Biden's debt talks got you down? Share people, share!
So what's on your minds, folks? Afghanistan pull out too slow for you? Collapse of Joe Biden's debt talks got you down? Share people, share!
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Terror Attack Broken Up in Seattle--Any Guesses as to the Religion of the Perps?
 |
| Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif, formerly known as Joe Davis |
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
The President and Afghanistan
Tonight, the President will go on television to put the final touches on Bob Woodward's next book inform the American public about the direction of his Afghanistan policy. Rumor is that he will "stay true to his word" and begin the drawdown this summer, in a manner that suggests 10,000 troops will return home by year's end (out of over 30,000 "surged" by the President last year).
I am glad that the President will stay true to his word, but I would prefer that he not hunt and peck around the margins. It is time to wrap things up on the Afghanistan COIN front, to recognize that Karzai is not a stable partner, and that our interests there are primarily in killing terrorists and not in creating a stable democracy.
Faster, please.
I am glad that the President will stay true to his word, but I would prefer that he not hunt and peck around the margins. It is time to wrap things up on the Afghanistan COIN front, to recognize that Karzai is not a stable partner, and that our interests there are primarily in killing terrorists and not in creating a stable democracy.
Faster, please.
Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) Makes Republicans Case on Raising Debt Limit
Senator Kent Conrad is--not without reason--known on the Hill as a man who knows his way around budgets. He is an adult on budget issues, and he takes our nation's debt seriously--very seriously. Some on our side of the aisle would be repelled by some remedies Conrad pushes--but in the main, he strikes a fairly good balance between budget cutting and tax increasing.
He's coming out swinging now (not running for re-election, natch), pushing the Vice President and his debt control confab to cut deeper--not $2T but at least $4T. In the course of his activities, he has fairly well articulated support for the strategy most Republicans advocate vis-a-vis the debt ceiling. The President and his people would prefer a clean raise to the debt ceiling--claiming that making a rise contingent upon spending cuts (as desired by Republicans) hazards financial markets and "plays politics" with the fiscal reputation of the United States. Republicans disagree, recognizing that absent the debt ceiling cudgel, there would be little incentive on the Dems side to actually DO anything about debt. Into the discussion steps Kent Conrad in this morning's WaPost: "But Conrad argued that all incentive will be lost once the debt ceiling is raised.
“If they reach an agreement and that passes and the debt limit then does not have to be dealt with until after next year’s election, there will be very little appetite here to come back and do what really has to be done to get our financial house in order,” he said."
Now that we all agree on that--let's start to cut some spending, shall we?
He's coming out swinging now (not running for re-election, natch), pushing the Vice President and his debt control confab to cut deeper--not $2T but at least $4T. In the course of his activities, he has fairly well articulated support for the strategy most Republicans advocate vis-a-vis the debt ceiling. The President and his people would prefer a clean raise to the debt ceiling--claiming that making a rise contingent upon spending cuts (as desired by Republicans) hazards financial markets and "plays politics" with the fiscal reputation of the United States. Republicans disagree, recognizing that absent the debt ceiling cudgel, there would be little incentive on the Dems side to actually DO anything about debt. Into the discussion steps Kent Conrad in this morning's WaPost: "But Conrad argued that all incentive will be lost once the debt ceiling is raised.
“If they reach an agreement and that passes and the debt limit then does not have to be dealt with until after next year’s election, there will be very little appetite here to come back and do what really has to be done to get our financial house in order,” he said."
Now that we all agree on that--let's start to cut some spending, shall we?
Monday, June 20, 2011
Why is there a Miss USA Contest?
I enjoy the site of a beautiful woman as much as the next guy--ok, maybe a little more than the next guy--but news this morning of the crowning of a new "Miss USA" awakens in me a long-festering bit of wonder. Why, in this day of female empowerment, do we still have "beauty pageants"? Are they not simply the human equivalent of the Westminster Dog Show? Some may think that they exist as a vestigial hangover from times of more open male oppression--but c'mon folks--men don't even watch these shows (outside of a sideways glance at the swimsuit "competition").
I guess the answer to my question is easy--freedom. We have the freedom in this country to do largely as we please, and if enough people want to do what you want to do, well then you can get it on television. I suppose the real question I should have asked is why does anyone care about beauty contests?
 |
| Miss California won the swimsuit competition and the crown |
A New Blog To Sample
A friend of Brother Tom has started a blog--The View from Erik Travels' World--and it is off to a great start. Erik is an MD who has traveled the world administering medicine through NGO's to the world's needy and war-torn. If there's a s***hole he hasn't been to, I don't know what it is.
I've never met the guy, but we've exchanged a number of incredibly interesting Facebook chats.
Erik's writing is raw and gritty, but it comes from the point of view of a guy who has earned the right to have a bit of a jaundiced view. He's a Buddhist who recognizes the value of both guns and money. I see in him a "save the world" liberal who now and again realizes that some of the world isn't worth saving, and some of the world doesn't want our saving.
This won't be every reader of the CW's cup of tea, but some of you will see great things in this blog's beginning. I do.
I've never met the guy, but we've exchanged a number of incredibly interesting Facebook chats.
Erik's writing is raw and gritty, but it comes from the point of view of a guy who has earned the right to have a bit of a jaundiced view. He's a Buddhist who recognizes the value of both guns and money. I see in him a "save the world" liberal who now and again realizes that some of the world isn't worth saving, and some of the world doesn't want our saving.
This won't be every reader of the CW's cup of tea, but some of you will see great things in this blog's beginning. I do.
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Target Workers Vote NO to Job Destruction and Extortion
Pleasant piece of news out of a Long Island, NY Target store Friday.
United Food and Commercial Workers union President, Bruce Both, saw Target employees'137-85 rejection of his union as proof that these sweat shop workers (you've seen the horrible conditions in a Target store haven't you?) needed him to continue their fight:
Uhm, Mr. Both, it's pronounced "the Soviet dream" and if the workers knew they could be protected from you and your pipe-wielding thugs, you wouldn't have even gotten the measly 38% yes vote that you did get.
Look, you and your extortionist dues collectors don't get it, but it appears most of the free Americans who are, in fact, living the American dream fortunately DO get it: unions = destruction of profitable employers and less personal freedom. Turns out most Americans still cherish the ability to make our own decisions and reject the notion that government and/or union "officials," who take our earnings through threat of violence, can make those decisions better than we can--especially when it comes to matters such as our own health care and our own jobs.
So here's some advice for every last one of you unionistas--go to Venezuela--they LOVE your thinking down there. Brother Hugo is raising the minimum wage again--to contend with 25% inflation. Pretty much a foregone conclusion that doing so will jack what is already the highest inflation in the developed world up another 5-10%. And the poor, who keep buying this pile of socialist BS, get poorer, just as everywhere this "experiment" gets reattempted.
United Food and Commercial Workers union President, Bruce Both, saw Target employees'137-85 rejection of his union as proof that these sweat shop workers (you've seen the horrible conditions in a Target store haven't you?) needed him to continue their fight:
"Target did everything they could to deny these workers a chance at the American dream," he said. "However, the workers’ pursuit of a better life and the ability to house and feed their families is proving more powerful. These workers are not backing down from this fight. They are demanding another election. They are demanding a fair election. They are demanding justice and they are prepared to fight for it."
Uhm, Mr. Both, it's pronounced "the Soviet dream" and if the workers knew they could be protected from you and your pipe-wielding thugs, you wouldn't have even gotten the measly 38% yes vote that you did get.
Look, you and your extortionist dues collectors don't get it, but it appears most of the free Americans who are, in fact, living the American dream fortunately DO get it: unions = destruction of profitable employers and less personal freedom. Turns out most Americans still cherish the ability to make our own decisions and reject the notion that government and/or union "officials," who take our earnings through threat of violence, can make those decisions better than we can--especially when it comes to matters such as our own health care and our own jobs.
So here's some advice for every last one of you unionistas--go to Venezuela--they LOVE your thinking down there. Brother Hugo is raising the minimum wage again--to contend with 25% inflation. Pretty much a foregone conclusion that doing so will jack what is already the highest inflation in the developed world up another 5-10%. And the poor, who keep buying this pile of socialist BS, get poorer, just as everywhere this "experiment" gets reattempted.
Friday, June 17, 2011
Big Fat Friday Free For All
Posted from the road, with all the Kittens. What are you thinking about today? Any bitching to get off your chest? Let your whine flag fly!
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Out of Town--Blog Slowdown
I'll be working from early morn tomorrow, then off for a few days. Blogging will be light or nonexistent from me until Sunday night. Be well, all.
A Great Photography/Travel Blog
 |
| Adam Allegro and Friend |
The Disgusting Sinkhole of Yucca Mountain
For a little history on the ridiculous, $15B sinkhole that is Yucca Mountain, this ditty from the WaPost will suffice.
It's a terribly superficial treatment of the subject, but it gives one a sense of the scope and glacial pace of this project. For instance--the reporters blithely pass around scurrilous anti-Yucca propaganda like "it is too wet" for long term storage and "subject to earthquakes". The science that went into Yucca's selection was estimable, and the fact that there is contamination in ground water might have something to do with the fact that we exploded mondo-nukes in that desert in the 50's--as opposed to deep storage underground in sealed vaults with sealed casks for the waste.
But that makes no difference. Nevada was happy to take $15B in construction.....just don't put any waste there.
It's a terribly superficial treatment of the subject, but it gives one a sense of the scope and glacial pace of this project. For instance--the reporters blithely pass around scurrilous anti-Yucca propaganda like "it is too wet" for long term storage and "subject to earthquakes". The science that went into Yucca's selection was estimable, and the fact that there is contamination in ground water might have something to do with the fact that we exploded mondo-nukes in that desert in the 50's--as opposed to deep storage underground in sealed vaults with sealed casks for the waste.
But that makes no difference. Nevada was happy to take $15B in construction.....just don't put any waste there.
David Brooks is Protesting
 |
| Alexander Hamilton |
Brooks' column this morning is particularly good--it zeroes in on the pathologies of BOTH parties effectively and conveys his sense of disappointment the miniaturization of American politics. My favorite line: "Covering this upcoming election is like covering a competition between two Soviet refrigerator companies, cold-war relics offering products that never change"
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
More on the Non-Stimulating Stimulus....
1.9 million fewer Americans have jobs now than had them before the stimulus. Hence, the artful "created or saved".
Monday, June 13, 2011
Anne-Marie Slaughter is Wrong--Plain Wrong--On Weiner
Anne-Marie Slaughter is a Princeton Professor, and reliable Democratic foreign policy type. Generally considered a moderate and an adult, she spent some time in the Obama Administration's State Department.
She has taken now to providing occasional commentary at CNN (natch), and in this one, she concludes the following with respect to "L'Affaire de Weiner": "Absent criminal behavior, which is another category entirely, the issue is whether sexual misconduct undermines a politician’s ability to represent his or her constituents and contribute to the common good."
No, Professor Slaughter, sexual misconduct is NOT the issue; at least it is not the ONLY issue. How about lying--repeatedly, cold-bloodedly, in situation after situation, to the public, your constituents, the leadership of your party and perhaps even your President? What about the question of trust? What about the smearing of Breibart and others in the not Bought and Paid For Media?
No--sexual misconduct doesn't alone undermine Weiner's ability to continue to serve. But his utter lack of trustworthiness does.
She has taken now to providing occasional commentary at CNN (natch), and in this one, she concludes the following with respect to "L'Affaire de Weiner": "Absent criminal behavior, which is another category entirely, the issue is whether sexual misconduct undermines a politician’s ability to represent his or her constituents and contribute to the common good."
No, Professor Slaughter, sexual misconduct is NOT the issue; at least it is not the ONLY issue. How about lying--repeatedly, cold-bloodedly, in situation after situation, to the public, your constituents, the leadership of your party and perhaps even your President? What about the question of trust? What about the smearing of Breibart and others in the not Bought and Paid For Media?
No--sexual misconduct doesn't alone undermine Weiner's ability to continue to serve. But his utter lack of trustworthiness does.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
On the Palin Emails
Sally posted earlier in the week on the Washington Post's efforts to enlist "citizen" journalists to comb through the voluminous emails of then Governor Palin to her staff, family and others. Conveniently forgetting to apply such modern flash mob tactics to anything resembling-oh, journalism (such as actually reading the Obamacare Bill or the Stimulus Bill)--the Post once again confirmed all that is suspected of the Bought and Paid For Media and its determination to make news, rather than report it.
But it seems that the pesky Ms. Palin simply won't cooperate, in that her emails appear to have been serious, sympathetic, rational and sometimes banal. No smoking guns here, folks--though I wonder who among us would stand up to this kind of scrutiny.
This has not been a good moment for the media--but has been a wonderful time for Mrs. Palin.
This has not been a good moment for the media--but has been a wonderful time for Mrs. Palin.
Progressivism Jumps The Shark--Walter Russell Mead
I read this article this morning after a friend posted it on my Facebook page. I like Walter Russell Mead generally, but this piece is so deftly done, so logically framed, that I may come to be more of a loyal reader. In it, Mead takes us through the fateful Lifecycle of Progressivism, from Great White Hope to Great White Father to Great Elephant to Great White Shark to Great White Whale. Creative and literary, yes. But also logical and incredibly well-written. His identification of the process through which good intentions become government programs promoting dependency and corruption is brilliant. One group that didn't come in for the criticism it should in this piece? Unions (he does touch on public sector unions). One can see in the rise of the union movement in the United States elements of all five stages Mead cites--from a force to rectify what were truly horrific and indentured work conditions to what we have now, a bloated, bureaucratic, politically connected patronage program that artificially inflates wage scales, even as the public code of the nation enshrines worker protections that no union organizer in the early stages of the movement would have thought possible.
The question Mead's piece leaves one with is--what is to be done? I'd really love to see a progressive criticism of Mead's piece--the logical gyrations necessary to contest it would be breathtaking to behold. Mead sees a need for reform--but what kinds of reforms? Can we as a people be trusted to vote in ways that may impact our short term benefits, but which are good for the nation in the long run? Are we ready as a nation to concentrate on the truly needy and deserving--who presently comprise just a portion of the entitlement class (look around folks, we're all in it)? I think we're moving in this country toward a great debate, one in which someone who tells the truth will be pitted against someone who protects the status quo. I know which side I'd like to be on.
The question Mead's piece leaves one with is--what is to be done? I'd really love to see a progressive criticism of Mead's piece--the logical gyrations necessary to contest it would be breathtaking to behold. Mead sees a need for reform--but what kinds of reforms? Can we as a people be trusted to vote in ways that may impact our short term benefits, but which are good for the nation in the long run? Are we ready as a nation to concentrate on the truly needy and deserving--who presently comprise just a portion of the entitlement class (look around folks, we're all in it)? I think we're moving in this country toward a great debate, one in which someone who tells the truth will be pitted against someone who protects the status quo. I know which side I'd like to be on.
What Might Have Been
The breathless search through Palin's emails has yielded little, except to reveal that all the reasons she was tapped for the VP spot in the first place. Practical, tough, willing to work with politicians of all stripe and an eminently capable governor.
I'm not a Palin supporter and wish she would exit the stage (and I wish the press would stop covering her every move as though she's a Kardashian or something). She's done very little to advance herself as a serious person and much (not all) of the criticism she's received has been justified. But just think what may have been if reporters had honestly covered her when she emerged onto the national scene a few years ago. Instead, we were treated to a portrayal of a woman that was power-mad, that had a low I.Q., and that may or may not have been the biological mother of her youngest child.
The irresponsibility of the media truly reached its nadir with Sarah Palin.
I'm not a Palin supporter and wish she would exit the stage (and I wish the press would stop covering her every move as though she's a Kardashian or something). She's done very little to advance herself as a serious person and much (not all) of the criticism she's received has been justified. But just think what may have been if reporters had honestly covered her when she emerged onto the national scene a few years ago. Instead, we were treated to a portrayal of a woman that was power-mad, that had a low I.Q., and that may or may not have been the biological mother of her youngest child.
The irresponsibility of the media truly reached its nadir with Sarah Palin.
Friday, June 10, 2011
Big Fat Friday Free For All
Let it OUT folks--what's been bothering you? Lose your staff like Newt? Having your emails read like Sarah?
Thursday, June 9, 2011
The Washington Post Needs YOU
...to go through Sarah Palin's underwear drawer.
25,000 pages of Palin's emails during her tenure as governor of Alaska will be released tomorrow. Because of course these emails require total perusal by this country's news organizations, the Washington Post is seeking citizen journalists to analyze them. The Post is looking for 100 folks to work in teams to ferret out the most important information contained in the emails.
One can just imagine what they consider the 'most important information.'
25,000 pages of Palin's emails during her tenure as governor of Alaska will be released tomorrow. Because of course these emails require total perusal by this country's news organizations, the Washington Post is seeking citizen journalists to analyze them. The Post is looking for 100 folks to work in teams to ferret out the most important information contained in the emails.
One can just imagine what they consider the 'most important information.'
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Weiner Comes Clean
Finally announcing what had come to be obvious, New York Representative Anthony Weiner admitted that yes, that was his member on the Twitter feed and that yes, he had sent it. Along with lots of other similar kinds of pics. He announced this at a teary-eyed media circus--a a Mark Sanford a couple of summers ago.
The media were justifiably all over the Sanford story--here was a conservative, married, God-fearing Governor sneaking down to South America without telling his staff. The hypocrisy was manifest. The media is all over this one too (though some conservatives think insufficiently, looking for a double standard), but hypocrisy isn't the issue. As I said in an earlier post--Democrats aren't the "family values" party and they don't wish to be. Scandals like this one are reprehensible in and of themselves--but in the case of a Democrat--there's not much here on the hypocrisy charge.
What strikes me about the difference in the Weiner and the Sanford cases was the motivation. Sanford's wrongs--while many--were clearly the actions of a man in love (he is still with the woman). He said it right there in the news conference. Weiner's actions? What motivated him? Doesn't seem like love to me.
The media were justifiably all over the Sanford story--here was a conservative, married, God-fearing Governor sneaking down to South America without telling his staff. The hypocrisy was manifest. The media is all over this one too (though some conservatives think insufficiently, looking for a double standard), but hypocrisy isn't the issue. As I said in an earlier post--Democrats aren't the "family values" party and they don't wish to be. Scandals like this one are reprehensible in and of themselves--but in the case of a Democrat--there's not much here on the hypocrisy charge.
What strikes me about the difference in the Weiner and the Sanford cases was the motivation. Sanford's wrongs--while many--were clearly the actions of a man in love (he is still with the woman). He said it right there in the news conference. Weiner's actions? What motivated him? Doesn't seem like love to me.
Monday, June 6, 2011
Debbie Does Doltish
My apologies for posting two photos of this ghastly woman in a weeks' time, but as luck would have it, Ms. Wasserman Schultz has come up with another doozy. It seems, per the DNC Chairwoman, that Republicans want to drag us back to pre-Jim Crow days. Why? Because of some of the new voter I.D. laws across the country.
This is not the first time we've heard that voter I.D. laws are somehow the same as voter suppression, but I've never heard anyone adequately explain how requiring a voter to have I.D. is racist. Can anyone help?
As long as she keeps talking, the Debbie Wasserman Schultz Chronicles just may become a weekly feature on this site.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Don't know what to serve for dinner?
Don't do ANYTHING until you've carefully examined Michelle Obama's new meal guidance. I've helpfully provided a copy here; might want to post it on your fridge. 
This apparently will lead to nothing but healthy, balanced meals on Americans' plates. Time to put away the Bugles, people!
Despite Mrs. O's claim in this article that 'I can already tell how much this is going to help parents across the country,' I'm pretty certain most of us have a good idea of what we should be serving our kids.
The Speech of a Future President?
Paul Ryan spoke to the Hamilton Society this week--a group of foreign policy experts. Not generally considered to be Ryan's territory, he delivered up this wonderfully framed speech. It is worth reading--all of it.
I would like to see Ryan get in the race. He's so closely associated with GOP prescriptions for improvement that his forceful advocacy thereof on the Presidential stump would be a natural. But I doubt he will.
Someday, however, he will be our President.
I would like to see Ryan get in the race. He's so closely associated with GOP prescriptions for improvement that his forceful advocacy thereof on the Presidential stump would be a natural. But I doubt he will.
Someday, however, he will be our President.
The Truth Hurts, Especially When It Comes From A Foreigner
Nile Gardiner hits the Administration betwixt the eyes. Key line...
After 29 months of the most left-wing presidency in US history, the American superpower is heading towards the economic abyss
Behold, Mark Steyn on Weiner-gate!
I've been silent on Weiner-gate lo this past week, largely because of my views on hypocrisy. When a "family values" politician gets caught with a dead girl or a live boy, well then, that gets my attention. When a Democrat sends a picture of his schwantz to a 20-year old coed--why, birds gotta fly....fish gotta swim. I get excited when Dems--climate change, eco-friendly, public teacher union lovin', tax the rich types--are caught with exceedingly large carbon footprints, driving SUV's, evading taxes and sending their kids to tony private prep schools.
So--Anthony Weiner's wiener does not "rise" to the level of my attention--but it has got Mark Steyn's--which is wonderful, as it gives Steyn a platform for lines like this:
"So we're drifting from outrageous cybercrime to "prank" to "Hey, who doesn't have snaps of his genitalia out there in the world?" To revive another Clintonian line: Everybody does it. "Everyone lies about Twitter-flirting," wrote the blogger Little Miss Attila, "and everyone knows that everyone lies about Twitter-flirting." "Flirting"? Why, yes: I'm assured by correspondents more au courant in "social media" that there's nothing unusual about Tweeting your nether regions to people you've never met in distant time zones. Get with the beat, daddy-o, it's a widely accepted courtship ritual of the 21st century: the flower of American maidenhood wants to see a prospective swain straining his BVDs at what I believe the lads at the TSA call Code Orange alert before they'll agree to meet him for a chocolate malt at the soda fountain.
To each her own. In my day it was "A White Sport Coat And A Pink Carnation," as Marty Robbins sang (Billboard Country & Western Number One, 1957). But apparently these days that leaves the ladies cold, and the pink carnation can prompt titters, unless it's artistically positioned across one's crown jewels, and you'd probably need to get in a professional photographer and some double-sided Scotch tape."
The man is unstoppable.
No--I'm more interested in Weiner's choice of vehicles....
So--Anthony Weiner's wiener does not "rise" to the level of my attention--but it has got Mark Steyn's--which is wonderful, as it gives Steyn a platform for lines like this:
"So we're drifting from outrageous cybercrime to "prank" to "Hey, who doesn't have snaps of his genitalia out there in the world?" To revive another Clintonian line: Everybody does it. "Everyone lies about Twitter-flirting," wrote the blogger Little Miss Attila, "and everyone knows that everyone lies about Twitter-flirting." "Flirting"? Why, yes: I'm assured by correspondents more au courant in "social media" that there's nothing unusual about Tweeting your nether regions to people you've never met in distant time zones. Get with the beat, daddy-o, it's a widely accepted courtship ritual of the 21st century: the flower of American maidenhood wants to see a prospective swain straining his BVDs at what I believe the lads at the TSA call Code Orange alert before they'll agree to meet him for a chocolate malt at the soda fountain.
To each her own. In my day it was "A White Sport Coat And A Pink Carnation," as Marty Robbins sang (Billboard Country & Western Number One, 1957). But apparently these days that leaves the ladies cold, and the pink carnation can prompt titters, unless it's artistically positioned across one's crown jewels, and you'd probably need to get in a professional photographer and some double-sided Scotch tape."
The man is unstoppable.
No--I'm more interested in Weiner's choice of vehicles....
 |
| Weiner, in his manly S-10 Blazer 4 x 4--for the mean streets of Brooklyn |
Friday, June 3, 2011
Big Fat Friday Free For All
Yes indeed my friends, another Friday is upon us, and with it, another opportunity for you to let it all hang out. What's on your mind? Thrilled that Mitt Romney's in the race? Wondering when Sarah will throw her motorcycle helmet in the ring? What's going on where you are?
Thursday, June 2, 2011
America's Public Schools, Busily Shaping Young Minds
Russellville Middle School in Arkansas, like most middle and high schools, published a yearbook this year. Not remarkable. This particular yearbook, however, listed among the usual yearbook fare the 5 Worst Persons of all Time.
Who made the cut, you wonder. Hitler? Check. Osama bin Laden? Another check. Charles Manson? Right-o. The last two? George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
Parents are rightly outraged. The school district's brilliant solution was to cover the list with black tape. And no one seems to have any idea how it happened.
What would you do if your son or daughter brought home such a yearbook?
Who made the cut, you wonder. Hitler? Check. Osama bin Laden? Another check. Charles Manson? Right-o. The last two? George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
Parents are rightly outraged. The school district's brilliant solution was to cover the list with black tape. And no one seems to have any idea how it happened.
What would you do if your son or daughter brought home such a yearbook?
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Someone Help Deb with the Definition of Illegal
This new DNC Chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, is awful. And I'm not just talking about her hair.Being bitterly partisan may go with the job, but she's so over the top it's hard to believe she's advancing her party's cause. Her latest gem is the assertion last week that 'Republicans believe illegal immigration should be a crime...the Republican solution is to pack them all up and ship them back to their own countries.'
Has anyone heard any serious person articulating this position? Tom Tancredo doesn't count. Why is the concept of illegal immigration so difficult for some to grasp?
Just Where a Hormonal 8th Grade Boy Needs to Go
A group of Berwick, PA 8th graders recently got a treat. They traveled to Baltimore to see the Aquarium. On the way back, they stopped for lunch...at Hooters.
The treat was the aquarium, of course.
June is Here
How should we acknowledge this? If you haven't made any proclamations, no need to fret: the Obama administration has taken care of this for us with a number of designations for June.
National Caribbean-American Heritage Month. African-American Music Appreciation Month. Great Outdoors Month. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month.
So have a mojito, crank up the Run DMC, go camping and watch Boys Don't Cry. Or watch Wild Things. It's downright American!
National Caribbean-American Heritage Month. African-American Music Appreciation Month. Great Outdoors Month. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month.
So have a mojito, crank up the Run DMC, go camping and watch Boys Don't Cry. Or watch Wild Things. It's downright American!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
