The Immaculate Overreaction

Aspects of the Penn State debacle are starting to get ridiculous. The latest: former Steeler and Nittany Lion great Franco Harris, he of Immaculate Reception fame and a spokesman for a Pittsburgh-area casino & racetrack, has now lost his job because of his outspoken support for Joe Paterno.

Harris was critical of the Penn State Board of Trustees for firing JoePa, feeling they lacked courage in not standing by him. In other words, he was supporting his long-time coach.

This is NOT a defense of any of the utterly indefensible players in the Penn State drama. But stop and consider something: Sandusky just may be found not guilty. Before you guffaw, look at OJ...or Casey Anthony. Then what?

An Unlikely Romney Cheerleader

Ann Coulter declares it high time to rally around Romney. You read that correctly. Ann Coulter.

In her typically bitchy style, she brutally takes down Newt and makes the argument that for the first time in a long while, we'll have an articulate Republican, that it's time to give up on the ideological purity and that we need to give up finding Reagan this time around.

She's right, but it's worth reading the whole piece.

The Hammer's Review of Books

Some tyrants are born, some are made, and some are made worse by our reaction to them. Buchanan makes a good case that Hitler was not necessarily a candidate for biggest bastard in the history of the cosmos prior to Britain and France's engagement. The book takes you through both World Wars focusing primarily on the diplomatic missteps, manipulations and lies that led the West into the bloodiest, most costly conflict in history. And if you had any preconceptions about Winston Churchill being the greatest Brit since Richard the Lionheart, you're in for a surprise.

Recommendation: Read it, you might learn something.




This is sort of a throwaway book I picked up from the bargain bin. The author David Hagberg, relates a Soviet Naval officer's account of a mutiny aboard a Cold War era destroyer. In my opinion the book isn't written very well, this being the author's first foray into non-fiction, but the story does offer some insights into Soviet military organization, inter-service rivalries and the same cover-your-ass mindset we've all seen in our military.

Recommendation: Eh? If your stuck in an airport have at it.





This is a must read! It's a play by play of the financial crisis we are still living with today...and it names names. The authors follow the evidence like a good prosecutor and are brutal in their analysis. The facts in this book illustrate, in a real way rather than just theory, how dangerous it is to put politics before economics.

Recommendation: Read it or shut your yap.

Tiger Beat Meets Sergeant Stryker

Former teen heartthrob*, former boy band member and one-time Mouseketeer Justin Timberlake did a good thing this weekend when he attended the Marine Corps Ball, sticking to a promise he made last summer when he was invited to accompany a young Marine to the annual event.

Timberlake wrote movingly in his blog about the experience, how he was humbled by the event, how proud he was to be there, and how it changed his life to be among his heroes.

Good for him.

*Never quite understood what made him a heartthrob, but I guess it's only me considering who he's been involved with.

Congressional Insider Trading

Big news this morning about yesterday's 60 minutes report on Congressional insider trading.  I didn't see the story, but UVA Professor Larry Sabato Tweeted an interesting idea--you get elected to Congress, you put your assets in a blind trust.  Sounds ok to me. In fact, sounds downright logical.

Crazy Wins Over Stupid & Evil

As you may know, Republicans are either crazy, stupid or evil. And of course there are subsets of the above categories. For example, advocating freedom is a subset of stupid. Identifying with the Tea Party is a subset of stupid and evil. Being deeply religious is a subset of all three. See how it works?

I have to say I disagree with Sally. I don't deny that Michelle Bachmann is an "idiot", being of course a subset of stupid. But I take issue with her assertion that it is the reason for her downfall. Crazy is the clear winner here and even a cursory analysis of Bachmann's media coverage would lead one to this conclusion. So, can we all agree she is crazy, not stupid.

I'm sorry Sally but I felt compelled to point this out.

Michele Bachmann Is an Idiot

After a strong initial showing and surprise victory at August's Iowa Straw Poll, Michele Bachmann has been sinking like a stone and is taken seriously by virtually no one.

That isn't stopping her from making a fool of herself. Last night the GOP candidates met for (another!) debate in South Carolina moderated by CBS. She's taken a totally legitimate email from the CBS team and is screaming liberal media bias. The email (inadvertently sent to the Bachmann team) essentially said she won't be getting many questions as her poll numbers are low and they hope to spend more time on other candidates.

Not getting questions at a debate (a Republican debate, mind you) is hardly media bias, Michele. It's merely a reflection of your standing in the polls-and that standing is not exactly helped by your whining.

UVA 31 Dook 21

Yes indeed, ladies and gentlemen, the Wahoos put another one in the win column yesterday, defeating the Blue Devils after three straight losses.  The prospect of an entire college career losing to Duke must have proved too much for the Seniors....

So the Hoo's are now 7-3, with Florida State and Virginia  Tech remaining.  I'd dearly like to win both of those games, would be incredibly satisfied with one victory (preferably over the Chokies, if needs be), but would--in the end--settle for playing both of them tough.

We'll see how things go. 

Romney and Conservatives

I had a long conversation yesterday with one of the smartest guys I know.  He's a committed conservative, and he's just not that into Mitt Romney.  The purpose of our call was for each of us to proselytize the other to his view (me, get him onboard with Mitt.  Him, get me offboard with Mitt).  Neither of us succeeded.  But the quality of the conversation and the thinking behind the two viewpoints led me to a "theory of the case"; that is, a sort of "Grand Unifying Theory" as to why I am where I am and why so many other conservatives are where they are.

First though, I will assert to you that I am more ideologically conservative than  the candidate I am supporting, though as I continue to read and watch Romney espouse his views, I find that he's more conservative than I thought six months ago. 

The very basic question here is how to fix America.  Both I and my interlocutor believe the country is in bad shape and that there is a lot of work to do to make it better.  Neither of us believe that the present administration can get it done, and both of us believe that the ideology of the present administration is at least partly responsible for the acceleration of our woes the past two years.  Both of us believe that the country (and the populace) has moved slowly but steadily leftward over the past 80 years, with only halting steps back to the middle here and there to arrest the drift (see R. Reagan).  Both of us believe that this drift must be reversed, and that it will ultimately serve as the catalyst for America's irreversible decline if not checked--and soon.  Where he and I differ is on how to make this happen--and this, I suggest, is at the heart of much of the Romney lukewarmity I see.

My friend believes we are already past the point of no return, that the other side is irredeemably corrupt and that no amount of compromise is going to fix things.  In fact, he argues that compromise is what put us in the pickle we're in, that we have compromised first principles granted us by the Founders, and that the only way to make things right is to hold steady to principles and elect a no-nonsense conservative as President.  He suggests that without such an adherence to principle, we'll lose not only the Presidency, but our lead in the House and any chance of taking the Senate.  His view of Romney is that he is insufficiently conservative and certainly insufficiently differentiated from the neo-socialism of the current administration.  These flaws suggest that he will be incapable of exerting the leadership necessary to move the country forward, that he'll deliver more of the same, making deals that maybe slow the "Road to Serfdom", but which do not ultimately create a U-turn in that road. He believes that Romney's steady but unspectacular numbers in the primaries are a reflection of the views of party faithful that we need a clean sweep, that we need to take on liberal neo-socialism head on, that we simply can't trust liberals and that compromise must end.  Put simply, a Romney Administration might slow the decline, but it will not turn it around.

I on the other hand, believe that a retreat to ideological purity will hand the liberals the victory they have been steadily moving toward, as no matter how skippy-jiffy I and my friend might consider conservative ideas to be, they simply aren't broadly adhered to enough in THIS VOTING population to serve as anything of a rallying point.  Let's face it gang--we are in the pickle we're in because many of these programs we all know to be cancers....are really, really popular with some elements of the voting population.  Voters are far too conflicted to be counted on in any way to come running to the conservative cause because we've got a great conservative candidate who can spell-bind you with his rhetoric--a la Newt--or inspire you with the simplicity of his solutions to hard problems--a la Herman.  Witness the COUNTLESS signs at Tea Party rallies two years ago saying "Hands of My Medicare".  Oh yes, we all cheered on granny as she poked Obamacare's threats to the program, some of us without ever really considering just how inconsistent with conservative principles Medicare is (while wildly popular with those who receive it). 

I believe the nomination of an ideological conservative at this point will lead to continuing gridlock and the certainty of our nation's continuing diminishment.  Not because what such a candidate would assert isn't right, or isn't what I believe--but because we can't sell it--at least not yet--to the George Bush voters who abandoned the Party for Barack Obama in 2008.  I see this as a math problem, and while we are all in love with conservative ideas and principles--a majority of Americans WILL NOT APPLY THAT LABEL to themselves.  We MUST target the muddled middle, voters who aren't ideological and who aren't political--but who recognize on some meaningful level that things are not right, that Barack Obama's path has made it worse--but--and this is a huge but--are NOT prepared to hear the inescapable truth that THEY are the problem.  That their cozy acceptance of easy mortgages backed by Uncle Sugar, student loans PROVIDED by Uncle Sugar, "save me from being underwater" restructuring deals pushed by Uncle Sugar and a whole host of other entitlements are what PUT US IN THIS POSITION, and that the only way out of this mess is to dramatically cut back on government spending.  At the heart of an ideologically conservative approach to these voters is the proposition that we have to "educate" them, that we have to convince them of the error of their ways and their own selfishness.  As wonderful as this notion is, and as fun a job as it would be--I simply cannot accept it as an electoral strategy.  I don't think you get elected President in this country by telling voters how screwed up they are.  I realize that this is a parody of an honorable approach--but it is EXACTLY how it will be portrayed by opponents. 

I support Mitt Romney for a lot of reasons--but mainly because I believe him to be a man of action animated by principle.  I support Mitt Romney because I believe that any notion that we are going to get ourselves out of this mess by creating some kind of modern day political Plymouth Colony is absurd, that any solution to where we are headed will necessarily involve some level of compromise.  The policies we seek to impact are simply TOO POPULAR for frontal assault, that the victory will be won,  one policy alteration at a time tilting the scale back in the direction of personal responsibility, limited government and free markets.

My friend and I agree completely on what the problem is, and that Mr. Obama isn't going to solve it.  I think his approach enshrines our diminishment by abandoning the playing field, and he believes my approach enshrines our diminishment by colluding with the forces that caused it.  I suspect that somewhere in between is a solution--and maybe the primary process is that solution.

Maybe the fact that conservative standard-bearers are grabbing headlines and making runs at Mitt will make him a better, more conservative candidate.  Maybe the fire nipping at his toes from Gingrich, Perry, Paul, Bachman et al will drive him to policy decisions more in line with the views of their supporters.  Maybe, in the end, Romney will be viewed as conservative enough to get the job done, and after a hard-fought primary season, the party will coalesce and he'll have the coalition he needs on our side to unseat the President.  This is my hope.  I don't think the process works with any other candidate.  I know I'll get some detractors on this one, and I accept your views.  I just think they are wrong.  But let's have some primaries, let's continue to let the process play out, and in the end, I'm damn sure I'll vote for the guy or gal with the (R) next to their name in November 2012. 

George Will's Romney Contempt Suddenly Makes Sense

A lot of conservatives are having trouble getting behind Mitt Romney, which of course is their prerogative. One of America's leading conservative voices, George Will, is among them. He took to his column in the Washington Post a few weeks ago to completely trash Romney, calling him the Republican's Michael Dukakis, and positing the question -has conservativism come so far to settle for this? Also his prerogative. Except...

Turns out Mrs. George Will is an advisor to the Perry campaign. Previously, she worked on the Bachmann campaign. And in June, she offered her services to the Romney campaign and met with campaign officials in Boston. No job offer was ever made to her.

Wonder how that column would have read had she been hired by the Romney team. And she was hired by the Perry team to prep him for debates. Based on his debate performances, I think it's safe to say the Romney-ites made the right call.

Carolina Faithful Giddy With Anticipation

University of North Carolina basketball fans around the country have created a near carnival atmosphere in anticipation of tonight's hoops action against the Michigan State Spartans on the flightdeck of the USS Carl Vinson. Celebrations have been particularly exuberant in UNC fan strongholds like Archer's Lodge, NC, Maryland's Eastern Shore and Teheran where a large percentage of Tar Heel grads reside.
In other Carolina news, unnamed sources on the UNC campus refuse to confirm persistent rumors that Joe Paterno has been offered head football coaching duties in the troubled and corrupt gridiron program.

Because it is Just Plain Wicked Cool

Hoops tonight, on the deck of an aircraft carrier

Have You Contributed to Romney for President Yet?

Every little bit helps, people!

Big Fat Friday Free For All

Well folks--here we are again--it's....um....uh.....what day is it?

Oops!  It is FRIDAY--your day to bitch and kvetch. 

Rick Perry Does Damage Control

Even if you didn't watch, you've surely seen the Rick Perry epic, cringe-worthy moment at the debate the other night that has gone viral and couldn't help but make you pity the man, no matter what your feelings toward him. He's gone into overdrive in attempt to laugh off the flub, appearing on every show that would take him yesterday. It won't likely help him, but he may have another career as a stand-up comedian. He delivered the top ten list on Letterman last night with impeccable comedic timing and he was a hoot. (#2 was the best):

10. Actually there were three reasons I messed up last night. One was the nerves. Two was the headache and three um … uh … oops.
9. I don’t know what you’re talking about, I think things went well.
8. Hey I was up late last night watching “Dancing with the Stars.”
7. I thought the debate was tonight.
6. Hey listen you try concentrating when Mitt Romney’s smiling at you. That is one handsome dude.
5. Uh, El Nino?
4. I had a five hour energy drink six hours before the debate.
3. You know I really hoped it would get me on my favorite talk show, but instead I ended up here.
2. I wanted to help take the heat off my buddy Herman Cain.
1. I just learned Justin Bieber is my father.

Nothing will change in the race...but he's handled the gaffe admirably.

What the *#@^!

Joe Paterno started coaching at Penn State in 1950 as an assistant and became head coach in 1966. During his tenure he built arguably the finest program in college athletics. He ran a clean operation, his recruits were the best (his linebackers were legend...and legion), and they graduated. As far as I know there have been no significant scandals, until now.

What in the hell happened? How could a guy like this participate in a cover-up of something like this? I am stunned, saddened and disturbed.

Amateur Hour Continues at the White House

A hot mic picked up a conversation between Nicolas Sarkozy and our President at the G-20 Summit last week, and it put neither leader in a flattering light. In the conversation, Mr. Sarkozy revealed that he 'could not stand' Benjamin Netanyahu and that he thinks Bibi is 'a liar.' O's contribution to the exchange? 'You're fed up with him, but I have to deal with him every day!' (You may not have heard about this, as journalists present at the event were requested to sign an agreement to keep mum on the embarrassing comments. Why? I don't know.)

This was a private conversation accidentally being picked up by a hot mic, so one could empathize to a degree. But seriously: 'I have to deal with him every day' ? Poor O.

Bibi could kick the ass of these two without breaking a sweat. And for unfathomable reasons, this President continues to have the support of the Jewish community. Why is that?

DOWN GOES FRAZIER

Joe Frazier died of cancer yesterday. I liked Joe Frazier. I liked his character. He was born to South Carolina sharecroppers in a time when opportunities for guys like him were, how shall I say, extremely limited. But he had talent and perseverance, and he worked his way to the top.

As a highschool kid I well remember the first Ali/Frazier fight at the Garden in '71. I recall the press hounding Frazier, the way people like Bryant Gumbel portrayed him as a shuffling, jive-ass house negro while Ali was glorified as authentically "black", an anti-establishment "take it to the man" heroic demigod. To this day I am sickened by the way Joe Frazier was treated... by his own people.

Smokin' Joe was a good champion, and he refused to be bitter. But in my opinion, it is not too late for those people who unjustly and maliciously slandered and vilified this humble, penitent, God fearing man, to come forward with a simple apology for the pain they inflicted.

R.I.P Joe Frazier.

Have You Contributed to Romney for President Yet?

If not, you can do so by clicking here.  Check to box that indicates you know your referrer's information to show the staggering influence of this blog!

Occupy The Lunatic Asylum

This morning's Washington Post treats us to a fresh helping of silliness in the form of an editorial from Alec MacGillis, reliable lefty WaPost reporter and Senior Editor at The New Republic.  In it, MacGillis suggests a few additional targets at which the Zuccati Park crowd could aim their smelly, self-indulgent siege guns, including Bill Clinton (for lowering the capital gains tax rate), Harvard (as a cut-out for high tuition bills and student loan debt), Wal-Mart (for being non-union), Towers-Watson (executive pay consultants, presumably for doing their job), Tyson's Corner (a place in Northern Virginia where there are a lot of government contractors) and The Supreme Court (for not putting a grand Progressive stop to it all and allowing corporations to be people).

Underpinning MacGillis' rant are the totemic liberal chants of "income inequality and economic justice".  Just read:

No doubt, the Occupy Wall Street protesters were right to target the financial industry first. Soaring Wall Street pay has been a key force behind America’s income disparities over the past three decades, and banks have yet to be held accountable for the destruction they wrought in recent years. 

Besides, if you’re really serious about addressing income inequality and economic injustice in America, there are other institutions and figures worth challenging. 

It is also difficult to overlook that countries with stronger unions, such as Canada and Germany, show a far more equitable distribution of income across the working population.

But nowhere in the article does MacGillis take the time to explain to us exactly why inequality of income (which has existed in this country since, oh, well--forever), is bad. You won't find it in MacGillis' article, and you won't find it in the narratives of progressives and you won't find it in the blather rising from the Occupy Wall Street crowd.  That's because income inequality measures nothing but envy, pure and simple.   It is a measure convenient to wave about when one seeks to redistribute income, yet it does not in any meaningful way convey anything tangible about an economy.

Put another way--what impact does income inequality have on society?  What is the evidence that there are pernicious impacts?  Or is it simply that the rich get richer faster than the poor get richer (which is, sorry to say, what has happened).  

Now--what is it that contributes to income inequality?  Are these contributors worthy of study and discussion? Yes, I believe so.  The tax code is worth talking about--most of you know I don't support taxing income and capital gains at different rate.  Have unions in this country so artificially inflated wage rates that manufacturing has largely left our shores in search of more affordable labor?  Has the home mortgage deduction contributed to a less mobile labor force, stuck in dog mortgages and unable to bargain its labor more effectively to potential bidders?  All of these things are in and of themselves worthy of discussion.  That they round up to "income inequality" leads these Dunderheads to then say, "well, we need to stop that"--and the best way they know how is redistributing wealth, rather than looking individually at what causes inequality (it is after all, a condition, not a cause) and seeking to devise policies that actually do something other than palliate envy.

GET A JOB!

The US economy had a positive October, at least according to new labor statistics. Unemployment dropped sharply from 9.1% to 9.0% after adding 80k new "situations" (as the Brits say). Of course this is impossible statistically unless they're playing with the numbers and gee, nobody thinks that unless, you know, they actually have brains in their head. Also, there's not much talk about under-employment or discouraged workers or McJobs (a favorite criticism of the last administration), but who wants to nitpick?

I was curious about what may be the American economy's "new normal" and crunched the unemployment numbers for the top five EU economies from 1999 through 2007. After all, if we're all socialists now, who knows how to run a Euro-Socialist economy better than the Euro-Socialists? So, while the US averaged 5.0% in this time period, the average jobless rate in a "booming" Europe was 8.58%. What, eight and a half percent? That's eerily similar to our present, and incredibly persistent unemployment figure.

The point is, these kinds of numbers are normal for mixed economies in the best of times. Why would anyone emulate failure? If Obama & Co. gave a damned about unemployment they would embrace capitalism. As Ayn Rand said:

If concern with poverty and human suffering were the collectivists’ motive, they would have become champions of capitalism long ago; they would have discovered that it is the only political system capable of producing abundance. But they evaded the evidence as long as they could. When the issue became overwhelmingly clear to the whole world, the collectivists were faced with a choice: either turn to the right, in the name of humanity—or to the left, in the name of dictatorial power. They turned to the left—the New Left.

Instead of their old promises that collectivism would create universal abundance and their denunciations of capitalism for creating poverty, they are now denouncing capitalism for creating abundance. Instead of promising comfort and security for everyone, they are now denouncing people for being comfortable and secure.

Big Fat Friday Free For All

Here it is again, folks. The opportunity you've all been waiting for! Unburden yourselves! Let your freak flag fly! Oh, and dont forget to contribute to Romney for President using the link on the right.

Occupy Tickbite Enters 160th. Year

My hometown of Tickbite is becoming uninhabitable. This "Occupy" crowd is growing more aggressive, more demanding and more obnoxious. Furthermore, the stench coming from these "Occupy" areas is becoming unbearable. I don't know about you, but watching someone consume potted meat and moon pies and square nabs and PBR day after day is getting old. It's time to do something about these people, and I mean RIGHT NOW!

FREDDIE & FANNIE; AT IT AGAIN!

12.8 million dollars ($12,800,000.00) in bonuses have been approved for 10 executives at Freddie and Fannie. As you probably know, these are quasi-private mortgage companies that are insured by the full faith and credit of the United States Government (talk about moral hazard). After the mortgage debacle of 2008 (actually 2008-present) they were taken over by Sam so as to get things back on a paying basis (right!). I don't know, call me crazy but when the taxpayer gets nailed for 150 billion dollars (so far) in bailouts due to an absurd business model, felonious bookkeeping and criminal chief executives like Jim Johnson and Franklin Raines, well I'm thinking bonuses are not appropriate at this exact moment in time. Alas the White House Press Secretary Jay Carney informs us that President Obama disagrees.

Donate to Mitt Romney for President

See the link on the right side of the blog or click here to contribute to the Mitt Romney for President Campaign.  Donations will be tracked to this blog, proving our incredible influence in Republican politics-- make sure you check the 'I know my referrer's information' block.

Photo of the Day

Hee-hee.

EUROZONE IST KAPUT?

It seems the Greek Prime Minister has called for a referendum on the EU bailout, and Brussels is not happy. George Papandreou (I think all Greeks are named George Papandreou aren't they?) said this is democracy in action and has nothing to do with him being a gutless politician seeking to cover his hummus eating ass. The Germans and the French bent over backwards to make this second bailout happen with a write-down of 50%, and now the Greek unions will have the final say? Oh what a web we weave.

Normally I could care less but in this age of globalization this could be the spark that crashes Europe. I've always thought the EU was a ridiculous, bureaucratic, world government pipe-dream but I would like to see an orderly annulment rather than a messy divorce. A Eurozone meltdown could have some nasty ramifications in this indebted, mismanaged political environment we find ourselves in today. It might be a good time to sell that Siemens and Telefunkel.

A Pox Be Upon the Lazy Gator Crowd

The Kitten and I did what modern parents and sorta parents do these days, and that is walk about with our children for Halloween.  Why this is, I simply don't know, but that's the way it is.  I don't remember Jimmy Wires trick or treating with us when I was a kid, at least when I was a kid who could spell and not wet my bed.  But now, it is a big social event, and we met up at a friend's house, had a wonderful meal with other parents who felt obligated--no, strike that--they wanted to walk about with their kids.  And then we set out to trick or treat.

We live on Maryland's Eastern Shore, and it is a relatively rural life.  Our little hamlet of Easton is the county seat, and it is a bucolic little town.  We are out in the county, amid the corn, soy bean and sunflower fields.  We trick or treat with friends in their "neighborhood" of maybe 40 houses, (an overhead shot is here, with the neighborhood being left of center along the water) which can be circumnavigated in about twenty minutes on foot.  It's quite a scene, with about twenty goblins, ghosts, wonderwomen, cowgirls and a respectable Joey Ramone flitting about the dark streets.  That's where the rant comes in.

There are lazy Josephuses who put their kids in the back of their Gators (we are one of the few respectable Talbot County farms without such a vehicle) and DRIVE this tiny little circuit.  Of course, they pull all the way into the driveways and then BACK OUT when the troop of little trick or treaters are trying to gain access to the loot.  It makes for a very annoying and slightly dangerous evening of what should be somewhat inebriated adult fun.

C'mon folks.  Get your fat asses out of the Gators and walk--if you must accompany your children.

The Least Surprising News EVER

After 72 days of wedded bliss, Kim Kardashian and Mr. Kim Kardashian have called it a day.

Ross Douthat on The Exploded Public Sector

The Hammer cited this article on Facebook, and since I am a big Douthat fan, I went right to it.  Well worth the read.  Here's a key graph:

Our entitlement system, meanwhile, is designed to redistribute wealth. But this redistribution doesn’t go from the idle rich to the working poor; it goes from young to old, working-age savings to retiree consumption, middle-class parents to empty-nest seniors. The Congressional Budget Office’s new report on income inequality points out that growing Medicare costs are part of the reason upper-income retirees receive a larger share of federal spending than they did 30 years ago, while working-age households with children receive “a much smaller and declining share of transfers.” Absent reforms, this mismatch will only grow more pronounced: by the 2030s, Medicare recipients will receive $3 in benefits for every dollar they paid in.

CAN RICK PERRY "REBOOT" HIS CAMPAIGN?

We've all heard that you get only one chance to make a good first impression. Unfortunately for Rick Perry, he blew that chance.

Perry was in the catbird seat. He entered the race as the front runner at 38% in some polls. By contrast Romney has barely gotten to 30% on a couple of occasions and usually polls in the mid to low 20's according to RealClearPolitics averages. Due in large measure (in my humble opinion) to Perry being a Texas governor with a good record (and maybe a little nostalgia for GWB), Perry looked like the man with the plan.

Can he "reboot"? Are we going to see Perry 2.0 turn things around and win the nomination? Not likely. In politics as well as business damaged brands are damaged brands. Once a product/company/politician, whatever, has been established in the consumer's mind as "damaged" it is nearly impossible to regain market share. It can happen, but almost never does.

Gov. Perry was on Fox this morning and he's a likable guy with some good ideas. I like him and would vote for him, but it's over. He's damaged goods.

WaPost Draws National Conclusion from Local Data@Fail

I was intrigued by the headline on this story, "The New U.S. Neighborhood Defined by Diversity as All-White Enclaves Vanish".  It seemed to me that this might be a bit of a stretch--that while I was certain that such demographic trends were the occurring in and around our DC, I wondered as to the extent of such trends in that great mass of easily dismissed "fly-over" country.  Sure--mostly Latin-American immigrants have made their way into communities across the country, but from the small sample size I've derived in my travels, I'd come to see them settling much as African Americans had, in areas with other just like they. 

Reading the story, it appears that the Post's intrepid reporters forged as far afield as Loudon County, Virginia, some 30 miles as the crow flies from DC.  No Nebraska.  North Texas.  East Colorado.  UP Michigan, Idaho...you get the picture.

Because something is a trend in the hipster coastal, urban areas--it is the NEW US NEIGHBORHOOD.  Get it. Because that's cool. Because "diversity" is cool, and "diverse" neighborhoods are just cooler than segregated neighborhoods.  Why?  Well because.  It is just so.

Northern Virginia Foodies, Take Note

Because here is a great site for restaurant recommendations coupled with enjoyable commentary. It's the observations of two fabulous people as they sample fare at a variety of Northern Virginia restaurants, with some stray reminiscences of a few out of the area establishments as well. You just may get an inspiration for dinner while you're taking a look, particularly if you have an appreciation for ethnic foods. Check it out!

Stock Market Prediction: Down, Down, Down

The Dow closed at 12,231.11 yesterday, and we've just been through one of the best months for that index in quite some time.  Buoyed by news from Europe that they've taken action to help the new "Sick Man of Europe (Greece)", investors seem to be riding a wave of enthusiasm that will--I'm sorry to say, come crashing down on them in the next month.  Here's a prediction:  on December 15th, the Dow will be under 11,000.

Why so glum?  I'm not glum, I'm practical.  I've written about this before--when the Dow was at 14,000 in October of 2007, it was weighed up by the ridiculous fiction that was the balance sheets of financial stocks.  When it was at 6500 in March of 2009, it was weighed down by people who had lost sight of the basic value of many of the industrials.  I said in March 2009 that the Dow had been overvalued by 25% at its high, and so its natural place was somewhere around 10,500, a figure that reflected the basic value of "the rest" of the market.

Here we are, two and a half years later.  Nothing has really changed in the basic fundamentals of the economy.  Unemployment is up a bit (from 8.6% in Mar 09 to 9.1% now).  No fundamental changes have occurred in 1) how we as a nation are addressing debt 2) how we as a nation are addressing financial regulation and reform and 3) how we as a nation are addressing revenue.  We are in the midst of a mini-bubble, caused by 1) a misplaced sense that the political agreements made in the Spring and Summer on the budget and the debt ceiling have had salutary impacts on the economy and 2) Europe's news.  It is all about to end.

In the next few weeks, nothing will dominate the headlines like the activities of the Congressional Super-committee.  Meeting largely behind closed doors (which I am ok with--see, Philadelphia, 1787), the Super-committee is meeting in order to come to agreement on how to deal with trillions of dollars in debt.  The "gun" to their head (and the rest of ours, presumably) is that if they DON'T come to some agreement, Defense gets cut by $650B and other discretionary spending gets cut by $650B.  If you thought our political system looked amateurish trying to deal with the debt ceiling, you ain't seen nothin' yet.

The prospect of a Presidential Election a year away provides both sides with incentives not to do a damn thing.  Positions are hardening on both sides, and the "gun" held to the head of the Congress was PUT THERE by Congress--it can be dropped at any time.  So we are left with the following scenario:  the Supercommittee is supposed to report out its "bill" to the Congress in three weeks.  They will not do so, as they will not have reached agreement on anything.  If they do, the bill will not be able to pass both chambers.  And so, the Congress will have to "extend" the mandate of the committee, or it will have to "drop the gun", both of which will ensure for the investing world a picture of continuing dysfunction in the American political system.  What's next?  Well, another credit downgrade, for one thing.  Any of the ratings agencies which have not yet dropped the US rating will HAVE to in order to continue to be taken seriously.  The dollar--the world's favorite reserve currency--will come under additional pressure, as what has been its bulwarks for 70 years--America's economy and its stable political system--will both be besieged.

Is the end near?  No, not really.  It's just that the present situation is not reality.  If you've got some profits to take--take 'em.  Because things will look differently in six weeks.

What a Romney v Obama Race Would Look Like

Yes of course, I'm getting way ahead of myself.  But that's what I do.  I've been thinking recently about what such a race would look like and several items occur to me.

1.  Both candidates appear to have problems with important portions of their electoral coalitions.  Governor Romney is having trouble appealing to evangelicals and some movement conservatives, and the President seems to be hemorrhaging white moderates AND far-lefters.  Let's face it--the far lefters won't vote for Romney, and the evangelicals/movement conservatives won't vote for Obama.  Those that do vote, will vote as we would expect, though many on each side will simply stay home.  And so, the election will be all about winning white moderates--who abandoned the Republican Party in significant numbers last election. 

2.  This will be a racially charged election.  The President realizes that his coalition is in trouble as whites defect, and so he will do whatever he can to 1) maintain his extremely high support among black Americans and 2) he will appeal aggressively to the Hispanic vote.  Governor Romney will continue to strongly support aggressive measures to limit illegal immigration, providing Republicans with something to cheer about while giving the President an issue to go to his coalition with. Things could get ugly.

3.  I believe the economy will quite obviously be the most important issue in this election.  I further believe that even if things get NO BETTER between now and the election, the President's electoral coalition--liberals, moderate whites, union members and public employees, and minorities--is sufficient to beat any of the Republicans except Mitt Romney. And so-if Governor Romney is the nominee and the economy does not improve, the President will have to do something fairly substantial to increase his chances.  This I predict--and I'm again, not the first--means Joe Biden gets thrown overboard.  Again folks--two conditions have to be in play for this to happen--the economy remains a dog, and Romney is the nominee.  If EITHER of these is not the case, Obama wins with Biden.

There you go folks, chew on that a bit.

Conservatism, and the Battle of the Sexes

Bill Bennett, former Secretary of Education and current self-appointed Determiner of What is Good and Proper in American Society, has turned his eye on men in America.  Put simply, he's demanding that American men "man up".  Put down the Xbox, pass up the Fantasy Football draft and, well, be men.  To be honest, I'm sort of drawn to Bennett's arguments, as I do sorta look with circumspection upon dudes who don't seem to want to grow up. 

Into the fray jumps a blog entry that takes apart some of Bennett's arguments...and more truth be told....some of the counters are pretty sensible too.  There's some flat-out misogyny in the post, but also some wisdom.   

H/T--Instapundit

WaPost Shamelessly Pursues Rubio

Well, it appears that the possibility of an Hispanic VP nominee is simply too much for the liberal intelligentsia to comprehend, as the attack machine is in high warble from the Washington Post to cut the rug out from under Florida sensation Marco Rubio.  We have a VP now who left a Presidential election in DISGRACE for having cribbed speeches from a British politician--but did we hear a peep of that from the WaPost last election?  Nah. 

Apparently Rubio's understanding of when his parents came to America and the facts appear to be at odds.  Whether this is because he is parroting their narrative, or because he has synthesized their story in order to make his own more interesting is the question.  I find myself not terribly interested in the answer, though I do find myself interested in the question--better yet, the timing of the question.

Big Fat Friday Free For All

Ok folks, let 'er rip!  What's bothering you today?  Pesky student loans need to be paid off?  Mortgage underwater? Don't worry--Uncle O will save you!

One Man's View of OWS

An interesting view of Occupy Wall Street.

Wild Ramblings on the Republicans

What is Rick Perry's major malfunction? Today he put the Obama's birth certificate back on the table. What is this guy thinking? "Birthers" are to Republicans what "9/11 Truthers" once were to Democrats. Omaba has been selling birth certificate coffee mugs at campaign events for Christ's sake (oh sorry, Presidential speeches promoting the administration's "Jobs Bill" currently being held up by Congressional Republicans so as to realize their dream of subverting the President at the expense of the American people). Anyway, is the guy stupid or just not ready for prime time?

I just heard Jon Huntsman on Fox and I've got some questions. First, do your parents know how to spell or are they just hopelessly trendy. How many votes do you think you'll generate by accusing mainstream Republicans as "anti-science" when global warming research has proven to be riddled with corruption? Also, you say Republicans are anti-evolution when any scientist worth his salt will tell you it is an important, but still unproven theory despite over 150 years of research. Lastly, wouldn't you be happier as a ski instructor?

Romney was in Ohio today and refused to support Gov. John Kasich's (or is it Jon) fight against public employee unions. So what is he up to? No balls or not too quick on the draw or is he the NEA's stealth candidate?

I do draw some encouragement from the tax issue however. Herman Cain's success has provoked a healthy debate and now every candidate is hard at work on tax reform proposals. My view is they can try to re-invent the wheel if they like, but the FairTax is all dressed up with no place to go (not that I would mix a metaphor). The FairTax as opposed to a flat tax or 9-9-9 has the advantage of being a well thought out, workable approach that has been vetted. And the country is ready to hear about it. Now is the time and I believe whichever candidate embraces this sublime and beautiful scheme will be the winner.

Prepare to be Inspired

Isn't this just so nice. Due to be published in spring 2012: Michelle Obama's book on how her very own garden is inspiring families, schools and communities (the cover says so). I wonder what happens less: Mrs. O working in the garden or anyone actually being inspired by the garden.

Interestingly, Paula Deen offers a different take on Mrs. Obama's oft-discussed healthy eating habits. And the White House is apparently livid about it, as the National Enquirer (yeah, I know) reports here.

Larry Summers Blows The Bubble

In a breathtaking example of not knowing when to stop digging when one finds oneself in a hole, former Secretary of the Treasury and of late--Obama economy czar Larry Summers--has an editorial in today's WaPost in which he attempts to lay out how to "solve" the housing crisis.  Some of it makes some sense (Summers can do that now and then), but his initial prescription is lunacy:   "First, and perhaps most fundamentally, credit standards for those seeking to buy homes are too high and too rigorous. The characteristics of the average successful applicant in 2004 would make that applicant among the most risky today. The pattern should be the opposite, given that the odds of a further 35 percent decline in house prices are much lower than they were at past bubble valuations."

Yes, that's right. Larry Summers believes what we need to do is have the government underwrite EXACTLY the kind of risky behavior that put us here in the first place. 

These guys have got to go....

Clinton, Bush, Should Come Clean

Robert Samuelson's got a great column in today's WaPost.  In it, he dreams aloud of a two-man tour of the country in which former Presidents Clinton and Bush would come clean as to the mistakes they made in office which helped put us where we are today.  A sample of the writing:  "Clinton would condemn Democrats’ ritualistic attacks on Republicans — he excelled at them — that equate any changes in Social Security and Medicare with demolishing the programs. Bush would challenge the world’s Grover Norquists for whom even the tiniest tax increase is an unpardonable sin inviting economic ruin."

 I shook my head as I read this, thinking how much I would love to see it (there was actually an event planned over a year ago for the two ex-Presidents to sit down together--I bought tickets, then it was canceled), but how impossible such a tour would be. 

We are fast approaching the time where even smart compromise won't work anymore, where we'll be consigned to the dustbin of history as the latest great empire to collapse under its own weight. 

T. Coddington Van Vorhees VII is In!

Iowahawk's favorite "kickin' it old school" Republican-T. Coddington Van Vorhees VII has declared for the 2012 Republican Nomination.  His declaration is a cry from the heart of Long Island Sound's most revered junior polo player.

Gameday

Up early to enjoy the sunrise with the dog.  It's a great scene here, geese in the cove, (gas)fires in the (gas)fireplaces, coffee, etc.  About an hour from now, I'll make the four-plus hour trek to Charlottesville for the UVA-NC State game, where the underachieving Wolfpack comes to town to take on the Wahoos, fresh off a big victory over then #12 ranked Georgia Tech.

I am, of course, wary of any game opponent that follows a big win.  NC State is 3-3, with ACC losses to a surprisingly tough Wake team and a very close loss to Georgia Tech.  This SHOULD be a very close game, which does not bode well for me returning home tonight at a decent hour, as the better the game, the longer it takes to get out of Charlottesville.

Oh....the other thing.  Hammer and I have a steak dinner on the game's outcome.

On Libya

I was struck yesterday by the coverage of Colonel Gaddafi's timely demise, in that for at least 6 hours--as I walked by silent TV's on Pentagon walls--it was covered as "breaking news".  Can something as final as a death actually "break" for several hours?  But--never mind that, on to substance.

David Ignatius has a column in this morning's WaPost in which he gives President Obama much praise for the conduct of the Libya operation.  Lauding his coolness, his veiling of things under NATO, his insistence on limited US participation and behind the scenes leadership--Ignatius does a reasonable job of citing what really was a very successful undertaking by the Administration.  The President is to be commended for the implementation of this campaign.

That said, there remains the question of whether the US should ever have been involved to the extent it was in the first place.  I believe not--this was not our war to lead or fight--it was the Europeans' war, who REALLY have the beef with North African illegal immigration and the thirst for Libyan oil. But because the Euro's have let their military power diminish under the umbrella of US protection, they found themselves unable alone to overturn the regime of even this tinpot dictator.   Hence US cruise missiles, drones, and jammers--all of which we brought in numbers early, in order that the Euros could then apply their feckless military to an already hobbled Gaddafi.  Oh...it still took another six months to pull it off.

The slope here is a slippery one, and questions as to "if Libya, why not Syria?  How about Saudi Arabia?  Bahrain?"  If the answer is that Gaddafi was a terrorist,well then why did we snuggle up to him three years ago?  If the answer is his repression of his own people by denying them the right to self-rule, I commend to you again the rogues gallery of other Arab regimes.

President Obama was right on Libya all the way from B to Z--it was the "A to B" move--to act at all--that was the wrong call.

The Obamaconomy Sucks, So Gene Robinson Wants to Talk Foreign Policy

In a classic case of deflecting attention from the problems at hand (read:  a sluggish, jobless, economy overwhelmed by Obama regulation and spending), Gene Robinson seems peeved that the Republican Presidential Candidates aren't spending enough time on foreign policy.  I suppose all that talk about how to create jobs is inconvenient to someone whose favorite is so clearly failing.

Can you imagine if the Republicans DID concentrate on foreign policy?  Robinson would be tut-tutting about how out of touch they are with the "pain" of "working people".

Big Fat Friday Free For All

Here we are again, folks--the day where we can let it all hang out.  What's bothering you?  Get it off your chests, folks!

The One, The Perfect One

President Obama believes all the decisions and choices he's made on the economy since taking office have been the right ones. Funny, the Bought and Paid For Media (BAPFM) would have considered such shallow self-reflection worthy of criticism when GWB was President. 

Post-Debate Thoughts

Last night the GOP field gathered in Vegas for its 439th debate. We should be tired of these by now, but I'm still drawn to them. Thoughts:

Romney. Still the best guy on stage, as far as intelligence, grasp of every issue, the calm he exudes, and his hair. But our man Mitt made a few mistakes last night for the first time in these debates. Putting his hand on Rick Perry's shoulder as he condescendingly explained to the crowd that 'Rick has had a tough couple of debates...' was not his finest moment. He looked mean. He also screwed up when he said 'of course I've never hired illegals, I'm running for president' as though he'd hire them otherwise. He's still better than everyone else, but made two unforced errors, the latter of which may haunt him. Best moment: when he told the crowd 'let's be clear: everyone on this stage supports legal immigration.'

Perry. Best debate so far, but let's be fair-that was a low bar to clear. Really fumbled the opportunity to address his pastor denouncing Mormonism as a cult. Attempted to draw blood from Romney on the hiring illegals issue and appears convinced he has a winner-he does not. Best moment (at least, the one that produced the biggest cheer of the night from MY couch: during a foreign aid discussion, when he said it was finally time to take a look at UN funding.

Newt. Still Newt, impossible not to love him. Best moment: when he said if he's the nominee, he'll challenge Obama to three Lincoln-Douglass style debates. (Can you imagine Obama in a setting where he has to talk for three hours on his own, with no prompter?)

Santorum. A scold. He is right on substance 99% of the time, but he is a jerk about 50% of the time. He really likes to cite his PA Senate races as proof of his electability. I'm mystified as to why he does this, because one can only be reminded of his 18-point loss.

Cain. Loveable, did not attack anyone on stage, but I'm starting to think he's just not ready. He deserves applause for coming up with a bold economic plan, but he really stumbles on issues not related to economics. Still, a happy warrior. Bright future.

Bachmann. Not bad. Very good on immigration, 9-9-9, and negotiating with terrorists. A Hillary-in-New-Hampshire moment when she pleaded with moms not to give up, life would get better when she was in office. It was quite heartfelt and appeared genuine. Screwed all of this up when she demanded time at the end to repeat 'Barack Obama is a one-term President.' Somehow forgot to mention her 23 foster children.

Ron Paul. Doofus. The man desperately needs a better tailor. Like Cain, bold economic proposals, but when he cited the need for cutting foreign aid even to Israel, you couldn't help but inwardly groan.

Huntsman. Absent. As much of an impact as he's had at other debates.

Very Romney-friendly crowd. I think Perry just may have moved the needle slightly for himself, but Cain's numbers will likely deflate.

And overall, nothing changes.

NPR on OWS

So I'm driving home yesterday, and I decided to take a few minutes to tune into NPR.  They teased me by mentioning a story about how the media is covering Occupy Wall Street, and so I hung on long enough to listen to this beauty by David Folkenflik.  Please take the 4:25 necessary to listen to it, as reading the text just doesn't do it justice.

Folkenflik approaches the story from the perspective that the Press just don't seem to know how to cover the OWS movement--finishing his piece with the following:  "So reporters are trying to cram this nebulous new phenomenon into a more familiar template. Is it like the civil rights movement? The Tea Party? Something else altogether? And they are stumbling around to figure out how enduring and how consequential it will be." 

What initially interested me in sticking around on NPR long enough to listen to this story was my own perception that the media has given OWS a pretty fair pass, much fairer than the Tea Party--a movement whose participation and impact (even at a similar stage of development) dwarfs this one--got.  I wanted to see if anything close to that came out of Folkenflik's story.  Presumably reporters would have been "stumbling around" searching for more familiar templates with the Tea Party two years ago, no?  I mean, it was a spontaneous, organic political movement rising in opposition to perceived problems in the body politic, right?

But no--the Press didn't stumble around--they reached for what was handy--the angry, racist, white people template--and applied it without a second thought.  OWS?  Well, now things get a little tricky folks--because unlike the Tea Party, what OWS folks appear to be arguing for (to the extent that a coherent argument can be discerned) comports largely with the collective Bought and Paid For Media (BAPF) worldview.   Of course reporters are stumbling around looking for templates--after all, they really kinda like what's going on, but they are sensitive to the fact that the protesters are not necessarily a group held in high esteem by many of the folks who read or watch their reporting.  What a dilemma!  How can we cover a movement which we support but which is so vastly out of step with so much of our audience?  I know!  We'll declare it new, and out of the ordinary, and we'll kvetch about how best to report it!

The plain truth is that OWS is getting an easy ride from the Press because the Press is fine and dandy with it.  The Press savaged the Tea Party because its worldview was and is in opposition to the statist BAPF media view.  Media bias? You betchya.

Big Fat Friday Free For All

Well folks, here it is again, your chance to blow off steam.  Here's a little from me....waaa, waaaa, waaaa.  I'm not exercising, I'm eating poorly, and I have a cold that's dragging me down. 

What's got you down?

Conservatives Answer OWS

Have you seen those annoying little picture stories popping up from miscreants who feel the government owes them something?  A new site is up called "We Are the 53%" (who pay Federal Income Taxes) and it is wonderful..  Hat Tip:  Instapundit

WHAT JUST HAPPENED?

Although I am a little slow on the uptake sometimes, I now must agree Rick Perry's candidacy is over. He is now polling lower than when he wasn't even a declared candidate. He has lost half his support in less than a month. What happened? What caused him to crater so quickly? In a word, immigration.

Clearly Gov. Perry is out of step on this issue. He is opposed to a border fence. In his home state of Texas he supports instate tuition for illegals. And in a recent debate he adopted the liberal narrative that conservatives are "heartless" when it comes to illegals. For most Republican primary voters that was it...finished, finito, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

Reasonable people can agree or disagree on particular issues and voters aren't looking for someone with whom they agree with 100%, 100% of the time. And I don't think Perry's views would necessarily disqualify him in the minds of most Republican primary voters, but conversely, they are in no mood for a lecture. They've been told time and again they are heartless, greedy, racist, and privileged and they don't want to hear it from one of their own.

Stick a fork in him, Rich Perry is done.

E.J. Dionne Takes on George Will Taking on Elizabeth Warren

I blogged last week on a George Will column in which he took on Elizabeth Warren's logic in her now very well-quoted series of remarks on the rich and their debt to the greater society.  Into the fray steps liberalism's greatest purveyor of ridiculosity, Mr. E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post.  In his essay, Dionne goes to great lengths in his praise of George Will, before delivering what he obviously believes is a triumphal take-down:


"Will is a shrewd man and a careful student of political philosophy. I am a fan of his for many reasons, but more on that in a moment. In this case, he demonstrates his debating skills by first accusing Warren of being “a pyromaniac in a field of straw men,” and then by conceding the one and only point that Warren actually made.  “Everyone,” he writes, “knows that all striving occurs in a social context, so all attainments are conditioned by their context.” Indeed. He gives us here a rigorous and concise summary of what she said.
Will then adds: “This does not, however, entail a collectivist political agenda.” In intellectual contests, this is an MVP move. Having accused Warren of setting fire to straw men, Will has just introduced his own straw colossus.There is absolutely nothing in Warren’s statement that implied a “collectivist political agenda.”

Wow--stunning, huh? Because Warren did not follow up her OBVIOUSLY collectivist statement with another which says "YES, THIS IS OBVIOUSLY COLLECTIVIST IDEOLOGY", Will has created a straw man of his own. Of course she didn't say that.  She didn't have to.  One only has to look at the great body of collectivist/liberal thought through history--not to mention Warren's own past writings and agendas--to discern where such a statement comes from. 

Of course no one makes it "on their own".  One must first tip one's cap to Mom and Dad, who supplied the genetic material.  Why not even take it a generation or two back from that, shall we?  The point for Will and other conservatives isn't that success is entirely self-generated, but that it IS the result of individual choices.  To try.  To strive.  To ignore adversity.  To challenge one's potential. These are NOT decisions derived of the collective, attributable to the roads built with tax money (paid mainly by the rich) or schools subsidized (mainly by the rich).  These are the yearnings and strivings of individual human hearts, and they are the well-spring of our capitalist, market based, democratic political system.

Sorry E.J.  You tried to take down the great man--but you failed. 

Samuelson on Soaking the Rich

Robert Samuelson has a column in this morning's WaPost sure to stir up more than a bit of class envy.  In it, Samuelson--in his balanced, economist way--offers a few statistics designed to 1) quantify the growing "inequality" of wealth--and more importantly, to demonstrate its global nature (as opposed to something just happening here in the land of Bush) and 2) to reinforce the staggering share of our national budget that is paid by the rich, especially the top 1%.

Let's review, shall we?  Income inequality measures NOTHING but class envy.   No one has been able to definitively cite HOW inequality acts as a real force in economics--but it apparently remains a force in political economy.

I think the Senate Democrats are being pretty smart on the way they are approaching raising taxes.  The President's figure of $250K as the start of being "rich" never worked with most folks, especially when couched in the President's annoying and ridiculous rhetoric of "millionaires and billionaires", and the reality of small business owners, their income range, and their capacity to generate jobs.  A million dollars in income?  Now that's getting to the point where more and more Americans will believe someone is actually RICH.  And so, the envy quotient actually begins to become politically effective.

I'd be surprised if some kind of surtax on "the super rich" is not passed.  The politics of compromise--which continue to be the way we move balls down the field in Washington--will virtually demand something like it in order to get the kind of spending constraints that conservatives want (and to protect Defense from deeper cuts than have already been agreed to). 

Republicans in Congress are going to have to think long and hard on what is important to them, and the answers may have electoral consequences.

The Triumph of Hope over Experience

Paul McCartney weds, yet again.

Remy's Back with Thoughts on Occupy Wall Street. A Troubadour for Our Age

Remy's on his game, again.

Behold, The Genius of Mark Steyn

On Occupy Wall Street.

Eat, Drink, and Be Merry, for Tomorrow the Higher Ed Bubble Will Burst

A story here of the growing trend on college campuses to provide today's coddled college students with epicurean delights.  Apparently, today's generation is a bunch of foodies whose college choices are in no small measure made with an eye to which school can provide them with an endless array of dining choices.  There is a vicious cycle at work here.  The system is awash in government money to subsidize college educations; total demand rises (fueled by the matriculation of those who in past generations would have been clerks, welders, carpenters and electricians); tuition rises right along with the availability of government money (actually at an even higher rate); institutions feel they must compete harder, so they build wonderful new (unnecessary) buildings and then treat their students like minor royalty.  Which costs money, which raises tuition, which the entitled American public believes should be borne by the government, which increases government money in the system, paid out of tax dollars, increasing the deficit, increasing the debt...and results in legions of Womyn's Studies majors with $100K in debt befouling the streets of New York while demanding that their student loan debts be forgiven.  This is no way to run a railroad, folks.

Romney Talks Foreign Policy

Mitt Romney gave a speech at The Citadel the other day, laying out some foreign policy thoughts and announcing his foreign policy team.  Sounding more and more Presidential, Romney talked about America's place in the world and the special place that it occupies--directly taking on the current President's tepid views on American exceptionalism.

Readers with a keen eye will note that Mr. Romney is an American Seapower man--stating that among his 100 day priorities would be to increase the Navy's shipbuilding plan from 9 to 15 ships a year.  Additionally, he sees and understands the necessity to meet China's rise with strength and firmness--provided mainly by the Navy and the Air Force.

Again folks--at one time I supported Governor Romney because I thought he was the only guy who could beat Mr. Obama. Now I support him because I want him to be President.

A Human Lap Dog

I've finally figured it out--Lady Gaga is essentially a human lap dog.

George Will 1, Elizabeth Warren 0

Harvard Professor and sometime Obama regulator Elizabeth Warren is mounting a challenge to the Teddy Kennedy seat in the US Congress, occupied inconveniently at the moment by Scott Brown, who drove a stake into the heart of Massachusetts liberalism by riding a wave of anti-Obama discomfort in the Bay State. 

Mr. Brown was supported strongly by the Tea Party, with whom he has never been close.  It appears the Tea Party may sit this one out, which would quite likely turn the seat back over to the Democrats, broadly, and a new Liberal Lion(ess), Dr. Warren.

Dr. Warren is famously quoted recently as lecturing the rest of us on how no one gets rich on their own.  George Will takes to the editorial pages today to pick apart her fatuous rhetoric.

Big Fat Friday Free For All

Good morning, all!  Once again, we've reached that time of the week, that special time of the week, when the blog becomes your bitch-pad.  What's on your mind, folks?  Your Attorney General got you down?  Your life lost all meaning because a man you never met who gave really good electronics show pitches is dead?

Quote of the Week

"We live in a strange era, in which our dominant news organizations consider it their most important function to prevent certain news from reaching the eyes and ears of the public."

- John Hinderaker at Powerline.blog in this week's post about the coverage then non-coverage at CBS News about Operation Fast and Furious and Eric Holder's time dementia in front of Congress.

PEE WEE HERMAN MEETS GENGHIS KHAN?

He may look like your next door neighbor (you know, the one with the Golden Retriever that keeps crapping on your lawn), but this Über-Nerd is a killer when it comes to politics. While Bill Daley runs the day to day at the White House (presumably), David Plouffe has Mr. Obama in full throttle campaign mode.

But this ain't 2008, and it appears Plouffe is a uni-dimensional, linear thinker, i.e. hit 'em hard, hit 'em again and if that doesn't work hit 'em some more. Admittedly he doesn't have a whole lot to work with seeing as his client now has a track record etc., but even still, this guy has no finesse. It's either steamroll the competition or nothing. Well according to the Washington Post's latest poll, it's nothing.

I just don't see the liberal establishment putting up with hair-brained strategy until election day. Something has got to give, I'm just not sure what. But when it happens it will be swift and dramatic. Stay tuned.

OH MOM, I FOUND A NEW ROOMMATE!

Amanda Knox, aka Foxy Knoxy, was acquitted of murder yesterday in her second trial in the university town of Perugia, Italy. As you may know, the Italian appeals system is a bit different from ours. Unlike our system where appellate judges are only concerned with the legal aspects of a trial, the Italians grant a new trial and the state has to present its case all over again. It's redundant as hell but it seems to work faster than ours and hey, that's just the way they do things.

So, was justice done? Well, there's no question the DNA evidence wasn't collected in accordance with the strict policies and procedures of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences. And I'm sure David Caruso would rip those sunglasses off and give a hard stare at how the Italians handled the chain of evidence. But believe it or not, murderers were actually prosecuted and convicted before DNA technology. Now some will say the evidence is all circumstantial and there were no eyewitnesses, and that may be true, but there usually never are. Was the Manson family convicted on eyewitness testimony?

I won't attempt a long recitation of the facts here. If you're interested you can research those for yourself but don't look too hard in the American media, you won't find a helluva lot. But in my humble opinion the facts, I repeat...THE FACTS all point to Knox and her boyfriend.

Coulter had a good column a few weeks ago on this case. Click on the header if you're interested.

George W. Bush, Term III (cont.)

It seems the coordinated activities of the CIA, CENTCOM and probably, the Yemenis themselves, have resulted in the targeted assassination of one Anwar Al-Aulaqi, an American born Islamic cleric and all around al-Qaeda rabble rouser.

Dead Meat

It is good and proper that he is dead.  I applaud the Obama Administration Justice Department for having reached a tough, but reasonable opinion stating that the targeted assassination of an American Citizen without judicial due process was legal.

Yet where is the outpouring of protest (except from Ron Paul)?  Where are the Democrats screaming for the President's head for his expansive view of the Commander-in-Chief authority?  Where are the legions of Bought and Paid For Media types openly questioning the legality of the Administration's actions?  Not hearing them?  Well of course not.  Because their man is in charge now, and it would be inconvenient to raise such questions in the midst of his trying to be re-elected.

Barack Obama's approach to the war on terror is George W. Bush's approach.  No--that's not right.  It's an amped-up version of GWB's approach.  But you wouldn't know it from the conspiracy of silence that is the BAPF Media.