I'm sure you saw this article from the AP today, but did any one else NOT gloss over the line "California's Supreme Court to postpone putting its decision legalizing gay marriage into effect"? How is this NOT blatant judicial activism? That being said, I must admit I'm entirely against gay 'marriage'. It is an abomination and a travesty. Just thought I'd throw that in there.
Well, what do we have here? The Associated Press makes a Freedom of Information Act request to the Navy for the release of John McCain's military records, John McCain approves the release by signing a SF-180... and the Navy releases them? Just like that? You mean, it's that easy? It's that quick?
How is this possible? John McCain isn't even the 'official' GOP Presidential nominee yet and he was willing and able to have his full military record released to the media and the public! I was under the impression that no matter how much a Presidential candidate tried to get military records released, the Military bureaucracy made that next to impossible to accomplish. I have been told this for 1194+ days! Was all that a lie?
Why would anyone not want to release a record of military service that includes a full accounting of the medals, awards and citations earned during that service? Wouldn't that kind of information only serve to demonstrate to the public a candidates bona fides for the job of Commander in Chief, and thereby enhance their chances of getting elected?
Curious!
It sometimes worries me when I think how the best we can hope for is a McCain presidency. But those worries are tempered by stories like this.
(I)n 1991 Cindy McCain was visiting Mother Teresa's orphanage in Bangladesh when a dying infant was thrust into her hands. The orphanage could not provide the medical care needed to save her life, so Mrs. McCain brought the child home to America with her. She was met at the airport by her husband, who asked what all this was about.I disagree with much of what McCain stands for, and saying I distrust his conservatism is an understatement. But while his decisions could end up causing problems unintended by him, and I have no illusion that he sometimes postures for political gain, I suspect "Doctor McCain" has a rather hippocratic view of politics: first, do no harm. Stories like this one suggest he is capable of doing much good, once the ethical gymnastics of an election are behind him.Mrs. McCain replied that the child desperately needed surgery and years of rehabilitation. "I hope she can stay with us," she told her husband. Mr. McCain agreed. Today that child is their teenage daughter Bridget.
...(T)here was a second infant Mrs. McCain brought back. She ended up being adopted by a young McCain aide and his wife.
"We were called at midnight by Cindy," Wes Gullett remembers, and "five days later we met our new daughter Nicki at the L.A. airport wearing the only clothing Cindy could find on the trip back, a 7-Up T-shirt she bought in the Bangkok airport." Today, Nicki is a high school sophomore. Mr. Gullett told me, "I never saw a hospital bill" for her care.
You would be hard pressed to find another person who enjoys and relishes the beauty that the natural world possesses and the awe it inspires more than me. The most memorable times of my youth were spent at a lakeside cabin in Canada enjoying the beauty of the lake (above and below the water), the surrounding forest, and the abundant fauna. I have had the great good fortune in my life to experience the pre-historic, Jurassic Park feel of the Everglades, the wide-open splendor of the High Desert of the American Southwest, the Shire like rolling hills of the Midwest Prairies, and the deep rooted agelessness of the forests of the Appalachians. To me, a guy who grew up in the shadow of a major metropolitan city and has seen my share of ornate churches, there is no greater Cathedral than a moonless night in the country - away from all the light pollution - under the blanket of a universe of stars. I will actually stop, as often as possible, to smell the roses and listen to the birds, and remind myself of the wonder of the world God has Graced us with - and thank Him for it, and for giving me the ability to appreciate it all. We are all part of this world, and to not recognize the wonder and majesty of it all is to deny the wonder and majesty of God.
But don't you ever - EVER - call me an Environmentalist! Rachel Carson was an Environmentalist !
Others, such as writer Paul Driessen, describe the fear of DDT as a "country club anxiety," a luxury of rich Westerners who can afford organic foods and all-natural cosmetics and clothing. They will never contract malaria. Meanwhile, Africans - many of whom are lucky to afford any food at all - have made it clear that they’re willing to accept the risk of potential side effects if it means avoiding the very real threat of malaria. Two weeks ago, Uganda initiated a program to spray houses with DDT, even though it will probably hurt their trade with the U.S. and the European Union. As Ugandan businesswoman Fiona Kobusingye told reporters, "I lost my son, two sisters and two nephews to malaria. Don’t talk to me about birds. And don’t tell me a little DDT in our bodies is worse than the risk of losing more children to this disease. African mothers would be overjoyed if that were their biggest worry."I’m not saying the environmental movement is entirely without merit. Nor am I a "global warming denier" or a person who believes in messing up the environment just for fun. But a movement that values a bird’s life over a human life is hard to accept and even harder to respect.
Thanks to Rachel Carson and the banning of DDT, 20+ million people have died. (a VERY conservative number I might add) Now, Al Gore looks upon himself as the new High Priest of Global Warming and head of the church of Environmentalism. Given the news about food shortages around the world thanks to the push by Environmentalist Al (remember, he cast the DECIDING VOTE in 1994 regarding the US Govenment Ethanol mandate) toward Ethanol production, one has to wonder how many people will suffer and die this time!
I care a great deal about the environment and the natural world, but if these two short-sighted do-gooders are examples of the quintessential Environmentalist, I think I'll pass on that label, thank you.
Are any other words really needed here?
BTW, if for some unknown reason you cannot understand my title to this post, or what this video is illustrating, you are not the Enlightened, Progressive or Free Thinking individual you believe yourself to be.
Hat tip to Dean's World).
I think the length and disappointments (at least for us Conservatives) of this political season has taken a toll on all of us. For the past few weeks I haven't been watching the news or going to any of my traditional web sites as much as I had been because, frankly, I'm burnout. I am, like many of you I'm sure, just so tired of the lies, the baby kissing, the lies, the ass kissing, the lies... and the disingenuous spin about how the lies that these politicians are telling us aren't really lies at all but just a demonstration as to how us rubes and peons out here in flyover country don't really "Get" what those in the Gentry all understand to be true.
Despite my political burnout, I decided to go out to Townhall.com the past few days and see what I may have been missing. Not that I needed to really "catch up" on anything - politics is too much like Daytime Soap Operas; just jump back in, watch, and in a relatively short time you'll have no trouble knowing who is sleeping with whom, who's dying of an incurable disease, which character has come back from the grave, and who stabbed who in the back. You know... same shit, different day!
Anyway, I'm glad I did decide to visit there, because I got to read two of my favorite columnists: Walter E. Williams and Thomas Sowell. I appreciate and enjoy Professor Williams mainly because I have had the pleasure of hearing him as a substitute host when Rush Limbaugh is out, and Thomas Sowell because... as we here at TBR have often said, he is one of the smartest and wisest people in the world.
Enjoy:
Political Loathsomeness - Walter E. Williams
A Living Lie - Thomas Sowell
What is leadership?
"Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence." - Albert Einstein
What is Racism?
"We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
What is the Truth?
"The sting in any rebuke is the truth." - Benjamin Franklin
What is Freedom?
"If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning." - Frederick Douglass
I don't know what it is, just what exactly has spurred this feeling so strongly today, but I am declaring today an Emergency Memorial Day here at TBR. Perhaps it's the fact that the "spiritual advisor" for a man that has an all too real chance to be the next American President is preaching a philosophy of "God Damn America" as opposed to "God Bless America" - and nobody in the MSM seems to care. Or perhaps it's because I feel wounded in my soul by the disrespect some Americans show toward the Military (the ones fighting to preserve their very right to be disrespectful, BTW). Perhaps it's because I know that with the coming elections the future of this grand experiment we call The United States sits upon the edge of a knife.
Whatever the reason, I can say with absolute confidence that, in some place and at some time, on this date in history an American died as a champion for Freedom and to further the cause of Liberty. And today - like every day in my life - I thank God for His Grace allowing me to be born an American, and I thank Him for and pay tribute to those that have fought and strove, lived and died, that this country and the ideals of Liberty and Freedom persevere - not just for Americans, but for the world.
Toward that end, I draw your attention to tonight's the Glenn Beck Show (7pm & 9pm, EDT) where you will hear the story of... America (Hat tip to Fury's Fiancee), and America's finest.
For SFC Stube and his brothers and sisters in arms who have given and continue to give, and to those who have given the last full measure of devotion, to and for this country and to all who love freedom...
Thank you, God Bless you, and God Bless the USA.
I'd gotten an email from the NumbersUSA people about an attempt to discharge HR 4088, the Secure America with Verification Enforcement Act, out from under the long and pointy nose of Nancy Pelosi. Interested in how my Congressman voted, I followed the link they provided to Discharge Petition 0005 and did a search for "Mack". Try it and you'll see there are now two Republicans named "Mack" serving in the U.S. House of Representatives. If you've been living under a rock (like me, obviously), you might be surprised to find out who the other one is.
Incidentally, if you're not from SW Florida's 14th district or any of the other districts with current signers, please urge your congressman to sign it.
In an 'exclusive interview' with KUTV in Wyoming, BH Obama declared that Hillary would have to be HIS VP and not the other way around. Just thought you'd like to know.
Since our nominee is considerably less than what we had hoped for, we can only hope for a VP nominee that fits the bill. My nominee: Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska.
There is an excellent short essay by Jim Manzi at The Corner explaining the difference between conservatives and (note the small-L) libertarians, and pleading for Republicans to heal the rifts between the latter and social cons. As the social-con flip side to Manzi's 'middle of the road, but leaning libertarian' position, Mr. Mazi's essay is well-received. This is very close to the argument the people at the American Conservative Party website took before I danced away from their tune, but rather than take a hard line demanding I favor his libertarian-leaning stance, he eloquently makes the case that we find a way to till a common ground together. It's this kind of rapprochement that will get the conservative movement past its current contentiousness and back on track.
This morning, my wife and I are listening to the news and they tell us that Ben & Jerry (yes those 2 bozos) are going to be endorsing Obama with a new flavor. The story we heard couldn't tell us what flavor it would be. She starts with "Well, it couldn't be chocolate. That would be racist. It couldn't contain Oreo cookies, either. That would just be wrong. It couldn't contain fruit, because that might offend the gays." My contribution "couldn't contain nuts because it might offend the crazy. I guess he'll just be selling a big bucket of frozen cream." For some reason, this seems like the perfect metaphor for the Obama campaign; he's all about change, but won't tell us what that change is.
This was the topic of discussion between Chris and I last Friday at lunch. We were both in agreement that she and Bill are so power hungry that we could think of little they wouldn't do to win. But then Chris asked, in the event she does indeed lose the nomination, "Do you think she would go Third-party?"
My gut reaction was that she would do anything - ANYTHING - to become President, so the answer I blurted out was "Of course." But boy did that start my mind - and our discussion - racing off into that area of speculation. How would she do it? Would she and Bill give any consideration to what that would do to the Democrat party? (Of course not!) Where would she try to position herself? Right of Obama but Left of McCain? (That last bit would be hard to do from our conservative perspective.) Perhaps to try to keep McCain off balance she would actually move to the right of him on Immigration? Truth and consistency are nothing to the Clintons, so I could see them trying that.
And while discussing that last topic (Hillary's political positioning for a 3rd party run) it hit me - Hillary and Bloomberg! That would give the Hilldabeast two of the things she would need the most to make a 3rd party run work - money and RINO/Independent support! This hit me like - well the only way I can explain it is when you are playing chess and you all of a sudden see the opening and all the moves your opponent needs to check-mate you! And you have that pit-of-your-gut feeling that shifts from wondering if your opponent has actually seen the same thing you have, or if he (she) is just so good that this was the plan from the start.
What if the Clinton machine actually does have dirt on Obama and just lacks the money resources to effectively exploit it? With Bloomberg's $$$ she could plaster the airwaves with "Obama is a Commie" and "McCain is a Fascist" ads from now until November, all portraying her as the only safe, moderate, known quantity candidate in the race.
What have we always known Bill's favored strategy to be? Triangulation! And wouldn't a 3rd party - positioning Hillary between the Obama far left and the McCain far right (in rhetoric at least) - be the very definition of that?
And what was the one of strategies put forth by Hillary's political mentor, Saul Alinsky to obtain political power? "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it." (and for those that would claim the Clintons are not Alinsky disciples, tell me who YOU think of when you read those 13 rules?)
I could be very wrong. I kinda hope I am. Perhaps Hil&Bill can pull this out by cheating the old fashioned way, but if they can't... well, I guess we'll see soon enough.
Just about everywhere I turned last week, I'd heard criticism of this piece by Mark Helprin in The Wall Street Journal. And for good reason - it's a rather testy diatribe against radio talkers, their listeners, and and principled conservatives for "playing recklessly with electoral politics by sabotaging their own party ostensibly for its impurity" and for the (ironically erroneous Dow Jones) notion that they'll make more money under a Democratic presidency. I thought I'd heard all there was to hear, and hadn't bothered to actually read the column until I caught up with James Taranto's Wednesday offering. That's when I noticed this:
Ostracism following tests of "right thinking" is a specialty of the left. Not that it doesn't exist on the right, blooming with great malice especially on the radio. But in light of their prospects, conservatives have no room for it. For by their neglectful forfeit they have lost the battles of culture and education, and to remain other than an occult force they must express their beliefs through politics, from which, after November, they may be for a time excluded.First off, the notion that Rush Limbaugh and his pals have neglected culture and education is either laughable or disturbingly creepy. I won't bother to make my point by quoting "The Doctor of Democracy at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies", or the host who regularly features "culture war" segments, or another who claims his show is "the Fusion of Entertainment and Enlightenment". Suffice to say, there are rather large doses of hypocrisy and projection floating in the halls of the devoutly agnostic WSJ.
But the thing that really grabbed me about Helprin's tirade was its praise for political confusionism over the principled views of the right, and how he sees such consistency as "a specialty of the left".
Readers of this site know full well my disgust for the Left. But I have some respect for those so far out on the other end of the spectrum (Joe Biden is a favorite example) that there can be little doubt that their consistent adherence to their own principles identifies a real ideology - sick though it may be. Such "holisticity" is sorely lacking among the great swath of power-hungry Democrats, whose pursuit of electoral gains usually outpaces any coherent idea what should be accomplished with victory. I reserve most of my disdain for them, and for their mirror-image in the Republican Party like Mr. Helprin and his torture-obsessed, unconstitutional, and economically illiterate champion.
There's nothing wrong with pragmatic compromise, Mr. Helprin. But you have to possess some vague idea what you're politicking for, or the discussion devolves into haggling on a price for a product you don't actually want.
Smells like victory.
But the campaign has something of a shellshocked feel, as staffers privately chew over a blowup last week where internal frictions flared into the open. Clinton campaign operatives say it happened as top Clinton advisers gathered in Arlington, Va., campaign headquarters to preview a TV commercial. "Your ad doesn't work," strategist Mark Penn yelled at ad-maker Mandy Grunwald. "The execution is all wrong," he said, according to the operatives.Granted, the Democratic primary season is just the first battle, and a new young turk general is rising to be a nominee that could pummel the Republicans. But I'll take my victories where I can get them nowadays. Getting rid of the Clintons and seeing the Democrats push the even further to the right might be a great thing - IF McCain can play Lieberman to Obama's Lamont."Oh, it's always the ad, never the message," Ms. Grunwald fired back, say the operatives. The clash got so heated that political director Guy Cecil left the room, saying, "I'm out of here."
It turns out the brand-new American Conservative Party [sic] web site* is determined to be a completely irrelevant blip in the ideological fracturing of the Republican Party. Bill Quick, the blogger organizing the effort, has issued a rather dictatorial edict declaring that social conservatives are not welcome unless they keep their mouths shut on the national level. You can see my farewell to them here.
* As Bill has explained here at TBR, he doesn't really want to form a new political party. He wants to set himself up as the Republican version of Kos, and he's just using the name to catch people looking for somewhere to escape the GOP carnage. I added the gratuitous [sic] because even Barry Goldwater joked about being among "the new liberals of the Republican Party" later in life. If you want to form something called "American Conservatism" and win elections with it, it better be the one defined by the Reagan landslides and not the Goldwater landslide or you'll never get very far.
This is going to be a long nine months.
Every time I see John McCain's name in print, it's like probing a cavity with my tongue. I know it's going to hurt, but I'm not willing to admit that it's real. Couldn't it just be a stray sesame seed from this morning's bagel? One more try and I'm sure I can pry it loose and feel better about it.
It seems even major-league conservative pundits like Mona Charen are experiencing this problem. She begins a column Friday by pointing out that John McCain is trying "to meet conservatives more than halfway." She then proceeds to provide example after example that turn my stomach, and by the end of the column she's probably no closer to resolving the same knot she has in hers.
You know what the worst part of this is? McCain's problem is entirely resolvable. I guess that at least half of all the people who have ever said, "There's no way I could EVER vote for McCain," could be turned into supporters (and without him changing a single policy position) if he would just utter two simple words: "I'm sorry." Okay, he'd have to go a little farther than that: "I've taken you for granted, and been mean-spirited at times when people didn't agree with me. I really do respect your views, and I'm willing to listen to yours. I need to be more open to the possibility that I could be wrong about some of my positions, and I may need to accept the fact that you could be right."
But we all know that's the one thing that will never happen - at least not before November 5th.
As I've repeatedly made clear, it's my opinion that the two-party system is amazingly resilient, but this should not be construed as an endorsement of the durability of either of the existing parties. Since the 2006 elections I've been fairly certain that the Republicans, by consistently trying to evade responsibility for their failures, and persistently attempting to compromise their way into the hearts of liberals, were the better target in the sights of doom.
Well, a new player is taking the field right now to teach the Republicans something about their own history. I predict with the help of the Internet, small-"C" conservatives will have a new home amazingly quick.
I'd heard about this earlier today, and have already registered at the ACP site. TBR won't be going anywhere, because our namesake's affect on American history, and the principles held by his party throughout the 19th and 20th centuries will endure no matter what my own party affiliation is. And it's not a done deal yet anyway. I'm too big a believer in the two-party system to do anything formal before ACP proves it's bona fides and really starts to compete with one or both of the other two parties.
Besides which, I could be wrong about the Whig precedent. The Republicans could see the ACP as the very real danger it can be to their half of the duopoly, and they could wise up. No matter where we end up, I'm rooting for - and betting on - the eventual victory of conservatism.
UPDATE: Nevermind.
Peter Robinson, blogging at The Corner, mused the other day about how John McCain, now the presumptive Republican nominee, could begin winning over disaffected conservatives.
This reminds me of an idea Clark Judge and I once had as we were musing about George H. W. Bush's second inauguration (which turned out to be Bill Clinton's first inauguration instead). After delivering his inaugural address, we decided, the president could turn, mount the steps to the Capitol, enter the President's Room, seat himself at a desk, and, as cameras flashed, sign half a dozen or so executive orders, delivering on as many campaign promises within an hour of his swearing in. The idea, of course, was to back words with action, and to do so at once.I couldn't resist spelling out my pessimism to Mr. Robinson within an email reminder.
As I recall, President Bush's son did exactly what you suggest on his first day in office, reversing many Clinton policies. That went a long way toward engendering my respect and support, despite my not being firmly convinced he had been the best conservative to install in the job. It took many years for him to squander that respect, but I suspect a President McCain would rise to the occasion and duplicate the effort.Mr. Robinson was kind enough to respond, and attempted to offer encouragement. "No, you're thinking too clearly... for a drowned man. You're still up and kicking."On the other hand, such a commitment might keep keep me from drowning in my own bile at the ballot box - depending largely on which promises he'd decide to make. Unlike most offended conservatives, it is McCain-Feingold that sticks most deeply in my craw. It really affects my impression of his sincerity on all other issues, that he thinks it his right to preach his opinion because he is elected, while he denies that same right to those who elect him. It's not the relative liberalism of his positions, but the sanctimony with which he delivers those edicts.
PS: On the other hand... maybe I've drowned already.
Perhaps. And here comes another kick.
If you haven't already watched this, take a few moments. You'll need to have a perspective about it in the coming months, and it just doesn't count if you take other people's word for it.
In my opinion, McCain's stilted, monotone speech - especially after Mitt Romney's powerful, eloquent and heartwarming concession before CPAC - will do little if any good with conservatives. Barack Obama's vapid cheerleading for defeat and class warfare will roll over him and leave nothing but a dark stain where the Republican Party had once proudly stood.
Just F**king great! Like my world isn't F'd up enough with the Republican Party nominating a damn "Maverick" liberal asshole, supporters of the wife of the first "Black" President claiming that her opponent - a Black man - isn't Black enough, and that man's supporter claiming In many ways, he really will be the first woman president" - now I find out that Global warming isn't gonna kill us, but Global Cooling will!!
ARGGGGGGGG!!!
"Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies. Rivers and seas boiling. Forty years of darkness. Earthquakes, volcanoes... The dead rising from the grave. Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together - mass hysteria."
My wife's morning routine includes a scan of Drudge. She took one look at the above picture and said "That HAS to be Photoshop'd." I love that woman.
I've sung this tune before, but the time is right to bang the drum again. Let me tell you a story...
There once was a political party that was fighting the Democrats over a series of issues. But the Democrats played the political game better, and kept insisting on compromises that favored their positions. Trying to get along and seem "bipartisan", the political party agreed to these compromises time and again, to the point that eventually their leadership, including the incumbent President, decided to give in and support the Democratic position on these issues altogether. Left without a platform to run on, the political party nominated a war hero to be their presidential candidate, hoping his popularity and personal integrity would be enough to win.
I know this all sounds familiar, but of course since the primaries aren't over, I'm not talking about today.
The political party was the Whig Party, not the Republicans.
They were arguing over states' rights, nullification, and slavery, not immigration, campaign finance, global warming and stem cell research.
The incumbent President was Millard Fillmore, not George W. Bush.
The war hero was Winfield Scott. He lost in a landslide.
And so will John McCain, I predict, if he gets the nomination - which seems all but certain at this point.
Following the election of 1852, without a platform significantly different from the Democrats, the Whig Party fell apart. Some of its members joined the Democrats, others formed a new party with a platform opposing the Democrats on the issues the Whigs compromised over, especially slavery. Thus was the Republican Party born, and the political rise of The Black Republican began. And to such an end as the Whigs experienced I expect the Republicans to come to in the coming years.
UPDATE: Hugh mentions the W-word himself, though more as a warning than pronouncing a doom.
But like any good prognosticator, I'll hedge somewhat.
Dave Price over at Dean's World is right, this is what happens when the Socialists are put in charge of things best left to the private sector. And something similar to the British NHS and Canada Health Act are what Hillary, Obama and Edwards (and, I hate to say, maybe even some Republicans) are all proposing for this country - Nationalized healthcare.
Ace has it right, that if any of these people come to power I guess what we will end up with is some sort of combination of Nationalized and Socialized healthcare system - sort of a National Socialist healthcare system...
So you can celebrate, too, the American Thinker was kind enough to let us know that Sunday is the anniversary of the outing of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If I weren't on a diet, I'd celebrate a bit more.
