Archive for July, 2009

“America Isn’t Hiring Precisely Because of Government Policy”

Tuesday, July 7th, 2009

Wanted to be sure and snag this beautiful piece of driftwood on the Internet River, before it floated any further out of sight. Valuable lesson for us all, or at least, those among us who need to learn it. Read…absorb…:

Jerry Bower, a guest blogger at CNBC, has good insight into why US companies are not hiring:

America isn’t hiring precisely because of government policy. Small business owners, who are usually the first into and the first out of the job pool, are standing by the fence and watching. They are paralyzed by regulatory uncertainty. If they hire someone who ends up doing poorly, will they be able to fire that person? Will they have to pay their health care bills after they’ve been terminated? If so, for how long? Who will pay for all these stimulus checks? If it will turn out to be small business, why would they hire instead of keeping costs low to prepare for the big tax bill? Where will the market move? Are you in the right business or are your clients in a politically disfavored industry? Are your clients in health care (being nationalized), autos (already nationalized), banking (somewhat nationalized) or any energy production process which uses carbon (pulverized)? Until you know, you don’t grow, and until you grow your market, you don’t grow your payroll.

Bowyer closes with a punchline that says it all:

Jobs aren’t languishing despite the government’s best efforts. They’re languishing because of them.

Update: And, you see where this gets ya.

Unemployment hit 9.5 percent in June, according to the Department of Labor, putting the figure 2.5 percent higher than the White House had predicted it would be if a government stimulus spending program went into place. Moreover, the new figure is nearly one percent higher than where the White House said it would be without any stimulus spending at all.

In fact, the White House never predicted that unemployment would rise above nine percent regardless of whether Congress spent the nearly $800 billion in so-called economic stimulus spending it recommended at the time.

Apologies in advance for what follows, I’m simply not a decent enough person to rise above it…

Hey all you Palin-haters. Yeah, you. Isn’t it great that we kept that know-nothing Tundra Barbie away from the seat of power? Really dodged a bullet there, huh? How many times do you think she would have used Air Force One to buzz-bomb Manhattan?

Going After Jenny Sanford

Tuesday, July 7th, 2009

When I say the GOP doesn’t need to change a single thing in order to turn things around in ’10 and ’12, this is exactly what I’m talking about. The terrible, terrible anger the Democratic Underground posters have for…Jenny Sanford, the betrayed Governor’s-wife?? Liberals, you see, have just as much anger as conservatives, plus a whole lot more — and the anger they have makes very little sense.

Now, it is my opinion, and that of many others as well, that Jenny Sanford has handled herself remarkably well. Unlike most political wives, she has not stood by her man in public as a show of support and solidarity. Most political wives mindlessly stand by in press conferences as their husbands blabber on about how sorry they are. Jenny Sanford did not. Kudos to her. She’s managed to retain some dignity and self-respect in this humiliating affair.

Of course, that means nothing to the DUmmies. Across multiple posts, she is being smeared and insulted.

The democrat party had this huge rout last year because they were able to convince the typical voter to stop caring about policy, and start caring about personalities. Promote not just the idea that There’s Something About Barry, and that our new iPresident is a godlike being, and “Nobody messes with Joe” and that the Delaware Dimbulb is some wonderful wise Supreme Elder Statesman…but that the lowliest democrat is a better person than the most esteemed Republican. They promoted their party as a sure cure for Goodperson Fever.

We must have some folks in the electorate who don’t feel terribly good about themselves. Because they fell for this in November, and it should be clear now that not a single thirst has been quenched.

Angry LiberalHow could it be? It should be obvious to anyone who uses his head as something besides a hat-hanger. There’s nothing about being a left-winger that can make anybody a better person. The quotes that Blogsister Cassy has rounded up here, are from hardcore types that are not only unfulfilled and unhappy — but angry, pissy, petulant, acrid, shrill, nasty and, worst of all, frenzied. Just like sharks at a feeding frenzy. The more blood they get the more they want. And if Cas wanted to make her list twice, three times, ten times as long, you know she’d be able to do it. She’d find the quotes. They’d be there. These people have the venom, and the need to spew it.

Republican campaign strategy: Just stop helping the enemy to keep all this bile a secret. People don’t want to talk about policy? People don’t want to talk about issues? People don’t want to talk about cause-and-effect? They’d rather be thinking about which political party makes you a Good PersonTM? Hey…don’t lick ’em, join ’em. Let’s have a nationwide debate about which ideology makes you a better person. Just stop cherry-picking the evidence.

I really wondered as I read these posts… how did these people get this way? I’m serious. How do you get so angry, deranged, and hate-filled? What happened to them? There must have been something.

I’ve got a few years on Cas and I have no curiosity about this whatsoever. But if you’ve been reading her pages for awhile you’ll understand my reluctance to conclude I’ve figured out something she hasn’t; this is a wise young lady with a wonderful head on her shoulders who has a lot going on upstairs. If she’s still asking questions and I’m not, it’s probably because she’s trying to figure out something I’m not.

But I know the answer to her question. It isn’t pretty.

In life, we have a lot of Proper Things To Do that offer us a only a delayed reward, or no reward whatsoever. Push the grocery cart someone left in the parking lot back to where it belongs; offer your seat on the bus to the pregnant woman; ask your stuffy old great-granduncle about the good-old-days, even though you don’t really want to know (yet) about them; help the lost child find her Mommy; open the door for the lady; donate your money to help soldiers who are coming back from Iraq or Afghanistan with some limbs missing; show your support for invading Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place; go to church; do your homework; say “excuse me”…the list goes on and on.

It’s not easy to teach a child to do these things, and so parents have picked up a lot of ways to get it done. The easiest way is to teach them this stuff while they’re still in toddlerhood, while the personality is still forming, at an age when they’re most accepting of the taboo. Obviously that doesn’t work for everything. Unfortunately, as kids get older, they become fascinated in their own growing understanding of cause-and-effect, and start to want to figure things out that way…the unreasonable little bastards. So some parents wait until the pre-teen years and have conversations with their children about cause-and-effect. But cause-and-effect is an advanced topic. As I said, above, many among us opted not to think about it at all in the last election. Many among them opted out simply because they don’t know how to think about it, and many among them, unfortunately, are parents. And so a lot of them skip this stuff altogether. Their unfortunate children grow up to be hardcore left-wing secularist liberals.

Real ManNow here’s the ugly part that smears all of us whether we’re liberals or not. When you know deep down inside that you really ought to be doing something, and you decide, for whatever reason, not to do it — deep down inside, what’s going to happen to you is you conceive the rage that has no home. You become bitterly angry, already, in that moment, but you don’t know it yet because your anger hasn’t yet found a target. When someone else comes along and does the thing you know darn well you should have done, just like an electrical storm finding a lightning rod, your anger finds the target. Think about the guy in Irreversible watching the woman being assaulted. Imagine the feelings he’s feeling, the thoughts going through his head. Now imagine some Dudley Doright jumping in and, well, doing right. Imagine how this would change the social-acceptance issues involved in ducking-and-covering. Imagine how angry that cowardly fellow would become, being shown-up like that.

That is exactly what we saw on the left wing just before we invaded Iraq, lasting all the way up to the 2004 elections and beyond. Anchorless rage finally finding an anchor. The craven isolationist looking upon, not quite so much an Adonis of perfection, or a Perseus, or a Hercules, or a Superman, or even any kind of hero — just someone else who made a better decision, and did what everyone else knows damn well needed to be done.

Call it what you will. Call it the product of lazy parenting. Call it a “If I Don’t Help Put Out The Fire, You Can’t Either” instinct. Once aroused, it arrives with a white-hot rage that knows no equal. And we all have it, or at least, the ingredients of it…

It is extraordinarily damaging to our implied social compact. Left unchecked, it turns otherwise decent people in to extremist liberals. It also is caused by being an extremist liberal. It feeds itself, feeding on itself, and makes itself bigger and hungrier.

Go on, read some of the comments Cassy found and tell me I’m wrong.

Republicans have the next election sown up. Really, they had the last one sown up, they just chose not to go for the kill. Just stop keeping secrets for the benefit of the enemy. Stop keeping secrets about the tremendous harm liberalism does to people’s souls.

Go, Dumpy!

Monday, July 6th, 2009

Speaking of Boortz, he did an unwise thing this morning. I think Boortz is going to be eating crow over this one. You can tell he’s on the wrong side of this thing, because he doesn’t agree with me:

Certainly Sarah Palin didn’t resign her seat as Alaska’s governor to pursue a higher political office. Now she has the patina of a quitter and is no longer a viable candidate.

I’ll go along with the “patina” part. It’s a good word, and it’s used well here.

1 a: a usually green film formed naturally on copper and bronze by long exposure or artificially (as by acids) and often valued aesthetically for its color
b: a surface appearance of something grown beautiful especially with age or use
2: an appearance or aura that is derived from association, habit, or established character
3: a superficial covering or exterior

The “viable” part does not apply. There would have to be a permanence about the patina for that to work. Now, walk me through this. It’s early 2012 and Sarah Palin, after two and a half years in the shadows, pipes up and says she’s interested in unseating President Obama.

From sea to shining sea, we all shout “Oh Sarah Palin, the quitter??”

Can’t quite see it, sorry. Patinas evaporate. And if they don’t, and you’re Sarah Palin, the eleventh Governor of Alaska, doing nothing to substantially benefit your state, pissing away your salary four, six or eight times as fast as you’re earning it, doing nothing to help this hypothetical Presidential bid of yours, doing nothing to help conservatism in general…but you’re worried about your “patina” so you stay put and grow your moss…you’re a loser. Sarah Palin is not a loser. So there’s really only one direction for her to go. The question is what took her so long.

Neal, this morning you had rocks in your head. You’ve done better before, and I’m sure you’ll do better again.

Caps-impaired commenter DumpyTheRed provides an education to the Talkmaster, more clear, more concise, and more articulate than anything I could put together. Hope Neal read it and realized the error of his ways. There’s some good wisdom in the paragraph below…even if there aren’t many apostrophes or capital letters.

restore credibility?
anyone else tired of hearing this phrase? we heard it time and time again when obama came back from his apology tour, about how he had restored the US’s credibility. the MSM repeated it over and over to hammer home that obama is god, and now the world loves us again. but alas, everyone still hates us, and looks like they will for a while. now we have to hear this phrase for palin. the people who say that the only reason mccain got as many votes as he did was because of palin, are correct in my opinion. i agree with whoever says palin “energized” the party. that’s true. the only spark mccain got was when he announced her as running mate. true conservatives dont care about restoring credibility with the republican party, or anyone else for that matter, we just want a freakin conservative candidate, and that’s what we get with her. let’s quit worrying about our credit score and just vote for those who are true to their beliefs; as opposed to people who pander to everyone in an attempt to not piss anyone else off – that’s the liberal thing to do, not conservative.

Bulls-eye for Dumpy. You don’t need any credibility at all, “restored” or otherwise, to credibly make the case: If you want people to transact business at a more frenzied pace, quit taxing them up to and beyond the point of pain for doing it.

And nobody needs to restore credibility here. At all. Except maybe the press, for going through an entire election season last year not doing their jobs. They have something that could stand some restoration, I think.

Best Sentence LXVIII

Monday, July 6th, 2009

It’s about time Neal Boortz snagged a Best Sentence I’ve Heard Or Read Lately (BSIHORL) award. And today he picks up the sixty-eighth one. Well done, Neal.

The best sentence:

Does it seem just a bit absurd to you to be celebrating freedom while the government tells you that you aren’t allowed to have fireworks?

So Did Janeane Make It to Dallas?

Monday, July 6th, 2009

I hope she did. This looks to me like an education she could use.

Hat tip: My Pet Jawa.

Are You Feeling Stimulated?

Monday, July 6th, 2009

Stop The ACLU:

May’s numbers out of Ohio are dismal. The Buckeye State’s unemployment rate hit 10.8% and the national rate is 9.5% with today’s numbers for June. In Dayton, Ohio, a company which has been in Ohio since the 19th century, NCR, has decided to relocate to another state. Columbia, SC, is using money from the President’s Stimulus Package to lure NCR away from Ohio. I’m sorry people, but all the road projects in the world won’t replace those long-term high paying jobs.

So my question to all of you is – Are You Feeling Stimulated?

According to the latest Gallup numbers – you aren’t.

63% are unsatisfied with the state of the nation
58% have a negative consumer mood
49% believe that economic conditions are poor
59% believe that things are getting worse

So it seems that none of you are feeling the least bit stimulated by all of Obama’s spending.

“We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.” — Winston Churchill

“You Keynesians are all the same, with your beady little eyes and flapping heads!” — Morgan K. Freeberg

“Palin/King 2012” Has a Nice Sound To It

Monday, July 6th, 2009

As in, Congressman Peter King. I know a lot of misguided souls are out there saying Republicans need to embiggen the tent, but it seems to me the tent can remain tiny enough to exclude…y’know…moonwalking child molesters who aren’t even capable of looking at their own hideously mutated mugs in the mirror.

Rep. Peter King Unloads on Michael Jackson and the Media Circus Covering his Death

TMZ has the video. A soon to be classic where Rep. King asks why the media isn’t covering the dead in Iraq and Afghanistan with the same enthusiasm as the one-gloved-one. Some excerpts:

“He was pervert. He was a child molester. He was a pedophile.”

“The media has disgraced itself.”

“Would you let your child or grandchild be in the same room as Michael Jackson?”

One thing from Yours Truly regarding this tent-embiggening. The jibber jabber around it has lately crescendo’ed into a thunderous din, with the speculation about whether or not Palin’s career is over. You’ll notice nobody’s wondering about the democrat party embiggening their tent, and if you live on a sane planet or sub-planet as I do, you may have been wondering how-come-that-iz?

Because, of course, the democrat party isn’t under this magnifying glass. Nobody’s wondering about whether their tent is big enough for this-or-that. Is that because they have a universal tent? No. They exclude all kinds of people. They exclude more classes, and noses within the classes, than conservatives have ever thought about excluding. Housewives. Homeschoolers. Boy Scouts. Gun owners. Frank Ricci and people just like him. Meat lovers. People who want to pay extra money for a private health plan. Small business owners. People who don’t want to join a union. Catholics. Protestants. Parents who favor abstinence-education. Real men who want to raise their sons into even better real men. I can add to this list all day and night if I wanna.

It’s the irony. There’s some genetic weakness we all have — you see some leftist weirdo welcoming a pervert like Michael Jackson with open arms. Or some scumbag who’s on death row because he butchered a little girl and left the bloody pieces out in a field somewhere. We have this tendency…to which the weakest minds among us rapidly succumb…to think that leftist weirdo dude is equally accepting of all other bits of humanity. Why are we tempted to think such a thing?

Love your wife and kids, let ’em know it, take them to church, work hard and buy an insurance policy to cover them just in case — and these same leftist kooks won’t give you the time of day. They like perverts, degenerates, and terrorists who’d kill themselves to take a few innocent office workers with ’em. But the leftists aren’t called-upon to make their tent any bigger. Nope. Just the other guys, who are ready to stand up for law and order. They need to learn to flex.

Just freakin’ insane. It reflects poorly on any among us who choose to accept it.

Update: Here’s a link for any of the child-molester-defending, liberal, pro-kiddy-diddlin’, democrat, pro-degenerate, anti-decency, blue-state, liberal, democrat, pro-weirdo, anti-sensible-person, left-wing, liberal, democrat, anti-child, pro-child-exploiter, pro-pervert…did I remember to say liberal democrat? …concerned twisted strange activist/citizen types can donate their loot to punish Congressman King for his comments against a wonderful pop sensation. Who happened to molest little kids.

I stand by my comments. Up-with-decent-people, down-with-perverts — versus — up-with-perverts-down-with-decent-people, really is a left-wing right-wing issue. Even if there are some left-wingers who don’t quite get that.

Thirty Ignorant Opinions That Are Nevertheless Somehow Popular

Monday, July 6th, 2009

One good thing that has come from Gov. Palin’s resignation, is I’ve been able to beef up my inventory of opinions it seems find support from a clear majority, even though they’re just plain dumbass opinions. They come to be because a lot of everyday folks feel socially obliged to feel opinionated about things, but haven’t had the time, energy, inclination or incentive to form opinions the way we all know opinions should be formed. So a lot of them take the easy-out. They say whatever sounds good, and from then on they get an ego-investment in this arbitrarily-selected opinion, that ends up being a dumbass opinion much more often than not.

It is how we use the democratic process to make our worst decisions.

It is the best evidence we have that we need to make the voting process more difficult, and not easier.

These are opinions that derogate the person who gives them ink, a voice, or an otherwise good name. There is a lot more going on with these opinions than just me disagreeing with them. For example — I don’t think we should legalize prostitution or drugs; I don’t think we should even be seriously discussing it. But I understand why well-informed, intelligent, good people think we should. I understand why people think women should be allowed to abort, and even have their abortions publicly funded, although I disagree with that too. These opinions go well beyond those. These opinions, and their popularity, are ugly remnants of this mindset we’ve been nurturing that all passionate things must be respected. It isn’t so. If you hold these opinions, you are a problem. You are uninformed. They are cries for help. They are shorthand notation for “I desperately require some way of forming an inflamed opinion but I don’t know how to get ahold of the information I need to form it responsibly.”

They are the opinion equivalent of driving several miles down the highway with your blinker on.

30. Together, we can take on global warming and we can win. Save the planet. Together we can do this.
29. We’ve got to get some more money into the education system, because our children are worth it.
28. Seventy languages in use in a school district is a sign that it is a rich tapestry of diversity, and that is good for everybody.
27. Any statement that qualifies “tax cuts” as an expenditure, such as comparing the “Bush tax cuts” with real spending plans.
26. We’re going to need a bigger stimulus.
25. The trouble with our justice system is that the people who decide the cases don’t have enough empathy.
24. We’ve got to do something to help the unemployed, like taxing the snot out of the businesses that just might hire them.
23. It’s going to take Barack Obama a long, long time to fix all this stuff, and He is trying His best.
22. If women were in charge of the world there wouldn’t be any wars.
21. FOX News tells lots of lies, but I can’t come up with any examples.
20. You know what we really need to change? If a guy has lots of sex he’s a stud, if a woman does the same thing she’s a slut. SO unfair!
19. Everything that needs inventing has been invented. Men, drop out of school, learn to rap and do your crunches.
18. We’ve got to change our policies because our (unnamed) allies in Europe don’t like us.
17. I can’t approve of Barack Obama’s policies. But I still like Him personally, and that’s what really matters.
16. We must all be forced to call gay people “married.” It’s a civil rights issue. For them. Not for anyone else. Just for them.
Culottes - Who Decides This Stuff?15. We have to raise the tax rate on the rich, because that makes us all a better people.
14. The Earth is sure to be doomed if I use traditional sandwich baggies. But it’s got a fighting chance if I use these ones that are 25% lighter.
13. Sarah Palin isn’t a real woman; she’s a Republican.
12. I know exactly what my thousand dollar car needs: Three thousand dollar rims.
11. If we drill, we won’t see a single drop of oil for x years. Besides, adorable polar bears, penguins, pristine environment blah blah blah.
10. We should not have attacked Iraq because Iraq didn’t attack us.
9. I wanna watch American Idol!
8. Hooters? Isn’t that a strip bar or something?
7. The second amendment is out of date because all them founders couldn’t have envisioned nukular weapons and what-not
6. Those illegal aliens are just trying to make a better life for their kids so we should coddle them all and make them citizens.
5. Vote for Obama! Hope! Change!
4. If your kid doesn’t feel like paying attention it’s a learning disability. Medicate him.
3. No one’s going to be safe until we get rid of all these guns we have lying around.
2. Culottes and clamdiggers. That’s what hip fashionable hot looking women should wear this summer. Who wants to see a gorgeous woman’s bare thigh anyway.
1. Palin quit because of a scandal. Yup. After all that digging, months and months, the entire Fourth Estate…they left one hidden. Boy, do they feel foolish.

New Tune for the Free Credit Report Guy

Sunday, July 5th, 2009

Red Planet Cartoons product, posted at American Spectator, becoming more and more tragically true with each passing day:

Hat tip to E Māua Ola i Moku o Keawe.

Like Celebrating the Birthday of a Frog You Are About to Dissect

Sunday, July 5th, 2009

Fellow Right Wing News contributor William Teach is beating the snot out of a hardcore lefty-loosey “progressive” type who’s suddenly interested in celebrating the Fourth of July.

As I discuss in my book, The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America Came to Be, the Tories who opposed American independence were the conservatives of their day. They revered tradition, and proudly followed orders from the king and the aristocracy in London. They hated and feared the idea of democracy, and thought the idea of equality was laughable…

Um, no, Mike. You can spin it all you want, but, the Progressive movement hadn’t even been born at the time. It is actually a product of the late 1800’s-early 1900’s, which had massive links to and much in common with the rise of fascism in Europe.

Nor were [the Tories] really Classical Conservatives, since they were supporting a monarchy, part of an authoritarian model. America’s brave revolutionary founders were, in fact, somewhere between Classical Liberals and Classical Conservatives. American conservatism is otherwise known as neo-conservatism, ie, Classical Liberalism.

And, since you folks despised patriotism and everything Americana, denigrated your country, pissed on the Flag, and dismissed July 4 for 8 years, you can’t suddenly take it for your own.

Familiar Blog That Nobody Reads visitor and commenter Smitty has a bit more to add back at his home-turf, The Other McCain

From Wikipedia, emphasis mine:

Progressivism is a political and social term that refers to ideologies and movements favoring or advocating changes or reform, usually in a statist or egalitarian direction for economic policies (government management) and liberal direction for social policies (personal choice). Progressivism is often viewed in opposition to conservative ideologies.

In the United States, the term progressive emerged in the late 19th century into the 20th century in reference to a more general response to the vast changes brought by industrialization.

As you watch the Obama Administration trainwreck pile up, the term “egalitarian” seems a jape, and “statist” seems to mean something akin to “banal Chicago thugocracy”, as Scare Force One is followed by the IG-Gate is followed by the Imaginary Legislation (HR-2454), etc.

There is much, much more there. Good learnin’s if you’re like Mike Lux…or, not quite quite so agendized and progressively-pious, or outspoken, but somewhat likewise ignorant, or not quite as ignorant but still could use a little bit of brushing up on this Independence Day.

How and why does a committed hardcore left-winger become interested in celebrating our country’s birthday? It certainly has to do with the proper people being in charge. But it’s still cause for serious introspection, I think, and given their less-than-accommodating reception to the true values of our nation, there’s something less than sincere about it. And more than a little bit silly. If you “love” something because of the potential it has to be remade into something else in your hands, it must be a surreal, incomplete kind of love, right? Why would you celebrate that object’s birthday? It’s somewhat akin to a junkyard owner celebrating the date one of his new additions rolled off the assembly line, or a seventh-grade biology student celebrating the birthday of a dead frog about to be placed under his knife.

Why bother? Other than to waste time…or deceive somebody about your true intentions…why bother?

Vegan Hot Dog Eating Contest

Saturday, July 4th, 2009

Obama Girl makes fun of both vegans, and Goodperson FeverTM.

Netflix Operations Center

Saturday, July 4th, 2009

In Nashville, TN. With video.

“No Cupholder”

Saturday, July 4th, 2009

Bugatti did it again. The demand for another W-16 1,000 horsepower supercar, this time with an opening top, created a need for all kinds of new carbon fiber reinforcements from acceleration and headwind. The result: An astronomical price tag.

You want to buy a camera? We can pit it against three others with nearly indistinguishable features, no problem. Blu-ray players? We’ll compile a three-axis matrix that triangulates the perfect combination of image quality, connected functionality and price. But if you’re considering the Bugatti Veyron 16.4 Grand Sport, we can’t do much for you.

Comparing it to any other car is pointless, because there is nothing else in its $2.1-million (based on current exchange rates) class.
:
The acceleration is so immediate you can feel your eyeballs deform under the G-forces. It’s a sensation of isolationist joy, an out-of-body awareness that you’re moving faster than the world can react. Bystanders vaguely remember seeing a flash of expensive paint a few seconds after you disappear over the horizon…you can outrun not only the 5-0’s cruisers, but their helicopters, too. If they wanna catch you, they’re gonna have to dust off Airwolf and drag Jan Michael Vincent out of rehab.

Aw, that last one was kinda mean. Car-mag columnists are scum sometimes, y’know? I suppose it must strain one’s creativity occasionally to spend an entire career coming up with hip edgy new ways of saying “this car goes fast.”

Unreasonable Woman Takes Too Long in the Bathroom

Saturday, July 4th, 2009

He almost missed the plane. He should be divorcing her.

She Left to Get Rid of the John McCains

Saturday, July 4th, 2009

…or, to be more precise about it, the Meghan McCains. You know the type. The BUT type. “I really, really want to see the Republicans win…BUT…” And then there comes a “I wish Republicans would,” followed by something you wouldn’t say unless you wanted the democrats to win. Sensible “gun safety” laws, homosexuals getting married and adopting kids, global warming, helping people who just want to make a higher minimum wage, Wall Street greed has to be checked — or it’s high time that dimwit Sarah Palin got her ass home to take care of all these retarded kids she keeps squirting out.

There is another type that’s been itching for Sarah Palin to go home. These are the democrats who say they are not itching for Sarah Palin to go home. “Please, please, oh please, run her and make sure she debates Obama.” If & when Palin comes rebounding back into the national scene, they’ll sneer, and squint, and chortle, and exclaim “you’re digging HER up again??” And start peddling like crazy the talking point that Palin’s an idiot but she’s the best the GOP can do. Always make desperation look like the other guy’s problem.

...And Don't Change a ThingThey want her to debate the Teleprompter genius Obama. Want to be there for it. Want to see the Holy Man squish her like a bug. This is a meme that was repeated over and over again. I wonder how they think the Palin/Biden debate went? They must not think Biden won, after all, because if Biden drank her milkshake at that one then they’re lusting after seeing something for the first time that they’ve already seen before. That doesn’t make any sense at all. So this is a confession that Palin won the debate, or at least, it was a draw…or it’s certainly reasonable for someone else to see that debate as a draw. You’d have to be hoping Obama can do something in a debate that Biden can’t do.

Joe Biden. Even now, he remains the best rebuke against liberal talking points against Palin. Just mutter “oh yeah it’s just swell we got that super genius Biden in the job instead of her, huh?” Roll your eyes and walk away.

But what of the John McCain type Republicans, the ones that are so anxious to assume a left-wing position on things to show how reasonable and moderate they are? If Palin tries this Monty-Python-run-away approach now, and comes back on the scene in a year or two, couldn’t they take on the “Oh I wish she’d just go away for good” thing? That would look very silly. That, in my mind, is the big difference between then and now. That has a very good chance at being the reason she did what she did yesterday.

In fact, if it turns out this really is some kind of a reckless political gamble, I offer that it isn’t really that reckless and it really isn’t even a gamble. Palin retires for three months, or six, or an entire year, into a life of a private citizen…in 2010 she stumps for this Senator or that one, for this Congressman or that one. Fade from view again, and then she’s interested in becoming President. She’s wearing some albatross around her neck then? I’m having trouble seeing it. If there really is a scandal here, of course, that would change everything.

But if there is no scandal, then at that time she’ll just look like she left ’em wanting more. Because that’s exactly what will have happened.

We’re about to head out of town and I don’t know about innerwebtubes access at our hotel, so presuming this is the last update for awhile — To Scandal, Or Not To Scandal, That Is The Question. If something hasn’t blown up by Monday, it’s not going to blow up for a long time or there’s nothing to blow up. Certainly if things stay clean by the time she leaves on the 25th, it’ll be highly unlikely for her to ever be tainted. Just look at all the attempts made already.

So for the immediate duration, the sidebar graphic remains unchanged…especially the “don’t change a thing” part of it. She’s the last, best hope for the country to regain some lost common-sense bearings, and as far as hopes go, she’s pretty far from a ramshackle, half-assed one. She has been, and remains today, quite a decent one.

You can tell this from the left-winger comments. They’ve been a lot more anxious, a lot more desperate, to get their talking points out there…certainly compared to Palin-backers like us. Examine the typical mixed-company (conservatives and libs) thread about Palin’s announcement; by the time things quiet down again, for every comment from a reasonable person there’s ninety-nine more comments from some weasely liberal ankle-biters. And not 99 ankle-biters either. Something like a dozen of ’em, typing in crap and hitting “Post” over and over again. It’s the same story different day: They have to get the first word, they have to have the last word, they have to have all other words in between. Nothing less will make their wrong-headed policies look appealing to anyone, and they know it.

Of course, some of this is trickery on my part, since I’ve been pretending not to know things I know. Got a call from Palin’s press secretary yesterday evening, in response to a private e-mail I sent the Governor. It was about yet another theory, one not yet explored by anyone. Bulls-eye, first try! And since this is The Blog That Nobody Reads, there is no damage involved in spilling the beans here.

I was right. Sarah Palin never was the Governor of Alaska in the first place.

It was Bristol. It’s true. And the entire Palin family, from what was relayed to me last night, is quite mystified it’s taken this long for anyone to figure it out.

“Which Is It, Political Suicide or a Shrewd Political Gamble?”

Friday, July 3rd, 2009

Neither one, dipshit. I’m quoting that dimbulb who’s filling in for Glenn Beck; clearly not a Palin fan, which is alright by me, but he’s indulging in wishful thinking like crazy. In so doing he’s really making an ass out of himself on live television. He’s homing in on the “quitter” argument, obviously got his ego wrapped up in it. I think he really does know: It’s now-or-never to get that talking point going. Palin can’t stand the heat, so she’s getting out of the kitchen. She’s meek. She’s mild. This isn’t the game for her.

Actually, it’s quite silly to debate whether or not Sarah Palin can take heat. That was decided months ago. One of the reason she has so many fans is that she’s shown she’s got the grace and maturity to let crap like this roll right off.

It’s the personal financial expense — and the pointlessness. Gov. Palin is doing exactly what I thought I’d be doing, in her shoes, several months ago. It’s an iron-clad rule with ankle-biters: GET AWAY NOW. They’re black holes for your energy. The “that which doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” rule doesn’t apply; instead, it’s the “never wrestle with a pig” rule that applies. I know this as well as anybody else. I’ve got jealous ankle biters in my past. I have no regrets whatsoever…none…about putting distance between me & them. I’m filled with regret about waiting as long as I did to get it done. So I can relate to this decision of hers, fully. Hanging around them, letting them hang around me — every single second of it was a soul-sucker. And there was no up-side to any of it.

In a stunning announcement, Gov. Sarah Palin said Friday morning she will resign her office in a few weeks.

Speculation has swirled for weeks, perhaps months that Palin would not seek re-election in 2010 as she pursues a political career on the national stage. The former vice presidential candidate has long been rumored to be considering a run at the Republican presidential nomination in 2012.

Palin did not address those rumors at the press conference at her Wasilla home, during which she did not take questions from reporters.

She implied that her real decision was not to seek re-election, and that the resignation was a natural step after that in order to avoid a lame-duck final 18 months of her term.

“With this announcement that I’m not seeking re-election, I’ve determined it’s best to transfer the authority of governor to Lieutenant Governor (Sean) Parnell,” Palin said. “I’m determined to take the right path for Alaska, even though it is unconventional and is not so comfortable.

She calls it a “superficial, wasteful political bloodsport.” Anyone who fails to understand that reference simply hasn’t been paying attention. Hopefully, once she’s out of the Governor’s office it will no longer be possible to target her for these capricious “ethics” complaints — at least until something materializes with some indictable meat to it.

Yeah, like that’s gonna happen.

Not sure if this has been mentioned elsewhere, but Dagny Taggart resigned as the Vice President of Operations, Taggart Transcontinental, in Atlas Shrugged. Twice. Both times in the middle of “reforms” similar to exactly what’s taking place right now. Just kinda interesting…

Also Blogging:

 • Cas
 • Mel
 • Rick
 • Neo

Twilight of Honeymoon III

Friday, July 3rd, 2009

Is charisma an adequate substitute for keeping your word? That is the operative question. And the answer is, I’m taking it — “yeah, kinda, sorta…for a little while.” We may be nearing the end of that little-while. Many signs in the air, this one being just one of the latest.

Hat tip to blogger friend Duffy:

Keynesian Bumper Sticker

Friday, July 3rd, 2009

Bumper sticker slogans are really tough, especially for a windbag like me.

But Paul Krugman’s educated-man-delusions of grandeur put the big reveal on the situation: It’s dire. It is heart-attack serious. We truly are witnessing the greatest country the world has ever beheld, thrashing around in agony, suffering a disease that is about to turn terminal. And the docs around the deathbed are quacks. We’re talking leeches, bloodletting, pigeons pecking at the feet stuff.

Time for a bumper sticker slogan. I make no claim to authoring the best one possible, or possessing the talents necessary for such a thing. I’m just offering something to the public domain. Something must be done. The public must be exposed to what is truly going on, and it has to be done in a language the public can understand. And the word that applies, that has seldom found the benefit of ink or voice, must be put in the slogan. It must, like all effective bumper sticker slogans, mix what is familiar with what is not yet familiar, and must be researched, with gusto, diligently, and in a great big hurry.

So here’s my humble offering:

You Keynesians are all the same, with your beady little eyes and flapping heads!

With heartfelt and profound apologies to Trey and Matt. Had to do it, guys. Word needs to get out, and we can’t depend on bad results to teach the lesson. The student has to have some humility in order for that to work, and it obviously isn’t there. The time has come to borrow some points from the Alinsky playbook (this one would be making use of Rule Twelve). We have to use what works.

The stakes are far too high to dick around with anything else, and too much damage has already been done.

Update: And here we go.

These people need to be ridiculed, to be lampooned. Their position is today — and it was exactly this position in the thirties! — “the reason our plan didn’t work is because you didn’t do it big enough.” The bucket of gasoline didn’t put the fire out, so go get a bigger bucket.

The concept of “Out of Control” has no more vivid an incarnation on this plane of reality; nor can it. Seriously.

Make fun of the Keynesians. Make fun of them as hard as you can. We know in that direction lies victory, for they themselves know they cannot afford to call themselves what they are. They cannot articulate their argument for what it is, and they cannot mention the name of their founder; either one would enable the common man of average intelligence to see through the smokescreen and the lies.

That Canadian-Ambassador dude looks kind of like Mr. Krugman, viewed in the right light, doesn’t he?

Update: For those who have greater belief in How the World Works than in me, you should be aware he’s on my side on this thing. In fact, he states the case much stronger than I ever did.

He’s right. Krugman’s record of being on the wrong side of things, is about as impressive as it can possibly be. Him and his Keynesian flying monkeys too.

Memo For File LXXXVIII

Friday, July 3rd, 2009

Krugman“O.K., Thursday’s jobs report settles it. We’re going to need a bigger stimulus.”

Economist Paul Krugman of the New York Times (hat tip: Conservative Grapevine)

“One of the methods used by statists to destroy capitalism consists of establishing controls that tie a given industry hand and foot, making it unable to solve its problems, then declaring that freedom has failed and stronger controls are necessary.”

Ayn Rand, “Word Around the Net” Quote of the Day for 7/2/2009 (hat tip: Gerard)

“As a nation we are under the thumb of idiots. Not just indoctrinated, or wrong-thinking, or power-hungry, or manipulative, or even malevolent people. No, I mean real lowbrows, people who constantly fall for really stupid ideas.”

James Lewis, writing in The American Thinker

“Simple men are often forced to admit and reverse their mistakes. Men of letters tend to compound theirs with more mistakes.”

— Morgan K. Freeberg

Cross-posted at Right Wing News.

What a Real Man Looks Like

Thursday, July 2nd, 2009

What looks bad when your life is goin’ good, but looks better than anything you’ve ever seen when you’re completely fucked?

A man, built by the Good Lord from stem to stern to stop bad situations from getting worse, endowed by Him with the muscle and brains to make that happen.

The link behind the picture goes to Gerard, who editorializes:

In a land where neuters, unicorn riders, and moonwalking molesters are deified and canonized, we can forget that there are real men still walking the American earth. Here’s one. Do you think she was glad to see him?

“A construction worker, suspended from a crane, rescued a woman who fell into the Des Moines River in downtown Des Moines Tuesday. A man who also fell into the water died.” — Photo Journal

And then, for the man reaching out his hand, Jason Oglesbee, and the others involved in the rescue, it was back to work on Wednesday, “We have a bridge to build here,” the supervisor said as his men went about their business. — Des Moines Register

Step back in the “real” world, of Gerard’s moonwalking perverts, airhead girls with their dogs-in-purses, banks that are too big to fail, overpriced iced mocha drinks, iPods, iPhones, iPresidents, “climate change,” Appalachian hiking…and smelly Jason is just in the way. He is the priceless coin that is artificially devalued when life goes on just a little bit too long being a little bit too sanitized. We forget how much men like him mean to us. We forget there is no other human denomination with quite the same value.

If we make a real commitment to that ignorant mindset, we are completely screwed. We deal a sustained assault on our own abilities to cope. With life itself. If we don’t, then maybe we’re not screwed.

Time will tell.

Thing I Know #130. The noble savage gives us life. Then we outlaw his very existence. We call this process “civilization.” I don’t know why.

On Marriage: Let’s Call the Whole Thing Off

Thursday, July 2nd, 2009

Cheating WhoreSays the flibbertigibbet, I screwed around on my husband, so I guess marriage can’t work out for anyone…plus, I get to write a column!

On marriage: Let’s call the whole thing off
Author Sandra Tsing Loh is ending her marriage. Is it time you did, too?
By Sandra Tsing Loh
updated 6:27 a.m. PT, Mon., June 22, 2009

Sadly, and to my horror, I am divorcing. This was a 20-year partnership. My husband is a good man, though he did travel 20 weeks a year for work. I am a 47-year-old woman whose commitment to monogamy, at the very end, came unglued. This turn of events was a surprise. I don’t generally even enjoy men; I had an entirely manageable life and planned to go to my grave taking with me, as I do most nights to my bed, a glass of merlot and a good book. Cataclysmically changed, I disclosed everything. We cried, we bewailed the fate of our children.

And yet at the end of the day — literally during a five o’clock counseling appointment, as the golden late-afternoon sunlight spilled over the wall of Balinese masks — when given the final choice by our longtime family therapist, who stands in as our shaman, mother, or priest, I realized…no. Heart-shattering as this moment was — a gravestone sunk down on two decades of history — I would not be able to replace the romantic memory of my fellow transgressor with the more suitable image of my husband, which is what it would take in modern-therapy terms to knit our family’s domestic construct back together. In women’s-magazine parlance, I did not have the strength to “work on” falling in love again in my marriage. And as Laura Kipnis railed in “Against Love,” and as everyone knows, good relationships take work.

Which is not to say I’m against work. Indeed, what also came out that afternoon were the many tasks I — like so many other working/co-parenting/married mothers — have been doing for so many years and tearfully declared I would continue doing. I can pick up our girls from school every day; I can feed them dinner and kiss their noses and tell them stories; I can take them to their doctor and dentist appointments; I can earn my half — sometimes more — of the money…I can administer hugs as needed to children, adults, dogs, cats; I can empty the litter box; I can stir wet food into dry.

Which is to say I can work at a career and child care and joint homeownership and even platonic male-female friendship. However, in this cluttered forest of my 40s, what I cannot authentically reconjure is the ancient dream of brides, even with the Oprah fluffery of weekly “date nights,” when gauzy candlelight obscures the messy house, child talk is nixed and silky lingerie donned, so the two of you can look into each other’s eyes and feel that “spark” again. Do you see? Given my staggering working mother’s to-do list, I cannot take on yet another arduous home- and self-improvement project, that of rekindling our romance. Sobered by this failure as a mother — which is to say, my failure as a wife — I’ve since begun a journey of reading, thinking, and listening to what’s going on in other 21st-century American families. And along the way, I’ve begun to wonder, what with all the abject and swallowed misery: Why do we still insist on marriage? Sure, it made sense to agrarian families before 1900, when to farm the land, one needed two spouses, grandparents, and a raft of children. But now that we have white-collar work and washing machines, and our life expectancy has shot from 47 to 77, isn’t the idea of lifelong marriage obsolete?
:
Imagine driving with me now to Rachel’s house for our new 40-something social hobby — the Girls’ Night dinner. Leap not from my car, even though I realize — given my confessed extramarital affair, avowed childhood desire to see my father explode into flames, and carpet of tattered Happy Meal wrappers — I may not strike you as the most reliable explicator of modern marriage. Still, we forge on, and what I’d like to do now is recant for a moment and not be quite so hard on marriage, which I think is a very good fit for some people.
:
[Helen] Fisher, a women’s cult figure and an anthropologist, has long argued that falling in love — and falling out of love — is part of our evolutionary biology and that humans are programmed not for lifelong monogamy, but for serial monogamy.

“Why Him? Why Her?” explains the hormonal forces that trigger humans to be romantically attracted to some people and not to others (a phenomenon also documented in the animal world). Fisher posits that each of us gets dosed in the womb with different levels of hormones that impel us toward one of four basic personality types:

The Explorer — the libidinous, creative adventurer who acts “on the spur of the moment.” Operative neurochemical: dopamine.

The Builder — the much calmer person who has “traditional values.” The Builder also “would rather have loyal friends than interesting friends,” enjoys routines, and places a high priority on taking care of his or her possessions. Operative neurotransmitter: serotonin.

The Director — the “analytical and logical” thinker who enjoys a good argument. The Director wants to discover all the features of his or her new camera or computer. Operative hormone: testosterone.

The Negotiator — the touchy-feely communicator who imagines “both wonderful and horrible things happening” to him- or herself. Operative hormone: estrogen, then oxytocin.

Fisher reviewed personality data from 39,913 members of Chemistry.com. Explorers made up 26 percent of the sample, Builders 28.6 percent, Directors 16.3 percent, Negotiators 29.1 percent. While Explorers tend to be attracted to Explorers, and Builders tend to be attracted to Builders, Directors are attracted to Negotiators, and vice versa.

Exclaims Ellen, slapping the book: “This is why my marriage has been dead for 15 years. I’m an Explorer married to a Builder!”

The nitwit. Guess Fisher forgot about that fifth one there. Poor schmucks that are married to these nitwits; they’re about to lose half their stuff because they made the awful mistake of allowing their nitwit wives to read books.

Yup, it’s really as bad as people think it is. Middle-aged married women with a Cinderella complex, angry that life isn’t perfect and stress free, get all sauced up and talk each other into divorces. Then they bury their gross wrinkly noses in hateful chick-books carefully designed to expunge any doubts about it that might remain, download some hunky stud off the innerwebs, and the poor schlub who was stupid enough to marry them loses half his stuff.

And then they become authorities on marriage, graciously counseling women who are more mature and mentally balanced than they are. Making craploads of money, if they get lucky…and still pulling in that alimony check. So that girls’-night-out wine-buying slush fund stays all slushy.

This is the kind of thing that makes me think our whole society needs a reboot. In a number of our most treasured institutions, the rules are made by whoever among us have proven themselves to be, without any doubt, the most dysfunctional.

“Controlled” Town Hall Meeting

Thursday, July 2nd, 2009

Think I got Robert Gibbs figured out. At work a few weeks ago, in another context we were discussing people who went to school to figure out how to answer the question you want to answer, rather than the question you were just asked, and make it look like you’re kinda sorta answering the question you were just asked.

Yup, that’s the dude.

Why’s everyone so shocked? Even Obama’s most ardent fans wouldn’t be able to go along with the idea that the candidate was actually inspected, vis a vis policies to be implemented…why start now? (Update: If they do want to insist on such a thing, boy has Boortz got a great mini-essay for them.) The rule of the campaign was that slick packaging is an adequate substitute for worthy contents inside. Why should that change now? Why would anyone be surprised that the presentation of every little thing is controlled? That’s how the President won the campaign…because He is so incredibly good at campaigning.

When ya got a shiny new golden hammer, everything looks like a nail. And so the President continues to campaign because that’s what He is good at. The only thing that needs explaining as far as I’m concerned, is how & why this arrives as news, to anyone.

Legendary reporter Helen Thomas, the source of that grating nails-on-chalkboard voice in the video above, who has been personally present to grill every single President since…uh…Rutherford B. Hayes or something…had some choice remarks about the testy exchange above.

Following a testy exchange during today’s briefing with White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, veteran White House correspondent Helen Thomas told CNSNews.com that not even Richard Nixon tried to control the press the way President Obama is trying to control the press.

“Nixon didn’t try to do that,” Thomas said. “They couldn’t control (the media). They didn’t try.

“What the hell do they think we are, puppets?” Thomas said. “They’re supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants. We pay them.”

Thomas said she was especially concerned about the arrangement between the Obama Administration and a writer from the liberal Huffington Post Web site. The writer was invited by the White House to President Obama’s press conference last week on the understanding that he would ask Obama a question about Iran from among questions that had been sent to him by people in Iran.

Not hard to see the culture gap here. The Obama administration thinks that continuing to polish the image, is the job. They’re perfectly justified in thinking this. You might say they have a “mandate” to look good. In fact, given the way the elections went last year, they’d be nuts to think otherwise.

Helen Thomas has just figured out what’s happening, now that it’s begun to impact her job. This is rather disgraceful in a sense. Thomas and crew figured out there was a conflict with what they said they were supposed to be doing for The American People, which is to clock in every day and turn rocks over so we could all see the dark wet slimy things…they figured out there was a conflict between that, and the Obama administration’s ultimate goal of looking good all the time. They figured this out in July of 2009.

Where they been snoozin’?

“I grow weary and fatigued of dealing with these perpetually-cheery, perky, talky, precocious, bubbly talkative people, and their penchant for destroying far more things than they build.” — Morgan K. Freeberg

Drill Baby Drill

Thursday, July 2nd, 2009

Best Sentence LXVII

Wednesday, July 1st, 2009

Ann Coulter, once again, snags the Best Sentence I’ve Heard Or Read Lately (BSIHORL) award. She could make a clean sweep of these things in her sleep. Writing on the now-famous Ricci v. De Stefano case, which was decided in favor of the plaintiffs by a 5-4 vote on Monday, she concludes

[Justice Ruth Bader] Ginsburg and the other dissenters made a big point of pretending there was some flaw in this particular test. None adopted [nominee Sonia] Sotomayor’s position that unequal test results alone prove discrimination.

This suggests that a wise Jewess, due to the richness of her life experiences, might come to a better judgment than a Latina judge would.

There are other such gems in there, including one ongoing theme that has long been one of my favorites: How hyper-liberal legal professionals, such as ham-and-egger lawyers, ambulance chasers, county superior court judges, appellate judges, legal pundits, et al…out of some supposed sense of inner decency…continue to saddle other professions with bizarre rules, regulations, codes and taboos that dare not come within a hundred and fifty yards of their own mahogany doorways.

They’re vultures. Which means you can’t really blame them. It’s contrary to a vulture’s nature to scrape a bone only halfway clean. Them getting away with it — that’s our fault.

Republicans Should Stop Being Bigots

Wednesday, July 1st, 2009

Interesting argument put out by this San Diego Union Tribune editor-guy.

Republicans have a good case to make to African American voters about how the GOP is the real party of empowerment and opportunity, and how the Democratic Party is only interested in empowering itself at the expense of minorities. So much so that it will attack those uppity enough to think for themselves.

On education, for instance, Democrats side with mostly white teachers’ unions against black parents who want their children’s schools to be held accountable for student performance — finally purged of what a Republican president called “the soft bigotry of low expectations.” The educational reform law, No Child Left Behind, has the support of the NAACP, but is fiercely opposed by the teachers’ unions.

Many African Americans also find appealing the GOP’s adherence to personal responsibility, lower taxes, smaller government, and traditional moral values.

But Republicans never get around to making that case to the black community, because too many of them are busy making jackasses out of themselves and coming across as thickheaded, insensitive, and mean-spirited racists. The election of the first black president only made matters worse, as some conservatives, particularly at the local level, responded to this historic event by taking political discourse into the gutter with jokes and sophomoric stunts that don’t amuse but offend…

After the bullet list, he tosses out the meaningless bromide that “Republicans don’t have a monopoly on racism.” That’s Rule Number Four, you’ll recall, from How To Motivate Large Numbers of People To Do a Dumb Thing, Without Anyone Associating the Dumb Thing With Your Name Later On: “Make a Big Show out of Conceding Points That Don’t Really Mean Anything.” Makes you look all even-handed and what-not.

Trouble here is, the bromide is not meaningless. The dust-up between Hillary and Obama last summer was heated, sustained, and showcased in a most unflattering light the condescending attitude the central liberal-democrat power structure has toward minority groups, both female and of-color. The comparison being made, therefore, is between Republicans — who can name as their fellow party members, some isolated individual head-cases possessing some appallingly poor judgment — and democrats, who seem to be philosophically determined to use anyone non-white and non-male as sort of a political fuel. Their message seems to be “Ask not what your political party can do about the injuries you’ve suffered as a minority, ask instead what the injuries you’ve suffered can do for our party.” We know from last year’s melee that that there’s some kind of a complex “Superdelegate” hierarchy involved with these minority classes, almost like something out of Dungeons and Dragons; blacks have more “hit points” than women, but just barely.

This Navarette fellow seems to have lost track of his own argument. He’s trying to make the case that there is some asymmetry between how Republicans and democrats treat minorities. But according to the evidence he himself brings to the table, the demeaning remarks exist on both sides. The beneficial legislation that offsets the political damage done by such demeaning remarks — also — exists on both sides.

The difference? It seems to me the democrats who are in charge now, when they talk about becoming a color-blind society they can’t possibly mean it. Witness the 5-4 Ricci decision by the Supreme Court earlier this week. Barack Obama’s nominee replaces the retiring Justice Souter, who was one of the dissenting four; in fact, Judge Sotomayer contributed to the prior ruling on this case, which was overturned. The case was all about stopping a promotion exam in the middle and changing the rules if & when it looks like the wrong people are winning. It was all about setting up a routine promotion process as a heated contest between whites and non-whites — artificially injecting into the process a sense that what’s good for this race over here, must be bad for that one over there. And, also, a sense that if your skin is the wrong color, and you play by the rules and “win,” it becomes necessary to have a do-over.

That the Supreme Court lowered the kibosh on this, has ticked off the folks who won the elections eight months ago…and it’s ticked ’em off mighty well. The democrat party approach to this seems to be that this was not a good decision by the Supremes, and it illustrates why we need more liberals nominated to the High Court. So we can keep playing favorites. We’re not, in spite of all the platitudes so ritually tossed out, ready to get “past it once and for all.” These are not sins “of the past.” We have to keep a thumb on the scale.

I think that’s the real divide. What are these wild-eyed crazy bigoted conservatives saying about it? That you shouldn’t change the rules in the middle of the game; if the test scores came out a certain way, you should just let them stand. That if your skin lacks pigment, you still have the same right to petition your government for your grievances as anybody else. Gosh, y’know…I think to a lot of people, that just makes sense. It’s not that extreme of a position.

So I agree with the Navarette editor guy. Except I would amend the advice, slightly, to say Republicans should get rid of their bigots. Their judgment seems so questionable that their assets as political decision-makers, must be doubted. Maybe once they are kicked out for good, they can join the democrat party…which seems, from where I stand, ready willing & able to consume all the poorly-thought-out racial and gender stereotypes, that any twisted and diseased individual cares to put to paper or voice.

They can afford to so consume. They aren’t called out on it.

Daphne’s Disgusted

Wednesday, July 1st, 2009

Unlike the rest of that unending parade of snarky females slapping us bumbling men upside the head claiming to want us to smarten up and do better, this one means it. She’s Blogsister Daphne, a woman of wit, class and substance, who claims to like men because she really does; and she’s upset with our obsession with Flo.

If obsession is the offense, I would point out we didn’t bring up the subject in the first place. But something tells me this is one of those things where “discussion” only exists as an idea…train has left the station…woman-talk-man-listen territory from here on out. We’ve all been there.

Lara CroftAnd we know the protocol. Wait for her to get done…try like the dickens to avoid doing anything to piss her off any further…stay quiet and out of sight…do something harmless. Like playing Tomb Raider.

For those who can’t bear to stay quiet — Buck represented us reasonably well, I thought. But hey, maybe you think he left something unsaid. I’m staying out of this one. Things reach a fevered pitch, and then they crescendo further to a point where even I start to have some common sense. Best to just stay out of (further) trouble.

Besides, have you noticed what they’ve done with Lara’s rack in the last two games? Great googly moogly.

Palin in Vanity Fair

Wednesday, July 1st, 2009

So pundits on both sides of the ideological divide are talking about the length of Todd Purdum’s 9,823-word essay on Sarah Palin in Vanity Fair.

Palin in Vanity FairI certainly do think this is newsworthy. And it’s not because I’ve been lying awake at night, wondering what Vanity Fair thinks of Palin. It’s because the Vanity Fair piece changes the dynamics of what’s going on.

Huffington Post provides a helpful and quick summary

Purdum explains the anonymity of the negative quotes about Palin to the staffers finding it painful, even privately, to reflect on the selection of Palin because:

There is ultimately no way to read [it] as reflecting anything but an appalling egotism, heedlessness and lack of judgment… They all know that if their candidate – a 72-year-old cancer survivor – had won the presidency, the vice presidency would be in the hands of a woman who lacked the knowledge, the preparation, the aptitude, and the temperament for the job.

Chuck Todd, filling in for Chris Matthews, pressed Purdum on these extremely harsh words, asking if Purdum actually had McCain staffers telling him this or if it was more of a read-between-the-lines of the staffers’ statements. Purdum demurred, saying he didn’t want to get into a discussion about sources, but he stated it’s safe to say that he had people from the McCain campaign saying words extremely close to those words that he wrote.

It’s not a flattering piece. Probably not a very informative piece either; “anonymous staffers” with such a swell excuse for staying anonymous…with the campaign now eight months in the rear view mirror? At times it swerves into sheer bigotry. Not quite so much the woman-bashing, which we’ve come to expect when the Manhattan crowd carps away about Palin — but — Alaska-bashing.

The first thing McCain could have learned about Palin is what it means that she is from Alaska. More than 30 years ago, John McPhee wrote, “Alaska is a foreign country significantly populated with Americans. Its languages extend to English. Its nature is its own. Nothing seems so unexpected as the boxes marked ‘U.S. Mail.’” That description still fits. The state capital, Juneau, is 600 miles from the principal city, Anchorage, and is reachable only by air or sea. Alaskan politicians list the length of their residency in the state (if they were not born there) at the top of their biographies, and are careful to specify whether they like hunting, fishing, or both. There is little sense of government as an enduring institution: when the annual 90-day legislative session is over, the legislators pack up their offices, files, and computers, and take everything home. Alaska’s largest newspaper, the Anchorage Daily News, maintains no full-time bureau in Juneau to cover the statehouse. As in any resource-rich developing country with weak institutions and woeful oversight, corruption and official misconduct go easily unchecked. Scrutiny is not welcome, and Alaskans of every age and station, of every race and political stripe, unself-consciously refer to every other place on earth with a single word: Outside.

So, of all the puzzling things that Sarah Palin told the American public last fall, perhaps the most puzzling was this: “Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America.”

It sounds like some central character in a made-for-TV movie taking place in the Renaissance era, something about Britain pushing into the Americas, or into Africa, or some other kind of colonialism. Some bigoted snotty Englishman dripping with venom describing those naked savages he’s been reading about off in that New World. Just stereotype after stereotype after stereotype…can’t you just see it? Makes you want to crack it open to see what else he has to say about Alaskans. Their kids can’t read; they eat their boogers; they poop in buckets…

So why is this news? You’ll find out when you examine the motive for allocating so many glossy pages on such an unlikely subject matter. Up until now, you could claim to be a devotee to cold, rational logic — and still arrive at any one of a number of different conclusions about the Palin effect on the 2012 elections, and the 2010 midterms. Palin is an incompetent that will snuff out the Republican candle for good. Palin is a pure placebo put there to patronize stupid conservative women. Palin is the equivalent of the atomic bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima. Palin is a Manchurian Candidate. Palin is a Trojan Horse…

Many of those options were eliminated just now, if you claim to be following logic. At least, they have been, if you presume 1) Todd Purdum of Vanity Fair is not a conservative Republican (and I’m just going to toss that in the stewpot, it seems safe) and 2) he knows what he’s doing. Purdum’s piece waxes lyrically about what strengths our youngest governor seems to possess politically, but always in the context of intermingling a carefully compiled dossier of her shortcomings. And the strengths, the obligatorily-mentioned strengths, all seem to have to do with her ability to campaign, not to govern. Something in my gut tells me this fellow is not a Palin fan.

In sum: This is the enemy, begging Republicans to put a weapon away.

Purdum doesn’t want us to know any more about Sarah Palin than we already do. He wants her heckled and ridiculed into non-existence, because if she remains on the game-board it sets up a potential outcome he doesn’t find appealing. Before this latest issue of Vanity Fair, that was just an idea, one kind of fun to think about. Now it’s a near-certainty with some solid strategic evidence behind it.

For those yet still unconvinced, here’s a thought: How much sense does it make for anyone, outside of Republican campaign officials and maybe a blogger or two, to be talking about Sarah Palin right now — at all? Think on that one for awhile. The drama with her grandson is over, the kid’s born, Trig is over a year old, she’s running Alaska, Joe Biden is doing such a swell job in that position for which he competed with her. We’re about to celebrate our country’s 233rd birthday; it’s very ill, perhaps terminally. The Nork Nerd is getting ready to lob a cruise missile in the air to help us celebrate, kind of a “Nice Car, We’ll Come Get It When We Want It” note to leave under the windshield wiper. The print media industry is on the ropes. Reporters are getting furloughed, laid off, outright-fired. Our new hopey-changey Obama economy is a turd circling the toilet bowl, getting ready to take the big plunge. Why is the glossy-mag industry looking up North?

The only answer I can think of for that one, is they’re concerned she might run and they’re afraid of what would result from that.

Can anyone think of another one?