« January 2007 | Main | March 2007 »
February 27, 2007
Obama '08?
David Geffen's recent comment about the Clintons -- i.e., that "everyone in politics lies, but they do it with such ease it's troubling" -- seems to encapsulate a lot of why people who don't like the Clintons don't like the Clintons. It's the slithering, stupid.
A friend of mine told me recently that he thought Hill winning the nomination is all but inevitable. Prior to this, I'd thought she is just too serpentine for American voters in Moderateland to vote for her. Nevermind, I was told. The media is on her side. Old dirty laundry from Clinton I will be perceived as cheap shots and will be easily deflected with that brilliant rhetorical shield: "vast rightwing conspiracy." In other words, Hill's all but untouchable, barring major missteps that the press would have to report.
I can accept that, once the nomination is in, Hill would be virtually untouchable in most media. For now, though, and as long as Obama is in the race, he's just too damn sexy a candidate for the media to overlook. If there's a perception he's a realistic hope for the nomination, my sense is the MSM's endearment would be enough that they'd expose Hill whenever Obama gives them the chance.
Primaries can inflict wounds that persist through general elections. As long as Barrack Obama is around, Hill will have a semi-objective media to contend with. Obama has already shown the political gusto to land punches, and the media's still smitten with Obama. Whatever he says will win plenty of attention.
I am afraid my friend is right in that once the Dem nomination is sealed, Hill may be unstoppable.
And this is why I am announcing my temporary support for Barrack Obama.
Posted by bill at 09:18 AM | Comments (1)
February 23, 2007
Proverbial tree falls in proverbial forest
Tom Vilsack is aborting his run for the White House.
While we're abandoning comically lost causes, I will be ending my 28-year bid bid to become the centerfielder for the New York Yankees.
Posted by bill at 12:00 PM | Comments (0)
February 22, 2007
The UN Human Rights Council and You: China's Brave New World
China, which -- read this slowly -- is a member of the UN Human. Rights. Council. -- has developed a system for dealing with Internet "addicts" ("sternly," says the Washington Post). "The Internet-addiction clinic is distinct from the other buildings on campus because of the metal grates and padlocks on every door and the bars on every window," WaPo reports.
Plus, you know, the electric shock treatement delivered to 12 year-old boys:
The imagination runs wild with ugly possibilities as to what else this UN Human Rights Council member is doing. All due respect to WaPo but if they found this, what isn't China divulging?
Maybe Abu Ghirab should be restyled as an Chinese "Internet addiction treament clinic." This way, it'd see the hard-hitting reporters back off. Critics would be dismissed as mere "skeptics," and US interrogators wouldn't face the relentless criticism.
Posted by bill at 05:07 PM | Comments (0)
February 21, 2007
Fred Goldman: Ass Kicker
As nauseating as OJ Simpson is, and has been for years, it can be encouraging to keep track of Fred Goldman, who's been a one-man ass-kicking machine since 1994. Although OJ, with the assistance of sleazebag lawyers, has managed to sidestep his obligation to the Goldman family, Mr. Goldman seems to have made a career out of making OJ's life as miserable as possible, while keeping alive the memory of Ron and Nicole.
Sadly, OJ probably will never get his earthly due, and neither will the Goldmans. But it's good to see someone trying. Goldman is the Jack Bauer in that fight, and I hope everyone's rooting for him.
Posted by bill at 01:08 PM | Comments (0)
The Big Tent
The Washington Post reports that liberal bloggers have already begun to target California House Democrat Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher, because she's not anti-war enough. The Post is careful to say Nancy Pelosi wants to keep Tauscher in "her diverse caucus" but even if that's true, this does not bode well for the Democratic majority.
Posted by bill at 09:47 AM | Comments (0)
February 20, 2007
Not your father's ADA
If you're one of many people under the impression the Americans with Disabilities Act means public wheelchair ramps and handicap toilets, think again. The ADA has a prominent place in the ranks of feel-good legislation bringing with it a boatload of unintended consequences. With the Plaintiffs' bar leading the charge, it's routinely invoked to demand compensation for purported "disabilities" that most of us never heard of before "disabilities" were profitable. Ultimately, it's is yet another means for unscrupulous plaintiffs' attorneys to bring formulaic, risk-free "nuisance suits," and it's the kind of legislation that, unintended (but predictable) consequences aside, politicians find hard to oppose. In fact, IIRC the ADA not only got through Congress but whisked across Bush I's desk with nothing but praise.
Over the weekend, news broke White Plains NY that a former IBM employee has sued the company, invoking not only the ADA, but "ageism" and VietNam PTSD in jusifying his apparent lust for (and in) online chat rooms during working hours. Reports the AP, the Plaintiff,
who has a wife and two children, said using the Internet at work was encouraged by IBM and served as "a form of self-medication" for post-traumatic stress disorder. He said he tried to stay away from chat rooms at work, but that day, "I felt I needed the interactive engagement of chat talk to divert my attention from my thoughts of Vietnam and death."
IBM claims he was fired "because he visited an Internet chat room for a sexual experience during work after he had been previously warned."
Posted by bill at 02:10 PM | Comments (0)
February 19, 2007
Presidents Day Barf Alert
With Senator Hill aiming for the White House, some Democrats are eyeing Bill Clinton to replace her in the US Senate. The Examiner reports:
Such a scenario is not beyond the realm of possibility now that the governor’s mansion in New York is occupied by a Democrat, Eliot Spitzer, who succeeded Republican Gov. George Pataki last month. If Hillary Clinton wins the White House, Spitzer would likely appoint a fellow Democrat to take over her Senate seat.
And this on top of a Hillary Clinton White House?
Posted by bill at 05:47 PM | Comments (0)
February 16, 2007
Of Marcotte and Daou
I wasn't sure what to make of the John Edwards blogger mini-scandal last week. Amanda Marcotte is a bigot and a shrew, but I wasn't convinced Edwards should be tainted by her stench. Campaigns can hire writers simply to write – i.e., to be a functionary and simply execute a task. It's hard to imagine a history of Catholic-bashing or what have you should really be of any moment. Some writers are hired to write, not to be an emissary of their clients.
Politics being what it is, though, even if the above is true, there was something exceedingly stupid on the part of the Edwards campaign. They should have figured her writing would be vetted. In fact, my sense is the entire mess is attributable to someone over there being too old, or too out-of-touch, to understand this newfangled blogosphere thingamabob, this despite John Kerry's misadventures in 2004. Pure old neglect.
There's more, too. In political campaigns, there's a blurry line between "writer" and "strategist" in any political campaign. E.g. - a campaign manager wants a 600-word op-ed on Issue X and outlines the issue and the position, and then lets the writer write. But in fleshing things out, some writers aren't simply executing a task – they are advising how to communicate Issue X with the voters. In short, writing is where politics hits the proverbial road. So if a campaign writer is a bigot, it seems fair to impute the stink to the campaign.
I wasn't about to vote for John Edwards anyway, so this is something of a non-issue. In any event, though, I finally came around to deciding the criticism of John Edwards on account of Amanda Marcotte was fair play, and not "all's fair," "gotcha" gobbledleegoo.
Anyway, I was thinking about all of this when I got an email from the Hillary Clinton campaign, written by Peter Daou, identified as the "Internet Director" for Hill's Exploratory Foregone Conclusion Committee. I haven't read all of his stuff, but it's worth noting what he thinks is important, and the groups he's affiliated with: the United Nations Foundation; AARP; Nuclear Threat Initiative, among others.
Despite Hill's tiresome centrist pitch and her trapeeze act on the political middle, it's clear she's surrounding herself with the left's most reliable shills. As a Democrat, she has to get her foot into every special interest imaginable -- I guess someone has to scare the bejesus out of retirees and generate false hysteria over nuclear plants.
But, along the lines of the Marcotte mess, there's plenty of Daou-related fodder. He seems to be a prolific writer, to say the least. Wonder what's in his closet?
Posted by bill at 02:05 PM | Comments (0)
February 14, 2007
Lots of important news today...
Meanwhile, at Daily Kos, star diarist "Bill from Portland Maine" quotes two tabloids -- The Globe and The National Examiner -- and says today is a "not so Happy Valentine's Day at the White House". And he's apparently serious.
The tabloids say Laura has had it with the President, has her divorce papers in order, etc., etc. And so Bill from Portland thinks it's true.
This is the left at its very best. Much as I'd like to believe this is tongue-in-cheek, I just can't. They're far enough over the cliff over there to actually believe this stuff.
H/T: Rich A.
Posted by bill at 09:41 PM | Comments (0)
February 13, 2007
Newt Gets it
Newt Gingrich continues to say the kinds of things that make conservative wish he would (or could) make a run for the White House. Today he's tackling that quaint old idea that the US is (or should be) an English-speaking country. "To become an American means becoming an American in values, culture and historic understanding," he writes. This includes speaking English -- and this isn't an unpopular sentiment. But "the left labels anyone who talks about the importance of learning English as bigoted against immigrants." Which is one reason even Republicans are afraid of the issue.
Posted by bill at 09:13 AM | Comments (3)
February 12, 2007
The Messiah trippeth
Two days after beginning his White House campaign in earnest, Barrack Obama is tripping over himself like a 10-legged man in a shoelace factory. Today's installement? American troops who die in Iraq have "wasted" their lives.
Posted by bill at 09:01 PM | Comments (0)
February 09, 2007
Welcome to the national scene
The Politico, which I believe is new on the scene, has a great article today on the imminent end of Barrack "O'Bama's" easy road to presumed greatness. All sorts of problems for the good Senator.
Posted by bill at 02:33 PM | Comments (0)
February 07, 2007
Where have you gone, Alan Sheppard?
In light of revelations astronaut Lisa Nowak is babbleyboo looney tunes, NASA announced today it will be reviewing its psychological screening procedures. Presumably they'll weed out the homicidal, diaper-wearing, eyes-spinning subset of the applicant pool.
Posted by bill at 09:43 PM | Comments (0)
The Baghdad Offensive
According to various sources (more at Hot Air), a major offensive is underway in Baghdad. Roughly 2,000 troops are sweeping various factions of bad guys out of the city, one street at a time. This seems to be the precursor to the "surge" and, I would think, a very significant development in the war.
If you haven't heard about the story, that's because no one is reporting it.
To be perfectly honest, I don't know what to think. There's something almost surreal about the media's radio silence. And I don't want to think too much about what could possibly be motivating it.
Posted by bill at 11:04 AM | Comments (0)
CJ celebrates Black History Month
The knee-jerk liberal response to violence in urban black communities is to blame inanimate instrumentalities instead of examining the potential societal, cultural, and economic factors. What is ironic is that minority groups that were historically victimized by government controls on guns now cry the loudest for gun control laws, including total prohibition. For example, liberal Jews in America have apparently forgotten, or choose to ignore, how the Nazis disarmed Jews before persecuting them.
The same shortsighted focus on gun availability and possession afflicts most African American political leaders. Ken Blackwell reminds us today that gun control has also been used as a tool for black control:
...restrictive gun laws have long been employed to the benefit of a select elite while circumscribing the liberty of populations less popular or less powerful.
Gun control measures, from the slave gun bans of the 1700s South to the Brady Bill regulations of the 1990s have unfairly targeted black Americans and have worked to curtail a disproportionate number of their constitutional rights. Access to firearms was understood by our founders and many early American jurists as an essential aspect of full US citizenship, and it was for this reason that the Black Codes established after the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment -- which constitutionally abolished slavery -- prevented black freemen from owning guns.
In prohibiting blacks from exercising the freedoms granted other Americans in the Second Amendment, the Black Codes emphasized the notion that African-Americans were not true citizens with full human rights.
Such lessons from the past are lost on the demagogues on the left--both black and white. And sadly, the public in areas afflicted by urban violence tend not to realize that gun control is, at its core, not about guns, but about control.
Posted by GadsdenFlag at 09:38 AM | Comments (0)
February 06, 2007
Tax relief, for the fortunate
When it comes to class envy, there's no easier means of demarcation than one's income. Nice, round numbers like $100,000 and $200,000 are often used by Democrats to decide who is "rich" and who isn't. $200,000 seems to be the magic number, for example, for John Edwards' campaign platform for a tax hike on the "rich." That same number applies whether we're talking about suburban Butte, Montana, or suburban Boston, Massachusetts.
But the above is really just an application of the Law of Unintended Consequences, that stubborn reality that rarely makes its way into the law. The list goes on. Today, New Jersey is patting itself on the back for having passed "property tax relief" -- potentially, a 20% cut in property taxes for anyone not making more than $100,000.
If you live in New Jersey and are hovering around $100,000, if you're lucky you live in a small-ish three bedroom place, that is, if you don't need to work in Manhattan. If you do, you don't own anything you paid for youself because housing is far too expensive. But according to New Jersey, you don't deserve tax relief. In any event, forget about trying to get ahead this year. Who wants a bonus when the net effect might be to reduce your after tax dollars?
And try not to look across the street. Your neighbors are 55 and, though they're nice folks, you can't help but notice you are a professional who invested - say - $100 and 4 years in post-grad education while they started working after high school, and bought that $750,000 center hall colonial in 1972 for about $13,000. You paid half a million for your smaller model, and probably not on the street you wanted. They'll retire at 57, with a pension and perhaps looking forward to a second, leisurely career. You won't have a pension, or free health care, or probably social security. Your wife has to work because that same house cost you a god awful amount of money, and you'll both work until you die. Have kids? Try not to think about it. Your neighbors' kids went to college for a fraction of what you kids will. And you're too rich for financial aid, so let's hope they play the oboe.
Anyway, say you live in New Jersey. Your neighbor will get the tax relief, but you sure as hell won't. You're rich. Or didn't you remember?
Posted by bill at 04:17 PM | Comments (0)
February 05, 2007
Have some time on your hands?
Commentary Magazine is wrapping up a four-round, eight-column debate between Max Boot and Victor Davis Hanson on the big picture in Iraq.
Posted by bill at 09:00 AM | Comments (0)
February 01, 2007
Chimpy McBushhitler strikes again
If your Thursday's off to a bad start, don't read this. I don't read the NY Times but a friend emailed today's op-ed, which chastises the Bush Administration for "bully Iran into stopping its meddling inside Iraq" and suggests diplomacy would be more effective.
This op-ed reads as though it could have originated in Tehran. It's fair enough to suggest Ahmadinejad is weakening, and Maliki shouldn't be canoodling with Iranian-trained militias, if he is. Those are fair points, although the insinuation Bush has somehow abandoned diplomacy is false. But the NYT, as it and its Angry Left readers have repeatedly done wherever President Bush is concerned, obscures kernels of truth and worthwhile debate, in a tiresome anti-war, anti-Republican polemic. The suggestion Bush is "bullying" Iran -- that poor sheep lost in the woods -- by clarifying that US soldiers can protect themselves from Iran's goons is beyond idiotic. And that's why the NYT is an intellecutal garbage dump.
There's always been plenty to debate on Iraq. But as the NYT shows time and again, there's no one on the left to offer any reasoned discussion.
Posted by bill at 08:59 AM | Comments (0)
