March 13, 2007
Bottum's up
Joseph Bottum, that is. Conservatives are right to be disappointed with the Bush Administration, Bottum writes:
Under President Bush, conservatism has won only in the sense of not losing as quickly as it would have under a President Gore or a President Kerry....Conservatives voted for George W. Bush in 2000 because they expected him to be the opposite of Bill Clinton--and so, unfortunately, he has proved. Where Mr. Clinton seemed a man of enormous political competence and no principle, Mr. Bush has been a man of principle and very little political competence."
(H/T: Gadsden Flag, who notes that for all Bottum says about Bush's disappointing record on conservatism, he manages to omit any mention of immigration reform, which polls as the "most important issue" facing America as noted, e.g., here._
Posted by bill at 02:04 PM | Comments (0)
September 12, 2006
W Smackdown
For a few years, I've half-wondered whether President Bush would one day take the gloves off an announce he's had enough of the rhetorical bullshit. Anyway, the George W. Bush I voted for twice is in the video below. If anyone's seen him, kindly return him to the White House.
Posted by bill at 10:43 PM | Comments (0)
June 29, 2006
President Bush's successes
For all of his shortcomings on the economy and foreign policy (to name just two areas of deficiency that leap to mind), I still thank God that George W. Bush defeated Al "Mr. Junk Science" Gore and that French-looking husband of the pickle fortune heiress. Here are two recent reasons why, and both involve a concept anathema to liberals--protecting our national sovereignty.
Dubya's pick for UN Ambassador, John Bolton, and the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, Robert Joseph, have essentially told the UN conference on global gun control on Tuesday to, in my words, screw-off.
Mr. Joseph was a bit more diplomatic:
"The U.S. Constitution guarantees the rights of our citizens to keep and bear arms, and there will be no infringement of those rights....The United States will not agree to any provisions restricting civilian possession, use or legal trade of firearms inconsistent with our laws and practices."
And yesterday, thanks in part to Dubya's nominees, the US Supreme Court ruled that we don't look to foreign courts to figure out how our police should operate. On behalf a 5-4 majority, Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr. wrote that US courts--and not the International Court of Justice--have the final say on how treaties are applied inside our borders. Not surprisingly, the liberal wing of the court said the ruling represented an "unprecedented" repudiation of a valid treaty and of the international court's interpretation of the treaty. Strangely, my copy of the Constitution says nothing about international court decisions being binding on us.
I'm all for kicking our president in the shins when he deserves it. But today I send out kudos to Dubya for putting John Robert Bolton, Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr., and John Glover Roberts, Jr., where they can do some good for our nation.
Posted by GadsdenFlag at 10:51 AM | Comments (0)
January 20, 2006
"Still morning in America"
Human Events Online has a great compilation of posts on the Silver Anniversary of Ronald Reagan's Inauguration, including the WSJ's editorial today:
Twenty-five years ago today, Ronald Reagan was inaugurated as the 40th President of the United States promising less intrusive government, lower tax rates and victory over communism. On that same day, the American hostages in Iran were freed after 444 days of captivity. If the story of history is one long and arduous march toward freedom, this was a momentous day well worth commemorating.
UPDATE: More here.
Posted by bill at 12:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 07, 2006
DeLay, Interrupted
The Washington Post (where one can see, in a photo of Ted Kennedy's head skewed wildly to the left, an example of perhaps truly unconscious media bias) has announced, along with every other news outlet, that today DeLay Abandons Bid to Remain House Leader.
The popular line is that DeLay, in a branch of government where the individual has not been the significant unit of analysis since Clay, was a cruicial personality and talent, whose vote-counting and cat-herding powers will be sorely missed by the GOP. And though DeLay's worth to his party should not be lost in the political obituaries, his central shortcoming remains: the track record of the Republican congress, as measured by spending, has strayed terribly far from what any '94 freshman would recognize as the conservative program for government. To stick to the idea that individuals are less important than the patterns to which they contribute in Congress, DeLay's downstep now makes him the third top-tier Republican to fall from the firmament (following Newt and Trent).
But this phenomenon, in turn, can be eclipsed by the rise of a new figure...
Posted by James G. Poulos at 05:33 PM | Comments (1)
January 04, 2006
The Abramoff Plague
Captain Ed predicts that "if the Abramoff corruption goes as deep as prosecutors say, look for an unprecedented series of power shifts in the next two cycles -- not partisan, but demographic, as American voters start looking for fresh choices." Specifically, he says:
- "Only if Abramoff never implicates a single Democrat -- unlikely, given the circumstances --will the House roll to the Dems in '06. If so, the GOP will deserve it for not cleaning their own house first."
- the possibly over 300 politicians involved "will busy themselves with scouring their reputations through positive public works, not negative partisan attacks," which CE notes is good news for Samuel Alito and other nominees.
- "almost-certain disqualification for serious Presidential runs by anyone currently on the Hill, including Hill(ary) herself. Abramoff's stench will touch everyone currently noted for front-runner status..."
Posted by bill at 08:57 PM | Comments (0)
December 12, 2005
Picture page
Bob from Londonderry emails:
"You guys should use more pictures. I like pictures."
Thanks for the exquisite insight, Bob. Here's a picture for you:
Posted by bill at 09:35 PM | Comments (0)
Debating McCain, Part II
Powerline nails the McCain dilemma on the head. He's not quite a "hardcore" Democrat, writes Paul Mirengoff:
McCain wasn't hardcore when he joined the gang of 14, thus effectively sinking the prospects of several outstanding conservative nominees for the court of appeals. Nor, in my view, is he hardcore in the war on terror when he advocates blanket "anti-torture" policies that would limit the government's ability to obtain information from terrorists.
A more honest view of why conservatives might support McCain comes from another operative who says, "the national environment has gone to s—-t and Republicans are going to take a beating in 2006; McCain is the only guy out there with the credibility to maintain Republican control in Washington.” But "the only guy out there" covers a lot of territory. The "only Washington insider" might be a more accurate formulation.
Right on. My own starting point for these things is to look at the left's level of agitation. And while Nathan Newman might despise McCain, let's face it - this doesn't mean much. Then again, where might one find out what the mainstream left thinks of McCain? Where is the mainstream left, anyway? Let's... see...where...did...the...left...go?
Posted by bill at 09:26 PM | Comments (0)
December 01, 2005
Blast from the past
Hey New Yorkers! Remember Rick Lazio? The sometimes-accurate Page Six at NY Post reports he may be considering a run for NYS Attorney General.
Posted by bill at 02:52 PM | Comments (0)
November 29, 2005
Debating McCain
While John McCain's conservative creds are debated, we might take comfort in the agitation he's causing leftists like Nathan Newman. Given Nathan's economic views his consternation is no surprise - presumably he'd be hostile to any candidate right of Greg Pason. But the left's notion that McCain might only be nominally moderate might at least spark an accounting of the Senator's record and what he would bring to the White House.
Posted by bill at 10:21 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 10, 2005
Where have you gone, Newt Gingrich?
Michelle Malkin has the skinny on conservatives' reaction to the GOP cave-in on ANWR drilling. It's now up to the Senate to keep the issue, another crumbling piece of President Bush's second-term agenda, alive.
Posted by bill at 01:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 20, 2005
Sound advice for a President who needs it
An even-handed statistical look at President Bush's plummeting ratings is here. I hope the numbers get better, though I'm not rooting for improvement for its own sake. My hope is that W understands (and cares) that many of us are tired of defending him. Peggy Noonan, who reminds us that she knows W better than do most polemecists, suggests humility:
...there's a family in crisis, and it's conservatism. He can let it break up, or let it wither under his watch. Or he can change. Just as he learned at 40 that to keep his family he had to become part of something larger than himself, he should realize as he approaches 60 that he has to become part of something larger if he is to save his administration. And that "something larger" is a movement that has been building for half a century, since before Barry Goldwater. The president would be well advised to look at the stakes, see what's in the balance, judge the strengths and weaknesses of his own leadership, and get back to the basics of conservatism.
Posted by bill at 09:12 AM | Comments (0)
October 05, 2005
Newt Again
If, or when, Newt Gingrich runs for president, he will do so from a position none of his possible competitors can duplicate or mimic. Speculation and boosterism echo and amplify the great grinding of gears now taking place among Republicans, and the following names are uttered:
Rudy Giuliani, who has quasi-announced, in Denmark; his major hurdle is the same as McCain's, only higher -- namely the primary season... Mitt Romney, the Massachusetts Mormon; buzz centers around his unorthodox technique of insulting his home state from event to speaking event... Haley Barbour, who is still more toasted and connected in Washington than Mississippi; he has that drawl, and wonks and minipundits insist paradoxically on his unmarketable regionalism... George Allen, who has no name recognition... and Chuck Hagel, who also has none.
Count as well both Cheney and Condi, both of whom have expressed a basic desire not to run for President. The risque possibility of a write-in campaign, which stems from a party's grassroots desperation and rejection of its establishment candidates, makes little sense when the prospective beneficiaries are current figureheads of the sitting administration....
With attitudes of discomfort now confronting Congress as well as that administration -- and with an increasingly strident upset over Bush himself leaking freely from the conservative wings of the House of Reps and the public prints -- Newt's attributes take on a certain luster. A former insider, now on the outside, he has earned his stripes as a non-reactionary yet pre-neocon (postmodern?) conservative. The only taint of which Gingrich isn't free is his own: the leftovers of the '96 meltdown. He has a name, he has a policy program, he has a certain legitimacy. He is closer to the right than McCain and Guiliani, and further from the President than any of the others with a comparably high profile. And he neutralizes Hillary on health care.
This is not sufficient for a sweep to power, but, given the next three years, it may be necessary.
Posted by James G. Poulos at 04:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 28, 2005
Underestimating the dent
Michael Barone weighs in on Tom DeLay, saying it's "bad news" for Republicans since "DeLay has been astonishingly effective in rounding up majorities for legislation supported by the Republican leadership and the Bush administration. He is well liked by many members." This may be true, but the bad news hardly ends there. Whether DeLay's indictment is ultimately exposed as political hatchetry, Republicans will suffer because one of its prominent leaders faces, or will have faced, a jail sentence, and was indicted. Reality check: The deck is stacked against Republicans, and DeLay's indictment is precisely the sideshow the DNC needs to portray Republicans as a reckless party undeserving of majority status. That will hurt in '06.
Posted by bill at 09:37 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 22, 2005
Jockeying
As conservatives' consternation over President Bush's inability (or unwillingness) to control spending and immigration continues its crescendo, his old rival, the moderate John McCain, enters the picture and addresses precisely these two issues in front of the American Spectator. The twist? As Barone points out, McCain is a Kennedy-style liberal on immigration. His wriggling on the issue, from a political standpoint, should prove fascinating. So should his ideas on fiscal conservatism. Of course he's running.
Meantime, Hillary Clinton - days after her husband gave President Bush one giant "up yours" on Meet the Press, joins the Angry/NYT left and announces she'll cast a futile vote against John Roberts. Of course she's running, too, for God's sake.
Sausages, laws and politics.
Posted by bill at 08:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 20, 2005
Ridiculous
As much as I sometimes like President Bush, he and his administration are capable of rubbing our collective nose in it, aren't they? His latest is his appointment of the unqualified Julie Myers to head Immigration and Customs Enforcement, under DHS. Her nomination is, as Michelle Malkin puts it, "a joke." True, true.
This is textbook political cronyism. Myers is unqualified... (writes Malkin):
She may be perfectly capable of writing briefs and I'm sure her knowledge of export controls is second to none. But as long as the borders are broken and al Qaeda continues to exploit lax immigration enforcement, I don't want her in charge of ICE. Why hire someone who needs to "seek out" those "who know more than I do" in order to her job? Why wait until the next mass terrorist attack to put those more knowledgeable people in leadership positions now and leave the paper-pushers in their cubicles?
...but this doesn't matter because:
Myers also was an associate under independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr for about 16 months and has most recently served as a special assistant to President Bush handling personnel issues.
Her uncle is Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, the departing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. She married [DHS Head Michael] Chertoff's current chief of staff, John F. Wood, on Saturday.
I would like to believe conservatives, or at least Republicans, would expect better from one of their own, but maybe this is foolishness.
Posted by bill at 09:58 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 16, 2005
Que Pasa, Senior Presidente?
At what point do we start calling it a Mexican "invasion"? Over 20 million and counting, and the Bush administration's cynical pandering (h/t: Michelle Malkin) to the future GOP base: Hispanics. Democrats, sensing opportunity, are prepared to pounce, as they should be. And, lest we forget, would-be terrorists know fecklessness when they see it. Is this another August 6th 2001 memo in the making?
Posted by bill at 02:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 24, 2005
Rove and DeLay
Andrew Sullivan is outraged by Karl Rove's remarks to the New York Conservative Party, and Dems want him to resign. For a different reason, I wouldn't mind seeing the back of Karl Rove:
Karl Rove, Bush’s key political strategist, has advised against using presidential vetoes because they risk alienating interest groups friendly to the administration that benefit from Republican legislation.
Similarly, with Tom DeLay, while the "ethics" charges against him sound like baloney, I think he went too far in his attacks on judges a while back. I wouldn't mind seeing the back of him, too.
By the same token, Dick Durbin should fall for his offensive remarks.
What's wrong with a little turnover in high office?
Posted by Good Samaritan at 10:58 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 22, 2005
Slouching
Dave St. John says he's disappointed with Republicans:
I was in awe of the campaign you Republicans waged to re-elect our president as well as gain control of Congress. We turned out and supported you. Surely things would happen now, I thought. But since the election, I feel your sense of urgency is gone. Folks across the aisle seem willing to say and do anything and there is little more than some "official" outrage from you to rebut their comments and assertions.
I've been disappointed, too. But is more to do with this, this and this. They compromise when they shouldn't, and unite in pointlessness.
UPDATE: Oh, and this.
Posted by bill at 09:07 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
SCOTUS Cogitation
Hendrick Hertzberg is in knots over the SCOTUS decision in Raich:
The least muddled opinion was Justice Thomas's separate dissent, certain passages of which (e.g., "In the early days of the Republic, it would have been unthinkable that Congress could prohibit the local cultivation, possession, and consumption of marijuana") could have been written by Justice Cheech or Justice Chong. Thomas's private views on marijuana are unknown, but if he had his way, as expressed in this particular opinion, any federal interference with homegrown, home-smoked pot, whether for medical or recreational purposes, would be ruled out as an unconstitutional usurpation of the states' powers "to protect the health, safety, and welfare of their citizens." But, then, almost any federal effort to protect those things would be similarly inadmissable. Hello to bong hits, but goodbye to workplace safety, environmental regulations, and Medicare. Thomas's view has the virtue of consistency. But consistency is not the same as wisdom.
Hey, wait! This reminds me of the NY Times editorial (link is an excerpt) on Raich("...we hope that Justice Antonin Scalia, who seems to be campaigning for chief justice, remembers that he concurred with the majority this week the next time the court hears a federal-powers case on, say, air pollution).
In any case, court watchers were aflutter reacting to news Justice Rehnquist could retire as early as Monday, as Clarence Thomas gains steam, and Antonin Scalia may be losing some, as conservatives' fave.
Meantime, Ted Kennedy, who isn't the President, says Thomas is not an option.
Paging Anita Hill! Paging Anita Hill!
Posted by bill at 08:45 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 18, 2005
Freshman GOP Senators Call on Durbin to Apologize
Via RNC eCampaign/Communications:
Freshman GOP Senators Issue Joint Statement
Call on Senator Durbin to Apologize
June 17th, 2005 - Washington, D.C. - Freshman Senators Richard Burr - NC, Tom Coburn - OK, Jim DeMint - SC, Johnny Isakson - GA, Mel Martinez - FL, John Thun - SD and David Vitter - LA today issued the following statement in response to comments made by Senator Dick Durbin - IL on the Floor of the United States Senate comparing U.S. troops to Nazis, Soviets and others:
"As freshman Senators, we recently campaigned to change the tone in Washington and accomplish great things on behalf of the American people. We are united in our support for our troops in the ongoing War on Terror. We found Senator Durbin’s remarks to be highly offensive and dangerous. This rhetoric is harmful to our soldiers and emboldens our enemies. We call on Senator Durbin to issue an apology to the brave men and women of the United States Armed Forces.
"The American Armed Forces are the best in the world and to compare them with Nazis, Soviet Gulags, or Pol Pot is outrageous. Millions of innocent people were murdered in death camps under these evil regimes."
Posted by Suitably Flip at 11:49 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 14, 2005
Be Wary of McCain-philes; Or, "If you think Bush is screwing up, turn to McCain"
Having sold out most recently in the filibuster compromise, John McCain finds himself the apple of the moderate eye, and by many accounts the Republican "front-runner" tag is purportedly a fait accompli. Last week NY Press' Russ Smith wrote that "[t]he GOP primary field is littered with cultural conservatives--say Sens. George Allen, Sam Brownback and the ineffectual Bill Frist--one or two deserving but unknown dark horses (Govs. Mark Sanford and Tim Pawlenty)," and the nomination "McCain's for the grabbing, despite the protestations (not at all unwarranted) by Bush-base Republicans...I wouldn't be surprised if Karl Rove is cooking up a deal right now with the phony campaign-finance reformer from Arizona to secretly pledge just one term in the White House before handing it over to Jeb Bush in 2012."
Today, E.J. Dionne unwittingly exposes the fraud at work here, by letting us in on a Big Secret from her strategy Deep Throat, whom she identifies, all mysterious like, as a "shrewd and loyally Democratic political operative": Psst. The Republicans will be "desperate to hold power" and, especially if they're still beset with "ethics problems," will look to the clean, moderate McCain to rescue Bush's legacy (Iraq) and stave off "bread and butter disconent" over the economy and the "quagmire."
Despite the insufferable self-importance ("I’m letting you in on a big secret here" – hey, thanks, E.J.!), Dionne's column reads like DNC talking points: (1) Iraq as quagmire; (2) Economy sluggish; (3) Moderates good; (3a) Bush-type ideologues bad; (4) McCain to the rescue. I suppose if one were to accept Dionne's fantasies, one might also agree that McCain is the Republican's last best hope. (Problem is, the electorate – particularly given the state of the Democratic Party – won’t leap at that storyline; for starters it’s the same one Kedwards banked on ("Help is on the way!"), and it was a loser; the left’s disarray since November confirms this, and their inability to formulate an alternative.) In the end, the McCain-to-the-rescue theme is a rouse by those anxious to re-judge the President and what he has come to represent. (Look at the Republicans! They’re desperate! Look what he’s done to them!)
But politics isn’t “Choose Your Own Adventure” (“turn to page 23 if the electorate thinks Iraq is a quagmire”). Try as she might to glean “bread and butter discontent” from Republicans’ recent missteps, Dionne and her comrades are simply pitiful, and wishful thinking won’t suffice to undo 2004. Voters crave leadership, not the kind of moderation McCain and Bill Frist eschewed a few weeks ago. This is one reason McCain – seemingly an ideal candidate, with an impeccable CV – has found it impossible to win nationally. Politically speaking, he embodies unelectable “compromise.” Ultimately, Conservatives should be wary of anyone claiming 2008 would be any different.
Posted by bill at 09:46 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 06, 2005
That Old Conservative Dissonance
It ain't easy being the new big tent. The Terri Schiavo schism (note: not the best link on that topic, but it'll have to do) endures. Moralist conservatives defeated the federalists in today's SCOTUS decision. The right half of the blogosphere, the one that doesn't need to use profanity to argue about law and politics, is sure to be abuzz tomorrow. Until then, don't miss Volokh's post here.
Posted by bill at 10:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 03, 2005
Laura Bush, Unplugged
If you haven't seen Laura Bush's speech at the annual White House Correspondents' Dinner, you can view the video here. Writes John Tierney:
Her timing had the audience howling, and the edgier lines had them gasping. Jokes about pent-up sexual frustration from a prim librarian? With her born-again husband sitting there and enjoying it? And cameras recording it for Republican preachers who are determined to get sex out of schools and off television?For the mainly Democratic audience - this was a crowd of Washington journalists and luminaries from Hollywood and Manhattan - it was an evening of cognitive dissonance. How to reconcile this charming image on stage with the Bush they love to bash?
Mrs. Bush's performance, and her husband's reaction, wasn't a shock to the reporters who cover the White House. For years they have tried to convince their friends outside Washington that Mr. Bush is actually not a close-minded dolt, and Mrs. Bush is no Stepford Wife or Church Lady. Yes, they're Texans who go to church and preach family values, but they're not yahoos or religious zealots.
Even NPR said Mrs. Bush's speech was "more than a breath of fresh air. It transformed the evening's proceedings, which suddenly suggested an entirely different metaphor. For a moment, it was possible once again to think of a Washington black tie function as fun. By extension it was possible to think of official Washington as a community with some species of shared interest."
UPDATE: More from Michelle Malkin here:
Just put it to the other-shoe test: If it were Teresa Heinz Kerry standing up on the dais telling the same jokes, the conservative commentariat would be buzzing for the rest of the year about what a tasteless skank she is."Lighten up?" How about cleaning up? The First Lady resorting to cheap horse masturbation jokes is not much better than Whoopi Goldberg trafficking in dumb puns on the Bush family name. Unlike many Beltway and Manhattan commentators, I do not think the Wonkette-ization of the White House is a good thing.
Posted by bill at 09:17 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
April 29, 2005
Power of the (Gambler's) Purse
Denny Hastert has decided to "pivot" on the House Ethics Committee rules, and, true enough, the decision to rescind the revised regs is a pivotal one. Talk of the town is that the GOP needs to clear the decks as far as the Ethics stink is concerned for two reasons--first, the consensus has emerged that reversal now will cost less than stubbornness carried through to the mid-term elections; second, concern has set in that Tom DeLay won't be able to clear his name without the seal of approval of a functioning Ethics Committee.
Problems? Sure. The winner-take-all attitude that still stiffens spines and curls lips on the Hill has made both Bolton and DeLay look like do-or-die martyrs in the making, as institutionally capable of dragging down whoever comes to their rescue as they are of countering a Democratic coup de presse with the fanatical support of the closed ranks. Congress is playing with fire when individuals become totems for whole movements and concepts that reach backward and forward in time by decades and even centuries. The questions of power, attitude, and danger raised by any number of inside scoops on the two embattled Republicans are eternal, and they have turned many a golden boy to a rancid pile in much shorter order than anything we are likely to see here in the months ahead.
Sometimes the brass-and-wood-panels world of high politics approaches the bent universe of another realm full of marble halls and felt tables. When power is a gamble and policy turns to pure politics, everyone has something to gain, and only the highest of rollers have something to lose.
Posted by Jorge Rome Guy Alssop at 12:44 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
