‘Billions and Billions and Billions’: Biden Has No Comment on Fisker Failure

“This is seed money that will return back to the American consumer in billions and billions and billions of dollars of good new jobs.”
— Joe Biden, Oct. 27, 2009

“With the help of UAW lobbying efforts for advanced vehicle manufacturing and federal dollars, the plant will become a production facility for Fisker Automotive, a new American car company that plans to produce 100,000 electric hybrid vehicles per year by 2014.
“GM’s former Wilmington [Delaware] assembly plant was selected for its primary global production facility based on its size, production capacity, access to shipping ports and rail lines, and skilled workforce.”

— United Auto Workers, February 2010

“Once again, the American public lost when the Obama administration attempted to pick ‘winners and losers’ in the free market. Today the electric car company Fisker Automotive, which received nearly $200 million in taxpayer money, is laying off three-fourths of its U.S. workers.”
— Sarah Palin, April 5, 2013

When Democrats piss away taxpayer money on useless boondoggles, they always do so while proclaiming their noble intentions, and the credit they get for their good intentions is sufficient to excuse their failures in the eyes of media stooges who consider it a career duty to help elect Democrats. It was therefore a rare moment in October 2011 when ABC News reported that Fisker — the company that Biden declared would bring automaking jobs back to Delaware — had instead pocketed its taxpayer-subsidized federal loans and was building cars in Finland:

But two years after the loan was announced, the company’s manufacturing jobs are still limited to the assembly of the flashy electric Fisker Karma sports car in Finland.
“There was no contract manufacturer in the U.S. that could actually produce our vehicle,” the car company’s founder and namesake told ABC News. “They don’t exist here.” . . .
Fisker Automotive, backed by a powerhouse venture capital firm whose partners include former Vice President Al Gore, predicts it will eventually be churning out tens of thousands of electric sports sedans at the shuttered GM factory it bought in Delaware.

Friday, we got the inevitable denouement:

Green Jobs: Taxpayer-Funded Fisker
Will Lay Off 75% of Workforce

Really, this is a drop in the bucket, compared to the “punch to the gut” unemployment situation, for the simple reason that Fisker never employed many Americans: Its U.S. workforce was only 200 people, of whom 160 got laid off Friday.

Twitchy is on the story, as are William Teach at Right Wing News, Rick Moran at American Thinker, Paul Swansen at Liberty News and the Washington Free Beacon. Yet when we consider the laudatory media fanfare that accompanied Biden’s 2009 promise of “billions and billions and billions of dollars of good new jobs” for his UAW buddies in Delaware, it’s strange to notice how the usual suspects of liberal journalism show no interest in following up on the story. Has anyone in the White House press corps bothered asking the obvious question?

Not that Joe Biden could actually answer any such questions — the man is a complete ignoramus about economics — but why won’t the media at least ask these questions, and get his stupid self-serving excuses on the record? Well, heaven forbid that the media should ever be honest enough to acknowledge that Sarah Palin was right . . .

 

If Obama Has Lost Garance …

Garance Franke-Ruta is a serious lefty writer, and also a friend of mine, and she gets all critical theory in analyzing President Obama’s declaration that Kamala Harris is the “best-looking attorney general,” saying that the president’s error was “in introducing an observation from the system of beauty into a forum that was about the system of power.”

As a journalist, I must note that Obama’s remark was factually inaccurate: Pam Bondi is much better-looking than Harris.

Permit me also to observe that the widespread outrage over the president’s compliment could be interpreted as further proof of Rush Limbaugh’s Undeniable Truth of Life #24: “Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women access to the mainstream of society.”

This great truth has been misunderstood as “sexist” or “misogynistic,” an accusation that is only true under the definition of those terms as describing any man who disagrees with a feminist.

Is life unfair to unattractive women? Yes. No one can argue with that. But life is also unfair to short guys — studies show that taller men have higher incomes, so that their competitive advantage in the Darwinian mating pool yields compound interest: Women prefer taller men and richer men, and the fact that taller men are also generally richer . . . well, unfair, eh?

Alas, the Marxoid practitioners of critical theory have shown little interest in the grievances of runts, even as the patriarchal oppression of women has spawned an entire industry: Women’s Studies departments at universities, a vast library of feminist literature, and terroristic militants who enforce a de facto policy of excluding from public life anyone who questions the basic premises of feminism.

Compelling critics into fearful silence is, after all, why the coven of witches at Harvard insisted on destroying Larry Summers — to make of him a scarecrow example, to warn others that any speculation about “innate differences” between men and women will not be tolerated in the corridors of elite academia, where young geniuses are indoctrinated to accept without question the egalitarian dogma of the One True Faith.

In this environment — one in which the slightest skepticism toward the One True Faith is viewed as heresy — even the President of the United States can be compelled to apologize for what was intended as a jocular compliment.

Well, I could write thousands of words about this and not finish, but it’s not yet National Offend a Feminist Week (which this year will be May 6-12). However, I would like to tell a brief story to help explain Garance Franke-Ruta’s grievance.

Last Monday, I covered a candidate forum in Hilton Head, S.C., featuring Mark Sanford and Curtis Bostic. The forum was held at a restaurant, Aunt Chilada’s. When it was over,  I decided to have lunch at the bar. There were three blue-collar workers, employees of an industrial air-conditioning contractor, also having lunch at the bar.

These guys were flirting with the young barmaid — “chatting her up,” as the Brits would say — and the barmaid didn’t seem to mind in the least. She bantered with the guys, volunteering the fact that she was a college student who also worked nights at another bar, and suggesting they stop by to see her there, too. The barmaid didn’t impress me as particularly beautiful. She was, however, young and slender and, for a bunch of guys who spend their days with a bunch of other guys sweating on construction sites to install HVAC systems, the chance to talk to this college-age girl who, working for tips, had an obvious incentive to be friendly, was not a chance to be missed.

Were those guys “sexist”? Were they engaged in harassment? Was this what lawyers would call a hostile work environment?

Bullshit.

It was just guys being guys — authentic, normal, natural — and if the barmaid wasn’t offended by their attentions, why should anyone else be offended on her behalf?

Feminists don’t generally inhabit the milieu of barmaids and blue-collar guys. Feminism flourishes in the white-collar world of office life, and especially in the world of intellectuals, the only place such a War Against Human Nature can avoid contact with the stubborn realities of life.

Garance Franke-Ruta is a magna cum laude graduate of Harvard, not a would-be school teacher working as a barmaid to pay her way through state university. Like all intellectuals — and certainly, any political journalist qualifies as an intellectual to some degree, under Friedrich Hayek’s definition of that term — Garance expects to be judged by the quality of her work, and is offended by the idea that “the system of beauty” might intrude itself into her sphere of activity.

But it inevitably does, doesn’t it?

Even in the world of progressive journalism — yea, verily, even among feminists themselves — a certain career premium is afforded to the pretty “lipstick feminist,” the telegenic “It Girl” who can manage to be sexy even while she’s denouncing the Damned Misogynistic Patriarchy.

Can you say “Naomi Wolf,” boys and girls? It certainly did not hinder her career as a feminist intellectual to be green-eyed and dimpled, and there are many other progressive females who have learned that good looks can be advantageous to their advancement as feminist spokespersons. And I suppose there are scores of highly qualified left-wing women intellectuals who watch MSNBC every day and see Krystal Ball making an idiot of herself and wonder, “What’s she got that I ain’t got?”

Well, a six-figure salary at MSNBC, for starters.

And if you don’t understand why feminism can never rid the world of that kind of blatant unfairness, ladies, you obviously haven’t been paying enough attention to what Rush Limbaugh has been trying to explain to you all these years.

Feminist are so cute when they’re angry. And they’re always angry.

 

Obama Hasn’t ‘Evolved’ That Far … Yet

Friday, the Department of Health and Human Services requested public comment on a proposal to provide taxpayer-funded sex-change surgery, but scrubbed the proposal off their Web site as soon as it was reported by news agencies. Ed Morrissey at Hot Air understands the Obama-logic:

Congress has been arguing over how to limit the current Medicare/Medicaid systems to keep them from going broke and taking the American economic system with them.  Some genius at HHS thinks this is the most propitious moment to talk about sticking taxpayers with sex-change surgery bills?
Smooth move.  But don’t think for a moment this won’t come back later, either.

Of course not: Under the radical dispensation, that which is not forbidden is mandatory, and to say that someone has a “right” to do something will be interpreted to mean that taxpayers are obligated to pay them to do it. This is what the entire fight about “marriage equality” is about: Granting same-sex couples access to whatever government benefits married couples get.

Our national motto has been changed from “E Pluribus Unum” to “What’s In It For Me?”

There is no real opposition to people cohabiting, having wedding ceremonies and calling their unions “marriages” — live and let live, whatever floats your boat — but there is understandable resistance to government action that requires us to treat such pairings as perfect analogs of man and wife. In addition to any traditional moral objections, there is the suspicion that this sort of radical “equality” will end up costing taxpayers money and restricting individual freedom. And one individual freedom that is already being eroded is the right to express traditional moral objections, so that the Family Research Council can be stigmatized as a “hate group” and targeted for terrorism by the sans-culottes of the new Jacobinism.

Remember: Sandra Fluke argued that it is “discrimination” for insurers not to cover sex-change surgery and, last year, a federal judge invoked the Eighth Amendment in ruling that Robert Kosilek, imprisoned for murdering his wife in 1990, has a constitutional right to a  taxpayer-funded sex-change. My reaction at the time:

The Eight Amendment? If a convicted murderer doesn’t have a vagina, that’s “cruel and unusual punishment”? As strange as this sounds, it is entirely logical if you accept the premise of sexual “rights” as understood by liberals.

Please read (or re-read) “The Problem With Sexual Rights.” We are traveling a road paved with weird intentions.

 

 


Vote Democrat! ‘Your Slave-Holding, Murdering, Adulterous, Baby-Raping, Incestuous, Snaggle-Toothed, Backward-A**ed, Inbreed, Imported Criminal-Minded Kin Folk’

A guy named Eddie Maxwell e-mailed Alabama state legislators to express his concern for preserving the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. It was an open-CC e-mail, and what ensued was a flaming open-CC’d response by Alabama state Rep. Joseph Mitchell, whose colleagues and constituents were shocked by the venomous hostility.

Uh, no comment from Sean Penn’s son.

Syria: It’s Complicated. Also, It Sucks.

The Lightworker’s Mideast visit was surely an ill omen, and now it appears that the opposition to Syria’s Iranian-backed dictator Bashar al-Assad is in disarray — which may not necessarily be bad news, given the now-obvious post-“Arab Spring” complications:

Syria’s opposition coalition was on the verge of collapse Sunday after its president resigned and rebel fighters rejected its choice to head an interim government, leaving a U.S.-backed effort to forge a united front against President Bashar al-Assad in tatters.
The resignation of Moaz al-Khatib, a moderate Sunni preacher who heads the Syrian Opposition Coalition, climaxed a bitter internal fight over a range of issues, from the appointment of an interim government to a proposal by Khatib to launch negotiations with the Syrian regime.
His departure plunged the opposition into disarray at a time when the United States and its Western allies are stepping up their support for moderates opposed to Assad’s regime. Khatib’s coalition was expected to play a key role in identifying the recipients and channeling the assistance.

The enemy of our enemy in Syria is still our enemy:

Building on the reputation they have earned in recent months as the rebellion’s most accomplished fighters, Islamist units are seeking to assert their authority over civilian life, imposing Islamic codes and punishments and administering day-to-day matters such as divorce, marriage and vehicle licensing.
Numerous Islamist groups are involved, representing a wide spectrum of views. But, increasingly, the dominant role is falling to Jabhat al-Nusra, also known as the al-Nusra Front. The group has been designated a terrorist organization by the United States for suspected ties to al-Qaeda but is widely respected by many ordinary Syrians for its battlefield prowess and the assistance it has provided to needy civilians.

So, we have an Iranian-backed dictator fighting against a domestic insurgency that includes dangerous radical Islamist elements. The CIA is reportedly all up in this mess, and it’s hard to see any real possibility of a “good” outcome.

How’s that Hope and Change workin’ out for ya?

 

Mr. Nobel Peace Prize Works His Magic: Israel Now at War With Syria?

All it took was an Obama trip to the Mideast, and suddenly everything seems to be flying completely sideways:

Reuters is reporting that Israel has fired upon and destroyed a machine gun position in the Golan Heights. It is unclear at this moment whether this is merely spillover from the Syrian civil war or whether this is a new front opening for Israel in the middle east.
Israeli Spokesman Ofir Gendelman stated on his Twitter page, Israeli forces “destroyed a Syrian machine gun nest that fired twice in the last 24 hours on Israeli patrols operating to safeguard the border.”

Meanwhile, there are confused and conflicting reports as to whether Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad has been shot by an Iranian bodyguard.

UPDATE: Erik Ortiz of the New York Daily News:

Online reports of Syrian President Bashar Assad’s death appeared greatly exaggerated Sunday.
Arab media said Assad was purportedly shot by one of his Iranian bodyguards Saturday night and was in serious condition.
He was supposedly taken to Al-Shami Hospital in Damascus, where surrounding roads were closed off.
Israel News One’s website even reported that Assad had been “assassinated.”
But online updates said the Syrian leader’s shooting was false and that he  was alive and in high spirits. The conflicting reports highlight the chaos that  continues to engulf the country, which has been mired in a bloody civil war for  two years.

It’s impossible to know exactly what’s going on in this kind of situation unless you can independently confirm the reports, which I can’t.

Meanwhile, it’s hard not to notice that while Obama worked actively to encourage the overthrow of the regimes in Egypt and Libya, he’s been willing to let this situation in Syria — where Assad is essentially an Iranian puppet — linger for two years.

UPDATE II: Daniel Halper at the Weekly Standard:

On Friday, President Barack Obama left Israel, after spending a couple days with the leaders of America’s closest ally in the region.
Now today, two days later, Israel has acknowledged that it fired at a military position in Syria. . . .
The sequence of events leads one to ask, what did the two leaders, Obama and Netanyahu, discuss regarding Syria when they met multiple times this last week in Jerusalem? And what did they agree to do to deal with the Syria issue?

Just another wonderful coincidence for the Lightworker.

UPDATE III: Andrew O’Shea at ViralRead is still updating on whether or not Assad has been shot and is or is not dead.

 

The Other War on Women, or: It’s Not Harassment When Democrats Do It

He “pulled a weiner”:

A state representative in Massachussetts is  being investigated after allegedly sending pictures of his genitals to a  government computer.
The investigation is ongoing and the  committee has not formally reprimanded the individual in charge, but it is being  widely reported that Democratic State Representative John Fresolo is the one  behind the scandal.
He allegedly sent ‘lascivious photos of his  privates’ to a computer at the State House, and an aide complained to the Ethics  Committee to start the investigation.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo has not confirmed  any accusations in the case except that he did say there was ‘sufficient cause’  for an investigation.
‘In order to protect the integrity of the  Ethics Committee investigation, Speaker DeLeo will have no further comment on  this matter,’ spokesman Seth Gitell said. . . .

(“You reporters need to stop asking so many questions! Can’t you see we’re busy orchestrating a cover-up here?”)

This is not [Fresolo’s] first scandal, as he has a  history of violence towards his family members that has put him in trouble with social services.
In 2005 he reportedly physically abused his  then-13-year-old daughter, and that came nearly a decade after he was arrested  for beating his then-wife in 1996. She later dropped the charges.
Blogger Michele McPhee reports that he is now on paid administrative  leave, which is allegedly angering his colleagues.
‘It’s bad enough that he pulled an Anthony  Weiner and had pictures of his penis on State House computers, but then he tried  to get his per diem pumped up. No one puts in for 220 days of commuting and with  his commute that’s a lot of money,’ a state representative told her on the  condition of anonymity.

Via Memeorandum, with more at Weasel Zippers, Gateway Pundit and The Daily Caller.