The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

EUSSR?

Posted on | October 20, 2012 | 22 Comments

by Smitty

Insty reminded me to write a post on this, via Hannan:

I guess you’re not supposed to note that they put the hammer and sickle atop the cross, at the same level as the muslim crescent, all of which, along with the yin-yang, superior to the star of David. And the notion that the symbols are distributed randomly within a five-pointed star shape (itself associated, inter alia, with Communism).

If the hammer and sickle are fit for this sort of thing, why are the Hindus not allowed a swastika in there? You can’t help but juxtapose this religious farce with the EU being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

The Nobel committee in Oslo chose to ignore the multiple crises threatening the EU. Instead, it took the longer and bigger view, praising the EU’s historical role in promoting reconciliation and peace, and warning its collapse would see an ominous return to “extremism and nationalism”.
Announcing the decision, Thorbjørn Jagland, head of the Nobel committee, said: “The main message is that we need to keep in mind what we have achieved on this continent, and not let the continent go into disintegration again.” The alternative was “awful wars”, he warned bluntly.

What is it with Scandinavia and Quislings? When war does come, and these EUnuchs are feckless to halt it, I do hope they wave their Nobel Prize as they are offered on the altar of Ares.

Update: thank you, Instapundit.

Category: Europe

My Beer vs. Nate Silver’s Two Beers

Posted on | October 20, 2012 | 20 Comments

Politics is a lot like pro football — it’s always more interesting if you’ve got money riding on the outcome. I don’t know if Hugh Hewitt is much of a football fan, but if he’s a gambler and you’re an Obama supporter, Hugh’s talk of the “ongoing collapse of President Obama’s campaign” identifies Hewitt as an easy mark. (Make him give you a point-spread.)

On the other hand, if Hugh wanted to clean up by making sucker bets with Obamabots, Nate Silver looks like a gold-plated chump. Nate’s Incredible Genius Forecasting Model™ was giving better than 2-to-1 odds for Obama as of Friday, so that Hewitt could bet $100 against Silver’s $200, if either of them was willing to put his money where his mouth is.

Some friends and I have been having an e-mail conversation about Nate Silver, and one of my friends — with a graduate degree in political philosophy — name-checked Richard Rorty in the discussion. (Show-off!) This required a response from the Hayekian Public Intellectual™, and here’s what I wrote:

Rather than invoking Rorty, I think that the basic problem is Hayekian. Like economic “planners,” Silver succumbs to the illusion of expertise and is seduced by the apparent exactitude of data, so that the Forecasting Model becomes a sort of Five-Year Plan. Silver’s method fails to compensate for situations (not really that rare in politics) where unexpected events falsify the predictive value of polling. Remember that we are talking about the opinions of fallible human beings en masse, as opposed to the behavior of a select group of professional athletes, which is why Sabremetrics cannot be too much help in predicting how the polls will shift in response to events that could not have been anticipated:

  1.  The multilayered fuck-up in Benghazi.
  2. An utterly lopsided victory by Romney in the first debate.

If you’ll go look at the RCP national average, you will notice that Obama’s lead was already starting to slip a few days before the first debate. I interpret that as the first glimmerings of a Benghazi backlash, and Romney’s Godzilla-stomps-Tokyo act in the first debate (which exceeded the expectations of even Mitt’s most enthusiastic supporters) accelerated that trend. We don’t really know how far that trend may go, but the fact that Ryan made a campaign stop in Pittsburgh yesterday is kind of a hint that Team Mitt thinks it might go pretty damned far. I’m willing to say, “I don’t know,” and concede the possibility that Obama might yet find a way to pull out a win.
Nate, however, has the burden of expertise obtained through his statistical fluency, and he can’t just throw out an anecdotal gut hunch: “Hey, this Benghazi mess might turn into a sucking chest wound for Obama if he’s not careful,” or: “Watch out for that Romney in debate — he’s a crafty weasel.” Or even: “Hey, y’know, maybe swing voters in Iowa are a bunch of closet racists who have just been waiting for a plausible excuse not to like Obama any more.”
Finally, I will once more repeat: Polls are a lagging indicator. When a game-changing moment happens, it may take a week or two for the polls to fully reflect the extent of the shift. And the 90% refusal factor means that the margin of error could either (a) hide the magnitude of the shift, or (b) exaggerate the shift.
It’s Hayekian, as I say, because there is no reliable way for the “expert” to discern which data inputs are most accurate and which are anomalous outliers.
My gut-hunch is that Silver’s 70% confidence in Obama’s re-election is about 180 degrees opposite of the true state of the race. Silver is a statistician who trusts his data, however, and he has no reason to trust my gut-hunch. So all we can do is wait and see. But if Nate wants to give me 2-to-1 odds, I’d happily bet a beer against his two beers.
— RSM
P.S.: I still owe John Fund a beer because Christine O’Donnell lost, that no-good witch!

Just kidding about that “witch” thing, Christine. Nobody ever listens to my advice, so no hard feelings, OK?

Category: Election 2012, Polls

Don’t Get Cocky, But Do Note The Aroma Of Fear Wafting From The Left

Posted on | October 20, 2012 | 44 Comments

by Smitty

Two weeks is a long time in politics, but the Romney campaign seems to have done the homework.
Don’t be afraid to say a prayer for Mitt as he heads into the final debate. I don’t care who you are: that’s some stress.

via American Power

Update: welcome, Instapundit readers!

Category: Election 2012

RNC Trounces DNC in Fundraising as Democrat Party Goes Bankrupt

Posted on | October 20, 2012 | 64 Comments

The official Federal Election Committee reports for September are out, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s DNC is a complete wreck. The Democrats ended September with cash on hand of $4.6 million, compared to the Republican National Committee’s $82.6 million.

That’s nearly an 18-to-1 cash advantage for Republicans.

Worse still for the DNC, they had to take out loans to pay the bills so that they owed $20.5 million at the end of September, meaning that that (subtracting cash on hand from total debt) they were $15.9 million in the red — essentially bankrupt. Wasserman-Schultz’s committee only raised $3.7 million in September; at that pace, it would take them more than four months to clear their debt, even if they didn’t spend another dime in the meantime.

Somehow, this seems an apt metaphor for the Obama era.

Now, go back to something I reported at The American Spectator last month when I was in Ohio, and Obama was leading the polls:

DAYTON, Ohio — Reporters circled around Reince Priebus at a campaign rally Monday in Lima and one asked the Republican National Committee chairman what he thought of polls showing Mitt Romney trailing President Obama in this crucial battleground state. Priebus said he was satisfied that the GOP challenger was “within a field goal” of the incumbent, and made a bold prediction: “We’re going to outspend the DNC 10-to-1 [in Ohio] for the next six weeks… We’re going to crush ’em on the ground.”

How many people actually believed that prediction? As incredible as it seemed at the time, Priebus and the RNC appear to be in a position to do exactly that and more. Meanwhile, reacting to reports that the DNC’s vendors are owed millions of dollars by Wasserman-Schultz’s committee — essentially taking I.O.U.’s from the Democrats — Jim Geraghty says:

Attention, vendors: Stop falling for this, make Debbie pay you in cash.

Worst DNC Chairman Ever!

Update (Smitty): welcome, Instapundit and Chockblock.

Update II (Smitty): more linkage at DaTechGuy

Category: Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Democrats, Election 2012, Reince Priebus, Republicans

Neal Rauhauser, Who Drove Barrett Brown Off the Deep End, Continues Unrelenting Harassment of His Targets

Posted on | October 20, 2012 | 22 Comments

Neal Rauhauser was a speaker at the 2010 Netroots Nation conference

“There’s nothing stopping them. They feel like they have the right to do anything they want to anyone who gets in their way.”
– Jennifer Emick, describing the online savagery she’s experienced since exposing “Anonymous”

When last we took note of Brett Kimberlin’s evil minion Neal Rauhauser on Oct. 2, Rauhauser had helped instigate Nadia Naffe’s lawsuit against Patterico. Being busy with campaign coverage, I overlooked Patterico’s Oct. 4 post about that lawsuit:

Kimberlin’s associate Neal Rauhauser recently admitted in a complaint to my office that he introduced Naffe to attorney Jay Leiderman:

I brought this situation to the attention of Los Angeles attorney Jay Leiderman, then introduced he and Naffe, and he is now representing her in a civil case against Frey.

In the same document, Rauhauser declared that if Naffe is successful, he believes it will put an end to my career as a Deputy D.A.:

[T]he lawsuit he faces from Nadia Naffe is another matter and it is understood that if she prevails that may put an end to Frey’s career in the DA’s of?ce.

That’s how Rauhauser operates: Once he targets somebody as an enemy, he becomes fixated and obsessed, and endeavors to get others to assist him in harassment of the target. Be sure and read the entirety of Patterico’s post, and especially notice the March 23 Tweet from the “Breitbart Unmasked” account.

Keep in mind that Rauhauser’s implacable hatred of Patterico dates back to July 2011, in the wake of the Anthony Weiner sex scandal when (a) Patterico was “SWATted,” and (b) Rauhauser posted a series of diatribes at Daily Kos under his “Stranded Wind” alias:

In a July 27 post, “Weinergate Perps Pay Dearly,” Rauhauser said Patterico “looks to be a pretty good candidate for the planner/operator behind Weinergate.” Rauhauser has never produced a scintilla of evidence to support that bizarre accusation. Weiner had resigned from Congress on June 16, 2011, after admitting “he had in fact sent the [Twitter] image and had had inappropriate online exchanges with at least six other women. ” So there was no reason at all — in late July, six weeks after Weigner resigned — for anyone to imagine a “planner/operator” as being “behind” the scandal, let alone to accuse Patterico.

Rauhauser was Patient Zero in a weird epidemic of left-wing paranoia that became known as “Weiner Trutherism.” Rauauser’s irrational demonization of Patterico might be laughed off, were it not for the fact that several people — now evidently including Nadia Naffe and attorney Jay Leiderman — have assisted Rauhauser in his harassment of Patterico. And what Rauhauser has done to Patterico is typical of what he does to everyone he targets.

Take, for example, Jennifer Emick, an online researcher who last year helped expose members of the “LulzSec” criminal hacker conspiracy, a rogue offshoot of “Anonymous.” Rauhauser discovered that Emick was an acquaintance of Aaron Barr, the former CEO of HB Gary Federal, a security firm that had unsuccessfully sought a contract to provide its services to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which had been targeted by “Anonymous.”

Rauhauser magnified the association between Emick and Barr into one of his typical conspiracy theories. It was apparently Rauhauser who got Barrett Brown so stoked up with paranoid rage last month that Brown unleashed a crazed video rant that got him arrested for threatening an FBI agent:

“I got to find out, thanks to a hack — thanks to another f–king stroke of luck, thank God — that HB Gary, since mid-February, had hired an FBI informant . . . making up reasons to raid Barrett Brown and get his information. . . .
“It turns out — from the e-mails that were stolen two months ago and that, thank God, I have — that that guy was an old military buddy of HB Gary executive Jim Butterworth. . . . I know what’s been done to me by these f–king contractors . . .
“FBI agent Robert Smith is a criminal who’s involved in a criminal conspiracy that has, thank God, been revealed, part of which was evident months ago, because I told the f–king FBI agent Daniel Forseck . . . when his f–king little Jennifer Emick — f–king informant, HB Gary employee — bragging about the sh-t, she gave me the number. I guess she wanted to talk to me and see what I’d say.”

The derangement evident in Brown’s 13-minute video reflected many of the same weird obsessions — HB Gary, Team Themis, Tom Ryan — that have crowded Rauhauser’s mind since his “Kookpocalypse” rant in February. (See my June 19 post, “Neal Rauhauser: Internet Super-Spy!” Patterico also has more background on Rauhauser’s “Kookpocalypse” episode.) Given that Barrett Brown had also been attacking Rauhauser’s enemies (me and Patterico) a couple weeks earlier, it was obvious who was feeding Brown’s paranoia.

Since Brown’s arrest in September, the harassment of Jennifer Emick has escalated and Neal Rauhauser has directly involved himself in this harassment, filing a false report with the city where Emick lives and sending defamatory e-mails to the sheriff’s department in the county where Emick lives. In his report to the city, which he posted on his blog, Rauhauser wrote:

I am being harassed by a mentally ill resident of the city . . .
I have worked as a political consultant since 2010 and Emick is one of a handful of deeply disturbed persons who have become fascinated with me. This all seems to be connected to events in the spring of 2010, when I worked for the primary challenger to pro-life Democrat Bart Stupak in Michigan’s 1st Congressional District.

This is a bald-faced lie. This has absolutely nothing to do with the Bart Stupak campaign, Emick never wrote a word about Rauhauser until he began attacking her — because of her online acquaintance with Rauhauser’s nemesis “Zapem” — and his claim that Emick is harassing him is the exact opposite of truth.

We are looking at another classic example of Rauhauser’s “accuse the accusers” strategy: Malign the target to pre-emptively discredit them, and to create confusion on the part of courts and police as to who is the victim and who is the victimizer.

Rauhauser’s assertion that Emick is “mentally ill” or “deeply disturbed” is part of this strategy. Rauhauser himself is a twisted Gordian knot of sociopathic tendencies, exhibiting habitual dishonesty, narcissistic grandiosity, persecutorial delusions and a sadistic delight in inflicting suffering on others. He has the sociopath’s cunning intuition, an ability to spot weak-minded people who are vulnerable to his manipulative behavior, and to solicit their assistance in his various schemes.

Neal also has the narcissist’s arrogance, so that he boldly lies to law-enforcement officials without any apparent fear of apprehension, because he thinks himself infinitely smarter than those to whom he lies. And why shouldn’t he believe this?

Rauhuaser has sent his conspiracy-theory treatises — filled with all manner of false and defamatory assertions — to the FBI, to various state and local law enforcement agencies, and even to members of Congress, and never once suffered any serious legal consequence for this peculiar habit. Probably, officials receiving his e-mails dismiss Rauhauser as a harmless kook, and underestimate the harm done by his online behavior. (Cops are apt to view such conflicts as  “just a bunch of crazies arguing on the Internet.”) 

One of the best analyses of Rauhauser’s personality is Ladd Ehlinger Jr.’s “A Breathtaking Lack of Empathy.”

Rauhauser seems incapable of caring about the harm he does to others. Barrett Brown is now in federal custody, and perhaps headed to prison, because of Neal’s manipulations, yet rather than acknowledge his role in inciting Brown’s meltdown and repenting of his evil behavior, Rauhauser just moves on in search of other targets to menace and manipulate.

Soon, however, a Virginia court may bring a certain amount of justice to Rauhauser, who is a co-defendant in Aaron Walker’s lawsuit against Brett Kimberlin. William Hoge has been chronicling the procedural progress of that lawsuit, and if you have followed the case, you know that at the next court hearing on Friday, Oct. 26, it’s possible that Kimberlin will be held in contempt of court.

And those who have studied Rauhauser’s modus operandi will perhaps not be surprised to learn that Neal has begun touting the “Kookpocalypse Konclusion . . .  I just got the word – close of business next Friday it’s all gonna happen,” with a countdown clock to Friday, Oct. 26.

So Rauhauser’s recent flurry of online evil — the “doxing,” the posting of photos of his targets and their homes, the e-mails to law enforcement, et cetera — could be interpreted as reactions to the legal pressure being brought to bear against Rauhauser’s client/associate Kimberlin. Neal exhibited a similar pattern of behavior in the weeks before the March raid on “LulzSec.”

Weird things involving Rauhauser’s targets are happening on a daily basis, and these things should not be dismissed as coincidences.

Category: Patterico, The Kimberlin Files

#OccupyResoluteDesk Looks ‘Not Optimal’ By Comparison

Posted on | October 19, 2012 | 2 Comments

by Smitty

This is a good piling on, and useful for contrast:

It doesn’t really help for nailing down to just what President Creepshow was really up to in Benghazi, however. Focus people, focus.

via Nice Deb

Category: Barack Obama

Is The Post-Debate Benghazi Discussion Playing Into Obama’s Hands?
UPDATE: Krauthammer Snookered?

Posted on | October 19, 2012 | 31 Comments

by Smitty

Given a non-optimal event, or, as real people would call it, tragic failure, controlling the spin is crucial. Benghazi certainly qualifies. And the spin after the second Presidential debate is doing a fine job of keeping the discussion manageable for the Administration, if not where they want it.

Neo-Neocon gives a detailed overview of the Rose Garden remarks of 12Sep2012, concluding:

Obama’s Rose Garden speech was carefully written to make sure the President sounded as though he may have been hinting at quite a few things that he’s not really saying, in order to keep all his options open later.

Not bad. And how was Candy cued about the importance of those 12Sep2012 remarks? Axelrod told her on 30Sep2012, that’s how. Which is why Red Diaper David gets paid the big bucks. Also, CNN admits its complicity in supporting Obama during the debate. But that’s in character.

The real issue here is why the Administration is successfully focusing all eyes on words that were spoken on 12Sep2012, and debate verbiage on 16Oct2012. These are certainly interesting, but peripheral. What we need to know is: where was the security that any reasonable person would require in Benghazi, leading up to and on 11Sep2012?

We’re not going to get answers to any hahrd questions, of course. There are too many legitimate issues of classified information, too many illegitimate issues of covering backsides, too many international implications of where the truth could lead, too many sycophants still wanting to drag #OccupyResoluteDesk across the finish line next month ahead of Romney. Fine.

What is the purpose of having a blog if you can’t point a finger and call: NONSENSE when you see it?

via: Insta–pundit.

Update: great roundup over at Nice Deb

Update II: does anybody not see that ‘Not Optimal‘ is just another calculated distraction? BHO hates you, he hates your liberty, and he thinks you’re stupid. He knows he’s toast if there is a real focus on the facts of Benghazi, and so he offers smoke screens. #Choom

Update III: alas, the CIA may not be keeping time with the White House drum:

The CIA station chief in Libya reported to Washington within 24 hours of last month’s deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate that there was evidence it was carried out by militants, not a spontaneous mob upset about an American-made video ridiculing Islam’s Prophet Muhammad, U.S. officials have told The Associated Press.
It is unclear who, if anyone, saw the cable outside the CIA at that point and how high up in the agency the information went.

I’ve been impressed in the first two debates at Romney’s capacity to push his argument exactly as far as he wants to, despite the moderator, and then comfortably resume his stance. Despite running in sand, Romney still conjures the piano music.

Update IV: A very detailed breakdown at Perfect Under a Red Umbrella. Again, beware efforts to run out the clock, and mire the discussion in minutia. Ultimately, this Administration has been nothing other than a pack of thugs.
More at Stacy on the Right.

Update V: via Insty again, I submit that Krauthammer is going for the bait here:

Missed by Romney, missed by the audience, missed by most of the commentariat, it was the biggest gaffe of the entire debate cycle: Substituting unctuousness for argument, Obama declared himself offended by the suggestion that anyone in his administration, including the U.N. ambassador, would “mislead” the country on Libya.

Nobody is missing it. We’re chewing on the fine print now. Romney knew he’d made his point, and left it there. BHO wins if he can reduce the conversation to finger pointing–President wins in ties–and distract from the broader question of his leadership vacuum.

Update VI: linked at Jackie Wellfonder.

 

Category: Barack Obama

The Left’s War on True the Vote

Posted on | October 19, 2012 | 14 Comments

As polls continue to show surging momentum for Republicans ahead of Election Day, left-wing groups allied with the Democratic Party and the Obama campaign have orchestrated a nationwide attack on conservative-led efforts to prevent vote fraud.

Maryland Democrat Rep. Elijah Cumming has sent letters to Houston-based True the Vote requesting “specific documents about the manner in which True the Vote and its affiliated organizations have been challenging the registration of thousands of voters across the country based on insufficient, inaccurate and faulty evidence,” Politico reported yesterday.

Cumming’s letter is one of the most recent attacks in the Left’s carefully coordinated war against True the Vote, which has pledged to deploy 1 million volunteer observers to prevent vote fraud in the 2012 election. True the Vote has been targeted by threats of investigations, lawsuits and criminal prosecution. As Brentin Mack of the left-wing Nation magazine wrote today, “civil rights lawyers and government officials … are striking back against” the group. Democrats and their allies perversely claim that it is somehow illegal for True the Vote to help prevent criminal violations of election law.

The Left’s “accusations of voter intimidation” against True the Vote are “entirely false,” the group’s founder, Catherine Englebrecht said today during a conference call.

Kendric Ward of Watchdog.org has detailed how True the Vote is being targeted by a coalition that includes the ACLU, NAACP and AFL-CIO. Engelbrecht said today that her group has received a large “amount of hate and electronic warfare,” including attempts to shut down their Web site. Quin Hillyer of The American Spectator has called on Republican leaders to defend True the Vote.

Even as True the Vote is under siege, however, major media organizations are actively assisting the Left’s effort to demonize the election-integrity group, with Jack Feeley and Kristofer Rios of ABC News singling out True the Vote in an article recycling claims about “voter intimidation.”

True the Vote was formed after the 2008 election by Engelbrecht, who exposed illegal voter registration activity by a member of the left-wing group ACORN. Most recently, the group exposed cases of voters double-registered in Florida and other states.

Category: Crime, Election 2012
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin