The Other McCain

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

Dear Jonah Goldberg: What?

Posted on | December 28, 2011 | 12 Comments

by Smitty

Jonah Goldberg has an excellent column in the LA Times, but throws this in:

Frankly, I can’t blame anyone for being underwhelmed by Romney, or begrudge anyone their frustration with the field. What’s harder to understand is how nobody has noticed that the conservative establishment, which includes many of my friends denouncing it, has become vastly more conservative over the last two decades. It’s more pro-life, more pro-2nd Amendment, more opposed to tax increases.

I guess my take on the nature of conservativism begins with the Founding Fathers, who seemed rather libertarian in outlook. Maybe if the technology had existed 240 years ago to pull stunts like the TSA, the Founders would have done it.

But I doubt it. Would the Founders have bought into central banking and social security? Maybe, maybe not, and counterfactuals are distraction, in any case.

So, if ‘becoming vastly more conservative’ means you can now slide a piece of paper between the Democrat and Republican parties, fine. I’ll buy it. But the GOP has a great deal of atonement to accomplish, and the VA primary fracas, hopefully, is not a general indicator of the willingness to repent of the GOP’s statist, anti-American leanings.

via McEnroe

Category: GOP

One Wonders: What Was The Context Of Cheney’s Deficit Remark?

Posted on | December 28, 2011 | 12 Comments

by Smitty

Ran across this last night, emphasis mine:

Former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill was told “deficits don’t matter” when he warned of a looming fiscal crisis.
O’Neill, fired in a shakeup of Bush’s economic team in December 2002, raised objections to a new round of tax cuts and said the president balked at his more aggressive plan to combat corporate crime after a string of accounting scandals because of opposition from “the corporate crowd,” a key constituency.
O’Neill said he tried to warn Vice President Dick Cheney that growing budget deficits-expected to top $500 billion this fiscal year alone-posed a threat to the economy. Cheney cut him off. “You know, Paul, Reagan proved deficits don’t matter,” he said, according to excerpts. Cheney continued: “We won the midterms (congressional elections). This is our due.” A month later, Cheney told the Treasury secretary he was fired.
The vice president’s office had no immediate comment, but John Snow, who replaced O’Neill, insisted that deficits “do matter” to the administration.

Source: [X-ref O’Neill] Adam Entous, Reuters, on AOL News Jan 11, 2004

Category: Uncategorized

Rick Perry Is Suing Virginia Over Primary Ballot Exclusion? UPDATE: ‘It Appears That Rick Perry Is Right’

Posted on | December 28, 2011 | 30 Comments

by Smitty

Or, “Rich Ferrous Vein Discovered In Irony Mine”. From the WaPoo:

Perry’s suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Richmond, contends that the state Republican chairman and members of the State Board of Elections ­violated Perry’s constitutional rights by enforcing state requirements for the gathering of signatures.
The suit maintains that Perry was unable to submit the required number of signatures because of the board’s “requirement that all petition circulators be an eligible or registered qualified voter in Virginia.”
That requirement substantially limits the number of people who could circulate petitions and thus “imposes a severe burden” on Perry’s freedoms of speech and association, the lawsuit argued. It cites the Constitution’s First and 14th amendments.
The lawsuit also challenges on the same grounds requirements regarding the number of signatures and the qualifications for signers.

I mean, isn’t Rick from “Don’t mess with” Texas? Haven’t the Virginia rules, while arguably onerous, been published a long time? While not a 10th Amendment call, doesn’t this very suit kind of trample the notion of federalism? If the Virginia primary was Newt’s Pearl Harbor, does this suit risk turning it into Perry’s Alamo?

Snark aside, unless he can show that the VA GOP deliberately rigged this primary, on which point I am really skeptical, the whole effort seems misguided. Sure, the GOP may here may be reading the rules closely, and sticking to the un-anointed, establishment candidates, but they’re still the rules.

Reached for comment, Hayao Miyazaki had this to say:

Update: a bit of research, based upon the comments, gives us a Red State post linking Ballot Access News, emphasis mine:

But what has not been reported is that in the only other presidential primaries in which Virginia required 10,000 signatures (2000, 2004, and 2008) the signatures were not checked. Any candidate who submitted at least 10,000 raw signatures, on notarized sheets, and which had at least 400 signatures from each U.S. House district, was put on the ballot. In 2000, five Republicans qualified: George Bush, John McCain, Alan Keyes, Gary Bauer, and Steve Forbes. In 2004 there was no Republican primary in Virginia. In 2008, six Republicans qualified: John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Rudy Giuliani, and Fred Thompson (an earlier version of this post erroneously said Alan Keyes qualified in 2008, but he only qualified in 2000).
The only reason the Virginia Republican Party checked the signatures for validity for the current primary is that in October 2011, an independent candidate for the legislature, Michael Osborne, sued the Virginia Republican Party because it did not check petitions for its own members, when they submitted primary petitions. Osborne had no trouble getting the needed 125 valid signatures for his own independent candidacy, but he charged that his Republican opponent’s primary petition had never been checked, and that if it had been, that opponent would not have qualified. The lawsuit, Osborne v Boyles, cl 11-520-00, was filed in Bristol County Circuit Court. It was filed too late to be heard before the election, but is still pending. The effect of the lawsuit was to persuade the Republican Party to start checking petitions. If the Republican Party had not changed that policy, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry would be on the 2012 ballot.

What I glean here is:

  • The rules have NOT BEEN changed.
  • Enforcement has been uneven over time.
  • The Osborne suit, coming in October 2011, is mighty, mighty convenient. Why, a couple months before the 2012 Presidential election due date, did an independent candidate for state legislature, quite unexpectedly become interested in the internals of the GOP nomination process? I’m not saying That He Elevated Fetishing Internal X-rays Which Any Sane Interlocutor Never cares about to an absurd level, but it would lead one to question the timing if, say, some link between Osborne and one of the campaigns were to surface.

I really hate to see this issue hang over the GOP like a cloud of air pollution. Maybe Ron Paul should get together with Mitt and have Romney’s campaign chair, VA Lt Gov Bill Bolling, set about enforcing the ballot rules in keeping with tradition. If either candidate is confident of his victory anyway, why should they seek to squelch competition? Especially at the cost of giving the GOP elephant such a donkey cast.

Update II: the plot thickens. At the Northern Virginia Tea Party FaceBook page,

Surprisingly, Rick Perry’s lawsuit challenging Virginia’s ballot access petition laws seems to be “spot on.” Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich were kept off Virginia’s GOP primary ballot for the March 6 primary. Rick Perry relies upon the US Supreme Court precedent of BUCKLEY V. AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (97-930) 525 U.S. 182 (1999), in which the US Supreme Court agreed with the District Court: “the requirement of registration limits the number of persons available to circulate and sign [initiative] petitions and, accordingly, restricts core political speech.” THEREFORE, THE REQUIREMENT THAT PETITION GATHERERS MUST BE REGISTERED VOTERS IN VIRGINIA CLEARLY VIOLATES A DECISION BY THE US SUPREME COURT IN 1999. Of course, courts can find any number of reasons to take unexpected twists and turns. But it appears that Rick Perry is right.

My recommendation to the GOP is that this matter be concluded soonest, with Newt and Perry on the ballot. Continued wrestling with the pig is just going to get lipstick everywhere.

Update III: Still further details at Tim Boyer. Has the VA GOP conducted a successful auto-beclownment operation? It may very well have.

Update IV: HotAir has some great detail. Morrissey takes the straightforward approach that this is a competence test for the campaigns. I’m 60% in agreement there, and 40% interested in seeing what the legal fallout from Perry’s suit is. I happen to be of the ‘more is better’ school of thought; even if you’re a Romney or Paul supporter, inoculating your candidate from competition is not necessarily a Good Thing. Could I vote for Ron Paul in a primary as a protest against GOP tomfoolery? It sounds mad, but less so over time. . .

Category: Rick Perry, Texas, Virginia

When the Story Writes Itself

Posted on | December 28, 2011 | 9 Comments

DAVENPORT, Iowa
Sometimes this job is hard. And sometimes it’s easy. And there was a moment last night that made my job much easier. Watch the video:

And now here’s the lead of my column today:

“Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul!” The chants were loud and persistent.
Mitt Romney came to town Monday and a Ron Paul rally broke out. As the Massachusetts governor left one of his relatively rare campaign appearances in Iowa, some two dozen supporters of the Texas congressman lined the sidewalk along outside the Hotel Blackhawk. Romney stepped out the door and heard the crowd expressing their enthusiasm for his GOP rival. Romney chuckled and waved before boarding the bus emblazoned with his slogan, “Believe in America.” As the bus pulled out and turned onto East Third Street, the Paul fans chanted louder and waved their signs, some occasionally yelling, “Liberty!”
In one of the multiplying oddities of the 2012 Republican presidential campaign, neither of the two candidates leading the polls in Iowa is the kind of conservative champion that has traditionally won the Hawkeye State’s first-in-the-nation caucus. Between them, however, the moderate Romney and the libertarian Paul combine more than 40 percent of the GOP vote here, according to the latest RealClearPolitics average of Iowa polls. And though they are neck-and-neck in the polls, there is no doubt which of the two current front-runners here generates the most fanatical support. When Ron Paul holds an event in Iowa, no Romney boosters are standing outside in the cold December wind maniacally shouting, “Mitt! Mitt! Mitt!” . . .

Read the whole thing at The American Spectator.





Category: American Spectator, Election 2012, Fear and Loathing in Iowa, Iowa, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul

Romney Campaign Infiltrated By DHS-Certified Right Winger In Black Ford Mustang Thinking Santorum Thoughts

Posted on | December 27, 2011 | 19 Comments

by Smitty

Stacy called to gloat about arriving at the car rental and getting a souped-up Ford Mustang for the price of a mid-sized rental. Spys reporting to Sissypuss the Blog Kitty reported that this was really a Romney campaign stunt, intending to rely on Stacy’s big foot on the gas to get him thrown in jail, and thus be unable to report on the details of whatever Iowa fix is in.

Bolstering the theory was a Speed Raaaaacist screed by Dan Collins, some deep fried Southern reminisce full of code words, dog whistles, and semaphores. Have a go. It’s got everything but a banjo, as far as I can tell. Little did Dan know that Stacy, while not competent yet on TweetDeck, or bluetooth headsets–though his teeth were better unmentioned–has in fact mastered the fine art of cruise control.

It seems that Stacy hasn’t been behind the wheel of a black vehicle with anything resembling an engine since his stunt driver days on the set of Smokey and the Bandit, and the thought of being crushed in Iowa for speeding like he was crushed at the roulette table in Vegas is really too much of a bother for Stacy in his dotage.

Thus, Stacy’s arrival at the Romney event in a Black Chariot of Justice may thus catch Romney’s campaign off guard. A nearly Gingrich-ian surprise, IYKWIMAITYD. At that point, the challenge becomes keeping the Rule 5 political cling-ons from piling up too thickly on the hood. Oh, who am I kidding? Stacy will end up giving Dave Weigel a lift. But that’s how it goes.

Just remember, Stacy: if you meet a young co-ed named Mary Jo, that car is not a submarine. Okay?

And yes, the Romney campaign has the vehicle bugged. When you give the gnarly old guy in the bib overalls a lift, and

he says “Knock, knock.”,

and you reply, “Who’s there?”,

and he says, “It’s the plumber. I’ve come to fix the sink,”

that is your cue that the Semi-Conscious Liberation Army, in conjunction with the Ron Paul campaign, is preparing to pull off an operation previously only seen in the pages of the Illuminatus Trilogy, but which they think they can operationalize. Remember: if the operation fails, the statute of limitations on you for that job in Peru is expired, and Jorge really could use a favor. Whether it succeeds or fails, it will help the Santorum campaign. That’s all you need to know.

Godspeed.

Update: linked at Reluctant-Rebel

Category: Conservatory, Farce, Fear and Loathing in Iowa, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul

The Santorum Surge: Mainstream Media Finally Beginning to See Omens in Iowa

Posted on | December 27, 2011 | 27 Comments

IOWA CITY, Iowa
If you’ll check Real Clear Politics, you’ll notice we haven’t seen any new poll numbers out of Iowa lately. With no new polls and no more debates, suddenly reporters are forced to focus on the actual on-the-ground campaign here in the Hawkeye State. And once you start paying attention to that kind of stuff, you can’t help but notice that somebody’s doing a lot better here than the poll numbers might suggest:

He has received key endorsements from well-known social conservatives in the state, and has had solid performances at each of the debates. And he’s running an old-school style campaign that Iowa voters expect in the retail-style politics of the Hawkeye State.
The man whose at the back of the polling pack — despite recent buzz giving him a late boost — is taking nothing for granted but has nothing to lose.
“My feeling is when you’re sitting last, if you can do better than that, that’s good,” he told Fox News.
Santorum said he’s got 1,000 caucus representatives in a contest with about 1,700 caucus locations. He acknowledges that means no official representative to make his case at each of the locations, but at “almost all of them, and no other campaign is going to have someone there who’s going to get up and speak on our behalf.”
Santorum, who claims organization and message will make the difference, is also banking on a divide and conquer strategy.
“There’s really three primaries going on here,” Santorum said. “Ron Paul has his own primary, the libertarian primary. And (Newt) Gingrich and (Mitt) Romney are sort of the establishment primary. And I think there are three who are vying for the conservative mantle to go up against the Gingrich-Romney duo. And I think that I’m going to be the one coming out Iowa with that mantle.
“And if we can do that, then we’re off to the races here, and conservatives around the country, just like they’re doing here in Iowa, are going to start rallying around our campaign,” he said.

Dan Collins also writes about the Santorum Surge today, and check out Curt’s headline at Flopping Aces:

Newt Implodes As Santorum Surges

Evidently, the “Newt Romney” factor is both real and spectacular. Nothing says “kiss of death” quite like the revelation that you’ve been walking the RINO walk while trying to talk the conservative talk.

The apparent collapse of Gingrich — at least insofar as it involves conservatives in Iowa — will be one of the big stories to keep watching. Multiple sources confirm the lack of organizational “ground game” for Newt here, but the key questions are, “How far will he fall?” and “Who will benefit most from Newt’s losses?”

Another sign the beneficiary might be Santorum: “Huck’s Army” founders Alex and Brett Harris today endorsed Santorum.

Today I had a long conversation with influential Iowa talk-show host Steve Deace, who remains skeptical of Santorum’s Cinderella potential. Listening to Deace’s analysis, I’d say the unreported story is this: Perhaps the real reason Steve King didn’t endorse Santorum yesterday is not only King’s longstanding friendship with Bachmann, but also that re-districting has given King some new territory that includes a lot of fired-up Ron Paul supporters. The last thing King needs is a bunch of fanatical Paulistas backing a primary challenger against him next year.

There are layers and layers of complexity to GOP politics in Iowa, and I don’t pretend to understand it at more than a superficial level. But I think the situation here is a lot more volatile than most people realize.

Santorum has not yet polled better than 10% in Iowa. If this surge is for real, and he finishes third or fourth — which could put him ahead of a big money “contender” like Gingrich or Perry — then it’s Katy-bar-the-door. And Santorum himself is entirely willing to put his fate in the hands of folks in the Hawkeye State.






Category: Election 2012, Fear and Loathing in Iowa, Iowa, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum

Red At CHWAC Doesn’t Get The Class Warfare Joke

Posted on | December 27, 2011 | 3 Comments

by Smitty

Caught Him With A Corndog posts about Princess Pelosi’s Hawaii trip:

Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, who served as Speaker of the House and is now head of the House minority, is once again spending her Christmas at the exotic Four Seasons Resort Hualalai at Historic Ka’upulehu in Kona on the island of Hawaii.

Nancy Pelosi exemplifies the notion that Socialism is the über-capitalism: there is nothing wrong with the idea of the corporation; only that there be more than one. Government is sort of a Highlander character in the economy, whacking private sector challengers. Sears and K-Mart, for example. If the government can tag every taxpayer for a quarter-mil per Chevy Volt, stand by for some future retail bailout, and a new line of politically correct, raaaaacially fair clothing. Nancy would, no doubt, make a pile of cash on the stock moves, but will not wear any of the new apparel, of course.

The joke, of course, is that Nancy and the gang actually give a flying French. . .fry about the various constituencies that keep them in power.

Category: Blogging, Democrats

Ed Driscoll Missed One: Introducing The New Lefty Craze ‘M-bowing’

Posted on | December 27, 2011 | 2 Comments

by Smitty

First, there was Obama’s bowing, and then Tebowing, and now M-bowing (Mao-bowing?), with the arms forming the outsides of the character, with the middle V described by the outline of the leg. The left leg.

This new body language is suitable for an #Occupy mike check near you. Try not to bite your mousy tongue while reading Driscoll’s whole post about the sad, drool bucket Left. But don’t laugh too hard, though: these creepy crypto-Marxists have the ear of #OccupyResoluteDesk. Just because they are not terribly bright does not render them harmless.

Category: Celebrities, Ed Driscoll
« 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