by Smitty
. . .but I do sympathize with his plight. Minor language alert. Loose f-bomb early on.
Will No One Rid Us Of This Troglodyte And His Osama Theories?
by Smitty
That didn’t take long. Sir Lance of the Boil is already out trolling for linkage, dragging foul ichor about the floors and generally stinking up the joint.
Of course Osama is alive, Lance! He’s cruising with Elvis in Bigfoot’s UFO! (A reference only maybe Belvedere will catch.)
Seriously, Trog: don’t you trust the Navy? You should.
Selecting The Next Bob Dole Proving More Than A Trifle Tedious
by Smitty
American Power picks up on the quest for more 2012 GOP candidates. Rubio’s firm withdrawal matches Christie’s. Who, then (emphasis mine)?
So for Republicans in 2012, while it seems late in terms of the “invisible primary” of money, media, and polling, in fact there’s still plenty of time for other candidates to throw their hats in the ring, and the field shaping up isn’t as bad as the media makes out. Mitt Romney’s going to be formidable, despite talk that RomneyCare is a killer (and I’ve even suggested RomneyCare’s an albatross). All Romney has to do is denounce his own healthcare record in Massachusetts as a colossal mistake, make reference to polling there looking for a change, and then turn around and say never again! It might be tough in the primaries against fellow Republicans, but with a GOP Congress looking to repeal ObamaCare, Romney can ride his mea culpa on top of a wave of conservative opposition to big government. He’s telegenic and an experienced campaigner, and the press will take him seriously, unlike Donald Trump.
Beyond that, I don’t know much about Tim Pawlenty, although he looks pretty self-assured at the clip from New Hampshire above. We’ll know more after a round of GOP pre-primary debates. Robert Stacy McCain reports on Herman Cain, by the way, who topped an AFP poll coming out of yesterday’s event: “Herman Cain Wins 2012 Presidential Forum in Manchester, New Hampshire” (with video). I like what I’ve seen of Herman Cain, and at this point it’s hard to figure out which would be a better ticket, Herman Cain and Allen West or Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann, although I think this is still super long-shot territory.
But notice that discussion of Governor Mitch Daniels, who was Budget Director in the George W. Bush White House. Hmm … Should he take the adoration seriously and enter the race, he’ll likely end up an also-ran who leaves the grassroots wanting. The Times gives cursory discussion to Sarah Palin. Perhaps her moment to enter the race has passed (doesn’t bother me, since I’ve long suggested she run in 2016). There’s also mention of Chris Christie, Rick Perry, and Paul Ryan, and who knows, maybe one of them will surprise us (I like Christie)?
In any case, like I said, let’s get on with the debates and see how things shake out. And keep an eye on the money. Michele Bachmann’s been raising funds like the devil, and fundraising’s one of the factors facilitating media coverage, so things can snowball for a candidate that way.
It strikes me that the GOP has the harder decision to make. The Democrats are totally sold out to the Progressive Cthulhu. The Tea Parties are attempting to hold the GOP to some semblance of a non-Progressive pose. The GOP, and the country, can win only if the GOP decides to lose its Ruling Class, Progressive posture and do something a bit more, you know, representative. One would think that this decision would be less of a challenge, but let me pose a corollary to the Iron Law of Bureaucracy:
Once entrenched, bureaucracy is harder to root out than an insurgency.
Back to the Bob Dole question of who can give the most graceful concession speech. Yes, this is a devil’s advocate play. The GOP heads are aghast at anyone exhibiting real passion for the historical roots of American greatness. The we-are-not-sheep spirit that informed the revolution in the first place. At the same time, we have seen enough of a rock star president who doesn’t know how to fill the office. And, in Trump, we’ve seen enough of a buffoon who can’t differentiate between leading the country and a reality TV show.
So who fits the bill of someone with enough heart to be recognizably American, yet enough savvy and résumé to be taken seriously by the big donors? I respect Herman Cain tremendously. The sole legitimate question that will be raised about him is his health. Having read his book, I also like Tim Pawlenty. There is no shame in quiet competence. Sarah? Sorry, she’s still not a candidate. Disposition remains not unfavorable, but the Left’s efforts at poisoning the well have been nothing short of phenomenal. Part of me wants to support her in a pure illegitimi non carborundum sense, but that is pure emotion, and we should not be voting with our hormones, ever.
One day, maybe, we will achieve an era where politics can be more safely boring.
If I’d Known the Drugs Were Gonna Be This Good, I’d Have Gotten Sick Earlier
Sunday night, my wife took me to the emergency room. The pain in my ribs — like a knife every time I coughed — had gotten to the point where even I had to admit that I was really sick. They hooked me up to a saline drip, gave me 4 cc’s of morphine, gave me an X-ray and then did a CAT scan of my chest. This stuff costs money, so I’m asking readers to hit my tip jar. You can think of it as a “Get Well Soon” fund.
Cash: When You Care Enough to Send the Very Best!
I’ll make this post sticky at the top of the blog for a while, with new posts below and, by way of rewarding readers for their generosity, here’s a vintage pinup of a sexy nurse: Continue reading If I’d Known the Drugs Were Gonna Be This Good, I’d Have Gotten Sick Earlier →
‘USA! USA! USA!’ (I’m Just Saying That Because It Bothers Liberals So Much)
It is unfortunately predictable that the success of the U.S. effort that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan would result in finger-pointing, one-upsmanship and needless politicization. For example, Nate Silver at the New York Times:
To state the obvious, this is good news for Barack Obama’s re-election campaign. I can’t imagine a single, atomized piece of news, foreign or domestic, that would be better for the President.
Although the Republican candidates had not seemed especially interested in making an issue out of national security — perhaps because Mr. Obama’s foreign policy has been fairly hawkish and not clearly differentiated from theirs — it at the very least neuters the issue for them. It presumably will become a significant talking point for the President — the sort of thing that swing voters will be reminded of in a commercial on the eve of the 2012 elections.
The news will also, almost certainly, trigger a significant improvement in Mr. Obama’s approval rating.
All of which is inarguably true, but it does seem a rather narrow way of looking at an event of such magnitude. Meanwhile, on MSNBC this morning, Joe Scarborough implied that Democrats didn’t want bin Laden dead, praising Obama for “courage and leadership [in] saying no to his own base” and “going against his own ideological leanings.” Here’s video:
The folks at Think Progress are offended. But indeed it appears that there are liberals so clueless that they didn’t find bin Laden’s death a cause for celebration. Continue reading ‘USA! USA! USA!’ (I’m Just Saying That Because It Bothers Liberals So Much) →
Not In Agreement With Insty Here
by Smitty
Insty links Victor Davis Hanson on the topic of America being in decline when many indicators argue for improvement.
Like Britain just after World War II, we have a leadership class that fundamentally doesn’t like the country it leads as it is, and wants to change it into something . . . less.
Britain’s leadership class, which grew up shell-shocked from WWI, had tried to outlaw war in 1928. Clearly and early example of Progressive policies achieving spectacularly opposite results, a mere dozen years later. So, after to World Wars, all that was left for Britain to do was commence crumbling, empire first, home islands more recently.
So is that a fair comparison with our Progressive Ruling Class?
I’d contend that our PRC isn’t interested in replacing the U.S. with something less. I daresay they want to scuttle the country, for all intents and purposes, by gaffing off immigration and border security, letting unions price American labor out of the market, and turning our schools into incubators for Marxist zombies.
The demolition of the dollar is nearly complete, as spooky dudes contemplate discarding the dollar in favor of something. . .else. You sort of know that even fewer, less accountable people will be making Big Decisions at that point. In fairness, the Federal Reserve is a cancer, and so the rest of the world may see little choice but ditching the dollar.
No, my non-vote of confidence in the PRC is such that I doubt they care for the United States at all.
So let that be a bit of fuel for the Tea Parties.
Question: Why Doesn’t The CompSci Matter In Computer Science?
by Smitty (via Digg)
Here is Anna North in Jezebel.com with another pothole in the road to societal destruction: “Why Women In Computer Science Matter”. Gender actually doesn’t matter, Anna, but National Offend a Feminist Week is all about exploring twisty little intellectual mazes to furious effect, let’s see what you have to say.
. . .in an editorial today, the Crimson’s Irene Chen points out that sophomore declarations aren’t the whole story. She writes, Continue reading Question: Why Doesn’t The CompSci Matter In Computer Science? →
Paul Krugman: Invisible Pimp Hand Strongly Squeezes Gay Buttock Near You
by Smitty (via PuffHo)
Krugman begins his NYT editorial recounting that the whole Wall Street crisis occurred on Bush’s watch. *Yawn*
So what’s the solution? The answer is regulation that limits the frequency and size of financial crises, combined with rules that let the government strike a good deal when bailouts become necessary.
I guess in the twisted mind of Krugman, regulation is like free speech; the answer to bad regulation is. . .yes, more regulation! In my ideal world, Krugman and his ilk would be forced to study control theory, where they may learn that the wages of more regulation is an overdamped system. In an ideal world, it may be OK, because almost nothing happens. In reality, you get the USSR.
Less regulation. Smaller markets, where the risks are more transparent, and the government isn’t finger-faddling everything. Crashes are like winter, a natural part of the system, chum.
To see what’s really going on, follow the money. Wall Street used to favor Democrats, perhaps because financiers tend to be liberal on social issues. But greed trumps gay rights, and financial industry contributions swung sharply toward the Republicans in the 2010 elections. Apparently Wall Street, unlike the voters, had no trouble divining the party’s real intentions.
In my mind, Federalism looks very libertarian. The Federal government shouldn’t be interested in individuals, period. Interest in making a buck is a reasonable corporate goal. Caring about private behavior of people is not. What a decadent conflation you have there, Krugman
1
And one more thing: by standing in the way of regulations that would limit future financial crises, Republicans are giving further evidence that they don’t really care about budget deficits.
Krugman, your faith in regulation is truly religious, is it not? What sort of teleological point does regulation offer you, sir? What kind of afterlife does it promise, this regulation which you think can save you?
No, fixing budget deficits is going to be a result of trimming the Federal government back to its Constitutional bounds, twerp. Then an only then can the American people pursue salvation where they find it in an economic context that is as safe as anything born manually, invisible pimp hand or otherwise.