Category Archives: The Nation

Graham becomes incoherent when he tries too hard to sound like DeMint

23 Replies

Just got this release from Lindsey Graham:

Graham Continues Push for Repeal and Replace of Obamacare

WASHINGTON – Continuing his commitment to the repeal and replace of Obamacare, United States Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) has introduced legislation to repeal another major provision of the recently-passed health care law – the Community Living Assistance Services and Support (CLASS) Act.

“The CLASS Act is a Ponzi scheme that would make Bernie Madoff blush,” said Graham.  “It’s billed as an insurance program for long-term care, but really it’s just a huge and very costly government accounting trick.”…

“To help build momentum for repeal and replace of Obamacare, we should continue holding up all the individual pieces of this monstrosity – like the CLASS Act – to the light of day,” said Graham.  “The more Americans learn about the details of this health care bill, and provisions like the CLASS Act, the less they like it.  The sooner we can repeal and replace Obamacare, the better off our nation will be.”

And so on and so forth. The rest is the usual nonsense.

Why “nonsense?” Because it is patently, objectively ridiculous to be talking about repealing an incremental, half-baked mishmash reform that hasn’t had ANY appreciable effect yet (have YOU felt or seen any effects? I certainly haven’t). I think that as health-care reform this was pretty lame (can you tell?), but for the sake of all that’s logical, give it a chance to see if it does anything. Unless you’re prepared to pass REAL reform (which would be awesome, and worth upsetting a few apple carts), hush up and observe for the next few years, THEN weigh in — when you know something.

Personally, I don’t know whether the CLASS Act in particular is well-designed or not. But that’s of secondary consideration in light of the senator’s assertion that he’s only talking about it in order to accomplish the goal of “repeal and replace of Obamacare.”

Did anybody proof this release before it went out? Did anyone say that line out loud before putting it in the lede and hed (and yes, “lede” and “hed” are spelled correctly in this context, you ignorant pedantic lubbers), and then saying it a third time later in the release? Is he really pushing for “repeal (a noun, within the context of following “for”) and replace (which cannot, in this or any other context, be anything but a verb)” of Obamacare?

Is this some crazy new mangled-English construct currently in vogue with a certain kind of Republican (the kind who says abominable things such as “Democrat Party”)? Because I’m telling ya, it makes zero sense to the rest of us. Did you mean to say you are pushing TO repeal (this time a verb) and replace (still a verb) it? If so, why not say so?

Lindsey Graham was a fairly eloquent opponent of what is termed “Obamacare” before it passed. He made his case, and explained his reasons in a respectable manner. But he lost the argument. But when he tries to fulminate about that as though he were a Tea Party ranter, all his coherence is left behind. Which is a shame.

I eagerly await the return of the real Lindsey Graham, because he’s a guy I greatly admire. Let DeMint be DeMint. One of those is too many. Don’t try to be what you’re not, senator.

Negative Nancy? She’s negative? SHE’S negative?

20 Replies

Wow. Wow. Wow.

Just got yet another release (it’s a daily ritual) from Joe Wilson that is all about Nancy Pelosi rather than the 2nd Congressional District race.

And this one calls her “Negative Nancy” in the head:

Help Send “Negative Nancy” A Message

What would you do if the policies you cherish and forced on the country caused mass unemployment and economic despair?Chances are, you would admit defeat, apologize profusely to the public, and then proceed to jump in a hole so deep that you would land in China (where your liberal agenda may actually be popular, so everybody wins).

However, Nancy Pelosi and her liberal friends lack the humility to retreat quietly into the night. Instead, “Negative Nancy” constantly barrages voters with tired rhetoric and liberal talking points. She would rather attack conservatives who voice your opinion than admit defeat.

Since we know that this is the way liberals operate, it should come as no surprise that Nancy Pelosi is coming to Charleston this weekend to make a speech. She is absolutely committed to punishing true conservatives like Congressman Joe Wilson, who have the integrity to stand up to her job killing liberal agenda.

“Negative Nancy” is planning on coming to our state from her lofty perch to energize her liberal allies. She thinks that with enough money and tired rhetoric she can defeat conservative ideals.

Help Joe Wilson stop the barrage of negativity coming from Pelosi and her liberal friends. Please click here now to support Joe and help him reach his goal of $25,000 this week!

Sincerely,
Dustin Olson
Campaign Manager
Joe Wilson for Congress

Wow, again. Release after release calling her every bad name you can think of, and you call HER “negative.” Wowee.

I think you might want to go back to calling her “liberal” over and over and over and over and over. At least that’s true, for whatever relevance it has.

Witches as a neglected demographic

15 Replies

Just to give you a smile, I thought I’d share an excerpt from a WSJ op-ed piece this morning (“Toil and Trouble in Delaware“), in which Aaron Kheifets, “a comedy writer whose work has appeared on The Onion News Network and Comedy Central,” explained why Christine O’Donnell should embrace, rather than run from, her witchy past.

After all, he asserts, Wicca is “a high-visibility, fast-growth demographic.” An excerpt from his advice:

She must demonstrate that she is willing to fight for their interests. She could start by proposing farm subsidies for sage and lilac to stabilize prices and reduce dependence on foreign sage and lilac.

Many witches have also been clamoring for public schools to begin teaching Wiccan alternatives to evolutionary theory, such as the possibility that the world was created from the dream of an omnipresent life-force that likes flute music.

Ms. O’Donnell could score further points by advocating for mandatory time off for special events in the life of your World of Warcraft character or by demanding an official apology for the Salem Witch Trials, which would include reparations. Above all, she must focus on community outreach such as busing Wiccan voters to polling stations in case their parents won’t let them borrow the car.

The level of interest generated by merely the mention of witchcraft is a testament to the power of the political juggernaut of Wicca. With witches willing to put Birkenstocks to pavement, going door-to-door for her, Ms. O’Donnell could even set her sights on the White House.

Of course, I particularly enjoyed it because of my own strong sense of the absurdity of Identity Politics. But even without that, you’re likely to find the piece to be a hoot.

GOP (and Dems, don’t forget) hurtling toward madness

10 Replies

Back on a previous post, Bud writes:

… (S)omehow Brad manages time and time again to confuse the idiot GOP with political parties in general. It really is pretty disgusting to have the Dems, who are at least attempting to address the nation’s problems in a meaninful way, with the imbecils who continue to distort, lie and weasel their way to power.

And what do they use this power for? For the good of the American people? Hell no. The bastards are merely trying to rule in order to feather their own nests. The GOP is about wealth creation for the super rich. And it’s worked. The poor and middle class have gotten nowhere for 30 years while the elitists in the GOP fool and fear their way into making the gullible believe there is a boogeyman behind every rock. And, inexplicably, they fool some poor school bus driver into thinking it’s in his best interests to give a billionare’s son his parent’s fortune TAX FREE! Unbeleivable.

But until the press gets it and starts calling the GOP out for the liars and scoundrels that they are we will continue to read about GOP idiocy in the name of political party partisanship. It’s NOT political party partisanship, it’s GOP fear mongering.

Bud, um… I’m pretty sure, without actually setting out the mathematical proof, that the set “political parties in general” DOES include the Republican Party. I’m not confused on this point. In fact, pretty much anyone who compiled a credible list of “Political Parties in the U.S.” would almost certainly list the GOP among the first two. I’m very confident in this assessment.

That’s why it’s such a problem that the GOP seems to have lost its frickin’ mind since Nov. 2008. Sensible Republicans are sort of walking around in shock as the screaming meemies take over.

Any other election, and Sarah Palin would have been relegated to the ranks of “unpersons” on the day after the last election, her name never, ever to been mentioned by any Republican who ever wanted another Republican to speak to him again. Instead, she is THE most mentioned Republican nationally, and it is widely accepted — among Republicans, and others — that her endorsement can make or break candidates running in races that have nothing to do with her. Yes, I’m speaking of the woman who as governor of Alaska repeatedly embarrassed the GOP ticket by how little she had learned from the experiences in her life about world affairs, and who since then has only added to her resume by… well, resigning as governor of Alaska. This is now the party’s queenmaker.

Any other election, and every Republican who ran against Nikki Haley for governor would have meekly lined up behind her on the day after the primary in a show of solidarity, all acting as though she was the one they really wanted to unite behind in the fall all along. This election, the GOP gubernatorial field is nowhere to be seen, with the exception of Henry “Good Soldier” McMaster, who’s doing his best to back her in spite of the vacant, confused look on his face. (He just doesn’t know what hit him, and is sufficiently dazed that he thinks this election is like other elections, and is acting accordingly.)

You may notice that the two examples I just cited describe OPPOSITE phenomena: One describes how the GOP is gravitating TOWARD its loonier, least credible fringes, while the other indicates how they’re moving AWAY from candidates they don’t trust, candidates who are trying to ride the Tea Party’s unfocused resentments right past the GOP into office.

Well, that’s just how crazy things are in the GOP these days. They’re about to win big nationally in November, and yet they don’t know whether they’re coming or going. That is to say, the sensible Republicans, the traditional core of the party, doesn’t know what’s happening. The Jim DeMints of the party know exactly where they’re trying to take the nation, and they keep confidently explaining it to us, but unfortunately what they say makes little sense.

Now you, Bud, may take solace in thinking that there’s a place for sensible people to run to amid the madness — the Democratic Party. I know no such solace, because I know better.

As Bart pointed out this week:

POINT: According to a recent Newsweek poll, “Some people have alleged that Barack Obama sympathizes with the goals of Islamic fundamentalists who want to impose Islamic law around the world. From what you know about Obama, what is your opinion of these allegations?”……52% of Republicans polled think that statement is either “certainly true” or “probably true.”

COUNTERPOINT: According to a Rasmussen poll taken in May 2007, …”Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure.”

In other words, BOTH parties are rapidly rushing toward their crazier extremes. People who identify themselves as “Democrats” or “Republicans” have surrendered their abilities to think to their respective sides to such an extent that they no longer stop to ask, “Does this make sense?” If someone who identifies himself as one of THEIRS says it, there must be something to it. And if someone on the other side denies it, well then it MUST be true.

And the members of BOTH factions are being pulled, with increasing acceleration, toward those loony poles as though they were in the grips of the gravitational fields of black holes at opposite ends of the universe. (Yes, I know the universe doesn’t have “ends,” but THEY obviously think it does. Besides, it’s a metaphor. Sheesh.)

The only hope for the country lies, of course, with the UnParty. But we already knew that, didn’t we?

Waiting for Nancy, and trembling in anticipation

24 Replies

The last couple of days, I’ve been getting a flurry of releases from SC Republicans that I haven’t stopped to read, because they all seem to be about Nancy Pelosi, which doesn’t interest me since my area of concern is South Carolina.

But the headline on this one was just SO over the top, so indicative of a party (the GOP) just quivering in anticipation at the advent of an individual. You’d think this was the second coming of Ronald Reagan, or some other partisan messiah.

Here’s a sample:

NEWS RELEASE

Victory launches daily reminder of why

Palmetto Values don’t fit with Pelosi Values

(Columbia, SC – September 17, 2010) When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s jet touches down in Charleston a week from Saturday, you probably won’t see any South Carolina Democrat candidates welcoming her. When America’s most wildly unpopular official comes calling, it’s good to have something else on your agenda that day, because a political embrace from Nancy Pelosi is like getting kissed by Typhoid Mary.

Pelosi puppet-in-waiting Rob Miller and fellow liberal Democrat John Spratt, who juggles the books for Pelosi as chairman of the House Budget Committee, would prefer it if Pelosi’s visit went unnoticed.

But they don’t need to worry about that. Starting today and continuing every day next week, SC Victory 2010 will countdown until Pelosi arrives with a daily reminder of why her views are at odds with the majority of folks here in South Carolina…

… and so forth and so on… But I’ll give you a hint: At no time are we told WHY the woman is coming here, or in what way it bears upon our lives. Maybe she’s coming to see Jim Leventis, the godfather of her daughter, or for some other personal reason. I don’t know, and I don’t care.

Hey, ya got me convinced: This Pelosi woman is not popular in SC.

Good thing she’s not running for anything here, huh?

Now, do you have anything to talk about that’s worthy of my attention? You know, something having to do with South Carolina… If you have something critical to say about these Democratic candidates in SC, something about THEM, please share it. Or — if you can manage it — something persuasively positive about your OWN candidates. But don’t bore me talking about somebody from frickin’ San Francisco. I don’t vote in San Francisco. I don’t intend EVER to vote in San Francisco. Believe it; I wouldn’t kid you about this.

Political parties are just so unbelievably insufferable. They just get worse and worse and worse. Just when you think they couldn’t possibly insult our intelligence any more, they go a little lower…

Editorial in The State explains Wilson ethics case well

8 Replies

I’m going to shock my ex-colleagues at The State by saying “nice job” on today’s lede editorial, “Joe Wilson’s goblets.”

This would be a shock because, as former military writer Dave Moniz (who now works at the Pentagon) once observed when I was his editor in the early 90s, praise from me doesn’t go higher than “pretty good.” (Dave’s on my mind because, not knowing my current situation, he passed on a tip about a Defense-related job this week, a gesture which I appreciate.)

But this was better than that. The piece accomplished several things:

  • Gave a clear sense of what little is known about the investigation, which was handy to have. I feel I have a slightly better grasp of what we’re talking about now.
  • Called Wilson to task, in no uncertain terms (essentially saying him, “You lie!” but without the shouting), for his bogus response and misrepresentation.
  • Called Rob Miller to task for his equally bogus and untrue assertions in trying to capitalize on the case.
  • Explained clearly just what is wrong with Joe Wilson in general, not just in this case: He sees EVERYTHING in the universe as a partisan struggle against “liberals.” Nancy Pelosi is his Great White Whale. And I’m sorry, Ahab, but that Unified Field Theory simply does not always apply.
  • Showed just how irrelevant such a worldview is to this situation, since the ethics panel investigating him is “composed entirely of people outside the Congress, four Republicans and four Democrats,” in in this particular case is investigating two Republicans (Joe being one) and three Democrats. Of course, we knew that latter part, but I had not yet seen a clear explanation of the Office of Congressional Ethics. After reading this, one can only be outraged by Wilson’s attempt to play on voters’ ignorance by claiming this is a a partisan, personal attack on him for being a self-styled hero of the angry right.

And while it was sort of an afterthought, I particularly appreciated this summary of just how totally screwed we, the voters, are in this situation:

Unfortunately, these two are the choices voters in the 2nd Congressional District have in November. Oh how we wish that were a lie.

Oh, wouldn’t it be lovely if we could?

The Koran-burning church, and other foolishness

33 Replies

By now you’ve heard about it. I tend to look at it from the perspective of Gen. David Petraeus:

KABUL, Afghanistan — The top American commander in Afghanistan has warned that plans by a small Florida church to burn copies of the Koran on Saturday, the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, could play into the hands of the very extremists at whom the church says it is directing that message.

Burning copies of the Koran, the Muslim holy book, “would undoubtedly be used by extremists in Afghanistan — and around the world — to inflame public opinion and incite violence,” the commander, Gen. David H. Petraeus said in an e-mail message to The Associated Press on Tuesday.

Echoing remarks the general made in an interview with The Wall Street Journal published Tuesday, he said: “It could endanger troops and it could endanger the overall effort. It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems. Not just here, but everywhere in the world we are engaged with the Islamic community.”…

Somebody needs to find a way to talk some sense to those rockheads down in Florida. Unfortunately, sense is one thing I’m sure they are adamantly determined not to hear. Folks like that are allergic to it, or something. The fact that it’s senseless provocation is what appeals to them. Or maybe I’m wrong. The pastor says he hasn’t changed his mind, but is praying about it. Here’s hoping the Almighty answers him with a big, booming, bone-rattling NO, so that even he can hear it.

One of the really unfortunate things about modern global communications is that when some marginal, fringe doofuses that no one in this country would pay attention to acts out this way, it gets reported to other idiots on the other side of the world, who use it as an excuse to riot and generally raise hell, which makes the idiots over here feel justified, and so the foolishness continues, one generation into the next… (I think the writer of Ecclesiastes would have been a blogger today).

Basically, what we have here is a low-rent version of the allegedly sophisticated “journalists” in Europe who proved how free and enlightened they were (to each other) by specifically commissioning cartoons designed for no other purpose than to be of maximum insult value to conservative Muslims. And thus another unnecessary cycle of violence was launched. (The Enlightened Ones would justify themselves by saying that the violent reactions were unjustified. Of course they were unjustified, you twits. They were also entirely predictable, and your provocation of it was entirely unnecessary.)

I mean, if you just start with what Mamanem taught you before kindergarten, you don’t go around poking fun at the way other folks do church. Sure, if you’re a Baptist, you know what those Methodists do down the street isn’t REAL baptism, but you don’t make fun of them because well-bred people don’t do that. Well, this is like that, only with AK-47s — we have a practical reason not to unnecessarily inflame irrational passions. It’s not just rude, but stupid.

And when it endangers our troops in the field — and Gen. Petraeus is absolutely right to point that out — it is inexcusable.

Why did I write this? I don’t know. I set out thinking this would be a good thing to discuss, but then as I was typing, I thought, “What’s to discuss?” So I threw in the cartoons stuff. I know some of y’all will argue with me about that, but the point is the same, from my perspective.

Are kids really herded and contained to this extent?

29 Replies

First, help me out, y’all: Remind me why the name “Lenore Skenazy” rings such bells in my head. Yes, I Googled her, and learned her work history (she was canned by The NY Daily News after 18 years — whoop-tee-doo, I was at The State for 22), to some extent her personal life, and the ideas, or idea, for which she is best known.

But none of that explains it. I’m pretty sure I had some kind of interaction with someone of that name at some point. Did she interview me, or did I interview her? Wait — did she used to run in The State? If so, I might have paid for her columns, even though she wouldn’t have run in editorial. There were some weird deals whereby I paid for newsroom features, and the newsroom paid for some of ours. Maybe that’s it.

Anyway, in the course of pushing her one big idea — set kids free (an idea with which I agree, by the way; their lives are indeed too regimented) — she wrote a piece that ran in The Wall Street Journal today.

It was an intriguing piece. It went beyond the usual kids-don’t-walk-to-school-enough theme, to this extent:

Take the bus. Sure, about 40% of kids still ride the cheery yellow chugger, but in many towns it doesn’t stop only at the bus stops anymore. It stops at each child’s house.

Often, the kids aren’t waiting outside to get on. They are waiting in their parents’ cars—cars the parents drove from the garage to the sidewalk so their children would be climate-controlled and safe from the predators so prevalent on suburban driveways.

Sounds pretty horrific. But is it true? I doubt that it’s true here in SC, where we seem to have trouble keeping the buses running at all. Or is it? Your anecdotes would be appreciated.

Most kids, though — including those who live three blocks from school — are driven there and back, to the point that:

…the language itself has changed. “Arrival” and “dismissal” have become “drop-off” and “pick-up” because an adult is almost always involved—even when it doesn’t make sense.

And then there’s the picture of the schools’ containment of the masses waiting for Mom and Dad:

…  afternoon pick-up has become the evacuation of Saigon. At schools around the country, here’s how it works:

First, the “car kids” are herded into the gym. “The guards make sure all children sit still and do not move or speak during the process,” reports a dad in Tennessee. Outside, “People get there 45 minutes early to get a spot. And the scary thing is, most of the kids live within biking distance,” says Kim Meyer, a mom in Greensboro, N.C.

When the bell finally rings, the first car races into the pick-up spot, whereupon the car-line monitor barks into a walkie-talkie: “Devin’s mom is here!”

Devin is grabbed from the gym, escorted to the sidewalk and hustled into the car as if under enemy fire. His mom peels out and the next car pulls up. “Sydney’s mom is here!”

She also tells of a school removing its bike racks to discourage kids from pedaling themselves to class.

So is it really this bad out there? I’m curious.

Joe just can’t (“liberal!”) help himself (“liberal, liberal! Pelosi, liberal!”). It’s like Tourette’s…

21 Replies

When I saw that Joe Wilson had put out a press release talking about incentives to create jobs, I thought Great! Some substance! A release in which I won’t have to read any fulmination about “liberals” and how they’re the root of all evil! After all, a jobs plan has to be pragmatic thing, meant to address the broad complex of practical, real-world problems leading to our current economic malaise.

Silly me:

Wilson Urges Job Creation Incentives as Unemployment Rises

(Washington, DC) – Congressman Joe Wilson (SC-02) today released the following statement after the Department of Labor announced the unemployment rate rose to 9.6 percent and the U.S. economy lost jobs for the third straight month:

“I’m not sure where Administration officials are spending their summer, but here in South Carolina, this is certainly not the ‘Recovery Summer’ we were promised.

“For 16 straight months, unemployment has been above nine percent.  Why the Administration and liberal leadership in Congress isn’t talking about job creation plans each and every day is beyond belief.  People are hurting and the time to act is now, not later or in another 16 months,” said Congressman Joe Wilson.

Congressman Joe Wilson has outlined a job creation plan that offers incentives to small business owners to hire more employees and gives American families more money to invest.  See his plan here and pass it along to Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

###

The boldfacing is Joe’s, not mine.

He just can’t help himself. It’s like Tourette’s or something. He’s incapable of completing a thought without reference to “liberals” or “Pelosi.” Just watch, and see if I’m not right.

You still have a landline? Haw! The AZTECS had landlines!

10 Replies

OK, so I stole that line from Dave Barry, who said it once to make fun of people who had Betamax video recorders (“Beta?! The AZTECS had Beta!” — or something very much like that), which is made extra ironic because the triumphant VHS technology is now SO last century…

But you get the point. Landlines are rapidly going the way of buggy whips and, well, TV sets — at least in consumer’s minds.

TV sets? you say. Yes, TV sets. This from the Pew Center for Media Research:

Landlines And Television Sets Losing Importance

According to a new nationwide survey from the Pew Research Center’s Social & Demographic Trends project, reported by Paul Taylor and Wendy Wang with Lee Rainie and Aaron Smith, only 42% of Americans say they consider the television set to be a necessity. Last year, this figure was 52%, and in 2006, it was 64%.

After occupying center stage in the American household for much of the 20th century, says the report, two of the grand old luminaries of consumer technology, the television set and the landline telephone, are suffering from a sharp decline in public perception that they are necessities of life.

The drop-off has been less severe for the landline telephone. 62% of Americans say it’s a necessity of life, down from 68% last year, but 47% of the public now say that the cell phone is a necessity of life…

Note, first, that Pew, or at least the respondents, are using “need” and “necessity” in ways that would have puzzled our hardy pioneer ancestors. Note also that while fewer people see TVs as a necessity, they’re still buying them like crazy:

Even as fewer Americans say they consider the TV set to be a necessity of life, more Americans than ever are stocking up on them. In 2009, the average American home had more television sets than people, 2.86, according to a Nielsen report. In 2000, this figure was 2.43; in 1990, it was 2.0; and in 1975, it was 1.57.

The disconnect between attitudes and behaviors, opines the report, may be that the TV set hasn’t had to deal with competition from new technology that can fully replace all of its functions. If a person wants real-time access to the wide spectrum of entertainment, sports and news programming available on television, there’s still nothing (at least not yet) that can compete with the television set itself…

So don’t write the obit yet. But as for landlines — exactly why DO I still have one? So I won’t miss the telemarketing calls?

I see also that only 10 percent regard flat-screen HDTV as a necessity. It’s probably going to be in the high 90s before I get one. Mainly because, much as I want one, my sense of need is still pretty old-fashioned…

Anyone know what this Wilson “ethics” thing is?

5 Replies

I haven’t written anything about the supposed ethics investigation of Joe Wilson because I don’t have the slightest clue what it is supposedly about. Neither the MSM nor the campaigns themselves have been particularly helpful on this point.

For instance, this release I just got from Rob Miller:

Dear Brad,

By now, I’m sure you have all heard the news.  Congressman Wilson is under investigation for breaking Congressional ethics rules.  Joe would have you believe that this is about some “glorified shot glasses” that he bought on one of his many taxpayer-funded junkets.  You and I both know that you don’t get investigated over $12 in trinkets.

Joe Wilson knows that, too– it’s why his staff won’t stop talking about $2 goblets, but won’t say if those are the limit of the investigation.

I believe in the iceberg rule.  The corruption we see in Washington is only 10% of the problem; the rest is hidden away, protecting the insiders, because if the public knew what was going on, they wouldn’t stand for it.  Joe Wilson was willing to steal $12 from taxpayers in public.  What is he willing to do in private?  Pocketing any amount of taxpayer money is not only wrong, it’s illegal.

From raising his own pay five times, to giving away hundreds of billions of dollars to Wall Street, to voting against South Carolina teachers and jobs, to being investigated for breaking the public trust, Joe Wilson is everything wrong with Washington today.  We deserve better.  Stand with me and fight for it.

Semper Fi,

… which as you see doesn’t indicate one way or the other what is allegedly going on. It merely insinuates, and lamely. Personally, when I see the tip of an iceberg I at least know, by implication, what lies below. I have no such helpful clues here.

Mr. Wilson himself is no more helpful, merely sending out such nonsense as the following:

Dear Subscriber,

Public disapproval with the liberal establishment in Washington is at an all time high. Folks have become aware that the path of smaller government and Reagan conservatism will lead us out of this dark era of liberal recklessness. This sentiment is felt all across the country, and people in South Carolina are demanding that their legislators respond with conservative solutions.While many representatives are hiding under their desks in fear of the public outrage, Congressman Joe Wilson is out touring the state to help cultivate this rich environment for change and reform. He is meeting with the real economic experts in this state – workers and small business owners.

On the “Joe Means Jobs” bus tour, folks in every corner of the state are talking with Joe and telling him how much they want the era of Big Government to end. Joe strongly agrees with this demand and is under attack from the liberals in Washington because of it. Nancy Pelosi and her liberal friends are funneling money into South Carolina’s liberal campaigns, in an effort to oust honest conservatives like Joe Wilson from office.

It is a long uphill battle that Joe must fight until November, but he is not backing down from Nancy Pelosi’s intimidation tactics. It is imperative that Joe stay out on the campaign trail to help spread the word about what liberals in Washington and even here in South Carolina are doing to bankrupt this state and country.  And to let folks know what he is going to do about it.

Click here to watch a video of Joe while on his bus tour!

Will you stand with Joe today and help him defeat the liberals in Washington? It is obvious that they desperately want Joe gone, since they specifically targeted him with their opposition money.

Please help Joe by clicking here to make a donation today!

I don’t know about you, but “It’s Nancy Pelosi’s fault” doesn’t help me any more than when the Dems moan about everything being Bush’s fault. Just another sad attempt at misdirection. In fact, he doesn’t even mention the charges in this particular piece, merely alluding darkly to “Nancy Pelosi’s intimidation tactics.” Sigh.

Has anyone read anything that I’ve missed that would shed a light? If so, please share…

Remembering the suffering at the Bulge, and elsewhere

24 Replies

This morning, Henry McMaster dropped by my table at breakfast, opening our conversation by saying, “Are you blogging somebody over here?” Which I took to mean that he was somewhat wary of talking with me after this incident. Or maybe he was referring to this piece involving his protege Trey Walker.

In any case, we didn’t dwell on the subject, but moved to something more important. Henry, apparently seeing I was reading the paper, mentioned The State‘s series this week about the survivors of the Battle of the Bulge. He immediately fixed on the very thing that always fascinates me about that battle — the day-to-day, routine human suffering apart from the combat. He said something like, “And we think WE have it tough sometimes…”

Indeed. As one who has never been tested by combat, but have certainly thought a lot about it, the thing that I’ve always found most intimidating about it is not the actual shooting part. Yeah, if you survived something like the landing at Omaha Beach, you’d be marked by the trauma for life. But in my own imagination at least, that part would be easy compared to the day-to-day misery of living in the field in harsh conditions.

And what the men trapped by the German blitz in the Ardennes went through is an extreme example.

This Bulge reunion is a particularly poignant event for my family, because when I first heard about it, I had thought of how we might be able to bring my father-in-law here for it. But he didn’t make it. He died in January. And when I told y’all about it on the blog, I wrote the following:

My father-in-law, Walter Joseph Phelan Jr., lived a full and worthwhile life. I was thinking yesterday as we mucked through the ice and snow about some of the far-harsher hardships he endured along the way. He was there in the Ardennes in late 1944, the coldest winter in Europe in a century, when the massive, unexpected German attack came. He was a member of the ill-fated 106th Infantry Division (like Kurt Vonnegut). That means he was right at the point of the German spear, right where it smashed through the Allied lines. A friend fell right beside him in the snow, victim of a bullet he felt was meant for him. If he had been the one it found, I’d never have met my wife, and our children and grandchildren wouldn’t exist.

Like Vonnegut and thousands of others, he was captured and held in a German stalag in the last months of the war, when the Germans didn’t even have enough food for themselves, much less for prisoners. After that experience, he never wanted to go to Europe again, and didn’t.

The coldest winter in Europe in a century… That detail from Stephen Ambrose’s Citizen Soldiers has stuck with me ever since I read it. Some of our troops, such as members of the 101st Airborne, were out in that, living in foxholes, for over a month. Every morning, as they stirred, their clothing would crackle as the ice that had formed in it overnight would break. In many instances, they couldn’t build fires for fear of revealing their positions.

I find the idea of soldiering on under such conditions inconceivable. Even if you weren’t killed, or captured (like Mr. Phelan), or wounded (like Bill Guarnere, who lost a leg in an artillery barrage), how on Earth did they not break? Many did, of course. But who could blame them.

Right now, I’m reading With the Old Breed by Eugene Sledge. Many have noted that for the Marines in the Pacific, the entire war was just as miserable as what the Army endured at the Bulge — only it was mud and blood and jungle rot rather than sub-freezing temperatures — and such books as this one and the one I just finished, Bob Leckie’s Helmet for My Pillow, present compelling evidence to that effect. As Sledge wrote of Okinawa, the Marines lived day after day in “an environment so degrading I believed we had been flung into hell’s own cesspool.”

There was a passage Sledge’s book that sticks with me, about how after that experience, the veterans had trouble relating to the rest of us back home; they had to struggle “to comprehend people who griped because America wasn’t perfect, or their coffee wasn’t hot enough, or they had to stand in line and wait for a train or bus.”

People like me. I just notice my coffee has grown cold as I was typing this. As I go to replace it with hot, I am mindful of the privilege, and those who suffered and died to make my life so easy.

Don’t say I never gave you anything, Doug

30 Replies

Since Doug was such a great sport giving to the critters back here, I’m including this extreme case of gummint waste for his enjoyment:

(CNN) — A worker was paid for 12 years without ever showing up for work at a Norfolk, Virginia, agency funded by federal, state and local money, officials say.

Norfolk Mayor Paul Fraim told CNN on Friday that when a new director took over at Norfolk Community Services Board recently, she was “doing her due diligence” when she discovered the hooky-playing employee was on the books. The director, Maureen Womack, then notified the city attorney’s office, Fraim said.

Sandy Johnson, a spokeswoman for the Community Services Board, told CNN Friday that her agency couldn’t comment because of the ongoing investigation.

On behalf of the city attorney’s office, Norfolk city spokeswoman Terry Bishirjian referred to a statement released on Wednesday that said, “The city attorney’s office, with the approval of Womack, took appropriate steps to prevent any further payments to the employee and the employee was terminated.”

They fired her now, huh? I’ll bet that’s a bitter pill for her — if she can stop laughing long enough.

Sorry Nevada, but your name is an actual word

26 Replies

I love this resolution submitted by Harry Mortenson (D-Las Vegas) of the Nevada legislature:

Whereas there are two common pronunciations of the name of our great state:

(1)   the provincial pronunciation utilized by approximately two-million Nevadans, using a flat A-sound — a sound not unlike the bleating of a sheep, and;

(2)   the cosmopolitan or Spanish pronunciation used by the other seven-billion inhabitants of our planet, using a soft “A” intonation—not unlike a sigh of contentment, and . . .

Whereas it is becoming a continuous, prodigious, and daunting task for the two million colloquial-speaking inhabitants to interrupt and correct the other seven-billion inhabitants of the Planet who utilize the Spanish/cosmopolitan pronunciation . . .

Therefore; be it resolved, that henceforth, there will be two acceptable pronunciations for the name of our great state:

(1)    the preferred pronunciation will be the colloquial pronunciation, and;

(2)    the less-preferred pronunciation will be the charitably-tolerated Spanish/cosmopolitan pronunciation.

I regret that he came down on the wrong side of the issue by choosing the wrong pronunciation as the preferred one, but I like that he had a strong sense of irony about it. He realizes that the way Nevadans pronounce it sounds to a literate ear like Anthony Hopkins seeming to make fun of an American accent by the way he said “chianti” as Hannibal Lecter. It’s jarring.

You know, I believe that South Carolina would be a lot better off if more of our lawmakers had a sense of irony about our own states foibles. If only we would all resolve to lighten up and “charitably tolerate” those whose ancestors did NOT fire on Fort Sumter. We need to clone James L. Petigru.

Mistaking feeling for thinking in American politics

20 Replies

I enjoyed reading an op-ed piece in the WSJ this morning headlined “A Muslim Reformer on the Mosque,” with the subhed, “The warriors for tolerance and the antimosque crusaders are both wrong.”

Some bits I particularly liked… this:

Election-year politics, ratings-hungry media and deep personal fear foment raw emotion. In such an environment, “I’m offended” takes on the stature of a substantive argument. Too many Americans are mistaking feeling for thinking.

And this:

As a proud New Yorker as well as a reformist Muslim, I think, and not just feel, that this would be a fitting salute to the victims of 9/11. It would turn the tables on the freedom-hating culture of al Qaeda. And it would subvert the liberty-lashing culture of offense.

Perhaps you’re noting there’s a certain theme in what I like. Of course, I kind of helped you out by boldfacing the important points.

That first one should be made into a bumper sticker:

Too many Americans are mistaking feeling for thinking.

Maybe we should streamline it:

Don’t just feel. THINK.

It can be truly said of so very many things. Sure, I can speak from the gut when I don’t really know what I’m talking about. I did it back here. But I was aware that I was doing it. I told you I was doing it. Am I always that self-aware and candid about it? No. We are infallible. I mean, fallible.

But I try to lobby for thinking whenever it occurs to me to do so. That’s what I was doing back here. A few threads back, I was accused by Kathryn of making like a Vulcan. To which I could only respond, “Captain, Kathryn is being illogical.”

Yeah, we need some passion in public life. But we could use a LOT more Spock.

We got a fever in American politics, and the only prescription is more Spock.

The News Corp. contribution to the GOP

5 Replies

Last night at the dinner table my wife was reading The Wall Street Journal, and on the side toward me I noticed the headline, “News Corp. Gives $1 Million to GOP.” Personally, I wasn’t interested enough to read the story (I’d already seen stuff about it earlier in the day), but I was curious about one thing — what page was I looking at? In other words, how far back in the paper would the WSJ, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., play the story.

It was page A4, she told me. OK, fine. I filed that away and went back to my dinner.

But I was reminded of it this morning when I saw these two Tweets from Jason Zacher:

So if GE (NBC), Disney (ABC), and Viacom (CBS) give tons of political money with no headlines, why do we care about Murdoch’s donation?about 1 hour ago via TweetDeck

OH! That’s right. It’s because the rest of the media hates FoxNews for being #1.about 1 hour ago via TweetDeck

To that, I had to respond, “Because it’s NEWS Corp — mainly about journalism, not making toasters. I don’t care much, but that’s why it gets attention.

Jason said back:

Sure, but a ton of its profits come from 20th Cent, HarperCollins, Fox Television, and several dozen other properties.

Yes, Jason, but the fact remains that Rupert Murdoch is mainly seen as a “press lord.” It’s a matter of image. Like my distant relative William Randolph “Citizen Kane” Hearst delving into politics.

Oh, y’all didn’t know Hearst and I were related? Yep. The Hearsts were originally from South Carolina, you know — way back. Another distant relative who was into genealogy once told us that my Dad was Patty’s fifth cousin. Which means we didn’t exactly come in for a piece of San Simeon.

Anyway, where was I? Oh, yeah. While it doesn’t interest me very much that Murdoch wants to make a political contribution, if it DID, I’d mainly be ticked that he whips out his checkbook so readily for them, when it took him months to send me a measly amount when I had covered one of the hottest political stories of the year for him. But that would be petty of me, wouldn’t it?

I did arch an eyebrow when I read this passage in the WSJ story:

News Corp. spokesman Jack Horner said the contribution was intended to promote the company’s core beliefs. “News Corporation has always believed in the power of free markets and in organizations like the RGA, which have a pro-business agenda and support our priorities at this most critical time for our economy,” he said.

He added, “The corporate donation has no impact on the reporting activities of our newsgathering organizations. There is a strict wall between business and editorial and the corporate office does not consult with our newsgathering organizations … before making donations.”

But for a very esoteric, inside-baseball kind of reason. Basically, the passage is unclear because of the terminology. “Editorial,” used by a business-side guy, is a vague term meaning “news,” and only peripherally, “editorial” in the editorial-page sense. He’s trying to say that the NEWS side is unaffected. And I believe that’s true, aside from the fact that they’re no doubt embarrassed at having to report this, even on Page A4.

But what about the wall between news and editorial (one that is rhetorically erased by using “editorial” to refer to both), or the wall between editorial (as I use the term, meaning the opinion folks) and business side? Obviously, neither of those critical divisions is important to Mr. Horner.

Of course, at the WSJ, the point is rather moot. That paper’s editorial board was totally on board with “the power of free markets” LONG before they were owned by Rupert.

Don’t look for sanity inside Beltway this year

21 Replies

To elevate a comment exchange to post status, back here Bart said:

The GOP may be a joke but it looks like they will have the last laugh come November when the American voters, who are a lot more intelligent than most give them credit for, sends a message that they don’t appreciate being Punk’d by a bunch of lying Democrats. Democrats, who by the way, are no picnic at the beach either.

The sword cuts both ways when it comes to deceit, dishonesty, and downright thievery by politicians.

I agree completely with you, Bart, about the Dems being no bargain. But no one should make the mistake of thinking a swing to the Republicans, particularly the Republicans of 2010, is in any way better.

Yes, the GOP will be more successful in November than Democrats, winning control of one or more of the two chambers of Congress.

And next time we have a Republican president, two years after he is elected, the Democrats will be more successful in the mid-term elections than Republicans.

And so on. It means nothing. The sad thing is that Republicans will foolishly believe that they won this year because of something they DID, and will give the credit to their mad rush to the extremes. So we’ll get more of that garbage.

Occasionally, something different from that happens. For instance, in 2006 a number of moderate Democrats won office, thanks in part to a campaign run by Rahm Emanuel. It drove the loony left even loonier, they hated it so. But it was better for the country. Unfortunately, those moderates — in both parties — make up such a tiny minority still that they have little impact upon the partisan insanity inside the Beltway.

My point is that these midterm shifts don’t have to be swings back and forth to the wacky fringes. They can pull us to the middle, toward sanity. It just doesn’t look at all like that’s going to happen this year.

This year — wow. This year, we see Sarah Palin not only NOT swept to history’s dustbin, as would happen in a country in which the voters were as sensible as Bart asserts (after all, she was a HUGE part of why the GOP lost the White House in 2008), but has such a secure brand (we Mad Men use words like “brand” a lot) that she is able to play kingmaker. Or queen maker, as the case may be. Although, reassuringly, it didn’t work out so well in Georgia last week.

If the voters choosing the GOP were so sensible, a sensible guy like Henry McMaster wouldn’t have fallen so easily to the likes of Nikki Haley. Nor would he have resorted to his own desperate attempts to prove that he, too, was suffering from Obama Derangement Syndrome.

No, the Republicans winning the House this year will not be a good thing, any more than it was a good thing when Nancy Pelosi became Speaker. Same diff.

Huck says nay to Graham citizenship proposal

6 Replies

Lindsey Graham may have decided to go way harsh on letting the U.S.-born children of illegals be citizens, but Mike Huckabee, charting his own course among leading GOP lights these days, begs to differ:

Huckabee on Immigration: Don’t Punish the Kids

Posted by John Wihbey on Wednesday, August 11, 2010

In a Wednesday interview with NPR’s On Point, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, an ‘08 GOP candidate for president and a potential candidate again in 2012, said he did not favor repeal of the 14th Amendment — which grants citizenship to all children born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents’ immigration status – and said that all children of illegal immigrants should have a path to citizenship.

Asked if he would favor changing the Constitution, Huckabee said, “No. Let me tell you what I would favor. I would favor having controlled borders.”

He also elaborated on his views on illegal immigrants’ children who came to the U.S. later on. “You do not punish a child for something the parent did,” he told On Point host Tom Ashbrook. “…I’d rather have that kid a neurosurgeon than a tomato picker.”

Huckabee’s positions likely represent dividing lines in any future GOP presidential primary. As the illegal immigration issue has flared up again in American politics, the issue of birthright citizenship has become a hot topic in GOP circles, as various people have called for its repeal or reinterpretation by the courts. (Listen back to On Point’s Monday segment on the issue.)

Huckabee is an interesting guy who thinks for himself on a number of issues. Sort of like Lindsey Graham, so this contrast is all the more interesting for that.

Gay bar planned next to Ground Zero mosque

26 Replies

Well, I got a hoot out of this item, shared by Stan Dubinsky:

Greg Gutfeld To Open A Gay Bar Next To Ground Zero Mosque To Cater To “Islamic Gay Men”

No, this is not a joke. In fact, it is instead one of the most brilliant pieces of provocations in recent years. Greg Gutfeld from Fox News’ Red Eye announced today via his blog that he is actively speaking to investors and plans on opening a gay bar next to the controversial mosque being built near Ground Zero in New York. To make matters worse (better?) the bar will be specifically designed to cater to homosexuals of the Islamic faith. God, this is going to be an exciting block.
Here’s Gutfeld’s entire post which he will expand upon during tonight’s Red Eye:
“So, the Muslim investors championing the construction of the new mosque near Ground Zero claim it’s all about strengthening the relationship between the Muslim and non-Muslim world.
As an American, I believe they have every right to build the mosque – after all, if they buy the land and they follow the law – who can stop them?
Which is, why, in the spirit of outreach, I’ve decided to do the same thing.
I’m announcing tonight, that I am planning to build and open the first gay bar that caters not only to the west, but also Islamic gay men. To best express my sincere desire for dialogue, the bar will be situated next to the mosque Park51, in an available commercial space.
This is not a joke. I’ve already spoken to a number of investors, who have pledged their support in this bipartisan bid for understanding and tolerance…

I just don’t know what I can add to that, other than to point out the obvious: The folks who want to build this mosque there have every right to do so, no matter how it may offend the sensibilities of many touchy Americans. In keeping with that principle, they are under NO obligation to, say, move it a few blocks away. At the same time, this guy is perfectly within HIS rights to start this bar, no matter how deeply offensive it would be to many touchy Muslims.

As a sorta kinda communitarian, I’m always interested in the tension between what people have a RIGHT to do, and what they OUGHT to do if they are sensible folk.

Privacy gone mad (again)

29 Replies

In a book review in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal — of The Five-Year Party, by Craig Brandon — there was a passage about yet another weird path down which our national obsession with, and perversion of, the notion of “privacy” has led us:

Mr. Brandon is especially bothered by colleges’ obsession with secrecy and by what he sees as their misuse of the Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act, which Congress passed in 1974. Ferpa made student grade reports off-limits to parents. But many colleges have adopted an expansive view of Ferpa, claiming that the law applies to all student records. Schools are reluctant to give parents any information about their children, even when it concerns academic, disciplinary and health matters that might help mom and dad nip a problem in the bud.

Such policies can have tragic consequences, as was the case with a University of Kansas student who died of alcohol poisoning in 2009 and a Massachusetts Institute of Technology student who committed suicide in 2000. In both instances there were warning signs, but the parents were not notified. Ferpa’s most notorious failure was Seung-Hui Cho, the mentally ill Virginia Tech student who murdered 32 people and wounded 25 others during a daylong rampage in 2007. Cho’s high school did not alert Virginia Tech to Cho’s violent behavior, professors were barred from conferring with one another about Cho, and the university did not inform Cho’s parents about their son’s troubles—all on the basis of an excessively expansive interpretation of Ferpa, Mr. Brandon says. He recommends that parents have their child sign a Ferpa release form before heading off to college.

Good advice. Those of you who argue with me about curfews and bar closings and the like may side with those who gave us this situation. But I have a parent’s perspective. I want to know what’s going on with my kids. And moreover, I have a right to know — one that in a rational world would easily supersede any imagined “rights” granted by FERPA.