Quotes of the Day

Two of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak’s closest allies, his new vice president, Omar Suleiman, and his defense minister, Hussein Tantawi, are quietly working on a plan under which Mubarak would step down from power, according to a U.S. scholar who has been staying in regular touch with the Egyptian political and military leadership.

“They want to be sure that Mubarak is going to cooperate,” said Stephen P. Cohen, president of the Institute for Middle East Peace and Development and a longtime confidant of Egyptian and Israeli leaders.

The two-part plan, according to Cohen, would involve the immediate removal of 100 members of the Egyptian Parliament whose election this past fall was seen as illegitimate. They would be replaced by 100 candidates who were barred from running in the election or who were defeated because of government meddling in the election process.

A second possible step would be the organization of new parliamentary and presidential elections. The plan, according to Cohen, “requires [Mubarak] to give up his office.” Asked whether Mubarak would do that, Cohen answered, “He is getting ready to do so.”

***

The White House on Sunday dispatched a former ambassador to Egypt, Frank Wisner, to fly to Cairo to urge the Egyptian government to, at the very least, embrace political reforms.

“As someone with deep experience in the region,” a White House official says, Wisner “is meeting with Egyptian officials and providing his assessment.”

Senior officials would not discuss whether Wisner was charged with showing Mubarak the door. Wisner, the ambassador to Egypt from 1986 to 1991, is currently in Cairo.

A major readjustment to administration rhetoric in response to the crisis in Egypt came on Sunday when the phrase of the day was “orderly transition.”

The president issued a statement saying he supports “an orderly transition to a government that is responsive to the aspirations of the Egyptian people.” And Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took to the Sunday shows to make that argument. “it needs to be an orderly, peaceful transition to real democracy,” she said.

But transition to what?

[...]

One administration official tells ABC News: “we don’t know.”

Video: So, is this what passes for civil discourse among the liberals?

So, liberals — is this what you call civility?

Posted on liveleak, in case it disappears:

From the Comments section of the video:

RACISTS like this, are begging for war. Let’s give them one. It is 220,000,000 white people, against 37,000,000 blacks. You know what a genocide looks like? You don’t, because there is no one left, to remember it. Be? smart, though. Let them, make the first violent moves. Let the people, see their violence. Let them give us a reason. Be patient. Do not move, as an individual. Wait. Keep giving them rope, they need, to hang themselves. LOL!!!

A-Farking-Amen. :mad:

(H/T Michelle Malkin)

BREAKING NEWS: Florida Supreme Court Judge Rules Obamacare Unconstitutional

This just in from the AP:

PENSACOLA, Fla. (AP) — Federal judge in Florida strikes down Obama health care plan as unconstitutional.

Here is Video of the decision announcement at Fox News by Megan Kelly via Eyeblast:

Update #4: Here’s the text of the entire decision handed down: (H/T Weasel Zippers)

Vinson Ruling

A highlight via Ace of Spades HQ:

It would be a radical departure from existing case law to hold that Congress can regulate inactivity under the Commerce Clause. If it has the power to compel an otherwise passive individual into a commercial transaction with a third party merely by asserting — as was done in the Act — that compelling the actual transaction is itself “commercial and economic in nature, and substantially affects interstate commerce” [see Act § 1501(a)(1)], it is not hyperbolizing to suggest that Congress could do almost anything it wanted. It is difficult to imagine that a nation which began, at least in part, as the result of opposition to a British mandate giving the East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold in America would have set out to create a government with the power to force people to buy tea in the first place.

In the final analysis, this Act has been analogized to a finely crafted watch, and that seems to fit. It has approximately 450 separate pieces, but one essential piece (the individual mandate) is defective and must be removed. It cannot function as originally designed. There are simply too many moving parts in the Act and too many provisions dependent (directly and indirectly) on the individual mandate and other health insurance provisions — which, as noted, were the chief engines that drove the entire legislative effort — for me to try and dissect out the proper from the improper, and the able-to-stand-alone from the unable-to-stand-alone. Such a quasi-legislative undertaking would be particularly inappropriate in light of the fact that any statute that might conceivably be left over after this analysis is complete would plainly not serve Congress’ main purpose and primary objective in passing the Act. The statute is, after all, called “The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” not “The Abstinence Education and Bone Marrow Density Testing Act.” The Act, like a defectively designed watch, needs to be redesigned and reconstructed by the watchmaker.

This is going to really put a monkey wrench Obama’s plans. Although, I tend to think that the Obama Administration will argue it to the Supreme Court of the United States.  The reaction from the White House is going to be an interesting one.

I do believe, that if this Healthcare Bill is scrapped, and they Democrats lose this issue; this may could very well render President Obama unelectable in 2012.  Something tells me, that this entire Presidency is going to be Jimmy Carter all over again.

Stay Tuned.

Update: Memeorandum has the roundup of reactions so far.

Update #2: Jonathon Chait at The New Republic weighs in:

That aside, the pattern once again has held that every Republican-appointed judge has ruled against the law’s constitutionality and every Democratic-appointed-judge has ruled for it. Now, the ultimate arbiter is the Supreme Court, where Republican appointees hold a 5-4 majority, though one of those 5 (Anthony Kennedy) is not a completely down-the-line Republican.

Given this divide, wouldn’t it make sense to… let elected officials decide? That’s the logic of judicial restraint, anyway, and it’s logic conservatives used to employ about a host of topics. But that was before they gained the ability to win huge victories in the courts that they couldn’t win at the ballot box.

Update #3: Steve Benon at Washington Monthly says:

Republicans are thrilled, of course, because activist court rulings are to be celebrated, just so long as it’s activism the right can agree with.

Liberals do the same thing Steve; so quit your whining, please. You look childish.

Update #5: AllahPundit weighs in:

What is a bit surprising is that Vinson went further and held that the mandate isn’t “severable” from the rest of the law — which means that the whole law is unconstitutional, not just the part that requires people to buy insurance. That’s unusual insofar as courts like to be modest when striking down statutes; if they can find a section of it unconstitutional while preserving the rest of it, they’ll do so out of respect for the democratic branches that enacted it. In this case, however, as we’ve been told by Democrats many times, you can’t have universal health care unless you force people to pay for it. Cutting the mandate out of O-Care and keeping the rest of the scheme intact would create a nightmare scenario in which people avoid buying insurance until they get sick, with insurers required to accept them by the new rules governing preexisting conditions. Before long, that cost burden would drive most insurers into bankruptcy, with the golden age of a public option or single-payer soon to follow.

[...]

A fun fact about ObamaCare: Unlike virtually every other federal statute, it contains no “severabililty clause” at the end requesting that if any part of it should be held unconstitutional in court, the rest should be preserved as good law. Vinson actually mentions that fact in the opinion and notes that an earlier draft of the law did contain such a clause, suggesting that it was deliberately dropped because even Congress agrees that you can’t sever any one part from such an elaborate scheme. The truth, however, may be more prosaic: According to a Democratic aide who spoke to the Times back in November, the clause was omitted because of … an “oversight.” Oops!

Update #6: Obligatory:

and….:

Sorry, I couldn’t resist. :P

Oh Great: Looks like Ethanol might just end up in gas

I saw this headline earlier and wanted to write on it.

Jazz Shaw, who writes over at HotAir and on various other sites, reports the following which was reported over at The Washington Post:

WASHINGTON — Nearly two-thirds of cars on the road could have more corn-based ethanol in their fuel tanks under an Environmental Protection Agency decision Friday.

The agency said that 15 percent ethanol blended with gasoline is safe for cars and light-duty trucks manufactured between 2001 and 2006, expanding an October decision that the higher blend is safe for cars built since 2007.The maximum gasoline blend has been 10 percent ethanol.

Jazz Shaw reports:

This decision was made despite repeated warnings from industry experts who have been pleading for more time to perform exhaustive testing. Were they being overly cautious? That’s a difficult argument to make, particularly since we told you last month that one delay in testing came from the fact that the higher ethanol blend fuel was melting down the seals in pumps and storage tanks during testing.

The laundry list of potential problems from this decision is extensive. Asking distributors to carry yet another fuel (even if it doesn’t melt their pumps) will require logistical juggling, equipment changes, new signs and other expenses which are inevitably passed on down to the consumer. Ethanol burns hotter than conventional fuel, leading to earlier failure of catalytic converters. (An expensive fix, as any of you who have been hit with it at the garage will attest.)

All of this is still being pushed under the cloak of a more environmentally friendly solution to energy challenges, a claim which current science has increasingly put in doubt. But would it at least produce any type of savings as we fight to get the budget under control?

Well, not so much so says Craig Cox of the Environmental Working Group:

Rather than furthering his goal to make America “the first country to have a million electric vehicles on the road by 2015,” however, Obama’s focus on biofuels as the way “to break our dependence on oil” would have the opposite effect if it means sending billions more taxpayers dollars to corn country to finance ethanol infrastructure, Cox said. “Building an ethanol infrastructure at taxpayer’s expense will just lock us further into the past rather than lead us to tomorrow’s energy future,” added Cox, who heads EWG’s Ames, Iowa, office.

Jazz makes a very, very, very, very good point here:

This is clearly a victory for King Corn, but lies in stark contrast to the President’s stated goals of Winning the Future. Exit question: Even if gas stations manage to offer this for cars built in 2001 and after, how will they ensure drivers of older vehicles don’t wind up putting it in their vehicles without retooling the entire delivery system?

Good question. I can see the lawsuits coming now. The first idiot that accidentally puts the corn-laced fuel into an older vehicle and tears the snot out of his engine; and ends up suing the gas station, the fuel delivery company and the oil company that produced the product and comes away with a few million dollars — will cause this little program to be stopped in it’s tracks. Think it would not happen? Think again; there are tons and I do mean TONS of lawyers out there, that are chomping at the bit to take a lawsuit like this and make money off of it.

Updated to add: ….and there is a alternative scenario — What will happen is, some person, who is barely getting by and making minimum wage, and can barely afford a car. This person will accidentally fuel up with this Ethanol laced gas, it will gum up his motor and the poor man will end up having to junk the car and will have scrape around for another one. That is the part that really bothers me. The fact that liberals are so damned hell-bent on fulfilling an agenda that they do not think of all of the possibilities — and because of that, someone out there, not necessarily someone of means; gets screwed in the end. That my friends is the sad part.

Just another example of your feckless Government at work. :roll:

Video: Andrew Breitbart blows the lid off the pigford lawsuit story!

I am going to be totally honest with you all; I do not even like Andrew Breitbart —- But this video right here, is pretty darned interesting.

If everything in this video is true, the Obama Administration could be looking at some problems down the road.  To be fair to Mr. Breitbart, he also goes after Republicans for their cowardice in not checking this out. In short, it is fraud on a massive scale and hopefully when this story breaks, someone in the Republican Party — like in the House, will order investigations.  The really funny part is, Breitbart says he hired someone from Huffington Post — of all places — to debunk the story and he could not.

Having said all of that; here is the video which comes from Ed Morrissey, who is out in California:

Of course the cynical person in me thinks that nothing will become of this; because of race and other factors, none of the people involved in this scandal will see justice. It is just how our system works. Only those who ruffle the wrong feathers — so to speak — are the ones who are actually prosecuted.

However, as they say; I will wait and see.

Stay Tuned.

Quote of the Day

FRANCES FOX PIVEN: “She wouldn’t even harm a fly.” “In the course of this brouhaha, it becomes apparent that leftist academics don’t want to be and should not be taken seriously, that the cultural elite can dish out violent rhetoric but cannot take being called on it, that the NYT has blundered into another loser of an argument, and that people who want to waste their tuition money should major in sociology, which has obviously become the redoubt of clueless, revolutionary manqués. . . . Piven denied to the NYT that she advocated violence in the article. It’s hard to see how that defense stands up, unless she is saying that she didn’t know what happened in Greece when she urged the American unemployed to take action ‘like the strikes and riots’ there.”

Here’s a reminder of what Piven’s “strikes and riots” in Greece involved:

At the same time, tens of thousands of protesters marched through Athens in the largest and most violent protests since the country’s budget crisis began last fall. Angry youths rampaged through the center of Athens, torching several businesses and vehicles and smashing shop windows. Protesters and police clashed in front of parliament and fought running street battles around the city.

Witnesses said hooded protesters smashed the front window of Marfin Bank in central Athens and hurled a Molotov cocktail inside. The three victims died from asphyxiation from smoke inhalation, the Athens coroner’s office said. Four others were seriously injured there, fire department officials said.

Just for the record. And here’s the conclusion:

“In sum, this was another week in which the media and cultural elites acted stupidly and were called on it. Twice in a row now they’ve tried to paint their opposition as violent thugs only to be revealed themselves as snobbish poseurs, projecting their own thuggish urges onto others. It was another week in which those living off the productive labor of others deride those others, try to undermine them, and are in the process undermining the very society which makes it possible for such foolish poseurs to live in comfort.”

Indeed.

?

Video: Why Egypt wants Mubarak out

So the truth comes out!

This comes via Bare Naked Islam:

Looks like this situation is a bit more complicated than many first thought.

Looks like this is going to turn out to be a very interesting story.

But, as a Paleo-Conservative, I simply say, this is what happens when American involves itself in foreign entanglements. This is that blowback; and Israel is going to suffer for it.

I feel need to clear the air here a bit

I quote many people here on this blog of mine. But rare is it that I end up quoting me! :P

Anyhow, last night, I was a bit upset at something that I read yesterday; and I wrote the following:

Say what you want; but I am really beginning to lose faith in the Republican Party, the whole idea of this damned Tea Party and the entire political process. It is all a big dog and pony show anymore. In other words, sometimes, I believe that Lew Rockwell and Yes, Ron Paul might just be absolutely right about the whole thing and I, yes, I, might have been wrong.  I might not agree with everything Lew Rockwell and Ron Paul says — but I think they’ve been right all along. American Politics; especially among Republicans is rotten to the core and all that the people on “The Hill” care about is their own political careers.

Well, 24 hours later and a few frantic e-mails from some of my readers, of whom I did not know I even had; I need to clear the air here.

No, I am not going to leave the Conservative side of the fence and become a Democrat again. Are you kidding?!?!?! :roll: I could never support that party again; especially after everything that I have learned about how they do business.

No, I am not going to join the ranks of the anarchists and start devolving into radical stupidity. I haven’t lost my mind yet folks! ;)

Nope, I was simply venting about my dismay about the Republican Party in it’s current state. That’s all. :D I’m not going anywhere and/or changing any views about anything.

So, relax gang… You have not lost me. I simply wish that the Conservative Republicans would fight the battle the right way; and not the stupid way. The problem is, the Republicans here as of late, are stuck on stupid. So are some of their bloggers. :roll:

There is a reason why America is declining

I saw this over at the New York Times and I thought it warranted a comment:

MY grandmother, who was born in 1905, spoke often about the immense changes she had seen, including the widespread adoption of electricity, the automobile, flush toilets, antibiotics and convenient household appliances. Since my birth in 1962, it seems to me, there have not been comparable improvements.

Of course, the personal computer and its cousin, the smartphone, have brought about some big changes. And many goods and services are now more plentiful and of better quality. But compared with what my grandmother witnessed, the basic accouterments of life have remained broadly the same.

The income numbers for Americans reflect this slowdown in growth. From 1947 to 1973 — a period of just 26 years — inflation-adjusted median income in the United States more than doubled. But in the 31 years from 1973 to 2004, it rose only 22 percent. And, over the last decade, it actually declined.

via Incomes Are Stuck on Technology’s Plateau – NYTimes.com.

This article goes on to lament about how America’s standing in the world has fallen and how America’s level of income has fallen, in comparison to the rest of the world.

There is a simple reason for that; and that is Globalism. We have sacrificed America’s standing in the World and our financial superiority in the world at the altar of globalism. Free trade has killed America’s standing. Do not misunderstand me here; I am not for outright protectionism, however, I believe ALL of these so-called “free trade agreements”  are unfairly slanted against America. We need to renegotiate this silly agreements with these foriegn countries and if those countries do not agree to the new terms; we should simply revoke the agreements. The we should go back to the old system of strict tariffs on those who wish to import their goods into this Country.

Until we do this; we are simply spinning our wheels.

The sick and sad part is that President Obama, when he was campaigning promised to do this very thing. Now that he is elected, he has done nothing.  Which speaks volumes for the man and the Party that he represents. Perhaps now populists will that Democratic Party, for that which it has become; the part of parasites and socialism — instead of the party of the common man — of which it was founded.

Others: Marginal Revolution, The Reality-Based Community and Economist’s View

I get mail!

Reader “NullVoid” writes:

Dear Paleo Pat,

I’m a libertarian; meaning, beyond foreign policy, there’s not much a paleoconservative like you would like about me. I’m for gay rights; free trade (NAFTA or no); open borders; etc. However, I cannot help but feel some pity for how old fashioned conservatives are treated. For one, it confuses the political spectrum to have them excluded.

Here’s hoping that, post-War On Terror, people like you will define the American Right.

and….:

Here’s something for your fellow paleos to be encouraged by; neocons are losing their grip on intellectual discourse. Oh, they still have the op-eds; but, their ideas are ridiculed in the university by reputable people. Seize the initiative, and use this opportunity to critique the neoconservatives and define what conservatism, properly conceived, consists in. Don’t compromise with the neocons, libertarians, liberals, progressives, or anyone else.

Those little e-mails make it worth every nasty e-mail, troll comment or technical glitch! :D

I’m glad to see that someone is actually reading here. Oh noes! Does this mean I have to act like a respectable writer now? Horrors! :eek: ;) :P

Video: The John Birch Society’s Rebuttal to the SOTU Address

Via The Liberty News Network:

State of the Union Rebuttal from The John Birch Society on Vimeo.

The Republican Party claims to be all about the Constitution

But where were they back in 2003?

This bunch of silly nonsense comes from The Politico:

The federal lawsuits against last year’s health care overhaul were greeted with eye-rolling and snickers from many conventional legal scholars.

Nobody’s laughing now.

A federal judge in Virginia ruled late last year that a key underpinning of the health care law stretches the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution past the breaking point, while another judge in Florida is expected to rule on Monday. Both cases are likely to proceed toward the Supreme Court.

And the challenges to the health care reform law are just the most visible sign of a broad, national flowering of state efforts to find shelter from the federal government in sometimes-neglected corners of the Constitution that touch conventional political hot buttons such as immigration and gun control, and exotic ones, such as citizenship and currency.

“This has been brewing for decades, and it just needed a catalyst to set it off. The Obama health care package happened to be that catalyst,” said Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott. “It emboldened us to assert states’ rights with regard to an array of different issues in which we are feeling that the federal government has overstepped its bounds.”

The model for this revival is the transformation of the Second Amendment from a hazily interpreted legal backwater to the core of a new gun-rights movement. And while the Constitution is often invoked, and even misquoted, for all manner of conservative causes, perhaps the truest meaning of the new phrase constitutional conservatism is found in the broad, imaginative and sometimes quirky new efforts to hem in the power of the federal government.

The Supremacy Clause, which asserts the primary role of the federal courts and the Constitution, could stymie much of this activity. But it’s all part of a movement that Bruce Ackerman, a liberal constitutional scholar from Yale Law School, told POLITICO constitutes “the most serious challenge” to the current constitutional regime since it took shape in the New Deal and the Civil Rights era.

So, the Republican Party is all about the Constitution now? Seems mighty funny to me that all of the sudden that the Republican Party is all about the Constitution now; but back in 2003, when their feckless leader George W. Bush, which I did not vote for — decided to invade the sovereign nation of Iraq, that none of the Constitutional purists were around to challenge him then. They, like most Conservatives in the beltway, cheered as President George W. Bush invaded Iraq, based on what we now know to be faulty information.

I also find it to be highly ironic that during the Presidency of George W. Bush; a white American — that not one person in the Republican Party questioned his tactics, spending or actions on foreign policy.  However, now that there is a liberal and yes, black President in the White House; the Republican Party has turned into the Constitutional purist party.  They claim that they want to repeal Obama’s healthcare plan to save money. I call B.S. on this one. They want to do to protect their biggest donor — the Healthcare industry. Further more, I believe it is because a good majority of the Republicans on the hill are just straight racist, like some other people I know.

Say what you want; but I am really beginning to lose faith in the Republican Party, the whole idea of this damned Tea Party and the entire political process. It is all a big dog and pony show anymore. In other words, sometimes, I believe that Lew Rockwell and Yes, Ron Paul might just be absolutely right about the whole thing and I, yes, I, might have been wrong.  I might not agree with everything Lew Rockwell and Ron Paul says — but I think they’ve been right all along. American Politics; especially among Republicans is rotten to the core and all that the people on “The Hill” care about is their own political careers.

I hate to be the one to admit it. But it is just damned true. :mad: Steaming mad

Update: RedState.com allows racist content on their site – Redstate pulls post, no apologies

After attacking me as a racist and an Anti-Semite. Funny how that works, isn’t it? :roll: Who me?

Well, I’ll be dipped in doo doo. RedState.com, the site that brutally attacked me a long while back for being a racist and an Anti-Semite……is now doing the same damned thing.

Brownstein writes: ‘The new data show that white voters not only strongly preferred Republican House and Senate candidates but also registered deep disappointment with President Obama’s performance, hostility toward the cornerstones of the current Democratic agenda, and widespread skepticism about the expansive role for Washington embedded in the party’s priorities. On each of those questions, minority voters expressed almost exactly the opposite view from whites.’ Comment: Indeed, because these white voters are generally creative, ambitious, studious and self-reliant while many of today’s blacks, whose lives are modeled after angry, nonproductive agitators like Jackson and Sharpton, are often the opposite.

Brownstein writes: ‘David Axelrod, Obama’s chief political strategist, said in an interview that “it would be a mistake to take exit polls from a midterm election and extrapolate too far” toward 2012. Conditions—and the composition of the electorate—will change a great deal by then, he said. But he acknowledged that Obama must “reset” the public perception about his view of government’s role. Axelrod…  also made it clear that he sees as a “particularly instructive” model for 2012 the case of Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet in Colorado, who won his contest last fall by mobilizing enough minorities, young people, and socially liberal, well-educated white women to overcome a sharp turn toward the GOP among most of the other white voters in his state.Comment: ‘Conditions… will change a great deal by then’? Hardly. The public has a very well-founded idea of where Obama stands and conditions are not going to change, or change that perception. And look at who is supporting Obama – well-educated white women who just might, over time, understand that his agenda is harming them and their own children. Many apparently are just not smart enough to know it yet even with all their advanced degrees… or because of them.

Brownstein writes: ‘Meanwhile, Republicans, with their 60 percent showing, notched the party’s best congressional result among white voters in the history of modern polling.’ Comment: And that number is not going to go down again. Because the media anger generated toward conservatism and Republicans always has been based on the theory that Democrats could do much better for the American people. Now the contrast between media rhetoric and reality is in.

Brownstein writes: ‘The racial gulf was similar when voters were asked whether they believed that Obama’s policies would help the nation in the long run. By 70 percent to 22 percent, minorities said yes; by 61 percent to 34 percent, whites said no.’ Comment: Because whites are generally well-disciplined higher-income people who generate wealth and pay taxes to the government. Meanwhile many blacks are collecting money and benefits from the government at a level that is absolutely unsustainable.

Brownstein writes: ‘Democrats have been losing support among blue-collar white voters since the 1960s, but in this election, they hit one of their lowest points ever. In House campaigns, the exit poll found, noncollege whites preferred Republicans by nearly 2-to-1 with virtually no gender gap: White working-class women—the so-called waitress moms—gave Republicans almost exactly as many of their votes as blue-collar men did. Comment: That is why they are referred to as “working class” voters. Because they know what it means to really work for a living and get their hands dirty, not live on some elite college campus or work in a media newsroom or sit in a law office or collect welfare or work at a do-nothing government job. This is something that liberals do not understand – what it means to really work for a living.

Brownstein writes: ‘Rodolfo de la Garza, a political scientist at ColumbiaUniversity who studies Hispanics’ attitudes, says… More minority workers hold marginal positions in the private economy… so they were less likely to be shocked by the severity of the downturn—and more likely to turn to government, rather than the private sector, to help survive it. “They didn’t lose money on Wall Street; they had shitty jobs, if they had jobs, so where would they look to if not the [government]?” de la Garza asked.’ Comment: And why do ‘minority workers hold marginal positions in the private economy’ and need to look to the government? How about their poor academic achievement and dropout rate. How about their refusal to learn English. How about their lack of skills, education and ambition to better themselves. How about their terrible schools run by Democrat teacher unions. How about young black males walking around with their underwear hanging out and Democrats defending them at every turn. That is why they have “shitty jobs”, professor.

Brownstein writes: ‘Merle Black, a political scientist at Emory University, says that (white) blue-collar disaffection from Democratic candidates reflects not only immediate economic distress but also a longer-term process of alienation from the party. “The noncollege whites … see themselves as a declining minority within the national Democratic Party, where they have very little control or influence on the policies,” he says. “The party is controlled by the coastal elites and nonwhites, and that is a very different kind of Democratic Party” than a generation ago.Comment: Indeed. Working white people never have supported the kind of radicalism in the Democrat party today. As the old saying goes, “I did not abandon the Democrat party. The Democrat party abandoned me.”

Brownstein writes: ‘College-educated white women, though not immune to these trends, displayed more resistance. Although traditionally the most liberal portion of the white electorate, even these women cooled toward Democrats last year. In contrast to the majority support they provided Obama in 2008, they voted 55 percent to 43 percent for Republicans in 2010 House races. In the exit poll, most of them agreed that government was trying to do too much, and a slim majority of them said they wanted Congress to repeal the health care law.Comment: Because some of these women finally are using their education to look at what is happening around them rather than reading about reality according toThe New York Times. It’s about time these females wised up like we conservative men have been suggesting for decades now.

Brownstein writes: ‘According to veteran conservative strategist Jeff Bell, all signs suggest that Obama has permanently antagonized much of the white electorate (nearly half of which this year identified itself as conservative in the exit poll). “The significance of the tea party is that it is not a situational vote,” says Bell, the policy director at the American Principles Project, a right-leaning advocacy group. “They are going to be militant even if, or when, the economy improves.… It’s significant if you have more voters who are willing to vote with the conservative coalition regardless of what’s going on with the economy.Comment: Very good observation. White Tea Party activists are not going to sway even with an improving economy. They are smart people who will always remember how the Democrats manhandled America between 2008 and 2010. They are not going to let it happen again. They finally understand the Democrats all too well.

Wow…. Just Wow

Screenshots in case it disappears: (click to make them bigger….)

rs1

rs1

rs3

rs4

Hypocrisy, thy name is RedState.

I mean, I could understand if it was Altright.com; but Redstate? Wow… That is interesting:eek: Surprised smile

Update: ….and just like that, the posting disappears. But, the internet, is forever. Click here to see the cached version over google.com.

Like the folks at RedState.com told me a good few months back:

The Internet always remembers, Mr. Adkins. And we’ll remember the next time you pop up your racist head, too.

Likewise Mr. Erickson, the internet always remembers YOUR racism and your straight up hypocrisy. Because I dispise those who say one thing and do another — I will continue to expose this sort of nonsense and call it for what it is. You and your crown princess of the Neo-Conservative movement Michelle Malkin, and the rest of the Neo-Conservative Blogosphere; who say one thing and do another, as usual. What is very shocking to me, is that CNN; a very respectable organization actually has this assclown on their network. It is a sad and very sick thing.

Interesting Book Review: The Neoconservative Persuasion: Selected Essays, 1942-2009

[video src="http://graphics8.nytimes.com/podcasts/2011/01/28/28bookreview.mp3" width="400" height="300" ]

This is pretty interesting….

Audio:

 http://graphics8.nytimes.com/podcasts/2011/01/28/28bookreview.mp3

| Open Player in New Window

The Story via the NYT:

Irving Kristol, who died in 2009, is sometimes called the “godfather” or even “father” of neoconservatism, and the patriarchal honorific, like a well-worn hat, sits comfortably atop “The Neoconservative Persuasion: Selected Essays, 1942-2009.” The book is strictly a family enterprise. It has been lovingly edited by Kristol’s widow, the historian Gertrude Himmelfarb, and carries a prefatory funeral eulogy by their sorrowful son, the Republican journalist William Kristol. Even the selection of essays reflects a uniquely familial degree of intimacy.

Himmelfarb recounts in her introduction that while “rummaging among old files” after her husband’s death, she discovered tattered copies of a short-lived and wholly forgotten little magazine called Enquiry: A Journal of Independent Radical Thought. Her husband and some of his young friends founded the magazine in 1942, the year of her marriage, and they kept it afloat for eight issues, until the young friends and Kristol himself disappeared into the Army. Himmelfarb has reproduced the cover of Vol. 1, No. 1 — austere, elegant, partly sans-serif in the 1940s style, 10 cents a copy — and the sight of the magazine does conjure an era.

(…)

There is sometimes a charm in Kristol’s prose, once he had gotten past his pompous Lionel Trilling period — a wry, man-of-the-people modesty, nicely joined with a genuine talent for summarizing ideas. Then again, he tried to capitalize on his Everyman sonority by claiming to speak on behalf of “the majority of Americans” or even “the overwhelming majority of Americans,” and sometimes “the American people” altogether, which, to my mind, undercuts the charm. In the course of an otherwise intelligent essay about Communism and McCarthyism as long ago as 1952, he wrote: “For there is one thing that the American people know about Senator McCarthy; he, like them, is unequivocally anti-­Communist. About the spokesmen for American liberalism, they feel they know no such thing.”

The remark is one of Kristol’s most famous, if only because his enemies have been quoting it back at him for almost 60 years. The habit of invoking the American people served him well, even so. Some of the more talented leaders of the Republican Party eventually cocked an ear in his direction, in search of oratorical and political and programmatic possibilities. And the alliance was formed.

Himmelfarb has thoughtfully filled “The Neoconservative Persuasion” with pieces that, with one exception, have not appeared in previous collections. The subtitle, “Selected Essays,” might lead readers to suppose that here must surely be Kristol’s Greatest Hits — the best and most popular of his essays. But Kristol himself gathered together his Greatest Hits in an anthology in 1995 called “Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea.”

The new book ought to be regarded, instead, as a Volume 2. It is faithful to his ideas and their evolution. And it offers an opportunity to evaluate his abilities as an essayist — his achievements as a thinker and writer within the little world known as the “New York intellectuals.” The achievements do not seem to me large. Kristol was not a Trilling, a Hook, a Howe or a Bell. For that matter, he never produced anything as substantial as his wife’s scholarly meditations on English history.

But it is true that unlike any of those other talented people, Kristol, with his tirades and simplicities, helped found a political movement. And under the name of “neoconservatism,” his movement invigorated the party of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush and, for better and for worse, wreaked enormous changes on America and the world.

As many of you know. I do have personal issues with the Neo-Conservative as a whole. However, I believe it to be fair to examine the history of the people around it. The book sounds like it might be an interesting read.

You can get it here:

There are those that might not like that I even blogged about this; to them I say this. Perhaps if you put some money into my Tip Jar, maybe I would not have to resort to blogging about subjects that I utterly detest. Further more, the way I see it, when those people start donating to this blog; then they can bitch at me about what I write about. Until then, quite frankly, they can just fuck off. (and I mean that in the most Christian way possible… :P ;) :D )

Not only that, I do try; even I disagree with that person — to get everyone a fair shake. I might disagree with them on some things, but there has to be something that I agree upon. If only the Neo-Cons felt the same way about us that disagree with them. Most of them are almost Nazi like in their fascism against dissenters. The Bush era proved that one. :roll:

Trading Advice: What Most People Don’t Realize About The Fed’s Superpowers

Bob Prechter’s Conquer The Crash reveals whether the Fed really can rescue the US economy
January 27, 2011

By Elliott Wave International

Since its creation in 1913, the primary intended role of the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank has been that of protector. In theory, the central bank was bestowed with the power to shape monetary policy in a way that would keep both booms and busts in check. The two main tools at its disposal — interest rates and money creation — would provide a “ceiling of normalcy” above expansions AND a “net of safety” below contractions.

To this day, the financial mainstream holds great faith in the Fed’s ability to fulfill its save-the-day duties — as these recent news items make plain:

  • “Why Raising Fed Funds Rate Is Positive For Equities.” (Seeking Alpha)
  • “Fed’s Moves Lift All Asset Classes.” (Associated Press)
  • “US Stocks Erasing Losses: The aggressive moves of the Fed have been an important driver for the stabilization of stock prices.” (Bloomberg)

But of all the variables the Fed creators took into account, there’s one glaring factor they neglected to consider: Namely, it cannot force consumers to spend, creditors to lend, or businesses to borrow. The events of 2007-2009 “credit crunch” and the subsequent “Great Recession” made that obvious. Remember how the government was upset at banks for sitting on the bailout funds instead of lending them out to consumers? And consumers weren’t exactly lining up on the street to get a loan, either.

The Fed’s inability to change social mood is the central theme in Chapter 13 of EWI President Bob Prechter’s NY Times business bestseller book Conquer the Crash. There, Bob describes the Fed’s strategy of lowering the federal funds rate to stimulate spending to be as effective as “pushing on a string.” Writes Bob:

“The primary basis for today’s belief in perpetual prosperity and inflation with an occasional recession is what I call the ‘Potent Directors Fallacy.’ It is nearly impossible to find a treatise on macroeconomics today that does not assert or assume that the Federal Reserve Board has learned to control both our money and our economy. Many believe that it also possesses the immense power to manipulate the stock market. The very idea that it can do these things is false.”

And so begins one of the most groundbreaking studies into the very real INABILITY of the Fed to fell the great bears of economic declines, or to feed the great bulls of economic vigor.

The best part is, you can read Chapter 13 of Conquer the Crash in its entirety FREE via a Club EWI resource “You Can Survive And Prosper In A Deflationary Depression.” The free report also includes SEVEN other chapters of Conquer the Crash that shed equal light on some of the most misleading notions of mainstream economic wisdom.

Don’t stay in the dark. Read all 8 chapters today by joining the rapidly expanding free Club EWI community today. Here’s what you’ll learn:

  • Chapter 10: Money, Credit and the Federal Reserve Banking System
  • Chapter 13: Can the Fed Stop Deflation?
  • Chapter 23: What To Do With Your Pension Plan
  • Chapter 28: How to Identify a Safe Haven
  • Chapter 29: Calling in Loans and Paying off Debt
  • Chapter 30: What You Should Do If You Run a Business
  • Chapter 32: Should You Rely on Government to Protect You?
  • Chapter 33: A Short List of Imperative “Do’s” and Crucial “Don’ts”

Keep reading this free report now — all you need to do is create a free Club EWI profile.

Cartoon of the Day

Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood?

The huge oversized 243-page book Diversity Lane/ A Liberal Family Saga now available at the Diversity Lane website! Endorsed by FrontPage, Townhall, Brent Bozell, American Thinker and tons of others– THE most enjoyable conservative book of the year, guaranteed.
For more fun visit us at the Diversity Lane Page at Facebook or visit Zack Rawsthorne’s Facebook Profile to shoot the breeze.  Don’t forget to read more at our website www.diversitylane.com or our blog www.diversitylane.wordpress.com.

Neo-Conservatives are hypocritical about free speech

I saw this over at HotAir.com this morning and I nearly fell out of the chair……laughing:

The civility narrative that grew legs after the shooting in Arizona is really just a ruse to keep Republicans from calling Democrats what America knows they are – Socialists. After all, it’s that kind of ‘hateful rhetoric’ that gets people killed right? Yeah, right.

The Democrats lost power in the House after Americans got too big a taste of their left-wing socialist agenda over the last two years. Now that they’ve lost power they need to stem what could amount to even bigger losses in 2012. Since they can’t really legislate to cover their tracks, they need to prevent Republicans from continuing to remind Americans about their socialist agenda – and what better way to do that than to decide that America needs a dose of civility. Of course they cloak it in the ludicrous notion that it’s contributing to an atmosphere of hate that might set off a crazy person on another shooting spree. But to any able minded person that’s just nonsense.

(….)

Even Obama’s rhetorical move to the center also plays into this civility narrative. With the entire MSM and political world gushing over Obama’s new and improved centrist talk, it increases the chances that Republicans will feel more uncomfortable pointing out his socialist agenda, or even calling him a socialist, and it will serve to neuter Republicans and make them less effective.

The bottom line here is that Republicans simply need to stop mincing words and continue to remind Americans just how destructive these radicals are to this great country. If they do that, along with some great legislating, I assure you that Americans will respond in 2012 just as they did in 2010.

Yeah, let us talk about the neutering of free speech shall we? Some of you might remember, when I was attacked by some of  David Horowitz’s vultures for pointing out the fact that a good majority of the people that were raising a stink about the so-called 9/11 mosque….were Jewish. All because I dared to point out that making fat jokes about Megan McCain was rather farking lame. My real name was posted, a very unflattering picture of me was posted  and straight up lies were published about me, all by these Neo-Conservative vultures, who claim to be Conservative and also some of them Christian.

Further more, I also recall how I was attacked, my blog hacked and basically, I am considered a pariah among the Blogosphere — all because I dared to call Michelle Malkin on her yellow journalism and outright stupidity.  I mean, these people went out of their way to threaten and intimidate a blogger; whom I thought was a good friend of mine, who really turned out to be a spineless coward. All because I dared to call a spade….a spade…..

So, to the Neo-Conservative right I say this; please, do not sit and carp about the so-called “Neutering of Free Speech or the Neutering of Republicans” okay? Because you are just as bad about that, as the damned Democrats are, especially when it comes to Jews and when it comes to your crown princesses, like Michelle Malkin, who is one of the most yellow Journalists in the Business. Her politics might be decent, but her ethics are lousy and I called her on that. For this, I was made to be someone that I am not.

Again, I will state for the record; I am NOT, nor have I EVER BEEN, a Neo-Nazi, Anti-Semite or White Nationalist. I am someone however, that despises Identity Politics on the LEFT and the THE RIGHT. Further more, I am someone who despises yellow journalists; who distort facts and make up lies to the further their political agenda.

The Neo-Con right likes to gripe about the left doing it; to that I say, what about Michelle Malkin? What about Jim Hoft? What about Ed Morrissey, who straight lies about Unions and other such stuff that he disagrees with? Meanwhile his wife lives on Medicare Advantage. It is straight up damned hypocrisy, and I will call it every damned time I see it folks.

I think the Neo-Conservative right, which is really Democratic Party Lite —- needs to look in the mirror, and clean up their own backyard, because they accuse the left of the very same thing, that they do themselves. Is it Anti-Semite to point out that Jews are involved in anything? No, it is not. Anyone who says that, is a identity politics vulture who wants to stifle freedom of speech. Political stance and leanings means nothing. All of it is damned wrong. Period, End of Discussion.

I am shutting comments off of this posting, because I am not interested in hearing the Neo-Con vultures idiotic ramblings about how I am an Anti-Semite. :mad:

Video: Who’s up for some Chris Christie Porn?

Our first flick comes from The coalition of the swilling: (H/T to HotAir.com’s resident Beta Male)

If that is not enough to wet your whistle, how an radio ad of Chris Christie trying to lure Illinois Businesses to….you guessed it, New Jersey: (Via Eyeblast)

I’ll tell you, this might just the guy for the Republican 2012 nomination. The office of the President of the United States is a heavy job. But, isn’t that right up Christie’s alley?

It is official: Mike Pence will not be running for President in 2012

Well, we can count this guy out:

U.S. Rep. Mike Pence shut the door today on a run for the presidency, but left wide open the likelihood that he’ll seek a different office: Governor of Indiana.

“In the choice between seeking national office and serving Indiana in some capacity, we choose Indiana,” Pence, R-Columbus, said of himself and wife Karen in a letter being sent to supporters. “We will not seek the Republican nomination for president in 2012.”

He said he would make a decision “later this year” about what his next political step is, but by not running for president it is considered a virtual certainty that he will run for the GOP nomination for governor. While he could, instead, run for a seventh term in Congress, that’s not considered likely given that Pence gave up the job that would have made him the fourth-highest ranking Republican in the House after the November elections, in order to focus on other political opportunities.

via Rep. Mike Pence closes door on White House run | The Indianapolis Star | IndyStar.com.

AllahPundit, as always, frets:

Needless to say, a big reason for the “Draft Pence” push in recent weeks was some social cons being uncomfortable with Palin or Huckabee as the nominee. Where do those people turn now?

To be quite honest, if all the social cons have to choose from is Huckabee and Palin; then that speaks to the sorry condition of the GOP in this day and age. I would say Mitt Romney, but the Evangelical Christians loathe him.  As a Fundamentalist Baptist, I can tell you that I am not too big on the idea of a Mormon being in the White House at all.  What I really believe personally is that the Republican Party needs to focus on fiscal issues and leave the social cons out of the mix in 2012.  Because honestly, that crowd is so darned fickle anyways, not to mention the rank hypocrisy that comes from those ranks.  I mean, just look at Palin, rode in on the white horse of social Conservatism and a few weeks later, her daughter comes up pregnant.

The simple solution is Tim Pawlenty. He is a fiscal Conservative, he is not a extremist and his family is not a reality show. I personally believe he would be a good choice for the G.O.P. in 2012. Here is hoping that Tim runs in 2012, because for once, I would like to vote for a Republican, that actually acts like one and not some made beltway boy or some right wing extremist or a talk show reality star. I want a real CEO type, that will make decisions to help small business and people like me find jobs again.

We need to put America back to work. We cannot do that with a shrieking harpy glamor model who’s got a reality show; that somehow believes that she is entitled to be President, because of her sex organs —- nor can we do that with a Democrat with a Bible who is prone to extremism.

Challenger: It has been 25 years

It is truly unbelievable. It has been 25 years ago, when these images were splashed across our TV screens:

A President comforts a grieving Nation:

The crew of the space shuttle Challenger honoured us by the manner in which they lived their lives. We will never forget them, nor the last time we saw them, this morning, as they prepared for the journey and waved goodbye and ‘slipped the surly bonds of earth’ to ‘touch the face of God.’  —- Ronald Reagan

This is a great one here, I ask that you go and read the entire thing….:

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) — For many, no single word evokes as much pain.

Challenger.

A quarter-century later, images of the exploding space shuttle still signify all that can go wrong with technology and the sharpest minds. The accident on Jan. 28, 1986 — a scant 73 seconds into flight, nine miles above the Atlantic for all to see — remains NASA’s most visible failure.

It was the world’s first high-tech catastrophe to unfold on live TV. Adding to the anguish was the young audience: School children everywhere tuned in that morning to watch the launch of the first schoolteacher and ordinary citizen bound for space, Christa McAuliffe.

She never made it.

McAuliffe and six others on board perished as the cameras rolled, victims of stiff O-ring seals and feeble bureaucratic decisions.

(—-)

“I wonder if it’s because the image is so ingrained in our brains, that it seems like yesterday,” Rodgers said.

Almost as many years have passed since the accident, as the span of her 26-year marriage to Dick Scobee.

“Isn’t it interesting about the number 25?” she asked softly. “Challenger was the 25th mission. This is 25 years.”

A full generation has come and gone.

Remember the families of this awful tragedy today in your prayers, as this week will be pure hell for them.

Something to watch, a documentary on this awful event….: