Archive for August 3rd, 2008

August 3, 2008

Good news, isolationists!

Higher oil prices =
Higher transportation costs =
Less foreign competition!

Which means you’ll pay more for damn near everything, but isn’t that what you wanted? Higher prices, less efficiency, and all the other “benefits” of decreased international trade. And, hey, we didn’t even have to increase tariffs to get it! Who says markets don’t work?

Maybe you should go vandalize a Starbucks to celebrate this good news.

August 3, 2008

The Cult of Hope

A glimpse inside the Kool-Aid factory.

August 3, 2008

Wooing the Harley vote

Tattoos, beer, babes, Harleys, heavy metal and . . . John McCain?

A Sturgis rally expected to be smaller than recent years still will be an interesting cultural crossroads when KISS, Kid Rock and Sen. John McCain all are in town at the same time.
“The single biggest thing people ask me about is Senator McCain,” says Rod Woodruff, founder of the Buffalo Chip Campground where the presumed Republican presidential nominee will take part in a ceremony to honor military veterans Monday.
McCain will find himself the opening act for Kellie Pickler, who will perform when the veterans tribute concludes, and for the evening’s headliner, Kid Rock.

Maverick could use this as an opportunity to add a new element his energy plan. Hey, a Harley gets over miles per gallon — everybody should ride one!

August 3, 2008

Media bias, Photo Dept.

The Washington Post can’t deny it.

August 3, 2008

Eggheads for Obama

While searching for demographic data on the current election, I came across this from Gallup:

Barack Obama has by far his greatest strength among voters with postgraduate education, while John McCain has his highest level of support among voters who have a college degree but no postgraduate education.

Obama wins 54%-39% among those with a postgraduate education. In other words, Obama mostly represents “Hope” for Ph.Ds. The trend is most remarkable among white voters, the pointy-heads are the only educational subgroup that Obama wins:

So, while whites with a bachelor’s degree favor McCain by a 17-point margin, whites with graduate degrees favor Obama by 7 points — a 24-point gap between the academic elite and the middle class.

UPDATE: Remarking on Maureen Dowd’s’s Obama-as-Darcy analogy, certified egghead Ann Althouse asks:

If we’re going to get all English proffy, heavy on the race-and-gender talk, shouldn’t we critique Dowd for portraying the black man’s pursuit of political office as a sexual exploit?

Yowww. Claw it out amongst yourselves, ladies. Good thing I resisted the urge to call that post “MoDo Gets Her Groove Back.”

UPDATE II: More poll data from Gallup, showing that — just like our academic superiors — those enlightened Europeans also prefer Obama:

Oui, nous pouvons!

UPDATE III: The eminently eggheaded George Will points out that it is Obama who keeps injecting race into the campaign:

Via Hot Air, where Ed Morrisey says:

It wasn’t an inclusive statement, or a historical note, but an allegation that
McCain and his campaign used or will use race as a fear tactic. Unfortunately,
[liberals] have exactly zero examples of this to bolster these smears.

Yes, but having “zero examples” never stopped ’em. They’ve got exactly zero examples of successful liberal programs, but yet they keep advocating more.

UPDATE IV: Andrew Sullivan (a European import with a graduate degree from Harvard) accuses the McCain campaign of “playing the argula card.”

August 3, 2008

Only 22% see ‘Celeb’ ad as racist

Rasmussen Reports:

Sixty-nine percent (69%) of the nation’s voters say they’ve seen news coverage of the McCain campaign commercial that includes images of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton and suggests that Barack Obama is a celebrity just like them. Of those, just 22% say the ad was racist while 63% say it was not.
However, Obama’s comment that his Republican opponent will try to scare people because Obama does not look like all the other presidents on dollar bills was seen as racist by 53%. Thirty-eight percent (38%) disagree.

Now, where is David Plouffe to explain to us once more what a horrible week John McCain had? By the way, Rasmussen’s daily tracking poll this morning has it Obama 47%, McCain 46% — and, most ominously for Team Obama, McCain has a 14-point favorability margin among independents.

UPDATE: Since we’re doing polling, let me point out that recent polls have shown McCain leading in Missouri, a key Midwestern swing state, as well as in Alaska and North Carolina, two red states where Team Obama had suggested their “map-changer” candidate might compete.

UPDATE II: Linked at Hot Air Headlines. Thanks, guys.

UPDATE III: Don Surber asks, “[D]id the Year of the Democrats end on Memorial Day?”

UPDATE IV: Obama 45%, McCain 44% in the Sunday Gallup Daily. Also, please check out, “Eggheads for Obama.”

August 3, 2008

Maureen Dowd’s romantic Obama

As if Barack Obama were not already “celebrity” enough, now Maureen Dowd of the New York Times compares him to Fitzwilliam Darcy, the romantic protagonist of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice.

Pride and Prejudice. Get it? Groan:

In this political version of “Pride and Prejudice,” the prejudice is racial, with only 31 percent of white voters telling The New York Times in a survey that they had a favorable opinion of Obama, compared with 83 percent of blacks.

As if this were prima facie proof of white “prejudice” against Obama, you see? Only because of his race do white voters hold him in low esteem, Miss Dowd suggests, as if there were no other reason to doubt the presidential aptitude of a man who, until 2005, had never exercised any public office beyond the Illinois state legislature.

A presidential election is not a romance novel, nor should it be a personal popularity contest. Now, like many other liberals, Miss Dowd wants to turn the election into a referendum on race, so that Obama’s election would be the triumph of MLK’s “dream,” while Obama’s defeat would symbolically ratify what liberals have always believed: Americans are a bunch of dimwitted reactionary bigots.

What Miss Dowd and other liberals should ask themselves is whether the much-noted “resistance” to Obama — his inability to break open a major lead in the polls, no matter how many tongue-baths he receives from fawning enthusiasts in the media — might actually be voters’ reluctance to playing along with this game.

Ordinary Americans are smart enough to perceive that the elites are demanding that they vote for Obama to prove they’re not racists. But the voters don’t feel they have to prove any such thing, and they resent like hell the suggestion that they do have to prove it.

UPDATE: Welcome Instapundit readers, and thanks for the link, Professor.

UPDATE II: Also linked by Burke to Kirk, who is happy to discover “a simple solution to my complex problem,” and by Rick, who declares: “I Am An Ordinary American.” Say it loud, say it proud!

UPDATE IV: “Eggheads for Obama”! Also, law professor Ann Althouse asks why MoDo sees “the black man’s pursuit of political office as a sexual exploit?” Let’s face it, Professor Althouse, MoDo sees everything as a sexual exploit.

UPDATE V: When Fausta Wertz looks at Obama, she doesn’t see Mr. Darcy, she sees . . . Urkel.

UPDATE VI: I’ve been Farked.

August 3, 2008

John Edwards scandal

Gossip blog mogul Ken Layne:

The story has everything a cable-news producer or magazine editor or soap-opera writer could ask for: adultery, political power, a monstrous mansion, betrayal, cash transfers, terrible lies, vanishing evidence, a fall guy, a saintly wife dying of cancer, a late-night hotel rendezvous in Beverly Hills, even a “love child.” And it’s perfect for the middle of summer, when there’s very little real news because the newsmakers are all on vacation. But nobody wants to touch it . . .

Hmmm. Why not?

The Democratic convention is a month away, and while he wasn’t anybody’s top choice for Obama’s running mate, Edwards was expected to give a prime-time speech at the Denver rally.

Bingo. This scandal kind of makes it hard for Edwards to give a convention speech talking about women and children and families, eh? Here’s Johnny, with the unconvincing non-denial:

August 3, 2008

Celebrity update

We read the tabloid dirt, so you don’t have to:

  • Lindsay Lohan planning a lesbian wedding?
  • Lindsay’s miffed about L.A. police chief Bill Bratton saying in a recent interview, “If you notice, since Britney started wearing clothes and behaving, Paris is out of town not bothering anybody, thank God, and evidently, Lindsay Lohan has gone gay, we don’t seem to have much of an issue.”
  • Former “Married With Children” star Christina Applegate diagnosed with breast cancer. She’s only 36.
  • “Indiana Jones” star Shia LaBeouf’s hand was “crushed” in last week’s auto accident, says the actor’s lawyer, who also suggestied that LaBeouf, who was cited for DUI after the accident, may not have been at fault because the other driver ran a red light.
  • More rumors that Joe Jonas of the Jonas Brothers band is dating “Bratz” blonde Chelsea Staub.
  • “Mini-Me” actor Verne Troyer is suing his ex-girlfriend for $20 million. Dude, she’s an “aspiring actress” — where’s she going to get $20 million?
  • Britney Spears denies she’s dating the hired help. Not that anybody’s volunteering to date her for free or anything.
  • People magazine wins the competition to feature Brangelina’s twins, beating out OK!, which scored three consecutive celeb baby cover-photo coups (Jamie Lynn Spears on July 21, Jessica Alba on July 24 and Matthew McConaughey on Aug. 4).
  • Why did Lance Armstrong dump Kate Hudson? She was too emotionally needy, a source says.
  • Penelope Cruz talks about kissing Scarlett Johansen in the new Woody Allen movie.
  • Nude photos of Ann Hathaway were among the items seized by the FBI when they raided her embezzler ex-boyfriend, Raffaello.

Don’t worry, guys: I’ve already filed a Freedom Of Information Act request for those photos. “The people’s right to know,” and all that. Meanwhile . . .

World’s weirdest body-building routines:

August 3, 2008

McCain’s strategy

Chuck Todd of MSNBC wastes a lot of words en route to a valid point:

The McCain campaign has found a good way to begin undermining Obama’s
credentials to be president and to try to turn his strengths into weaknesses. The problem is that McCain isn’t comfortable running this campaign. You can tell by the tenor of his own defense of his tactics.

It is obvious to me, if to no one else, that John McCain is not comfortable with attack politics — at least not against a liberal Democrat. He’s never had any problem attacking fellow Republicans, but he’s never been in a truly competitive election against a Democrat. This is a weakness, but perhaps not a fatal weakness for the Republican, if he can keep up the pressure on Obama (who’s never been in a competitive election against a Republican). On the other hand, Todd’s problem is that he’s bought into the myth of Obama’s inevitability:

Will the pundits say McCain was the best candidate to prevent a landslide but not the best candidate to provide the necessary contrast to topple Obama?

Which is to say, Todd assumes that Obama will win, that his route to victory in November will basically be a replay of his route to winning the primary. But there are no caucuses in a general election and no superdelegates, either. It is this assumption of Obama’s inevitability that prevents Todd from recognizing the possibility that Obama may yet experience a McGovern/Dukakis kind of meltdown.

Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter makes similar assumptions:

Maybe convincing nervous white voters that Obama is another Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson in his use of racial grievance politics will carry McCain to the White House.
But this is not 1988, when Vice President George Bush turned Michael Dukakis into an unpatriotic coddler of criminals. (Bush that year had a popular president and a strong economy behind him.) And it’s not 2004, when his son Swift-Boated John Kerry. (The president would have likely won anyway by playing on post-9/11 fear.) This year, McCain is running under a tattered Republican banner, with more than 80 percent of the public thinking the country is on the wrong track.

See? Liberals are so euphoric over GOP “brand damage” that they whistle right past the graveyard, refusing to acknowledge Obama’s weakness as a candidate.