Archive for June 15th, 2009

June 15, 2009

Bill Kristol is wrong

And you ask, why is Bill Kristol wrong?

It is one thing to assume (at least, for the sake of argument) that a liberal like Obama desires what is good for America. It is another thing to assume that a liberal actually knows what is good for America, or that, knowing what is good, he will actually pursue the good competently and persistently. The history of liberalism disproves any such assumption. . . .

Stop Obama: Because He’s Not Grover Cleveland. If conservatives need a slogan, I say that will do.

June 15, 2009

The Hot Redhead Is Right!

Today’s Day-by-Day:

It’s the Rule 5 Christina Hendricks Principle: Any argument is more persuasive when made by a hot chick. Just think if Friedrich Hayek had been a sexy dame with big gazongas . . .

UPDATE: Welcome Instapundit readers! Speaking of libertarian fantasies, imagine Jon Corzine crushed like a bug on a windshield on the Jersey Turnpike . . .

June 15, 2009

Health-care townhall goes green?Obama cultivates the plants!

The MSM is asleep at the switch as Barack Obama fields “spontaneous” health-care questions from . . . a former Democratic Party candidate for Congress:

This questioner can be seen in a CNN video covering the Green Bay event. The woman is identified as “Paulette Guerin” and labeled as an “attendee” of the meeting on the CNN segment. In fact CNN got the spelling of the woman’s last name wrong, it’s not Guerin, but Garin. . . .
Garin was a recent Democrat candidate for Wisconsin’s 1st Congressional District. Not only that but Garin is a proponent of a single-payer plan, as Obama was when he was a Senator from Illinois. In fact, Garin says right on her webpage that Obama is a proponent of the single payer plan and she urges fellow Wisconsinites to flood Congress with calls to implement the single payer system . . .

Jeff Gannon could not be reached for comment.

June 15, 2009

The Blogger Whom Allah HatethGets No Credit for His Scoop

Allah hates me — I own that Google-bomb — and the complex algorithm of Allahpundit non-linkage contributes enormously to situations like this:

In October, a truck driver traveling through a low-income district of Jacksonville, Fla., saw a billboard advertising a program that offered free cell-phones for the poor. The truck driver tipped me, and I reported it on my blog.
Sunday, the New York Times finally did a feature story about Lifeline, a federally-subsidized, federally-mandated program.
The blogosphere is excited about this story. Do I get any credit for my scoop? Of course not. Because I suck.

People have asked me why I keep pointing out how much I suck, but it is Allah who — by his eternal non-linkage — continuously points this out. I merely note the fact, so that when my friends behold with sadness my poverty and obscurity, they need not wonder why.

UPDATE: Woe unto ye, Ed Driscoll, for it is a proverb among the wise that there is hatred sufficient to encompass all who link the blogger whom Allah hateth.

June 15, 2009

‘Experts’ Euthanize the U.S. Economy

What does the long-ago death of a matinee idol tell us about the likely results of Obamanomics? Glad you asked!

Actual science involves the ascertaining and application of facts, with the knowledge that there are more facts in the universe than any person can ever possibly know. The pseudo-religion of Science, by contrast, involves the belief that “experts” already know all the important facts, and that much of what we normally call “common sense” is contradicted by the facts most recently discovered by these experts, who constitute the high priesthood of the cult of Science. . . .
Think about how, when Timothy Geithner’s nomination as Treasury secretary was before the Senate, we were told that Geithner — who couldn’t even correctly calculate his own income tax — was nonetheless the only man in the country who could save our economic fortunes. Even Republicans praised Geithner, with Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah calling him “a person of great integrity.” . . .
Last week, financial analyst James Quinn portrayed Geithner, President Obama and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke as the Larry, Curly and Moe of an economic slapstick routine that would be hysterically funny, if only the consequences weren’t so predictably tragic. . . .
We should hardly be surprised that the journalistic priesthood sings the praises of the economic priesthood, even as Dr. Larry, Dr. Curly and Dr. Moe proceed to administer to the American economy the kind of Science that the surgeons provided to the late Jeff Chandler.

Read the whole thing.

UPDATE: The DJIA was down 200 points at noon. Maybe some “squirrels” are getting wise to the game.

UPDATE II: Somewhat related: Liberal mathematics.

June 15, 2009

Riots in Iran vs. Riots in L.A.

Michelle Malkin nails it:

Iranian youth risked their lives to protest election fraud.
L.A. youths set cars and buses on fire and took to the streets to riot . . . after their basketball team won.

Right. I’m thinking the dictators of the world should show coverage of the L.A. basketball riots on their government TV stations: “See? We told you democracy doesn’t work!”

More riotous news at

June 15, 2009

Karl Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Rove?

Do the publishers of The Atlantic Monthly have no shame at all?

Ahmadinejad’s bag of tricks is eerily like that of Karl Rove – the constant use of fear, the exploitation of religion, the demonization of liberals, the deployment of Potemkin symbolism like Sarah Palin . . .

Really, Sully? I mean, really? WTF goes through someone’s mind when they dream up an idiotic comparison between (a) Karl Rove, a Republican political strategist, and (b) Mahmoud Ahmadinejed, a Jew-hating genocidal maniac?

You might as well compare Rove to Charles Manson or Pol Pot. Please note that Sullivan’s comparison involves no hypotheticals. It does not appear to be any sort of parodic humor, except unintentionally. He evidently means to suggest in all seriousness that Ahmadinejad and Rove are similar in some meaningful way.

Whatever you think of Karl Rove — and I am certainly not his biggest fan — there is something absurdly puerile in the suggestion that his political strategies involve “the deployment of Potemkin symbolism like Sarah Palin” (???).

WTF? How did Palin become involved in this? It’s as if Sully is merely reacting at some kind of Rorshach level of subconsciousness.

More from William Jacobson and Donald Douglas. Via Memeorandum.

UPDATE: I went outside, smoked a cigarette, then took a shower and ate a pizza and now, an hour later, I’m still agog at the wretchedness of Sully’s phrase, “Potemkin symbolism like Sarah Palin.” Sully attributes this to Rove — as if the governor of Alaska were self-evidently a signature “Rovian” tactic — and then says it is part of a “bag of tricks is eerily like that” of Ahmadinejad. Or vice-versa, actually, but the idea of moral equivalence is there.

How? Why? I’m scratching my head. Given that hyperbolic extremity of ad hominem is sort of a speciality of mine, and that I am a three-time nominee for Sully’s “Malkin Award,” you might think I’d have the kind of insight necessary to reverse-engineer a thing like this.

This morning, I ignored Frank Rich’s column, in which he cited Shep Smith as having “tied the far-right loners who had gotten their guns out in Wichita and Washington to the mounting fury of Obama haters.” A flimsy theory of causality — a connection asserted rather than demonstrated — and I thought to myself, “Well, other people will tear that to shreds. No need for me to get exercised over it.”

So now I’m wondering why this particular excursion by Sullivan made me react, whereas Rich’s idiotic column did not. Perhaps it is that Sully boils his slander down to a single sentence so transparently false.

Or perhaps it is that Sully decided to throw in the name of Sarah Palin. Remember, my Donkey Cons co-author is now collaborating on Palin’s autobiography. I actually covered Palin during the 2008 campaign. So I have a concept of Palin as being an actual human being, rather than some kind of “Potemkin symbolism.”

WTF? I look at phrase, and try to figure out exactly what Sully means by it. “Potemkin villages” were the cruel propaganda hoax by which the Soviets sought to convince naive foreign visitors that everything was hunky-dory in the worker’s socialist paradise.* In what sense does Sarah Palin deserve the descriptor “Potemkin”? What is the meaning of “Potemkin” in this context? And exactly how does Karl Rove fit into this?

It is a meaning, and a connection, that exists only in Andrew Sullivan’s febrile imaginings. He evidently aims to denounce a certain style of Republican political rhetoric, and grasps randomly to pluck the names of two pet bogeys — Rove and Palin — out of thin air. To him, these people are indeed merely symbols, and it doesn’t occur to him that there might be anything offenisve in mixing them together in a comparison to Mahoud Ahmadinejad.

If a supposedly serious political commentator like Sullivan doesn’t hesitate to say such things, why are we shocked when a late-night comic jokes about A-Rod having sex with Palin’s 14-year-old daughter?

UPDATE II by Smitty:
I think a better title would have been: “If Sarah Palin is a Karl Rove production, does that mean Andrew Sullivan is Trig?”

UPDATE III: * Struck the incorrect sentence about “Potemkin villages,” a concept which several historical-minded commenters tell me dates to the time of Catherine the Great, and not the Soviet era.

UPDATE IV: And welcome Instapundit readers. Insty links Ann Althouse working over Sully on the Palin front. I think Althouse misses the basic dynamic of what Sullivan (and others) are doing. It’s as simple as this: “Bush sucked. Therefore, we can say anything we want to about any Republican.”

Go back to that Frank Rich column I ignored Sunday morning. Everybody in the news business gets e-mails from cranks. Shep Smith reaches a television viewership of a million or so, and gets crank e-mails, whiich he mentions in relation to the Holocaust Museum shooting. This, says Frank Rich, is the smoking gun proving that Republican “Obama haters” have blood on their hands.

Well, no, it doesn’t. Here’s a little clue for the clueless: The Holocaust Museum shooter used to send crazy letters and e-mails to The Washington Times when I worked there. He probably sent the same kind of crap to lots of publications. That’s what crackpots do. It has nothing to do with the Republican Party.

In the current political climate, the liberal media have some kind of Bush = Nixon = Hitler formulation in their minds that justifies them saying anything they want about Republicans. And do you know who I blame for that? Republicans.

The GOP’s media operations are third-rate. Cynthia Yockey is running a one-woman campaign against Letterman. Where are the Republican Party media operatives lending her assistance and support? Nowhere.

If the Republican Party even has media operatives, that is. They certainly don’t have good ones. And when you run a bad media operation, you get bad media.

UPDATE V: Also linked by Nice Deb, who notes that CBS compared Ahmadinejad to Bush on June 8.

UPDATE VI: Wow. Linked twice by Insty on the same post. George Carlin called it “vuja de”: When you get the feeling that nothing like this has ever happened before. Did I mention that Bill Kristol is wrong?

June 15, 2009

Yes, Maher, this *is* that for which you voted

by Smitty (h/t Digg, THRFeed)

Self-described libertarian pundit Bill Maher ripped Barak Obama during a lengthy monologue on his HBO program Friday night, accusing the president of being obsessed with appearing on TV and failing to come through on pre-election promises.
“This is not what I voted for,” Maher said. “I don’t want my president to be a TV star.”

Yes, Maher, you sorry sack of stuff, you’re getting that for which you voted . If you watch the 5 entire minute clip, you see this invertebrate claim to have his panties in a bunch about the POTUS, and then blame all of the crappy policy for which he voted upon Republicans, banks, insurance companies, etc. Stacy and I missed Maher’s roundup, about which we are formally miffed, of course.

Listen, ladies and gentlemen of the Left: vote thug, expect mugging. Hmm. I think I just came up with my Tea Party sign.

Yes, Left, you’re in character for lacking introspection, for projecting your shortcomings and fears upon your opponents, for ignoring history and the Constitution, for attempting to bring to pass a Utopian fantasy.

Next time, vote for for a common sense implant.