Jack Kemp, RIP Age 73

The LA Times is reporting:

Jack Kemp, the all-star college and pro quarterback who went on to serve nine House terms, as secretary of Housing and Urban Development and as Robert Dole’s VP running mate on the 1996 Republican presidential ticket, died this evening.

Kemp also ran his own unsuccessful presidential campaign in 1988 against Ronald Reagan‘s vice president, George H.W. Bush, who would go on to appoint Kemp as his HUD secretary.

The cause of death was cancer. He was 73 years old and had allowed his office to release the news of his terminal illness only in early January.But there were no details of treatment or what type, only word that he would continue his charitable activities.

I chose this particular clip because Kemp was a native os the west side of LA.

Addendum:

Bit went with the L.A. Times story because Kenp was a native of Los Angeles.   All well and good, but I want the  Buffalo perspective, Robert J. McCarthy, Buffalo News:

“Buffalo, N. Y., is my hometown,” he told the crowd on Aug. 18, 1996. “Don’t let anybody tell you it’s not. And I want you to know I learned every lesson in politics and football from being a congressman and a quarterback for the Buffalo Bills.”

The late Tim Russert was born in Buffalo.  Kemp adopted Buffalo.

Recall Geraghty’s Law:

All Barack Obama statements come with an expiration date. All of them.

Gateway Pundit:

Candidate Barack Obama promised to shut down the military tribunals of Gitmo detainees.
Obama wanted US trials for the Islamic terrorists.

His first day in office Obama announced that he would close Gitmo and put a halt to the military tribunals.

William Glaberson, New York Times:

The Obama administration is moving toward reviving the military commission system for prosecuting Guantánamo detainees, which was a target of critics during the Bush administration, including Mr. Obama himself.

 Recall that B.J. Cinton was called an accomplished liar.   Barack Obama is just a liar.

This is rich.

In my view, this oughta be required viewing in any PolSci class.

I’ve been saying for a long time now, that “The Moderate Voice”, isn’t.

We see yet another example this morning where the writers there decided jump on a story with both feet without even bothering to check any other possibilities than the one that makes the right look the worst:

I know that movement conservatives have been behaving in incredibly bizarre ways since Obama took office, but this, I think, might set some kind of record. Erick Erickson, the founder of RedState, which is supposedly the most influential political blog on the right, posted this tweet tonight:

Of course, the writer at the supposed ‘moderate voice’ then goes on to appeal to authority on the matter, to back her claim:

John Amato at Crooks and Liars provides details, with some help from a twitterer who discovered Erick’s tweet:

I’m not even going to bother with the rest of it.

I can’t say I have ever been more disgusted, for having labeled the claims of ‘moderate’ correctly, before. For all of the claims of moderation the Gandleman claims  you’d think he’d have actual moderates, as opposed to what he clearly has now, which is clearly a band of leftists posing as moderates to gain some kind of gravitas.

How can I say such a mean thing?  Well, for one thing, you would think that at least one of them would have noticed the news articles of the last couple days.  For example, this one.

It seems Twitter is still having its share of security trouble, because according to Cnet, a person by the name of Hacker Croll was able to hack into a Twitter administrator account, by guessing the secret question to reset the administrator’s password on a Yahoo e-mail account where the Twitter password was located. This person was also able to view the details of 10 other accounts including Britney Spears and Ashton Kutcher according to screenshots posted to a French blog site.

Interesting to me how the all observant author in Joe Gandleman’s stable didn’t appear to notice these news reports.By my count there’s a bit over 50 of them right now. The way these things usually go, there’s far more in the way of security issues then there is security breach reports.

Let’s face it, John Amato is a lost cause, as is the aptly named Crooks and Liars. Always have been. I don’t expect anything approaching honesty out of anything coming off that particular site.  Then again, they’re not claiming to be moderate like “The Moderate Voice”, are they?

My suspicion is that there’s some dirty play going on here.  Either Moderate Voice fell for it foolishly, or was in on the thing from the get go.  Same goes for Crooks and Liars in my view.

Developing.

Added thoughts: This stuff will obviously go away. We’re not, for example, going to see Memeorandum pick up any further comment on it, and the whole thing will likely go quiet on us.  But, this is the kind of undercurrent of skulduggery conservatives contend with all the time.  Even from supposed freindlies.

In constitutional republic, even the president has to follow the rules.   Not in a Chicago style banana republic.    In Obamaland rules are for for the little people and the rules are what Obama says they are, Scott, Powerline:

The Chrysler reorganization is shaping up as another milestone in the decline of the rule of law under Barack Obama. We’ve said for quite a while that bankruptcy is the only viable option for Chrysler and General Motors, not–as Obama claims–because they don’t know how to make the right kinds of vehicles, but because their unsustainable union contracts make it impossible for them to be profitable. That reality has now been turned on its head, as the administration has tried to bully Chrysler’s secured creditors into going away, while the United Auto Workers Union, solely on the basis of political clout, would be paid at an implied rate of 50 percent and would emerge owning 55 percent of the company, with the government also holding a stake.

This is banana republic capitalism at its worst. Political influence, rather than the

Zachery Koowe, New York Times, doesn’t quite call Obama a lier, but he comes close:

Peter A. Weinberg and Joseph R. Perella are part of a band of Wall Street renegades – “a small group of speculators,” President Obama called them Thursday – who helped bankrupt Chrysler.

[…]

But now the two men, along with a handful of other financiers, are being blamed for precipitating the bankruptcy of an American icon.

While Koowe is kind to Obama, I will be kind to the whores Julianna Goldman and Linda Sandler:

May 1 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama thanked everyone from unions to executives for working to keep Chrysler LLC alive while blaming “a small group of speculators” for forcing the automaker into bankruptcy.

“A group of investment firms and hedge funds decided to hold out for the prospect of an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout,” Obama said yesterday in Washington before Chrysler filed for bankruptcy protection.

[…]

OppenheimerFunds, based in New York, said it rejected the offers because the government “unfairly” demanded that the fund’s shareholders make greater sacrifices than were being asked of unsecured creditors.

“Our holdings in secured Chrysler debt are entitled to priority in long-established U.S. bankruptcy law, and we are obligated to our fund shareholders to support agreements that respect these laws,” the company said in an e-mail.

Goldman and Sandler seem unable or unwilling to distinguish between a senior and junior creditor.   If they don’t know the difference, and I doubt they are indeed that dumb, they too stupid to be reporting financial news.    If  they do they difference, as I suspect, they writing bad copy to to the bidding of the Obama administration.   That to they whores more than journalists.

For those who don’t under stand the difference the difference between senior anAn attorney representing several Chrysler bondholders accused the Obama administration of intimidating his clients by issuing threats of public humiliation if they opposed their brokered deal to resolve the automaker’s debts. Speaking to WJR, Thomas Lauria said that the White House called the bondholders “vultures” for insisting on their rights as senior creditors and told them that the Obama administration would use the White House press corps to attack them in the media. Corky Boyd has the transcript (also via HA reader Geoff A):d junior creditors, listen to Tom  Lauria, a bankruptcy attorney, explain it,  via Glenn Reynolds, Instapundit, and WJR.   While Lauria, didn’t use exactly these words, he described the entire White House press corps and Obama administration whores.

Banana republic have lousy economies, because investors will not put their money into places where tin pot tyrants, change the rules to fit their personal whim.   The key to long term economic prosperity is the rule of  law, and the Obama administration is waging savage war on the rule of law.

Addendum:

It is likely that none of these bloggers read the story here.   However a blogger can dream.  Ed Morrissey, Hot Air, climbs on board the thug meme:

An attorney representing several Chrysler bondholders accused the Obama administration of intimidating his clients by issuing threats of public humiliation if they opposed their brokered deal to resolve the automaker’s debts. Speaking to WJR, Thomas Lauria said that the White House called the bondholders “vultures” for insisting on their rights as senior creditors and told them that the Obama administration would use the White House press corps to attack them in the media. Corky Boyd has the transcript (also via HA reader Geoff A):

More from Memerandum:

The Mahablog, Instapundit, Politics Daily, Gateway Pundit, Reason, Clayton Cramer’s BLOG, NewsBusters.org, Pajamas Media, The Sundries Shack, The Rhetorican, Founding Bloggers and Nice Deb

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

The Honorable Eric H. Holder, Jr.
Attorney General of the United States
United States Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C.  20530-0001

Dear Attorney General Holder:

This letter is respectfully submitted to inform you that I must decline the invitation to participate in the May 4 roundtable meeting the President’s Task Force on Detention Policy is convening with current and former prosecutors involved in international terrorism cases.  An invitation was extended to me by trial lawyers from the Counterterrorism Section, who are members of the Task Force, which you are leading.

The invitation email (of April 14) indicates that the meeting is part of an ongoing effort to identify lawful policies on the detention and disposition of alien enemy combatants—or what the Department now calls “individuals captured or apprehended in connection with armed conflicts and counterterrorism operations.”  I admire the lawyers of the Counterterrorism Division, and I do not question their good faith.  Nevertheless, it is quite clear—most recently, from your provocative remarks on Wednesday in Germany—that the Obama administration has already settled on a policy of releasing trained jihadists (including releasing some of them into the United States).  Whatever the good intentions of the organizers, the meeting will obviously be used by the administration to claim that its policy was arrived at in consultation with current and former government officials experienced in terrorism cases and national security issues.  I deeply disagree with this policy, which I believe is a violation of federal law and a betrayal of the president’s first obligation to protect the American people.  Under the circumstances, I think the better course is to register my dissent, rather than be used as a prop.

Moreover, in light of public statements by both you and the President, it is dismayingly clear that, under your leadership, the Justice Department takes the position that a lawyer who in good faith offers legal advice to government policy makers—like the government lawyers who offered good faith advice on interrogation policy—may be subject to investigation and prosecution for the content of that advice, in addition to empty but professionally damaging accusations of ethical misconduct.  Given that stance, any prudent lawyer would have to hesitate before offering advice to the government. 

Beyond that, as elucidated in my writing (including my proposal for a new national security court, which I understand the Task Force has perused), I believe alien enemy combatants should be detained at Guantanamo Bay (or a facility like it) until the conclusion of hostilities.  This national defense measure is deeply rooted in the venerable laws of war and was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in the 2004 Hamdi case.  Yet, as recently as Wednesday, you asserted that, in your considered judgment, such notions violate America’s “commitment to the rule of law.”  Indeed, you elaborated, “Nothing symbolizes our [adminstration’s] new course more than our decision to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay….  President Obama believes, and I strongly agree, that Guantanamo has come to represent a time and an approach that we want to put behind us: a disregard for our centuries-long respect for the rule of law[.]”  (Emphasis added.)

Given your policy of conducting ruinous criminal and ethics investigations of lawyers over the advice they offer the government, and your specific position that the wartime detention I would endorse is tantamount to a violation of law, it makes little sense for me to attend the Task Force meeting.  After all, my choice would be to remain silent or risk jeopardizing myself.
For what it may be worth, I will say this much.  For eight years, we have had a robust debate in the United States about how to handle alien terrorists captured during a defensive war authorized by Congress after nearly 3000 of our fellow Americans were annihilated.  Essentially, there have been two camps.  One calls for prosecution in the civilian criminal justice system, the strategy used throughout the 1990s.  The other calls for a military justice approach of combatant detention and war-crimes prosecutions by military commission.  Because each theory has its downsides, many commentators, myself included, have proposed a third way: a hybrid system, designed for the realities of modern international terrorism—a new system that would address the needs to protect our classified defense secrets and to assure Americans, as well as our allies, that we are detaining the right people. 

There are differences in these various proposals.  But their proponents, and adherents to both the military and civilian justice approaches, have all agreed on at least one thing:  Foreign terrorists trained to execute mass-murder attacks cannot simply be released while the war ensues and Americans are still being targeted.  We have already released too many jihadists who, as night follows day, have resumed plotting to kill Americans.  Indeed, according to recent reports, a released Guantanamo detainee is now leading Taliban combat operations in Afghanistan, where President Obama has just sent additional American forces.
The Obama campaign smeared Guantanamo Bay as a human rights blight.  Consistent with that hyperbolic rhetoric, the President began his administration by promising to close the detention camp within a year.  The President did this even though he and you (a) agree Gitmo is a top-flight prison facility, (b) acknowledge that our nation is still at war, and (c) concede that many Gitmo detainees are extremely dangerous terrorists who cannot be tried under civilian court rules.  Patently, the commitment to close Guantanamo Bay within a year was made without a plan for what to do with these detainees who cannot be tried.  Consequently, the Detention Policy Task Force is not an effort to arrive at the best policy.  It is an effort to justify a bad policy that has already been adopted: to wit, the Obama administration policy to release trained terrorists outright if that’s what it takes to close Gitmo by January.

Obviously, I am powerless to stop the administration from releasing top al Qaeda operatives who planned mass-murder attacks against American cities—like Binyam Mohammed (the accomplice of “Dirty Bomber” Jose Padilla) whom the administration recently transferred to Britain, where he is now at liberty and living on public assistance.  I am similarly powerless to stop the administration from admitting into the United States such alien jihadists as the 17 remaining Uighur detainees.  According to National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair, the Uighurs will apparently live freely, on American taxpayer assistance, despite the facts that they are affiliated with a terrorist organization and have received terrorist paramilitary training.  Under federal immigration law (the 2005 REAL ID Act), those facts render them excludable from the United States. The Uighurs’ impending release is thus a remarkable development given the Obama administration’s propensity to deride its predecessor’s purported insensitivity to the rule of law. 

I am, in addition, powerless to stop the President, as he takes these reckless steps, from touting his Detention Policy Task Force as a demonstration of his national security seriousness.  But I can decline to participate in the charade. 

Finally, let me repeat that I respect and admire the dedication of Justice Department lawyers, whom I have tirelessly defended since I retired in 2003 as a chief assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York.  It was a unique honor to serve for nearly twenty years as a federal prosecutor, under administrations of both parties.  It was as proud a day as I have ever had when the trial team I led was awarded the Attorney General’s Exceptional Service Award in 1996, after we secured the convictions of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and his underlings for waging a terrorist war against the United States.  I particularly appreciated receiving the award from Attorney General Reno—as I recounted in Willful Blindness, my book about the case, without her steadfastness against opposition from short-sighted government officials who wanted to release him, the “blind sheikh” would never have been indicted, much less convicted and so deservedly sentenced to life-imprisonment.  In any event, I’ve always believed defending our nation is a duty of citizenship, not ideology.  Thus, my conservative political views aside, I’ve made myself available to liberal and conservative groups, to Democrats and Republicans, who’ve thought tapping my experience would be beneficial.  It pains me to decline your invitation, but the attendant circumstances leave no other option.

Very truly yours,

/S/       

Andrew C. McCarthy

cc:        Sylvia T. Kaser and John DePue
National Security Division, Counterterrorism Section

Hat tip:  National Review Instittute.

Welcome, one and all to the most intense nightly read anywhere on the ‘sphere…The Bitsblog Nightly Ramble

• Torture is Barry Manilow covering AC/DC: A great position paper on torture, from Frank Fleming, over at Pajamas Media.  You may not recognize the name, but perhaps you’ll remember where he posts: IMAO.  That’s a clue, kiddies… go in with full shields up, ’till you figure out what’s going on.
• Smile, it’s cheaper, now: We’re looking at Cameras of late, for our youngest, so this post from Glenn comes along at a fabulous time, even though we’re likely going to buy used this time around. A 720p cam for $140? Looks like the same thing that happened to computers is happening with cameras, only faster.
• It’s about freedom: Arthur Brooks, at  The Wall Street Journal suggests that there’s a bit of a culture war going on about the future of capitalism. Given what we’ve been seeing with the executive branch vis’ a vie GM and Chrysler of late, that should be no shock. Obama’s moves here draw the battle lines very clearly. But I suggest that we call this what it really is… what we’re dealing with here, is a battle over freedom, since capitalism is the natural product of a free society. I agree with Arthur that this is a war that is cultural in it’s nature. But as with other countries that have tried to legislate out the cultural aspects of the people…(And I’ve written about these before) … what we see going on from the Democrats… the confiscation of value in the Chrysler case particularly, is as anti-freedom as it gets. Were seeing an ostensibly free people defeated by their own government. In the end, that’s what the folks at the tea parties are (Correctly) worried about.
• Another Obama failure:  The bond holders… IE; the people who are managing the 401k’s,and who have investments of your money in mine in Chrysler  stood up to Obama’s confiscation, yesterday. The Chosen one was not amused:
  

  “A group of investment firms and hedge funds decided to hold out for the prospect of an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout,” Obama said, flanked by his economic, energy and environmental teams. “They were hoping that everybody else would make sacrifices, and they would have to make none. Some demanded twice the return that other lenders were getting. I don’t stand with them.” .

  Obama tried to spin this one off as a victory for him. Bottom line, however, is that it’s another major failure. Atlas is shrugging, folks.  Let’s tell the truth about this; The only groups not making sacrifices here are the unions… Obama’s biggest political backers… and the government… both of which get the spoils of the confiscation Obama tried to arrange.  I’m going to urge you folks who have 401k’s to look closely at your portfolios, and determine if your funds actually have Chrysler stock in them. I’m willing to bet the majority of you do, even if you hadn’t directly arranged for it… that’s the nature of mutual funds.  You’re the ones being asked to sacrifice to support the unions. And the bond holders Obama’s beefing about? They’re simply doing their job… fighting for the people who invested with them. And think about this;  Supposedly, NOT fighting for the investors is why Ken Lewis is drawing unemployment today.  

•  Suiters for Souter’s job: This morning, the headlines were filled with the news that after 20 years, Justice David Souter is pulling the pin. This in turn started the inevitable replacement speculation festival.   Interesting, that the two most left leaning robes are the first ones be replaced. Souter, and Justice Ginsberg, arguably the two most liberal voices on the bench.  Granted, Ginsberg hasn’t announced yet, but it seems reasonable to assume she’s going to be replaced one way or the other, within the next four years given her health situation.  My guess is that unless Obama manages to nominate an avowed Marxist… (And no, I’d not put it past him) the balance of the court wouldn’t be changed much.  Jake Tapper seems to agree.  
• BitsBlog offers Obama a consulting Service: Oh… and my guess: Obama will be looking for a female for the role. It’s gotta be PC, after all. You know, come to think of it, I wouldn’t be shocked if he nominated Nancy Pelosi. Be an interesting way to eliminate a long standing thorn in his side, while tossing a bone to the whackjob left. Michelle offers some insights on possible nominees…. any one of which would be a blinking disaster for America.
• The qualification list:  Speaking of Michelle she lists a Ron Sims… the guy Obama tapped for the number 2 position at HUD, to be ” transparency-killing, truth-challenged hack.” Seems to me she’s understating it. Then again, it occurs to me that those words constitute the list of qualifications for working in the Obama administration.
• He left his brain… in San Fransisco: Senility has finally taken hold of Tony Bennett. Sad to see.
• Right, again: As I predicted, the other night, Fox won the ratings war, by not running Obama’s publicity stunt.
• Infighting, but over what, exactly? I’ve been watching this infighting with RNC Chair Steele for several weeks now. Since I’ve already written heavily to the idea that there are too many in the RNC ‘Old Boy Network…. (And by the way you need to read Adam Graham’s latest missive at Pajamas Media on that point…)…  I’m inclined to think one way or another it comes down to that particular fight. It would help me if I better understood Steele’s vision for the party.  Example; are Orin Hatch, and John Cornyn, both  named yesterday in a separate post, among those fighting against Steele?  I’m starting to think I should approach the RNC chair with some questions that may help the perception on all of this. I’m also considering putting out some feelers to Toomey’s office, as well, on the same subject.

Glenn Reynolds notes, this morning:

HECKLE AND CHIDE: When bus passengers yell at driver, it improves safety. Is this an argument for free speech in general?

Well, consider this question in light of the actions of the federal government and the tea parties… the latter of which are engaged in as classic an example of free speech as we’ll ever see in our lifetimes. Do you suppose that in the end, it’ll keep Obama and the Congress from going even more radical leftist than they might have?

That’s a thought that is both encouraging and frightening at the same time.  Frightening, to contemplate just how far they’d go absent that very vocal check on their power.

As Bit rambled:

Apparently, the Tea Parties now officially exist… though Barry clearly still doesn’t understand them.  Still, let’s have that serous conversation, Barry. Do you suppose he’ll ever have the stones to address this? You know better, don’t you? Oh, Hopey Changitude.

Yes the tea parties exist, and the one has now acknowledged that they exist.  Howver Obama stil calls them tea baggers, rather than tea partiers    We  wonder about Obama’s sources.    Sam Stien, Puffington Post, suggests the one is reading Miss Andrea Sullivan:

Is Barack Obama reading blogs, particularly the site of one of his campaign’s most committed supporters, Andrew Sullivan?

At his press conference on Wednesday evening, the president defended his decision to end the use of torture on detainees, by citing an article he had recently read, in which it was noted that during World War II, Winston Churchill refused to use such tactics on the spies captured by the British

And to think the Obama has the audacity to criticize normal people for listening the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.    They are tea parties, not tea bags.    Reading a real life tea bagger like Sullivan would go long way to explain Obama’s confusion.

Speaking of confusion,  Scott, Powerline, wonders about the veracity of Obama purported historical facts:

Churchill was the leader ultimately responsible for the firebombing of Dresden. He was not particularly constrained by high minded liberal notions of wartime restraint, though late in the war (after Dresden) he opposed “the bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror.”

Did Churchill ever say “we don’t torture”? I don’t know and I wonder what Obama was talking about. Obama’s “knowledge” on this point may derive from the deep well of leaning afforded by a recent Andrew Sullivan post calling for the prosecution of Dick Cheney (why stop with Cheney?), based on a column last week by Ben Macintyre.

As do the Brits, Michael Tomasky, Guardian(UK):

[T]he president did make one glaring error. He said, when discussing torture, that he’d read an article recently saying how Churchill, at the height of the blitz, said of Great Britain “we don’t torture.”

He may well have read such an article, and Churchill may well have made such a statement. But Britain did torture.

Further, confused about his own budget:

WASHINGTON (AP) – “That wasn’t me,” President Barack Obama said on his 100th day in office, disclaiming responsibility for the huge budget deficit waiting for him on Day One. It actually was him – and the other Democrats controlling Congress the previous two years – who shaped a budget so out of balance.

And confused about his stimulus plan,  Gatewasy Pundit:

During his 100 Day Press Conference Barack Obama bragged that his administration had created or saved 150,000 jobs.The US economy lost 598,000 jobs in January.
The US economy lost 706,000 jobs in February.
The US economy lost 742,000 jobs in March.

At least they know what is normal in South Carolina, Make Adams, Twohhall:

I’ve been down in South Carolina spending the last few days with a beautiful woman who is opposed to gay marriage. I hope that doesn’t offend you. In Hollywood, that’s called bigotry. In South Carolina, it’s called “normal.”

Antropogenic global warming a relgion, not science,  or says one jUK judge, Marc Sheppard, American Thinker:

The judge ruled that Nicholson’s extreme green views fit the definition of “a philosophical belief under the Employment Equality (Religion and Belief) Regulations, 2003.” So strong were these “beliefs,” that they “put him at odds with other senior executives within the firm.” The 41-year-old told the employment tribunal that, as head of sustainability at Grainger plc, Britain’s largest residential property investment company, he constantly tangled with fellow-executives over the company’s environmental policies and corporate social responsibility.

Cram down, smack down:

WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)–A measure to allow bankruptcy judges to rework mortgages of strapped homeowners failed in the U.S. Senate Thursday, clouding its chances of becoming law.

The defeat is a setback for the Obama administration, which had championed the measure as a central plank of its plan to right the housing market.

The measure was offered as an amendment to broader banking legislation. It failed on a 51-to-45 vote, with 12 Democrats, including Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, joining Republicans in opposition.

 Arlen is Dirty Harry’s problem now, Bret Baier Fox:

Cutting in Line?

Some Senate Democrats are upset over the deal Majority Leader Harry Reid made with Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter, allowing Specter to keep the seniority he earned as a Republican and bypass other Democrats on some of the most powerful committees.

The Hill newspaper reports that Maryland’s Barbara Mikulski says, “I won’t be happy if I don’t get to chair something because of Arlen Specter.”A senior Democratic lawmaker — who spoke on condition of anonymity — says the Democratic conference will vote against giving Specter seniority over others, saying that Reid’s agreement is “his deal and not the Caucus’s.”

American Chopper meets American Beauty, People:

Sarah’s the one one the right.

If Pavlov was alive today, he would have dropped using dogs in a heartbeat and used the Left-sphere exclusively for his experiments

Moe Lane.

Welcome one and all to the most intense nightly read on the ‘sphere… The BitsBlog Nightly Ramble

This is the  “Would you buy a car from this president?” Edition

• Abject failure: Let’s save tine on the press conference, publiscity stint of last night, and the verdit on the first 100 days, which I’ve already rendered anyway. I suppose, though we could give yu some indications of Obama’s huge success story.
• RIP American Auto industry, thanks to Democrats…. and unions: So, Chrysler will be taking bankruptcy, apparently seeing the other choice which was GM’s wasn’t all that appealing. As to GM, Kaus has most of it nailed:
  

  Let the UAW, as new owner of GM, pay the price for the overgrown work rules of its locals. Let the UAW demand above-market raises from itself. Let the UAW try to raise money from new lenders after the previous round of lenders has been royally screwed (thanks, in part, to the UAW). And then let the UAW try to sell the cars that result.
  …
  As long as the government steps out of the financing picture, the UAW will feel the consequences of its own excesses. Just don’t bail them out again! …

  I’ll add, let the UAW work under the rules of the game that the new owners… The US government, has placed on them in terms of the kinds of cars that can be built, and we’ll see how well they sell. To date, the cars the left wants built, don’t’ sell.  The Volt seems a great place to start. Let them stew in their own juices.   

  What Kaus misses however, is what happens when the repercussions of that arrangement come home to roost? Certainly we’ll all know what killed the American Auto Industry. trouble is, we’ll have cured the decease, but killed the patient.   They’ll be no doubt what killed them off, and very little argument in political circles afterwards, but still, no life in the subejct. So, what’s the point? 

  The other thing, of course is that there will be no stopping the government from printing more greenbacks to keep the unions afloat. Somehow,either way this falls out,  I don’t see that as an overall plus, but I suppose there’s very little for it, if we can’t delay this nonsense until the midterm elections. Oh, Hopey Changitude.

•  NORK Rides again:  Seems North Korea…. well, at least the little gargoyle… has decided to respond to the UN security council. essentialy, the answer given is “Get stuffed”.   Another great bit of work under the flag of Obama foreign policy, huh?  Oh, Hopey Changitude.
• The Economy, too: The GDP fell more than expected last quarter. A great Obama Victory.  Oh, Hopey Changitude.
• Apparently, the Tea Parties now officially exist… though Barry clearly still doesn’t understand them.  Still, let’s have that serous conversation, Barry. Do you suppose he’ll ever have the stones to address this? You know better, don’t you? Oh, Hopey Changitude.
• It’s all yours, Barry:  PrezBO is trying to disown the deficit he created.  It’s all done with mirrors and hope. Oh, and Barry? When even the AP calls you a liar, you have serious problems.  
• Feedback: Lots of great feedback from my post on American Thinker, yesterday.  I’ll tell the truth here. I’m enough of a fan, that I consider it an honor being mentioned in the place. The place oughta be on your regular read list.  Tom seems a nice guy, too. I’ll be submitting more over there as time goes on, and we’ll see where it goes.
• More feedback:  The Pajamas Media post last week is still catchng traffic, apparently, if I read the inbounds to this blog, from the place correctly.   It’s getting easier, writing for blogs other than this one, though I’ll admit there was an adjustment period.  In establishing a style, here on BitsBlog, I was told I tended to be too formal… and frankly, that was a problem breaking out of that box. Now, I find myself forcing myself back into that box, or at least finding a balance that keeps things readable. Apparently, I’m not doing badly, though, so it’s all good… as learning experiences are.
• Running for cover: I note this Horror story in the Netherlands.  I note also, though, their apparent reluctance to identify the nationality/ethnic background of the driver in question.  What do you want to bet this is yet another example of Jihad? I wonder more, if we’ll ever be told about it.

Pay no attention to the dolting idiot who thinks he Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden. from Doug Powers @ Michelle Malkin:

Biden’s appearance prompted the White House to release a statement saying that Biden was only talking about planes going to and from Mexico, even though Biden made it clear that he wasn’t only talking about Mexico

The best way to avoid the spread os swine flu is to wash your hands:

Wash your hands often with soap and water, especially after you cough or sneeze. Alcohol-based hands cleaners are also effective.

For normal folks, hand sanitizier would be good.   For the  strutting Delaware Blue Hen, make it foot sanitizer, taken orally.

An annoying note at The New Ledger which to my view exemplifies the problems conservatives face with the Repubclican estabishment:

NRSC Vice-Chairman Orrin Hatch said today that he doesn’t believe former Congressman Pat Toomey has a chance to beat newly turned Democrat Arlen Specter in next year’s Senate race in Pennsylvania. Hatch even suggested that the NRSC may seek to recruit a candidate to run against Toomey.

“I don’t think there is anybody in the world who believes he can get elected senator there,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch, the vice chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Asked if the NRSC would back Toomey, Hatch said, “I don’t think so” and that the party should look for “someone who can win there.”

The Chairman of the NRSC, Texas Senator John Cornyn, has yet to endorse Toomey and said today that he wasn’t sure that Toomey would be the “only candidate” or the “strongest candidate” either. In fact, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham suggested a name today that has been thrown around in political circles since Specter’s defection – Tom Ridge. The reluctance of the NRSC to get on board Toomey’s campaign, especially in the wake of Specter’s defection, is troubling. What kind of Republican party does the GOP leadership in Washington want to have?

(under breath…Tom Ridge? Ummmm… you’re kidding, right? )

Clearly, the answer is they want more of the centrist nonsense that lost us the ’08 election.

I said at Pajamas Media  about a week back:

For a long time, the Republican Party has been neither conservative nor libertarian. So few were surprised to find a rather bright line drawn between the GOP and the recent tea party protests.

…

While conservatives and libertarians make up the majority of the GOP, they don’t make up even half of the leadership. The rank and file are interested in principles of conservatism and libertarianism. They want to see those principles applied to governing. The GOP leadership has no interest anymore in such matters, being more enamored with attaining and remaining in power. Those principles are just standing in their way.

That disconnect I mention in that article, between the Republican rank and file and the Republican ‘leadership; has never been exposed as it is in their reaction to Toomey.

 To my mind the actions and comments of the Republican leadership, Hatch, particularly, constitutes working directly for the defeat of real conservatives, and favoring the ‘go-along to get along’ RINO spinlessness that has so infected the Republicans over the last several years. Apparently,  Hatch shares Barrack Obama’s view of the Tea Parties, and the message they sent Washington.

Perhaps it’s time to send Mr. Hatch a message he wont be able to deny?

Wanna know something Mr. President, there some six billion people in the World.   Not all of them like me.  Sobeit.

Mr. President, you mock Bush’s economy, but unlike yours, the Bush economy actually worked:

Your recovery plan has failed.

Hat tips:    Sweetness & Light video, graphic

More, I don’t have a monopoly on snide, Moe Lane, Red State does it very well.

Welcome, one and all to the most intense nightly read anywhere on the ‘sphere… The BigsBlog Nightly Ramble.

This is the “Bang the Drum Slowly” Edition

• Spectre Specter: I’ve gotten some interesting feedback from readers on this monring article on Arlen Specter.  Also gotten some linnks in for other the take of others on the matter… the most notable of which would be John Hawkins, who wrote a great one on the topic, this monring.  I hadn’t heard Mike Smirkonish’s take that he mentions, but I must say I’m a little disappointed. I understand he’s playing to an audience that’s more liberal than some, down there in Philly, Mike, at least in my hearing, has always been one to let logic, not political/broadcasting expediency to rule the day. If that’s no longer the case, perhaps it’s time for a few thousand of us to start talking to WPHT management, hmmm?
• Who has changed?  Glenn Reynolds makes a point I mentioned this monring:
  

  SO I HEARD SOME GUY ON THE RADIO saying that the Republicans have changed from the Reagan era — now they’re a bunch of social conservatives. But back during the Reagan era, I remember hearing that the Republicans were . . . a bunch of social conservatives. And back then they were pushing the abortion-banning Human Life Amendment — hard — along with a statutory end-run (the Human Life Bill) that simply declared life began at conception. Also school prayer and all sorts of stuff. I’m not actually hearing much along these lines from today’s Republicans, for whom tepid efforts at limiting late-term abortions are a big deal — but who are nonetheless stone-age troglodytes on social issues because they’ve got the same position as Barack Obama on gay marriage — and I’m wondering where this big shift to the right really is.

  As I said this morning; both parties have been moving left for decades, now… since Reagan at least.

• Putting the fire out with gasoline:  Jon Henke notes that given the reaction of the left, Specter isn’t going to find much support among Democrats, either.  Kinda looks like he’ll be that rare pol that loses in the primaries of both parties.
• Pig Fizzle, for Shizzle: WHO is now reporting 7 dead from Swine Flu, not hundreds. And while frankly I tend as a rule to take their figures with a grain of salt, they tend to make far more sense than the hype we’re seeing. Meantime, Janet says “Don’t call it Swine Flu.” Gee, Janet, whose sensibilities are you protecting?
• Not so Clear: Clear Channel is cutting 590 jobs across the CC empire. All of them in Radio. Not too much a shock, actually.  Still, that’s a better situation than a number of others in the industry.
• Yeah, I know… 100 days… Yada, Yada. I’ve already made my comments on the subject, but this one says it well, too.  And guess what? For all the hype, the fact is that Obama is very nearly the least popular president for the last 40 years.
• Add to the ‘Places to Avoid’ list: If you’re thinking of a vacation, forget NOLA.
• So much for saving the Big Three: I mentioned the other day that GM was going to be half owned by the Union. Guess what? Chrysler, too.  You going to take my word on this stuff, yet?