Ham Slam

I think it’s fair to say that belief in Geithner’s mishandling is now officially unideological:

Mary Katherine Ham, Weekly Standard, quiped after Ann Coulter and Bill Maher agree.

Connecticut takes dead aim at First Amendment, Jack Fowler, National Review:

The [Democrat]-controlled Judiciary Committee has introduced Raised Bill 1098, a bill aimed specifically at the Catholic Church, which would remove the authority of the bishop and pastor over individual parishes and put a board of laymen in their place. Yes, we’re asking the same questions you are (Where does the legislature have the authority to do this? Isn’t this a blatant violation of the First Amendment?), but we assure you that this is not a hoax.

Connecticut has no authority over a private associations,  even if called a church,  even the Catholic Church.   The  Declaration of Independence holds that rights flow from God to Man and not from God to King, the Connecticut legislature.   The  good people, all good people, need to slap down the fools in the Connecticut legislature, and slap them down hard.

No Catholic need recognize the authority any of kangaroo board which might be appointed under such a law.

Addendum: (Updated and bumped)

Apparent victory, Christopher Keating, Courant:

Following the biggest political firestorm of the 2009 legislative session, a public hearing scheduled for Wednesday on the financial and administrative management of the Catholic Church has been canceled. The bill is dead for the rest of the legislative session.

The bigots lose a round.   The Declaration of Independence is not yet voided.

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

 This is the “Hey Cabbie” edition. As in, get me the bleep off this picture.

• Democrat infighting: The Washington Post today notes that the Democrats are getting stung by dissent from their own party.  Well, look, guys, just remember dissent is the highest form of patriotism. You told us that repeatedly, remember?
• Just another corrupt Obama appointee: I’ve mentioned Adolfo Carrion before, and told you he was a problem. Apparently, others are now starting to notice.
• ‘It’s just a mistake’:Kaus quotes Buffett:
  

  I don’t think anybody on December 7th would have said a `war is a terrible thing to waste, and therefore we’re going to try and ram through a whole bunch of things and-but we expect to-expect the other party to unite behind us on the-on the big problem.’ It’s just a mistake, I think.

  Mickey notes this is the first time the Dinosaurs have utterly ignored a proncouncement from Buffett. What he’s saying must not fit the mold, huh?

• Moderate Taliban? James Joyner suggests there is such a thing and we should be dealing with them. I’m unconvinced, James. I’ve said it before and will say it again: It’s time we get out of the notion that this thing with the Muslims is going to come to some kind of a mutually agreeable end, and that civilization is going to have any sway whatsoever over a band of people who insist on remaining in the fourteenth century, and who are, by their own words quite willing to kill 1000 of their own for the purpose of killing one Jew.  Absent groups willing to stand up and forcefully identify themselves as not fitting that mold and then proving it by their actions, including putting down the groups that DO fit that mold, , the idea of a moderate anything, here, is a pipe dream, and one that will quite probably get many of us killed, trying to pursue it.
•  His own hero?  And by the way, James, this is confirmation, not revelation.
• Recepies for Goose pate’  Heh.  Those blenders can get kind of expensive, though.
• Hey, Derb!  Isn’t this a question to be asking Obama, directly? I mean, I know he’ll think you’re just joking, but still…
• But will it work in Casper? As regards the Broadband gap:It seems to me the peope who don’t understand the dynamics involved, here, also do not understand the dynamics involved with our transportation needs. Anyone who doesn’t understand why broadband is troublesome in Wyoming isn’t going to understand why mass transit, or for that matter, the ‘smart’ car, isn’t going to work well, there, either. Yet, we’ll willingly place such people in charge of the systems of the world via bodies like the UN, because of the myth that ‘Europe does it better’. Or, Sweeden. Or whatever.
• Blinded them with what?  Yes, science over all… and apparently, that ‘all’ includes ethics. Science without ethics, is what we’re talking about here. And that seems to me to leave us without a hypocratic oath, for example…wherein doctors are held to doing ‘no harm’.  Then again, Obama and his administration, to say nothing of the Democrats in Congress, have clearly demonstrated they’re not bound by ethics, either. So why should we be shocked, here?  Then also, there’s the deal with Global warming, so apparently they’re not bound to science itself, either… the whole deal seems unbound in their myopic sight. After a while, we will collectively reach the conclusion I reached years ago; That Democrats are bound to nothing permanent, except their desire for power.

I note by way of  Ben Smith at Politico, another arranged wrestling match on our horizon… Newt v Rush. There’s nothing like the spectacle of conservatives having a disagreement while the Soros Dominated Dinosaur media stands on the sidelines yelling “Fight!! Fight!! Fight!! Fight!!”
Rush clearly knows where this is being arranged, and what is driving it:

“I’m frankly getting tired of talking about Newt. I mean, it’s a pointless exercise,” Limbaugh said of Gingrich’s dismissal of him on “Meet the Press.” “I’m surprised by nothing when I’m dealing with people in the media who think they’re in politics. … They are fly-by-night operators, and most of them stand for nothing until they see a poll about what the American people want, and then they go out and try to say one way or another what the American people want while trying to falsely hold onto an ideology at the same time — and you can’t count on them. You can’t depend on them. They will sell you out; they will throw you overboard to save themselves, faster than anything. And they’ll use you on their way up as often as they can at the same time.”

Rush is understandably less than happy with Gingrich, as well:

“I mean, next week Newt could come out and profess his total admiration and love for me if it would serve his purposes,” he continued. “They’re running TV ads against me. Newt Gingrich wishes they were running TV ads against him.”

Yeah, well….maybe. But, maybe not. There is certain unpredictability in Gingrich I’ve always found problematic. Apparently, given his comments, Rush does as well.
Now as it happens, and generally speaking, I like Gingrich. We have political disagreements, there’s no denying that. I’ve taken him to task in articles I’ve written over the years. That said, I think he can be a positive influence, assuming  somebody’s actually holding the reins.

Ponder, please, those last six words.

There, I think, lies the issue. Gingrich, along with everyone else on the planet, just now, sees a vacuum at the head end of the Republican Party. Nature, as you know, hates a vacuum. Gingrich is trying to fill that vacuum. More power to him in that process. The competition of ideas, even assuming Gingrich doesn’t win out, will serve the party, and the country, well. However, as Barack Obama found out, it’s a lot different when you’re in the big chair. Leading is a lot different than sniping from the sidelines. Frankly, while I marvel at Newt’s ideation and articulation of those ideas, I wonder if Gingrich has the qualities that are required for leadership. At the moment I consider that an open question. He’s certainly an idea man… but idea men generally speaking are not the best leaders; they tend to feed their ideas to the people that ARE leaders.

Among the qualities of true leaders is a dedication to principle. So, the biggest objection I have to Newt is the issue of his dedication (or possibly, more accurately, the lack of it) to conservative principles. It is on these matters that I have most often leveled a blast at Gingrich. All too often he gets too bound by his ability as a ‘pie in the sky’ thinker, and forgets he needs to be at least equally bound by conservative principle. It’s my view that that’s the source of the friction at the moment between Newt and Rush… And indeed, between Newt and many conservative voters. Rush, for whatever else might be said about him, (And yes, I’ve had disagreements with him as well) has at least been, in my view, steadfast in his dedication to conservative principles, whereas Newt Gingrich has not always done so. That’s the unpredictability factor I spoke of.

That said, I think it also worthwhile to point out that a lot of this is being cooked up by an overtly left leaning press, who really doesn’t have anything better to throw at the Republicans just now, given that they’re out of power, and given that the Democrats currently in power, so very desperately need the distraction from the disaster that is Democrat -run Washington. It should not be a surprise, therefore, to find the press spending so much ink on these minor skirmishes.

I want you to notice who it is who ends up being labeled as the bad guy in all of this. On each one of these occasions Limbaugh being cast by the press as being the center of whatever conflict they’re talking about, and being the dastardly arch- enemy of more moderate Republicans. Almost as if someone was trying to create an impression, hmm?

You see, I’ve been saying for some weeks now, that the left is busy trying to separate the Republicans from their conservative base, to thereby cripple them politically. I suggest that this is merely another chapter in that book. It’s my view the participants in this arranged match should be aware of that and act accordingly. So, too, however, should the spectators.

Update: Jonah has more

From Jen Rubin at Commentary:

Jake Tapper appears to be one of the few (only?) mainstream reporters keeping current on the Chas Freeman story. You would think it would be hard to ignore the growing tidal wave of protest and controversy. The latest is a letter signed by the Republican members of the Senate Intelligence Committee taking issue with the appointment. And one wonders how the civil libertarians on the left who are apologizing for Freeman and smearing his critics will respond to this from Huffington Post:

One new development, revealed here for the first time, which is likely to further damage Freeman’s already battered standing is that the former ambassador advocated creating a national identity system in the US as a part of the war on terror. During a 9/11 Commission interview, Freeman remarked that of three major changes the US government should make to effectively combat terror, one was that “the United States should implement a national identity system, so we better know who is who.”

This all raises several questions. First, how long can the rest of the mainstream media hold out without reporting on an embarrassing debacle for the Obama administration?

It’s a good rhetorical question. However, I should think that our experience with Bill Clinton and the supposedly mainstream media, through the 90’s should be taken as an answer… So long as the man holds office, they’ll keep lying for him.  The bottom line is, any crowd as far in the tank as the Dinosaurs have proven to be, are going to be true believers until there’s no more breath in the man’s body.

Meantime, take heart; It seems to me that this story is one example of why, for example, the New York Times is in the process of heading down the Chapter Eleven freeway. On the express lane, yet.

Second, where are the Democrats on the Intelligence Committee. Does Diane Feinstein think Freeman is an acceptable pick? It is interesting to note how lacking in — what’s the word? ah yes — “oversight” the government is now that Congress and the White House are controlled by the same party

Well, yes, there is that, and it seems to me that we made mention of that during the most recent election. For all of the problems that John McCain brought to the table, most of which we chronicled here, that was one of the major selling points that John McCain had for his candidacy.

At the bottom line of all of this is the idea that the American voter bought this load of poop at the beginning of November. I think it’s safe to say the bill is now coming due. I think it also safe to say that the midterms, assuming that the voters are actually kept up to speed on this stuff, is going to be a very interesting time indeed.

Meanwhile, I notice that Eli Lake over the Washington Times as saying that the GOP Senators… what there remains of them…  are now following that they’re going to be looking over this business with Freeman very closely. This newfound attention to detail is certainly refreshing . Frankly, however, I think we could have used it a couple of years ago. Look;  had the Republicans been quite as diligent in their work then as now, we might still have a Republican dominated Congress.

Lesson learned, yet, people?

Somehow, I doubt it.

Right Wing News polled 55 conservative bloggers on a number of topics including Rush Limbaugh, Michael Steele, Obama, 2012 Presidential candidates. You can see the results here.

First time for John’s new system, which was a breeze to run, from my perspective.

The New York Post, last night, put up some interesting analysis as regards what is behind this business between the President and the British. In it, Arthur Herman does some serious analysis on what is driving this animosity toward the British. In Herman’s view, what amounts to is resentment for our shared history and values. These are values which Obama overtly rejects.

At the bottom line:

Perhaps the president simply believes some other nation should replace Britain as our closest friend. (For a while, the Clinton administration meant to put Germany ahead of the UK.) Or perhaps Obama has a different view of the special relationship – one held by the likes of his onetime mentor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

These critics don’t see a legacy of freedom going back to Magna Carta. They see a historical procession of self-serving white males. And Churchill is not the man who singlehandedly stood up against Hitler and who warned us all about the Soviet Union’s iron curtain, but a white supremacist.

In this view (which also sees an America steeped in racism, colonialism and greed, rather than a nation dedicated to the proposition of liberty under law), there is no need to preserve any precious British-born legacy.

Remember, gang, Hitler and Stalin were both wildly popular with the supposedly American left in the forties… You can understand why Obama, a student of leftists… Alinksy being one, Frank Marshall Davis being another… all of whom lived through the period, would be less than happy about a strong relationship with the Brits and have, shall we say, a less than full respect for Churchill.

This would also seem to explain other aspects of the emerging Obama foreign policy in the Middle East. Remember Churchill’s comments as regards Muslims;

Churchill

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die. But the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytising faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science – the science against which it had vainly struggled – the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.

If a new President is going to do some serious Muslim backside kissing, it doesn’t do to have the bust of a person who would write such, in his office. From what we’ve seen of Obama and his foriegn policy so far, this all fits. It should also scare the hell out of every American.

There are a great many questions that spring up from all this, but a couple of ugly answers, as well.

For example, it would appear that the questions about Jerry Wright’s influence on what kind of President that Obama would make, have come back to haunt us. Specifically, the question of how someone can sit through 20 years of liberation theology’s teachings and come out an American, dedicated to the western culture’s ideas and ideals, and freedoms implied by that distinction, appears to have been answered: They cannot.

 I strongly advise reading the entire Post article.

Barack Obama on racial dialog, Helene Cooper, International Herald Tribune:

“I’m not somebody who believes that constantly talking about race somehow solves racial tensions,” Obama said. “I think what solves racial tensions is fixing the economy, putting people to work, making sure that people have health care, ensuring that every kid is learning out there. I think if we do that, then we’ll probably have more fruitful conversations.”

BO claims fixing the economy is important.  Yet in near two month in office, Obama has done absolutely nothing at all to repair the economy.  The economy crashes and all BO can do is to party like an animal.

Charlie Rangel (D-corrupt) thinks his taxes are none of your business, Jason Mattera thinks otherwise,video:

Hat tip: Michelle..

I mentioned the other day, the Palm Treo 650 I picked up recently.  Here’s an update for you, after the break.

Read the rest of this entry »

Obama is not trying to solve the economic crisis. He is using the crisis to socialize America

John Ray, Stop the ACLU..

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

This is the ‘Fool for the City’ edition. A nod to Foghat, who I happened to be listening to when I wrote this, and, yes, that is a photo from inside a Circuit City, which closed it’s doors after 60 years, yesterday. Amazing how things fall together, sometimes when I write these things.

• Olberman gets caught. You know, if there’s anyone on television today, that is more emotionally unstable than Keith Olberman, I certainly don’t know of it.  Seems our boy keith has been caught stretching the truth just a bit about his educational credentials. Olberman Watch takes Keith back behind the woodshed for some attitude re-adjustment.  We’ve known for a long time that Olberman’s relationship with the truth was one of fantasy, anyway. This one really brings it home.
• What I think….   I’ve been contributing at Pajamas Media since the beginning of the year. I like the folks I like the style, and the exposure for the blog doesn’t hurt either. But one of these days I’ve got to try sending something over to The American Thinker.  I’ve been watching the goings on over there. Let’s just say that they should be on your regular read list if they’re not already.
• Harder than they figured:  Today, particularly I note a posting there, by our old buddy Rick Moran, who says the Democrats are falling apart over this omnibus spending bill. Says Rick:
  

  It is an attempt to hold the Democrat’s feet to the fire on the more than $14 billion in earmarks. If they want that kind of waste in the bill, they are going to have to eat the pork sandwich themselves with no help from Republicans.

  The Democrats look weak, unsure of themselves, and in disarray – which mirrors exactly how the White House looks.

  Rick, I’ve said for some time now, you have a firm grip on the obvious. That’s less snarky than it sounds; Too many people don’t. Anyway, all this makes one wonder how we’re going to look a year or so down the road, if the Democrats can’t get their act together in the all-important first 100 days.

•  Poity for thee, but not for me: Chris Dodd does soemthing Republicans would get spanked for. The press yawns.
• Diversity?  Limbaugh’s been saying for years the one area where liberals cannot take diversity is diverity of thought.  Right again. And, Again.
• Meanwhile, Sarah Palin demonstrates that unlike the Democrats, she’s been governing from the middle.
  

  Photo from the LA Times Blogs

• Thing that make you go (WTF!!!?!?): So, if this guy is homeless, and can’t get a job,  and eating at a Soup Kitchen where Michelle Obama is gracing them with her presence, what the bleep is he doing with a cell phone? Apparently, there are varying degress of poverty. Or maybe… just maybe… this is about reinforcing Obama celebrity, and not actually helping the needy, eh? 
• Weapons of Mass Distraction, Obama style: Boortz makes an interesting point:
  

  Iran has test-fired a new missile with a pretty hefty range. Don’t you think this is something to worry about, compared to salaries of corporate CEOs? Wait a minute! Was that a CEO I saw getting off that private jet at the local airport last week?

  It seems that in Obama’s mind(less), CEO’s have less right to their salary than Iran has to Nuclear missiles.  Or maybe he’s creating a distraction, huh?

• No, Mister President, the joke is YOU: So, Obama thoughht the reporters were joking when they asked him about his socialism?  Yeah, right. Think about it: Wasn’t that in the end the question Joe the Plumber was asking?  And trust me, Barry, if you have to call the New York Times to explain yourself about why you’re not a socialist, you more probably are one. That would also seem to be confirmed by the number of people jumping off the Obama bandwagon, particulary business types who were avid supporters of Obama… there’s a message here. I wonder how many can hear it?
  

  Ayn Rand

     Billy speaks to this today was well, from a different starting point;

  “3) When opposite basic principles are clearly and openly defined, it works to the advantage of the rational side; when they are not clearly defined, but are hidden or evaded, it works to the advantage of the irrational side.”

  (“The Anatomy Of Compromise” – Ayn Rand, from The Objectivist Newsletter, January, 1964, re-printed in “Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal”, 1967, part II, “Current State”)

  Gee, under those conditions, I can’t imagine why Obama would feign ignorance on such matters. Can you?

• Global Warming  Cooling  Change    Or not, maybe. Increasingly apparent, these days, that the ‘Global Warming’ debate among scientists is anything but over. Just don’t tell the Dinosaur media.
•  I smell something…. like… Honey… Startrek Perfume? Well, yeah, that’s a place where no man has gone before…
• Hey, Arlen:  Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.  Schmuck.

I note via Glenn Reynolds, an article on Time’s website:

Dodd is looking increasingly vulnerable. The silver-haired father of two young girls is facing his toughest re-election fight ever, and he doesn’t even have an opponent yet. (Though CNBC pundit Larry Kudlow and former GOP Rep. Rob Simmons have both expressed interest in running.) In a January Quinnipiac poll, 51% of Connecticut voters said that they would not vote for Dodd in 2010. . . . Much of Dodd’s current woes stem from a pair of mortgages that he must wish he had never gotten. His reputation still has not recovered from the revelation last year that he received a sweetheart deal on his mortgage, saving upwards of $75,000 courtesy of Countrywide, one of the biggest pushers of the subprime mortgages that have landed the U.S. economy in such dire straits. . . . These days being chairman serves only to remind voters of his own problems with Countrywide and, fairly or not, makes Dodd the face of two deeply unpopular bailouts of Wall Street and an only slightly less unpopular stimulus plan.

 

Hmm. I wonder about him not actually having an opponant yet. I’ve not done a study on such matters, but it seems to me we’ve had plenty of examples of sitting Congresscritters who were in such situations, and yet managed to survive… whose numbers actually went up, once an opponant was found. Not that the ethics problems he faces are not serious; they are most serious and are currently an impediment to the Democrats as a whole, much less Dodd in particular.

 Yet, the election is two years away… and if the people of Connecticut had any serious memory at all, they’d not have re-elected him the last several times. 

Still, let’s for the sake of argument aver that I’m wrong about that, and that opponant secured, Dodd is still in trouble, two years hence. At this point, it becomes a question of how coat-tails work in reverse… Can an intensely unpopular congress, with a given ruling party,  pull down the re-eection chances of a sitting presdient of the same party? 

I suspect it can and does work that way. Our seeing things go that way, I guess depends on voter anger lasting those two years, until the midterms, and then to ’12.

However;

These are all, to my mind, secondary influences to the upcoming elections. Of primary import, I think, is what and who the Republicans offer the voter in ’10 and in ’12. If they come up with watered down conservatism again, they’ll lose again, and this whole conversation will be moot.  On the other hand, should they actually come up with conservatives, then all these other questions come into play.

Just got a note from some guy claiming to be running a search optimization company. His concern? I am not listed as number one under the search of “Truck Parts”.

Gee, I can’t imagine why I wouldn’t be listed as number one under that search string. After all, I’ve put so very much into casting this site as a truck parts supplier. ([/snark]

SEO  (Search Engine Opimization) requires, among other things, the ability to correctly identifywhat your target is. I think we can label this sales effort a monumental failure. Ya know, somehow, I don’t think he’s going to be getting my business.

These school children had a choice under President George W.  Bush.  It is likely they will have none under Barack Obama, video:

It does seem the only kind of choice the ‘rats support is the kind that kills human beings.  Just call failure to fund school choice a very late term abortion.

Hat tip:   Anchoress.