Snark of the Day: Erick Erickson

This is not a fight between Rush Limbaugh and Michael Steele. This is a fight between Michael Steele’s mouth and his foot. Matt Lewis has some more thoughts.

Erick Erickson, Red State.

Michael Steele has  dismissed Rush Limbaugh as a mere entertainer, CNN:

Late last week, Steele told CNN’s D.L. Hughley that Limbaugh is an “entertainer” whose comments are “ugly.”

El wrongo moose breath, Sam Youngman, Hill:

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, who last month blasted CNBC host Rick Santelli from the podium in the briefing room, challenged reporters on Monday to ask Republicans if they agree with Limbaugh’s desire.

When a mere radio commentator can make the White House howl in pain, it is time to twist the knife, not offer a bandage.  Presidents don’t look good when engaged in a urination contest with a radio commentator.  Mr. Steele,  calling attention to President when the White House playing the role of a fool, is part of your job.   You ought send Rush a thank you card.

Welcome, one and all to the most INTENSE nightly read on the sphere… Bitsblog’s Nightly Ramble

This is the Roadside Cafe edition.

• Death Wish 17: Is it just me, or does the name of Charles Bronson sound odd in this context?
• Great speech: If you missed Rush’s speech at CPAC  on Saturday, you’ll want to knock an and a half hour out of your schedule. You can view it here.
• Keep it real: Rich Lowry has a firm grip on the obvious. That’s less snarky than it sounds. I like Rich.. and so few in the media DO in fact understand reality, that one who does is increasingly important.
• Good Day: You will recall I ran a bit of a statement here on Saturday night about Paul Harvey. The left is now reacting to his death with all the class and charm of an impacted wisdom tooth. In other words, about usual.
• NERW: In mentioning Paul Harvey’s passing, over the weekend, I leaned heavily on Scott Fybush’s Northeast Radio Watch.  As well I might; Scott’s likely got the best coverage of Radio and TV and the operation thereof that I know of. An example of that today, as he marks Harvey’s passing with some extended comments. BBCT, Scott.
• ABC says goodbye: I happened to catch a retrospective of Harvey’s career being hosted by Gill Gross on 890/WLS last night. Clearly an ABC feed, and one apparently cut in Harvey’s studio, if I had to guess by the audio.  I wish I knew if the show was available for download somewhere. Perhaps the Paul Harvey site will have it in the future. If it does, I’ll let you know. I’ll tell you this, by way of explaining my obvious respect for the man; It was Harvey who was one of the folks who attracted me to radio in the first place. It was Harvey, among others, who taught me simply by doing, that Radio was a way to make freinds with people you’d never meet. In those days, of course it was a fairly uniqe thing, that way. Radio has diminished since those days, alas, and in more than it’s replacement with the internet.  It was special, then, though, and  Harvey is among the last of that breed that made it so and made me want to be a part of it.  I suppose that as usual, it’ll be some time before we look back and recognize just what we’ve lost.
• Big Bang: Not one, but two Instalanches in one week? I must live right. BBCT, Glenn.
• CPAC Fallout: It’s a little weird watching the feedback showing up on places like Memeorandum since CPAC ended. It makes you wonder on what planet their version was held.  They certainly weren’t watching the same version I was.
• FAIL: Interesting, though to see, by way of Glenn, that the denizens of the Huff and Puff are now admitting:  “You’re damn right I wanted the Iraq war to fail.”  Amazing what has to transpire to get the left to face up to it’s own beliefs and their consequences.
• Does anyone remember Democracy? Apparently Obama would as soon we didn’t. See for yourself where he spoke at camp Lejune.. and didn’t use the word ‘Democracy’ once.
• Iraq: What’s happening behind the Iraqi Drawdown.
• Iran: While we’re at it, let’s not forget Iran, who it turns out has the plans to Marine One, the President’s Chopper. Every once in a while there comes a happening that threatens to break through the usual liberal naivete’ about the state of the world. In this case, is there doubt in anyone’s mind… (OK, outside the current administration, anyway…) as to why Iran would have these plans?  What else do they have that we don’t know about? At some point, we’re going to have to understand that these people simply don’t WANT peace… and react accodingly. This ha sbeen going on for quite a while now, and is not seomthing we’re going to be able to negotiate away.   Iran has been the glaring exception to Obama exactly following my prediction on continuing Bush’s Middle East Policy. I get the idea that when an attack finally comes from Iran, Obama and his minions will act surprised.
• Whatever happ3ened to… the “worst economy since the Depression?” Funny how we never hear about that, anymore. When they needed something to beat Bush about the head and shoulders with, it was a phrase we heard form every democrat every single 30 seconds on the dot.  Now, you’ll never hear that from Christina Romer, these days. What you will hear is a happy go lucky sing-song approach that makes one thing we’re  going to be seeing someone in a purple dinosaur suit shortly. Easier, I supopse, to sell than yet another bailout of AIG.
•  A foot of Global Warming: Oh, speaking of alternate planets, Greg Pollowitz over at Planet Gore snarks:
  

  That’s right, folks: the Left’s day of civil disobedience in D.C. to protest global warming looks to be snowed out — just as I predicted back in December.

  No kidding. This is getting to be the norm, not the exception. I’ve noted five such happenings so far this year, two of which were local events. In chatting with freinds over the weekend, someone, and I forget who, came up with the observation that the frequency with which the global warming types run into this particular problem smacks of planning on their part. I tend to disagree, in that these are people who can’t agree on lunch, much less agree on predictions of weather two days from now, much less six months in the future. Or, twenty years, as they claim to be doing with their claims of ‘global warming’. Yet, it does seem to stretch the law of averages somewhat that their Luddite Festivals get snowed out so often. Perhaps it’s all a right wing conspiracy. Yeah, that’s it. Gotta be. Amazing, the snowstorms right wingers can cause to prevent Al Gore from getting his way. By the way, I have a bridge for sale, if you’re interested. Bruce McQuain, looking out his window into the backward of his Atlanta home, quips “Damn global warming, anyway.”  Tell ya what, Bruce, I was scoping out WSB last night. Usually, we get ’em up here if there’s a nor-easter coming… and it was kinda funny to hear them talking about 3 to 5 inches in the forecast.

• Yet another Appointment with ethics issues? I see Obama has appointed Adolfo Carrion for his Director of Urban Affairs. As is becoming usual with Obama appointments there seems to be some ethical concerns about the guy. Gee, Big shock, huh?  Next for Kathleen Sebelius, I suppose.   Ya know, I wonder; Why would someone accept such a placement?  Just about everyone Obama has appointed has some serious skeletons hidden, or not so hidden. I think if I were appointed into such a group of people, I’d feel vaugely insulted. Then again, I think criminal behavior isn’t a good thing.
• No so smart:  Even the ones who aren’t under criminal investigation have questions of competance. Obama’s got a website being run by someone who as yet can’t figure out the complex task of running a mailing list.  Is there a blogger on the planet who doesn’t know how to do that? Apparently, having the roper liberal ideology, or having a daddy who kicked in lotsa bucks to the campaign, isn’t enough to overcome not knowing what you’re doing.
• Why are these people celebrating?  What was Nero doing while Rome Burned? 

Anthropogenic global warming is a huge fraud, Alan Caruba.   Yetfor reasons beyond comprehension Barack Obama was pledged to solve a problem that simply does not exist, Conservative Free Press(CA):

[T]he UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that has merrily falsified alleged scientific data to advance the hoax while the UN Kyoto Protocol imposed limits on CO2 emissions. Most of the nations that signed it have largely ignored it, discovering that it harms their economies. The U.S. avoided signing, but Americans have elected a President who is utterly devoted to this “solution” to a problem that does not exist.

Maybe BO is trying to lower the bar.    So that when the ice caps don’t melt he can claim credit for saving them. much like B.J.  Clinton both invented the Y2K fraud and claimed credit for preventing the crisis.

Bill Maxwell, St. Petersburg Times, says “On race, blacks are cowards too:”

On matters of race, most blacks run away from introspection, and we do not like to hear others publicly remind us of our responsibilities to ourselves. One problem we should openly talk about, but run from, is the high number of black children born out of wedlock. Depending on whose numbers we use, between 70 percent to 80 percent of black children are born to single mothers.

Well Bill Cosby is not a coward, and he has the arrrow wounds to prove it.

Kim Priestap, Wizbang:

You can catch Greta’s special on Rush’s speech at 9:00pm tonight on Fox News Channel. Their ratings must have been through the roof yesterday if they are rerunning it again

Expect more libtard attacks on El Rushmo.    Libs always attack people who scare them.   In Rush’ s case it scares the heck out of the libs  that Rush can deliver a one hour speech without using a teleprompter.   Let a lib try that.

While wading through the Jawa Hut, I noted the following.
I’ll sign this in a heartbeat.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

“We, the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid any more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt-ridden, deluded, and other liberal bed-wetters.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim that they require a Bill of No Rights.”

ARTICLE I:
You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.

ARTICLE II:
You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone — not just you! You may leave the room, change the channel, or express a different opinion, but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

ARTICLE III:
You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.

ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.

ARTICLE V:
You do not have the right to free health care That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we’re just not interested in public health care.

ARTICLE VI:
You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don’t be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.

ARTICLE VII:
You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don’t be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won’t have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.

ARTICLE VIII:
You don’t have the right to demand that our children risk their lives in foreign wars to soothe your aching conscience. We hate oppressive governments and won’t lift a finger to stop you from going to fight if you’d like. However, we do not enjoy parenting the entire world and do not want to spend so much of our time battling each and every little tyrant with a military uniform and a funny hat[pre-9/11 mindset…ed]

ARTICLE IX:
You don’t have the right to a job. Sure, all of us want all of you to have one, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.

ARTICLE X:
You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to pursue happiness — which, by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an overabundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.

If you agree, we strongly urge you to forward this to as many people as you can. No, you don’t have to, and nothing tragic will befall you should you not forward it. We just think it is about time common sense is allowed to flourish — call it the age of reason revisited.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

As I say… I’ll sign into this one. Will you?

Melisa Clouthier:

Will he be president? He didn’t answer when I asked him.

Hmmm.
We can certainly do a lot worse.Wwe could, for example, nominate John McCain again.  Or, one of his clones.

I am frankly a little annoyed over Newt’s comments about Sarah Palin, about Thanksgiving time last year. Still, his attitude on domestic drilling, and other energy concerns I find quite attractive.

Whether not I want him in the White House, depends on a great many factors.  But at the very least, having him involved between now and midterms, and certainly between now and the next general, means that the party’s discussion about our own future will continue apace.  I regard that as nothing but a good thing.

Joyner, this morning:

Via Glenn Reynolds, I see that Paul Kotkin has written an interesting essay on an “internal civil war” [Is there another kind? -ed.] looming within the Democratic Party:

This is the Democratic Party’s moment, its power now greater than any time since the mid-1960s. But do not expect smooth sailing. The party is a fractious group divided by competing interests, factions and constituencies that could explode into a civil war, especially when it comes to energy and the environment.

Broadly speaking, there is a long-standing conflict inside the Democratic Party between gentry liberals and populists. This division is not the same as in the 1960s, when the major conflicts revolved around culture and race as well as on foreign policy. Today the emerging fault-lines follow mostly regional, geographical and, most importantly, class differences.
Gentry liberals cluster largely in cities, wealthy suburbs and college towns. They include disproportionately those with graduate educations and people living on the coasts. Populists tend to be located more in middle- and working-class suburbs, the Great Plains and industrial Midwest. They include a wider spectrum of Americans, including many whose political views are somewhat changeable and less subject to ideological rigor.

This is, broadly speaking, right. Small problem, though: With light editing, one could write exactly the same kind of essay about the Republican party.

(Chuckle)

One can easily expect somebody from the democrat party to say that this is the unkindest cut of all.  James makes other points about this, all valid,  but the one point that he seems to miss is the one about power.

What we have here, is merely an extension of what we’ve been seeing along with the Democrats.  Their stated goals, their stated purposes, what they tell us they’re going to do and why, all fall victim to the knife, sacrificed on the altar of raw, unadulterated power. Which tells us point blank that’s all this was ever about, all along.

I would add that to the extent that James is correct, where this thing applies to the Republicans as well, you should note that the conflicts within the Republican Party along those lines and up being almost to a man, conflicts between the grass roots and the far left of the Republican party.

See, that’s the thing about governmental power.  The founders knew that it was an addictive poison.  That’s why they designed the constitution specifically to limit governmental power.  To the extent that we don’t have limited government, is the exact extent to which the Constitution, and those wishes of the founders, have been bypassed.

Perhaps the perceived prevalence of power grabbing being greater amongst liberals, has something to do with their regarding the Constitution as a “living document” .

Edit: Bit, fixed droped blockquote tag

People with college degrees earn a lot more money that people without degrees.   Simply a fact.   So if everybody had a college degree, would everybody earn more money?  No.   However you would have a lot of young people with college debt to repay, but without the college level job to pay off the debt.

College degrees do not get you college level jobs.   All  a degree gets you is an interview.   It is your interview which gets you the job, and it is your job performance which keeps your job.

Further, employess are not looking for college graduate per se.   Rather they looking for specific skill sets, electrical engineer, history teacher, computer programer, etc.    If you have the wherewithall to do say chemical engineering, for all sakes go for it.   However a degree in chemical engineering will not get you a job as chemical engineer unless  can first convince a prospective employer that you do chemical engineering and then you can demonstrate the ability to be a chemical engineer.   Employers are interested in skills sets.    A diploma is only a proxy for a skill set.   I know of engineers without degrees and engineering graduate without engineering positions.

Having said that, I am less than impressed by this:, Justin Pope and Libby Quaid, Associated Press:

In his address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, President Barack Obama called for every American to pursue some form of education beyond high school.

To which, I say:  Why?   Sending everybody to college will result in lots under over credentialed, under employed, people with puppy mill deplomas saddled with college debt.

Pursuit of a higher education is at best a complex question, Paul E. Barton, Carnegie Foundation:

Conventional wisdom has it that the demand for workers with college degrees is growing rapidly in the United States and will escalate. But the issue of what job qualifications will be important in the future and for whom is complex, with several threads of argument intertwined. First comes the very important question of how an individual can best prepare educationally to do well in the future labor market. Coupled with that question is the need for citizens to have an equal opportunity to attend and complete college, such access being key to the nation’s major problem of income inequality among racial and ethnic groups. Second is the question of how many college graduates the nation needs to produce, and with what skills, to ensure our national prosperity in an age of rapid technological change, globalization, and strong international competition.

This is to any reasoned mind a complex question.    Simplistic answers, even from the President, especially from the President, simply will not do.  We can and should  expect better from the President.

Glenn says last night:

RICK MORAN THINKS THE “TEA PARTY” PROTESTS are amateurish and disorganized. At Playboy, on the other hand, they think they’re suspiciously well-coordinated. Both are right!

Of course they’re amateurish.  Most of these people have never organized a protest before (hence the tendency to do things like forget bullhorns). That’s what you get at the beginning of a movement. But it’s much bigger news when 200 people with jobs who’ve never protested turn out, than when 20,000 of the usual suspects organized by ACORN or ANSWER march with preprinted signs. If this keeps up (and I think it just might) the amateurishness will fade away soon enough. Then Moran will probably complain about the loss of authenticity.

I saw Rick’s  piece last night and intended to bounce directly off of it but got sidetracked with a trip to the movie theater with Donna. The movie was… well… OK. I’ll tell you about that later.

Anyway, Rick is quite correct that from what I’m seeing the protests are amateurish and unorganized.  However as Glenn indicates that’s a good thing.  Too much organization, and it looks more like a union meeting.

That said, whether not it loses that amateurish feel comes down to whether or not it continues growing at the rate it has been.  Let’s face that the Tea party movement has been growing like weeds of late.  It is ironic that Barack Obama has done more since the inauguration to rouse the right and make the left question their judgments than anyone on the right has done in the last several decades.

The single reason why liberals get into protests so often, is because it’s so effective for them.  One of the reasons it so effective for them point blank is that they do it said damnably often.

It seems to me that therein is a major point Rick is missing.   Look at the difference.   Call it what you will , but conservatives organizing protests is something unheard of in recent times.  That it happens at all with conservatives, is a huge story. we expect the left to be generating these kind of things.  Not the right.

It’s also true that that lack of protest over the years, probably accounts for a large part of the amateurish nature of the whole thing.

This is out of character for conservatives. That they do reach so far out of their character to do things like this, indicates the degree of anger going on.  As I’ve suggested before in these spaces, anger is something which is not to be underestimated, as motivation.

I suspect this is going to be a turning point in our history .  I have very little in the way of doubt that these organizations will continue to grow and learn and gain influence.

Mountain people will tell you that avalanches start with something as small as a raindrop , or a pebble.

Update: (Bit) Instalanche!

I must live right.

Wikipedia:

On February 26, 1993, at 12:17 p.m., a Ryder truck filled with 1,500 pounds (680 kg) of explosives was planted by Ramzi Yousef and detonated in the underground garage of the North Tower.[88] The blast opened a 100 foot (30 m) hole through 5 sublevels with the greatest damage occurring on levels B1 and B2 and significant structural damage on level B3.[89] Six people were killed and 50,000 other workers and visitors were left gasping for air within the 110 story towers. Many people inside the North Tower were forced to walk down darkened stairwells that contained no emergency lighting, some taking two hours or more to reach safety

more:

On September 11, 2001, al Qaeda suicide hijackers crashed American Airlines Flight 11 into the northern facade of the North Tower at 8:46 a.m., followed seventeen minutes later by a second team of hijackers who crashed United Airlines Flight 175 into the South Tower.

Islamists have been waging war on the West since at least February 1993, a war not yet decided.    So given the history of the last sixteen years,  on wh0m does Barack Obama chose to wage war, Larry Kudlow, Money & Politics:

Let me be very clear on the economics of President Obama’s State of the Union speech and his budget.

He is declaring war on investors, entrepreneurs, small businesses, large corporations, and private-equity and venture-capital funds.

In both 1993 and 2001, Islamists tried to destroy the American economy and the America way of life.   Now in 2009, Barack Obama aims to finish what al Qaeda started.   BO has in effect declared war on the American economy.    I suppose when when the economy totally collapses, BO will simply declare that the Market Economy was a failed system.

By all indications Northern Trust is very well run institution.   The House Financial Services Committee is not.   Barney Frank should stick to what he knows how to run, a house of prostitution.

David L.

On which side is Barney Frank (Massachusetts Four)?   The Treasury Department pressures a perfectly sound financial institution to take federal TARP funds, and Frank uses that as excuse to terrorize the bank, Tom Petruno, Los Angeles Times, :

The Chicago bank, which got $1.6 billion of taxpayer funds under the government’s financial-system rescue plan last year, said Friday that it was talking to its regulators “with the goal of repaying [the] funds as quickly and prudently as possible.”

[…]

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, wrote to Northern Trust this week demanding that the bank pay back what it spent on the golf tournament.

Background, Tom Maquire, Just One Minute, on why Northern Trust took TARP money:

Can I answer two questions with two questions?  First, does Ms. Dowd even bother to read the Times?  If she did she would have learned that in order to avoid creating any stigma associated with taking TARP funds, the Feds exhorted seemingly healthy banks to take some cash.  Treasury and Fed officials seem to think that they can better maintain confidence in the banking system if the list of TARP recipients is not viewed as an excellent proxy for a list of banks likely to fail.  Go figure.

My second question is, does Ms. Dowd have any familiarity at all with Google?  If she did she would have learned that Nothern Trust focuses on trust services and wealth management rather than mortgage and commercial lending, their prospects are excellent,

Hugh S, Wizbang concludes:

You think? I noted on Thursday that financial institutions are becoming increasingly uncomfortable with the unstable and emotional outbursts by Democrat House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA). Yesterday Northern Trust, which honored a two year old contract to sponsor last week’s Northern Trust Open, announced that it will pay back the TARP funds rather than operate under the thumb of the House Financial Services dictator.

If Barack Obama wants to reverse the direction of the nation’s economy, he had best tell Mrs. Pelosi to find somebody fit to run the Financial Services Committee.

No links yet, but we’re hearing that Radio News Legend Paul Harvey has died.

Addendum: I’m now getting confirmation from ABC

Photo Courtesy of Scot Fybush and Northeast Radio Watch.

With Mr Harvey gone, one wonders what will become of this studio.
I think perhaps the best comment I can make is to relate what Scott said a few years ago:

But when Mr. Harvey sits down and, on the cue from his engineer (out of frame through a window to the left of the clock), launches into “Hello, Americans…”, there are few experiences that can compare to being in the studio when the master is practicing his art. I think I may have breathed once or twice during the 15-minute midday newscast (fed from here at 10:35 AM CT), but it’s hard to remember in all the excitement.

After the newscast is over (and with it, Mr. Harvey’s day – he comes in at 4 AM, writes both his daily broadcasts himself, and is on his way home after a few quick retakes of several words in the midday newscast), we’re treated to a brief tour of the comfortable office suite in which the Paul Harvey News staff works. While the control room still houses four big Otari reel-to-reel machines, the broadcasts are now edited digitally to be refed to ABC in New York and then to the hundreds of affiliates around the country.

A conference room looks into the studio; it’s used for greeting visitors (including my companion for this tour, Blaine Thompson of Indiana Radio Watch fame, for whom Mr. Harvey has several questions about Fort Wayne and about his affiliate there, WOWO.)

Down the hall are offices for the staff, for Mr. Harvey himself and for his wife, Angel, who still comes to the office from time to time. (We can attest, having seen it personally, that the Paul Harvey newscasts are still typed on an IBM Selectric typewriter by the man himself.)

It’s a pleasure to report that Paul Harvey himself is every bit as gracious and accommodating in his studio as he sounds on the air – and that, at 85, he’s still the picture of good health.

Alas, Time marches on. Scott wrote that five years gone now, and a couple months.

See Dubya just now chimed in on Twtter, saying Harvey was everything Cronkite was supposed to be.  And so he was.

Mr. Harvey… and frankly, this is the only time in my life I’ve ever referred to a newsman I wasn’t annoyed with as ‘Mister’… you will be missed.