Andrew Olmsted, RIP

A quiet salute from here.

Background here

And here.

He even cached a final post, apparently.

Oh… Did you notice Norman Hsu trying to get his old conviction overturned?

And why would he do this? Because overturning that conviction will negate a longer jailterm for this more recent crime, involving Hillary Clinton and fund raising. A big jail term for a Clinton fund raiser is something the Clinton camp doesn’t need, just now.

Now, just asking, mind you, but who’s paying for his legal defense, I wonder?

Was installing a new screen in my Palm Pilot, tonight. While working, I had a chance to mentally break down each candidate with respect to Iowa.

Some notes in no particular Order:

Mike Huckabee;

Huckabee did about as well as I expected. Iowa is a place where the Evangelical Christian band does pretty well, and Huckabee gained by this. This was not a particularly cynical action, he genuinely subscribes to the brand, as I perceive it, as do a lot of Iowans… as The Conservative Reader will likely tell you when asked. But hiow will this play for the rest of the race is unclear at best.

Iowa is a place with a cultural value structure that is increasingly unique in today’s America. (We’ll get into the question of that being a good thing or bad at another time) Thing is, I don’t see Huckabee successfully playing the “Evengelical Christian” brand as successfully in New Hampshire as he did in Iowa. As such, his momentum, (If there is such a thing in primaries, anymore) is lost after Iowa. He may be able to pick up some of the breadbasket states later in the season, but this is his high water mark in terms of picking up delegates, I think.

If there’s one thing that annoys me, one thing I can’t make much sense out of, it’s how the cultural conservatives of Iowa can fall in line behind his campaign and scream he’s another Ronald Reagan. Sorry, I figure anyone who gets the endorsement of the NEA and other teacher’s unions isn’t a conservative. Sorry, that’s not the reincarnation of Reagan… It’s not even a conservative of any stripe. Rather, that’s the reincarnation of Jimmy Carter.

Mitt Romney :

Romney did better than I expected. The cultural discussion in Iowa has much to add to the Romney showing… That’s a complex statement because some of those influences are conflicting. On the one hand, Romney doubtless got some sympathy in Iowa, a state whose people pretty much identify with people of faith… of any stripe. That Romney did as well as he did suggests there’s not enough resistance to that faith being Mormon to account for his second place finish. One gets the impressions watching the blogs and some of the discussion groups I monitor, that the real cultural issue with Romney for a lot of Iowans was not his Mormonism, but his take on abortion.

On the non-cultural side, his governmental spending habits caused him some problems, in Iowa too.

New Hampshire will play less heavily on all those issues… he’ll get less resistance on Abortion and yet more resistance on his public pronouncements of faith exactly the opposite of the reaction in Iowa. The big question mark here, is how his public pronouncements of faith will play in New Hampshire.  I wonder, too, how his being Governor of a neighboring state will play… will it help, or hurt? Hard to say from here.

In terms of total delegate count, he may be playing the correct line. If he’s played the correct line and places at least second in NH, he’ll be formidable for the remainder of the cycle.

John McCain :

McCain’s showing in Iowa is a bit of a surprise. He’s in a better position, perhaps, than Huckabee and Romney going into New Hampshire, given his position in that state, already. He also is no Reagan and certainly no conservative, so his showing was something of a surprise, given the politics out there. Only thing I can think of is they’re working against electability issues we’re not being told about.

Fred Thompson :

He did far better than the claims he was going to drop out were suggesting he would. He’s still very much in the hunt, here, and that alone is a momentum builder.  I think we’re going to see him coming on stronger in the New Hampshire race and beyond; A sting in the ass is a motivation few can ignore,a nd given his past political fights, it’s a situation he does best in.

Ron Paul :

The resident Looney was spot on with what was expected. And granted, he was within a point or two of both McCain and Thompson… but both of those improved their situation from what was expected. The old saying applies, here… it’s not where you’re at but where you’re going. Paul ain’t going anywhere.

Rudy Giuliani :

Rudy got a mere 4%, but he pretty much ignored Iowa, so they pretty uch ignored him. I’m not convinced that the 4% he got means much to the nomination, overall. I think it was a stupid move to ignore Iowa as he did, but I can understand why he did… he’s looking at the evangelical base out there and the objections to his support for ‘sanctuary cities’ and recognizing he’s not going to do well.

We’ll look at the Democrats tomorrow. I’ve got a server to build before I hit the sack.

Stephen Green, Vodka Pundit, asks a simple question:

Dear Iowa Republicans,

I’ll put this in language even your tiny little Iowa brains can understand: What the f*** is wrong with you people?

The news coming out of Des Moines (literally, French for “tell me about the rabbits, George”) tonight is distressing in the extreme. 32 years ago, your Democratic brethren took one look at Jimmy Carter — the worst 20th Century President bar Nixon, and the worst ex-President ever — and declared, “That’s our man

James Tartano, Opinion Journal, provides Stephen a clue:

Here’s a list of the winners of past contested Iowa caucuses:

• 1972: Edmund Muskie (D.)
• 1976: Gerald Ford (R.), “Uncommitted” (D.)
• 1980: George H.W. Bush (R.), Jimmy Carter (D.)
• 1984: Walter Mondale (D.)
• 1988: Bob Dole (R.), Dick Gephardt (D.)
• 1992: Tom Harkin (D.)
• 1996: Bob Dole (R.)
• 2000: George W. Bush (R.), Al Gore (D.)
• 2004: John Kerry (D.)

Only one of these caucuses–the Republican one in 2000–actually produced a president. (Jimmy Carter finished first among actual candidates in 1976.) Of course, political trends like this one go on only until they end, and this one already has an exception

Nothing is wrong with Iowa caucusers, at least nothing new.    Save for candidates named Bush, Iowans make it habit to pick losers.    And the demographics of Mike Huckabee’s Iowa win are so far removed from the demographics of the nation as a wh0le as to render Huckabee’s chances of winning the nomination trivial.   Iowa is simply the O.J. Jury of caucuses.

More, Memeorandum.

Danger extreme  hatred for the human race on display.  From Times Online(UK):

A married mother of three has won thousands of pounds in compensation from a gay nightclub that discriminated against her because she is heterosexual.

Sharon Legg, 33, who worked on the door at Dreams in Bournemouth, said that her manager had repeatedly called her derogatory names such as “breeder”

So much for thinking Europeans are  enlightened.  

Hat Tip:  Lucianne

“Iowa plays an important role, but look, fewer people participated in the two caucuses than the number of people who vote in Witchita, Kansas. Fewer people participated in the caucuses than vote in Dakota County, Minnesota, and I’ll bet most people don’t know where Dakota County is. This is a relatively small number of people.”

 Karl Rove,  quoted by Jim Geraghty, National Review.

Interesting story in the American Thinker by buddy Rick Moran, this morning. It seems that the number of people idetifying themselves as Republican has hit a two year high.

According to pollster Rasmussen, the number of Americans who identify themselves as Republican has risen to a two year high:

The number of Americans who consider themselves to be Republicans jumped nearly two percentage points in December to 34.2%. That’s the largest market share for the Republican brand in nearly two years, since January 2006 (see history from January 2004 to present).

At the same time, the number of Democrats fell to 36.3%. That’s down a point compared to a month ago. During 2007, the number of Democrats has ranged from a low of 35.9% in July to a high of 37.8% in February.

The reason for the jump in self identified Republicans? Greater confidence in the party to fight the war on terror would seem to be the key. While it has not affected President Bush’s approval ratings, recent international events – including the improving situation in Iraq – reminds voters why they prefer the Republican party over the Democrats when it comes to national security.

There is that.

Moran says:

At the very least this news – if it holds – will mean that Democrats would probably only realize modest gains at the ballot box next November – if they win anything at all. A far cry from the heady days last summer when it appeared the Democrats would almost run the table in the Senate and continue building a bigger majority in the House.

Perhaps. But I can’t help but wonder if this is a good thing. I mean, how much of this newfound Republicanism is in name only? Candidates like John McCain and Ron Paul leap to mind.

Bitsblog has a special place, can’t say just where, for Keith Olbermann.   I have found another blog which holds Olberman in like regard:

Half of Keith’s audience watches him on Crooks and Liars. He’s got to stay in good with the netroots types, even if it means rooting for the loser.

never even say Obama’s name on the air—-maybe a couple brief mentions in passing, usually framing something about him in a dim light. He has never given Obama fair coverage. His truthtelling never included honesty about Obama. You would never have known he was running for anything, let alone President, by watching his show. I lost respect for him for that reason.

Douchebag. But he’s not going spoil my mood because Obama is giving a SPEECH FOR THE AGES.

KO is clearly just falling prey to “oh God I’m live and need something superficially insightful to say” disease. It’s common during times like these no matter who the commentator.

I do detect a pro-Hillary bias in his reporting on the Democratic nomination process – at all times. I never see him interviewing any of the other candidates on Countdown, but I’ve seen him interview Hillary. I’m going to be interested if he does get those interviews how he acts, or if he’ll ever ask Hillary a tough question.

Olbermann might make such an analysis to get a sense of how Obama will fare in the vast majority of Democratic primaries that do not allow independents to vote. Did that ever occur to you?

All he does is play up the fact that independents helped carry Obama to victory. DUH! Stop carrying Clinton’s water!

he is certainly trying to downplay the win…he did it again… If you take independents away…HE STILL WINS…

Olbermann is a Hillary hack. The guy never even mentions Obama. Any “host” that never brings on a guest that disagrees with him has their agenda. Go do another horrid “Special Comment,” Keith.

I’m a Clinton supporter, and I have never detected a bias for Clinton from him. Bias for Democrats, yeah, sure.

Jesus Christ, you WON, get a f@@@ing grip. Calling Olbermann, Krugman and any progressive that has been sticking his neck out for YOU in a sea of Republican media propaganda a “hack” and worse is exactly why people like me could not support Obama in the primaries…. Stop dumping on progressive allies.

Seriously, we have big problems if progressives are going to go ballistic on a guy like Keith Olbermann. He’s literally the only person on TV who’s worth a shit in terms of attacking Bush and defending progressive principles.

Had to turn off the Olby-Tweety Show when they were still talking as if there’s only two candidates when Edwards was neck and neck and eventually beating Hillary. It’s pathetic.

Even though I like Keith a lot, I feel like he has been downplaying Obama and playing up to Hillary whenever he talks about the campaigns.

Could the Daily Kos become the next Swamp Stomper?   Film at Eleven.

Hat Tips, Hot Air, Olberman Watch.

Dodd has dropped out. So has Biden. Most didn’t know they were running at all. THe results were so bad for them they apparently decided not to wait the few days to New Hampshire.

Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, will be going negative, or so the CW has it. I have my doubts she’ll be able to overcome Obama in NH with that kind of politics, however. As David points out, people claiming to be agents of change usually don’t do well, when what they show is the same old dirty campaigns, and little else.

On the other side, McCain is in a fair enough position… he placed well in Iowa given he wasn’t there much if at all, and is polling well in NH.

Romney got caught off his guard, but not enough to cause any permanent damage.

Fred’s still in the hunt if  he can do passibly well in NH.

I caution the reader not to read too much into the Iowa results; As has been pointed out in many places, Iowa is kind of a weird place politically, at least in comparison to the remainder of the nation. New Hampshire is as well, but perhaps to the opposite end of the spectrum.  I’m not convinced that even the two primaries put together will give us a reliable trend, this time out.

But it’s on to New Hampshire we go.

Mrs Clinton’s dais has one message on it, change, her props, Madeleine Albright, Wesley Clark and B.J. Clinton sends another contradictory message,  Clinton administration redux. 

Mrs. Clinton has a choice, neither particularly attractive.   Either she can run on a third term for the Clinton administration, scandal and incompetence, or she run, somehow, as an agent of change, borrowing Barack Obama’s meme.   What the Smartest Woman in the World can not do creditably is to do both.

Hat Tip:  Michelle Malkin.

Yeah, Fred, too.

But I meant me, at the OTB Caption Contest 

Hey, Billy;

Yeah, I was aware of the links from Starz to Looking Glass…(One of my offbeat favorite pop tunes was “Jimmy Loves Mary Anne” (Both that and “Brandy” were written by Elliot Lurie, who was the lead vocal/guitar)) Great stuff for students of Pop. Brandy, for it’s part was another B side that ended up being the A side…(Ala Doobie’s “Black Water”) I thought it was some of the classer pop I’ve heard at the time; Still do. I think that record got a bit undersold, if you ask me.

Do you know Kenney Chesney ported ‘Brandy’ to country just recently? Weird.

But the transition from “Looking Glass” to “Starz” wasn’t all that big a transition, as you’d think; The LG we came to know wasn’t the sound the band was really chasing. In reality, Looking Glass was a bar band, and a fairly bluesey one at that, though the producers were looking for another “Brandy” all the time and basically produced all the sound out of them. t That was why they never went much of anywhere after the second single (Jimmy) which only went about the middle 30’s Billboard at the time. Trouble was, their bar band background made a real jarring difference between what the NY producers of the day came up with, and what the band sounded like on stage. Two different animals. As a result, they drew the wrong crowd to the shows.

Starz, then, was an attempt to go the direction LG should have gone.
And yesh, I guess you could call it glam rock’, if you wanted. It was certainly heavier than most of the pop of the day., Which was always the point of heavy metal at the start; it was heavier than what most folks were doing; a relative thing. Who else was working in that neighborhood? Grand Funk, (Same label) perhaps. Deep Purple, though by 77 they were losing their following with the personnel changes. Nugent, but he wasn’t drawing.  Rush, who was just doing “Caress of Steel” about then. (Lakeside Park was a single, but never made it past 40 or so on the chart) Thin Lizzy, who only had one single… Rainbow, who never did hit their stride single-wise. Scorpians from the RCA days. (Speedy’s Coming came out that year… hell of a track… I even added it to my playlist  for a while. Went nowhere.) And so on. Arrowsmith was just coming back, but “Draw The Line” had n singles working. Alice Cooper was running out of gas by ths time and his stuff was getting classed in the Pop racks, anyway.

Great bands, all of em… but the business was looking for the singles. Which, to turn this wandering full circle is what caused Looking Glass. And let’s not forget that about half the A&R efforts by this time had gone over to Disco.

By the way, a 12 string? Yeah, I guess that makes sense. I admit that I always thought that sounded like it’d been done in a doubler, like an Eventide or something. I learned something, there.

 No shock, I suppose, but that’s what Fox is teasing just now.

So is ABC  who now reports Romney is in second. Thompson third, McCain foruth, or so I’m hearing on the radio now. (KCJJ is coming in up here but they’re a bit weak, having gone to night pattern… on 1000 watts this time of night)

Democrats shake out this way…

Obama, Edwards Clinton.

They got a real heavy turnout, says WHO radio, so this may be a bit in sorting out.

In what’s maybe the quickest act in the blogosphere.  Charles opened his registration door:

 

The Door Opens – Update: The Door Swings Shut

Thu, Jan 3, 2008 at 10:58:39 am PST

Registration is now open for a limited time. Please read all of that fine print, turn off spam filters, and remember: LGF is a tough room.

UPDATE at 1/3/08 11:27:56 am:

Now closed, with 127 hatchlings in about 30 minutes, and one already blocked.

Charles closed the door.  Life in the fast lane.

The media lost Fallujah, and had it not been for the determination of the Bush administration, they would have lost the entirety of Iraq to al-Qaeda terrorists as well. 

Ed Morrissey, Captain’s Quarters.