Follow the Money

To say it’s a slow political day, this Christmas Day, is understating it by several factors of scale.  Example… When I see CNN’s political ticker, by way of Memeorandum pointing out that President Bush gave his wife a purse for Christmas and got some biking gear from his wife…  I know it’s a slow day, like few others have been, or will be for the next 11 months.

Memeorandum -scanning has not been without profit, however…

I noticed an article from Chris Drew in the New York Times this morning.  As regards the Democrats and their efforts to as the article says “rein in fees on consulting”.

Without quoting the article directly,it appears that the gravy train for the Democratic consultants is over.  The worst of the offenders is Bob Shrum and his crew.  At least, that’s what the article suggests.

While it is certainly true that there’s been an awful lot of money floating around on the Democrat side in the consulting game, these last couple of cycles, and it’s also true that this is a a problem that the Democrats should have dealt with long time ago, the almost universal concern being shown over the costs involved with political consulting on the Democrat side these days is revealing another way, and it’s one that they probably didn’t intend.  This newfound concern for the amount of money spent for political consultants is suggestive that the Democrats don’t have the money to spend, this time around.  Granted, that that’s not a admission that most Democrats would like you to know.  Which, is probably why they don’t stated as such in the article… the article is being printed after all, in what has become widely regarded as the DNC house organ.

But here’s the real tale….if I were looking for signs that a political party was in some kind of trouble, financially, one of the first places that I personally would look would be at their attempts at cost control.  Particularly, I would be looking for changes in their cost control attempts.  The report suggests a major change in the way the Democrats are doing business.

Oh… This newfound concern over money also suggests implicitly that the Democrats figure the election can still be bought, if they just spend it correctly.

Were that the Democrats were nearly as worried about how they spend your money and mine.

A thank you note from Kyle-Anne Shiver, American Thinker to our troops:

One of the most gratifying things of all is that they know we love them and that we care about every single hair upon their heads in harms way.  They have a sense of our prayers and our genuine concern for their welfare.  Their correspondence is overflowing with their gratitude for our gifts, letters and cards. 

America’s message is getting through loud and clear in myriad ways, both tangible and intangible.  The NYT etal no longer have the power to stifle our love for those who take our flag into battle and who suffer the injury and insults of battling America’s enemies in our name. 

Amen.   We winning a war on two different fronts.

From both DavidL and myself… Please accept our warmest wishes for the Christmas season.

Glenn:

 PEACE ON EARTH? “While the headlines concentrate on peace breaking out in Iraq, that’s but part of a worldwide trend for the last few years. Violence has also diminished, or disappeared completely, in places like Nepal, Chechnya. Congo, Indonesia and Burundi.”

And why is peace breaking out in all these other places, all at once? There can be only one reason:  Because we acted in Iraq.

News from just up the road in Mississauga, Ontario… Jazz great Oscar Peterson has died at age 82 from Kidney failure.

… IN OTB’s Caption Contest

What IS that guy DOING, anyway?

Michelle Malkin’s Christmas message.

Hat Tip:  Hot Air.

Is Ron Paul a nazi?   Well some of Paul’s well embraced supporters are.   Virginia Heffernan, New York Times,  describes Paul’s “nazi  troubles:“

Ron Paul, our Internet president, seems to have Nazi troubles, as in they’re saying he’s one of them.

Stormfront, a “white nationalist” Internet community, has given him money. And he can’t seem to stop meeting with self-described neo-Nazis, according to Bill White, the Commander of the American National Socialist Workers’ Party.

Just as you can judge a bird by its feather, you can judge a politician by his blogs.    In Paul’s case the knee jerk defense is provided by LewRockwell.

Is the end, the question is not important.  Paul’s foreign policy would be suicidal.

Aside, my condolences to Charles Johnson, Little Green Footballs, and the Lizardoids, for being lauded in the article   

Little Green Footballs, the hawkish and rigidly empiricist blog that first furnished evidence of memo-forging in the Rathergate case, has started due diligence

We still love you Charles et al

Hat Tip:  Memeorandum.

Since 1955 NorAD has been tracking Santa annually. The last few years, they’ve been providing that tracking data as an online service. Click the logo to go there.

Edit: Link repaired.

I wanted to pass along a couple of pictures that were passed along to me by readers last year. I never got the chance to use them last season because I didn’t see them until well after new year’s. But now seems as good a time as any to post them.

in case you don’t recognize it, I will tell you up front that these are pictures from Arlington National Cemetery. They do this, every year. Every headstone in the place, gets a wreath. Every person buried at Arlington, is remembered with honor, and perhaps there is no time they are honored more than during the holiday season.

The Arlington Wreath project was started on the order of fifteen years ago by the president of the Worcester wreath company in Maine, who apparently decided to send holiday wreaths to Arlington is a way to honor the country’s fallen soldiers . Each and every year without fail since then 5000 or so evergreen wreaths are made up in the state of Maine, and then decorated , then loaded on a truck bound for Arlington.

The last I heard, there was supposed to be a wreath laying ceremony this morning at Arlington.

Longtime readers of this blog will recall that my wife is something of a fan of one Trace Adkins. Truth to tell, I like him as well… and particularly admire him for recording this one, which this story reminds me of. I know… copyright laws, and all… I hope Trace doesn’t mind, because I think this says it so well, what I feel looking at these pics.

I never thought that this is where I’d settle down,
I thought I’d die an old man back in my hometown,
They gave me this plot of land, me and some other men, for a job well done,
There’s a big white house sits on a hill just up the road,
The man inside he cried the day they brought me home,
They folded up a flag and told my mom and dad, we’re proud of your sonAnd I’m proud to be on this peaceful piece of property,
I’m on sacred ground and I’m in the best of company,
I’m thankful for those thankful for the things I’ve done,
I can rest in peace, I’m one of the chosen ones, I made it to Arlington I remember daddy brought me here when i was eight,
We searched all day to find out where my granddad lay,
And when we finally found that cross,
He said, “son this is what it cost to keep us free”
Now here I am, a thousand stones away from him,
He recognized me on the first day i came in,
And it gave me a chill when he clicked his heels, and saluted me.

And everytime I hear twenty-one guns,
I know they brought another hero home to us

 

We’re thankful for those thankful for the things we’ve done,
We can rest in peace, ’cause we are the chosen ones,
We made it to Arlington..

yea dust to dust,
Don’t cry for us…

We made it to Arlington.

Oh… and before I forget…. Remember to thank the LIVING soldiers as well. Here’s one way. There are other ways, as well.Look, let’s make this easy….you’re going to see a lot of people in uniform traveling for the Christmas season. When you see one, take the time to say “Thanks for wearing that Uniform, and doing our country proud”. The smile you get in return will doubtless make your day.

Glenn:

THIS SOUNDS ABOUT RIGHT:

“If a nuclear war between Israel and Iran were to break out 16-20 million Iranians would lose their lives – as opposed to 200,000-800,000 Israelis, according to a report recently published by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.”

Certainly does sound about right. But I caution against trusting in these numbers actually preventing Iran from doing exactly that… starting a war against Israel.  That attitude is exactly the one Ron Paul exhibited with Russert yesterday… and it leaves aside the point that this is a rational argument against such an action on the part of Iran…. and fails utterly to take into account the idea that Jihad is anything but rational.

In 1992, B.J. Clinton campaigned on a “Middle Class Tax Cut.”

In 2000, John Edwards promised to make Christopher Reeves walk again.

Now Michael McAuliff, Daily News(NY), reports Mrs. William Clinton is promising “Elect me and oil prices instantly drop:” Sure Honey, I’ll still respect you in the morning.

Mrs. Clinton seems to know almost as much about economics this year as she did about health-care in 1994.  She can not get past seeing the world in terms of evil villains, which sees every where.

First, Mrs. Clinton blames oil prices on the oil producing countries:

When the world hears her commitment at her inauguration about ending American dependence on foreign fuel, Clinton says, oil-pumping countries will lower prices to stifle America’s incentive to develop alternative energy

“I predict to you, the oil-producing countries will drop the price

If Mrs. Clinton’s plan is so good, and evidently does not require action by Congress, why wait the ten weeks from Election Day to Inauguration to announce it?  Why not just announce her magic plan the day after her election, and give her voters ten extra weeks of cheaper oil?

Second, Mrs. Clinton forgetting that she had already blamed the price of oil on oil producing countries, then proceeded to blame the price on oil companies:

She warned that folks shouldn’t be grateful now if oil countries cut prices from near $100 a barrel to $60 or $70, and compared it to trying to boil a frog.

“You put him in hot water, it jumps right out, you put him in cold water and turn up the heat – he’s a goner,” she said. “We’ve got to figure out how were going to not be the frog in the cold water anymore

Oh course, Mrs. Clinton already has her eight million dollars.  Why should she care what you pay for oil.  She likes Jimmy Carter’s energy plan, but dislikes Ron Reagan’s, because the Gipper’s made the price of gasoline less expensive.

Clinton argued that former President Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s actually started moving in the right direction toward energy independence, but his successor, Ronald Reagan, “dismantled” that work.

“Because costs were low, people didn’t care, didn’t complain,”

As Mrs. Clinton sees it, the more energy costs the better it is for her.  Sure Mrs. Clinton can afford her energy plan, but can you?

More, Blackhedd. Red State, adds, “What Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Know About the Price of Oil.”

Hat Tip photo: HillaryNation.

Ron Paul, as you may know…particularly if you’ve been reading here, was on Meet the Press yesterday. Now I doubtless will be getting reaction from the Paulettes, as I do every freakin’ time I bring the subject up…. reaction not unlike the reaction Britney Spears and her problems initially brought up….

Part of the price of speaking the truth, I suppose.

In any event, here we go.

MR. RUSSERT: So if Iran invaded Israel, what do we do?

Well, first off, Russert seems a bit off his feed, here. The fear, here is that Iran will Nuke Israel, not invade it.

REP. PAUL: Well, they’re not going to.  That is like saying “Iran is about to invade Mars.” I mean, they have nothing.  They don’t have an army or navy or air force.  And Israelis have 300 nuclear weapons.  Nobody would touch them.

If I recall, correctly, BinLaden had an equal amount, and yet managed to do serious damage.

But, no, if, if it were in our national security interests and Congress says, “You know, this is very, very important, we have to declare war.” But presidents don’t have the authority to go to war.

Can it be that Ron Paul has never heard of the War powers act? How can someone so disconnected, ever think about running for President?

MR. RUSSERT: You…

REP. PAUL: You go to the Congress and find out if they want a war, do the people want the war.  But it’s totally unnecessary.  I mean, that, that, to me, is an impossible situation…

A short time ago, Ron Paul was making lots of noise about how GWB considered a 9/11 scenario, an ‘impossible situation’. Now, we see the blindness of Ron Paul.

MR. RUSSERT: If…

REP. PAUL: …for the Iranians to invade Israel.

MR. RUSSERT: This is what you said about Israel.  “Israel’s dependent on us, you know, for economic means.  We send them” “billions of dollars and they,” then they “depend on us.  They say, `Well, you know, we don’t like Iran.  You go fight our battles.  You bomb Iran for us.’ And they become dependent on us.”

Who in Israel is saying “Go bomb Iran for us”?

REP. PAUL: Well, I don’t know the individuals, but we know that their leaderships–you read it in the papers on a daily–a daily, you know, about Israel, the government of Israel encourages Americans to go into Iran, and the people–I don’t think that’s a–I don’t think that’s top secret that the government of Israel…

MR. RUSSERT: That the government of Israel wants us to bomb Iran?

REP. PAUL: I, I don’t think there’s a doubt about that, that they’ve encouraged us to do that.  And of course the neoconservatives have been anxious to do that for a long time.

So, when Russert dares ask Ron Paul for particulars he utterly fails to come up with those particulars. He’s blowing smoke, friends.  He clearly has no clue what it is he’s bloviating about. Or perhaps he’s working based on a prejudice, and trying to justify his nonsense in ways that don’t directly reference that prejudice? That seems to me most likely.

I don’t know about Ron Paul’s fantasy world, and frankly I don’t really care… but out here in the real world, Iran is not just a problem for Israel, but it is also a problem for the remainder of the world, America included, and not just because they want to eliminate Israel.  Does Paul really consider the Iranians to NOT be a threat? I mean, is he really moronic enough to assume that once Israel is out-of-the-way, the “everything for radical Islam” mindset that rules Iran won’t be looking for fresh meat? If so, he’s just disqualified himself (yet again) from the office of President, by his utter stupidity.

That aside, It’s possible that the Israeli leaders want America to Bomb Iran, as he says.  Wouldn’t surprise me at all.  But the bottom line is Ron Paul doesn’t have his facts together and can’t prove his accusations. Throwing around accusations for which you don’t have facts to back it up, does not sound overly presidential to me.  What he claims to be evidence, is that these accusations are based on an article that he read in the papers somewhere.  What paper?  Where?  Who wrote it?  Who was quoted in it?  And what ‘neoconservatives’ here at home have been pushing for our bombing of Iran? What are their names? Has Ron Paul any names to share? Does he have any proof? He certainly offered none.

I suspect, based on what he’s shown us here, that this is nothing more than anti-Israel tripe masquerading as educated policy decisions. His reference to the Neoconservatives is of a piece with his (And more, his supporters) repeated references to the “Jew Lobby”.  Sword at the Ready commented on this last September:

 

What I keyed in on is his growing usage of calling anyone who disagrees with him, “neocons”. During the last few days, the commentary and debate I’ve had with Ron Paul People has only revealed that slur to be a secondary and motivating factor in wanting Paul for President outside of retreating from the war on Jihadists. The moment you disagree with them, the “neocon” slur gets fired over and over. They have “neocon” on the brain.

It’s amazing to discover that they hate “neocons” more than Jihadists, and some simply suggest there would be no Jihadists if it weren’t for “neocons” like me.

“Neocon” – short for neoConservative – or ‘not really a conservative’ – but a Jew, an Israeli or someone who supports Zionists” is apparently the common definition.

Lots of these Ron Paul People are anti-semites apparently – I’ve not heard such vile depricating bashing of Jews except when reading White Supremacist garbage, hearing Ahmedinejad speak or reading old Nazi propaganda.

So, anyway, back to Russert:

 

MR. RUSSERT: Would you cut off all foreign aid to Israel?

REP. PAUL: Absolutely.  But remember, the Arabs would get cut off, too, and the Arabs get three times as much aid altogether than Israel.

Perhaps Ron Paul has never heard of oil income… something Israel is remarkably short of.

But why, why make Israel so dependent?  Why do we–they give up their sovereignty.  They can’t defend their borders without coming to us.  If they want a peace treaty, they have to ask us permission.  They can’t–we interfere when the Arab leagues make overtures to them.  So I would say that we’ve made them second class citizens.  I, I think they would take much better care of themselves. They would have their national sovereignty back, and I think they would be required then to have a stronger economy because they would have to pay their own bills.

Does anyone really think Ron Paul has Israel’s best interests at heart? Or is he, as I suspect and suppose, simply responding to the anti-Israel Stromfront goons he’s been associating himself with since the beginning?

 

MR. RUSSERT: And you actually go further.  You said this.  “Abolish the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Central Intelligence Agency and dismantle every other agency except the Justice and Defense Departments.” And then you went on.  “If elected president, Paul says he would abolish public schools, welfare, Social Security and farm subsidies.”

REP. PAUL: OK, you may have picked that up 20 or 30 years ago, it’s not part of my platform.  As a matter of fact, I’m the only one that really has an interim program.  Technically, a lot of those functions aren’t constitutional. But the point is I’m not against the FBI investigation in doing a proper role, but I’m against the FBI spying on people like Martin Luther King.  I’m against the CIA fighting secret wars and overthrowing government and interfering…

MR. RUSSERT: Would you abolish them?

REP. PAUL: I would, I would not abolish all their functions, but I–the, the, the…

MR. RUSSERT: What about public schools?  Are you still…

REP. PAUL: OK, but let’s go, let’s go with the CIA.  They’re, they’re involved in, in, in torture.  I would abolish that, yes.  But I wouldn’t abolish their right and our, our requirement to accumulate intelligence for national defense purposes.

MR. RUSSERT: But if you…

REP. PAUL: That’s quite different.

MR. RUSSERT: But if you eliminate the income tax, you take away half the revenues for the federal government.  What you’re left with is the Defense Department, Social Security, Medicare and pensions.  Everything else is gone. So you have to start making choices if you’re going to keep…

REP. PAUL: All right.  We can.  The big one is overseas expenditure.  You have to develop a transition.  You have to start paying down the deficit, balance the budget.  But you have to say I believe the most reasonable place to save is in foreign policy, hundreds of billions of dollars.  Because it gets us into trouble, it ruins our national–our defense is poor now.  Then the Department of Education, who–we elect conservatives to get rid of the Department of Education.  We used to campaign on that.  And what did we do? We doubled the size.  I want to reverse that trend.

MR. RUSSERT: What about public schools?

REP. PAUL: That’s what I’m trying to…

MR. RUSSERT: Are you still for…

REP. PAUL: No, I’m not–I’ve never, I’ve never taken the position–is it in my platform?  And…

MR. RUSSERT: It was–when you ran for president in 1988, you called for the abolition of public schools.

REP. PAUL: I, I bet that’s a misquote.  I, I do not recall that.  I’d like to know where that came from, because I went…

 

It’s not in its platform, true, but it is in his history.  It’s in his political thinking.  It’s in his makeup.  It’s a popular sentiment among his supporters.  It is also an unanswered question.  What you see in the box above is Ron Paul dodging the question being put to him.  It’s that simple.

Make no mistake about what I’m saying here.  I have for years complained about governmental largess, including the supposed of educational system that we’ve been suffering under. but if that’s what he really stands for, and I think it is, why does he not have the courage of his convictions? Again; not very presidential.

MR. RUSSERT: Let me ask this.  Term limits.  You ran on term limits.  “I think we should have term limits for our elected leaders.” You’ve been in Congress 18 years.

REP. PAUL: But I never ran on voluntary term limits.  There’s a big difference.

I shouldn’t even have to comment here.

MR. RUSSERT: But if you believe in the philosophy of term limits, why wouldn’t you voluntarily…

REP. PAUL: Well, it’s, it’s one of those, it’s one of those things that’s not on–I mean, you don’t see that out I’m campaigning on that.

Yes, Ron… it’s just one of those things… that seem to pop up rather frequently when you’re around. This is what Ron Paul calls “Principled Leadership”?

Look, can we leave this loser, Ron Paul, and his followers behind, and his distractions and get back to the adult side of the conversation, now?

Others blogging: The Campaign Spot, Los Angeles Times, The Sundries Shack and PoliGazette, Hot Air Conservative Reader

The Washington Post is questioning the moral underpinnings of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, “Racial Undercurrent Is Seen in Clinton Campaign:”

It has unfolded mostly under the radar. But an important development in the 2008 Democratic battle may be the building backlash among African Americans over comments from associates of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton that could be construed as jabs at Sen. Barack Obama‘s race.

These officials, including Clinton aides and prominent surrogates, have raised questions or dropped references about Obama’s position on sentencing guidelines for crack vs. powder cocaine offenses; on his handgun control record; and on his admitted use of drugs as a youth. The context was always Obama’s “electability.”

Hat Tip:  Hot Air.

Rush Limbaugh and others have skewered any conservative credentials Mike Huckabee has pretended to hold.   Selwyn Duke, American Thinker, examines the Huckster’s religious bona fides, or lack thereof same:

Belief can be a great thing, of course.  Our Founding Fathers’ unprecedented respect for liberty was born of their Christian belief that rights were bestowed by the divine king and not worldly ones.  Mother Teresa’s Christian beliefs inspired her to toil tirelessly to aid the destitute and dying in India.  But whereas the founders kept charity out of government and Teresa kept government out of charity, Huck conflates the two in a disastrous mix of bad theology and bad political science.  Perverting Christianity’s message and violating 2000 years of its tradition, he believes it is his Christian mandate to do good works through government. 

Duke seems to give Huckabee credit for sincere, if muddled,  beliefs.  I will not go that far.   Huckabee uses his religiousity as  cover.    I believe there is no basis for using Christian belief to give away other people’s money.

Hat Tip photo:  Wikipedia.