Yawn… Romney Wins Iowa Straw Poll

—AMES, Iowa —AP— Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney won an easy and expected victory in a high-profile Iowa Republican Party Straw Poll on Saturday, claiming nearly twice as many votes as his nearest rival.

Is this the same Straw poll that gave us Pat Robertson? As a matter of fact, since it started running in 1979, the Iowa straw poll has only gotten one right.  That would be our current president.  Prior to that… not so much.

Forgive me if that kind of a record doesn’t impress me.

CNN political ticker is reporting:

DES MOINES, Iowa —CNN— Rep. Ron Paul’s wife was hospitalized Saturday morning, the Texas Republican’s presidential campaign announced shortly before voting was to begin in the Ames GOP straw poll.

The campaign did not say why Carol Paul was taken to the hospital, but emphasized she is out of danger.

“Carol Paul became ill this morning and was taken to an area hospital,” Jesse Benton, a Paul spokesman, stated in an email. “She appears to have stabilized and is awaiting treatment. Dr. Paul is with her and will arrive at the Straw Poll when the situation permits.”

The guy’s a flake, but I’ll still wish for her recovery.

I pray I’m wrong, but it doesn’t look good.

Word on the live wire is that they’ve gotten into the area of the mine where they think the men are, and the conditions that are being reported do not appear survivable.  Further, I gather that the owner of the mine has mat in a hurry-up fashion with the families of those trapped, before supposedly going to a press conference, which as far as I can tell, has not occurred yet.  This situation has remained essentially unchanged since 10am eastern. The ‘feel’ I’m getting is not one of large hopes, in spite of their words.
As a side note, we here in western NY have noted some seriously altered coal train activity in the last few days. Increased frequency of unit coal trains along with some very abnormal power assignments on them, suggesting a short term reaction to a shortage being created somewhere in the system.

Perhaps there’s no connection, but the timing of the sightings here, is interesting, and even a little unsettling to long-time railfans.

There is an old adage, which states that it is impossible to get ahead, if you spend all your time getting even.
James at OTB notes McQ’s rehashing of his take on the purposes, and utilities of ‘divided government, by way of Bruce Bartlett on Sullivan’s column.

Bruce Bartlett and Bruce McQuain argue that the American people prefer gridlock and that, paradoxically, divided government (one party controlling the White House and another the Congress) is more likely to achieve conservative aims than having Republicans control both policy-making branches. I’m skeptical of both claims.

It’s true that gridlock has been the norm in recent decades, with Democrats usually controlling at least one House of Congress and Republicans usually winning the presidency. This, however, almost certainly reflects the vagaries of our electoral system rather than some conscious choice for divided government.

There has been a certain degree of slowdown, certainly, but I wouldn’t precisely refer to as “gridlock”.  Further, I question whether not gridlock is even desired.  Let’s break this down;

First, let’s look at Gridlock, and how, supposedly, we get there.

It seems to me that we are going about this based on the idea that a 50% democrat 50% republican mix, is going to achieve gridlock.  I would suggest to you that nothing could be farther from the truth, given the number of liberal republicans that we are dealing with.  John McCain being one. Arlen Spector, Lincoln Chaffee, and so on.

You see, the problem, is not so much the parties involved, though that he is a decent indicator, the problem is the underlying principles for each individual. Those are not necessarily reflected by the party label.

The result is a 50/50 balance of democrats to republicans is not going to be enough to halt the tilt to the left. Moreover after 60 years and more of democrat dominated legislatures, even a small republican majority is not going to be enough to overcome the leftist tool that has been established, or even slow it down , given the number of liberal republicans still in the mix.

(An aside: There is a level of amusement, about these comments, having their genesis on the website of Sullivan.. someone whose claims of being a conservative have had their credibility stretched beyond all belief.  )

As an example of how going 50/50 doesn’t solve the issue, let’s look at the output of the most recent session of Congress.

An increase of the minimum wage.  A very very watered down ethics bill.  A Federal budget that’s approximately ten times what President Bush wants, and he being no skinflint himself.  Extraordinarily stupid CAFE regulations, which will finish the job of killing off the American auto industry.  Tell me again about how this is gridlock.

* Second, let’s attack the issue of whether not gridlock, precisely, assuming that it’s even a cheap of all, is what is needed.

Here, Billy Beck (Here, also) and myself would appear to be on the same page, where he says:

What you’re arguing for is stagnation of destruction at its current pace. That’s utterly hopeless in any case, because of the nature of what’s usually called “compromise” in these affairs. The left is always going to make way, and there is no “gridlock”, in the end.

For my part, I say gridlock a nice first step, but it’s not really what’s needed. what is needed, is repair.  There is an old adage, which says you cannot get ahead, if you spend all your time getting even.  So it is here.  After 60 years and more of leftist dominated legislatures, what is needed is an equal time to the right.  In short, repair of the damage.  Gridlock even assuming we can achieve it, (and as I have suggested I don’t think we can given the current methods) far from providing that, is going to prevent it.

The one idea that has never been tried is a dominant republican majority.  Large enough, so that the republican leadership is not beholden to its own left.  I say, that is precisely what is necessary, now.  But I also maintain, that that goal is impossible, if what we’re shooting for is “balance”.

If Eliot Spiter were a republican in Washington,  the democrats would be talking impeachment.   As it is, Spitzer iis democrat in Albany.  But for how long?   Erick, Red State, has a laundry list of charges.

They should start yelling against about the President spying on Americans and covering up the firings of US Attorneys. Then we can point to actually illegal spying by Elliot Spitzer and his efforts to cover up what happened by granting “special counsel” status to regular employees

Sptzer would like to be president, but can he survive as govenor?

Upon being asked, during a phone interview, for a comment on the vindication of the Marines at Haditha that John Murtha slandered, his staff responded:

Click.

We’re still waiting for you to apologize, Mr. Murtha. You already have no credibility.  Would you prefer we assume you have no honor, as well?

Update:

Michelle notes the story as well.

Update II: See also:

Murtha.. a man without honor, but with lots of taxpayer cash

Hey Billy, even you aren’t aware of the scope of the attempt, here…. an unusual situation…

“The United States should consider implementing a European-style gasoline tax if it hopes to deal with energy security and global warming, the head of Ford Motor Co. said Wednesday.

‘The way to get at is to make an economic decision just like in Europe where the fuel prices are seven or eight dollars a gallon,’ Ford chief executive officer Alan Mulally said. ‘Then our behavior would change dramatically.'”

I’ll say.

Yeah, well, first; I mentioned this one yesterday, and was about to post a follow on, when I noticed your post. Check this:

Michigan Democratic Congressman John Dingell — who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee — plans to introduce legislation to fight global warming that includes a 50-cents-per-gallon tax on gasoline — and the elimination of mortgage tax deductions on houses larger than 3,000 square feet.

Dingell admits the ideas are not popular. “I know I’m going to catch hell for them,” he says. “If we are serious about global warming, we need to reduce consumption by making it more expensive.”

Cybercast News reports critics are calling the ideas “ill-informed, misguided, and economically detrimental.”

I dunno about you, man, but this smacks to me of some degree of coordination.

But make careful note of what I said yesterday about the causes, here.. and it’s a point Quick misses, too:

Mulally is just trying to sign onto it, because he figures he’s going to have a Democratic run Congress to deal with for a while. And as you see, the Democrats are already making similar noises.  It’s the old line about having established what kind of girl she is, they’re now down to haggling over price.

Over at Q&O, McQ says:

You know sometimes you think that something is so obvious that even Ellen Goodman might figure it out. But then you’d be wrong. In one of the more absurd columns it has been my misfortune to read in a long time, Goodman tells us that the political blogosphere just isn’t diverse enough for her:

Last week, these progressive political bloggers not only attracted 1,200 to Chicago for the Yearly Kos convention, but made it a designated stop for seven out of the eight Democratic candidates.

Nevertheless, there is another, less flattering way in which broadband has followed broadcast and the liberal political bloggers mimic the conservative talk-show hosts. The chief messengers are overwhelmingly men — white men, even angry white men.

Huh. I mean, how do you answer someone as seemingly clueless as this?

You do so by noting what’s at the heart of the complaint, and the words used.

Pull back a bit, and get a wider shot, here. The big picture take-away from all of this is the lesson of how ‘diversity’ gets used by liberals. Goodman deems that blogdom is “not diverse enough” because it isn’t populated, much less dominated, by those of her gender and leftist-driven politics. Which, for all that has been attributed to the word the last decade or three, is all the intention of such liberals ever was…. making everyone else’s politics more like theirs.

And, yes, that is the goal of anyone who is active in politics.  That is, making other people’s politics more like your own.  But notice which hand of the political spectrum is, that labels such efforts “diversity”.  Also note, who is who gets to decide what “diversity” is.

Mrs, Clinton gets snotty and sloppy with the facts.  When asked why she favored socialized medicine, i.e. HillaryCare, Mrs. Clinton flatly denied having ever favored socialized medicine.   Alllah Pundit, Hot Air, has the video.

Last week, Mrs. Clinton openly admitted a canidate should not speak everything he might think.  Now she denies having favored, and still favoring, socialized medicine.   This is only the pre-primary season, and Mrs. Clinton is cracking under the pressure.

How much longer before she Howard Deans?

?

Sudhin Thaanawala. writes, “Peace activist Cindy Sheehan announces candidacy:”

(08-09) 15:20 PDT San Francisco (AP) —

Citing her son as inspiration, a tearful Cindy Sheehan announced her candidacy Thursday for the U.S. House of Representatives.

The anti-war activist is running as an independent against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has represented San Francisco in Congress since 1987.

“The country is ripe for a change,” said Sheehan, who spoke at a podium with her son’s photograph attached to it. “It’s going to start right here and right now.”

Two points.

One, Mrs. Sheehan is not a peace actistist.  Not because she is a moonbat, but rather because no person on the sane side of Jack Murtha or Mrs. Sheehan, professes to believe that withfrawal of United States forces from Iraq will result is a ceasation of hostities. 

Rather, just the opposite,  The accepted belief is that the withdrawal of US forces will result in massive genocide.  Call genocide what you will, it is not peace.

Two, while Mrs. Sheehan gave birth to Casey Sheehan, she has no right to besmearch Specialist Sheehan’s tragic death to further her, not his, political positions.   Specialists Sheehan died in service to coutry, defending freedom.  She Sheehan loaths freedom  and adores dictators.

Mrs. Sheehan, do not invoke the name of your dead son in order to kiss up to Hugo Chavez.

Hat Tip:  Sister Toldjah.

?

Presidential elections are won by taking and holding the middle.  B.J Clinton become the only ‘rat elected president the last thirty years by claiming to be a new, read moderate, democrat.   For B.J.’s professed moderation we eight years of Janet Reno and Joyclyn Elders.

The vehicle for B.J. moderatation was Democratic Leadership Council.   The DLC recently held a convention, which all democrate candates, including B.J.’s wife shunned in favor the Yearlly Kossack.

Shunned, albeit maybe not stunned, DLC chairman, Harald Ford, Jr.still professsed to hold the keys to the Oval Office:

“They’ll find their way back to the middle. And if they don’t, they won’t win.”

It seems unlikely that Ford cleared his statement with Markos Moulitsas Zúniga, who now claims ot own the middle of the Democrat Party.   If there is a key to the White House in democrat hands, in can not be both in hands of Ford and Zúniga.  In fact the Pnch Sulzberger Blog thinks Zuniga owns the middle:

In fact, the online “progressive movement” led now by people like Mr. Moulitsas, a former Republican and U.S. Army veteran, has become much more acceptable and palatable to centrist and leading Democrats. And prominent or recognizable enough that the Republicans are now trying to link the 2008 candidates and Democratic party to a group it deems the far left – the liberal blogosphere.

Back in the real world,  , Kimberley Strassel,,Real Clear Politics asks, “Will Democrats Abandon the Middle?”   They already have.

?

Billy Hollis over at Q&O:

I’m referring to Tom Daschle. You’ll recall that he got knocked out in 2004 despite being the Democrats’ leader in the Senate at the time.

His co-senator, elected in 2002, was Tim Johnson, who suffered a serious stroke a while back. Johnson’s seat is up for grabs in 2008.

Now, look, I don’t have anything against Johnson, even though there were some shennanigans in his very close election. (I don’t think he was the one who ordered the shennanigans.) It’s a terrible thing that he has to contend with a stroke, and I wish him a full and speedy recovery.

But he’s not currently able to fulfull his office, and likely won’t be for months. Maybe never. So I don’t even think he needs to be hanging onto his Senate seat as it is, though with the Democrats needing every last seat to maintain control, I guess I understand why that’s happening.

Now Daschle comes along and starts complaining about how mean and nasty the Republicans are because they intend to win that seat in 2008:

Clearly, what we have here, is someone who recognizes that the Democrats are not going to be able to win that contest. And so, he throws any weapon he has had the problem.

It raises the logical question, however, would he have considered himself even more untouchable and then he obviously did in his race with Thune, had he become disabled in some fashion? Or, perhaps even more to the point, is the question would he be reacting this way, if a republican had become disabled during their term of office? Somehow, I tend to doubt that his generosity and fairness of mind extends quite so far.

James Joyner says this morning:

Anthony Watts as generated a huge amount of blogospheric attention with his report on Steve McIntyre’s recalculation of temperature trends. It turns out that the Y2K bug skewed previous data from this decade.

Four of the top 10 years of US CONUS high temperature deviations are now from the 1930s: 1934, 1931, 1938 and 1939, while only 3 of the top 10 are from the last 10 years (1998, 2006, 1999). Several years (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) fell well down the leaderboard, behind even 1900.

James goes on to relate how it’s a little beyond his expertise.  Frankly, I think it’s beyond the expertise of most people talking about it.  However, James goes on to point out that Watts suggests that the effect on U.S. global warming propaganda machines could be huge.

The fact is, just about any fact that questions the global warming scenario, pokes some very serious holes in that whole propaganda machine.  Which, of course, is why the global warming hucksters cannot brook any questioning of their mantra.

One could logically ask if the global warming scare wasn’t being created by an overheating Pentium floating point unit.  Certainly, warming on a somewhat smaller scale.

Q&O notes this story, also declaring it  …

…another reason that a good dose of skepticism should be maintained when anyone declares the ‘science of global warming is settled’.

Indeed, there already were many such. Not least of which was the people pushing the mantra.

Boortz raises an interesting point:

Yesterday the federal government proposed yet another version of an airline passenger pre-screening program.  It’s called Secure Flight.  It will let domestic passengers volunteer to provide their date of birth and gender when the purchase airline tickets.

According to the Transportation Security Administrator, giving these pieces of data will help clarify many of the mix-ups that currently exist … such as infants being banned from flights because a name similar to theirs is on no-fly list. The new program will resolve 95% of the miscommunications.

Congress’ concern has been about the invasion of privacy, initially requiring passengers to give commercial data and be assigned risk scores.  In fact, they were so concerned that they banned the implementation of any program until it meets their standards of ensured privacy and accuracy.

In addition, Homeland Security announced that international flights will be required to send the passenger list data to the U.S. government before the plane even takes off.  This is will give U.S. authorities more time to identify and remove terror suspects from flights.

As for giving up personal information … come on, it’s a birth date.  Your drug store has it, what’s the problem with coughing it up when you fly?

You really do have to wonder what the objection is here.  I have long since begun to suspect that the people raising such objections, in light of modern day realities such as what Neal talks about here are either tilting at ghostly windmills , or are actively working toward our being attacked again, or both.

Personally, I drive everywhere I go, anyway.  The reasons, however, have shifted some what; they now include the idea that my safety is being held in balance with some mental midgets idea of “civil liberties”.  When that kind of nonsense starts occurring, I will simply remove myself from the equation, thank you.

And while I’m on the subject just a quick note to the ACLU : Not in MY name, you blinking morons.

Bret Baier, who is still doing Hume’s job, says last night:

Anti-war groups are said to be split over the question of whether to attack Democrats over their failure to secure legislation mandating a troop withdrawal from Iraq.

The Hill reports some activists feel moveon.org has abandoned its credentials as an issue-based advocacy group in favor of becoming a cheerleader for the Democrats.

One such group — voices for creative non-violence — is holding protests outside the local offices of Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin.

And one activist with the group Code Pink says she has dropped her membership in MoveOn — calling it “very conservative.” she says that when MoveOn supported the Iraq supplemental funding bill — “They betrayed us.”

A few points on all of this:

1. Go ahead and tell us how the left supports the troops, again.
2. I’ve got news for you, kiddies, MoveOn.Org never was anything but a cheerleading group for the democrats.
3. What can be said about the politics, and for that matter the mental stability of a group who figures the Democrats aren’t leftist enough, and that calls the Democrats ‘Very Conservative” ?