October 17, 2012 - October 10, 2012
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
I'll be playing
the Keith Richards part. I'll explain.
THE BOOK OF YOU.
For days and days, I haven't been able to watch the news except in
snippets. There is no news. There is mere caterwauling as Obama's
Alinsky virus spreads into Republican ranks and infects the entire body
politic. For now it's all about lies in every quarter as every
principal politician and pundit pursues his own personal interest.
People change sides and perspectives on an almost daily basis in what
has ceased to be a campaign and become instead a kind of vaudeville
I can't possibly provide all the links I've been combing through -- no,
I haven't been idling -- and if you care enough you can surely find
them for yourselves, so I won't be doing that work for you. Gingrich
wins in South Carolina by dressing down the CNN moderator who led off
the Carolina debate with a question culled from maliciously solicited
gossip by an embittered ex-wife. The NYT responds by claiming that
Gingrich loves the media, which causes all the leading journalists at
Fox News to close ranks around their CNN "colleague." Barf. Even Lady
Laird's FNC favorite, Neil Cavuto, superciliously declared he would
have asked that same question first, too, because he is a journalist, by gar. Self-important
asshole is more like it. I'm not even going to mention Chris Wallace
and Charles Krauthammer. Oops. I guess I just did. Not to mention the
ritual Gingrich scorn of Ed and Allah at Hotair.
People claim the American people have a short memory. I suggest that
nobody has a shorter memory than the self-proclaimed conservative
intelligentsia. Cavuto gets on his uppers and somehow forgets the two
years of lefty propaganda surrounding Clinton's
Lewinsky/perjury/impeachment scandal arguing that private sex lives are
personal matters and have nothing to do with affairs of state, that
lying about sex isn't lying at all but inevitably human. Sure, the
question can be asked. But first?
Really? There's some known universe in which ordinary Americans should trust the journalistic objectivity of NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, NPR, CNN, or even FNC to ask questions that aren't expressly designed to embarrass Republicans and elevate Obama? Not if they want to keep going to social events hosted by the powers who own the New York Times, The Washington Post, and the White House." *
Which leads some to the argument that CNN's John King was deliberately
helping Gingrich by making himself a target (uh, no, I saw his face),
thus propelling Gingrich to an unexpected win against the candidate the
Dems really fear -- Romney. Which has somehow become an article of
faith for both the Republican establishment and any number of
conservatives who believe Romney is the only electable Republican
candidate. Yea, even Ann "Attila" Coulter is carrying water for Romney,
as was Mark Steyn a week or two ago when he claimed that Gingrich is
essentially totalitarian, though now he is curiously reversing his
field to savage Romney's rhetoric, his bloated campaign organization
(like an unyieldingly incompetent government bureaucracy), and his
whole candidacy (like a bad Broadway show that can be made better but
Meanwhile, everybody on the Republican side has pissed off everybody
else on the Republican side. Gingrich attacks Romney's Bain experience,
which rightly causes Romney to propose that Gingrich is employing
leftist anti-capitalist arguments that will be exploited by Obama in
the general election. Then, in the wake of his South Carolina loss,
Romney declares Gingrich a "disgrace" and "a Fannie Mae shill," and his
sudden new ally Chris Christie (panting for a VP nod, apparently) tells
the MSM that Gingrich is an "embarrassment to the party." Sarah Palin
wades in to tar Christie for taking a NJ state helicopter to his son's
baseball game, tells him "not to get his panties in a wad," and reminds
him he's just made an Obama ad against a Republican who might get
In the margins or in the background, the Santorum who claimed credit
for his association with Gingrich a week or two ago is now a Santorum
who dismisses Gingrich's term as Speaker as a time of chaos and "an
idea a minute," while Gingrich falsely claims to have been a
Goldwaterite (he supported Rockefeller) and Romney falsely claims to
have been a Reaganite (he repudiated Reagan in his Massachusetts
gubernatorial run) even as he continues to use the Reagan phrase
"shining city on a hill" because his huge writing staff can't come up
with a better close for his stump speech. And Mark Steyn, erstwhile
Gingrich opponent, does to Romney what Tina Fey did to Palin with her
"I can see Russia from my house" line that has since been attributed
ceaselessly to Palin herself. What did Steyn do? He quoted this from
Romney's stump speech: "I believe in an America where millions of
Americans believe in an America that’s the America millions of
Americans believe in. That’s the America I love." Thanks, Mark. That's
not going to go away anytime soon.
Why you haven't heard from me lately. What we're watching is the
success of Obama's Alinsky tactics. He has succeeded in so poisoning
the political waters with his own strategem of saying whatever he
thinks works at the moment while repeating the most pernicious of the
out-and-out lies ad nauseam that he has conjured a mirror image of
himself in the opposition. He doesn't need to participate actively. He
just has to prod and nudge and drop in the occasional harpoon to keep
the whole melee roiling. Meanwhile, meanwhile, meanwile -- the MSM is
too busy with Republican self-destructiveness to cover Fast &
Furious, Solyndra, LightSquared, and other administration criminalities
that would be worthy of an impeachment investigation if anyone in the
news elite, including Fox News, really cared. Or cared about covering
the truly "dismal
There is one person — one American
among the 300 million of us — who is not to blame for the state of the
union. Everyone else, each of you, in some small or large way, bears
some share of the blame, but not this guy. Not one little bit.
This guy is Barack Obama. He is not the least bit to blame for the
dismal state of the U.S. economy. George W. Bush is, for sure, and that
evil Dick Cheney, oh, no doubt. House Speaker John A. Boehner — evil,
too — is, of course, to blame. But guess what? So is Senate Majority
Leader Harry Reid, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, and every
Democrat in the House and Senate.
Now, President Truman made it very clear: The buck stops with him. No
passing the buck for that guy. But Mr. Obama blames everyone but
himself. Mr. Bush, he says, left the nation in a ditch, a deep ditch,
and he’s been digging out since he took office. And Congress? Those
guys are just plain awful, he says. So mean. Wah, they won’t do
anything I want done! Mr. Obama feels so sure about it that he’s basing
his re-election campaign on bashing Capitol Hill.
Well, I did find one
illuminating essay, by J.E.
Dyer, a back bencher (of course) at Hotair.
If the voters weren’t silly, they would
understand that it has to be Mitt Romney, because, well, primary voters
were silly and picked Christine “I am not a witch” O’Donnell over Mike
Castle in Delaware, not to mention running with that goofy Sharron
Angle in Nevada, and look how that turned out. You can’t get
California and you probably can’t get New York, if you’re the GOP
nominee. But you have a good shot at Pennsylvania and Ohio,
Michigan and maybe even Illinois, if you’re Mitt Romney. Newt
Gingrich? Forget it. Gingrich can’t even win Georgia...
As with the O’Donnell-Castle primary outcome in 2010, however, it’s not
the voters who are silly. They know that all things aren’t equal
in 2012. The voters who put Gingrich over the top yesterday
believe that we can’t keep going down the same political path in the
United States – and that that holds for Republicans at least as much as
for Democrats, if not more. Their perception is that the GOP
leadership is invested in the current path of government: that it
doesn’t want change; it is not committed to restoring liberty and
limited government, but instead is comfortable with the growth of
regulatory intrusiveness, and seeks merely to broker pragmatic
accommodations to leftist activism as a sort of rear-guard action.
Considering that the GOP has been doing this for most of the last 80
years, the voters aren’t wrong. They aren’t wrong about Mitt
Romney: his record of enthusiastic accommodations to the left is a set
of rusty, clanking weights tethered to the back of the
Mitt-mobile. Gingrich and Santorum both have some ‘splainin’ to
do as well, but Gingrich has specifically repudiated some of his
earlier faux pas (such as the snuggle-up with Nancy Pelosi on combating
“global warming”). He also speaks trenchantly on the issues that
exercise the most voters: federal debt, health care regulation,
regulation in general, government intervention in the economy, illegal
It does matter to primary voters, moreover, that Gingrich “takes it to”
the media by rhetorically denouncing the questions posed in the GOP
debates. Voters on the right perceive the one-sided political
attitude of the media to be a significant problem for American
Many voters are determined not to be ruled by federal executive
agencies whose agendas are approved by MSNBC and the New York
Times. These voters are voting for the candidate they deem most
likely to reverse America’s slide into precisely that method of
government. That they see such a candidate in Newt Gingrich
speaks more loudly about the general state of the GOP than about
anything else. Voters are seeking to break the inertia and
conventionalism of the Republican Party; this is, in fact, a power
struggle, and one in which I would not bet against the voters...
The people have one tool – the vote – by which to express the sentiment
that things have to change. In 2008, Mitt Romney didn’t look all
that different from George W. Bush. The Obama tenure has been a
wake-up call that has put Romney in a new perspective: in 2012, he
doesn’t look as different from Barack Obama as conservative voters
would prefer. Obama is less an outlier than the end-gamer of the
same big-government principles embraced by both major parties over the
past 80 years. We have now seen with our own eyes where those
principles lead, and the voters don’t want to go there. It’s not
the voters who need to wise up; it’s the Republican Party.
Which brings me at last to my video. I decided to watch Pirates of the
Caribbean 4 after reading a solidly literate review dismissing
Nicely and convincingly
written. Everything the franchise could do it has done. Not worth
watching. Then I read the first comment
(paraphrasing): "What's wrong with you, dude? It was a bang-up
I trusted the commenter over the reviewer -- my mood these days -- and
he was right. It was a
bang-up entertainment. But it was also more than that. It's a
pirate movie obviously, but as I watched I became aware that the only
honest communications between pirates in the whole movie occurred at
the beginning between Captain Jack Sparrow and his pirate dad, Keith
Richards. (The old man warns him that his next adventure will be a
demanding personal test.) Throughout the rest of it, everybody was
continuously, obsessively, even perversely, lying about everything.
Absolutely nothing and no one could be trusted, including the hero who
eventually does a right thing because of a love he has to lie even to
himself about. It's comical in the extreme, but eventually you begin to
wonder why they talk to each other at all, because everything they say
to one another is a lie. They turn on each other in an instant,
sometimes in mid-sentence, and betrayals are so constant and inevitable
you're left with the conviction that
it's all simply a game, which is fine in an entertainment but not in
The truth is, we're all being taken for a ride by pirates -- by
everyone who has something public or private or, worse, venally
vengeful to gain, even the Charles
Krauthammers and National Review
editors on the sidelines.
So I thought, maybe it really is
all over. Maybe there's no point in
talking any more, blogging any more. No matter who wins, we all lose.
But if I'm going to be swayed by a
pop culture movie, I have to be swayed by its message, such as it is,
too. Captain Jack Sparrow does finally commit an unselfish act, both to
save someone he loves and to destroy the most evil of his direputable
colleagues. Maybe that's a victory worth fighting for. Small in the grand scheme of things, perhaps, but not inconsequential to those most directly affected. Like our children and grandchildren.
Which brings me to a modest proposal I simply can't execute alone.
Forget the pirates on the Republican side. The worst of the pirates on
the scene is still Obama, the Blackbeard of the movie. It is still the
mission to defeat him.
I propose constructing a news aggregation site that consists of no
Republican advocacy or candidate-specific campaigning. It consists of
aggregating and organizing the abundant stories about the costs,
corruptions, lies, disinformation, evasions, persecutions, accomplices,
unconstitutionalities, and other monstrosities of the Obama
administration. A go-to source for
anyone seeking information about just how bad Obama has been as
and how catastrophic a second term would be. Not gossip, not snarky
abuse, not rumors, not explosions of anger. Just the facts regarding
where he has been (I'm not even excluding fact-based "birther" analyses
bio questions), who he consorts with, what he has done, what he has set
in motion, what he intends, and how the history shows he has gone about
I don't know what the right software is. It has to allow those of you
who care to participate to contribute links individually, maybe one or
two a week each. I'm not a news aggregator talent myself, but I can
accept your input and do actual postings; I simply have no idea how to
set it up. I'm still learning how to use my iPhone.
The mission is Beating Obama. My idea for a title. Who among you is
still feeling like a pirate rather
than a damsel hopelessly walking the plank?
My son is still working on my book. Slowly. But he'll do me proud. Eventually.
Fountain of Youth? No. "Does this face look like it's seen the Fountain of Youth?" But how about regeneration of the American spirit? That's a different question altogether.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Watch to the end.
To the fatal snakebite that isn't.
I STOP TALKING ABOUT THE NFL? Last week, Roger Simon compared
Newt Gingrich to a warthog.
metaphor. In the best Republican debate yet, Newt prevailed once again.
His beltway enemies have struck and struck and struck. They must be
dismayed at the way he shrugs off their venom:
If you've got the
guts, the race card is a deuce.
That's the headline. The subhead is that the other three sane
candidates also turned in outstanding performances. Two or three times,
Romney ceased being a Ken doll and had the crowd going. Rick Santorum
got to talk about something other than same sex marriage. Surprise. He
had something to offer. And where was
this Rick Perry back when he
had a chance at being nominated? I can't find a clip, but he was good:
for the first time I could see him as a president. He won't be, but I
was encouraged to see four on the stage at one time who could be. (The fifth
got tangled up with a honey badger. Enough said.)
Oh well. The glass is not half empty but half full. What I saw was a
reaffirmation of capitalism, limited government. religious faith,
American values and
character, and a huge rebuff of the MSM portrayal of Republicans as
racist reactionaries. Thank you, South Carolina, and thank you, Fox
We're not as much alone in our quaint beliefs as WAPO and CNN and the
NYT and the Hollywood publicity machine would like us to be. If the
Golden Globes broadcast and its PC-oriented awards disgusted you, take
this as an
My sneaky way of bringing the conversation back to the truly important
subject of the day (and my prior post), NFL football.
I've seen Vince
Papale in person. He's real -- no Hollywood fiction. A special teams hero nobody in Philly will ever forget. What we can be.
I kid. But do
I? Maybe not. We have to keep getting up from the last hit and
making the next play. If we do, we win. It's that simple. Americans of
every stripe know in their hearts that Obama is a diva wide
receiver (never a QB -- BO=TO, dude) with no stats to back up his endlessly running mouth. He runs
for the sidelines at every whipstitch, and he doesn't have the balls to
catch a tough pass in the middle of the field. Even the MSM can't hide
these facts about him forever, and no matter how hard they try, the
people who vote will know.
Don't lose heart. Every poll that shows Obama under 50 percent in a
head-to-head matchup is an indicator of victory. The undecideds always
break big against the
incumbent. Remember that.
the LGBT liberals among you, here's the preferred "sarcastic" narration
of the clip above that makes it seem like a scene from a network
Newt's just a nasssty boy. Won't be seeing him on Fashion Police
anytime soon. More proof that there is no God. But isssn't Newt awful?
You betcha sistah. Wait for our hot hot "Honey Badguh" episode on Glee. [We're Fox, the parent company of most LGBTA propaganda, except for Matt Lauer's volunteer efforts.]