People are policy and while much attention has been focused on the profusion of buffoons and poltroons Obama has installed at the cabinet and sub-cabinet level positions in his administration, the real work of radically changing the character of our government has been entrusted to anonymous apparatchiks.
Some of these have bubbled to the top and have resignd: green czar and self identified communist Van Jones, UN financial reform guru and part time identity thief Jide Zeitlin, performance czar and tax cheat Nancy Killefer. Safe schools czar and pedophile apologist Kevin Jenningsremains on the job as do others.
Today, however, we may have won one small battle in the war to keep the adminstrative machinery of the nation out of the hands of people who are opposed to our system of goverment. Obama’s nomination to fill the a vacant seat on the National Labor Relations Board has fallen to a bipartisan fillibuster.
The NLRB was established by our last socialist president in 1934. Its function is to oversee union elections, by that I mean elections held in companies to determine union representation, and to adjudicate unfair labor practices. It all sounds innocuous. And it is if the board confines itself to being a neutral enforcer of federal labor laws and regulations. Enter Craig Becker, stage left.
Becker is associate general counsel of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the union that provides the left with goons, and a close associate of its president Andy Stern. Mr. Becker has held some fairly exotic positions on labor relations. Positions which, in a different administration even of the same party, should disqualify him from being considered for this post.
For example, Becker has written that ‘employers should be stripped of any legal cognizable interest in their employees’ election of representatives.’ This radical view would even extend to prohibiting employers from alerting the NLRB to illegal campaign conduct. In the same law review article quoted above, Becker wrote that ‘employers should have no right to raise questions concerning voter eligibility or campaign conduct.’ Taking such views one step further, Becker believes that employers shouldn’t even be heard when it comes to most NLRB cases, writing: ‘employers should have no right to be heard in either a representation case or an unfair labor practices case.’
Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) announced Monday evening that he will support a Republican-led filibuster over President Barack Obama’s nominee to serve on the National Labor Relations Board.
The move is likely to infuriate labor groups who have fought hard for Craig Becker’s nomination to serve on the five-member NLRB - and will likely give Republicans enough support to sustain a filibuster Tuesday.
“Mr. Becker’s previous statements strongly indicate that he would take an aggressive personal agenda to the NLRB, and that he would pursue a personal agenda there, rather than that of the administration,” Nelson said in a statement. “This is of great concern, considering that the board’s main responsibility is to resolve labor disputes with an even and impartial hand.”
We welcome Senator Nelson’s opposition to seating Becker on the NLRB. But my eye was drawn to the next paragraphs.
Nelson, a conservative Democrat up for reelection in 2012, has seen his approval ratings drop sharply since he lent his support for Obama’s health care bill in December and secured deals for Nebraska’s Medicaid payments.
His latest decision could help him tout his independent credentials back home, but will likely generate anger from the left, which says Becker is a well-qualified nominee who has been denigrated by his opponents.
http://www.skygod.com/quotes/greatsantini.html In reading that I was reminded of the eulogy given by novelist Pat Conroy at the funeral of his father, USMC Colonel Donald Conroy who is best known as “The Great Santini”. (The eulogy itself is worth the read even if you aren’t familiar with Conroy or his novels.)
Let me do it in his voice: “We didn’t even have a map of Korea. Not zip. We just headed toward the sound of artillery firing along the Naktong River. They told us to keep the North Koreans on their side of the Naktong. Air power hadn’t been a factor until we got there that day. I radioed to Bill Lundin I was his wingman. ‘There they are. Let’s go get’em.’ So we did.”
I was interviewing Dad so I asked, “how do you know you got them?”
“Easy,” The Great Santini said. “They were running - it’s a good sign when you see the enemy running.”
“There was another good sign.”
“What was that, Dad?”
“They were on fire.”
This is a good sign for 2010. As Obama’s influence wanes under the multiple blows of self-dealing, incompetence, and left wing ideology he is finding few allies. Many of his party realize the radioactive nature of the administration to the American public and they are taking steps to distance themselves from him. In short, the enemy is running and he’s on fire.
Chuck DeVore appeared last night on FOXNews with Glenn Beck talking about the role of government and his race for the U.S. Senate. While reiterating his policy of not endorsing candidates, Beck declared: “You intrigue me.” Beck had Assemblyman DeVore on the program for two segments (they will play sequentially):
Early on the in the program Glenn listed the litany of liberal interest groups who have given Chuck DeVore a failing grade for his hundreds of votes in the California State Assembly. As he went down the list he handed Chuck his jar of jelly beans, a bottle of water, and even the infamous red phone. Chuck intoned: “I don’t want the red phone” to which Beck chuckled: “They never call…”
Beck seem unabashed sharing his affinity for the Assemblyman especially as Chuck related his feelings about the history of the progressive movement.
Bottom line: Chuck DeVore is indeed the tea party candidate and, as George Will declared on Sunday, will be the Republican nominee.
The latest in a long line of attacks on the filibuster comes from Paul Krugman of the New York Times. Krugman, better known professor of Economics and International Affairs at Princeton University and and Captain of the Obama Administration Cheerleading Squad, wrote a column arguing that the filibuster is destroying America. Krugman argued that filibustering Republicans, not international terrorists, not a nuclear weapon seeking Iran, not North Korea, not another economic meltdown on Wall Street, and not the $12.3 trillion dollar national debt, will lead to America being lost. This fear-mongering by Krugman is the latest attempt to convince liberals in the Senate to abolish the filibuster with a simple majority vote. From Krugman in the NYT.
We’ve always known that America’s reign as the world’s greatest nation would eventually end. But most of us imagined that our downfall, when it came, would be something grand and tragic. What we’re getting instead is less a tragedy than a deadly farce. Instead of fraying under the strain of imperial overstretch, we’re paralyzed by procedure. Instead of re-enacting the decline and fall of Rome, we’re re-enacting the dissolution of 18th-century Poland.
Although I deeply respect the intellect of this Nobel Prize winning Economist, I disagree with his analysis. He is clearly way outside of his area of expertise when talking about Senate procedure, because his analysis is laughable. Krugman argues that filibustering Republicans are going to be the cause of the dissolution of the republic. Krugman’s evidence?
Today, by contrast, the Republican leaders refuse to offer any specific proposals. They inveigh against the deficit — and last month their senators voted in lockstep against any increase in the federal debt limit, a move that would have precipitated another government shutdown if Democrats hadn’t had 60 votes.
So Krugman seems to argue that because Republicans were against a $1.9 trillion debt limit increase, Republicans are a danger to constitutional democracy. In December of last year, the Republicans and Democrats negotiated an agreement for a debt limit increase to get us into February. Democrats needed the consent of Republicans and moderate Democrats and they did something that they have been unwilling to do most of last year, they negotiated with the other party. Krugman also is mad that Republicans don’t offer specific enough proposals. That does not seem like a compelling case that the only way to save America is to change the Senate’s rules through strong arm tactics.
It is clear to most who follow Congress closely that a smaller debt limit increase would have passed if the Senate could not muster 60 votes to pass the massive $1.9 trillion increase that eventually passed the Senate and House. Krugman provides no evidence of any piece of legislation or nomination that Republicans blocked to establish that the filibuster is a clear and present danger to destroy the government. He merely asserts that the our republic is in danger if we don’t terminate the rules that protect extended debate and allow the minority party to participate in the legislative process in the Senate.
More Krugman fear-mongering:
The truth is that given the state of American politics, the way the Senate works is no longer consistent with a functioning government. Senators themselves should recognize this fact and push through changes in those rules, including eliminating or at least limiting the filibuster. This is something they could and should do, by majority vote, on the first day of the next Senate session.
There is nothing wrong with Senators being against a debt limit increase, because they want to decrease spending. Conservative Senators may be compromising too much on spending and may need to use the filibuster even more to attack the $12.3 trillion debt that this generation is passing on to future generations. ObamaCare can’t pass right now, because the American people hate the bill and have pressured just enough Members of Congress to stall the legislation. The House that operates on majority rule, can’t pass the Senate passed ObamaCare bill right now. Krugman can’t blame that situation on the filibuster. Ironically, a minority of Senators is protecting the majority of the American people’s views on ObamaCare.
The Obama Administration has only been denied one significant piece of legislation, in part, because of a filibuster in the Senate. Debt limit increases passed twice. The Krugman supported $787 billion so called Stimulus passed. The Cash for Clunkers Keynesian dream bill passed. Obama passed his Budget last year. He passed a 2009 omnibus spending bill. Liberals havea hard time pointing to bills, other than the wildly unpopular ObamaCare bill, that has been a victim of the filibuster. Krugman’s assertions are unsupported by the evidence and not at all reasonable. Of all the attacks on the filibuster, this Krugman attempt at fear-mongering should convince no one that the filibuster rule should be changed at all.
Democrats returned to Washington after being battered all of August over the health care plans. Barack Obama decided to rebuild their energy and so he spoke at a joint session of Congress to talk health care.
Throughout the speech he said he wanted to hear about GOP counter-proposals and repeatedly accused them of having none. Every time, congressional Republicans held up their proposals so he could see they did have counter-proposals.
Nonetheless, from that speech in September until today, Barack Obama has insisted the GOP had no proposals. He insisted the Democrats work behind closed doors and shut out the GOP.
Now, because the House Republicans gave the President a chance to improve his image at their retreat, Obama wants to sit down with Republicans at his guest house in front of TV cameras and discuss the proposals the GOP has had all along that he pretends he knew nothing about.
If Barack Obama cannot be genuine and interested in Republican ideas when the cameras are turned off, there is absolutely no way he can be genuine and sincere with the cameras turned on.
The important practical question following the death today of Congressman John Murtha is what happens to the House seat he held on behalf of the people of Pennsylvania’s 12th District. The good news, so far as I can tell from early reports, is that Ed Rendell won’t get to appoint an interim replacement, but rather the voters will have to choose one in a special election.
This is yet another critical election; recall that Obamacare passed the House with a 3-vote margin of victory, and any effort to run it back through the House with the watered-down Senate langauge on abortion will cost at least two of those votes (Bart Stupak and Joseph Cao), while now two others (Robert Wexler and Murtha) have left the House since the vote was cast.
The steady drumbeat for Marco Rubio keeps going on and on. Today he is picking up the endorsement of Congressman Mike Pence.
Congressman Pence said, “I am proud to endorse Marco Rubio for the United States Senate. Marco Rubio’s faith in free markets, limited government and traditional moral values make him the right choice for Republicans in this race. At a time when the American people long for leaders of principle, Marco Rubio will be a courageous check and balance on the current Washington establishment.
“With Washington spending money we don’t have and empowering the government at the expense of individual freedom, we need more leaders like Marco Rubio who are willing to take a stand for the common sense and common values of the American people.”
The job done by Focus on the Family and the Tebows with their much-publicized Super Bowl advertisement was nothing short of masterful. In fact, I’m not sure that word describes the level of mastery Focus on the Family showed with their domination of the pro-abortion left through last night’s ad and the public relations battles leading up to it.
To fully understand what a massive PWNing of the Left this was, it’s necessary to briefly look back at the last couple weeks of hype and debate over this ad. When it was reported that Tim Tebow (who, despite being a dirty, jeanshorts-wearing Florida Gator, is a model citizen and upstanding individual) was appearing in a Focus on the Family commercial with his mother which was being aired for the purpose of encouraging people to Choose Life, the Leftists in the media (a redundancy, I know) and in the political sphere went into a frenzy.
There are thirty inches of snow in Washington, DC. Here in Macon, Georgia, an area global warming scientists have long predicted would become a desert, we are 24 inches into a rain surplus in the past 365 calendar days.
You know what this all means right? We need a new federal agency to “study and report on the changing climate.”
It should be no surprise that an organization like the New York Times, which is a consistent money loser these day, is in favor of a government take over of the student loan industry. A group of people who have shown no ability to run a successful business tend to hate success. But their reasons for doing so are not just nonsense, but total distortions of reality.
The Times writes, “The direct loans would not be handled by the government, but through colleges and universities, just as Pell grants are now.” That’s nonsense. If a student who has student loans financed via, say, Chase as I do and does not like Chase’s service, the student can go to Wells Fargo. In all cases the colleges and universities handle most of the dealings, but it is the backside of the equation the Times chooses to ignore.
I’m going to sum this entire thing up, because the sooner we move past this the happier everybody’s going to be.
Republican Party* (in the person of House Republican Leader John Boehner & House Republican Whip Eric Cantor): Mr. President, you claim that you want bipartisan health care talks. Do you have the moral courage to commit to junking this existing unpopular, hyper-partisan health care bill and start over from scratch, with a further commitment for transparency and against reconciliation?
White House** (in the person of Press Secretary Robert Gibbs): No.
And I think that should end it right there: Republican Members of the House of Representatives don’t debate press secretaries, either.
Moe Lane
*H/T: FireDogLake(I know, I know, but there was nothing offensive about this specific post).
Back in November of 2009, the House of Representatives passed a health care rationing bill, 220-215. For the purposes of this discussion, we will note four Congressman ‘yea’ votes: Abercrombie of Hawaii; Cao (R) of Louisiana; Murtha of Pennsylvania; and Wexler of Florida.
In December of 2009, the Senate passes their version of the bill. It lacks the ‘Stupak Amendment,’ which is the only reason why Cao voted for the House version.
In February of 2010, Murtha dies suddenly. The effective vote is now 218-215.
With me so far? Well, here are the two problems that the Democrats are now facing:
If the final version of the bill does not include the Stupak Amendment, Cao will not vote for it (and neither will Stupak), thus making the final vote 217-216 againstand the bill not passing. If the final version of the bill does include the Stupak Amendment, then every Democratic Senator is going to inundated with screaming progressives. How could they resolve this? By junking the Stupak amendment and making a vulnerable Democrat flip-flop on his previous vote. In a year when it’s a bad idea to be a Democratic incumbent anyway.
The other problem is Abercrombie. As Philip Kleinand Ed Morrisseyboth noted, he’s supposed to be out the door at the end of the month in order to run for Governor of Hawaii. He had also promised to stick around to get health care rationing passed. The conditions of the special election to replace him - not to mention, the problems in delaying his formal gubernatorial run - are sufficiently complicated that breaking his word on the latter will probably cause him less problems in the long term. So, after February 28th, that puts the regular vote down to 217-215 for, and 217-215 against if Stupak is not passed. In that case, the Democrats need to flip two vulnerable Democrats (if the vote’s a tie, they lose).
Shorter Moe Lane: eight years of karma just caught up with the Democratic party, and it’s charging interest.
A 1993 federal law forces about 116,000 voters with unknown addresses to stay on the Kansas voter list. That means almost 7 percent of Kansas voters have addresses where mail cannot be delivered. Kansas has about 1.7 million registered voters.
The number of voters with questionable addresses was as high as 174,000 in May 2008, and is down from November 2007 when it was about 154,000. The numbers vary over time and are reduced when lists are purged after federal elections.
There’s a Senate seat at play in Kansas this year, along with the gubernatorial race.
I know, I know…he had his run and he didn’t really give us much during the second half of his second term to set up an electoral edge for Republicans going in to the ‘08 cycle. He made some things, in fact, worse for us in several fairly big ways…but still-you gotta love seeing the Cowboy in Chief rub it in Bambi and the left’s face just a little…this story out of Wyoming, Minnesota(via Minnesota Public Radio-note-picture comes from the same link):
It was late at night and I wasn’t sure I’d seen the billboard correctly as I whizzed past it on I-35 in Wyoming last week on the way back from Wrenshall. But an e-mailer confirms I saw what I thought I saw.
Who knows if it’s a fake, or a hoax, or the figment of some poor guy’s imagination living up in Minnesota suffering from a little late-night brain freeze. And-who cares? THIS is damn funny stuff.
Given all the recent talk about Sarah Palin, and specifically whether she’d be a better President than the incumbent, we give you the Slurm® Keys to the Presidency, brought to you by new Slurm® Energy Drink. Keep the energy to party all night, Slurms MacKenzie™ Style!
Character
Under the stress of the job, the personal failings of “the man behind the desk” will come out. It’s no contest on this one. We’ve got a mother whose worst failings were to use the wrong email account and to stand up to a wife beater, versus the cokehead Community Organizer.
The steady drumbeat for Marco Rubio keeps going on and on. Today he is picking up the endorsement of Congressman Mike Pence.
Congressman Pence said, “I am proud to endorse Marco Rubio for the United States Senate. Marco Rubio’s faith in free markets, limited government and traditional moral values make him the right choice for Republicans in this race. At a time when the American people long for leaders of principle, Marco Rubio will be a courageous check and balance on the current Washington establishment.
“With Washington spending money we don’t have and empowering the government at the expense of individual freedom, we need more leaders like Marco Rubio who are willing to take a stand for the common sense and common values of the American people.”
His full endorsement press release is below the fold. How long before someone starts a Draft Pence-Rubio 2012 website?
Miami, FL – Congressman Mike Pence (IN-06), who currently serves as House Republican Conference Chairman, today announced his endorsement of Marco Rubio for U.S. Senate.
Making today’s announcement, Pence said, “I am proud to endorse Marco Rubio for the United States Senate. Marco Rubio’s faith in free markets, limited government and traditional moral values make him the right choice for Republicans in this race. At a time when the American people long for leaders of principle, Marco Rubio will be a courageous check and balance on the current Washington establishment.
“With Washington spending money we don’t have and empowering the government at the expense of individual freedom, we need more leaders like Marco Rubio who are willing to take a stand for the common sense and common values of the American people.”
Welcoming Pence’s endorsement, Rubio said, “Mike Pence’s professional and political careers have been defined by his thoughtful advocacy of conservative principles. I am proud to have Congressman Pence’s support and look forward to working with him in Washington to promote freedom at home and abroad.”
About Congressman Mike Pence: Pence was first elected to Congress in 2000. Now in his fifth term, he was elected unanimously to serve as House Republican Conference Chairman during this Congress. In this role, he helps develop and disseminate the message of the Republican Conference and promote its Members. He also continues to drive a number of legislative initiatives, including the Broadcaster Freedom Act, the Free Flow of Information Act, the Daniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act, and the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act.
During the 109th Congress, Pence served as Chairman of the House Republican Study Committee, the leading voice for advancing conservative social and economic issues in Congress. He has also emerged as a national spokesman for conservative principles. The American Conservative Union honored him in 2006 with the Courage Under Fire Award, which recognizes those who have stood for principle when doing so puts them at risk physically, politically or economically.
Pence began his career in radio broadcasting in 1992, with “The Mike Pence Show” airing weekdays on 18 stations throughout Indiana. He also hosted a Sunday morning political television show in Indianapolis from 1995-1999. He was born in Columbus, Indiana, graduated from Hanover College in 1981 and earned his J.D. from the Indiana University School of Law in 1986. Pence and his wife Karen have three children and reside in Columbus, Indiana.
The important practical question following the death today of Congressman John Murtha is what happens to the House seat he held on behalf of the people of Pennsylvania’s 12th District. The good news, so far as I can tell from early reports, is that Ed Rendell won’t get to appoint an interim replacement, but rather the voters will have to choose one in a special election. As the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza reports:
According to state law, the governor has ten daysonce the vacancy is officially declared to decide on the date for the special election, which can come no sooner than 60 days following that proclamation.
That likely means the special election will be held on May 18, which is the date already set for federal primaries around the state. (Special elections costs the state huge sums of money and it’s likely that Gov. Ed Rendell will choose to go with an already established election day to save some cash.)
Democrats have won every [House] special election in this Congress, including one pick-up from the GOP in New York 23. Another is set in the Florida 19th on April 13, with yet another seat opening soon when Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-HI) steps down to run for governor.
In other words, there will be a couple more opportunities for voters to affect the composition of a House already narrowly divided on President Obama’s signature issue, and for now, at least, there are no longer the votes to pass anything unless and until Nancy Pelosi turns some “no” votes into “yes” votes without losing more of the original “yes” votes.
PA-12 has trended Republican in recent years - Cillizza notes that it was the only district carried by John Kerry in 2004 to flip to McCain in 2008 - although it’s hard to tell how much of that is due to Murtha-specific issues and to the hangover from Obama’s ham-handed comments during the Pennsylvania primaries. My best advice to the PA GOP is to study carefully the mess made in NY-23 (the behind-closed-doors selection of a thin-skinned and too-liberal member of the dysfunctional, corrupt and discredited state legislature) before a candidate is chosen for this special election.
There are thirty inches of snow in Washington, DC. Here in Macon, Georgia, an area global warming scientists have long predicted would become a desert, we are 24 inches into a rain surplus in the past 365 calendar days.
Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and Jane Lubchenco, head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, announced NOAA will set up the new Climate Service to operate in tandem with NOAA’s National Weather Service and National Ocean Service.
“Whether we like it or not, climate change represents a real threat,” Locke said Monday at a news conference.
Lubchenco added, “Climate change is real, it’s happening now.” She said climate information is vital to the wind power industry, coastal community planning, fishermen and fishery managers, farmers and public health officials.
Please tell me, when is the climate not changing? As we orbit the sun orbiting the center of the Milky Way Galaxy our climate will, as it has done since God first said “Let there be light”, continue to change.
There is nothing new under the sun. This is just the 21st century equivalent of the 5000 year old sun worshipping religions.
It should be no surprise that an organization like the New York Times, which is a consistent money loser these day, is in favor of a government take overof the student loan industry. A group of people who have shown no ability to run a successful business tend to hate success. But their reasons for doing so are not just nonsense, but total distortions of reality.
The Timeswrites, “The direct loans would not be handled by the government, but through colleges and universities, just as Pell grants are now.” That’s nonsense. If a student who has student loans financed via, say, Chase as I do and does not like Chase’s service, the student can go to Wells Fargo. In all cases the colleges and universities handle most of the dealings, but it is the backside of the equation the Timeschooses to ignore.
The Timescontinues, “Some lenders say the new system would lead to more student defaults, but contracts between the government and loan-servicing companies clearly state that the companies will be evaluated partly on how successful they are at preventing defaults.” Actually, there are greater defaultsunder the federal direct loan program than the private loan program. In fact, I was advised at a former job to just stop paying my direct loan because nothing would happen, unlike with my privately handled loans. I still kept up my payments, but I worked with a number of people who didn’t.
I’ve also heard from friends in the credit reporting industry that credit companies routinely ignore unpaid federal direct student loans because of how the U.S. Department of Education treats students in default, i.e. they do nothing.
The Timesconcludes with “By redirecting the savings into a variety of federal programs aimed at needy students— including the Pell grant scholarship program — Congress would be putting the money to good use.”
Really? The Timesdoes not define “needy” students. What about middle class students whose parents can’t afford the costs of the loan? And what about the escalating costs of college attendance? As we’ve noted before, the Democrats’ plan also calls for total debt forgiveness after 20 yearsand after ten years if the student goes to work for the government.
Schools would have no incentive to decrease academic costs because no matter how much a student paid — and their repayment could be no more than 10% of their income — the loan will be forgiven.
The Democrats’ plan makes no economic or financial sense. The New York Timesis forced to grossly distort everything about it to make it sound the slightest bit reasonable.
Yes, George W. Bush spent too much and proved redundantly that the term “big government conservative” is an oxymoron. And yes, when Bush left office our economy was in trouble. But how long will Obama claim that the only way for our economy to recover is to continue a spending spree that will leave us unable to recover from government debt?
Apparently, forever. In his State of the Union speech, Obama said, “One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by a severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse, and a government deeply in debt. Experts from across the political spectrum warned that if we did not act, we might face a second depression. So we acted — immediately and aggressively. And one year later, the worst of the storm has passed.”
But it hasn’t. Unemployment is still nearly 10% and — according to Reagan administration economist Arthur Laffer — the “recovery” we are in is a false one. With the Bush tax cuts about to expire, and both capital gains taxes and estate taxes to rise next year, we’re headed into a far worse economic crisis than we suffered last year. But that doesn’t deter the president one bit.
That picture above is a Reuters picture from this Politico columnback in September. Remember that? Democrats returned to Washington after being battered all of August over the health care plans. Barack Obama decided to rebuild their energy and so he spoke at a joint session of Congress to talk health care.
Throughout the speech he said he wanted to hear about GOP counter-proposals and repeatedly accused them of having none. Every time, congressional Republicans held up their proposals so he could see they did have counter-proposals.
Nonetheless, from that speech in September until today, Barack Obama has insisted the GOP had no proposals. He insisted the Democrats work behind closed doors and shut out the GOP.
Now, because the House Republicans gave the President a chance to improve his image at their retreat, Obama wants to sit down with Republicans at his guest house in front of TV cameras and discuss the proposals the GOP has had all along that he pretends he knew nothing about.
If Barack Obama cannot be genuine and interested in Republican ideas when the cameras are turned off, there is absolutely no way he can be genuine and sincere with the cameras turned on.
The GOP is often referred to as the stupid party. Let’s pray they aren’t stupid enough to sit down with a President who has for six months dismissed them as having no ideas. Barack Obama says he wants a bipartisan approach to health care now. Well, there is bipartisan support for scrapping the current proposals and starting over.
Unless Barack Obama says they should scrap the present plans and start over, the GOP should not entertain his invitation to use a gaggle of Republicans to rehabilitate our socialist President.
The job done by Focus on the Family and the Tebows with their much-publicized Super Bowl advertisement was nothing short of masterful. In fact, I’m not sure that word describes the level of mastery Focus on the Family showed with their domination of the pro-abortion left through last night’s ad and the public relations battles leading up to it.
To fully understand what a massive PWNing of the Left this was, it’s necessary to briefly look back at the last couple weeks of hype and debate over this ad. When it was reported that Tim Tebow (who, despite being a dirty, jeanshorts-wearing Florida Gator, is a model citizen and upstanding individual) was appearing in a Focus on the Family commercial with his mother which was being aired for the purpose of encouraging people to Choose Life, the Leftists in the media (a redundancy, I know) and in the political sphere went into a frenzy.
Is Tim Tebow endangering his NFL career by being political?asked ESPN, which features columns almost weekly that engage in political discussion by decrying racism in sports (such as accusing a college football teams of not scheduling an in-state school because of a fear of black people), patronizing blacks as inferiors who need Benevolent White Folks’ help to have a chance in life (see “Rooney Rule”), and by delving into plenty of other issues that have nothing to do with sports. Columnist Tim Keown even claimed that Tebow’s status as a Christian meant he was guaranteed to be exploited by “extreme-right fundamentalist groups that would love to trot him out as their hood ornament.”
NOW, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and others went much farther in response to what they expected to be an affront to their pet issue — promoting abortion — and demanded that CBS refuse to accept Focus on the Family’s $2.5 million and turn away an ad whose whole purpose, they said, was “to create a climate in which Roe v. Wade can be overturned.”
“The spot, which has not been released, is said to feature Tebow…and his mother telling the story of her decision 23 years ago to ignore medical advice and continue a risky pregnancy,” reported the Washington Post. This, of course, was an untenable situation for these groups. “Focus on the Family has cynically set it up so they can say anyone who disagrees with airing this ad is disrespecting one woman and her choice!” declared NOW’s Terry O’Neill, in between frantic checks under her bed and in her closet for George W. Bush and Karl Rove.
When CBS refused to pull the ad, pro-abortion activists ratcheted up their alert level to DEFCON 1, and went into full character-assassination mode (for evidence, just peruse the 284,000 results of a Google search for “Pam Tebow liar”) while defending the decision to abort a baby as every bit “as tough and courageous a decision as is the decision to continue a pregnancy” in the pages of the Washington Post.
Needless to say, these tactics — in the face of silence from anybody at Focus or in the Tebow family — rubbed a good portion of the American population the wrong way. A good example of this was Sally Jenkins, the self-described pro-choice sports columnist at the Washington Postwho wrote, “Tebow’s 30-second ad hasn’t even run yet, but it already has provoked “The National Organization for Women Who Only Think Like Us” to reveal something important about themselves: They aren’t actually “pro-choice” so much as they are pro-abortion.”
At that point, as Jenkins said, the ad hadn’t even run yet, and the pro-abortion left was already driving people away from their side with their growing cacophony of smears, outrageous claims, and demands that those who pick the “life” side of the “Choice” coin be silenced.
Then, after all of that buildup, the ad aired, and the pro-abortion left was revealed in all their horribly humiliated glory:
That — that— was the ad that caused the pro-abortion crowd to go into a frenzy of censorship advocacy, character assassination, and mask-slipping demonization of mothers who dare choose life over death for their unborn children.
In one fell swoop, Focus on the Family and the Tebows exposed the realpro-abortion left to a larger audience than, perhaps, had ever seen them in their natural state: as abortion-loving autocrats who despised Choice almost as much as (infant) life itself — all without really having to doanything.
Brilliant.
The fact that the commercial was notovertly pro-life (or anti-abortion) made the PWNing even sweeter, and likely brought far more people over to the Life side of the issue (or, at least, divorced them from the pro-abortion side) than an overtly anti-abortion spot would have. This is, in part, because the pro-abortion left used the run-up to the Super Bowl to reveal themselves to a massive audience as being solidly anti-Life and pro-abortion, and because the ad that actually ran demonstrated how laughably needless the left’s character assassination and censorship efforts really were.
On top of all that, the absence of an abortion message in the ad meant the pro-abortion left had to bear the entire burden of publicizing such a divisive and touchy issue all by themselves.
This was made possible, in part, by a brilliant non-information campaign. The ad’s contents were kept entirely secret until last night, with only the aforementioned media summary having been allowed to go public. In this absence of detail, the pro-abortion left immediately assumed the worst, treating the ad as though it would approach the issue as they do: by getting in people’s faces and shoving views down their throats.
The fact that Focus on the Family did nothing of the sort made the pro-abortion left’s smear-and-silence campaign into a massive overreaction — and made Focus’s effort an EPIC WIN for the pro-life side of the aisle.
*hat tip to RedState reader eburke for the apt phrasing
Via Instapundit, comes the latest slap in the face to Libertarians-for-Obama by the Obama administration. Slashdot:
“US government policy is that photos produced by federal employees as part of their job responsibilities are not subject to copyright in the US. But Kathy Gill writes that after originally putting official White House photos in the public domain, since January the Obama White House has been asserting that no one but ‘news organizations’ can use its Flickr photostaken by the official White House photographer, who is a US government employee…”
You mean, like this?
Original here. Relevant language on the Flickr account:
This official White House photograph is being made available only for publication by news organizations and/or for personal use printing by the subject(s) of the photograph. The photograph may not be manipulated in any way and may not be used in commercial or political materials, advertisements, emails, products, promotions that in any way suggests approval or endorsement of the President, the First Family, or the White House.
A shame whoever wrote that didn’t read this(linked to by the White House Flickr account itself).
Copyright Pertaining to US Government Work
A work that is a United States Government work, prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties, is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no U.S. copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws,
reproduce the work in copies in print or in digital form;
prepare derivative works of the work;
perform the work publicly;
display the work;
distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.
Caveats
Other persons may have rights either in the work itself or in how the work is used, such as publicity or privacy rights.
Not all work that appears on US Government Websites is considered to be a US Government work. Check with the content curator to see whether the work is a US Government Work. Works prepared for the United States Government by independent contractors may be protected by copyright, which may be owned by the independent contractor or by the United States Government.
The United States Government Work designation is distinct from designations that apply to works of US state and local governments. Works of state and local governments may be protected by copyright.
Copyright laws differ internationally. While a United States Government work is not protectable under United States copyright laws, the work may be protected under the copyright laws of other jurisdictions when used in other jurisdictions. Outside of the United States, the United States Government may assert copyright in United States Government works.
…so people will understand that I’m about as interested as David Freddosoin being overly nice in pointing out his past bloviating. My back isn’t actually killing me, right now, but that’s only because I was being very, very careful about removing all that anemic winter from the car. I’m going to be forty in a couple of months; I don’t bounce back from straining myself over anemic winters like I used to.
Three observations about our marvelous new technological paradigm:
Everything in print gets recorded these days. Everything.
Nothing ever goes away. Ever.
The only thing that people are patient about when it comes to online matters is in waiting for just the right moment to demonstrate that someone is an idiot.
I would join David in suggesting that RFK Jr get out of the weather prediction/doomsaying business, only I can’t for the life of me think of anything else that he’d be any less incompetent at. Ditch digging? He could learn that on the job.
Moe Lane
PS: Just to reinforce the scorn: the plural of anecdote is not data; I am not obligated to accept your religious beliefs as being scientifically valid; and this is why political dynasties are a bad idea.
This weekend, at the National Tea Party Convention, Joseph Farrah addressed the crowd and claimed that the search for Bambi’s birth certificate is a valid arm of conservative activism. Below is my response.
While the constitutional issue is there still and could still be tested, the truth of it is … it doesn’t matter electorally. The voters don’t give a whit about that, they just want to take out some justice in the voting booth. We have to beat the left on issues not technicalities and until we beat them on issues they will control the dialog. The people are awake and the crapweasels in Washington are about to get the rug pulled out from underneath them. I believe that it’s going to be a tsunami not a wave.
All we need is for them to do…no no…trya few more things, and we will take back the House for sure and have an actual chance at the Senate. If not, at least a lot of good new conservatives, of varying degrees, in the Senate. Such as, Toomey, DeVore, Rubio, Williams, and possibly some outside chances like Rand Paul and JD Hayworth [I know Becker, I am positing a best case scenario, don't rain on my parade right now ]. Obama triangulated himself into a tight corner and now he has no options, at least no options that won’t expose him as a socialist-style dictator, lacking the skill of Il Duce and the commitment of Stalin of course.
Where can he go? Cap and trade? What you haven’t heard of the latest out of the IPCC? Yeah it’s a fraud. Card Check? Yeah, cause everybody wants to be GM…FRACKING GM!!!!. Stimulus part?? aka Jobs bill? We haven’t even spent half of the first jobs..errr..stimulus bill…nor have we spent all of TARP for that matter. Just what exactly are you saving that money for Bambi??? Spread the wealth why doncha? You commie! Education? Fist you! [expletive deleted]. I would no more give you my child than I would give you my money, and I don’t really give a whit about money.
Oh, well maybe if a couple judges step down and Bambi makes appointments and the abortion issue comes up, you know most people are pro-choice?? Wrong, most people, as shown in the 09 Gallup poll, are pro-life which, in its essence is a much more definitive designation than it’s nebulous nemesis pro-choice. With those “generic” terms, in which pro-choice would have the advantage specifically because of it vague nature, pro-life still won by majority 51% to 42% for all polled and 70% to 26% in the Republican Party. As well a plurality of women and a clear majority of men who identify as pro-life.
National Security…uh…he just hired Google to do surveillance. This alienates just about everyone, except Google I guess. The undie bomber, civilian trials, Miranda rights for dang near all terrorists captured, sorry but Bambi’s credibility has just about run out here as well.
So there it is, Social, Economic, and National Security…a solid B+. Well at least for an affirmative action Nobel laureate who went to Harvard and can’t prove he ever wrote a single article in the Harvard Review. Or were they all written in Farsi…I keed I keed. Face it…Bambi’s up the creek without a paddle and the poor kid don’t know how to swim, which is odd for a guy who grew up on an island…hey, that works emotionally too…Awesome. Yeah I don’t like Bambi.
Moving on…
2010 Is going to go down in history. Obama was correct when he said that the 2010 elections aren’t going to be like the ‘94 midterms. He was even correct as to why … they got him. But what he didn’t realize is that he is a negative electorally. This, despite his personal draw, which he only gets from the American Idol style popularity polls that the Progressives always claim prove his mandate. That man is a fraud and the people, even the dumb ones, can feel the mugging taking place. They can feel the absolute petulance, as Rush has noted, in every word he uh uh utters. The people will not suffer long the insults hurled by this man and his court of weasels, both political and personal.
Every day I go down to the deli that I live above (mind you I live in VT on the east border…near Dartmouth), I order my food and chat with the owner and the customers. All of them are Democrats. Over the course of the last year I have one converted, two possibly on the fence, and one new comer who read Kirks 10 Principles on my suggestion and recently admitted that she is actually moving towards my side. This is the activism Farrah and his birfer acolytes should be focused on, and this can absolutely be done. But it does require sacrifice. You have to shed your fear and talk about politics in public; you have to find a way to engage off-line.
For some, that will be the precinct committeeman, for others it will be interning or volunteering on a campaign to stuff envelopes or make calls, but for everyone…you must do something off-line to make this happen. As bloggers this should be considered an opportunity to be a part of paradigm shift that is occurring between the old “MSM” and the new media.
So to Joseph Farrah and those tilting at the birfer windmill, I say quit. No one who matters cares about this issues. This is a great time to be a conservative activist, let’s make it count.
Aaron B. Gardner
P.S. As Toby aptly points outs, Farrah is also playing right into the hands of the Dead Stream Media with these antics.
]. Obama triangulated himself into a tight corner and now he has no options, at least no options that won’t expose him as a socialist-style dictator, lacking the skill of Il Duce and the commitment of Stalin of course. 
