Miscellany: 11/22/09

Here We Go Again: Is Hasan a Murderer or Himself a "Victim" Not Responsible for His Actions?


I have zero tolerance for liberal/progressive attempts to portray the Ft. Hood terrorist as not responsible for his actions--i.e., perhaps he was "mentally ill" (isn't that rather oxymoronic that the Army would hire a psychiatrist whom himself was "mentally ill"? Physician, heal thyself!) or a "victim" of his Muslim heritage... When liberals postulate any criminal is not responsible for his own actions, it undermines the very foundation of our legal system.


I have no problem with Major Hasan's full legal rights in front of a military court-martial; this is not the government trying to plant evidence on an innocent Army officer whom just happens to be Muslim. But let's stop pretending he didn't engage in a premeditated act. The evidence is compelling. First-person testimony has it Hasan shouted "Allahu Akbar" ("God is great") as the unprovoked doctor opened fire on his fellow unarmed American soldiers. Let us not dishonor, with a sophistic comparison of a murderer, the true victims: the ones whom died while serving their country with honor and distinction. Rest in peace, our fallen American heroes.


Senators Landrieu, Lincoln, and Nelson Are Tools of Senator Majority Leader Reid


I was looking for (but couldn't find) some conservative cartoonist caricaturing the Blue Dog Democrats as toothless lap dogs for Pelosi, Reid and Obama, getting kicked for the sport of it, and doing tricks at their command. Allowing debate to proceed on a compellingly unsatisfactory bill, that masquerades as "reform" but is in fact an unprecedented market share grab by the federal government, is unconscionable for anyone whom suggests he or she is moderate, independent or conservative. News reports of business-as-usual deal making in the bill (about $100M in Louisiana relief) to attract Landrieu's vote makes her sham justifications even more disingenuous. I am sick and tired of hearing Landrieu and others parrot propaganda statistics misleadingly comparing health care expenditures between European countries/Canada against the United States. Do you seriously want to compare the innovation, quality and responsiveness of medical care in the United States to these countries? For all the health insurer-bashing going on about "windfall profits" and dropped coverages, etc., the fact is that our private health insurers schedule costly procedures or approve expensive drugs many of the other developed countries, under a government-protected, "non-profit" monopoly, reject or postpone. Ironically, as those countries seem to recognize the shortcomings of their own health care systems and appear to be cautiously moving towards a more competitive system, the Democrats in Congress seem focused on changing something that most people in this country are happy with.


It is true that these senators have not necessarily voted for the bill and may end up voting against whatever emerges. But that will never be good enough: they sold their political souls to put on the table one of the worst pieces of legislation ever to be put in front of the US Senate without any meaningful guarantees of consensus, bipartisan reform. Now we are at the mercy of majoritarian abuse--which could defeat any meaningful attempts to improve the bill, simply by maintaining 51 votes from the 60 seats they hold. I recommend that voters in Louisiana, Arkansas and Nebraska put down these Blue Dogs' political careers their next election.


Palin Rationalizes Her Personal Attacks on Letterman


Comedians make fun of politicians--it's not personal. When Sarah Palin responded to Letterman's bad taste Alex Rodriguez joke not by simply demanding a public apology but by saying that she wouldn't trust Letterman around her underage daughters, that was stepping over any reasonable line of appropriate behavior. 


What Americans respect in leaders is someone whom remains calm, reassuring and even-tempered under crisis, someone with thick skin and whom doesn't sweat the small stuff, not someone whom abuses her power and influence to pursue a vendetta against a former brother-in-law or some comedian whom delivers a bad joke. Barack Obama retains solid favorable ratings not because of his wrong-headed policies and political agenda, but because he comes across as likable, reasonable, articulate and confident. Sarah Palin strikes most Americans as a lightning rod and a divisive figure, not someone whom can bridge the political divide (as Barack Obama disingenuously promised but has failed to deliver on in any objective, substantive way).


It's not just Palin's hypocrisy of targeting Letterman, whom was not the first comedian to crack a joke about Bristol Palin; Bristol Palin, at the time of the joke, was 18 and a key public figure in a national abstinence campaign. (Sarah Palin would disingenuously attempt to suggest that David Letterman intended the joke to be about a different, obscure daughter, just barely in her teens. Yeah, right... A joke about an unnamed Palin daughter getting knocked up by a major league baseball player was not intended to be about the oldest daughter, an unwed mother...) I wrote a few posts on this topic back in the late spring.


Sarah Palin has attempted to suggest that she responded just like any mother protecting her kids. Dennis Miller, Bill O'Reilly and other media conservatives are in lockstep with her thin defense of a disproportionate, unacceptable response. (And I have little patience for the politically correct nonsense that Sarah Palin is being attacked for behavior that would be respected in a male politician.) A number of Presidents (Nixon, Carter and others) have had politically embarrassing siblings; Ronald Reagan's two youngest children had their moments, as did George W. Bush's twin daughters.


I have news for Sarah Palin; if she intends to go knocking on doors in Idaho, looking for votes, there's one 11-year-old boy's porch from which the "momma bear protecting her cubs" had better stay away.


Sarah Palin Jokes


In honor of Sarah Palin's best-selling memoir, I've collected my favorite jokes from the late-night circuit:

"People in Alaska are looking forward to Sarah Palin's memoir. They're already calling it 'The Book to Nowhere.'" --David Letterman

"The book costs $24.99, but it has a $5,000 jacket." --Jimmy Fallon

"Well, the publisher was impressed that Sarah Palin finished the book four months ahead of schedule. That's not a big deal. She finished her term as governor 18 months ahead of schedule." --Jay Leno

"Sarah Palin's got that book out, that 'Going Rogue.' And she says that she was upset with John McCain because at the end of the election night, the McCain people would not let her deliver a concession speech. And I thought, don't worry, Sarah, I'm sure you'll get another opportunity." –David Letterman

"Since resigning as governor, many say Sarah Palin is now going to spend some time working on her memoirs. Alaskans are saying they can't wait to start reading Palin's memoirs and then quit halfway through." --Conan O'Brien

David Letterman's Top Ten Sarah Palin Tips For Writing A Book 

6. Limit yourself to one "you betcha" per chapter.

4. When in doubt, just type (wink).

3. Don't let writing cut into attending "Fire Letterman" rallies.

1. I'll try to find ya some tips and I'll bring 'em to ya!

Political Cartoon

Scott Stantis of the Chicago Tribune reminds us of what's come from Obama's high-sounding campaign rhetoric:

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Dan Fogelberg Song/Remake


My favorite song from the late soft rock artist Dan Fogelberg, best known for "Same Old Lang Syne" and the immortal love ballad "Longer Than", among numerous other hits, is ironically not of his own tunes, but a soulful rendition the the 1960's Cascades' classic, "(Listen to the) Rhythm of the Falling Rain". I love the sax and the musical arrangement; this is one of those remakes that I think improve on the original hit (others include, as I mentioned in a prior post, Dave Mason's "Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow?", and the Hollies' take on the Supremes' classic "Stop! In the Name of Love"). 


Ladies, make sure that the men you love in your lives are checked for prostate cancer; Dan Fogelberg was a tragic victim of this terrible disease, and he and his surviving family members would not want others to experience the same heartbreak.

Miscellany: 11/21/09

Ron Paul (R-TX) Pushing to Audit the Federal Reserve

Finally, given the Fed's irresponsible moves that have aided and abetted two asset bubbles over the past decade-plus, playing a game of chicken with ruinous inflation, we see our favorite libertarian Republican Congressman gaining bipartisan support to bring necessary accountability to the Fed; of course, all the vested interests of the Fed are out in full force, crying like Chicken Little. No party impacting the national economy is above the law and public scrutiny, and that includes the Fed.

The Reid Plan: Public Option Opt-Out?

I view Reid's as little more than a cynical move: I'm sure that American taxpayers and businesses in states choosing not to participate would be subject to a pro-rata share of "health care reform" costs and regulations, and I'm sure that any pricing discrepancies between the federal government-rigged insurance markets and state-regulated markets will become a political issue, with Democratic politicians demanding inevitable massive subsidies to make up for the inherent inefficiencies and below-cost premiums for higher-risk patients under government-run health care.

In fact, Reid is largely counting on public concurrence with the progressive delusion that "government competition" will bring down or moderate the escalating costs of health care--his implicit message to undecided senators is that they will be targeted by angry citizens facing ever-escalating premiums. uncovered by this Reid health insurance government nirvana; in fact, this conjecture is patently absurd, especially when you consider that the government already pays over 45% of health care costs; does anyone really believe that health care expenditure cost trends are independent of the government? The government is part of the problem; increasing the footprint of the government is not the solution.

There is only one way the federal government could make a positive difference--by stripping away the Byzantine system of state mandates, largely reflecting the pressure of special-interest groups.However, and this is the key point of the debate, when you centralize the mandate system to the federal system (which, of course, papers over the Constitutional issue of the balance between state and federal power), what you do is essentially relieve special-interest groups of the burden of a fragmented 50-state approach to their objectives, replaced by a single point of efficacy. The critical point is, who establishes the mandates? Does anyone believe that Democrats are going to DECREASE versus INCREASE the number of mandates? And do you believe that costs go up when mandates are decreased or increased? (Clearly the latter.) This is little more than "spread the  (health) wealth"; people want to shift their higher health costs, in many cases reflecting the consequences of their own personally irresponsible decisions (e.g., drug abuse, gluttony or inadequate exercise, driving unsafe cars, bike-riding or motorcycle operations without safety helmets, etc.), onto the rest of society.

So the Democrats are engaging in deliberate misleading arguments. Who really cares (besides those of us whon believe in the Constitution) whether they put the mandates in the bill or they delegate the decision to a progressive Democratic Administration whom will do the dirty work for them? All Obama has to do is appoint the "right" empathetic regulator. The Democrats can have their cake and eat it, too: they will disingenuously argue they didn't vote in the mandates that a government bureaucrat imposes by fiat. This is the same way progressives have always worked to promote their anti-liberty/responsibility agenda--just like the back door approach of legislating through unelected progressive judges on the federal courts.

Going back to the original point, the real intent of Reid's gimmck is to intimidate senators, daring them to vote against the "lower premiums" guaranteed by "public sector competition". In fact, you can't legislate away risk, and the idea that the public sector option can survive in a market when they assume all the higher risks, with insurance premiums set below their true cost, is ludicrous. A truly competitive system will see better-risk policyholders rushing to the exits, heading for more attractive private-sector options more adequately reflecting their own health risks/costs.

This does not mean I believe the status quo is acceptable; I agree that the government has screwed up the concept of health insurance, and it is government's responsibility to fix what it has broken and for which it is morally responsible. I think there must be a better system for handling higher-risk policyholders, but they should be expected to share in the cost burden, and the uncovered costs should be equitably absorbed across insurance policyholders. That's what assigned risk pools are supposed to do. What the Democrats should have done is to focus on ensuring existing assigned risk pools were properly funded and established (or perhaps the concept of a national assigned risk pool), and perhaps guaranteeing unlimited caps on lifetime benefits through government reinsurance. They could have mandated a catastrophic coverage program, where all equally share in the risk of catastrophic events.

Instead, we have politicians debating things like whether the American taxpayers should subsidize a mother's choice to kill her preborn child. "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's"; the state must not extend an unwarranted, morally reprehensible intervention against the gift of preborn children, God's greatest blessing to mankind.


Ft. Hood Mass Murderer Paralyzed

Nidal Hasan reportedly is paralyzed from the waist down and his hands hurt. I'm generally empathetic towards the disabled, particularly those whom are not responsible for their condition, but I have to admit there is a certain justice to the fact that Major Hasan has to live each day, both mentally and physically, for the rest of his miserable existence on earth with the consequences of his acts of terrorism. He took away sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, or fathers and mothers, lives done too soon, from their heart-broken families and grieving nation.

Political Cartoon

On a day when the Senate is scheduled to vote on debating Harry Reid's move to fund and regulate a hostile government takeover of our free enterprise health care system, Chuck Asay reminds us of groups whom have been co-opted by progressive Democrats.  (I do think Chuck has it wrong about the National Right to Life Committee, which strongly opposes Reid's train wreck bill.) For corrupt groups that get in bed with progressive politicians (might I suggest they use a private-sector condom, given the tendency of American liberals to screw up the government and thus the American people, having indiscriminate intercourse with European socialism?), I am reminded of the Cherokee legend of the little boy and the rattlesnake (which I've mentioned in a prior post):

The little boy was walking down a path and he came across a rattlesnake. The rattlesnake was getting old. He asked, "Please little boy, can you take me to the top of the mountain? I hope to see the sunset one last time before I die." The little boy answered "No Mr. Rattlesnake. If I pick you up, you'll bite me and I'll die." The rattlesnake said, "No, I promise. I won't bite you..."

When he got back down to the bottom of the mountain, he reached in, took out the snake, and the snake bit the young boy...The boy replied to the snake "Hey! You bit me, you said that if I'd help you out, that you wouldn't bite me!" The snake replied "But you knew what I was when you picked me up!""

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Jim Brickman Song

Guest Christian/pop vocalist Michael W. Smith beautifully interprets pianist Jim Brickman's memorable love ballad. Maybe one day I will find the right lady to sing it to...

Miscellany: 11/20/09

Harry Reid and Senate Health Reform: Smoke and Mirrors


Are the American people stupid? That's what Democrats seem to believe. The hype is that the government can shrink the uninsured gap to about 6% while at the same time reduce the deficit! And, pray tell, what is this magic spell which Hawaii, Massachusetts, Maine, Tennessee, Oregon, and others, facing steep above-projection costs, never managed to cast on their own? HINT: Are the states allowed to print their own money?

If you really believe that sausage making of health care "reform" behind closed Senate Democratic doors is the Holy Grail of Democratic politics: keep in mind what Harvard Medical School Dean Jeffrey Flier recently wrote:

In discussions with dozens of health care leaders and economists, I find near-unanimity of opinion that, whatever its shape, the final legislation that will emerge from Congress will markedly accelerate national health care spending rather than restrain it.

If anyone seriously doesn't know what happens when you have a larger number of people chasing the same limited number of medical personnel, the same level of technology or medical supplies, he or she has never participated in an auction.


Investors Business Daily points out some of the gimmicks being used: tax-first-pay-later, dubious Medicare cuts (when Democrats themselves fought against Medicare cuts in prior years and at the same time Medicare has over $30T in unfunded liabilities), and tax hikes to the upper class or health care sector companies (which will eventually get passed on to their customers like any other cost). Stealth, if not later explicit tax hike, not to mention imposed rationing, on the middle class--just to fix something that really isn't a problem: people choosing not to buy a perverse type of insurance, which goes beyond catastrophic coverage. Anyone want to bet how long it will take Democrats, after the bill is passed, to suddenly "discover" there aren't enough rich people to pay for their health care spending spree mandates?

Fireworks at the Joint Economic Committee: Kevin Brady (R-TX) vs. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner (Tax Cheat)


There was a sharp clash between Brady (whom makes no secret of his disdain for the job Geithner is doing) and Geithner. Geithner operates like any true Obama crony: what would Obama do? Wait a minute...it's coming to me...it's coming to me...It's BUSH BASHING! Brady pointed out that Geithner was serving on the Federal Reserve before and during the economic tsunami. (Score, Brady! Game, set, and match!)

Bush bashing has become such as established Democratic tradition, I wonder if Obama has submitted an application to get Bush bashing established as an Olympic sport; after all, the rest of the world has been playing the same popular sport almost as long as the Democrats. No doubt the IOC, taking a cue from the Nobel Prize committee and eager to please Obama after denying Chicago the 2016 Olympics, will award Obama a gold medal, based on the expectation that he will soon swim in the White House swimming pool....

Political Cartoon


I like the way Glenn McCoy captures here the essence of Bush bashing:

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Pat Benatar Song

I believe this is also Pat Benatar's signature song. Simply a brilliant performance of a powerful message song by someone I consider the best female rock vocalist. (I also like a live version of the song preceded by a short introduction of another song, "Suffer the Little Children", but I couldn't find a relevant video.) Child abuse, whether physical or emotional, is inexcusable and unconscionable; children are gifts from God.

Miscellany: 11/19/09

Government Accountability Office Issues Report on Stimulus/Jobs

First of all, isn't the GAO an oxymoron? In any event, the first thing that pops up is the notable observation that nearly 10% of the jobs saved or created are from stimulus projects which in fact have not been funded (no doubt the Treasury is already counting the tax revenues coming from those unfunded jobs...) Then there's the billion or so that has been spent with no jobs to show for it... There's a self-congratulatory note on improving transparency (although the usability of that information is suspect, approximately 10% of contracts still aren't listed and it looks like the projects are outstripping the ability of agencies to oversee them). Significant reporting and management control problems? Of course....

Palin Questions McCain's Decision on Wright Exclusion During the General Campaign

It's hard to avoid Palin's book tour interview snippets, with Palin appearing on multiple Fox News primetime shows.  It was McCain's call not to use the Rev. Jeremiah Wright story, which broke out during the spring; I suspect it was because of McCain's desire not to let any racially divisive issue surface during the general campaign, in the way, say, that the G.H.W. Bush campaign's use of the Willie Horton issue did, originally raised by Dukakis' rival for the nomination, Al Gore. Palin's argument for using the issue is not particularly novel or profound; the issue was repeatedly raised by other conservatives during the general campaign.

I have a more nuanced view on the issue; I don't think McCain's campaign would have benefited much from using the issue, mostly because the American public was already aware of the issue (and I doubt few of the people whom voted for Obama would have rethought their decision based on Wright) and Obama had already cut his ties to Wright. I think I would have raised the issue more in terms of Obama's being part of the corrupt Chicago Democratic system allied with Rezko, Blagojevich and others. The issue for me dealt with Obama's claiming he was unaware of Wright's radical views during his 20-year association with the church and his repeated failure to address Wright's approach which contradicted his own.

Political Cartoon

I don't think anything annoys me more politically that getting lectured by a Communist government over our trade protectionist policies and our government's lack of fiscal discipline.

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Bee Gees' Song

What can you say about the Brothers Gibb, celebrating their golden anniversary? I think it's impossible for them to write or record a bad song. I'm a huge fan: their soft rock origins, their disco phase (my favorite song of the latter 70's: "Tragedy"), and their more recent material. Somehow it seems so unfair to pick out any song, because the tunes are wonderfully melodic and well-crafted, and the harmonies are exquisite. I enjoy the lesser known tunes as well. For example, the wistful "First of May" brings back fond memories and simple pleasures of youth, our first childhood crushes, and the friends left behind; I remember returning to my maternal grandfather's Fall River home for a holiday visit as a college student, struck by how much smaller the house and yard seemed versus my childhood memories. And, of course, the Bee Gees wrote huge hits for other artists, including what I consider Barbra Streisand's best pop hit, "Woman in Love".

"Run to Me" came across to me as a more contemporary, mature version of the Rogers and Hammerstein's "You Are Sixteen Going on Seventeen" (from my favorite movie of all time, "The Sound of Music"). This song is simply glorious, from the distinctive initial guitar string plucks on to that soaring chorus and trademark harmony--I wouldn't change a thing.

We miss you, Maurice; rest in peace.

Miscellany: 11/18/09

The Tightening Standards on Female Breast Exams


Recently announced preventive medical guideline changes on breast health focusing on a higher-risk group of women (i.e., 50-74 years) have earned a rebuke by the American Cancer Society and other outlets; these relaxed standards were based more on a cost/benefit perspective. Obviously younger women do get cancer and need to raise the issue of troubling symptoms with their doctors, but the cost/benefit/medical risk approach raises an important question as Senate Democrats seek to introduce their own health care "reform" bill shortly. Health care insurance is not really (catastrophic event) insurance when you add millions of newly insured, all using possibly unnecessary and costly preventive medical services (e.g., annual checkups) and medicines, straining system capacity. The proposed legislation has the perverse result of raising inflationary pressures in the system, which "reformers" use as a rationale.


Fox News on Promoting Sarah Palin

Every time I think I've had my say on Sarah Palin, Fox News or media conservatives like Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity say things absolutely ludicrous. I cannot believe that we are seriously discussing the Presidential prospects of a governor whom quit in the third year of her only term in office with disingenuous excuses only the most gullible would believe, had the questionable thin skin and poor judgment to go after a late-night comedian, ended the 2008 election with the worst ratings of any Vice Presidential nominee over the past 30 years (and we are including Dan Quayle), and is seen by some 70% of the American public in a recent poll as being unqualified to be President.

When I hear Bill O'Reilly quote "undecided voters" on Palin as giving her an opportunity to advance her candidacy, post talking points on liberals "scared" of Palin, attack McCain because he didn't rebuke campaign staffers whom found Palin difficult to work with, or push her as the only Republican "star", he's showing the limitations of his analysis. Schwarzenegger, for instance, had true star power, getting elected governor twice in one of the most liberal states in the country, and Giuliani is still America's mayor; both of these men have accomplished far more than Palin has on a substantive basis. Palin has the highest negatives of any prospective Republican candidate, and she has yet to win a single poll, despite massive public exposure. Only about 25% of the American voters are progressives. When 70% believe she's unqualified, that's cutting across moderates, independents, and conservatives. That's before the hot spotlight of a Presidential nomination race with numerous public debates, and her opponents will be a lot tougher than Katie Couric or Charlie Gibbs.

Yes, the motivation for the fact McCain staffers complained about Palin's behavior had absolutely nothing to do, in fact, with her behavior (she is clearly a saint!) but needing to find a scapegoat for a losing campaign; after all, we all know the existing precedent of the Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Bush, Dole, Gore, and Kerry campaign staffers all turning on their vice-presidential nominees in a losing campaign... (Yeah, right.) The fact is that Schmidt and others in the campaign were among those whom advocated Palin's selection, and she lost them. There were reasons why the McCain camp delayed the Gibbs and Couric interviews as long as  they did; she was not a quick study, and we already know how she handled the interviews--it was "gotcha journalism" or stupid staffers whom didn't let Palin be Palin. Fox News Palin apologists claim that if you spend 9 hours in a newsroom, you'll inevitably say something stupid; in fact, Couric was not quizzing her on whom are the key leaders in Yemen or Albanian exports. The "media-savvy" candidate decided a question about what she reads is really a cheap shot at Alaskans in general and she needed to take a stand at her own expense (although not saying so in response to the question)? No doubt Google, when it asks a similar question for user profiles, has a hidden anti-Alaskan agenda... When Obama was asked by a Chicago publication what he read (before the Presidential campaign), he didn't interpret the question as intrinsically racist... To quote that wise American tennis-playing philosopher, John McEnroe: "You can't be serious!"

Heaven forbid that Barbara Walters ask Palin for her own candid assessment of her campaign performance; Walters decided that the real newsworthy story was another publication's photograph of the former governor in shorts made it to the cover of Newsweek magazine; Walters knew the tough question all Americans wanted answered: Did she think that Newsweek using a photograph Palin voluntarily posed for was sexist? (No in-depth, follow-up question of why Palin decided it was a good idea in the first place to pose for a photograph she now conveniently considers cheesy...) And asking softball questions about how Palin felt about being named by "unnamed" campaign sources as a "diva"? Really, Ms. Walters? Given months of Palin being slammed by progressive websites on much worse personal terms, the best she can come up with, after a tough political campaign, is one McCain staffer's description (probably reflecting unreported incidents of unprovoked boorish behavior towards staffers whom didn't know their place)?

When I hear Sean Hannity accept at face value Palin's excuse that the reason she didn't answer Couric question on what newspapers or magazines she reads was because she considered the question to be an anti-Alaskan slur (no doubt all questions Palin unacceptably answers are "anti-Alaskan slurs"...) When she refused to answer the moderator's questions during the Vice Presidential debate?  Everybody knows that responsible politicians only need to answer questions which fit into their talking points...

She's "obviously an intelligent" woman--oh, give me a break, Hannity! What led you to that conclusion? When she put her or her own baby Trig's health at risk by rushing back to Alaska from Texas simply so he would be born there? Her famously inarticulate, convoluted, rambling, question-repeating responses? When she couldn't name a Supreme Court decision? When she argued two years of being the titular head of the Alaskan National Guard or having a military base on Alaskan soil qualified her to be Commander in Chief in the event John McCain died? When she had the political street smarts to go after late-night comedians and McCain staffers?

When I hear her described as a "common sense" conservative, I have to wonder if Rush Limbaugh is taking too many pain killers. What part of conservatism? When she decided the best way to attract energy company investment in Alaska was to push through windfall profit taxes? When she threw taxpayer money at alternative energy? When she was saying complimentary things about Barack Obama before McCain nominated her to be Veep?

So she thinks big government, death panels and deficits are bad (well, except for the federal earmarks she accepted). I bet if you press her for specifics, she'll eventually come out in favor of Mom, apple pie and Chevrolet... Haven't we had enough of bumper sticker politics and political spin from the progressives?

Political Cartoon

Gary Varvel has a second notable cartoon about the upcoming KSM circus trial. It does lead you to reflect--who really is a peer to a war criminal? DC-area sniper John Allan Muhammad has already left this life, and Nidal Hasan isn't available... Does the defense attorney get to strike any prospective juror whom has an opinion on 9/11? Maybe he's one of a kind...

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Led Zeppelin Song

The uncharacteristic soft rock song surfaced on the last studio album by Led Zeppelin at the end of the 1970's. The story I had heard at the time was that it was written in the context of a wedding tribute (and in fact you'll find the song cited on many wedding websites). In fact, it was written in tribute of songwriter Robert Plant's 5-year-old son whom died of a stomach infection. (It also brings to mind Eric Clapton's later tribute to his own young son ("Tears in Heaven") whom died in a horrific accident.) Plant's songwriting is extraordinary, and the beautiful melody and arrangement speak for themselves. (I bet you thought I was going to choose "Stairway to Heaven"...)

Miscellany: 11/17/09

Mark Kirk is Right About Keeping Illinois Citizens Safe


My former Congressman, Mark Kirk (R-IL 10), is running for the Senate seat once held by Barack Obama. Mark Kirk, a pragmatic Republican, is easily one of the most qualified candidates ever to run for the US Senate from Illinois over the past 30 years; Kirk and other Republican congressmen are standing up to Illinois Democrats, whom have engaged in political spin in terms of promoting the use of an Illinois facility to house alleged terrorists. Blagojevich successor Pat Quinn and Illinois' senior senator, Dick Durbin, are trying to help out Obama with his ill-considered decision putting political pandering (i.e., the largely symbolic goal of closing down Guantanamo Bay detention center, a state-of-the-art facility already paid for with taxpayer money) over common sense by offering to establish "Gitmo North", the Thomson correctional facility in northwestern Illinois. Quinn and his heavy-spending fellow Democratic legislative cohorts are desperate for a federal bailout, to feed on the federal teat, even to the extent of accepting a disproportionate amount of the risk (up to nearly half of remaining detainees) relative to other states, suggesting the safety of Illinois citizens is for sale in the middle of a deep recession. I personally think that the existing staff at Guantanamo Bay have done an excellent job of keeping the rest of the world safe from these dangerous detainees that nobody wants.

More on the Palin Book

Sarah Palin's book goes on sale today. (I'm not sure which New York Times list her book will appear in--nonfiction or fiction. As McCain campaign manager Steve Schmidt notes, "It's total fiction.")  Unlike her former running mate John McCain, Sarah Palin is as much into political spin as Obama and almost every other Democratic politician. The Associated Press has ready issued a fact check on the book. The reader can check out the long laundry list; I'll simply note as an example Palin's claims of frugality with Alaskan taxpayer money are called into question with things like occasional $700/night hotel rooms and trying to claim up to $20K in her children's travel costs. Reportedly even McCain has been troubled by some of Palin's scapegoating of and unprovoked, one-sided, unfair attacks on campaign staffers. Who are the real adversaries in Palin's mind--progressives or McCain staffers? It's hard to tell. How do the people, whom knew and worked with her on a day-to-day on the campaign, see her? They reveal a side not apparent in public rallies when she was on her best behavior:

"The book fully reveals her. Dishonest, small and petty...People knew that's what she was like...It's like, 'What's she so angry about?' She was picked to be vice president of the United States. She had an exceptional opportunity. Everything is someone else's fault. There's no accountability. It's mean-spirited. But if you look at the record, it is what it is."

In life sometimes you don't get a second chance to make a good impression. Sarah Palin had an opportunity not to sweat the small stuff, to be gracious, humble and forgiving. To quote the concluding lines of one of my favorite poems by Robert Frost:

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I --

I took the one less traveled by,

And that has made all the difference.

Political Cartoon

Cartoonist Gary Varvel suggests here that the upcoming KSM (Khalid Sheikh Mohammed) trial may become a circus just like the OJ Simpson murder trial, calling to mind attorney Johnnie Cochran's famous reference to the ill-fitting blood-stained glove: "If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit." The real target of the cartoon is progressives, whom are so fixated on identifying enhanced interrogation techniques as "torture" they would probably on principle even let the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks go free.

Musical Interlude: One of my Favorite Love Duets

The upcoming American Music Awards is featuring an appearance by one of the most outstanding female pop vocalists over the past 25 years, Whitney Houston. My favorite song from her was released in 1991, and she had an extraordinary duet with another gifted vocalist (Mariah Carey), both likely upcoming features in this spot. But the first single that really caught my ear in 1986 wasn't so much her breakthrough hit ("Saving All My Love For You"), but a sweet duet with one of Michael Jackson's big brothers, Jermaine.

If you say my eyes are beautiful
It's because they're looking at you
And if you could only see yourself,
You'd feel the same way too.
You could say that I am a dreamer
Who's had a dream come true,
If you say my eyes are beautiful
It's because they're looking at you.

If you wonder why I'm smilin'
It's because I'm happy with you
And the warm sensations touch my heart
And fill me through and through,
I could hold you close forever
And never let you go
If you say my eyes are beautiful,
It's because I just love you so.

Now, my heart is an open door
Won't you come inside for more
You give love so sweetly now,
Take my love,
Take me completely now.

If you say my eyes are beautiful
It's because they're looking at you
And my eyes are just the windows,
For my feelings to come through,
And by far you are more beautiful
Than anything I ever knew,
If you say my eyes are beautiful (X3)
It's because they're looking at you. 

Miscellany: 11/16/09

Axelrod: GOP Moderates Need Not Apply?

There is an intentional policy of the Obama Administration to paint the Republicans as being dominated by intolerant conservatives, that moderates and independents are not tolerated or respected in the GOP. This message is not political advice aimed at reviving the GOP (bless Axelrod's heart!), but at moderate or independent voters. The case in point is NY-23, a Congressional district that went to a Democrat (Bill Owens) for the first time in over  100 years. (The fact is that the GOP retook the Virginia and New Jersey governor's mansions for the first time in years, despite Obama's numerous appearances and commercials on the Democrats' behalf, including the progressives' most potent weapon: Bush-bashing.)

First of all, the charge that pragmatic Republicans are not acceptable simply isn't true; for example, Gerald Ford, George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, and John McCain were all nominated for President despite active opposition by a number of conservatives. Republicans have elected a number of moderate GOP governors or mayors, e.g., Schwarzenegger, Pataki, Crist, Pawlenty, governor-elect Christie, and Giuliani. The Maine US senators are notoriously moderate, as were a number of Bush Administration cabinet members (Powell, Gates and Ridge).

Second, the Democrats have little reason to talk, given the way the progressives tried to squeeze Gore running mate Joe Lieberman out of the Senate over his support of the liberation of Iraq. They can argue that they are open to pro-life or conservative Democrats, but the fact is that Democrat centrists have almost no shot at the Democratic Presidential nomination, where progressive activists are at least as motivated as media conservatives. The tolerance for Democratic conservatives or moderates is largely limited to those districts or areas where GOP Presidential nominees have performed well.

The fact is that Democrat Bill Owens did not win a majority of votes in NY-23; in fact, Conservative Hoffman lost by fewer percentage points than the Republican candidate remaining on the ballot received. The GOP nomination of a liberal (not moderate) Republican was decided in a political back room, not a primary ballot box. The Republican nominee pulled out of the race at the last minute, largely because her own polls indicated that her support had evaporated. You can say all you want about Sarah Palin supporting Hoffman, but it was the voters of NY-23 whom decided the race, over 45% of whom decided to vote for Hoffman, and Palin was not on the ballot. If Hoffman was out of touch with mainstream Republicanism, he would have lost by more than a minor percentage. The issue was not whether NY-23 would elect a moderate Republican; rather, the GOP and Democratic candidates were so similar on major policy issues that the Republican nominee repaid the loyalty of the back room deal by a last-minute endorsement and robocalls for Owens. Hoffman provided a real alternative to voters. Hoffman would have won if Republicans hadn't split their votes for two candidates running against Owens.

Sarah Palin's Book Tour: She Should Be Going On "Dr. Phil" (McGraw)

Now that Sarah Palin no longer poses a threat to aspirations of the Winfrey-endorsed Barack Obama Presidency, Oprah Winfrey is heavily promoting today's show; the rationale of Sarah's appearance has to do with this week's release of an expected runaway best seller, "Going Rogue". (A $5M advance certainly makes a book tour worth while, and it's interesting to note that Palin is booking the tour through swing states,) I've made my feelings known about Sarah Palin in several posts over the past 14 months and have no interest in her exploiting last year's race for personal gain (but, my being against the Politics of Envy, Palin's income taxes will definitely help bankroll Obama's spending spree).

I've mentioned in the past that one of the lessons I learned from my undergraduate days was not to rely on secondary sources, but given the very title of the book, Sarah Palin has made it clear she wasn't a team player during the campaign and in fact tries to make that a virtue (as well as not knowing the intricacies of national policies). Somehow she thinks that Joe Six-Pack will identify with her union-member, Costco-shopping household roots and they prefer someone like themselves in national leadership (remember Alan Jackson's lyric, "I'm not sure I could tell you the difference in Iraq and Iran. But I know Jesus and I talk to God"?)

I'm not sure I buy Joe Six-Pack wants someone like him to be President; he probably knows that he's not qualified to be President and definitely wouldn't want the responsibility or burden, and I suspect he realizes that someone without the necessary background and skills would probably be easily manipulated behind the scenes.  We have not had a President with significant federal or bipartisan administrative experience elected since 1988 (Obama was 2 years into his rookie Senate term when he announced). The results seem to speak for themselves: nation building, massive federal deficits, a broken immigration system, chronically underfunded social security and Medicare, etc. Do we really believe that a former governor, without federal experience and whom quit in less than 3 years in office of a resource-rich, thinly-populated state without an income tax, is up to the task of being President of the United States?

Sarah Palin has had a year to come up with some rationalization for her poor performance in last year's race. She is blaming McCain campaign staffers and gotcha journalism  for the disaster of the ABC and CBS television interviews. No, Sarah; whereas Alaskans may have thought it was endearing in 2006 that you had no positions on pending Alaskan legislation and sportsmanlike when you took anti-intellectual shots at your political opponents, that doesn't play well with the American people. And no contrived namedropping of ancient philosophers and classic American authors in her book can explain away her ludicrous rationalization of having a military base on Alaskan soil or trade missions with Russia and Canada constituted meaningful military and foreign policy experience, her inability to name a single Supreme Court decision beyond Roe v Wade, or her inability to articulate McCain's domestic policy views (beyond comfort-zone topics like energy exploration in Alaska).

What Sarah really needs is a visit with Dr. Phil McGraw, whom I'm sure would counsel her to "get real" about her own performance and to create a more positive, less polarizing politics. It's fairly easy to take negative shots at Obama: massive deficits, government empire building, unfocused and poorly prioritized domestic policy, vacillating military and foreign policy leadership, etc. No matter how many times Palin backers attempt to sugarcoat her resignation by buying at face value her explanations of  expensive "frivolous" complaints (nobody quite ever explained how a government "reformer" like Palin, who at one time had sky-high approval ratings and warm bipartisan relations in Alaska, managed to attract so many money-draining ethics complaints), the fact is that Palin's campaign performance last year essentially poisoned her Alaska bipartisan coalition (as key GOP legislative foes, alienated by Palin's path to the governor's mansion and emboldened by her rapidly dropping public approval ratings, joined with furious partisan Democrats to block key Palin appointments and initiatives).

Here's the point: I think in 2012 we are going to see a focus on Republicans whom go beyond Obama's post-partisan rhetoric and actually will deliver on REAL bipartisanship and consensus to address salient American problems and REAL administrative competence and leadership. We need to go beyond Palin's bumper-stick politics and negative attacks to provide a positive message and substantive policy initiatives, not unlike the GOP's innovative 1994 "Contract with America".

CNN recently revealed its poll that revealed some 70% of the American public (myself included) do not believe Sarah Palin is qualified to be President. Republicans are not fools; the last thing they are going to do in 2012 is to nominate a person whom swing state moderate and independent voters do not believe is a credible candidate. I don't care that Karl Rove, whose political judgment is normally astute, opined that Palin can turn things around (I personally think that Rove, a Fox News contributor, is all too aware that Fox News is in the tank for Palin and is trying to put the best face forward for her prospects, but I don't buy for a second that he really believes it.)

The main reason McCain was able to resurrect his candidacy for the Republican nomination from single-digit support in late 2007 (and all the media conservatives opposed to him because of immigration and other issues) is because a decisive plurality GOP voters believed that he was the most electable of the declared candidates, given a highly unpopular incumbent Republican President. Polls over the past year have repeatedly shown that Palin has consistently finished behind Romney and Huckabee, despite massive publicity advantages.

Political Cartoon

Nate Beeler's cartoon makes the point that Islamic extremism isn't just "over there"; in an Internet world and rapid transportation, we should not be lulled into a false sense of security with the continent buffered by vast oceans. We need to be vigilant against home-grown terrorists whom put their extremist religious views above their American citizenship.

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Linda Ronstadt Song

My nephews and nieces loved Spielberg's "An American Tale" cartoon movies about the experiences of a Russian immigrant mouse family (the Mousekewitz's). Linda Ronstadt and James Ingram had a huge pop ballad hit from the first movie: "Somewhere Out There". But my favorite song was Linda's solo hit from the sequel ("Fievel Goes West"): "Dreams to Dream". My niece Megan in particular empathized with Fievel's separation from his family in the original, and the sequel focuses on the move to the Wild West to find a better life. "Dreams to Dream" reminds me of Megan every time I hear it, and I'm sure Megan's preborn son will one day learn of Fievel's adventures. I love you, Megan!



I lose my way, no one cares
The words I say, no one hears
My life it seems is a world of dreams
Deep in the night, you'll find me
Dream and you're right behind me
Stay, if you will stay
We'll dream the night away
Dreams to dream
In the dark of the night.
When the world goes wrong
I can still make it right.
I can see so far in my dreams
I'll follow my dreams
Until they come true.

There is a star waiting to guide us shining inside us
When we close our eyes.

Come with me you will see what I mean
There's a world inside no one else ever sees
You will go so far in my dreams
Somewhere in my dreams your dreams will come true.

Dont let go if you stay close to me
In my dreams tonight you will see what I see 
Dreams to dream,
As near as can be
Inside you and me, they always come true.
Inside you and me, they always come true.