Mark Krikorian pitches a fit at the Corner over the name Jose being the most popular among boys born in Texas over the last year. He is taken to task for it, but a bit more response is called for.
Shall we look at what have we seen people with the name Jose accomplish in America in the past? There are a number of All-Star baseball and football players, like Jose Hernandez (all-star shortstop in 2002) and Jose Contreras (all-star pitcher in 2006). Men named Jose are cops, firefighters, lawyers, and in just about any other honorable profession in America.
Oh, yeah, and three men named Jose have earned this country's highest military honor while defending this country: Sergeant Jose M. Lopez, Private First Class Jose F. Valdez, and Private Jose B. Nisperos.
Mr. Krikorian, it seems American has done well by men named Jose. On the other hand, you have managed to out yourself as someone who seems awfully obsessed with people who have Hispanic-sounding names.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Age of Google 101 for Daily Kos...
Don't think that by deleting a post, it will go away.
Google caches can always come back to bite you. As this Redstate blog notes.
The cover-up is always worse than the crime...
Google caches can always come back to bite you. As this Redstate blog notes.
The cover-up is always worse than the crime...
"Christmas in Cambodia" every day!
That's what Barack Obama seems to be giving us these days. While some are outraged, I think the best medicine here is laughter.
Yes, I do think it's hitting the level of comedy. Besides, Obama's expecting an angry attack. Laughing at him will throw him off kilter, and might provoke a more... useful response.
Yes, I do think it's hitting the level of comedy. Besides, Obama's expecting an angry attack. Laughing at him will throw him off kilter, and might provoke a more... useful response.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Unpatriotic Conservatives, 2008 style...
In 2003, David Frum wrote a brilliant takedown of anti-war conservatives. It pulled very few punches, and laid out a compelling case that they were clearly .
Today, though, there is a new batch of unpatriotic conservatives who are perfectly willing to sell out our troops by sitting out 2008 - perfectly willing to let Obama win, despite the deleterious effects he will have on the country. If there are better words than unpatriotic and selfish, I'd like to hear them.
Quite frankly, they are going about immigration all wrong. We do have some problems, particularly with gangs and drugs. But how do we deal with that aspect of border security when we waste our time raiding meat-packing plants and construction sites? We don't. But it provides plenty of bloody shirts for people like Michelle Malkin to wave in the immigration debate.
But when they will, through their inaction, elect someone who is likely to surrender in the war on terror, someone who is stupid enough to meet with people like Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions, and someone who will likely appoint Supreme Court justices who will be more inclined to engage in judicial putsches on issues like gay marriage, it's time to call them out.
What is truly the most important issue facing America, immigration, or the war on terror? I think most Americans would argue the latter. Holding our troops hostage over immigration is despicable, and it will not win friends.
Today, though, there is a new batch of unpatriotic conservatives who are perfectly willing to sell out our troops by sitting out 2008 - perfectly willing to let Obama win, despite the deleterious effects he will have on the country. If there are better words than unpatriotic and selfish, I'd like to hear them.
Quite frankly, they are going about immigration all wrong. We do have some problems, particularly with gangs and drugs. But how do we deal with that aspect of border security when we waste our time raiding meat-packing plants and construction sites? We don't. But it provides plenty of bloody shirts for people like Michelle Malkin to wave in the immigration debate.
But when they will, through their inaction, elect someone who is likely to surrender in the war on terror, someone who is stupid enough to meet with people like Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions, and someone who will likely appoint Supreme Court justices who will be more inclined to engage in judicial putsches on issues like gay marriage, it's time to call them out.
What is truly the most important issue facing America, immigration, or the war on terror? I think most Americans would argue the latter. Holding our troops hostage over immigration is despicable, and it will not win friends.
Iraq Progress...
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Doomsday Strategy
AJ-Strata discusses Hillary's latest comments, and is well worth the read.
That said, it's a very interesting strategy... one that could very well sink Obama in 2008.
Think about it: Come June 3, Hillary is likely to emerge with a slight lead in the overall popular vote. She will have won a large number of the major primaries. And, of course, there are two large delegate-rich states which she won, but which will probably not have a single delegate.
Once the delegates are denied, Hillary will refuse to endorse Obama. She and her supporters will very publicly sit on their hands. She will simply state that she cannot support the disenfranchisement of Michigan and Florida. Obama, of course, will have to find some way to mollify her - and in doing that is going to reinforce the perception that he's a bit of a wimp.
Eventually, when the damage is done, Hillary will graciously (yeah, right) stand aside for Obama and watch him lose. She will then run in 2012 on an "I told you so" campaign.
That said, it's a very interesting strategy... one that could very well sink Obama in 2008.
Think about it: Come June 3, Hillary is likely to emerge with a slight lead in the overall popular vote. She will have won a large number of the major primaries. And, of course, there are two large delegate-rich states which she won, but which will probably not have a single delegate.
Once the delegates are denied, Hillary will refuse to endorse Obama. She and her supporters will very publicly sit on their hands. She will simply state that she cannot support the disenfranchisement of Michigan and Florida. Obama, of course, will have to find some way to mollify her - and in doing that is going to reinforce the perception that he's a bit of a wimp.
Eventually, when the damage is done, Hillary will graciously (yeah, right) stand aside for Obama and watch him lose. She will then run in 2012 on an "I told you so" campaign.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
What does the GOP need?
Governor Schwarzenegger's comments about the GOP's need of re-branding will probably touch a few nerves. But in a sense, he is right, albeit, it's not so much "re-branding" the GOP needs, but to instead ditch the "new brand" that largely emerged from 2005 to the present.
From 2005 on, a certain group of conservatives (not all, but a very vocal segment) have decided that at some point, they had a monopoly on principles. Those who did not toe their line on certain issues (most notably immigration, but you can include Terri Schiavo and the nomination of Harriet Miers on that list as well - if you want, you can even include No Child Left Behind and Medicare Part D as well) were often derided as RINOs, unprincipled, or worse.
The result... well, I'll let you read some views from SJ Reidhead, The Anchoress, AJ-Strata, and myself.
Take some time to peruse those blogs (outside the posts I linked to), and see if you can describe where SJ Reidhead, The Anchoress, AJ-Strata, and myself tend to stand on issues.
I dare to say that most people would think that the four of us are probably in the mainstream of George W. Bush's political coalition. They'd peg us as Republican and right of center.
Yet all four of us are feeling less and less welcome in the GOP, and that is largely due to the fact that people like Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, and Ann Coulter have routinely talked down to us as if we were somehow not good enough to be in their club, and a lot of party leaders have gone along with their commissar act, and have not called them out on it. then of course, when this "new brand" of strict compliance was no savior at the polls, they demanded even stricter compliance, claiming a lack of principle was the problem.
The fact that people may have looked at their "true conservative" brand and decided to reject it does not seem to have crossed their mind at all. So they try a harder and harder sell, ticking off more and more people. By insisting on a coalition of the pure, they are literally shrinking their base of support. As long as the GOP goes along with that, then they will find their base of support shrinking as well.
So, maybe the GOP needs to tell the commissar wing to stuff it.
From 2005 on, a certain group of conservatives (not all, but a very vocal segment) have decided that at some point, they had a monopoly on principles. Those who did not toe their line on certain issues (most notably immigration, but you can include Terri Schiavo and the nomination of Harriet Miers on that list as well - if you want, you can even include No Child Left Behind and Medicare Part D as well) were often derided as RINOs, unprincipled, or worse.
The result... well, I'll let you read some views from SJ Reidhead, The Anchoress, AJ-Strata, and myself.
Take some time to peruse those blogs (outside the posts I linked to), and see if you can describe where SJ Reidhead, The Anchoress, AJ-Strata, and myself tend to stand on issues.
I dare to say that most people would think that the four of us are probably in the mainstream of George W. Bush's political coalition. They'd peg us as Republican and right of center.
Yet all four of us are feeling less and less welcome in the GOP, and that is largely due to the fact that people like Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, and Ann Coulter have routinely talked down to us as if we were somehow not good enough to be in their club, and a lot of party leaders have gone along with their commissar act, and have not called them out on it. then of course, when this "new brand" of strict compliance was no savior at the polls, they demanded even stricter compliance, claiming a lack of principle was the problem.
The fact that people may have looked at their "true conservative" brand and decided to reject it does not seem to have crossed their mind at all. So they try a harder and harder sell, ticking off more and more people. By insisting on a coalition of the pure, they are literally shrinking their base of support. As long as the GOP goes along with that, then they will find their base of support shrinking as well.
So, maybe the GOP needs to tell the commissar wing to stuff it.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Conservatives out of touch...
OK, what would you consider to be the most pressing issue facing America this week?
War on Terror? Energy? The economy? Nope, none of those are the pressing issue of the week, according to Michelle Malkin. No the big issue of the week is Beyonce's new clothing line.
Good fucking grief.
If you wonder why conservatives have image problems, this is an example right here.
They obsess over the trivial - and woe unto those who suggest that there is a bigger picture or more important things to deal with. And they wonder why I prefer to think of myself as a Donald Bellisario Republican as opposed to a conservative?
War on Terror? Energy? The economy? Nope, none of those are the pressing issue of the week, according to Michelle Malkin. No the big issue of the week is Beyonce's new clothing line.
Good fucking grief.
If you wonder why conservatives have image problems, this is an example right here.
They obsess over the trivial - and woe unto those who suggest that there is a bigger picture or more important things to deal with. And they wonder why I prefer to think of myself as a Donald Bellisario Republican as opposed to a conservative?
U.S. Congressman a FARC go-between?
Interpol has recently confirmed that Raul Reyes's laptop has not been tampered with. If that is the case, then Gateway Pundit raises an interesting bombshell.
Perhaps it's time to ask Barack Obama if he intends to sell out Colombia to the tender mercies of Hugo Chavez and FARC.
Perhaps it's time to ask Barack Obama if he intends to sell out Colombia to the tender mercies of Hugo Chavez and FARC.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
No regard for democracy...
Today, the California Supreme Court went rogue, throwing out a law that had been enacted by the people of California in a referendum back in 2000 - and by a pretty fair margin.
As I discussed this issue earlier, this is pushing America to a fundamental question that we will have to answer in 2008: How is this country supposed to work, is it run by "we the people," or will it instead be run by a judiciary that has metastasized into a polite and gentle dictatorship?
That is not the only case. The polar bear listing is another, and contrary to complaints from Hugh Hewitt, Secretary Kempthorne really had no choice on this matter, and arguably has taken the only course of action that will minimize the effect. If he had refused to list the polar bear, the NRDC and other groups would have found a judge all too willing to overturn the decision of an Administration that was chosen twice by the American people to make such decisions - something that has happened repeatedly.
It's not a small question for me. I want to know if my vote will count, or if it will be tossed out because some judge thinks he or she knows better?
As I discussed this issue earlier, this is pushing America to a fundamental question that we will have to answer in 2008: How is this country supposed to work, is it run by "we the people," or will it instead be run by a judiciary that has metastasized into a polite and gentle dictatorship?
That is not the only case. The polar bear listing is another, and contrary to complaints from Hugh Hewitt, Secretary Kempthorne really had no choice on this matter, and arguably has taken the only course of action that will minimize the effect. If he had refused to list the polar bear, the NRDC and other groups would have found a judge all too willing to overturn the decision of an Administration that was chosen twice by the American people to make such decisions - something that has happened repeatedly.
It's not a small question for me. I want to know if my vote will count, or if it will be tossed out because some judge thinks he or she knows better?
Braun signs!
NL Central pitchers beware! Ryan Braun has apparently signed a big extension.
Now, if they can only get Prince Fielder signed to a similar deal...
Now, if they can only get Prince Fielder signed to a similar deal...
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Why the Congressional GOP is lagging McCain...
AJ-Strata has an excellent post on why the Congressional GOP is lagging McCain.
The tone the right has taken on immigration has been shrill, declaring those who did not toe a hard line traitors repeatedly, as well as enemies of the Republic (Paul J. Cella is one of the more easily found ones, but you can see similar sentiments in some comments on threads at Free Republic). As I posted elsewhere, such comments have been counter-productive, to put it mildly, and arguably, destructive to the Republican coalition. Some of the comments, quite frankly, would only have been resolvable via the Code Duello.
The hard-liners on immigration have been akin to the people crying about global warming - with practically no proof for their dire predictions, and their response, is much like those of the global warming believers to critics, as described by Michael Crichton.
Some of this rhetoric borders on the fringes as well. In the age of Google, it is easy to find. It's why the "dirty pool" MacRanger describes can stick, as well, even when the specifics are false. Just glance at the immigration threads at FreeRepublic.com, or comments at Townhall (particularly those directed at supporters of President Bush on immigration, like Linda Chavez or Ruben Navarrette), and you can see just why the dirty pool works. The lies are believable.
Contrary to what Mac wants to believe, the MS-1 loss, as well as Hastert's seat, indicates that conservatives have lost touch with America in some respects. I can't speak for anyone else, but who wants to vote for someone who views them as a traitor over a disagreement - much less work with them?
Perhaps MacRanger can answer that question. Because the Congressional GOP needs to either answer that question - or they need to mend fences with the moderates they have been working so hard to alienate.
The tone the right has taken on immigration has been shrill, declaring those who did not toe a hard line traitors repeatedly, as well as enemies of the Republic (Paul J. Cella is one of the more easily found ones, but you can see similar sentiments in some comments on threads at Free Republic). As I posted elsewhere, such comments have been counter-productive, to put it mildly, and arguably, destructive to the Republican coalition. Some of the comments, quite frankly, would only have been resolvable via the Code Duello.
The hard-liners on immigration have been akin to the people crying about global warming - with practically no proof for their dire predictions, and their response, is much like those of the global warming believers to critics, as described by Michael Crichton.
Some of this rhetoric borders on the fringes as well. In the age of Google, it is easy to find. It's why the "dirty pool" MacRanger describes can stick, as well, even when the specifics are false. Just glance at the immigration threads at FreeRepublic.com, or comments at Townhall (particularly those directed at supporters of President Bush on immigration, like Linda Chavez or Ruben Navarrette), and you can see just why the dirty pool works. The lies are believable.
Contrary to what Mac wants to believe, the MS-1 loss, as well as Hastert's seat, indicates that conservatives have lost touch with America in some respects. I can't speak for anyone else, but who wants to vote for someone who views them as a traitor over a disagreement - much less work with them?
Perhaps MacRanger can answer that question. Because the Congressional GOP needs to either answer that question - or they need to mend fences with the moderates they have been working so hard to alienate.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Understanding Hamas...
It seems Barack Obama says he understands Hamas's view.
Given his statements, I have to disagree.
If someone truly understands Hamas, they would not be opposed to letting Israel do some serious ass-kicking.
Given his statements, I have to disagree.
If someone truly understands Hamas, they would not be opposed to letting Israel do some serious ass-kicking.
Friday, May 09, 2008
If you ever doubted the Burmese junta was slime...
Read this, and all doubt should be gone.
The Burmese junta is damn lucky we have a Global War on Terror to fight. Because if we had the Marine Division available, it might be worth it to force the relief supplies in.
The Burmese junta is damn lucky we have a Global War on Terror to fight. Because if we had the Marine Division available, it might be worth it to force the relief supplies in.
Thursday, May 08, 2008
Took a bit of a break...
Quite frankly, blogging needed a bit of a break. Hope to be a bit more regular on here soon.
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Congressional medding goes both ways...
When Congress tried to overrule the Air Force on CSAR-X, it set a bad precedent. In essence, by dragging a lot of politics into the mix, they have delayed that program for a while.
Now, KC-X is facing a similar delay, this time, rather than trying to stick it to Boeing, Congress is going to earmark the contract to Boeing. Now, I will not call this a pork-barrel situation, as CAGW did (CAGW in the past has come out for going back to oil-fueled carriers, killing the V-22,and has called the C-130J pork, so take their national-security recommendations with the appropriate level of salt).
The fact is that there are some people have about the Northrop Grumman entry. They are questions that deserve answers.
Now, KC-X is facing a similar delay, this time, rather than trying to stick it to Boeing, Congress is going to earmark the contract to Boeing. Now, I will not call this a pork-barrel situation, as CAGW did (CAGW in the past has come out for going back to oil-fueled carriers, killing the V-22,and has called the C-130J pork, so take their national-security recommendations with the appropriate level of salt).
The fact is that there are some people have about the Northrop Grumman entry. They are questions that deserve answers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)