Monday, April 07, 2008

To explain any loud screams around the Washington Post newsroom...

Going back to my earlier post on the possible change at Miller Park, I have mentioned that I would like to be a fly on the wall of George Will's office when he finds out about their consideration of artificial turf.

Here's why:
From his April 3, 2005 column (see page 2):
This season, for the first time since the Astrodome opened in 1965, every National League game will be played on real grass.
Mr. Will seems to have spoken too soon.

I have already sent the Brewers an e-mail expressing my support for the considered change.

I strongly support the installation of artificial turf in Miller Park, not only for the better appearance,but also because I believe it would be a superb fit for the skill sets of a number of the players on the Brewers (Rickie Weeks, Corey Hart, Tony Gwynn Jr. Bill Hall, Ryan Braun, and Mike Cameron), giving the team a bit more of an edge in Miller Park.

Call it getting the Brewers a bit more home-field advantage.

Sunday, April 06, 2008

Artificial Turf at Miller Park?

The Brewers are apparently considering replacing the natural grass at Miller Park with artificial turf. This could be very good news.

With players like Rickie Weeks, Ryan Braun, Bill Hall, Corey Hart, Tony Gwynn Jr., and Mike Cameron, this would be a huge benefit for the Brewers. Why? Because the ball goes faster and bounces higher on artificial turf.

Adding artificial turf would give the Brewers a bit of a home-field advantage.

UPDATE: Not like they need it when they polish off a sweep, but I want to be the fly on the wall of George Will's office when he finds out.

Anti-Mormon motivations? UPDATED

Race42008 has some more info on some of the backers of the ad opposing Mitt Romney as McCain's running mate.

Read their track records. Then ask for yourself if the objection is really about social liberalism, or if it's because he is Mormon.

Because I know what this looks and sounds like to me. So, do I believe the protests of people like commenter FreedomFighter in a previous post on that ad, or do I believe my own eyes?

UPDATE: More discussion at Townhall.

UPDATE 2: Redstate commenters blow off concerns about the ad.

Friday, April 04, 2008

Weyrich proves untrustworthy...

Memo to Mitt Romney: The next time you run for President, do not trust Paul Weyrich.

The reason: The ad that Weyrich signed on to. (Article 6 Blog has some info here.)

What changed between the time Romney ran for office and even suspended his campaign, and the present day, when he is one of those mentioned as a possible Vice Presidential nominee? I can think of only two things: 1. Romney dropped out and ultimately endorsed McCain, citing the needs of the country and the GOP and 2. Mike Huckabee's complaints that conservative leaders didn't back him.

So now, Weyrich seems to be caving in to complaints from Mike Huckabee. In one sense, you cannot blame him for the second factor - his bread is buttered by these people.

That said, there things that must be said openly: Weyrich's flip-flop makes him untrustworthy. He's not someone who will have your back. He seems to be an individual whose personality is that of a Soviet-era zampolit.

It should also be noted some major Huckabee supporters were behind the ad. I guess they're saying Mormons need not apply for VP as well.

Thursday, April 03, 2008

Dobson projects...

James Dobson seems to think that John McCain has somehow divided the GOP.

In that, he is being grossly dishonest. Dobson needs to cast his eyes a bit closer to home. Specifically, he needs to deal with the fact that in dividing the GOP, he and his followers, particularly those who have demanded hard-line "no compromise" positions have been just as divisive, if not more so, than people like McCain.

Dobson, for instance, endorsed a candidate who made very liberal use of the politics of religious identity. He also seemed to be utterly unwilling to throw his support behind Mitt Romney when his support could have been very helpful, instead waiting until after Romney was out to make an endorsement. At the same time, when Huckabee's playing to anti-Mormon bigotry went on, he failed to say one word in opposition - probably to avoid upsetting his wife (which probably explains why he wouldn't endorse Romney in the first place).

Now, explain to this Mormon why the fuck I should trust James Dobson, or back someone he is inclined to support.

Of course, I will get the usual claims from Dobson backers that he was acting on principle, that Romney was not "really" a conservative, or some other bullshit explanation. But the problem is that Romney was the best shot to see those principles enacted in 2008.

So, this November, I'm pulling for McCain to win. Dobson will now have to kiss McCain's ass if he wants anything, and Republicans will be able to re-define certain relationships. Yeah, it's spite on my part. But I think I have some good reasons to feel that.

Wednesday, April 02, 2008

2-0

Man, it's gotta suck to be a Chicago Cub. When you can hear "Let's go Brewers" get chanted on the broadcast AT WRIGLEY FIELD.

But it's sweet for a Brewers fan.

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Pelosi muscled...

AJ Strata reports that Nancy Pelosi has caved on the super-delegates.

One of two things happened: Most likely, the DCCC told her they could not hold the House if the donors pulled their funds. Or, she has just decided to flip-flop.

Hillary Clinton is a very good political brawler. She clearly won this round.

Monday, March 31, 2008

Opening Day...

The four sweetest words in the English language:
Brewers win, CUBS LOSE!!!!

Thursday, March 27, 2008

With screw-ups like this... no wonder people don't respect the law

It seems that the folks who decide on legal immigration have bollixed things up once again. This time, they are refusing to grant a visa to an interpreter who helped our troops in Iraq, even though he and his family are clearly facing death or physical harm from terrorists.

The bureaucrats at INS would not even take note of the letters in the file from Secretary of the Navy Donald C. Winter and General David Petraeus. One would think any reasonable person would take note of said letters, the medal awarded, and the fact that this guy is facing the very real risk of physical harm.

This is not the only situation. I became aware, via a second-hand account, of a Colombian family who faced a somewhat similar dilemma. They didn't translate for the US, but they had heard of a FARC "recruiting campaign" that was to take place at the school where one of their sons attended. They tried to get here legally, but ultimately, when faced with the likelihood of their son being kidnapped and used as cannon fodder by a terrorist group, they came here on tourist visas and overstayed.

We don't know why the INS decided not to approve this, and to even label him a terrorist. And that is the problem with that bureaucracy. With screw-ups like these, it is no wonder a lot of otherwise good people are deciding that the law is fouled up.

This is why I reject the whole Malkin/Tancredo approach on immigration. Ultimately, we are dealing with people. It's not numbers, it's not about culture, it's people - individual persons who deserve to get equal treatment under the law.

The Marine Corps would be perfectly justified in bringing this translator and his family home, providing them with support, looking after them, and daring ICE to come after them. This man had more than earned American citizenship for himself and his family by coming to our aid in helping liberate Iraq. They should also assign their top JAGs to this and similar cases where the fouled up immigration system is causing problems for them. Other services should do the same. The Army, for instance, had an illegal immigrant who took part in the liberation of Iraq - doing the defense of our country that the likes of Reverend Wright have vehemently opted out of (yes, I know Wright served in the Marine Corps - but that service does NOT cancel out "God Damn America").

But this calls for a total revamping of immigration law in this country. It also means that we pass common-sense reforms that will deal with the real problems. Big Lizards has made a number of good posts on this issue, and the discussion should start there. There needs to be some penalty for breaking the law. But contrary to the assertions we hear from the right, it is not a choice between deportation and nothing. There are ways to ensure that those who broke the law pay a price for their actions. If they are fined, and agree to a form of probation, they have not received amnesty, contrary to the assertions from Michelle Malkin.

It is hard to respect laws when they are applied very poorly. Scrap the system, and start over.

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

How bad is it for the Dems?

Whoever wins the Hillary/Obama deathmatch will lose at least 19% of the other candidate's supporters, and as much as 28%.

This is not just losing, it's getting blown out.

Furthermore, the GOP is not likely to lose as many voters. On the one hand, Hillary engenders a fierce response from them. On the other hand, Obama's pastor caused a controversy that Obama has not handled well. This translates into a blowout win.

The conservatives who demanded ideological purity on immigration and elsewhere? Out of luck. John McCain will, in all likelihood, win without them.

They forgot one simple lesson: The winner decides the terms, not the loser. Now, McCain will win, and he will have a level of support in the general election that will likely be a mandate.

In other words, he will have the support to pass things like comprehensive immigration reform.

Conservatives gambled and lost. The consequences are going to be painful for them. Maybe now, they will learn that half a loaf is better than nothing.

Monday, March 24, 2008

It's the law...

Remember how all these food cops went crazy, and are now micro-managing vending machines?

Maybe people need to read this Victorville Daily Press article, ideally with Ice-T's "I'm Your Pusher" from his album Power is playing (it should be readily available via Amazon.com or iTunes for those who are not fortunate enough to have it).

Seems black-market sweets have managed to find their way into the schools. It's not that hard to imagine, when a box of 36-48 candy bars goes for about $15. Then keep in mind that the black-market candy bars usually go for $2 a pop. So you get anywhere from $72 to $96 per box of candy.

These candy pushers have it made. And they owe it all to the food nazis.

Just remember, "supply and demand" is not just a concept... it's the LAW!

Thursday, March 20, 2008

How'd he do?

Not too well, if you believe the Rasmussen poll.

Obama's speech handled the Wright controversy about as well as the Denver Broncos special teams unit handled Devin Hester last November.

And like Hester with just enough space, McCain seems to be breaking away for a big one.

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Reading suggestion for Barack Obama...

Eli Lake's January 2007 article is well worth the read.

In fact, Barack Obama should have read it before he spouted off on McCain today.

Money quote:

An American intelligence official said the new material, which has been authenticated within the intelligence community, confirms "that Iran is working closely with both the Shiite militias and Sunni Jihadist groups." The source was careful to stress that the Iranian plans do not extend to cooperation with Baathist groups fighting the government in Baghdad, and said the documents rather show how the Quds Force — the arm of Iran's revolutionary guard that supports Shiite Hezbollah, Sunni Hamas, and Shiite death squads — is working with individuals affiliated with Al Qaeda in Iraq and Ansar al-Sunna.

Another American official who has seen the summaries of the reporting affiliated with the arrests said it comprised a "smoking gun." "We found plans for attacks, phone numbers affiliated with Sunni bad guys, a lot of things that filled in the blanks on what these guys are up to," the official said.

A gaffe was made, but not by Barack Obama.

Walking the Walk is more important than Talking the Talk...

Remember the whole Don Imus controversy?

Well, it seems that back then, Barack Obama had no problem calling Imus out over his comments (which were nowhere near as bad as Jeremiah Wright's).

But when Wright preaches "God damn America" and calls Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice a skeeze (Rice's bio, by the way, shows that she had it much harder than Obama did), Barack Obama asks us to understand why he cannot disown the guy.

Barack Obama looks more and more like he is either a hypocrite, or a man so averse to confrontation that he will always look for an easy way out. Neither thing is good in a President.

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Ultimate verdict: No Sale.

Barack Obama's big speech today was to try to put the Wright thing behind him. Or that is what he was hoping.

It didn't fly with me.

In essence, he flunked on two counts:
Strike one:
Given my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church? And I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and You Tube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way

But the truth is, that isn’t all that I know of the man. The man I met more than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor. He is a man who served his country as a U.S. Marine; who has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country, and who for over thirty years led a church that serves the community by doing God’s work here on Earth – by housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.
What Obama says may be true, but Mussolini made the trains run on time, and Hitler created the autobahn. But we still view both men as bad guys.

Had I heard some of the crap over the pulpit in my ward, I'd have walked out and found a new ward - while going to the stake leadership to explain exactly why I was doing so. I wouldn't hesitate to tell the speaker that he or she was in the wrong. If necessary, I'd stop going to church for a while.

Strike two:
And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions – the good and the bad – of the community that he has served diligently for so many years.

I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community.
Here is the portrayal of what an Obama administration will be: He'll deny problems when they exist, allowing them to get worse. He does not have the guts to take a tough stand and risk a lot of flak from his community or political base, the Democrats who choose to blame America for the world's ill - contrast that to President Bush, who has been more than willing to anger his community and political base when he felt it was the right thing to do (prescription drugs, immigration, etc.).

Obama has missed opportunities to do so. This was his last, best chance. He did not do so, instead, he tried to have it both ways.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong-Il, Hugo Chavez, Raul Castro, Osama bin Ladin, and Ayman al-Zawahiri now have plenty of reason to celebrate if Senator Obama is elected.

Obama's character was weighed today and found wanting. That's why he won't get my vote.

Saturday, March 15, 2008

Obama and Romney are apples and oranges...

Given the strong displeasure that I expressed about Mike Huckabee's playing to religious bigotry to derail the presidential campaign of Mitt Romney, it may open me up to charges of hypocrisy to discuss the Obama-Wright matter. Indeed, Obama has also been the subject of some nasty rumors that he is really a Muslim, rumors, which appear to have no basis in truth.

But it's a case of apples and oranges when discussing Wright and TUCC/Mormonism.

Frankly, the issue has now shifted from Wright's comments, particularly with his departure from Obama's campaign. Now,the issue is how forthcoming Barack Obama has been, and if Powerline and Rich Lowry have gotten it right, then Barack Obama appears to have tried to BS the American people.

Contrast that to Mitt Romney's handling of the Mormon question. He did not drag his religion into the campaign. Romney never tried to dissemble about it, either.

Obama's now in a lot of trouble - there is no sugar-coating this. He had projected an aura of being genuine, of respecting those who disagreed with him, and of trying to bring people together as Americans. Now, though, this image is tarnished, if not in tatters.

Barack Obama may win the Democratic nomination, but if he wins, America will be just as divided as it was before.

Friday, March 14, 2008

Well, well...

AJ-Strata has found something interesting. Seems that Tom Tancredo's hard-line position on immigration is out of step with his district.

This is not surprising. Multiple GOP primaries have gone to candidates who favor a comprehensive approach, much like Senator John McCain has. They do not seem to be able to prevail in Republican primaries.

And that is the real issue. Social conservatives do not seem to be able to close the sale with significant chunks of the Republican primary electorate on issues like immigration to the point of rejecting a candidate on this issue. So now, they find themselves losing Republican primaries.

That is not John McCain's problem, and he is under no obligation (contrary to assertions from people like Rick Santorum) to accommodate them. To the contrary, the conservatives need to re-think, and ask themselves why they cannot close the sale. They certainly are not inany position to dictate terms to John McCain.

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Jeremiah Wright, meet Fred Phelps . . .

Sen. Barack Obama's pastor says blacks should not sing "God Bless America" but "God damn America."

The only discernable difference seems to be that Freddie says "God Hates Fags" and Jerry says "God Hates Whitey."

Now, a little discussion of the relationship between pastor and his flock . . .

Once upon a time at my parish, the visiting priest started giving a homily that absolutely nothing to do with the Scripture readings. He quickly stepped into a general attack on the United States in general and the U. S. military in particular, using the typical leftist ideological cant.

I walked out of that homily--as did others. I had to really carefully examine my conscience before I went up to receive Eucharist; even then, I subsequently sought out spiritual counsel from another priest whose guidance I'd come to trust.

That incident led me to quit serving as a Eucharistic Minister at the next opportunity to do so, because I felt that I could not stand in the sanctuary before Communion--a very visible sign of unity with the priest--should that priest turn up again on a day when I had the duty. Were it to become a pervasive attitude in that parish, I would probably have started attending Mass at another parish. (I've done that before due to other issues.)

There comes a point where silently sitting in the pew becomes assent. There comes another point where sitting silently in the pew moves from assent to agreement.

If Barack Obama finds these beliefs to be worthy of associating himself with, that's bad. If he actually believes it, it's worse.

We keep hearing about "hope" and "change." Obama's pastor doesn't seem to offer either one.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Food Gestapo in the schools...

It seems that now, we have Food Gestapo in the schools. An eighth-grade honor student got suspended because he bought a bag of Skittles. I guess the schools in New Haven don't have any drug or gang problems if they can crack down on candy.
Michael Sheridan claims he was in a school hallway after lunch Feb. 26 when a classmate asked if he wanted some candy. The student had a lunch box filled with candy and a wad of money, he said.
And so, a principal decides to put a big black mark on a student for buying a freaking bag of Skittles with his money, simply because the school district established a "wellness policy" sans input from parents. The kid's mom has every right to be pissed off about this. The principal apparently decided to make an example.

This is what frosts me about a lot of people on the left and right. It's not enough that government practically rapes my wallet, not government is getting into people's refrigerators. What's next? Government in the john?

But the other lesson is what the vending machine bans have wrought. In a day and age where a kid can get to Costco or BJ's and buy a few boxes at about $15 each. Each box usually holds 36-48 candy bars. Sell them at $2 each, and you got yourself the makings of a thriving business.

It would serve the principal right for this suspension to not only be lifted, but for that school's black market in sweets to suddenly take off.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Coalition-Bulding 101... or The Lessons of IL-14

Jim Oberweis lost, but there are two lessons to be learned here:
1. Do not piss off large chunks of the primary electorate of your party by firing off nasty anything about your opponent. If you piss off people who largely agree with you because of some purity test or personal cheap shot, you have nobody but yourself to blame for losing. Mike Huckabee should bear this in mind for 2012 - and then act accordingly.

2. A hard-line policy on immigration does not win elections. In GOP primaries, like one in the third congressional district of Utah or the eighth congressional district of Arizona, the hard-line position usually cannot top 45% when it is faced with those favoring a more comprehensive approach (in Arizona 8, the only reason the hardliner won was because it was a first-across the line approach). This has even been the case in the 2008 presidential race.

3. The talk-radio hosts and major conservative media outlets have proven that they are largely out of touch with a large part of the Republican Party and the American public. If the GOP heeds their siren song, it will not go well.

Monday, March 10, 2008

It's not about cake...

I have a lot of respect for MacRanger. Being a guest on his show was quite an experience, and well worth pursuing. That said, with regards to John McCain, he is way off base.

The fact of the matter is that "true" conservatism did not close the sale with the Republican primary electorate in 2008, particularly on what seems to be the litmus test of the past few years, immigration.

And I find it quite telling that people like Mark Levin don't seem to get it, and in fact, seem to be taking issue with people like the folks at Powerline Blog, who point out (correctly) that conservatives are not in a position to make demands on John McCain. Levin's comments are just typical of the poor strategic and tactical sense shown by conservatives in the last few years. And poor strategy, tactics, communications, execution, and interpersonal skills will not be negated by how principled a person is.

Finally, one last note: Losers do not get to dictate terms to the winners. If conservative want McCain to respond to their desires, they have to go to him, and they need to move his way. It would be respectful of the Republican primary electorate. It may even be a matter of their political viability - because it is very likely that the Democratic nomination will end with a significant number of disaffected Democrats, and McCain will more than likely be able to appeal to a lot of them. And if he wins, with folks like Levin loudly campaigning against him because he lacked sufficient purity, he and Republicans will have every reason to ignore conservatives.

Saturday, March 08, 2008

Some Thoughts on Anti-Trust

The recent contretemps over Northrop/EADS winning the KC-X tanker contract has led to think about the Clinton/Reno Justice Department's absurd approach to antitrust issues.

To fully understand why I view it as absurd, one needs to keep in mind two dates:

August 1st, 1997, and May 18th, 1998. Two dates that are less than a year apart. But they illustrate what the DoJ got wrong--and what they also got wrong.

On August 1st, 1997, The Boeing Company was allowed to gain a monopoly on domestic large airframe production. After that date, one had a choice of Boeing, or going to Airbus.

On May 18th, 1998, the Justice Department commenced its antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft. At that time, users had a choice of Windows, Macintosh Classic, or Linux for an affordable computer operating system. Now, one has a choice of Windows, Mac Classic, Mac OS X, BSD Unix, Solaris, Ubuntu, Red Hat, Debian, SuSE, FreeBSD, and the beat goes on . . .

Nowadays, web applications seem to be the way of the future, making the operating system less relevant than the browser, and there's plenty of choice in the browser world, too.

The Justice Department missed one fundamental point. Creating a computer program requires the following:

1. A reasonably quiet area to think
2. Skill in a computer language
3. A computer
4. Appropriate software

You can do it in your study or a public library. Get a bunch of people together with some venture capital or just a burning desire to show just how good and utterly cool y'all and y'all's ideas are, and you might end up being the next Microsoft or Google.

Creating a large commercial aircraft, in contrast, requires at least one hellaciously big factory (if not dozens of them) and a lot of expensive machinery. You can't do it in your study, or even in your garage (no matter HOW full of fancy tools your pegboard is).

So, Justice screwed everything up . . . and the fallout will likely screw a lot more things up.

Thursday, March 06, 2008

Arrogance on the right...

Let's get this straight... Kevin James thinks that after the results of the 2008 Republican primaries, he can dictate terms to John McCain on immigration?

Mr. James, it is very simple, the candidates who backed your position (particularly Hunter and Tancredo) lost, and were barely asterisks in the polling data. Even Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee (in the most disingenuous flip-flop of 2008) couldn't ride it to victory.

You are not in a position to dictate terms to John McCain. The voters in Republican primary elections from across the country have chosen him.

And if I were John McCain, I'd be pissed off, and would probably tell you where you could go.

The people or the courts?

Remember when the cry was "count every vote" back in those days so long ago? Well, it turns out that there are times when those who would say that don't practice what they preached.

For an example - take California, where the left now seeks to overturn a 2000 referendum about gay marriage. In other words, they are asking judges to overturn the result of democracy they don't like.

I'm sorry, but that is wrong. I hate the Westboro Baptist Church freaks, but I fucking hate people who want to tell me that my vote should not count if they don't like which way an election went. It really comes down to how this country is supposed to work.

Do we the people get a say in this matter, through elected representatives who have public deliberations on controversial issues, or are we merely selecting those who choose the people to be judges, acting in a capacity that amounts to a polite and gentle dictatorship?

This issue was bound to happen with judges who decided to make the laws from the bench. It could have been any number of issues that would have triggered this confrontation. Gay marriage just happened to be it.

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

The Democratic primary just went high-order...

Looks like the Democrats now have guaranteed themselves a nasty convention. Just looking at the maneuvering gives me the feeling that their convention will not turn ugly, it will start ugly.

And the superdelegates will have to decide it.

Meanwhile, McCain doesn't have to do that much...

Foolishness on the right...

It seems the GOP wants to remain the stupid party.

Never mind the fact that John McCain, a very vocal supporter of comprehensive immigration reform who has utterly rejected the Malkin-Tancredo hard line, has clinched the nomination. It seems that some conservatives will be pushing a hard line.

It has not won elections, it cannot even reliably win Republican primaries (only winning when there are multiple candidates supporting the approach favored by the majority of Republican primary voters in a given race).

Yet they insist on it. Conservatives are clearly out of touch with the GOP on this issue.

Friday, February 29, 2008

KC-X Winner

Northrop/EADS has just won the Air Force tanker contract.

Boeing is, of course, expected to file a protest.

I doubt that the protest will be upheld--after the hash the USAF made of the last go-around, the procurement office no doubt dotted every i, crossed every t, and minded every last p and q.

A Prince of a Soldier...

Prince Harry's combat career has come to an end.

In this case,it was due to some leaks from foreign media. The statement from the MoD says volumes.

It is well worth keeping in mind when one discusses leaks. Not only did a leak put Prince Harry at risk, it also now places the troops he fought alongside at risk. His early departure will mess with his unit, no matter how many contingency plans were made by his superiors.

Just whose side is the press on?

Thursday, February 28, 2008

OK, Ryan goes back to third, then...

Bill Hall got hurt this morning fielding grounders.

He wants to play today. I like the spirit, but I'd sit Hall, move Braun back to third, and stick Gabe Gross or Joe Dillon in left for today.

The Brewers start Cactus League baseball today. May they treat Athletics pitching like a bunch of baby seals... CLUB `EM!!!

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

LA micromanages pet owners,,,

It seems that Los Angeles has decided that they have time to micromanage pet owners.

I can accept the notion that a pet owner should be held responsible for the life, health, and happiness of the pet. But with that responsibility needs to come the right to make the decisions. Spaying/neutering is surgery, and surgery has risks.

I had a guinea pig who suffered an injured leg. To set said leg would have required that he be anesthetized. Only guinea pigs sometimes have adverse reactions to anesthesia, or at least they did back in the 1980s. That had to be taken into account.

But I had the right back then to make the calls. The City of Los Angeles clearly feels that they have the time and resources to boss pet owners around.

After all, it's not like Los Angeles didn't have bigger problems to deal with.

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Barack McGovern Obama...

Does the title sound harsh?

Watch this clip and decide for yourself.

Prima facie evidence that Barack Obama is just another McGovern Democrat. Unilateral disarmament, pacifism, and all that comes with it.

Comparing him to Neville Chamberlain earlier today is probably charitable.

More questions about Obama...

Listening to Barack Obama's recent comment on friendship with Israel, I can't help but think that we are getting an American Neville Chamberlain should he be elected.

The reason is because of who his advisors are.

Noah Pollack asks the legitimate question:
Does anyone think that if the time comes that Power has President Obama’s ear, she will advise him to do anything other than repudiate America’s greatest ally in the Middle East in favor of appeasing its greatest enemy? And here’s an even better question: Does Barack Obama have a single adviser who would tell him to do anything else?
Let's add this to that delegation to Syria led by Obama advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was most famous as Jimmy Carter's national security advisor when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan and the Iranians stormed our embassy (arguably the first overt signs of the danger we now face). Relying on Jimmy Carter's advisors should be a prima facie downcheck on national security.

This is not about Barack Obama's patriotism. As far as I know, he at least talks a good game, although methinks he doth protest too much. I certainly think it is fair to request that he explain why he accepted a contribution from a former member of Weather Underground, and that he be asked if he agreed with the comments of that supporter that were printed in the New York Times on 9/11.

He can complain about people raising this point, and can say he condemns their actions all he wants, but the fact remains that he took the money notwithstanding his objections to the Weather Underground's actions. So it seems that those actions of the Weather Underground bothered him, but not so much that he couldn't accept contributions from them. It's a lot like Michelle Malkin and some of the unacceptable rhetoric on immigration she looks the other way on.

I didn't give Malkin a pass on her questionable associations on immigration, and she's just a columnist. So why should I give Barack Obama a pass on his questionable associates when he wasn't to live at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW in Washington, DC?

Monday, February 25, 2008

The company you keep matters...

I admit it: I judge people by their associates.

In terms of the immigration hard-liners, I have explained how their associations render their position unsupportable.

Well, it seems Barack Obama got approved by one of the Weather Underground in his initial run for the Illinois state senate.

William Ayers made a very damning comment in the New York Times in my book:
''I don't regret setting bombs,'' Bill Ayers said. ''I feel we didn't do enough.''
The date of that article was September 11, 2001. The day terrorists flew airplanes into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon and only failed to hit the White House or Capitol due to the heroism of the passengers.

Obama needs to explain this.

Friday, February 22, 2008

Which is it?

Barack Obama's comments in the Democratic debate last night warrant one question:

Is he stupid, or did he make this up?

Confederate Yankee has a good initial take-down on these comments. More at Strata-Sphere as well.

Why is this important?

Think of it this way: If he gets taken in by a story like this, how likely is it that he will get taken in when he negotiates with Iran?

Thursday, February 21, 2008

ARRGH!!!!

How can Ned Yost NOT have the heart of his order decided?

It's really simple:
Weeks leads off, Hardy bats second, Ryan Braun hits third, Prince Fielder bats cleanup, Corey Hart hats fifth, Bill Hall bats sixth.

It's not that hard... unless you want Hall to bat fifth and Hart sixth...

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Yeah, sure...

Barack Obama tried to spin his wife's comments after some incoming fire.

Weak.

Sorry, I know it sounds harsh, but it's a weak explanation.

If she meant the politics, why didn't she say so? She got a graduate degree from Princeton, for crying out loud!

Once again, Barack Obama is treating Americans like they are stupid, and that we didn't really hear what we heard.

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Thwarting Democracy...

Democrats sure do not act Democratic at times. The only reason gay marriage is the law in Massachusetts is because a court imposed it on that state.

Now, in order to thwart an intelligence program that they lack the votes to stop, they decide to let the trial lawyers handle it, as the Wall Street Journal explains:
We asked one phone company executive what he'd do, after Friday's expiration, in response to a government request for cooperation. His answer was blunt: "I'm not doing it. If I don't have compulsion, I can't get out of court [and those lawsuits]. . . . I'm not going to do something voluntarily." Having talked to telecom executives, we can tell you this view is well-nigh universal.

Mr. Reyes claims that existing wiretap orders can stay in place for a year. But that doesn't account for new targets, which may require new kinds of telecom cooperation and thus a new court order. Mr. Reyes can make all the assertions he wants about immunity, but they are no defense against a lawsuit. For that matter, without a statute in place, even a renewed order by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is likely to be challenged as illegitimate. A telecom CEO who cooperates without a court order is all but guaranteed to get not merely a wiretap lawsuit, but also a shareholder suit for putting the company at legal risk.
George W. Bush wins two presidential elections. He is the commander-in-chief, and as such, is responsible for this country's security. His approach was explicitly chosen in 2004, during the war.

Instead, trial lawyers and activist judges will subvert the will of the people.

The need for more planes...

If there is any doubt about the Air Force's need for more planes, this should remove it:
Officials at Air Force Special Operations Command say it will become increasingly hard to keep two key aircraft flying: The MC-130H Combat Talon II, used to drop commandos into hostile territory and then retrieve them, and the AC-130U, a hulking gunship that flies low to deliver firepower, are both in need of substantial overhauls.

"We are literally flying the wings off these two airplanes," said Brig. Gen. Brad Heithold, director of the command's plans, programs, requirements and assessments office at Hurlburt Field, Fla.

There are only 20 Combat Talons and 17 AC-130Us. This small fleet is in heavy demand by special operations forces around the globe. In 2001, the AC-130Us flew just over 5,200 hours. The gunships logged more than 9,000 hours in 2007. It's comparable, Heithold said, to putting 70,000 miles on a car in a single year instead of a more normal 12,000 miles.
In a word: Yikes.

Time to do some earmarking, if necessary. Yes, I know: The trendy thing is to decry earmarks. But those used to buy more planes for the Air Force are going to be useful. It is also crystal clear that they are needed.

This needs to be an issue.

Friday, February 15, 2008

A satisfying endorsement...

Mitt Romney's endorsement of John McCain was very satisfying, if only because it sticks it to Mike Huckabee.

The fact remains that Romney's going to need more allies than he had in 2008. Endorsing McCain is one step in that direction. Now, he will have the support of a number of the Republican establishment. Regan was willing to show unity with Ford after 1976.

If Romney is to win in 2012, he also needs to make it very clear that he will not be pushed around, and that he will be able to stick it to folks who diss him. This he has done, and Huckabee knows it, which must be why he has to be the first high-profile case of Romney Derangement Syndrome.

All in all, the GOP will be Romney's after November 2008, no matter what. He's shown he is a team player, but he also is the best we're likely to get in 2012.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Does Obama think I'm stupid?

Barack Obama's speech last night really frosted me - the key part is below.
Obama noted that although George Bush and Dick Cheney won't be on the ballot this November--loud applause--"the Bush-Cheney war and the Bush-Cheney tax cuts for the wealthy, those will be on the ballot. If I am the nominee, John McCain won't be able to say that I ever supported this war in Iraq, because I opposed it from the start. Senator McCain said the other day that we might be mired for a hundred years in Iraq. A hundred years, which is reason enough not to give him four years in the White House."
Come to think of it, I have been bugged by his constant talk of "ending the war" - at least as it pertains to Iraq.

The argument we get from him is shockingly cynical. He seems to think that people who take the threat of Islamofacism seriously don't want the war to end.

His assumption, as reflected in his speeches and ads, couldn't be further from the truth.

I think everyone wants the war to be over. The real question is how the war ends. President Bush and John McCain want to win. A war that is won is a war that has, by definition, ended. Which, of course, Barack Obama doesn't see fit to acknowledge.

On the other hand, Obama says he wants to end the war. Yet he seems unwilling to win, and goes so far as to say we should not have fought:
We can't keep spending what we don't have in a war that shouldn't have been fought.
In other words, he wants to quit. This is where he thinks I am stupid or something. By quitting, America loses.

I don't like it when people treat me like an idiot. I do not care if it is Mike Huckabee playing his cynical Mormon-baiting games and then turning around to complain that ads about his record are negative, Michelle Malkin claiming that anything short of deportation is amnesty, environmentalists who claim that whales are more important than our sailors and the restrictions on ASW training they want are reasonable, or Barack Obama cynically claiming that those who want victory do not want to end the war. I tend to have a very visceral and negative reaction to that sort of thing.

That's why John McCain got my primary vote, and why he will probably get my vote in November.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

My vote, and why it went as it did.

It's official. This morning, I cast my vote in Virginia's Republican primary election. It will be said that I cast my vote for John McCain, and that is how it will likely be tallied. But in reality, it was more a vote AGAINST Mike Huckabee.

In some ways, I guess I was naive. I thought that Americans had gotten over religion as a barrier to the Presidency. That was arguably a question settled by John F. Kennedy.

I was wrong.

The New Republic seems to have hit the nail on the head:
Southern states have GOP primary electorates dominated by evangelical Christians, specifically by Southern Baptists. And many of those Southern Baptists are committed to blocking the ascension of a Mormon to the presidency.
This is not to say all of them are. Nancy French at Evangelicals for Mitt and John Schroeder at Article 6 Blog backed Romney. So did MacRanger, who I had the pleasure of talking with in a number of shows (albeit after a flirtation with Fred Thompson).

But there is just too much evidence that they are a minority among evangelicals:
* James Dobson's maneuvering, discussed earlier in this blog.

* The admission from Huckabee's research director that many evangelicals would grab on to an issue like "flip flop", but would really be voting against Romney because he was Mormon.

* The Vanderbilt study contains statistical backup of the anecdotal evidence.

* The increase in anti-Mormon sermons in the run-up to the South Carolina primary.

* The comments on Huckabee's official campaign blog.

The preponderance of the evidence points to anti-Mormon bias among evangelicals as a primary factor in the failure of Mitt Romney's 2008 campaign.

Sorry, but I feel like I've been given the finger by values voters. Never mind that I have a lot of agreement with them on a number of issues, they simply have decided that a Mormon should not be president, and have made it clear that any Mormon who is too uppity will be taken down.

To quote Mase from "Will They Die 4 You" on the South Park Chef Aid soundtrack:
[Someone] smack me, I'ma smack 'em back
If it lead to the guns, then that be that
So, I sent them a finger and a hearty "fuck you" in return. Spiteful? Yeah, to a degree, it was. And I think, given the evidence, I'm entitled to take a shot or two. But there's also a cold, rational way of thinking about this situation.

Quite frankly, I trust religious conservatives about as far as I can throw a Nimitz-class carrier. I'd rather have a moderate like McCain than a religious bigot like Huckabee. In the future, an endorsement from James Dobson and others of his stripe will be a negative in the primary - and I will keep options open, including sitting out a general election if I do not like the choices.

That's pretty much where I am now.

Friday, February 08, 2008

Noted, Dr. Dobson...

James Dobson certainly played things cagey prior to Super Tuesday.

He told people to vote against McCain on Monday. But he didn't bother to actually endorse anyone until after Mitt Romney withdrew from the race.

Never mind what Romney did in Massachusetts after gay marriage was imposed on that state. Never mind the way Romney had lived his life. Never mind that in his time as an ecclesiastical leader, he never took a penny (and probably made financial sacrifices in that role, unlike Mike Huckabee).

But it seems his wife worked to exclude Mormons from the National Day of Prayer events in 2004.

If it looks like anti-Mormon bias and sounds like anti-Mormon bias... then you ain't likely to go broke betting on anti-Mormon bias.

Yob tvoyu maht, Dr. Dobson. I ought to vote for McCain on Tuesday to spite your religiously bigoted ass.

Life's little frustrations...

Am I the only person who is utterly unhappy with the way that some of these variations on candy bars and sodas aren't around all the time?

For instance, the new Snickers Charged is a great candy bar. I'd like to be able to pick it up more often. But it is a "Limited Edition", meaning in a few months it's gone. The same fate befell several varieties of Mountain Dew: Live Wire (an orange-flavored Dew), Pitch Black (a very good grape-flavored Dew), and Game Fuel (which was quite cool as well).

I mean, c'mon, I'd like to be the "cool" uncle who provides these goodies for my nephews (when I am not teaching them how to throw a slurve and/or slider). Get them loaded up with the Snickers Charged and Dew... and then handing them back to my sisters.

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

Regain my trust, conservatives...

MacRanger is ready to sit out 2008. If he thinks this is going to get me to address his concerns, he is sadly mistaken.

So, I am going to set him straight here.

I was supporting Mitt Romney for the nomination - at least up until earlier this week when both the election results and the conduct of one of his supporters combined to make sitting out the GOP primary my only real option. I do not view the apparent nomination of John McCain with dread, and much of this is due to how conservatives have acted over the past two and a half years.

I am pro-life, and think abortion should only be allowed in cases of rape, incest, or when the mother faces imminent and unavoidable risk of death or grave bodily harm should the pregnancy continue. I generally support a flat-rate income tax. I'm in favor of a string national defense, and carrying the war on terror to victory. I think the federal government spends too much for too little return on social programs, and if they cannot show results (or improvement), then the funding needs to stop. I want something done about the future of Social Security and Medicare, which combine for about 15% of any given paycheck. I want the borders secure - and illegal immigration effectively controlled, but I recognize a big part of that is a guest worker program, and I do not think a 21st Century version of the Maginot line is the answer. I think judges should not make the law, nor should they lightly overturn decisions of the state legislature or Congress - this forms the crux of my support for various amendments to define marriage as one man and one woman. I also believe in live and let live.

I should fit in with conservatives. But recently, I cannot stand them. They have set litmus tests: To be a "true" conservative, you needed to toe certain lines on immigration and other social issues.

I don't. And for that, I've been called "traitor" based on the immigration debate, including just this past May by Paul J Cella of Redstate. That site has also at times hosted others who proclaimed those who disagreed on the Miers nomination party hacks who had "sold their souls" - all because they didn't join the neo-Borking.

As I said in my open letter to that site in October, I have better things to do than to politically empower those who view me as a "party hack" who has sold his soul and/or a traitor to this country. And those who do engage in such conduct, who decide to claim that those who disagree with them within the GOP have "sold out" or worse, should not be surprised when the recipients of such comments decline to support them in primary campaigns - or hold it against the candidates who the name-callers support (which may have cost Mitt Romney support in California).

This was even before the conduct of the latest primary. Between anecdotal evidence from Article6Blog.com, the admission of Huckabee's own research director (in an interview with Article6Blog), and a Vanderbilt University study make it very clear that a significant chunk of conservatives decided to disqualify arguably the best-qualified candidate for the nomination on the basis of his religion.

Of course, the denials of religious bigotry will come hard and fast. But they need to address the evidence. Which now leads me to ask a tough question: Can I trust the social conservatives - specifically the religious right - at this point in time?

Between their conduct on immigration and the treatment Mitt Romney got in the primary, the answer, at least in my mind, is a big NO. Trust, once gone, is going to be hard to restore.

The last straw in terms of the loss of trust is the fact that right now, if my three nephews were to ask, I would have to tell them that I do not think they can be President, despite what good they do in their lives. Furthermore, I would have to tell them that the reason is because of the church they belong to - one they have been raised in (and which several generations of my family have belonged to). One of these nephews has a father who is going to serve this country in the Global War on Terror (and there have been Mormons who have served our country in time of war since the Mormon Battalion was formed during the Mexican War, and which includes Medal of Honor winners like Bernard Fisher and Mervyn S. Bennion, as well as Lyman Swenson, commanding officer of USS Juneau during the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal).

I cannot work to politically empower people who seem to hold my faith in contempt. And, after the way the 2008 Republican primaries have evolved, it seems that the social conservatives largely hold Mormons in contempt. The Vanderbilt study reported that half of evangelicals would vote for a more moderate candidate if the conservative was Mormon.

Anti-Mormon bigotry was not the only reason Romney failed to win the nomination. But it was one of the primary reasons (the other was that talk show hosts like Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, Rick Roberts, and even Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh have manged to be bigger Bush-bashers than John McCain has ever been accused of being), and I think a lot of Bush loyalists who would otherwise have voted for him instead went with McCain.

How can conservatives regain my trust? They need to start by showing they can be team players. None of this stay home in 2008 nonsense. Otherwise, I will be more than willing to reciprocate for their lack of support. I don't like taking those measures, but it's what has to be done, I suppose - it seems to be the only thing they will understand.

Second, they need to make it clear that they understand that the Mormon-baiting used by Huckabee's supporters was wrong, and they need to make amends. This sort of thing is a two-way street, and if they want folks like me to back their preferred candidates, they need to be willing to do the same.

When Mark Levin and others are willing to tank an election, they are playing the worst form of "gun to the head" politics. To hold our troops hostage is despicable, and needs to stop. If anyone would deserve the label of "traitor", is it Levin and these others.

Third, accept the fact that people might be willing to disagree with you on principle and respect them for having principles, and guiding themselves by said principles. If you cannot prove pandering, don't make the charge.

That is how conservatives can start to regain my trust. It's up to them. But believe me, I will go independent after November 4 if I do not see progress on this. There is a price for things like failure and distrust - and I will impose it.

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Call it...

The GOP has apparently made its decision for the nomination.

In one sense, it is nice to see the talk-radio hosts and pundits ignored by the Republican primary electorate. But the problem is that a large chunk of the social conservatives, specifically the religious right, have now been outed as religious bigots.

Harsh? Just the harsh truth.

Just look at the stuff Article6Blog has unearthed in months of coverage. And while the anecdotes are not proof in and of themselves, they are backed up by the Vanderbilt study. So, fundamentally, there was a large portion of the conservative movement that decided to disqualify Mitt Romney due to where he went for church.

At this point, I will sit out the Virginia primary. The attack on McCain's service as a POW was way below the belt. In November, I expect McCain will be the GOP nominee I vote for. After then, it's about 90% likely that I will probably re-affiliate as an independent, joining AJ-Strata and The Anchoress, among others. I may be talked out of this, but it will take a LOT of doing by McCain's people.

That's just how it will be. I have things that I am very satisfied doing, and the time I will now have for them will be well-spent. Because, quite frankly, conservatives pushed me too far.

Monday, February 04, 2008

Illegal immigration issue a loser on the campaign trail...

From the Weekly Standard's CampaignStandard:

Lots of talk in the media about McCain vs. The Mighty Wombats of Talk Radio. Ask President Tancredo about that one. The talkers can raise an issue to prominence, they can entertain, but they do not really deliver actual votes. Sorry Rush.

Defeated Senate schemer Rick Santorum now campaigning for Mitt with a way-over-the-top robocall calling McCain nuts. A cheap shot from a prickly guy; a lot of people in GOP politics miss Santorum's voting record in DC, but very few miss him.

Which leads to the illegal immigration issue. From an election results perspective it appears hanging out with the anti-immigrant Bund seems to be a kiss of death. Tancredo: fizzled. Fred Thompson, endorsed by Iowa nativist Steve King; Kaput. Now Romney; on the ropes. I've never seen an issue with so much perceived heat, yet such short legs on Election Day.

Gee, why could that be?

Perhaps the Republican primary electorate has different views than the conservative intelligentsia?

Blown calls...

This last Super Bowl is a classic case of how bad calls can put you in a hole.

On 4th and 13, rather than risk a long field goal that was within his kicker's range, Bill Belichek decided to go for it, and failed. It manages to top "kick to Devin Hester" in terms of poor judgment (I suppose the special teams coordinator for the Broncos will feel better). The result: No margin for error late in the 4th quarter, when the Patriots surely needed it. As a result, they emulated the 1942 Bears, rather than at least forcing the Giants into overtime.

Today, some very bad calls by the right have put the GOP in a hole. For the GOP, the problem was they allowed certain people to set the bar to a well-nigh unreachable level for any electable candidate. Jeff Jacoby has a good column about that matter.

Patrick Ruffini explains the fallout. Short version: The purity wars left conservatives split several ways. The alleged heretics who disagreed on one or two issues (Miers and immigration were two biggies) who got pissed off enough at the hard-liners decided to back McCain - along with his natural base of military voters, moderate Republicans, and independents. The rest divided between Romney and Huckabee.

Huckabee's attack on Sean Hannity is a classic case of the purity war gone out of control. Since this is Mark Levin, it's more a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

But the price has been clear: People like AJ-Strata and The Anchoress had been reliably Republican voters during the Bush Administration. When the Congressional GOP decided to let Ingraham, Levin, Malkin, and Noonan do their thinking for them, they began to say, "What the hell?"

Even McCain's win is going to have some fallout - and largely because of Huckabee. Huckabee's staying in for one reason, and one reason only: Stopping Romney. Article 6 Blog has some good analysis, and more fallout.

The right has gone non-linear, and that means that the GOP is in a hole. Worse, the result could be a Democrat in the White House, possibly one who will owe his nomination to the organization who gave us the "General Betray Us" ad, or his primary opponent, who voted against condemning the ad.

Conservatives blew the calls in 2005 and 2006. The price for that remains to be seen. If they do end up benched (which a McCain nomination would be), it is a benching that they have earned. When people with you 80% of the time aren't willing to support your preferred candidates, you have problem. People in the center just are not comfortable voting for the GOP as a party, but will support specific candidates.

The right screwed up, and needs to own up.

Friday, February 01, 2008

Blade mostly beats the rap...

Wesley Snipes has largely beaten the rap.

Guess Blade proved he could handle those blood-suckers after all.

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

The conservative intelligentsia lost...

John McCain's victory in Florida is, for all intents and purposes, a defeat for the conservative intelligentsia.

The GOP could have done far worse.

Fundamentally, this is a win for those who got tired of the ultimatums from the hard-liners. Hugh Hewitt has, I think, hit on this, albeit unintentionally.

As I discussed earlier, these attempts to impose ideological conformity have split a number of people from the GOP. AJ Strata chose to remain independent. The Anchoress is going to re-affiliate as an independent.

The conservative intelligentsia just got sent a message with a 2x4 upside the head. If they are smart, they'll make peace on immigration - and cut a deal that both they and those alighted with McCain and Martinez on the issue can live with. A visible compromise on immigration will give the GOP a chance in the 2008 election.

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

State of the Union...

President Bush gave his last State of the Union address last night.

Overall, you have to admit that the man has produced results. This is something that he does not get credit for, particularly from the right.

As much as it may frost some conservatives to read this, President Bush managed to get a number of conservative reforms enacted in areas like education, health care, and medical research. He did it by being willing to give a little to get the first toeholds for these reforms - and for that, he took a lot of flak from those who decided that his actions were "unprincipled". I'd like to know just what the Ingraham/Malkin/Noonan/Tancredo axis managed to accomplish over the least eight years, other than showing how a few malcontents can wreck a governing coalition over the short term.

Mitt Romney has shown a lot of the same style that President Bush did - just look at the way he handled health care in Massachusetts. He found the problem, then tailored a solution to that problem - even though some think tanks gave him a lot of grief. Again, it is your choice - you can go with a think tank or pundit who can put stuff out in a vacuum, or you can trust someone who's on the ground and who has to deal with the problem.

Hopefully, the GOP can tell off the folks who caused us some very real problems ove rthe last three years - mostly by getting in the way of common sense solutions.

Monday, January 28, 2008

One tacky board game...

It seems the Kansas governor's son has designed a board game.

OK, some people are upset, but as far as I'm concerned, this is the kind of thing you should be willing to risk if you are willing to do the crime. It comes with doing the time.

Can't do the time, don't do the crime. Simple as that.

A new destroyer christened...

The USS Dewey was christened at Pascagoula, Mississippi.

This is the 55th Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. The good news is that they're pretty good ships. The bad news is that we probably could use a lot more than just the 62 we are building.

We just aren't building enough.

Plenty of pitching...

The Brewers have a surplus of starters as we near spring training for the 2008 season.

It's a good spot to be in. Someone's gonna need a starter - and the Brewers can easily afford to part with Claudio Vargas... maybe for a good backup catcher.

Friday, January 25, 2008

Take a hint, Republicans...

AJ-Strata has discussed a very good post in which the Anchoress takes the GOP to the woodshed, in particular, she goes after the purists.

Her money quote:
If Ronald Reagan were alive right now, watching the GOP split into these tantrum-throwing factions (whereby “perfection” is duly defined as “pro-life, pro-gun, pro-free-market, pro-worship, pro-Bush-doctrine, pro-tax-cut, pro-ship-back-all-illegals” and then, as each less-than-perfect candidate’s failure on one or more issues is noted, each are thus deemed unworthy of the support of the pristine and uncompromising “base”) I think he’d be disgusted with the lot of you.
I know how she is feeling, although I would also be very willing to mention the way that far too many remained quiet in the face of Huckabee's Mormon-baiting.

But let's be serious, when those who dissented from the base on the Harriet Miers issue got labeled party hacks who had sold their souls, whereas those who forced her withdrawal before there were even hearings to determine if she was qualified were principled. Then there was the labeling of those who supported the President's approach on immigration as traitors on multiple occassions.

Yeah, I can't blame AJ for remaining an independent,. I really cannot blame the Anchoress for her decision to hit the loud handle.

I've been close, too. If, for no other reason than comments like this one from Redstate:
Some vocal supporters and sycophants of the Romney campaign have deluded themselves into thinking that if a voter does not like Mitt Romney, he must be anti-Mormon bigots.
Yeah, sure - let's pay no attention to that Vanderbilt study that shows that some of the reasons he cited may have just been code words. Let's ignore the fact that Huckabee's own research director said that most evangelicals would hang their hats on "flip-flop" as their reason to vote for someone else, but that the real reason would be that Romney was Mormon. And it is hard to dismiss the apparent coincidence of Huckabee's strongest showings (winning Iowa, a close second in South Carolina) coming in states where the politics of religious identity came into play. And Huckabee clearly was playing those politics.

Sorry, but if it looks like anti-Mormon bigotry and sounds like anti-Mormon bigotry, there's a good chance that such bigotry is a factor.

Maybe the bigotry is over-emphasized, but the perception of bigotry exists. That perception is not just happening vis-a-vis religion, but it also seems to end up being perceived by Hispanics in the recent debates on immigration, and that has Karl Rove worried:

HH: You’re a student of American political history. Religion has played more of a role in the Republican primary than at anytime since 1960, or even 1928. Do you think, if Romney’s not the nominee, that the LDS, which is a significant portion in some states of the Republican values base, or on the other hand, Evangelicals who are literalists, are easily brought back in if their guy isn’t on the ticket?

KR: Oh, I think so. I do think so. And I think, look, again, it’s, they’re not drawn into politics simply because of the presence of Mitt Romney as LDS, though they applaud that. They’re brought in by the fact that he’s a person of deep personal faith, who has espoused socially conservative values, and fiscally conservative values, and has a life record that they find attractive. I don’t think it is the only thing, or even the principal thing that drives a lot of LDS to vote Republican. And so you need to be worried about does it look like if, does it look like 1928? I think it did hurt the Republican Party long term, that it looked like we were anti-Catholic. And so we’ve got to make certain that we don’t look anti-anything. We need to be for something. And to the degree that that happens, depending on what, you know, if a Huckabee doesn’t win, or Romney doesn’t win, or if their supporters who are going to feel…if they feel welcomed, are going to remain and be enthusiastic in the fall, particularly given a choice between our likely nominee, whoever that is, and the Democrats’ likely nominee, whom I suspect will be Hillary Clinton.

HH: We’ve got a minute left, Karl Rove. You warned about the cliff of turning Latino-Americans against the Republican Party. Have we gone over that? Or are we dancing on it? Or have we drawn back from it?

KR: Well, we’re dancing on it. I don’t think we’ve drawn back, and I don’t think we’ve gone over the cliff. But we are, we are at a point where we’d better be very careful about this. I understand people’s deep concerns about securing our borders, and about being overwhelmed by a wave of illegal immigration, and about giving amnesty, which is the forgiveness of an offense without penalty. But we have to be very careful about not looking like we…look, we did this once before. We did this in the 1920’s when Republican congresses and a Republican president passed legislation that essentially shut the door to Jews and Italians coming into the United States. And we suffered for thirty years, forty years as Jews and Italian-Americans remembered sort of the closing of the door to people who looked and acted and thought like them, and came from the same part of the world originally in order to become Americans. We’ve got to be very careful about that.

Will the GOP take the hint? The party's future may depend on it. Folks like AJ-Strata, Anchoress, and I ought to be folks the GOP should count on for votes at least. AJ has, however, chosen to remain unaffiliated, the Anchoress is going to go back to being unaffiliated, and I have been considering it.

The GOP needs to think about its course very hard.

Suspension lifted...

Hugh Hewitt has earned his way OFF the suspension I imposed earlier.

The short version is that Hugh Hewitt has, in recent months, convinced me that he at least deserves a link from this blog. Perhaps the turning point was when he was willing to stand up and call out Huckabee over his Mormon-baiting.

Now, it remains to be seen if the rest of Townhall.com can do the same.

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

al-Qaeda's Nemesis: The Pointy-Haired Boss

The Army's Combating Terrorism Center at West Point has studied captured documents from Iraq, and has some interesting things to say. (Hat tip to Richard Saunders at Wild Turkeys.)

This paragraph jumped out at me:

"These documents tell us more about AQI than they do about Iraq," said Brian Fishman, an associate at the West Point center and co-author of its Sinjar analysis. "When you've got hundreds . . . entering the country with different skill sets and different intentions, you have to build a bureaucracy to use your resources efficiently.


(Emphasis added.)

Well, I've been working in corporate America too long, so here's my vision of a young al-Qaeda manager's annual review:

"Abdul, I see that you are not mentoring and grooming enough fedayeen to enter into management roles. Now, we are under a fatwa that requires us to engage in a broader, more inclusive search for managerial talent . . . "

"Selim, the fedayeen I recruit on Monday are going to be blowing themselves up on Wednesday! In case you missed it, I'm running the al-Anbar Martyrdom Department, and we've always had extremely high turnover, it kind of comes with the mission statement! How in the hell am I supposed to mentor some idiot from West Bumf***, Syria--who probably can't even read the Qu'ran, fer Allah's sake--when he's going to be DEAD in a couple of days?"

"Abdul, hey, I know it's frustrating, but you've got to see it from my side of the jebel. I have to keep al-Zawahiri happy. Ever since he read Deming--may that infidel dog roast slowly over a fire of goat feces--he's been going on about 'Total Quality Jihad' and 'suicide vest quality circles,' and don't get me started about how he wants 'proactive efforts to gain and leverage mindshare.' Then there's the 'Allah Akhbar' web portal project . . . I mean, the guy wants to use Java, when all the smart money is going to Ruby on Rails . . . doesn't ANYONE in the executive cave ever read the trade journals anymore? Anyway . . . look, if you find a really smart guy, could you try to talk him into applying for the management track?"

"Selim, I did that--HR shot him down for being a Alawite."

"Oh, yeah, I forgot." (Pause) "Did you find another job for him?"

"Selim, when I said 'HR shot him down,' I wasn't using a figure of speech."

"Bummer."


And that will be the downfall of al-Qaeda and Islamism in general: they will gradually become just another sclerotic bureaucracy managed according to the buzzword du juor.

Monday, January 21, 2008

The 2008 Brewers...

OK, let's get away from politics and go to what is important.

Baseball.

The Brewers have a good lineup, and the future looks bright, too. The second and third items are very exciting. The first item also speaks volumes - they are looking to make the post-season and win it all.

On the one hand, it's a pain. On the other, it's nice to see the Brewers get ready to kick some serious ass this year.

State of 2008...

Ed Morrissey has a good run-down on the situation.

What is most notable is that the hard-line candidates, Huckabee (well, at least given what he is promising and his use of the politics of religious identity) and Thompson, have failed.

In other words, the GOP has spoken, and the zampolit wing has been rejected. The three left standing are all capable individuals who can serve honorably in the

That is the good news.

The bad news: There will be a heck of a fight. The purists will sit on their hands, no matter which of the three remaining are left.

The GOP will be better off without them.

Thursday, January 17, 2008

The decisive battle won?

The anti-war movement has retreated from its efforts to de-fund Iraqi campaign, which might not sound like much, but this is probably a sign that the decisive battle may be decided soon.

Let's lay this out very clearly: Our troops were winning on the battlefield. The terrorists have no hope of forcing us out. Their only hope was for the anti-war movement here to force us to prematurely quit.

And the anti-war movement has failed, and in their failure, they have tied the Democrats to working for defeat. Now,they are trying to keep us from a "long-term presence" in Iraq. They are clearly in a retreat, and they will not have the votes to override a veto. Nor can they stop President Bush from making an agreement without looking like they are undercutting the troops.

George W. Bush may have just managed to win the decisive battle in the war on terror.

The Air Force's Plea...

The Air Force Magazine editorial for January is something we need to heed, and soon.

The Air Force's planes are getting old. The KC-135s are over 45 years old. Most of their air crews are younger than that. The F-15s are also old. The average age of an Air Force plane is climbing.

Two planes need urgent replacement: The KC-135s, and the C-130Es. The former could have been replaced by KC-767s long ago, but Congressional objections killed that. The latter is being replaced all-too-slowly by the new C-130J.

Congress needs to get to work. Fast. We got sidetracked earlier this decade due to the 9/11 attacks. That stuff happens. But the peace dividend is now going to cost us a lot of money to set things right. It may have already cost our military lives.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Comeback Mitt?

Mitt Romney has pulled off a comeback with his victory in Michigan.

The good news here is the failure of Huckabee's politics of religious identity.

The Democrats also have some problems. If Hillary wins, she will not only face an energized GOP, but there will also be an arguably lackadaisical turnout for her among the hard-core left.

The GOP may have a shot at the Presidency and the House. The Senate is going to be tough.

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Olbermann's disgusting accusation...

Keith Olbermann is someone from whom the despicable can be expected. But his comments about the video of the Iranian harassment of our naval vessels are a new low.

It's stunning that some in this country are willing to take the word of a regime run by a Holocaust denier who has openly expressed his desire to wipe an American ally off the map over the military that protects his right to make such outrageous comments. But it should not be surprising. Olbermann's done this before, and he will do it again.

But it says a lot that Olbermann tossed his insult from the safety of his studio. I wonderifhe would have the guts to say it to Admiral Mullen's face.

Monday, January 14, 2008

Victory in sight?

The events of the last year have some people talking about victory. One of them is the President of the United States.

Money quote:
But I want to tell you what the history will say. The history will say, it was when you were called upon, you served, and the service you rendered was absolutely necessary to defeat an enemy overseas so we do not have to face them here at home. (Applause.) It will say loud and clear that this military, comprised of brave men and women who sacrificed on behalf of a noble cause called peace -- the men and women of this military understood that we're in an ideological struggle; that we're facing cold-blooded murderers who kill the innocent to achieve their hateful vision of a future.
This is the question. Our troops understand. But which politicians understand? Listen to those who are running for President, and think this over from now until November.

Looks like we need more Raptors...

While most F-15s are in good enough shape to keep serving, I think it's time for Congress to write Lockheed a check for at least another 100 Raptors, and probably more.

The R&D costs have already been recouped, and it's also obvious that the F-15s are aging, and arguably not well. The F-22's a good plane, and it's only $116 million per plane on fly-away costs. For a Congress that can spend billions in earmarks each year, certainly an earmark for another 100 F-22s isn't unreasonable, is it? Maybe two runs of 100 would not be a bad idea.

There ain't no such thing as too many Raptors.

I mean, if you're gonna pork, make it useful pork!

Thursday, January 10, 2008

My beef with Huckabee explained...

Article 6 Blog has done perhaps the best coverage of religion as an issue in the 2008 race for President.

That is why this post from that blog is worth reading.

The scary thing is that Huckabee may very well succeed in at least knocking Mitt Romney out of the race. Unlike McCain, who has earned some big-time credentials on issues by doing things like supporting the surge when the surge wasn't cool, and backing stuff he believes in despite flak from friends and foes, or Giuliani, who has perhaps the better turn-around and crisis management track record than Romney, Mike Huckabee's not even showing that he is really capable of defending his positions. Instead, his campaign has been on the grounds he is a "Christian leader" and he has literally claimed that Romney's efforts in the past to point out his track record have been unfair.

Hmmm... I don't know about you, but I find something very suspicious about that.

I don't think it is unfair to compare job performance. It is not unfair to bring up a person's track record. But running against a guy's religion is dirty pool. Had this been a real job, rather than a political race, they would face some problems under the Civil rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion.

And therein lies the reason Mike Huckabee is not going to get my vote under any circumstances. He was, for all intents and purposes, a coward. He refused to defend his track record or his positions on fiscal and foreign policy issues. He chose to instead make an issue out of Mitt Romney's religion. A man that dishonorable should not be President of the United States.

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

New Hampshire... what it means...

Mitt Romney finished second in a clean fight in New Hampshire. In this case, McCain won independents by a wide margin (a 3:2 ratio to Romney), and that was what gave him about a five-point win. Mitt exits with an overall lead in delegates and having come off two very strong debate performances.

The independents are the real story. They apparently went over to the Dem primary in New Hampshire, after leaning Dem in Iowa as well. In New Hampshire, this was apparently by a 59-41 margin.

How big is that? Look at the 2004 exit polls. George W. Bush was just about even in the independent voters (48% to John Kerry's 49%). In 2006, the exit polls show the GOP got blown out by a 57-39 margin.

The independent voters in New Hampshire tilted the race to John McCain. The message sent to the GOP is pretty simple: In 2005-2006, you let the right go too far. They want to win the war on terror, but they do not want a hard line on immigration or most other social issues.

Will the GOP listen? They have to, if they want to win elections.

EDIT: I cannot find the 59-41 source... but I did find CNN's exit polling data for the Democratic and Republican primaries. The Democratic primary electorate had about 44% of independents. The GOP electorate came in with 34% independents.

Look at the total turnout. 279,276 people voted in the Dem primary. 228,531 voted in the GOP primary. That means about 122,760 Independents voted for one of the Dems compared to 77,690 who voted for one of the Republicans. That's a 61.2 to 38.8 blowout.

My initial recall (which I couldn't find) was optimistic.

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Risks and Rewards...

Mitt Romney is in a bit of a bind.

The GOP primary electorate is bound and determined to hold a certain position on immigration. This position, though, does not seem to play well when it comes to the general election.

In essence, to secure the nomination, he may have to cripple his chances in the general.

It's not a good spot to be in. In essence, those who have demanded a hard line on immigration have now effectively ruled out John McCain, who at this point would be as much an automatic winner in the general as Rudy Giuliani, by virtue of holding Ohio (Giuliani would flip New Jersey and Pennsylvania).

What is Romney's path? Michigan might be the opening, but it is far less certain, due to the influence of the labor unions.

Monday, January 07, 2008

The type of change I want to see...

AJ-Strata has an excellent post on the changes we need in this country.

1. I want to see the country get behind our troops fully - that means supporting them until the victory is won.

2. I want to see an end to a lot of this bickering. Get some forward progress - start trying to solve the problems instead of insisting upon ideologically pure solutions.

3. I want the ugliness gone - that includes the shit Mike Huckabee pulled in Iowa (the politics of religious identity), and will probably pull in South Carolina as well.

4. I want terrorists to get their asses kicked. Hard. I want Gitmo running, and I want those terrorists talking. And I really don't care if some al-Qaeda thug gets roughed up.

5. Oh, and cutting tax rates would be nice, too.

6. Oh... and let's make sure our troops get the new gear they need, as well.

Romney coming back?

It looks like Romney had a very good weekend at both debates, coming across as the winner, despite being ganged up on in the first debate. Plus, there's the small matter of winning the Wyoming conventions.

When all is said and done, he will emerge from New Hampshire maintaining the overall lead in delegates at worst. McCain's ability to pull in independents is likely to have Mitt in second place.

Now, I do not agree with all of Mitt's positions. In fact, I share AJ's concerns about his pandering to the Tancredo wing of the GOP. But he is the best all-around candidate I have seen on the GOP side.

Mitt Romney is a lot like George W. Bush in his positions (at least aside from immigration) - but George W. Bush sucked at communicating with the American public, and it cost him in 2005 and 2006 when conservatives listened to the siren song of those who demanded ideological purity and left him hanging.

This should be a no-brainer...

The Supreme Court is going to hear the case of one Patrick Kennedy (NOT the Congressman, just to make it clear), on appeal from the Louisiana Supreme Court. If the nine justices have two neurons to rub together among them, they will uphold the lower court's ruling.

Mr. Kennedy, you see, raped his eight-year-old stepdaughter. And, after he was tried and convicted by a jury of twelve good citizens, he was given the death penalty, in accordance with the laws passed by the elected representatives of the people of the state of Louisiana. A second person, Richard Davis, was given the death sentence for a similar crime involving a 5-year-old girl.

The stakes are high, as is the matter with any Supreme Court case. I think that prosecutors should have the option to seek the death penalty in these cases.

Hopefully, the Supreme Court will see things this way, so that Louisiana can carry out the sentences passed down by its courts. Might I suggest they call the GRU and ask to borrow their blast furnace?

Friday, January 04, 2008

The Dishonorable Defeat of Mitt Romney...

There really is no other word to describe the defeat of Mitt Romney in Iowa except dishonorable. When you take a look at WHY people voted Huckabee, it came down to the fact that Huckabee was "Christian" and Romney was allegedly not (never mind that the church is called the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints).

Huckabee did not win Iowa on the strength of his stands on various issues (because his foreign policy and fiscal stances are closer to the Dems than to the GOP), nor his track record on social issues (because, if that were the case, one would realize that Romney not only left very little daylight between his positions and Huckabee's, but he arguably faced a major crisis in that matter). He certainly couldn't boast of accomplishments comparable to Romney's before entering political office (saving the 2002 Olympics and turning around several companies, not to mention helping to launch companies like Staples).

His victory was arguably due to his playing of the religion card against Mitt Romney. Article 6 Blog has documented a lot of this. What is most damning are the comments left on his official site's blog by his supporters. It is very telling that he could not have exercised some very basic moderation of his blog. In fact, he certainly seemed to be willing to turn a blind eye to the Mormon-baiting, as long as he won Iowa.

Equally sickening is the fact that conservatives of a certain stripe rewarded Huckabee for this. In 1994, Newt Gingrich expressed outrage when Romney was attacked by the Kennedy family over his religious beliefs. Today, there is the sound of silence from the right as this dishonorable conduct is turned on a Republican. Then again, after the Harriet Miers nomination and the right's embrace of Ramos and Compean, I find myself not so surprised.

Mike Huckabee's dishonorable tactics make it impossible for me to vote for him. Indeed, if it is a choice between Huckabee and Obama, I'll vote for Obama - because here's just no difference between the two on the big issue that matters, and because I can no longer in good conscience empower a political movement that rewards dishonorable conduct. Obama would be a mess, but at least he is honorable. something I cannot say about Huckabee.

Furthermore, Fred Thompson is also unacceptable to me unless he is willing to fire Cyndi Mosteller, who has engaged in similar Mormon-baiting against Romney. If Fred Thompson is honorable, he'll stand on his positions, and NOT resort to Mormon-baiting. Otherwise, I'll find better things to do than cast my vote for him.

Thursday, January 03, 2008

GOP says "No Mormons Need Apply"

Huckabee's lead in Iowa speaks volumes about what a significant chunk of the GOP believes, and quite frankly, it is ugly.

In essence, a candidate with a far superior resume lost because an opponent used the politics of religious identity. In essence, when he couldn't really attack Romney's record, his resume, Huckabee pretty much attacked his religion.

It's sickening. It is also a very sobering moment for me. We just saw someone who was at ground zero of the marriage debate and who stood up against human cloning and who did so in a statesmanlike manner get defeated largely because of his religion. Don't take my word for it - see Huckabee's supporters and staffers.

This is a fence that may be unmendable.

EDIT: Alexham at Redstate now demands that we be nice to Huckabee.

Sorry, but I see no reason to be nice to someone whose only message was "Vote for me because the other guy's a Mormon."

Why should I support someone who views me as a devil-worshiping cultist, Alexham? Why should I not sit out or vote for the Democrat (should Obama be the nominee)? At least Obama's not only honest, but the defeat of Huckabee may prompt the GOP to finally do something about the ugly side of certain SoCons.

And this is not just because I am a Mormon. It is because Huckabee's tactics are beneath contempt - either the First Amendment's protection for freedom of religion and Article VI of the Constitution mean something, or they do not. And it is obvious that SoCons seem to have a very selective respect for those provisions.