Daily Archives: May 10, 2012
The topic of Barry Oh’s! academic records, transcripts, standardized test scores, papers, and the likes are hermetically sealed and somehow unavailable to the public despite the theory that all information wants to be free.
I mean pirated DVD copies of the new Avengers flick were probably for sale on the streets of Beijing before it was in U.S. release, yet the President’s records are somehow absolutely leak-proof. That’s dedication, my friends. Either that or David Axelrod had everything destroyed.
But why would the President’s records need to be sealed in the first place? Simple: think Elizabeth Warren.
Warren is finally getting the vetting she deserves and as Warren Zevon would say, it ain’t that pretty at all. Affirmative action hire? Check. Sketchy scholarship? Check. Empirical emptiness? Check.
Could Barry Oh’s! record reveal the same?
Enjoy every sandwich.
Dick Morris is sometimes accused of being like a stopped clock; right a couple of times a day, regardless.
From his article Romney Should Win in a Landslide:
The journalists in the mainstream media, who are not politicians and have never run campaigns, do not realize what is happening. The Democrats, as delusional in 2012 as they were in 2010, are too much into their own euphoria to realize it. But America is sharply and totally rejecting Obama and all he stands for and embracing Romney as a good alternative. While few are saying these words, they are the truth.
And the mainstream media is still wearing sackcloth and ashes regarding Dick Lugar’s loss to Richard Mourdock… foreshadowing?
As long as the Morris article is one of those two times a day he’s right—and Morris offers plenty of evidence as to why it might be so—I’m cool.
Peter Suderman at Reason gives a world-class review of The Escape Artists: How Obama’s Team Fumbled the Recovery.
Despite the quasi-provocative title—designed, no doubt to help the book sell—Suderman characterizes the effort (from Noam Scheiber, a writing worker from The New Republic) as a hagiography and an apology for the Administration writ large.
The major players are all professional Democrats and liberals of one stripe or another. Scheiber’s detailed, thoroughly reported account describes their efforts at responding to the faltering economy while pursuing the rest of Obama’s ambitious agenda. In the process, Scheiber takes as a given his protagonists’ centrality to the success or failure of the economy.
It is an assumption that his subjects share. Their endless infighting and many personal differences are what drive the book and furnish its occasional bursts of dramatic urgency. But they are united in a conviction that the system is broken—and that only they know how to fix it.
Of course, they didn’t fix it, based in large part to the oversized and totally unwarranted hubris of the President. Meanwhile, the President continues to blame George W. Bush.
The older I get, the more I see humility as an essential characteristic, something that’s missing from the I, me, my of this Administration.
Read the whole thing. It’s a great review.
Obama once said his Christian faith prevented him from supporting homosexual marriage.
Now, he’s flipped and does. But that presents a few disconnects.
Is it uncouth to point out that in 2004, when it was politically convenient for him, Obama argued that his religious faith dictated that marriage should be between a man and a woman? Now his faith dictates the opposite. What has changed during the last eight years isn’t the Golden Rule or the words and teachings of Jesus, the New Testament, or the Hebrew Bible; it is what is most politically expedient for a certain politician from Chicago.
Here are some other possible explanations: (Christian) faith no more? Full-blown cognitive dissonance? Maybe an extra-Biblical divine revelation?
And what does the President think Jesus Christ would have said about homosexual marriage?
There are those who think Richard Lugar’s primary loss Indiana Treasurer Richard Mourdock is a bad thing. The worriers are Democrats, the traditional media, and some in the Republican establishment. These individuals worry that Lugar’s loss smacks of ‘polarization’ or ‘partisanship’ or the dysfunction of Washington politics.
But why was Lugar’s primary loss really so disheartening to these people?
Because they feel the Congress should offer a non-stop, feel-good, bipartisan parade of legislation passed to protect the earth, help the poor, save the children (except the unborn), care for the elderly, protect the banks, give minorities a leg up, aid and assist Cherokee women, eradicate Christianity from the public square, create or save green energy, jobs, and electric cars, improve education, implement arms control, sustain Head Start, provide free health care, and much, much more while making America safer in every way, reducing our carbon footprint and the federal debt, and enhancing our freedoms.
And if these things aren’t happening—or happening fast enough—it is evidence of the impotence of normal Washington politics, as is the aforementioned primary win—in a rout, the scariest signal to the politicos—of Richard Mourdock.
I must draw upon the words of Dear Reader, so I can be perfectly clear: as I stand here today, we are at a crossroads of history and the real challenge the American people need Washington to address is not more legislation, but rather, how to unwind the unintended consequences of the untenable and unsustainable financial, moral, regulatory, and national security positions that have put into practice by those like Richard Lugar and the rest of the almost-permanent political class.
But where to start in the great unwinding? I’d suggest with appropriations. After all, if it ain’t funded, it ain’t.