Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Endorse Saxton?

Ok – Well I have waited a few days for The Oregonian to retract their endorsement of Saxton. Wow, I guess they really mean it. I think this means we don’t have to worry about global warming anymore now that hell has just frozen over.

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Lieberman at 17

Lets just get it straight for the record: I am going out on a limb now and saying I don’t think the Democrats will take control of congress in the upcoming elections. Why? Read on.

The last I heard, Joe Lieberman is up by 17 in Connecticut. This is really pretty astonishing. I seem to remember quite a bit of hubbub when his party leadership turned their back on him, supporting Lamont in the primary. When Lamont won that primary, there were endless sound bites about this really sending a message about the mood on the Iraq war.

Well what now? Obviously the only message that can be drawn here is that the Democratic leadership was way out of touch with their plan to “off” Lieberman.

What does this mean in the larger sense? Frankly I have said it all along. I don’t think there is any parallel whatsoever between now and 1994. The year the Republicans won control of the house and Senate for the first time in 40 years. I don’t think the Democrats will seize control of both houses. What were some of the differences between then and now?

1) One big issue had aroused a lot of Democrats and Republicans alike. That issue was the “Assault Weapons” ban. It passed by two votes in the house and only with major back room arm breaking. Bill Clinton himself has said that issue cost the Democrats congress.
2) The Republicans then had a far better wedge issue then than the Democrats do now. That issue was National Health care. The closest thing the Democrats have now is the Iraq war. With health care the Republicans could quite clearly take a stand, and they did, they clearly said they would vote against it if it ever came up. For all their posturing there isn’t that tone at all from the Democrats on the war. Precious few of them are willing to say they would cut off funding tomorrow. When a bill came up for that recently in the Senate I think it got one vote. However dissatisfied the American people are with the war, the Democrats don’t seem very willing to act on what they say. The so called “cut and run” strategy.
3) All the major News outlets are pretty much in consensus. The Democrats will seize control of the House and Senate come November. Nancy Pelosi is already considering her Presidential run. This is the exact opposite of 1994. Back then the only person I know of who called it right was Bob Novack on “The Capitol Gang”. Why does this mean anything? Well, the out of power party typically does well in mid terms because generally it is thought the base really shows up. I don’t think this is the case here. The base showed up for the Republicans because of ire at National Health care and the Assault Weapons ban.
So that’s my analysis. While I do think there is malaise about the Iraq war, I don’t think that translates into “the Democrats have a solution”. I don’t think the Democrats even believe it. If they did they would be running on the issues rather than Mark Foley, they wouldn’t need him. My guess is the Republicans will hold on to their majorities in both houses by a slim margin.

Friday, October 13, 2006

Food Stamps in Four Hours

From the LA Times:

KMEX helps an effort to get Latino immigrants to apply for food stamps. An O.C. group takes it a step further and offers a class on how to do it.

This one just says it all. I couldn’t find a better primer on what’s wrong with our country. Some quotes:

“Advocates say immigrants, if here illegally, are also worried about being deported if they apply for food stamps.”

Well, right there you know they are talking about people who havnt been in this country too long. They still think logically, like “Gee, if I am here illegally, breaking the law, maybe it wouldn’t be too smart to try and get free stuff from all those chumps who are working”. Sadly, they will soon learn the idiocy of the American system and the abuse of the taxpayer, and profit from it!

“Other immigrants say they were simply embarrassed."The Mexican man is macho. He doesn't want to come to this country and beg," said Alfonso Chavez, the Community Action Partnership's outreach coordinator.”

God forbid we should maintain common decency, like its sort of crappy to come to a country and then go on the dole. “Hey, here I am, now I can rest and all you fools paying taxes, go out and work a little harder”

“In 2004, Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service and the Mexican Embassy agreed to jointly disseminate brochures and create the public service announcements.”

Thank you Ag department. We are so glad you are working to serve foreign nationals. Hey, if you get a chance, could you possibly spare some time to serve those who are actually paying for all this crap? I mean seriously, if you are giving away taxpayer money, is it really necessary to go and inform people “hey! Come over here to get the free crap all those idiots who pay taxes are giving you”.
Its not hypocrisy

Can anyone imagine the furor that would be unleashed if a Republican group went around outing Democrats who were gay? Ones first impression might be there is nothing more definitive of hypocrisy than this, the lefts most recent action. However one would be wrong to think such a thing.

A look at past events:

Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas – Hill follows Thomas, her boss, from job to job and then low and behold, as soon as he is up for a Supreme Court position out come the horrible tales of sexual harassment, a hitherto unknown term. “Why he joked about a pubic hair on a Coke can, and recounted plots of porn movies……in the office!!!!!” Oh my God, how horrible we were all told. Joking about pubic hair? Porn movies? This will not do said groups like NOW, Emily’s list etc. “Women never lie about this sort of thing” we were all told.

William French Kennedy Smith and Uncle Ted Kennedy – A few years later, accused of rape by a woman after a night carousing at a bar. “Yes, this is a tragic event for the Kennedy’s. Rather than focus on this one event, “we should remember what the Kennedy’s have done to advance women’s rights,” said the same crowd. Obviously accusations of rape pale by comparison to accusations of follicle contamination of a carbonated beverage by the NOW crowds yardstick.

Of course then there was Bill Clinton. Numerous rape and harassment accusations were levied against him. None of these were any less credible than Anita Hill’s horrible and tragic tales. Again, the groups for women’s rights stood on principle and shut up. No protests, no marching with the accusers up the Capitol Hill steps. The women were all lying we were told.

And of course there was former Democratic congressman Gerry Studds – Actually had sex with a minor while in office. Was proud of it. Held up as a pioneer of gay rights until his retirement several terms later.


Yet in the end it really is not hypocrisy, for you see none of these groups care one whit about the constituencies they purport to represent, or abbreviate in their acronym. In fact they are quite true to their cause. For none have principle, charter or creed though they would like you to think they are stalwarts of such things. No, in the end what they are is quite clear. They are simply stooges, henchmen of standard partisan politics and nothing more. They dress themselves up in vestments of righteousness yet they care about nothing other than acquiring power. To win ultimate power they will sink to absolute depths. The only mystery here is how anyone can support this sort of thing and look at themselves in the mirror.

Tuesday, October 03, 2006

Check the Hang Time

So now we have the latest in ludicrousness – calls for the Speaker of the House to resign over the Foley dirty email silliness. This gets into one of the things that really peeves me about media bias. I do believe the media does tend to report on virtually everything at one time or another, where the bias comes in is the hang time they give it.

Lets look at the record: Democratic Representative Gary Condit, accused of murdering Chandra Levi. If anyone had called for the house democratic leader to resign the press would have paid it no mind. Senate Majority Leader, Republican Trent Lott makes some silly comment at Strom Thurmands (former Dixiecrat who did at one point support segregation) retirement and he gets drummed out of his leadership position. Why? Because the press gave so much hang time to those calling for his ouster. Literally weeks after Lott is removed from the leadership Democratic Senator Chris Dodd speaking at an honorarium for Senator Robert Byrd (Democrat and former Klansman) says he believed in everything Byrd ever did and would have followed any lead he ever took. The press buries it on page nine and never reports on it again.

So now we have Nancy Pelosi (House Minority Democratic Leader) calling for Speaker of the House Hastert to resign. The press dutifully reports these serious and grave concerns. A more ridiculous proposition could not be found, and if Hastert were a Democrat it would be treated with that level of seriousness. To the press, Nancy Pelosi is the picture of reasoned and serious debate. It will be treated as a page one issue, worthy of consideration, and hopefully given enough hang time to have effect.

Bottom line – Foley wrote some dirty emails to a minor. That’s bad, his resignation is appropriate. Foley is clearly wrong and possibly evil, but in the end he did act with more honor than Condit, or Dodd or Democratic Rep. Gary Studds ( who actually had sex with a minor congressional pagee and refused to resign) ever did. He resigned immediatly

Just because his email writing was foul, that does not mean Nancy Pelosi should now be thought of as a serious individual. The press should give appropriate hang time to her concerns. It is unlikely that they will.