Michigan Oracle

Need a Job?

2010-11-22T18:35:00.004-05:00

TSA Announces Reforms in the Wake of Public Outcry

2010-11-19T23:54:00.006-05:00

(Washington, November 19, 2010) In the wake of widespread public outcry over intrusive pat-downs and explicit body scans at the nations airports, the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) has announced several reforms effective immediately.

First, in an effort to reduce complaints and save money, the TSA has decided to employ prostitutes as screeners. Studies have shown that many prostitutes are either sentenced to community service or have been required to show a legal source of income in order to get their children back from foster care. Those needing to perform community service do not need to be paid, and the others can work for minimum wage without benefits. Furthermore, owing to their skills and experience, it is expected that the result will be a reduction of complaints from up to 50% of the population.

Another set of reforms comes in response to complaints from Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Because of objections based on Muslim sexual modesty, Muslims will henceforth be exempt from all pat-downs and body scans. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs stated the President expects the reforms to reduce terrorism by showing sensitivity and understanding toward Muslims.

All other passangers must still be screened.

The Great Recession Continues (and will continue)

2010-07-23T20:10:00.005-04:00

I haven't posted in nearly a year. But Charles Krauthammer's comments on Ben Bernanke’s testimony on Capitol Hill have caused me to speak out:

In a decade and a half we’ve gone from "irrational exuberance" to "unusual uncertainty.” And to translate from Federal Reserv-ese, what was heard on Wall Street was him saying:

I don't have a clue what’s happening in the markets. I don't know what our economy is doing, [and] if it’s going to expand -- at what rate. But I stand ready to do anything I need to do -- although I have no idea what that’s going to be and whether I really have any arrows left in my quiver.

Now look at what Steve Wynn said about the Obama administration:

Lesson: The man (or woman) who says, "Fiscal, monetary, regulatory, and tax policy will be henceforth be 'X', and will remain 'X' for the foreseeable future; and of course, 'X' is reasonably business-friendly" will be able to end the recession and usher in a new era of prosperity. (Wynn gaffed the Tocqueville quote in the video, but no matter).

Otherwise, who in his right mind will invest in this climate of uncertainty?

Of course, the Fed can still do some things on the monetary side, but for Heaven's sake, what is so difficult to understand about the idea that nobody is going to invest for growth when fiscal, monetary, regulatory, tax policy is in perpetual flux?

We're asking investors: "Invest your money. We need your money invested in order to grow the economy. But, of course, you won't know how much we'll tax you, or what regulations we'll impose on you. But put your precious and limited assets at risk anyway."

I certainly hope the knaves (or fools, depending on their level of scienter) currently in charge, get their heads handed to them on November 2.

LIVE FREE -- OR NOT

2009-08-11T15:38:00.009-04:00

OLD NEW HAMPSHIRE LICENSE PLATE
"Live Free or Die"

The NEW New Hampshire License Plate
for the Age of Obama:
"Take my Liberty; Just Don't Let Me Die"

Flint is Famous

2009-06-12T18:17:00.004-04:00

Flint is world-famous; she made the UK Telegraph!

Yay.

The Union Label

2009-06-03T11:13:00.004-04:00

Michael Moore expressed "joy" at the demise of GM. Of course, "It is not the joy of revenge against a corporation that ruined my hometown and brought misery, divorce, alcoholism, homelessness, physical and mental debilitation, and drug addiction to the people I grew up with." That's good. For a minute, I was afraid Moore was bent on revenge against the company he got rich slandering.

Now we have President Obama doing for the nation what the UAW did to Flint:

So shun the union label, and buy stocks in companies offering palliatives for "misery, divorce, alcoholism, homelessness, physical and mental debilitation, and drug addiction," because such things are coming to a town near you.

Sotomayor -- a minor point

2009-05-29T10:15:00.003-04:00

With all the talk of the pronunciation of Sonia Sotomayor's surname, has anyone else thought of Golda Meir this week?

"Why did I think of her?" I asked myself.

Could it be the fourth paeon -- the mertic foot consisting of three shorts and a long: ~~~' ??

Of course, if you accent the first syllable in "Golda" it doesn't work, since you have a choriamb instead.

But close enough for government work, to which Judge Sotomayor aspires.

Notre Shame

2009-04-28T10:49:00.013-04:00

I've expressed strong disagreement with Notre Dame's decision to invite the president to speak at Commencement. I still love Notre Dame and think it's a great institution, and I was willing to acknowledge that reasonable people (who haven't reflected) could hold the view that it is "an honor" to host the president; that "he's just speaking"; and that Notre Dame doesn't thereby "endorse all of his views." And I think ND can recover from this recent flap.

But at the heart of my criticism was ND's decision to award the president with an honoris causa law degree, despite the president's hostility to natural law theory, leading to his disregard for the rights not only of the unborn, but of the recently born (e.g., survivors of botched abortions ).

As Martin Luther King said in his letter from Birmingham jail:

"How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all."

The reference to Augustine points to Catholic natural law theory, and goes to the heart of the Catholic position against abortion and infanticide. (And for us Protestants, it should be remembered that Luther quoted Augustine more than any other church father).

It may sound "nutty" to suggest basing law on the law of God, but the alternative to natural law is blind obedience to "man-made" law. As Dostoevsky said, "Without God, all is permitted."

Granted, since we all see "through a glass darkly" in Paul's words, we don't want to impose some crude theocracy based on our own view of God's law. But cutting God out of the picture undercuts King's whole foundation.

Purely man-made law, with no appeal to heaven permitted, leads ultimately to the gas chamber. If man feels that all there is is man, then man's law is seen as the best man can do to solve man's problems. Resisting man and his man-made laws eventually gets you labeled as an "enemy of the people." Freedom disappears. How long will it remain legal to express resistance to gay rights, abortion, etc?

Frances Schaeffer wrote at length about this, and Whittaker Chambers wrote eloquently about why a godless state has to destroy its critics.

For those who lived under Hitler, what would have been the basis for resistance to the Nazis' man-made law but an appeal to some higher law? (Bonhoeffer). Jim Crow? (ML King). The Gulag? (Solzhenitsyn) Cuba? (Valladares, Boitel).

Mary Ann Glendon, Harvard Law Professor and former ambassador to the Vatican, has just turned down ND's award to her of their prestigious Laetare Medal. Her letter is instructive.

http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=1395

Of course, Obama does not appear to be in the same order of magnitude as the tyrants listed above. He has, however, shown that the waters that sustain him are not from the Jordan, but as one observer noted (years ago in another context), from the "fiery brook " (Feuerbach translated means "fiery brook").

666

2009-04-23T21:25:00.002-04:00

Do You Love Big Brother Yet?

2009-04-04T22:11:00.002-04:00

Legend in His Own Mind

2009-03-25T23:16:00.005-04:00

Remember the Moody Blues song from the 60's about Timothy Leary, entitled "Legend of a Mind"?

This parody could possibly be called "Legend in his Own Mind."

Anyway, here it is:

Timothy Geitner’s dead.
No, no, no, no, his plan’s good, wait and see.
Timothy Geitner’s dead.
No, no, no, no, his plan’s good, wait and see.
The money that he made,
The taxes left unpaid,
At least he’s getting laid,
Timothy Geitner. Timothy Geitner.

Timothy Geitner’s dead.
No, no, no, no, his plan’s good, wait and see.
Timothy Geitner’s dead.
No, no, no, no, his plan’s good, wait and see.
The money that he made
The taxes left unpaid,
At least he’s getting laid,
Timothy Geitner. Timothy Geitner.

One the East Coast you’ll hear them boast
About a light they say that shines so clear.
So raise your glass, well drink a toast
To the little man who went to bat for AIG.

Your stocks go up, then go way down,
He’ll run the dollar right down into the ground.
The Dow goes up, then down so low,
He knows exactly which way we’re gonna go.
Timothy Geitner. Timothy Geitner.

Your stocks go up, then go way down,
He’ll run the dollar into the ground.
The Dow goes up, then down so low,
Timothy Geitner.

The money that he made
The taxes left unpaid,
At least he’s getting laid,
Timothy Geitner. Timothy Geitner.
Timothy Geitner. Timothy Geitner.
Timothy Geitner. Timothy Geitner.

Original Lyrics Here:

Lincoln Darwin

2009-02-12T21:09:00.004-05:00

OK; I haven't written in awhile. But today is the 200th birthday of both Lincoln and Darwin.

Darwin, mind you, was not in favor of slavery. Nevertheless, his life's work provided support for people like Herbert Spencer and his social darwinism.

Lincoln, on the other hand, transcended biology and soared to great spiritual heights to support those who would advocate for the political equality of all men.

Compare these quotes:

First, Darwin:

There is however no doubt that the various races when carefully compared and measured differ much from each other as in the texture of the hair, the relative proportions of all parts of the body, the capacity of the lungs the form, and capacity of the skull, and even in the convolutions of the brain. But it would be an endless task to specify the numerous points of difference. The races differ also in constitution in acclimatisation and in liability to certain diseases. Their mental characteristics are likewise very distinct; chiefly as it would appear, in their emotional but partly in their intellectual faculties. Every one who has had the opportunity of comparison must have been struck with the contrast between the taciturn, even morose, aborigines of S. America and the light-hearted talkative negroes.

***

The variability or diversity of the mental faculties in men of the same race, not to mention the greater differences between the men of distinct races, is so notorious that not a word need here be said.

--Darwin, The Descent of Man.

Contrast this with Mr. Lincoln:

"Whenever I hear any one arguing for slavery I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally."

***

"I . . . hold that . . . there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man. I agree with Judge Douglas he is not my equal in many respects---certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, without leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man. "

In the above quotes, as in many others, it is clear that Lincoln was not "pure," in the modern sense, regarding the issue of absolute equality of the races. Other quotes could be cited to show also that Mr. Darwin's position was not altogether diabolical on these issues.

But the legacy of both men is of interest to me. There are modern scientists and other writers who argue that there may be differences among groups in IQ. They cite biological facts. If we forget God, as Lincoln didn't, this could become a tough issue and we could treat different groups differently in a myriad of ways. But if we remember God, as Lincoln did, we remember our Common Father. This has great implications in our relations to others. Count me among those who say we should accord everyone equal rights. Who cares what someone's IQ is? I've met plenty of African Americans whose abilities exceeded mine, as well as plenty who didn't. Statistical differences should count for nothing when it comes to constitutional rights. But if someone's IQ were 140 or 79, he would still be a child of God, as am I. I'm often shocked at how the legal system gives short shrift to low IQ people, black or white; when all the judges, lawyers, social workers, and court staff would have to do is take five minutes with them in order to "draw out of them" their thoughts and take their concerns into account.

Lincoln provides support for equality under the law, even among people of disparate levels of intelligence or achievement. Darwin's legacy provides a basis for treating people differently.

These are the differing legacies of the two men. I'm not afraid of science. Bring it on. But I would urge that is irrelevant, because I'm not interested in bringing about equality of outcome. But I am interested in treating everyone with respect and dignity, and according them full legal rights.

"Ye shall know them by their fruits." Matt 7:16

Sarah Palin in January 2009

2009-01-08T21:35:00.003-05:00

Sarah Palin is back with a new interview.

The issue looms as to whether she could be a viable presidential candidate in 2012. I have expressed some admiration for her in the past. After several weeks of further reflection, here is what I think:

The big issue with Sarah Palin is that she's really "folksy." Folksiness is a 2-edged sword: her populist appeal gives her star power, but while folksiness doesn't necessarily imply lack of intelligence, it can suggest it depending on the person's overall record.

Her record is actually very good. But it's as if Andy Griffith were running for president. Andy would have been considered the "cream of Mayberry." But would he have been too "folksy" for the presidency?

The answer is not necessarily "yes." Same with Sarah.

Lions Bailout in Jeopardy after 47-10 Thanksgiving Blowout

2008-11-28T14:52:00.004-05:00

Nearly three weeks ago, we reported on the push for a Lions bailout. At Thursday's annual Thanksgiving game at Ford Field in Detroit, someone displayed a sign also urging the bailout.

A reliable source told us today, however, that since the Lions are insufficiently connected to certain key powerful football fans in congress, they would probably just be allowed to fail as the "Lehman Brothers of the NFL."

Carl Levin, Debbie Stabenow, and the members of the Michigan congressional delegation are reportedly unwilling to expend any political capital on an 0-11 Lions team. They are reportedly "keeping their powder dry" in case there is still a chance for the proposed auto company bailouts in the wake of John Dingell losing the chairmanship of the House Energy and Commerce Committee to Henry Waxman after merely "offhandedly raising the issue of a Lions bailout in the House cloakroom" within earshot of Bears Fan Rahm Emanuel (D-IL).

My previous post was linked on the popular "the Corner" blog on National Review Online. Thanks to John J. Miller, host of the great author interview show "Between the Covers", also on NRO.

Detroit Lions Seek Bailout After 0-9 Start

2008-11-10T13:56:00.010-05:00

Detroit Lions Seek Bailout After 0-9 Start

By Brian M. Champion

Nov. 10 (Michigan Oracle) – The Detroit Lions, bottom-feeders of the National Football League, sought bailout cash from the United States Congress today after yesterday’s humiliating 38-14 home loss to the Jacksonville Jaguars. The Lions’ 0-9 start has been their worst start since, um, some other recent season.

Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, a reliable supporter of President-elect Barack Obama, is already expected to secure a bailout from Congress for Detroit’s beleaguered automobile industry. Detroit is also in line to receive $25 Billion to develop alternative fuel vehicles.

Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm is reportedly
an insider among President-elect Obama’s economic
advisers. God knows why, judging from the Michigan
economy. The are shown in June at a campaign
appearance at Joe Louis Arena in Detroit.

“The economy is in the crapper, Kwame’s in jail, and the Lions are 0-9. The self-esteem of Detroiters could hardly be lower,” Granholm said after Sunday’s loss. “Luckily, I have an inside track with the redistributors. In addition to the industry bailout, I’m also hopeful that Congress will either provide a direct grant to the Lions or hire an army of grief counselors and other psychologists. I don’t see how the workers of Michigan can be productive going forward in their current state of mind. Financing a better team or otherwise providing the help they need should result in a net gain to the taxpayers in the form of higher future tax revenues from our workers, who are normally the most productive in the world.”

“At least Michigan is a blue state. I had to literally talk some Republican out-of-work Lions fans off the ledge,” Granholm said.

Mental health experts define major depression as a persistent depressed mood lasting more than two weeks without relief. A chief symptom of major depression includes a loss of productivity. Lions fans, which comprise a major part of the Michigan population, have been clinically depressed since the late 1950’s with only brief periods of relief.

David Littman, former Chief Economist for Comerica Bank, argues that this depressed mood has definitely affected the Michigan economy in an adverse way. “Even tax cuts might not work at this point, since normal incentives fail to motivate economic actors when they’re curled up in the fetal position,” Littman said. “Comerica had to move its corporate headquarters to Dallas because senior management also started getting sucked into this Lions vortex,” he added. “It’s too bad we had to leave the state right after having the new Tiger Stadium named after us, though. But Comerica executives' kids even started to become Lions fans.”

The Ford Motor Company is expected to receive a large share of the auto industry's bailout money, and this should also benefit the Ford family, owners of the Detroit Lions. It is the overwhelming consensus of local sportswriters though that this will not result in any benefit to the Lions without a separate direct bailout.

Sales have also been slow for Detroit’s other automakers. GM’s financing arm, GMAC, has also begun to suffer losses—despite previously having been GM’s only profitable entity—as a result of the credit crisis. Beleagured Chrysler was previously left as a mere shell after Daimler Benz spun the company off, taking even the paperclips and bathroom fixtures back to Stuttgart. GM has been in talks with Cerberus, the holding company with a majority share in Chrysler, and seeks bailout cash to help facilitate the proposed purchase, which GM hopes will help them build a stronger GM for the 21st Century. Fired former Lions general manager Matt Millen is reportedly heading these talks for General Motors.

Lion Head Coach Rod Marinelli defended his team. “Our guy’s have been playing their hearts out all year,” Marinelli said during his postgame presser. “They don’t need a handout; just a hand-up.”

Top: Drew Stanton’s first NFL pass resulted in a touchdown.
Heck, that’s something. Bottom: Lions Coach Rod Marinelli
discusses the bailout.

Lions fans suffering the following symptoms should not wait for the bailout but should seek help immediately:

--persistently sad or irritable mood, especially on Sunday evenings in autumn
--pronounced changes in sleep, appetite, and energy
--difficulty thinking, concentrating, and remembering
--physical slowing or agitation
--lack of interest in or pleasure from watching Lions games that were once enjoyed, but compulsion to watch anyway
--feelings of guilt, worthlessness, hopelessness, and emptiness, especially around fans of successful NFL teams
--recurrent thoughts of death or suicide
--persistent physical symptoms that do not respond to treatment, such as headaches, digestive disorders not related to stadium food, and chronic pain unrelated to any alleged workman's compensation or personal injury claim
--failure to recover from the closing of the Stroh Brewery in 1999

When several of these symptoms of depressive illness occur at the same time, last longer than two weeks, and interfere with ordinary functioning, professional treatment is needed.

The GOP’s Future and Why McCain Really Lost

2008-11-06T14:18:00.006-05:00

After a couple of days to think about it, clarity has set in.

McCain lost because Americans desire security and usually vote for the “steady hand.” In this election, Obama appeared to be the “steady hand.”

I used to put a lot of weight behind the idea that voters are moved primarily by ideology. Just get the ideological message right and the voters will respond. Sometimes they do respond "with their head" to such a message. But Obama’s background suggests that he has a fondness for a kind of radical socialism that is alien to Americans.

The McCain campaign tried to bring this out, but they failed. Why? Did it mean that McCain himself was not moderate enough? Does this mean that the country is really not a “center right” country after all, but a center-left country (as “Jed L” of the Daily Kos argues)?

No. In these uncertain times, Americans more than ever wanted stability and security. This is a very conservative impulse on their part. They looked at the two candidates and chose the steady hand. Obama appeared cool, collected, self-possessed, intelligent, mature, confident, and in every other way reasonable. McCain appeared impulsive, such as when he pledged to buy up all bad mortgages in response to that day’s headline, or when he suspended his campaign and flew back to Washington uninvited.

Americans just want to keep the jobs they have or recover the jobs they lost, and at the wage they have had. They want to keep their house. They want their children to have the same things they had (or have even more, if possible; but these days they would settle for “the same”). Investors want stability so they have no surprises in next year's economy. Everything seemed “ad hoc” with the McCain campaign, as if he were saying, “Let’s throw this against the wall and see if it sticks.” The whole “maverick” theme smacked of frenetic eccentricity, which is just another form of instability.

The public craved stability but voted for a radical. They did so because Obama did not in any way seem to be a radical to the voters. In Saul Alinsky fashion, he wisely avoided alarming anybody.

The voters are also quite accustomed to baseless negative ads and attacks. They discount these attacks as exaggerations, if not outright calumnies, unless they “resonate.” They only resonate when the attack matches what the public itself sees in the candidate. As Groucho Marx said, “Who are you going to believe; me, or your own lying eyes?” McCain could have said that this year. The voters believed their own eyes, and not the attacks. This year, the public SAW A VERY UN-RADICAL OBAMA WITH THEIR OWN EYES. They were not about to believe any discordant attack that labeled him as a radical.

The tragedy is that Obama actually is a radical. But an intellectual radical with a seemingly moderate temperament.

The same thing happened in 1932, as Amity Shlaes describes in her book, The Forgotten Man. In response to the widening depression, Franklin Roosevelt pledged “bold, persistent experimentation,” which turned out to be a recipe for instability. The business community wanted stability. They would not risk precious capital in an atmosphere of uncertainty. Uncertainty is disruptive of the calculations that are needed before capital is risked. But FDR was such a reassuring and reasonable-appearing father figure that he exuded security and stability. “He was good on TV after the crash,” as Joe Biden might say.

The result was a depression that lasted an entire decade, as opposed to a severe but short-lived panic. Herbert Hoover (“Wonderboy” as Calvin Coolidge called him), was also a bold and persistent experimenter, having been a brilliant engineer and administrator. But with his priggish personality he had not reassured the public, nor had his tinkering provided the stability the markets needed, even if that tinkering had been in the right direction (which it had not been).

What the Republican Party needs next time is the same thing the Democratic Party always needs. It’s the same thing every party always needs. The answer is not to run to the center. It is not to throw Sarah Palin under the bus. It is not to purge either the intellectuals or the anti-intellectuals, the conservatives or the moderates, from the party.

The answer is to nominate a strong, mature, reassuring, cool, self-confident, reasonable, candidate. Ideology is important, but it is important as part of the candidate's formation and growth. It comes out but is more in the background during the campaign. What the public wants to see most is a grownup as the White House's next occupant.

FDR was a father figure. Reagan was a father figure. Clinton, despite his faults, came off as a reasonable, regular guy – a “fun dad” – the opposite of nervous and frenetic. Bush was a happy and reassuring Texan, quite likeable at first, and another fun dad. But then his administration became secretive (we don’t like an insecure dad who buries himself in the paper and ignores us). Carter was the regular guy from Georgia. Once in a while we elect a genius – Wilson or Hoover or Nixon -- because of their resume or their apparent cerebral competence (the "smart dad" who can help you with your homework). But the result is not always happy. Usually we want dad to love us and take care of us. This year Obama was dad, despite his youth. When we were little, our dads were young too.

Obama is a radical. The markets will not be reassured. Obama may even desire this instability because he can then more easily implement his ideas to a desperate nation. He can blame the chaos on Bush as FDR blamed Hoover. A guy who looks like he'd be a good dad might turn out to be a deadbeat dad. Just ask a single mom.

Will business risk capital in this atmosphere? If not, where will the recovery come from? Not from government, which gets it’s funding from the private sector. Why are the banks sitting on cash and not lending as they’re supposed to? GM won’t expand; they’re looking for a bailout themselves.

"Brother, can you spare a dime?"

Another Positive Note

2008-11-05T10:32:00.001-05:00

Check out these African Americans cheering McCain's concesion speech near the end of this video produced by the Flint Journal. Not booing him, but applauding. McCain said,

"A century ago, President Theodore Roosevelt's invitation of Booker T. Washington to dine at the White House was taken as an outrage in many quarters.

America today is a world away from the cruel and frightful bigotry of that time. There is no better evidence of this than the election of an African-American to the presidency of the United States.

Let there be no reason now ... Let there be no reason now for any American to fail to cherish their citizenship in this, the greatest nation on Earth."

McCain struck the right note. The citizens applauding him showed magnanimity and good faith, and both they and McCain provided a basis for hope of unity for all of us as Americans.

I'm not going to get carried away, because the Obama "toxic rolodex" has me very concerned. But my fingers are crossed.

Voter turnout and reaction to Obama's victory

Proud of America but still not hopeful

2008-11-05T09:14:00.002-05:00

I join with others in celebrating what America has accomplished in electing its first black president. Living and working in a mixed area, I'm genuinely happy for my black friends and clients, because of THEIR tears -- which are real tears of joy this morning. That part has nothing to do with ideology. This day was hundreds of years in coming. I'm flying the flag today for that reason.

The reason I said the lamps are going out is that you need a hazmat suit to touch his rolodex. He could transcend all of that and be a good president, but I'll have to see evidence of that before I believe it. He was a winsome candidate who had a great organization, and his vote margin exceeded the fraud margin, so there's no questioning the outcome. I'm not going to argue that Bush's presidency was successful; except for preventing a domestic terror attack for seven years and a few other things, he didn't really deliver "peace and prosperity." But after decades fighting the cold war, the answer to these problems is not "progressive" economics and foreign policy. Sorry.

I'd be happy to be proven wrong. Sometimes a president is trusted if he runs against type, as when Nixon went to China or Clinton reformed welfare. The country wouldn't have trusted their opponents to do the job because we would suspect bad faith. Obama is no dummy; he could put it all together. But that would be based on "hope" and not evidence.

Why McCain Lost

2008-11-04T22:39:00.002-05:00

"The lamps are going out all over Europe; we shall not see them lit again in our lifetime."

--Edward Grey, 1st Viscount Grey of Fallodon (1862-1933)
On the eve of WWI

Re: “Change”:

“The mad mob does not ask how it could be better, only that it be different. And when it then becomes worse, it must change again. Thus they get bees for flies, and at last hornets for bees.”

--Martin Luther

How to assign blame for the Great McCain Debacle of 2008?. Ross Douthat and Rush Limbaugh have argued, respectively, that the McCain loss didn’t represent a failure of moderate conservatism, or that it did.

Let’s sort this out from my point of view.

Obviously McCain tried to woo moderates, the theory being that for a Republican candidate to win a majority, he must win not only the base, but also moderates. These moderates, though, would be frightened off by the “right wing red meat” of an explicitly conservative campaign.

But what is a moderate, anyway? A moderate is a person who is either uninformed, confused, or for other reasons cannot decide between the alternatives. The flaw in the McCain strategy was to assume that this hypothetical moderate person holds to his moderation as a matter of principle rather than as a weakness.

A moderate is a person who is looking for leadership. A moderate is looking for someone to stiffen his spine; to give him a pep-talk; to give him something to believe in. Appealing to “moderateness” as if it were a doctrine someone would be willing to fight and die for represents a fatal category error.

Coaches give pep talks to get languid players to get them to stop being "moderates" out on the field.

The problems that vex us will generally be solved by employing solutions that have some inspiring content that is either left or right of center. Splitting the difference between the two is a recipe for confusion and despair, not principle. Granted: extreme, wild, nutty, or incoherent solutions will turn off moderates as well as any other thoughtful people on either side of the divide. But trying to turn an arbitrary compromise into a rallying cry of principle is a mistake. Principled compromise is something that is achieved only after true ideological adherents find they are at loggerheads after the kind of spirited fight that could have left one side utterly vanquished, obviating the need for any compromise at all.

The kind of ideological compromise we’ve seen the McCain campaign try to sell, though, from it’s inception, is “compromise” in the negative sense of the word, as in compromising one’s principles, which is what senators too often do. This explains a lot.

Imagine a failing football team looking for a new coach. One candidate for the coaching position advocates the west coast offense. Another emphasizes an old-fashioned Bo Schembechler-style running game. In this example, a moderate would be a person who couldn’t decide which approach held the most promise for success. I submit that this moderate is definitely NOT someone who firmly believes that some muddled hybrid combination of the two holds real promise. This moderate is someone who doesn’t know the right answer and is looking for a leader. The leader could strongly in favor one approach or the other, or some third thing. But not some mushy combination or compromise between the two positions.

When, say, a Ronald Reagan comes along, a typical moderate could be persuaded to follow such a relatively conservative candidate if that candidate appeared to be strong, persuasive, winsome, self-confident, and the timing was right for his message. A moderate candidate in the same election would not fare any better among moderate voters just because he was, well, “in the middle” ideologically. The moderate voter looks at the moderate candidate and subconsciously thinks, “This guy is as confused as I am,” or, “This guy isn’t offering any leadership.”

McCain in 2008 made a fundamental error in assuming that a majority coalition could be amassed trying to add some mushy middle to the Republican base. That middle looked at McCain and thought that while McCain was heroic in Vietnam, he certainly was not much of a leader in the ideological battles of 2008. That moderate looked at Obama and saw a self-possessed, reasonable-looking “leader” with a seemingly consistent message and a vision for solving America’s vexing problems. Never mind that Obama is a socialist. That wasn’t going to get out in 2008 with the mainstream media “in the tank” him. The moderate voter just saw a candidate with a consistent commitment to well-being of the middle class and the poor.

And it may be that it could have been difficult for any Republican to prevail in 2008 considering the damage done to the Republican brand over the last 8 years. But considering that George W. Bush did the limbo dance since 2001 trying to be a moderate, it isn’t surprising that the brand was damaged with moderate-seeking muddleheadedness. W a moderate, you say? Why yes; what else do you call “compassionate conservatism” but mushy moderation? What else do you call conducting a war that included trying to reconstruct a whole society, rather than just blowing up stuff and killing people, like armies are supposed to do? (If we were afraid of a power vacuum in Iraq, we should have just occupied the place. If we didn’t want to do that, we shouldn’t have gone in). What do you call coercing taxpayers to pay for other people’s prescription drugs? What do you call record expenditures for social programs? It certainly wasn’t conservatism. Whoever warned that those who remain in the middle of the road will get run over, was right. Just ask W (Never mind those who argue that Bush’s moderate initiatives were more popular than the times he was more traditional in his conservatism. I would argue that good old fashioned “smiting and wrath” conservatism wins respect, because it honestly says, “These things are True. These truths are permanent.” --- “‘Laissez-faire, c'est fini’; Sarkozy, I disagree”)

Trying to be a moderate, Bush’s numbers tanked. Trying to appeal to moderates as a moderate, rather than providing leadership and direction to moderates, McCain was unable to beat the leftward most presidential candidate in history.

Losing his base halfway through the campaign, McCain chose Sarah Palin as a running mate. Despite being rough around the edges, she was a sensation. She had the guts to stand up to Obama and Joe Biden. Her critics weren’t going to vote for her anyway. Do I think she should spend some time reading Kirk and Hayek and Friedman (and Whittaker Chambers and Buckley and Adam Smith and the whole Regnery stable) in the next year or so? Sure. She should have performed much better in the gotcha interviews. But she should study intellectual conservatism so she can grow in intellectual depth, not change who she is. She was just fine as she was, and she was more inspiring to moderates because she showed the classic virtues of strength, courage, self-confidence (including ideological self-confidence), humor, and compassion. In fact, I think she showed a particularly feminine brand of self confidence, that je ne sais quoi that Camille Paglia and others were trying to describe. We’re used to male self-confidence, in our sports heroes, for example. But genuine female self-confidence, while common in our mothers and grandmothers, for example, is rare among famous women, such as movie stars, with their eating disorders and other neuroses. Many moderates who were not snobs were turned on by this self-confident woman, even if they were not as conservative as she was.

In the last two weeks of the campaign we heard cries from the McCain campaign that Sarah was “going rogue” by speaking off-message (as if their message had been particularly effective). Would that the whole McCain campaign had gone rogue from the campaign’s management.

Palin showed the kind of guts and leadership that was more persuasive to moderates than the pabulum otherwise served up by the campaign. Sure some moderates were lost, but those particular moderates would have been lost anyway. And many others were inspired to be supporters.

The lamps are going out all over America. We may not see them lit again in my lifetime. Time to join the Resistance. But if there’s still a free country left, there’s “next time”:

“Palin-Jindal ’12”!

Colin Powell Endorses Barack Obama

2008-10-20T08:55:00.004-04:00

Colin Powell endorsed Barack Obama, which certainly bolsters Obama's meager foreign policy credentials. If the inexperienced Obama needs any advice, Colin Powell is really good at slide show presentations.

Powell balances Obama nicely; they have a nice yin and yang thing going. Yin: Obama wants to pull out of Iraq precipitously. Yang: Powell is known for saying this: "One of the fondest expressions around is that we can't be the world's policeman. But guess who gets called when somebody needs a cop."

Powell also said that having a black president would be "electrifying."

But, no, this endorsement has nothing to do with race.

Sarah: Come to Michigan!

2008-10-03T17:52:00.005-04:00

Sarah Palin disagrees with the McCain campain regarding giving up on Michigan, and said she thinks she and Todd should come up here.

She talks not unlike a Yooper, and Michiganders (or Michiganians) would relate to this. What she would have to do is slip in a few references to "Up North." "Up North" is well-nigh sacred to many of us in the southern part of the state. We make our money, such as is still there to be made, here in southern or southeast Michigan. But then we like to spend some of it, when we can, "Up North," in God's Country.

What is Alaska, but "Up North" on steroids?

I think Sarah Palin could resonate in Michigan not only with native northern Michigan people, including "Yoopers," but also with us "trolls" (those who live "under the bridge"), because many of us hold the north country of Michigan to be nearly sacred.

By all means, come, Sarah, Warrior Goddess of the North.

A Democrat-Caused Problem

2008-10-02T16:02:00.004-04:00

"[T]he mortgage mess is especially infuriating because some of us saw it coming. Two years ago, I joined with 19 of my colleagues demanding that we crack down on mortgage abuse, particularly by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. A bill doing exactly that, The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act, was approved by the Senate Banking Committee. But it was killed on the Senate floor by Democrats who favored pushing out mortgages to people with dubious prospects for paying them back. They claimed we were concocting a problem that didn’t exist. We were not, and that makes the resulting mess all the more disgusting."

--Sen John Cornyn (R-TX)

John McCain should be ramming this down Barry's throat. Why isn't he? Why is he allowing his poll numbers to go down over this, when it's crystal clear the Democrats caused this problem?

Bailout Fails

2008-09-30T13:53:00.004-04:00

So Nancy Pelosi allows 95 members of her own party to vote no on the bailout, including many members of her own leadership, and then blames Republicans for not averting the "crisis." This was done in order to blame John McCain for any ensuing catastrophe, and to embarass him after he had flown in to try to forge a bipartisan deal on the bailout.

There are people who will do anything to get Obama elected. The Brownshirts are out, They've been trying to create an economy reminiscent of Weimar Germany. Now we have the "Obama Jungend."

If I were the DC Fire Department and the Capital Police, I'd remain on high alert.

A Democrat Scandal

2008-09-25T21:07:00.002-04:00

In any kind of a just world, there would be a big fat "D" attached to this financial scandal. Just view this video. I know, I know; Fox News is the propaganda arm of Karl Rove, yadda yadda yadda. But it's pretty clear to me that the people wearing the white hats in this matter have an "R" after their names, and the villians have a "D".

The Democrats were all for "affordable housing" and they cared about the "little guy"; yeah, yeah, yeah; blah, blah, blah. Meanwhile, my great-grandchildren will have to pay for their profligacy, all because the Democrats once again wanted to use other people's money to buy votes.

Steamed? You bet I am.

"The GSEs need to be reformed without delay."

--John McCain 2006

Financial 911

2008-09-23T21:43:00.002-04:00

Maybe slightly over-the-top, but screw 'em.

Danger, Will Robinson

2008-09-23T21:34:00.001-04:00

The Big Bailout

2008-09-19T12:53:00.002-04:00

Would this work?

AIG

2008-09-16T23:33:00.002-04:00

Word is, AIG gets an $8.5 x 10^10 loan in exchange for giving up 80% to the fed.

Does this mean the Federal Government is now in the insurance business?

Is John Edwards rubbing his hands together, and saying to himself, "I feel a comeback coming on" ??

Interview II

2008-09-12T19:14:00.003-04:00

I remarked before that I was somewhat disappointed at Sarah Palin's performance in the Charles Gibson interview. During the day, while I was trying to get some Actual Work done, it nagged at me that I should not have left Gibson's (and ABC's) performance go unremarked.

Of course, Vladimir Putin won't treat Sarah with kid gloves, so I think I was correct in emphasizing her performance. However, I should point out the following:

The editing by ABC was so amateurish that I thought I was watching a "What's Up, Tiger Lily"-style asian martial arts movie. Shame on ABC.

But most important, Charlie Gibson, or perhaps the punk-intern who wrote his questions for him, truncated Palin's prayer before a group at the Wasilla Assembly of God church to make it sound like Sarah was calling upon the Almighty to sanction some sort of Christian version of jihad. As the context makes clear, she asked that God help them all act in conformity with His will. Gibson left out a crucial clause, and then said he was quoting her exact words, rendering her prayer as the aforesaid call to jihad. This makes Gibson either a knave or a fool (for not checking the context himself), and henceforth to hell with him in my book.

The Interview

2008-09-12T08:25:00.004-04:00

I'm a fan of the Warrior Goddess of the North, but I was somewhat disappointed in her performance in the interview with Charles Gibson. She has to be exhausted, with a new baby and sending her son off to war this week, and then having to prepare for this major MSM inquisition. Understandably she looked tired and ill-prepared. But Vladimir Putin won't make allowances for that sort of thing. So she shouldn't be cut too much slack, except to point out that executive decision making is not the same thing as fielding gotcha questions.

I thought her command of energy issues was obvious, and that alone comes close to making her qualified. But on the Bush doctrine, I think she just didn't know what it was, but should have. Having said that, I think her instincts are good and she's smart and a quick study. So in substance, I'm not really worried about her ability to lead, despite the fact that sometimes I expect a voice to come on saying, "in this portion of Fargo, the part of Marge Gunderson will be played by Joan Cusack."

911 + 7

2008-09-11T09:07:00.003-04:00

It's been seven years since 9/11.

The other shoe never dropped.

I remember hearing liberals saying al Qaeda likes to attack every two years or so -- that's their timetable -- and as Ann Coulter and others have pointed out, these liberals obviously intended to define success as America getting through 2003 and 2004 without another major terrorist attack.

They almost appeared to be hoping that another attack would occur so that they could point out that Bush was wrong.

It's been seven years. No more attacks. We haven't become a police state, except in the imaginations of the paranoid.

Can't we give some credit to the Bush Administration?

The Incredible Palins!

2008-09-07T23:30:00.005-04:00

Remember the animated classic movie about a mom who tries to save the world while still managing to be a mom?

It's the Incredible Palins!

Syndrome says, "AlaskaGirl?? You married AlaskaGirl?? You married AlaskaGirl!! And Got Busy!!"

Credit where credit is due: My 13 year old daughter Emily thought up the name "AlaskaGirl." I was trying to think of a name for Sarah Palin that might stick, like "Northern Warrior Huntress" or some such nonsense, and then my 16 year old daughter thought of Elastigirl from the Incredibles, and then Emily said, "How about AlaskaGirl!"

I thought Frozone and his wife could be Barack and Michelle Obama, but they'd have to be on the same side.

Also, Syndrome, in the upper right hand corner, could represent the mainstream media.

Helen of Troy, eat your heart out

2008-09-04T14:40:00.002-04:00

The Face that Launched a Thousand Snits:

The Coming Palin Volunteer Army

2008-09-03T23:43:00.005-04:00

She did well (Ya Think??)

I'll bet even more volunteers will turn out now.

Palin Treated like Clinton Rape Victim

2008-09-03T09:17:00.001-04:00

The nuts on the left are really going after Sarah Palin. You'd think she was one of Bil Clinton's rape victims.

The Palin Legend

2008-09-02T21:18:00.002-04:00

You don't get writing like this every day:

[H]er daughter's pregnancy just reinforces what seems to me a big part of her emotional appeal. It's more than her being a relatively normal person; rather, her family represents vitality and life -- the men are virile, the women are fecund -- as opposed to the effete, navel-gazing, metrosexual arugula-muncher heading the other ticket.

--Mark Krikorian

OK; the guy still can't bring himself to endorse McCain. But still . . . WOW.

Hunting Lessons

2008-09-02T13:26:00.001-04:00

Sarah Palin's virtues are many, and I just thought of one more:

She can teach Dick Cheney how to hunt.

Attack of the Pointy-Heads

2008-09-02T09:51:00.002-04:00

Here come the pointy-heads:

"Barack Obama was the editor of the Harvard Law Review, for heaven's sake. And the best McCain can do is a woman who minored in poly-sci at the University of Idaho?"

--Susan Reimer, Baltimore Sun

Good luck with this line of attack, lefty pointy-heads.

Party of the little guy my a**.

Harry Truman didn't even go to college.

Then there's more:

"Can you at least make a choice that doesn't have Rush Limbaugh panting? (He called Palin a "babe." It was another memorable moment in the ascent of women in this country.)"

I wonder when the last time someone made a pass at Susan Reimer.

2008-09-02T08:53:00.002-04:00

Look what Jay Nordlinger said, (very succinctly, I might add). That's why I don't do this for a living; I'm not that good:

"I wish that the news about Palin's daughter had been released the first day -- the day Palin was announced. I wish it had been part of the general news about her and her family -- the introduction. Why? Because the dribbling out of the news a few days later . . . makes the ticket look somehow sneaky. Deceptive. The news taints the whole Palin roll-out, just a bit. It takes the bloom off the rose, just a bit. Plus, many people don't believe that the McCain team knew about the pregnancy, in advance. And, frankly, I don't blame them. That said, Palin is a sensation -- something that the Republican party has not seen much of in a long time. I'll have more to say (which is just as much a warning as a promise!)."

Palin Pregnancy

2008-09-01T22:02:00.003-04:00

Let's unpack this Palin pregnancy thing.

Sarah Palin electrified the world when John McCain announced her as his running mate.

This is an impressive woman, but she has her hands full with her family. She has a new special needs child. With her affirmation of the child's humanity, she enhanced her moral standing. I am, and remain, a big fan.

It now comes to light that Bristol Palin, her 17 year old daughter, is pregnant by her boyfriend, and a wedding is planned.

The problem will not be with the Christian base, as the pointy-heads think. The problem is a perception of disorder, and we want our leaders' lives ordered.

There is no chance the evangelical comminity will condemn her, as the media snobs should know if they knew anything about evangelical Christianity and it's place as a foundation for basic traditional American thinking. The beautiful people, however, are so ignorant of its nuances that one can only conclude that there are serious deficiencies in their education, even those with Harvard PhDs.

The Maureen Dowds of the world will expect that judgmental churchgoers will look down their noses at a sinner. Talk about projection. It's the pointy-heads who will be looking down their noses at these gauche provincials.

I would venture that most Evangelical Christians know someone who has had a child out of wedlock. Usually it's the young girl who's sitting two pews back with her baby and her parents. In these congregations, there is no condoning of sex out of wedlock, of course, but there is also no condoning of procrastination, gossiping, sloth, stealing envelopes from work, exagerating income tax deductions, etc. These people in the pews look up at the cross, and they remember who paid for all these sins. "There but for the Grace of God go I," many of them think to themselves.

So Bristol Palin will not be condemned by Christians. But she and her mother will be looked down upon by the pointy-heads. You'll be able to see it in their eyes: "Our kind of people don't get pregnant at 17. Our daughters go to college on a glidepath." A callous but witty Oscar Wilde quote comes to mind: “To lose one parent may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness.” Read that as: "One family experiencing an unusual pregnancy (that the Beautiful People couldn't ever see themselves permitting) might be seen as a misfortune, but two (in one year) make the Palins look careless.

I regard these beautiful people as moral monsters. But this is what I'm afraid might do damage: If the candidate looks "careless" or looks like she lacks the necessary "class" or "polish" required of the job; or lacks the necessary control of her life, then even some normal Americans could say, "I don't condemn her. She could even be my best friend here in the real world. But a heartbeat away . . . ??"

Obama talks like he understands that condemning her is immoral. He said, in effect, "Lay off this subject. Families are off limits." That's to his credit, but for one thing: Obama's act is beginning to wear a bit thin. A pattern is emerging: First, one of his surrogates says something boorish. Damage is done to the victim. Obama apologizes for his acolyte's boorishness, so that the boorishness doesn't rub off on him. Repeat ad nauseam. This is starting to look so calculated that this observer can only conclude that Obama (or David Axlerod or somebody) is behind the strategy. Either that, or Obama can't control those under him (not a good quality in a Chief Executive).

This is largely a tempest in a teapot, of course, and people vote for the leader of the ticket and not the running mate (Bush 41 won in 1988). But I'm wondering if the Average Joe's (or Jane's) enthusiasm for Sarah Palin has been slightly dampened by the amount of seeming disorder in her family, even if they admire her and would not hold anything against her if she were an ordinary mortal; and even if they deeply admire her, as I do, for her affirmation of life.

What will happen now? This electrifying woman will come out and speak again, and remind everyone why she became a sensation in the first place. I actually think this will happen. But in the mean time, all I can say is, "What a wild ride." Thursday: Obama dazzles everybody. Friday: Sarah Palin makes everyone forget all about Obama. Sunday: What will Gustav do? Monday: The Palin daughter is pregnant.

I think I've got a whiplash.

P.S.: I hate to be one more voice publicly musing about a 17-year old girl's private business. So let me say this: I think Bristol's upcoming marriage has a greater chance of lasting 50 years than most of the beautiful people's marriages have of lasting 5. What's more, the Maureen Dowds of the world know it, deep down. Because they're unhappy.

Live from NOLA

2008-08-30T22:30:00.003-04:00

You watch. If the levees break in NOLA due to Gustav, the GOP convention delegates will be watching on the Jumbotron while John McCain gives his acceptance speech from some gymnasium to where people have been evacuated. I thought of this yesterday, but now I see the McCains and the Palins are planning to go to NOLA on Sunday. But I see this extending into convention week. The very savvy McCain has shown every indication that it is able to make such lemons into lemonade.

I can see it now: Todd Palin driving some boat, carrying hapless victims out of the 9th Ward. Sarah Palin wading through the water or filling sandbags. A casually-dressed McCain in the middle of the action.

Of course, the partially-improved levees could hold and this may be mooted. But I can see NOLA as Minneapolis south.

"Sarah Palin, Über-Babe," or "Mrs. Smith Goes to Washington"

2008-08-29T21:28:00.004-04:00

About a week ago, Jacob Weisberg from Slate wrote an online essay arguing that if Barack Obama loses the general election, America is a racist country.

Let me see him and raise him.

If John McCain loses this election, it is strong evidence that America has lost her character. This is because Sarah Palin has character, and John McCain has shown character in choosing her as his running mate.

Make no mistake: I am a conservative Republican of the type who has had reservations about Senator McCain. The Arizona Senator whom many of the press have dubbed a “maverick” has been given that appellation, in the estimation of many people like me, because he has strayed from the reservation of Reagan Conservatism.

Why, for example, did he champion campaign finance reform, which appeared to me to be an infringement of free speech? If rich bastards have a disproportionate impact on the public debate, the cure, it always seemed to me, was to publicize lists of wealthy donors to campaigns, so that the public could readily identify those who were trying to wield the “joystics of power.” (“Joysticks of power” is my trademarked phrase of mine; I can picture nefarious Superman-comic bad guys, wide-eyedly and orgiastically controlling the world with video-game controllers).

Why, for another example, did John McCain have a good relationship with the press? If anyone in the modern age has made a Faustian bargain with Lucifer, it is the MSM, the “drive-bys” (as the Great One puts it); those who buy “ink by the barrel” as Mark Twain put it. It could only be that John McCain had likewise Sold His Soul to the Devil, buying a few accolades at the expense of his Eternal Soul.

Ah, but wait: this is the man who spent five and one-half years in a North Vietnamese prison camp. Who had greater bona fides as a lover of his country that that?

This was the conflict in the minds of people like me: Did the GOP find its soul in nominating this man like this, who suffered so much for his country? Or did the “stupid party” once again nominate “the old guy” whose “turn it was”?

Just what, however, did John McCain actually do with his nomination? He went ahead and chose "Mrs. Smith" to be his running mate. “Mrs. Smith?” you say. Yes; Mrs. Smith. As in “Mrs. Smith Goes to Washington.”

Sarah Palin is the real deal. Oh, I know; “Put not your faith in men,” as the scriptures say, and you could read “men” as “women.” Sarah Palin could let us down, as could anyone.

But this woman came up to the mike and without a trace of nervousness introduced herself to America, and we were collectively mesmerized.

I was donating platelets at the time at the announcement, a process that takes up to two hours. While I had two needles in my arms drawing blood from my body, so that a centrifuge could extract the life-giving platelets, I found myself prostrate. But I did have a remote-control clicker in my right hand (I couldn’t bend my elbow for two hours, even to scratch my nose). I was, therefore, able to click between Fox News and CNN to follow the coverage.

What a beautiful lady Sarah Palin is. She found out her unborn son had Down’s Syndrome; and instead of aborting, she carried her son to term and made public statements about how beautiful he is: “perfect” was her word. WOW. Wow, wow, wow. These’s a holocaust going on, right now, at the expense of the mentally retarded. Thanks to people like the sophisticated and urbane Mr. Obama.

Mr. McCain is known for upholding “honor” and “duty” above all other ideological considerations. He sure showed it in the Hanoi Hilton, when he refused to go home when he had the opportunity, and instead stayed with his men.

He showed it again when he chose a genuine reformer as his running mate. Sarah Palin was on the Wasilla, AK, city council when she railed against waste in the budget. The sitting mayor tried to institute a recall campaign against her. It failed. She got elected herself as mayor. Taxes and waste were drastically reduced. Then she ran for governor of Alaska and won again. She took a jet owned by the state and sold it on eBay for a profit. She said she wasn’t a “mansion kind of person.”

She got herself elected without having to be beholden to the money interests of Alaska’s oil business; in fact, the people of Alaska elected her precisely because she did stand up to the corrupt moneyed interests of Alaska. This, of course, is bad news for the Alaska congressional delegation. Senator Ted Stevens won his primary, but he’s the kind of guy she ran against. As for Don Young, the state’s sole member of congress, ditto. The other US Senator, Lisa Murkowski, is the daughter of the guy she defeated for governor.

So talk about Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.” She’s at odds with the ENTIRE CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION OF HER STATE. And yet, John McCain chose her to be his running mate, even though THAT CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION IS OF THE SAME PARTY JOHN McCAIN BELONGS TO. To me, this shows that John McCain, in keeping with his fidelity to Honor and Duty, has decided to Clean Up the Republican Party. God Bless Him.

As you can tell, I’m pretty “gone” on this chick, Sarah Palin. And I’m pretty impressed with John McCain at this point. Even though money is tight, I just made my first campaign contribution in years for this ticket.

God Bless John McCain. God Bless a Real Woman, Sarah Palin. God Bless Todd Palin, who must be a hell of a man to “close the deal” on a woman of character like this. And, as they always say, “God Bless America.”

Obama and McCain at Saddleback

2008-08-16T23:25:00.003-04:00

I'm not going to go over everything that happened at Saddleback between Rick Warren and Barack Obama and John McCain.

But I can say that what is impressive and disappointing about Barack Obama were both on display. He seemed self confident, sincere, and reasonable. BUT.

But when he quoted the book of Matthew about how Christ said whatever we do to the least of these we've done unto him, my first thought was who are the least of these but the unborn? Is there someone lesser who could qualify as the least? Obama was apparently confident that Pastor Warren wouldn't drive a Mac Truck through that one, or else he's tone deaf to his own faux-sincere rhetoric.

I've read both of Obama's books. Dreams From My Father is a nice read, actually. His narrative voice carries the reader along, all the way to Africa. I had some issues with it, but all in all, it's his story and he can tell it as he likes. The Audacity of Hope, on the other hand, was ultimately irritating, and he was irritating in the same way at the Saddleback Church forum. At Saddleback, as in Audacity, he "gets you into the tent" with his seeming sincerity, charm, intelligence, and wit. He makes you think he listens and cares. Then he defaults to the extreme liberal position every time. After a while, you throw up your hands and just give up on the guy. It's like Lucy pulling the football from Charlie Brown. Every time.

The Audacity of Hope barely mentioned the Reverend Wright. It wasn't about him. Joining Rev. Wright's church wasn't about what it appeared to be either, I suspect, or Wright would have been mentioned more as an influence. It was about faking sincerity, Obama's specialty. Who was it who said, "Sincerity is the thing; if you can fake that, you've got it made?"

McCain's story about the North Vietnamese camp guard who showed McCain a kindness and then briefly drew a cross in the dirt was moving, and seemed real to me. McCain became animated whenever a question touched on his country's interests. I think he's the real deal, despite my policy differences with him.

I've wanted to like Obama, or else I wouldn't have read both his books. I still hope, if he becomes president, that he listens to the little angel on his shoulder, who tells him to be sincere and to care, rather than the little devil who tells him merely to look sincere. But I think McCain is more capable of grabbing that devil and drop-kicking him.

The Fairness Doctrune and the Georgia Invasion

2008-08-15T12:18:00.003-04:00

Apparently a sizeable minority of Americans would favor a return of the "Fairness Doctrine." The Fairness Doctrine, or course, is basicly a government regulation that says you cannot exercise your free speech rights unless they are satisfied that you have also permitted someone who disagrees with you to exercise their right of expression on your broadcast medium and on your dime.

This is in the United States of America.

This represents a move against freedom, by people who are more interested in advancing their agenda and using the force of law to oppose that freedom.

Kind of like what Russia is trying to do in Georgia: crushing people's democratic rights and freedoms by force so that the aggressors can do what they want.

Patriotic Americans can do no less than oppose the Fairness Doctrine and support the people of Georgia.

Of course, I have no way of gauging who President Saakashvili truly is, but he sure sounded like Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, and Adams to me. Is he just a glib speaker? I hope not. His words in defense of liberty everywhere were very moving, and if I had a link I'd post it. But as for standing up for Georgians generally in this crisis, and for the implications for freedom in the world, here are some nice sentiments.

Michigan in play for McCain?

2008-08-09T08:29:00.002-04:00

Is McCain making Michigan competitive? Could Michigan become a bellwether state in November? Will Obama have to spend time and money in states that should be reliable "blue" states in what should be the Democrats' year? Good news for McCain; bad news for the Annointed One.

Kwame Kilpatrick

2008-08-09T08:25:00.002-04:00

New parody song about Kwame Kilpatrick.

John Edwards Scandal

2008-08-09T00:36:00.002-04:00

Isn't anyone on the right going to defend John Edwards in his present troubles?

After all, there is currently no evidence that he urged the killing of his inconvenient love child, which would have been in keeping with the protocols of his party.

Obama's New Logo

2008-08-06T23:23:00.003-04:00

George Carlin, RIP

2008-06-23T20:51:00.001-04:00

George Carlin is dead at 71.

I must admit a soft spot for George, as I have a taste for intelligent irreverence in comedy. It cuts through the bourgeois fog we often sleepwalk through in our day-to-day lives.

But Carlin, who was known for, among other things, “the Seven Words That Can Never Be Said on Television,” cut himself off from the light with such statements as:

"The whole problem with this idea of obscenity and indecency, and all of these things - bad language and whatever - it's all caused by one basic thing, and that is: religious superstition. . . There's an idea that the human body is somehow evil and bad and there are parts of it that are especially evil and bad, and we should be ashamed. Fear, guilt and shame are built into the attitude toward sex and the body. ... It's reflected in these prohibitions and these taboos that we have." (2004)

He was right that prudery is unhealthy.

But he was wrong about religious superstition, and that reluctance to fully embrace sexual frankness is based on such superstition. Granted, many people who call themselves religious mistake prudery for spirituality, just as many mistake following a checklist of rules for spirituality.

The real reason most people are uneasy with full sexual frankness has to do with the sacredness of sexuality. Most of us would be uneasy in the face of open propositioning, but not because we would not like to engage in some of these activities. Rather, we’re uneasy because we sense on some level that sexuality is so powerful that it can destroy a life as well as bring life into being. Men of another era used to name hurricanes after women, and called battleships “she” instead of “it,” recognizing the powerful forces moving them in their own lives. These same men, if they outlived their wives, often died very soon afterward. Carlin trivialized that which we knew was not trivial.

So again, when we heard the seven words you can’t say, we either recoiled, or laughed uneasily, because of the man’s audacity. Those who laughed without reservation have stunted souls, able to enjoy the profane but not appreciate the sacred. Unfortunately, today such people are legion.

Under Mr. Carlin’s system, he is now mere food for worms. I hope he said, in the moment of mortal extremity, “God, maybe I don’t have all the answers. Here I come,” thereby saving himself.

“Requiescat In Pace”

Charlton Heston RIP

2008-04-07T20:32:00.002-04:00

My tribute to Charlton Heston:

My "6 degrees of Kevin Bacon" connection: My maternal grandparents owned a business in St. Helen, Michigan many years ago, and apparently they knew Heston's parents (his biological father drank a lot, apparently). This was before his mother remarried Mr. Heston, and the family moved to Illinois (Heston went to Northwestern, where my brother-in-law went). My mother said she thinks she remembers that Charlton Heston had a friend up there named "Fraser", and speculates that this is where he and his wife got the name for their son.

Charlton Heston was a classy guy indeed. May he rest in peace.

Who Do You Want Answering The Phone At 3 AM?

2008-03-28T13:11:00.004-04:00

Comcast Digital Voice Parody

2008-03-10T22:51:00.004-04:00

Maybe this isn't funny unless they run Comcast Digital Voice Commercials in your area.

Maybe it's not funny anyway.

Romney

2008-01-15T10:36:00.000-05:00

I'm off to vote for Mitt.

I'm not 100% on board with any candidate, but Mitt's gotten some things done. I yearn for competence. Rudy has the same appeal. He's off the reservation on some social issues, but who has actually accomplished more things appealing to conservatives? Why isn't Rudy running on this, and saying, "Let's turn our cities around!" and "Who has a better record of actual conservative accomplishments?"

I like Fred. He's conservative and a real smart guy. But where's the passion, other than in occasional spasms?

I admire John McCain, but the phrase "off the reservation" comes to mind again -- this time critically. Plus, I'm afraid in Michigan McCain's numbers will be goosed by Dems and Indies coming in to vote in the GOP primary just to screw things up, and we need to boost Mitt's. I also don't want a repeat of 1996; i.e., let's nominate the old guy whose turn it is and who can crack a joke with the press.

Huckabee is one hell of a speaker; or should I say one "heaven" of a speaker. After GWB I long for a president facile with the language. But I don't want a president who reminds me of the guy I work with. I want to have a beer with a guy like the guy I work with. I want a president like the guy who laid me off -- somebody who knows how to make a business decision. My next job will be offered by another guy like the guy who laid me off, because that is the type of guy with the wherewithal to actually hire people. Either that, or I'll make my own job -- this still being America, at least for the time being -- and Huck's paternalism promises only to gum up the works.

I like Duncan Hunter, but he doesn't stand a chance. And everyone should listen to Ron Paul and think about what he's saying before returning to the real world.

Merry Christmas

2007-12-20T00:45:00.001-05:00

Lesser of Two Weevils

2007-12-13T11:42:00.001-05:00

Chávez Referendum

2007-12-02T22:30:00.000-05:00

From the New York Times:

CARACAS, Venezuela, Dec. 2 — From the unusually quiet streets of this capital to the hushed tones of state television announcers, Venezuela was on edge Sunday night as voters awaited the outcome of a contentious referendum that would give President Hugo Chávez sweeping new constitutional powers.

Hours after the polls closed, the government still had not released official results, causing political leaders to speculate that the vote was too close to call.

Corrected Version (run through Michigan Oracle Truth Filter):

CARACAS, Venezuela, Dec. 2 — From the unusually quiet streets of this capital to the hushed tones of state television announcers, Venezuela was on edge Sunday night as voters awaited the outcome of a contentious referendum that would give President Hugo Chávez sweeping new constitutional powers.

Hours after the polls closed, the government still had not released official results, causing political leaders to speculate that the vote is being rigged.

UPDATE: Well, I'll be darned. This referendum must have been really unpopular; you just know Chávez goosed the results but lost anyway. Reminds me of Violeta Chamorro's 1990 victory in Nicaragua over Daniel Ortega. ¡Viva Líbertad!

Evel Knievel RIP -- 1938-2007

2007-11-30T17:22:00.001-05:00

Evel Knievel: May he rest in peace.

Waterboarding

2007-11-27T18:19:00.000-05:00

Regarding waterboarding, novelist Stephen King recently said, "[I]f the Bush administration didn't think it was torture, they ought to do some personal investigation. Someone in the Bush family should actually be waterboarded so they could report on it to George. I said, I didn't think he would do it, but I suggested Jenna be waterboarded and then she could talk about whether or not she thought it was torture."

OK. Fair enough, provided when we catch the next Khalid Sheikh Mohammad we put him in a room with Stephen King, and tell him, "Look, Steve, we're giving you a choice. You see, Abdul here isn't talking. We're pretty sure many lives would be saved if he talks. Of course, you know best. We'll let you decide. You can either let all these people die, or else you can let us waterboard him -- waterboarding being the most humane form of coercion we could come up with."

These sanctimonious prigs don't seem to get it. No moral person favors techniques like waterboarding; however, serious people would compare it to something like cannibalism. There should be a hard and fast rule against it -- EXCEPT.

Except what? Well, if 20 people were stranded, say, and two of them went for help, and these two found themselves starving with 20 miles to go, and one of them died, the survivor might actually have a moral duty to dine on his buddy so he could make it the other 20 miles and save the whole group.

The next president can read Mr. King. Mr. Bush can keep reading Vince Flynn.

Lord Vladimir Voldemort Putin

2007-11-21T16:51:00.000-05:00

Beware! Beware!
Vladimir Putin is really Lord Voldemort!!

Brady Quinn

2007-11-11T20:15:00.000-05:00

I went to Notre Dame this weekend, and saw them lose their 9th game of the season. They lost to the Air Force Academy 41-24. Despite this season's abysmal record, this stadium was still packed (it's still ND football, after all), although tickets could be had outside the stadium for $10, alas.

The 105dB fighter jet flyover was really cool, even for the Irish fans.

I must say, Brady Quinn is missed (as is his favorite target, Jeff Samardzija); his picture is still all over the ladies' dorms. What was interesting to me was what I saw at the "Le Peep" Restaurant in Mishiwaka. The have signed photos from couple of celebrities, including a past Miss Indiana 2006, Betsy Uschkrat. There were two Brady Quinn Photos, both with scripture references written below the autograph. Here those references:

James 1:2-3:

Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance.

Proverbs3:5-6:

5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart
and lean not on your own understanding;
6 in all your ways acknowledge him,
and he will make your paths straight.

Maybe Joe Theisman was a little unfair for berating him for chewing gum and not having combed his hair when he was selected by the Cleveland Browns 2007 NFL draft. Or maybe the Bible verses were just for "the troops." But I thought his verse selection was worthy of note, and maybe he's the "real deal."

Charles Schumer -- The Era of Reagan is Over

2007-11-01T18:51:00.000-04:00

Let's not just pick on the junior senator from New York. Let's look at the senior senator, Charles Schumer.

Here's a recent quote of his:

“We’re about at the tail end of the Ronald Reagan era, where his ideas — fresh and, even as a Democrat, I’d say, many of them needed at the time — have just lost steam, lost resonance.”

--Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY), 2007

The first comparable historic quote I thought of was this:

“So it is with a heavy heart that I assume the throne. Yet, out of the ashes of this tragedy, we shall rise to greet the dawning of a new era... {The hyenas start emerging, casting eerie green shadows and laughing hollowly}...in which lion and hyena come together, in a great and glorious future!”

--Scar, The Lion King, 1994

No more Hakuna Matata

Hillary -- One's First Wife

2007-11-01T08:29:00.000-04:00

Back in 1992 some female reporter said George H. W. Bush wasn't popular with women voters because "he reminds every woman of her first husband." I guess some people knew what she meant, despite the fact that many women have either had only one husband or never married, and that even with some of his admittedly puzzling public policy stances Bush was a pretty solid and dependable guy (and a war hero). There were women who voted for GHWB who loved their husbands, something the harridan media elite wouldn't understand.

Now we're told that even large numbers of Republican women will get in the sanctum sanctorum of the voting booth and vote for Hillary. I hear that while Hillary will not carry the male vote, she will probably come close. She will supposedly also do very well with other traditional GOP constituencies. I assume most of this is either from push polls, or based on name ID. Maybe it's a result of spin from the Hillary camp and her water-carriers in the media -- the same type of people who trashed GHWB.

What I am not hearing (so I'll be the one to say it) is that despite ideology men in large numbers will vote for "ABH" (Anybody But Hillary) because she reminds them of their first wife. Even happily married men will vote against Hillary because she will remind them of somebody else's first wife. I've been married once, and for 23 years, and Hillary still reminds me of that octopus woman rising up from the sea at the end of Disney's The Little Mermaid. I can imagine what men who have gone through a bitter divorce must think.

Rudy and the Christians

2007-10-23T20:26:00.000-04:00

Rudy is the GOP front runner, and who woulda thunk it? He's pro-choice, pro-gun control, &c. Why is he the front runner?

He's cheerful and optimistic. Downright Reaganesque in this regard. Perhaps savoir faire and joie de vivre sometimes trump ideology (one of my pet theories).

But what should Giuliani say to the social conservatives to make sure he keeps his lead? My advice to Rudy is that he should say something like this:

"These days, we are all led to think we should either be overtly religious or else hostile to religion. But I can recall a day in which a person who has perhaps not been very religious in his life could nevertheless be respectful of religion. Remember the old movies? A not-so-pious character might take his hat off when a priest enters the room; or he might sincerely listen to the wisdom of an evangelical protestant minister. Well, ladies and gentlemen, I'm like that character in the old movies. Perhaps I haven't lived a life that lived up to someone's else's moral litmus test, but I will take my hat off to that priest, and will listen respectfully to that protestant minister. Jesus said 'render unto Ceasar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's'; I have done a good job in the role of Caesar in New York City. I have kept order -- a God-pleasing thing. And if I have failed to live up to God's high standards in the category of morals, please be aware that I am respectful of those who admonish me based on God's transcendent principles."

Why don't actual politicians ever say anything like this?

Turkey

2007-10-17T19:48:00.000-04:00

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, has apparently backed down from the resolution she had earlier pushed regarding Turkish genocide against the Armenians in 1915.

Now, this is an idea that surfaces from time to time. Armenian-Americans periodically urge their congress-critters to pass such a resolution.

Just why we should be doing this now, however, was a mystery to me. Eight years from now, in 2015, the centenary of this event would be marked. Marking the event at that time would represent nearly unanswerable timing for the Turks.

Coming now, however, I couldn't help but speculate that Ms. Pelosi was deliberately trying to undermine our war effort. We need the Turks in that part of the world; nevertheless, the Turks are at odds with the Kurds, a major constituent group of the Iraqi nation. And we want the Iraqi nation to succeed. To honor the slain Armenians at this time would be to antagonize the Turks, dissipate any leverage we might have with the Turks, and invite their incursion into northern Iraq against the Kurds.

I see today, however, that Ms. Pelosi has backed away from the resolution. Perhaps I misjudged her. On the knave-fool continuum, I had adjudged her a traitorous knave. I was mistaken. She appears now to be a clueless fool.

Dr. Granholm

2007-10-14T11:41:00.001-04:00

The Michigan Republican Party (Saul Anuzis, Chairman), has put out a clever radio ad, in classic radio soap-opera style, dramatizing how a dying patient" (the Michigan economy) was killed by "Dr. Granholm," who raised taxes when even the medical support staff knew that this was the wrong treatment modality. Short and to the point.

Al Gore

2007-10-12T08:28:00.000-04:00

Al Gore has just won the Nobel Peace Prize, but the inconvenient truth is that the folks at Nobel never rescinded Yasser Arafat's award, and Mr. Gore decided not to refuse the award on that basis. Nobel & Co. should have stuck to dynamite -- a useful product -- rather than continue to blow up the few remaining fragments of their credibility.

Jimmy Carter

2007-10-10T17:36:00.000-04:00

Jimmy Carter is at it again, calling Dick Cheney a "disaster."

He who lives in glass house . . .

Yoko in Iceland

2007-10-09T20:47:00.001-04:00

John Lennon’s widow, Yoko Ono, unveiled something called the "Imagine Peace Tower" on an island near Reykjavik, Iceland on what would have been John Lennon’s 67th Birthday. One would hope she refrained from singing.

Apparently, light will emanate from this monument in an eco-friendly manner each year from October 9 (Lennon’s Birthday) until December 8 (the day he was shot). If I lived in Iceland, I think I would rather see the aurora in the night sky, but, alas, I’m not an Icelander.

What really grated was when I heard on NPR that Yoko intoned that the enslaved and persecuted will be there each year, "in spirit," or some such nonsense. Would that John Lennon had never penned the execrable "Imagine," the lyrics of which glorify communism, the ideology that enslaved and persecuted more people than even National Socialism. Maybe then I’d be listening.

IMAGINE:
“No heaven”= atheism
“No possessions”=communism; dictatorship of the proletariat
“No countries”=international communism; one world government
“No possessions”=communist abolition of private property

Here are my rewritten lyrics to this song:

Imagine there's no heaven,
It's easy if you try,
What's right and what's wrong,
defined by the strongest guy,
Imagine all the people
bleeding in the streets...

Imagine there's no country,
It's easy if you dare,
Constantly on the run,
from tribal warfare,
Imagine all the people
in a Hobbesian nightmare...

You may say I'm a liberal,
but I'm not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
And the world will die as one.

Imagine no possesions,
I wonder if you can,
No food and no shelter,
A famine in every land,
Imagine all the babies
Dying all over the world...

You may say I'm a liberal,
but I'm not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
The founding fathers' work will be undone.

Copyright 2007, the Michigan Oracle

New Photo Revealed In Diana Inquest

2007-10-09T10:21:00.000-04:00

Limbaugh and the "phony soldiers"

2007-10-01T17:32:00.000-04:00

Frankly I'm getting tired of the amount of hyperbole in politics these days. What kind of fatuous lunatic do you have to be to actually believe that Rush Limbaugh really intended to insult US troops as a group? The man's pro-military statements have been borderline hagiographic for 20 years.

Maybe I'm guilty of the same thing by calling many Democratic members of Congress "fatuous lunatics." But don't they have something better to do than take one of Mr. Limbaugh's comments out of context, and in a bad-faith manner purposely convey a meaning 180 degrees from what he meant? Shouldn't they be passing legislation, or something?

On second thought . . .

Hillary vs Obama

2007-10-01T00:10:00.000-04:00

Barak Obama accused Hillary Clinton of having the “wrong” kind of experience to lead America. Hillary, of course, is touting her experience over the less-experienced junior Senator from Illinois. Obama portrayed Hillary as someone adept at gaming the system, in contrast to someone like himself who can bring about the kind of fundamental change this country needs.

Bill Clinton came to his wife’s defense, painting Obama as a callow youth ill-equipped to handle our current knotty foreign policy challenges. “We didn’t have the terror threat [in 1992]. We didn’t have the troops in Iraq . . . Her experience is more relevant and more compelling,” Clinton said.

Mr Obama, as if he had set up the whole exchange and had waited for this moment, replied with some of Mr Clinton’s own words to George H.W. Bush from 1992: “You can have the right kind of experience and the wrong kind of experience.” Hillary, again, has the “wrong kind of experience.”

I wish someone would have quoted Patrick Buchanan from 1992 (at that time speaking on the subject of the Arkansas governor’s lack of foreign policy experience):

“Bill Clinton's foreign policy experience stems mainly from having breakfast at the International House of Pancakes.”

Spacey

2007-09-25T22:06:00.000-04:00

Actor Kevin Spacey decided to go to Venezuela to visit dictator Hugo Chavez, joining Hollywood airheads Sean Penn and Danny Glover as tinseltown useful idiots.

"Spacey."

Aptly named.

Ahmadinejad at Columbia

2007-09-24T21:09:00.001-04:00

Columbia could find no reason to exclude Ahmadinejad from speaking at the university.

Hey, if truth is relative, Columbia may as well be consistent and not discriminate between good and evil. I'd love to hear what criteria they use at Columbia to teach students to discriminate between truth and error, good and evil, "s*** and Shinola" (as grandpa used to say), etc.

Dan Rather

2007-09-21T23:27:00.001-04:00

In commenting on Dan Rather's recent lawsuit, I can't do much better than review what I wrote 3 years ago:

September 10, 2004:

CBS was caught, having fallen for obviously forged documents purporting to show Bush's bad behavior while in the Texas Air National Guard. These documents were filled with the indicia of the modern word processor, not the 30+ year old typewriter. The superscript "th"; the "proportionate spacing"; the testimony from the conviently 20-years dead Jerry Killian's widow and son that Killian would never have written this stuff, all mean nothing to Dan Rather and CBS.
Rather than face the extreme embarrassment of having to admit that they've been "had", Dan Rather and CBS are just "gutting it out." They have enough trial lawyer friends at CBS to know that bad lawsuits can eventually be favorably settled, as long as one spends enough money on "expert witnesses" paid handsomely to support one's absurd position.
So expect Rather and Co. to intone solemnly on this, as if they are hot on the trail of the next "Watergate." Meanwhile, everyone else will be hot on the trail of the real story: That this is the next "Jayson Blair."

I am glad I went out on a limb early to say that the Bush National Guard memos shown recently on CBS's "60 Minutes" were forgeries. I have spoken to document experts before, and I recognized "authority" when I saw similar experts comment on these items.

September 13, 2004:

John Fund in the Wall Street Journal notes this:

"Earl Lively, director of operations for the Texas Air National Guard in the 1970s, told the Washington Times that the memos are 'forged as hell.'"

I would say they were "forged IN hell -- in the Devil's Smithy."

***

The yeoman efforts of Little Green Footballs in exposing this phony story only served to meticulously document the obvious. Anyone looking at the Bush National Guard memos could tell at a glance that they were done on a modern word processor and not a vintage typewriter. Expert analysis only reinforced this. Rather may feel that CBS breached their contract, hanging him out to dry and leaving him with a legacy of shame. While this lawsuit is about money, it is also about Mr. Rather trying to move himself out of the "knave-fool" continuum (where there currently is a split of opinion as to where on that continuum he resides). He would like to be seen as an honest journalist again, so he is asserting that he thinks the story was true. However, if he succeeds in convincing us that he actually believes this yarn, he'll only convince us that he's a fool. These documents were so obviously fraudulent that no one with his credentials could possibly fall for it, and, whether knave or fool, he was sacked "for cause."

I think he's banking on the belief that enough of US are fools and might actually believe him.

Mind you, he might admit again that the documents are "not verifiable" (he probably won't say "fraudulent," despite items like this, comparing one of the "1972" documents with the same text typed on MS Word in 2004. But what does it say about Dan Rather that he lacked the good sense to bail out on this story? Once again: Is he a knave or a fool?

I hope the lawyers on both sides charge the heck out of their clients, CBS and Rather. And in the end it would be great if they both could lose.

Comments on Tasered University of Florida Student

2007-09-19T20:48:00.000-04:00

I would hope no one would think I was advocating indifference to civil liberties violations by offering up a parody to the University of Florida incident in which the student was tasered. It is a bit chilling to think that the police could come in and taser a non-violent individual for trying to ask a question. However, I think this incident was a put-up job, as if the victim had read Carlos Marighella's "Mini-Manual" but who, instead of inspiring serious revolutionary activity, decided to create a farcical incident tailor-made for the YouTube age (recall that the Mini-Manual was de rigeur for 1970's Marxist revolutionaries).

When the storm troopers come, I hope I would have the courage to join with those with whom I who disagree on other matters and stand up to the thugs. But on a college campus, there is always a danger of youthful group-based overexubrance, and when things get heated, ugly incidents sometimes need to be put down before general mayhem ensues. In this case, I think if Mr. Kerry had the cojones he could have said, "Thirty seconds, man. I'll answer your question, but others have questions, too." Or maybe somebody with a bullhorn could have said the same thing. No one would have had to be tasered or arrested, if this guy was for real.

But this guy probably would have kept at it until he was physically confronted, yelling, "OW, OW!!" at every opportunity in order to show he was being repressed. This stunt would show how repressive the "powers that be" actually are.

It was Karl Marx who said, "History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce." In the 1970's we had the Baader-Meinhof Gang / Red Army Faction. Now we have this guy. He was ripe for parody.

Tasered UF Student Repressed

2007-09-18T14:52:00.001-04:00

View clip from Monty Python and the Holy Grail, from which an audio clip was added to this video.

The Detroit Lions

2007-09-17T21:04:00.000-04:00

My Lions are 2-0.

Of course, the two wins were against two teams who were almost as, or more, hapless than the Lions were in 2006.

Nevertheless, I'll savor any Lion perfect record that is more than one week into the season.

Is Donovan McNabb less than 100%? If so, I can dream of a Lion victory next week at Philadelphia, and a 3-0 record. However, I'm prepared for a 2-6 record in a few weeks.

In case you don't know, being a Detroit Lions fan is a hereditary disease and there won't be any effective gene therapy developed in my lifetime. So here I am.

But whatever happens, Jon Kitna has proven himself as "the man."

Greenspan and the free flow of oil

2007-09-16T08:23:00.000-04:00

Drudge has a link to a Sunday Times of London article that quotes Alan Greenspan as saying the primary motive for going into Iraq is oil.

“I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” said the former Fed chairman.

Well, so what?

The left will say, "See? See? It was about oil." The White House is probably thinking, "Great. Just what we need. Now everybody will think we went in there for a purpose that wasn't noble."

But what's not noble about keeping the oil flowing at market prices?

We can and should do more to make ourselves more energy independent. But for the time being, our "pursuit of happiness" is in no small measure powered by oil. If a soldier dies to keep the oil flowing, he dies so his somebody can afford to drive to her daughter's soccer game, or some liberal can drive to a peace rally. And so Cindy Sheehan can afford to travel to Crawford, Texas.

I suppose people don't need to drive to work or ship goods. If the free flow of oil is threatened, we should just say, "Wow, this is a tough break. I guess we'll just have to have another Great Depression."

So oil is not just about oil. Oil powers other things. And the free flow of oil insures a fair income to those who are selling it as well (which is fair to the people living in those countries, if they have consensual governments -- gee, just what Bush has been pushing).

I don't think Greenspan meant to say he thought the war was offensive to him. I think he meant to say, "This is the way it is; why not say so?"

Bush is afraid people will think his little cabal of oil people just want to make money. He invites this kind of speculation by being secretive about things that could be talked about openly. Why can't Bush say what I'm saying here? He probably doesn't trust people to accept it, so too many people don't trust him. Ronnie could have communicated it.

Any soldier who has died for the free flow oil has died for the American way of life as we know it, and has therefore died for freedom, just as American soldiers always have.

UPDATE: Since posting these thoughts, I've come across this clip from Peter Beinart and Jonah Goldberg in which they discuss the meaning of Greenspan's statement. Beinart seems to be saying one thing I pretty much had in mind but didn't get into, namely that oil in that region finances everything, and so everything, including human rights abuses, etc., seems to be connected to oil; whereas Goldberg seems concerned about the way the media uses a statement like Greenspan's to leave a reductionistic "blood for oil" conception in the public's mind. In any case, I agree with both that the war wasn't started primarily "to make Haliburton rich."

The Anti-War Crowd -- Not All on the Left

2007-09-14T23:03:00.001-04:00

Newt Gingrich has said that there is an 80-20 chance the Democrats will take the White House next year. I am not sanguine about Republican chances in '08, but my view is that it's more like 60-40. The reason is that I refuse to underestimate the Democrats' ability to offend the American people.

The Democrats are in a bind. They may very well win the White House next year, and again, I put their chances at better than even. The Republicans have really screwed the pooch. But let's explore this bind I claim the Democrats are in:

The anti-war hard left is acting as if the majority of the country is in agreement with them. The Democratic candidates for president dare not cross them. But why?

Think about it: Whenever the President orders a military attack, the polls immediately report presidential approval ratings of, say, 80%. Now let's assume that 80% of the people would approve of an invasion if America were able to invade and take care of business in an expeditious fashion. Invariably, however, victory takes a little longer, and the approval ratings sink.

It is my view (and forgive me for using rough estimates) that perhaps 20% of the country is of the hard, anti-war left. On the other extreme, perhaps 20% would like us to nuke Iran, China, etc., tomorrow. The rest are in the middle. The problem is that if half of the country is Democratic, and all of the hard lefties are in the Democratic fold, then 40% -- or nearly half -- of the democratic coalition is of the hard, anti-war left, even though they are on the fringe when the whole of the population is considered. So no wonder the Democratic candidates need to kow-tow to them.

But the hard, anti-war position is a loser in the general election. George McGovern found that out in 1972 in the midst of the unpopular Vietnam War -- when he lost 49 states -- even his own south Dakota. Calling General Petraeus "General Betray-Us" is a losing proposition of the same type.

It is my view that many of the people who initially cheer an invasion have not seriously analyzed their position, and when victory is not immediately forthcoming, they turn against the effort even if our people are still in the field. But if my analysis is correct, many of these new anti-war people are anti-war not because "war is dangerous for children and other living things" (as the 60's poster read) but because they would have liked to have seen more PROGRESS on the war front, and they have lost patience with a president who refuses to change tactics and who has allowed himself -- and the country -- to get mired down in a "quagmire."

In sum, I think half of the anti war sentiment in this country consists of people who think we haven't fought this war in the George Patton / William Tecumseh Sherman fashion. Assuming they're all receptive to a flower-power campaign is a ticket to another GOP victory.

Hillary Clinton understands this. I think most of the others do as well. If they can dance on this tightwire (sounding like an American, yet not getting the nutroots too upset) and they can perhaps avoid falling Karl Wallenda-like in November 2008, and the White House will be theirs. But is won't be as easy as many think.

Lebensraum

2007-09-12T23:26:00.000-04:00

Some provincial governor in Russia has urged Russians to take the day off and procreate.

Hasn't Putin said something similar? Russia, after all, doesn't want to fall prey to the fate of Western Europe, which is caught in the grip of a nihilistic death wish and is not replacing its numbers.

Hey, why not? In Russia, they have plenty of Lebensraum.

Citizen Gore

2007-09-09T22:15:00.000-04:00

When Georges Danton was condemned during the French Revolution, he famously declared, "Robespierre will follow me; he is dragged down by me."

Three months later, Robespierre indeed followed Danton to the guillotine.

Al Gore is now being pilloried by animal rights extremists for not being a vegetarian: apparently eating meat contributes mightily to global warming.

If Mr. Gore had any testicular fortitude, and hadn't needed Naomi Wolf to counsel him on how to be an Alpha Male, he'd throw his hands up in exasperation with these people, and like Danton, declare that these various leftist extremist movements will eventually consume each other.

Mr. Gore, sadly, more resembles Robespierre, of whom it was once remarked by Comte de Mirabeau, "That man will go far, he believes everything he says."

Debut Blog

2007-09-06T20:53:00.000-04:00

This is the debut blog for the "Michigan Oracle."

Rest assured, o my brothers (and sisters); I am far too humble to take the appellation "oracle" very seriously. I am well aware of my fallibility, and brandish the moniker "michiganoracle" merely in a whimsical vein.

I will try to get things right. Many might eventually disagree with my politics and religion, which I will reveal in dribs and drabs in due course; but in the real world I would seldom arrogate to myself (even if I were able) the power to impose on others my vision of the world. And I will never merely regurgitate "talking points" from any organized political or religious organization here.

But I will try to be honest. That's all I can promise at this time. I have five kids. My time is limited. But there is more to come.