Monday, August 31, 2009
Thank goodness for Rep. Watson (D-CA) and that new spirit of bipartisanship sweeping Washington!
Charles Krauthammer from Friday's Fox News All-Stars (via The Corner):
Even if [Panetta] is nominally in power he is completely marginalized. Juan says it [the infighting within the administration between CIA and Justice] is a civil war. If it's a civil war, we already have seen Appomattox. It's over, and Panetta handed over his sword.
Everything he has fought over he has lost, and these aren't just marginal territorial turf disputes. These are core interests.
Number one, he opposed the release of documents, and twice he lost on that.
Secondly, he opposed the appointment of a prosecutor. Of course, a prosecutor has just been appointed.
And lastly, and most importantly, the interrogation of high-level enemy terrorists has been removed from the CIA. It's now in the hands of the FBI and White House.
Now, what's left? Signal intelligence is not CIA, it's NSA. Human intelligence — any important intelligence — is not CIA anymore. It's in the FBI and the White House.
So it is Central Intelligence, but it doesn't gather intelligence. All that's left is analyzing intelligence. Well, you don't need $30 billion a year for analysis. You can hire the RAND corporation who will do it at 1/100th of the cost and save billions of dollars that you could waste on the Cash for Clunkers and purchase every secondhand car in America.
This is a real institutional problem...The Obama administration has relegated the CIA to the role it had pre- 9/11. And we know what that resulted in.
I couldn't agree more. This disabling and weakening of our intelligence capabilities is not good and shouldn't go quietly into the night.
'Puter agrees with the dirty, nasty hippies that eugenics is a great moral evil. However, 'Puter doubts the good faith of the filthy, stinking hippies. To show consistency, 'Puter expects the hippies to also call on California to remove all mention of Democratic president Woodrow Wilson and Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, ardent supporters of eugenics. Once the hippies have run Planned Parenthood out of California and scrubbed every trace of our twenty-eighth president from the history books, 'Puter will believe the lefties' feigned outrage on this issue.
For a great discussion of progressivism's (read, liberalism) long-lived and shameful support of eugenics, see Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism, now in paperback.
That might be the sound of your favorite website at some point in the future. It appears that the democrats are enjoying this business of having the government control everything. CNET News obtained a draft copy of a bill (S.773) developed by Sen. Rockefeller's office has been working on in secret for months. This version would extend the authority for the president to temporarily seize control of private-sector computer networks during a "cyber security emergency".
The problem is that the bill doesn't define many things well. Not that this is a surprise to any of our readers as the Czar highlighted similar problems with the Healthcare reform bill. Furthermore, many computer security professionals are concerned that the government may not be the entity they want seizing control of the networks when they have repeatedly received failing grades on their computer security posture. This is even after efforts (in varying degrees) were put forth under both of the previous two presidential administrations.
From the CNET article reference above:
"The language has changed [in this draft of the bill] but it doesn't contain any real additional limits," EFF's (Electronic Frontier Foundation) [senior staff attorney] Tien says. "It simply switches the more direct and obvious language they had originally to the more ambiguous (version)...The designation of what is a critical infrastructure system or network as far as I can tell has no specific process. There's no provision for any administrative process or review. That's where the problems seem to start. And then you have the amorphous powers that go along with it."
Translation: If your company is deemed "critical," a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.
Hmmm, the government controlling banks, major industrial sectors (transportation and health), with a largely complacent media (i.e. why do we need town halls to hear the kind of questions that are being asked of our representatives - shouldn't the journalists be capable of asking these questions?), etc. And we're not to believe that we're heading towards socialism?
Sunday, August 30, 2009
It is no coincidence that the Western leader most worried about a new bout of inflation is German chancellor Angela Merkel. If there is one thing that Germans agree about, it is the necessity—social and political as much as economic—of a sound currency. The hyperinflation of the 1920s brought about a German change in mentality as great as, or greater than, the one caused by World War I, with what disastrous consequences 50 million dead might attest if they had voice. The solidity of the deutsche mark was the great German achievement of the second half of the twentieth century.
The cash for clunkers program is over, and here is what the website says:
The CARS program ended sales on the Monday night with nearly 700,000 clunkers taken off the roads, replaced by far more fuel efficient vehicles. Rebate applications worth $2.877 billion were submitted by the 8 p.m. deadline, under the $3 billion provided by Congress to run the program.
Issue #1: I'm not sure that the phrase, "replaced by far more fuel efficient vehicles" is accurate. Our vehicle was 1 MPG off from meeting the requirement. The replacement is an SUV which probably isn't much different in "combined MPG" based on what the sticker reports. Maybe there was a restriction on what vehicles you could buy but I didn't see any as I researched it. I would caution the government from using the adjective phrase, "far more".
Issue #2: There goes $3 billion of taxpayers money to a subset of the nation. Only those who had older cars that likely in the past couldn't afford a new car or could and didn't want to shell out the cash. To all those who did qualify - you're welcome for my donation to your car purchase. If the government is smart, they'll offer a tax break to those who DIDN'T use the cash for clunkers program to offset this wealth redistribution program.
Issue #3: The dealership was in no shortage of activity - so much for all the bailouts needed, in my opinion. A little thinning of the crowds (or dealers) would have been welcome.
Sally sleeps a lot, more than any dog the Czar has had. She will spend at least 12 hours in a comfortable spot, and seems to resent being sent outside for a walk or even downstairs to eat. The boys have been bringing her food and water bowl to her, which frankly isn’t the best reinforcement tool. But at least she doesn’t shake and cower over everything. There has been progress.
The Царица was becoming a bit frustrated with Sally’s refusal to move off the bed. The elder Цесаревич was trying to assist mom with getting Sally down from the bed. Sally prefers to stay where she is, so the dog would simply flop over onto her other side when either of them tried to pick her up. “This is ridiculous,” said the Царица, “All you want to do is lay around all day, and expect people to pet you and bring you food and water or whatever else you need.”
“Oh no,” exclaimed the 6-year-old Цесаревич, “She’s a democrat!”
Note to self: perhaps the boy should spend less time around the Mandarin.
In better news, the boys were taken to the toy store of their choice today. Each picked out a toy of their preference, and each paid for his toy with his own money—money that was earned all summer long helping out around the house and yard. The boys agree that working hard, earning money for it, and then using the money to buy what they wanted was intensely rewarding. They got to keep the change, naturally, which allows them to start saving for the next toy. Yep, the Czar exclaimed, they are republicans.
Shall we review his financial experience?
In 2003, President Bush proposed transferring control of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae from Congressional control to the Treasury, fearing that Congress lacks the ability, experience, or competence to prevent a runaway financial meltdown of the mortgage industry. It was Frank who opposed it, stating that there was no impending problems with the easy availability of low-cost mortgages to the poor. It was also Rep. Frank who pointed the finger at the Bush Administration less than five years later when the financial meltdown followed.
Prior to that meltdown, he accepted campagin contributions from Freddie and Fannie (who also donated conspicuously large amounts of cash to pet Frank causes), which seemed malodious to many; worse, he had a personal relationship with Herb Moses (a Fannie Mae director), who personally oversaw the implementation of Rep. Franks more controversial programs that helped deteriorate the situation, particularly the damnable Community Reinvestment Act. The classic quid pro quo arrangement resulted in Frank receiving campaign contributions, and Moses serving in a sponsor-protected directorship role.
His reward for corrupt and blatant insider influence? Chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee. When asked to explain his dirty dealings? Prejudice against his homosexuality. Looking over his record, nothing he does is ever his fault.
Now, not content with incompetent financial influence, he wants to audit the Federal Reserve in order to restrict their ability to lend as they see fit.
Frank expressed unease at what he called the Feds power to "lend money to anybody they want" in emergency circumstances. We are going to curtail that lending power. We are going to put some restraints on it, he said.
The irony there is painful, as nothing seems to be able to restrain the Democratic-led House of Representatives from throwing money toward automobile manufacturers, car dealerships, appliance manufacturers, and more. Rep. Frank, especially, is the least qualified to discuss the dangers of easy lending...unless he learns from his mistakesin which case, he knows better than anyone else how screwing around with risky loans can cause financial chaos.
The Czar concludes that Rep. Frank is no better at finance than Hello Kitty. At least she doesnt open her mouth about it.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
What that caller was describing in very succinct terms is the situation that we have in this country today with our current Congressmen and Senators not looking out for the taxpayers but rather two distinct special interest /victim groups. The first group would be the money men – Unions, lobbyist, etc. – who use their financial power to direct policy and law to benefit their “constituents”. The second group would be the large group of people in this country that do not pay income tax – and in most cases get an earned tax income credit at the end of the year. They are able to dictate policy based on the fact that they are dependent on the government for their well-being and therefore are a reliable voting block for those willing to keep the money flowing to them.
So that leaves us with a situation where the people that actually create the wealth that drives the economy and makes it possible to pay for all of the government’s largesse really don’t have a voice in the government. We have congressmen openly stating that they are going to vote for legislation (i.e. Health Care Reform) despite the fact that a large and vocal group of constituents don’t want this. Why would they do this? Some would say that they are just being benevolent and that because of their superior intellect to those of us not in the political class that they are giving us what we need, even if we are too stupid to realize that said need.
The reality is that they are on the hook to repay the unions for their $70 million investment in the last election cycle, and to keep all of the loyal dependent class of voters happy. Now from the perspective of the unions, their investment of $70 million for a return of $10 billion in the form of a bailout of their pension and health plans is money well spent. For those in the dependent class it is worth it to vote for these politicians since they don’t have to pay for anything that they are getting from the government since that money comes from someone else.
So I ask the question again, who represents those of us that make up the tax base of this country? The truth of the matter is the who is you. It would be easy to just give up and say that it is futile to speak out since no one is listening. We face a very uphill battle to make our voices heard, but people are starting to make a difference. Keep going to your town hall meetings, keep sending letters and postcards to your elected officials, start your own blog, do whatever it takes to spread the word that there are hardworking people in this country that want to be heard and will not be ignored while select special interest/victim groups are catered to.
Despite what most people will tell you due to their poor understanding of our political system this country is not a democracy, it is a representative republic. Our politicians represent us. There is no way that a government can meet the needs of every citizen. You and I may share 99% of the same beliefs, but it is that 1% that we don’t have in common that creates conflict. There is a quote from Ronald Reagan that goes along the lines of a person that supports me 51% of the time is not my enemy. Our politicians need to realize that it is their obligation to support what the majority of voters in their districts want.
Therefore it is important to always make your voice heard. If you worry about offending someone with your beliefs than you shouldn’t even say hello to anyone because the way you do it may upset them. Always be civil, always be factual, but always be willing to express your beliefs and don’t be afraid of being shouted down or labeled as a racist, fascist, or a right-wing nut. The left has realized that in the absence of any real substance to their arguments, and the need to obfuscate their real intentions of spreading the wealth (which in reality is spreading the poverty) they need to shout down and demonize those of us that can see them for what they are and what they are trying to do to this country.
The 2009 "Firearms Law & The Second Amendment Symposium" will be held on Saturday, September 12, at Northwestern University Law School, in Chicago, Illinois. This event will be sponsored by The NRA Foundation and the Northwestern University chapter of the Federalist Society.
Capitalizing on recent developments in our nation's federal courts regarding the Second Amendment, panelists will discuss and debate current Second Amendment scholarship and related issues. The symposium will feature top Second Amendment scholars and attorneys, such as Profs. Nelson Lund of George Mason University, Nicholas Johnson of Fordham University, Michael O'Shea of Oklahoma City University, David Kopel of the Independence Institute (a frequent contributor to NRA magazines), historian Clayton Cramer, and more. Panelists will discuss key topics such as "original intent" versus the "living Constitution," the scope and future of the Heller decision.
Your Mandarin loves the delicious irony that this event will be held in one of the most crime riddled cities that employs the most draconian gun-laws in the nation. Suck on that King Richard II (that would be Mayor Richard Daley).
And if that were not good enough, it seems that our new less corrupt but feckless Governor Pat Quinn (D) has signed House Bills 182 and 3714 despite pressure from anti-gun groups and politicians (yes, I mean Mayor Daley and his cronies).
HB 182 will simply change the "Unlawful Use of Weapons" (UUW) law, allowing a law-abiding citizen to carry a firearm in his dwelling or in the dwelling or on the land of another person where he has been invited. Governor Quinn also signed HB 3714, which states that as a condition of probation and conditional discharge, a person shall automatically be prohibited from possessing a firearm only if the offense was either a felony, or a misdemeanor that "involved bodily harm."
Hopefully this is another nail in the coffin of the movement to make it a crime to actually defend oneself and family with deadly force.
Kennedy proved eager to deal with Andropov--the leader of the Soviet Union, a former director of the KGB and a principal mover in both the crushing of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution and the suppression of the 1968 Prague Spring--at least in part to advance his own political prospects.Like my old near-neighbor Mike Barnes (D-Md.) who worked on behalf of the Sandinistas against his own government, don't forger that Ted Kennedy, God have mercy on his soul, was effectively an enemy of the United States in foreign-political terms for much of his career. Like many on his side of the aisle, he was at times more comfortable with enemies of his country than his domestic opponents within it.
Someday, one of these clowns (probably a Republican, the feckless gits) will be indicted under the Logan Act, which would make the Volgi happy. Said act reads:
§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
Can you imagine what Cold Warrior Jack or McCarthy Staffer Bobby would have thought about this? Kennedy possessed some undoubted gifts, charm, manners, and a certain noblesse oblige, but in many ways he was the embodiment and vanguard of the transformation of the Democratic party from the party of the little guy to the party of the ideological leftist. Let us not hope that what good he did is interred with his bones and the evil lives on after him. But as Billy Shakes pointed out, that ain't the way to bet.
Do read the whole article: it's worse than you think. (Or remember.)
Freda writes in after thinking over the Czar’s surprise over conservative women who hate Sarah Palin. The Czar asked why all the shudders. As a woman and a conservative (both good things!), Freda writes in:
I’m a little perplexed and disheartened to hear that conservative women hate Palin. Maybe I have a different perspective because my entire professional career has been in a male dominated industry (construction)...If you have to prove you’re serious enough, intellectual enough, or savvy enough to who[m]ever you have set up to be that judge then you’re looking for validation in the wrong places. Palin’s refreshing because she’s comfortable with who she is and she isn’t a savvy politician. I don’t care if she doesn’t give a good interview or isn’t quick with non-answers to gotcha questions like most politicians. I care about her principles and her character. That’s what matters where I work, that’s what should matter where Govt works.Of course, the Czar did not mean to imply that all or even most conservative women hate Sarah Palin. Rather, the Czar was shocked to encounter more conservative women who expressed distaste for Ms. Palin. Freda’s points are of course perfectly valid and the Czar has stated here and elsewhere that he thought Palin was a great, surprising choice—although her greatest fault was that she made McCain seem dull and slow by comparison.
I want a candidate with sound conservative principles and the character to stand-up for those principles. I think Palin was that candidate and it was a nice bonus that she looked like me, a woman.
Of course, no less important is this comment:
Still love the blog. Read you guys every day.You is teh awsum, too.
Friday, August 28, 2009
They can also get the job done. Associated Press reports that the UAE Navy—sometime in August, although the news broke today—seized a ship correctly suspecting the vessel was a North Korean ship smuggling weapons into Iran.
No surprise: it was. Although no nuclear materials were found, the ship was indeed loaded with a variety of RPGs, fuses, and other illegal gear labeled as machine parts. That was hardly the only deceoption. Seems that the ship, the ANL Australia is a vessel owned by an Australian subsidiary of a French company, sailing under the Bahamian flag with material exported by an Italian company with offices in China. Okay, well, the important thing is the UAE Navy figured it all out in time.
The prohibition against Iran taking in weapons is, of course, a condition established by the UN, who have already resolved to do nothing except find a way to make kids touch themselves. Lots of luck.
Indeed, it isn’t that Iran needs RPGs, fuses, and other weapon materials: they have plenty of their own already that international monitors know all about. So why do this? Because the powder and propellants in RPGs and weapon fuses go into making roadside bombs exactly like the kind that have killed over 40 Americans in Afghanistan this month alone. They use the cheap, Korean stuff for those, keeping their own legitimate stash of weapons right where intelligence agencies can see them. We did a similar thing with Dad’s beer when we were kids. Leave his cans where he could see them and count them, but drink your own secret stash.
Nice work, UAE. Somewhere in Afganistan, there is a Marine who has never heard of your country, but who will one day soon go home intact to a joyful family due to your intervention. You have our thanks.
Lower House elections are taking place tomorrow (or today, by the time you read this), and the polls seem to indicate that the long-serving Liberal Democratic Party is about to be thrown out of office on a wide scale, with the Democratic Party of Japan taking hold.
Japanese political party names do not, er, correspond to American ones. The Liberal Democratic Party is a substantially right-wing, conservative entity that has steered Japan since 1955you know, when Japan went from being a backwater, post-war slumlot to a major economic powerhouse with a substantially high level of living. The Democratic Party of Japan, by contrast, is a liberal party. Very liberal. How much? See if your blood gets chilled by this recipe:
Before Japan enters an age of fewer children and an aging population in the early 21st century, we must overthrow the ancien régime locked in old thinking and vested interests, solve the problems at hand, and create a new, flexible, affluent society which values people's individuality and vitality....First of all, we shall build a society governed with transparent, just, and fair rules. Secondly, while the free market should permeate economic life, we aim for an inclusive society which guarantees security, safety, and fair and equal opportunity for each individual. Thirdly, we shall devolve the centralized government powers to citizens, markets, and to local governments, and build a decentralized society in which people of all backgrounds participate.
Let us recount the many elements of Progressivism. An emphasis on youth development. A break from the old ways and their foggy, outdated thinking. The urgent need to reform society to something bigger, better, and greater. Emphasis on individualism, but not personal freedom. A pledge for transparency and equity. Total inclusion of all people as economic equals, regardless of what they put into the system. A guarantee of safety, security, and opportunity in this dangerous time. Reduce powers to citizens, markets, and local governments. A decentralized society that makes all people equal by force.
Sound familiar? Let us hope that Japanese voters are better versed on world history than Americans were last fall.
Instead, we have concluded that there’s a lot of data being gathered, but not a whole lot of information yet. Why? Climatology is still very much an emerging science. The Czar and the inscrutable Mandarin both studied climatology under the same professor,* and one of that professor’s most prescient comments was that given how much he had seen the science change in 20 years, the next 20 years will be even more amazing. It has been more than 20 years, but he was quiet right in how much climatology has changed. That’s good, in that we have advanced our knowledge so ridiculously far, but bad in that we have learned how little we still know about a complex, inter-related chaotic process.
One thing is certain: anyone who is certain about anything else in climatology is lying to you or simply deluded. This is why most climatologists with incredible pedigrees tend to avoid discussion on climate change: they know that, as the experts, they have the least data of all. And when climatologists ask to see what data there is, they’re told to go foxtrot themselves. (Note: read BorePatch’s entire series on the shell game of climate change data by clicking the junk science label at the bottom of that link. Fascinating research by him.)
For example, some opponents have proposed that the sun affects our weather in unknown ways, and that there are some solar cycle models that could account for temperature swings on the earth better than any other type of data.
Nonsense. Even scientists agree that’s just cherry picking data that support your hypothesis. The fact is that global climate change—whether that’s warming or cooling—is happening now, and we have to act now by passing all sorts of liberal-heavy socialist/progressive legislation now that will cost billions of dollars.
Except that some climatologists did consider the question as serious. And they have concluded that yes, the sun alters our climate in not-fully-understood ways.
The Czar wants you to understand this: this does not settle the debate. All this is a remarkable discovery that throws out a lot—but not all—of the so-called settled science.
There are still many, many claims that need to be evaluated and proved or disproved. We do not want to cherry pick our conclusion, but it is not cherry picking to state that, again, we have still so much to learn that action now benefits politicians, not the human race. Baby steps save more lives.
Unfortunately, the Czar expects to see no retractions from bloggers or concessions from liberal commentators. Instead, the Czar expects this to be turned around: “so if the sun affects earth’s weather, than you conservatives just conceded that there is climate change!” So let the Czar state it: folks, on the subject of solar cycles having no effect on alleged climate change, you were wrong. Dead wrong. Slow, steady, careful research proved to have a better outcome than jumping on a bandwagon. Go ahead and say it. You were wrong. It won’t hurt, and besides...you need the practice.
* The Czar studied meteorology in hopes of defying the weather; the Mandarin studied it in hopes of building a weather control weapon. We are, um, equally close to achieving our goals.
Attorney General Eric Holder has launched an investigation to second-guess the conduct of CIA interrogators of terrorists during the early days of the War on Terror. Attorney General Holder claims that even if interrogators acted in accordance with orders from above, taking actions blessed by legal counsel, interrogators may still be personally and criminally liable.
On the ObamaCare front, President Obama and the Democrat Congress propose to mandate rationing of health care, leaving doctors no choice but to forgo tests and procedures doctors and patients may think beneficial. Yet ObamaCare does not require the rationing entity (government) to take legal responsibility for the government's mandate to doctors to refuse certain treatments to patients. That is, even though doctors cannot legally provide the treatment, doctors remain liable in tort for failure to provide the impermissible treatment if the patient is harmed by the refusal.
In both instances, the government is leaving individuals open to liability (criminal and civil) for taking actions mandated by government at the time they were taken. How wacky is this? Well, here's an cruddy illustrative analogy for you. 'Puter likes to use union workers in his analogies because as we all know, all unions are in it for the children (who are our future).
Hank works on the GM truck line in the mythical failed state of Michiganistan. Hank's been putting bumpers on GMC 1500s for 25 years, and is a few years short of retirement. Hank's been an exemplary employee, attaching bumpers exactly in accordance with his superiors' instructions. Hank's never deviated even minutely form the designers' specifications. One day, Hank learns that the bumpers he's been installing are claimed to be substandard, and may or may not have contributed to injuries in auto accidents. GM redesigns the bumpers to be installed, and Hank keeps working for three more years. One day, the Michigan State Police show up at Hank's house and arrest him for installing the allegedly defective bumpers. The next day, Hank is served with a civil lawsuit, attempting to hold him liable for injuries to thousands of people allegedly caused by the bumpers Hank's installed.
"Crazy!", you say. "Not really.", replies 'Puter.
Hank's the CIA interrogator who did exactly as instructed, with legal imprimatur, who now is the subject of a liberal second guessing of War on Terror tactics. Hank's also the doctor who can't prescribe a treatment who is hung out to dry by the very government that prevents him from doing his job. ('Puter knows the doctor/Hank analogy is weak because Hank is in trouble for his actions, while the doctor is in trouble for his inaction, but suspend your danged overly-literal mind for a minute here). President Obama's chosen course pushes liability down onto people who are not culpable. This is not a formula for success in either national defense or health care reform.
The foreseeable consequences of the Obama Administration's interrogation and health care policies are thus: (1) we will be less safe because our protectors will fear prosecution for doing their jobs, so the job will remain undone; and (2) we will be less healthy because there will be fewer doctors willing to risk their livelihoods for following the government's arbitrary rationing rules.
Welcome to our brave, new world, Obama style.
This reminds me of my larger theory, which I may get around to presenting to you sometime, that I believe that Nazi analogies should be more permissible in today's political discourse than they are. Not personal comparisons of Politician X to Hitler, because Hitler remains a unique monster; but analogies to Nazi ideology and tactics, when accurate and appropriate.Hmm. I seem to recall he had a rather different opinion when reviewing a book that pointed out that whole swaths of his own side’s ideology and program , while instantiated differently, drew from the same wells as Hitler and, in particular, Mussolini did. That was “tedious and inane—and ultimately self-negating.” For a demolition of his argument, see Jonah Goldberg’s reply here.
On he goes, saying,
If you read, for example, Adolf Hitler's basic stump speeches from the pivotal 1932 election, you'll see that he was often saying things - about the economy, let's say - that are perfectly within the bounds of acceptable political discourse even today. They're right wing, but within the bounds. I say this, obviously, not to make the point that Hitler's economic policies were grand, but to make the point that carefully drawn analogies ought to be fair game.Wait, wait. Right-wing? Let me quote an author Tomasky respects:
We have also recognized, since at least the 1950s and in some prescient instances even earlier, that certain consanguinities between the far left and the far right did exist in those days, and that the Nazi program was in some respects a left-wing program, appealing on a class basis--and, always, a racial basis--to German workers and the petit bourgeoisie. It was not called National Socialism for nothing.This authority? Michael Tomasky in his "Yes, yes, there are certain incidental points of similarity between fascism and liberalism, but come on, don’t be stupid” review of Liberal Fascism. He acknowledged National Socialism’s left-wing program (“in some respects”) when forced to by Goldberg’s argument (and evidence), but now he’s reverted to the “National Socialism is right-wing” trope.
For the record, was Hitler right-wing in the American sense as Tomasky would have us believe? As in free-market economics? Let’s go to the videotape.
Here's Hitler rambling on in his usual, half-baked, pseudo-intellectual fashion to the Düsseldorf Industry Club on January 27, 1932. I’ve cut it down a little, for which you should thank me. For the whole thing, go here to page 93.
I may cite an example: you, Gentlemen, are of the opinion that the construction of the German economy must be based upon the concept of private property.… It is characteristic of all truly great revolutionary epochs in the history of mankind that they pass over, with unparalleled ease, forms which have become sacred only with time or which only apparently become sacred with time. …[P]rivate property is only morally and ethically justifiable if I assume that men’s achievements are different. … But if the results of men’s achievements are different, then it is expedient to leave the administration of these achievements to men to an appropriate degree.… [I]t would be madness to claim that, while there are doubtless differences in value in the economic sector, there are none in the political sector! It is nonsense to base economic life on the concept of achievement, of personal value and thus practically on the authority of the individual, while denying this authority of the individual in the political sphere and substituting in its place the law of the greater number—democracy.”Quick translation for those whose eyes have glazed over: it’s time for the economy to be controlled by Big Men in cooperation with the state. Remember: when Hitler says “individual,” he does not mean what Americans hear: the free citizen operating on his own in a free market or political system. (Or “personal value:” not the inherent worth of every human, but how much better one man is than another.)
He’s implying none-too-subtly that the democratic Weimar Republic needs be replaced by a revolutionary new order in which authoritative business “individuals” will collaborate with an all-powerful state, as (he goes on to say, warming to his topic because it’s what he really cares about) all of Germany becomes completely unified under a Weltanschauung—world-view, ideology—which it’s lost under the chaos of democracy and the demonic threat of Bolshevism. What Germany needs is genius, in the old, scary Romantic sense. Economics were not Hitler’s long suit or even a primary interest, but his principle, as with politics, is that the Right People should rule without constraint. The great must dispense with morality, law, etc., which are designed for the little people for whom liberty is dangerous. The greatest good is the life of the nation as embodied in the ideologized God-State.
Now in what conceivable universe is this a “right-wing” program in the Anglo-American sense? Sure, Hitler hates the Bolsheviks, but that’s like saying because the Crips hate the Bloods, they’re on the side of law and order.
Hitler’s party may have been considered “right-wing” within the universe of radical-socialist parties at the time—especially in Soviet parlance because as Hitler notes, Trotsky has ordered the KPD to ally with the Social Democrats to stop the NSDAP at this point—but this is entirely relative and to a great degree a product of Soviet black propaganda. Hitler’s own taxonomy of the NSDAP (later in that speech, for example), placing the Center Party as an arm of World Bolshevism, is just hyperbolic demonization of everyone not him, not a rational construction of a political spectrum anyone should accept.
To imply, as Tomasky does, that the economic program of a socialist, authoritarian, corporatist party is analogous to that of the Anglo-American, small-government, rule-of-law, economic-liberty “right wing” is lunacy. (Especially when the American “Progressive” “left wing” has recently attempted to socialize the medical system, opined that it’d like its opponents to “shut up,” and effectively corporatized most of the auto industry.)
As Goldberg pointed out in his book, fascism was considered glamorous, Progressive, and modern, and a close cousin of Communism, just without the latter’s fetish for state ownership of the means of production. These ideas—and the emotions upon which they’re based—have deep roots in human nature. But I repeat myself:
As I’ve mentioned before, fascism is a hypertrophied version of some very deep human desires. Its endpoint is not swastikas and concentration camps, but that hardly makes irrelevant the fact that it‘s always—deliberately—taken away freedom and economic opportunity in the name of letting the Smart People, the Great & the Good, run things in a beneficent Third Way, unopposed by the messy multitude of interests that compete in an free, open, democratic system.And while I’m there:
…interested readers should look at Chapter 8 of Liberal Fascism to look at what Goldberg (a Friend of the Gormogons) calls “Liberal Fascist Economics” and consider the direction of where we’re going and where we’ve been before under the New Deal and War Socialism, not to mention where Europe ended up under Mussolini and Hitler (or arguably, though he doesn’t mention it, Lenin’s NEP). Goldberg argued that our economic system was already fascist-influenced in important respects, and—although he hasn’t written on the topic—I suspect he’d say that the “bailout” is a massive dose of ’roids which will make those fascist elements bulk up and metastasize.So why would Tomasky go out of his way to make the off-handed (perhaps reflexive) point that Hitler’s economic program was “right wing?” Tomasky believes liberals possess a magical je ne sais quoi that allows them to never participate in any coercive governmental action:
Not to mention the bankers’ and auto executives’ truckling and kowtowing to Congresses’ crackpot mandates is, moreover, classic behavior under fascism: big businesses seeking to protect themselves from competition or failure by giving the state control and sometimes ownership.
But where that collective urge crosses the line into coercion, well, that is where liberals--I mean liberals who know something about liberalism--get off the train, and do their noncoercive best to derail it.Like Wilson’s imposition of segregation in the federal government, ministry of propaganda, attempted militarization of society, Sedition Act banning criticism of the government or military, imposing draconian censorship, founding his own Stasi informer-police in the APL, loosing the Palmer Raids, encouraging persecution of German- and other hyphenate Americans, and imprisonment of between 100,000 and 200,000 Americans on political grounds. Like when FDR set up the NRA to set prices, tried to pack the Supreme Court, used the American Legion as Wilson used the APL, unleashed brutal strike-breaking, and locked up a 100,000 Japanese- and a few thousand Italian- and German- Americans. Like when Harry Truman attempted to introduce compulsory health insurance and seized the steel industry.
That’s why good liberals shifted their votes to Coolidge, Dewey, and Ike, and excoriate Wilson, FDR, and Truman to this day, having read them out of respectable discourse. They haven’t? Ah yes. As Goldberg put it bluntly in his reply to Tomasky:
History is full not only of examples of liberals failing to derail the locomotive’s rush to coercion, but of liberals actually shoveling as much coal into the engine’s furnace as possible.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
$9300 Room in dark, foreboding group castle (whereabouts undisclosed) ...
The house is active, with Gormogons coming and going throughout the day. We regularly host people who are in town for government stupidity reducing-type activities.
Our opinions about the issues of the day – as well as Hello Kitty, religion, guns, and technology – are superior, which leads to wonderfully thoughtful conversations about what is going on around us and why we should be running the world. Everyone in the house is in one way or another working towards our visions (we have plenty of visions).
We have nothing communal. You want to eat - go get some food - shoot it, buy it, or have your spouse hit it with a car and drag it home in your suit - we don't care. We dine together every Sunday and sometimes during the week, but people have different schedules and we won't bother you if you don't bother us. Consensus is for weenies - we decide how things run in the castle - there are no meetings only mandates and proclamations from those in charge. If you're not comfortable with the way that the house is going, the Mandarin will be happy to offer his boot to ease you.
THE CURRENT HOUSEMATES
There are five Gormogons and one female currently living in the house. Three of the people in the house are people of rage. There is one linguist. We are four technophiles, and multiple gun advocates. We rotate Sunday night cook nights where we make a a huge feast with lots of roasted meat for everyone in the house. We like hanging out with each other occasionally until 'Puter really gets gross and then we do our own thing.
We really don't want a new housemate. Seriously, it's trouble enough when the 'Puter and Czar get into hockey "discussions" with the Volgi dropping conversation grenades into the fray. GorT has fried the last two potential roomies in some freakish experiment trying to improve his time traveling. The Mandarin while sitting quietly in the corner is really a festering pot of rage which doesn't bode well for neophytes to the castle. So, really, if you do get wind of where the castle is (thanks to Veep Biden's big mouth), I would just keep walking past and hope that the 'Puter doesn't draw a bead on you with his .30-06.
Associated Press has this photograph of it (<click the link). Or of something that isnt it. The Czar remembers Texas being quite a bit bigger than this.
Look, if you can make a home out of what is Texas, that it ought to be easy to parcel up this floating island and sell it off to wealthy real estate fools. Abu Dhabi has got them buying acres of sand, for crying out loud. This oughta be easy: its ocean-front property all around. Unlike Texas.
But if it really bothers you, let us know. The Gormogons can send Zдravgր out there to clean it up. Hes the janitor at the Castle Gormogon (shown to the right), and based on what he can do after one of Puters parties here at the Castle, he should be able to clean up a Texas-sized trash pile in about 12 hours.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
You all know this. Muscovy, for example, is not a member of the UN and never will be. Neither is the nation of TJICistan.
The UN, if you don’t realize this, is an anti-American collection of college socialist dope smokers and reprobates who, were they not members of the UN, would be leading platoons of young men dressed in black toward Rome or would be in jail.
The Czar gets annoyed when they make petty threats to other nations when every dictator in the world knows they lack the teeth to back it up, beyond pointing either the United States military or the pockets of the American citizen at every problem they come out of their pot smoke haze to zone in on.
The Czar gets angry when they demand the US be held responsible for every imagined slight in the world, making us to blame for the lack of environmentalism in China and India, the source of world hunger, the fact the dollar is weaker, or that we tend to utilize capitalism to lift our poor out of hunger and misery, as opposed to the other member nations that sip coffee and sit around sunny courtyards bemoaning that the kids don’t read Das Kapital like they used to, and now the poor in their countries have to go ahead and eat fiberglass because their economic infrastructure has collapsed.
So it cannot be a surprise when the UN simply steps out from behind its you-can-thank-us-for-Israel mask and openly says “We are nothing more than radical liberals here to turn you into one of us.” Nor can it be a surprise when certain UN efforts push the Czar’s rage button.
Let us review. The UN is a superstructure of the failed and useless League of Nations. Right. The League of Nations was formed by Woodrow “Benito” Wilson. Uh-huh. Wilson was a staunch progressivist who pushed America into a sometimes brutal dictatorship. Yup. Progressivists were and are liberals that believe every aspect of your life needs to come under scrutiny for how it can be improved to help society as a whole. Yes sir. Progressivists tolerate no discussion or dissent, and provided the infrastructure for everything that continues its attempts to destroy the world from the early 20th Century all the way through today. Got it. If you have trouble following this, just read the purple text.
The Czar wants badly to line someone against a wall and open fire. Or at least hit something hard with a rolled up newspaper. Instead, he will wait in vain for the day that America swears in a bona fide conservative leadership that finally pulls our sorry asses out of the UN, and watches them shut down as their major source of income requires them to sober out and get real jobs. Their days of living in their mother’s basement, spitting out copies of their socialist pamphlets on an iMac, need to come to an end.
Don't you wish Ken Starr had done that?
Via Warming Glow.
By the by, though, doesn’t young Ted look like half the Irish crapweasels we went to school with?
Update: KSK’s Tommy from Quincy delivers a special, Bay State eulogy.
The Boston Globe's editorial board, no bastion of conservative thought, calls out the Massachusetts Teachers Association (read, union) for standing in the way of education reforms that have driven student Advanced Placement exam scores through the roof.
The reforms' crime? Merit pay for individual teachers who excel, rather than lockstep pay increases for all. Teachers' unions are concerned that a focus on teacher merit will lead to competition among the members of its bargaining unit. As the Globe correctly notes, the union's delaying tactics are damaging children.
'Puter cannot better the Globe's spot on assessment of the situation, so he concludes with its words: "For now, it would be enough for teachers unions to simply get out of the way and let their most ambitious members and students soar."
One of the biggest myths perpetrated by Vladimir Putin’s propaganda machine is that during his 10-year rule over Russia, the former president and current prime minister succeeded in “pacifying” the North Caucasus. Nothing could be further from the truth. What we are witnessing today is the start of the third Caucasus war in 15 years, following the two Chechen wars of 1994 and 1999.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
(Source with extensive discussion. Via Jonah on the Corner.)
The Œc. Vol. has frequently thought—anecdotally—that something like this is the case. A whole range of explanations suggest themselves, but Confucius* says: Most worrisome scenario is that it’s simply a function of higher education which, rather than cultivating the educated, thoughtful scholar of traditional liberal education, has turned into a factory for shallow, fashionable, conformist, moralizing, leftist “intellectuals.” And remember, kiddos, back when people could read, intellectual was not a synonym for scholar or educated person. It was pejorative, like the Russian term intelligentsia, which seems to have been whole-heartedly adopted by those it contemned.
Whatever the cause, the trend suggests an explanation for the fact that a significant fraction of the American élite appears to profoundly dislike America—or at least to consider it inferior to the abstract, idealized, intellectualized version that they believe it should become. (To be redeemed, but that’s a whole other post.)
As Cicero said in De Divinatione: Sed nescio quo modo nihil tam absurde dici potest quod non dicatur ab aliquo philosophorum† (2, 119), and as Orwell may or may not have paraphrased, “Some ideas are so stupid, only an intellectual could conceive of them.”
One worries that chart shows the growth of our very own, homegrown intelligentsia, presenting a very thorny socio-political problem.
* For those who came in late: Confucius is the Gormogons’ Œcumenical Volgi.
† But I know there's nothing you can say so absurd that it hasn’t been said by some philosopher or other.
With today’s appointment of Denis Hughes – who just happens to be the president of the New York state AFL-CIO – as the chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, that jingle may need to be updated to “Look for the Union Payoff”.
Congress has decided it has had enough of Cash for Clunkers. After all, the program proved to be unmanageable, has completely run out of funding, and still has yet to pay money to the people who were to have been saved: auto manufacturers and dealerships. GM, for example, is fronting the money to dealerships who are running out of cash due to the government’s inability to pay up.
The same folks who want to run your healthcare system, but proved incompetent at handling a quarter million basic cash transactions.
Maybe they should try something easier. Like refrigerators. Yup. Cash for Refrigerators kicks off this Fall, in hopes that the government can accomplish something quite a bit smaller without effing it up.
And they’ve already effed it up. There is no requirement in the legislation for you to turn in your old fridge. You can simply buy a new fridge, freezer, or other Energy Star appliance minus up to $200 off sticker price, and keep your old one. So the environmental benefit of getting rid of your old appliance to get a greener one? None. Manufacturers and retailers both fully expect consumers to buy inexpensive appliances to move the old one out to the garage or basement and keep it. So because most older, inefficient appliances will remain in use but will be joined by new units elsewhere in the house, we will actually add to the appliance load on the environment by an amount exactly equal to the number of appliances moved to the garage or basement. Except now, it’s taxpayer money burning up the ozone layer.
The same folks who want to run your healthcare system think that this will help the environment.
The intent of course is to Save the Liberal World. “These rebates will help families make the transition to more efficient appliances, making purchases that will directly stimulate the economy,” said Steven Chu, whom the Czar regards as a fantasy-prone individual unable to differentiate between reality and academic theory. Analysts believe the small amount of stimulus money available—only $300 million this time—will not make a dent in stock prices or enough to benefit appliance makers. And the $50 to $200 rebate adds up to little more than a Fall sale price for retailers.
The same folks who want to run your healthcare system think that $300 million will offset the losses caused by the massive unemployment rate and subsequent decrease in purchases of durable goods.
The only truly helpful government exchange program should be the Democrat-to-Republican exchange currently scheduled to happen in late 2010. Everyone should benefit there.
VoIP does not make calls over the internet; it merely uses a switched, digitized, and packetized transmission using the internet protocol (IP), meaning that call information can be routed like internet data around road blocks in any order, and then reassembled into meaningful data at the far end. It need not use the internet to do so, but is instantly compatible either way.
So what, perhaps. But this is a surprisingly bad deal for Apple and a rare lack of foresight that is simply incredible. VoIP is massive in its application, including the ability to do video calls, screen pops (imagine getting a call from an unknown number, and then on the second ring see a picture of the guy, his contact information, and his business and personal history based on info you collected years ago so you dont have to remember the names of his kids or what he sells), the ability to change banking, personal, or business passwords using your voice, and more. This isnt 2001-esque future crap, but stuff people are actually doing right now. The future of this is even more incredible. Oh yeah, its generally cheaper than any other form of commercialized voice transmission.
So basically, AT&T has tricked Apple into making two separate devices out of the iPhone: a phone, and a web browser. But not a holistic application that is both and neither, like other phones are rapidly becoming. The Czar agrees that a lot of VoIP developers are probably crotch-kicked over this revelation. For all the iPhone promised to be, it winds up being a cell phone and a tiny little Newton that surfs the web. Bad call, Apple. You let a 1950s application kill your future-oriented handheld.
It's a unionized town!
Teacher pay's up,
And kids' test scores are down.
The whole state's run by
A gov who's a clown.
New York, New York!
It's a helluva town!
'Puter would like to thank Gormogon operative Noah, who may or may not live in the Workers' Paradise of Ciudad de Nueva Jork, for citing him to this takedown of the United Federation of Teachers in, of all places, the New Yorker.** Although the article is concerned with New York City's schools, its observations are equally applicable across the state. 'Puter speaks from experience, living Upstate and all. The article's conclusion? Unions are good for neither children nor taxpayers.
Joel Klein, chancellor of New York City Public Schools states the underlying problem thus: "The three principles that govern our system are lockstep compensation, seniority, and tenure. All three are not right for our children." Well put.
Read on for a description of the Rubber Room, where horrible teachers are sent for years as their firings wind through mandatory arbitration. Addled inhabitants of the Rubber Room complain of human rights violations, comparing it to terrorist prisons at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Yet this horrible, horrible teachers are being paid full salary, summers off, and accruing retirment and health benefits, just for sitting there reading from 8:15 to 3:15 each school day. If that's Guantanamo, sign 'Puter up.
The article is above all an indictment of a system where workers and their union masters hold almost godlike power. For example, one Patricia Adams was placed in the Rubber Room for several years, as she was found passed out in her classroom (full of kids), reeking of alcohol. For unknown reasons, the City schools agreed to let Ms. Adams back in the classroom provided she submit to random alcohol testing. In February 2009, Ms. Adams passed out in the school office holding a water bottle full of booze. According to the attending technician, Ms. Adams was so intoxicated, she was unable to blow into the breathalyzer. Yet the UFT got a known alcoholic back into the classroom, with kids. The article continues on with additional examples of teachers no student ought to have, protected by union rules and paid for their incompetence with taxpayer dollars.
'Puter takes away from this article what he has always known. The education industry is no longer about kids. It is about protecting teachers and projecting union power to crush reform, regardless of the impact on education itself. UFT and Ms. Weingarten are reprehensible. It is their intransigence that has cost this country generation after generation of kids. No sensible person wants to screw teachers over, but in negotiating no meaningful teacher discipline, we get the education system we deserve. One in which bad teachers, unable to be fired, ruin children with impunity, without fear of consequences, for there are none.
After your Gormogons (mostly the Czar) solve the health care debacle, 'Puter proposes we take up a new battle. Our cry will be "No unionizing against children and taxpayers."
**'Puter encourages readers to send him ideas for posts, particularly about union abuses and financial issues. His address is to the left. 'Puter'll even let you live if you disagree with him, unlike the Czar, who has been known to hunt opponents down for sport.
Again, nothing illegal and nothing that the government should prevent. However, I would check my T&C's if I were an iPhone user and see if such a restriction were disclosed to me. I would also check, if I were an iPhone developer, to see whether Apple disclosed that information as well. I'd hate to invest a ton of money building out an innovative iPhone application that had VoIP potential or real features only to be barred just before or after deploying it.
My take aways from this post are two-fold: First, Apple better be careful how it treads here - scare away the innovators with agreements like this will damage the future potential of the iPhone platform. Second, AT&T needs to get past the voice plan revenues. We've already discussed what a farce they are and if that's so important in this deal, then how well postured is AT&T for the future?
Monday, August 24, 2009
Behold, 'Puter gives you the following example! The Veterans' Administration sent out letter to at least 1,200 Gulf War veterans informing them that they have Lou Gehrig's Disease (ALS). ALS is a fatal neurological disorder that gradual robs the afflicted of their ability to control their muscles. The problem? The 1,200 veterans do not, in fact, actually have ALS.
'Puter thinks he'll take Mr. Rahm Emanuel up on his offer, and not let this good crisis go to waste. 'Puter respectfully calls on the 1,200 affected veterans to rise up with their erroneous letters in hand and beat President Obama's proposed health care reform abomination to death. What better example of the absolute insanity of letting the incompetent federal government run anything of personal importance than wrongly informing 1,200 veterans that they're going to die a horrible death?
Veterans, your country needs you again. Semper fidelis. (Sorry, non-Marines).
Scotland is getting a real taste of what it's like to be a separate country.
Lockerbie bomber Adbelbaset Ali Mohmet al-Megrahiwho has indeed killed a lot more people than we know about, well beyond the Lockerbie horroris dying of prostate cancer in a Scottish prison.
Libya, now a wonderful, sunny place since 2001, is entertaining offers from the UK and other countries for securing rights for oil exploration. Might be nice, perhaps, if the UK had something tangible to sweeten the deal.
England's Foreign Office Minister Ivan Lewis sends Scotland's MoJ Kenny Kenny MacAskill a letter, arguing that al-Megrahi deserves the right to spend out his last days in Libya, released from prison.
Gormogons Spotlight On: ScotlandMacAskill, looking to help out England, authorizes the release of the prisoner, which outrages the civilized world.
Mu‘ammar al-Qaḏḏāfī publicly thanks the English for their assistance in securing al-Mergrahi's release, and instantly undoes eight years of progress with the rest of the world. The US, understandably, is furious and demands England's PM Gordon Brown explain the story.
Brown's handlers disavow any involvement with Scottish justice, and basically throws Scotland under the bus. Certainly, this has nothing to do with any Libyan oil deal, so there was no such letter written.
An unnamed Scottish government worker releases some of the letter to press.
David Cameron, head of UK's Conservative Party, asks that Brown release the letter from Lewis to expose the dirty deal that Brown's government was involved in.
Brown then miraculously finds a letter sent to Mu‘ammar al-Qaḏḏāfī from the UK stating that it would be very bad for al-Megrahi to be released. This clearly proves the Brown government had no involvement. As far as anyone can tell, MacAskill acted on his own against the wishes of the Brown government to the South.
Scottish legislators are meeting today to clear up the matter. As MacAskill will be testifying before Parliament, expect a lot more fun to follow.
Not really. It is irresponsible to go wave watching near hurricane-roiled seas. It is even dumber to attempt swimming. Injury or death is at least foreseeable, if not likely. These folks knew or should have known what they were getting into, and they paid with their lives. And they risked the lives of potential rescuers as well.
So, let their epitaphs read "killed by their own stupidity."
The hosts go on to talk about all this anger and they attempt to link it to a racist agenda. While I won't discount that some people in America might still have racism issues, I think they miss the point. Recent polls show that over 70% of people don't like the agenda that POTUS Obama is pushing. People are starting to wonder whether this is really the hope and change that they voted for when they're seeing the data on what his (and his friends') agenda is costing us and our nation. People shrugged off the stories about who Obama associated with, but maybe they should go back and see if those stories are still holding water. Politicians are pretty well defined by the company they keep.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Please drop any one of us a lineour email addresses are at leftand let us know if you have us on your blogroll or favorite sites. In return, well do our best to get you on our blogroll so you can get some free advertising and here and bump up your readership. Free advertising! Its about the only thing the Gormogons dont corrupt.
P.S. Love ya!
The feminine half of our hosts turned her attention to POTUS Obama, and how she has come to loathe his attitude toward the people of Indiana. She is most upset about his bold-faced statements to the people of Elkhart, from his condescension (“I don’t know if you guys have been noticing, but we’ve had a little debate in Washington...”; yeah, they’ve noticed. Hard.) to his complete about-face on how Elkhart—one of the hardest hit communities in the United States—has yet to see any of the boons promised to them.
So, the question naturally followed, why vote for him? Incredibly, she said that the moment the GOP picked Sarah Palin, she picked Obama to win. “I cannot stand that woman,” she said with a shudder. The Царица herself agreed that McCain hit a brick wall in picking her over so many qualified people. This is not nearly the first time the Czar has heard established conservative women speak out against Sarah Palin.
Shocking, and it might be safe to suppose that most male GOP supporters thought she was a great choice. No, liberals, not because she was a former beauty queen...but because she brought a youthful enthusiasm to politics and a common sense, been-there-done-that approach to problem-solving. The Czar asked why, expecting her to state that it was the accent, or the perky hair, or the big cutesy smile, or any of the other stuff we have heard. So why turn on her with nearly the same distaste that liberals of either gender engender? The answer was interesting.
These women were terrified she might screw it up for conservative women. The Couric interview in particular made it look like a conservative woman just doesn’t get politics. Seriously, that’s the best they could come up with? Not someone who can confidently answer a taxation question, jam home the importance of foreign policy, or tell the media to shut up about her private life.
This was interesting. The Czar felt she could handle herself pretty well, given that she had gone from largely unknown governor of a poorly known state to the international spotlight in a matter of hours. The response, which the Czar has seen echoed elsewhere, is that she is anti-intellectual, and goes for the quick and easy sound bite rather than the meaningful answer. Given her acumen, she comes off to conservative women as a manufactured phony.
It seems bizarre, but the less than 10 conservative women the Czar has talked to about this seem to believe, universally, that she does not represent women’s issues or interests nearly as well as Obama.
Fine—you think she’s a fake who either does not represent you, or represents you so well that you fear the slightest mistake will set back the advances of conservative women everywhere. But why would so many women then vote for Obama? If McCain/Palin only represents 50% of your interests, why vote for Obama/Biden, who represents probably 5% at best of your interests?
Because, evidently, women believed her to be a reflection of McCain. Women are convinced, and perhaps with perfectly valid reasons, that Palin was picked to swing the Clinton voters away from Obama. In effect, she was a stunt—and all of her shortcomings were not so much a reflection on Palin as they were a reflection that McCain liked them. Yeah, he liked her youthful enthusiasm and administrative experience, but he didn’t pick a Carly Fiorina, or a Condy Rice, or other under-60ish accomplished women. No, he picked her because he wanted someone perky, who could say goofball things like Biden and get away with them because she’s cutesy and winky. In short, they concede Palin is a serious, powerful woman—but not nearly serious and powerful enough to be vice president today. She would become a Dan Quayle-caliber laughing stock. Fine for Biden, but not with all women would have invested in her.
The Czar asked if, in the next few years, she continues down the path of becoming someone more established—speeches, presentations, books, interviews, policy wonking—well, then perhaps. But 2012 is not 2008, and she just was not ready to earn women’s support any more than a man would have deserved it.
Okay, that’s fair, the Czar conceded...but why all the shudders?