Hannibal Lecter Would Choke On A Piece Of My Mind

Latest

In Which Ax Channels The Ghost Of Joe McCarthy*

*At least, what liberals say Joe McCarthy did.  Which he didn’t, but facts never seem to get in their way.

Now then.  It’s time for a Flaming Skull of Raeg.

This is what you get when you make my head explode.  And what, you might ask, has me so hot ‘n bothered?  Oh nothing.

Just the top Democrat message guy going on TV and popping off about how the Chamber of Commerce is a threat to democracy. Why?  Because it told the public that it took some money from foreign companies.

Well let me think for just about half a second on this one.

K, I’m done.  That was fast, wasn’t it?  Here’s what I came up with.

  1. This is a global economy, smart guy.  So if a business-oriented interest group takes money from foreign companies, it’s possibly because those foreign companies have parts of their business in America.  With, y’know, people working at them.  You know, at JOBS AND STUFF.  BECAUSE BUSINESSES MAKE JOBS.
  2. The Chamber came out and TOLD people.  In the biz, that’s called disclosure. So if people want to know, for voting purposes, if the Chamber got money from foreign interests.  Which it did.  And it said so publicly.  So what’s the big deal, yo?
  3. Politics of fear.  I think that’s all I need to say about that.
  4. No, that’s not all I need to say.  I have to show you the DNC ad linking Karl Rove, Ed Gillespie, and the Chamber of Commerce to a mugger in a parking garage.  Really.

The other thing is, I get this feeling that I’ve seen this sort of shady, back-door campaign contributions somewhere before, but I just can’t place it.

Obama Accepting Untraceable Donations

Contributions Reviewed After Deposits
By Matthew Mosk
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Sen. Barack Obama‘s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed.

Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.

Oh.  That’s where.

Back to Axelrod, though, because this really is a gold mine of stupid.  Here’s what the Times quoted Ax as saying:

David Axelrod, the president’s senior adviser, was asked Sunday by Bob Schieffer on “Face the Nation” on CBS if he had any evidence that the chamber was using secret foreign funds to influence the election.

“Well, do you have any evidence that it’s not, Bob?”

Enter the Flaming Skull.  You have got to be [blogger reminds himself to be family friendly] kidding me.

Let’s apply that to a few other scenarios.

David Axelrod is a child molester.  Do you have any evidence that he’s not, Bob?

David Plouffe is a smily-faced axe murderer.  Do you have any evidence that he’s not, Bob?

Nancy Pelosi is a witch, and should be burned at the stake.  Do you have any evidence…actually, that one might be true.

Just kidding.  But do you have any evidence that she’s not, Bob?

The point is, I could say that Rahm Emanuel spends his spare time flaying kittens with a rusty piece of barbed wire; and if the burden of evidence is on him, he’s solidly up a creek.  I expect that not even Rahmbo would do such a horrible thing, but nobody can prove otherwise.

On a lighter note, would you like to know the limit of the NY Times’ ability to suspend disbelief?  From the same NY Times article, further up the page:

The Democrats have offered no evidence that the chamber is using foreign money to influence the elections. The chamber has overseas affiliates that pay dues to the main organization but says it has a process to segregate those funds from any used for electioneering.

We just found rock bottom.  Not even the Times is willing to omit the truth on this one.

Exit question:  Even if all of this were substantive, substantiated, and worthy of the time and energy the White House is putting into it…is it really the best idea to attack the biggest business interest group in the nation, three weeks before an election whose main electoral factor will be a faltering economy?

Light up the comments.

Advertisements

Bullies.

First of all, a warning to ladies and young people who may be reading this:  I’m about to write a post which contains graphic descriptions of violence.  In some cases, I believe violence to be the only answer, and this is one of those cases.  If graphic descriptions of a person receiving a richly deserved beatdown makes you uncomfortable, I suggest you go play in some other sandbox for the next few minutes.

Thanks.

Facebook is normally the inspiration for my posts these days.  One friend or another will write a pithy comment, or let fly a barbed zinger in their status…and the rest, as they say, is history.  I normally write about politics, and this post will contain some of that.  But since both liberals and conservatives have kids, bullying is as un-polarized as an issue can be.

One of my friends put up the following as her status today:

[NAME] is a straight ally and there are 3 days until National Coming Out Day. I’m coming out for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equality because it’s 2010 and almost 90% of LGBT youth experience harassment in school, and too many lives have been lost. Donate your status and join me by clicking here:

That’s a viral-marketing technique being used by the National Human Rights campaign to agitate for hate-crimes legislation.

The discussion of whether or not bullying a gay kid is a hate crime is a discussion for another time.  I think it’s a philosophically ridiculous argument to say that it is a hate crime, but that’s another discussion for another time.  Maybe later.

If a child is being harassed, the reason for the harassment is irrelevant.  What matters is that that the harassment is, and someone should make it stop.  Ideally, this would be the school system.  At the point which kids are in a public school, their parents have all ceded their responsibility to raise their kids — so the responsible adult in this case would be the administrators in the school system.

The problem is, they can’t.

A bully bullies because the only way he can feel better about himself is to shred someone else.  He does what he does to prove his supremacy to someone else.  But the problem is, his behavior is seated in the utterly insecure feeling that he is insignificant to those he cares about the most — parents, friends, girlfriend, whatever.  A school administrator can’t fill that void.

A bully bullies before, between, and after classes.  A school administrator has a full-time job without dealing with this kid’s destructive impulses, and simply cannot be there to stop him.  A bully, like an assassin, only has to be right one time.  The administrator, playing the part of a bodyguard, has to be right all the time.  It simply can’t be done.

This is when the natural right of a parent to defend their offspring comes into play, and where I get really freakin’ angry.

First, I won’t send my kids (when I have them) to a public school.  This will keep me out of trouble as much as it will keep them out of trouble.

Second, I’m going to have my kids trained in two martial arts of their choice, from the time they can walk.  I prefer Krav Maga and Mui Thai, but if they want to go with Aikido or Brazillian Jiujitsu, that’s fine with me.

Third, I will teach them that if any person ever presents themselves a threat in any way, they have my permission — no, they have my command, to put a boot to that person’s face (or any other weak point on their body) at extreme velocity.  I want my kid to put that bully in a wheelchair for six months.

Fourth, I will make it widely known that if any attempt at retaliation is made, I will personally visit a level of violence upon their head that cannot be fathomed.  No man, no woman, is allowed to tell a child of mine that they are not allowed to defend themselves.

And would you like to know why?

Because the adult (and I use the term loosely) who spawned and raised that little twit to threaten my child is responsible for every ounce of the danger my child was in.  They are responsible for putting my child in harm’s way.  At that point, I’m already on a hair-trigger.  And if that person decided it would be a good idea to tell me that my child did something wrong…

You’re gonna need a bigger wheelchair, pal.

So word to all the parents out there: Don’t let your kids grow up to bully other kids.  If they bully mine, it won’t go well for anybody on your side.

OH NO YOU DI ENT.

Sometimes, I meet Democrats who seem to be misguided, but genuinely good people just wanting to make America into what they think is a better country.

And then sometimes, there are the rest of them.  Like the guy running for Governor in California.  Seems he thinks it’s okay to call someone names, if it convinces people to vote for him.

Governor Moonbeam called his female opponent a whore.

Now as a guy, I gotta tell you that this particular insult hits very close to home for a lot of women — whether or not it’s true.  Think about it, how many times have you seen a catfight devolve straight into questioning each others’ chastity?

Yeah, I’ve seen that too.  I’m guessing ol’ Jerry has seen that too.

Well now is as good a time as any to relive the glory days, on how Governor Moonbeam got that nickname — one bad turn, and all…

The year was 1979.  Jerry was the starry-eyed governor of California, and dating what passed for a rock star in Linda Ronstadt.  The lady (I guess) gave an interview to Rolling Stone, in which she spilled the beans on her humorous pet name for the Guvnah — “Moonbeam.”  Chicago Tribune columnist Mike Royko pounced:

“I long ago gave up trying to figure out what Gov. Moonbeam stands for or believes in,” Mr. Royko wrote in April 1979, “besides getting his pretty mug on TV and confusing people into voting for him.” He added that Mr. Brown was an “intellectual hustler,” who “can jabber so nimbly that no one can figure what he’s talking about.”

So there ya go.  California’s King Dingaling got his nickname from a rock-star girlfriend in the late seventies, and his reputation for being a gutless hack from his many years of practicing that behavior in public.

So my question for the Dems is this:  In a deep, dark blue state…this is the best you could do? Gavin Newsom lost to this dude?

Boy, you deserve everything you get, don’t you?

Long time no see…

I just remembered, I HAVE A BLOG.

First of all, MUSIC.  This is what I’m listening to at this very moment:

Tasty.

Now, back to teh blog.  Sure, nobody reads the thing, but that’s not an excuse.  A whole lot of not being anywhere near a computer for a while, THAT’S an excuse, and I’ve got that one down cold.  I can’t really talk about my life that much, but I can at least hammer out a few thoughts now and again…

So since the last time I was here, the Great Red Wave began to build.  I think it’s begun to crest a bit, but it’s still gonna be epic.  The rumor that has everyone on edge is the one out of Florida, saying Meek is going to drop out and endorse Crist as the only guy who can beat Rubio.  That’s not gonna happen, and here’s why:

First, that rumor is easily traced back to Crist’s campaign.  That automatically makes it suspect, because this guy will say absolutely anything to get elected.  He’s the definition of a political whore, and proud of it.

The idea is to create the fear that Meek is going to quit, which will cause some of his more weak-minded supporters to give up on him.  That, in turn, should lead to a polling bump for Crist, a downward sucking sensation for Meek, and force Meek to quit whether he wants to or not.  The problem with that idea is that anybody supporting Meek at this point is doing so because they like the guy.  He has no weak-minded supporters, only the hardcore cultists that propelled the President to victory over Hillary in the primary.  Furthermore, even somebody named Meek has gotta have some pride.

More music:

Now then.  Let’s say Meek did quit, just before the early voting started.  That’d be sometime this next week, probably around lunchtime Tuesday.  This puts the story in the news cycle until the weekend — and the conventional wisdom will be that Meek dropping out will be helpful to Crist.  That’s possible, but not for the long-term.  Since the conventional wisdom will be good for Crist, he’ll get a poll bump of five to eight points, plus whatever eggheads decide to go with Crist just because Meek told them to.  That will put Crist within shouting distance of fifty, but it won’t be quite enough.

See, to get those voters, he has to A.) convince those vestigial Republicans that he hasn’t switched parties, while B.) convincing all of Meek’s voters that he HAS switched parties, and C.) get em all to turn out to vote, and D.) keep that up until election night.  A will be tough, B will be tougher, C is flat-out impossible for anyone, and D is rendered irrelevant.  Dude, Meek’s support is made up of the entirety of the African-American vote in Florida.  You’re telling me they’ll show up for the orange guy who knocked out the black guy, just so he could get elected?

Don't do stupid things.

There is no possible way you’re gonna bridge that gap in under a month.  They’ll stay home, and that’s somewhere in the neighborhood of 30% of the Florida Democrats’ voting bloc.  Even if most of them show up, he’s still hosed.

And when those Democrats stay home, guess who else loses?  Alex Sink, the Democrat running for governor.  The Democrats aren’t going to ask the only black candidate in Florida to step aside for an orange candidate already destined for the ash heap of history, just so they can also lose the gubernatorial race.  They’d be nuts to try.

Idol Campaigning: Anatomy Of A Campaign

And now, for my little sisters’ sake, I shall do a shade of analysis of American Idol politics.  I would much rather watch NCIS, but the AI demon possesses the family television regularly…so it rubs off.  Paula may be the single most inane human being on the planet – I barely escape the episodes without bleeding from the eyes…

Red-state versus blue-state, in American Idol. It seems that nothing can escape the reaches of anti-conservative bias. You may have not seen it (heck, you may have not watched it…), but it’s there. Doubt me?

How shall I count the ways? Read the rest of this page »

Just a thought…

A spin you could put on the whole job-market thing:

More than 90% of Americans still have their jobs.  Kinda like 95% of Americans will get a tax cut, right?  I’m still wondering why nobody has taken this angle on it yet…

Tools ‹ Mainstream Mayhem — WordPress

AlllllRIGHTY THEN.

I’ve been watching the two sides of the Specter Defecter food fight over the last day, and I think I can sum up the totality of both sides.  Here goes:

GOP: Sweet.  It’s about time he started being honest…

Specter: WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!  I CAN’T GET REELECTED BECAUSE OF THE WAY I VOTED, WWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ahem.

I think both sides are at least a little off.  While I am certainly glad to see Sen. Specter finally make himself an honest man (albeit still a hypocrite, since he decried the same move from Jeffords), it shows great disregard for the voters that worked to re-elect him in 2004 – over the fact that George W. Bush lost Pennsylvania in 2004.  He didn’t deliver PA, but the Republicans still stood by him.  Pat Toomey would remember that quite well.

The GOP’s reaction is also a misguided reaction.  I can understand the venting of nearly three decades of frustration with Senator Specter – we conservatives are beyond upset with Specter’s behavior of siding with Republicans only when the issue wasn’t very important to us.  But the fact remains that both the Republicans and Democrats can count to sixty.  And no matter how much we hated Senator Specter, he is now free to agree with Democrats as much as he wishes, and perhaps more so.  This will be damaging to Republicans in the short term, and damaging to America in the long term.  I’m not sure this could have been averted – but it would have been worth attempting, and putting up with Specter, for at least one more term.  At that point, unleash Toomey.  Because after that, if Republicans still have not retaken the Senate, it will matter very little to conservatives’ long-term goals.

%d bloggers like this: