Is This The "Hopey-Changey" For Which You Voted?

So President Barry says that the "time for bickering is over" on health care.

Another sanctimonious boob dismisses serious policy differences by belittling them.

This is "bipartisanship"? This is "reasonable discussion"?

No. This is typical far-Left arrogance.

The problem for President Barry is not that this is "bickering." It is not misrepresenting the contents of his proposals.

President Barry's problem is that the GOP and Conservatives are telling the truth about his proposals.

Moonbatosphere Moron ... But I Repeat Myself

With today's WaPo attack piece on Bob McDonnell --- surprise! The WaPo is taking the pro-homo side in the culture war --- Virginia's moonbats are engaged in an "Amen!" chorus. Or is it the other way around?

I found one particularly interesting. Now, I suppose there are plenty of reasons to criticize McDonnell on this, but Fred attacks McDonnell's dismissal of the complaints about the blocked re-appointment of a Virginia Beach judge as "irrelevant" to this race, "seeing as how Governors appoint judges!"

Uh, except when the legislature is not in session, and then only temporarily, not in Virginia they don't.

Fred, you're a moron.

Dan Snyder Is Pond-Scum

Give the guy credit, though: in a league in which Al Davis and Jerry Jones are both owners, Dan Snyder still manages to be the most hated owner in the league, and by his team's own fans. It's not that the Redskins have stunk up the place under his ownership, though they have. It's not the revolving door in the Head Coach's office, though there's been that, too. It's not even charging $8 for one beer even though a case of it should cost less than that.

It's things like this, which convince me he works at it.

And that, while I'll attend an occasional game, I will never be a season ticketholder.

Does It Have Twice The Nuts?

Pathologically far-Left Ben & Jerry's has a new flavor to celebrate the legalization of homosexual "marriage" in its native Vermont: "Hubby Hubby."

I suppose it rolls off the tongue more easily than "Fraudulent Poseurs."

Interesting Description

According to the New York Daily News, the State Department is investigating private guards at the Kabul, Afghanistan, embassy for frat-house activities and other "deviant behavior."

I put the last in quotation marks because, well, that's apparently the phrase the State Department is using.

Interesting phrase. In an Administration which seeks to mainstream homosexuality, endorses single-sex "marriage," and wants to provide Federal civil rights protections for ... well, "deviants," it is indeed breathtaking to contemplate what qualifies as "deviant behavior."

Brilliant!

Every freedom-loving blogger should embed this one:



H/T to Greg L

Catharsis!

Moonbat Cindy Sheehan admits what should have been obvious to everyone, but probably won't be admitted by others on the far Left: that "the 'antiwar movement' wasn't so much antiwar as anti-Bush."

Another Death Penalty Offense?

There are some cases other than premeditated murder for which the death penalty may well be an appropriate penalty.

Those who perpetrated this crime --- the kidnapping, holding, and serial child rape of Jaycee Lee Dugard --- should be eligible for the ultimate penalty. Particularly heinous is the fact that the wife of the alleged rapist was completely complicit in his crimes.

Enlisting The Government Schools To Violate The Constitution

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.

U.S. Const., amend. XIV

The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.

U.S. Const., art. I, sec.3

One of the notions of which the Framers of our Constitution were keenly aware was the principle that, in a republic, a nation of laws, not men, it was absolutely necessary that our fundamental documents be easily understandable to the average citizen. Thus, our Constitution is a fairly simple document to understand.

One good example of this principle put into practice is the census. Having created — per James Madison’s “Virginia Plan” — one legislative branch based upon proportional representation of the population of each state, and foreseeing the growth to be enjoyed by the nascent nation, the members of the Constitutional Convention immediately understood that a method of apportioning those representatives among the several States would be necessary at certain
intervals. Hence, they required a decennial census to apportion representatives.

But apportionment of Members of Congress is the sole constitutional purpose for the census. Other than that sole design, the census has no other purpose authorized by the Constitution.
When, in 2000, the Youngs received their census form, Form D-2, to be precise, it was the long form. It included a cover letter over the signature of Kenneth Prewitt, Director of the Bureau of the Census.

While it was nice to see that we would be “actually enumerated” after years of talk of statistical “sampling” promoted by an administration desiring to rig the process, the actual form was something of an anticlimax, preceded by weeks of television and radio advertising. We even received, in this year’s property tax assessment, a palmcard from our friends in the McCoart Center, promoting participation.


Interestingly, not a single word of that advertising mentioned the constitutional purpose for the census, i.e., apportionment of representatives. All of it focused on what we would get for doing so. The palmcard provided a blurb about “What Happens when you fill out Census 2000... You can improve education, help our nation’s farmers, provide help to people in need of social services, build better housing where needed, move transportation forward and create jobs.” It was of a piece with the broadcast advertising.

Well thanks, but no thanks. The federal government shouldn’t be in the business of education in the first place, or in providing housing, or in socialist “services,” i.e., those enjoyed by identifiable groups of people whose votes politicians decide to buy. And it certainly shouldn’t pervert the important constitutional purpose of the Census to achieve the extra-constitutional ends which are the sole topic of the advertising campaign.

Like the advertising preceding it, the Youngs' last Census form was a fascinating exemplar of bloated, statist nannyism of the big-government bureaucrats who doubtless put it together. Some credit is due, however; Prewitt’s cover letter states that the “First” reason answering the form is important is apportionment. However, he then went on to talk about how “[t]he amount of government money your neighborhood receives depends on your answers.” What’s funny, though, is that looking around my neighborhood, I have a sneaking suspicion that my neighbors and I are paying for a lot more than we’re receiving. And I have a conceptual problem with voluntarily participating in a process by which my wages are plundered for government handouts in areas in which the federal government has no business whatsoever.

And I’m particularly offended by the notion that the federal government cares about my telephone number, my sex (properly identified as “sex,” not the ubiquitously misused “gender”), my age (asking for both age and date of birth; is this a math test, too?), my race, and my marital status (Questions 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6, and 7, respectively). Whether I’ve attended “regular school or college” in the last year, or the education I’ve completed also is none of the federal government’s business (Questions 8 and 9). Neither is my “ancestry or ethnic origin,” the language spoken at home, the state in which I was born, or my citizenship (Questions 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14).

Particularly offensive, though, were other questions, like where and in what type of housing I lived five years ago, or my disability status (Questions 15, 16, and 17). I’m not going to the government for a handout, and I’m offended by those who do. Why should I aid the imperial federal government in its plundering of my wages for those who do?

Then there’s the lifestyle questions. These ask about grandparents raising their grandchildren, and service in the military (like the government can’t figure that out for itself?!?). Most important to the federal government, however, are those questions which aid in its plunder of the productive, like whether and where an individual worked, how they got there, and what they earned (Questions 21 through 32). And then there are those about an individual’s household, their cars or trucks, and the costs (Questions 33 through 53). Maybe if I thought the last would result in an increase of the standard deduction on my income tax (which has gradually been reduced in value since the 1950s), I’d be inclined to answer them. Fat chance of that, though.

In 2000, many advocated refusing to answer any questions beyond the number of persons in a household, risking a fine of $100 under 13 U.S.C. Section 221. The Youngs did so, without consequence.

This year, however, according to News McNuggets ... er, USA Today, however, our government schools will be enlisted to violate the Constitution.

According to the article, our children will be enlisted in a process which is not only designed to satisfy its constitutional limits, but to "determine ... the distribution of more than $400 billion in federal funds to state and local governments every year." And rather than teaching our children of the sole constitutional purpose of the census --- something which should take about 15 minutes, in total, the article tells us that:

Between January and March, the Census Bureau will help plan a week of Census education in schools. During Census Week, teachers will devote 15 minutes every day for five days to the topic by discussing such things as civic participation, confidentiality or geography. Beginning in mid-March, more than 120 million Census questionnaires will be delivered to residential addresses.

Somehow, that sound suspiciously like using the government schools for statist indoctrination, rather than constitutional education.

Most disturbing in this entire process is that the “First” purpose of the census — apportionment — is virtually an afterthought to the government promoting full participation in it. Once again, the federal government is promoting ignorance among the citizenry. Perhaps it’s because the Left understands that constitutional ignorance is necessary if their statist agenda is to prevail.

She's At It Again

Moonbat Cindy Sheehan, that is. Now, she's dogging President Barry on his vacation.

Of course, you probably read it here first, since the media won't be giving her favorable coverage with President Barry in office.

H/T to Drudge.

The Return of Political Ambulance Chasers

So Ted Kennedy has died. I associate myself with the comment of a Facebook friend, who observed that "it's fair to say his suffering, and ours, is lessened today, and for that, all can be thankful." Except that the suffering of many whose lives were ruined by the Liberal welfare state and its continuation will continue unabated. Since that's about the nicest thing I can say about this statist, let's leave it at that.

What is truly despicable are those who suggest that we should enact yet another bad policy --- socialized medicine --- in his memory. While of a piece with most of his legislative "accomplishments," it is little more than dancing on his grave to suggest that President Barry's health care "reform" should be enacted simply because this Senator-for-Life has given up the ghost.

But hey! There's nothing like the far-Left's arrogant and empty invitation to a public "debate" on the subject!

UPDATE: One more "nice thing" about the late departed comes to mind. Give him credit for this: he demonstrated more backbone that virtually any of his fellows. That it was in the service of an agenda of proven failure and anti-constitutional government authority diminishes that considerably.

Robert Novak, RIP

Since we're on vacation, I'm not posting much, but I couldn't let the passing of Robert Novak go by without notation.

Some view it as an opportunity to take one last cheap shot, from a far-Left propagandist who applies that label to Novak in an exercise which is more projection than anything else. One cannot help but wonder whether it's not jealousy, the covetous rantings of one well aware of the fact that his passing probably won't be noticed by ... well, virtually anyone.

Robert Novak made his mark on Washington in a way few journalists could hope to. Agree or disagree, he was a force with which to be reckoned.

RIP.

I Wonder ....?

It seems that police have interviewed a "suspect" in the case of the posting of posters caricaturing President Barry as the Joker in The Dark Knight.

"Suspected of what?" you might ask. Well, you'll have to read the article to find out, and I'm not saying there might not have been a series of petite crimes here, but I have a question:

How many "suspects" were interviewed for posting caricatures of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney in the last eight years?

I suspect that the answer is one fewer than have been interviewed over President Barry's caricature.

Yeah, But What Were You Saying A Few Years Ago?

It seems that the Washington Post has published Michael Gerson's comments indicating that he is mightily perturbed at the casual use of the imagery of Nazism, describing it (rightly) as a "lazy shortcut to secure an emotional response." He goes on to condemn it when "Michael Moore compared the USA Patriot Act to 'Mein Kampf,'" and "Al Gore warned of 'digital Brownshirts.'"

Some are mightily impressed that the WaPo has published his commentary, and indeed, there is much that accurate and praiseworthy in it.

Gerson uses nice historical examples of inaccurate and intemperate use of the analogy. He gives credence to his argument when he condemns the tactic when used by the far Left.

When the WaPo does so nearly a decade after their invocation of that imagery by the far Left? Not so much.

The relevant question to the WaPo is "What were you saying when Moore and Gore invoked Nazi imagery against Conservatives?"

My guess is that the WaPo didn't have too much to say at the time, rendering publication of Gerson's present comments like nothing so much as partisanship applying purportedly objective principles in pursuit of a partisan agenda.

It's too bad that Gerson --- a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush --- is allowing himself to be used by the WaPo in pursuit of its unremittingly partisan agenda to discredit those resisting President Barry's push for socialism.

Empty Complaints About Health "Reform" Protestors

It's become quite a mantra with those who are complaining about the protests at various townhall meetings. Even the sometimes sensible have gotten in on the attack on what they call "poisonous rhetoric."

I'm a little confused by their complaints, though. Are they objectively disgusted by the behavior people who refuse to go along with the rest of the Obama-addled sheeple?

Or are they merely angry because people who refuse to go along with the Obamorons are employing the same tactics that they Obamorons and their fellow travelers have used for, well, decades? After all, for most, the outrage is selective, and targeted only at political enemies. No enemies to the far Left, after all.

Once again, as they did for years with criminals, the far Left is confusing they victim with the perpetrator.

What's really sad is the fact that there are those who are not on the far Left who are perfectly willing to lend them aid and comfort.

Propagandistic Buzzword Of The Day

Turned on C-SPAN's Washington Journal for a few minutes this morning, and there was former ABC infobabe ... er, propagandist ... er, "journalist" Linda Douglass, in her new role as White House Minister of Propaganda for Health Care, with the talking point of the day.

After months on the campaign trail and in the White House, President Barry's Administration is no longer calling it "health care reform"; now it's "health insurance reform." Ms. Douglass must have used it over a dozen times in five minutes.

Never mind that President Barry's program would virtually destroy private health insurance in the United States which is, of course, his unstated goal.

So remember: the buzzword phrase of the day is "health insurance reform."

Wow

A few days ago, I noted the passing of John Hughes.

Here, you can read a tribute by a young lady who became his pen pal. If you're not left with a tear in your eye after reading it, you have no heart.

Having had a few professional dealings with people in the public eye, I have become keenly aware of the fact that --- media notwithstanding --- most of them are a lot like the rest of us. John Hughes' gift seems to have been a keen awareness of that fact, and the ability translate it onto the screen.

An Interesting If Not Unexpected Source

After years of hearing dovish Democrats making false claims that the Bush Administration and/or Conservatives had accused them of being "unAmerican," it is nevertheless unsurprising that the first politicians whom I have heard using that word to describe their political opponents are House Speak Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD). It's not a new thing from the Obamorons, but it remains despicable, nonetheless.

They should be forced to resign their posts. Immediately.

Hypocrisy, thy name is "Democrat."

UPDATE: Doug Mataconis has a good discussion here.

Perhaps It's Your Policies Which Are The Problem

Apparently, a Washington Democrat Congress-critter so fears his constituents that he's decided to phone it in. He also compares opponents of socialized medicine to Nazis, though --- of course --- the premises and rhetorical tactics of proponents for Obamacare --- demonizing insurance companies and their executives (read: "Jews"); taking over a large swath of the American economy --- has much more to do with the philosophy of National Socialism than do its opponents.

If you can't face the the people whose lives you are attempting to "change," you don't belong in office.

Great Video Demonstrating Liberal Arrogance

This demonstrates the difference between a "meeting" and an "indoctrination session." What the AARP intended was an indoctrination session. When the attendees insisted on a meeting, the AARP officials walked out:



I guess the vanguard of the proletariat couldn't be bothered with the uninformed opinions of the proles.

John Hughes, RIP

Anyone who came of age in the Eighties knows well his work: Ferris Bueller's Day Off; The Breakfast Club; Sixteen Candles. Children today still love his Home Alone movies. For many, his movies marked their own passing from youth into young adulthood. Many were, and remain, classics of the movie genre which, in literature, is called bildungsroman.

John Hughes, taken too soon from us at age 59, in New York.

RIP

Despicable Double Standards

A few days ago, I had a post about a poster being distributed around Los Angeles. Since then, the far Left has gone virtually apopletic, and the inevitable cries of "racism!" have been heard about the land. The whole contretemps even warranted a truly asinine front-page story by Phillip Kennicott in today's Washington Post Style section.

This poster seems to capture the double standards being applied by those on the far Left. Since I can't seem to make it larger, the poster shows President George W. Bush as a Nazi, giving the upraised arm salute, while reading underneath "Free Speech." President Barry's caricature read "Treason."

Pathologically Silly

This is just one of those things that strike me as silly: asking people six months into a new presidential administration "Do you consider the first six months of the Obama administration to be a success or a failure?"

Nevertheless, that appears to be just what CNN has done, learning that: 37% of those polled deem it a failure; 51% deem it a success; and only 11% say it's "too soon to tell."

Well, cast me in the small minority. Short of suffering a full-scale nuclear attack, I don't know how you deem any President's term a "failure" after only six months. Similarly, I don't know how you deem any President's term a "success" after only six months.

While I have little use for President Barry --- my definition of a "successful" Obama presidency is one in which he doesn't get what he wants --- it's simply nonsense to suggest that any assessment of his presidency can be made at this time.

The good news is this: President Barry's "failure" number is 5% higher than George W. Bush's at a similar point in the latter's presidency.

Delusional

Over at the Star City Harbinger, a neo-socialist website mainly for the Roanoke area, they recently posted a quotation from Samuel Adams, apparently claiming affinity with the great Patriot of the Founding Era.

Of course, claiming accord with Adams --- a believer in natural law; signer of the Declaration of Independence; and perhaps most importantly, brewer of beer --- is simply a paradigm case of an illegitimate effort to seek legitimacy.

Indeed, one would have had to have consumed an excess of his eponymous modern product to believe that Adams' political beliefs had anything to do with the efforts at the website which seeks legitimacy by invoking his name.

The Perfect Choice

I refer, of course, to the Great Prevaricator's recent trip to North Korea to secure the release of two American journalists charged with espionage. Of course, in the warped view of the Dear Leader, anyone who tries to obtain and report upon facts about his regime is engaged in "espionage," but never mind that.

The bottom line is this: who else would you send to pick up two women?

Obama Cult Of Personality On Full Display

At the White House, no less! Apparently, it's in celebration of der Fuhr... er, President Barry's birthday.

And it's pathetic. It reminds me of the penultimate scenes of Rocky IV, where Ivan Drago's greater-than-life-sized visage is raised before the fight in Moscow.

Come to think of it, it's a lot like Soviet-style propaganda. To the same end, as well.

Say what you will about George W. Bush (many do), but if he ever attempted the power grabs sought by this third-rate Chicago hack (auto industry; financial industry; health care; etc.), the far Left moonbats who survived their strokes would be in a permanent state of high dudgeon. And yet ... they cheerlead for a power-grabber of proportions beyond those even of the moonbats' most fanciful construction of Bush Administration efforts to respond to the terrorist threat.

Hypocrisy, thy name is Liberal.

And by the way, I'm not calling President Barry a "Nazi," unlike those who frequently equate George W. Bush with Hitler, as Doug Mataconis notes here. For the historically challenged, der Fuhrer's birthday was widely celebrated by the mind-numbed, sycophantic faithful, who apparently behaved much as the Obamorons are behaving today. I am not commenting upon any similarities between the two other than that one.

Alabama County Lay Off 2/3 Of Bureaucracy

Now, the real question is, will anyone notice?

Priceless!

One of those things that makes me wish that I had some artistic talent:

Of course, that I don't does not mean that I can't reproduce it here.

H/T to Drudge.

More Evidence Of America's Continuing Decline

I don't think I'm a prude, but one doesn't have to be to oppose allowing minors to perform in strip clubs.

Rhode Island: too small to be a state; too large to be an insane asylum.

H/T to Xrlq.

Interesting Campaign Slogan

An interesting e-mail just came across my desktop, with the subject line "Help John Bell defeat Anti-Gay Delegate Bob Marshall." It was for a fundraiser for the Democrat candidate against Bob Marshall.

I would guess that this means that John Bell is "Pro-Gay."

I suppose that if one wants to affirmatively campaign on a pro-homosexual sodomy platform, one could, but I wouldn't expect it to be successful anywhere other than San Francisco, or perhaps Greenwich Village in New York.

Politics Trumps Faith

Jimmy Carter apparently has decided to leave the Southern Baptist church over his political disagreements over the church's teaching over the role of women.

Yet another Democrat for whom politics is more important than religion. Color me shocked.

"Academics"?

It seems that over a thousand law professors from around the nation have signed on to a letter endorsing President Barry's nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the United States Supreme Court. It contains a virtual rogue's gallery of the Left of legal academia.

Just for grins, I checked out the names from my law school, Emory University School of Law, to learn who signed onto it.

One of those names, Professor Frank J. Vandall's --- my Torts professor (he memorably described a faulty rug in class as "a tort waiting to happen") --- is misspelled. One of the "Ls" is omitted from his last name.

One would have thought that those involved would have gone to the trouble of spelling one of the participant's name correctly. After all, Senate Democrats and other critics once savaged a Reagan appointee, Judge Daniel Manion of the Seventh Circuit, for typographical and spelling errors appearing in his briefs, and tried to derail his nomination on that basis.

H/T to SCOTUSblog.

Duke Official Faces Pedophilia Charges

My only questions are: (1) whether this guy was at Duke during the railroad against Duke's lacrosse team; and (2) whether he signed on to the petition of faculty members against students later proved to be innocent.

Michael Jackson Murdered?

I've resisted commenting on Michael Jackson's death because, well, aside from the tragedy of a 50-year-old man dying an extremely premature death, I'm not a big fan and I really don't care. Sure, I feel bad for those who loved him, as I do for the loved ones of anyone who dies, but the reaction of some reminds us that the word "fan" is shorthand for "fanatic."

Now, however, as more questions are being raised about his death, I have become convinced that his death was murder, and that the perpetrators can be found among the Obamorons in the Democrat Party.

After all, word of Jackson's death supplanted news of Friday's vote in the House of Representatives for the largest tax increase in American history, and the most invasive effort ever to control the American economy.

That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it.

The Real Consequence Of Mark Sanford's Infidelity

The most immediately meaningful impact of South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford's admission of marital infidelity is that it displaces the media's attention from President Barry's ineptitude in addressing events in Iran.

It's a good excuse not to cover Barry's abject failure to support democratic values, even though I am of the firm belief that the actual winner of the Iranian presidential election is of little consequence on most major policies.

Jobs Killed By President Barry

While it's nearly impossible to know whether Federal economic policies "save or create" any jobs, at least in the private sector, it's pretty easy to tell when they close a factory and kill jobs.

The people of Tampa thank you, President Barry and Congress, for your idiotic SCHIP taxes.

I guess these jobs will be tallied against those President Barry claims to have "created or saved."

Great Presidential Quotations In American Foreign Policy

John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Inaugural Address(1961):

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

At the Brandenburg Gate (1963):

Ich bin ein Berliner.

Ronald Wilson Reagan, at the Brandenburg Gate (1987):

Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!

Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., on the stolen Iranian presidential election:

Er, uh, ...c'mon, guys, you're making me look bad!

"Gone" Barack Obama

Barack Obama Countdown widget brought
to you by www.obamacountdownwidget.com

The Strategy

With news that President Barry's health care "reform" proposals are in deep political trouble, the true agenda of the far Left is made more and more apparent.

It is beyond reasonable or serious debate that the current state of American health care is the result of government intrusions on the free market. Medicare socialized half the system --- the elderly consume more than half of all health care, for obvious reasons --- with promises (from, among others, Hubert H. Humphrey) that it would never cost more than $10 billion per year. Wouldn't it be nice if it only cost twice that amount? Medicaid is part of the not-so-Great Society, the War on Poverty. When can we expect the "exit strategy" that Democrats demand for every other "war"? Federal mandates that hospital treat all who appear at emergency rooms --- even those who don't need emergency treatment --- has imposed incredible costs.

So, what does the far Left want now? Well, "single-payer" --- more properly called "socialized medicine" --- is currently a non-starter. So what will happen?

Depend upon President Barry and his minions to advance proposals which will further screw up medical care in America, attempting to provoke a clarion call for completely socializing American medical care.

These people are nothing if not Machiavellian.

What A Pity

As a gag, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger sent a set of sculptured bull testicles to a Democrat state senator, who returned them with a terse note. The gift was in response to an earlier gag gift from the state senator to the Governator.

Apparently, the state senator has had his sense of humor surgically removed.

Along with --- like most Democrats --- the portion of the anatomy that the Governator's gift was intended to replace.

Making The Virtual The Actual

Today's headline on Drudge:

ABC TURNS PROGRAMMING OVER TO OBAMA; NEWS TO BE ANCHORED FROM INSIDE WHITE HOUSE

And this should surprise ... no one.

Coverage Of The Chrysler Proceedings

As usual, SCOTUSBlog is providing yeoman's service in covering today's filings in the United States Supreme Court regarding the Obama Administration's extra-legal and probably unconstitutional efforts to deny Chrysler bondholders their property rights in an effort to pay off Obama supporters (i.e., the UAW).

Whether the Supreme Court will actually take the cases is, of course, a mystery (only about one in a hundred petitions for a writ of certiorari are granted), but if the court does, SCOTUSBlog recognizes that it constitutes the potential for "the most significant Supreme Court ruling on the government’s power to deal with economic crisis since the Court struck down major parts of President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal, in Schechter Poultry Corp. v. U.S. in 1935 and U.S. v. Butler in 1936."

Excellent!

As usual, Ann Coulter gets it exactly right.

An excerpt, applying Liberal "logic":

I wouldn't kill an abortionist myself, but I wouldn't want to impose my moral values on others. No one is for shooting abortionists. But how will criminalizing men making difficult, often tragic, decisions be an effective means of achieving the goal of reducing the shootings of abortionists?

Following the moral precepts of liberals, I believe the correct position is: If you don't believe in shooting abortionists, then don't shoot one.

Quite An Authority

Back in the day, those of us who hold the so-called "mainstream" media in contempt would refer to our local journal as the "Pot. News." Of course, a little while back, that journal merged with the Manassas Journal-Messenger and became the News & Messenger, and this little bon mot fell into disuse.

Today, a reminder why it still fits: the editorial discussing the upcoming Democrat primaries identifies one of the gubernatorial candidates as "Jim Moran."

Now, I have little use for any Moran brother, but even I know that the one running for the Democrat nomination for Governor is the (relatively) good one, former Delegate Brian Moran.

And this is an editorial board which would presume to recommend candidates with endorsements?

Kinda tells you why you should ignore the so-called "mainstream" media.

UPDATE: Well, now they've corrected it. Without credit, of course.

The Return of Political Ambulance Chasing

Remember Columbine? Two dysfunctional punks kill a bunch of school mates, and the far Left demands gun control. Virginia Tech? A dysfunctional and probably mentally-deranged bozo kills dozens, and the far Left demands gun control? Matthew Shepard? A homosexual is killed, and the far Left demands so-called "hate" crimes legislation.

Now, we have the murder of a practitioner of the vilest form of abortion --- partial-birth abortion --- and before the identity of the suspect is even identified, the far Left is screaming that his motive must have arisen out of the fact that he is a Pro-Life extremist! The Virginia moonbatosphere is already all atwitter (not aTwitter) with the allegation. Newly-minted UVa grad Jamelle (a criminal justice major, perhaps?) already has two posts, here and here, and the Howling [Mad] Latina reveals her insight into the mind of a killer a thousand miles away here.

These guys must be mind-readers, because I've nowhere seen the motive of this guy identified. Now, while the police could hardly be blamed for looking into this motive, had they not already had a suspect (as yet, unidentified) suspect in custody, moonbat bloggers drawing this conclusion in the lack of any evidence are nakedly pursuing a political agenda, perhaps at the cost of the truth. Yet for all they know at this point, this abortionist was shot by the jealous paramour of his homosexual lover, but then I would be doing what they are: making allegations in the absence of any evidence whatsoever.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, Pro-Life groups have uniformly condemned the murder.

Isn't interesting that the "blame America first" crowd jumps in to blame a respectable political movement for the violence of an as-yet unidentified suspect, for an as-yet unidentified motive, while disclaiming all responsibility for giving aid and comfort to terrorists who --- guess what? --- blame America for all the world's ills.

Identity of causes is not identity of tactics.

RPV Convention Thoughts

Attended the Republican Party of Virginia State Convention in Richmond last night and today. Didn't participate in "bloggers row," but you can find many fine reports from those who did.

Good time, and much better-run that last year's fiasco. Most of our candidates --- Bill Bolling for Lieutenant Governor; Ken Cuccinelli for Attorney General --- won.

We got down a little later than expected (8:00), because we had to drop Jimmy off at someone's home so he could attend his Scout troop's spring creek cleanup today. Started out at the Jeffersoniad/New Media suite. Kinda odd: the beer and wine were free, but you had to pay for sodas. Then trooped over to the McDonnell/Bolling affair, stuck my head in the Brownlee suite and talked for a time with a few young Hampden-Sydney alums who were supporting his candidacy.

Best Hospitality Suite --- Americans for Prosperity's affair at the Hilton Garden.

Best Bar --- Fifth District Chairman Tucker Watkins' late-night gathering. First met Tucker last year, when someone dragged me to it, and we immediately hit it off. Tucker is a good ole' boy, and I've found that such a characteristic meshes well with my Pennsylvania Dutchman credentials. We picked up the conversation right where we left off. Helps that we have some mutual friends at the alma mater.

Least Likely Attendee --- "Not Larry Sabato" himself, Ben Tribbett. He was a good sport about it when having his tail twisted.

Best Line of the Convention --- John Brownlee: "We remember when acorn was just a nut, and not a collection of nuts."

CORRECTION: Ron Josephson on Facebook informs me that I am incorrect, and that this line was uttered by David Foster. My apologies to Mr. Foster.

One of our candidates lost, however. I voted for Bill Stanley for State Chairman. Not that I have anything against Pat Mullins. I've known him since he was Fairfax County Chairman. He was and is a good guy, and I believe he'll do a fine job as State Party Chairman.

However, holding in contempt the manner of his initial elevation to the post, with the despicable removal of Jeff Frederick, I could not validate that with my vote, even though he had the support of many whom I respect. Hence, I would have voted, and did vote, for any credible candidate in his stead.

With that having been said, I am completely happy with the GOP ticket, and anticipate a GOP sweep statewide in November's election. While we had left before the announcements were officially made, one finds in the blogosphere that the losing candidates all were gracious in defeat, pledging their support for the ticket.

We shall see.

Judicial Hypocrisy

As most have by now heard, California's Supreme Court reaffirmed the people's sovereignty by today rejecting a challenge to Proposition 8, an initiative on last November's ballot to reaffirm the definition of marriage as the union between one man and one woman.

Informed readers will recall that same-sex "marriage" was imposed upon the people of California by a 4-3 vote earlier last year.

Nevertheless, demonstrating that the far Left is nothing if not shameless, the vote was only 6-1. The lone dissenter was Carlos Moreno, who had been under consideration as President Barry's nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court to replace Justice David Souter.

Ironically, Moreno --- who had been part of the majority imposing so-called same-sex "marriage" upon the people of California --- criticized today's ruling as representing a "drastic and far-reaching change."

Bold words from a man who just last year was redefining an institution which has never constituted what he imposed upon the people of California.

I'm not sure what's more shocking and dismaying in the age of President Barry: that this man was under apparently serious consideration for appointment to the United States Supreme Court, or that any judge on any court could make such an assertion with an apparently straight face.

Interestingly, just a few days ago, the New York Times ran a puff piece on Moreno describing him as in the "dead center" of the California Supreme Court, and demonstrating "surprising humility."

Yeah. It's certainly "humble" to attempt to redefine perhaps the oldest institution of human civilization. Then again, the Times called the California Supreme Court "a moderate to conservative court."

One cannot help but wonder about the color of the sky in their planet.

Obama Interview

More evidence that President Barry doesn't have a clue.

Does This Really Surprise Anyone?

It's pretty pathetic that the far Left in this country is so opposed to actually defending it that they have decided to declare a practice which results in no real permanent physical harm, but which achieves its desired result (the extraction of information), to be "torture."

On the other hand, it's hardly surprising that people who don't understand what the word "marriage" means would also have problems understanding "torture."

Making 'Em Look Like Pikers

Let's face the hard, cold facts of life: eight years of George W. Bush and six of a GOP-controlled Congress left the GOP reputation for fiscal responsibility in tatters.

After all, by 2008, the Federal deficit was running at an all-time high of nearly half a trillion dollars.

Well, President Barry is better than GWB, as virtually every one knows. So his first-year deficit? Four times President Bush's, coming in at nearly $1.8 trillion dollars.

So the next time some Democrat starts lecturing about GOP fiscal irresponsibility, it might be wise to have that little statistic handy.

More Swine Flu News

Has anybody else noticed that more schools (over 400) closed over swine flu fears than there were confirmed cases (under 200 in total) over the last week?

SWINE FLU NEWS!!!!

I just heard a report that 10,000 people got it, and 95 died of it, TODAY ALONE!!!

Oh, wait a minute. That was the regular flu.

So You Thought It Would Get Better?

To those who thought Democrat smears would diminish with Jeff Frederick's ouster, one moonbat blog offers this.

SOLD!

RINO No More!

It seems that Arlen Specter is switching to the Democrat Party.

While one can certainly speculate as to all that factored into this action, a number of things are certain:

1. Specter's bout with brain cancer did more damage than anyone suspected;

2. Democrats have no standards other than power;

3. Specter obviously lacks the integrity to resign his seat and run for its as a Democrat; and

4. The fraudulently-misnomered "Employee Free Choice Act" may now have life breathed into it, though Specter denies that he will vote for cloture.

What a scumbag.

Amy Frederick Bows Out

Given current idiocies, referenced in her letter, can't say I blame her:

Dear Friends:

Since first beginning to explore the possibility of campaigning to represent the people of the 52nd District in the House of Delegates, I have been humbled by the support and encouragement I received from across eastern Prince William county, and indeed, beyond. Having been honored to stand by Jeff's side for the past six years as he has served, I’ve had the opportunity to meet and get to know many of the people of this district. They have made this job a rewarding experience for both of us, and the lasting friendships will always remain.

Today, it is with mixed emotions that I announce my withdrawal from the race to succeed Jeff in the House of Delegates.

Unfortunately, some in the leadership of the Republican Party have demonstrated a greater interest in playing politics than in advancing our conservative principles and making life better for the families and the citizens of Virginia. I'm not interested in running for office to serve under broken leadership, where the Speaker compromises principle for what he perceives as immediate political gain. What so many entrusted with leadership in our party fail to recognize is that ignoring our core principles in pursuit of titles and power without purpose is exactly the behavior that severely reduced our ranks in the House, handed the Senate to the Democrats, and has resulted in one statewide loss after another.

Although my campaign ends today, it has been a pleasure to travel around the district and introduce myself as a potential candidate to so many wonderful people.

I want to first thank my friends and family for supporting me and encouraging me to run. I also want to thank Kris Morris and my supporters, who have spent hours volunteering on my behalf. To these people, I will remain forever grateful.

I'm excited about the future, and I will be working hard to make sure that people of principle who share Jeff's and my commitment to service are elected and re-elected this year. I'm confident that in years to come, our party will have new leadership and a new direction, which will bode well for fresh, new ideas -- and ultimately, handing our children a better Commonwealth than the one we inherited.

Most sincerely,

Amy Frederick

Personally, I always thought she was a better politician than Jeff. Too bad.

That Explains It

I awoke with a start at about 6:10 this morning. I didn't find out until later that it was this: GM Offers Plan for Nationalization.

As I noted below, my maternal grandfather was a GM dealer for over forty years.

Obviously, what woke me was the tremors caused by the fact that he was spinning like a top in his grave.

Utterly Unexpected

Anyone who's gone to college knows that you can virtually guarantee a good grade by kissing your professor's a**!

A Crying Shame

Apparently, GM's many troubles have caused it to send its Pontiac Motor Division to the gallows.

This is a crying shame. In my experience, there are Ford people, GM people, and (a few Chrysler) people.

I'm a GM person. I've never owned anything but GM products: three Pontiacs; two Buicks; and an inherited Cadillac sedan. The 1994 Pontiac Grand Am I bought new was one of the finest vehicles I've ever owned. Agile and practical, I put more than 215,000 on it before we gave it to my stepdaughter. My mechanic used to have his new technicians do the oil changes, and they would marvel over the fact that its high-mileage engine was cleaner than cars with half or a third as many miles on it. I never had to replace a seal on the engine during the entire time I owned it. We've owned two Pontiac Montanas, one of the finest mini-vans on the market, and my wife still drives one (the first was killed by a careless driver). Heck, the father of my first serious girlfriend was an Oldmobile salesman.

It's probably genetic, as my maternal grandfather was a GM dealer for over forty years in Sunbury, Pennsylvania. Pontiac was the first brand he carried, beginning in 1946. Over the years, he picked up Cadillac, GMC Trucks (later dropped), Buick (my father persuaded him to take it on, as Buick District Manager in Philadelphia, and also married my mother, so I'm here because of a Buick), and Opel (later dropped). I remember his annual trips to Michigan (the town of Pontiac, of course) to see the new models.

It's traumatic.

Pontiac Motor Division. RIP.

Diminishing The Nation He Was Elected To Lead

As President Barry continues his magical mystery tour around the world, it's no mystery as to what his goal is: diminishing the nation he purports to "lead."

Never mind that his behavior makes Jimmy Carter look like he has a spine by comparison. Never mind the radicals who have influenced him at every point in his life.

Sometimes, you just can't believe the pablum emanating from this third-rate fool. Speaking after listening to a diatribe from Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega, he responded with this:

“I’m grateful that President Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was three months old.”

Of course, it's not about blame, Barry. It's about the fact that you're President of the United States, and you represent this nation as both Head of State and Head of Government. And in that capacity, you stand for everything --- for good or ill, as informed by your own ridiculous philosophy --- done by this nation.

Spare us your narcissism, and man up a little bit.

Better yet, grow a pair.

Could Someone Explain ...

... why the vilest women of the far-Left --- Rachel Maddow and Janeane Garafolo --- are among those most adamantly belittling participants in the tea party protests by comparing them to a sex act? Especially when no self-respecting man would engage in that act with either of them?

Stupid Quotation Of The Day

And the award goes to ... Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norten, champion of unconstitutional legislation to give the District of Columbia a vote in the United States House of Representatives!

She was on C-SPAN this morning with the incredibly beautiful Greta Brawner, complaining that the unconstitutional legislation is being held up by those who would preserve the constitutional rights of D.C. residents to exercise their Second Amendment rights, and came up with this little gem (near the beginning of the interview):

Whoever heard of your gun or your vote?

Unfortunately, it is Delegate Norten herself who is taking that position, failing to understand that it is guns in the hands of private citizens which guarantee the vote.

Just as they guarantee that persons of her hue are not still treated as property.

EASTER REDEMPTION!

Captain Richard Phillips is FINALLY freed after a four-day stand-off.

Sadly, one of the four pirates survived, to be subjected to the research of the United States Department of Justice.

Kudos to three Navy SEALS with good aim!

The Illegitimate Senator?

With the news that the Department of Justice is asking a Federal trial court in Washington to void the convictions of former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, a Reagan-era quotation comes to mind:

"Which office do I go to to get my reputation back."

--- Former Labor Secretary Ray Donovan, upon his acquittal on corruption charges.

Now, this decision by Attorney General Eric Holder isn't the same as an acquittal, which still only means that the government's case was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. But it certainly calls into question the results of the senatorial election conducted last year in Alaska, in which former Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich defeated Stevens in a close race (less than 4000 votes). The vote was held just days after Stevens' convictions.

Was this the thing that made the difference? Ask any Alaskan (I know quite a few) and the answer is, "Almost certainly."

Of course, one has to wonder, in this extraordinary situation, whether Mark Begich would have the dignity and decency to resign his seat, and allow a special election, re-running his race against Stevens, without the cloud which heretofore surrounded Stevens?

Naaaah! He's a Democrat! Power at all costs.

Even if that cost is your dignity and your soul.

Nevertheless, if Begich had any decency, that is the course that he would follow. And you can bet that, were the roles reversed, far Lefties would be demanding that course.

UPDATE: Apparently, some Alaska political leaders agree. Not surprisingly, they are Republicans. It seems that all involved --- former Senator Stevens; Alaska's voters; the courts charged with administering justice; the American public which is supposed to be served by the Department of Justice --- deserved better.

Whatever happens now, Democrat Senator Mark Begich has to be at the top of any list of "Most-Endangered" Democrats when his term is up.

President Barry Announces New Legislative Initiatives

In light of the deepening economic crisis, President Barry took the occasion of the G-20 Summit in London to announce a series of reforms to kickstart the American economy:

1. Immediate closure of the Departments of Housing & Urban Development (which has failed miserably and provided neither housing nor much urban development), Health & Human Services (ditto), Education (double ditto), and Commerce;

2. The firing of Ron Gettelfinger, James P. Hoffa, Gerald McEntee, and Rich Trumka from their posts as heads of the UAW, Teamsters, AFSCME, and the UMW, respectively. Since the President now has the power to fire corporate executives in companies propped up by the government for a few months, there is no reason why he shouldn't be able to fire bosses of unions propped up by the government for decades;

3. An executive order barring the payment of so-called "prevailing" wages on government contracts, and a demand that Congress immediately repeal the racist-motivated Davis-Bacon Act requiring ascertainment and payment of such inflated prices:

4. Called for immediate passage of the National Right to Work Act, and the Freedom from Union Violence Act;

5. Issued a veto threat against the fraudulently-misnomered "Employee Free Choice Act," and the push-button strike bill for first responders;

6. Suspension of Medicare and Medicaid payments and reimbursements, pending full repeal of these programs for socialized medicine;

7. Immediate authorization for off-shore drilling for oil and natural gas in all promising areas; and

8. Making permanent the Bush tax cuts.

My understanding is that, upon hearing this, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's head exploded.

Six Minutes Of Brilliance

Guys like this must scare the heads of the Democrat Party to death:

He's Baaaack!

John S. Gray, of Lake Ridge, that is.

It seems that Mr. Gray, whose candidacy to represent Prince William County at the State GOP Convention set for late May in Richmond was rejected by the County GOP Convention nearly two weeks back, is entirely bitter about it. Of course, he was rejected because he's one of the most undependable political chameleons in the County, having run for public office as Republican, Democrat, and Independent over the last ten years or so.

In fact, the only party under whose banner he has not run is the one to which he most appropriately can be categorized: the Flake Party.

In any case, here's the text of his letter:

On March 14, the local Republican Committee held its annual convention.

As the Republican super majority on the Board of County Supervisors now emphatically requires that all senior citizens, the disabled and small business owners (amongst others) affirm their legal
presence in Prince William County, I was wondering if the Republican delegates to that convention were themselves required to affirm their own legal presence in PWC to use facilities paid for by county
taxpayers?

I know for a fact they were not, so I guess what is good for the goose isn’t good for the gander. Gee, how sad. I wonder what we call that?

JOHN S. GRAY

Lake Ridge

And since hard truths are little-valued by the editors of the News and Messenger, here's the comment that I posted, but don't expect to see for too long on the website.

Well, Mr. Gray, I don't know what we call "that," but I know what we call people who knowingly make false statements: liars.

In fact, all participants as delegates to the County GOP Convention were required to "affirm their legal presence in Prince William County," because all participants in the County GOP Convention were required to be "legal and qualified voters in Prince William County," i.e., registered voters, which requires legal presence. This requirement was plainly stated on the application to be a delegate to the Convention. So your charge is false. It's also knowingly false, since --- if you are the same "John S. Gray" who applied to be a delegate to the Convention (or perhaps just the State GOP Convention; it is is one or the other, or both) --- you signed this very affirmation as a condition for consideration.

Now, if this is the same "John S. Gray" who applied and was rejected to be a delegate to the State GOP Convention, I suppose his bitterness --- if not his dishonesty --- is understandable. Then again, if this is that "John S. Gray," he's unsuccessfully run for elective office as a "Republican," a "Democrat," an "Independent," and perhaps every other political party except the brazenly "Flake" party.

Since I Know It Won't Be Approved...

There's an old saying, something to the effect that "You can't teach a pig to dance. You won't succeed, and you'll annoy the pig."

Isn't it amazing how partisans for the radical homosexual agenda, who demand special privileges while putting on a great pretense about only wanting "equality," then engage in behavior which causes others to deny them even the simple courtesies?

I thought I'd make my comment here, rather than at "Special Privileges Loudoun":

Whiny? You know, it just doesn't pay to try to have a respectful, civilized conversation with a fag. In the end, you'll almost always be belittled, demonized, or a combination of both.

Guess Who's NOT Coming To Dinner?

I suspect that George F. Will will not be receiving any more invitations to dine with the Obamessiah.

A Banana Republic?

I haven't commented here on the Jeff Frederick imbroglio, but a post by my friend Leslie Carbone provokes the desire to agree publicly: Jeff Frederick should stay.

And agree I do, with virtually every point Leslie makes. Jeff is my Delegate, and a friend. I voted for him to be RPV Chairman. I did so having gone to Richmond intending to vote for John Hager, whom I have known (and liked) far longer than I have known and supported Jeff. Indeed, I had some serious reservations about some of the criticisms raised by Jeff's campaign. But the Convention run by John Hager's staff changed my mind.

And, like Leslie, I am deeply concerned about the bitterness of this fight, which has caused deep divisions among good friends. Fortunately, at least among the Jeffersoniad, I don't see the personal animosities arising out of differences of opinions that I see elsewhere. Those who think that Jeff should step aside, or be removed, seem to believe that this is the best course for entirely practical reasons, and I would be a fool to suggest that such an argument lacks merit. The very fact that it is made by serious people without a particular axe to grind makes it worthy of respect. That is, of course, as opposed to the reflexive rantings of fatuous dilletantes who hide behind pseudonyms and whose nihilistic actions make them unworthy of serious consideration.

And it is difficult indeed to take some of the latter seriously. They have joined in the far Left's efforts to demonize Frederick. And since they frequently suggest that the best way for the GOP to succeed is to be more like Democrats, I have to reject them ab initio. As Ronald Reagan demonstrated (see also 2006 and 2008 election results; Bush 43 Administration), "slower socialism" as a politically-motivating concept is both the road to serfdom and a recipe for electoral disaster.

But I am stubborn enough to believe that more harm would be done by Frederick's departure for bad reasons than would be done by his retention of his position even given his flaws.

Has Virginia's GOP really fallen upon such hard times that we're going to allow Virginia's far-Left moonbatosphere and its spineless cousins among so-called "moderate" Republican bloggers to not only dictate who is an "acceptable" Republican, but also to overturn the results of a lawful vote?

'Fact is, it has been some time since an RPV State Chairman has completed a term to which he or she has been elected. The last one may well have been Pat McSweeney (1992-96). And then-Governor George Allen tried to orchestrate his removal, as well. Like now, I opposed that removal effort, which seems to have been as contrived as this one.

All that Governor Allen achieved, given the super-majority requirements of the State Party Plan, was to weaken McSweeney and RPV for the remainer of McSweeney's term. And one wonders whether that effort didn't come around to bite Allen on the posterior, whether a strong RPV could have made the difference in Allen's unsuccessful run for a second term to the United States Senate in 2006.

I actually attended the State Central Committee at which McSweeney's removal was considered. Among other things, Tenth Congressional District Chairman (then, and sadly, now) Jim Rich earned my everlasting emnity for his role in that contrived controversy. My impression at the time --- and confirmed at subsequent meetings, where I frequently carried proxies for others --- was that the SCC was largely not so much the voice of the various units from which its members were elected as it was a "gold watch" for good and faithful service. I vividly remember one member standing up at the meeting during a subsequent convention to complain about the fact that the Party was providing child care for young children, so that their parents could attend and vote at the convention. I remember thinking --- and may have said in response at the time --- that this older gentlemen probably didn't have to suffer exposure to the little urchins at the country club, but that the Party's future was in young parents, and their children, and that his complaint was both silly and counterproductive.

Sadly, it seems that certain elements of the SCC have gotten no more serious in the interim. As Leslie notes, the charges against Jeff are by and large "silly," even among those that are not maddeningly vague (Charge 3 is that Jeff made "Unauthorized expenditures of RPV funds for unbudgeted activities without either State Central Committee or Executive Committee consent," and fails to specify even a single such "Unauthorized expenditure"; how does one respond to that?), and/or contrived, and/or false (Charge 2: failure to comply with a directive to disclose vendor contracts; Charge 10: failure to notify the Executive Committee of a non-existent security breach).

Indeed, some have the stench of bitter irony. Charges 4, 5, and 6 essentially complain about Frederick's conduct of SCC meetings. I'd bet a dollar that 10th Congressional District Chairman Jim Rich has signed up for this lynch mob, which makes these bold words from a man who has disregarded the "minimal rights" of those opposing him in similar circumstances.

Jeff has responded more than adequately. Not that his response will matter much to those sizing up Jeff's neck for a noose.

I have no illusions that the merits will make much difference to many among those on the SCC who never supported Jeff. In the memorable phrase of a friend regarding a particularly odious honor proceeding of which we were both aware in my law school days, it may well be that the "kangaroos [will be] a-hoppin'" at the 4 April SCC meeting.

But nevertheless, Jeff Frederick should stay.

Despicable Change

Apparently, President Barry has a plan to charge wounded veterans for the costs of treatment for their injuries sustained in battle.

There are plenty of questions about our veterans' health care system. But I've never heard anyone seriously question our national moral obligation to treat those who have given so much for their country.

This is unspeakably vile. More evidence --- as if more were needed --- that the far Left just doesn't get it.

H/T to Drudge.

Ron Silver, RIP

Tony Award-winning actor Ron Silver has died. Didn't know that he was formerly the President of Actors Equity, a union that I've filed NLRB charges against on behalf of a client.

As a former Democrat who became an independent based upon the far Left's coopting of the Democrat Party on terrorism and national defense policy, he was proof that Hollywood isn't quite hopeless, aside from his considerable thespian abilities.

RIP

Not News: The Truth Hurts, So Moonbats Lie

The latest meme of the moonbat blogosphere is that opponents of the fraudulently-misnomered "Employee Free Choice Act" --- including former Democrat presidential nominee Senator George McGovern --- are "lying" about it, because they say it "means the end of the secret ballot."

But --- like the legislation's title --- the accusation itself is a carefully-crafted misrepresentation.

Here's what moonbat Josh Chernilla, quoting MSNBC's vile lesbian commentator, had to say over at "Blue Commonwealth":

Corporate interests are bent on lying about the Employee Free Choice Act - they'd have you believe that the bill means the end of the secret ballot - but nothing could be further from the truth. The Employee Free Choice Act simply gives employees the choice to join unions - not the employers. Right now, workers can join unions through majority sign-up or a secret ballot election, and they can do so under the Employee Free Choice Act, too. The only difference is it will be the employees' choice, not the employers.

Now, never mind that George McGovern has never been known as a champion of "corporate interests," even among the most pathetic of the moonbat Left. But EFCA proponents are advancing their cause by lying about the argument of their opponents.

No one says that "the bill means the end of the secret ballot" as a general proposition. Of course, secret-ballot elections can still be sought and conducted for decertification and deauthorization (prohibiting unions and employers from imposing or enforcing a forced-unionism agreement). And, of course, a union could still seek a secret-ballot election to organizing a bargaining unit, though why one would do so when it could conduct its campaign behind closed doors and pressure employees without allowing employers to conduct a campaign is a mystery.

But of course, "the bill means the end of the secret ballot" to put a union to its proofs when it presents a petition for union representation signed by a majority of employees. And therefore, also of course, it "means the end of the secret ballot" in the circumstances to which it applies.

The lie itself also demonstrates a singular ignorance of existing labor law, one which one might not expect from someone with Maddow's academic credentials, were it not for her political credentials.

But, as recent presidential history has demonstrated, no lie is too outrageous in pursuit of more power for the far Left.

The entire notion that "it will be the employees' choice" is false, since these advocates for more union-boss power --- like most labor statutes --- virtually ignore those employees who do not support union representation. Of course, what Maddow fails to recognize is that the notion that it is "the employers'" choice is true, but only to the extent that existing labor law doesn't recognize the right of even a substantial minority of employees --- say, 30% of a bargaining unit, the percentage necessary to seek a certification, decertification, or deauthorization election under existing law --- to demand a secret-ballot election when a union and employer agree to card-check recognition. Of course, what currently requires agreement of an employer --- recognition upon a showing of majority support with signed authorization cards --- would become mandated under EFCA, with no mechanism for either an employer or bargaining unit employees to demand an election.

Hence, the term "card check" is absolutely accurate. Union representation would be imposed upon all employees, even those who don't want it, upon a showing that a mere and perhaps ephemeral majority had, in full view of union organizers, signed authorization cards.

It is understandable that the far Left would want to cast EFCA opponents as liars, since the change they propose would permit imposition of monopoly bargaining upon employees based upon the unexaminable promises, misrepresentations, and --- yes --- lies of union organizers in collecting authorization cards. It would also then impose mandatory "arbitration" of first contracts upon a failure to reach agreement, but that's a pernicious element of EFCA which gets less attention than the more fundamental flaw in its extinguishing of the right to a secret-ballot election to prove union support.

Maddow and Chernilla: Liars for the far Left.

Too Funny

As Barbie turns 50, the newest advertisement:

The Ignorance Of Creigh Deeds

Got this fascinating little e-mail from Creigh Deeds today:

Dear Friend,

Yesterday, I was so proud to have a Democratic President.

As you may have heard, President Obama signed an executive order to lift the ban on federal funding for promising embryonic stem cell research. Once again, America will take the lead in conducting research that has the potential to improve the quality of life of countless Americans. I'd be grateful if you could take a moment to join me in support of President Obama.

Show your support for President Obama on stem cell research.

While we should celebrate this historic day, the fight for stem cell research is far from over. Here in Virginia back in 2005, I exposed Bob McDonnell’s radical stance on this issue. I fought tooth and nail against him. And let there be no doubt that if elected Governor, Bob McDonnell would do everything he could to close Virginia's doors to the cures and hopes of stem cell research. We as Democrats simply can’t afford to lose in 2009.

I believe that yesterday was a beginning, not an end. I want Virginia to lead in the development of stem cell research. I believe our research institutions should lead in this fight, which not only would create 21st century jobs here in Virginia, but also help find the way to cures. Let’s show President Obama how important a step yesterday was.

Thank President Obama for supporting the promise of stem cell research.

Thank you for joining me in support of President Obama. Together, we can continue to move this Commonwealth forward.

Sincerely,

Creigh Deeds

Now, aside from the fact that I'm no friend of Creigh Deeds --- don't even know how I got on his e-mail list --- this missive is rife with revelations about the guy who apparently wants to sell himself as a "conservative" Democrat.

First, there's the implication that America can't "take the lead in conducting research that has the potential to improve the quality of life of countless Americans" unless government funds it. Remember, of course, that the so-called "ban" on embryonic stem-cell research was only a ban on government funding of it (which, to his credit, Deeds apparently recognizes); the private sector was completely free to use embryonic stem cells --- importantly, for foes, from aborted fetuses and discarded embryos from fertility clinics --- to their heart's content.

Does Creigh Deeds really believe this? Wow.

Moreover, while I don't pretend to understand the science of it --- my degree is in law, not genetics or biology --- the issue here isn't whether embryonic stem-cell research would occur. It clearly could occur, even under the eeeeeeevil! Bush Administration. Whether it did occur, I don't know. But to the extent that it did, it occurred with private or state funding, not federal funding.

But that raises this important little question: if it didn't occur, or if you're worried that it didn't occur, doesn't that raise a question as to whether it might not have occurred because its potential is not what the abortion lobby wants you to believe it to be? My layman's understanding is that the most practical applications of stem-cell research has not involved embryonic stem cells. With that being the case, might it be that private entities chose not to fund it based upon a disciplined cost-benefit analysis of its potential?

And if private entities subject to the discipline of the market have made that determination, how is it that government --- subject to no apparent discipline, at least in the age of the Obamorons --- can make a rational contrary determination?

Aside from the profound moral questions at issue, it is utterly clear that the decision to fund federally embryonic stem-cell research is the result of the damnable confluence of a pro-abortion lobby that would impose no limitations on the unbridled "choice" over the life and death of the most innocent, and a Big Government lobby which arrogates unto itself the authority to interpose itself into all manner of individual decisionmaking other than a mother's decision to kill her unborn child.

How either attitude is consistent with the scheme of "ordered liberty" created under our Constitution by great Virginians like Madison, Jefferson, and Washington remains a mystery.

Why Doesn't This Surprise?

Apparently, one of the moonbats formerly known as one of the Ranting Kids is in high dudgeon over the decision of President Barry's Secretary of the Interior to delist wolves from the endangered species list under the Endangered Species Act.

Now, if you begin from the premise that an objective standard exists by which we can determine that certain species are "endangered" or not --- never mind that, having spent the last hundred years canonizing Darwin, the ESA is little more than an effort to overcome application of his theory --- it would seem to follow that circumstances exist for both putting species on the list, and for removing them.

Of course, if you begin from the premise that government must always grow and seize more control over our lives, then removing them becomes anathema, no matter how well they are doing as a species.

Guess which premise informs the moonbat formerly known as one of the Ranting Kids?

Hasn't He Been Paying Attention?

You've got to love the Drudge headline:

"Chavez Calls On Obama To Follow Path of Socialism."

Apparently, Mr. Chavez hasn't been paying attention. After all, it would be entirely redundant.

Paul Harvey, RIP

It was reported minutes ago that broadcast pioneer Paul Harvey has joined his beloved wife, who passed away less than a year ago. Like my maternal grandparents, they were together an amazing nearly seven decades.

I vividly remember, as a small child in Logansport, Indiana, riding in my paternal grandparents' car, and hearing his resonant voice delivering the news. even before I paid much attention to what the news was.

He will be missed.

RIP.

H/T to Drudge.

Time To Take Up Arms?

Let's see if I've got this right: you overpay your taxes, timely file for a refund of the overpayment, and the State tells you that you can't have your money back?!?!?

Well, that seems to be what's happening in Kansas.

Somebody please explain to me how this doesn't justify taking up arms against tyrannical government.

More "Change We Can Believe In"?

It seems that President Barry's Justice Department is defending Bush Administration secrets:

Despite President Barack Obama's vow to open government more than ever, the Justice Department is defending Bush administration decisions to keep secret many documents about domestic wiretapping, data collection on travelers and U.S. citizens, and interrogation of suspected terrorists.

I suspect that President Barry got quite a splash of cold water in his face when he went from carping Democrat nominee to "President-elect" and, as a result, will adopt and pursue many of the same anti-terrorism policies of his predecessor.

And I'm delighted that even the sanctimonious boobs elevated to positions of responsibility by the mediocrity who is President Barry have recognized the effectiveness and importance of the strategies pursued by the former President.

But "change we can believe in"? Change in which I would believe would be if President Barry issued an apology to former President Bush for his sanctimonious and ill-informed attacks.

Of course, the nice thing about having a cult of personality is not having to tolerate demands for such honorable behavior.

A Little Too Close To Truth

On Inauguration Day, the line that ran through my head was a variation of the line from the Beatle's tune, "Eleanor Rigby": "Oh, look at all the pathetic sheeple...."

Now, there's a YouTube that captures that pathos of the Obamorons, a parody of this video:



Wish I'd thought of it, and had the talent to pull it off. Alas, I must simply settle for linking to it.

H/T to Doug Mataconis.

The Wrong Title

"Blue Commonwealth" is flacking for what newly-minted Fifth District Democrat Congressman Tom Perriello is calling his "Road to Recovery" campaign... er, "constituent meeting" tour.

With the policies that he's endorsing, of course, it's more appropriately categorized as the "Road to Serfdom" tour.

The Far Left Meme On Gregg's Withdrawal

Apparently, President Barry's Administration is quite embarrassed by Senator Judd Gregg's (R-NH) withdrawal from consideration for Secretary of Commerce. Apparently, Senator Gregg determined upon further reflection that he could not serve in an Administration with which he has serious and fundamental disagreements.

Now, I thought it a mistake for Gregg to agree to serve in this capacity. From what I know of Gregg, he is a fairly Conservative Senator, and service in a manifestly far-Left Administration would create inevitable conflicts.

But of course, some on the far Left is in high dudgeon over Gregg's decision. They dismiss it as mere "political games." I wonder what they were saying about those partisan, obstructionist Democrats who opposed the President's policies in 2001? Well, I don't really wonder.

So this is apparently the treatment of fundamental policy differences in this childishly-conceived "post-partisan" era: dismiss them as "obstructionist" (damn those obstructionist parties in the 1934 Reichstag!); belittle them; and declare anyone in disagreement with the new Administration somehow "unAmerican."

Sieg Heil!

Local Judge Set For Elevation

According to the Virginia Lawyers Weekly, Prince William County/Manassas/Manassas Park Circuit Judge Rossie D. Alston, Jr., is in the mix for appointment to the Virginia Court of Appeals, the Commonwealth's intermediate appellate court.

If elected, Judge Alston --- the Circuit's President Judge --- would be the second Prince William jurist elevated to Court in recent years. Virginia Supreme Court Justice LeRoy F. Millette, Jr., was elevated to the Virginia Court of Appeals before being tapped for the Virginia Supreme Court.

Judge Alston grew up in Dale City, and is highly regarded for his abilities on the softball field.

Delegate Jackson Miller, Republican from Manassas, has apparently been championing Judge Alston's appointment.

UPDATE: Demonstrating uncharacteristic wisdom, the legislature has, in fact, selected Judge Alston for elevation.

Virginia Democrats Promote Perversion Rather Than Doing What's Right

With unemployment numbers hitting an unexpected high and much of the country's attention focused on the negotiations surrounding the economic recovery package, you would think that our state legislators would want to promote job growth and economic development. Nonetheless, it appears as though the Democrats in the House of Delegates have decided to place more importance on their extreme left-wing agenda rather than promoting the interests of Virginia residents.

House Democrats in a General Laws subcommittee voted Wednesday to promote perversion by supporting Del. Adam Ebbin’s HB2385, which would require public employers to provide special protections to sexual deviants. A majority of the House Democratic Caucus co-patroned the bill.

H/T to Blue Commonwealth. 'Cept our friends over at Blue Commonwealth are a little slow on the uptake, and reported as "last night" something happening four days before.

Here's A Shocker!

Apparently, the woman who had octuplets last week, impregnated through via in-vitro fertilization, had her six previous children also through in-vitro fertilization. In short, only a man, a plastic cup, a freezer, and a turkey baster were involved in the conceptions of the children of this single woman.

It will come as no surprise to learn that this woman spent some quality time as a guest in one of California's state mental hospitals.