Bookworm Room

Don Surber got to ride for a while on McCain’s Straight Talk Express.  He blogs about it here.  It’s an amusing read and it does give you more of a sense of McCain’s personal charm (not to mention Surber’s personal charm).

On a more serious note, Harold Kildow looks at the larger meaning of Aliza Shvarts’ execrable “art” project which purported to show the results of serial abortions, and serves up his own ruminations with a link to Roger Kimball’s excellent comment on the same subject.

No Comments »

This came to me as an email, but I was able to find it as someone’s post.

No Comments »

In two preceding post, I’ve talked about the studied incrementalism of Obama’s lies (here and here). Obama is now taking a page out of the Hillary play book on lying and simply denying, outright, easily ascertainable truths.

UPDATE:  And yet another blatant Obama lie — although this one may be because Obama, who claims an audience didn’t applaud, is so used to screaming and swooning that he’s incapable of even acknowledging polite applause.  (H/t:  Danny Lemieux.)

Tags: Barack Obama, Lies

No Comments »

One of the first things you learn as litigation defense counsel is that you will lose if you let the plaintiff control the case’s message. It’s easy to let this happen, because the plaintiff comes out of the gate like gangbusters, and the defendant finds himself, logically, in a defensive, purely reactive posture. “You did this.” “I did not. And what if I did, anyway?” It’s all about responding to the plaintiff’s narrative.

What the defendant needs to do, and often doesn’t do until the eve of trial, is look at his own facts in a vacuum, without the throbbing background drumbeat of the plaintiff’s complaint. In every case in which I’ve taken the time to do this, and do it well, I’ve discovered that there is a completely different narrative theme available to the defendant — not one that is merely reactive and defensive, but one that stands on its own as coherent, believable (and often winnable) story. If I can get out from under the plaintiff’s tale, either the plaintiff loses entirely, or the plaintiff’s margin of victory shrinks substantially.

I wish the Republican party would figure out that the same rules of behavior should apply in this political race. Right now, in full gangbusters mode, the Democrats are marking out the battlefield. “Bush lied.” “Cheney is evil.” “We’ve lost in Iraq.” “Global warming and polar bears.” “Pathetic, maltreated illegal immigrants.” “Economic despair.” The Republicans are in a pure, panicked reactive mode, either desperately distancing themselves — “I never liked George Bush, either” — or trying to coopt the Democrats — “I’m more green than you are.” John McCain is no exception.

The Republicans need to take a deep breath, convene in a smoke filled back room and come up with their own story, untainted by the Democratic world view. Not surprisingly, because he is, after all, a lawyer, Hugh Hewitt completely understands this. The other day, when I had a rare moment alone in the car — meaning I could listen to grown-up radio — I caught Hewitt expounding on the pure conservative messages that the Republicans should be hammering home without fear. I’ve never figured out how to link to podcasts, so this is how you find it: Go here, and look for Hugh’s May 14 show, hour 2.

What Hugh has to say all comes out in the first ten minutes of that segment, and it’s very much worth listening to. Even if you don’t agree with everything he says, what stands out is that he’s envisioning a message that comes, first and foremost from the Republicans, without first being past through the Democratic filter. That’s how you win.

Right now, Republicans are in a losing posture, not because they have a bad message, but because they have no message at all. They look like cornered rats, trying to confuse the cat into thinking they’re something other than a tasty meal. They need to come out like gangbusters too, loud and proud, with a message that resonates with ordinary Americans. Right now, the Democratic message is resonating, but that’s primarily because there’s nothing else out there to stop those sound waves from vibrating around in the political ether.

Tags: Democrats, Presidential elections, Republicans

2 Comments »

Danny Lemieux sent me a link to what must be one of the clearest statements ever written about the media fetish regarding Democratic candidates generally, and Obama specifically. The author is Gerard Baker, writing in the London Times. After describing media love affairs with presidential candidates from Kennedy on up, Baker gets to the meat of the matter:

The alert among you will have noticed by now that what all these spiritually uplifting leaders have in common. They are all Democrats. Never in any of the chapters of this hagiography does a Republican, a conservative, appear in a remotely similar light. These alien creatures by contrast have always been portrayed as cartoonish representatives of the Dark Side of humanity, or, if they were really lucky, simply idiots, failed B-movie actors and irredeemably ignorant hicks with embarrassingly neanderthal views on women, religion and communism.

It’s been a while coming - neither Al Gore in 2000 (before the luminescence created by his recent joint Nobel/Oscar triumphs) nor John Kerry in 2004 quite fit the bill. But it’s fairly clear now that, with the near-certain nomination by the Democrats of Barack Obama everything is in place for the media to indulge in one of the greatest, orgiastic media fiestas of hero-worship since Elvis Presley.

You will not see a finer example of the genre than the cover story of this week’s Newsweek, which was entitled “The O Team”. This rhapsodic inside account of Senator Obama’s campaign reads a little like a cross between Father Alban Butler’s Life of St Francis and the sort of authorised biography of Kim Jong Il you can pick up in any good bookshop in Pyongyang.

Mr Obama is portrayed throughout as an immanently benevolent figure. Not human really, more a comforting presence, a light source. He is always eager to listen to all aides of an argument, always instilling confidence in the weak-willed, resolutely sticking to his high principles and tirelessly spurning the low road of electoral politics. I stopped reading after a while but I’m sure by the end he was healing the sick, comforting the dying, restoring sight to the blind and setting prisoners free.

You must read the rest of Baker’s article. It’s beautifully written and it perfectly nails the scary way in which the media worships their latest savior. And if you haven’t watched the video I recommended in the preceding post, you’ll definitely want to after having read Baker’s article.

Tags: Barack Obama, media

1 Comment »

I would have missed this if Danny Lemieux hadn’t sent it my way.  You’ll want to watch it — all two minutes.

5 Comments »

In a delightful post about how the parties choose their Presidential nominees, Patrick (the Paragraph Farmer) gives a perfect description of Barack Obama and why he may not be the savior people hope:

Barack Obama has the top of the Democratic ticket all but sewn up, in spite of having spent more time campaigning for president than serving as a U.S. Senator or doing anything else to prepare for the job, with the possible exception of networking among fellow congregants in a large church with the blessing of a fundamentally unserious pastor (anyone who regards “social justice” as an adequate paraphrase of the gospel is a disciple, however well-meaning, of Karl Marx).

With the Democratic presidential nomination, Obama will join the likes of John “Cambodian Christmas Hat” Kerry, Al “Invented the Internet” Gore, Bill “Better Put Some Ice on That” Clinton, and Michael “One-Man Parole Board” Dukakis, all of whom were brutalized by partisan pundits for faults that would have been apparent to anyone doing even a cursory background check.

By the way, given Obama’s “Yes, we can slogan,” am I the only one who finds it vaguely disturbing that this most immature of political candidates has as his slogan a theme that most parents will recognize as the chorus from the theme song for Bob the Builder, a show aimed at the toddler set?

Tags: Barack Obama, Bob the Builder

2 Comments »

I don’t doubt that something unsavory will pop up about Matthis Chiroux, the media’s latest conscientious objector poster boy, simply because something unsavory always seems to be lurking around these keys (not that the MSM lets its readers know). So that’s not what interests me. What caught me was the first two sentences in the AFP story reporting on Chiroux conscientious objector status:

Matthis Chiroux is the kind of young American US military recruiters love.

“I was from a poor, white family from the south, and I did badly in school,” the now 24-year-old told AFP.

Yup — that’s our military: poor and stupid Southern crackers, leavened, I’m sure, by poor and stupid urban blacks.  It’s amazing that the military isn’t one giant race war run by idiots.  If only it weren’t for the truth about the military’s real composition.

With regards to the AFP, I can only say what Daffy Duck would say:  “You’re dethpicable.”

Tags: media, Military

4 Comments »

Cliff Thier talks about the far-reaching implications of the Court’s (and the government’s) “fundamental rights” language.

The WSJ’s editors take on the election ramifications of the decision — a bit of unexpected, and undeserved, good luck for Republicans in a terribly managed campaign season.

As was to be expected, National Review quickly put together a whole catalog of articles about the ruling, with thoughts from the editors themselves, William Duncan, Maggie Gallagher, and Ed Whelan.

All of the above articles on the subject make clear that the case is a bit of judicial legerdemain, creating entirely new rights where none existed before, so as to bypass the troglodytes who troop regularly to the voting booths.  Marvin Baxter, a dissenting associate justice, sums up in a nutshell everything that is wrong with the Court’s opinion (and this holds true whether or not one agrees with the Court’s outcome):

“Nothing in our Constitution, express or implicit, compels the majority’s startling conclusion that the age-old understanding of marriage — an understanding recently confirmed by an initiative law — is no longer valid. California statutes already recognize same-sex unions and grant them all the substantive legal rights this state can bestow. If there is to be a further sea change in the social and legal understanding of marriage itself, that evolution should occur by similar democratic means.” (Emphasis mine.)

Hate John McCain as much as you like — and he’s doing his dangerous maverick thing again which deserves condemnation — but if you want to try to keep more activist judges from getting on the US Supreme Court, gamble on him. I can guarantee you that, no matter how “mavericky” McCain gets, a President Obama, working with a Democratic Senate, will put on the Supreme Court justices who will make your head spin.

Tags: Gay marriage, Judges, Judicial activism

No Comments »

Have you heard the old expression “a fine Italian hand?” It’s an old saying that applied to a situation in which you believed, at first, that you were dealing with one rather inept adversary. However, as the matter progressed, you began to realize that there was a more skilled, subtle — and invisible — player involved, manipulating things at a much more sophisticated level. That player was the “fine Italian hand.” In Iraq, it is becoming more and more apparent that Americans are facing, if not a fine, than a deadly Iranian hand. Bob Owens has more on this story with regard to a new and deadly weapon on the Iraqi battle field.

UPDATE:  Someone who has the technical expertise to know, has indicated to me that there are technical problems with the view expressed in that linked article that require us to take its conclusions with a large grain of salt.  Read it, by all means, but he suggests that we do not rely too heavily on its conclusions.

Tags: Iran, Iraq

2 Comments »

California joins Massachusetts.

I’ll be interested to read the decision when I get the chance.

As for me, let me reiterate my usual point.  I am not categorically opposed to gay marriage.  However, I think we’re rushing too fast to change human relationships that have been fixed across all human cultures for thousands of years:  marriage is between a man and a woman.  Even polygamy doesn’t mess with that basic (and biological) principle.  I prefer more thought before getting pushed politically into such changes.

Tags: Gay marriage

41 Comments »

Apologies for my silence today, but I let deadlines pile up and I now have to face that dismal music.  It’s entirely my own fault, because I wanted to blog, not do paying work, but the paying work has to be done — and I certainly owe it to my clients to do their projects and do them well.

In the meantime, if you are looking for stuff to tickle your brain, I can highly recommend the selections this week at the Watcher’s Council:

1. “Evolution” = “Growth”
   Soccer Dad
2. Making Capitalists
   Bookworm Room
3. The Audacity of Newsweek
   Wolf Howling
4. Curiouser and Curiouser
   The Glittering Eye
5. And People think George W. Bush Is a Moron
   The Colossus of Rhodey
6. BUMPED: McCain Ahead In Electoral Vote Race?
   Rhymes With Right
7. Where we went wrong
   Hillbilly White Trash
8. Protecting Marriage
   Done With Mirrors
9. Los Angeles’ Combat High School
   The Education Wonks
10. Lebanon Becomes Hezbollahstan
    Joshuapundit
11. And Tango Makes 420
    Cheat Seeking Missiles
12. Poll: Aberica Is a Sucky Place To Live Right Now
    Right Wing Nut House

Non-council links:

1. POLITICS: Yes, Experience Matters
   Baseball Crank
2. Obama on Lebanon: Cognitive Egocentric Porridge
   Augean Stables
3. Lebanon’s “300″ Heroes
   Ya Libnan
4. Numb
   Kaboom: A Soldier’s War Journal
5. Is the Criminal-Justice System Racist?
   City Journal
6. Military Exceeds All Recruiting Goals
   UrbanGrounds
7. Minn: Muslim Students Force Out Disabled Teacher With Dog
   Atlas Shrugs
8. The Fall-Out: How a Guilty Liberal Lost His Innocence
   Democratiya
9. Heroes and Villains
   Dr. Sanity
10. “We Are All Jews Now!”
    All Things Beautiful
11. Has Obama “Lost His Bearings”?
    Sister Toldjah
12. Holding Things Accountable for What Men Do With Them
    Classical Values
13. Monopsony Madness
    The Atlantic
14. Boris Scares Cameroonies
    Dodgeblogium

As you see, I’ve denominated this post an open thread, so feel free to chime in on subjects that interest you.  I’ll be back later (you know I will!).

5 Comments »

I purposely didn’t read the news stories headlined “McCain’s wife sells off” something, something, something Sudan.  I knew what I’d find there, once I got passed that smear headline implying that McCain & Co. are profiting off of people’s misery in Africa.  The actual facts would show that Mrs. McCain is a wealthy woman who has assets invested all over the place, and by some chain of investments, there’s a tie to Sudan.  Heck, I own Fidelity Mutual Funds and I’m sure that my funds make money through investments in lots of things that would disturb me if I looked too closely.

Unlike me, Terry Trippany (who hosts Webloggin and is one of my valued friends) did take the time, not only to read the article, but to consider its implications for everyone — Democratic and Republican — in the current election:

It’s a strange one sided sort of game the Associated Press is playing in its latest attack against John McCain. AP writer Jim Kuhnhenn is applying a six degrees of separation style standard in trying to accuse John McCain of investing in the Sudan because his wife owned some mutual funds that had holdings in an Indian company that allegedly does business in the Sudan. The far left has picked up on this “AP newsbreak” as evidenced by its front page status at The Huffington Post.

So I decided to play the game myself by looking at the mainstream media’s favorite target of obsessive adulation, Barack Obama. My my, would you look at that? When I applied the McCain standard to Barack Obama I quickly discovered that Obama’s top contributors are being targeted by activists that are targeting financial companies to divest in the Sudan. Surprised?

You can — and should — read all the details here.  What Terry shows is that AP’s outrage is surprisingly one sided because, if one uses the attenuated approach AP applies to show a McCain taint, Obama’s top contributors have money equally tainted by Sudanese blood.

Tags: Barack Obama, Campaign Financing, John McCain, Sudan

2 Comments »

What’s becoming increasingly scary about reporting — or maybe it was always a problem and, without the internet, we just didn’t know it — is the media’s abysmal ignorance.  Here is yet another example of the pathetic idiocy of those who relay news to the world.

Tags: media

8 Comments »

There are no good people or bad people. There are only people who have different cultural values. My deep and abiding respect for the multicultural principles underlying moral relativism demand that I accept as culturally reasonable the fact that terrorists in Iraq strapped a remote-controlled bomb to an eight year old girl in order to demonstrate their resistance to Western imperialism by blowing up an Iraqi commander.

Aw, the heck with it. These people are monsters. This is subhuman behavior that is the antithesis of anything resembling civilization. I wouldn’t be surprised if one of the “masterminds” sacrificed his own daughter to this plot.  Nothing can be said to excuse this act.

Tags: Child Abuse, Iraq, Moral Relativism, Terrorists

13 Comments »

The title of my post is all I could think of when I read this story.

1 Comment »

Charles Johnson, at LGF, working off the top of his head, put together a list of Obama’s troublesome associations:

* Rabidly anti-Israel Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi. The Obamas were regular dinner guests at Khalidi’s Hyde Park home for years.

* Terrorist sympathizer Ali Abunimah, who runs the viciously anti-Israel web site Electronic Intifada.

* Unrepentant Weather Underground terrorists William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.

* Reverend Jeremiah Wright. What more needs to be said?

* Anti-Israel foreign policy adviser Samantha Power — fired after calling Hillary Clinton a “monster.”

* Anti-Israel foreign policy adviser Robert Malley — fired when it was revealed he has been holding talks with Hamas.

* Hatem El-Hady, former official of the Hamas-linked charity Kindhearts, closed by the Justice Department. El-Hady’s web page suddenly vanished from the Obama campaign site with no explanation, after being exposed by LGF and others.

* Tony Rezko — a Chicago fixer currently in a whole lot of legal trouble.

He ends by saying:  “There are more, I know; this is just off the top of my head.”

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to add to that list.