TARP, President Bush, and the Constitution

Can I just stop calling it TARP? The Troubled Assets Relief Program, as it was originally called, shall henceforth be known as PERP, the Presidential End-Run Program. As in, President Bush didn't like Congress' decision on the auto-bailout, so he did an end-run around the entire legislative branch and did what he darn well pleased. After all, he's the executive.

Well, Mr. President, let me tell you about the Executive Office, and the powers it holds.

The President of The United States of America is bound by the Constitution to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed". The Presidential Oath requires the would-be president to swear to "faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.''

Nowhere does the Constitution enable the President to circumvent the will of Congress, save by veto. As Congress never passed an auto bailout bill, there was nothing for President Bush to veto, or to send back to Congress. He simply saw something that he did not like, and dismissed the objections of the elected representatives of the citizens of this country. He took a law marginally related to what he wanted to do (TARP/PERP), and made it do what he wanted, contrary to the expressed will of Congress, American citizens, and the wording of the bill itself. No fanfare, no rationalizations of the illegality/unconstitutionality of what he was doing. No justifications of how this was "faithfully upholding the law". Just a few penstrokes, and a quick press conference.

Great. Peachy. One can only imagine what horrors this could be the precedent for.

There's a reason that the Constitution balances the executive and legislative branches. There's a reason that laws must be approved by both Congress and the President. But now, according to President Bush, the entire legislative branch and the Constitution can be bypassed at the will of the Executive.

Just great.

I am indebted to George Will's article on this subject in the Washington Post.

UPDATE: I just finished reading the Will article all the way through (I had only seen a couple paragraphs before), and I note that a lot of this post makes the same points as Will's article. I could say something to effect of "great minds think alike", but that would be somewhat egotistical, don't you think? So I'll simply say that Will's article is great, and deserves a thorough reading through, as I should have done before I wrote this. That said, this is my material, not copied or paraphrased from Will's. He did give me a great idea, however.

Hey!

Tigerhawk linked to me-- Christmas has come early in Ithilien!

Moving on, you remember those end of the world posts? Well, it could be worse.

I could live in Britain, where enforcers from debt collection agencies have been given the go ahead to break into people's homes, pin the homeowners down, and ransack the home for belongings to appropriate to pay down the debt.

Don't worry though. They say they'll regulate it. Besides, these new powers "will not be used to search debtors’ pockets or to remove jewellery." So if you're into carrying everything of value on your person, you might be safe from these people, who, despite the word "bailiff", are not police.

Of course, Britons may wish to give their pockets snap and velcro closures, as things could fall out when the enforcers breaks into their home and tackles them. And they might want to ask national icon Doctor Who just who he gets his jackets from, as the pockets are bigger on the inside than they are on the outside.

Another link up

This time it's On Tap, a nifty blog written by the guy who writes NRO's Campaign Spot and a few other guys whom I have never heard of, but I'm pretty sure I should have. Truly good stuff, funny, and a thoroughly interesting series going on right now called the On Tap Awards.

Housekeeping

People who look at my link sidebar (all .75 of you) will notice that Jac has been removed. Is there still good stuff on Jac? Yes. Do I object to being called a prostitute by the author simply because I'm a stay-at-home mom? And do I object enough to avoid the blog?

Also yes.

Anyway, Jac has been replaced by Althouse (his mother, coincidentally). I've been planning to add Althouse to the list for quite a while. Occasional bizarre and Not Entirely Safe for Work posts, but usually good stuff from a center-left point of view. If you're concerned about NSFW-ness, avoid the comments in certain posts (her recent one on tattoos, for example. Yikes!).

It's the end of the world as we know it, Part Three

A ten-year-old boy has been arrested, and charged with terrorism, for bringing a cap gun on a school bus, and later not having put his toy down before he answered the door. Actually, truly charged, and facing imprisonment if convicted.

The kid wants to be a police officer when he grows up.

This should make every single parent sick. And angry.

All links for "It's the end of the world as we know it" parts one through three were found on The Corner. You should go and read it.

It's the end of the world as we know it, Part Two

God is being airbrushed from American history-- at the Capitol Visitor's Center. As in, the Capitol Building of the United States of America. Edited out of our national motto, the rostrum of the Speaker of the House, the Northwest Ordinance, and the Constitution.

There's nothing left for me to say about this... well, no, there's two things. The first one is that, while I'm rarely alarmist about the whole "war on Christianity" thing, I will say that this is despicable, and that you should read the article for full effect. The second thing is that nowhere in the Constitution are people granted a right against being offended.

Unless that's been "edited" too.

It's the end of the world as we know it, Part One

Occasionally, any rational person will wonder, if only briefly, if civilization is dying.

Today is one of those days.

Every so often the Oxford University Press revises its children's dictionary and puts out a new version. All well and good. Until you look at what they've taken out, and what they've added:

Words taken out:

Carol, cracker, holly, ivy, mistletoe

Dwarf, elf, goblin

Abbey, aisle, altar, bishop, chapel, christen, disciple, minister, monastery, monk, nun, nunnery, parish, pew, psalm, pulpit, saint, sin, devil, vicar

Coronation, duchess, duke, emperor, empire, monarch, decade

adder, ass, beaver, boar, budgerigar, bullock, cheetah, colt, corgi, cygnet, doe, drake, ferret, gerbil, goldfish, guinea pig, hamster, heron, herring, kingfisher, lark, leopard, lobster, magpie, minnow, mussel, newt, otter, ox, oyster, panther, pelican, piglet, plaice, poodle, porcupine, porpoise, raven, spaniel, starling, stoat, stork, terrapin, thrush, weasel, wren.

Acorn, allotment, almond, apricot, ash, bacon, beech, beetroot, blackberry, blacksmith, bloom, bluebell, bramble, bran, bray, bridle, brook, buttercup, canary, canter, carnation, catkin, cauliflower, chestnut, clover, conker, county, cowslip, crocus, dandelion, diesel, fern, fungus, gooseberry, gorse, hazel, hazelnut, heather, holly, horse chestnut, ivy, lavender, leek, liquorice, manger, marzipan, melon, minnow, mint, nectar, nectarine, oats, pansy, parsnip, pasture, poppy, porridge, poultry, primrose, prune, radish, rhubarb, sheaf, spinach, sycamore, tulip, turnip, vine, violet, walnut, willow

Words put in:

Blog, broadband, MP3 player, voicemail, attachment, database, export, chatroom, bullet point, cut and paste, analogue

Celebrity, tolerant, vandalism, negotiate, interdependent, creep, citizenship, childhood, conflict, common sense, debate, EU, drought, brainy, boisterous, cautionary tale, bilingual, bungee jumping, committee, compulsory, cope, democratic, allergic, biodegradable, emotion, dyslexic, donate, endangered, Euro

Apparatus, food chain, incisor, square number, trapezium, alliteration, colloquial, idiom, curriculum, classify, chronological, block graph

Sorry for the huge block, but you need to see the full list. To get the full effect, however, you need this quote from the Telegraph article: "The publisher claims the changes have been made to reflect the fact that Britain is a modern, multicultural, multifaith society."

Ah. I see. In order to placate all those non-Christians, references to Christmas (including the innocuous "cracker" will be deleted. In order to placate all those non-Britishers, references to the monarchy, the titular head of the United Kingdom and Canada, will also be deleted. Also references to every-day Christianity-- which happens to be the state religion (Anglicanism). But wait, we've already deleted Her Majesty, who is one of the heads of the Church of England, so deleting the Church is twice as easy! And, in order to be modern, we'll take out... well, plants and animals aren't interesting to children, so let's replace them with things like "tolerate", "MP3 player" (seriously, who needed a dictionary entry for that? One would think that "player" and a knowledge of the alphabet and the numbers 1-3 would have sufficed), and "biodegradable".

There's also this gem of a quote: "We are limited by how big the dictionary can be – little hands must be able to handle it...". I can only roll my eyes. How much bigger would the dictionary have been if they hadn't deleted some of those words? A page? Two, maybe, three? You'd need fifty pages before it made a difference to "little hands"-- which would work out to about three entries a page (there are 152 deleted words listed). This excuse is simply that-- an excuse.

Oh, also from that article of Roger Kimball's: apparently some American Muslims informed the Department of Homeland Security that while the word "progress" is acceptable, "liberty" is to be avoided. Why? Because it is a "buzzword for American hegemony".

Personally, I'm alright with liberty being a synonym for America.

Rod Dreher

Talented writer.
That said, he has officially flipped his lid. Dreher used to be a bona fide conservative-- ideas differ, of course, and I thought some of Dreher's were a little out there, but that was alright. I don't insist on ideological orthodoxy (can I say homodoxy?). He's drifted as the years have passed-- I first noticed the drift after the publication of his book Crunchy Cons, which I agreed with in some places and disagreed with in others.

This came out today-- hence my assertion that Dreher has lost it:

Today, the greatest threats to conservative interests come not from the Soviet Union or high taxes, but from too much individual freedom. Look around you: Americans have been poor stewards of our economic liberty, owing to cultural values that celebrate unfettered materialism. Our families and communities have fragmented, in part because we have embraced an ethic of extreme individualism. Climate change and a peak in oil production threaten our future because we have been irresponsible caretakers of the natural world and its resources. At best, the religious right stood ineffectively against these trends. At worst, we preached them, mistaking consumerism for conservatism.

Uh-huh . Because some people made poor use of their freedom, I have to much of it. Because some churches confused and conflated policy and doctrine, I, your standard American citizen, have too much liberty. Some people made choices that Mr. Dreher considers wrong-- strip individual freedom from all!

Unless Dreher is willing to punish this "excessive freedom" with jail (that is what is generally done to take away freedom in this country), he needs to rethink this idea. And if he is willing to take away people's freedom...

There has been a lot of discussion around the conservative blogosphere lately about booting various people out of the conservative tent-- Kathleen Parker, Christopher Buckley, etc. But there are some people, perhaps including Dreher, who are far more deserving of it.

Well then

That's that. Done. Hail to the Chief and all that.

Seriously, though, Hail to the Chief. This is not the resolution I'd hoped for-- but that's okay. Congratulations, President-Elect Obama.

Meet your loyal opposition.

Arg

How on earth am I supposed to concentrate on anything today? I keep hitting refresh on the politics pages...

Compulsive

4 hours after swearing that I couldn't handle reading more politics today... I've been reading politics for an hour and a half.

It's gonna be a LOOOOOOOONG day and a half. Heaven grant that it be ONLY a day and a half-- I cannot fathom the thought of another 2000-style hanging/pregnant/dimpled chad fiasco.

So. Closing arguments are done, the people who are gonna decide before they're in the booth have mostly already decided... all there is to be done is to wait.

Quiet desperation

1. Barack Obama deliberately took who knows how much in illegal donations. Seriously. This is every bit as illegal as Watergate.

2. The LA Times has a video of Obama at an event where Rashid Khalidi, noted PLO-supporting scum-bag, is speaking, most likely spewing his typical vitriol. Are they going to do anything with it? No, or at least not until after the election.

3. The media is so far in the tank that even some of them are starting to get embarrassed. Conveniently, their embarrassment is coming so late as to be ineffective.

Quite simply put, this just isn't fair. Or right.

Assuming Obama wins, I'm not going to be one of those whack-jobs who says, "Well, he's not MY president". But will I be bitter?

Well, yeah.

Bad timing

Right before an important election is a really bad time to get hit with the mother of all head colds, but this is nevertheless what I did. I'm recovering now, but I figured I owed you an explanation for the silence. Moving on:

1. Senator Ted Stevens has managed to do the impossible and offend the Alaskan people enough (by being found guilty of 7 federal counts of misconduct) that there's a chance of him losing his Senate seat. Hallelujah! Although I note on CNN that he's asking Alaskan voters to "stand with me".
Huh?? That is one narcissistic senator. Much like others I could mention.

UPDATE: Via Instapundit, at the Club for Growth:

"I think he can win. He's the best thing for that, for the Senate. Alaskans know this.

"[...]I think that's going to be, you know, a matter of opinion. I can remember Richard Nixon, you know, his years of service, what he's done, and everybody were ridiculing him and he ended up being the greatest president in the history of our century.

-- Don Young, Alaska's one and only House Representative.

Alaska's congressional delegation is an embarrassment.

2. The GOP spent $150,000 on making Sarah Palin national-campaign-presentable. There are three problems with this:
a. I REALLY enjoyed mocking John Edwards $400 haircuts.
b. That's a heck of a lot of money.
c. Why is it deemed impossible to look presentable in something that costs less than $150? If that's so, then the vast majority of American women have no business going anywhere other than Wal-Mart and McDonald's. A $20 shirt is not a crime against fashion if it fits you and you look nice in it. Heck, neither is a $5 shirt. Would it have killed the campaign/GOP/whomever to acknowledge that and save the money for, say, Michigan?
I'm not trying to say that Palin should be running around in $40 outfits, by the way. I doubt they would hold up against a campaign schedule, although they do just fine for most. I'm just saying that it doesn't need to be flown in from New York, either.

3. What is with the McCain adviser calling Palin a "diva" (also on CNN)? Way to kill your own ticket, guy. Also, way to chicken out and do it anonymously. Way to grant the interview in the first place and grant an already-biased media more ammo that they didn't need. Nicely done, that.

4. I am a Joe the Plumber fan.

5. The election is a week from today. The polls are erratic. It ain't over till it's over.

We shall see.

Palin

found to have abused gubernatorial power.

Well this is just great. We are now not just screwed, but royally screwed.

Pardon the crudeness of the expression.

Can I vote "present" this year?

I just finished reading

How Ronald Reagan Changed my Life, by Peter Robinson. Good stuff, and profoundly hopeful. I'll post more thoughts on the book later, but for now... I think I'm going to stop despairing over the election. Reagan wouldn't have.

How McCain lost me

And found me, and lost me again. Let's take it in (more or less) chronological order (pre-primary, primary, generals)

1. Immigration. McCain's policy on immigration is irresponsible, in my view. I just moved from the southwest, where illegal immigration is rampant. The drain on local and regional resources is crazy. I can't imagine how much just having to print everything twice must cost, let alone all the other services that we provide. To criminals. That is my main beef, I suppose. There's a reason that "migrants" used to be called "illegal immigrants". They broke the law, and it seems like poor policy to reward people for breaking the law by giving the thing they broke the law for: "Hey shoplifter, would you like to keep that Wii? I suppose it would be inhumane to take it back, as they're so awesome and all." We put our own citizens in prison and sometimes strip away their right to vote for breaking the law. Seems like we should deport people who aren't ours. Why do we want to import thousands of people who, by fact of being here, are already criminals? (Hoo boy, I'm gonna get it for that one.)

2. "Honor Politics", as Ramesh Ponnuru(? I can't seem to find the link, but I'm pretty sure it was an article by Ponnuru in National Review during the primary season. If I can find the link, I'll post it, along with quotes) called it. McCain's career has been in large part defined by his explosive anger towards people whose views he didn't agree with. Ponnuru's thesis was that McCain views his positions as THE honorable position-- disagreement is by definition dishonorable. I agree with Ponnuru-- and McCain's behavior towards those he views as "dishonorable" is inexcusable. Calling a fellow senator a "chickensh*t" during a policy disagreement is not the mark of someone who should be anywhere near international negotiations. I don't care to think of the consequences if McCain were to call Ahmadinejad a pig turd-- even if he would be right to do so. However, McCain hasn't lost it (so far) during the campaign. Maybe he's mellowed. I surely hope so. A person who is not in control of their temper is a dangerous person in the Oval Office.
At the other end of honor politics is McCain's seeming belief that compromise is honorable, as is disagreeing with your supporters. It's as if McCain saw the benefit reaped by Bill Clinton after his Sister Souljah moment and decided that that was always the way to go. Compromise can be honorable, as disagreeing with your supporters can be. But they are not honorable in and of themselves, and sometimes McCain supports bad policy (immigration) and/or goes out of his way to poke conservatives in the eye (immigration. See also the primaries of 2000).

3. McCain's treatment of Mitt Romney during the primaries. When it became clear that Romney was going to be the last serious contender for the nomination (did anyone really think that Huckabee would win?), McCain began to lie concerning Romney's position on withdrawal from Iraq. It's this form of political victory at any cost that most Americans (including me) despise.

That about covers McCain losing me. How he found me:

1. The Surge. It takes plain nerve to a) be highly visible to the President, b) be a member of his party, and c) tell him he's wrong, consistently, for 3 years. The Dems in Congress are great at telling the President he's wrong, but awful at coming up with good solutions. McCain should be credited with saving Iraq, and as Iraq is the major foreign policy dilemma at the moment, that seems like a stellar commendation for McCain as Commander in Chief.

2. Sarah Palin. Actually, this could swing either way-- find or lose. I was over the moon about Palin after she was announced. She's an actual reformer, with massive approval ratings and solid conservative principles. You can relate to Palin in a way that I've never seen with another politician. She served as a reassurance that McCain was listening to conservatives, and if he still didn't agree with us on everything, at least he thought our ideas were valid and worthy of nominal support.
I'm still a Palin fan. But judging by her interviews, she MAY be out of her league. If she is, then McCain's choice was obviously a gimmick (and he blew her post-convention introduction to the country). I'm going to give Palin throught the debate and see how she does. If she does well, then I will stay solidly supportive of her and McCain. If she's not ready, then I will stay supportive of her-- in 2012. And I will go back to holding my nose when I pull the lever for McCain.

How McCain lost me redux:

1. His reaction to the economic crisis. I (naively) thought he might have won the election when he suspended his campaign. Gimmick? Sure. Good idea anyway? I thought so. McCain has been warning about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for years-- the man is prescient, if nothing else. It was a pleasure to see a politican stop bloviating about his mighty self and go to work... or it would have been if McCain had accomplished anything. Instead, he introduced another element to tricky negotiations, contributed nothing to the discussions, and then let Obama pressure him into announcing that the bill was far enough along that he could participate in the debate after all. Well, Senator, it's Tuesday, nothing's going to be voted on until Thursday at the earliest, and whatever passes is likely to resemble a lefty Christmas tree (MAN that simile's getting old. How about a lefty Easter basket?). And the House Republicans have been disgraced (the whole House has been disgraced, but that's not how the spin will work out). That's far enough along? Great.

2. Debate. I only caught the economic section, but I was not impressed. Yes, people hate them. But Obama was right-- earmarks are only a fraction of this country's budgetary woes. For pity's sake, hit back! Mentioning that the spending Obama's already proposed is going to cost more than the bailout would have been a good place to start.

So yeah. I'm back to agnostic on McCain. I'll vote for what I perceive as the lesser of two evils, but I'll not do it gladly.

Note: I'll add links to the post shortly-- but my little guy is calling, and toddler wails reduce surfing skills by 10.

I am beyond words

If this is true, I am speechless. Listen to the first two minutes. It's Karl Rove (yes, I know, I know) discussing the wind up to the House bailout vote today.

Bailout fails to pass House

One wonders if this is what sliding over the brink looks like.

What kind of crap is this?!?

The House Republicans have introduced an alternative to the Paulson Plan. All well and good. That is their prerogative.

It is NOT the prerogative of the House Democrats to say that the Republicans are holding up the Paulson Plan. There's a reason that Rep. Boehner is called the MINORITY leader-- the Republicans are a solid minority in the House. Pelosi is holding up the vote to provide political cover for House Dems.

I don't have the energy to deal with Dems turning the bailout into what people on The Corner are describing as a lefty Christmas tree with pork dripping off every branch.

Can we fire the entire political class from Congress on up and start over?

More random thoughts and a new link

There's a new blog up in the links section: Jac. It's written by Althouse's son, which should be reason enough to check it out, but the guy is a good thinker, and a good writer, on his own account. Jac and I don't agree (he will be voting for Obama), but from what I've read of his blog, he's a sane voice, as I hope to be. He doesn't write exclusively about politics, but a good and necessary part of politics writing (for me at least) is a reminder that the other side of the aisle contains real people too.

Anyway. After reading Jac's "How Obama Lost Me" pieces, I'm contemplating writing a "How McCain Lost Me and Found Me Again (Sorta)" piece. I still have major issues, but at least it's gotten to the point that I won't be gagging in the voting booth, which is a relief. I may also write a "How Obama Lost Me" piece, as I was tempted by the... well, what Obama could have been, had he been what he was selling. As someone who has followed politics closely since 2004, I am very tired of the bickering.

On the bailout: The more I read, the more convinced I am of two things:
1. The bailout is a terrible idea, and
2. It is absolutely necessary.

I have no desire to add $10,000 dollars of debt per household to the already staggering national debt (thanks, W). I have no desire to give irresponsible greedy people a "get out of jail free" card. But it seems that we have little choice-- although if my taxes go towards multimillion dollar severance packages for said greedy and irresponsible people, I intend to scream loud, long and hard. I also sincerely hope that the Paulson Plan has been amended to have oversight-- the original plan had buyouts as the sole purview of the Secretary of the Treasury, and explicitly forbade oversight and review. That is insane, and another cause for screaming bloody murder.
I have nothing else to add, except that this had darn well better work.

As for the McCain capaign "suspension": when my sister told me about it, I nearly had a heart attack. She didn't give me any context at first, and my first thought was, "What, like Hillary's suspension?!" Once my heart went back to its normal pace, I heartily approved. People can call it a gimmick or stupid, but I don't think that's how most people will see it. They will see an adult putting aside the glory of a presidential run for his real job at the Senate. You know, the one he gets paid for. As for Obama saying "we can do both" when asked about postponing the debate, he strikes me as a cocky teenager who thinks he can conquer the world after he finishes his homework. Or, to use a more geeky comparison, he seems like the Scout from Team Fortress 2. Ridiculously fast, cocky, and young, the Scout says "I'm not even winded!" when he scores a capture in the game-- often right before he gets blown up by some more durable class. Obama's statements have all the hallmarks of a teenager who didn't get his way in the first place (It was McCain who first announced his intentions of returning to Washington-- Obama didn't commit to it until after the President summoned him) and is now trying to save face by saying, "Oh yeah? Well I can multi-task better than you can!"

Sorry

Lots of inactivity around here. Which does not mean that I haven't been keeping up-- I'm just flabbergasted. Economics are not my forte, and I've been scrambling trying to figure out what the heck is going on. I still haven't gotten it figured out, although I am a fan of leaving what McCain has been calling the "moral hazard" intact-- that if your company fails, you've, well, failed, and I should NOT have to bail you out. I understand that a couple of these companies were so big and enmeshed that not bailing them out could have been catastrophic-- but for pity's sake, we've just added, what, $700 BILLION to the national debt?!? C'mon, folks.

On top of that, I've seen several hard-core feminists telling me that I'm not a real woman. Or at least, Sarah Palin isn't because she thinks abortion is wrong-- ergo, I'm not a real woman either because I agree with her (I'm less extreme than Palin-- I think that abortion should be an option in cases of rape or incest, even if I would never do it). Apparently, the status of womanhood is not determined by chromosomes or even anatomy. It is determined by whether or not someone wishing to be designated "woman" agrees with the chianti-sipping, free-loving, abortion extremists in New York.

Peachy.

And, even better, the hard-core feminists will never get called on it in the MSM. Just in the pages of conservative blogs and mags, which are oh-so convenient to ignore. The HCFs (hard-core feminists takes too long to type) are supposed to be all about choice-- so how come I don't get to choose to think for myself? According to the, I'm only a "real" woman if I agree with them. They've thought this as long as I can remember, but this the first time I remember them actually saying it.

How repulsive can they get?

Good stuff

This article in the Financial Times is good stuff. It makes an excellent point that the Dems had better get through their skulls if they want any sort of lasting success. Read, as they say, the whole thing. Registration is required, but it's fast and free.
Via Tigerhawk.

Palinpalooza

It turns out that that bogus list of Palin-banned books was on Obama's official website. Now, I'm not one to hold campaigns accountable for everything their supporters say. But if it's on your official website, you'd better be DARN sure that it's correct-- you are responsible for that. And when it's not correct, just shooting it down the memory hole is not sufficient.

Anyway. I've had a few days to ruminate about the Palin pick. I don't know if anyone could have predicted what picking her for VP would do to the race. If McCain knew, then he is exactly what Limbaugh has been calling him: McBrilliant. In one simple, usually symbolic move, McCain changed the entire race and gave himself a decent chance at winning. I think the reason for that is simple: Palin is a real person.

She doesn't pontificate about her father having a blue collar job-- instead she talks about the jobs she and her husband have held. Americans are able to relate to Sarah Palin in a way that they haven't related to anyone in the White House in my memory. And in one swipe, McCain stripped away the glories of elitism. Sarah Palin is confident, capable, and winning. And she did all these things without a trust fund, an Ivy-league education, or a papered pedigree. To me, it feels like government has just been given back to me-- that government really can work for me after all. It's as if McCain has reaffirmed what most Americans have known all along-- that someone who graduated from an obscure university in Idaho is just as capable as someone from Harvard. That government isn't a Kennedy-esque birthright, it's an American birthright. That you don't have to be born to privilege or even rise to it to make a difference.

Like there really is a shot for putting average Americans back in control of their government.

There'll be more on the policy and politics of Palin coming up. But I wanted to capture the mood of one reinvigorated conservative.

Convention and Commentary

I'll have (a lot) more thoughts up soon, but to all those commentating about Sarah Palin (*cough*MSNBC*cough*), listen to an Alaskan: Wasilla does NOT rhyme with Godzilla. Sibilant 's', folks, sibilant!

You've noticed the media

Saying that Governor Palin is under investigation for alleged misconduct involving the firing of an Alaska State Trooper. What the media hasn't been telling you is that the trooper allegedly harassed the Palins, to say nothing of the death threats.

Would it really have hurt the media that much to, well, put the news in context?

Hat tip: The Wall Street Journal

I can't do any better

Than to point you to Instapundit and Contentions for more reactions to Palin (the Corner is great, as always, but seems a little slow this morning). My favorite reaction is from Noah Pollak on Contentions: "Message to Obama: This is how you do a VP announcement, rookie."

Palin!

This is... well, cool. Sarah Palin, McCain's newly minted running mate, has been one of my favorite conservatives for quite a while. There are a couple of downsides, inexperience being the major one. How can we nail Obama for that when Palin's been in office for about a year, and was the mayor of Wasilla before that? Although the governor of Alaska does have to worry about terrorism issues-- Alaskans take the security of the Pipeline very seriously, and it would be a significant target. But as far as foreign policy goes... well, she probably has about as much experience as Obama, minus his Rainbow Tour.

But the upsides of this choice are potentially enormous. Describing how relieved conservatives should be is a tall order. Not only did McCain not pick Lieberman, Hillary, or a pro-choicer Republican, he picked a solid conservative, one who has a track record of standing up to corruption (see Alaska's congressional delegation) and pork (she helped kill the Bridge to Nowhere). She supports drilling in ANWR. In choosing her, McCain has shown that even if he doesn't agree with conservatives on a lot of things, he has been listening, and is willing to work with us. Or at least I think so-- with McCain, one is never sure.

Not to mention she's just likeable, in a way McCain can never hope to be. I caught the last five minutes or so of her speech this morning-- she's genuine. She's a former professional fisherman, for heaven's sake. She is part of what America is supposed to look like-- not broken and impoverished and victimized, the way the DNC painted us this week, but independent, unafraid, and enterprising.

I've withheld full-throated support for McCain, waiting to see whom he would choose for veep. I still don't like him, but with this choice, I can willingly get behind him instead of dragging my feet. Now that the choice is made-- Go McCain-Palin '08!

McCain's VP

is supposed to be announced tomorrow, but as the Secret Service will go to guard the prospective VP tonight, keep an eye out for breaking news tonight. Other than Obama-Zeus's speech (see below).

Chicago politics in action

This has to be read to be believed. It concerns the appearance of a conservative pundit on a radio show discussing Obama's ties to William Ayers. This is not the "politics of personal destruction". This is the politics of mass hysteria.

Seriously. Go read it.

Hat tip: Tigerhawk

Someone at the Obama campaign needs to grow up

Presidential politics are not high school class president elections, folks. The Obama campaign had its fake presidential seal:


And now, Obama has evidently decided that giving his acceptance speech from a football stadium is not enough. He's giving his speech in the football stadium, but the stage is-- I am not joking-- designed to look suspiciously like an ancient Greek temple. It also includes a podium that rises up from beneath the platform. One wonders if it will rise so high that Obama will float in the air over his temple.

Pictures to come. And thanks to the Chicago Tribune for the pic of Obama's "seal".

Hat tip: LGF, where they're occasionally annoying, often prescient, and usually funny.

Senator Tubes to Nowhere survived

the Alaskan primary. This guy, in addition to being under investigation (if memory serves he's been indicted) on corruption charges, pitches fits on the Senate floor, gets pork like nobody's business, and is convinced that the internet is a series of tubes. Come on Alaskans.

On the plus side, Don Young is neck and neck with his challenger, so the news from the Great White North is not unmitigated badness.

?!

Elizabeth Edwards slammed for keeping husband's affair secret

If I hadn't seen it on CNN I'd think it was from The Onion.

It's an interesting window on the culture of liberal politics. Many people have been sympathetic, and then there are those who call her "complicit" and "self-serving", who say that she owes them an apology (Those comments are from a Democratic strategist and commenters at Daily Kos. If anyone can find the link to the diary and comments at DK, I'd be obliged). Because she chose to preserve any shred of privacy and dignity she could salvage? Please. The woman has kids, an incurable and spreading form of cancer, and a heel for a husband. Yet they're upset with her for, in their view, messing up what they wanted.

This is the party that's supposed to be so "empathetic".

Leave the lady alone.

Posted without comment

At Basic Instructions, under today's date (they don't have an embedding link).

McCain and College Football

I saw a McCain ad running here talking about McCain doing battle with the big three: Big Oil, Big Pharma, and Big Business. This is insane. Since when is it the American way to attack people for doing well in life? If they did it dishonestly, then they deserve the penalty, but if not, then they deserve congratulations. Companies are not people; they're, well, companies. Companies that employ thousands of people who make a good living off these entities that John McCain wants to fight. Come on, Senator, you're supposed to be different from Obama. Remember Michelle Obama saying:

"We left corporate America, which is a lot of what we’re asking young people to do. Don’t go into corporate America. You know, become teachers. Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a nurse. Those are the careers that we need, and we’re encouraging our young people to do that."

McCain's rhetoric in regards to "Big Business" is strikingly similar to that of the Obamas. Whose votes are you really trying to win, Senator?

Honestly, this reminds me of BYU's football team (I haven't followed college football in years, but I remember this story). BYU is a private school run by the Mormon Church, and the school has a strict, church teachings-based honor code that all students, including the football players, are expected to abide by. Several years ago, the then-head coach Gary Crowton decided to stop aggressively recruiting Mormons, figuring they'd come and play for him anyway. What happened next surprised no one except, perhaps, Crowton. The talented Mormon high schoolers went off to other schools, and Crowton lost players that he had recruited because of their unwillingness to abide the religion-based honor code.
There is a direct corollary to the McCain campaign here. McCain seems to think that he's got the Republican/conservative vote in the bag, as Crowton thought he had all the Mormons. So McCain is off courting all the independent/Democratic voters he thinks he may be able to sway. What he's accomplishing, however, is the alienation of what should be his voter base (see fighting private enterprise, being willing to put in a pro-choice veep, and countless other things) in the attempt to get people who probably won't stick with him anyway. In the end, he's likely to go down in flames, just as Crowton did.


Peachy.

I'm back!

With an increasingly interesting race on, to boot.

Obama says, concerning veep selection, "I won't comment on anything else until I introduce our running mate to the world."

1. Our running mate? For a guy who's trying to ditch his elitist image, he sure uses the "royal plural" a lot.

2. Um, shouldn't he be more concerned about introducing his running mate to the American public before he introduces him/her to the world? Maybe the veep pick will visit Germany?

I know they're nit-picky little things... but seriously, even John Kerry didn't talk about introducing John Edwards to the world (to my knowledge). That sounds more like childbirth than politics.

Holes in the wall

Sometimes it starts to feel as if-- in the words of Mark Steyn-- America truly is alone, and the rest of the world has built a wall to protect themselves (and their little opinions) from what are pleased to call American corruption and influence. And then some brave soul does something like this: a London-based group has started a website called America in the World. Their purpose is to combat anti-Americanism.

My introduction to the website was a video they've produced describing what the world would be like without the American soldier.

From an American military brat: Thanks, guys.

Internet: I has it

But only after a fashion. Internet access will be spotty at best until the ISP gets its act together on Thursday.

But ye gods and little fishes! Be away from the internet for one week and what happens? John Edwards 'fesses up to the Rielle Hunter affair. Russia invades Georgia and forcibly redraws her borders. The ChiCom Olympics start (I love to watch the Olympics-- but I have to plug my nose while watching these), and China promptly cheats by playing little girls in the gymnastics competition.

Anyway, there'll be more (a lot more) commentary on all of this when I've had a chance to read up on everything, but in the meantime, here are two street signs from this neck of the woods:

Report [HOV lane] Violators: 111-111-HERO

Litter and it will hurt

Ah, the Pacific Northwest. Home of the threatening street sign.

Radio Silence

My internet has issues at the moment-- as in, it's non-existent. Expect posting to resume next week, when I will have things to say about DHS, TSA, and editors of university newspapers.

Narcissism, a case study

Obama announced today that he had "become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions." (Thanks, CNN)

Now, it's one thing when somebody else says that about him. (See Chris Matthews saying "he's a gift from the world to us in so many ways"; "the Biblical term... is 'deliverance'"; "shiver up my leg"... in fact, just see this video that McCain's campaign put out.) People say all kinds of things about presidential candidates, and just about anybody else, for that matter. But when you start saying those things about yourself, it's an entirely different matter.

Several people have drawn (unfavorable) comparisons between Obama's speech in Berlin last week and Lincoln's Gettysburg address.

Obama said: "Now the world will watch and remember what we do here."

Abraham Lincoln said: "The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here."

The difference between the two is a modesty that is essential to any human being. Or at least any human being who doesn't wish to be insufferable.

Obama's utterances about himself often tend towards the messianic. He and his loyal followers will make the oceans recede, heal the planet, restore America, &c., &c. Not to draw unsavory comparisons, but as unsavory comparisons are inevitable, here goes: the only people who say things about themselves like that are tyrants and fools (deity excepted). Obama's no tyrant. But he should be careful about the company he keeps, or he will look like a fool.

Oh, Senator? You're no Abraham Lincoln, either.

This

is what I think every time I hear or read one of Obama's speeches.

JibJab

Kudos to JibJab-- nothing political has made me laugh like this since the primaries started:


Make sure you notice the unicorn.

The Winner's Speech

Senators McCain and Obama: Take some advice from an average American. Give this speech. Whichever one of you does, and does it well, will win this election. The Speech goes something like this:

My fellow Americans:
I have seen the prices climb steadily at gas stations. I know many of you are dreading heating your homes this winter. I also understand that most of you are frustrated with how the government has (or has not) handled this problem. Some have proposed a gas tax holiday. This is akin to the fire department seeing your house ablaze and, instead of putting out the fire, watering the roof of your storage shed. You don't lose the storage shed, but everything precious to you is in your home, not your shed. Right now, our lifestyles depend on vast amounts of oil, natural gas, and coal-- non-renewable resources. Sooner or later, we will run out, and while Washington dithers back and forth about "sustainability", etc. , the price of gas and food, the most critical purchases Americans make, have at least doubled in the past year. Ethanol clearly is not the solution-- not only are its effects miniscule, but the shortage of corn and the resulting increases in food prices have caused pain throughout the world. This is utterly unacceptable. And I have a plan to begin fixing it.

This morning, I introduced legislation in the Senate to nullify all bans on nuclear power plants [EOWYN: I don't know if this is strictly possible, as all the bans a quick Google search came up with are state bans, but something like this needs to happen]. By the time the presidential election happens in November, clean, renewable energy plants will already be in construction in the following states: [EOWYN: Senator's pick, but I would start with New York, California, Florida, Michigan, and Ohio]..., provided passage of my bill.

I am aware of the problems involved with nuclear waste, as I am also aware that no one wants a nuclear waste site in their backyard. These are problems with no easy solution, but building these power plants will buy us some time and relief from ridiculous prices for electricity, not to mention lessening air pollution.

I am also aware that nuclear power plants are expensive. That is why, beginning on my first day in office, I will veto any bill that includes earmarks, so-called pork, coming from Congress. Far too much money, given by taxpayers, is wasted on these pork projects, which include improvements to bike paths and building multi-million dollar bridges that would service fewer than 60 people. This is an outrageous use of American citizens' money-- indeed, in some cases, it is little better than highway robbery. Last year alone, Americans forked over $13.2 billion to greed. That is down considerably from the $29 billion in 2006, but it is still insane. There are far better uses for that money. One of the optimal uses for it would be tax-cuts. However, I am going to ask for the faith of the American people. If you approve (government does, after all, work for you), the same amount of money that was used for pork last year, $13.2 billion, will be appropriated and used to fund the following plan:

Our nation's top scientists and engineers, including auto designers, manufacturers, propulsion experts from NASA, and others, will be given jobs (at competitive pay) and space in Washington D.C. for one purpose-- to design cars that don't need oil, natural gas, or ethanol. I know that electric cars already exist. I also know that they are expensive, and frankly, often unexciting to drive. The cars coming out of this lab in D.C. will run on the IKEA principle: give quality, and give it cheaply. I only want viable, sellable cars coming out of this lab, cars that are ready to go into production immediately. The most expensive design should cost no more than $30,000 out the door, with the least expensive being in the $10,000- $15,000 range, or even less if they get really ambitious. The first of these cars will be on the market within 4 years, as the design specs coming out of this government-funded lab will be provided to every American auto-maker free of charge, provided they can mass-produce it within 2 years.

While this lab in D.C. is working on cars, they will also be collaborating with oil companies. No one wants to dis-employ all those who work for oil companies, nor is it reasonable to ask the companies to research themselves out of business. I propose, instead, to give a tax-break or other financial incentive to each company that can present a model for a viable alternative energy source capable of serving a major city and that will pledge to have it up and running with in five to ten years of their presentation. Private enterprise is one of America's greatest strengths-- I won't ask any company to commit suicide. I simply ask them to evolve, and to embrace the challenge as Americans have always done.

I know this is an ambitious project. I know that almost everything in it has never been done before-- people have come up with prototypes, and PhD papers, and models, but there has never been anything more concrete than that to show the American consumer. Politicians typically talk big and have very little to show for it at the end.

Not this time. This is the United States of America. We fought a war to free ourselves, first from foreign tyranny and then from the tyranny of slavery. We have saved the world-- twice! We built a railroad to span a continent, airplanes to fly over it, roads to drive across it, bridges to cross its lakes and rivers. We put men on the moon not once, but six times. We are responsible for some of the greatest technological advances the world has ever seen-- do not tell me that we can't find a way to get off oil. This country has never failed to accomplish something we have united behind. Everyone agrees on the need to find other ways to drive our society.

Let's get to it.
**

The key to this speech is sincerity. We have had enough of typical politicians right now. Both McCain and Obama are running as the anti-politician, the guy who is really there to make the country better instead of for his own aggrandizement. Now is the time to prove it. C'mon, guys, you're running for Leader of the Free World. Boldly go where few politicians have gone before-- lead. Accomplish something that really could change the world. Give America another reason to be proud.

Absentee

Sorry for the silence around here-- the whole clan got sick. We're on the mend though, and regular blogging will resume tomorrow.

Your Daily Dose of Insanity

'Toddlers who dislike spicy food "racist" says [sic] report'

Don't miss that line at the bottom where the preschool and day care teachers are encouraged to inform on their charges. They also said "some people think that if a large number of racist incidents are reported, this will reflect badly on the institution. In fact, the opposite is the case." The more kids we report for racism, the better!

To quote Dave Barry, "No, I am not making this up."

...

In what alternate universe does any sane parent want to send their offspring to a preschool where their 3-year-old will be reported to the local government? It's like kids in the Soviet Union being encouraged to report on their parents, only now the adults are reporting on the kids.

Incidentally, I wonder how long it will be before the parents of a kid who doesn't like curry will be indicted for a hate crime.

Freedom Fail.

CWCID: Jonah Goldberg

The State of the Race

The Democratic Party has put forth its most unelectable candidate in who knows how long.

The Republicans are still likely to lose.

Sad, isn't it? Here, briefly (I'll have an in-depth profile on each of them later), we have the candidates:
Barack Obama is young, charismatic, and eloquent. He is vastly inexperienced (he just finished his first term as a Senator; before that, his only experience consisted of being a legislator in Illinois). He is relatively unaccomplished (yes, being a Senator is an accomplishment, but he's done very little as a Senator other than to run for president). He is the most liberal Senator in the Capitol Building. And he lies.

John McCain is a hero, very experienced in military matters, and loyal to a fault. He is old. He has a vile temper. He can't give a good prepared speech to save his life. And when he's nervous, it shows-- a friend of mine says that he looks like a dog about to throw up. She's right. McCain is neither conservative nor liberal, which might play well except for his habit of kidney-punching conservatives just for the fun of it. And he lies.

I'd pick McCain. But unless something changes-- either a catastrophic mistake on Obama's part or America snaps out of its usual election-year amnesia-- Obama is going to win for one good and simple reason: he makes you believe that he should. The man is a speaker like none I've seen before.

This is not a reason to elect a person to the presidency. I can't force any campaign errors on Obama's part (let's hear it for unforced errors!). This blog exists, in part, to fight against the collective amnesia that seems to grip people when it comes to politics. Because this is important stuff, people. You can only ignore politics if you're sure that politics will ignore you, as the saying goes (anyone have a citation?)-- and politics is not leaving us alone right now. Talk to people. A person's political opinions are not sacrosanct-- this country was founded partly on the belief that you need to talk about politics. The Founders trusted us with this country, not an aristocracy, political parties, or anything else. Just us. Vote your conscience, but make sure you do it because you're informed, and have thought long and hard about who the Leader of the Free World should be. That's what George Washington and the rest trusted us to do.

Make 'em proud.

Rules

Just so they're there, here are the rules:

1. Comments are very welcome, but profanity and personal insults* are not. If there's anything too egregious in the comments, I will delete them.

2. There's a good reason that I don't use my real name (did you think it was really Eowyn? Not that that wouldn't be awesome...). If you are one of the few people who know who I really am, please respect my anonymity. Frankly, I don't want to get death threats from the same type of people who threaten Danish cartoonists.

*unless they're really good ones. "Ill-favored five-legged child of a camel and a roach" would be a good example of this.

Inaugural

The Fourth of July seemed as good a time as any to start this blog. I've been kicking the idea around in my head for quite a while. As today is a holiday and this blogger has family, I'll begin with posting the poem from which the title of this blog is taken:

America for Me

'Tis fine to see the Old World, and travel up and down
Among the famous palaces and cities of renown,
To admire the crumbly castles and the statues of the kings,--
But now I think I've had enough of antiquated things.

So it's home again, and home again, America for me!
My heart is turning home again, and there I long to be
In the land of youth and freedom beyond the ocean bars,
Where the air is full of sunlight and the flag is full of stars.

Oh, London is a man's town, there's power in the air;
And Paris is a woman's town, with flowers in her hair;
And it's sweet to dream in Venice, and it's great to study Rome,
But when it comes to living, there is no place like home.

I like the German fir-woods, in green battalions drilled;
I like the gardens of Versailles with flashing fountains filled;
But, oh, to take your hand, my dear, and ramble for a day
In the friendly western woodland where Nature has her way!

I know that Europe's wonderful, yet something seems to lack!
The Past is too much with her, and the people looking back,
But the glory of the Present is to make the Future free,--
We love our land for what she is and what she is to be.

Oh, it's home again, and home again, America for me!
I want a ship that's westward bound to plough the rolling sea,
To the blessed Land of Room Enough beyond the ocean bars,
Where the air is full of sunlight and the flag is full of stars.

By: Henry Van Dyke


I am grateful for the freedom I have here. May the future be ever more free.