Team Obama has unveiled a designer line of campaignware that will create a crisis of conscience for conservattive fashionistas.
I've never heard of many of them. But Tory Burch and Vera Wang -- really?
Click here if you want to know which other of your favorite designers have gone over to the dark side.
H/t: Drudge
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
We Have a Nominee! Now We Need a Veep
Let the wild rumpus start: we have now entered the general election phase. What a relief that we won't have to suffer any more of those debates (how many of them were there?)
The good news is that the most electable of the bunch won. There is growing enthusiasm for Mitt Romney among those of us who wanted someone more conservative.
Team Obama is inadvertently helping Romney to solidify his base among conservatives by running a commercial that accuses Romney of being captured by the far right. Oh, if only that were true. And yet, the more the Obama campaign tries to paint Romney as a die-hard conservative, the better he sounds.
This peculiar tactic by the Obama campaign is undoubtedly aimed and moderates and independents. The problem for Obama, however, is that the narrative has no basis in reality. None. Romney is a New England Republican. The People's Republic of Massachusetts does not elect wing-nuts. Voters know this.
Now that Romney has secured the nomination, speculation on who he will select as his running mate grows more intense. Mike Huckabee's name was floated earlier this week. Not a bad choice, really. I opposed Huckabee when he ran for president; I found his comments on foreign policy frighteningly naive. Huckabee's talk show, however, has showcased him as something of a statesman. His presence on the ticket would perhaps help evangelicals who stil worry that Mormonism is a cult.
This is not to say that Huckabee is necessarily the best choice, only that he deserves a serious look.
The good news is that the most electable of the bunch won. There is growing enthusiasm for Mitt Romney among those of us who wanted someone more conservative.
Team Obama is inadvertently helping Romney to solidify his base among conservatives by running a commercial that accuses Romney of being captured by the far right. Oh, if only that were true. And yet, the more the Obama campaign tries to paint Romney as a die-hard conservative, the better he sounds.
This peculiar tactic by the Obama campaign is undoubtedly aimed and moderates and independents. The problem for Obama, however, is that the narrative has no basis in reality. None. Romney is a New England Republican. The People's Republic of Massachusetts does not elect wing-nuts. Voters know this.
Now that Romney has secured the nomination, speculation on who he will select as his running mate grows more intense. Mike Huckabee's name was floated earlier this week. Not a bad choice, really. I opposed Huckabee when he ran for president; I found his comments on foreign policy frighteningly naive. Huckabee's talk show, however, has showcased him as something of a statesman. His presence on the ticket would perhaps help evangelicals who stil worry that Mormonism is a cult.
This is not to say that Huckabee is necessarily the best choice, only that he deserves a serious look.
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Election Results For Kentucky Primary
Tom Massie has won the Republican nomination for Kentucky's Fourth Congressional District. This is a big victory for Sen. Rand Paul, who not only endorsed Massie but has been all over the radio in campaign ads for him. In part, Paul's support for Massie reciprocated Massie's early support for Paul in his primary race against Trey Grayson.
But the Massie victory, in addition to showing Paul's increasing influence within the Republican party, also puts the lie to the media narrative that the Tea Party is dead. It is not.
The continued vibrancy of the Tea Party is bad news for Democrats -- as was President Obama's poor showing in the Kentucky Democratic primary. Obama won, but "uncommitted" baged 42 percent of the vote as of this writing. Is It worse to give away that many votes to "uncommitted" or to a felon?
In any event, Democrats will blame Obama's weak performance on racism: bitter Kentuckians clinging to guns and bibles. Or maybe he'll blame W.
But the Massie victory, in addition to showing Paul's increasing influence within the Republican party, also puts the lie to the media narrative that the Tea Party is dead. It is not.
The continued vibrancy of the Tea Party is bad news for Democrats -- as was President Obama's poor showing in the Kentucky Democratic primary. Obama won, but "uncommitted" baged 42 percent of the vote as of this writing. Is It worse to give away that many votes to "uncommitted" or to a felon?
In any event, Democrats will blame Obama's weak performance on racism: bitter Kentuckians clinging to guns and bibles. Or maybe he'll blame W.
Monday, May 21, 2012
Notre Dame, Catholic Dioceses, Sue Obama Administration
Today 40 Catholic dioceses, and Notre Dame University sued the Obama administration for violating the first amendment by requiring religious employers to pay for their employees'sterilizations, birth control and morning after pills.
The Obama administration surely knew this was coming. But the onslaught of plaintiffs -- the preeminent Catholic university in America and 40 Catholic dioceses -- sets this up to be a well-litigated constitutional show-down.
Notre Dame sued in federal court for the Northern District of Indiana. Cardinal Timothy Dolan sued for his diocese in the Southern District of New York.
In all, there are 12 different suits around the country -- and counting. That should be enough to guarantee a circuit split, and another trip for the Obama administration to the Supreme Court.
With any luck, Paul Clemente has already been retained to serve on the side of the angels.
We will be following the briefing with great interest.
The Obama administration surely knew this was coming. But the onslaught of plaintiffs -- the preeminent Catholic university in America and 40 Catholic dioceses -- sets this up to be a well-litigated constitutional show-down.
Notre Dame sued in federal court for the Northern District of Indiana. Cardinal Timothy Dolan sued for his diocese in the Southern District of New York.
In all, there are 12 different suits around the country -- and counting. That should be enough to guarantee a circuit split, and another trip for the Obama administration to the Supreme Court.
With any luck, Paul Clemente has already been retained to serve on the side of the angels.
We will be following the briefing with great interest.
Sunday, May 13, 2012
Bree Becomes Desperate House Member, But at Least She's Still Republican
I did not see this coming: the finale of Desperate Housewives surprised with Bree Van de Kamp moving to Louisville to get elected -- as a Republican -- to the Kentucky state legislature!
This was not the season finale, but rather the end of the series.
Each of the characters either died, was killed off, or got her dream job. For Bree, that meant the Kentucky state legislature. Apparently the show's writers thought it was more humane to give Bree minority status in the House than to stick her with David Williams in the Senate.
This was not the season finale, but rather the end of the series.
Each of the characters either died, was killed off, or got her dream job. For Bree, that meant the Kentucky state legislature. Apparently the show's writers thought it was more humane to give Bree minority status in the House than to stick her with David Williams in the Senate.
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Rand Paul Explains Mourdock Win
Sen. Rand Paul deconstructs Richard Mourdock's victory in Indiana's Republican primary over Sen. Dick Lugar. This election, Paul concludes, manifests the Tea Party's continued vibrancy.
In an op-ed for the Washington Times, Paul is gracious about Lugar while nonetheless welcoming Mourdock as the sort of "statesman," not "horse trader" that Paul hopes to see in the Senate next year.
Paul notes that Mourdock's victory over Lugar is in some respects similar to Paul's victory over Trey Grayson in Kentucky's Republican primary last year.
Just days ago, when France and Greece lurched left, Democrats pointed to this as evidence that the Tea Party victories of 2010 were a fluke, not to be repeated this year. Mourdock's nomination says otherwise.
A few excerpt's from Paul's analysis of Mourdock's win, in which he lays out a de facto Tea Party Agenda. Reagan fans will enjoy the reference "painting with bold colors":
We win as Republicans when we paint in bold colors. We win when we stand up for issues such as smaller government, constitutional principles, true liberty and the protection of life. We win when we take strong stands for the Second Amendment and the right to work. We succeed when our vision is clear and our principles are sound.
What happened on Tuesday was not one angry group of voters rebelling. It was not one or two conservative groups pushing an agenda. It was all of them, acting as one, urging the Indiana GOP to nominate someone who would stand with them.
We must fight to continue the small battles we already have won. Hoosier voters rewarded the candidate who pledged to keep the earmark ban and rejected the senator who just weeks ago voted to restore earmarks. . . .
The Tea Party sprang up out of two main events in 2008-09: the TARP bailouts and Obamacare. These were huge new reaches for big government. They were massive intrusions into running the private sector. They were against everything we as a party were supposed to stand for.
Senators and candidates who either were on the wrong side of these issues or simply did not stand up and fight have been deservedly running for cover ever since.
The Tea Party is not a single-issue group. Rather, it is a group that is fed up with an attitude in Washington. Tea Partiers are fed up with politicians who spend money we don’t have, racking up trillion-dollar deficits year after year.
They are tired of politicians who do not see limits in the powers of Congress and the federal government to intrude into our lives.
They are sick of being told they have to accept a mealy-mouthed version of what they believe and what they know we must do to save our country.
We must balance our budget sooner rather than later, or we will face ruin. This will require entitlement reform. Tuesday, Hoosiers voted for a candidate who publicly pledged to support the Tea Party budget in the Senate, which balances in five years.
We must repeal Obamacare and ensure that nothing like it passes ever again. Hoosier voters nominated the candidate who stood the strongest for the Constitution and for freedom
Paul is correct that Lugar is a decent man who served honorably. However, he had become an Obama apologist, and was so entrenched that he no longer maintained a home -- not even an apartment -- in Indiana. Good for the Republican primary voters for voting for bold, unapologetic conservatism.
.
In an op-ed for the Washington Times, Paul is gracious about Lugar while nonetheless welcoming Mourdock as the sort of "statesman," not "horse trader" that Paul hopes to see in the Senate next year.
Paul notes that Mourdock's victory over Lugar is in some respects similar to Paul's victory over Trey Grayson in Kentucky's Republican primary last year.
Just days ago, when France and Greece lurched left, Democrats pointed to this as evidence that the Tea Party victories of 2010 were a fluke, not to be repeated this year. Mourdock's nomination says otherwise.
A few excerpt's from Paul's analysis of Mourdock's win, in which he lays out a de facto Tea Party Agenda. Reagan fans will enjoy the reference "painting with bold colors":
We win as Republicans when we paint in bold colors. We win when we stand up for issues such as smaller government, constitutional principles, true liberty and the protection of life. We win when we take strong stands for the Second Amendment and the right to work. We succeed when our vision is clear and our principles are sound.
What happened on Tuesday was not one angry group of voters rebelling. It was not one or two conservative groups pushing an agenda. It was all of them, acting as one, urging the Indiana GOP to nominate someone who would stand with them.
We must fight to continue the small battles we already have won. Hoosier voters rewarded the candidate who pledged to keep the earmark ban and rejected the senator who just weeks ago voted to restore earmarks. . . .
The Tea Party sprang up out of two main events in 2008-09: the TARP bailouts and Obamacare. These were huge new reaches for big government. They were massive intrusions into running the private sector. They were against everything we as a party were supposed to stand for.
Senators and candidates who either were on the wrong side of these issues or simply did not stand up and fight have been deservedly running for cover ever since.
The Tea Party is not a single-issue group. Rather, it is a group that is fed up with an attitude in Washington. Tea Partiers are fed up with politicians who spend money we don’t have, racking up trillion-dollar deficits year after year.
They are tired of politicians who do not see limits in the powers of Congress and the federal government to intrude into our lives.
They are sick of being told they have to accept a mealy-mouthed version of what they believe and what they know we must do to save our country.
We must balance our budget sooner rather than later, or we will face ruin. This will require entitlement reform. Tuesday, Hoosiers voted for a candidate who publicly pledged to support the Tea Party budget in the Senate, which balances in five years.
We must repeal Obamacare and ensure that nothing like it passes ever again. Hoosier voters nominated the candidate who stood the strongest for the Constitution and for freedom
Paul is correct that Lugar is a decent man who served honorably. However, he had become an Obama apologist, and was so entrenched that he no longer maintained a home -- not even an apartment -- in Indiana. Good for the Republican primary voters for voting for bold, unapologetic conservatism.
.
Our Troops Are Not Fighting For The One
The most startling aspect of President Barack Obama's flip-lop on gay marriage is his slip about exactly for whom he thinks American troops are fighting. Obama told ABC,
when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don't Ask Don't Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I've just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married.
(Emphasis added.)
It's a revelatory comment. No doubt all those soldiers, airmen, marines and soldiers were shocked to learn that they are fighting on behalf of Obama. Most of them thought that they were fighting for America, for the citizens of our country and most specifically for their friends, families and neighbors.
Obama's self-absorption is something to behold, even in the context of a profession that draws narcissists. Nonetheless, this peak into his mind is astonishing for its utter lack of modesty. The most charitable construction is that soldiers fight for their country, and Obama feels that he epitomizes or symbolizes America. That's still pretty grandiose.
We knew that Obama is a narcissist just as we knew he has always supported gay marriage. Neither of these propositions is in any way surprising.
Still, the assertion that our soldiers are fighting "on my [Obama's] behalf "does not sound like something the elected leader of a democracy should think, let alone say. It sounds dictatorial. And creepy.
when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don't Ask Don't Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I've just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married.
(Emphasis added.)
It's a revelatory comment. No doubt all those soldiers, airmen, marines and soldiers were shocked to learn that they are fighting on behalf of Obama. Most of them thought that they were fighting for America, for the citizens of our country and most specifically for their friends, families and neighbors.
Obama's self-absorption is something to behold, even in the context of a profession that draws narcissists. Nonetheless, this peak into his mind is astonishing for its utter lack of modesty. The most charitable construction is that soldiers fight for their country, and Obama feels that he epitomizes or symbolizes America. That's still pretty grandiose.
We knew that Obama is a narcissist just as we knew he has always supported gay marriage. Neither of these propositions is in any way surprising.
Still, the assertion that our soldiers are fighting "on my [Obama's] behalf "does not sound like something the elected leader of a democracy should think, let alone say. It sounds dictatorial. And creepy.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Tape Leaked From Romney's Fundraiser at John Schnatter's Home
A new videotape, apparently made by cell phone, shows Mitt Romney complimenting Papa John's founder John Schnatter on his lovely home. Oh, the horror of it! Schnatter hosted the fund-raiser for Romney at his Anchorage, KY home on April 19, 2012, and Romney thanked and complimented his host! Some would call this good manners; Democrats call it corporate fat cats acting elitist.
These are the same comments we knew that Romney made at Schnatter's fundraiser last month. There is no secret here - it's not like Romney was caught talking about bitter people in the hinterland clinging to their guns and religion. The only difference is that now we have video
Romney pointed out at the fundraiser that Democrats, in their never-ending invocation of class-warfare, would say that Schnatter shouldn't have such a nice home. (One percent! Pay your fair share!)
Yes, it is true. John Schnatter has a great home, and he opens it up for numerous events -- politicians from both parties, myriad charities and his community.
As Romney has often noted, John Schnatter is a self-made man. He started delivering pizza out of his dorm-room in college. Romney is right: John Schnatter is an American success story; he is proof of what America gives us the freedom to accomplish when we apply hard work and perseverance to a good idea.
Here's what the slime ball who took the undercover video forgot to videotape: the boy scouts next door who sat outside to waive to Romney; the 70-year old woman who mowed her lawn just before Romney drove by, so that it would look nice; the Schnatter's neighbors who made signs and sat in lawn chairs to cheer for Romney as he drove by; and most importantly, the mother in the old car with the 2008 Obama sticker who took her son by the Schnatter's home to catch a glimpse of the next president.
These are the same comments we knew that Romney made at Schnatter's fundraiser last month. There is no secret here - it's not like Romney was caught talking about bitter people in the hinterland clinging to their guns and religion. The only difference is that now we have video
Romney pointed out at the fundraiser that Democrats, in their never-ending invocation of class-warfare, would say that Schnatter shouldn't have such a nice home. (One percent! Pay your fair share!)
Yes, it is true. John Schnatter has a great home, and he opens it up for numerous events -- politicians from both parties, myriad charities and his community.
As Romney has often noted, John Schnatter is a self-made man. He started delivering pizza out of his dorm-room in college. Romney is right: John Schnatter is an American success story; he is proof of what America gives us the freedom to accomplish when we apply hard work and perseverance to a good idea.
Here's what the slime ball who took the undercover video forgot to videotape: the boy scouts next door who sat outside to waive to Romney; the 70-year old woman who mowed her lawn just before Romney drove by, so that it would look nice; the Schnatter's neighbors who made signs and sat in lawn chairs to cheer for Romney as he drove by; and most importantly, the mother in the old car with the 2008 Obama sticker who took her son by the Schnatter's home to catch a glimpse of the next president.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
WaPo Gives Obama Four Pinnochios For "Whopper" About Sherman Minton Bridge
The Washington Post has given President Barack Obama four Pinnochios for remarks about the Sherman Minton Bridge that bore no resemblance to the truth. This is not Obama's first truthiness problem with an Ohio River bridge.
Recall that last September, the Post gave Obama three Pinnochios for his remarks about the Brent Spence Bridge in Northern Kentucky. Obama made a big show for standing on a bridge that connects the home state of House Majority Leader John Boehner to that of Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. Obama tried to blame the crumbling bridge on Republican obstruction of his job bill - even though there is bipartisan support to fix the bridge and construction is scheduled to start in 2015, regardless of the jobs bill.
Yesterday Obama blamed Republican obstructionism for preventing the Sherman Minton from being repaired. According to Obama,
There are bridges between Kentucky and Ohio where some of the key Republican leadership come from, where folks are having to do detours an extra hour, hour-and-a-half drive every day on their commute because these bridges don’t work. They still said no.”
As the Post points out -- and as most everyone in Kentucky and Indiana knows -- the Sherman Minton is open; it has been for months. It was finished ahead of schedule. And without a dime from Obama's jobs bill.
It is embarrassing, really, that Obama's staff does such a bad job fact-checking that they make the man look look like he's dissembling about something that the citizenry can verify first hand, every time they commute to and from work. This sloppiness with basic facts reflects either incompetence on the part of the administration or an indifference to the truth. Or both.
H/T: HotAir
Recall that last September, the Post gave Obama three Pinnochios for his remarks about the Brent Spence Bridge in Northern Kentucky. Obama made a big show for standing on a bridge that connects the home state of House Majority Leader John Boehner to that of Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. Obama tried to blame the crumbling bridge on Republican obstruction of his job bill - even though there is bipartisan support to fix the bridge and construction is scheduled to start in 2015, regardless of the jobs bill.
Yesterday Obama blamed Republican obstructionism for preventing the Sherman Minton from being repaired. According to Obama,
There are bridges between Kentucky and Ohio where some of the key Republican leadership come from, where folks are having to do detours an extra hour, hour-and-a-half drive every day on their commute because these bridges don’t work. They still said no.”
As the Post points out -- and as most everyone in Kentucky and Indiana knows -- the Sherman Minton is open; it has been for months. It was finished ahead of schedule. And without a dime from Obama's jobs bill.
It is embarrassing, really, that Obama's staff does such a bad job fact-checking that they make the man look look like he's dissembling about something that the citizenry can verify first hand, every time they commute to and from work. This sloppiness with basic facts reflects either incompetence on the part of the administration or an indifference to the truth. Or both.
H/T: HotAir
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)