The First Octoberfest of 2010

Oh, baby!

The Liberal Left Misses Dubya, Too

Oh this is just too gleefully rich for me:

There's a new argument emerging among supporters of the Ground Zero mosque. Distressed by President Obama's waffling on the issue, they're calling on former President George W. Bush to announce his support for the project, because in this case Bush understands better than Obama the connection between the war on terror and the larger question of America's relationship with Islam. It's an extraordinary change of position for commentators who long argued that Bush had done grievous harm to America's image in the Muslim world and that Obama represented a fresh start for the United States.

Oh you are just kidding me!  Seriously?  We've got the likes of Maureen Dowd pining for Dubya?

The war against the terrorists is not a war against Islam. In fact, you can’t have an effective war against the terrorists if it is a war on Islam. George W. Bush understood this. And it is odd to see Barack Obama less clear about this matter than his predecessor. It’s time for W. to weigh in. 

Incredible.

Ed Morrissey has the rest:

That, of course, is one of the delicious ironies of this situation.  Obama has done nothing but attack and demonize Bush for the last nineteen months, mainly to distract attention from Obama’s own failures on the economy.  In fact, while Dowd et al demand a response from Bush, Obama is busy on the campaign trail (an activity that Obama chided the GOP for doing while Obama attended big fundraisers) attempting to continue blaming Bush for the economic slide Obama promised to prevent with his massive spending.

Heh!  And Doug Powers has a wonderful line here:

Are they asking the same George W. Bush who started an illegal and immoral war, lied about WMDs so his buddies could profit from the invasion and tortured exclusively Muslim detainees to come to the rescue of a president who was supposed to save America from all the horror Bush hath wrought? That’s fine, I just wanted to make sure we were on the same page.

Yes, I appears most of us are on the same page.

And let me reiterate what most poeple already recognize; this isn't about building a mosque.  It's about building a mosque right there.  That point is even more evident when you know that Gov. David Paterson offered to meet with developers in order to help them find a new site and they refused.  In fact, developer Sharif El-Gamal said the planned mosque is "nowhere near the World Trade Center site."  Yeah, well, we know that's not true.  We know, too, that wreckage from the attack crashed through the Burlington Coat Factory building which is to be the site of this mosque.  Pretty near, if you ask me.

And now the liberal left who support the building of this mosque on the ashes of the World Trade Center want George W. Bush to weigh in.  They assume he will support the plan; he might and he might not.

Be careful what you wish for.

China's Buildup

This is scary as hell:

A Pentagon report suppressed by the administration describes a massive Chinese military buildup that has only one purpose: to deny us access to the Western Pacific and destroy American forces that try.

IBD has the frightening details:

"China is fielding an array of conventionally armed ballistic missiles, ground- and air-launched cruise missiles, special operations forces and cyberwarfare capabilities to hold targets at risk throughout the region," the report says. These targets would be American bases and carrier battle groups that might be sent to aid Taiwan.

The 74-page Pentagon report also notes that China is "pursuing a variety of air, sea, undersea, space and counterspace" weapons designed specifically to attack U.S. forces. Primary among them is the Dong Feng 21D carrier-killer ballistic missile that can hit moving and heavily defended American carriers with pinpoint accuracy at distances between 900 and 1,000 miles from China's coasts.

They don't have to attack us; they already own us, thanks to Obama.  

IBD questions why this report was delayed for five months and just now released.  Why was it suppressed?  Read their whole piece for the details.

Meanwhile, what are we doing?  Uhmmmm......not so much.  We are singing Kumbaya for a non-nuclear world.  We're canceling weapons programs and defense shields.  We're demilitarizing.

The Heritage Foundation points out:

The [People's Liberation Army] has enjoyed sustained growth in its resources, its capabilities, and its sophistication for so long that we are no longer surprised by its burgeoning reach and expanding envelope. There are individual technologies, such as anti-ship ballistic missiles, that are being pioneered by Chinese engineers, but we have become accustomed to China’s overall efforts to become a true military power.

You become complacent; you lose.  Period.

Technology is Not My Friend, Part II

Yeah, that'll teach me to complain about technology. I arrived at school this morning to discover we'd been hit by lightning last night. No lights, no air, no electricity, no phones, no coke machine...

I'll be keeping my mouth shut from now on.

One Term?

Concidentally, there are two pieces out this morning suggesting that Obama will be a one-term president.  Politico has an article entitled:  Obama, the One Term President, by Roger Simon, while The American Spectator has Our One Term President by Tom Bethell. 

Each author attributes this prediction to different causes, however.  Simon suggests Obama's problem is...:

You have to stay on message, follow the polls, listen to your advisers (who are writing the message and taking the polls) and realize that when it comes to doing what is right versus doing what is expedient, you do what is expedient so that you can get reelected and do what is right in the second term. If at all possible. And it will help your legacy. And not endanger the election of others in your party. And not hurt the brand. Or upset people too much.

Obama does none of that.  He does exactly what his handlers want him to do.  In the wake of George Bush's unpopularity, George Soros and friends helped push Obama to the top spot for the purpose of enacting as much radical legislation as possible, as fast as possible, before his luck ran out.  Thus we witnessed the head-spinning shenanigans of the first year in office which dealt with Obamacare, the Stimulus, the expansion of the welfare state and Cap and Tax, to name a few.  They ran out of steam on the Cap and Tax issue so a great deal of that regulation was empowered to the EPA.  

I don't think anyone, Obama included, ever expected him to be a two-term president.

Bethell, at The American Spectator, suggests a different reason for the One Termer label; he points to the economy as the primary Achilles heel:

Most important from Obama's point of view is the economy. It is still in poor shape and is likely to stay that way. The unemployment picture has not brightened. In California it is 12.6 percent, while in Michigan it is 14.9 percent. 

There are no real signs that it's getting better soon.

So...will Hillary steal the nomination from Obama in 2012?  Bethell points out that it is always possible the "Republicans will nominate a dud" which has happened before.  Obama could still slip in a second term, however, his poll numbers drop lower and lower almost daily.  This latest mosque controversy don't help.

The Republicans need to be getting their house in order.  I need to see a leader rising to the top, and quick.  I do not want to see the same tired faces. 

Do NOT just hand this man a second term.  We may not survive it.

Techonology is Not My Friend

Man........it's been a Monday, for sure.  I've had technology problems all.day.long.  ALL DAY. 

I got to work at 6:45, fired up the computer, and by 11 I was able to open up my email because the thing is so freakin' slow.  I tried to run a Powerpoint last Friday and couldn't even get the slides to advance.

The a/c in my classroom topped out at 88 today.  Maybe that's not "technology" exactly, but it wasn't working for me. 

The teenager's iPhone4 arrived today, except I told him to watch for it (because I checked my shipping info and knew it was coming), but do you think he did?  No.  FedEx took it back to the facility where I had to go pick it up this afternoon.  Why didn't I make him go get it, you ask?  Because it's across town and I'm scared for him to drive on I-20.  Over-protective. 

So I picked up the iPhone and we went to Best Buy to get it activated and get his stuff moved to the new phone.  But they couldn't because I bought it from Apple.  They sent me to the AT&T store who also could not activate the phone because I bought it from Apple.  They sent me back home to do it via iTunes, which I should have done in the first place, except NOW I'm having issues with iTunes.  I have to download the latest version....

...is it just me or does iTunes have a "new" version every time I get on there? 

Lordy.

And so I get on the blog, finally, which don't even get me started about how neglected this little blog is, but when I check this new "Spam" filter thing, well....there's all these comments and it makes no sense whatsoever why they are in a Spam filter.  NOTHING about them looked Spammy. 

Today, I'm not a friend of technology.  My karma must be off.

I'm getting off this laptop before it blows up or gives me the blue screen of death and going to open a book.  Paper and ink.  Works for me.

Tomorrow will be a better day. 

Shocker: Obama Backtracks on Mosque Statement

Obama's position on the Ground Zero mosque has been the dominant topic on Memeorandum for days; and of course, now he's pulling back on his statement.  I think Byron York handled this one best when he pointed out that Obama is very well aware of the fact that he says one thing and means another:

Now, there is simply no doubt that Obama's Friday evening speech, in the context in which it was delivered, was an endorsement of the Ground Zero project. It was certainly widely understood as such...But on Saturday, Obama said all those listeners were wrong, that they misunderstood him.

That's the whole thing...context.  Of course he wanted his iftar guests to conclude he supported the mosque.  Why else issue such a statement at such a time and place? 

But now, he has the luxury of saying, "Wait!  Wait!  You misunderstood me," to everyone else. 

Bullshit.

Of course the Imam has a legal right to build there.  Once again, that's not the issue.  The issue is the sensitivity of it.  I forget who said it but someone on television made a comparison to Pearl Harbor; nobody would consider building a monument to kamikaze pilots at Pearl Harbor.  It's not so very different.

Drudge isn't shy about heading into this one:

And, now, it should come as no surprise to anyone that Obama's buddy, Charlie Crist, has come out in support of Obama's statement.  You've got to just love this one.  Crist, who was just nearly tanked by the photograph of him and Obama as he supported the stimulus, now comes out in support of the mosque:

"I think he's right - yeah," Crist, who was elected governor as a Republican but is now running for Senate as an independent candidate, told CNN. "We are a country in my view that stands for freedom of religion. You know, respect for others. I know there are sensitivities and I understand that, but I think Mayor Bloomberg is right and I think the President is right."

What a buffoon.

And on the same day we learn that Rubio has passed Crist in the polls.  This one is still very tight, but Crist is doing himself no favors here.  Keep on talkin', Charlie.  Keep on talking. Maybe you'd like to go take a dip in the Atlantic with the Obamas while they're on yet another vacation, this time in your state. 

It'll be good times watching Gibbs spin all this tomorrow.  Can't wait.

Full Metal Jacket Reach Around: The Visiting Family Edition

The first week of school is behind me now, and we'll be able to get into a routine next week and get rolling.  I've been wiped out and tired this week, but I miss the routine, so this will be good.  I've got a busy day today as my daughter, her husband, and my niece are coming over from Dallas to visit my mom at The Glen; I've got to get outside before the temperature hits triple digits and get the lawn mowed, then get inside and knock the dust off the furniture that's been accumulating all week. 

I haven't blogged much this week, obviously and neither have I read many blogs this week, but again, routine will settle in and life will return to normal.  Let's get onto the links so I can see what my buddies have been writing about and what's been happening!

Althouse cautions against reading too much into Obama's "support" of the Ground Zero mosque; she points out that he didn't exactly say it's a good idea, just that they have the right to do it.  Pirate's Cove also takes a look at Obama's comments and agrees with Althouse's position, yet still finds misinformation in other parts of the comments.  Smitty wonders "how much contempt will Americans suffer?"  No Sheeples Here points out that Obama seems to have finally found a "church home" he likes. And don't miss Doug Ross's parsing of the statement, because he ROCKS.  Ed Driscoll has a great roundup of reaction to this and concludes Obama's statement is an "unforced error." 

And in on a related note, American Power checks the guest list at the White House Ramadan dinner.  Wyblog wonders why the White House is so selective when it comes to religious diversity.

Troglopundit sees more to Bush's spontaneous greet the troops outing this week than meets the eye.

Legal Insurrection posts on Harry Reid's waffling position on the birthright issue.

The Camp of the Saints capsulizes Stacy McCain's latest jaunt, which is nice because I've been unaware he was even on one since I haven't read much this week. 

Caught Him With a Corndog has found a new blog; is Red turning foodie on us?

Ah, comic relief!  Sandy is cracking me UP with her lightbulbs!  Right there with ya, girl!

Sister Toldjah examines the issue of transparency once again, and notes the IG tie in.  Obi's Sister chimes in, too.

Pundette points out that the Brits are still sour on Obama.  "He fails to inspire."  True that.

Bride of Rove surveys the blogosphere and has some nice links.  I will NEVER go vegan BOR, never.  I had prime rib last night and it was fabulous.

Okay, I've got to go fire up the lawnmower; the temps are climbing an the clock is ticking.  Happy Saturday to you.

Obama's Ramadan Message

Today was the first day of school for the students.  NOW I remember what it feels like to need to go to sleep at 7:30 in the evening...long before the sun even goes down.  Forgot that part. 

I was getting all ready to settle into bed with Stieg Larsson and Sam Adams when I made the mistake of stumbling across Obama's Ramadan message.  I knew better than to read that.  Really.  But I did it anyway.

Now, the whole idea of Obama having a message for Ramadan doesn't drive me crazy; neither does the iftar dinner.  George Bush held one every year he was in office.  But, oh my goodness, is the message ever different.  Consider what George W. Bush said in his final White House iftar in 2008:

"One of the great strengths of our nation is its religious diversity. Americans practice many different faiths. We all share a belief in the right to worship freely. We reject bigotry in all its forms. And over the past eight years, my administration has been proud to work closely with Muslim Americans to promote justice and tolerance of all faiths," he said.

And Obama's message today:

For all of us must remember that the world we want to build – and the changes that we want to make – must begin in our own hearts, and our own communities. These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.   Ramadan is a celebration of a faith known for great diversity and racial equality.  And here in the United States, Ramadan is a reminder that Islam has always been part of America and that American Muslims have made extraordinary contributions to our country. 

On the surface, Obama echoes Bush in saying that Muslim Americans have made contributions to our society.  But the heart of Obama's message stresses the change that Americans must make in their hearts.. 

As Americans, he says we should  change our hearts and communities to emulate Islam in "promoting justice, progress tolerance and dignity of all human beings."  It's like he's saying that as Americans we hold but don't practice those principles. 

Maybe I'm over-parsing it.

I probably just missed the "dignity" message in this story, and the justice served in this one. And I'm sure there is progress and tolerance in this story, if I could only find it.  I don't know about racial equality but the gender equality can't be found in this story.  Or this one.

Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.

Following the Imam to the Middle East

This is a story that bears watching over the next few weeks:  our State Department (read:  tax dollars) plans to send Feisal Abdul Rauf, the Imam planning the Ground Zero Mosque, on an outreach trip to the Middle East. 

The Weekly Standard's John McCormack has the money quote:

If the purpose of the junket is to "help people overseas understand our society"--and not to help Rauf raise the $100 million for his mosque--wouldn't it make sense to send someone representative of the vast majority of Americans who oppose the Ground Zero mosque? Perhaps the State Department could send someone--maybe Juan Williams or Rich Lowry or Abe Foxman or Bill McGurn or David Harsanyi or Neda Bolourchi or Sarah Palin or Rod Dreher or Christopher Caldwell or Bill Kristol--to explain to the people of the world that Americans aren't bigots but simply find it offensive and insensitive to build a mosque two blocks from the site of a horrific Islamist terrorist attack? 

And then McCormack suggests that Greg Gutfeld might be the perfect guy to do this.  Gutfeld, as you know, has suggested building a gay bar next to the mosque since we're all concerned about sensibilities and such.

And in a related story, Andy McCarthy reports that human remains are still being found at Ground Zero:

In late June, CBS — in a barely noticed story that is no longer available on its website — reported that 72 sets of human remains had just been recovered and identified as a result of new construction work at the Ground Zero site.

And we're ready to build a mosque there?  Seriously?

I'm not sure what kind of "outreach" this Imam is really headed to the Middle East to do, but I hope it's to point out that sensibilities run both ways and NOT to raise money for a mosque at Ground Zero that runs against the wishes of most Americans who will NEVER FORGET.

On Blogging, Routines, Schedules, and Discipline Referrals

I've had three different people tell me today they miss my regular political blogging; how nice that was!

These last weeks of summer have been consumed with my mom's fall, illness, and settlement into The Glen for PT and rehab, and now the start of school.  The past two days have been  inservice, which has NOTHING to do with working in your room to prepare...that is done EARLIER in the week on your own time! 

 The students show up tomorrow and I really am looking forward to getting back into a routine and a normal schedule.  Some days I'll be harried as hell because I'll naturally have to run out to check on my mom a couple of times a week which will put me home much later than normal.  By the time I cook dinner and clean up the kitchen, it'll be my bedtime!

But, we'll adjust.  Routine is good.  Fall elections are coming! 

I appreciate your kind comments and I promise I'm still here and not going anywhere.  In the meantime, check my friend Naomi Lopez-Bauman's column with Robert DePosada on Charlie Rangel.  He's a piece of work, no? 

And if it's gleeful snark you need, check out my blogging idol Bride of Rove.  I just adore her.

Meanwhile, tomorrow I'll be explaining the rules of the school, "major" and "minor" infractions, and class expectations to sophomores.  The Louisiana schools discipline referral form has been revised this year.  Be sure to check out item #22.   Here's hoping none of us actually have to write a referral for THAT one.  Don't freak...it's been on referrals around the country for years, just not ours.  It's just a little disconcerting, is all.

Happy school year to me!, and I'll be back on my political saw horse in a day or two!

Inservice

Busy

No blogging today - first day of school today - inservice and whatnot. 

I'll be back.

Thoughts on Swollen Dogs and Queen Michelle's Spanish Holiday

I have to work today.  We have Open House at the school and I have to be there this afternoon.  Meh.  Then back to the daily grind tomorrow;  where did my summer go?

Yesterday I had a mental ticker over my head all day as I ticked off one chore after the other.  I got both dogs to the vet for their yearly shots and new supply of heartworm pills.  I got my car washed and vacuumed.  Got the license plate light repaired on the Teenager's car.  Went to visit my mother at The Glen.  Sat in 100 degree heat while she smoked four cigarettes.  Went to the grocery store (forgot half my list...) then came home and made shrimp primavera for dinner (wild caught Gulf shrimp!).

Meanwhile, I noticed that Checkers, the Boston Terrier, either had an allergic reaction to her shots (never happened before, though...) or got stung in the backyard, or poisoned by a frog.  Her whole little face was swollen like nobody's business and her muzzle was red, red, red.  She acted fine and was breathing fine, but I called the Emergency Vet (mine was closed) and they told me to monitor her breathing and to give her half a Benedryl.  She stayed swollen all evening but by midnight it had started going down some.  However, then her fur started looking lumpy and weird and her belly was all red; maybe the poison was working its way out of her.

This morning she still acts fine, is much less swollen, and her coat looks back to normal.  I gave her another half a Benedryl to work on the remaining swelling in her face and she seems fine.  I'll never know what happened but it was scary.  The other dog, the Lab, keeps coming up to check on her while she's sleeping.

Otherwise in the world, the story that keeps catching my eye is still the Michelle Obama vacation; not sure why I keep going back to that when there are other political happenings going on, but the hypocrisy of it just galls me.  I was reading this account, picked up from Drudge, from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette which tries to clarify some of the misinformation.

For example:

Other officials, asking not to be named because the first family considers it a private matter, said some reports of the trip have been exaggerated. Mrs. Obama is not traveling with 40 friends, one official said, but with two friends and four of their daughters, as well as a couple of aides and a couple of advance staff members.

Okay.  Six friends.  So why 60 rooms?  Or 50?  Is that misinformation, too?  I understand we have to have security and secret service, but 50 rooms?  Can't they double up?!

Robert Gibbs wouldn't comment other than to say  "She is a private citizen and is the mother of a daughter on a private trip. And I think I'd leave it at that."  The article quotes Anita McBride who points out that as a "public person," the First Lady draws scrutiny.  It's a matter of semantics that Gibbs is playing, isn't it?  She's a private citizen, but a public person, and this trip, at least a large portion of it, is funded by the taxpayer.

Professor Jacobson points out that this trip is "the latest in a line of seemingly imperial indifferences to optics in these difficult economic times."  And Allahpundit says,

As for the taxpayer expense for security, transportation, etc, (a) those same expenses would be incurred to some (lesser) extent during a U.S. vacation and (b) given the aortic hemorrhaging that is our national debt, what’s a little vacation paper cut here and there?

Yes, indeed, those midterms are right up the road and the optics of this trip, and the one to follow later in the month, will be fresh in the minds of the voters.  I guess maybe the Obama supporters don't begrudge their king and his queen a lavish lifestyle on the taxpayer dime, but I clearly remember every time George Bush went to Crawford, Texas, they came unglued.  Laura Bush vacationed solo, too, as the Post-Gazette points out, but she mostly went to national parks.

Oh well.  As for me, I'm just looking forward to another trip to Natchitoches sometime this year.  Or maybe we'll run up the road and check out El Dorado, Arkansas.  Steve will have to be elected president before I can afford any lavish five star hotels in Spain and cordoned off beaches.

C'est la vie.

Full Metal Jacket Reach Around - The Back to School Edition 2010

My last Saturday before school starts and it's raining, which is not so bad, really.  I had a list of things to do today which included getting my car washed but I guess I'll postpone that one.  The dogs need to go for shots, which I can do, and I have some minor housekeeping to do.  I'm halfway into the second Stieg Larsson book and that will keep me busy should I run out of productive things to do.

Steve and I went for our massages yesterday - fabulous!  Steve got a "deep tissue massage" which he loved and I had the traditional Swedish massage with hot stones.  Awesome.  If I could just do that every day after school...

I got my car back from the garage yesterday before noon and they didn't charge me as it had been in twice for the same thing in the past four weeks.  Kudos to them for making it right; I guess it was just a difficult thing to find.  It's an older car and I'm pretty certain everything they did to it before had to be done anyway.  No bad feelings.

On to the links:

Stacy McCain is backing Nathan Deal as governor of Georgia rather than the Palin endorsed Karen Handel.

Lots of folks are outraged at Michelle Obama's lavish vacation in Spain.  Reaganite Republican says, "At least Jimmy Carter knew enough to stay home and put on a sweater, joining us in the malaise."  No Sheeples Here points out that though some personal expenses may be paid by Lady Obama and her friends, a large cost of this trip is being paid by the taxpayer.  Pundette points out that it isn't easy being queen, after all.  Emptysuit is none too pleased, either.
 
Doug Ross explains the Obama's disconnect from reality.

The Camp of the Saints posted some thoughts on the gay marriage issue.

Chocolate covered bacon on a stick?  No.  Just no.

Pecan Corner has an excellent post on Hiroshima and the ridiculousness of apologies or reparations. 

Bride of Rove has some thoughts on the Japanese ambassador's visit to the Hiroshima ceremony:

A nation moribund in the molasses of moral equivalence cannot move to defend herself for fear of giving offense and is a nation not long for this planet. America — not Obama’s America obviously – but the America most of us know, is not sorry for doing what she needs to do to survive, thrive and prosper. She is not sorry for defending herself.

On the same subject, Wyblog blasts Obama's misplaced outrage.

Fausta had a great post about the most transparent administration in history and its play on words. 

Pirate's Cove examines the effects of The Generational Theft Act.

Staci looks at the Good the Bad and the Ugly.

Okay, I've got to get moving and get to the vet before he closes.  These crazy dogs need their shots and with school starting Monday, this might be my best chance to get it done.

Have a wonderful Saturday!

On Out of Control Government, "Local Issues," the Taliban, Hiroshima, and Noonan

I've got another busy day ahead.  I've got some business to take care of this morning and then Steve and I are taking the afternoon off and getting massages at one of the casino spas.  Neither of us has ever had a "professional massage" so I'm looking forward to this.  I'm sure I'll be addicted.  The literature assures me it will alleviate stress and "release toxins" from my body.  Heh.  Okay.  I'll go for that!

Around the web a couple of things have caught my eye which I don't have time to get into very deeply this morning.  Enjoy this pretty picture (left) that my niece took, and consider...

This column from Charles Krauthammer.  As usual, I agree 100% and it sort of goes to my Farm Dust post earlier in the week.  Governing by fiat.  The money quote:

In the modern welfare state, government has the power to regulate your life. That’s bad enough. But at least there is one restraint on this bloated power: the separation of powers. Such constraints on your life must first be approved by both houses of Congress.  That’s called the consent of the governed. The constitutional order is meant to subject you to the will of the people’s representatives, not to the whim of a chief executive or the imagination of a loophole-seeking bureaucrat.

This post by Pundette, which addresses the goofy comment by Robert Gibbs that Obama doesn't want to weigh in on "local matters."  Pundette:

A local matter. What a cowardly approach to an issue that most Americans care about intensely. Obama's missing something essential: Basic love of country? Common human sympathy?

And she quotes Rush, who said,

Isn't this fascinating? Not gonna get involved in local decision making. Wouldn't you love to be hearing that in Arizona? Let me ask you a question, was it just New York that was attacked on 9/11, or was it the country? It was the country, was it not? United States of America was attacked on 9/11. They're getting involved in our local health care decisions. They're getting involved in the kind of cars that we buy. They are getting involved in virtually every aspect of our lives they can insert themselves.

No kidding.

This column at Fox in which the son of Brig. Gen. Paul W. Tibbets, Jr. laments the decision to send our Japanese ambassador to the Hiroshima commemoration.  He sees it as a sort of apology and says his father would not have approved:

"It's an unsaid apology," Tibbets, 66, told FoxNews.com from his home in Georgiana, Ala. "Why wouldn't it be?  Why would [Roos] go? It doesn't make any sense.  "I know it's the anniversary, but I don't know what the hell they're trying to do. It needs to be left alone. The war is over."

I heard Oliver North speaking to Sean Hannity about this earlier in the week and he was equally outraged. The ambassador did not give a speech at the event, but some quoted in this piece believe the U.S. should apologize for dropping the bomb.  I have no doubt that Obama will get around to that.


And finally, consider this post from Andy McCarthy in which he notes the fact that our government still has not designated the Taliban as a terrorist organization.  WTF?!

Yesterday, after three months of delay, the State Department finally issued its congressionally mandated annual terrorism report. It shows that the United States has not even designated the Taliban as a terrorist organization — not in Afghanistan, not in Pakistan.

I'd like to know the reasoning behind that one.  Read McCarthy's piece to see why this is such a big deal.

And if all that isn't enough to keep you going, here is Peggy Noonan lamenting the fact that America is at a boiling point and that for the first time, we don't expect our children to have things better than we did.  'Scuse me, Peggy, but weren't you over there singing glorious about the potential of The Great Obama, before the election?  Yeah.  Hush, now, okay?  Just, hush.

Busy Day - Cars, College, Insurance...

Blogging has been light today:

Took the teenager out to get registered for college today; on the way back the car overheated AGAIN - it's been in the shop TWICE for the same problem in the last four weeks.  Won't even talk about how much money I've invested in this non-repair job so far.  I'm fixing to go nuclear.  Let's see if they make it right before I unload on them on this blog.

I had a dental appointment - ick.

Then had to go deal some teenage driver paperwork and insurance.  Pesky details.

I'm about to crack a Sam Adams and grill a steak. 

Back soon.

On Bloomberg's Defense Ground Zero Mosque

Michael Bloomberg's defense of the mosque to be built near Ground Zero is simply disgraceful as well as weak.  I haven't weighed in on this issue much on this blog, partly because so many others are doing a fantastic job on the coverage (Pamela Gellar...) and partly because I just couldn't believe it would actually happen.  That's a problem I often have - "That's so ridiculously inconceivable it just CAN'T happen!  People can't be that crazy!"  I said that before the 2008 election.  See where that got me.

Yesterday New York's Landmark Commission voted unanimously not to give landmark status to a building where the new mosque is to be built just 600 feet from Ground Zero.  This means, of course, that the building can be demolished and the construction on the mosque can proceed.

Bloomberg gave a speech following the vote in which he drew some, well, odd comparisons:

"Of all our precious freedoms, the most important may be the freedom to worship as we wish. And it is a freedom that, even here in a City that is rooted in Dutch tolerance, was hard-won over many years. In the mid-1650s, the small Jewish community living in Lower Manhattan petitioned Dutch Governor Peter Stuyvesant for the right to build a synagogue – and they were turned down.

Okay, so I agree with the fact that our founders intended us to have "freedom to worship as we wish" but he loses me on the comparison to the Jewish community.  I see where he's going with this - that we should exercise tolerance - but the analogy doesn't work.  The Jews never bombed American buildings and they didn't kill 3000 innocents on 9/11.   He then goes on to the Quakers:

"In 1657, when Stuyvesant also prohibited Quakers from holding meetings, a group of non-Quakers in Queens signed the Flushing Remonstrance, a petition in defense of the right of Quakers and others to freely practice their religion. It was perhaps the first formal, political petition for religious freedom in the American colonies – and the organizer was thrown in jail and then banished from New Amsterdam.

Same argument here.  The analogy is flat.  He doesn't ignore the Catholics either:

"In the 1700s, even as religious freedom took hold in America, Catholics in New York were effectively prohibited from practicing their religion – and priests could be arrested. Largely as a result, the first Catholic parish in New York City was not established until the 1780's – St. Peter's on Barclay Street, which still stands just one block north of the World Trade Center site and one block south of the proposed mosque and community center.

The point he's making is that we should exercise tolerance and let other religions have the freedom to practice, to worship.  Nobody is denying that to the Muslims.  There are plenty of mosques in New York City.  There are lots of places that a new mosque could be built should it be necessary to do so.  The fact that THIS mosque is to be built on hallowed ground, at the site where extremist Muslims attacked and killed Americans, is such a gross display of insensitivity it completely trumps any insensitive issues that might lie in one's refusal to let Muslim's practice there. 

For Bloomberg to ignore that is beyond the pale.

This is the thesis of his argument:

The government has no right whatsoever to deny that right [to use that site for worship] – and if it were tried, the courts would almost certainly strike it down as a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Whatever you may think of the proposed mosque and community center, lost in the heat of the debate has been a basic question – should government attempt to deny private citizens the right to build a house of worship on private property based on their particular religion?

First of all, nobody is denying anyone the right to worship.  Nobody is trying to "deny private citizens the right to build a house of worship," but don't build it there.  If the leaders behind the mosque project had any intention of bridging community good will and bring people together, they wouldn't build it there.  They don't.  Their point is otherwise intended.

Quite simply, the intent of this particular mosque is to serve as a sign of victory over Americans.  "We beat you.  You can't stop us." 

Bloomberg is a fool to ignore this.

Dorothy Rabinowitz at the Wall Street Journal asks:

Namely, how is it that the planners, who have presented this effort as a grand design for the advancement of healing and interfaith understanding, have refused all consideration of the impact such a center will have near Ground Zero? Why have they insisted, despite intense resistance, on making the center an assertive presence in this place of haunted memory?

And do you just love Robert Gibbs yesterday and his goofy response when asked about this issue?  He declared that the administration was not going to weigh in on "local decision-making."  Since when have they adopted that policy?

In the end, it doesn't matter what they call the mosque, how they frame it, what kind of outreach they do, it's still a victory marker for radical Islam.  If the New York Landmark Commission won't do it, then some other legal way must be found.  It's a slap in the face to the memory of those who died there.

Reading Table

I'm loving the Stieg Larsson books; I've just now discovered them.  I'm slow.  Have you SEEN my reading stack?  C'mon.  I'll try to take a picture for you if I can find my wide angle lens.

I'm about to finish the first one, so no spoilers, please.  But have you read them? 

EPA Continues Fight to Regulate Dust

In one of its more idiotic moves, the EPA is continuing its move to regulate ...farm dust.  Farm dust!

This issue has come up before; in 2009 a federal court upheld the EPA's right to regulate farm dust when the Bush administration tried to regulate airborne soot and dust:

The American Farm Bureau Federation and the National Pork Producers Council challenged EPA in 2006 over its decision to regulate coarse particulate matter -- or dust -- in rural areas, arguing that the agency had failed to show any negative health effects associated with the dust (Greenwire, Dec. 15, 2006).  EPA had considered exempting farming and mining operations, but the agency ultimately decided it could not exclude particular industries.

Farmers then, and now, naturally decry the move as stifling and ridiculous.   Anyone who has ever been on a farm, or on a rural gravel road, knows there's dust on a farm:

Farming and agriculture groups said the regulations would hurt their industries, affecting everything from combine dust to feedlot dust and even the dust from gravel roads.

In February 2009, the Iowa Defense Alliance wrote:

What the regulations do not do is taking into account the fact that most often farmers do not have control over the creation of this dust. For instance, when you are traveling down the highway and see a farmer planting his field in dry years you see a cloud of dust shadowing the machinery. This dust is created when the machinery stirs up the dirt during the planting process. Or perhaps it is sometime in fall, you see a combine harvesting the beans or corn. As the combine harvests the crop dust is created from the dry plant material in combination with the dirt being stirred up by the combine’s wheels. Another situation when dust is created is not necessarily related to farm work. When a vehicle travels over a dry gravel road dust is created. There really is not much that can be done to quell the production of this dust, but the EPA is insistent on regulating it nonetheless.

The latest maneuver in the debate is a letter to the EPA signed by 21 senators protesting the move to regulate farm dust as explained in a July 8, 2010, Policy Assessment related to the Clean Air Act.  The new guidelines "would establish the most stringent and unparalleled regulation of dust in our nation's history."

You can read the letter here (pdf - 3 pgs).

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air wrote about this in March 2009:

Now, farmers will be held accountable when their dust moves outside of their property lines and towards towns and villages.  That will impose extra cost on them depending on which way the wind blows, an excellent metaphor for Congress but a deadly imposition on a farm sector already struggling with an economic turndown and falling land prices.  The compliance costs to keep dust tamped down will be enormous, and will force out the smaller farmers who can least afford the mitigation costs.  It pushes the productive family farm even further into the anachronism category.

And he closes:

We need a strong agricultural sector to produce food as inexpensively as possible with maximum efficiency to keep us fed and healthy.  Dust may provide some health risks, but nothing as acute as poverty and starvation, which existed in much more significant scale in the US before the Green Revolution of the 20th century.

If such a plan ever moves out of the realm of debate and into practice, it would indeed crush the agriculture industry, especially the family farm.  Large corporate farms might be able to handle the extra costs, but the small farmer doesn't stand a chance.

Where do they think our food actually comes from?  It just materializes in a Whole Foods on its own?

Idiots.

(Cross posted at Potluck )

Lady Gaga Worried About Pod People and SB1070

You almost have to laugh at the insipid, ridiculous blathering of someone like Lady Gaga:

Lady Gaga tells Vanity Fair contributing editor Lisa Robinson that she tries to avoid having sex because she is afraid of depleting her creative energy—“I have this weird thing that if I sleep with someone they’re going to take my creativity from me through my vagina.”

Seriously?  Like the pod people?

Ms. Gaga is on board with other "celebrities" like Kanye "George Bush Hates Black People" West in protesting SB1070, although not to the point of boycott (for her).  At her Phoenix concert this weekend, she told the crowd:

"We have to be active. We have to protest.  . . . I will yell and I will scream louder," the 24-year-old pop sensation told the sold-out audience at the US Airways Center.  "I will hold you, and we will hold each other, and we will peaceably protest this state."

She told them about a meeting a young boy shortly after her arrival in the state...

During Saturday's concert, Lady Gaga told the crowd about a boy she met earlier in the day who's home was raided over "a parking ticket or something," and whose brother was deported to Mexico,  the newspaper reported.  Calling the case "disgusting," the star, whose real name is Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta, dedicated the song "You and I" to the boy.  "I think it's important that people understand that it's a state of emergency for this place and this state," she said.

I haven't been able to find a news report of said incident, and I'm unaware of the provision in SB1070 that allows parking ticket raids, but if you're here illegally, I guess that's a risk you take.

Ms. Gaga laments the "state of emergency for this place and this state" and on that account she has it correct - just ask Sheriff Paul Babeu who said:

What’s very troubling is the fact that at a time when we in law enforcement and our state need help from the federal government, instead of sending help they put up billboard-size signs warning our citizens to stay out of the desert in my county because of dangerous drug and human smuggling and weapons and bandits and all these other things and then, behind that, they drag us into court with the ACLU,” Babeu said.

Two hundred and fifty thousand (250,000) were detained last year for being in the country illegally according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and 17% of those already have a criminal record in the United States.


I don't guess statistics like that matter to Ms. Gaga.


Maybe she can add a chorus of Kumbaya to her next act.

Backdoor Amnesty

I saw David Vitter on Fox this morning discussing the leaked memo on immigration; he was outraged as many of us ought to be.

W. James Antle, III has an article at American Spectator explaining the contents of the memo.  Basically it's a backdoor amnesty plan; it gives United States Citizen and Immigration Services options on how to circumvent the legal process of immigration:

One proposal contained in the memo was that the USCIS grant "parole in place," which comes with a work permit and the right to apply for a green card, to various illegal immigrants. Another suggestion was to give "deferred action," delaying deportation indefinitely and preserving eligibility to apply for a work permit, to illegal aliens who would have benefited from the DREAM Act. 

It should surprise no one that this administration believes this is even an option for them.  This is the administration that has expanded governmental authority to new heights. 

As Charles Krauthammer pointed out:

It is just a bad idea and bad politics. It’s lawless. These are people who are appointed people in the administration deciding because Congress hasn’t enacted a law it wants enacted, it will do it by creating or finding loopholes in existing law.  It is like the administration, which was not able to get approval by Congress for cap-and-trade or carbon tax, and having the EPA do it by itself. That’s not the way the Constitution says our government runs. The laws are done by Congress. The administration is supposed to administer.

The will of the American people be damned!  Obama knows more than you do and he's smarter than you, and he knows what's best for you!  He won! 

Since we haven't seen his college transcripts, we don't know if Obama studied any basic civics classes, but I'm guessing not. 

You can read the memo here.  (PDF - 11 pgs.)

Why would the administration even be looking at such options?  Can these illegals also gain voting rights by decree of the USCIS?  It should strike fear in the hearts of every American that this administration is even looking at ways to circumvent the constitution for purposes of amnesty, that this administration is waging war with Arizona over immigration, that this administration is acting like we're under a dictatorship.  What the leader wants, we'll find a way to get.   What will be next, after amnesty?  What Constitutional laws will we banish by decree?

Again, Congress makes the laws.  Not Obama.

We are a nation of laws.  Or at least, we used to be.

Another Gift for Forest Baker from Pete Stark

Via Hot Air, here's another gift for Forest Baker from Representative Pete Stark:



You might remember this clip from June where Stark declares "our borders are quite secure." 

Ed Morrissey makes an interesting point:

Also, take a look at Stark’s body language in this exchange. Normally combative (and aggressively insipid in most cases), Stark seems to be collapsing in on himself as the woman builds an argument effectively enough to win applause from her fellow constituents. The bombastic Stark is almost inaudible when he admits that ObamaCare is a symptom of a federal government that no longer adheres to Constitutional limitations, and indeed doesn’t recognize them at all.

Pete Stark has been in Congress 37 years.  Send him home, California.

Media Hypocrisy in Action

Doug Ross has a post on the Chelsea Clinton wedding that probably nails down pretty well the way lots of folks feel about the event.  At least, his wife's rant says what I was thinking, anyway. 

One one level, I honestly don't care if Chelsea Clinton had a huge wedding.  I don't begrudge her that one iota. Personally, the Jenna Bush wedding is much more my style.  Heck, when Steve and I married earlier this year (after EIGHT years of talking about it), we spent less than $100 and that included the license, the hamburgers at the restaurant on Fox Run Golf Course at Barksdale, and a gift for the chaplain that performed the ceremony.  His wife took our pictures and we had a big ol' time. 

Now, I realize Chelsea's situation is different.  It's her first wedding and her parents are important people with lots of money.  I get all that.  Every young girl, I suppose, dreams of the gorgeous wedding.  I'm certainly not suggesting Chelsea have a justice of the peace wedding. 

What is so galling is the media and this is what Doug points out in his post.  The hypocrisy of the media is obvious when you consider what would have been written had the Bush's held such a huge shindig for daughter Jenna's wedding.

"Those elitist, out-of-touch Republicans!"  I can just hear it.

Just let me hear one time from the liberals that conservatives are out of touch elitists.  Let me hear just one time how the Democrats are for the little people.

Hypocrites. 

Will Jindal Take Over as Head of RNC?

Local radio personality Moon Griffon is predicting that Governor Bobby Jindal will replace Michael Steele as head of the RNC next January.  This suggestion stunned me, because it's so obviously the wrong move, but in politics I guess you never know.

Others have suggested that it would be a better plan for Jindal to run for Mary Landrieu's Senate seat when she comes up for re-election in 2014.  This would put Jindal in position for a VP slot or even a presidential bid in 2016.  He's already served in the U.S. House before becoming Governor of Louisiana.

Part of the political machinations at work involve the Louisiana Lt. Governor's race which will be determined in a special election on October 2.  The position had belonged to Mitch Landrieu who recently was elected Mayor of New Orleans.  Candidates running in the special election include Sammy Kershaw (R), Secretary of State Jay Dardenne (R), St. Tammany Parish President Kevin Davis (R), political newcomer Melanie McKnight (R) of Baton Rouge and state GOP Chairman Roger Villere.  There are three Democratic candidates but none have much name recognition; the most likely of those would be State Senator Butch Gautreaux from Morgan City.

The Hayride has done an excellent analysis of the Lt. Governor's race here and is predicting a Dardenne win.  The problem most conservatives will have with that is that while listed as a Republican, Dardenne is not very conservative and has a record from his time in the State Senate as a big spender; in addition he voted for tax-payer funded abortions. It is predicted that Roger Villere will get "the Tea Party vote."

The candidates will have to run again in 2011 for a new four year term.  The kink in the line is that this position is first in line to assume governorship should the current governor step down.

If Jindal stepped down to say, take over the RNC, or to run for president, or whatever other whim suits him, the Lt. Governor would take his spot.  Currently, Jindal is up for re-election as governor in 2011 and he still insists that is the only job he wants.  If Dardenne wins as Lt. Governor, and Jindal does in fact move on, Jindal would essentially be leaving the state in the hands of a liberal RINO.

Hotline on Call has done a round-up of who they see as potential RNC leaders come January.  Jindal is nowhere on it.

Griffon and pundits like C.B. Forgotston suggest that Jindal will "bail" before he has to deal with the state's financial woes.  That may be.  But as head of RNC?  I just don't see that as the right direction for him.  I can't see him doing it. 

I'm probably wrong.