Charter Member of the Sub-Media

September 08, 2008

Amusing « Politics As Usual »

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read. The writer has zero grounding in anything approaching reality. It's a collection of unsupported assertions designed to explain away the fact that the Democrats' platform is not supported by even a plurality of citizens, and is slowly losing support.

Thank you for your time.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 07:43 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
Re: Unforced Errors « Politics As Usual »

Something occurred to me today at work. I wasn't 100% clear in my post about the Democrats unforced error.

See, I don't think the flags getting left behind say anything about Democratic Party patriotism, or Obama's ability to lead.

But while I won't go so far as to say "perception is reality", I will insist that perception matters.

Like it or not, Democrats have a perception problem.

There is a perception that Democrats don't love America for what it is, they love it for what it could be. There is a perception that when America is attacked by terrorists or criticized by Europeans, Democrats (and/or liberals) respond by wondering what we did wrong, rather than thinking maybe we're resented because we're right and a great nation. There is a perception that Democrats think Europe and socialism are just swell, and they want to make the US exactly like Belgium and/or Sweden.

Republicans take advantage of this perception to make Democrats appear less patriotic.

Democrats often make things easier on Republicans who want to do that. Such as refusing to wear a flag lapel pin after 9/11 (or even now) because it might be perceived as too jingoistic. They come up with terms like "flyover country." They make disparaging cracks about non-urban dwellers who "cling" to guns and religion.

Democrats forget two things:
1) Due to the balance between population and geography built into our Constitution (brilliantly, by the way), Montana and Wyoming have just as many Senators as California and New York.
2) There isn't quite enough population in the urban areas like San Francisco, Seattle/Portland, Chicago, New York, and D.C. to get elected President. So Democrats condescend to and disparage the people they need to win elections. They claim to be the party of the "little guy", the worker, the lower income...but only as long as they vote and are not heard.

How else do you explain liberal and/or Democrat disdain (if not hatred) for Wal-Mart? That's the middle-class store of choice.

So the flag thing was an error, plain and simple. Call it an error of not making a smart decision in dealing with unused flags. I think it far more likely that it was an error of someone not paying attention to details, or fulfilling their responsibility.

Because all spin aside, they flags were "in and around" trash dumpsters, and they sat there for one week and one day before anyone even picked them up. There's no possible way that can be considered theft, or dishonest.

Now, is it right that this hurts public perception of Democrats? [shrug]
As was pointed out, one under-emphasized aspect of a political campaign is it demonstrates the organizational and performance skills of your administration.

Like it or not, the American flag (and these were good-quality, cloth flags here) is seen as an extremely important symbol of the United States to a huge number of its citizens. Being careless of it would be like someone tearing up all your family pictures, and then saying, "Eh, it's nothing! I didn't hurt your family! Those pictures don't represent your family in any way, it's just pixels on paper! What, are you some yokel who thinks photographs capture your soul or something?!?!? What a rube!"

But in any case, like it or not (again), perception does matter. This was a blunder. Democrats are attempting to minimize the damage with spin, but I don't think it was very effective. And it was not a blunder that was caused by trying to do anything to Republicans, or prevent Republicans from gaining ground or anything. It was a complete mistake.

Now, for balance, I'll point out something I don't like much:
Misrepresenting truth.

Go read that. I saw the original transcript, and Obama isn't trying to shift the battle to a basketball court. He was asked a question by someone in the audience, and I thought that in that sort of context, his answer was very good, very human, and not arrogant at all.

Look, people, there's enough stupid stuff going on, like Obama and his campaign ignoring Sarah Palin's successes as governor of the largest single geographical space in the US to label her as just being a mayor of a small town. She actually accomplished quite a bit as Alaska's governor, whereas Obama has spent most of his Senate career to date campaigning for President. When he hasn't been campaigning, he's been avoiding taking any stand that could hurt him politically (and that goes back to his Illinois congressional days).

So do we really need to distort what Obama said about basketball? No.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 05:36 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

September 07, 2008

September 06, 2008

HUGE Unforced Error by the Democrats (UPDATED) « Politics As Usual »

Democratic convention flags found in trash:

If this catches on, it will undermine all the work Obama and Democrat politicians have done to try and convince people they love America.

In the comments, Mr Lady points to one possible explanation. Plausible, but not definitive, as I explain in my reaction.

But if you go back to the original link, and follow the links there, you find this:

The person claims the majority of the bags with flags in them were near the trash, on a dock, and would have been thrown away. The person thinks it was probably an oversight by the Democrats rather than any nefarious plot against the flag. But the person doesnt believe anyone was coming to get them: The flags were there for a week and a day and no one came looking for them.

Caution, someone may try to claim these pictures are of the flags. Nope. It's the flags in the picture I posted.

Now, I'm sure it is an oversight, not a planned dis of the nation's symbol.

However, as I say in the comments, my military experience makes me take such symbols very seriously, and there is no more important symbol of the United States than the flag. Seriously.

It probably doesn't matter as much to enough of the rest of the US to make a difference, though.

Again, it will be interesting to see how it plays out...and if it even gets mentioned by Newsweek, CNN, the NYTimes; and if so, what spin gets put on it by them.

My business is making assessments of what is really going on behind foreign govt smokescreens. And in this case, if the Republicans stole the flags, I expect to see theft charges made. Failure to make any charges will be a strong (though not definitive) indication that the flags were going to be thrown out.

Final Update:
From the Hot Air post's comments:

Remember were not just electing one person or two, were choosing an administration. The people that Obama associates with will be giving positions of authority and power over us in the new administration. We have to judge not just Obamas actions, we also have to judge the actions of those around him.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 10:23 AM | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0)

September 04, 2008

And Another Thing! « Politics As Usual »

The truth is slowly becoming clear to all:

All Republicans have to do is win the conservative vote to win the Presidential election.

Republicans no longer have to court Democrats to get enough.

We are now pretty much at least a 51% conservative (not Republican, mind you) nation. Maybe higher.

That's what all the churn about Palin is about. McCain got the conservatives on his side, and will win the Presidency now (barring a major miscue that allows the Democrat-supporting media to de-legitimize* either or both Republican nominees, a la Dan Quayle).

Read More "And Another Thing!" »

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 10:50 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
More Palin Reactions « Politics As Usual »

Someone mentioned Hillary Clinton's, "No way. No How. No McCain."

That reminded me of how horribly wooden Clinton is. I know some say she gave a good speech the other night, but in my opinion, she is a horrible speaker. Atrocious.

That line, for example, sounded like a high school drama class attempt to act. By a freshman.

And, not her fault, but her voice really stinks. It tends to rasp and grate, so you can tell she got a voice coach. But now, when she pitches her voice to carry (like she did in that line), she drones.

Bob Dole was a bad speaker with a bad voice, too. George W. Bush is a bad speaker with a pretty decent voice. The point is, you have to just speak and let the microphone do the work. Clinton can't, or won't (because of how bad her voice sounds when she speaks normally). It sucks that we demand certain aspects from our elected officials that don't have a direct relationship to governance, but Hillary Clinton lacks this key aspect. She'll never be POTUS.

Palin, on the other hand, is a good (not great) natural speaker. She has a nice voice, and she let the microphone work for her.

Here's another good roundup of Palin driving left-leaning pundits nuts.

Two related things have also struck me:
1) Lefties are deriding every Republican speech and ad as attacks and smears and negative.
2) A very, very few lefties are saying they are disgusted with their side's sudden vicious, hypocritical, and apparently sexist attacks on Palin.

Well, as has been said many times, this is nothing new.
It goes back to McCain's military service meaning nothing, but Kerry's making him a better choice for the job than Bush, after Clinton's lack of service meant nothing when Clinton was running against the elder Bush and Dole. It goes back to ignoring Senator Byrd's history as a racist (among many others), yet never relinquishing attacks against Strom Thurmond and Trent Lott as racist (among many others). It goes back to denouncing Rice, Powell, Steele, and Thomas (among many others) as not really being black, simply because they are Republican (-leaning). It goes back to abandoning the self-descriptive of "progressive" for the world "liberal" when people figured out what progressive meant, then abandoning "liberal" when people figured out it meant the same thing as "progressive" (trying to fool people with words). It goes back to playing the same word games over abortion, too.

Simply put, Democrats want power. They don't care how they get it, really. They will use all sorts of concealing terms and word games to hide who they are and what they stand for, they promise all sorts of magic dreams to single issue voters to build support, they make extravagant promises of government assistance and pork to buy votes, all so that they can enact an (elitist) agenda they know that the majority of the US will not, and would not ever, agree to. To be fair, they truly believe that once enacted, a majority of Americans will be pleased with the result...but they have no qualms about using any verbal or political tactic to get the votes to enact it over the current objections of the majority.

So attacking Palin because she is an effective conservative spokesman is par for the course.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 09:35 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
My Thoughts on Sarah Palin « Politics As Usual »

Man, there's just too much to link in order to make my points.

So let me just say this:

Republicans are not as sexist as left-leaning pundits think we are. Palin is popular because she has conservative credentials. It has very little to do with her gender (although some feminist-leaning Republicans are certainly into that aspect). She would have been a great pick, regardless of her gender.

See, I don't know about Democrats, but Republicans I know actually pay pretty close attention to politics. Democrats, in trying to be Big Tent (so as to get more votes, I think), have lots and lots and lots and lots of single-issue voters who don't pay attention to the needs of other single-issue voters. Blacks and Hispanics hate each other politically. We just saw the rift between feminists and blacks play out between Obama and Clinton, right? Abortion on demand is just a silly concept to the gay rights groups. If Democrats have a unifying theme, it is that they represent the assumptions and condescension (although often not the actual needs) of urban, upper-middle class whites.

Here's a good example of the Democrat prejudice at work. He absolutely doesn't get Republicans. That's not really a bad thing for us, of course. We get lots and lots and lots of mileage from left-leaning pundits not understanding how we think and why we vote. Which results in lots of Cargo Cult-like aping of conservative stances like the "Strong and Tough" pretense a few years back, and the Kerry War Hero bid that directly lost the last election.

See, conservatives (and to be honest, there is only an indirect connection between conservative voters and Republican politicians) have a unifying political concept that underlies everything we vote for:

Individualism. We believe in individual responsibility, individual accomplishments, individual failures, getting to enjoy the fruits of your individual successes and paying the price for your individual failures. That means we tend to reject identity politics that looks only at group identifiers like gender or skin color. As a result, even though we do/say things that left-leaning pundits/voters can only understand as racism, we are actually far less racist than Democrats. We see people as people. We reject Obama as being an inexperienced smooth-talker, regardless of his race. We reject Hillary Clinton as a shrill scold, regardless of her gender. We believe things like, if one person can succeed from bad circumstances, anyone can. We believe in teaching to fish, not giving a lifetime of fishes. We do not believe, like Democrats apparently do, that identity is destiny.

Another thing that Palin's performance and reception shows me is that Democrats are in big trouble, politically. Conservativism is growing in power and acceptance. Please note, conservativism, not the Republican Party. Like I said, there is only an indirect connection between the two.

In fact, there wasn't a single conservative in the field for the Republicans this election cycle. The closest was Fred Thompson, who wasn't really a conservative, but adopted the mantle of Champion of Conservative Values, with the intent to use his acting/speaking ability to articulate our political views.
Heck, as much as I like and support him, George W. Bush isn't really a conservative. He is a conservative on foreign policy issues, but doesn't get much credit for it because he can't articulate why he makes the decisions he does.

In any case, Sarah Palin represents a true "pro-life, pro-personal gun ownership, spending cuts, increased energy production, personal-responsibility, self-growth, truly representing your constituents" political philosophy. She's going to be very successful in the Republican party because of it, and it will drive Democrats nuts.

Just like it says here and here.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 09:12 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

July 26, 2008

Liberals and Democracy « Politics As Usual »

Some liberals apparently hate it with a passion.

It's not the right type of democracy, you see.

Democracy is only allowed when it affirms liberal tropes, not when it denies them.

Ireland and the working class of Europe has already experienced this with the EU "Constitution".

Sure, it's not all liberal elites who do this, or support this, or even feel this way.

But: lie down with dogs, get up with fleas. Liberals always lecture conservatives on people we reject who nonetheless claim to be conservatives as if they represent the entire conservative movement. Liberals don't even attempt to denounce this sort of anti-democracy detailed in the link, from what I've seen.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 08:12 AM | Comments (1699) | TrackBack (0)

July 25, 2008

Dems and the Public Trough « Politics As Usual »

I have believed, for quite some time now, that the driving force behind Democratic Party politicians eagerness for social programs was a thinly-veiled vote-buying scheme.

After some thought, it hit me the other day that for a non-insignificant (although perhaps not even reaching a plurality) portion of Democratic Party elites, the true intention is that if you provide money, you can attach strings. Thus, feeding the populace from the public trough becomes yet another way of controlling the unwashed masses.

For me, from now on, the D stands for Domestication.

Read More "Dems and the Public Trough" »

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 07:08 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

June 03, 2008

...And the Next Thing You Know, We're France! « Politics As Usual »

What Tony said.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 10:51 PM | Comments (39) | TrackBack (0)

June 02, 2008

More Evidence Dems are... « Politics As Usual »

...basing their national strategy around deception. more about faking appearances than winning on issues.
...believe pretending to be conservative is a winning strategy.

Read Ann Althouse's response to Ezra Klein's rambling, then take your pick of the above ending choices.

"All of the above" is a valid choice, too.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 06:32 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

May 30, 2008

Politics and the State of the Union « Politics As Usual »

I dunno.
At this point, I don't think I care much anymore.

Democrats have fully and openly demonstrated their complete childishness and lack of integrity as a national party and as national-level politicians. With the rise of the internet, they aren't even hiding it any more. Then again, when caught, they flat-out deny it and are never punished for their prevarications. The fact that so many people still vote for Democrats makes me figuratively ill.

Republicans should win every single election in a landslide.

Sure, congressional Republicans have openly demonstrated they are greedy and willing to compete with Democrats for buying votes.

But the nation and many states clearly become more lawless, more chaotic, and less strong economically whenever Democrats take control.

It's obvious, people!

Then again, even as much as the Democrats willfully ignore the Constitution, I'm confident the pendulum will swing and we will someday have a nation of sensible, rational conservatives once more.

I'm old and crotchety enough to not worry about it anymore. The nation may be going to hell in a handbag, or it might not. In any case, things will come around. It probably felt much like this back in the 1920s, too, if not worse. The nation made it through okay.

Heck, maybe I'll find myself on a political path that will end with me helping bring about the change for a more rational nation, more rational legal code, and more rational voting populace.

In any case, I'm going to keep on doing what I'm supposed to and not get overwrought about stuff.

I think I'm really getting the hang of the Duty/Responsibility stuff.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 10:05 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

May 18, 2008

This is why I'm not that worried about a Dem majority in Congress.

The country is finally coming around to the conservative point of view on most issues (taxation, health care, guns, and the conservative view is even gaining ground on abortion issues).

I don't care which party pushes conservative issues, as long as conservative issues are pushed.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 05:45 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

May 05, 2008

Too Obvious for the GOP to Use, Apparently « Politics As Usual »

Everyone's blaming President Bush for the economic downturn.

I know it's easier to blame one person than to blame a group, but it seems obvious to me:
We had an excellent economy until the first part of 2007, and then things started to go badly.

What happened in early 2007?

We sat the new members of Congress! To include handing leadership of both the House and Senate to the Democrats.

There's your economic downturn right there.

They did nothing good. They failed to reign in earmarks. They did nothing to improve our energy situation. Had they implemented just half of the energy policy President Bush recommended, we'd be in far better shape than we are now.

The 2008 Economy: When Democratic Party Policies Came Home to Roost.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 01:46 PM | Comments (18) | TrackBack (0)

April 11, 2008

Funny Video (updated) « Politics As Usual »

Hot Air's got a funny cartoon up, but I can't watch it because I'm at work. So I'm posting it here so I won't forget to check it out when I get off work.

Oh, and sharing it with all my non-Hot Air readers, for what it's worth.

Eh. It really wasn't that funny. This isn't the video you are looking for. Move along.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 08:38 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)

March 19, 2008

Sunday Racist « Politics As Usual »

You know, I don't actually consider it that bad that Obama had an ongoing professional relationship with Pastor Wright even after Wright stirred up anti-white and anti-American anger/hatred.

There are so many people who go to church without letting any of it penetrate, so why should Barack be any different than, say, a President hearing several times a year that he shouldn't commit adultery?

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 01:17 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

March 18, 2008

Obama's Speech on Race « Politics As Usual »

I don't really have anything to say about it, I just want to get in on that sweet, sweet blog traffic.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 07:58 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

March 12, 2008

The Real Political Upset This Presidential Election Cycle « Politics As Usual »

A Senator will actually win the Presidency this fall.

The last 3 elections, I told people: the one with the most executive experience will win; it's held true since 1984 (if you consider 1 term as Governer to be greater than two terms as VP, and I do; and if you consider Bush I's other executive experience before becoming VP, and I do).

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 10:19 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

March 04, 2008

Clinton Resurging? « Politics As Usual »

She looks comfortably ahead in Ohio, and may actually eke out a popular-vote win in Texas (although the Texas state Democratic Party primary rules are freaky stupid, and would still deliver the majority of delegates to Obama).

Even though I predicted a McCain-Obama general election, I'd be tickled pink to have Hillary! win the Democratic nomination.

It may not be for the reasons you think.

For me, the bottom line is that Obama is the Messiah to millions of people who plan on voting with emotion rather than logic. I don't want that sort of candidate going up against any Republican candidate, much less McCain. But even more importantly, I want The Political Messiah to be defeated by his own party. If McCain beats Obama, then for the next four years you will see stories of how racist America still is, especially the Neo-Nazi Skinhead Dead White Male Republican Party. If Hillary! beats The Political Messiah, then the Democratic Party should descend into an angst-ridden introspection of their own racism.*

Of course, if Hillary! wins, she'll lose to McCain in a landslide, and then we can look forward to 4 years of stories of how sexist American still is, especially the Male Boorish Pig Patriarchic Phallic Dead White Male Republican Party. But that's okay, because we'll still hold the Presidency, and no one has ever really rioted over sexual tension, unlike racial tensions.

Bonus thought: Is the Democratic Party ever going to get tired of sending people to the Senate who shirk their duties to run for President? Kerry, Obama, Hillary!, and Edwards missed a staggeringly stupid number of votes to run for President, and fail.

Read More "Clinton Resurging?" »

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 10:24 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

February 27, 2008

Drifting Leftward? « Politics As Usual »

The 2006 Congressional election, the Iraq war debate, Hatred of President Bush, the Inevitability of Hillary!, the Obamessiah defeating Hillary! for the Democratic Party nomination, the least conservative GOP candidate winning the nomination for Republicans, the Global Warming craze, etc, all seem to make it look like the US is drifting Leftward.

You know what? I don't think so.

Democratics won control of Congress in 2006, 'tis true. But they haven't done anything with it. Support for Iraq has grown again now that we appear to be winning. The New York Times did its typical slanted, anti-GOP biased reporting, and for once the public was wise to the clumsy attempt. Dan Rather was disgraced (even if many people don't really understand how he disgraced himself). The Republican Party's default stance on immigration may not have popular support...but the Democratic Party's stance has even less, and what little it has is from illegals who are beginning to flee the nation in response to the enforcement of existing laws in response to pressure from public opinion to do so. The Democratic Party is going to find that they cannot get public support to pay for universal health care under any reasonable circumstances.

The Left is being cocooned by Huffington Post, Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth, slanted Hollywood dramatizations, The Cossacks, the Rise of Olbermann and MSNBC, the increasingly bold bias of mainstream news, the purported influence of the Kos Kids.

In fact, the tide is turning somewhat. McCain will have his day (and may well end up President), but he won't scratch the itch.

Americans want an individual right to guns acknowledged by the government. Americans want more restrictions on abortion. Americans are getting pretty tired of homosexual activism (although they have no intention of rolling back any current rights, just don't want to elevate Gay Rights above any others), are tired of affirmative action, are tired of illegal immigration going unchecked, are tired of being vilified by "elites" at home and in Europe.

This isn't a projection or personal perspective illusion, folks.

The same groundswell of public opinion demanding the reform of Welfare to get people off the public dole is going to compel a rightward/conservative shift in Congress and the Supreme Court on such issues as gun rights, abortion rights, illegal immigration, taxes, and affirmative action.

Just wait and see.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 09:57 PM | Comments (20) | TrackBack (0)
Change for Change's Sake « Politics As Usual »

One thing that bothers me (and many others, it seems) about Obama's platform is the emphasis on Change (and on Hope, too).

It didn't really strike me until I saw a brief clip of one of his stump speeches. On his podium was CHANGE in white letters on a blue background. Then there were a few other signs in the background, exactly the same.

Change can be good as long as it is Change toward* something. But Change as an End in and of Itself? Lunacy. Change without a clear goal in mind, without a clear understand of what steps you need to take to get there is naught but Chaos.

Chaos can be good. Chaos sweeps out calcification. But I'd have to argue that our federal government is not all that calcified right now...and all Obama really intends to do is expand the calcified part, i.e., the bureaucracy, by vastly expanding universal single-payer health care.

I do not approve.

Further, I don't think anyone really supports Obama for his platform. Further, I don't think Obama's platform is really about Change. And I don't really believe Obama has said all that much about his agenda.

But that's okay. You get what you pay for. Even if Obama ends up being as incompetent as his record would tend to foreshadow, our governmental structures will prevent him from doing any truly irreversible damage.

But I do wish we had a better GOP slate to offer a decent alternative.

Read More "Change for Change's Sake" »

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 09:43 PM | Comments (41) | TrackBack (0)
Remember, I Called it First* « Politics As Usual »

What I said.

What Glennstapundit says:

Anyway, to Hillary's undoubted dismay it seems to be turning into a McCain vs. Obama election already.
Read More "Remember, I Called it First*" »

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 01:02 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

February 25, 2008

Obama or Clinton: An Interesting Choice for Republicans « Politics As Usual »

Zombyboy has a good post that raises interesting points about Obama vs Clinton, from a GOP perspective.
Here's my response:

If I may make a football analogy? Thank you.
The Clintons are like a player from University of Miami: you know what you are going to get: a great political player, but a thug. They'll make political decisions exactly in line with what you'd think: triangulating to maximize political and public support, but generally along the Democrat lines. You know you aren't going to get soaring oration. You know you aren't going to get inspired leadership. You know you aren't going to get decisions based on principles. You know that you are going to get a finger (wagging) in the wind to test its direction, and then a frenzied attempt to get in front of public opinion, and ruthless defamation of anyone who criticizes or otherwise takes any action that the Clintons feel may reduce their power. It's all about power, money, and legacy with the Clintons. Just as it is almost always about personal aggrandization from a U of Miami player. (apologies to any U of Miami player who doesn't fit this description).

But Obama is like the Division II (or Division III) standout. He's done some amazing things against amazingly inferior opponents. He has the measurables to dominate in the NFL (or world political stage). But will he? He entered the national stage as a 7th round draft pick (sort of), and in training camp, he's continued to tear it up...but only against other 3rd-stringers. Is he ready to be a pro-bowler? Or will he bust?

We don't know.

With Obama, his ability to be a good President will depend on the quality of people he surrounds himself with. The Clintons were never really good at that. They surrounded themselves with toadies and button-men. George W. Bush surrounded himself with competent advisors and, despite what you hear from the half of the country with BDS, did a fairly decent job in everything except PR. For a non-politico whose only experience was being a governer in Texas, he did a credible job as leader of the most powerful nation on this earth. Far better than Jimmy Carter, at the very least. Obama has that ability to rise above himself...if he surrounds himself with people who don't buy into the Messiah hype and take the pains to actually give him competent, good advice. And as long as Obama himself doesn't buy into the hype, just like a football player gets fat and lazy when he believes his own press...

So the choice is between a brutal, thuggish player whose abilities are well-known (minimum abilities assured, but little upside) and a relative unknown who could be an All-Pro or the next Ryan Leaf (Jimmy Carter).

So I'm not unhappy with Obama vs. McCain. If McCain chews him up and spits him out: great! We've got The Maverick in the office who will at least push some GOP concerns, and should resist the Democratic Party's headlong rush towards a socialist police state. Or we've got Obama, who will highlight the ideological bankruptcy of socialistic government, or will at least (at the very worst) avoid repeating the disgrace the Clintons would bring to the White House along with their other baggage.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 08:49 AM | Comments (18) | TrackBack (0)

February 20, 2008

When Obama Loses the Presidential Election*... « Politics As Usual »

...because a plurality of the populace doesn't buy his Hope Hype, the Democratic Party stalwarts are going to go apeshit**.
48% of the country (well, 48% of those that actually vote) will not be able to understand why 49% of the populace that votes weren't stunned by the audacity enough to vote for The Messiah.

They won't be able to handle it. It will be Florida 2000 all over again, multiplied by Ohio 2004 (with a good dash of complete ignoring Congressional 2006), salted with just enough of the 2008 edition of Pauline Kael's "No one I know voted for him" that the Truther squads will be legion.

It will be an orgy of Reality-Based Community delusions claiming "Faux" news lied us into another Republican Presidency so that our gas prices will be low. Which makes no sense, and thus is par for the course.

I have no confidence in any sense of perspective from the American Left these days.

It's going to get ugly, folks.

Read More "When Obama Loses the Presidential Election*..." »

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 08:52 PM | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

February 15, 2008

A Good Fisking, IMHO « Politics As Usual »

By Random Jottings, regarding the likelihood that any criticism of Obama will be seen as a dirty trick by his supporters (including the Mainstream Media).

I don't agree with his final fisk paragraph, by the way, but everything else is good.

What it comes down to, I think, is that the original writer that Random Jottings fisks doesn't really recognize the existence of conservatives among normal people. He apparently believes that all correct-thinking people naturally support the typical Democratic Party platforms. "Conservatives" are a mean-spirited miniscule minority that lead all the average people away from voting for what they really want by disparaging Democratics and their platforms in unfair and negative terms.

The condescension of that world view is breathtaking. But that sort of condescension is also the oxygen within which the Democratics move, each assuming himself to be the elite amid a sea of "sheeple". The idea that people might know what Democratics are all about and still reject them seems like a possibility this writer cannot even imagine. Unless he can push it off on some Democratic "bogeyman", i.e., "The South" and "heartland" residents. The Democratics have lots of perjoratives like that, including "evangelicals", "red states", "flyover country", etc.


Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 12:44 PM | Comments (438) | TrackBack (0)

February 11, 2008

Why I Will Continue to Blast McCain (But Will Vote for Him Anyway) « Politics As Usual »
While Mr. Smerconish is a conservative who didn't support Mr. McCain, he thinks "the conservative blasting of McCain is good publicity around here." His independence and maverick status are exactly the qualities that could help him carry the tightly contested Philadelphia suburbs that voted to re-elect GOP senator Arlen Specter, a moderate, in 2004 but rejected conservative Rick Santorum in 2006.

The more I complain about him being too liberal, the more moderate Democrat and independent votes he should attract. Theoretically. If anyone ever actually read this blog.

Via here.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 01:40 PM | Comments (25) | TrackBack (0)

February 06, 2008

Political Prediction « Politics As Usual »

Caveat: it's still early, and there's much that could happen to invalidate not only this prediction, but the backing reasons behind it.

But with no further ado, please welcome your next US President:

Read More "Political Prediction" »

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 10:41 AM | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0)

February 05, 2008

Conservative Air America Initiative? « Politics As Usual »

That's what this article seems like to me.


Liberals grow more liberals by controlling thought at universities! If we don't do the same thing, we won't have enough conservatives in the future!

Alarmist crap, IMHO.

People become conservatives when they grow up. Liberalism is about avoiding personal responsibility and letting the govt take care of everything. Being swayed by liberal arguments is a phase that everyone goes through, and usually between the ages of 18-22. Some grow out of it, some don't.

Bottom line: good idea expressed well will gain traction in the minds of a majority of the populace and the politicians. We don't need "conservative" universities any more than the liberals needed their own "talk radio". The internet helps spread both good ideas and liberal talking points. No matter what, there will be people smart enough to realize Big Government doesn't work very well. No matter what, there will be people dumb enough to keep voting more largesse for themselves or their favorite condescension target from the public trough, i.e., consistently vote Democrat.

Let's not waste effort combating university culture that has been set for more than 4 decades. Our poor selection of candidates was not due to university culture, I can tell you. Let's concentrate on developing and disseminating conservative thought. That's how we win.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 10:30 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Never Ascribe to Malice What Should be Ascribed to Incompetence « Politics As Usual »

Rarely has there been a better example more deftly described than this.

A good read, interesting. You will be better for having read it.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 10:20 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

February 03, 2008

Good Reason to Back McCain « Politics As Usual »

Even for a FredHead like me: (via the Instalanche Guy)

Don't let "perfect" be the enemy of "good", especially if it keeps Hillary! out of the White House.

There's more, lots more. I just summed up what I got out of it in that one sentence. Read the whole thing, you'll be better for it.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 12:01 PM | Comments (42) | TrackBack (0)

January 29, 2008

Political Prediction « Politics As Usual »

I think it's going to end up Obama vs McCain, thus proving you can have an election with two Democrats as the top candidates.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 07:07 AM | Comments (14) | TrackBack (0)

January 22, 2008

Fred Drops Out of the Race « Politics As Usual »

In retrospect, it was inevitable.

I'm extremely disappointed, too.

(Yeah, I could have just reacted to David J's thread by leaving a comment there. But this way I might get more attention. And I'm nothing if not an attention-hound.)

There, David J. says:

I--honestly, no bullshit--think that its just an off cycle. Hope.

If it isnt just an off cycle, though, then the problem isnt just with the GOP, its with the American political system. Its a problem that encompasses public expectations of government and a fundamental lack of understanding of political principles. I could also make a backhanded swipe at growing populism, but Im at work and only have so much ranting time available to me right now.


My thoughts are that it is not just an off-cycle...and yet I don't see it as the nadir of the GOP, either.

Rather, I see it as a sign of hope that Fred lasted this long, and that he was able to get his message out to so many people.

On the other hand, I think Fred's campaign and ultimate failure does highlight the political bankruptcy of our political system. But here's the thing: Prior to 10 years ago, we would never have heard of Fred. The left-leaning MSM would have suffocated his candidacy and his message before it ever started. The MSM would have continued to push the GOP candidate it wanted (Huckabee) to help propel an easy Democratic Party victory.

This isn't the first time we've had independent access to political, social, governmental, and historical information apart from the MSM gatekeepers. But this is the first time their influence was so clearly displayed.

Sure, we don't have the Presidential candidate we want...but true conservatives are upset and angry. We should have a little more power over whatever candidate wins the nomination, and even more power over the eventual President, even if it is a Democratic. Conservatives and our issues are being taken more seriously (see how illegal immigration laws are being enforced more now, over the objections of leaders of both political parties), and can no longer be dismissed with emotionally-charged denigrating words in MSM reports without the full story percolating up through other channels. Look at how the lawyer keying the Marine's car became publicized.

The Reagan Coalition is in a transformation phase, I think. I think we are applying the marketplace of ideas to our conservative movement, and as we network and organize ourselves further, we will be a force.

In about 8 years, I think.

Goldwater resulted in Reagan. I think Fred (and what we internet-savvy conservatives have learned) will result in a true Conservative movement rising to power in the GOP. We had the Christian right bloc be in power, followed by the socially-liberal, economically conservative moderates dictate to the GOP from 2000 until now...our time is next.

I think.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 11:41 AM | Comments (18) | TrackBack (0)

January 14, 2008

Bipartisanship is Crap « Politics As Usual »

Bipartisanship is crap.

Our country faces continual challenges, because the nature of life and institutions is to face challenges; life/society rarely goes smoothly without intervention of some sort, and we are competing with other nations. The "problem" is that different political philosphies see different challenges, and even when Dems/Repubs/Libs/Greens see the same challenges, and prioritize them the same way, we all see different solutions.

I want to elect Republicans who act like Republicans.

Actually, Democratics want to elect Democratics who act like Democratics, too. But Democratics like it when elected Republicans act like Democratics, which is why this "Bipartisanship" bugaboo gets brought up. It is a hammer, wielded by opinion-leaders, which is only used to pound Republicans into acting like Democratics.

It's tiresome.

Solution: drop this bipartisan standard, let all sides argue out what their position is, and let the best platform win the support of the people, and act on it. If you got the votes to block it and your constituents demand that you do, go ahead. But let's not bludgeon politicians into becoming RINOs or DINOs for the sake of some "bipartisanship". I, and many other like-minded people, are pleased as punch with "gridlock".

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 09:10 AM | Comments (17) | TrackBack (0)

January 11, 2008

GOP Debate Summation, II « Politics As Usual »

From David J., again. Natch.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 09:24 AM | Comments (22) | TrackBack (0)

January 10, 2008

Didn't See the Republican Debate? « Politics As Usual »

Well, you can catch up here.

If David J. promises to one of these every time, you can deliberately skip the debates and not only not miss anything, you'll probably walk away with a deeper/better understanding of what was said.

One thing that struck me is that pretty much all these Republicans are letting the Democrats set the discussion parameters. Thompson is the only one who isn't harping on "fixing America" or "improving America". They name-drop Reagan, but they miss the essential attitude that made him so popular: "the United States is already pretty dang good!" If a Republican candidate would come out and merely accentuate the positives, and then promise to make sure that his policies will continue to keep things going well, they'd probably do very well.

That's what Fred Thompson should do.

Sure, the mainstream media boycotts, downplays, diminishes, etc, economic and strategic good news because it feels that doing so will help re-elect Democrats, who will do the "right" things for the "right" reasons (which basically means doing the wrong thing for statist/fascist/leftist reasons, but who's quibbling?), but if someone who can articulate as well as Fred would keep repeating how good things are, it would force the mainstream media to back up their assertions...

Here's the thing that Instapundit has pointed out a few times: people's view of the economy is affected as much by how they think other people are doing as they are themselves. So they can have a good job, enough money, plenty of gadgets, and not personally know anyone who has lost their job or in dire straits, but still feel the economy is sagging just because they think the rest of the country is in bad shape.

We need someone to be positive about America again. There is much to be positive about!!!

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 08:08 AM | Comments (76) | TrackBack (0)

January 04, 2008

Thank You, Iowa! « Politics As Usual »

You helped keep Thompson's campaign alive.

Show Comments »

posted by Nathan on 07:11 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

January 02, 2008

My Plea to Iowans: Please Vote for Fred « Politics As Usual »

I really want to have a decent chance to vote for him for President of the USA. And I can't if you screw him over.

The same thing goes for New Hampshire, and all the other early primary states.

Show Comments »