The Necropolitan Sentinel

chi per lungo silenzio parea fioco

Executive Rock and Roll

Posted on July 12, 2011 By

2 Comments

I’m not supporting Thaddeus McCotter’s White House run just because I want to be able to tell people that I’ve shared my fondness for the Ramones with the president on Twitter. Sure, “I tweeted about Rock ‘n’ Roll High School with the most powerful man on Earth” would make for an okay page bio and a nice business card line. And I would finally have something to brag about other than my Mario Kart prowess.

But his accessibility and good taste are only part of his draw. McCotter’s entrance into the 2012 presidential race has been welcomed by those who prefer constitutional conservatism espoused by someone simultaneously bookish and cool.

McCotter’s endearing quirks such as his electric guitar proficiency and fascination with all-time Oscar champion Swamp Shark illustrate that he knows how to pick his spots, which is coincidentally a positive quality for a president to possess. Unlike with the last guy to win the presidency, McCotter’s appeal only begins with his likeable nature.

The Rad One may be most famous for his Red Eye appearances, where he delivers utterly sensible discourse in advocacy of restrained government when he’s not relentlessly putting down poor host Greg Gutfeld. His ardent fans appreciate both his commonsense beliefs and a dry wit that makes Steven Wright look like Gallagher. That’s presumably why Gutfeld was one of the first people to suggest a McCotter candidacy despite the relentless, droll teasing.

His appeal isn’t limited to those of us degenerate insomniacs who invariably find ourselves deciding what we want for dinner while watching Fox News Channel at 3 a.m. Constitutional-minded Americans are desperate for a presidential hopeful who recognizes that we are endowed with rights not granted by the FDA or Harry Reid.

A stalwart defender of economic liberty like McCotter is naturally fervent opponent of our present ruinous economic course. As a foremost believer in natural rights, the congressman isn’t going to, say, perpetrate the idea that the government’s role is to compel citizens to buy crappy health insurance. The only people left who think letting the feds spend our money will cure the economy are those who are so smart that they’ve never been able to get jobs off college campuses.

In a victory for consistency, McCotter remains shrewd whether he’s discussing domestic or foreign issues. His previous postures indicate that he would take a stand against bullies abroad rather than trying to befriend them like the allegedly popular incumbent.

For one, McCotter has made it his mission to shred Iran like they deserve, with his measured yet impassioned account of the murder of Neda Agha-Soltan particularly serving as a devastating indictment of the gangster regime. Conservatives should look forward to the debate where McCotter points out that he was condemning Iran while the president was infamously pondering an ice cream order.

At the same time, he hasn’t been conservative on every single thing. He notably supported the auto bailouts in what will serve as a red flag for Red State-minded people.

He’ll have to convince right-minded voters to accept that there will never be a candidate whose views overlap perfectly with their own: they’re not going to get a Venn diagram where one circle perfectly lines up on top of another. In this case, it’s a rare deviation from conservative doctrine for a congressman from Michigan who seems to have thought he was serving his district’s interests.

In reality, letting car concerns enter bankruptcy would have been best for them and us. But every potential Obama defeater will fall short in some manner. Some will do so far more than others: Mitt Romney drew up the freaking blueprint for Obamacare. And even conservative favorite Rick Perry has deviated from the platform that’s kept in a lock box buried under Chuck Norris’s garage.

Obama’s only hope will be if his political adversaries nominate someone so moderate that he or she will alienate the left, right, and center. The best candidate will be an overwhelming conservative who promises to be everything the present president isn’t.

McCotter’s winning percentage is much more reminiscent to the one posted by his beloved successful Detroit Red Wings than his beloved regrettable Detroit Lions. He has maintained that he’s been pro-labor like a prominent conservative icon, even if those on the right may still find his position misguided on this particular issue.

His demeanor will aid his quest. The vigorously concise McCotter is never chattier than he needs to be. Unlike the president, he doesn’t need to read his big words aloud off a screen. Also, he knows what they mean, which is one of the benefits of being able to speak lucidly sans teleprompter.

McCotter’s impressively clear defenses of freedom prove that it’s possible to have fun being serious. After all, he found a way to mention Led Zeppelin on the House floor during remarks about a potential federal shutdown. We could use a leader who hold faith in both classic liberalism and rock.

Such a philosophy would be a nice and necessary change of pace from an incumbent administration that resembles a lead balloon. The fact that McCotter would get the Keith Moon reference only enhances his case. Raddeus Thaddeus would be a grown-up president, but that wouldn’t keep us from having a great time during his term.

Anthony Bialy is a writer and “Red Eye” conservative in New York City. He tweets at http://twitter.com/AnthonyBialy.

 

How Far the Left Has Fallen

Posted on July 12, 2011 By

5 Comments

Do you remember when this speech was an anthem of liberal philosophy?

“Can’t you understand? If you take a law like evolution and you make it a crime to teach it in the public schools, tomorrow you can make it a crime to teach it in the private schools? And tomorrow you may make it a crime to read about it. And soon you may ban books and newspapers. And then you may turn Catholic against Protestant, and Protestant against Protestant, and try to foist your own religion upon the mind of man. If you can do one, you can do the other. Because fanaticism and ignorance is forever busy, and needs feeding.

And soon, your Honor, with banners flying and with drums beating we’ll be marching backward, BACKWARD, through the glorious ages of that Sixteenth Century when bigots burned the man who dared to bring enlightenment and intelligence to the human mind!” Spencer Tracy in Inherit the Wind

Well Rebel Pundit at of all places the Printer’s Row Literature Festival in Chicago demonstrated the depths that liberalism has fallen to:

We presented a board with a selection of well known book covers and asked visitors of the event if they could choose to ban any of the books on the board, which if any, they would in fact ban. They were allowed to choose any three of the eleven choices.

Hey this is a book fair! What are odds you are going to find people willing to ban books? Apparently, if they are conservative books, the odds are pretty good:

Participants overwhelming chose Sarah Palin who received 53 votes putting her at 36% overall, Glenn Beck at 23% and Ann Coulter at 22%. All of the other choices received a very minimal amount of votes, with the next most popular to ban being Adolf Hitler at 0.5%

As this is Rebel Pundit’s story we encourage you to visit his site and watch the video of this Orwellian exercise, but before you do consider: this is how far modern liberalism has fallen; to the point where what was considered an iconic liberal speech would be directed toward them.

If you’ve ever wondered why we on the right differentiate between “modern liberalism” and “classical liberalism” now you know.

The Kenneth Gladney Beating: Trial Day One Ends

Posted on July 12, 2011 By

2 Comments

The St. Louis Times brings its readers up to speed on the Kenneth Gladney SEIU beating trial:

A trial began in St. Louis County Municipal court on Monday in the case of two men accused of assaulting a third man selling buttons outside a town hall meeting in south St. Louis County in August 2009.

The charges stem from a contentious meeting called by U.S. Rep. Russ Carnahan, D-St. Louis, to discuss aging. But much of the audience came to talk about health care reform, including Tea Party members and others opposed to proposed changes on one side and supporters of President Barack Obama on the other.

Kenneth Gladney said he was selling “Don’t Tread on Me” buttons and flags outside the forum when Elston McCowan, of St. Louis, and Perry Molens, of De Soto, attacked him, unprovoked.

Each was charged with assaulting a person and interfering with police, both misdemeanor ordinance violations.

“They attacked (Gladney), there’s no question about it,” John Mirelli, a witness for the county, testified Monday.

McCowan and Molens, each at the meeting for the Service Employees International Union, claim Gladney was selling anti-Obama buttons and that when they confronted him about them, Gladney started the physical attack by slapping McCowan’s hands.

The attack escalated to punches and shoves, and McCowan suffered a fractured shoulder, his attorney claimed.

Jim Hoft used Sunday’s post to virtually live-blog the first day via updates, focusing mostly on concerns about potential “union ties” in the jury pool. Of course, we don’t know how strong the ties were, or how many actual jurors might lack objectivity on account of such considerations–but Gateway Pundit is definitely covering the trial, and it’s the first place to go for on-the-spot reporting.

Secondhand Smoke: Is There Anything It Can’t Do?

Posted on July 12, 2011 By

5 Comments

Now it is “associated with” ADHD. Secondhand smoke ‘could increase risk of ADHD in children by 50%’:

Children exposed to secondhand smoke in the home increase their odds of developing common mental and behavioral disorders by 50 per cent, experts say.

Passive smoking is already known to increase the risk of cot death, asthma, meningitis and middle-ear infections among children.

Punchline:

Although the team have found a strong association between secondhand smoke and neurobehavioural disorders they haven’t proved that one has caused the other.

However, they wrote in the latest edition of the journal Pediatrics: ‘Assuming a causal relationship, 274,100 excess cases of these disorders could have been prevented had the children not been exposed to second hand smoke in their homes.’

Emphasis added by me. That lack of causality makes a bit of a difference, no? You’d think the authors of the study would take the utmost care to emphasize the critical distinction between causality and correlation. But no. Instead, they’re trying to use an “association” as an excuse for Big Brother to insert his foot in the door:

They added that it could ease the burden on children’s mental health services.

The study, co-authored by Dr Gregory Connolly, concluded: ‘Health and economic burdens might be reduced significantly if voluntary smoke-free home policies are rigorously introduced.’

My emphasis again. There’s something about “voluntary” and “rigorously introduced” that doesn’t quite jibe.

I detest cigarette smoking, but that’s beside the point. The statists will use any excuse they can find to extend their micromanagement of our lives.

Cross-posted at P&P.

James Wolcott Would Like to Think

Posted on July 11, 2011 By

19 Comments

. . . that because Stacy McCain is depressed, Dan Collins and Joy McCann are therefore sitting around feeling sorry for themselves. Because . . . well, never mind why because!

Dan and I are, as you can imagine, a bit too busy for that. But thank you for playing, Mr. One Step Behind.

I’m sure you’ll catch up with life . . . one day.

At least, we can hope.

In the meantime, the rest of you must try not to blog when you’re down–because the likelihood is, James Wolcott of Vampire Fair will be along eventually to kick you.

Though he may be fashionably late and a bit ill-informed, so his kicks are somewhat ineffectual these days.

Any Other Dictators Out There Who Need To Step Down?

Posted on July 11, 2011 By

1 Comment

Just fill out this application, and we’ll be with you shortly. Syria–next!

For a President who wants to pose as being as far from from George W. Bush as possible, Barack Obama is becoming his own worst enemy. Perhaps that’s because the world doesn’t stop spinning just because someone says “when.” Not even for Barack Obama, the American President who, upon election, presented himself as the “one . . . we’ve been waiting for” to solve all of our Middle Eastern woes through sympathy and understanding.

To relieve oneself of the “interventionist” label, there’s a requirement: You have to – you know – stop intervening in everyone’s affairs around the world. This applies even when things are ugly and there are calls for foreign intervention. The hand you’re looking to be played before taking action is one that says there’s a de facto American interest involved–and, no, you can’t pass the buck along to someone else because – well – we are America. Our leadership is crucial to any alliances we have, and any failures by an allied endeavor will be an American failure.

After months of reports on the atrocities in Syria–including brutal crackdowns, missing persons, and horrible bloodshed (as opposed to the threat of such things in Libya when we got involved)–the Obama administration is revving up the pressure. Only this time, it’s taking a more careful approach that they’re clearly hoping will turn out better than what we saw in Libya. Ambassador Robert Ford made a visit to Hama, an opposition stronghold in Syria, with the intention of displaying solidarity with the protesters. Unhappy with that trip, pro-government forces attacked the U.S. Embassy in Damascas today, wherein the Marines stationed there had to do both their jobs and the Syrian forces’ job of protecting the walls of the compound after it was breached by protesters.

Don’t worry, though: Obama will be filing a formal complaint with the top Syrian diplomat in the U.S., and we’ll have this thing cleared up in no time. Watch out, though: We might have another U.N. resolution on our hands–which, after this Libyan adventure, might actually come to mean something these days.

Have you ever seen the Jon Stewart clip on “Freedom Packages”? Which one will Syria get, do you think?

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
America’s Freedom Packages
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

Does the White House Want to Drain the Taxpayers Dry?

Posted on July 11, 2011 By

13 Comments


Looking at what the President attempted in the budget negotiations is pretty disturbing. The Wall Street Journal lays it out for us:

Taxes Upon Taxes Upon . . .
Obama wants $1 trillion in taxes on top of what he’s already signed.

So the fondest Washington hopes for a grand debt-limit deal have broken down over taxes. House Speaker John Boehner said late Saturday that he couldn’t move ahead with a $4 trillion deal because President Obama was insisting on a $1 trillion tax increase, and the White House quickly denounced House Republicans for scuttling debt reduction and preventing “the very wealthiest and special interests from paying their fair share.”

How dare Republicans not agree to break their campaign promises and raise taxes when the jobless rate is 9.2% and President Obama’s economic recovery is in jeopardy?

We think Mr. Boehner is making the sensible choice. No one wants to reform the tax code more than we do, but passing a $1 trillion tax increase first on the promise of tax reform later is a political trap. If the President were really sincere about reform and a willingness to keep the top tax rate at or below 35%, he’d negotiate that at the same time he does a debt deal. Mr. Boehner will have a hard enough time getting any debt-limit increase through the House, much less one that raises tax rates.

Keep in mind that Mr. Obama has already signed the largest tax increase since 1993. While everyone focuses on the Bush tax rates that expire after 2012, other tax increases are already set to hit the economy thanks to the 2010 Affordable Care Act. . . .

There are numerous . . . new taxes in the bill, all adding up to some $438 billion in new revenue over 10 years. But even that is understated because by 2019 the annual revenue increase is nearly $90 billion, or $900 billion in the 10 years after that. Yet Mr. Obama wants to add another $1 trillion in new taxes on top of this.

The economic ironies are also, well, rich. Mr. Obama is now pushing to reduce the payroll tax by two-percentage points for another year to boost the economy, but he’s already built in a big increase in that same payroll tax for 2013. So if a payroll tax cut creates jobs this year, why doesn’t a payroll tax increase destroy jobs after 2013?

Mr. Obama is also touting spending cuts he’s willing to make in entitlements in return for bigger tax increases, yet the spending increases built into ObamaCare aren’t even up for discussion in the debt-limit talks. The Affordable Care Act adds more than 30 million more Americans onto Medicaid’s rolls, when that program is already growing by 6.5% this year. So Mr. Obama is willing to cut current entitlements on grounds that they are unaffordable, but he’s taken what may be the most expensive entitlement off the table.

We think this was the President’s spend-and-tax plan from the very first. Run up spending and debt in the name of stimulus and health-care reform, then count on Wall Street bond holders and the political establishment to browbeat Republicans into paying for it all. He apparently didn’t figure on the rise of the tea party, or 1.9% GDP growth and 9.2% unemployment two years after the recession ended.

Read the whole thing; the delineation of all the taxes that were part of the “Affordable Care Act” is infuriating; it’s been a while since most of us actually read that list.

UPDATE: Also, see Insty’s post-prez-presser mini-roundup.

Optics Over Reality: Ryan’s “Winegate” [UPDATED x4--and BUMPED]

Posted on July 11, 2011 By

37 Comments

Aw, come on: it was called The Path to Prosperity, not The Path to Penny-Pinching.

It turns out that splurging in Washington, D.C. is not the same as splurging in Glendale, California. I had feared as much. Last time I ate something spendy, it was a chocolate bar that cost a whole $2.59 and had to last all month, at one square a week. I bet I enjoyed it more than Rep. Ryan did that wine, though.

But Josh Green is gloating over at The Atlantic:

Remember John Edwards’s $400 haircut? That turned out to be quite a problem for him. It looks like Paul Ryan is about have a similar problem on his hands. According to . . . Talking Points Memo, Ryan — the leader of the tighten-your-belt, fiscal-austerity crowd — is in the habit of drinking $350-a-bottle wine, specifically Jayer-Gilles 2004 Echezeaux Grand Cru. In fact, Ryan enjoyed two bottles of this fancy Pinor Noir while dining the other night with a pair of conservative economists at Bistro Bis, the swanky Capitol Hill restaurant favored by lobbyists and other expense-account barons.

Ryan had the misfortune of sitting at the table next to Susan Feinberg, a Rutgers business professor, who didn’t share his nonchalance about calling for draconian budget cuts for the poor and elderly by day and then sipping $350-a-bottle wine by night. Feinberg confronted Ryan after dinner and demanded to know “how he could live with himself.” Confronted by TPM, Ryan did not deny the story, but lamely pleaded ignorance about the cost of the wine. And he was rather ungallant to Ms. Feinberg, whom he called “crazy.”

If there’s any justice in the world, Ryan ought to get at least as much grief for this as Edwards got. And if I were President Obama’s adviser, I’d suggest that he add $350 wine to that line about Republicans defending corporate jets and hedge-fund fat cats.

That would be President “wagyu steak” Obama, of course. The guy who once had a tent put up on the White House lawn for a state dinner, and turned it into a nightclub. Word is, he partied that night like it was 1999 . . . except that everyone was flat broke, ten years later.

The liberal-but-always-fair Tommy Christopher points out, at Mediaite:

This is the kind of story that the political media eats up, like the time John McCain couldn’t remember how many houses he owned while he was calling then-Sen. Barack Obama an elitist, or all of those eco-conscious celebrities who fly around on fossil fuel-guzzling private jets. Fair enough; Ryan was drinking some pretty expensive wine.

However, Washington, DC is just an expensive place to eat, period. That’s why, unless I’m mooching off of a more well-heeled colleague, or there’s an open bar, you’ll always see me nursing a light beer and scarfing bar nuts. If I saw Paul Ryan, or any other legislator, at a place like Bistro Bis with an Amstel Light in hand, I’d probably sneer, “Poseur!”

Be that as it may, I think we all have the right to eat dinner without being annoyed by some other patron of the same upscale restaurant (the federal minimum wage won’t even get you a plate of fries at Bistro Bis) who thinks we’re spending too much on dinner.

Which brings up the question of how Susan Feinberg realized that the wine she saw at a completely different table was as pricey as it was, when Rep. Ryan himself apparently didn’t even know that–he had one glass of it, and was just trying to pay his share by picking up the cost of one of those bottles. There is also the issue of whether it’s “ungallant” to call someone “crazy” who is acting . . . well, a bit crazy.

Though apparently it’s open season on Josh Green; feel free to critique his choices next time you see him having a night on the town. He won’t mind. If he picks up the check for something he isn’t really consuming, that means you should guilt-trip him all the more.

UPDATE: Jimmie Bise has more.

UPDATE 2: Ann Althouse weighs in.

UPDATE 3: James Joyner has some thoughts.

UPDATE 4: Ryan’s accuser may have been drinking $80-a-bottle wine; more at The Examiner.

First « 423424425426427 » Last