A column by David Limbaugh is now being parroted by the Establishment Republican Media as the Litany Against McCain. It serves as the ERM's Test of the Faith; to wit:
A Conservative does not criticize a sitting Republican president, ever, regardless of the effect of said President's actions on the national security.
A Conservative always supports tax cuts, even when a Republican Congress cannot not restrain its spending.
A Conservative believes that the problem of illegal aliens can be solved by literally rounding up millions of people in the United States and deporting them, with no possibility of mistakes nor violation of liberties of American citizens, nor consideration of extenuating circumstances (such as members of the Armed Forces with illegal alien parents).
A Conservative tortures enemy captives to extract information, regardless of the quality of said information.
A Conservative tears up the rules of the Senate, regardless of unintended consequences such as loss of the protection of said rules when Republican control of the Senate is lost.
A Conservative cannot believe in climate change, and cannot disagree with the Republican Establishment on environmental issues.
A Conservative cannot criticize the political positions adopted by Evangelical Christian groups.
A Conservative cannot criticize corporations. Theodore Roosevelt was mistaken in his "trust busting".
We just want make sure we've got it straight.
Come 'an Git It!
Uncle Sugar Daddy has backed the truck up and is tossing the hams out on the curb. The Old Folks might get hams, too. Our Gummint knows no bounds in its generosity; just send the bill to the kids.
Not Unexpected.
In an effort to make every delegate count - for her - Hillary starts pulling the strings to get the Michigan and Florida delegates reinstated for the party convention.
Monday, January 21, 2008
MLK's "Knock at Midnight" Sermon.
Bill Bennett featured this sermon on his MLK Day show. This sermon is quite prescient of our many present-day afflictions.
Hot Air points us to an article in the Tuscon Citizen about Mexican legislators complaining that the strong new Arizona law on businesses hiring illegals is leading to an excessive number of illegals returning to Mexico. One would hope the incongruity of this complaint will ultimately hit these distinguished representatives of the great Mexican state of Sorona like a 2x4 to the back of the head...but don't hold your breath.
Some Warning Symptoms of McCain Derangement Syndrome.
Associative Cognitive Dissonance - patient rants incessantly that McCain's stand on the Bush tax cuts demonstrated lack of conservative beliefs, while ignoring or dismissing runaway spending by Establishment Republican Congress. Foams at mouth about McCain's betrayal of 1st Amendment while exhibiting memory lapse about GWB signing same legislation (GWB stated at signing, "I believe that this legislation, although far from perfect, will improve the current financing system for Federal campaigns").
Must find McCain's life and character completely deficient, leading to citing dubious sources regarding the Senator's military record. This symptom may indicate patient need to view another's behavior as unassailably good or irredeembly evil. This symptom can also indicate Rushannitingrahamoulterlevine Worship.
Cannot project future consequences of beliefs or actions. For example, patient finds that it is sufficient to merely insist that *all* illegal aliens must return to native lands immediately, yet cannot articulate realistic and actionable plan to do so, and refuses to admit that present situation is defacto amnesty.
Must adhere to a strict orthodoxy, very similar to patients with BDS. For example, cannot permit other conservatives to advocate environmental stewardship since this entire topic has been historically deemed a concern only of the neo-Luddite Left.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
McCain Derangement Syndrome.
Michelle Malkin and Laura Ingraham, please call your offices. Also, the National Review begins its journey of denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Nightcrawlers in Carolina, and a Fruitcake Returns.
The worms are crawling around in SC; another anti-McCain smear campaign is being circulated by "Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain" (no link deserved). Coincidentally, Ross Perot emerged from his bunker recently to call Newsweek's Jonathan Alter, dishing the dirt on McCain. Hmmm.
Monday, January 14, 2008
McCain Taking Flak, or, The Conservative Crack-Up.
Michelle Malkin really, really dislikes John McCain. Witness the video above, posted to her blog, the second in her series "McCain Gets Booed". This allegedly documents the deep revulsion that "conservatives" have for John McCain. Of course, the most precious ox of Malkin's to be gored by McCain is his alleged softness on the illegal alien problem.
This revulsion toward John McCain, regrettably, does exist. We've encountered it in many blogs and opinion columns, and heard it on many radio talk shows. It is attributed to McCain's heresies against important conservative policy positions. The correct positions appear to have been established by self-appointed protectors of the faith, based on little if any dialogue on these issues by conservatives.
We've previously discussed two of his heresies, immigration and judicial appointments. We will use the immigration issue to demonstrate how the dialogue between different but legitimately conservative points of view has been silenced.
If one is intellectually honest, then one may state that it is more true than not that the Republican candidate's positions on illegal immigration are equivalent. Short of brutal - and, we argue, unAmerican - tactics, we must face the fact of assimilating some millions of people that are here illegally. Not all, certainly. First, there is a border to be "sealed". There are criminals that must be deported, heavy fines to be imposed on businesses knowingly violating the law, penalties to be paid by illegals, reform of identification and documentation bureaucracies, and hardball to be played with Mexico.
The actions described above will lead to millions of illegals to leave, and all of the candidates agree with these initiatives. For those millions of illegals that can and chose to remain, the federal government must choose one of two courses of action. Course One is to rapidly and agressively track down these remaining people and force them to leave regardless of their circumstances. Course Two is to begin naturalization and assimilation for those who step forward for documentation, and deportation of those who refuse and are discovered over time.
The first course of action has appeal to some conservatives; it can swiftly restore the "rule of law" and the essential sense that the federal government is protecting the physical and economic well-being of its citizenry from foreign threats. There are costs, too. It will appear as a police-state action, it will likely trigger an enormous amount of litigation that will choke an already suffocating court system, it will consume an enormous amount of military and law-enforcement resources, and there will be circumstances of true injustice and tragedy where we must measure whether we have lived up to our frequently-proclaimed Judeo-Christian ethics and the conservative tenet of non-interference of government in the lives of its citizens (for some citizens will be caught in this mess).
The second course of action avoids the drawback of the first, and does with time (perhaps too much time) bring normalcy to immigration and border security. However, it does cheat those wanting to become citizens who have followed the rule of law and have waited their turn. Those persons may continue to wait or ultimately be denied naturalization.
There are legitimate points for advocacy and opposition for both options by conservatives. However, the debate between these options was stillborn and the "conservative orthodoxy" became a emphatic call for the Draconian Option One, but with no acknowledgment of its drawbacks nor any real plan to implement it. It seems to have just to felt good take the "angry path". Was this adhering to true conservatism or rather mere populism, with a generous dollup of hyperbole for entertainment?
After much thought and consideration, we at Deaddrifts feel that the most sound conservative approach to solve the illegal alien issue is following Option Two. We mourn the fact that a legitimate discussion of this issue has not taken among conservatives. A loss for our movement, and a symptom of a growing sclerosis within it.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
The Knives are Drawn - I.
The self-appointed Mullahs of Conservative Doctrine (as they interpret it, of course) have drawn out their knives are going after John McCain* (for example). Here is the list of his offenses that the Mullahs find most egregious:
Immigration. The fracas of this fall's failed immigration reform left the stain that Mac supports amnesty for and is generally soft on illegal aliens. McCain did learn from this debacle that the problem of illegals now in the country cannot be addressed until the inflow of illegals is stopped (for the sake of intellectual honesty, this means ending all sources of illegal entry, such as expired visas, as well as physical border protection). McCain claims to have heard this message loud and clear. He advocates harsh penalties for businesses that knowingly hire illegals, deportation of illegals with criminal records, and a process to work out the rest of the disastrous mess caused by two decades of neglect. A true conservative would advocate that this process must be congnizant of an individual's freedoms and civil liberties, but many public conservative voices seek to kindle a directionless anger about the presence of illegal aliens with silence on the details as to how to implement a realistic path for repatriation or assimilation and citizenship. It's easy just to say no, but the problem is still there, and McCain is correct in saying that doing nothing on this part of the problem is de facto amnesty.
It is asserted that "Gang of 14" blocked appointment of conservative judges. Not so. What the "Gang of 14" refers to is the compromise reached by certain Senators to enable, without altering Senate rules on filibusters, Bush judicial nominations to be voted on. The result was that John Roberts and Sam Alito were confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court and a number of conservatives were confirmed to the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Absent the compromise, the Chuckie Schumer Democrat filibuster was halting the confirmation of Bush nominations. The only other alternative to the compromise was the so-called constitutional option altering filibuster rules. We do not know that it would have worked. We do know that with the compromise, critically important confirmations were achieved and the fillibuster rules were preserved for a time when there would be a Democrat Congress, which in fact was elected in 2006. At this point it is Chuckie Schumer who is complaining that it was the Democrats who got snookered by the compromise...
Mitt Romney has been trumpeting his 'git-er-done' record on taxes and budgeting. But as Annenberg's Fact Check shows, the record is not quite as good as Mitt claims:
Romney doubled "fees" (read TAXES) and changed corporate tax structures that hiked taxes by $500M.
Romney submitted budgets that cut personal income taxes. However, none of those budgets were adopted by the Massachusetts Legislature. Their state tax rate still stands at a flat 5.3%.
His budget cutting was essentially window dressing ($10M) except for cuts to higher and primary education ($400M)
He was able to close a $1.2B budget shortfall - no easy feat - but not the $3B he claims.
Romney has pounded McCain on his lack of faith on the Bush tax cuts, but the Republican Congress of 2001-2006 went hog wild with spending to cement their hold on power and paid the price. This is a real source of congnitive dissonance with many in the GOP who love cutting taxes but also love pork patronage.
Saturday, January 05, 2008
Huck's Tax Record.
The Annenberg Political Fact Check look's at Mike's tax record in Arkansas. The verdict: he did raise taxes and cut taxes, while state spending did increase under his adminstration (about 50% in eight years, well above the rate of inflation). Our irritation with Huck on this issue is not his lack of tax cut piety (more piety would be good), but in denying paternity of the tax hikes. Not the most chiseled profile in political courage.
Ending the official holiday season with a glass of port, a CAO Italia Ciao, a brisk walk in the winter's night, and listening to the Vienna Philharmonic's New Year's Day Concert. God bless us, everyone. Cue the Radetzky March!
Continued Rotting of Local Radio.
Lucy Ann Lance has been cashiered by the new owners of WAAM, ending her very popular local morning radio show. Also fired is her producer and operations manager. One reporter will be left to cover local news and events. Lucy's show will be replaced by syndicated dreck.
How much does it cost to start up and run a 500-watt station?