After President George W. Bush won a second term, the press sulked in defeat. To assuage their disappointment, they tried to find any excuse to snipe at the re-elected president and eagerly seized on the price tag of the inauguration. Take it away, Will Lester:

President Bush’s second inauguration will cost tens of millions of dollars — $40 million alone in private donations for the balls, parade and other invitation-only parties. With that kind of money, what could you buy?

■ 200 armored Humvees with the best armor for troops in Iraq.

■ Vaccinations and preventive health care for 22 million children in regions devastated by the tsunami.

■ A down payment on the nationÂ’s deficit, which hit a record-breaking $412 billion last year....

The questions have come from Bush supporters and opponents: Do we need to spend this money on what seems so extravagant?

Of course state dinners are supposed to be special. But where the Obama/Calderon affair really hit the heights was in the festivities after the dinner, which took place in a huge tent — the word “tent” doesn’t quite do it justice — set up on the South lawn. As the AP reported:

"R&B diva Beyonce topped the entertainment bill for the dinner, taking place in the East Room of the White House, with the action later moving to a luxury marquee on the South Lawn of the presidential mansion. The marquee, the size of two-thirds of a football field, decked out in elaborate black decor and nightclub-style lighting, featured a stage and baskets of flowers and models of Monarch butterflies dangling from the ceiling."

Despite what the Obama administration may claim, this country is in the midst or tail-end of a rather severe recession. There are a lot of people out of work who have to deny themselves much smaller luxuries than the Obamas gave themselves a few evenings ago. Those of us who are employed see a president who has already spent too much for policy spending only for his own pleasure, and we know who is ultimately paying for his parties. Obama doesn't seem to realize, or more likely care, that our hard work pays for his ability to eat Wagyu beef and set up a nightclub on the White House lawn.

The extravagance of the Obamas is bad, but what's almost worse is the double standards of a press corps who only seem capable of outrage when a Republican president is in office. Their unwillingness to highlight or criticize the Obamas for behavior that horrified them when Bush was in office is not surprising, but it is pathetic and infuriating.

(h/t: Hot Air)

Update - Great point by Decaf in the comments: you paid for a party that celebrated the visit of a foreign leader who insulted one of our states in front of our Congress.

Posted by: Slublog at 04:24 PM | Comments (226)
Post contains 545 words, total size 4 kb.

The wonder is that it appeared in the New York Times. One hopes that the light currently dawning on our European Socialist bretheren will also shine down upon our own benighted Progressives. It turns out that comprehensive welfare states are not sustainable, kids.

And Victor Davis Hanson has some thoughts about how one might go about building a resurgent Germany if one were so inclined.

[Edit: Via the eagle-eyed GkBXs, fixed the spelling of Dr. Hanson's last name.]

Posted by: Monty at 03:27 PM | Comments (144)
Post contains 81 words, total size 1 kb.

Just a picture, says more than I can, or need to say.

Congratulations. Godspeed.

via ExJon

ALSO (update): congrats to all the grads out there, and the families who love on em. Well done y'all.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 10:30 AM | Comments (231)
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.

To channel Michael Gerson, at this point, the options for Obama, Menendez and Reid are limited. They will either repudiate Richard Blumenthal's candidacy or they will be tainted by BlumenthalÂ’s lies.

Blumenthal's campaign is still reeling from the controversy caused by his videotaped speech in Norwalk in 2008 in which he said he had served in Vietnam, when actually he served stateside during the war in the Marine Corps Reserve.

"I have made mistakes," Blumenthal told the crowd at the Democratic Party nominating convention in Hartford. "I regret them. And I have taken responsibility. But this campaign must be about the people of Connecticut."

In an acceptance speech that lasted 12 minutes, Blumenthal never once said the word "Vietnam." He did mention his troubles, however.

"This week, as you all know, I had a little bit of a tough time myself," Blumenthal told the crowd. "You all have been hearing what my wife, Cynthia, has been telling me for almost 30 years — that I am not perfect. That I make mistakes."

Mistakes?

Get off at the wrong exit from a highway is a mistake.

Hooking up with an ex after a few too many drinks is a mistake.

Repeatedly saying you served in Vietnam when you didn't? That's a pathological condition.

As Shakespeare wrote in Henry V's St. Crispin Day speech,

And gentlemen in England now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

Is this Blumenthal's way of dealing with that feeling? Was he just trying to gild the lilly when it came to his service?

Don't know, don't care.

Whether or not or you served in a war zone is not something you are unclear on. It's not a trick question. It's a bright line kind of thing.

Aside from his repeated statements on the matter, he let reporters constantly report on his 'Vietnam service'. In his defiant press conference he said he wasn't responsible for correcting mistakes of journalists. Well, he took it upon himself to correct some mistakes.

Mr. Blumenthal is quick to correct unflattering statements published about him or to refute opinions with which he disagrees. One reporter got a call from the attorney general for inserting a middle initial in his name. He has none.

Good to know what his priorities are.

At their convention, Republicans nominated Linda McMahon for the seat. She didn't get enough vote to prevent a primary against former Congressman (and real life Vietnam vet) Rob Simmons.

I know McMahon is a hero for her role in the Blumenthal story but she makes me nervous.

Untested candidates are inherently dangerous but that's doubly true for a woman who has been involved in running a major professional wrestling company. Anyone willing to bet a lot of money there won't be some sordid stories coming out the day after the primary if she wins? Anyone?

Personally, I prefer a nice clear choice between the serial liar and the war hero.

Posted by: DrewM at 10:24 AM | Comments (138)
Post contains 525 words, total size 4 kb.

U.S. District Court Judge Jack Weinstein doesn't give a damn what the law says, nor does he have an interest in meeting his oath.

So, of course, the New York Times gave the progressive jurist a front-page article:

Judge Weinstein, who sits in the United States District Court in Brooklyn, has twice thrown out convictions that would have ensured that the man spend at least five years behind bars. He has pledged to break protocol and inform the next jury about the mandatory prison sentence that the charges carry. And he recently declared that the man, who is awaiting a new trial, did not need an electronic ankle bracelet because he posed “no risk to society.”

Judge Weinstein has gone to extraordinary lengths to challenge the strict punishments, issuing a series of rulings that directly attack the mandatory five-year prison sentence faced by defendants charged with receiving child pornography.

“I don’t approve of child pornography, obviously,” he said in an interview this week. But, he also said, he does not believe that those who view the images, as opposed to producing or selling them, present a threat to children.

“We’re destroying lives unnecessarily,” he said. “At the most, they should be receiving treatment and supervision.”

That's not his call. Congress and the state legislatures get to decide what sentences are appropriate for crimes and the Supreme Court has upheld mandatory minimums as a proper exercise of that legislative power.

Judges are supposed to be bound by their oaths to faithfully support the Constitution and the laws of the United States. But not "progressive" judges. Judge Weinstein thinks he knows better, so he'll squirm every which way to avoid complying with his sworn duty.

Weinstein has been at this for years. Fortunately, I think he's finally hung himself. As the quote above says, he finally gave an interview in which he expressed his belief that folks who view child porn should get "treatment and supervision" instead of the congressionally-mandated five year minimum. If I were a prosecutor who had one of these cases assigned to Weinstein's court, I'd give serious thought to moving for recusal based on his now-public statements and past history.

If Weinstein wants to end the mandatory minimum law, he should run for Congress. His disregard for his duty to uphold the laws and Constitution is a step beyond the typical liberal judicial philosophy into a truly "progressive" belief that the law is what the judge says it is and legislatures can take a hike.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 09:38 AM | Comments (94)
Post contains 453 words, total size 3 kb.

California Republican Darrell Issa posted this compilation of Sestak's charges and months of Gibbsy's refusals to answer yesterday:

It sounds a lot like a crime occurred and the Felon in Chief is getting away with it.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 07:24 AM | Comments (152)
Post contains 52 words, total size 1 kb.

Swiping the Sesame Street theme, take a look at the four pics in the header of this (head's up) NYT story.

If you don't feel like clickin, I'll describe them,

FDR signing the G.I. Bill
LBJ signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (gee I wonder why they picked this?)
Ronald Reagan Showing Why We Must Lower Taxes
Barack Obama signing the Health Care Reform Act

...

These are the examples offered under the lede "A Progressive Agenda to Remake Washington".

Of course Reagan isn't praised in this steaming pile of journalistic analysis, he's blamed for cutting taxes for the rich, cutting social programs and growing the (then anemic) military. But that is just a sidebar in the story, the real point being offered is this:

If there is a theme to all this, it has been to try to lift economic growth while also reducing income inequality. Growth in the decade that just ended was the slowest in the post-World War II era, while inequality has been rising for most of the last 35 years.

Allow me to suggest that part (a) is nonsense, part (b) is precisely the point, only these ninnies do not understand the ramifications of killing the goose.

There's another subtle swipe intended to depress the conservative wave that is building toward November, a shot at Scott Brown's vote on the financial regulation POS.

Still, the turnabout since Jan. 20 — the first anniversary of Mr. Obama’s inauguration and the day after Scott Brown, a Republican, won a Senate seat in liberal Massachusetts — has been remarkable. Then, commentators pronounced the Obama presidency nearly dead. Today, he looks more like a liberal answer to Ronald Reagan.

It's a pretty nice little jujitsu move, deflecting the loss of Kennedy's seat to a Republican with some RINO red meat, I'll give them that. And for those of us who want so much to put a stop to Obama's agenda, kinda frustrating. Scott Brown is not Ronald Reagan, but neither is he Ted Kennedy. The sisters and Scott will piss us off a few times, but hey, Arlen won't anymore.

I see that as a net gain, not a net loss. I'm willing to take "the needle's amoving the other way" and accept that "there's aways to go" (we Texans love to mutilate language).

I'm prepared to take the long look. The landscape has changed. Granted, largely because a completely Democrat controlled Congress and White House have shoved their agenda down the throats of America. But a majority of Americans surely are rejecting their crap.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 06:19 AM | Comments (114)
Post contains 445 words, total size 3 kb.

I got appendicitis one fall when I was fourteen years old, and ended up being fairly immobilized for most of a week. Even then I wasn't much of a fan of television, and we didn't have any videogames, so I found myself quickly being bored out of my skull. My mom -- always more observant than I gave her credit for -- one day brought me home a big box of paperback books she'd bought at a garage sale for a buck and a half.

At first I was leery: what kind of books would my mom pick out? Romances? I didn't want to seem ungrateful, but I wasn't hopeful. As I dug through the books, though, I quickly discovered that my mom had brought me home a treasure-chest.

Most of the books were action or sci-fi books from the "golden age": Doc Savage, Man of Bronze, E. E. Howard's Conan books, the Travis McGee novels by John D. McDonald, and the "robot" novels by Isaac Asimov. But the most wonderful books in the bunch were the old proto-sci-fi books by Edgar Rice Burroughs: the John Carter of Mars books. I read The Princess of Mars and The Gods of Mars that week, and dreamed of Barsoom and lissome alien princesses. I could never go back to my Tarzan books with the same enthusiasm after that.

Asimov's "Robot" books remain my favorites to this day as well: Lije Bailey and R. Daneel Olivaw are two of the classic characters in both sci-fi and detective literature. The box contained Caves of Steel and The Naked Sun; much later, in college, I read The Robots of Dawn.

I thought I was going to be stuck in my room, in pain, watching the minutes and hours creep by. Instead, I spent the entire week adventuring on Barsoom, solving crimes with a sentient robot on a future Earth, and kicking bad-guy ass as Doc Savage, Man of Bronze.

What books got you into reading, Morons?

Posted by: Monty at 04:32 AM | Comments (329)
Post contains 343 words, total size 2 kb.

Friday, Friday, Friday and not a moment too soon.

The Guys Who Can Walk On Water
Here's part of a documentary about some guys in Europe who've discovered that with with the right equipment, speed and technique, they're able to run and 'skip' themselves on water. They call it 'liquid mountaineering' and eventually hope to be able to run across an entire river. Are they on to something or is it all a big spoof - you decide.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:16 PM | Comments (1059)
Post contains 613 words, total size 6 kb.

I think I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around this story because there's no way to match this "free condoms from the school nurse" thing with the nice rural Oklahoma town I grew up in. It just wouldn't compute.

At our nation's capital though:

High school students and college-age adults have been complaining to District officials that the free condoms the city has been offering are not of good enough quality and are too small and that getting them from school nurses is "just like asking grandma or auntie."

So D.C. officials have decided to stock up on Trojan condoms, including the company's super-size Magnum variety, and they have begun to authorize teachers or counselors, preferably male, to distribute condoms to students if the teachers complete a 30-minute online training course called "WrapMC" -- for Master of Condoms.

"If people get what they don't want, they are just going to trash them," said T. Squalls, 30, who attends the University of the District of Columbia. "So why not spend a few extra dollars and get what people want?"

REALLY? REALLY?

If you got a whole bunch of people who shouldn't be having sex it would be teens and college-age students who need free condoms—2.5 million condoms in FY2010 so far.

REALLY?

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:38 PM | Comments (242)
Post contains 255 words, total size 2 kb.