Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 03:10 AM | Comments (78)
Post contains 8 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm here from the downtown HQ. I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

And I'm here on a mission of mercy.

So let's talk about something important.

A-B-C.

A-always, B-be, C-commenting. HTML is for tag closers only.

One more thing.

A-I-D-A.

Attention, interest, decision, action. Attention -- do I have your attention? Interest -- are you interested? Decision -- have you made your decision for a topic? And action - are you ready to comment this moment?

Because smart military blog commenting is a game of inches.

And because the ladies get cut-off t-shirts. That's just the way it is.

Where's Joe?

Posted by: Maetenloch at 05:33 PM | Comments (912)
Post contains 567 words, total size 10 kb.

First, a little background.

“Well I think if swing voters in the pro-Israel community had any idea how extreme Media Matters was on issues of Israel and supporters of Israel, they would regard Media Matters as another, you know, Rev. Wright,” Dershowitz told The Daily Caller.

“And for many, many in the pro-Israel community, it would be a game changer.”

../

“When I started reading their stuff it sounded like the kind of stuff you see on neo-Nazi websites,” Dershowitz said. “Or on Hezbollah-supporter websites. It is so extremist. The thing that shocked me is that anybody regarded it as mainstream.”

Media Matters did not respond to a request by TheDC for comment.

Dershowitz said he is not on Media MattersÂ’s email list and is only aware of the language they use when discussing Israel and IsraelÂ’s supporters because of emails sent to him from what he identifies as a neo-Nazi website, ReportersNotebook.

“You know where I get their stuff? I read their stuff mostly on a neo-Nazi website that sends it to me,” he explained. “Somehow I am on their mailing list. I am not on Media Matters’s mailing list. But I tend to read Media Matters articles when they’re sent to me by a neo-Nazi website.”

The man behind ReportersNotebook, Michael Santomauro, denied that his email or blog is neo-Nazi in orientation, though he admits to questioning the narrative of the Holocaust and says he believes that Israel is a fascist state.

I'm not a Nazi, I'm just asking some questions about the "narrative" of the Holocaust and the Fascist Zionist state.

And what's that I hear about bread being baked with the blood of Christian babies? Just saying, every rumor has a kernel of truth to it. Just sayin'.

Then he called Media Matters and the Soros/Podesta front organization CAP the David Duke of the extreme left.

“Media Matters and Center for American Progress are two extremely left-bigoted groups that are so virulently anti-Israel and anti-supporters of Israel that they’ve gone over the line from anti-Zionism to anti-Semitism,” Dershowitz said. ”They now use the term ‘Israel firsters,’ the way anti-Catholic bigots used to use the term ‘Vatican firsters’ or ‘Irish firsters,’ as if to suggest Americans who support Israel have dual loyalty. This false charge goes back to the Bible — goes back to the Book of Esther, goes back thousands of years. It was one of Hitler’s justifications for killing the Jews: ‘Dual loyalty, they’re not good Germans, they’re not good Americans,’ whatever it is.”

Dershowitz has been vocal against Media Matters in recent days, making that charge of anti-Semitism. However, his classification of the Center for American Progress as borderline “anti-Semitic” is noteworthy because both Media Matters and the Center for Progress have received money directly from billionaire left-wing financier George Soros, who has faced similar charges in the past.

“These two organizations have been found to be anti-Semitic by many of the objective monitoring groups,” he said. “And now they are closely associated with the Democratic Party and I have said very clearly there is no room in this tent for me on the one hand, and for Media Matters and for this other group on the other hand."

And he says he will not vote for Obama (he endorsed Obama in 200 if Obama continues his friendly relationship with Media Matters.

LetÂ’s have a full and open debate on this, but to the extent that the Obama administration associates with these bigots [at Media Matters], theyÂ’re going to lose a lot of support among Christians, Jews and others who think that American support for Israel is in the best interest of the United StatesÂ…So donÂ’t confuse these bigots with liberals. TheyÂ’re not. TheyÂ’re extremists, theyÂ’re way, way beyond the pale. And any association with the Obama administration is going to hurt the Obama administration. There is not enough room under the big tent for people like meÂ…and the bigots of Media Matters. The Obama administration is going to have to choose. Â…

I could not vote for anyone who has anything to do with Media Matters, thatÂ’s clear. ThatÂ’s just clear as can be. I will take an oath here that I will not vote for a candidate that has any direct association with Media Matters. ThatÂ’s like asking me to vote for Hezbollah or asking me to vote for Hamas or asking me to vote for the Fascist Party. I wonÂ’t do itÂ…That association has to stop. Just in the same way that President Obama totally terminated his association with the Reverend Wright, he has to terminate any association with Media Matters and with the intellectual thugs who are behind it.

Yeah I wouldn't count on that.

Obama, Incorporated

A subsidiary of George Soros.

Let me get Alan Derschowitz prepared for something:

It's called a paradigm shift. It's going to seem a little weird and scary at first, but it will also be thrilling and ultimately liberating.

A lot of things that have bothered you for sixty years -- which haven't seemed to make sense to you, because your brain was screening the truth from you -- are suddenly going to make a lot of sense indeed. And you're going to be kicking yourself for not seeing it sooner, like an optical illusion that suddenly changes from a lady's face to a candle.

thanks to @rdbrewer4 and @starchambermaid

Posted by: Ace at 03:29 PM | Comments (443)
Post contains 942 words, total size 6 kb.

I missed all this.

Olbermann claimed that what is documented to have happened, did not.

And of course he's doubling down. A later tweet proclaims: "No Occupy Rapes, No Cover-Up, No Apology, No Retraction."

If this sounds demented -- given the thorough documentation of Occupy rapes -- I think Olbermann is claiming that Occupy "outsiders" did the rapes, no actual Occupiers.

Oh: Frothy nothing Tommy Christopher joins Olbermann in claiming, bizarrely, that there were no rapes, and Lee Stranahan knocks him around.

Posted by: Ace at 03:00 PM | Comments (122)
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.

So warned Larry Summers in a 2009 memo warning Obama away from Sonlyndra.

But the government is in the business of politics, not business. These investments were made for political reasons, not business ones.

Like the mythical monster Hydra—who grew two heads every time Hercules cut one off—President Obama, in both his State of the Union address and his new budget, has defiantly doubled down on his brand of industrial policy, the usually ill-advised attempt by governments to promote particular industries, companies and technologies at the expense of broad, evenhanded competition.

Despite his record of picking losers—witness the failed "clean energy" projects Solyndra, Ener1 and Beacon Power—Mr. Obama appears determined to continue pushing his brew of federal spending, regulations, mandates, special waivers, loan guarantees, subsidies and tax breaks for companies he deems worthy.

Favoring key constituencies with taxpayer money appeals to politicians, who can claim to be helping the overall economy, but it usually does far more harm than good. It crowds out valuable competing investment efforts financed by private investors, and it warps decisions by bureaucratic diktats susceptible to political cronyism. Former Obama adviser Larry Summers echoed most economists' view when he warned the administration against federal loan guarantees to Solyndra, writing in a 2009 email that "the government is a crappy venture capitalist."

Markets function well when the returns are received and the risks borne by private owners. There are, of course, exceptions: Governments have a responsibility to fund defense R&D and other forms of pre-competitive, generic R&D—e.g., basic science and technology from nanoscience to batteries—but only when they pass rigorous cost-benefit tests and maintain a level playing field among alternative commercial applications.

On the other hand, political investments go to political allies, to pay for political coverage -- to the tune of four f'n' billion dollars.

Obama paid off his cronies?

Bullshit.

You paid off Obama's cronies.

Obama just wrote the check on your account.

David Gold, a venture capitalist and critic of ObamaÂ’s investments in clean tech, said that even if staffers had been removed from the final decision-making, they had the kind of inside access to exert subtle influence.

“To believe those quiet conversations don’t happen in the hallways — about a project being in a certain congressman’s district or being associated with a significant presidential donor, is naive,” said Gold, who once worked at the Office of Management and Budget. “When you’re putting this kind of pressure on an organization to make decisions on very big dollars, there’s increased likelihood that political connections will influence things.”

The Washington Post notices something JohnE. wrote about six months ago.

Steve Spinner, who helped monitor the Energy Department's issuance of $25 billion in government-backed loans to renewable energy projects, was one of Obama's top fundraisers in 2008 and is raising money for the president's 2012 reelection campaign.

Spinner did not have any role in the selection of applicants for the loan program and, in fact, was recused from the decision to grant a $535-million loan guarantee to Solyndra Inc. because his wife's law firm represented the company, administration officials said Friday.

So, who is she and what is the name of the law firm?

Well, her name is Allison Spinner and she is a partner at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati. She also personally contributed $2,300 to Barack Obama in 2007.

She wasn't the only employee at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati to donate money to Obama's Presidential campaign. A search for donations from individuals with an employer listed as "Wilson Sonsini" and "WSGR" returns over $130,000 in donations. These are donations from individuals, remember. For reference, General Electric donated $529,855 to Obama.

How much did her law firm's clients get from the government?

Oh, a mere $2.75 billion.

Posted by: Ace at 02:48 PM | Comments (63)
Post contains 636 words, total size 5 kb.

Obama's new campaign ad, "The Story of Us," focuses one half its running time on Obama's 2007 campaign.

So we seem to be all agreed: We were in fact better off four years ago, not four years later.

Remember the Glory Days? Right, that was 2007.

Since then...?

Um...

Um....

Had some nice bailouts.

Killed bin Ladin.

Posted by: Ace at 02:21 PM | Comments (123)
Post contains 97 words, total size 1 kb.

In a 1975 interview:

If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Now, I canÂ’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we donÂ’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path.

Santorum of course strongly disagrees and every time Libertarianism is brought up he mocks it and states he's always fought against this pernicious idea that the government should provide freedom to the maximum extent possible.

, "One of the things I will talk about that no President has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea."

And:

, "I am not a libertarian, and I fight very strongly against libertarian influence within the Republican Party and the conservative movement."

Conservatives complain that Romney cannot explain conservatism. He speaks it as a second language. If that.

That's true.

On the other hand, Santorum not only can't speak in terms of a Freedom Agenda, but he expressly repudiates the very concept every single time he's asked about it.

I thought Freedom was a pretty compelling campaign theme.

Time was, most of you thought so too.

But we'll try it your way. We'll see how we do on an avowedly opposite platform.

Posted by: Ace at 12:53 PM | Comments (644)
Post contains 400 words, total size 3 kb.

39%-27%.

Perhaps more tellingly, Santorum now trounces Romney 55% to 34% in a one-on-one matchup among likely GOP primary voters. This is the first time any challenger has led Romney nationally in a head-to-head match-up. Santorum also leads Romney head-to-head in Michigan.

Since the party is determined to make a mistake -- elevating the secondary goal of "Beat Romney" over the primary goal of "Beat Obama" -- I'll cool out on the Santorum stuff.

But when we lose in November... Well, I tried.

Posted by: Ace at 11:24 AM | Comments (943)
Post contains 99 words, total size 1 kb.

Is anyone really offended?

Was it a "great line" in the first place?

I get it, though. Because no Republican in any position of prominence could have used Dana Milbank's lame line -- "All [Democrats] have to offer Hispanics is the chimichanga" -- without experiencing two months of fake, ginned-up "outrage."

Liberals, by definition, are not racist. So if a comment comes along that pushes a stereotype, you must have just misunderstood.

Conservatives, by definition, are racist. So if a similar comment comes along, that's proof of the racism.

But I don't know if doing the same thing in return helps us at all.

But "I Might Have Tacos" Is Racist? The nuanced decisions they make!

I assume the mayor there who said "I might have tacos" as his suggestion for Latino outreach must be a Democrat, as MSNBC studiously refuses to identify his party.

Nope: Rocks says he's a Republican.

So, if a Republican says something similar he gets a national campaign directed against him.

Jim Messina doesn't even issue an apology.

Thanks to @rdbrewer4

Posted by: Ace at 10:16 AM | Comments (303)
Post contains 177 words, total size 1 kb.

Good news: She's out of US politics.

Bad news: She's in global politics. For a long time.

Proof it's true? Jay Carney swears it's not true.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been in discussions with the White House about leaving her job next year to become head of the World Bank, sources familiar with the discussions said on Thursday.

...

"Hillary Clinton wants the job," said one source who knows the secretary well.

A second source also said Clinton wants the position.

A third source said Obama had already expressed support for the change in her role. It is unclear whether Obama has formally agreed to nominate her for the post, which would require approval by the 187 member countries of the World Bank.

Here's a bright side I see: If these positions are typically held by French socialists and fellow travelers, wouldn't Hillary's posting there represent a step up, as far as the American/capitalist interest?

Not saying she's terrifically patriotic or capitalist -- just a step up.

Update: Commenters correct me and say the World Bank is traditionally headed by an American; it's the IMF that's traditionally headed by a French socialist.

So, not a step up.

Posted by: Ace at 09:37 AM | Comments (158)
Post contains 215 words, total size 1 kb.