One of the things I like best about the internet is that it allows one to determine the general makeup of a movement. If the debates between social conservatives and more moderate/libertarian Republicans on-line are any indication of the overall health of the party, then it's going to be an interesting year and a half.

The most surprising thing about this primary season, thus far, is the sustained popularity of Rudy Giuliani among GOP voters. Socially-conservative voters and opinion leaders, such as James Dobson, seem irritated by this trend and have gone out of their way to criticize the former New York City mayor. Social conservative leaders have already declared that if Giuliani is picked as the GOP candidate, they will sit out next year's election (you know, because that worked so well in 2006).

To clarify - I'm not speaking specifically of social conservatives here, but of those who did sit out the election due to frustrations with Republicans on spending, immigration, etc.) Although it should be mentioned that exit polls showed 1/3 of evangelicals voted for the Democrats in 2006 because they were frustrated with scandals. My general point is that sitting out an election and putting a party that generally agrees with you out of power is not helpful in advancing an agenda. Still, I apologize for the lack of clarity.

Before social conservatives start polarizing the party, however, they may want to look at emerging political and demographic trends and what that means for picking a candidate.

Rush Limbaugh, among others, likes to say that if the GOP would only run a candidate in the mold of Ronald Reagan, we would start winning elections again. Reagan is the first president I really remember, and he was a great man.

But he's dead, and there will never be another candidate quite like him. Reagan had a unique blend of traits - he was a man of principle who had the ability to communicate his ideas with humor and style. I would venture to say that people voted for Reagan because he made conservatism attractive, not because they were necessarily conservative themselves. He also won because he was the right man for his time. More on that later.

Reagan was helped by the fact that he ran against two of the most inept Democratic candidates this side of John Kerry - Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale. Still, Reagan ran two great campaigns and accomplished a lot in his eight years.

But he's gone, and conservatives have to let him, and the time in which he was president, go. It's also time to face a very hard fact - the country is trending toward the Democrats. more...

Posted by: Slublog at 12:25 PM | Comments (112)
Post contains 1039 words, total size 6 kb.

Pardon my double-posting.

Posted by: Ace at 12:18 PM | Comments (14)
Post contains 9 words, total size 1 kb.

Dan Rather has sued CBS for breach of contract. He wants $20 million in compensatory damages and $50 million in punitive damages.

In the suit, filed this afternoon in State Supreme Court in Manhattan, Mr. Rather charges that CBS and its executives made him “a scapegoat” in an attempt “to pacify the White House,” though the formal complaint presents virtually no direct evidence to that effect.

I'm still looking for an online copy of Rather's complaint.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 12:14 PM | Comments (21)
Post contains 88 words, total size 1 kb.

If as Auric Goldfinger noted, “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action.” what is 26 times?

Every private entity that Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) favored with an earmark in this yearÂ’s defense bill recently has given political money to the lawmaker, according to an analysis of House Appropriations and federal elections records by Roll Call and Taxpayers for Common Sense.

PACs and employees of those 26 groups together have contributed $413,250 to Murtha since the beginning of 2005. He collected nearly a quarter of the sum — $100,750 — in the two weeks leading up to March 16, the original deadline for lawmakers to file their earmark requests.

Apparently Murtha found some time in his busy schedule of slandering Marines in Iraq to meet with potential “donors”. You know, just like in the old days.

Posted by: DrewM. at 11:43 AM | Comments (13)
Post contains 154 words, total size 1 kb.

If you're so inclined.

Posted by: Ace at 11:20 AM | Comments (20)
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.

I've never been as proud of my boys.

I'm pretty sure I have it in me on an average Wednesday night to cure Parkinson's in an entire zip code.

A man's testicles might be a source of stem cells to help him fight serious diseases, US scientists have shown.

They extracted early-stage sperm cells from mice, then turned them into cells capable of becoming different tissues.

...

The testicular cells do not need to be genetically "tweaked" to behave more like embryonic stem cells, unlike other "adult stem cells" found elsewhere in the body, say the scientists.

...

He listed several illnesses which he hoped could be tackled using stem cell technology, including Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's, stroke, diabetes and even certain cancers.

It is hoped that one day, implanting large quantities of stem cells into tissue damaged by disease could prompt the body to replace it.

There is, of course, a catch:

...

He said: "At present, there is an awful lot of interest in this from veterinary circles as a source of stem cells for animal use.

"I can see more problems getting humans to agree to have this done, as it would be a very painful procedure to have them extracted."

It's all ball bearings nowadays. Maybe you boys need a refresher course.

Via Reliapundit.

Posted by: Ace at 11:15 AM | Comments (21)
Post contains 241 words, total size 2 kb.

I asked Bullwinkle to do this. "Toss my salad" is code for "Not safe for work."

(Not Safe For Work, And Maybe Not Safe For Home, Either Another exclusive from the blogosphere.

Turns out the 600 year old Sunni-Shia split is primarily about syrup versus jelly. Who knew?

I haven't been this excited over a new technology since they started making Legos in non-rectangular shapes.

Posted by: Ace at 10:53 AM | Comments (16)
Post contains 97 words, total size 1 kb.

Nearly a billion dollars bet on a dramatic market downturn will be lost on Sept 21st.

In comment 5 below, Abe explains it's more complex than a bet on a meltdown. It's so complex, actually, that I can't even fathom how to shorthand it.

I think the basic point is "This isn't a bin Laden deal."

Posted by: Ace at 10:21 AM | Comments (29)
Post contains 86 words, total size 1 kb.

Democratic Senator Pat Leahy continues to claim all kinds of disaster that hasn't actually happened regarding habeas corpus. This morning, his "Habeas Corpus Restoration Act," cosponsored by faux-Republican Arlen Specter, was considered by the Senate.

The bill failed to reach cloture 56-43 (which means we'll probably be seeing it again). Notable fence-jumpers on this are Republicans Specter, Chuck Hagel, Richard Lugar, George Smith, Olympia Snowe, and John Sununu. They voted for cloture. Independent Joe Lieberman, in a reversal from his vote on a similar bill last September, was the only non-Republican who voted against.

This isn't encouraging. We are only three votes away from seeing key provisions of the Military Commissions Act undone.

Leahy makes what I will charitably call "errors" in his attempts to gather support for the bill. I hope to spend some time on posts about habeas corpus, but am a little busy right now preparing for an advocacy tournament. For now, see National Review Online's excellent editorial on the topic.

If ever there has been cravenness hidden under bold rhetoric, it is the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007, brainchild of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s senior members, Arlen Specter and Patrick Leahy. This effort to return to the federal district courts the cases of alien enemy combatants held at Guantanamo Bay might more aptly be called the “Avoiding Congressional Accountability Act” — or, as the Brookings Institution’s Benjamin Wittes has tartly suggested, the “Leave It to Justice Kennedy Act.”

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 10:19 AM | Comments (14)
Post contains 259 words, total size 2 kb.

Bonus damage. And Jane's Defense Weekly isn't some flakey Internet rumor site. Doesn't mean it's true, but it's better intelligence than our own idiots can manage.

An accidental explosion in a secret weapons facility in Syria killed dozens of Syrian and Iranian military engineers as they were trying to mount a chemical warhead on a Scud missile in July, a report has claimed.

Fifteen military personnel and “dozens” of Iranian advisers died when the fuel for the missile caught fire and the weapon exploded.

A cloud of chemical and nerve gases, that included the deadly VX and Sarin agents as well as mustard gas, was sent across the facility in the northern city of Aleppo, according to a new report in Jane's Defence Weekly.

The July 26 explosion had been reported earlier by the official Syrian news agency Sana, which said that only 15 Syrian military personnel were killed and 50 others injured in an accident involving “very explosive products.” It made no mention of Iranian officers also being killed in the blast, which it said was not an act of sabotage.

The engineers were trying to weaponise a Syrian-made Scud missile with a range of around 300 miles when the explosion occurred.

The Iranian engineers were working at the facility as part of a 2005 strategic co-operation agreement between the two countries, whose close ties are seen by Israel and the United States as a major threat to regional security.

JaneÂ’s Defence Weekly said the project included Iranian assistance to develop five pilot facilities in Syria to produce chemical weapons, allowing Syria to advance its programme of such non-conventional weapons that it began in the 1970s.

The report coincided with widespread speculation that an audacious Israeli air strike against another Syrian facility two weeks ago may have destroyed a nuclear shipment from North Korea.

Via Dave in Texas.

Here's a sample report along those lines from Drudge.

Posted by: Ace at 09:53 AM | Comments (23)
Post contains 334 words, total size 2 kb.