Archive for the ‘Republicans’ Category
Members of the media can’t notice Joe Biden’s
brain farts malapropisms, but they’re outraged that Marco Rubio sips water.
Behold the Marco Rubio water bottle,
“Send the liberal detractors a message that not only does Marco Rubio inspire you. … He hydrates you too,”
First, the luncheon menu was 3,000 calories:
Steamed Lobster with New England Clam Chowder Sauce
New England Clam Chowder Sauce
Sweet Potato Hay
Per Serving: Calories 783, Fat 45.7g, Saturated Fat 16g, Cholesterol 247 mg, Sodium 1819 mg, Carbohydrates 55g, Dietary Fiber 7.5g, Sugar 14g, Protein 29g
Hickory Grilled Bison with Red Potato Horseradish Cake and Wild Huckleberry Reduction
Butternut Squash Puree
Baby Golden Beets and Green Beans
Red Potato Horseradish Cake
Strawberry Preserve and Red Cabbage
Wild Huckleberry Reduction
Per Serving: Calories 1184, Fat 34.6g, Saturated Fat 16g, Cholesterol 177mg, Sodium 7445mg, Carbohydrates, 149g, Dietary Fiber 16.7, Sugar 97.2g, Protein 51g
Hudson Valley Apple Pie with Sour Cream Ice Cream, Aged Cheese and Honey
Sour Cream Ice Cream
Maple Caramel Sauce
Per Serving: Calories 1060, Fat 64.4g, Saturated Fat 39g, Cholesterol 331mg, Sodium 488mg, Carbohydrates, 108.5g, Dietary Fiber 1.7g, Sugar 75g, Protein 14g
Total Nutritional Counts (not including booze pairing): Calories 3027, Fat 145 g, Saturated Fat 71g (49% of fat), Sodium 9752 mg, Total Carbs 312.5g, Sugar 186.2g (59% of carbs)
And the eye roll,
Can’t you see I’m eating?
Before the election, it was never mentioned. Now they’re even talking about it on the Weather Channel.
Steven Hayward sums my feelings in one sentence: DUMB AND DUMBER: THE STUPID PARTY MARCHES ON.
Go read the whole thing.
Famed political scientist Harvey Mansfield is the WSJ’s weekend interview,
The Crisis of American Self-Government
Harvey Mansfield, Harvard’s ‘pet dissenter,’ on the 2012 election, the real cost of entitlements, and why he sees reason for hope.
‘We have now an American political party and a European one. Not all Americans who vote for the European party want to become Europeans. But it doesn’t matter because that’s what they’re voting for. They’re voting for dependency, for lack of ambition, and for insolvency.”
For those who want to split hairs as to which European party, essentially all European politicians and their parties embrace dependency on government-funded social programs, be them public-funded college educations, pensions, or medical care.
The welfare state’s size isn’t what makes it so stifling, Mr. Mansfield says. “What makes government dangerous to the common good is guaranteed entitlements, so that you can never question what expenses have been or will be incurred.” Less important at this moment are spending and tax rates. “I don’t think you can detect the presence or absence of good government,” he says, “simply by looking at the percentage of GDP that government uses up. That’s not an irrelevant figure but it’s not decisive. The decisive thing is whether it’s possible to reform, whether reform is a political possibility.”
What does he want the Republicans to do?
Conservatives should be the party of judgment, not just of principles,” he says. “Of course there are conservative principles—free markets, family values, a strong national defense—but those principles must be defended with the use of good judgment. Conservatives need to be intelligent, and they shouldn’t use their principles as substitutes for intelligence. Principles need to be there so judgment can be distinguished from opportunism. But just because you give ground on principle doesn’t mean you’re an opportunist.”
Nor should flexibility mean abandoning major components of the conservative agenda—including cultural values—in response to a momentary electoral defeat. “Democrats have their cultural argument, which is the attack on the rich and the uncaring,” Mr. Mansfield says. “So Republicans need their cultural arguments to oppose the Democrats’, to say that goodness or justice in our country is not merely the transfer of resources to the poor and vulnerable. We have to take measures to teach the poor and vulnerable to become a little more independent and to prize independence, and not just live for a government check. That means self-government within each self, and where are you going to get that except with morality, responsibility and religion?”
Words to live by, indeed.
Here’s a selection of Mansfield’s books:
Cross-posted at Liberty Unyielding.
The White House plan:
- $1.6 trillion in tax increases over 10 years,
- more spending right now: $50 billion in immediate stimulus spending, CORRECTION: $200 billion in stimulus
- home mortgage refinancing and
- a permanent end to Congressional control over statutory borrowing limits.
In exchange for locking in the $1.6 trillion in added revenues, President Obama embraced the goal of finding $400 billion in savings from Medicare and other social programs to be worked out next year, with no guarantees.
The decision to present this absurdly one-sided proposal comes straight from the Obama playbook. Recall that the president has presented budgets so ridiculous that they could not garner even one Democratic vote in Congress. Republicans then presented detailed budgets that, unlike the president’s, actually address the debt crisis. Obama responding by demagoguing the Republican cuts.
Republicans shouldn’t play this game again. They should tell the White House to eliminate the stimulus spending and the proposal to end Congressional control over statutory borrowing limits, and to propose detailed and significant spending cuts. If the White House declines to do so, Republicans should walk away.
Making the Senate present a budget for the first time in 3 years would be a good start, too.
Ezra Klein thinks the Republicans should now propose their own. Ezra, where’s the Dems’ budget?
Don’t forget: The man now engaged with Congress to work out a grand deal is the same one who could not pull over to his side a single Republican vote for his stimulus legislation, who had to ram through ObamaCare with procedural tricks, and whose inept handling of last year’s debt-ceiling talks ultimately led his fellow Democrat, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, to isolate him from the final negotiations. This is not a history to inspire confidence.
Mr. Obama’s tendency to campaign rather than lead, to speechify rather than negotiate, has already defined this lame-duck session. The president has wasted weeks during which a framework for a deal has been in place.
Within two days of the election, Mr. Boehner had offered an enormous compromise, committing the GOP to provide new tax revenue, through limits on deductions for the wealthy. Mr. Obama campaigned on making “the rich” pay more—and that is exactly what Mr. Boehner agreed to give him.
All that was left for the president to do was accept this peace offering, pair it with necessary spending cuts, and take credit for averting a crisis. Mr. Obama has instead spent the past weeks campaigning for tax-rate hikes. He wants the revenue, but collected only the way he chooses. And on the basis of that ideological insistence alone, the nation is much closer to a crisis.
Then again, the most frightening aspect of the White House proposal is that it wasn’t an error. Perhaps the proposal was thoroughly calculated. This suggests a president who doesn’t care about the outcome of the cliff negotiations—who thinks that he wins politically no matter what. He’s betting that either the GOP will be far more responsible than he is and do anything to avert a crisis, or that the cliff gives him the tax hikes his partisans are demanding. Win-win, save for the enormous pain to average families across the country.
Not that Obama gives a rat’s behind. He’s going on vacation. Besides, the Democrats are completely convinced that if no deal is reached, the Bush tax cuts expire, and sequestration takes effect, Republicans will get most of the blame.
Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I’m not sure we’ll ever be able to answer that. It’s one of the great mysteries.
Marco Rubio may be the future of the Republican Party, but his views on science appear to be stuck somewhere in the seventeenth century.
Nor’easter heading our way. If we lose electricity, we can take comfort that the POTUS will be playing basketball.
Last night I watched on line the Romney rally in Yardley, PA, 15 miles away from here. It was a complete surprise to me: For starters, it was cold (upper 30s/low 40s), hundreds of people in Bucks County were flooded and had no electricity or heat since Sandy struck on Monday, and most importantly, Bucks was Obamaland.
PowerLine has a report from an attendee,
The crowd was enormous. The first picture attached was of the line at security. That “line” is about 50 people abreast — off to the left you can see one half of one tent; there were two, side by side, filled edge to edge with metal detectors — and it wasn’t yet 4 PM. Traffic was backed up for miles, literally, on nearby I-95. And people kept coming. And coming. And coming. The crowd was upbeat and feisty — two signs I recall were “No Heat/No Power/and in two days/No Obama,” and “Buck Ofama.”
As of this writing I have heard no official crowd size estimates. I have no relevant training, and unlike, say, Red Rocks, there was no vantage point from which you could see the entire crowd. The rally was in a large field, and the crowd simply sprawled in three directions. My estimate, based on other crowd estimates, is that eventually there were about 25k people there, not counting ones I couldn’t see because they came very late and trailed off in the darkness, and not counting the several thousand who had no tickets and watched from outside the Hurricane fence. The second picture was taken from my vantage point during the Romney presentation — and there were at least as many people behind me as there were in front. And at least equal numbers directly in front of him, and the same off to his left front.
And it was cold. In the upper 30s, which doesn’t sound so bad in the abstract, but it was bitterly cold to people who had been standing in the cold for hours, and especially bitter to folks who had had no heat for almost a week. With a brisk wind to add to the misery. The wait grew longer and longer. And to be blunt, the Marshall Tucker Band had limited success perking up the waiting throng, and the speakers who stood up next — former Governor Tom Ridge, Senator Pat Toomey, and current Governor Tom Corbett — had a little more success, especially Corbett. But Corbett ran out of anecdotes, and the crowd became silent and stolid. After an interval, a pair of Romney videos played, well received, but after they ended, the same stolid silence descended. I was beginning to fear the rally would be a bust. But nobody left; like the next stage of enduring the hurricane and the aftermath, everyone simply waited quietly in the cold.
And then the bus appeared.
And then the cheering started.
Ragged at first, the cheers swelled to a roar as the Romney campaign bus wheeled into the arena. Mitt and Ann Romney emerged, and it was like a wall of sound fell on the crowd. The Romneys strode to the stage, embraced, and after immediate pleasantries, Ann introduced Mitt.
I keep hearing how wooden Romney is on the stump. They must have meant some other Romney. This one was fluid, his voice at turns powerful and emotional. I don’t know how the crowd noise came across on TV, but in person, it was its own physical presence, vibrating everyone with its intensity. Except when Romney grew sober when relating a sad anecdote; then the crowd simply disappeared, for both the speaker and the listener. A rousing crescendo of a conclusion by Romney, capped off by a surprisingly good fireworks display, and the rally was over. It took some people more than three hours to escape the traffic.
Romney didn’t say anything new. But he connected with the crowd on both emotional and intellectual levels. The man oozes resolve and commitment the way steelworkers ooze sweat. He clearly loves America, and radiates that love, in counterpoise to Obama, whose distaste for the nation remains palpable. (You can’t hate half the nation, urge your supporters to take *revenge* on half the nation, and still love the place and the people.) Based on the crowd size and reaction in a county that went solidly for Obama four years ago, based on the confidence of the man, I would say it’s likely Romney will indeed win Pennsylvania — and with it, the presidency. While you’d expect rally attendees to favor the candidate, their enthusiasm was something I did not sense at a McCain rally four years ago — and even after Romney’s rally, even after hours standing without seats in the cold, the attendees I spoke with were still bubbling with enthusiasm.
Over in Ohio, Mitt got 30,000, Obama 2,800.
But fear not, Obama has the coveted Pee Wee Herman endorsement. That ought to count for something.
Email from a reader: The rally was announced on Friday afternoon.
And, one more thing,
I don’t know if gas stations are back to normal in Bucks, but in adjacent Mercer Co., NJ, they are definitely not. Risking a long wait without assurance of available gas means you have a most motivated voter.
Last night was the last presidential debate of 2012. Here’s the full transcript, and the full video,
Heritage Experts Analyze Final Presidential Debate, and they discuss
- Cutting the Defense Budget
- The Navy and Number of Ships Needed
- Defense Readiness Is Key to America’s Role in the World
- Jobs on the Home Front
- Federal Pay for Education Employees Won’t Create Jobs
- The U.S. Place in the World
My two cents:
- Obama doesn’t understand the difference between Chapter 11 bankruptcy and total liquidation; Romney does.
- Romney is the one who’s aware of opportunities in Latin America,
Number two, we’re going to increase our trade. Trade grows about 12 percent year. It doubles about every — every five or so years. We can do better than that, particularly in Latin America. The opportunities for us in Latin America we have just not taken advantage of fully. As a matter of fact, Latin America’s economy is almost as big as the economy of China. We’re all focused on China. Latin America is a huge opportunity for us — time zone, language opportunities.
Obama let that one fly right by, as his administration blissfully ignores our hemisphere.
- No one brought up the European Union (Greece, yes).
- Iran’s hyperinflation situation was not mentioned; it may, however, prove to be a critical factor on the regime’s viability. Iran was the country most mentioned during the debate.
- Obama demanded sequestration as part of the budget deal. Oh yeah.
- Obama came across as “snarky, condescending, peevish, & small.”
Contrary to the president’s assertion, the creation of aircraft carriers and submarines did not mean that we needed fewer ships. Quite the contrary. Aircraft carriers need just as many if not more supporting vessels than the obsolete battleships that no are no longer under commission. So do subs. The decline in naval strength compromises America’s ability to project power abroad. That is particularly true in places like the Persian Gulf, where President Obama is trying to sound as tough with Iran as Romney.
Even more foolish is the president’s attempt to portray contemporary naval vessels with cavalry horses. That says more about his own lack of understanding of the military than Romney’s. It also may cost him some votes in a state that he still hopes to win: Virginia, home of the largest U.S. Naval base in the country and hotbed of support for a stronger military.
Today, though only DSRV’s and ROV’s require a support vessel for operations, independent submarines are still referred to as boats not only due to the historical term, but the fact that they still require support from a Submarine Tender while in homeport for repairs and maintenance the crew cannot perform.
And, finally, the bayonets,