The Laughable-And Predictable-Weinerquiddick Reaction From The Left

Yes, I’m calling it Weinerquiddick, not Weinergate. I caught a tweet in passing yesterday that said:

And I suddenly realized what good advice that was. Henceforth, I will label no scandal with the suffix “gate”. I prefer “quiddick” over “aquiddick”, though. Seems to flow a little better. Hence, Weinerquiddick.

If you were out, I don’t know, having a life, this weekend, you missed Weinerquiddick, so I’ll summarize. Someone sent a lewd picture from Congressman Anthony Weiner’s (D-NY-09) twitter account to a young woman in Washington state. Weiner claims his account was hacked, but the improbability bar seems pretty high on that one. If you’re interested in who sent the pic, to whom, why, and how, start with the links I’ve posted and do some digging.

At this moment, I’m more interested in the reaction by the left and by the MSM (I know, I repeat myself) to this emerging story. It’s made me laugh and cry all at the same time, more than once. The reaction from the MSM has been to largely ignore the story. It took almost 24 hours for the AP to release anything on the story, and it looks like only CBS has run with the AP story. At least according to my Bing search as of this minute.

As for the left-wing blogosphere, they have gone ballistic over the story, but not attacking Congressman Weiner, begging him to come clean. No, the source of their anger is the Twitterer who caught the offending tweet, and Andrew Breitbart, for daring to publish the information about it.

I won’t say that Weiner definitely did this. His story is not completely impossible, just incredibly implausible. But this reaction, as I implied in my title, is typical of the left. When a scandal emerges regarding one of their own, the MSM suddenly becomes like The Three Wise Monkeys:

MoveOn, nothing to see here, nothing to hear, nothing to talk about.

Meanwhile,  the left wing attack dogs go after the source, trying to destroy the credibility of a Twitterer and a respected right wing journalism site. They have their Alinsky playbook out and they’re following it step-by-step. At this point, it’s become as easy to them as color by numbers.

Think this is a one time thing? Do you remember John Edwards? The MSM ignored that story for as long as they possibly could, trying very hard to pretend it didn’t exist so it would go away. Meanwhile, the left wing blogosphere did everything possible to discredit the source of the story, the National Enquirer. Now, I’m not saying that the Enquirer should be at the top of anyone’s “reliable sources” list. They predicted the imminent breakup of President George W. Bush (R-USA) and Laura more times than I can count. But they are capable of getting a story right. And it was evident from the very beginning, to anyone who bothered following up on the story, that the Enquirer had something. It just wasn’t absolutely certain what exactly they had. There was a ton of smoke, and some fire there. But the MSM was not interested in following up. Even such new media sites as Wikipedia were circling the wagons. I remember monitoring Edwards’ Wikipedia page during that time and arguing vehemently that, at the very least, the story about the scandal should appear in his bio, as it was relevant to his VP consideration. The editors were adamant that not one word would appear.

Now, consider a right wing “scandal”. I’ll just pick one, a prominent one, and how it was handled.

The New York Times ran a front page exposé on an alleged affair between John McCain and a staffer, on considerably less evidence (in fact, none) than either the John Edwards incident or this Weiner one. So little evidence that they were later forced to retract a page one story.

As I keep saying, there is a possibility that Weiner is telling the truth. And frankly, it wouldn’t take much in the way of good investigative journalism to get some more details and find out. Go talk to some people in Seattle, talk to Weiner himself, find out how his account was compromised, and what he did to secure it afterwards. Talk to his aides. Pass around a few pictures of Benjamin Franklin. People will talk. They always do.

However, I have little confidence that this will happen. The MSM could have done all this during the Edwards affair. They could have done it with McCain before running a front page piece that they would later have to admit was a lie. They could have done all these things, and they could do the right things in this case. But they won’t. The MSM is no longer interested in journalism or objective reporting. They’re interested in protecting the left and attacking the right. They are the PR wing of the Democratic party. If these three incidents don’t prove that to you, nothing will. And, sadly, I could probably spend two days on research and come up with over 100 more examples. It wouldn’t be that hard.

In Memoriam

 

Please click through to this link, and remember the fallen heroes that made today’s backyard barbecue possible.

Thank you for your service to our country, servicemen. Whether you’re living, dead, KIA, MIA, POW, I salute you, and honor you, today and every day.

One Of The Many Reasons I Can’t EVER Support Mitt Romney

I’m fairly libertarian when it comes to personal rights, and conservative when it comes to most else. I’m a strong believer in the the Constitution and Bill of Rights, particularly amendments 1, 2, 4, 9, and 10. Ok, all of them.

Anyway, I’m not incredibly far to the right, although I’ve drifted farther there over the last few years. Having said all that, I’ve been able to vote in Presidential elections since 1988, and every single GOP Presidential candidate that I’ve gotten to vote for has been to the left of me. I’m tired of being forced to vote for people who don’t represent my views. After McCain I promised myself that I wouldn’t do it again. I realize that this is likely a promise that I’ll break someday, but it won’t be in 2012.

Also, I firmly believe that these centrist Republicans are destroying the party. The biggest reason that the GOP lost in 2006 and 2008 wasn’t because they lost the independents, but because they lost the base. President George W. Bush (R-USA) did many things right, but he did many things wrong too, and people like me got tired of big government conservatism. Sometimes I still wonder if Senator John McCain (R-AZ) might have turned out to be a worse President than President Barack Obama (D-USA). At least with Obama in the White House, we generally have a pretty unified GOP fighting against him. McCain would have wanted to implement many of the same types of policies as Obama, and the GOP would’ve gone right along with their leader. And that would’ve dispirited the base even further.

Instead, what we got in 2010 was a fired up, energized, and angry base. A base that has had enough of big government and just wants it to STOP.

Former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) is far to the left of me. Everyone knows all about RomneyCare by now, which was the model for ObamaCare. But even if I could forgive him for that (I can’t), he showed off his big government credentials in Iowa again today.

Talking to an Iowa voter, Romney said, “I support the subsidy of ethanol. I believe ethanol is an important part of our energy solution for this country.”

Romney held the same position in 2008.

He also was evasive regarding Congressman Paul Ryan’s (R-WI-01) plan.

Romney declined to say whether, if he were president, he would sign into law the GOP Medicare plan authored by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) — something that a rival, former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, said Thursday he would do.

“That’s the kind of speculation that is getting the cart ahead of the horse,” Romney told reporters. “I’m going to propose my own plan, and my plan will be somewhat different than what the Paul Ryan plan is, but I support the objectives of the Paul Ryan plan, which is keeping Medicare alive, keeping it solvent and keeping the nation solvent.”

I don’t know if he’s just avoiding sticking his neck out against political pressure, or if he’s not interested in a smaller cleaner government (I suspect both), but this kind of squishiness frustrates me. Yes, I know that it’s politically risky in Iowa to come out against ethanol subsidies. But that’s what leadership is all about. Making the risky choices and standing behind them. The country is in dire shape. This is a moment of truth. We can’t afford leaders who won’t lead. At the risk of over using a quote from President Ronald Reagan (R-USA):

Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?

Let us show that we stand for fiscal integrity and sound money and above all for an end to deficit spending, with ultimate retirement of the national debt.

Romney is a pale pastel. I’ve been outspoken in my support for former Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) precisely because she raises that banner of bold colors. I’m perfectly aware of all of the issues with a Palin candidacy. I will gladly support someone else if that person is willing to step to the front as she has, and be outspoken on issues, and attack Obama where he’s obviously wrong. Romney either can’t or won’t do that, and thus he is not qualified to lead our party or our country.

Thus, he will never get my vote, not even if he’s the GOP nominee. You can say that’s wrong, that I’m forgetting the important goal, of getting Obama out of the White House, but my response is that you’re missing the important goal, saving this country. That’s only going to happen with an energetic and enthusiastic conservative base. President Romney will not make that happen. I believe that with him in office, 2014 & 2016 will look like 2006 and 2008, only worse. We can’t let that happen. I’m more willing to see four more years of Obama than I am willing to see that.

As an aside, I will say that former Governor Tim Pawlenty (R-MN) seems to get the idea, but I’m not ready to jump on his bandwagon just yet.

Happy 100th Birthday, Vincent Price

Today is Vincent Price’s 100th birthday.

He could make anything seem sinister, and yet he did it with charm and grace. He made your stomach churn in a good way, much different from the Freddy Krueger-ish films of today.

An Inconvenient Tax

 

If you’ve followed this blog for any time at all, you know that I’m no fan of our tax code. I’m opposed to a flat tax because I don’t believe it has any hope for long term success. We flattened the tax code back in 1986. Look where we are now.

No, we didn’t flatten the tax code completely in 1986, but given our history, how long do you think a flat tax would stay flat? 5 years? 1 year? 60 days?

Whatever it is, it won’t be long. That’s one of the many reasons I’m a FairTax supporter. A documentary called “An Inconvenient Tax” will be released on July 4, detailing exactly what our tax code costs us, how it came into being, and what we can do next. While the video doesn’t appear to endorse the FairTax, I think I can guarantee that it will be mentioned and discussed. You can pre-order it from Amazon for $14, and you’ll get it around July 4th. Expect a review from me by July 7th at the latest. Still, I encourage you to get it now and not wait for me. I guarantee you’ll learn something, and be angry at what our government has done to us.

Please check out the trailer below.  The website is www.aninconvenienttax.com.

 

 

An Inconvenient Tax from Life Is My Movie on Vimeo.

The One Nation Bus Tour Video

Since I’ve been posting candidate vids lately, this seems appropriate:

 

Surprisingly, Byron York at the Washington Examiner reports today that most of the GOP field still doesn’t think she’s running.

"The bottom line is Sarah Palin is not going to run for president," says a Republican adviser close to front-runner Mitt Romney. "She's making money, she's moved on, she's kind of an entertainer rather than a politician. She still has some sway with the grass roots, but she is not going to run."

"I don't think she's going to run," says a Republican close to Tim Pawlenty. "She has faded a lot in the last few months. I look at what she's doing now and say that she's found a way to get back in the story."

Wishful thinking. It doesn’t take a psychic to read the “Tea” leaves lately. It’s now a matter of when, not if. And I expect the when to be in the next 30 days. But I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a bit longer than that.

ICYMI The First Time-Libs Still Hate Free Speech

Remember, I posted just last week about the ongoing efforts of Democrats to shut up people who disagree with them.

Since then we’ve got four more examples. First something from Florida where college students want to ban Limbaugh and Beck.

You know, I think Keith Olbermann is a loudmouthed obnoxious idiot. And both O’Reilly and Limbaugh can be just a loudmouthed. Chris Matthews is just a lying hypocrite. But I’d never try to shut any of them up, or take down their advertising, or anything like that.

Not so for Media Matters For America, a supposed media watchdog group, who is really just a propaganda arm for the White House. They’ve started a “Drop Fox” campaign, to punish advertisers on Fox News. Their first target? Orbitz. Orbitz drop kicked MMFA with their response:

"This is a political organization that has been funded pretty extensively to go after one network, and we aren't going to engage in that fight," Orbitz spokesman Brian Hoyt said.

"We have a strict policy of tolerance and non-discrimination, and that means we don't favor one political side over another. Tolerance is a two-way street," he said. "We're going to advertise on conservative TV stations, liberal TV stations and -- if there are any out there -- unbiased news broadcasts."

[…]

We haven't bowed to any boycott in the past, and we won't bow to these types of smear campaigns in the future," Hoyt said.

"What they're doing is distorting our record. We don't care about your sexual orientation, religion or gender; we preach tolerance," he said. "Our commitment to the LGBT community should not be at question -- at all."

Incident #3? The new White House Director of Disinformation.

"This week, Jesse Lee will move from the new media department into a role in the communications department as Director of Progressive Media & Online Response," read an internal memo from Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer, provided to The Huffington Post. "For the last two years, Jesse has often worn two hats working in new media and serving as the White House's liaison with the progressive media and online community. Starting this week, Jesse will take on the second role full time working on outreach, strategy and response."

The post is a new one for this White House. Rapid response has been the purview of the Democratic National Committee (and will continue to be). Lee's hire, however, suggests that a portion of it will now be handled from within the administration. It also signals that the White House will be adopting a more aggressive engagement in the online world in the months ahead.

Actually, this isn’t really new. President Barack Obama’s (D-USA) 2008 campaign had something similar. Remember FightTheSmears.org? It’s still there. Waiting to be ramped up again, I’m sure. They also had Linda Douglass asking people to snitch to the White House about any negative stories about ObamaCare. In fact, as assaults on the First Amendment go, this is pretty tame for Obama.

Still, it’s all part of a pattern. Let’s wrap up the pattern with some research by the appropriately named Media Research Center.

They sent Joe Schoffstall to wander around with a pretend petition to “Ban Conservative Hate Sites”:

"The undersigned hereby adamantly demand that the United States government shut down right wing hate sites. The hate speech propagated by sites like the Drudge Report, Hot Air, Instapundit, Big Government, and others must not be allowed to corrupt our political discourse any longer. These sites are dangerous not only to truth and freedom but also to our society as a whole. BAN THEM NOW!"

Only one person refused to sign. This is more just a sad statement about America, than a statement about liberals, though, I must admit.

If you still think these are isolated incidences, you’re dreaming. It’s all part of a pattern, and the pattern is that liberals want to silence the opposition. That’s what the “Fairness Doctrine” is all about. They know their policies can’t stand up to scrutiny, and know that the only way to continue to remain in power is to limit that scrutiny as much as possible.  These won’t be the last items like this you’ll see. In fact, expect to see significantly more between now and next November. Particularly if things don’t appear to be going in favor of the Democrats.

In Other Mitt Romney News

Former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) officially announced today that he’s going to officially announce his candidacy for President. Personally this whole tap dancing around getting in the race, and then announcing of announcements drives me crazy. I understand it all, but it’s still lame.

I Did Say She’s Running, Didn’t I?

Tuesday we heard about her biopic premiering in Iowa, of all places, and this morning, we heard on CBS that:

Scott Conroy, a reporter at RealClearPolitics.com and co-author of "Sarah from Alaska," got a sneak peek at the documentary and said on "The Early Show" Thursday he's heard from "several reliable sources" that, over the next couple of days, another "major indicator" is going to surface that she's ready to run in 2012.

And later today, we found out what he was most likely talking about.

She’s going on a bus tour of United States historical sites, starting along the eastern seaboard.

Surprisingly, there’s still no change in her status with Fox News:

“We are not changing Sarah Palin’s status,” said Bill Shine, the executive vice president of programming at Fox News, in a statement provided to The Daily Caller.

Of course, they never got rid of former Governor Mike Huckabee (R-AR) either. I guess the difference is that neither Huck nor former Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) have launched “exploratory committees”. And I don’t think Palin will. She’ll just enter the race when she’s ready. And she will. I no longer have any doubts about that.

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air agrees with me and thinks the question of “will she” has been answered:

It seems pretty clear that Palin wants to raise her national profile, and she wants to do so simultaneously in key early-primary states and in the media centers of Atlantic seaboard.  One doesn’t do that in a presidential primary season without having a specific goal in mind.  If Palin was interested in growing the grassroots for down-ticket Republicans in Congressional races, summer 2011 would be too early to help in that way.

So let’s consider the when of the candidacy.  National Journal reports that the formal entry could come as late as October, when Utah requires candidates to register, and Palin’s reach and name recognition means that she can wait longer to jump into the race.  I’d still expect it sooner rather than later, because Palin will want to use the momentum from the bus tour and the documentary to maximize the impact of her announcement.  She could go as long as Labor Day if the film does boffo box office, but given the usual success of political films, I’d look for something sooner — perhaps as soon as Independence Day.

Independence Day sounds like a good idea on the surface, but that’s the weekend she resigned from the Governorship of Alaska, also. I’m not sure she wants to bring attention to that while she’s announcing, so I’d expect sooner than that.

The bus tour starts this weekend joining Rolling Thunder, the motorcycle rally in D.C. honoring POW/MIA’s.

In perfect timing, Gallup, released a poll today showing her and former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) leading the GOP pack.

Mitt Romney (17%) and Sarah Palin (15%) now lead a smaller field of potential Republican presidential candidates in rank-and-file Republicans‘ preferences for the party’s 2012 nominee.

That’s fine by me. I will walk barefoot over hot coals to prevent Romney from getting the nomination. I’ll crawl naked over those same coals to keep him out of the White House. I do believe that he will be worse for the country than President Barack Obama (D-USA). Perhaps someday I’ll modify my opinion on that, but don’t hold out hope.

And, other news is lining up that’s helping out Mrs. Palin. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN-06) has hit a rough patch. She had a failed money bomb yesterday, and skipped an Iowa GOP dinner today, where she was scheduled to speak. Her Presidential aspirations may be fading. I like Bachmann, but she’s a firebrand, and I think the House suits her right now. I don’t like the idea of her in the White House. I’ll vote for her, if she’s the nominee, but I don’t think I’d be too happy about it. I’ve always thought legislators make poor Presidential material, and the last 2 1/2 years certainly haven’t changed my mind.

After a dull winter and spring, it looks like the summer is going to be an entertaining one for conservative political junkies. The GOP race is finally heating up.

Democrat On Entitlements

I hope you’ve seen this video by now:

 

Simon Rosenberg beclowns himself in epic fashion. You see his disdain before he even says a word. It’s obvious on his face that he doesn’t want to be there, and is looking for an excuse to get out.

Another abdicator, just as I said. I saw this earlier today, and spent my drive home and part of the evening trying to come up with something pithy and witty to say about it. But Ed Morrissey at HotAir sums it up better than I ever could have thought about doing:

Actually, this is practically a paint-by-numbers primer on the Democratic strategy on entitlement reform. Step 1: Declare that the Republican plan will kill people. Step 2: Denounce demagoguery. Step 3: Offer no plans of your own. Step 4: Feign offense when challenged on strategy. And finally, Step 5: Walk off in a huff without doing anything.

He whines from the beginning that he’s not allowed to speak, but he doesn’t let Ferguson speak either, so that’s all obviously just for show.

Attack and abdicate. It’s the Democrat way.