Watch this. The most depressing video you’ll see this week year.
Think Crowder was just picking out the few things that supported his story? Think again.
I hate to sound heartless, but the question must be asked. Is it time to essentially raze Detroit?
Think this can only happen in Detroit? No. This is where we’re all headed if President Barack Obama (D-USA) is re-elected. This is where progressivism leads. It’s the only possibly destination on this road.
I’m always harping on those Peaceful Green Hippies and I have been at least moderately supportive of Richard Mourdock (R-IN) in his bid to unseat Senator Dick Lugar (R-IN), so it would be hypocritical of me not to mention this.
This is disappointing to say the least. I don’t think that what happened here was quite as over-the-top as what we’ve seen at other venues with Democrats, but I’m splitting hairs. It shouldn’t happen, regardless.
Richard Mourdock was on the Dana Loesch show yesterday afternoon doing damage control, and he did apologize and own up to the mistakes by his campaign. Good. The blogger in the video added this to his blog post as well:
UPDATE: An apology for what occurs in the video below has been issued by Treasurer Mourdock today on the Dana Show. An apology has also been received from Deputy Treasurer Jim Holden. Both explained they believe this was a case of mistaken identity.
At Rebel Pundit, we do accept the apologies offered. However we do feel after this unfortunate event, it is important to remember, this type of behavior is something we hope to never see at a Tea Party or conservative rally of any kind. Regardless of who is questioning a candidate, be it a main stream media reporter, blogger, average citizen, or an opponent, candidates and their staff must be held to a higher standard, if they seek to represent us.
I’m still not happy about it, but I’m less unhappy than before. And I am encouraged that Mourdock quickly made the effort to get out in front of this issue.
Loesch has more at BigJournalism, including Mourdock’s response during a phone call with her (but not the audio from her show, shame on you, Dana).
Michele Bachmann (R-MN-06) announced her candidacy last night, stating that she’d filed the necessary paperwork. I think that was a spontaneous moment, as she has no accompanying vid, and her website is pretty barren.
I still think she’s too much of a hardliner and too much of a firebrand to be President. And I still don’t like legislators as Presidents. I’d rather see her run for Governor of her state, or even my state. I’d vote for her for that. Still, she’ll be a formidable candidate.
Anyway, you can check out what there is of her site at www.michelebachmann.com. Remember, one “L” and two “N”s.
Che Guevara is born. Intelligence of our nation’s youth hardest hit. Seriously, read up on the guy, if you can find something that’s even close to objective. He’s not someone to be admired or emulated. He should be ridiculed and loathed.
Stars & Stripes was adopted by Congress as the Flag of the United States.
Resolved, that the flag of the United States be thirteen stripes, alternate red and white; that the union be thirteen stars, white in a blue field, representing a new Constellation.
Happy Flag Day! Interestingly, only PA has Flag Day as a state holiday, establishing it on this day in 1937.
Last night, the leading declared contenders for the GOP nomination for President squared off in New Hampshire. If you missed it, you’re not alone. The only people that tune in for debates like this in the middle of June the year before the election are people that are paid to do so, political junkies like me, and people with money to drop.
If you’re interested, you can find my thoughts on the first debate here.
The night had some clear winners and losers, and some people who got stuck in the mud in the middle. Overall, I was impressed. Even the weakest of the candidates had some good moments. And, just to be balanced, I don’t think anyone was pitch perfect through the entire night.
The strongest performance of the night was by Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN-05). She was solid from beginning to end, only stumbling a little bit on the follow-up question on gay marriage (she’s for a Constitutional amendment, and for states rights—that’s not impossible, but it is confusing). Maybe a couple of her answers seemed a little over-rehearsed, and she dropped to talking points once or twice, but that’s nit picking. I was impressed with her, as I always am when I see her interviewed.
She had the strongest performance, but she wasn’t the “winner”. Last time I thought former Governor Tim Pawlenty (R-MN) had the strongest performance, but Herman Cain (R-GP) might have been the winner, due to making himself known. Similarly, I think former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) was the winner last night. As the perceived frontrunner, what he has to do is show up, look Presidential, not screw up, and not get hammered too much by the other candidates. He cleared that bar easily. He had a couple of weaker answers, but think you’d have to be a conservative policy wonk to really catch that. In short, he showed why he’s the frontrunner.
The biggest losers of the night were CNN, the moderator John King, and former Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK). I thought during the first debate that Palin really needed to be there. Last night that felt even more true. The field is starting to look set now, and those in the field are going to be gaining momentum and attention from those with money and political pull. She’s starting to hurt her chances by not declaring. A lot of this is true for Governor Rick Perry (R-TX) as well, but I think all of the Texas references last night help him a bit. Texas is about the only thing keeping America’s economy afloat at the moment, and that’s hard to hide.
As for CNN and King, neither should be allowed to ever do a Presidential debate again. The format was awful, not giving candidates time to answer detailed policy questions with the necessary details. King was rude and annoying, constantly interrupting with “uh” to get the candidates moving or back on topic, sometimes before they’d finished a single sentence. I could deal with all of that, though, but there were subtleties that were even worse. The entire debate seemed designed around protecting President Barack Obama (D-USA) and Mitt Romney. There were very few questions on topics that harm either of them. What about jobs, inflation, foreign wars, $4 gas, cap and trade, energy subsidies, and entitlement reform? There was one question early on about the Ryan plan, and another directed at Pawlenty regarding his ObamneyCare statement this weekend. I know having 7 people there makes it challenging, but surely it’s possible to better than that. The debate was painful to watch, and not because of the candidates.
Speaking of which, here’s a friendly word of advice to GOP Presidential candidates. I know all about President Ronald Reagan’s (R-USA) 11th Commandment, and I know that we need to make this election a referendum on Obama, but unless you want Romney to be the nominee, you’re going to have to take some shots at him as well. And when the moderator gives you a nice slow pitch right down the middle of the plate, you need to hit that one out of the park. Yes, I’m talking to you, Tim Pawlenty. Why couldn’t you back up your ObamneyCare statement? Surely you had to expect a question about this? Awful. Truly awful.
As much as I was impressed with Pawlenty during the first debate, his performance last night, especially during the first hour, was a huge disappointment. He did seem to gain strength as the night wore on, something he shared with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA-06), and Herman Cain. I thought all three stumbled early, but picked up in the second hour. Newt fumbled again discussing his position on the Ryan plan. He needs to figure out how to answer this question, or just drop out.
Cain’s biggest problem, though, wasn’t himself, but that for long periods of the night, he was basically ignored by King and the questioners. I think former Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) also suffered from this to a lesser degree. What I saw of Santorum impressed me much more than last time around. He seemed much more relaxed and composed. I just wish I’d seen more of him.
Ok, have I left anyone out? Oh yes. My statement about Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX-14) from last time still applies. He was Ron Paul. Brilliant about some things and frighteningly scary about others. Fortunately for him, since the debate topics shied away from foreign policy to such a degree, he didn’t get as many chances to show just how scary he can be. In fact, on most of the domestic policy questions he made good points and good sense. His one answer on Social Security and Medicare may have been the right one “shut them all down”, but it’s not going to win over many voters, even in the GOP.
Overall, I was impressed with the field. Any of these people would be a great improvement over the current occupant of the White House. I have some more thoughts on the candidates themselves, but that’s a topic for another post.
If you missed the debate or just want to watch it again, here’s the vid, courtesy of The Right Scoop.
President Lyndon Johnson (D-USA) nominates Thurgood Marshall to the U.S. Supreme Court. Marshall becomes the first black justice for the Supreme Court in October. Marshall was known for his persuasive arguments (as an attorney before the Court) in Brown v. Board of Education, and was known as a broad supporter of civil rights.
Historian Dr. Jan Romein had this to say about it:
This apparently inconsequential diary by a child, this "de profundis" stammered out in a child's voice, embodies all the hideousness of fascism, more so than all the evidence of Nuremberg put together.
I’ve been thinking about writing this post for some time. Larry Sabato pushed me over the edge. I have nothing but respect for Mr. Sabato. He is the guru of election prognostication. But there’s been a common meme appearing about former Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) lately, and I’ve always felt it’s nonsensical. Sabato repeated it in his last column, and it didn’t sound any better even coming from him.
Ultimately, we don’t believe she’s running for two reasons. She has more influence and a far higher income outside of elective politics than in it.
I’ll address the latter first, because it’s the easiest to destroy. The problem with that statement is that it’s essentially true for just about every single person in the field. You think former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) can’t make more money outside of politics? Former CEO Herman Cain (R-GP)? Ridiculous. But this point is continuously brought up about Palin and only Palin. When I see this as a criticism, I know the analysis is unserious.
Now, regarding influence. This part of the statement also does not stand up under any serious scrutiny. Let’s look at some scenarios.
So, that’s all the possible scenarios. Which ones did she lose a lot of influence that she would not have lost by staying out of the race? Yeah. None of them.
Now perhaps Mr. Sabato is not thinking long term but is instead thinking short term? That might be it, as I’ve also heard that Palin is better suited to being a kingmaker right now.
Well, she can certainly be a kingmaker. There’s no doubt about that. In fact, one would have to say that at this point, the three most sought after endorsements will be Sarah Palin, Mitch Daniels, and Mike Huckabee. The three of them together have appeal strengths that map to pretty much the entire GOP base. However, will her endorsement mean any less if she enters the race, than if she stays out? The only way that her endorsement becomes relatively meaningless upon entering the race is if she blows up and is a total dud in the primaries. Of course, that would mean that she doesn’t really have any influence now, either. So, again, this argument doesn’t hold water.
Now, I believe she’s running. But, there certainly are reasons to speculate otherwise. It’s true that she hasn’t done much of the standard political moves necessary to start a national campaign. Frankly, that’s the biggest reason to speculate that she isn’t, not the junk analysis at the top of this post.
