I DON’T THINK HOLDER WILL LAST THROUGH OBAMA’S TERM

Present Attorney General Eric Holder; photo, Daily Caller

For that matter, one can’t be sure that Obama will remain through his term either. The breadth and depth of impeachable and triable crimes by this Administration is breathtaking. True, one must never ascribe to malice that which was done by sheer ineptitude. The problem is that under the present Occupier in Chief, actions that clearly apply to both categories are hard to number for the sheer volume.

What if? There are many with plausibility if not probability. Let’s see….
Be prepared to see a Republican v Biden general election this year. Be prepared, too, to see ethics charges brought-up by Congress against President Biden for his blanket pardons of Holder, Geithner and Obama.

Forget global warming – it’s Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again): Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years.

Pieter Breugel; Hunters in the Snow, ca. 1565

Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening of the season available for growing food.

Heh. I know what’s freezing over, and it ain’t the Thames.

Florida is a vast game reserve of endangered RINO’s. Just ask Lt. Col. Allen West.

Conservatives from Florida to Washington, D.C., were shaken last week as one of the best-known of their voices in Congress was dealt the worst possible hand in the redistricting process. With the release of preliminary maps for Florida’s new congressional districts, the incumbent who inarguably was hit hardest in the process was freshman Republican Allen West, retired U.S. Army colonel and swashbuckling Tea Party conservative.

Lt. Col. Allen West (T-FL)

Quoth William Jacobson:

Newt has gained widespread Tea Party support in the past few days, but it may be too little too late. And trust me on this one, if the Romney establishment is holding grudges from the 1980s and 1990s against Newt, they will remember that in 2011-2012 the Tea Party movement was against them.

Palin says “Vote Newt.” Hopefully more people do than the polls indicate.

Please. The main problem with Mitt is the cluster of statists and squishies he has around him… i.e. Crists’s advisors, replete with decrepit RINO’s like Sununu. The simple fact is, Mitt is the only candidate capable of dispiriting Tea Party support.

Buckle-up, Conservatives, Libertarians and Constitutionalists. This is going to be a bumpy ride.

Mann oh-Mann!  Mikey gets a “hockey stick” – er, (cough) never mind.

(Heh. -Ed.)

. . .

In the Wall Street Journal, no less…

No Need to Panic About Global Warming: There’s no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to ‘decarbonize’ the world’s economy.

A candidate for public office in any contemporary democracy may have to consider what, if anything, to do about “global warming.” Candidates should understand that the oft-repeated claim that nearly all scientists demand that something dramatic be done to stop global warming is not true. In fact, a large and growing number of distinguished scientists and engineers do not agree that drastic actions on global warming are needed.

Image courtesy NASA.gov

“Please read the whole thing.”

The Journal piles-on with a video, Opinion: The Global Warming Hoax, featuring Princeton physics professor William Happer.

Hoax, you say? Science run amok, another Piltdown Man?

This would never have come about without the internet. As Ken Layne said some years back, [pardon the language] “We can fact-check your ass!” The web provided access to another feature of the human condition: intellectual competition; the marketplace of ideas.

For decades, the lay community seemed alone in it’s incredulity. Then in 2005 Anthropogenic Global Warming officially became Climate Change. Not a few of us “amateurs” sensed trouble with the science: Why fiddle with the message of heating if heating is measurably occurring? Then in 2009, “change we can believe in” became ‘Global Climate Disruption.’ It’s New! It’s Improved! It’s… Scienterrific!

Stubborn things, facts.  They’d show-up at odd times.  Notes here and there about thermometer placement being selectively corrupted.  Satellite thermal image cameras needing calibration. Hurricanes that refused to show-up. Scientists complaining about data taken out of context. Tree-ring evidence fudged. Multi-billion dollar “carbon exchanges” established by companies heavily invested in “green energy” products and infrastructure. Long-established cyclicality of polar bear populations being ignored. Greenland’s “shrinking” ice sheets that are still there. Astrophysicists complaining that solar output data was totally ignored. Gigabytes of hacked e-mails exposing outright fabrications, “tricks” with statistics, ad-hominem attacks targeting peers…

Stubborn thing, Science. This mess will be cleaned-up from the inside, if Science wishes to recover it’s reputation.

Academia has other internal problems to face; The collapse of the Global Warming hoax parallels a measurable global cooling of the Public’s trust in statism and it’s attendant intellectual laziness, atheism, moral relativism and central planning. Showing up at an “Occupy” protest with complaints that one’s master’s degree in puppetry doesn’t pay the bills has more than a sick ironic twist to it, yeh?

Liberty and Tyranny was readable and enjoyable, as far as it went.  To the positive, in it Levin had borrowed concepts heavily from Tocqueville and Rand, Smith, Hayek, Friedman, Sowell… and just about anyone who had been debating and observing the contest between Libertarians and Conservatives over the previous decade. It served as a great review and would make a decent first-year introduction text to a course on modern political philosophy.

This reviewer’s one negative criticism of Liberty and Tyranny was that Levin had introduced no novel ideas, no shred of original insight.

Listening recently to Mark on many occasions via web stream, there’s been nothing new in his discussions of Ameritopia. More to the point, nothing so far from Levin about Utopia being the bait to Power‘s switch.  Is that obvious but vital point lacking? It ought to be the central point of the work.  Perhaps it is.  Why bother otherwise?

So, gentle reader, if you come across something in Ameritopia redeeming or unique to Levin, please feel free to drop us a line.  An old copy of Hayek’s Road to Serfdom has us preoccupied for the time being.

Many thanks!

…

Sarah Palin Write-In

…

Hollywood and America’s Left need “actors” and “editors” to re-cast historical figures – rather, to play “make believe.”   Problem is, we have plenty of tape in the record on Thatcher that would make great viewing, but it just doesn’t explain the “correct” narrative. So off they go into the land of spin.

Ditto Sarah Palin.  Who needs her when we have Julianne Moore and Tina Fey to show us how Sarah really is.  (I can see 2012 from my house. – Ed.)

All this while we have a cocaine-abusing gay-cruising constitution-trashing law-breaking Alinsky-Stalinist partying the Oval Office, and the best the Left can do is hit girls?!  Who needs screenwriters when reality is so completely absurd?

. . .

Here’s The Washington Times’ review.

“…Here, her fight against left-wing orthodoxy is depicted as ferocious and honorable, with minimal time devoted to criticisms. One could be forgiven for guessing the filmmakers themselves were conservatives, if one didn’t know better.“  Whether this movie “fair” or not isn’t the point: Balanced fiction is still fiction.  It’s redundant. Worse, it reduces one of the 20th century’s most important records to two hours of bread and circus. Better to invest one’s time and treasure here.

. . .

Thanks Maggie Thornton!  (…and you too, Baroness Thatcher and Sarah Palin.)

When even Rush Limbaugh buys into the “criticising Bain is criticizing capitalism” meme, we have lost as a party. There is a huge difference between using government powers to impose value judgments (a la Obama) and making value judments in evaluating a candidate’s background.

It’s over.

Not so fast, Professor Jacobson…

Obama’s “Winning The Future” (WTF!) campaign had been aimed at demonizing “greedy capitalists” and economic liberty from the get-go. Even without Romney and Bain, liberty and free markets were going to have their heads on the chopping block.

So no, it cuts both ways. Bain Capital as a model works. Only failing companies were purchased – some were too sick to recover, others have since thrived. Never once purchased a healthy, growing company and plundered it. Romney can position any number of Bain successes against Solyndra and the Volt – and show how one model uses private capital to grow the economy and the other public money to tank it.

Yeah, so let’s go swimming, professor.

“I still like him and admire him personally, but he’s certainly more liberal than I thought he was,” Brooks said.

NYT "Conservative" David Brooks

This, from the erstwhile Paper of Record’s “conservative”, the man who penned “Run Barack Run!” He refers to Barack Obama as “liberal?”  The entire Brooks article is a bold-faced lie on different levels…

All Brooks had to do to obtain an accurate expectation of Obama was to read Barack’s own “memoirs” and listen to his Chicago NPR interviews and peruse the course outline of his work at Chicago as a part-time lecturer and  “constitutional expert.”  A simple gander through easy-to-acquire primary source material would have told Li’l Davy Brooks everything he is now “learning” six years late.

To disabuse himself of doubts of Obama’s intent, Brooks could have examined secondary sources for confirmation: Obama’s influences, starting with Ann Dunham, B.O. Sr. and dear “Uncle” Frank; his work at Saul Alinsky’s Chicago office; his work with ACORN/SEIU and Obama’s social network which includes Rashid Khalidi, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, Reverend Wright…

Brooks is in the news and information game; Facts are his stock-in-trade. It seems obvious to those of us who had examined Barack Obama’s public record that professionals such as Brooksie had done so, too. There was far too much in plain sight beyond the “crease in his pants” for Brooks not to have known and understood the man he was gushing over.

Brooks’ work has consistently struck yours truly as left-of-center establishmentarian. (Dig his pet concept of “national greatness.” Das schmecht!) Hell, if this man is a “conservative” then his entire career has been antithetical to his core values, has it not?

“…More liberal than I thought he was.” No. Obama is not “liberal.” He is statist-totalitarian. Brooks knows it. He’s known it all along.  This latest sad mea culpa and CYA won’t cut it.  If Brooks had a shred of decency he’s apologize and retire in shame.  If she, too, had any grace, the Decrepit Grey Lady would do likewise.

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

ROMNEY
24.6
30,015

SANTORUM
24.5
30,007

PAUL
21.4
26,219

GINGRICH
13.3
16,251

PERRY
10.3
12,604

Via Dow Jones

: ] -Ed.