People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Friday, January 28, 2005

Lee Hochstader Gets It Wrong

A staff writer for the Washington Post, Lee Hockstader, makes the argument that the firestorm that occurred within the Virginia Republican party last year over the massive - and completely unwarranted - tax increase that eventually passed and was signed into law by our tax-crazy governor (oh, did I mention he's a Democrat?) is a problem for Republican gubernatorial candidate Jerry Kilgore.
... Kilgore's party fractured last year over Warner's tax hike, and it hasn't regrouped. Forced to choose sides, Kilgore went with the anti-tax true believers over the budgetary pragmatists. Now he'd love to paper over the split; he's endorsed all 17 Republican delegates who broke ranks to side with Warner for higher taxes. But he will be hard-pressed to run an anti-tax campaign, given his party's garbled message. [ my emphasis] (link)
If Kilgore was running for party chairman, this argument might work. But Kilgore is running for governor and will be seeking the support of an ever more conservative and tax-averse electorate. He will be shouting his anti-tax stance from the tallest rooftops. He will be using the recent tax increase - and resulting budget surplus - as a cudgel with which he'll beat every liberal to a pulp.

For a lesson in Republican party strategy relating to such matters, I refer Mr. Hockstader to the gubernatorial campaign of Arnold Schwarzenegger in California. Arnold successfully ran a campaign in which he lumped all of the state's legislators (Dem and Rep) in one pile of incompetent and detached tax-and-spenders who needed to be stopped from sending the state into a spiralling descent into fiscal calamity. If there was a party in disarray at the time more so than the California Republican party, I haven't seen it. Remember the prior candidacy of Bill Simon? Liberal California Republicans - including the party establishment - refused to endorse him because he was perceived as being too conservative. Arnold succeeded by throwing them into the swamp pit with the liberal Democrats and going directly to the people with his demands for fiscal sanity. He won overwhelmingly.

Kilgore will do the same. The Virginia Democrats and their cowardly, traitorous allies on the Republican side are working feverishly to spend the massive budget surplus before Kilgore and his conservative allies can make a huge issue out of the fact that the Democrats had shrieked dire warnings about impending disaster if taxes weren't raised, only to see those taxes rise and the government become awash in cash it can't spend fast enough. But their efforts will be vain. Kilgore is going to stuff it down their throats, one spending inititiatve at a time.

And he will win going away. You can make book on it.

Not that I'm a betting man.

Pity The Feminists

I came to the conclusion a number of years ago that the reason the feminist movement failed was because it was lead by ... well, feminists. The foundational principles of their effort were commendable. Women, for many decades but in growing numbers beginning in the 1960's, demanded equal access to the workplace (and the boardroom) and to be able to compete on a level playing field with men. They had every right to make such a demand, and America was better off for it.

Then the feminists took control of the debate.

The discussion turned to lesbian issues, transgender issues, sexual harassment issues, "equal pay for equal work" issues, and the like. A discussion lead by mean, angry, men-hating feminists. Oh, I left out ugly. And the movement came to a grinding halt as men - and more reasonable women - around the country recoiled from their venom and vitriole, and from their bizarre antics relating to vagina monologues and abortion revelry.

But don't take it from me. I provide here a few words from columnist Diana West:

Feminists, partisan politics

By Diana West

I hate women. Let me rephrase that: I hate "women" — the ones who make a career of it, the feminists who like to blow things up and then cry as the pieces rain down, choking on the vapors. Which filled the air, apparently, up at Harvard when big, bad awrence Summers — Harvard's prez, who has just got to stop saying he's sorry — declared in a meeting that the dearth of women in the hard sciences might have something to do, not so much with (yawn) male chauvinism but with the innate differences between the sexes. "I felt I was going to be sick," said Nancy Hopkins, a biology professor at MIT who stormed out of the meeting. "My heart was pounding and my breath was shallow," she informed reporters. "I couldn't breathe because this kind of bias makes me physically ill." Why, had she not left the room, "I would've either blackedoutor thrown up."

Clearly, what the hard sciences need to attract more qualified female candidates is a nice, comfy fainting couch. And let's send one over to the Senate, too, while we're at it. "She turned and attacked me," Sen. Barbara Boxer whimpered on CNN in her twisted reprise of the poisonous little temper tantrum she and other Democrats threw along the way to the Senate confirmation of Condoleezza Rice as secretary of state. Having spray-painted Miss Rice a liar —and dashed off a quick fundraising letter about it all on the side — Mrs. Boxer was now depicting Miss Rice as a bully. Why? For a response that exhibited more polish, more civilization than the smearing senator deserved: "I would hope we can discuss what ... went on and what I said without impugning my credibility or my integrity."

That's ladylike. I like ladylike. (link)

If America's women are going to build on the wonderful achievements they've made to date, they are going to have to step over the prostrate bodies of these mewling, acidic, and still grossly unattractive old trolls and move forward.