Quote

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

Friday, June 22, 2007

McWho? II

John McCain, in a neck-and-neck battle with some guy from Nebraska (or is it Kansas?) for fifth place in the race for the Republican nomination for president, is still the darling of the liberal press.

Today's ass kiss:

Courage at a Cost
Why McCain Deserves Conservatives' Respect
By Michael Gerson, The Washington Post


On occasion, Sen. John McCain seems like a martyr anxious for the stake, offering his own lighter to get the proceedings started. His flamboyant heresies on campaign finance reform, global warming and immigration have left conservatives suspicious that he has a mild form of Chuck Hagel's disease: an uncontrollable moral exhibitionism designed to please the liberal media.

Ultimately, however, judgment matters more than temperament in a president. And stepping back a moment from the past few years, McCain's judgment on the big issues deserves grudging respect from conservatives. (link)


No he doesn't. Nobody in Congress, short of Ted Kennedy, deserves less respect than does John McCain (not even that batty Barbara Boxer; it's not her fault she lacks intelligence). Not unless we want to give "grudging respect" to Adolf Hitler as well for having brought about the demise of the Third Reich.

John McCain, through his opposition to the 1st Amendment (McCain-Feingold), opposition to the 2nd Amendment (to this day, nobody has ever explained to me what that gun-show loophole is or was), opposition to oil exploration in an oil starved world (ANWR), opposition to tax cuts, but, by God, support of legislation intended to solve an unsolvable problem that may not exist (global warming), has disrespected the American people. For all that he deserves our collective disapprobation. And a ticket home.

Only when John McCain decides to finally pack it in and totter off into the nursing home will I respect his decision-making capacity, for having made that long-overdue and long-anticipated decision.

Not before.

A Pig Sty By Any Other Name ...

Progressive. Liberal. Tomato. Tamato.

The Kos kids think they gain respect by demanding a change in how they are described, labels they are assigned, rather than by the principles they maintain. Whatever:

Liberals adopt name for 'progress'
By Christina Bellantoni, The Washington Times

Don't call them liberals. They prefer the term "progressive" and think their brand of politics is where the country is headed.

Historically, "progressive" has been defined as one believing in moderate political change and especially social improvement by governmental action.

For the thousands of liberal activists who gathered in Washington this week and want to "Take Back America," the meaning of the word is that and more — it's about taking action.

"It's a willingness to fight," said James Boyce, a host for BlogTalkRadio and a longtime Democratic political strategist. "It's about spine and dogma and a certainty of movement. It's a way to counter conservatives."
(
link)
"Spine and dogma." "Certainty of movement." Spoken by someone who probably isn't old enough to get served at the local pub and whose parents probably have him under evening curfew.

The two most prominent examples of liberals progressives in the weblog world here in Virginia are Raising Kaine and Not Larry Sabato. I defy anyone, including the children that contribute to the two sites, to tell me what principles they espouse. Show me the dogma. Both simply regurgitate the pablum that comes their way from Democrats around the state, and punctuate the information they are provided with a host of exclamation marks (that's where that "willingness to fight" crap comes in, one would suppose)(!!!!!).

I especially enjoy the reasoned arguments that are made in response to logically valid, carefully expressed policy considerations that come from the other side. Those arguments usually go something like this:

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

That, my friends, is "progressive." I'll not disagree.

Perhaps I Was Too Harsh

After having just criticized liberal-progressives for believing in nothing (see above), I'm reminded that they do actually believe in one thing.

Government.

Talk radio, by anyone's standards, is dominated by conservatives. Liberals hate the thought. So what to do about it?

Do they pick up a microphone and compete? Do they go to radio station owners and convince them that their scheduling of liberal talk radio show hosts will boost business and put more cash in the owners' pockets? Do they go out and buy their own radio stations?

No. They demand that the government censor the other side:
Talk radio 'dominated' by right
By Kara Rowland, The Washington Times

A report from a liberal think tank yesterday criticized the "right-wing domination of talk radio," saying the current landscape does not serve all Americans.

In a report titled "The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio," the Center for American Progress concluded that 91 percent of weekday talk radio is conservative, compared with liberal content at 9 percent. The group, which said it analyzed 257 news and talk stations owned by the five biggest radio broadcasters,
calls for stricter media-ownership limits and public-interest requirements. (
link) [my emphasis]
Or, put in clearer terms, government censorship.

Rather than compete - openly, fairly - in the arena of ideas, these guys demand that the government step in, with guns drawn, and reserve time for them to regurgitate their Democratic talking points to a listening public that has no interest in hearing what they have to say (what ever happened to Air America, anyway?).

That, folks, is progressive dogma. Government censorship of the nation's airwaves.

Speaks volumes.

Money Found! VDOT Saved!

It appears that our cash-strapped transportation department, the one that is overseeing, on a shoestring, all our crumbling roads and bridges, has found a few dollars with which to stay in business.

See the 232 pages of VDOT allocations that will be going to road improvements across the commonwealth over the next six years
here.

The first page consists of a project that will remain a complete mystery (a "Statewide Enhancement Program") and seven projects that have nothing to do with our roads.

If the other 231 pages remain consistent, it's no wonder we had a crisis.


Line items 2 thru 8 are devoted to;

● The Virginia Creeper Trail

● Breaks Interstate Park Pedestrian Trail

● John Anderson Blockhouse

● "Access Road, Walking Trail, & Related Facilites"

● "Trailhead, Related Facilities & Restoration

● Fisher Peak Mountain Music Interpretive Center

● Birch Knob Trail

● Riverwalk through town of Pound

Lest you got distracted, these are transportation department projects. The same transportation department that was in crisis a few months ago. 1 page of 232 pages.

For the love of God.

So Much For Helping The Poor & Downtrodden

This New York Times exposé of a "charity" for the poor that presidential candidate John Edwards set up speaks volumes about the charlatan that hides behind those perfectly manicured bangs and who sheds crocodile tears over the plight of America's impoverished:
In Aiding Poor, Edwards Built Bridge to 2008
By Leslie Wayne, The New York Times


John Edwards ended 2004 with a problem: how to keep alive his public profile without the benefit of a presidential campaign that could finance his travels and pay for his political staff.

Mr. Edwards, who reported this year that he had assets of nearly $30 million, came up with a novel solution, creating a nonprofit organization with the stated mission of fighting poverty. The organization, the Center for Promise and Opportunity, raised $1.3 million in 2005, and — unlike a sister charity he created to raise scholarship money for poor students — the main beneficiary of the center’s fund-raising was Mr. Edwards himself, tax filings show.

The organization became a big part of a shadow political apparatus for Mr. Edwards after his defeat as the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 2004 and before the start of his presidential bid this time around. Its officers were members of his political staff, and it helped pay for his nearly constant travel, including to early primary states. (link)
The Center for Promise and Opportunity. "The stated mission of fighting poverty." John Edwards's personal bank account.

Remember a few years back when William Aramony got into all kinds of trouble after having been caught raiding The United Way charity's coffers and spending money that was intended for the needy on himself? He resigned in disgrace.

Edwards, wiildly popular among Democrats, is running for president.

What does this say about him and them?

Capitalism Has a Way

Most of you won't remember a circumstance that arose a few decades ago (Reagan was in office?) when our Congress put a quota on the importation of foreign cars and trucks (because Detroit was even then feeling the pinch). There was a lesson I learned from the Subaru people during those years, one that has to do with the ever evolving and dynamic nature of capitalism, and the boundless imagination that goes into overcoming obstacles.

When faced with a looming situation where it had reached its maximum number of allowable trucks one year, Subaru started building them with two cheap, crude bucket seats in the rear bed and calling the new model, for the purposes of importation, a car.


Ingenious, no?

Subaru thrived and American consumers got what they were looking for. Sweet deal.

Those seats, by the way, were quickly and easily unbolted and the seats were tossed in the trash.

I was reminded of that when I read this morning of Congress' latest attempt at stymying the free flow of capitalism:

Senate Adopts an Energy Bill Raising Mileage for Cars
By Edmund L. Andrews, The New York Times

Washington, June 21 — The Senate passed a broad energy bill late Thursday that would, among other things, require the first big increase in fuel mileage requirements for passenger cars in more than two decades.

The vote, 65 to 27, was a major defeat for car manufacturers, which had fought for a much smaller increase in fuel economy standards and is expected to keep fighting as the House takes up the issue.
(
link)
Since Detroit can't pull new technology out of a hat, the automakers will have to downsize their offerings. For a time. Or, until they figure out a way to continue to provide the vehicles that the American public still look to purchase, they'll offer huge incentives on the little cars so that they can continue selling boatloads of big ones. It's all in the average mileage numbers they rack up.

I trust in the system. These guys will figure out a way to bring to market that which we want to put on the road. This despite our elected representatives' best efforts to do what's best for to us.

Photo by John Pascarella.