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

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Point. Counterpoint.

The Washington Post this morning on George Allen's announcement that he is running for office again:
American history and politics have a rich tradition of second acts; Mr. Allen is no less plausible a candidate than others who have risen from defeat. Virginians will be justified in hoping for a candidacy from Mr. Allen that offers substance and serious policy discussion.
From on High:
Like anyone at the Washington Post gives a shit about "substance and serious policy discussion."  Last time around?  Stephen Spreuill on the Washington Post's "race to the bottom," October 24, 2006:

"Even by the usual standards, the Washington Post’s coverage of the Virginia Senate race between incumbent George Allen and former Secretary of the Navy Jim Webb has been remarkably one-sided. Since mid-August, the Post has published approximately 100 newspaper articles and editorials about allegations that Allen is racist.

"On August 15, the Post ran a story on page A01 titled, 'Allen Quip Provokes Outrage, Apology; Name Insults Webb Volunteer.'

"The incident certainly merited coverage, but nothing like what was to follow. The Post followed up Tuesday’s story (and accompanying editorial) with another front-page story on Wednesday. On Thursday, three stories in the Post were about the “macaca” incident, including one purporting to debunk Allen’s excuse that 'macaca' was a nickname referring to the volunteer’s mohawk-style haircut. Style-section reporter Libby Copeland reported that the hairstyle in question was not a mohawk at all, but rather 'a hybrid of the mullet and the ‘faux-hawk,’ a hipster look that peaks at the top of the head, reminiscent of the cartoon character Tintin.'

"As the campaign got dirtier, the Post exhausted every conceivable angle in order to keep the 'macaca' story in the paper. First, it sought out the professional grievance groups ('For One Group, ‘Macaca’ Recalls Slurs After 9/11'). Then, it compared Allen’s woes to those of other (Republican) politicians ('Comments Haunt Another Senator; Montana’s Burns Joked About Latinos'). Finally — two weeks after the incident — the Post profiled Macaca himself ('Fairfax Native Says Allen’s Words Stung').

What came next made all that preceded it look like high-minded debate. On September 24, the liberal web magazine Salon.com reported that, according to several of Allen’s college football teammates, he used the 'N-word' in college. The Post picked up the story two days later, and two days after that it covered allegations that Webb had also used the 'N-word' in college. Allen’s accusers were admitted Democratic partisans, and Webb’s accuser a Republican, but none of this stopped the Post or other mainstream media outlets from following them down into a gutter of unsubstantiated rumors.

After the 'N-word' debacle, the Post took an even weirder swipe at Allen. After weeks of portraying him as a racist redneck, it published a 1,302-word article about how his 'cowboy' image was nothing more than a 'shtick' ('Will Sen. Allen’s Cowboy Boots Fit Virginia Voters? Detractors Call Cowboy Image a Shtick'). As National Review’s Byron York noted at the time, 'Webb’s senior advisor is the only detractor quoted in Shear’s article, which features positive quotes from two present and former Allen staffers, plus one Allen fan.'

At first, the race between Allen and Webb looked like the kind of race policy wonks dream about.

Instead, it has degenerated into a disgraceful mud-slinging contest — a race to the bottom aided in no small part by the Washington Post.
I don't expect the gutter-dwellers at the Post to go on the attack in 2012 with the macaca ploy (although they did bring it up just this morning),  but you can bet there'll be a whole lot more about "radical agendas" and tea party affiliations, maybe even a little bit of the old standby - RACIST! - than there will be any ""substance and serious policy discussion."  These people hate George Allen and everything he stands for.

Expect that hatred to be reflected in that which appears on the pages of that rag they call a newspaper. Again.

The Tea Party & Obama

Worlds apart.

Where Stalin Would Thrive

In Virginia's most liberal county, of course.

This speaks volumes about them.

As They Desperately Try To Hold The Narrative Together ...

... the climate mongers among us continue to see their scheme crumble:

This involves the official British inquiry into the scandal that doomed the global warming movement.

Expect the Penn State inquiries to be denounced as shams soon as well.

Global warming was always a scam.

We slowly get to the truth.

The Universe has Been Shaken To Its Core

So does that beef burrito include beef or not?

Just when you thought the world made sense.

What's next?  Soylent Green?

An American Dichotomy

Ever wonder how it is that America's corporations are doing so well while the average American is doing so poorly?

In microcosm:

They are all doing great!


The World Has Turned Upside Down

I don't know.  Maybe it's just me.  But doesn't it seem proper that when you seek knowledge on a particular subject that you'd refer to someone who has knowledge on that subject?

I ask you: What do Jennifer Granholm and Jeffrey Immelt know about creating jobs?

A step into bizarroworld:

From "Former Michigan Gov. Granholm to Teach Job Creation at UC Berkeley" we learn that Jennifer Granholm, who presided over a state that, "in the years since she took office through October, the latest month for which final employment data was available, Michigan lost some 632,400 payroll jobs, a 14.1 percent decline, and within that, 281,800 manufacturing jobs, a 37.6 percent decline," is going to teach others how to ... create jobs.

Or not?

And what of GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt, Mr. Obama's new "jobs" guy?

See "Obama names GE chief Jeffrey Immelt to head economic recovery advisory panel."

What's that all about, you ask?

"President Obama's decision to tap General Electric Co. Chief Executive Jeffrey Immelt to lead an initiative on jobs and ..."

An initiative on jobs.

At least it can be said that Immelt, unlike Granholm, has at least created jobs.


While killing jobs.


That's right.  Nobody in America has done more to destroy American jobs than Jeffrey Immelt.  Except for maybe Jennifer Granholm.  And Obama.

And he and she - they - are now in position to teach us how to grow American jobs?

Please.  Stop.  You're killing me.

Keith Olbermann. 'Unemployed Uberdork.'

I love the effective use of words.

Look, The Guy's a Worm, But ...

... the courts should give wide latitude to the voters.  Especially in an instance where the circumstances are murky.  Try to put aside your distaste for Rahm Emanuel, Obama's close adviser, and decide if he truly deserved to be kicked off the ballot in Chicago:
Who's a Carpetbagger?
Wall Street Journal editorial

Conservatives like to gripe that too many politicians go native in Washington and never return home. So why are so many people rejoicing that an Illinois appeals court ruled yesterday that former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is ineligible to run for mayor of Chicago on February 22 because he hasn't lived in the city for the past year?

According to the 2-1 court decision, although Mr. Emanuel was a "qualified elector" in the state, his return from Washington in October fell short of the one-year residency standard required for municipal office in Illinois. No returns, no exceptions. The ruling overturns rulings by the Chicago Board of Elections Commission and a Cook County judge that had allowed him to stay on the ballot.

As carpetbaggers go, however, Mr. Emanuel isn't even a venial sinner. He has lifelong ties to the Windy City, and for six years he represented the Fifth Congressional district that includes part of Chicago before President Obama offered him the White House job in late 2008. While in Washington, he maintained his Illinois driver's license, paid income taxes in both locations, and continued to pay property taxes on his Chicago home, which he rented out during his absence.

The Illinois court argues that Mr. Emanuel's intention to return to Chicago does not meet the legal definition of residence as a "permanent abode." But Mr. Emanuel's absence was done in the course of service to the country. (We have our issues with the quality of that service, but that's a separate issue.) Under Illinois law, voters who are away "on business of the United States" may have their residence requirement waived—an exception that should logically extend to candidates.

It's tempting to enjoy Mr. Emanuel's ballot troubles because he's a darling of rich Chicago liberals and it's a rare misstep for the Daley machine, which is backing him. But we don't think Mr. Emanuel should be penalized, or Chicago voters denied the chance to vote for him, because he chose to serve his country. [link]
In short, the courts should butt out.  If Emanuel is undeserving of the office, the people will make the right decision.  That's what elections are all about.

Rahm Emanuel should be on the ballot. 

And the people of Chicago should then vote him into retirement.