Friendship
"[T]there comes a time in every friendship when you have to say, "I never liked you, get lost."
-Phil Hartman, as Bill McNeal, NewsRadio episode "Chock"
May 11, 2008
Light Posting Next Few Days
I'll be in a SharePoint 2007 training class the first part of the week and so will not be posting during the day. Comments will be set back to moderated because I seem to be under a massive spam attack the last few days.
May 10, 2008
Voting Requirements
I just got back from the Blue Rocks game a little while ago, and for the 7th inning stretch, they asked women (nurses, I believe) who were there with the Breast Cancer Awareness promotion to sing "Take Me Out to the Ballgame." They were very nervous because they weren;t sure they knew the words.
When I'm absolute dictator, being able to sing the chorus of "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" will be a requirement to be allowed to vote.
Why Can't a Woman be More Like a Man?
Lyrics, A Hymn to Him Lyrics >>
For some reason (I sincerely don't know why) this song just popped into my head. I googled and found the lyrics linked above, and it hit me that if My Fair Lady were written to day, Henry Higgins and Colonel Pickering would have ended the play as gay lovers. Look at some of these lyrics:
Men are so pleasant, so easy to please;Whenever you are with them, you're always at ease.
...
Well, why can't a woman be like you?
...
But by and large we are a marvelous sex!
Why can't a woman take after like a man?
Cause men are so friendly, good natured and kind.
A better companion you never will find.
...
Men are so decent, such regular chaps.
Now, the real point of the song is probably summed up in the last line, as Higgins reveals who his true love really is:
Why can't a woman be like me?
I have a hunch (and I'm not going to bother to Google to prove or disprove it) that there are any number of "scholarly" articles examining this song, and the play as a whole for homosexual undertones.
However, those undertones most likely spring from George Bernard Shaw's misogynism which was a significant part of the plot of his play
Pygmalion, on which My Fair Lady was based. I wrote a paper on high school on Shaw's hatred of women as made evident in both Pygmalion and Man and Superman. (Contrary to what they once said on Cheers, that's not the one where Superman battles the Mole People.) While apparently heterosexual, Shaw, like most socialists and progressives, had a negative opinion of people, especially women. (He did, however, advocate equal political rights for women. Also like most socialists and progressives, he had a high opinion of himself.) In a foreword or afterword (I can't remember which) to an edition of Pygmalion I read as a kid, he argued against changing the ending of Pygmalion, where Eliza chooses to marry Freddy, rather than Higgins, because, Shaw argued, women were mercenary about marriage and therefore Eliza would choose the more financially secure and socially prominent Freddy over Higgins. Many, if not most, adaptations and performances, most prominently My Fair Lady, have indeed changed the ending to have Eliza choose Higgins.
I guess if there's a point to this post, and it's certainly not where I started writing, it's to emphasize that, for all their claims to the contrary, socialists, progressives and others of the Left, really do hate people and that's likely why they're so eager to have government (of course led by the Left, who somehow escape their otherwise global condemnation of humanity) control them.
Useless Pope Fact of the Day
Since Pope Benedict did Mass at their park, the Nationals have been 8-3 at home.
(Source)
May 9, 2008
Quote of the Day
"The foundation of national morality must be laid in private families. . . . How is it possible that Children can have any just Sense of the sacred Obligations of Morality or Religion if, from their earliest Infancy, they learn their Mothers live in habitual Infidelity to their fathers, and their fathers in as constant Infidelity to their Mothers?"
-- John Adams (Diary, 2 June 1778)
Reference: The Works of John Adams, C.F. Adams, ed., vol. 3 (171)
Last Night's Lost
Random Thoughts:
1) So, Locke was "desired" by the island/its inhabitants almost from birth and kept screwing up their plans. First, by choosing the knife. Then by refusing his chance to go to a science camp. (Note: I did once attend a science camp, but was not taken to a remote bizarre island. Well, I was taken to DC.)
2) As I understood it, Abbadon (sp?) was working with the freighter. Alpert wanted Locke for the island's sake, while it seems that Abbadon is working with Widmore. With Jacob being "unavailable," Christian giving the orders and Locke ending up on the island at Abbadon's behest now, does that mean Locke is actually (albeit inadvertently) aiding Widmore and not the island? Wouldn't be the first time Locke screwed the pooch.
3) What's up with Claire? She was positively loopy. I've seen some speculation that she's dead, and this being Lost, you can't discount that.
4) If there isn't a Lost drinking game, I'd suggest the following rules:
a) Drink every time Locke says "Don't tell me what I can't do."
b) Drink every time Kate uses that same concerned look
c) Drink every time Sawyer calls someone by a nickname
d) Drain it every time there's an opportunity to share information but they don't (That will cause alcohol poisoning)
5) I do say "Don't tell me what I can't do" along with Locke every time he says it. I don't know why.
6) Kind of cool when they revealed young Locke as having drawn the smoke monster. How deep does this connection with the island go?
7) You almost had to feel bad for Ben as he knew he was no longer the "chosen one." But from the flash-forwards, we know he seemingly ends up back in charge. Does this mean bad news for Locke? Could he die saving the island? Could he decide he needs Ben's deviousness/dark side to save the island?
Man, I love this show, but I can't help but feel I'm getting set up for a colossal disappointment when we're finally told what's going on...
May 8, 2008
This means something different in Great Britain than it does here....
Great tits cope well with warming
Apparently they're talking about birds...
WE WIN!!
This Day in History 1945: V-E Day is celebrated in American and Britain
On this day in 1945, both Great Britain and the United States celebrate Victory in Europe Day. Cities in both nations, as well as formerly occupied cities in Western Europe, put out flags and banners, rejoicing in the defeat of the Nazi war machine.
It was a long, hard-fought victory. At times it seemed foolish to continue to fight, but we fought and prevailed against one of the greatest evils this world has ever seen.
Of course, had today's Democrats been around back then, the Nazis would likely control mainland Europe and be executing any remaining Jews in their concentration camps. The war was really hard and saving Europe just wasn't worth the effort and doomed to failure anyway and we had a Depression going on. It would have been foolish to fight such an impressive military as the Nazis had. And fighting them just created more Nazis anyway.
UPDATE: Here's the image I was thinking of when I chose the headline:
From the opening credits of the greatest sitcom of the 80s, Cheers. Although, I'm not 100% it actually refers to V-E Day. It might be V-J.
UPDATE 2: It's neither V-E or V-J Days. According to IMDB, it refers to the end of Prohibition. Who'da thunk it?
Quote of the Day
Without liberty, law loses its nature and its name, and becomes oppression. Without law, liberty also loses its nature and its name, and becomes licentiousness.
-- James Wilson (Of the Study of the Law in the United States, Circa 1790)
Reference: The Works of James Wilson, Andrews, ed., vol. 1 (7)
May 7, 2008
I know this shouldn't be funny...
If Obama is forced to make the ticket Obama/Clinton, do you think Hillary will wait until after he's inaugurated to murder Obama or do it while he's president elect?
Quote-a-palooza
"War, like most other things, is a science to be acquired and perfected by diligence, by perserverance, by time, and by practice." - Alexander Hamilton
"Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand." - Augustine of Hippo
"I want the people of America to be able to work less for the government and more for themselves. I want them to have the rewards of their own industry. This is the chief meaning of freedom." - Calvin Coolidge
"Among a people generally corrupt, liberty cannot long exist." - Edmund Burke
"We are apt to be deluded into false security by political catch-words, devised to flatter rather than instruct." - James A. Garfield
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." - H. L. Mencken
"We focus on the negative and our politicians stoke our unhappiness all the more. They bribe us with our own money, promising to expand the government to address the grievances that they promote. But we ought to be careful what we wish for." - Tom Purcell
"The time is long overdue to stop gullibly accepting the left's vision of itself as idealistic, rather than self-aggrandizing." - Thomas Sowell
"[O]ver the course of Bill Clinton's (bungled, distasteful) presidency and Hillary Clinton's (bungled, distasteful) campaign for the presidency, the couple have separately and together become incarnations of the most unattractive attributes of their generation's elite- blind ambition cloaked in do-good self-righteousness, a sense of entitlement, high-handed snobbiness, hedonism, narcissism. As a poster couple for people of a certain age and demographic, they have become a bit of an embarrassment." - Kurt Andersen
"After years of learning how to fight an unfamiliar war in Afghanistan and Iraq, and to protect us at home, we are finally getting most things right. But if our soldiers and intelligence agencies have learned how to win, our politically correct diplomats and the American consumer haven't- and are doing as much at home to empower radical Islam as those on the front lines are to defeat it." - Victor Davis Hanson
"Oh, let's also point out that, as a matter of political reality, Clinton might as well be calling for a ban on the use of unicorn meat in dog food, because there is no way her [gas tax holiday] proposal can actually, you know, happen." - Jonah Goldberg
"Every several weeks, I write a column suggesting what this presidential election might look like if we had serious candidates and a press corps that treated the presidency as an important office in which vital decisions would be made by its incumbent. I invariably get flooded with e-mails telling me, basically, 'Blankley, don't hold your breath'." - Tony Blankley
"I wouldn't want to give you the idea that my hometown newspaper is entirely heartless when it comes to right-wingers. In fact, just recently, I had occasion to write the following letter to the editor: 'First it was William F. Buckley who got a terrific, extremely respectful, front page send-off. Today, it was Charlton Heston's turn. Clearly, all a conservative has to do in order to get his just desserts from the L.A. Times is to die on a slow news day." - Burt Prelutsky
Jay Leno: Happy Cinco de Mayo. People love Cinco de Mayo. I saw this one woman throwing back shots of tequila one after the other. Then I realized it was Hillary Clinton working the Latino vote. ... Hillary Clinton told People magazine this week she's never had cosmetic surgery. She said it it's not for her. You know how politicians hate anything that's fake. ... Actually, there was a rumor she had cosmetic surgery back in the '90s. They said she had her eyes done when she was First Lady. It turns out it was right after the scandal. They just took the blinders off. That was all. No actual surgery was involved. ... Because of where John McCain was born- he was born in the Panama Canal Zone, you know, not in the United States- there was a question as to whether he could legally become president. Well, this week, the Senate declared McCain is eligible to become president, and listen to this, because of his age, also eligible to be a greeter at Wal-Mart. So that worked out great for him. ... President Bush blasted Congress for not allowing oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Democrats said it wouldn't do any good, because it wouldn't produce oil for 10 years. You know, the same thing they said 10 years ago.
Democrats: Party of the Elite
Through May 1, the Democratic presidential field has suctioned up a cool $5.7 million from the more than 4,000 donors who list their occupation as “CEO.” The Republicans’ take was only $2.3 million. Chief financial officers, general counsels, directors, and chief information officers also break the Democrats’ way by more than two-to-one margins. The Democrats’ advantage among “presidents” is a less dramatic but still significant $7.2 million to $6.1 million. And this isn’t new: In 2004 all but one of these categories of top corporate officers broke just as dramatically for the Democrats, the “presidents” being the exception.
Republicans do somewhat better further down the corporate food chain, but still lose the competition for contributions from executive vice presidents, vice presidents, and managers.Wall Street firms, long a symbol of American elite accomplishment, also tilt decisively toward the Democrats. Employees in storied Wall Street institutions such as Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, and Morgan Stanley have all favored the Democratic field by a large margin. Even both sides of the recent Bear Stearns/JP Morgan Chase deal choose Democratic candidates over Republicans by two-to-one margins.
Democrats also enjoy enormous fundraising advantages among well-educated professionals — lawyers, teachers, accountants, journalists and writers. They carry practitioners of the hard sciences, winning solidly among physicians ($8 million to $4 million), biologists, chemists, physicists, and plain old scientists. Republicans must settle for a slender advantage among rocket scientists.
Not surprisingly, universities offer Democrats a hotbed of support. Professors favor Democrats over Republicans by a nine-to-one margin ($3.7 million to $430,000). Their students, though presumably struggling with sky-high tuition bills, nevertheless sacrificed enough late-night pizza and chips to send $4.1 million to their professors’ favorite candidates and another $1.4 million to the GOP. The “objective” media — reporters, journalists, publishers and editors — also breaks heavily for the Democrats. But no listed occupation gives the Democrats a greater edge than the unemployed. These presumably idle folks have dropped over $14.6 million into the laps of the Democrats. Their idle Republican neighbors, in contrast, have unburdened themselves of a mere $9,775. Go figure.
Who favors the Republicans? The Democratic field, after all, enjoys an overall fundraising edge in excess of $200 million, so any pocket of Republican strength is noteworthy.
In this upside-down campaign season when populist GOP campaigners like John McCain and Mike Huckabee surprised the pundits with their primary victories or, in the case of Ron Paul, their fundraising prowess, it almost makes sense that the party of the country club set has been winning the fundraising race among the common man. That’s right. The white-shirt/red-tie brigade of Republican presidential aspirants holds a nearly three-to-one edge among janitors, custodians, cleaners, sanitation workers, factory workers, truckers, bus drivers, barbers, security guards, and secretaries. While Democrats command the financial loyalty of architects, Republicans successfully woo contributions from the skilled craftsmen who turn their blueprints into reality — specifically, contractors, hardhats, plumbers, stonemasons, electricians, carpenters mechanics, and roofers. This trend extends to the saloons, where the Democrats carry the bartenders and the Republicans the waitresses. The GOP field even secures more financial support from teamsters, steelworkers, bricklayers, and autoworkers.
In defense of super-delegates
The notion of super-delegates has taken quite a beating in recent months as the contest between Hillary and Obama has heated up. Given the general weakness of Democrats and their inability to resist those who yell loudly, it's likely that super-delegates will either be abolished or reduced in importance by next election. This would be a mistake.
For one reason, this is the exact sort of primary that super-delegates can lend their expertise to most clearly. Putting all histrionics aside, this is a very close election. Despite the common media meme that Obama is sweeping away the primary season, he has less than 53% of the pledged delegates so far. (Hillary has a slight lead among super-delegates.) When also taking into account that many of Obama's delegates were elected in caucuses rather than primaries, which include a larger number of people, it's hard to portray Obama as the overwhelming choice of the Democratic electorate. Further, Hillary won votes in two states that aren't included in those delegate totals either. The plain fact is neither candidate can claim to be the clear choice of the Democrat party delegates.
The popular vote is similarly close. RealClearPolitics has Obama with a 2.2% margin in the popular vote. But when Florida is included, his margin shrinks to 1.2%. Include Michigan, and it shrinks to 0.26%. Add in estimates from the caucus states, and his margin rises to 0.57%, which can hardly claim to be an overwhelming mandate.
So, this is the perfect situation for super-delegates to resolve. With no clear mandate for a candidate, super-delegates can look at each candidate's strengths and weaknesses and can choose who they feel will best represent the party in the general election. People are chosen super-delegate based off years of experience and service to the Democrat party and should therefore best understand politics and what the party needs to compete in the fall.
In addition to their superior knowledge of the political process, as a result of their involvement, super-delegates may know information about a candidate that hasn't become widely known yet that may greatly diminish a candidate's chances of winning should it come out during the general election campaign. (In this context, examples might be that Obama really is a practicing Muslim or that Hillary really does play the other side of the field, so to speak.)
I've actually had experience with this sort of matter. I won't name names, but there was a candidate a few years ago who had some embarrassing issues in their past. (I don't remember the issue now.) Had this come out, their family would have been humiliated. Any chance they had of winning the election would have vanished. The issue had happened years in the past, and by all accounts the person had turned their life around, and so didn't deserve the matter being brought up. And the person's spouse and children didn't deserve to be put through the wringer of having this become public. We only found out about it after a local news agency discovered it and was planning on running the story. Fortunately, they were talked out of it since the candidate was extremely unlikely to win, was largely unsupported by the GOP and didn't deserve to be embarrassed. The person has not run again for any office, but I've kept my eyes out since to make sure they don't try to. If they should decide to run again, I'll be sure to take them aside and explain that their "secret" is out and will likely become public should they proceed in their candidacy.
It's that sort of insider knowledge that super-delegates can bring to the table and can use to prevent embarrassment and humiliation to someone who doesn't deserve it.
So, super-delegates do have an important role to play in the process and tossing them aside could hurt the Democrats in the future. They dispose of them at their own risk.
May 6, 2008
An Win Expectancy Finder Analysis of Major League
Who really helped the Indians win?
Hat Tip: The Hardball Times
Carville on Hillary and Obama: "If she gave him one of her cojones, they'd both have two."
The Campaign Spot on National Review Online
Click on the link above and see Obama attempting to dispute the remark, but his response is so tepid, he inadvertently confirms it.
May 5, 2008
Quote-a-palooza
"Without religion, I believe that learning does real mischief to the morals and principles of mankind." - Benjamin Rush
"Who could argue with the idea that, when it comes to sex education, our teenagers should be taught to say 'no'? Considering what's at stake (their health, their future, their dignity as human beings, their morality)- and because we love them and want what's best for them- nothing short of a clear-cut abstinence message will do. At least, that's how it appears out here in the Real World... Our teens deserve better than just a condom and a message to 'be safe.' Our children are not animals, incapable of controlling themselves. They are not hopelessly immoral creatures who are going to 'do it anyway.' Yet 'comprehensive' sex ed teaches them that they're just that. Parents, this is a slander against our youth. It's a lie- one that we must fight. Teaching abstinence may be hard work- and heaven knows it's not going to win you any popularity contests. But for the sake of our teens, there's simply no substitute. In the end, you're the only real 'protection' they've got. So don't let them down." - Rebecca Hagelin
"This year, American taxpayers will spend more than $9,200 on the average public-school student. That's a real increase of 69 percent over the per pupil expenditure in 1980. The total bill for a student who remains through high school will be almost $100,000. This spending would be worthwhile if it gave us the results we need to compete globally. But it hasn't been doing so. American students still score poorly compared to students from other countries, especially in math and science. The National Assessment of Educational Progress shows 18 percent of fourth-graders and 29 percent of eighth-graders scored 'below basic' in mathematics last year. And far too many students drop out. At least 1 in 4 quits high school. Among minority children, the picture is even bleaker. In 2002, only 56 percent of black and 52 percent of Hispanic students graduated, compared to 78 percent of white students. The Census Bureau has found that a full-time employee with a college degree will earn more than $2 million over a lifetime. One with only a high-school diploma will earn half as much, while a dropout, obviously, will earn even less. More ominously, an independent study found dropouts die an average of nine years sooner than graduates. Our educational system is a national problem- but one that calls for local solutions. One approach is to provide school choice." - Ed Feulner
"In a quest to lower my impact on the environment, I calculated our [family's] carbon footprint if we cut our use of electricity and natural gas in half, switched our two cars for a single Toyota Prius and reduced our annual mileage by half, tripled our train travel, and never took an airplane. Furthermore, what if we became vegetarians, ate only local organic food in season, bought only second-hand clothes, furniture and appliances, never went to movies, bars or restaurants, and recycled or composted all our waste? Even then our combined carbon footprint would be 7.3 tons per year, but that would get us just below the world average of 4 tons per capita annually... The creators of Carbon Footprint claim that everyone in the world must eventually emit no more than 2 tons of carbon dioxide per year. When did Americans last emit so little carbon dioxide? Around 1870." - Ronald Bailey
"Are you willing to spend time studying the issues, making yourself aware, and then conveying that information to family and friends? Will you resist the temptation to get a government handout for your community? Realize that the doctor's fight against socialized medicine is your fight. We can't socialize the doctors without socializing the patients. Recognize that government invasion of public power is eventually an assault upon your own business. If some among you fear taking a stand because you are afraid of reprisals from customers, clients, or even government, recognize that you are just feeding the crocodile hoping he'll eat you last." - Ronald Reagan
"The McCain [health care] plan would provide an annual tax credit of $2,500 per individual or $5,000 per family. The idea is to encourage families to buy their own health care plans- preferably plans that save consumers money when they follow healthy lifestyles and make smart economic choices. Unlike Clinton and Obama, McCain would not require that insurers cover people with chronic illnesses. Instead, McCain proposes state 'guaranteed access plans' for those patients. Politically, Plan McCain may be suicide. Clinton and Obama have kept to the current employer-based system- which gives workers the happy illusion of not paying for their health care, when in fact it comes out of their paychecks. Like President Bush, however, McCain has concluded that the best way to curb health care costs is to return the incentive to save to patients. Because when you know a doctor's visit will only cost $25 and that you won't have to pay for a test you may not need, you have no incentive to economize. That's the problem with the status quo: The cheaper we make it look, the more it ends up costing. The way Americans look at health care has been distorted by a system that cuts costs where they are least onerous. Gone is the day when patients paid for annual medical exams and insurers picked up the tab if a family member became seriously ill. Now you don't have to be sick to be subsidized, and workers have come to expect someone else to pick up the tab for routine care, minus a modest co-pay. Credit McCain for proposing to make the process transparent, so that people have a more personal stake in the care they receive." - Debra Saunders
"Is the bottom falling out for Barack Obama?... The latest Fox News poll, conducted after the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's appearance at the National Press Club, showed Obama's favorable/unfavorables at 63 to 27 percent among Democrats, compared to Hillary Clinton's 73 to 22 percent. Suddenly she's not the only one with high negatives. And 36 percent of Democrats say they would be disinclined to vote for Obama because of his longtime relationship with his former pastor. There's more bad news in The Pew Research Center poll of Democrats. Obama's national lead among Democrats is down from 49 to 39 percent to a statistically insignificant 47 to 45 percent... Obama's standing as a general election candidate also seems to have taken a hit. Gallup showed him tied with John McCain 45 to 45 percent before the Wright appearance and trailing 47 to 43 percent afterward; at the same time, it shows Hillary Clinton tied with McCain 46 to 46 percent... A few pundits still are saying that Obama's choice of pastor is a distraction, an irrelevancy. But some voters, perhaps in the belief that a president's judgment and values have important consequences, don't agree." - Michael Barone
"The evidence is that if every eligible voter voted, national elections would probably remain unchanged. 'Simply put,' political scientists Benjamin Highton and Raymond Wolfinger wrote in a 2001 article, 'The Political Implications of Higher Turnout,' U.S. 'voters' preferences differ minimally from those of all citizens; outcomes would not change if everyone voted.' So, maybe, just maybe, we have our priorities wrong. Perhaps cheapening the vote by requiring little more than an active pulse (Chicago famously waives this rule) has turned it into something many people don't value. Maybe the emphasis on getting more people to vote has dumbed down our democracy by pushing participation onto people uninterested in such things. Maybe our society would be healthier if politicians aimed higher than the lowest common denominator. Maybe the people who don't know the first thing about how our system works aren't the folks who should be driving our politics, just as people who don't know how to drive shouldn't have a driver's license. Instead of making it easier to vote, maybe we should be making it harder. Why not test people on the basic functions of government? Immigrants have to pass a test to vote; why not all citizens? A voting test would point the arrow of civic engagement up instead of down, sending the signal that becoming an informed citizen is a valued accomplishment. And if that's not a good enough reason, maybe this is: If you threaten to take the vote away from the certifiably uninformed, voter turnout will almost certainly get a boost." - Jonah Goldberg
Why do Catholics prefer Hillary to Obama?
But all that aside, how do we understand the apparently strong preference for Clinton over Obama? This question brings to mind a distinction a seminary classmate once made between what he called “Real Nuns” (RNs) and “Catholic Career Girls” (CCGs). RNs tend to be the ones in habits, ones who don’t sign petitions in favor of women’s ordination, and who seem to love everything about being Catholic. CCGs tend to wear business suits and are denizens of the CCD Congress in Los Angeles.
Obviously that’s a humorous caricature, but anyone who has spent any time at all in the Catholic Church readily recognizes the general validity of this distinction.For our purposes, ”RN Catholics” would never vote for either Clinton or Obama, so they’re not included in these polls. Meanwhile, Clinton could almost pass for a CCG herself, and she certainly appeals to that demographic group. She is an “empowered” woman with an unthreatening, Christian-lite Gospel that would attract people who want the compassion without all the doctrine. With apologies to Professor Kmiec, I think Clinton is more of a “Catholic natural” than Obama when it comes to connecting with the religious sensibilities of lukewarm or dissident Catholics.
I think the primary reason is stated before the excerpt above: whites are trending Clinton.
May 4, 2008
May 3, 2008
Live-Blogging the GOP State Convention
I'm here at the Republican State Convention with a weak signal, so I may have stop at some point, but we're about to begin the nominating and endorsement process.
We gathered here in regional caucuses at 7:30 to elect representatives to the various convention committees and to give candidates a chance to speak to us and make their pitch for our support. I was selected to be one the Wilmington region's representatives on the Resolutions committee. So a few minutes after the start of the convention, I left to attend the meeting of the resolutions committee, where we passed two resolutions: one remembering those Republicans who have died since the last state convention and another one honoring the memory of former Republican national committeeman W. Laird Stabler, Jr. For obvious reasons, I don't know what the convention as whole did during that time.
A video message from John McCain was played urging us to unite behind his candidacy to keep the White House in Republican hands.
Delegates to the national convention were elected as were electors who will cast Delaware's electoral votes if McCain carries Delaware.
A video message was played from Newt Gingrich urging us to support some platform an organization of his developed. He's clearly laying the groundwork for a run for the Presidency in the future.
Former FBI director Louis Freeh gave the keynote address in support of John McCain's candidacy, including a story about how McCain worked to try to peacefully resolve a standoff with a Montana militia under the condition that his involvement not be publicized. The more I learn about McCain, the more I respect him.
Currently, State Senator Gary Simpson is giving an address placing Mike Castle's name in nomination for the convention endorsement. As I've often felt at past conventions, why do we need to go through the whole rigmarole for Castle? We know he's running, we know he'll be endorsed. I think Castle would get the delegates more enthused if he just bypassed it all and saved us some time rather than going through multiple speeches and a rally. State Representative Debbie Hudson just began her seconding address. A nomination speech, plus two seconding speeches, plus a rally, plus an acceptance speech is a bit much for an endorsement that's not in doubt.
In terms of other bloggers, I've seen, but not had the chance to speak to, Dave Burris and David Anderson. Elbert of That's Elbert with an "E" had told me he would be stopping by, but I haven't seen him. And Tyler Nixon just shook my hand as I was typing the prior paragraph.
Updates as news warrants. I will likely be leaving early as I have a mid afternoon commitment in Wilmington.
UPDATE (10:12): In an upset, Castle was endorsed unanimously. While bouncing beach balls around during the rally, a chandelier was broken.
UPDATE (10:31): Castle spoke for almost 20 minutes. Michele Rollins was just introduced in her position as head of Winning Women here in Delaware and is speaking about Mike Castle some more. We didn't hear enough about him already? She's now switched to talking about picking good candidates and referred to "President McCain" in the present tense.
UPDATE (10:34): Nominations for Senate are beginning. John Davis, chairman of Kent County is placing the name of Tim Smith (I think) into nomination.
UPDATE (10:36): Oops. Davis zigged when I thought he would zag. He's actually nomination Christine O'Donnell. He gave a long introduction without naming the name of his candidate and I guessed wrong.
UPDATE (10:41): I was going to make a comment about the rude people talking during Vance Phillip's seconding speech for O'Donnell, but it seems to be O'Donnell's people themselves doing it. Phillips made a comment: "I love both Christine O'Donnel and Tim Smith. How's that for a politician?" I'm supporting O'Donnel, but Smith made an impressive talk to our Wilmington caucus this morning.
UPDATE (11:10): Turns out that a neighbor of mine is also a delegate from Wilmington. So I'm not the only Republican on my block. And she tells me that some of the guys across the street who I haven't gotten to know yet are also Republicans.
UPDATE (11:15): Christine O'Donnell won the endorsement with 60.7% of the vote just over the 60% requirement. Smith has promised to drop out and support the endorsed candidate.
UPDATE (11:21): Liane Sorenson, while nominating John Brady for Insurance Commissioner said he graduated from "Sallies" I hate that. The name is Salesianum.
UPDATE (11:40): Dave Graham, candidate for Governor, couldn't find anyone willing to place his name in nomination. As one person behind me said, referring to the filing fee, "There's $5,300 well spent." Mike Protack's scheduled nominator couldn't be found, so David Anderson, a scheduled seconder had to step up and fill the void.
UPDATE (11:43): Forgot to mention: Brud Lee, Judge Lee's son knew my website when he saw my name tag. I'm not used to people knowing my blog. That's quite surprising.
UPDATE (11:44): Protack's scheduled nominator is not giving the second seconding speech. Apparently his granddaughter texted him and he had to respond. Certainly forgivable.
UPDATE (11:47): It was just said that Mike Protack doesn't give up. Isn't that exactly why so many people are annoyed with him? It's the top of the ticket or nothing for him?
UPDATE (12:26): Bill Lee got the endorsement with over 80% of the delegate vote. We were discussing at one point if Protack would take the hint if he got crushed by a candidate who wasn't even present and had earlier promised not to run. We decided probably not. If the hint were to be taken, it would have been taken by now.
UPDATE (12:37): While we're going through the process of nominating and seconding speeches for Charlie Copeland for the Lieutenant Governorship, I figured I'd give an update on some other issues going on here. Terry Strine, the current state chairman, had decided to run for National Committeeman would resign the office of state chairman upon officially becoming committeeman at the national convention. There was to be an election to select his replacement after the regularly scheduled convention today. Tom Ross, current City Republican Chairman, was the only candidate for the election. (I've known Tom for almost a decade now and he's actually the reason I came to my first convention since 2001 in order to support him in his race.) In the past week, Laird Stabler, III, son of the long-time National Committeeman, announced his intention to run for the position so long held by his father. Last night, the State Committee elected Stabler by a margin of about 5 or 7 votes. (I forget which right now.) So, we're still up in the air as to what is going to happen as to if there will be an election for State Committee Chairman or not. I asked Tom Ross just after the vote on the gubernatorial endorsement and he only said an announcement would be coming soon. The announcement made just before the start of the endorsement process for Lieutenant Governor was to hold on until an announcement was made. That's likely an attempt to keep people from leaving, as is often the problem when the Convention is at the beach, as it is today. (One Convention I was at actually lost its quorum due to people leaving since there were no important offices left to issue endorsements for.) Updates on the state chairman's election (or not) as events warrant.
UPDATE (1:05): Terry Strine did resign. In a rather emotional address, he announced that would resign this coming Friday. He stated that he'd be doing the same activities in a private capacity that he would be doing as National Committeeman: raising funds, building ties to the national party and conservative organizations in DC, etc. He's already agreed to serve as co-chair of McCain's Delaware organization, and will be working on Charlie Copeland's campaign for Lieutenant Governor and John Clatworthy's campaign for State Senate, and extended an offer of assistance to other campaigns. He took a lot of grief in his tenure as State Chairman but it needs to be remembered that it's a thankless job, without pay and many long hours that he took on when no one else would. He's done a lot for the party and he will continue to do so in the future.
UPDATE (1:13): Tom Ross is officially the next chairman of the Delaware Republican Party. As I said above, I've known Tom for a decade now, and he's a hard worker, fair and honest person who will do what is right and necessary to help rebuild and strengthen the Republican Party in Delaware. In his brief but fiery acceptance speech, he showed he's not afraid to take it to the Democrats and he will do so as State Chairman.
And with that done, we're adjourned!
"Mr. Obama seems to think he can repeal the laws of economics."
Windfall Profits for Dummies - WSJ.com
We tried this windfall profits scheme in 1980. It backfired. The Congressional Research Service found in a 1990 analysis that the tax reduced domestic oil production by 3% to 6% and increased oil imports from OPEC by 8% to 16%. Mr. Obama nonetheless pledges to lessen our dependence on foreign oil, which he says "costs America $800 million a day." Someone should tell him that oil imports would soar if his tax plan becomes law. The biggest beneficiaries would be OPEC oil ministers.
There's another policy contradiction here. Exxon is now under attack for buying back $2 billion of its own stock rather than adding to the more than $21 billion it is likely to invest in energy research and exploration this year. But hold on. If oil companies believe their earnings from exploring for new oil will be expropriated by government – and an excise tax on profits is pure expropriation – they will surely invest less, not more. A profits tax is a sure formula to keep the future price of gas higher.
...
This tiff over gas and oil taxes only highlights the intellectual policy confusion – or perhaps we should say cynicism – of our politicians. They want lower prices but don't want more production to increase supply. They want oil "independence" but they've declared off limits most of the big sources of domestic oil that could replace foreign imports. They want Americans to use less oil to reduce greenhouse gases but they protest higher oil prices that reduce demand. They want more oil company investment but they want to confiscate the profits from that investment. And these folks want to be President?
Political campaigns usually feature economic illiteracy, but Obama seems to raising it to a new level.
May 2, 2008
It was one hundred years ago today...
that the third most popular song in America was officially published:
Katie Casey was base ball mad.Had the fever and had it bad;
Just to root for the home town crew,
Ev'ry sou Katie blew.
On a Saturday, her young beau
Called to see if she'd like to go
To see a show but Miss Kate said,
"No, I'll tell you what you can do.""Take me out to the ball game,
Take me out with the crowd.
Buy me some peanuts and cracker jack,
I don't care if I never get back,
Let me root, root, root for the home team,
If they don't win it's a shame.
For it's one, two, three strikes, you're out,
At the old ball game."Katie Casey saw all the games,
Knew the players by their first names;
Told the umpire he was wrong,
All along good and strong.
When the score was just two to two,
Katie Casey knew what to do,
Just to cheer up the boys she knew,
She made the gang sing this song:"Take me out to the ball game,
Take me out with the crowd.
Buy me some peanuts and cracker jack,
I don't care if I never get back,
Let me root, root, root for the home team,
If they don't win it's a shame.
For it's one, two, three strikes, you’re out,
At the old ball game."
Thoughts on last night's Lost
Once again, Jin shows why he's probably my favorite character (him or Sayid): he will do anything to protect his wife and child. He and Sayid are in many ways the only true Men on the show. Bernard's a bit wussy and Sawyer's getting there, being less selfish and more likely to defend the weak around him. Charlie got there more than anyone, as shown by his self-sacrifice. It's interesting that the only males who get off the island are those who don't seen to mature: Hurley lapses back into insanity and Jack is still as selfish and self-destructive as ever. I don't know that this theory means anything, given Locke's just as selfish and apparently stays on the island, Boone died as a result of trying to make radio contact with others, Charlie died as noted above, and Eko died as a result of believing all is justifiable if done in the name of survival.
So, my nascent theory about the island wanting the unselfish to go away is likely crap. Never mind.
What is it about women wearing a men's shirt? Yum.
At first I thought Juiet was being a bitca again to Kate telling her than she and Jack kissed, but it turned out to be a selfless act, letting Kate know that Jack loves her and not Juliet.
So Jack and Claire's dad... Dead? Not dead? Undead? Should be interesting to see where that's going.
What's Kate doing for Sawyer? My guess: something related to his daughter.
"We're dead, Jack." The producers have ruled out them all being dead, but they threw this line in for a reason....
As I've said before, I don't have a theory as to what the heck is going on on the island. I've just decided to enjoy the ride and can't wait to find out what's going on.
UPDATE: How could I forget what might be the most important point of all? As Rose asked, why did Jack get sick on an island that makes people get better?
Why do conservatives cheer increased government revenues?
An article at NewsBuster about government revenues setting an all-time record sparked the title question. I've actually been pondering this question for a while. What this means is that the government is now taking more money from the people than ever before. Why is that something to celebrate?
My hunch is that conservatives have spent so long arguing that the people are overtaxed, they rejoice at being proven right: tax cuts can spark economic development which will increase government revenues. But in focusing so narrowly on that one issue, they lose sight of the larger: we're working to reduce the size of government, and giving it more revenues is not the way to do that. They might win this battle, but the rhetoric undercuts our ultimate objective: smaller government. This increased revenue is not a cause for celebration in and of itself, but rather a call for further tax cuts.
Keep your eyes on the ball, guys.