Even MORE Postmortems

A lot of folks… me included… typically respond with “Who gives a shit?” when Euro-Weenies opine on American politics. But there ARE exceptions to the “Who gives a shit?” rule, especially when it comes to the Brits. It’s that “special relationship” in play, in large part, and the fact that the Brits tend to look at America and see the best in us, rather than the worst (other Europeans do, too, although they’re in the minority on “the continent”). One such exception appears in today’s Daily Mail, under the heading of “The night we waved goodbye to America… our last best hope on earth.” Excerpts:

Anyone would think we had just elected a hip, skinny and youthful replacement for God, with a plan to modernise Heaven and Hell – or that at the very least John Lennon had come back from the dead.

The swooning frenzy over the choice of Barack Obama as President of the United States must be one of the most absurd waves of self-deception and swirling fantasy ever to sweep through an advanced civilisation. At least Mandela-worship – its nearest equivalent – is focused on a man who actually did something.

I really don’t see how the Obama devotees can ever in future mock the Moonies, the Scientologists or people who claim to have been abducted in flying saucers. This is a cult like the one which grew up around Princess Diana, bereft of reason and hostile to facts.

It already has all the signs of such a thing. The newspapers which recorded Obama’s victory have become valuable relics. You may buy Obama picture books and Obama calendars and if there isn’t yet a children’s picture version of his story, there soon will be.

Proper books, recording his sordid associates, his cowardly voting record, his astonishingly militant commitment to unrestricted abortion and his blundering trip to Africa, are little-read and hard to find.

If you can believe that this undistinguished and conventionally Left-wing machine politician is a sort of secular saviour, then you can believe anything. He plainly doesn’t believe it himself. His cliche-stuffed, PC clunker of an acceptance speech suffered badly from nerves. It was what you would expect from someone who knew he’d promised too much and that from now on the easy bit was over.

He needn’t worry too much. From now on, the rough boys and girls of America’s Democratic Party apparatus, many recycled from Bill Clinton’s stained and crumpled entourage, will crowd round him, to collect the rich spoils of his victory and also tell him what to do, which is what he is used to.

Dang. That’s harsh. Author Peter Hitchens (Christopher Hitchens' brother, oddly enough) goes on at some length, and his op-ed is pretty much on the money, for the most part. I tend to disagree with his evaluation of The One’s acceptance speech, but NOT with his views on The One’s qualifications for office. I’m also in semi-agreement with his views on how things are likely to unfold in an Obama administration, but less so with his gloomy outlook on what this all means. Peter Hitchens delivery tends to be a little hyperbolic, but he does articulate my objections to The One fairly accurately. The op-ed is worth a read.

―:☺:―

The postmortems continue… and my favorite author P.J. O’Rourke weighs in with his postmortem in the November 17^th edition of the Weekly Standard (“We Blew It. A look back in remorse on the conservative opportunity that was squandered.”). And Boy-Howdy…is it ever a good one! Excerpts:

Let us bend over and kiss our ass goodbye. Our 28-year conservative opportunity to fix the moral and practical boundaries of government is gone--gone with the bear market and the Bear Stearns and the bear that's headed off to do you-know-what in the woods on our philosophy.

An entire generation has been born, grown up, and had families of its own since Ronald Reagan was elected. And where is the world we promised these children of the Conservative Age? Where is this land of freedom and responsibility, knowledge, opportunity, accomplishment, honor, truth, trust, and one boring hour each week spent in itchy clothes at church, synagogue, or mosque? It lies in ruins at our feet, as well it might, since we ourselves kicked the shining city upon a hill into dust and rubble. The progeny of the Reagan Revolution will live instead in the universe that revolves around Hyde Park.

[…]

It's not hard to move a voting bloc. And it should be especially easy to move voters to the right. Sensible adults are conservative in most aspects of their private lives. If this weren't so, imagine driving on I-95: The majority of drivers are drunk, stoned, making out, or watching TV, while the rest are trying to calculate the size of their carbon footprints on the backs of Whole Foods receipts while negotiating lane changes.

People are even more conservative if they have children. Nobody with kids is a liberal, except maybe one pothead in Marin County. Everybody wants his or her children to respect freedom, exercise responsibility, be honest, get educated, have opportunities, and own a bunch of guns. (The last is optional and includes, but is not limited to, me, my friends in New Hampshire, and Sarah Palin.)

Reagan managed to reach out to blue collar whites. But there his reach stopped, leaving many people on our side, but barely knowing it. There are enough yarmulkes among the neocons to show that Jews are not immune to conservatism. Few practicing Catholics vote Democratic anymore except in Massachusetts where they put something in the communion wafers. When it comes to a full-on, hemp-wearing, kelp-eating, mandala-tatted, fool-coifed liberal with socks in sandals, I have never met a Muslim like that or a Chinese and very few Hispanics. No U.S. immigrants from the Indian subcontinent fill that bill (the odd charlatan yogi excepted), nor do immigrants from Africa, Eastern Europe, or East Asia. And Japanese tourists may go so far as socks in sandals, but their liberal nonsense stops at the ankles.

We have all of this going for us, worldwide. And yet we chose to deliver our sermons only to the faithful or the already converted. Of course the trailer park Protestants yell "Amen." If you were handling rattlesnakes and keeping dinosaurs for pets, would you vote for the party that gets money from PETA?

In how many ways did we fail conservatism? And who can count that high? Take just one example of our unconserved tendency to poke our noses into other people's business: abortion. Democracy--be it howsoever conservative--is a manifestation of the will of the people. We may argue with the people as a man may argue with his wife, but in the end we must submit to the fact of being married. Get a pro-life friend drunk to the truth-telling stage and ask him what happens if his 14-year-old gets knocked up. What if it's rape? Some people truly have the courage of their convictions. I don't know if I'm one of them. I might kill the baby. I will kill the boy.

[…]

But are we men and women of principle? And I don't mean in the matter of tricky and private concerns like gay marriage. Civil marriage is an issue of contract law. A constitutional amendment against gay marriage? I don't get it. How about a constitutional amendment against first marriages? Now we're talking. No, I speak, once again, of the geological foundations of conservatism.

Where was the meum and the tuum in our shakedown of Washington lobbyists? It took a Democratic majority in the House of Representatives 40 years--from 1954 to 1994--to get that corrupt and arrogant. And we managed it in just 12. (Who says Republicans don't have much on the ball?)

Our attitude toward immigration has been repulsive. Are we not pro-life? Are not immigrants alive? Unfortunately, no, a lot of them aren't after attempting to cross our borders. Conservative immigration policies are as stupid as conservative attitudes are gross. Fence the border and give a huge boost to the Mexican ladder industry. Put the National Guard on the Rio Grande and know that U.S. troops are standing between you and yard care. George W. Bush, at his most beneficent, said if illegal immigrants wanted citizenship they would have to do three things: Pay taxes, learn English, and work in a meaningful job. Bush doesn't meet two out of three of those qualifications. And where would you rather eat? At a Vietnamese restaurant? Or in the Ayn Rand Café? Hey, waiter, are the burgers any good? Atlas shrugged. (We would, however, be able to have a smoke at the latter establishment.)

Those are lengthy excerpts from an article that is long, and I’ve barely scratched the surface. Yes, the article is long, but more importantly… it’s GOOD. I don’t believe I’ve read a more perceptive (and humorous) catalog of conservative failings… ever. There’s more than one reason I claim P.J. as one of my favorite authors… not the least of which is his sense of humor… but I love him primarily because of his sensibilities and his uncanny ability to put his finger directly on the pulse of sensible conservatives. “Sensible conservatives,” of course, is defined at El Casa Móvil De Pennington as me and those who think like me. My tongue isn’t completely in my cheek as I write this, ya know. I've been having friendly discussions (heh) with other, more strident conservatives in this space throughout the election season. To no avail, mostly.

I know a lot of folks who visit EIP don’t chase all the links I post. We all have limits on our time… understood. But if you read anything I link at all, then please read this. Especially if you claim to be a conservative… and even if you’re not (Lori!). You may disagree with O’Rourke in the end, but I’ll wager he’ll give you a LOT to think about.

Post-Mortems

Brevity is the soul of wit Saturday… since it’s Football Day and I’m otherwise occupied. But here are a few items for my politically-minded readers (both of ya!) that you’ve probably already read. First… the inimitable Charles Krauthammer with “The Campaign Autopsy” (via memeorandum and Real Clear Politics). Excerpts:

WASHINGTON -- In my previous life, I witnessed far more difficult postmortems. This one is easy. The patient was fatally stricken on Sept. 15 -- caught in the rubble when the roof fell in (at Lehman Brothers, according to the police report) -- although he did linger until his final, rather quiet demise on Nov. 4.

In the excitement and decisiveness of Barack Obama's victory, we forget that in the first weeks of September, John McCain was actually ahead. Then Lehman collapsed, and the financial system went off a cliff.

[…]

We don't yet appreciate how unprecedented were the events of September and October. We have never had a full-fledged financial panic in the middle of a presidential campaign. Consider. If the S&P were to close at the end of the year where it did on Election Day, it will have suffered this year its steepest drop since 1937. That is 71 years.

At the same time, the economy had suffered nine consecutive months of job losses. Considering the carnage to both capital and labor (which covers just about everybody), even a Ronald Reagan could not have survived. The fact that John McCain got 46 percent of the electorate when 75 percent said the country was going in the wrong direction is quite remarkable.

Senator McCain might as well have had one of those “Born to Lose” tats on his shoulder after the financial meltdown. As Krauthammer notes, even Reagan couldn’t have pulled this one off after the financial system…not just “the market”… tanked. Mr. Krauthammer has more and it’s good stuff… as usual.

Reading Krauthammer makes one think “How now, Brown Cow?” Well… Investor’s Business Daily has a few answers in its op-ed “Road Still Leads Back to Reagan in Republicans’ Latest Soul Search.” (via Real Clear Politics) Excerpts:

Few will claim that "big government Republicanism" — or, as Goldwater referred to it, a "Dime Store New Deal" — is the wave of the future. Conservatives know that competing for the affection of voters by leasing their souls to corrupt lobbyists has been a fool's errand. Within days will come a restatement of minimalist government principles, especially by the economic right.

This will resonate immediately as President-elect Obama has espoused the most collectivist philosophy of any presidential candidate since George McGovern in 1972. As the newspapers are filled each day with articles detailing the failures and corruption of government at every level, it will be easy to hang the Democrats with this issue.

[…]

The social right will have a more difficult time putting the genie back in the bottle after eight years of being promised that the national government could achieve what they had been working for years to achieve at the state level. Yet again, since the national levers of power are now gone, practicality will force the social conservatives to go back to basics, and win the war for the culture at the local level.

From a practical standpoint, the results of the Nov. 4 election should not be disheartening for the Right. When Obama stuck to his teleprompter, he talked about tax cuts, family values, the Second Amendment and strong national defense. Without his teleprompter, he talked about a national police force, overturning state conceal carry laws, how health care is a "right" while his supporters salivate at the prospects of censoring, smearing and criminalizing conservatism.

Unlike Republicans, the Democratic leadership of Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid understand power. Liberals will move to shut down talk radio, dressed up in the nicest of language of course. Only a few days ago, Schumer equated Rush Limbaugh with pornography.

I agree with nearly all of what the IBD has to say in this space, particularly with its view on the social conservatives’ agenda. State and local gub’mint is the place to go for this sort of stuff, not the federal gub’mint. But then again I’ve always thought this way… when I think about a “social agenda” at all, which is rare, indeed. I’ve never taken the trouble to lay out my political beliefs in detail (who the Hell cares, anyway?), so I’ll just repeat what’s in my Blogger profile: “Politically moderate, I'm conservative on foreign policy and national defense issues (surprise!) and liberal on social issues.” It all comes back to that ol’ saw: “You can’t legislate morality.” You shouldn’t even try. My mini-rant aside… there’s much to like in the IBD op-ed.

And finally... something for us 27-percenters: “Why I'll Miss President Bush,” in today's WSJ. Excerpt:

President Bush will soon be heading home and for many that day cannot come soon enough. Count me among those who will miss him and his bedrock decency.

He had a rough road from day one. His first inauguration struck me as a portent. I was there, shivering in the grandstands on Pennsylvania Avenue. At the exact moment the president heard "Hail to the Chief" for the first time and was announced to the audience, a sleet storm descended from the skies.

It has never let up.

Through it all Mr. Bush kept his head up and soldiered on. He took the criticism in stride.

All too true, dat. And you know there's more...

Reality Check

So… I’m still in a bit of a funk today. I’m having the hardest of hard times coming to grips with the reality of the nation’s political situation, truth be told. Here’s part of an e-mail exchange I had with SN1 earlier today:

Me: So... here I am, waiting for the coffee pot to finish its magic. Yesterday was SUCH a strange day. I was up until 0400 yesterday morning, watching all the election returns (Missouri and N. Carolina still "too close to call" as I write), and up again just after noon. When I say "strange," I mean the feeling I get whenever I see The One's smiling face and hear people refer to him as "President-elect Obama." I've even said "President Obama" out loud a couple of times and it simply doesn't work for me. At all. I'm still in something akin to a mild state of shock. In my heart I knew McCain would lose, but the reality is very hard to accept.



What's the temp like among the troops? Most of the milbloggers I read have the typical military attitude... Obama will be the CinC, and that's that. Salute smartly and move on...

SN1: As for the local mood regarding the election…you hit it spot on. Here’s an excerpt from an email I wrote the kids:

Ok...now that the initial shock has worn off...

The beauty of our country is our ability to have an election, peacefully transfer the greatest power on the planet, and press on with our lives.

We'll be ok. I don't agree with the man on a lot of things...but he'll be the president and I'll support him, because he is our nation's leader. That's what we in the military do...we follow our leaders.

So you nailed my sentiments…and those of most around here…right on. I’m having a hard time imagining him as the CinC as well…I really don’t want to retire while he’s in office…another reason to stay in…

I’ve noticed in my ramblings around the ‘net… through the (primarily military) blogosphere… that the above opinions are nearly universal, and that comes as NO surprise to me. As SN1 stated… “that’s what we in the military do… we follow our leaders.” The key point is left unsaid, of course. But, just to clarify for readers of little or no military experience, there are two salient points in play here.

First and foremost: everyone who puts on the uniform of our country swears an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States” and “I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me” (there are minor differences between officer and enlisted oaths, but let us not quibble over details). I cannot over-emphasize the importance of this oath, as it ends with the words “So help me God.” You swear the oath, you make a commitment in the presence of the Deity and invoke His help. This is NO small thing. It’s the very essence of what it means to be in the military and that essence remains a part of you as long as you live. Or it should, at any rate. There are always a few outliers.

Point Two: The President of the United States isn’t the President of the Democrat/Republican/What Have You Party… he’s the President of the United States, duly and lawfully elected to that office by the people. As such, the incumbent is OUR president, and that’s no small matter, either. I could launch a huge tangential rant about how annoyed I was with the Left for failing to realize this fact over the course of the last few years, but I’m sure you know where I’m coming from, Gentle Reader. And I flat REFUSE to become the right-wing equivalent of a moonbat by saying shit like “Obama isn’t MY president.” The people have spoken, for better or worse, and we’ll have another go at this four years on. In the meantime… I suggest any malcontents out there suck it up and get with the program. Otherwise? Vote with your feet. There are airplanes departing these shores every single day. Get on one and be gone, as you obviously don’t “get” what this country is all about. I’ll end this part of the rant right here… or, ‘nuff said.

One last point… I agree with what Cassie has to say on this subject:

It remains for us now to find a way to reconcile our political differences, for despite the rhetoric of hope and change our differences are stark and will not give way to the fuzzy talk that wins votes. This will require grace and magnanimity from the victors as well as restraint and willingness to forget old grudges from the losers in this contest. We need not forebear to criticize, but we should never undermine policy once Mr. Obama takes his oath in January.

And above all, let us respect the dignity of the office of the President. He has earned it by dint of the campaign he ran, as well as by virtue of the thousands of votes cast for him. It is well that there will be no unseemly haggling over the vote counts, as happened in 2000 and 2004. This has been a long contest and with two wars going on and an economic turndown to deal with, our energies will be best directed to the conversation about the America we want to leave for our children and grandchildren.

The good news is that we all still have a voice in that America. Let's roll our sleeves up and make it a better place.

What she said.

(Image from The Wiki)

A Class Act

John McCain's concession speech, just in case ya missed it (10:00 min):







My initial reaction to this speech last evening was there has to be just a little bit of buyer’s remorse amongst some Obama voters. Not the hardcore Obamanons, mind you... I'm thinking more of the cross-over vote and/or newly registered “Independents.” Senator McCain is a class act… a man of courage, integrity, and values. He would have made a great president.

I also watched Obama’s acceptance speech last night and it wasn’t all that bad. There wasn’t any substance in the speech (as usual), but he did say a few of the “right” things. Once again, in case ya missed it, here’s Obama’s acceptance speech (17:00 min):

I was up until 0400 this morning watching all the brouhaha. I’m tired, disappointed, and emotionally hung-over today (no alcohol hangover, thankyouverymuch). But I need to say one thing: I was SO very proud to be an American last night. Our democratic political system played out as it has so many, many times in the past. There will be yet another peaceful transition of power, with no blood in the streets, no riots, no threat of a coup d’état. There will be a recount or two where the results were close, but that’s about it. My bottom line: I may not like the results but I LOVE the process.

Well Done, America.

Why I'm Voting Democrat...

Via Lex… especially for Blog-Buds Barry and Doc… a letter to the editor, published at American Thinker. Just a couple of excerpts to whet your appetite (I’m sorely tempted to use a Guns ‘n’ Roses pun here, but I’ll resist):

I’m voting Democrat because like most Americans I trust lawyers more than anyone else; I think only lawyers should run the government, and all the Democrat Leaders are lawyers: Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Joe Biden, John Edwards, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Leader Harry Reid, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry, to name just a few. (Al Gore dropped out of Law School, so I don’t trust him as much, except on Global Warming.)



I’m voting Democrat because the Democrats support the trial lawyers and I think this country needs more lawsuits and less tort reform. And I don’t believe the trial lawyers’ contributions have a thing to do with it.



I’m voting Democrat because Congress has done such a wonderful job under Democrat leadership the last two years, that I want a lot more of the same.



I’m voting Democrat because I want to get my health care from the same competent, efficient, cost-effective, customer-service-focused folks who run the US Post Office, the Pentagon, FEMA and the state Registry of Motor Vehicles.

[…]

I’m voting Democrat because I’m for putting up barriers to free trade, as they did in 1930 with the Smoot-Hawley bill. That made things much better then.

I thought about adding more excerpts… but you get the picture. And you should go read ALL the great reasons for voting for The One… and his partners-in-crime running for House and Senate seats, too. I mean… how could you NOT, based on the way they’ve run things over the past two years? (Which, of course, in no way makes up for the debacle of the previous SIX years of a GOP-controlled Congress… but those retards were voted out in 2006, right?)

Signed, Sealed, Delivered...

Well, delivered to the Official USPS Big Blue Box that sits here on the grounds of Beautiful La Hacienda Trailer Park, anyway. And soon to arrive in Livingston, one would assume.

More in a bit. I'm off to yet another late start today, but my civic duty has been done.

Nobama.

Joe's 15 Minutes

Via Blog-Bud Phlegmmy:

The man does make sense, doesn’t he? I’m bettin’ The One wishes he’d NEVER had that conversation out on the trail, eh?

While we’re on the subject of last evening… however indirectly it might be… I think Senator McCain scored a thin win last night, on points. But I also believe his (McCain’s) performance was/is too late to change anything, as the “undecideds” are largely a myth at this point in time. In other words… if I were a Lefty I’d be telling anyone/everyone who would listen that I’ll be off to Canada pretty soon (think: Dubya/2004). But I’m NOT a Lefty, and I intend to stay right where I am, thankyouverymuch. The Republic will survive an Obama presidency… maybe even in a form we’ll recognize, four years on. I’m hopeful.

Oh yeah… I should ALSO add I’m not giving up. Stranger things have happened in American politics than a McCain win, ya know.

Frontline

The biggest complaint from most of us who oppose The One is his demonstrable lack of experience, his opaque track record, and the fact he seemingly hasn’t done anything of consequence during his four years in the Senate — and that would be the US Senate, not the Illinois State House. Well… it’s come to light that this didn’t just happen, it’s by design. Here’s Tom Daschle, speaking about His Boy Barack:

In 2006 ... he talks to you about the possibility of running for the presidency. What do you tell him?

I tell him he should do it. We went to my favorite restaurant and took the kitchen table in the back where nobody could see us. We had a bottle of wine and a great meal and what was supposed to be a conversation that lasted about an hour I think went over three.

And during that time I told him that I thought his lack of Washington experience was one of his greatest assets. And I argued that windows of opportunity for running for the presidency close quickly. And that he shouldn't assume, if he passes up this window, that there will be another. I had that experience, and I wouldn't want him to see the same thing happen to him.

Why the 2008 window for Obama?

I think the window is important for a couple of reasons. One, it was an open opportunity -- that is, he wasn't running against an incumbent; and secondly, because the longer he's in Washington, the more history he has, and the more history he has, the more he's going to be explaining his votes and his actions and his statements and his positions that undermine his message. His message is one of change, his message is one of new direction, and it's harder to do that after you've been in Washington for a long time.

The passages above were taken from the PBS/Frontline web site, specifically from the text of the interview with former senator Daschle. The web site is an adjunct to the Frontline program “The Choice 2008,” a two-hour show that ran last evening. I watched the whole thing and was more than a little surprised at the even-handedness and objectivity of the program. Frontline tends to have a decidedly Left point of view, and I expected the program to be a puff-piece for The One. And it wasn’t… much to my surprise.

But… back to the main point. There was also another interview during the program last evening where a Talking Head claimed a conscious decision was made by Obama and his staff to keep the junior Senator from Illinois away from any and all issues that might be the least little bit controversial. I looked high and low for that quote, but it’s either been edited out of the interviews, or eliminated entirely. But… the point remains: The One’s track record is thin, by design. I find that particularly troubling.

I really liked “The Choice 2008.” Frontline usually re-runs its Tuesday show on Thursday evenings (in my market, anyway) and oftentimes again on Saturday. I heartily recommend watching the show if you haven’t made up your mind about who you’ll vote for on November 4^th. MY mind has been made up for months now, and I think it’s a testimony to the quality of the Frontline presentation that I felt my decision was reinforced by watching that show. In other words, Frontline’s “The Choice 2008” validated my judgment… and that’s no small feat for a bunch of left-wing documentary producers. You can also watch the program in its entirety on the web site… but I don’t know anyone who has the patience to watch two hours of teevee on a computer screen. I certainly don’t, but your mileage may vary.

The Winter of Our My Discontent

So… today is the season's first “heating day” here on The High Plains of New Mexico. It was 44 degrees when I awoke this morning (I use the term “morning” quite loosely) and it’s supposed to hit a high of 58. I don’t think we’re gonna make that, but I could be wrong. It’s been known to happen. One thing I DO know: no beer and cigars on the verandah today. Nosiree, Bob.

―:☺:―

I’ve been wrong about a lot of things in my life, as noted above, but it appears I wasn’t wrong about the McCain campaign. Here’s Bill Kristol, writing in yesterday’s NYT (“Fire the Campaign”):

It’s time for John McCain to fire his campaign.

He has nothing to lose. His campaign is totally overmatched by Obama’s. The Obama team is well organized, flush with resources, and the candidate and the campaign are in sync. The McCain campaign, once merely problematic, is now close to being out-and-out dysfunctional. Its combination of strategic incoherence and operational incompetence has become toxic. If the race continues over the next three weeks to be a conventional one, McCain is doomed.

He may be anyway. Bush is unpopular. The media is hostile. The financial meltdown has made things tougher. Maybe the situation is hopeless — and if it is, then nothing McCain or his campaign does matters.

But I’m not convinced by such claims of inevitability. McCain isn’t Bush. The media isn’t all-powerful. And the economic crisis still presents an opportunity to show leadership.

Mr. Kristol goes on to lay out a roadmap of sorts for a McCain recovery and come-from-behind win. It’s really late in the game for Mr. Kristol’s prescription (or anyone else’s, for that matter) to work, but God knows the current campaign isn’t working… at all.

I was looking for the transcript of yesterday’s Fox News Sunday panel discussion, in which Mr. Kristol gave the closing remarks… all about the sorry state of the McCain campaign. Those remarks were short and to the point, whereas Mr. Kristol’s op-ed in the NYT tends to wander a bit. But the op-ed will have to do, in the absence of a published FNS transcript. I’ll keep watching for those remarks and will post them when and if they become available.

In the same vein (kinda-sorta), here’s Victor Davis Hanson, writing at Real Clear Politics (“Jumping Ship…”):

Obama, as I have said ad nauseam, has brilliantly prepped the battlefield to such a degree that a Farrakhan endorsement or surrogates calling Palin a quasi-Nazi or a bimbo, or smearing McCain as near senile is irrelevant; yet one screamer in a crowd of tens of thousands is proof of McCain's and Palin's racism and hatred.

Again, most conservatives know this paradox, but for some being outraged, as the conservative voice of reason, at McCain's supposed low road ensures a CNN spot, or some future rehabilitation during the expected Obama regnum of the next eight years. I think should I write a column suddenly taking the "high road", praising Obama's wit, taste in books, and metrosexuality, I would be dubbed principled rather than cynical, 'even-handed' rather than self-serving, and a maverick rather than toadish.

Yet for a self-acclaimed conservative to vote Obama would mean that higher taxes, larger government, more entitlements, more of a UN-centered foreign policy, dialogue with an Iran, less coal, oil, and nuclear energy production at home, more "oppression" studies and "reparations", leftish Supreme Court judges, open borders (I could go on) were the truly conservative positions, or perhaps suddenly truly the 'right' positions. And as far as ethics go, in fact, a cursory review of the past Obama campaigns would reveal a ruthlessness never seen in any of McCain's efforts. Obama's record is far more left than McCain's is far right. Obama the healer has proven to be the most partisan in the Senate, McCain one of the most bipartisan.

The foregoing isn’t so much a treatise on the failures of the McCain campaign as it is a warning to conservatives who have jumped ship for The One. Yeah… I’m looking at you, Doc and Barry. Just imagine… for a moment… The One, Pelosi, and Reid discussing tax policy over dinner, mmm-kay? Or, Hell… discussing anything else of import for the nation, for that matter. That doesn't scare ya?

―:☺:―

Good news… the Dow Jones Industrials are up 700 points or so about a half hour away from the market close; the other indices are also up. So, we’re spared a ninth consecutive down day on Wall Street. We certainly needed a breather, eh?

―:☺:―

And finally… a new, self-explanatory, tongue-in-cheek video of that ol’ ‘80s hit “Take on Me” has surfaced and is making the rounds of these here inter-tubes. It’s pretty cute, so I thought I’d pass it on. Me and about 379 other people, according to ViralVids. Here we go…

Pretty good, innit?

A Rational Defense of HopeyChange... and a Rebuttal, of Sorts

Blog-Bud Doc put up a thoughtful post earlier this week entitled “Why I’m Leaning Toward Obama.” His very first line is this:

“Leaning, mind you. Much can change in the next few weeks.”

And then Doc launches into a well-reasoned explanation for his leanings, which basically involve contrasting Senator McCain’s character with that of Senator Obama’s. And Doc obviously finds flaws with Senator McCain, or rather with Senator McCain’s campaign, and to a much greater extent, some of Senator McCain’s idiot supporters… the sort of people who send out idiotic rants like this in the hope of swaying opinion.

(Short parenthetical digression: people who send out videos like the one at the link aren’t so much McCain supporters as they are Obama haters… and there are a LOT of haters out there, sad to say. I’ve noticed there’s a tremendous amount of bad information — which is to say info that is factually inaccurate or outright lies, as in the “Obama is a Muslim” meme — being circulated via e-mail, and I’ve received way too much of it. But the point is… the “hate” stuff is out there and it’s having a NEGATIVE effect on some of the undecideds.)

This, I suppose, plays into my point that McCain is running a very inept campaign. I’ve not articulated that point in a main blog-post here at EIP, but I’ve left comments to that effect in my friends’ blogs when the subject comes up. One such comment:

I'm of the opinion that the McCain campaign has been... to date... one of the most inept, tone-deaf, and incompetent presidential campaigns... ever. One expects this sort of thing from the Dems (witness: Dukakis and Kerry), but from the GOP? McCain's descent into faux populism ("Greed and corruption on Wall Street!") turns my stomach, and the "handling" of Palin has simply been a disaster... of incredible and potentially devastating proportions.

I'm thinking it's too late to save it, but I HOPE to God I'm wrong.

So. Back to Doc. If I’m reading him correctly, Doc believes Obama has run a more principled campaign while McCain has opted for traditional mud-slinging. Or… McCain is doing the classic “whatever it takes” maneuver so common to our politicians (especially when they fall behind), thereby sacrificing his principles. Doc does have a point with the direction he’s taking here, and that point is “character matters,” where the tone of a campaign is concerned. This is something of an explanation as to why otherwise rational people might choose to vote for The One. I’m sensing there’s a lot of disgust over the state of our political process, but I’m of the opinion that The One is most certainly NOT the answer. But to give the Devil his due, Obama has played this discontent like a freakin’ Stradivarius. And McCain has not.

It ain’t over ‘til it’s over… and The Fat Lady ain’t gonna sing until the wee small hours of November 5^th. Doc, in closing to this particular post, makes the point that American politics has (seemingly) always been about choosing the lesser of two evils. I’ll agree with that. You have to go back to Reagan to find an example of someone worth voting for, rather than someone to vote against. But… that said, McCain is the lesser of two evils in this election cycle, which is obviously one of the more important elections of our time. The One is just be SO wrong and SO detrimental to the success and prosperity of America it’s scary.

Your mileage may vary. But I hope not.

(Image from NY Magazine)

The Incredible Lightness of Being... A Dim-o-crat

I’m not the first person to note that some of the more perceptive comment on our presidential election comes from beyond our shores. There’s a lot to be said for a “disinterested” perspective… or as disinterested as one can be about an American presidential election (and no, that’s not ethnocentric hubris. It’s just fact). Case in point… Clive Crook, writing in Sunday’s Financial Times (free registration required):

For Mr McCain to win the election against the odds that faced him pre-Palin – with the economy in the tank and the incumbent Republican president setting records for unpopularity – would be sensational enough. For this to happen because of his vice-presidential pick, a decision that is usually of next to no consequence, beggars belief. The Democrats had to bring all their resources to getting themselves into this fix. They proved equal to the task.

As I argued last week, Mr Obama’s own initial reaction to the Palin nomination was exactly right. All the party had to do was follow his lead. Mr Obama, in effect, would give her enough rope; her inadequacies would reveal themselves in due course; it cost nothing, in the meantime, to be courteous, and to keep pressing on the issues, where the Democrats still enjoy an advantage with most voters. Ms Palin’s first television interview last week, an adequate but far from stellar performance, affirmed the wisdom of that course.

But the Democratic talking-heads had to exult in their disdain for Ms Palin and all she represents – namely, a good part of the electorate whose support Mr Obama needs. In the space of a few days, they irreversibly damaged Mr Obama’s candidacy and transformed this election.

[…]

Certainly, the Democrats can see they are in a hole. Somehow, though, the word has gone out: “Keep digging.” Mr Obama is also urged to be less cool and lose his temper. Voters adore an angry candidate, you see. “Dig faster, and be more angry,” is the advice coming down from the political geniuses who decided it was a fine idea to laugh at Ms Palin in the first place. A recurring television image in the past few days has been the split-screen contrast between a serenely smiling Republican operative and a fulminating red-faced Democrat about to have a stroke.

Mr. Crook puts his finger on something that frankly has amazed me over the past week or ten days. You don’t have to be a frickin’ rocket scientist to realize that dissing Mrs. Palin ain’t exactly… umm… smart. One could possibly cut the Democrats some slack for their initial reactions to Governor Palin… but to keep on keepin’ on like they've been doing? It's absolutely, positively inexplicable to anyone with three inter-connected, fully-functioning synapses.

A quick look at any of the recent polls would tell ya Mrs. Palin is a bona fide phenomenon. The woman struck a chord with the conservative electorate and that chord has yet to quit resonating throughout the Right and the entire nation, actually. And the Democrats seemingly just don’t get it. On the other hand, I think they DO get it. But the fact is they can neither help… nor stop… themselves in expressing their utter contempt for a woman like Sarah Palin and those terribly unsophisticated rubes who identify with her. And that, Gentle Reader, is real hubris at work.

Keep digging, Lefties. It’s oh-so-amusing to watch your slow-motion train wreck in progress. As it will be to watch you rend your garments, don your ritual sackcloth and ashes, and listen to your wails of agony at having lost yet another election, come November. The fact of the matter is Middle America doesn’t much like you or your policies. But we most especially dislike your condescension.

―:☺:―

Related: “The Audacity of Defeat." Excerpt:

It’ll be far more acrimonious this time around if the GOP wins. Already mainstream commentators (on the liberal side) are preparing for the bitterness and reprisals with premature eulogies of Obama’s campaign. On Sept. 14, The Washington Post’s David Ignatius said, by choosing Palin, McCain had sold his soul to the devil to win the election. Richard Cohen, a colleague of Ignatius at the Post, implied that Obama was “too cool” to fight back against Palin’s “jibes, her sarcasm, her smug provincialism, her exploitation of mommyhood” and so on. The Times’ Paul Krugman, incredibly, wrote on Sept. 12 that McCain’s “lies” were worse than those of Karl Rove and Bush. “The Bush campaign’s lies in 2000 were artful—you needed some grasp of arithmetic to realize you were being conned.” Yet, according to Krugman, McCain’s campaign is so dishonest that should he and Palin win the White House, their administration would be “much, much worse” than Bush’s.

And you thought Bush Derangement Syndrome was bad, eh? Just wait. You ain't seen nuthin' yet! Heads are gonna explode, and lots of 'em, too.

(via Real Clear Politics)

―:☺:―

Kinda-sorta related… Didja see this?

It's time to dump Biden and replace him with Sen. Hillary Clinton. I don't care how it's done. Campaign chief David Axelrod can figure that out. And the sooner the better. Because I'm starting to think that if Team-Obama doesn't do something dramatic fast, it's gonna lose this election. There's a worrisome shift in momentum and in the polls. The Palin phenomenon, while truly unfathomable to Democrats (ed: See?), has energized McCain's campaign and allowed him like Houdini to snatch Obama's "change" theme right out from under him. It's time to snatch it back.

Conventional wisdom says replacing Biden with Clinton can't be done. That it's too late. That it'll make Obama appear indecisive, impulsive and lacking good judgement (sic). Many Democrats believe this would cause irreparable harm to the campaign, ringing Obama's death knell. But this couldn't be further from the truth. In fact, it'd be a freakin' coup for Obama, and would instantly melt Palin's undeserving outsize political ice cap.

[...]

Obama should do what the Republicans would do in this situation. In fact, he should do exactly what his opponent did. Shake things up. Be unconventional. Roll the dice. Out-McCain McCain. Who cares how it looks.

Oh, YES! Please, please DO!! What a capital idea!

[Pssst! Senator Obama! Over here!

This is really, really GOOD advice…and, trust me… you should take it! Seriously. Yes, I know this sounds strange coming from a McCain supporter, but really… I have your best interests at heart. I want to see you keep this thing close, ya know. We don’t wanna see any McGovern-like blow-outs, now, do we? That would be truly embarrassing and would… for all intents and purposes… end your brilliant political career just as it was beginning. Keep in mind: you’re a young man and 2012 ain’t that far away. Pick up that phone. Go on… call her. You know she wants to hear from you. It’s what’s best for the country the Party you, and Joe won’t mind. At all.]

(Snerk) (Smirf) gag… grwun… snork… Bwah-wah-HA-HA-HA!

Oh shit, Oh Dear.

I can’t even type this with a straight face.