Joe Biden to Republicans in 2005: “I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don’t make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.”
Feb 252010
Feb 252010
Can’t Rupert Murdoch afford a competent photographer who can get a photo of the subject with his eyes open?
The above photo of Akio Toyoda was in Wednesday’s WSJ (Feb 24). The online version no longer has that photo to go with Holman Jenkins’ article, but it did until a few hours ago.
Feb 242010
Here’s a wild guess: New York Times reporter Sheryl Gay Stolberg wasn’t actually in the White House Cabinet Room to see this:
WASHINGTON — Tempers were fraying in the White House Cabinet Room as night turned into morning on Jan. 15. President Obama had been cloistered nearly all day with House and Senate Democrats, playing “marriage counselor,” an aide said, as he coaxed, cajoled and prodded them on a health care overhaul.
As the clock neared 1 a.m., the two sides were at an impasse. Mr. Obama stood up.
So how did she get this information? Direct revelation from God? From an impartial eyewitness? Unauthorized surveillance cameras?
I tend to doubt all three of those possibilities.
URL here.
Feb 172010
I was pleased to see John Willson talking up George Washington’s reaction to the Newburgh Conspiracy over at Front Porch Republic. It’s a fitting topic to think about on President’s Day. My response is here:
Now there’s an idea! Let’s abolish the stupid President’s Day holiday and replace it with Newburgh Day on March 15.
King George 3 appreciated the significance of that event. We should, too.
Several years ago when some of us were compiling our lists of the Ten Most Significant Political Events of the Millenium, I put this Newburgh event close to the top of my list, if not at the very top.
Ah, I found it in my e-mail archives. What follows was my contribution back in the closing days of the last millenium.
1. Martin Luther’s speech to Emperor Charles V, ending with “Hier steh’ ich. Ich kann nicht anders.” Actually, he probably didn’t say those exact words, but the meaning was clear. This example paved the way for a later hero such as Linda Tripp to stand tall and resist the full force and fury of a trillion dollar government and its hate-spewing groupies.
2. George Washington’s gentle refusal to take part in the Newburgh Conspiracy in 1783. His willingness to relinquish power, and his refusal to grab more power when it was there for the taking, is an event almost without parallel even in American history, but it was the defining moment for the political history of the United States.
3. The invention of the Printing Press
My response to Dr. Willson’s response is below. I think we’re straying a bit from the original topic.
Dr. Willson, you could have written a lot about Martin Luther vs the Roman Church that could have set a Lutheran like myself to squirming. You could have taken the side of Thomas More in the debates over the issues of authority and unity, for example. You could have poked at Luther’s doctrine of sola scriptura. But to compare the courage of Luther with that of the Holy Roman Emperor? There was little risk of Charles having to give up life and fortune. He knew where his social status and bling-bling came from. He was taking the side that kept his bread buttered. As to his sacred honor, it would have been honorable to honor the safe-conduct that he had used to get Luther to come to Worms. Then he could have had the courage to give his speech to Luther’s face instead of talking behind his back after the good monk had escaped his treachery. Yes, Luther had an escape planned, and good for him. There was no need for him to be a passive martyr, any more than Linda Tripp or any of Clinton’s victims should have been criticized for having a possible “book deal” by which they might support themselves in the face of ostracism and blackballing. Luther needed an escape route. Charles V had no need of one.
It’s unfortunate that we’re not spending more time talking about how to celebrate Newburgh Day. Where do we buy Newburgh Day greeting cards, for example? What would be an appropriate gift for one’s spouse?
Feb 112010
President Obama says he is agnostic about keeping his campaign promises. That’s OK. I’ve been atheistic about him for a long time.
But here are some conditions before we even think about increasing taxes. These items should help offset the damage.
- Abolish public employee unions and re-instate the Hatch Act.
- Enact term limits for members of Congress. No, they do not need to be severe limits, but they do need to result in at least a 10 percent turnover. Yes, we need a Constitutional amendment to do it. So get cracking.
- Eliminate ag subsidies. Cold turkey.
Otherwise there is little point.
Feb 112010
Even though I complain almost daily about the partisan hackery and unprofessionalism of newspaper journalism, even though Leonid Brezhnev would have drooled at the possibility of having a press as subservient to party ideology as the U.S. mainstream media now is, I didn’t realize it had become quite this corrupt. It’s an AP article by Sharon Theimer that appeared in the Battle Creek Enquirer a few days ago: “The influence game : Toyota’s Powerful DC Friends”
The article happens to make a lot of good points. There are legislators who worked hard to get Toyota to locate in their districts, and who have reason to want Toyota to stay. Those legislators are now the ones who are investigating Toyota’s safety issues. It’s a corrupt arrangement, to say the least.
So what’s wrong with the news media telling us about it?
Nothing. The news media absolutely should tell us about it. They should tell us about it starting when legislators get involved in plant-siting decisions in the first place. That kind of business-government partnership is corrupt from the word go. But it has been going on for years, with encouragement from newspaper editors across the land. It is only when the administration which has made a heavy investment of tax dollars in the former General Motors needs help in attacking one of General Motors’ competitors that the news media have seen fit to point out the problems with this kind of government involvment.
And naturally, this article had not a word to say about the conflict of interest when the corporate owners of General Motors, aka the Obama administration, are the ones that are providing regulatory oversight of General Motors’ competitors.
The next time a Governor John Engler or Jennifer Granholm gets involved in trying to entice a business to locate a plant in our state, will these same news people who pushed this story into print have a word of criticism about this kind of inappropriate role for elected officials? Of course not. It’s only when Public Motors and its influential friends on the left need help in harrassing the competition that they will point out the conflict of interest involving the influential friends of competitors.
The people who can put something like this in print, but only for this purpose, are not ordinary human beings with a conscience and a sense of right and wrong. They are not people who are driven by idealism. These are people who are more Machiavellian than Niccolò Machiavelli, but without the moral scruples.
Feb 092010
NY Daily News headline: “President Obama to GOP leaders: Stop ‘grandstanding’ and get to work on jobs legislation”
Next thing you know, President Obama will tell the GOP leaders to quit using teleprompters.
Feb 082010
I actually saw a bit of the Super Bowl, toward the end. And I saw that Green Police ad.
David Roberts at Grist wonders if it was aimed at teabaggers, but then rejects that idea and thinks it’s aimed at people like himself — self-righteous green moralists?
But why does it have to be one or the other? Why couldn’t it have been aimed at both, with a different message takeaway message for each of the two opposing groups?
Or maybe the takeaway message is that obnoxious greenies should buy Audis and make the company a lot of money, and then the teabaggers will be justified in their opinions of Audi drivers.
Feb 082010
It wasn’t just the Community Reinvestment Act that got us into this mess.
The problem wasn’t merely that HUD under Mr. Cuomo was raising the volume of risky loans for which taxpayers were guaranteeing. HUD was also encouraging a dangerous decline in underwriting standards at these government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs). Says former Fannie Mae chief credit officer Edward Pinto, “HUD commissioned much research aimed at forcing the adoption of more flexible lending standards by the GSEs.”
WSJ article, “Prosecutor, Charge Thyself : Andrew Cuomo has more to answer for than does Bank of America.”
Feb 052010
This is corruption. No possible good can come from a meeting between the chief regulator and the CEO of one of the companies being regulated. This is not how regulation is supposed to work. This is just an opportunity for political pressure and political concessions.
Either the cars have defects or they don’t. A meeting behind closed doors between the CEO of Toyota and a representative of Public Motors is not going to establish any facts. It’s not going to make cars any safer. The regulatory process needs to be transparent and objective, and not dependent on two guys talking nice to each other or tough to each other.
Does a public prosecutor want to meet one on one with the mafia godfather before deciding whether or not to prosecute? Does a public prosecutor want to meet one on one with the local representative of Angels of Mercy before deciding whether or not to prosecute There are proper ways of conducting interrogations. What LaHood is doing is not one of them.
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said Wednesday his agency is widening its probe of sudden acceleration complaints in Toyota Motor Corp. vehicles to look at the possibility of electromagnetic interference with electronic throttle systems, and said he wants to talk directly with company Chief Executive Akio Toyoda.
URL here.
What if a company like Toyota actually develops a safety problem with its cars someday, and somebody gets killed? The blood will be on the hands of the Obama administration. The government is supposed to be an honest regulator and is supposed to provide information on such things to the public, and to keep unsafe cars to go uncorrected. But now that it has a huge conflict of interest, there is no basis for the public to believe anything it says or does in the way of safety regulation. We still have the usual workings of the market to help us, but we’re deprived of a source of information we used to have. Obama took it away when he instituted the public automotive option.
What LaHood is doing is tearing down any residual shreds of confidence we may still have had that the government could be an honest regulator in spite of its huge conflict of interest.