Americans Support Troop Surge in Afghanistan

A lot of readers wouldn't know it, but I started blogging specifically in response to the despicable antiwar opponents of the Bush administration. Some of the commentary on the left this week is reminiscent, but folks are attacking Bush, not President Obama. Actually, Blue Texan at Firedoglake attacks the entire "Bush-Cheney cabal," so that's an especially good indicator of the derangement, "Liz Cheney Warns Against “Walking Away” from Afghanistan, Apparently Forgetting that Dick Cheney Walked Away from Afghanistan":

The Bushies’ failure, after 8 years of pissing away American lives and treasure, to competently execute and win that war is so massive, so scandalous, that anyone named Cheney shouldn’t be doing anything else on television but apologizing and begging the American people’s forgiveness.

Worst of all? Hearing Cheney try to jam Obama about the dangers of “walking away” from her father’s mess — after Dick and W. did exactly that when they got the genius idea to launch their epic fail in Iraq.

These criminals have absolutely no shame.

But it's Howie Klein who's really the essence of leftist insanity:

President Obama is days away from announcing the inevitable buckling under to the military-industrial complex and giving the generals more young Americans as cannon fodder for a useless and unwinnable war, that most Americans do not support. So who in Congress really wants to end the war and who's content just leaving it up to the military to do whatever they think is best?

Insane, as well as incorrect.

The trend has been building for months: Recall IBD's survey from October, "Americans, In Reversal, Now Back Afghan Troop Surge" (at that time, 48 percent supported sending trooop reinforcements). But check out this morning's Gallup poll, "In U.S., More Support for Increasing Troops in Afghanistan":

Americans over the last two weeks have become slightly more likely to favor sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, and slightly less likely to favor a reduction in forces. At this point, 47% of Americans would advise President Obama to increase the number of U.S. troops -- either by the roughly 40,000 recommended by the commanding general in Afghanistan or by a smaller amount -- while 39% would advise Obama to reduce the number of troops. Another 9% would opt to leave troop levels as they are, while 5% have no opinion.

The data still show that Americans are divided on the war, but with a clear and comprehensive plan for success in place -- Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal's counterinsurgency strategy -- Americans see greater likelihood of success, and thus the resulting increase in popular support.

This is the trendlline prediction of political science research on the Iraq war, and we're likely to see the same pattern in opinion of Afghanistan. See, Christopher Gelpi, Peter Feaver, and Jason Riefler, "Success Matters: Casualty Sensitivity and the War in Iraq."

(P.S. What will be most important, over the long term, is how well President Obama will be able to resist the nihilist antiwar forces of the Democratic base. The president's dithering on an Afghan troop buildup lies in large part in his weighing the polling data on a cut-and-run from the deployment. Worried about popular opinion going into next year's midterms, the adminstration thought better of opting for Democratic-leftist defeatism. Like many have said, the war will define this administration, even after the disastrous health care monstrosity passes, in whatever form, into law.)

Jazz Shaw Apologizes - Calls for Left's Mea Culpa on Sparkman Suicide, and for Others to 'Set the Record Straight'

Hey, I think folks should give credit where credit's due.

Jazz Shaw, at the Moderate Voice, has apologized for his insinuations that conservatives were responsible for the death of Bill Sparkman: "The Census Worker Suicide":

At the time, I wrongly jumped to a conclusion in my column, The Ghouls Surrounding Bill Sparkman. I assumed at that time that the most likely cause of death was murder by some local moonshiners or pot farmers or other mountain folk up to no good. Obviously, I was incorrect, and I apologize. This was obviously an ill and deeply troubled man, dealing with an illness, a lack of a job and family problems, who decided to take this route out of his problems.

Of course, there were some other writers in Blogtopia and MSM who also jumped to their own conclusion about how Sparkman died... theories which have not panned out given the current evidence. I’m sure they will be along shortly with their own apologies to set the record straight.

That takes a lot of courage and integrity. I have been highly critical of the writers at Moderate Voice for being, well, not so moderate. But Jazz Shaw's apology is classy, and no doubt will be a rarity in a political environment increasingly hate-filled and polarized.

That said, as a follow up from this afternoon, I'm reiterating my call for Larisa Alexandrovna -- who has smeared me personally as racist -- to issue an apology and retraction for her Bill Sparkman race-baiting. Ms. Alexandrovna's racist allegations against conservatives seek to delegitimized partisanship and shut down debate -- these smears are all the leftists have left, so don't expect much from these people, so intent to gain political capital from the cult of victimology.

That said, Mark Kleiman has offered a retraction, if not an apology:

It turns out that the death of a census worker in Kentucky was a suicide, not an act of domestic terrorism. Thus, contrary to my earlier speculation, the people who have been trying to whip up panic fear of the federal government in general and the Census in particular aren’t in fact responsible for the killing.

That said, Charles Johnson continues to refuse an apology.

Readers are asked to drop additional retractions (or apologies) in the comments, and I'll update.

See also, Pirate's Cove, "Kentucky Census Worker Officially Comitted Suicide, the Left Completely Pwnd."

Independents Favor Republicans 44-20 in Generic Vote - Rasmussen Reports

I wrote my "FreshJive" post this afternoon (where I discuss Obama's bleeding with independent voters) before seeing this: "Rasmussen: Republicans Extend Lead to Seven Points on Generic Ballot; Independents Favor Republicans 44-20":

1994-ish:

Republican candidates have extended their lead over Democrats to seven points, their biggest lead since early September, in the latest edition of the Generic Congressional Ballot.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 44% would vote for their district’s Republican congressional candidate while 37% would opt for his or her Democratic opponent.

...Voters not affiliated with either party continue to heavily favor Republicans, 44% to 20%.

I'm curious -- if Republicans take the House in 2010, will the media even report it?

Well, I guess that's silly. Of course they will. What they have refrained from mentioning is that Democrats actually gained control of Congress in 2006.

Also, from CBS News, "Obama Faces Challenge with Independents," and Gallup, "Obama's Approval Slide Finds Whites Down to 39%."

Hat Tip: Allahpundit.

Cartoon Credit: William Warren at Americans for Limited Government.

Best Conor Friedersdorf Tweet Evah!

I'm almost rolled over laughing! Talk about hammering Conor Friedersdorf!

I'm checking my @AmPowerBlog replies and I find one from Sandra Binder. And then clicking on her page we get this beauty:

So now I am totally following Sandra's tweets!

Hopefully next she'll put ever-so-worthy E.D. Kain on the chopping block, and not to mention Andrew Sullivan (no link for him, but R.S. McCain's on the case, "Kentucky Census Right-Wing Lynching Fake Hate-Crime Suicide Schadenfreude Update).

No doubt Dan Riehl's hip to it (see, "Conor Friedersdorf vs. Dan Riehl").

Who says Twitter's worthless!!?

FreshJive Calls Out Obama: 'A Devastating Take on the Iconic Obama Poster'

Mediaite's got the story, "'Hope Is Fading Fast': A Devastating Take on The Iconic Obama Poster." But Rachel Sklar, the author, gives FreshJive short shrift (via Memeorandum):

This shirt will probably cause a more conflicted reaction as Democrats debate whether it’s fair or unfair, and Republicans will probably love it. What makes this image significant, of course, is that it comes from the left ...

Well, yeah, sort of.

Actually, those on the right have seen way more clever posters, signs, and t-shirts all year -- at the tea parties and town halls. This one's cute, but not so orginal as to knock anybody's socks off.

It is important on the left, but also inaccurate. The reaction on the hard left is not conflicted. Radical blogs like Firedoglake have been hammering the "corporate" Democrats for some time now. (Frankly, Jane Hamsher's a commie tin-pot dictator-in-waiting.) And Josh Marshall's pissed that the party can't overcome GOP parliamentary procedures slowing down the ObamaCare monstrosity. Folks like this want radical change, "structual change," in response to the perceived "political polarization" that's causing a breakdown of "informal rules." Ezra Klein's also called for an end to the filibuster, and Scottie Lemieux also repudiates long-standing congressional rules protecting minority rights in favor of giving Dems power to ram down their unpopular policies -- and thus implement tyranny of the majority (isn't that just what radical leftists really want?).

What's good about this is that, yeah, for all of his own radical proposals, on some issues President Obama is trying to hold onto the political center (look at his Afghanistan decision to back McChrystal's troop surge), lest his "fading hope" turns out to be a political avalanche of dissatisfaction among moderates. So, as the radicals pull Obama leftward, back over to his own communist ideological inclinations, we'll seen even more of a rightward acceleration among independent moderates, who're already bailing on "hopenchange," as they say screw that with socialist extemism.

In short, the Democratic-left is fubar. Everyone's tired of Obama's s***.

Bill Sparkman's Death Ruled Suicide: Meanwhile, Deafening Silence on the Radical Left?

Once again, Michelle Malkin nails the meme of the day, "When Will the Left Retract the Kentucky Census Worker Case Smear?" (Via Memeorandum.) Michelle posts this image, from the Brad Blog," which I had also posted in my earlier coverage:

I'm especially waiting for an apology from my personal race-baiter extraordinare, Larisa "Airhead" Alexandrovna. When the Sparkman story broke, Ms. A.A. wrote, "

Does that sound like a suicide to you or even the possibility of suicide? Is there even any room for that theory given what the police found? It is clearly murder, regardless of what investigators think was the reason for it (political crime incited by political hate speech or a drug related murder or any number of possibilities).

But of course, the motivation did matter to Larisa race-bait:

I think that it is also fair to question the role Rep. Michelle Bachmann (the psychotic, drooling, knuckle-dragger, ill-informed conspiracy theorist, birther and hater masquerading as a member of Congress) jihad against the Census Bureau had something to do with it.

I think people in positions of power inciting hate and violence need to be held accountable. As a public official, she has a duty to protect not only her constituents, but also the public interest. That duty is her priority, above whatever self-serving agenda she has.

We all have opinions. Some people, like Bachmann are ignorant, but like to share their ignorant views anyway. That is fine. She wants to make an ass out of herself, that is her business. But when she assumes the mantle of a public official, a member of the US Congress no less, then she takes on a certain responsibility.

As a citizen opining at whatever KKK rallies she attends, she is fully within in her rights. But when she appears on national television and tells the public that the President is a usurper who was not born in the US and cannot, therefor, be the President, she is playing a dangerous game. When she takes that sentiment and appears on Fox News and to an audience of rabid nationalists, pointing to a black President as a threat to white citizens, she is being even more irresponsible.

No doubt there are lots of other nihilist hate-masters like this who need calling out. Robert Stacy McCain is on the case with Andrew Sullivan. See, "NEWS ALERT: Kentucky State Police Will Announce Sparkman Investigation ResultUPDATE: Official: It Was Suicide."

Keep in mind that Robert's an authority on the Sparkman case, having done shoe-leather reporting from Kentucky, published at American Spectator. See, "Murder and Motives in Clay County," and "Video: Media Bias in Kentucky Census Worker Killing."

P.S. Larisa's man-crush smear-merchant Charles Johnson's refusing an apology, even after leading the left's Sparkman murder hysteria with insinuations suggesting there's "strong suspicion that anti-government sentiment may have been the motivation."

(Some) Leftist Reaction to the Explosive Climate Research Scandal

I've started the headline above with "some" in parentheses since the CRU scandal is too devastating for even the most hardline eco-extremists. We do have a few enviro-Stalinists, hoping to chain the world community to the gulag of global warming totalitarianism. But things aren't working out too well for the commissars of late.

This cartoon, up at Climate Progress, demonstrates the left's fearmongering (it's the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, with the fourth dude in denial). These captions appear with the cartoon:

* Embarrassing climate e-mails will have limited impact
* Scientists behaving badly won’t change evidence ...

And the left's total non-seriousness is captured in the comments, with the suggestion that the real scandal is the hacked e-mails:

HackerGate.

With Watergate, the questions were:

Who broke into the hotel room?
What were they trying to do?
And for the cover-up, What did they know and when did they know it?

Those should be the questions about HackerGate. Who hacked the emails, for whom were they stolen, who knew about the crime, and when did they know it?

But even George Monbiot, a huge AGW backer - or propagandist - sees a devastating impact from the CRU e-mails. See, "Global Warming Rigged? Here's the Email I'd Need to See":

It's no use pretending this isn't a major blow. The emails extracted by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I'm dismayed and deeply shaken by them.

Yes, the messages were obtained illegally. Yes, all of us say things in emails that would be excruciating if made public. Yes, some of the comments have been taken out of context. But there are some messages that require no spin to make them look bad. There appears to be evidence here of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released, and even to destroy material that was subject to a freedom of information request.

Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics, or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I believe that the head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign. Some of the data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed.

Again, that's from a guy who's a huge AGW propagandist. theory. But check Viscount Monckton, at Pajamas Media, "Viscount Monckton on Climategate: 'They Are Criminals'":

This is what they did — these climate “scientists” on whose unsupported word the world’s classe politique proposes to set up an unelected global government this December in Copenhagen, with vast and unprecedented powers to control all formerly free markets, to tax wealthy nations and all of their financial transactions, to regulate the economic and environmental affairs of all nations, and to confiscate and extinguish all patent and intellectual property rights.

The tiny, close-knit clique of climate scientists who invented and now drive the “global warming” fraud — for fraud is what we now know it to be — tampered with temperature data so assiduously that, on the recent admission of one of them, land temperatures since 1980 have risen twice as fast as ocean temperatures. One of the thousands of emails recently circulated by a whistleblower at the University of East Anglia, where one of the world’s four global-temperature datasets is compiled, reveals that data were altered so as to prevent a recent decline in temperature from showing in the record. In fact, there has been no statistically significant “global warming” for 15 years — and there has been rapid and significant cooling for nine years.

Worse, these arrogant fraudsters — for fraudsters are what we now know them to be — have refused, for years and years and years, to reveal their data and their computer program listings. Now we know why: As a revealing 15,000-line document from the computer division at the Climate Research Unit shows, the programs and data are a hopeless, tangled mess. In effect, the global temperature trends have simply been made up. Unfortunately, the British researchers have been acting closely in league with their U.S. counterparts who compile the other terrestrial temperature dataset — the GISS/NCDC dataset. That dataset too contains numerous biases intended artificially to inflate the natural warming of the 20th century.

Finally, these huckstering snake-oil salesmen and “global warming” profiteers — for that is what they are — have written to each other encouraging the destruction of data that had been lawfully requested under the Freedom of Information Act in the UK by scientists who wanted to check whether their global temperature record had been properly compiled. And that procurement of data destruction, as they are about to find out to their cost, is a criminal offense. They are not merely bad scientists — they are crooks. And crooks who have perpetrated their crimes at the expense of British and U.S. taxpayers.

I am angry, and so should you be.

Some may recall that Viscount Monckton gave a recent lecture that went hyper-viral on YouTube, and Al Gore has refused to meet Monckton for debate:

But it turns out the Scott Eric Kaufman, who's a now a co-blogger at the neo-communist LGM, is looking to scrap; notice how he oddly finishes his genuinely hare-brained post with an (unearned) arrogant dismissal, "I don't envy climate scientists the tsunami of stupid they're about to suffer."

And that's not far removed from Comrade Repsac3's theory, where he suggests those taking seriously the CRU bombshell are the new "truthers." See, "Climate Conspiracy Trutherism":

... the idea that a whole bunch of scientists are getting together and conspiring to fake data and lie to the public in the name of propagating a particular theory as to whether & why the climate throughout the world changes--and that the proof of this is to be found in e-mail "confessions"--strikes me as being right up there with the folks who cannot accept that the Towers fell because of damage sustained by the planes, Oswald acted alone, Obama was born in Hawaii, and Lennon/McCartney really did write all those hit songs themselves.

Unreal, I know. But when huge elements of the global campaign of neo-communism hinge on the global warming scam, it's not hard to see why these idiots have blinded themselves to genuine significance of the CRU case.

In any case, more at Memeorandum.

Obama's 'Big Tent': First State Dinner to Exclude Congressional Republicans

It's really hard to miss the bitter hypocrisy. London's Telegraph reports that for the first time in recent administrations an American president will hold a formal state dinner on the White House lawn, "Barack Obama to Host First State Dinner in Huge Tent":

A huge tent has been pitched on the White House lawn to accommodate 400 guests at Barack Obama's first state dinner.

An invitation to the event on Tuesday evening has become the most sought-after ticket in the US.

The event, in honour of the visiting Indian prime minister, Manmohan Singh, is a chance for Mr Obama and his wife Michelle to welcome the Washington elite - and a smattering of Hollywood celebrities - into their new home.

Whereas President George W. Bush would hold his 140-person dinners in the formal state dining room, the Obamas have broken with recent tradition by taking a "big tent" approach that will accommodate 400.

Secrecy surrounds the event with the White House jealously guarding details of the guest list and menu, though produce from Mrs Obama's new vegetable garden is expected to be used and curry is suspected by some to be on the menu for the first time.

Deepak Chopra, the billionaire pioneer in New Age spirituality, announced on Twitter that he would be flying to Washington to attend and was "V honored to be invited".

Oprah Winfrey, the talk show hostess, is strongly rumoured to have been invited and there is speculation that George Clooney and Brad Pitt will attend what has been dubbed "Washington's equivalent of the Oscars".

According to the well-connected Hollywood blogger Nikki Finke, the former DreamWorks partners Steven Spielberg, David Geffen, and Jeffrey Katzenberg will be at the dinner.

Alhough Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal is expected to attend, top Republican congressional leaders are not invited. See the Washington Times, "Top Republican Lawmakers Not Invited to State Dinner."

Even Senator John McCain's not invited, and that's after Obama claimed to want a new era of bipartisanship in America.

RELATED: "Let’s Face It: Obama Is No Post-Partisan."

Amid Growing Pressure, Obama to Back McChrystal's Troops Surge in Afghanistan

From London's Telegraph, "Barack Obama ‘to Announce 30,000 Afghan Troop Increase Next Week’":

President Barack Obama has convened his “war council” for the ninth and possibly final time before his expected announcement next week to send more than 30,000 troops to Afghanistan after more than 80 days of deliberations.

White House sources indicated that Mr Obama is preparing to address Americans in a live prime-time broadcast next Monday followed by testimony before Congress by senior figures such as his Pentagon chief Bob Gates.

The same sources said Mr Obama was close to deciding on an increase of between 30,000 and 35,000 more American troops in addition to the 68,000 currently in Afghanistan.

Gen Stanley McChrystal, commander of Nato forces in Afghanistan, who requested some 44,000 troops in an August 31st document that was subsequently leaked, is expected to travel to Washington to tell Congress of his plans for the troops.

Mr Obama convened a group of senior officials, including Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Mr Gates, at 8:13 pm. EST in the White House Situation Room.

The United States president has faced a growing chorus of criticism from hawks and others who have accused him of “dithering” and allowing the Afghan situation to deteriorate. White House officials insist he has been engaged in a process of serious deliberation that will prevent him repeating he mistakes of his predecessor George W. Bush.

"The delay is not cost-free," former vice president Dick Cheney told Scott Hennen, a conservative talk show host. "Every day that goes by raises doubts in the minds of our friends in the region about what you're going to do, raises doubts in the minds of the troops."

McClatchy says the troop figure is 34,000. See, "Obama Plans to Send 34,000 More Troops to Afghanistan." (Via Memeorandum.)

Also, from the New York Times, "Pressure Builds Over Obama’s Afghanistan Plan."

Hat Tip: Theo Spark.

'The Sack Lunches' (Chain E-Mail, Don't Know If It's New or Old, Just Worth Sharing)

My wife just shared this with me, sent via e-mail from my father-in-law:

"The Sack Lunches"

I put my carry-on in the luggage
compartment and sat down in my
assigned seat. It was going to be a long flight. 'I'm glad I have a
good book to read. Perhaps I will get a short nap,' I thought.

Just before take-off, a line of
soldiers came down the aisle and
filled all the vacant seats, totally
surrounding me. I decided to
start a conversation. 'Where are you headed?' I asked the soldier seated nearest to me.

'Petawawa. We'll be there for two
weeks for special training, and then we're being deployed to Afghanistan.

After flying for about an hour, an
announcement was made that sack lunches were available for five dollars. It would be several hours before we reached the east, and I quickly decided a lunch would help pass the time..

As I reached for my wallet, I
overheard a soldier ask his buddy if he planned to buy lunch.
'No, that seems like a lot of money for just a sack lunch. Probably wouldn't be worth five bucks. I'll wait till we get to base.'

His friend agreed.

I looked around at the other
soldiers. None were buying lunch. I walked to the back of the plane and handed the flight attendant a
fifty dollar bill. 'Take a lunch to all those soldiers.' She grabbed my arms and squeezed tightly. Her eyes wet with tears, she thanked me. 'My son was a
soldier in Iraq ; it's almost like you are doing it for him.'

Picking up ten sacks, she headed up the aisle to where the soldiers
were seated. She stopped at my seat and asked, 'Which do you like best - beef or chicken?'

'Chicken,' I replied, wondering why she asked. She turned and went to the front of plane, returning a minute later with a dinner plate from first class. 'This is your thanks..'

After we finished eating, I went
again to the back of the plane,
heading for the rest room.
A man stopped me. 'I saw what you did. I want to be part of it.
Here, take this.' He handed me twenty-five dollars.

Soon after I returned to my seat, I saw the Flight Captain coming down the aisle, looking at the aisle numbers as he walked, I hoped he was not looking for me, but noticed he was looking at the numbers only on my side of the plane. When he got to my row he stopped, smiled, held out his hand, and said, 'I want to shake your hand.'

Quickly unfastening my seatbelt I
stood and took the Captain's hand. With a booming voice he said, 'I was a soldier and I was a military pilot. Once, someone bought me a lunch. It was an act of kindness I never forgot.' I was embarrassed when applause was heard from all of the passengers.

Later I walked to the front of the
plane so I could stretch my legs.
A man who was seated about six rows in front of me reached out his hand, wanting to shake mine. He left another twenty-five dollars in my palm.

When we landed I gathered my
belongings and started to deplane. Waiting just inside the airplane door was a man who stopped me, put something in my shirt pocket, turned, and walked away without saying a word. Another twenty-five dollars!

Upon entering the terminal, I saw the soldiers gathering for their trip to the base. I walked over to them and handed them seventy-five dollars. 'It will take you some time to reach the base. It will be about time for a sandwich.
God Bless You.'

Ten young men left that flight
feeling the love and respect of their fellow travelers. As I walked
briskly to my car, I whispered a prayer for their safe return.
These soldiers were giving their all for our country. I could only
give them a couple of meals.

It seemed so little...

A veteran is someone who, at one point in his life, wrote a blank check made payable to 'The United States of America ' for an amount of 'up to and including my life.'

That is Honor, and there are way too many people in this country who no longer understand it.'

May God give you the strength and courage to pass this along to
everyone on your email buddy list....

I JUST DID

Carly Fiorina: The Next Dede Scozzafava?

I've noticed how much air time Carly Fiorina's been getting -- and I mean I've really noticed, since it was a student in of my classes who informed me that she's a recent cancer survivor. I didn't know that Fiorina was treated earlier this year for breast cancer; and now she's using that experience to provide insight into the ObamaCare reforms, and especially on the recent mamography controversy (and perhaps some gender sympathy).

And I guess that's no surprise. Michelle Malkin's got the former HP CEO's number, "Carly Fiorina Channels Dede Scozzafava, Wields Race/gender Card Against Conservative Rival":

Grass-roots conservatives, your attention, please: The NRCC and GOP dumped $1 million of your hard-earned money into radical Leftist Republican Dede Scozzafava’s NY-23’s campaign — money that was squandered trashing mainstream conservative candidate Doug Hoffman, who lost the race by less than 3,400 votes.

Now, the GOP elite Senate candidate in California, Carly Fiorina, is running against Democrat Barbara Boxer by…trashing mainstream conservative GOP rival Chuck DeVore.

Fiorina’s strongest argument against DeVore? He’s a white man and she’s not.

Really:

Asked why she is a better candidate than her Republican primary opponent Assemblyman Chuck DeVore (R-Calif.), Fiorina said that a woman stands a better chance of defeating Boxer.

“I have nothing against white men, I am married to one,” Fiorina said at a breakfast at Americans for Tax Reform. “But Barbara Boxer has defeated [them] over and over again.”

Political observers with long memories should remind Fiorina how Boxer engineered GOP defeat. Bruce Herschensohn, the Republican candidate in 1992, was a staunch and unapologetic conservative talk show host who came within 5 points of beating the San Francisco liberal. Desperate to ensure Boxer’s victory, dirty Dem operatives launched a last-minute smear campaign by shouting about strip clubs.

Herschensohn’s skin color and chromosomes had nothing to do with Boxer’s win.

In keeping with Fiorina’s identity politics-driven campaign, she also said today that even though she didn’t follow the nomination closely, she would have voted to confirm Obama SCOTUS pick Sonia Sotomayor.

An Obama echo, not a choice.

More at the link.

Video Hat Tip: Flap's Blog.

Does it Get Any Whiter Than This? MSNBC's Racial Hypocrisy

Michelle Malkin's got the best post up this morning, "The Indelible Whiteness of MSNBC" (via Memeorandum):

MSNBC host Chris Matthews, MSNBC reporter Norah O’Donnell, and MSNBC guest Joan Walsh shamelessly played the race card against Sarah Palin and her book-buying audience last week.

In Michigan, O’Donnell smugly noted that Palin’s fans were “largely white — almost no minorities in this crowd.” Matthews parroted the line, assailing the “white crowd.” Walsh likened the gathering to a “paranoid tea party.” Matthews hammered away at the “monochromatic” scene.

Ahem. Check out the masthead of MSNBC TV, “The Place for Politics.” Wear sunglasses and SPF 30 lotion. You’ll need protection from the blinding white glare:

Check the whole post. I love it!

And Glenn Reynolds quips, "MINORITY WOMAN criticizes MSNBC’s “indelible whiteness.” Hey, it’s the Stuff White People Like network ....

That's me and Michelle last week. You can take your sunglasses off now.

RELATED: "Michelle Malkin Visits Orange County Conservatives!"

**********

UPDATE: A little hatred in the comments, from "Anonyomous" (of course), "howthe FUCK is that different from fox news are you fucking insane or just blind get a fucking clue."

ANSWER: A lot different, asshole. Fox News has not "shamelessly played the race card against Sarah Palin..."

Of course, Michelle Malkin's a Fox News contributor, so she alone adds more diversity, ideological especially. But f**kers like you don't give a s*** about that, you know?

Liz Cheney on Obama's Afghanistan Indecision: 'Completely Inexcusable' - Plus, Obama to Surrender Key Provinces to Taliban!

Liz Cheney on Aghanistan, from yesterday's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos":

"I think it’s just completely inexcusable that we’ve now had month after month after month of photo-op out of the White House and no decision. The president is very fond of saying, ‘Before I commit troops, I’m going to think very carefully about it.’ Somebody in the White House needs to remind him: He’s already committed troops. We’ve got American men and women in Afghanistan today, because we’ve got to prevent Afghanistan from again becoming a safe haven for Al Qaida. The cost of walking away, the cost of defeat, the cost of retreat is huge. They’re fighting there today, and they’re fighting without the kind of resources and reinforcements that he needs — that they need."

Also, at Weasel Zippers, "Afghan Source: Obama in Secret Negotiation With Taliban to Hand Over Southern Provinces in Return for Quiet ...", and Steve Schippert, "RapidRecon: Whispers of Surrender in Afghanistan?" (Via Memeorandum.)

Pakistan is pushing a negotiated handover, and given Pakistan's earlier indecision on defeating Taliban-Qaeda-Laskkar insurgents in North Waziristan (with catastrophic results), this sounds like the worst possible outcome possible.

Plus, Wake Up America adds this:

Flashback, Obama- 2009:

"This is not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity," Obama told the annual Veterans of Foreign Wars conference -- cautioning that the insurgency would not be defeated overnight. "Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which Al Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans."

Is Obama actually prepared to surrender gained ground to the Taliban in secret agreements, while pretending to understand the danger they pose in public?

If true then Obama is far more dangerous to America than most originally thought.

Prospects for ObamaCare in the Senate

A number of interesting healthcare articles this morning. From the Miami Herald, "Political Minefield Awaits Health Bill." Also, from Rich Lowry at the New York Post, "Marching off a Cliff: Dems' Health-Care Delusion":

But check the Politico, "How Health Care Reform Could Fall Apart":

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid eked out 60 votes on a procedural motion to start the health care debate Saturday night – but there’s no guarantee he can pass a bill on the merits.

And as he struggles, the reasons are clear: deep divides among Democrats on a public insurance plan, abortion, tax hikes and cost-cutting. Liberals want the plan to be generous enough. Moderates fear a budget-buster. And everyone is trying to avoid angering seniors.

Even in the blush of Saturday’s victory, Reid (D-Nev.) is far from having the votes to move his $848 billion package to final passage. At least four centrists have pledged to oppose it in its current form, largely over the public option. Reid is in a bind. Stay to the left, and moderates vote no. Move a tad to the right, and Reid faces insurrection from the left, as liberals in his own caucus and in the House vow not to compromise any further on their signature issue.

As one of the Senate most liberal members, Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), told POLITICO’s The Arena: “I have made it clear to the administration and Democratic leadership that my vote for the final bill is by no means guaranteed.”

Health care reform proponents considered Saturday’s vote a major milestone, one that significantly boosted the odds of passing a bill. But, as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) vowed Saturday, “the battle has just begun.”

More on the prospects at the link.

Plus, at the Washington Post, "Public Option at Center of Debate" (via Memeorandum).

Bob McDonnell Provides Winning Formula for GOP

When I announced my call the other day for "Bob McDonnell For Governor - of California!," I was hardly joking. I mean, if the dude was out West, his conservative message and policy pragmatism would work wonders for what's ailing the Golden State. In what's become an annual ritual, Sacramento's facing a $21 billion budget defict for 2010-2011. With the governor's race next year, California voters need someone willing tackle the tough fiscal issues - someone who'll save this state, frankly.

So far both Meg Whitman and Steve Poizner, the two top prospects for the GOP nomination, have avoided talking deficit politics like it's some kind of budgetary H1N1. (See, "Poor California: No Money and No leadership.") And Attorney General Jerry Brown, so far all alone in the Democratic field, not only ignores the budget crisis, he certainly won't do anything to fix it if elected. The Brown family politicos (father Edmund G. "Pat" Brown, Sr., in the 1960s, Governor Moonbeam in the 1970s, and failed 1994 gubernatorial candidate Kathleen Brown), are big government liberals. It's their legacy, along with the disfunctional government-by-initiative process in this state, that needs undoing.

I'm betting that a man (or woman, but Carly Fiorina's running for Senate, not governor) like Bob McConnell has the skills and vision to lead the state back to greatness -- and that's saying a lot, since polls show voters seeing California's best days long past (see, "California's Best Years Have Passed, Voters Say").

In any case, maybe I should be doing some consulting for the GOP's national party elites. It turns out that the top honchos are looking to the McDonnell model as a winning formula for future elections. From the Politico, "GOP Eyes McDonnell Strategy" (via Memeorandum):

After four years of grappling with how to appeal to voters, a group of top Republicans believe they’ve found a winning formula for 2010. Call it the McDonnell Strategy.

The shorthand: run on economic policy, downplay divisive cultural issues, present an upbeat tone, target independent voters and focus on Democratic-controlled Washington—all without attacking President Barack Obama personally.

It’s an approach that elected Bob McDonnell to the Virginia governorship earlier this month.

While Republicans posted two hard-fought gubernatorial victories on Nov. 3, McDonnell’s path to victory is the one that most encourages the GOP, a remarkable case of a social conservative who made his name in politics as an abortion opponent yet managed to reverse a Democratic trend in Virginia and shellack his opponent by nearly 18 percent while largely steering clear of cultural issues.

As rejuvenated GOP governors gathered at a resort outside Austin for their annual strategy session there was little doubt who they wanted to spotlight. McDonnell was shown off at nearly every public event, paraded before the reporters, consultants and lobbyists here as the example of how Republicans can find swing state success in the Obama era.

New Jersey Gov.-elect Chris Christie was also offered as a reminder of the party’s twin triumphs this month, but it was McDonnell who was in demand. Swarmed by new friends, some of them with business interests in Virginia, the commonwealth’s next governor was usually the last official to leave the mix of cook-outs and plenary sessions that marked the Republican Governors Association (RGA) conference.

“McDonnell’s stock was very high already and he found a way to get it even higher,” said Nick Ayers, the RGA’s executive director.

That was in part because Ayers’ boss—and a man who is seen among the establishment Republicans here as something close to the GOP’s de facto national leader–made sure to hold up McDonnell as a model.

Interestingly, looking at Memeorandum's thread, so far it's mostly hardened leftist radicals who're responding Politico's piece on this McDonnell formula for the GOP -- Digby's Hullabaloo and Howie Klein's DownWithTyranny! (ironically, if not ominously, these two are all about tyranny, and if the left's candidate is elected California governor in 2010, don't be surprised if we see John Steinbeck conditions across the land, and actually a reverse Grapes of Wrath exodus out of the state as voters flee disfunction and an impending multi-culti, high-tax, and affirmative action meltdown on the Left Coast).

Photo Credit: Regent University's Flickr photostream.

Sarah Palin's Going Rogue Book Tour Draws Crowds and Controversy - and Predictable Leftist Demonization

I have a new and timely piece up at Pajamas Media, "The Going Rogue Book Tour Draws Crowds and Controversy."

I wrote the essay Friday night, just hours after Governor Palin issued an apology to fans in Noblesville, Indiana. Recall that hardline netroots bloggers have attacked Governor Palin for leaving hundreds of Indiana fans stranded after she took off from the event at 9:00pm. I'm critical of Palin's handlers at the Pajamas piece. But the story's now becoming more clear. Both Conservatives for Sarah Palin and JammieWearingFool indicate that at least some of the more explosive and viral outrage at the Noblesville event was likely staged by leftist Palin-bashers. Jammie's Just a Grunt rebuts the left's staged attacks, linking to the Politico's piece, "Sarah Palin Embraced in Indiana Republican Hub." And check the video from Politico as well:

Actually, checking the comments at my piece we have some confirmation of disgruntlement among some of Palin's conservative fans (with minor editing):

I was one of those that stood in line and missed meeting her. I arrived at 7 that morning to stand in the 4-hour line to buy 2 books and get a wristband, which were randomly marked with an letter of the alphabet. I brought my son back at 4 to get in line again. An hour later the security guards came out and finally told us what the plan was to let people in (alphabetical order). Her bus arrived (on time)-but only then did security start bringing people in to empty pockets (that could have been started sooner). Each wristband was good for 2 books and 4 family members. And it was clearly stated that she would stop at 9:00. (You do the math!) Our wristband was “N”–and the “M” group was the last to go in. A store employee came out, sheepishly said that the signing was over, and handed out book plates. I was so upset that I left and didn’t get one-and THEN found out the next day that she had signed them, so I would have had at least that momento.

Disappointed? Oh my, you don’t know the half of it!!! But I do not blame any one person-this was not a purposeful slight on anyone, only a huge mistake on the part of a company (Borders) that probably had never had to handle logistics like this before. During my 9 hours standing in the rain and cold, I met a lot of like-minded people, that believe that our country could soon cease to exist as the last free nation in this world. Mrs. Palin is the symbol of what we need to prevent that from happening-honesty, hard work, integrity. Not the now-daily barrage of lies and denigration of us and our values that we get from our politicians.

I am most disappointed in the “boo-ers” at the end of the signing. Bunch of NARCISSISTIC SELF-CENTERED WHINERS. YOU DESERVE OBAMA, AS HE IS THE EPITOMY OF NARCISSISM. And they would have had to known that the media would love to use their actions as more fodder to denigrate a good person. I have never been a “band-wagon” person, but I am afraid for my family and my country. I was not there to make myself happy (well, ok a little, I admit!) but to show my support for HER. Mrs. Palin promised to try to do something to make up for not being able to meet her, and I know I can trust her word. Or I would never have been there in the first place.

Okay, that's settled, so note how there's more despicable attacks on Palin today, from the usual suspects of the smear-mongering left. Matt Taibbi, for example, slams Palin as a "WWE politician" and "political tool":

... Sarah Palin sells copies. She is the country’s first WWE politician — a cartoon combatant who inspires stadiums full of frustrated middle American followers who will cheer for her against whichever villain they trot out, be it Newsweek, Barack Obama, Katie Couric, Steve Schmidt, the Mad Russian, Randy Orton or whoever. Her followers will not know that she is the perfect patsy for our system, designed as it is to channel popular anger in any direction but a useful one, and to keep the public tied up endlessly in pointless media melees over meaningless nonsense (melees of the sort that develop organically around Palin everywhere she goes). Like George W. Bush, even Palin herself doesn’t know this, another reason she’s such a perfect political tool.

With Pavolian predictability, Andrew Sullivan piles on Taibbi's obnoxious screed. And Frank Rich, the left's most useful idiot, uses yet another New York Times column to smear and slander conservative activists as basically racist "teabaggers" (or, in Rich's code words, that "demographic is white and non-urban"). And Rich's gets a dig in at Bill Kristol and others as "discredited neocon hacks."

And for all that, there's no mention by either Matt Tabbai or Frank Rich of President Obama's widely-panned diplomatic tour of Asia. See, "Barack Obama Dream Fades as China Visit Fails to Bring Change: Even His Allies Feel Let Down by the President’s Lack of Progress Both in Asia and at Home."

No doubt Sarah Palin's to blame for that.

Hat Tip: Theo Spark.

**********

UPDATE: Linked at The Rhetorican, "Staging Anger…" Thanks!!

Health Care Debate Heats Up in Senate; Health Care Protests Heat Up Nationwide

There's lots of debate on the procedural moves in the Senate to start the floor debate and amending process for the Democrats' ObamaCare monstrosity. Here's how the Los Angeles Times explains things:

Without a vote to spare, Democrats pushed their healthcare legislation over its first obstacle on the Senate floor Saturday, as the chamber voted to begin formal debate on a sweeping measure to guarantee medical coverage for nearly all Americans.

The 60-39 vote, backed by all 58 Democrats and two independents, overcame a Republican-led filibuster designed to block consideration of the bill and kept up momentum behind President Obama's top legislative priority.

Although it was only procedural, the dramatic balloting -- before a rare packed gallery on a Saturday night -- also set the stage for a much-anticipated healthcare debate that is expected to begin after Thanksgiving and consume the Senate for the remainder of the year.

The rest is here.

Also, from Dana Loesch, "Million Med March; Show Me Institute," which has much more photos from the "Million Med March" in Clayton, Missouri. Gateway Pundit has more, "Hundreds Protest Obamacare at St. Louis Million Med March."

Bob McCarty Writes has the video:

Also, in Los Angeles, Hugh Hewitt headlined the Docs4PatientCare healthcare protest at the Wilshire Federal Building. I'll update when photos from the Westwood event become available.

RELATED: Kevin Hall, "Palin Was Right About Death Panels; Doctors Nationwide Fighting Back Against ObamaCare."

Berkeley Faculty in Solidarity With Student Protesters: Demand Full Amnesty For Wheeler Hall Occupiers; Misdemeanor Charges, No Handcuffs Upon Release

I'm reading Ananya Roy's eyewitness report of the Wheeler Hall occupation. Roy is a Professor of City and Regional Planning at Berkeley, as well as a social justice activist and mentor. She went inside Wheeler Hall, and was accompanied by Berkeley Professor of Linguistics George Lakoff (a hardline socialist and political blogger at Huffington Post). This passage, where the Berkeley faculty call for full amnesty for the student occupiers, is pretty mind-boggling:

A bit later Anne Wagner and other faculty suggested that some of us head to California Hall. We rounded up as many faculty as we could find and went to California Hall, which was locked. At first it seemed hopeless. But we stood there, some of us pressing our faculty IDs up against the glass door. And then a police officer came out, asked us to sign our names, and explain our case. We did so and a few minutes later she let us in. We found ourselves in a meeting with Chancellor Birgeneau, EVCP Breslauer, Police Chief Celaya, VC Le Grande, and Dean of Students, Jonathan Poullard. Some of the ASUC folks were also there. The meeting had an urgency to it - we were worried about the fate of the students who had occupied Wheeler but also about students at the barricades. The faculty emphasized their concerns about police violence and mentioned several incidents. The solution for those occupying Wheeler (they had already been arrested) was the following: that they were to be cited for trespassing (misdemeanor) and then released, without handcuffs, with faculty observors and student observers present. No police vans, no Santa Rita jail, no handcuffs. The faculty and students went out to disseminate the message to those at the barricades, to calm things down, and Shannon Steen, Will Smelko, and I went with police chief Celaya back into Wheeler [emphasis added].

This time on the 2nd floor, the 30 or so students (some non- students, including an "embedded" reporter with Democracy Now) were seated, handcuffed. They were tired but in good spirits. In small groups they were cited, allowed to collect their belongings, and then released. Will, Shannon, and I accompanied police officers to escort each group out of the building and past the barricades. We had already advised them to be peaceful as they made their exit but we also urged them to immediately seek legal counsel. They had many friends and supporters waiting for them at the barricades.

I noted previously that communist Amy Goodman's Democracy Now! is a major backer of the student mobilization and campus direct action, but an "embedded reporter"? That's really taking it to another level. (See, "Berkeley's Wheeler Hall Protest Marks Escalation in Campus Intifada.")

Also, providing an eyewitness testimony is Shannon Steen, who is Associate Professor of Theater, Dance, and Performance Studies at Berkeley. And note this from Professor Steen's faculty blurb:

A specialist in critical race and performance theory, she writes on the intersection of Asian and African American racial determinations. Her book on this topic: “Racial Geometries: the Black Atlantic, the Asian/ Pacific, and American Performance,” will be published by Palgrave Macmillan in early 2010. Her anthology /AfroAsian Cross-cultural Encounters/, co-edited with Heike Raphael-Hernandez, was published by New York University Press in fall 2006. Steen's new project uses President Barack Obama’s 2006-08 campaign to investigate the relationship between affect, race, and performance in the realm of electoral politics.

Note that last sentence: Steen's a professor of theater and dance, but her next project is on President Obama and the "performance realm of electoral politics." That reminds me of the academic radicals chronicled in David Horowitz and Jacob Laksin's, One-Party Classroom: How Radical Professors at America's Top Colleges Indoctrinate Students and Undermine Our Democracy. Many of today's radical professors have actually no scholarly expertise to conduct high-level research in politics, history, or economics, but they manage to teach courses on "Theories of History, Ideology, and Politics" in English Departments and courses on "Marxisms" in Comparative Literature courses. These offerings are, in fact, personal faculty vehicles for radical student indoctrination.

I'm not familiar with Professor Steen, but her account of the Wheeler Hall protest puts her clearly in solidarity with the student's revolutionary ideology:

Ananya has already described the meeting between the Chancellor and various admin, the ASUC leadership, and several faculty (there were about 10 of us). I’ll just add that at that point, there were really only 2 options for how to proceed: (1) book the students on site and escort them out of the building to the barriers, or (2) try to load them onto vans and take them off-site to book them, and release them from there (there was also brief mention of jailing them over the weekend, but that was never really pursued). While the chief of police Mitch Celeya preferred option 2, those of us who had been at the barriers all day and were worried about the increasing tension there after a series of violent encounters btw students and police (more on that below—I arrived at Wheeler at about 9.30am), impressed upon him and the Admin that this option would likely escalate the struggle outside the building. The ASUC senators and faculty were fully in agreement on this, and the Chancellor and Celeya agreed to go for option 1.

Check the post for more details. This passage clearly demonstrates Professor Steen's solidarity, if not complicity:

Celeya escorted Ananya, Will Smelko (ASUC President), and me into the second floor of Wheeler. The occupiers (there were about 40) were lined up against the wall in the north corridor, sitting with their hands behind them in “plastic tie” restraints. Everyone was unharmed and safe – as Ananya reported, the group was committed to non-violent tactics, and so had not resisted arrest, which contributed to their safety. The vast majority were students, although one was a reporter from “Democracy Now” who was not; he had on a press pass that was clearly displayed around his neck. Some looked genuinely scared, some were in fairly good spirits. A couple looked like the restraints were not just uncomfortable but painful, so the officers removed and recuffed those individuals at a looser setting. Several of them asked about their belongings (which they were allowed to take with them as they left the bldg), and about 2 or 3 (I now forget the number) of their fellow occupiers who had been arrested earlier in the morning and taken away. They were especially worried that a couple of them seemed injured. The UCPD in Wheeler did not know where they had been taken, but they guessed the Berkeley city jail where they were booked and released.

The officers set up a classroom to process the students, and took them in 4 at a time to do so. The plan was to escort them outside in groups of 5. I’d say it took about 30-40 min from the time we arrived for the first group to be processed and ready for release. At that point, there was a hold-up of another 10 or 15 minutes while the police outside were changed over – the Berkeley city police were replaced with Oakland police. During all of this, and between reassuring the students inside and asking questions for them of the UCPD officers, I was texting the students I knew outside (especially Cynthia Nava and others in Solidarity) of the plans to bring everyone out, and asking them to spread the word at the barriers to calm people out there (more on this too below).

More at the link.

Not once does Professor Steen repudiate the illegal actions of the students who seized the campus builiding. She's concerned with police brutality, as if this is going to turn out to be Kent State:

These were the most frightening moments by far, and as one colleague put it, did make it seem like we were very close to riot conditions. I asked students at various points to write me with their stories of what they experienced, but there were faculty there too who could perhaps explain it in more detail. I will say this: I did not witness first-hand any of the inciting moments of the barrier altercations – I only witnessed the barrier incidents once they were already in progress. I have no idea what events sparked them, and have heard many different stories. Having said that, I also have big questions about what we’re doing using batons, which can do real damage to people, on unarmed students. Many of us have that question, and I do think we need to keep asking it.

Maybe some of those questions might ask, "Why the f*** did you take the university hostage with your totally selfish and self-serving actions?"

From the Daily Clog, a student threatens police, who are standing by:

Here, an officer responds to student provocations:

Yeah, it's pretty messed up alright. And with simple misdemeanor charges, the university's practically treating these kids like royalty. And who really is responsible for the "inciting moments and barrier incitements." This video, despite the propaganda title, shows students resisting the commands of officers to stay back:

Also, from the Berkeley Daily Planet, "6:36 p.m.: UC Berkeley Students To Be Cited and Released."

Here's the picture of the SWAT team reaching the student occupiers (via Twitpic). It's hardly looks like AR-15's were drawn and blazing:

We'll see what happens when three of occupiers jace the criminal justice system. See, "Court Date For Wheeler Occupiers."

The 'Hockey Stick' Scandal

I've been reading around the web a bit, catching up on latest in the Climate Research Unit (CRU) scandal that broke wide open yesterday.

One of the things I'm learning more about is the 'hockey stick', which refers to the (hypothesized, and now rigged) dramatic increases in global temperatures in the last 130 years, so that when graphed the changes look something like a hockey stick. The chart's from Wikipedia's entry, the "Hockey Stick Controversy." What's so interesting about this, is that the graph is derived from the data and research aggregation of Michael Mann, who is at the center of the CRU hacking case now unfolding online.

The first post to read is at Jeff Id's Air Vent blog, "Baby Steps." That entry links to a series of essays by the author called the "Hockey Stick Posts," where the first entry is called, "How to Make a Hockey Stick – Paleoclimatology (What They Don’t Want You to Know)." Clicking there leads us to a Michael Mann research paper on the hockey stick phenomenon, "Proxy-Based Reconstructions of Hemispheric and Global Surface Temperature Variations Over the Past Two Millennia."

Now, going back to the Baby Steps post, Jeff Id (who's apparently been at the center of some of the online debates) adds this key passage:

These new emails do not provide any huge revelation of collusion, we already knew about that. They don’t provide any smoking gun proving intentional corruption of data for a conclusion (although the Jones quote was good enough for me). They don’t have any proof of making a conclusion in exchange for money or proof of changing a conclusion for personal benefit. I don’t know about you, but I didn’t expect any of that. The mechanism of reward for certain results is exactly what some of us expected it to be.

What the emails show is that there is some good science going on. There are some quality open discussions in them for sure. What they also show however, is a pattern of elimination of dissenting views. They show an advocacy by some ’scientists’ which belies scientific credibility. These few names are universally limited to the top people in the field — think about what that means. These are the ones who actively work to make sure that dissent is unpublished and are often the loudest in public to discredit others. Mann (creator of the bogus Al Gore hockey stick) seems to be the worst offender along these lines but he clearly has a circle of trusted friends. Finally, these files show a lot of money involved in the industry. Big dollars are in play with big travel budgets, prestige and a lot of power for those who follow the main player’s lead [emphasis added].

There's lots more developments in the controversy.

Check Marc Sheppard, "The Evidence of Climate Fraud," which has an analysis of the devastating significance of the CRU scandal. Also, John Hinderaker has a post examining the hacked e-mails, "The Alarmists Do 'Science': A Case Study." (Via Memeorandum.)

Plus, a couple of entries from James Delingpole, "Climategate: How the MSM Reported the Greatest Scandal in Modern Science," and "Climate Change Has Nothing to Do With the Holocaust or 9/11":

But you’d be forgiven for thinking otherwise from all the hysterical propaganda put out by the ecofascists of the AGW lobby.

Here’s the latest example from those silly trustafarian children at Plane Stupid:

Actually, this isn't a horrible joke (see for yourself here).