Change! Elena Kagan Backs 'Vapid and Hollow' Hearings at Her Own Confirmation!

The main story's at NYT, "Kagan Shifts on Disclosure of Legal Views at Hearings":

At the opening of questioning in her Supreme Court confirmation hearing on Tuesday, Solicitor General Elena Kagan quickly backpedaled from her past call for nominees to speak more openly and in specific terms about their constitutional views.

Under questioning by the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, Ms. Kagan said she thought it would be inappropriate for her to talk about how she might rule on pending cases or cases “that might come before the court in the future” — or to answer questions that were “veiled” efforts to get at such issues.

Moreover, she said, she also now believed that “it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to talk about past cases” by essentially grading Supreme Court precedents, because those issues, too, might someday come again before the court.

In a 1995 book review, Ms. Kagan wrote that recent Supreme Court confirmation hearings had taken on “an air of vacuity and farce” because nominees would not engage in a meaningful discussion of legal issues, declining to answer any question that might “have some bearing on a case that might some day come before the Court.” She called on senators and future nominees to engage in a much more open and detailed discussion of legal issues.

Actually, Kagan was a little more elaborate in her 1995 article. She attacked what she called a confirmation process that was a "vapid and hollow charade."

Check the link and note (in the last few pages) how the public is served with a "serious" and "substantive" discussion of the constitutional issues when the nominee is Robert Bork (who threatened to bring about "Bork's America") and not someone like Elena Kagan (who took $20 million in royal Saudi money to establish a gender-oppressive center for Islamic studies at Harvard).

And check Neomi Rao, "Elena Kagan and the 'Hollow Charade': Progressive views of judging are difficult to defend. That's why no recent nominee has tried."

This woman is a disaster: Dishonest, indecent, and extremely radical. The public would be well served by an open and frank airing of Elena Kagan's views. Instead we get the vacuous spinelessness that is the essence of confirmation to the High Court in the post-Bork age.

Thanks Democrats.

More at The Hill and Memeorandum.

Sports Illustrated Swimsuit 2010 Brooklyn Decker Diary

Brooklyn Decker at Sports Illustrated:

And check out Daley Gator while you're at it!

Campaign Contributors Sue Charlie Crist for Return of Donations

At the Fox News clip, and also Legal Insurrection, "Charlie Crist Sued For Return of Donations - Copy of Complaint Here."

RELATED: At Miami Herald, "Tom Grady files lawsuit demanding Charlie Crist return donations."

The Second Amendment and the Incorporation Doctrine

From Glenn Reynolds, at Pajamas Media, "The New Normal: The Second Amendment After Heller and McDonald":

Following Monday's McDonald decision, gun ownership by law-abiding citizens is the new normal, and the Second Amendment is now normal constitutional law.

I’ve been interested in the Second Amendment for a long time, but for a long time, it wasn’t really part of the Constitution.

Oh, I mean it was part of the Constitution — right there between the First Amendment on one side, and the Third Amendment (the only part of the Bill of Rights that really works — when did you last hear of troops being quartered in someone’s house?) on the other. But in “mainstream” constitutional discourse, it just didn’t exist.

Courts routinely rejected Second Amendment claims, frequently with atrocious misstatements of what little caselaw existed, and usually with almost no discussion. Popular discussion was, if anything, even more dismissive. Former Chief Justice Warren Burger said that the notion that the Second Amendment protected individual rights was a fraud, and that it only protected “state armies.” (And wouldn’t that have been interesting if it had turned out to be true. …) The general position taken by most mainstream media types, and most academics, was that the Second Amendment didn’t protect individuals, only the right of states to have a national guard, a right that was obsolete anyway. It had nothing to do with individuals owning guns.

There wasn’t actually much support for this “collective right” position, in terms of scholarship or caselaw — the 1939 case of United States v. Miller, often cited for that position, doesn’t actually say that, but for many years, unanimity substituted for understanding, and ridicule substituted for research. (Burger’s “state armies” claim appeared not in a law review, but in Parade magazine.) That began to change with Don Kates’ article, “Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment,” in the Michigan Law Review, and really picked up after the publication of Sandy Levinson’s “The Embarrassing Second Amendment” in the Yale Law Journal. Soon, scholarship accumulated, and it was possible even to speak of a ”Standard Model” of the Second Amendment, in which the linguistic, structural, and historical elements came together to explain, in a widely accepted way, why the Second Amendment did, in fact, protect an individual right to own guns.

Opponents continued to criticize this view and to characterize its proponents as shills for the NRA, but it was a rearguard action — especially as polls continued to show, despite contrary media efforts, that around three quarters of Americans believed the Second Amendment gave them a right to own a gun, and that legal efforts to limit gun ownership were unconstitutional.

RTWT at the link.

Professor Reynolds argues that the Second Amendment has now been incorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment, and thus made a normal part of constitutional law.

RELATED: "5 Ridiculous Gun Myths Everyone Believes." And see all the discussion at Memeorandum.

Jennifer Love Hewitt Encore!

A sizzling hot encore to my recent Jennifer Love Hewitt blogging, posted at Theo's.

Elena Kagan Confirmation Hearings — Day 2

Picking up from yesterday, at USA Today, "Kagan Promises 'Impartiality' as Senate Hearings Begin."

And this morning at Daily Caller, "Republicans Bring Up Kagan's Record on Military":

Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan on Tuesday defended her policy of barring military recruiters from the Harvard Law School career counseling office, saying the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell” policy violated its anti-discrimination policy.

“We were trying to make sure that military recruiters had full and complete access to our students,” Kagan told Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, “and we were also trying to protect our anti-discriminatory policy. So we were trying to do both of those things.”

Kagan repeated before the Senate Judiciary Committee her opposition to the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, and said she subsequently eased the policy at the request of the Department of Defense.

Kagan said that as dean of the law school, she never totally cut off military recruiters’ access to students, but rather encouraged military veterans’ organizations, rather than the school, to sponsor these efforts.

“I said on many occasions that this (military service) was a great thing for our students to think about doing in their lives,” she told the Alabama senator. Kagan said that Harvard had a strict anti-discriminatory policy, “and the military could not sign that pledge.”

The recruitment matter is one of the few points on her resume that Republicans have been able to use against her. Her policies and writings on the issue call up broader themes of patriotism and equal rights, both emotional topics at a time when the nation is at war and both parties are gearing up for the midterm elections. In some measure, the November balloting will be a referendum on her patron, President Barack Obama.

But see John McCormack, at Weekly Standard, "Kagan Defends Discriminating Against Military at Harvard" (via Memorandum). And at Weasel Zippers, "Kagan Defends Discriminating Against Military at Harvard... Had No Problem Using Saudi Money to Establish an Islamic Law Program..."

Plus, live-blogging at Althouse.

RELATED: From Ed Morrissey, "Kagan's SCOTUS Deception to Defend Partial-Birth Abortions."

Blue Texan at Firedoglake Trashes Right-Bloggers for Criticizing Senate Majority Cyclops Robert C. Byrd

This is really rich.

Yesterday left-wing extremist Blue Texan at Firedoglake erupted in outrage at the right's relatively mild reaction to the death of former Senate Majority Leader Robert Byrd. See, "Conservatives Trash Robert Byrd While His Body is Still Warm." Check the link. For reminding folks of Senator Byrd's disgraced past as an Exalted Cyclops of the Ku Klux Klan, Blue Texan writes, "As always, the right remains a paragon of class."

But back in January, Blue Texan attacked former GOP Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott as "chummy with racist hate groups." See, "Senate Majority Leader was Affiliated with White Supremacist Group."

Words fail.

Screen caps below.

I can't speak for fellow right-bloggers, but my personal policy is to denounce racism when I see it. That's apparently not the way it works with Blue Texan and Firedoglake. The hypocrisy is stunning of course. FDL is home to at least two of the biggest racist bigot bloggers on the web, Jane Hamsher (more here) and Tom Boggiani.

All in a day's work, I guess. Don't rest, friends. Expose these people for the enemies of truth and decency that they are.

Added: Cold Fury links with, "Death becomes them."

Sports Illustrated 2010 Anne V Model Diary

Following up from last night's entry ("Sports Illustrated Swimsuit 2010 on Location — Lisbon, Portugal"), here's Anne V in a special clip:

David Weigel Joins MSNBC!

I saw some of the buzz on Twitter earlier, and tweeted:

So, I'm getting a kick out of this now as the news is confirmed. See Dan Gainor, "Weigel Goes Even Further Left, Signs as MSNBC Contributor."

Since I've been accused of leading "something of a crusade" against former Post blogger Dave Weigel, how could I resist this announcement? Weigel, who left the Post amidst a controversy where he bashed tons of conservatives, has joined the leftwing convention at MSNBC (video right).

According to a Tweet from "Countdown" host Keith Olbermann, Weigel has come on board as a contributor. "And confirming, @DaveWeigel is now MSNBC contributor @DaveWeigel Welcome aboard and my condolences, uh, congratulations!" wrote Olbermann.

Now Weigel has joined the team of Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz. This from the guy who just today told the world of his wonderful career saga that started out as editor of a campus conservative paper at Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism. "Was I really that conservative? Yes," he wrote, somehow expecting readers to believe him. While he admitted some of his troubles came from "hubris," much of what he wrote most already knew, that he was no friend to the right. "At Reason, I'd become a little less favorable to Republicans, and I'd never been shy about the fact that I was pro-gay marriage and pro-open borders."

Throw in Weigel's parade of assault on conservatives, prominent figures on the right from Rush Limbaugh to Matt Drudge and Newt Gingrich and the bigger question becomes, does he agree with the right on anything? The answer is: it doesn't matter anymore. He's gone from an organization fighting to keep its credibility to one fighting to lose what little it has.

More at Mediaite and Memeorandum.

AND PREVIOUSLY: "Updates on the David Weigel 'JournoList' Scandal."

The Enemy's Best Friend

At Bosch Fawstin:

RELATED: Jennifer Rubin, "Wanted: Grown-Ups to Take On Obama’s Iran Policy." And Bret Stephens, "Iran Cannot Be Contained."

Immigration Sob Story of the Day: 'Students Face Deportation to Countries They Don't Remember'

At LAT:

Early one morning in March, two Chicago-area brothers were dozing on an Amtrak train when it stopped in Buffalo, N.Y. A pair of uniformed Border Patrol agents made their way through the car, asking passengers if they were U.S. citizens. No, the vacationing siblings answered honestly, with flat, Midwestern inflections: We're citizens of Mexico.

And so it was that college students Carlos Robles, 20, and his brother Rafael, 19 — both former captains of their high school varsity tennis team — found themselves in jail, facing deportation.

Their secret was out: Despite their upbringing in middle America, their academic success and their network of native-born friends, they had no permission to be in the United States. Their parents had brought them here illegally as children.

The Robles brothers, now out of jail but fighting removal in Immigration Court, are among thousands of young illegal immigrants in similar situations, living at risk of being expelled to countries they barely remember.

Two weeks ago, a Harvard University student who came from Mexico at age 4, Eric Balderas, joined their ranks after he was arrested by immigration agents at an airport in San Antonio.

They are known in some circles as "Dream Act" kids, named after proposed legislation that would grant them legal status.

Their cases underscore a contradiction in the Obama administration's approach to immigration enforcement. Even though the president supports the Dream Act — which would provide a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants brought here as children who enroll in college or the military — his enforcement bureaucracy continues to pursue deportation cases against the increasing number of students who would be protected by it. It's part of a push that is on track to remove a record 400,000 illegal immigrants this year.

Sorry. Don't feel sorry for these people. Here's what's really happening behind the media's sob-story headlines. It's the "Dream Act" immigration scam. First they come at you with cap and gowns and sad faces. Then once they suck some of the undocumented into the program, they pump them full of indigenous supremacy indoctrination. It's all of a piece. You can see how it all comes together. The "Dream" activists work side-by-side with the left wing extremists, working to delegitimize the U.S. and advance the Democratic Party's neo-socialist agenda. And despite the media spin, it's hard for Americans to be sympathetic in the face of crass exploitation of the migrant poor for the communist reconquista agenda:

Sports Illustrated Swimsuit 2010 on Location — Lisbon, Portugal

Sports Illustrated on Location in Portugal with Anne V, Cintia Dicker, Jessica Gomes, and Jessica White:

PREVIOUSLY: "Sports Illustrated 2010 Esti Ginzburg Photoshoot."

Obama's Racist Government

From Barbara Simpson, at WND:

For a president and an administration with the media in its pocket, it's amazing they haven't convinced the American public that it's OK to protect lawbreakers by racial profiling.

I know, I know – if you believe the left's rant, only conservatives are racist bigots. But the truth is, the liberals lead on that one, and they're proud of it.

When they demand special rights for a certain class of "brown" people, they're racially profiling and are bigots.

They should be ashamed. Not only have they opened racial divisions in this country that were virtually closed decades ago, but they cater to it and are moving this country to the breaking point.

The issue is illegal aliens: foreigners who cross our borders illegally, stay in this country illegally, take jobs using fake identification – both of which are illegal – and feed at the trough of American generosity for food, housing, medical care, education and whatever else they can get.

On top of that, too many get involved in criminal activities from petty crimes to felonies. The costs to the criminal justice system and the numbers of incarcerated illegals prove the point.

Arizona hit the breaking point: bankrupt hospital emergency rooms, overcrowded schools, enormous social costs on every level, escalating crimes, record-setting kidnapping rates and violence against private citizens as well as police officers and Border Patrol, including murder.

It's a basic responsibility of the federal government to protect the borders and the citizens living within them. There are laws on the books to accomplish that.

But for political and philosophical reasons, politicians for decades have chosen not to enforce the law. They've chosen not to think first of the welfare and safety of the country and all Americans. They do what they please, hoping it will buy them votes and change the face and culture of this country permanently to their advantage. Their attitude is: The country be damned.

RTWT.

Updates on the David Weigel 'JournoList' Scandal

Ann Althouse has been raising some big questions about the secretive JournaList. For example, "The entire Journolist archive needs to be made public."

Now there's an initiative to raise money and buy the JournoList archives so Althouse can open up that can of worms.

Meanwhile, Weigel offered a "weasely" explanation for the affair at Big Government this morning. Plus, Robert Stacy McCain's got an interview with Andrew Breitbart on what's up with all of this.

And recall my warning's about Weigel's progressivism over a year ago? Well, check this out at Politico, "On Right, Opinions Mixed on Weigel":

Starting last month, Dan Gainor, vice president for business and culture at the Media Research Center, the conservative media watchdog group, went on something of a crusade.

Angered by a joke that David Weigel made about Matt Drudge on his Twitter feed, Gainor contacted conservative groups asking them to stop cooperating with Weigel, who had recently taken his blog about the conservative movement to the Washington Post.

“We encouraged conservatives not to deal with him,” he said. “We contacted other conservative organizations and said, ‘This guy is no friend of the conservative movement. We recommend that you deny him access.’ Some did.”

When MRC asked the Heritage Foundation to disinvite Weigel from its weekly Tuesday blogger briefing, Rob Bluey, the briefing’s organizer, said the meeting was on the record and occasionally attended by liberal journalists, and declined to go along with the group’s request.

Most of the group’s other efforts also failed, but the MRC’s reservations about Weigel — voiced in an early letter to Post Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli, and given public airing on Post Ombudsman Andy Alexander’s piece on the affair on Friday — have played a major role in shaping the debate over whether the Post made the right move in accepting Weigel’s resignation in the wake of leaked emails in which he disparaged prominent conservative figures. Alexander wrote that the “biggest loss” from the whole affair was “The Post’s standing among conservatives.”

But even as MRC and its fellow conservative media watchdog group Accuracy in Media enjoyed a “we told you so” moment over his resignation, other conservative voices — including many of those conservatives whom Weigel covered — have come out supporting his work.

And actually, the rest of of the piece cites commentators and journalists who're all backing Weigel. Maybe Politico's looking to hire Weigel as well!

Folks should read Dan Riehl for what's been consistently the best commentary on Weigel's failings. And Mike at Cold Fury's got a related piece that's worth a look as well.

My position, at this point in politics, is that it's pretty much impossible to be friends with someone who's simultaneously working to utterly destroy all that I hold vital in culture, politics, and national security.

Melissa Etheridge - 'Come to My Window'

Melissa Etheridge has a new album, "Fearless Love."

I've loved her music (and I'm always moved by cancer survivors --- cancer's a relentless killer). I'll update on the new release later. Until then, enjoy "Come to My Window":

Elena Kagan Confirmation Hearings

I'm getting to this kinda late, but there's a some kind of video feed here.

And at the New York Times, "Kagan Promises Impartiality as Hearings Open."

Check also Politico, "GOP plans attack on Kagan" (via Memeorandum.)

Added: I don't think Kagan's nomination will be defeated. Still, the Politico piece suggests Republicans will get mileage from trashing leftist judicial activism. There's also the threat of a filibuster. See The Hill, "Sessions leaves Kagan filibuster on the table." And while yesterday's Los Angeles Times sough to paint Kagan as a centrist ("Kagan's a not-so-leftist liberal"), the only thing that's changed since her socialist college days is the scale of her naked ambition and bogus appeals to moderation. The American Prospect is setting up some defensive talking point, in any case. See, "A Guide to the Kagan Smears."

And Ann Althouse has all kinds of Supreme Court blogging here.

John Hawkins: Why I Denied David Frum at Blogads Conservative Hive

Via Ann Althouse, just lovin' John Hawkins' post:

Now, as a general rule, I try to be very open minded about who gets into the Blogads Conservative Hive. If they're generally friendly to conservatives and seem to have a mostly conservative audience, I don't mind having them on board. So, aside from conservative blogs, there are Libertarian blogs in the Hive and there are blogs I'd call center-right. It goes without saying that there are plenty of issues where members of the Hive, myself included, don't see eye-to-eye.

Still, to the best of my recollection, there have only been two bloggers ever denied a spot in the Blogads Conservative Hive for ideological reasons. One of them was Charles Johnson from Little Green Footballs whom, ironically, I sponsored at Blogads and invited to the Hive, and then later booted from the Hive after his blog went completely off the rails to the Left. In that case, I didn't even get to discuss it with Charles because my emails bounced (I assumed he blocked them -- yes, I've been told he does that sometimes)...although I really tend to doubt that he cared since I'm undoubtedly just conservative creep #8,642 to him at this point.

The other blog denied entry into the Blogads Conservative Hive for ideological reasons was FrumForum.

I love it!

Charles Johnson and David Frum get the RWN boot. Talk about delicious fail!

Lots more at the link. Added: Now a Memeorandum thread.

Daisy Lowe at Esquire UK

It's scandalous.

See, "UK Model Daisy Lowe, Topless, Fab in Esquire."

Hat Tip: Theo Spark.

Robert C. Byrd, Longest Serving KKK Leader in U.S. Senate, Dead at 92

God rest his soul.

At the video, former Senate Majority Leader Robert Byrd, in a 2007 floor speech, decries as barbaric Michael Vick's dog-fighting operation.

Byrd was 92 and the longest serving member of the U.S. Senate. A former member of the Klu Klux Klan and "Exalted Kleagle," Bryd was the only senator to vote against both Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas for confirmation to the Supreme Court. As late as 2001 Byrd was known to still deploy the epithet "nigger" in political debate. But the Democratic Party and leftist leadership groups nevertheless championed racist Senator Byrd as a lion of the Senate. The man should have retired decades ago, along with the hatred with which he represented.

RELATED: At Fox News, "Robert Byrd, Longest-Serving U.S. Senator, Dies at 92" (via Memeorandum). And Moonbattery, "Item #3: White Sheets to be Flown at Half-Staff Today."

And nothin' but encomiums for Exalted Kleagle Byrd at the racist Daily Kos. Go figure.

'Imma Be'

Some Black Eyed Peas to get readers hip-hoppin' this mo'nin', yo!

Decentralized Democracy: The Way Out of Afghanistan

Lots of coverage on Afghanistan today at Memeorandum. Of special note is Jules Crittenden's post, "Quagmire!" (on the Christian Science Monitor).

If it was me in charge, I'd be making the case to stay in Afghanistan as long as necessary --- it's the central front in our ongoing GWOT (with AFPAK). It's been a long time, though, and with Barack Hussein in power, we have no leadership in foreign affairs.

In any case, check out the useful analysis from Stephen Biddle, Fotini Christia, and J Alexander Thier, at Foreign Affairs, "Defining Success in Afghanistan: What Can the United States Accept?"

We won't build a centralized democracy in Afghanistan, but a decentralized model might work:

Power sharing would be easier under a decentralized democracy, in which many responsibilities now held by Kabul would be delegated to the periphery. Some of these powers would surely include the authority to draft and enact budgets, to use traditional alternatives to centralized justice systems for some offenses, to elect or approve important officials who are now appointed by Kabul, and perhaps to collect local revenue and enforce local regulation.

Increasing local autonomy would make it easier to win over Afghans who distrust distant Kabul and would take advantage of a preexisting base of legitimacy and identity at the local level. The responsibility for foreign policy and internal security, however, would remain with the central government, which would prevent even the more autonomous territories from hosting international terrorist groups or supporting insurrection against the state.

A decentralized democracy along these lines should be an acceptable option for the United States. Its reliance on democracy and transparency is consistent with American values. Individual territories with the freedom to reflect local preferences may adopt social policies that many in the United States would see as regressive. But the opposite could also occur, with some places implementing more moderate laws than those favored by a conservative center. By promoting local acceptance of the central government, this option would remove much of the casus belli for the insurgency. And it would preserve a central state with the power and incentive to deny the use of Afghan soil for destabilizing Pakistan or planning attacks against the United States.

A decentralized democracy would comport with much of the post-Cold War experience with state building elsewhere. A range of postconflict states in Africa (Ethiopia and Sierra Leone), Europe, (Bosnia and Macedonia), the Middle East (Iraq and Lebanon), and Asia (East Timor and, tentatively, Nepal) have used some combination of consociationalism, federalism, and other forms of decentralized democratic power sharing. Although it is too early to make definitive claims of success, to date not one of these states has collapsed, relapsed into civil war, or hosted terrorists. And some, such as Bosnia and Ethiopia, have remained tolerably stable for over a decade. This is, of course, no guarantee that decentralized democracy would work in Afghanistan. But its track record elsewhere and its better fit with the country's natural distribution of power suggests that it offers a reasonable chance of balancing interests and adjudicating disputes in Afghanistan, too ....

Afghanistan is not ungovernable. There are feasible options for acceptable end states that would meet core U.S. security interests and place the country on a path toward tolerable stability. The United States will have to step back from its ambitious but unrealistic project to create a strong, centralized Afghan state. If it does, then a range of power-sharing models could balance the needs of Afghanistan's internal factions and constituencies in ways that today's design cannot, while ensuring that Afghanistan does not again become a base for terrorists. In war, as in so many other things, the perfect can be the enemy of the good. The perfect is probably not achievable in Afghanistan -- but the acceptable can still be salvaged.

Badge No. 3478

I had a feeling they'd be down there today...

At Five Feet of Fury, "My blogger-husband & I ordered to stop videotaping on public sidewalk, by Toronto cop today, badge #3478."

And Blazing Cat Fur, "Five Feet of Fury Meets Badge No. 3478":

This is pretty funny. Sadly it's the missed photo-op of the day. I only caught the tail end of our conversation with Badge No. 3478, an arrogant boob too dim to understand that he serves the public and not the other way around. Read 5 Feet's account for the details ....

Actually, be sure to RTWT at both links.

Charles Johnson's Got Nothing Left

Charles Johnson's not well, seriously:

Robert Stacy McCain has some background, "A. Charles Johnson."

And all of this is just rehash. I wrote about it here: "A Theory* of Racist Smears and the Case of Robert Stacy McCain."

'Restrepo'

Didn't get a chance this weekend. It's playing up in L.A. and my wife's been working. Might get there later in the week. The homepage is here. And from LAT:

From the frightening chaos of daily firefights to the backbreaking boredom of digging bunkers in unforgiving terrain, in "Restrepo" (pronounced re-STREP-o) which deservedly won the Grand Jury Prize at Sundance earlier this year, the filmmakers have given us war at its most elemental. For all the high-tech equipment and the precision of high-flying bombers that have come to define modern warfare, the film is a reminder that much fighting is still done if not quite hand to hand, then alarmingly close enough to see the enemy's breath fog the frigid mountain air.

Sports Illustrated 2010 Esti Ginzburg Photoshoot

"Esti Ginzburg, 19, is a native of Tel Aviv, Israel. " Well, hey, I'm a Zionist already!

Amanda Marcotte is Mad – Mad!! – at the 'Haters' Who Destroyed David Weigel

Seriously.

You can't make this stuff up:

In case it’s not obvious, Jesse and I are both on Journolist. Unlike a lot of people, I have no doubt that it was someone on the listserv --- someone who agreed to keep the listserv private --- that leaked the emails to the gossip blog Fishbowl. I know back-stabbing hater behavior when I see it, and this is textbook. Dave rather recently got the plum job at the Washington Post, and that’s the sort of thing that brings haters out of the woodwork. Whoever decided to ruin him probably thinks of him or herself as a good liberal, and probably thinks they deserve the job that Dave got. Well, you’re not, and I’ll bet a million dollars that you don’t. So congrats. Enjoy your moment of successful hating today. Tomorrow morning, whoever you are, you’re going to wake up the same hack you always were. Except now you’ll be covered in slime and responsible for taking someone out of a job where they were actually doing good, useful work. You fail on every level, asshole. Maybe if you spent more time working and less time hating on people with more talent than you, you wouldn’t be driven to perform gross acts of haterade.

More talent?

Right. At, uhmm, teabagging them before they teabag you, I guess:

The 'Homeless Guy' Slam on American Power!

God, this hilarious!

It turns out the STFUSexists has a pretty good readership, mostly college-age feminists, from what I gather. And what holds these youngins together is summed up by Robert Stacy McCain, who notes:

Anyone who has read Thomas Sowell’s The Vision of the Anointed (as everyone should) recognizes in this a signature trope of elitist liberalism: “We are enlightened and sophisticated, whereas conservatives are benighted and bigoted.”

In other words, the little women at STFUSexists are intolerant know-it-alls who know little when it comes to conservative ideology and politics.

And on that note, looky here: One of Miss Olga's readers was moved to write a full post after skimming my blog, and then writes:

I just got done looking at his blog as well and that was the first thing that struck me, how naked Katy is fine and dandy on a cover because she is ‘classy’ to Lady Gaga’s dead-body using weird. I also noted the obligatory nods to ‘Socialism’ without any clear understanding what that is or intelligent tying of it to our current president. My favorite had to be the pic of him outside of Kohl’s buying ‘patriotic clothes’, stocking up for the 4th as he puts it. Normally, I wouldn’t notice or care, other than to remark that he looks a lot like a homeless guy in that get up, but on a tea bagger’s, lefty watchdog blog I kind of take it more as it was intended-as in that he is more patriotic and therefore more deserving of having a voice in this country. This is my biggest angst/source of hilarity with these assholes, that they claim so much love of our country while having absolute disdain for the election process and for the rights and freedoms that this country actually stands for (or should be).

Where to begin?

Well, first I'm dyin' to know what's the "homeless guy' tip off at the pic. I mean seriously ... I just shaved, LOL!!

And I know GSGF is lovin' it:

Besides that, well, no need to go on too much about all of this. I would like to know the basis for our friend's claim that I haven't "any clear understanding" what socialism is, nor an "intelligent tying of it to our current president."

I guess our little one didn't spend much time in the archives. One of my widely read posts during the campaign was "The Ideological Foundations of the Obama Phenomenon," illustrated with a cartoon that might well describe the thinking of Miss Olga's followers:

And if I don't mind saying, I know a thing or two about ideology, and one thing I know is that my knowledge is most assuredly not based on the same kind of self-annointed omnipotence we find among leftist little tikes like these.

For edification, here's a few suggestions, since I doubt our little know-it-all is quite as versed on Marxist theory and praxis as she implies.

Let me recommend:

David Priestland, The Red Flag: A History of Communism.

Jamie Glazov, United in Hate: The Left's Romance with Tyranny and Terror.

Leszek Kolakowski, Main Currents of Marxism: The Founders - The Golden Age - The Breakdown.

BONUS: Walter Russell Mead, "Literary Saturday: The Communist Manifesto."
And here's the perfect quote (at Hole Snipe):

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

-- Winston Churchill

Protesters Blast Israel at G8/G20 Summit in Toronto

One of the things we've learned in recent years is that demonization of Israel has become the central foundation of all hardline radical anarchist/socialist anti-capitalist gay-rights mobilizations. Below is the screencap from the Canadian Jewish Congress' Twitter page (via Lumpy, Grumpy and Frumpy):

And check the background discussion at Business Week, "G-20 Protesters Burn Cars, Smash Starbucks Window."

RELATED: Here's Justine Apple and Bernie Farber on Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QuAIA):

“Apartheid” is not a term thrown about lightly. Apartheid is a crime against humanity, a despicable, discriminatory and disgusting regime supported only by irredeemable racists. Thus, Israelis and the vast majority of diaspora Zionist Jews are tarred by the brush of horrific racism, systemic oppression of human rights and visceral hatred.

QuAIA targets Israel with this dangerous and invidious libel, positioning the world's only Jewish state as the racist successor to white supremacist South Africa. International pressure brought down apartheid's racist oppression. Now, anti-Semites use these same tactics to soften up international public opinion and pave the way for Israel's destruction.

Be sure to RTWT.

And check the roundup at CBC, "Toronto's Tarnished Image." Also, Mark Steyn, "Spectators in Body Armor," and iOWNTHEWORLD, "Those Friggin Tea Partiers!!!" Added: See also Pirate's Cove, "Moonbats on the March: Violence at G20."

Putting the Failed in Failed States

The new Foreign Policy is out. There's lots of stuff on failed states, including the "The 2010 Failed States Index."

Somalia is the #1 failed state. See, "In the Beginning, There Was Somalia."

But to go along with that cover shot at left, check out "Why Bad Guys Matter":

Bad guys matter, and when they rule, they make weak states weaker. And the countless anecdotes are backed up by numbers: In a celebrated study, economists Benjamin Jones and Benjamin Olken looked at whether the death of a country's leader altered economic growth. It did, sometimes for better and sometimes for worse. Recently, an Oxford colleague, Anke Hoeffler, and I sifted through their results again, distinguishing this time between democrats and autocrats. We found that in democracies, changing the leader does not change growth -- all leaders are disciplined to perform tolerably. But in autocracies, the growth rates are as unpredictably varied as the leaders' personalities. Here lies the difference between good leaders and great ones: Good leaders put right the policy catastrophes of bad leaders; great leaders, like the men who shaped the U.S. Constitution, build the democratic checks and balances that make good leaders redundant.

More at the link.

Radical Feminist Hate Mail of the Day

It's not hate mail, actually (but close enough). It's a STFU Tumblog, "STFUSexists." And I guess that includes me, and I'm targeted for extra STFU-ing for my neocon-ishness. See, "Another neo-con with a woman problem → ...":

Now, I’m not expecting much from someone with a No-Bama icon who thinks that Melanie Griffith has written books about why the right wing is awesome, but if you’re claiming to be a political blog, be a f*cking political blog. Even if you’re a stupid political blog, even if your political blog has no basis in reality, be a f*cking political blog. Objectifying women doesn’t count as “culture analysis”. So cut it the f*ck out, and stick to what I’m sure is your wealth of knowledge on foreign policy and the educational system or whatever.

That's just the conclusion, so RTWT.

And the record, I can't stand feminist ayatollahs, and amazingly, you find them on both the left and right. It's an ideology of hate and anti-rationalism. STFU sums up the views perfectly, and since this lady, "Miss Olga," blows off Melanie Phillips so breezily content-free, we'll put her in the "Own Goal" category. Folks really do need to make an actual argument if they want to be taken seriously, which is why I like debating conservative women like Cassandra and Opus 6, who don't care for objectification too much either but they're more than able to defend their positions.

And by the way, if you're not reading her, check out Cassy Fiano for the best feminist deconstruction in blogosphere.

Just Lower Our Taxes

At Moonbattery, "Meanwhile, Back at the Joe Biden 'Recovery Summer' Tour," and Gateway Pundit, "Eat Up… Joe Biden Gets Gets Custard in Face When Business Owner Tells Him: “Lower Our Taxes”" (via Memeorandum):

Joe “Bite-Me” Biden traveled to Wisconsin yesterday to campaign with far left Progressive Russ Feingold (D-WI). Smokin Joe ordered a custard at a popular custard stand in Glendale during one of their stops. When Biden asked Kopp’s Frozen Custard stand owner how much he owed him, the owner responded,

“Nothing, just lower our taxes.”

Katy Perry Goes Topless for Cover of Esquire

Yep.

It's the real deal, and she looks fabulous.

See Esquire, "Katy Perry: A Woman We Love."

Also, full cover shot and more at Hollywood News, "Katy Perry Goes Topless on Cover of Esquire Magazine."

I'd say this is a bit more classy than Lady Gaga's bid to use dead bodies as props for the Monster tour. After a while shock is a turnoff. But hotness sells, over and over again. Katy Perry's got that side of the business down cold.

And Celebuzz quips, "Russell Brand is a really lucky guy."

This isn't quite like "going nuclear" at The Classical Liberal, but it's good. Very good.

And I'd say this post deserves billboard status at Sir. Smitty's Rule 5 Sunday!

Sarah Palin at CSU Stanislaus

Video c/o Sissy Willis:

I'm late to this story, but it's a pretty big one. Some unidentified dickheads dissed Palin on live mic, and Fox40 Sacramento's' freakin', since they were the only network doin' a live feed. Best thing to do is read Sistah Toldjah's post, "Fox40, Multiple journo-dudes slam Palin after CA speech (UPDATE 8: FOX40 RESPONDS TO ST)." Sistah's got the audio of the unidentified, unprofessional slams on Palin, and Fox40 actually responded in the comments at the blog. Jennifer Cubachi also covered the story, "About Fox40 and the Sarah Palin Controversy." Interesting how bloggers broke open a big scoop. The network's repsponse is here, "Statement Regarding Comments Overheard On FOX40.com Stream Following Sarah Palin Speech."

BONUS: Ed Driscoll at RWN, "Fox40 Covers Sarah Palin at Cal State, Forgets ‘All Mics are Hot’ Rule."

And check the thread at Memeorandum. And also, at Merced Sun-Star, "Sarah Palin discusses education and freedom at CSU Stanislaus banquet: She pokes fun of Jerry Brown and controversy over her speech, which raised $200k."

Patriotic Gear

This one's for GSGF...

Out shopping last weekend for some new patriotic apparel. My wife used to work at Kohl's, so every June I pick up some new gear in preparation for Fourth of July. Great for tea parties as well:

IDF Women

At Theo's:

Jan Brewer Roundup

Just posting a few links for those who's posted Jan Brewer's YouTube, "Brewer to Obama: Warning Signs Are Not Enough."

See also Atlas Shrugs, Blazing Cat Fur, and Carol's Closet. Added: See Hall of Record, Middle of the Right, Moonbattery, and Stormbringer.

Drop me a link in the comments if you've posted it. Thanks.

RELATED: "Arizona Gov. Stands by Claim That Most Illegals Smuggle Drugs Into Country." (And previously, "Most Illegal Immigrants Smuggling Drugs, Says Gov. Jan Brewer.")

Obama Financial Regulation Bill is Bank Bailout Bonanza

Everyone knows President Obama takes average Americans for suckers, but does he have to be to transparently obvious about it?

Here's his Saturday address below, on the new financial regulation bill in Congress. And get this: The White House homepage notes that the bill "creates a resolution authority to wind down firms whose collapse would threaten the entire financial system." And the president says "we'll create what's called a resolution authority that will help wind down firms whose collapse threatens our entire financial system." But then Obama sums that up by claiming, "Put simply, we'll end the days of taxpayer bailouts..."

Say what? No more Wall Street bailouts?

Well, not exactly. Check the Heritage Foundation, "Obama: Read My Lips, No More Bailouts (But Let’s Keep $50 Billion Around Just in Case)." In fact, the bill includes $50 billion in that resolution account, which will --- wait for it! --- bailout failing firms at taxpayer expense. And according to the Wall Street Journal:

Republicans warned it could restrict access to credit and enshrine the idea that the government won't allow big firms to fail.

In a bid to address the causes of 2008's market collapse, the bill gives regulators power to constrain the activities of big banks, including forcing them to divest certain operations and to hold more money to protect against losses.

If those buffers don't work, the government would have the power to seize and liquidate a failing financial company that poses a threat to the broader economy.

Sounds like this won't be the "end of financial bailouts" after all.

Obama. Is. Fail.

RELATED: At The Hill, "Obama asks Congress to take financial reform over the ‘finish line’." And Jules Crittenden, "Porky Bank." (Via Memeorandum.)

Dave Weigel: 'I don't know how my ego will ever recover...'

Ann Althouse calls Dave Weigel kinda smug, as seen here:

David Weigel 6.14.10 @ 5:01PM#

Well, I really enjoyed the two and a half years I spent here, and I'm constantly confused as to why mentions of my name lead to a lot of schoolyard insults. I really can't figure out why they do it -- lack of fulfillment seems like a good enough theory. After all, I'm here, and they're where I left them in 2008.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to return to my rewarding job and large circle of friends. I don't know how my ego will ever recover...

But big boy Scotty Lame-ieux thinks old Weigel is just the cat's meow:

I haven’t seen anybody raise any objections to Weigel's excellent reporting, and if his reporting is good what he says about people on a private listserv is completely irrelevant...

Uh huh.

That Weigel thought Matt Drudge should burn to death in self-immolation is no big deal. It's all of those awful "whiney" Republicans who're to blame.

Typical stupid Lawyers, Guns and Money bullshit.

Here's what Daily Caller publisher Neil Patel had to say about Weigel's "excellent reporting":

The Washington Post holds out Weigel as their reporter of choice to cover conservatives and Republicans. Weigel spends all his time going to conservative and Republican events and claiming to be an objective reporter there to cover them fairly. In between these events Weigel goes online and vents on JournoList to 400 other journalists — many who claim to be of the “objective” variety — about just how much he hates those “ratfucker” (his word) conservatives and Republicans. All of the other journalists in the know about this fraud just sit tight and let the fraud continue. Are these the “basic journalistic norms” that those on JournoList are upholding? The reporters on JournoList owe their readers an explanation.

More at Memeorandum. And see Media Decoder, "Post Blogger Quits After Limbaugh, Drudge Comments Were Made Public."

Added: From Matt Lewis, "Dave Weigel's Resignation From Washington Post Divides Conservatives."

Lady Gaga Wants Dead Bodies as Stage Props on Monster Tour

Recall Ann Althouse prevously: "You think the new issue of Rolling Stone is tough on General McChrystal, but how do you think Lady Gaga feels?"

Yeah. It's tough being upstaged by the Commander of U.S. Forces Afghanistan, and while boasting those double-barrel machine-gun breasts, no less.

So here comes the next ante up, "LADY GAGA has come up with a way to make her live shows even more shocking - having dead bodies on stage."

The singer is teaming up with corpse-preserving scientist GUNTHER VON HAGENS to spice up her already blood-soaked Monster Ball Tour.

German doctor Von Hagens is a controversial figure who has outraged boffins with his Body Worlds exhibition of dead people.

Yep. More here and Confirmed at Von Hagens' website, "ANATOMIST DR. GUNTHER VON HAGENS RESPONDS TO REPORT OF COLLABORATION WITH LADY GAGA..."

But check the Minneapolis Star-Tribune:

"It would be good to top this tour - which is already out there - with something nobody has done before, using dead bodies as part of a gig."

No one’s fed baby seals onstage into a Cuisinart blender either, but that doesn’t mean it has to be done. The idea of using laminated corpses as stage props is probably a line we didn’t need to cross, because Gaga will have to top that next tour, possibly by gassing members of her adoring audience. She’ll call it youth-anizing!

PHOTO CREDIT: Body Worlds on Wikipedia.