Another example of why Neo-Conservatism failed in this election

Check out this interview of former McCain blogger and editor of the Weekly Standard Michael Goldfarb.

The Money Quote:

“It’s unbelievable the way the media has covered this and the way has been played — which is partly from the bullshit inside the campaign. When you have The New Yorker write a story about how Sarah Palin was selected… well, that was like Jane Goodall going in and writing about fucking apes mating in the jungle–they don’t know what’s going on. They’re writing from another planet. I like Sarah Palin, I think she was a very attractive candidate, but I think she made a lot of mistakes. But so did Biden.”

Jeffery Goldberg thinks that Goldfarb is crazy. I disagree, I do not see crazy there, I see something that was a hallmark of the Bush Administration, and that’s cocky arrogance. Which seems to be what McCain’s biggest downfall was. Goldfarb’s arrogance and his refusal to admit that Bush was wrong about his convictions is what totally turns me off.

Oh, and by the way, I know what I wrote here, okay? Goldfarb made a good point. That’s all I am saying. I didn’t say that I like the guy. You can be right and still be a feckless prick.

(via Memeorandum)

I was afraid of this

Last night I blogged about this and warned the far right not to do it, but naturally, because I am such a small blog, no one listens.

Anyhow, Huffington Post has the complete transcript of President Obama’s interview with Al-Arabiya Arab TV Network. Head on over and read it, because it is a bit much to quote here. Of course, the reaction amongst the far-right blogs was quite predictable.

However, Michael Goldfarb over at the Neo-Conservative Weakly Standard (:P) makes a valid point:

Reacting to this quote here:

Q Will the United States ever live with a nuclear Iran? And if not, how far are you going in the direction of preventing it?
THE PRESIDENT: You know, I said during the campaign that it is very important for us to make sure that we are using all the tools of U.S. power, including diplomacy, in our relationship with Iran.
Now, the Iranian people are a great people, and Persian civilization is a great civilization. Iran has acted in ways that’s not conducive to peace and prosperity in the region: their threats against Israel; their pursuit of a nuclear weapon which could potentially set off an arms race in the region that would make everybody less safe; their support of terrorist organizations in the past — none of these things have been helpful.
But I do think that it is important for us to be willing to talk to Iran, to express very clearly where our differences are, but where there are potential avenues for progress. And we will over the next several months be laying out our general framework and approach. And as I said during my inauguration speech, if countries like Iran are willing to unclench their fist, they will find an extended hand from us.

Mr. Goldfarb comments:

Wouldn’t a simple ‘no, a nuclear Iran is unacceptable to the United States and our allies’ have sufficed? Instead Obama says that Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapon is “unhelpful,” that it’s “not conducive to peace.” When Obama was in Israel, he said that “a nuclear Iran would pose a grave threat and the world must prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.” He added that he would “take no options off the table in dealing with this potential Iranian threat.” In the first debate of the general election, Obama reiterated that the United States “cannot tolerate a nuclear Iran.” But when Obama has the chance to speak directly to the Muslim world, he can only muster retread rhetoric from his inaugural address about clenched fists and open hands.
President Bush was incapable of engaging the Muslim world with his own words, but neither was it possible for the Muslim world to confuse his view of American interests in that region. President Obama has the potential to secure real progress through his skill as a communicator, but there’s always been a fear that some portion of his success in negotiating difficult issues was the result of a willingness, or perhaps a compulsion, to tell his audience whatever it is he thinks they want to hear.

I must say, he does have a valid point. One cannot use flowers and anvils at the same time. It tends to confuse people. Hats off to Goldfarb for bringing up this point.

Family Planning money…..under the bus!

Obama finally capitulates.

WASHINGTON – House Democrats are likely to jettison family planning funds for the low-income from an $825 billion economic stimulus bill, officials said late Monday, following a personal appeal from President Barack Obama at a time the administration is courting Republican critics of the legislation.
Several officials said a final decision was expected on Tuesday, coinciding with Obama’s scheduled visit to the Capitol for separate meetings with House and Senate Republicans.
The provision has emerged as a point of contention among Republicans, who criticize it as an example of wasteful spending that would neither create jobs nor otherwise improve the economy.
Under the provision, states no longer would be required to obtain federal permission to offer family planning services — including contraceptives — under Medicaid, the health program for the low-income.
via Officials: Family planning money may be dropped – Yahoo! News.

I must say, I cannot criticize Obama for this one. Because I feel abortion is murder, I am glad to see that Obama is telling Democrats in Congress to dump this. This is one that I will give him credit for. The Economy can be recovered without paying for abortions or handing out condoms. I find it quite shocking that the Democrats would use a economic situation like this, to further a murderous agenda.Which furthers my belief that the Democratic Party has become the communist party and an Anti-Christian, Anti-Life party.

(Via Memeorandum)

The G.O.P. grows a pair

It is about damned time.

President Barack Obama is coming to the Capitol this afternoon to curry favor with congressional Republicans. But it appears GOP leaders have already made up their minds to oppose his $825 billion stimulus plan.
House Republican Leader John A. Boehner and his No. 2, Whip Eric Cantor, told their rank-and-file members Tuesday morning during a closed-door meeting to oppose the bill when it comes to the floor Wednesday, according to an aide familiar with the discussion. Boehner told members that he’s voting against the stimulus, and Cantor told the assembled Republicans that there wasn’t any reason for them to support the measure, according to another person in the room. Cantor and his whip team are going to urge GOP members to oppose it.
via Boehner to GOP: Vote against stimulus – Patrick O’Connor and Jonathan Martin – Politico.com.

It is absolutely amazing that now, after the fact; that the G.O.P. bungled the most important election, that now the G.O.P. is going to grow a pair of stones. Gee, where was that bravery and fortitude during the election?

Of course, when you run a pseudo-Conservative and a self-proclaimed “War Hero”; What do you expect?

(via Memeorandum)

Liberal Democrat John Conyers starts Liberal Witch-Hunt against Bush Administration

This ought to be very interesting.

via Politico.com:

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) has subpoenaed Karl Rove, the former top political advisor to President George W. Bush, to question what Rove knows about “politicization” of the Justice Department.
The Senate Judiciary Committee had subpoenaed Rove during the last Congress, but relying on an executive privilege claim by Bush, Rove refused to appear.
Conyers had previously subpoenaed former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten, Bush former White House chief of staff, seeking any information they had. Conyers is also seeking White House documents related to the firing of nine U.S. attorneys.
After the White House refused to comply with the subpoenas, and Miers refused to even appear before the committee to answer the subpoena, the House Judiciary Committee sued. A federal judge backed the committee in a major win for Conyers and House Democrats, but resolution of the case has been delayed by the changeover in administrations. President Obama has vowed to comply with congressional subpoenas.
“I have said many times that I will carry this investigation forward to its conclusion, whether in Congress or in court, and today’s action is an important step along the way,” Conyers said.
Rove has until Feb. 2 to respond to the subpoena.

To me, this looks like a partisan witch-hunt. Because no proof that Karl Rove or anyone else at the White House knew about it. Just Liberal accusations.

Update: This is not to say there was no bad conduct at the Justice Department, Monica Goodling basically admitted that she made some very unethical decisions. But to attempt to tie it to Karl Rove and to George W. Bush by Proxy; is basically a stretch. I mean, because there is no proof of it, at all. All there is, are E-mails that have been parsed to extract Liberal talking points. I mean, do the Liberals really believe that Karl Rove, of all people, is going to sing like a bird? I mean, the man’s a Bush Loyalist. He is just not going to give the Democrats what they want.

The problem is, Obama is not going to enforce this at all:

Obama and Eric Holder, the administration’s nominee for attorney general, have both said they will not try to “criminalize policy differences” with the Bush administration, especially controversial policies like authorization by the Justice Department of waterboarding.

So, it looks like Mr. Conyers is going a have a bit of trouble of getting the support of the White House on this. However, there’s this:

But many prominent Democrats, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (Vt.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, have said they want to pursue Bush administration officials whom they believe misled Congress.

There two ways one can look at this. It could be that Conyers will be on his own, because Pelosi won’t support it. However, on the other hand; Pelosi, Leahy and possibly other, like Wexler, might get behind this and pursue it and not have the support the White House; thereby creating a rift between Congress and the White House.

Either way, it will be an interesting story to follow, as you know, as well as I, that this will spark an outrage among the far right, especially amongst the Neo-Conservative media. Somehow, I just do not think that the Democrats in Congress want to risk a fierce blowback in the media from the Conservatives. Because any way you attempt to paint this, it will be viewed by some, as a partsian witch hunt. I just do not believe that the Democrats have the stomach for a backlash that would follow something of this nature.

More Progressives on TV?!?!

I know what you’re thinking and I thought the same thing.

Open Left seems to think that we need more Progressive Voices in the Mainstream Media.

Seriously?

Let’s see here:

CNN = Liberal/Hillary Supporter, then Obama
MSNBC = Liberal as hell/In the tank for Obama as hell
ABC = Liberal
CBS = Liberal
PBS = Liberal
NPR = Liberal
FOX NEWS = Conservative

Now, someone tell me what is wrong with this picture?

Liberals whine about Fox News asking Jackass Murtha's constituents "Would want these people in your backyard"

This pretty sad, and a bit stupid.

Rep. Jack Murtha (D-PA) said last week that the U.S. could hold the detainees in federal prisons, just like we hold thousands of other dangerous inmates. This morning, Fox and Friends responded by sending a reporter to Murtha’s district to flash photos of suspected terrorists — their only identification being Muslim headgear — and ask residents, “Would you want a guy like this living in your backyard?”
via Think Progress » Fox Shows Photos Of Muslim Men: ‘Would You Want A Guy Like This Living In Your Backyard?’.

Of course, my fellow Conservatives have a better idea.

Fox News Reports:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Sunday shrugged off Republican suggestions that the federal government reopen Alcatraz prison in her San Francisco district to house detainees from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
President Obama this week signed an executive order calling for the closure of the prison at Guantanamo within the year. Republican Rep. Bill Young then suggested to White House counsel Greg Craig that the prisoners who could not be released back to their home countries or sent to a third country be put up in “the Rock,” the famous military installation and prison that closed down in 1963 and is now part of the National Park Service.
Asked whether that was a serious proposal, Pelosi said, “It is — no.”

Hey, here’s a better idea, how about putting them all on a nice barge, in a cage; where they cannot escape. Tow the barge out to say the middle of the Atlantic or Pacific ocean , far enough away from land, where nobody will get hurt from the radiation and nuke the damned thing. Will save taxpayers money. I know, I really do not want my tax dollars being used to house, feed, and cloth a bunch of cold-blooded murders.

Of course, this will never happen, seeing that the Moonbat Liberals are terrorist appeasers and all.

Kristol gets the boot from the New York Times

Yes, I know about the story, and yes, I even read his final column.

I did not read Kristol much, I did not care for his writing style. Where Peggy Noonan‘s writings are thoughtful, wistful and draw one back to an era of Conservative goodness in America; which appeals to the history buff in me. Kristol’s writings were more jaunted, vengeful and frankly, a bit screechy for my tastes. In essense, his writings were more of a Ann Coulter vein, than anything else.

..and Yes, the facts were wrong at times. This why I tended to avoid his column. Not to mention the fact that he seemed to be “Sucking up” to Obama at the end.

So, while I am suprised at his leaving the Times, I cannot say that I did not see it coming.

Others on the subject: (Color coded as to thier politics) The New Republic, Firedoglake, Michael Calderone’s Blogs, Guardian, RedState, The Corner, Newsweek, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Ben Smith’s Blogs, BuzzFlash.org, TPMCafe, The Mahablog, The Reaction, Gawker, AmSpecBlog, theheretik.us, driftglass, Political Machine, TBogg, Liberal Values, Sister Toldjah, If I Ran the Zoo, ATTACKERMAN, Discourse.net, Prairie Weather and No More Mister Nice Blog

(via Memeorandum)

RedState Update: Jackie and Dunlap on Obama Week One–Inauguration, Secret Oath

Jackie and Dunlap on the Inauguration, Obama’s Second Secret Oath of Office, closing Guantanamo, Cheney’s wheelchair, Rush Limbaugh, and the Oak Ridge Boys

Video:

RedState Update HQ

Barack Obama's pledge to disarm America hits some speed bumps.

Uh-oh…

via Challenges loom as Obama seeks space weapons ban | U.S. | Reuters:

President Barack Obama’s pledge to seek a worldwide ban on weapons in space marks a dramatic shift in U.S. policy while posing the tricky issue of defining whether a satellite can be a weapon.
Moments after Obama’s inauguration last week, the White House website was updated to include policy statements on a range of issues, including a pledge to restore U.S. leadership on space issues and seek a worldwide ban on weapons that interfere with military and commercial satellites.
It also promised to look at threats to U.S. satellites, contingency plans to keep information flowing from them, and what steps are needed to protect spacecraft against attack.
The issue is being closely watched by Lockheed Martin Corp, Boeing Co, Northrop Grumman Corp, the biggest U.S. defense contractors, and other companies involved in military and civilian space contracts.
Watchdog groups and even some defense officials welcomed the statement, which echoed Obama’s campaign promises, but said it would take time to hammer out a comprehensive new strategy.
Enacting a global ban on space weapons could prove even harder.

Of course, we all know that the Obamassiah will get his way, he will destroy those who stand in his way. Just ask Larry Sinclair.

In case you forgotten, here’s Obama making his promise to disarm America:

Others: Macsmind, Atlas Shrugs and Sweetness & Light