President-Elect Obama chooses another Clinton-era lawyer for White House Counsel

What is this new administration going to be, Clinton 2.0?

According to Politico, it appears so:

Gregory B. Craig, a well-known Washington lawyer who quarterbacked President Bill Clinton’s impeachment defense, has been chosen White House counsel by President-elect Obama, according to Democratic officials.
Craig is intimately familiar with the president-elect’s record because he played the role of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in debate preparations.
The officials said Obama has settled on Craig, but were not sure when it would be announced.
The choice gives the president-elect both experience and loyalty. During the primaries, Craig was an early Clinton alumni defector to Obama. Columnist Robert D. Novak reported back in the winter of 2007 that Craig had told him he “was impressed with Obama when he first met him at the home of investment banker Vernon Jordan, an intimate friend and supporter of the Clintons.”
Craig was an Obama foreign policy adviser during the campaign. At the start of the Clinton administration, he had been the State Department’s Director of Policy Planning, the head of State’s in-house think tank. He also was senior adviser on defense, foreign policy and national security to Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.).

So much for all that Hope and Change and new Government. Sounds more like an old and quite familiar Government to me. Between this and the Lobbyists that Obama is bringing in to run his Administration, it just looks like the Clinton era all over again.

Captain Ed at HotAir.com observes the following:

There is nothing inherently wrong with lobbying. There is plenty wrong with hypocrisy, especially on the grand scale committed by Barack Obama during this campaign. He regularly indulged in the populist demonization of lobbyists and claimed to lead a new movement to purify Washington of their eeeeevil influences. Now that he has the power, Obama has no problem working with lobbyists for fraudulently run mortgage giants and drug makers, smear artists, and asbestos-lawsuit defenders.
That’s change that 63 million suckers believed in.

Couldn’t have said it better myself! 😀

This is why I voted my principles and not with my emotions. I would be willing to bet there’s a bunch of Conservatives and Libertarians who are feeling mighty stupid right now. Glad I was not one of them. 🙂

Lew Rockwell jumps the shark

I am generally not a critic of those who agree with me on politics, much less conservatism. But every once and while something gets posted somewhere, and me being the opinionated person that I am, I just cannot let it get past me.

I happened to be looking at my RSS feeds and I happened to see a posting by Lew himself, and alarm bells starting going off. Yes, it was that bad.

Before I get into this, let me just say that I harbor no malice towards Lew and his friends at his Blog and website, in fact, there is a good deal of stuff that he and his crew, write over on his blog and website, that I agree with, but this one here just jumped the shark, badly.

From Lew’s Blog:

bush-obama-s

Okay, here’s what is wrong with that up there. To infer that George W. Bush’s Administration and the Administration of President-Elect Barack Obama will be exactly the same, as much as I hate to say this about Mr. Rockwell; is just beyond crazy. Because we are talking about two totally different people; politically, ideologically and personally. I regret to say this, but for all of George W. Bush’s faults; the war, the scandals, everything — I have a real hard time sitting here and believing that he was an Imperialist, yes, he did have a very flawed vision of what he wished to accomplish in the middle east. Yes, he did take some advice from the likes of John and Neil Podhoretz. Yes, it was advice that ended up doing the President more harm that it did good in the end, politically. But to infer that he was a blind imperialist, is borderline Alex Jones sounding.

Believe me when I say this, I am about as a non-Bush fan as it comes, but I just cannot buy into the whole idea that Bush is some sort of Imperialist, being driven by some evil machine. Nor can I, with my normal functioning brain, sit here and believe that Barack Obama will do the exact same things as Bush. I just cannot do that. Because Barack Obama and the Democrats follow a totally different Political ideology than the Republicans. Now before anyone screams about the bailouts, I am fully aware of how Bush basically tossed fiscal Conservatism under the bus. I was not very happy about that. I also noticed that the bailout plan that he signed unto, has failed. But the truth is, he was forced into that, because he was told by the “so-called” experts, that it would work. Now it seems that the “experts” were wrong.

What I am basically trying to get at here is this. If the old school Conservatives or Paleo-Conservatives, and the Libertarians want to be taken serious by the rest of the Conservative movement and the Republican Party as a whole, they need to seriously look into stopping with the Alex Jones material and stick with policy and reality. Because not everyone buys into some of the sillier nonsense that I have seen within them circles. Not only this, but they need to really get away from the abject racism that I have, in fact, seen posted on some of their Blogs.

Update April 1, 2011: Boy was I ever wrong here! 😯 My apologies to Lew Rockwell. My feelings on race remain unabated. Please, See here. Thanks.

Wanna see some real Liberal Stupidity?

Go here to read.

Anyone who says that Abortion is NOT murder, has got a severe mental problem.

Then again, we are talking about Liberals. 🙄

For the record, it is the opinion of this Libertarian Conservative writer that Abortion IS murder; however, I do NOT believe this moral issue should corrected by legislation. Like I do not believe ANY moral issue should be corrected by legislation.

Ron Paul for 2012?

Possibly says Campaign for Liberty press guy and Ron Paul grandson-in-law Jesse Benton.

Via Reason Magazine:

Last week, Campaign for Liberty press guy and Ron Paul grandson-in-law Jesse Benton was driving to a constituent event with his boss and the subject of 2012 came up.
“He hasn’t closed out the idea of another run,” said Benton today. “We have some time to decide whether he runs again, or whether he gets behind somebody else. But we don’t have tons of time. By the middle of 2009, the decision needs to be made.”
Benton isn’t pushing Paul one way or the other. “I could get behind either decision, but it needs to be made in the next six months or so,” he said. “One thing we learned is that those voters in New Hampshire and Iowa expect, to see their candidates early and often.” Paul entered the 2008 primaries in January 2007, about 11 months and two weeks before the Iowa caucuses.
I asked about the rumor that former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson might jump into the race (unclear in which party yet). “If he were to decide that he wanted to do that, he’d be a great guy to take the reins. But I don’t think that what Dr. Paul captured was 100 percent transferable to anyone else. I think the Bob Barr campaign assumed that and it didn’t pan out.”
Would Paul run as a Republican again or as a Libertarian? “We try not to ever deal in absolutes in politics,” Benton said carefully. “But he would be very likely to be running as a Republican again.” It’s not just that “working within the system” gets more exposure for a candidate. It’s that several Republican primary states include the caveat that candidates cannot run in their primaries and go third party if they lose. “To be frank, I got tired of the ‘third party’ question getting asked time after time, and I know that Ron did too.”
Paul is almost exactly a year older than John McCain, and turned 73 in August.

Now personally, I would like to see Ron Paul or someone of his kind to run in 2012. Because I personally believe that by 2012, the American people are going to be quite disgusted by the tax and spend polices of Obama. This will be fueled by all of the broken promises of the Obama administration. Quite possibly by then the Economy will be in a full-tilt state of ruin and Obama just will not be able to fix it; this will open the door for a Ron Paul type of Conservatism, which will allow that person to come in, get rid of the Federal Reserve and get America back on the gold standard.

Of course, that person will have a uphill battle, he would have to battle the establishment Republican AND Democrats who want to keep America on the collision course that it is on now. It will not be an easy battle. But it is one that can be fought and won with the right kind of campaign staff and message.

Say what? Michelle Malkin defends……Rep. Dennis Kucinich?!?!?!?!?!

I do believe that politics just entered a another level of nutty crazy. Silly

Michelle Malkin is defending, supporting, agreeing with, of all people, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Democratic Senator Rep. Dennis Kucinich, the UFO chaser! Raised Eyebrow

Quote:

Believe it or not, I am going to say something nice about Democrat Rep. Dennis Kucinich. He voted against the bailout every time. In a ready-for-YouTube exchange, he snorted when Kashkari said, (paraphrasing here) “taxpayer money shouldn’t be poured into businesses that are going to fail.” Kucinich retorted that Kashkari would be hearing that line played back to him for the rest of his career.

Now I agree with what Michelle said, but Michelle Malkin saying nice stuff about Dennis Kucinich?!?! DENNIS FREAKIN’ KUCINICH?!?!?! Surprise

Hey Jesse! Could you kindly check Michelle’s Coffee mug please? I think she might have gotten slipped a mickey! 😉

….Come to think of it, I might just check my coffee mug…. 😛

Even more on Bill Ayers

I am about sick and tired of blogging about this subject. But it appears that the Republicans were basically correct about Bill Ayers.

Go on over and read about it. I’m not quoting it here, because at this point, it is a non-issue.

Others yammering on about it: Jules Crittenden, Macsmind, Gateway Pundit, Whiskey Fire, www.redstate.com, Flopping Aces, Atlas Shrugs, Tim Blair, protein wisdom, Hot Air, Patterico’s Pontifications, Stop The ACLU, Doug Ross, Pajamas Media and Fausta’s Blog, Wake up America, Commentary, Gateway Pundit, Little Green Footballs

Say What? Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State?

I’m a bit late to the press here on this one. My apologies.

But it appears that little miss cackle-a-lot might be our next secretary of state. So, says the Washington Post:

There’s increasing chatter in political circles that the Obama camp is not overly happy with the usual suspects for secretary of state these days and that the field might be expanding somewhat beyond Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Gov. Bill Richardson (D-N.M.), Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and maybe former Democratic senator Sam Nunn of Georgia.
There’s talk, indeed, that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) may now be under consideration for the post. Her office referred any questions to the Obama transition; Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor declined to comment.
The pick of the former presidential contender and Senate Armed Services Committee member would go a long way toward healing any remaining divisions within the Democratic Party after the divisive primaries. Also, Clinton has long been known for her work on international women’s issues and human rights. The former first lady could also enhance Obama’s efforts to restore U.S. standing amongst allies worldwide.
And Obama could put her in his speed-dial for a 3 a.m. phone call every morning.

So much for all that talk of Hope and Change eh? Instead we’re getting left overs from the last Democratic Administration; Wonderful. 🙄

I guess Obama did not defeat the Clinton political machine after all.

The Children that parished at the Waco compound siege were unavailable for comment. 😡

Ruh Roh!: Mormon exposed by Campaign Finance Laws

(This comes via Reason Hit and Run)

As reported by the NYT:

SACRAMENTO — The artistic director of the California Musical Theater, a major nonprofit producing company here in the state’s capital, resigned on Wednesday in the face of growing outrage over his support for a ballot measure this month that outlawed same-sex marriage in California.
The artistic director, Scott Eckern, came under fire recently after it became known that he contributed $1,000 to support Proposition 8, which amended the state Constitution to recognize only male-female marriages. The measure was approved by 52 percent of California voters on Election Day. (Same-sex marriages had been performed in California since June.)
In a statement issued on Wednesday morning, Mr. Eckern said that his donation stemmed from his religious beliefs — he is a Mormon — and that he was “deeply saddened that my personal beliefs and convictions have offended others.”
His donation was brought to light by online activists angry about the measure’s success at the polls.
“I understand that my choice of supporting Proposition 8 has been the cause of many hurt feelings, maybe even betrayal,” Mr. Eckern said. “It was not my intent. I honestly had no idea that this would be the reaction.”

Of course for some, his resignation is not enough:

But the swift resignation was not met with cheers by those on either side.
Marc Shaiman, the Tony Award-winning composer (“Hairspray”), called Mr. Eckern last week and said that he would not let his work be performed in the theater. “I was uncomfortable with money made off my work being used to put discrimination in the Constitution,” Mr. Shaiman said. He added, however, that the entire episode left him “deeply troubled” because of the potential for backlash against gays who protested Mr. Eckern’s donation.
“It will not help our cause because we will be branded exactly as what we were trying to fight,” said Mr. Shaiman, who is gay. “But I do believe there comes a time when you cannot sit back and accept what I think is the most dangerous form of bigotry.”
Supporters of the marriage ban said that critics of Mr. Eckern were attacking freedom of expression, and they chastised the theater’s board for subjecting Mr. Eckern to a political litmus test.
“No matter your opinion on Prop. 8, we should all agree that it is wrong to intimidate or harass anyone for exercising their constitutional rights,” said a letter to the theater’s board president on Tuesday by Frank Schubert, campaign manager for Protect Marriage, the leading group behind the ballot measure.
For its part, the theater disavowed Mr. Eckern’s donation and issued only a brief statement on Wednesday accepting his resignation, while emphasizing that it would not “impinge on the rights of its employees to engage in political activities.” A longtime employee, Mr. Eckern had been artistic director since 2002.
The outrage over Mr. Eckern and the subsequent dismay voiced by Mr. Shaiman are the most recent evidence of the tension running through the entertainment industry since Election Day, particularly in California.

This is why I am against the idea of Church meddling the affairs of the Government. I will say, at least it is on a state level and not at the federal level. One cannot legislate morality. If the Governor of California wants to save his skin, he’d better strike this law from the books. But because he is a Republican, he will not.

While I do personally believe that Homosexuality, from a Christian viewpoint is immoral, I think it would be and is a tragic mistake to attempt to use the Government, of any sort; as a means to try and legislate morality. It is a tragic mistake and will cost our Nation and divide it’s people in the long run.

Memo to Michelle Malkin – Move on, please….

(H/T to HotAir.com)

I knew this was going to happen… I am again forced to criticize Michelle Malki n. (or say the stuff that Ed and Allah want to say, but will not, because they do not want to get fired!)

In this Video Michelle is carping about the way that the Sarah Palin was treated and because John McCain didn’t jump on the sofa like Tom Cruise and scream to the top his lungs, “The EVIL Liberal destroyed my changes of being President! and My former campaign staffers are trashing her now, shame shame shame!”

Here’s the nail scratching the chalk board video:

However, this is what I heard the whole time I watched it:

I think if women, Conservative or Liberal want to be taken seriously in Politics, at least by this writer; they need to act like adults and not crybabies when things really don’t go their way.

I mean Michelle criticizes the homosexuals over prop 8 and tells them to move on. So, why doesn’t she practice what she preaches? 🙄

Just sayin’

Creepy, Freaky and quite deaky!: Obama to appoint an "auto czar?"

(H/T to Michelle)

Full Disclosure: My Dad is a retired G.M. Employee and Union member.

You know, living here in the middle of all things Liberal, being a Libertarian Conservative is a bit, well; Odd. It does have it’s advantages. I tend to be a bit more Moderate about things. However, this one here spooks me.

This one’s via US News and World Report:

The troubles of the ailing auto industry are quickly becoming a major focus for President-Elect Barack Obama’s young administration. As Congress and President Bush debate an industry bailout, sources indicate that Obama may favor creating a White House office, headed by an “auto industry czar,” to oversee reforming the troubled American auto industry.
The Detroit News reports that both “Bush and Obama are signaling they may favor appointment of an auto czar to oversee the government’s efforts to funnel emergency assistance to automakers.” Congressional leaders and members of both the outgoing and incoming administrations have all said that automakers might receive federal aid only on certain dictions, including efforts “to further improve fuel efficiency and show that they have a plan to return to profitability. Automakers could also be required to give the government preferred stock in the companies and accept government representatives as board members. As in the 1979-80 Chrysler bailout, workers may have to make wage concessions.”
The press was unable to get direct confirmation of the plan yesterday. John Podesta, the former Clinton administration official heading Obama’s transition team, told the Washington Post “When we have an announcement about that, we’ll raise it.”

While I am bit happy to see that my dad’s 31 years will not be basically flushed down the toliet, because of incompetent managers. The word Czar being used in the relation to Business, gives me the willies. Least I be accused to trying to channel McCarthy; I think it reaks of Communism myself.

Could not they use another word? Like Commission, or Overseer, or something? Anything but Czar. 😮

I may just be a old paranoid weirdo, but Czar conjures up images of concentration camps, Nazi’s and all that sort of stuff.