The Times tells us a deal is near to extend all the Bush tax cuts, including those for "the rich".
I don't know how Obama avoids a primary challenge from a conventionally pro-tax, anti-war liberal - in other words, someone like Obama v.2008.
The Iowa caucuses are currently scheduled for Feb 6, 2012; I would think anyone other than Hillary would have to announce by early summer, when unemployment is likely to still be above 9%.
This is the party whose recent nominees have been Gore and Lieberman (now in exile); Kerry and Edwards (now a punchline); and of course, Obama and Biden (still a punchline). Doesn't that list make the case for Hillary, or does someone really think she would be even worse?
She looks exhausted. I don't think she will do it.
Posted by: Clarice | December 06, 2010 at 12:47 PM
Russ Finegold has a lot of times on his hands starting January 1 and he fits your mold quite well. Anti war pro tax down the line liberal.
Posted by: Gmax | December 06, 2010 at 12:48 PM
OT supreme court to hear challenge to blue states suing utilities over co2 emissions. Kagan has to recuse. Admin wanted this out of court and over to the EPA but at least 4 justices had other ideas. Should be a high likelyhood that the moonbats get slapped around again.
Posted by: Gmax | December 06, 2010 at 12:52 PM
Where does that leave Evan Bayh?
Posted by: Extraneus | December 06, 2010 at 12:57 PM
I still think with the HMS Pantsuit things would've been worse because you'd have gotten the Il Douche agenda without the deaf political ear. Including an embarrassment for a spouse.
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 06, 2010 at 12:58 PM
I don't care how leftist Russ Feingold is, I'm fairly sure he is not as corrupt as Obama.
Posted by: Jane (sit on the couch or save your country) | December 06, 2010 at 01:10 PM
I'll make the case she'd be worse. She's as much of a socialist as Obama and more competent. She'd get carbon taxes and insane tax rates passed if elected. And I see no way she'd ever change Bill's wag the dog foreign policy.
Posted by: Ken Hahn | December 06, 2010 at 01:12 PM
Yeah Jane but McCain likes him to the point that he made more of a maudlin fool out of himself than usual last week. That's a deal breaker right there.
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 06, 2010 at 01:13 PM
I don't know how Obama avoids a primary challenge from a conventionally pro-tax, anti-war liberal - in other words, someone like Obama v.2008.
That person won't get elected. Obama was a pro-tax (but not for you!), anti-spending, anti-Iraq war, pragmatist. The left supported him for his anti-war, repeal Bush tax cuts (remember when the Bush tax cuts were the "Bush tax cuts for the wealthy"?) stance, but the middle fell in love with him for all the stuff he wasn't.
A strict leftist just can't garner the votes.
Posted by: MayBee | December 06, 2010 at 01:14 PM
I don't care how leftist Russ Feingold is, I'm fairly sure he is not as corrupt as Obama.
Russ Feingold is a huge leftist, but I believe he is principled about his lefitsm, and I admire that.
Posted by: MayBee | December 06, 2010 at 01:16 PM
I believe he is principled about his lefitsm, and I admire that
Didn't Walter Duranty say that about Stalin?
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 06, 2010 at 01:20 PM
I think that the Wikileaks scandal has irreversibly damaged Hillary. Before this, she could have tried to run to the center, picking up votes from her committed leftist base and working-class Democrats disaffected with Obama, much as she had in the 2008 primaries. But to do that successfully, she had to be able to distinguish herself from this administration, and that is becoming increasingly hard to do. The wikileaks scandal doesn't increase the image of her as competent or knowledgeable, and it undermines the image of herself that she tried to cultivate during her years in the Senate and on the campaign trail in 2008.
So perhaps Obama will get a challenge from the left. Dennis Kucinich might run again, but he's already something of a joke, so I can't see how that would do anything to hurt Obama.
Posted by: Kurt | December 06, 2010 at 01:22 PM
I have to believe that the number of people who actually wanted the Bush tax cuts to expire is exceedingly small.
There is almost no other explanation for allowing the process to go on this long, considering we have known the expiration date from the beginning. Democrats had 4 years to get exactly what they wanted. I suspect they have.
Posted by: MayBee | December 06, 2010 at 01:22 PM
A strict leftist just can't garner the votes.
No, but a strong primary challenge might weaken Obama's lefty support in the general.
Posted by: Porchlight | December 06, 2010 at 01:23 PM
CH:
I don't Feingold has had anyone executed lately for thought crimes.
Posted by: Appalled | December 06, 2010 at 01:23 PM
I think Hillary is gunning for 2016, notwithstanding her protestations that Sec. of State is her last public position. If he challenged Obama in 2012, I think that would hurt her in 2016. Thus, if Obama is going to be challenged, it would be from a Howard Dean type.
Obama, in my view, is going to have a relatively easy path to the the nomination in 2012. There really is no realistic alternative, and Obama can still raise $$$$. Could a Dean type cause the type of trouble for Obama that Pat Buchanan caused for George H.W. Bush in 1992? Possible, but I think unlikely.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | December 06, 2010 at 01:23 PM
No, but a strong primary challenge might weaken Obama's lefty support in the general.
True. But it may strengthen his Indy support, depending on the GOP candidate.
Posted by: MayBee | December 06, 2010 at 01:24 PM
"not as corrupt as Obama"
C.S.Lewis: "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
IMO Russ and Barack are two peas in a pod nanny scolds who are sure they know what's best for everybody.
Posted by: boris | December 06, 2010 at 01:30 PM
Yeah Jane but McCain likes him to the point that he made more of a maudlin fool out of himself than usual last week. That's a deal breaker right there.
I wouldn't support either he or Hillary, but I think both love this country, a trait sorely missing in the current WH occupant.
Posted by: Jane (sit on the couch or save your country) | December 06, 2010 at 01:32 PM
A challenge from his left is the best-case scenario for Obama. If he isn't inviting one on purpose, he should be. It's the only way he can keep the reasonable-sounding ruse going.
"Hey, maybe we were wrong about Obama, Mabel. He's really not so extreme."
Posted by: Extraneus | December 06, 2010 at 01:35 PM
True. But it may strengthen his Indy support, depending on the GOP candidate.
Maybee,
I really cannot imagine anything that would strengthen his independent support at this point. I think the sort of burning of them that has been done cannot be recovered from.
Maybe that is wishful thinking.
(Happy Birthday BTW)
Posted by: Jane (sit on the couch or save your country) | December 06, 2010 at 01:36 PM
But it may strengthen his Indy support, depending on the GOP candidate.
Maybe, in a best-case scenario, though that didn't play out for Carter with Kennedy's challenge. I think a sizable chunk of indys have left Obama for good.
Posted by: Porchlight | December 06, 2010 at 01:41 PM
Jane-
He'll get Brooks, Frum, and Noonan on the case.
Hillary's career is over-Wikileaks and overcharge buttons-"smart diplomacy".
Posted by: RichatUF | December 06, 2010 at 01:44 PM
Appalled, I think Feingold, if President, is capable of enacting policies which would lead to, if not actual deaths at the time, a significant decline in the standard of living, of which lifespan is a component. Sorry but "principled leftist" is an oxymoron to me now; there's enough historical evidence of policies failing to not cut anybody slack who still believes in them.
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 06, 2010 at 01:45 PM
Read Obama's Lips -
No New Stitches
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | December 06, 2010 at 01:45 PM
Here's a cup of further delusional thinking, I try to illuminate it, but you can't drive
a horse to drink, in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | December 06, 2010 at 01:53 PM
Evan Bayh is planning a primary challenge from the "center."
Posted by: Stilicho | December 06, 2010 at 01:56 PM
The arc from here to the Iowa caucuses is a lifetime in politics. I still don't believe we have seen worst of the economy or of national security. Anything can happen between now and then including a Jeb Bush insurgency within the Republican ranks of candidates. Whoever challenges Obama in the primaries will be the Eugene McCarthy of their generation and go down in flames at the democrat primaries. The "professional" left do not control the Democrat machine especially where they need to - Chicago, Philly, New Yawk, Boston, L.A. Maybe they have some control in Seattle, Madison, San Fran, Ann Arbor and Austin but that will not be enough.
The big question is will a stalled economy and a stalled war in Afghanistan give The One the same insights given to LBJ in 1967?
Posted by: Jack is Back! | December 06, 2010 at 01:58 PM
"He'll get Brooks, Frum, and Noonan on the case."
T. Codd's badmitton foursome appear to be getting screechier watching their boy in the WH generally fuck things up with each passing day while it also becomes abundantly clear that they--our betters--are getting impatient with us.
Posted by: lyle | December 06, 2010 at 01:59 PM
"Hillary's career is over"
Not only is Wikileaks ending her career, it is ending the career of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of US embassy employees. I would not be surprised if all most all US employees have to be withdrawn.
No one (from the host country) is going to trust them with anything.
If I were a life insurance company I don't believe I would write a new policy on these guys neither.
Wikileaks-Chinese top Officials say not to trust country's economic data.
Posted by: pagar | December 06, 2010 at 02:03 PM
The arc from here to the Iowa caucuses is a lifetime in politics.
The arc of Obama's campaign is long, but it bends toward poverty and hopelessness...
Posted by: RichatUF | December 06, 2010 at 02:09 PM
Pager-
It will do State little good to clean house if they don't find the folks responsible for the leaks first.
Posted by: RichatUF | December 06, 2010 at 02:12 PM
I agree with you, Clarice. She went into the primaries last time optimistic that she was a shoo-in and instead it turned out to be a gruelling campaign. I think it just plum tuckered her out. A coronation is one thing, having to actually fight for the crown is another.
Posted by: Chubby | December 06, 2010 at 02:16 PM
The thing is this, chubby, her tin ear is almost as bad as Obama's. She had more experience and can cover it up better, but she's no Bill Clinton. The notion that she was the brains of the couple is laughable. She was hs Beria.
Posted by: Clarice | December 06, 2010 at 02:18 PM
How quickly you've all forgotten the man with the strangest mouth this side of Donald Trump: Gov. Howard Brush Dean.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | December 06, 2010 at 02:20 PM
Boris "C.S.Lewis: "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive."
Just happened to see the movie on cable "Tender is the Night" wherein one of Fitzgerald's characters states "There is no greater tyranny than the tyranny of the weak."
True that.
Since half the population pays no income tax, and since a number who do are also members of (one or more)protected classes, I would say the weak have more than enough votes to apply their tyranny quite forcefully.
Posted by: Old Lurker | December 06, 2010 at 02:23 PM
I agree with Pager. State is going to have to clean house but so are all federal agencies.
While I don't agree or disagree with the WIKI leaks, I do know it's the responsibility of the government to keep state secrets....and it's the job of journalist to report news. So, who is really to blame for the leaks?
just read a book that I'll be giving away this holiday (all I can afford) cause it's Amerians actually taking a stand. It's a thriller. I recommend it.
www.booksbyoliver.com
If WIKI has the 'goods' on Wall St. then I think there will be hell to pay for a long time with American investors when they see how corrupt their brokers are. Good article. Thanks, Tom.
Posted by: WhiteRose | December 06, 2010 at 02:27 PM
O/T: Andrew Breitbart has a big report on the Pigford Settlement.
Posted by: MayBee | December 06, 2010 at 02:28 PM
I do think all western industrial societies to have a problem--reflected here in studies cited today by Instapundit to the effect that men , young men, are bearing the largest burden of unemployment. We simply have no means of providing employment to the fifty percent of our citizens whose IQ's are less than average. Once upon a time we had coal mines, road work, auto building, etc which employed large numbers of young, not terribly smart men. Now, if you cannot manage to do white collar work you are pretty much unemployable.
Whoever, resolves this will save Western democracy.
Because unless these people find jobs we will have to support them, and if they are supported by the govt they will soon cease to be liberty minded citizens.
Posted by: Clarice | December 06, 2010 at 02:29 PM
Again, Clarice, I totally agree with your analysis. If she had won, it wouldn't be a Hillary WH, it would be a Bill WH.
Posted by: Chubby | December 06, 2010 at 02:29 PM
The Halperin piece, well it strikes the right balance of naivete with revulsion
Posted by: narciso | December 06, 2010 at 02:31 PM
I refuse to vote for anyone touted as "the smartest woman in the world" [Hillary] or "the smartest man in the world" [Obama] or anyone who has ever held a US Senate seat. Haven't we learned enough about these people yet?
Let me vote for some average dummy who has actually accomplished some management successes.
Seriously.
Posted by: JorgXMcKie | December 06, 2010 at 02:37 PM
I posted this on the other thread but wanted to make sure this isn't missed: Kathy Griffin was on a USO tour according to Tammy Bruce? WTF! She got booed by the troops for teeing off on Bristol Palin and reacted by chanting "War is Hell". Seriously, is there anybody that's a grownup in the civilian government?
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 06, 2010 at 02:40 PM
A question for people with a better recollection of the time... When Kennedy primaried Carter, was it from Carter's left or from the "center"?
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | December 06, 2010 at 02:42 PM
Secretary of State is the graveyard of Presidential ambitions. Unless the officeholder is willing to completely alienate both the State Department and our foreign friends, neighbors and enemies, he or she can only look (to the American public) both snooty and impotent at the same time. That's (in part) why Obama appointed her; I'm (somewhat) surprised that the Clintons didn't see what that was about. Maybe she and Bill weren't speaking at the time, although when it comes to politics I think their phone lines are always open.
Posted by: Boatbuilder | December 06, 2010 at 02:42 PM
Her hayday was around the time of Newsradio, and she was easily the most annoying member of the cast, even including Joe Rogin, who
would blaze a trail, yeah that's it, in reality programming
Posted by: narciso | December 06, 2010 at 02:44 PM
Michelle Malkin covered that earlier, Capt and I was heartened by it, actually. It seems to me that the troops are generally grateful to USO informers and easy audiences..so if they did this, it reveals how extensive is the revulsion against the left acting as if we all shared their views.
The "War is hell" comment probably indicates Griffin's career is about to hit a skid.
Posted by: Clarice | December 06, 2010 at 02:44 PM
"...is there anybody that's a grownup in the civilian government?"
Come now, Cap'n. What do you want for $122,000 per year on average?
Posted by: Old Lurker | December 06, 2010 at 02:45 PM
((I refuse to vote for anyone touted as "the smartest woman in the world" [Hillary] or "the smartest man in the world" [Obama] ))
as they say, there's a fine line between genius and idiocy :)
Posted by: Chubby | December 06, 2010 at 02:52 PM
I found a writeup of the story at, where else, Foul Air and I guess it was put together by the subgeniuses at VH1. Clarice it was extremely encouraging that the troops reacted as they did. Of course the witless harridan didn't take into account that Bristol's sibling is a brother in arms. What an unfunny idiot.
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 06, 2010 at 02:55 PM
I really think we should just split up the country now. Sure it will be inconvenient and lots of us will have to move, but I'm starting to see no way out of the mess the democrats have created.
BTW Obama just called a meeting at the WH because apparently Biden couldn't get the dems to agree to the tax cuts. Let me guess, Obama will change his mind and refuse to sign the bill.
It's not your money democrats!
Posted by: Jane (sit on the couch or save your country) | December 06, 2010 at 02:56 PM
"The "War is hell" comment probably indicates Griffin's career is about to hit a skid."
About to? I thought she had already been flushed out the bottom of the porn industry.
Posted by: lyle | December 06, 2010 at 02:57 PM
Hiya folks...
Back to KAF from The Heart of Darkness. Good times and good peeps out there, but now it's back to the clown college and bad food.
Made life significantly more interesting for several regional insurgent big shots. We would have rounded them ALL up if we had another 60 days. We now leave it to the Canadians to screw up.
Will have pictures and commentary out as soon as I get my internet account back up and running.
Thanks for all the great care packages and goodies. I gave a lot of it out to the dogfaces, but kept the really meaningful stuff for myself. They loved it, and I loved it.
Posted by: Soylent Red | December 06, 2010 at 02:59 PM
I thought she had already been flushed out the bottom of the porn industry.
Dear God, the thought of her doing porn could cause national impotence. Keep in mind she must be the only person who attached herself to Levi Johnston to boost her career,
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 06, 2010 at 03:03 PM
Hey Soylent; great to hear from you
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 06, 2010 at 03:04 PM
OL,
Dispersion drops the political weight of the free riders considerably. The bottom quartile is only an effective political force in the Deep Blue Hells where they can be whipped to the polls on election day. The 2nd quartile is where the action is and they're malleable. If the GOP can come up with some program allowing them to provide for themselves then many of them will will vote Rep.
Clarice,
Given the coming geezer increase, the GOP should take a look at exempting household employment from certain onerous aspects of current labor laws. They should sure as hell strangle the SEIU crooks' attempts to unionize household service. Two retired couples can keep a couple in service for less than the cost of assisted care. I expect to see that become quite common.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 06, 2010 at 03:06 PM
OT,
I do not like Jennifer Rubin's new semi-conservative column in the WaPo.
Posted by: Porchlight | December 06, 2010 at 03:09 PM
Hey Soylent! So nice to hear from you.
Posted by: Porchlight | December 06, 2010 at 03:10 PM
Yay Soylent! WE miss you - and we are always thinking about you. Did you get Matt's package? I know you are getting Janets' packages.
Posted by: Jane (sit on the couch or save your country) | December 06, 2010 at 03:27 PM
Thanks to YOU for all your great efforts & sacrifice for us Soylent!!!
Posted by: Janet | December 06, 2010 at 03:30 PM
True Rick, and the IQ thingy dispersed their impact even more. But now that vote stealing is so efficient, the dispersion effect is diminished...
Posted by: Old Lurker | December 06, 2010 at 03:32 PM
I wish you'd write that up and publish it somewhere Rick. I'd add that we need to bring back vocational schools. As long as we keep pretending every kid is college material we will keep replenishing ACORN's ranks with the otherwise unemployables.
And yet the paperwork for household workers is onerous. Every time anything like this is mentioned , however, we get screams from the usuals.
Posted by: Clarice | December 06, 2010 at 03:34 PM
"Keep in mind she must be the only person who attached herself to Levi Johnston to boost her career."
Sounds like porn to me. The hard core type.
Posted by: lyle | December 06, 2010 at 03:35 PM
Once upon a time we had coal mines, road work, auto building, etc which employed large numbers of young, not terribly smart men.
Actually, we still do have those things.
We've just let the native workforce be undercut by imported foreign labor.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | December 06, 2010 at 03:48 PM
Glad to hear from you Soylent!
-----------------------------------
"It will do State little good to clean house if they don't find the folks responsible for the leaks first. "
The story I heard was that there were several million Government employees and possibly others that had access to the system that the State Dept leaks came from.
We know that We have had US Senators (such as Rockefeller-D-WV, Kerry, D-Mass, Kennedy-D- Mass, running to every foreign Anti-American leader they can find to spill US Secrets; why even bother looking any further? Fire them all.
Just to show how crazy the world of protecting government secrets has gotten.
Russian Spy Honeytrap.
"A womanising MP who employed a suspected Russian spy has defended giving her a job and insisted: 'I'm not naive.'
"Liberal Democrat Mike Hancock, 64, who sits on the defence committee, was introduced to Katia Zatuliveter on one of his regular visits to the Eastern Bloc superpower.
"He employed the 25-year-old blonde as a parliamentary assistant - handing her at least three years' access to official documents on defence policy."
The EU Referendum Article is even stronger.
""I've been in Strasbourg since 2004. I remember at least five of Mike's Russian female assistants," said another group member, who declined to be named."
State secrets are a disaster!
Posted by: Pagar | December 06, 2010 at 03:50 PM
No one (from the host country) is going to trust them with anything.
No one from the host country ever trusted them with anything. Everything was filtered by what the other party wanted.
I've got a piece on the WikiLeaks thing up today: from the comments, it sounds like SIPRnet really was as open as they have been claiming in the Guardian.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | December 06, 2010 at 03:58 PM
Well, 30% of the Dem vote is black. My computer model indicates that fewer than a dozen black voters would support a fully white candidate over Ibama. So . . . forget about it.
Posted by: PaulL | December 06, 2010 at 03:58 PM
Griffin is currently part of the show "The Apprentice" at a golf outing sponsored by the Donald. Her schtick has grown tiresome and trite.
Personally I think Dean will come at Obama from the left. He masterminded the 50 state strategy and got dissed by Rahm for his efforts. He was loudly upset about no public option in Healthcare. His revenge on obama will be sweet.
Posted by: maryrose | December 06, 2010 at 03:59 PM
Hearing from Soylent just made my day.
Posted by: hit and run | December 06, 2010 at 04:07 PM
Hey, Soylent, how are the night clubs in Kandahar:)
Does this mean the Rakkasans are rotating out?
For all others interested in what it must be like in the 'stan, you can get the DVD of RESTREPO tomorrow on the 7th of December from Amazon. This is a must see documentary which I have watched a number of times with friends. LUN
Posted by: Jack is Back! | December 06, 2010 at 04:14 PM
. . . it sounds like SIPRnet really was as open as they have been claiming in the Guardian.
Used to do this for a living. SIPRNET is just the backbone. The stuff that's on it is open or not, depending on policy and procedures. I can't believe they had a diplo database on there with open access (I'm quite certain they didn't when I retired). If so, it's merely a matter of time before it leaks, even without the other glaring issues (e.g., a guy with Manning's issues shouldn't even have had a clearance, let alone access).
Nice article. I would've used "access" as the header instead of "compartmentalization" . . . but you got both in there, and the way you explained it might be better for those unfamiliar.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | December 06, 2010 at 04:15 PM
Hey, Cecil, Obama is CINC and look at this "issues".
Getting a S or TS or TSC used to take years sometimes. It took me 18 months to get my TSC and I was raised an Air Force brat on 9 different bases! Now I understand they have farmed out all the backgrounds and punks like Manning can get a TS in less than 6 weeks. Makes no sense but then electing a guy POTU who wouldn't pass a normal background check doesn't either.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | December 06, 2010 at 04:26 PM
Soylent!!!!!
Posted by: MayBee | December 06, 2010 at 04:33 PM
Hey, Cecil, Obama is CINC and look at this "issues".
The attitude on security tends to flow downhill, but I still have a hard time blaming much of this on the Prez. Manning should've had his access pulled immediately if half the stuff in the press is correct (which his OIC could've done), and I can't see why he ever had access to stuff like diplo cables. That last is at least partially a top-level policy issue, but I'd bet a very large sum that the guys who made the decision didn't really understand it.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | December 06, 2010 at 04:39 PM
Soylent!
So glad you are safe. Can't wait until you are stateside. A friend's husband returned from Iraq and even though he is not a touchy feely person I hugged him the first minute I saw him.Consider yourself hugged!
Posted by: maryrose | December 06, 2010 at 04:51 PM
Census Initiates Trot Back
'Cause it's too damned far to walk by the end of the month. They're pimping 310,859,869 as today's "best estimate" on the main website and that's over 800K above the high middle estimate and about 2.4 million above the middle estimate. From the news release:
Sure it does. It also provides a nice butt cover for the disappearance of the 2 million Mythical Mexicans generated by the use of very misleading models by Pew (with some strong help from INS).
My bet is that this is also an attempt to lay ground work for a claim that the most expensive Census ever conducted is "wrong" and that many poor trapped in the disintegrating Blue Hells weren't counted.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 06, 2010 at 04:57 PM
"No one from the host country ever trusted them with anything. Everything was filtered by what the other party wanted."
I disagree! Legal Insurrection says it better than I can:
As reported by The L.A. Times, a cable from the U.S. Embassy in Beirut revealed by WikiLeaks alleges that Murr assisted the U.S. and Israel in the targeting of Hezbollah:
Lebanon's Defense Minister Elias Murr told Americans the army would stay out of the way if Israel tried to wipe out Hezbollah, according to a secret March 2008 conversation revealed in a diplomatic cable revealed by WikiLeaks."
" [Updated at 7:53 a.m.: The cable originated from the U.S. Embassy in Beirut and was sent to the State Department in Washington.]"
I would be willing to bet that Elias Murr expected the Americans to keep what he told them a secret. Of Course, the info would be filtered. He still trusted the Americans to safeguard it. Now he is a dead man walking because his trust was misplaced. There will be thousands, if not more, in the same situation he is in before this is over.
I liked your article in Pajama Media, Charlie. Especially this sentence:
"It seems to me that our ideal other source would be someone with broad access, either at CIA, in the Department of State, or in the national security apparatus in the White House."
I would be real surprised if this was not true.
Posted by: Pagar | December 06, 2010 at 05:18 PM
And the minute the integrity of the actual nose count is gone, then assigning reps in the house and so many federal grants that are based on nose counts will become a political football. Since all such machinations are completed by our betters in government service and their union handlers and facilitators...you just know where this ends.
Not to mention the oddity of paying a "company" to complete an inventory counting assignment and at the same time pay that same company to prove it counted wrong.
Posted by: Old Lurker | December 06, 2010 at 05:20 PM
narciso, that was a different strange-looking redhead on NewsRadio. As for Kathy Griffin, I always thought she looked more like a gorgon than a griffin.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | December 06, 2010 at 05:22 PM
drudge has the police cruiser light on for a surprise move by Obama on the tax deadlock
Posted by: peter | December 06, 2010 at 05:26 PM
Back to Topic: According to NRO and Tweeters Barry O and Repub leaders have signed off on a complete tax rate extension for 2 years including cap gains, estate and business depreciation, and dropped barry O's $400 welfare credit for a witholding tax reduction for taxpayers only, long-term unemployment extended for 13 months through december 2011. This is such a cave by barry O I wonder if enough Dems will vote for it.
Barry O is like Groucho Marx, "these are my principles, if you don't like them..... I have others!!
Posted by: NK | December 06, 2010 at 05:27 PM
Just checking in during a busy work day and how great to see Soylent posting!
Posted by: centralcal | December 06, 2010 at 05:31 PM
Can't wait to find out how many of those 311M entered "American" as their race.
Posted by: Extraneus | December 06, 2010 at 05:33 PM
Don't miss the second annual PUK awards.
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=47654
Posted by: Clarice | December 06, 2010 at 05:35 PM
George Voinovich announces he is against extending the current tax rate regime (see LUN).
I have been physically closer to Voinovich than to any other US Senator (I shook his hand about 30 years back at a Hungarian-American men's club in the Cleveland area when he was running for mayor). I guess my belief in low marginal income tax rates didn't rub off on him.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | December 06, 2010 at 05:37 PM
She was Suddenly Susan, an artifact of the 90s, more destined for obscurity than Mambo # 5,
Posted by: narciso | December 06, 2010 at 05:44 PM
Clarice, thanks for that link. It is a treasure.
Posted by: pagar | December 06, 2010 at 05:52 PM
A question for people with a better recollection of the time... When Kennedy primaried Carter, was it from Carter's left or from the "center"?
I don't think Kennedy himself could figure that out, as Roger Mudd famously discovered. Kennedy was running from Hyannisport, and he thought that would be enough.
Posted by: jimmyk | December 06, 2010 at 05:55 PM
Well golly! It's hard to think of a reason why I would ever prefer Hillary Clinton to anyone--even a mumbling stumbling old alky pulled out of an alley in say Newark New Jersey.
She's as hard left as Obama--and while she doesn't have much of a political ear, she might occasionally take a bit of political advice from our First Black President--old Bildo himself. So in that regard she may be more dangerous to the Republic than Obama.
But she remains short on experience. The State Department is the first thing she's ever really run, other than her mouth and her campaigns.
If you want some fun and a bit of schadenfreude go over to the blog The Confluence--largely written by a bunch of Hillary supporters, and see the catfight they have going on with folks in the left side of the party who "did Hillary dirt to get Obama elected and now have fallen out of love with Obama". It's worth three bags of popcorn and couple of sodas.
Posted by: Comanche Voter | December 06, 2010 at 06:06 PM
Speaking of reading Obama's lips:
It should be superful, souperflul, superfla, superflua, ">http://www.mediaite.com/online/barack-obamas-kennedy-center-gaffe-similar-to-sarah-palins-north-korea-flub/"> easy to say superfluous if you're the smartest man on the planet.
Bet Soylent can say it right the first time!
Posted by: daddy | December 06, 2010 at 06:24 PM
Soylent, it is wonderful to hear from you. Happy belated Thanksgiving!
Posted by: Elliott | December 06, 2010 at 06:30 PM
Obama--kicking and screaming--is caving on taxes.
Posted by: glasater | December 06, 2010 at 06:35 PM
Apparently cutting payroll taxes. Is that the best way to increase jobs?
Posted by: Clarice | December 06, 2010 at 06:39 PM
I will never forget Voinovich's refusal to vote for John Bolton as UN Ambassador because of charges that he had yelled at his secretary. Good riddance to that lightweight fool.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | December 06, 2010 at 06:39 PM
George Voinovich announces he is against extending the current tax rate regime
Listening to mega-douche Hewitt I was reminded why I can't stand that SOB: Mr I'm-a-Buckeye was going "Voinovch has just been in office too long; he was a good mayor of Cleveland and governor". Maybe it seemed that way when Mr Buckeye was at Harvard as an undergrad or at Meeeeechigan for law school, surrounded by commies that don't think it's a BFD when Voinovich raised every goddamn tax he ever had a chance to. He's just a bean-counting back bencher who is in favor of balancing the books by taxing every productive citizen to the max. Hewitt should really STFU when he doesn't know wtf he's talking about. Expert in Ohio politics my ass.
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 06, 2010 at 06:40 PM
I am curious as to whether Obama will be joining Lautenberg in donating to the United States treasury. By my reckoning, extending the tax cuts would slash his federal income tax obligations by $200,000 or so per annum.
Posted by: Elliott | December 06, 2010 at 06:42 PM
Christopher Hitchens at Slate goes on the war screed against Assange, but also gets in some Plame/Wilson bashing:
"As for the public's right to know and the accountability of our covert or confidential agencies, it is only a short time since the entire American liberal consensus was witlessly applauding a clumsy and fruitless prosecution, directed entirely at the hopelessly overdramatized exposure of a relatively minor CIA official, married to a monster of conceit who makes Assange look bashful. It then turned out that Valerie Plame's job description had been made public by Robert Novak and Richard Armitage, who also had in common with Assange a rooted opposition to the administration's Iraq policy. Elements of the left and the right appear to have switched positions on full disclosure since then.
Guess he doesn't like the movie either. ">http://www.slate.com/id/2276857/"> link.
Posted by: daddy | December 06, 2010 at 06:47 PM
CH,
But at least Hewitt told us what we were in for in his prophetic tome A Leftist Myrmidon in the White House. Oh wait...
Posted by: Elliott | December 06, 2010 at 06:50 PM
The deal: Wa Po
By Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 6, 2010; 6:40 PM
President Obama and congressional Republicans have agreed to a tentative deal that would extend for two years all the tax breaks set to expire on Dec. 31, continue unemployment benefits for an additional 13 months and cut payroll taxes for workers to encourage employers to start hiring.
The deal has been in the works for more than a week and represents a concession by Obama to political reality: Democrats don't have the votes in Congress to extend only the expiring tax breaks that benefit the middle class. The White House estimates that the proposed agreement would prevent typical families from facing annual tax increases of about $3,000, starting Jan. 1.
Posted by: Clarice | December 06, 2010 at 06:55 PM
Good point, Elliott. I'm not sure many of our fellow citizens know enough about Lautenberg's announcement that he doesn't want, and therefore isn't accepting, the tax cut anymore. That kind of selfless patriotism should be trumpeted to the common people of this nation. And since Obama will obviously be joining that great man in his sacrifice for us, every schoolchild should be taught about these singularly honorable acts.
I understand that John Kerry doesn't want the tax cut either. Nor do Warren Buffett, or obviously Al Gore. That extra 5% capital gains figure should net the treasury billions after the rest of those fine Democrat conscientious tax-cut objectors follow in their footsteps.
It's enough to bring a tear to one's eye. [sniff]
Posted by: Extraneus | December 06, 2010 at 06:57 PM