First Runner-Up for QotD

First Runner-Up for QotD

From Mostly Cajun:

We signed out from under that “ruler” thing in 1776. I don’t mind being led, but I am an American and a combat veteran. I don’t do “ruled”.

Can I get an "amen"?

Quote of the Day

Quote of the Day

I've been busy, so I didn't notice that Mike Vanderboegh had published another excerpt from Absolved on Monday until Wednesday night. Here's today's QotD excerpted from that piece, and if you haven't read the novel up to this point, I suggest that you read this part and then start at the beginning and read the whole thing:

You've got us surrounded, you poor bastards.

Remember that we consider our rights merely codified by the Constitution. They are, we sincerely believe, God-given and inalienable. Remember too that we are willing to die for our liberties rather than surrender them up meekly. Remember as well that men and women who are willing to die for their principles are most often willing to kill for them too.

Hey, Nicholson Baker can write Checkpoint, Vanderboegh can write Absolved.

Think of it as the "fairness doctrine" in action.

Quote of the Day

Quote of the Day

I don't know how I missed this one:

So, when is Bush supposed to declare himself Emperor-for-Life and declare martial law? I'm sure I read somewhere that was his real plan all along. - "alath" in a comment at Tam's

I Have a Couple of Questions . . .

I Have a Couple of Questions . . .

. . . for the President-elect:

1) Will the fixing of our souls be part of the single-payer medical plan after it passes, or will it simply begin on inauguration day? (Or will it require an Executive Order?)

2) Same question about healing the planet. I assume the rising of the seas will slow immediately? Or did that begin already?

You have to stay on top of those campaign promises!

Gun Sales & Me

A lot of pixels have been spilled concerning the quantity of firearms, ammunition and accessories being purchased in the wake of The Obamessiah's ascension. Here's my story:

You probably already know about the M14, but here it is again. Since I sold my Mustang, I have a pretty nice chunk of change, and I decided I wanted a really first-rate M1A/M14. My previous experience with Fulton Armory was good, and they offer their Peerless M14 at a pricey, but not overwhelming price.

One problem - 12-14 month delivery.

Kind readers pointed me to Ted Brown, who has an outstanding reputation and offers rifles built on the forged LRB M25 receiver. VERY pricey, but just DAMN. That should be a piece of art when it's done. I sent him my order last week with a deposit. The wait is 7-10 months. But I'll be receiving the stripped receiver for transfer as soon as it comes in, just in case Obama wants to add the M1A/M14 to the banned list. I want to own the "rifle" as soon as possible. I've already purchased eleven 20-round magazines.

I currently own one AR15 lower and two uppers. The lower was custom built by Fulton Armory on a Bushmaster stripped receiver with all FN parts except for a Jewell 2-stage target trigger and a Ergo grip. One upper is a Fulton custom with a 16.25" Douglas air-gauged 1:9 twist bull barrel, a GG&G extended picatinny rail, a free-floated quad-rail forend and a Harris bipod. Mounted on top is a Leupold target scope. It's a tack-driving SOB shooting 75 grain Hornady BTHP handloads.

The other upper is a Stag M4gery with an EOTech and backup irons that co-witness.

I wanted a second lower with a VLTOR carbine stock for the M4gery.

On Saturday two weeks before the election I went in to my favorite gun shop, Murphys Guns & Gunsmithing, and asked them if they could get me an assembled Bushmaster lower without a buttstock (it's a catalog item for Bushmaster). During that trip I bought a T/C Encore frame from them. Later in the week they got back to me: Yes, they're available, "plenty in stock" at the vendor. I went in the next Saturday (the one before the election last Tuesday) and placed my order, paying in full up front.

I went in last Saturday to see if they'd received it.

They'd forgotten to order it.

They're no longer in stock. Nobody really knows when they'll be able to get one.

My VLTOR buttstock came in from Brownell's last week. I think it's going to be lonely for a while.

At the last Gunblogger's Rendezvous, I shot Dave's .308 T/C Encore, whacking the steel plate at 400 yards with relative ease. Today I placed an order for a .260 Remington barrel, stainless, with a muzzle brake, scope base and a forearm from Bullberry's.

Delivery is running three (3) months on those.

Quote of the Day

Quote of the Day

The swooning frenzy over the choice of Barack Obama as President of the United States must be one of the most absurd waves of self-deception and swirling fantasy ever to sweep through an advanced civilisation. At least Mandela-worship – its nearest equivalent – is focused on a man who actually did something.

I really don’t see how the Obama devotees can ever in future mock the Moonies, the Scientologists or people who claim to have been abducted in flying saucers. This is a cult like the one which grew up around Princess Diana, bereft of reason and hostile to facts. - Peter Hitchens, The night we waved goodbye to America... our last best hope on Earth

Hitchens will now be ridiculed as a racist. You heard it here first.

Obama Plans to Hit the Ground Running, It Seems

Obama Plans to Hit the Ground Running, It Seems

From Investor's Business Daily:

Marching Orders

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, November 10, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Transition: President-elect Obama isn't planning to wait for Congress to pass his agenda. On Day One, he plans to rescind Bush executive orders on everything from embryonic stem cell research to offshore drilling.

When minority Republicans seemed to force congressional Democrats to abandon efforts to extend the legislative ban on offshore drilling that expired on Oct. 1, it was considered a pro-drilling victory. In July, President Bush had lifted an 18-year presidential ban on offshore oil drilling. Soon, it was hoped, it would be drill, baby, drill.

The Democrats knew otherwise. They'd run out the clock knowing that a President Obama and a re-elected Democratic Congress would undo this right-wing mischief. As Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., noted at a Sept. 18 press conference: "Nobody's going to be drilling offshore in the next three months."

Judging by statements made by John Podesta, nobody's going to be drilling anywhere domestically for a very long time. On "Fox News Sunday," Obama's transition chief called the federal Bureau of Land Management's plan to open about 360,000 acres of public land in Utah to oil and gas drilling "a mistake."

"They want to have oil and gas drilling in some of the most sensitive, fragile lands in Utah," Podesta said. Expect Obama to rescind that action and reissue the executive order banning offshore drilling in protected waters.

The Washington Post reports that the Obama transition team has a list of 200 Bush administration actions and executive orders scheduled to be undone with a stroke of Obama's pen on alleged climate change, embryonic stem cell research and other issues.

Who was it that said, "Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Pretty cool, huh?" Oh, right Paul Begala during Clinton's administration.

Read the whole thing.

All those people who keep saying that Obama will have to move to the middle in order to get anything done want to reconsider?

Ramirez Weighs in on the Palin Question

Ramirez Weighs in on the Palin Question


The man is a national treasure. (Mike Ramirez, not McCain.)

More Right-Wing Hatemongering

Unix-Jedi emailed me this morning with a very interesting link. It seems that the very same people who apologized to the world for Bush getting re-elected are now advising us that we all just need to get along.

Jim Treacher had something to say about that. Specifically:

There's nothing easier than telling the guy you just beat that he should forget the depths you plumbed to do so.

So did Victor Davis Hanson:

When I hear a partisan insider like Paul Begala urging at the 11th hour that we now rally around lame-duck Bush in his last few days, I detect a sense of apprehension that no Democrats would wish conservatives to treat Obama as they did Bush for eight years.

Which was picked up by Tim Blair. But what U-J sent me was a link to a specific comment at Tim Blair's Daily Telegraph post. This one:

That website made me want to puke. Those head-tilts are now not of compassion but condescension. As if the left has anything to teach anyone about graciousness or moderation in attitude or behaviour.

Of course conservatives will "get along" and make nice - it's why they knew they could get away with all the atrocious things they've said and done the past 8 years. Did anyone hear GWB whining about all the stuff that's been said and written about him? Has he blackballed a network for asking "tough" questions? Has he querulously queried a news anchor about being a shill for the opposing side?

Do you know why conservatives generally have the capacity for graciousness in victory and defeat? Because, as a rule, conservatives are happy with who they are. There's no cognitive dissonance going on, because we live what we believe - we like free markets, so we consume; we actually care for our less fortunate neighbours, so we give generously (of our OWN money that we earn) and we buy their stuff so they can gain wealth; we don’t believe the economy works by taking from one and giving to the other (as though a dollar for you means a dollar less for me), so we work hard, pay our taxes grudgingly and rejoice at the success of others while working to secure our own; we don't believe in AGW, so we don't agonise over the recycling or flying or driving anywhere. It's bliss.

If you're a lefty in a western capitalist democracy, this is impossible because you are living off the wealth created by a system you think you despise. You are inherently angry and bitter all the time, because your life can't measure up to your impossible ideals, and you are naturally self-absorbed and self-centered because of this anger and bitterness. It's all consuming.

Of course, I'm generalising. I'm sure some of the head-tilties pictured were appalled at the treatment of the conservatives at the hands of the minority (but vocal) radicalised elements of their pseudo-religion, and in the last 8 years raised their voices again and again in protest at such unprovoked and vicious assaults on the character and person of their political opponents, all the while gently counselling their wayward brethren to focus on critiquing ideas, and having genuine debates rather than resorting to name-calling.

And I know, some conservative once called you a name so we are just as bad. Boo hoo. Go cry in your victory herbal tea, winner, and try to figure out just how to run something and lead something for once, instead of making dopey-hopey-changey noises and singing "How many times must a man blah blah" while wearing your "Abort Sarah Palin" button on your "Sarah Palin is a C***" t-shirt while waving your "GWB is not my President" banner and throwing a molotov cocktail at the McDonald’s on the corner. Oh, and did I forget to mention the "No War for Oil" hat on your head?

This makes me sound unhappy doesn't it? But the above is what the left actually DID. It's so bitter, angry, twisted and unhinged that merely stating the fact makes me sound bitter, angry, twisted and unhinged. So sad. (head tilt) But I weally, weally wuv you guys and want to make it work so your heads don’t explode. M'kay?(/head tilt)
JanineV of Perth

You go girl!

But my favorite comment was this one by "Diggs":

In my lifetime I've seen two Democrat Congresses clamor to allow the military to lose a war; one successfully (Viet Nam), one unsuccessfully (OIF). I've seen two Democrat Presidential candidates demand that they be voted in as Commander in Chief so that they can so order the US military to lose said war; one unsuccessful (McGovern), and one successful (Obama). I've watched Democrat Senators and Congressmen defame the soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines who daily risk their lives so that these retards can do that defaming at no risk to themselves. And I've just retired after 22 years as a commissioned officer in the US Army, so I can now freely criticize the US President.

No, I'm not going to hold back just because I'm "above all that". I'm going to be just as brutal to Obama as any Lefty was to George Bush because it matters. It matters that we didn't fight back against the slime merchants at their level, and now they’ve won. And now my fellow soldiers, my brothers-in-arms, the folks who had my back in harm's way, have to serve once again under someone who not only doesn't understand them, but loathes them and their honor. Now I have their back.

Obama isn't worthy to lick the Iraqi dirt off the bottom of the lowest ranking Army Private's boots. And I'm not going to let him and his ilk slime the military any more just because it's not proper.

No damn way.

First runner-up is this:

Tim, I am a psychiatrist.

This apparent desire to 'get along together' of '52 to 48' is actually a classic symptom of group psychopathology.

According to Object relations Theory, the Obama supporters are identifying with the object (Republicans) into which they have projected annihilation fantasies for the past 8 years. This is then followed by 'reparation', which is what we are seeing now.

It's all very infantile.

Deep Freud of Melbourne

Isn't it, though? See today's QotD. Specifically, Ragin' Dave's comment to it.

Five Years? Toshiba Has Them NOW!

Five Years? Toshiba Has Them NOW!

Instapundit links to this story from the Guardian:

Mini nuclear plants to power 20,000 homes

£13m shed-size reactors will be delivered by lorry

Nuclear power plants smaller than a garden shed and able to power 20,000 homes will be on sale within five years, say scientists at Los Alamos, the US government laboratory which developed the first atomic bomb.

The miniature reactors will be factory-sealed, contain no weapons-grade material, have no moving parts and will be nearly impossible to steal because they will be encased in concrete and buried underground.

The US government has licensed the technology to Hyperion, a New Mexico-based company which said last week that it has taken its first firm orders and plans to start mass production within five years. "Our goal is to generate electricity for 10 cents a watt anywhere in the world," said John Deal, chief executive of Hyperion. "They will cost approximately $25m [£13m] each. For a community with 10,000 households, that is a very affordable $250 per home."

Deal claims to have more than 100 firm orders, largely from the oil and electricity industries, but says the company is also targeting developing countries and isolated communities. "It's leapfrog technology," he said.

The company plans to set up three factories to produce 4,000 plants between 2013 and 2023. "We already have a pipeline for 100 reactors, and we are taking our time to tool up to mass-produce this reactor."

The first confirmed order came from TES, a Czech infrastructure company specialising in water plants and power plants. "They ordered six units and optioned a further 12. We are very sure of their capability to purchase,' said Deal. The first one, he said, would be installed in Romania. 'We now have a six-year waiting list. We are in talks with developers in the Cayman Islands, Panama and the Bahamas."

The reactors, only a few metres in diameter, will be delivered on the back of a lorry to be buried underground. They must be refuelled every 7 to 10 years. Because the reactor is based on a 50-year-old design that has proved safe for students to use, few countries are expected to object to plants on their territory. An application to build the plants will be submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission next year.

"You could never have a Chernobyl-type event - there are no moving parts," said Deal. "You would need nation-state resources in order to enrich our uranium. Temperature-wise it's too hot to handle. It would be like stealing a barbecue with your bare hands."

Other companies are known to be designing micro-reactors. Toshiba has been testing 200KW reactors measuring roughly six metres by two metres. Designed to fuel smaller numbers of homes for longer, they could power a single building for up to 40 years.

I (and Instapundit) mentioned the Toshiba units back last December. Still nothing about how the thermal power of the reactor is converted into electrical power. Micro steam turbines? Thermoelectric conversion? What? Still, I like the idea of neighborhood power generation. Makes me wish I were Bill Gates so I could afford one of my very own.

Still, I'm glad to know that the .gov has seen fit to license the technology for production. It's about damned time.

Quote of the Day

Quote of the Day

5) The frothing stomach-churning buzzkill sweeping Woodstock Nation as more and more Obamacons realize that the 56 million Americans who voted against Obama are not going to be easily persuaded to join the Borg. Plus, they vote. Double-plus, they're re-organizing. Triple-plus, they're armed and sending Mission Packs of ammo to each other for the holidays. - Van der Leun - Internet Mosh Pits I Am Ignoring for the Moment

Here's that Brokaw & Rose Exchange

Here's that Brokaw & Rose Exchange


It was mentioned in the post below, That's What I've Been Saying for over Five Years. Good commentary by whoever did the YouTube video.

UPDATE: Commenter Mark (no, not that Mark) gave a link to the full interview and said "I'm seeing reports of quotes out of context." I watched the whole thing. Here's my transcription of part of it:

Brokaw: There are conservative commentators who say there's a lot about him we don't know, because we haven't asked enough tough questions; the Bill Ayers relationship, even those who say we've got to go back and explore what his drug use was, . . .

Rose: Even though Senator McCain had a chance to do that very thing, and ask him about it in one of the debates

Brokaw: And did not, chose not to go there.

--

Rose: What do we know about the heroes of Barack Obama?

Brokaw: Well, he uh, Thurgood Marshall is a big hero of his. He's got a picture of him in his office.

Rose: Is that because of his central role in arguing Brown v. Board of Education?

Brokaw: Well, I think, remember Barack Obama went to Harvard Law School, taught at the University of Chicago. And there was no greater legal figure in the African-American community or even signs that America was changing than Thurgood Marshall, so that makes perfect sense. Um, you know it's an interesting question. I don't know what books he's read. I know that he's uh, he's got a great curious mind. So does John McCain, by the way. He's always got a book in his hand. Mark Salter who's a first rate writer . .

Rose: Is his old best friend.

Brokaw: Right. They're trading book ideas constantly.

--

Rose: Have we had a serious debate about foreign policy in this country?

Browkaw: No. We've not had. There are a number of issues that have not come up. John McCain believes in a league of democracy - putting together a separate group to push against Russia. Charles Krauthammer wrote that that was, he couldn't say and I can as Charles put it, that was designed to kill the United Nations which is a good idea. We didn't examine that very carefully. We don't know a lot about Barack Obama and the universe of his thinking about foreign policy. China has been not examined at all.

Rose: At all.

Brokaw: Which is astonishing.

Rose: But do we know about what they think? It is more likely that we'll know about John McCain because he's been speaking about foreign policy over a longer period of time.

Brokaw: Right.

Rose: But I don't really know, and do we know anything about the people who are advising them, I mean in terms of whether - Susan Rice and where they are. And do we know who might populate these governments.

Brokaw: Tony Lake who worked in the Clinton Administration. Dick Holbrook obviously is eager to be involved in the briefings. There are some kind of neutral foreign policy specialists in the academies and the Council of Foreign Relations that Barack Obama has been reaching out to. John McCain has been reaching out to those think-tanks and institutes

Rose: AEI and others.

Brokaw: Right of center. Sure. We do know, who, do we know is going to be secretary of state? No.

--

Rose: I think it was you, and maybe not and you'll correct me, but after we began to understand the implications of terrorism and someone asked you whether there was subjects that you thought journalism hadn't done its job, media hadn't done its job, you suggested understanding what was brewing out there.

Brokaw: That was me, and I talked about all the incidents that were building up, the Cole, the attack on the embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, and we would report them but we didn't connect the dots. And I went to see Louis Freeh about something else one time - we were talking about computer crimes - and he said "You should look into terrorism." And I walked out thinking "We should look at terrorism," and didn't.

--

Rose: There are so many things I don't know in terms of the makeup of. . . we've gone through this long campaign. I care about it almost as much as you do in terms of being a political junkie. But there are questions you don't know in terms of. . . I don't know know what Barack Obama's world view is. I really don't know.

Brokaw: No, no, I don't either.

Rose: I don't know how he really sees where China is and where it wants to go, and how smart he is about that, or India, or the whole global structure.

Brokaw: Well, one of the . . .

Rose: Or John McCain either.

Brokaw: Yeah, one of the things I tried to get out of the national debate, and they began to answer it a little bit, which I think is an important question: what is the Obama Doctrine and the McCain Doctrine when there is a humanitarian crisis? We're going through one this week in the Congo. Again, I raised the Congo as an example of that. And the use of American military forces to intervene if we have no national security stake in all of that. And they both said in kind of the broadest possible terms, "Well we should go help out." but you didn't get the impression that they were going to go pull the trigger on that in the next day. That's an important discussion for this country to have.

Rose: If you look at Rwanda, and where you've been, and the Secretary - former Secretary of the United Nations has said "We made mistakes." The President of the United States has said "We've made mistakes." Where would they be if they faced the same choices with respect to that kind of genocide?

Brokaw: And that's what we should know.

Rose: And we don't know.

Out of context? Somewhat. But I think this comment left at Charlie Rose's site pretty much sums it up:

This interview does nothing to disabuse my view that the Media is populated by self-serving, egoistical, pandering Maggots; fly larvae who's only job is to destroy and corrupt healthy systems and drag them into the muck and mire of their own decadent slime. The editorial offices and J-Schools need to be flushed after disinfection with a flame-thrower. The casting of blame onto McCain, for not bringing forth at the debates those questions the Media should have been asking at the start of Obama's run for the Oval Office, and their willful blindness at the corrupt machinations of the convention denying Hillary a fair vote, is purely despicable.

Or this one:

This interview does nothing to disabuse my view that the Media is populated by self-serving, egoistical, pandering Maggots; fly larvae who's only job is to destroy and corrupt healthy systems and drag them into the muck and mire of their own decadent slime. The editorial offices and J-Schools need to be flushed after disinfection with a flame-thrower. The casting of blame onto McCain, for not bringing forth at the debates those questions the Media should have been asking at the start of Obama's run for the Oval Office, and their willful blindness at the corrupt machinations of the convention denying Hillary a fair vote, is purely despicable.

And, finally, this one:

The apparent lack of any knowledge of who Barack H. Obama is, what he stands for, who his heros are by you and Mr. Brokaw and the misnamed MSM is absolute proof of the pro-Obama, anti-McCain journalists failure to report any of the negative information that is available on all of details in BHO's past. His friends, advisers, heroes, counselers are known,Ayers, Wright, Alinsky, "Frank a well documented communist and many others leftist academics.What he stands for is a socialistic spread the wealth big governemnt, tax those who earn, give it to those who don't calling it a tax cut when it is welfare and a truly anti-military administration. When a sucker buys a pig in a poke he finds a rock when he open the poke. The democrats chose a candidate in a poke and when the poke is opened out comes a socialist/Marxist.

And with that in mind, Bruce has a bumper sticker for sale you might want.

One more thought: All the commentary in the interview about Obama having to "move to the center to govern" is going to be pretty funny about this time next year, I think.

Bias? What Bias?

Bias? What Bias?

Found over at Mostly Cajun:


See tomorrow's Quote of the Day.

What I've Been Saying for Over Five YEARS

What I've Been Saying for Over Five YEARS

What makes me angriest: that there is no outcry against election fraud; that the media have become pure political instruments; that our "educational system" has produced an ignorant electorate.

--

Never before has the ignorance of the electorate been so intensely cultivated as in this election. We all know that major publications and broadcasters have simply refused to report news, and what they did report was spun politically. And among the stories they are not reporting, is the massive electoral fraud, from the "where is all that money coming from?” to the “how dare state officials refuse to verify the identity of voters?" one, to the refusal to report, day by day, on Joe Biden's scandalously inept, incompetent, and often meretricious campaign. Instead, they obsess on every real and imagined misstatement by Sarah Palin, who for me has been the most attractive of the four candidates.

An ignorant electorate is a real threat to good government, and the whole point of the First Amendment is to create a wide-open national debate from which the truth might emerge. The current behavior of the media–now totally politicized–makes it very hard to get to the truth. They censor themselves, just as our Italian friends confessed they were doing to themselves thirty years ago.

Rush today played some clips from a conversation about Obama between Charlie Rose and Tom Brokaw. Each said repeatedly “we really don't know much about him.” Well, duh, whose fault is that, y'all? Yours. You haven't done your job.

That's from Faster, Please! in a piece entitled Election Thoughts. RTWT.

Quote of the Day

Quote of the Day

The problem is which paragraph to choose? I settled on this one:

All across the world, Mr. Obama's election has helped mend America's tattered image as a racist, violent cowboy, willing to retaliate with bombs at the slightest provocation. The huge outpouring of international support following the election shows that America can still win new friendships while rebuilding its old ones, and provides Mr. Obama with unprecedented diplomatic leverage over our remaining enemies. When Russian tanks start pouring into eastern Europe and Iranian missiles begin raining down on Jerusalem, their leaders will know they will be facing a man who not only conquered America's racial divide but the hearts of the entire Cannes film community. And those Al Qaeda terrorists plotting a dirty nuke or chemical attack on San Francisco face a stark new reality: while they may no longer need to worry about US Marines, they are looking down the barrel of a strongly worded diplomatic condemnation by a Europe fully united in their deep sympathy for surviving Americans. - Iowahawk: Election Analysis: America Can Take Pride In This Historic, Inspirational Disaster

Tip of the hat to reader DJ for the pointer.

Somebody's going to offer Iowahawk a lot of money to write comedy for a living, I think.

Home Again, Home Again, Jiggety Jig

Home Again, Home Again, Jiggety Jig

Man, that four-hour trip home from the jobsite sucks. Blogging will probably be light this weekend. Like everyone else, I'm burned the hell out on politics. I think I want to kick back and read some brain-candy.

Quote of the Day

Quote of the Day

This little corner of America did NOT provide a majority vote to elect Barack Hussein Obama. This state didn’t. The shadow that was a great nation did.

I am NOT a happy person this morning. - Mostly Cajun, Yesterday

Cuts to the Quick, Doesn't He?

Cuts to the Quick, Doesn't He?

Michael Ramirez pens another Pulitzer-worthy effort:


As I've said before, "I don't care who you are, that's funny right there!"

I Reiterate . . .

I Reiterate . . .

Steven Den Beste in his post on the election, not the end of the world wrote, among other things:

A lot of bad things are going to happen during this term. But I don't think that this is an irreversible catastrophe for the union. I've lived long enough to absorb this basic truth: the US is too large and too strong to destroy in just 4 years. Or even in 8. We survived 6 years of Nixon. We survived 4 years of Carter. We even survived 8 years of Clinton, God alone knows how.

The President of the United States is the most powerful political figure in the world, but as national executives go his powers are actually quite restricted. Obama will become President, but he won't be dictator or king, let alone deity. He still has to work with the House and the Senate, and he still has to live within Constitutional restrictions, and with a judiciary that he mostly didn't appoint.

The main reason this will be a "coming of age" moment is that now Obama and the Democrats have to put up or shut up. Obama got elected by making himself a blank slate, with vapid promises about "hope" and "change" -- but now he actually has to do something. Now he has to reveal his true agenda. And with the Democrats also having a majority in both chambers of Congress, now the Democrats really have to lead. And they're not going to do a very good job of it. It's going to be amusing to watch.

And the people who fell for the demagoguery will learn an invaluable lesson.

Oh, the Democrats (will) try to blame failure on Republican filibusters, of which there will be many. But that's always been a factor in our system, and many people believe it's an important check on government excess. The tradition in the Senate is that it is supposed to be a buffer against transient political fads, and the filibuster is a major part of that.

If the Democrats go all in, and change the filibuster rule, then they'll have truly seized the nettle with both hands and won't have any excuses any longer. That's why they won't do it. It's their last fig-leaf. But even with the filibuster rule in place, they'll be stuck trying to deliver now on all the promises implied, or inferred, during this election. The Republicans can only filibuster on bills the Democrats have already proposed.

(My emphasis.)

As I wrote in The Nuclear Option back in May,

The title of this essay is "The Nuclear Option." I named it that for a reason. John McCain has caught a lot of flak for preventing the implementation of "The Nuclear Option" with his Gang of 14 who negotiated the compromise that also resulted in Judge (Janice Rogers) Brown's confirmation.

But he was right.

As we go into the 2008 elections, the Democrats will, once again, control the House and Senate - perhaps with significant majorities. No matter who ends up in the White House, the Senate Judiciary Committee will be run by Democrats, and any and all nominees will be vetted by them. If John McCain wins the White House, then "moderates" are the best we as a nation can expect to see confirmed, but if Obama or Hillary wins, then Republicans will be in precisely the same position the Democrats were in. Filibuster will be the Republican's only arrow in their quiver.

What do you want to bet that "The Nuclear Option" will be brought up by the Democrats in that event?

At least that's not a tool the Republicans generously handed them.

Thank whatever Diety you worship for that.

Awwww Crap!

Awwww Crap!

Michael Crichton has died. I didn't even know he had cancer. One of the most eloquent voices against the abuse of and the politicization of science has been silenced. And it appears that his web page, where most of his speeches and essays are posted is getting hammered - I'm seeing a lot of "503 Error - Service Unavailable" messages.

I've read just about every book he's written, and most if not all of his essays. The last book of his I read was Next, and it was one of the most disturbing novels I've ever read - especially since I know how thoroughly he researched his work. The man was a national treasure.

If you haven't already seen it, I strongly recommend you go to this post from July and watch the 56 minute interview he gave to Charlie Rose after Next came out.

RIP, Michael. We need you, and we're going to miss you. The Church of Global Warming will be ramping up their membership drive shortly.