And do it more widely. It's past time for conservatives to lift a play from the progressive playbook and start using the judicial branch to go on offense.
Thursday, December 30, 2010
And do it more widely. It's past time for conservatives to lift a play from the progressive playbook and start using the judicial branch to go on offense.
20-minutes-of-fame Julian Assange construct the façade of an idealistic crusading electronic muckraker?"Lurking somewhere behind all these improbables is a rather small Western elite that is enormously influential in the media, government, the arts, universities, and Hollywood."
global warming so easily get away with becoming “climate change”?
authoritarian and Islamist Palestinian groups become reinvented into traditional Western victimized minorities — analogous to women, gays, and minorities
professors convince us that their universities are progressive, anti-capitalist, and against the grain institutions?
Barack Obama invent himself into a bi-partisan, working across the aisle, no more red state/blue state unifying figure?
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Monday, December 27, 2010
Sunday, December 26, 2010
But optimism leads to more solutions than does pessimism.
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Never let facts interfere with your vision.
Read it all.
Friday, December 24, 2010
Small businesses, like my 53-person outfit, see no reason whatsoever to do anything but hold tight to our cash for the next two years.... This is not fear; rather it is a rational business approach to having low confidence in future conditions.The next election is only 2 years away. Will business continue to sit on the sidelines? I fear they will unless the next Congress aggressively moves against the current administration.
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
It's a three-ring, all-clown circus.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Who to believe?
Well, the man predicting a mini ice-age is an astrophysicist studying the sun who seems to have a history of making accurate predictions; the one predicting global warming admits that "climate scientists" missed the warming effects on atmospheric circulation that is now bringing heavy snows to London.
My money's on the astrophysicist.
[Update] A rational response to the Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal - from a Marine's wife.
There's a lesson here for our political class as well.
A nice article - well written - but it shows that solar power is only economical if you can get someone else (called the taxpayer) to subsidize it.
Monday, December 20, 2010
It will be, if the progressives have a say.
Well, in my opinion, they voted correctly - but for the wrong reason.
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Also from the comments: "I laugh when I hear progressives say, “We need to empower kids.” No, we need to DIS-empower them –so that they listen and learn, and thereby, ultimately, become intellectually empowered."
Read it all.
government has ruined this place and I will never forget it. “How can we let the progressive nightmare continue to happen to the nation when a state of almost 40 million (nearly a nation unto itself) has already experienced the disaster first?”
As a PhD (1978; Electrical Engineering), I would no longer recommend going for the doctorate. In fact, I am increasingly skeptical of the economic value of a Master’s degree.
Read the comments as well.
A smart grid would help make everything better, thus improving reliability, security, and efficiency, which are of critical importance given that electric power consumption worldwide is expected to triple by 2050.Ultimately it’s about control.
The key to making things better is two-way data communications among all the elements, so that information about the grid's condition can be shared and acted upon. To do that, many devices, including those on the customers' premises, must be computer controlled and interactive.
[I]f it hasn’t been pointed out often enough already, the wealth has already been taxed repeatedly. There comes a point where enough is enough already.Paraphrasing the President: “I think at some point you have taxed enough money.”
Instapundit comments: “Why are they against labels? Because if they were labeled accurately, no one would listen to them ....”
Saturday, December 18, 2010
The original YouTube video is here.
[W]e need to move in the direction of empowering individual citizens and consumers in this process, and reintroducing competition. The notion of what insurance is has been so destroyed over 45 years. These days, insurance in the health-care industry is like a service contract on your furnace. It’s regular services. Insurance was supposed to be protection against catastrophic occurrence. If we move back in that direction, and people absorb the initial, underlying costs of carrying forward ordinary health insurance, the cost even of insurance for those catastrophic occurrences would come way down.Amen.
Er, it’s also motivating non-religious conservatives. And religious independents. And non-religious independents. And religious moderates. And ....
I hate to burst your bubble, but “American exceptionalism” isn’t a codeword for religious-right extremism.
Maybe it’s time to pay attention to the other 99% ....
Friday, December 17, 2010
According to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, the solution to our poor international standing is the adoption of national curriculum standards and revamping teacher pay to reward performance rather than credentials and seniority.
Marybeth Hicks responds:
Yo, Arnie. Merit pay for teachers is not the problem.We’re infusing self-esteem, while in far away Finland, Australia and South Korea, they’re simply teaching math, science and reading.
More likely, the problem rests at the feet of the teacher education elite, who long ago usurped American public education for the cause of social justice and social engineering. Thanks to their “child centered” pedagogy, we’re more concerned about righting injustice than teaching kids the knowledge and skills they will need to be truly competitive, self-sufficient and successful.
We’re infusing self-esteem, while in far away Finland, Australia and South Korea, they’re simply teaching math, science and reading to a eager population of knowledge-thirsty learners. This would explain why their kids are acing the tests, while ours aren’t.
The answer to the enigma ... may lie in the realm of molecular biology. A recent groundbreaking discovery suggests that there may well be a “second genesis” for life on earth, predicated on a microbe that has replaced the element of phosphorus necessary for life with the lethal element of arsenic in its structure, thus “break[ing] the unity of biochemistry.” Moreover, according to NASA astrobiologist Mary Voytek, the microbes “have the arsenic in the basic building blocks of their makeup,” implying the existence of a “shadow biosphere” on the planet.I told you so.
Here we may have come upon the real explanation for the leftist and liberal orientation in the human mind. Since it is so not amendable to the lessons of experience and persists in opposition to the indisputable verities of political life, it must owe its vigor and longevity to a different chemical architecture at the very source of its engendering. Socialism is likely the product of a shadow biosphere and may have taken root in the halomonadaceae family of bacteria, from which it evolved into such notable, arsenic-based life-forms as Karl Marx, Saul Alinsky, Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, George Soros, and even Barack Obama. Lounge liberals and lesser creatures like Frank Rich of the New York Times, Chris Matthews of MSNBC, or Aluf Benn of Haaretz would merely have lower concentrations of arsenic in their DNA.
Linked from Fox News.
"[T]he bill," Judge Hudson wrote, "embraces far more than health care reform. It is laden with provisions and riders patently extraneous to health care -- over 400 in all." He declined a deeper examination of Congress' intent with respect to severability because such an analysis "is difficult to apply in this case given the haste with which the final version of the 2,700-page bill was rushed to the floor for a Christmas Eve vote." The ruling highlights the amusing yet important lesson of Obamacare: Nothing good ever comes of thousand-page bills, legislative secrecy and extraneous special-interest riders.Sheesh.
Save the rich (for a ‘small’ fee).
Thursday, December 16, 2010
It should be renamed the Center for Stupidity not in the Public Interest.
What Dionne and those of his ilk fail to realize is that the progressive movement has gone so far to the left that the mainstream ‘independents’ and conservative ‘right-wing extremists’ are essentially the same political distance away.
What do Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have in common? As I type this email, they're all trying to push a new back-room tax deal through Congress that will move our country in the wrong direction.Oh, they got the message all right. They’re desperate to enact as much of their agenda as possible before they get thrown out and replaced by a new Congress.
This bill passed the Senate last night and is now moving towards the House and could be voted on as early as today.
You may have seen reports that Tea Party activists are joining together in opposition to this bill. I oppose this deal for a number of reasons, because most importantly, this tax deal does not live up to the constitutional values we share.First: This bill will not make the current lower tax rates permanent for all Americans.Another bill making its way through Congress is the 1.1 trillion dollar omnibus spending bill containing 6,600 earmarks. These bills show contempt for you and our efforts to return fiscal sanity to our government.
Second: This bill will add to our already massive deficit.
Third: This bill will re-institute the death tax - charging some Americans with a new tax as high as 35%. The death tax currently stands at zero. Americans already pay taxes on their money once to the government during their lifetime; the government should not take 35% of the estate from their heirs at death.
Remember, the Federal Reserve also announced they are embarking on a policy of Quantitative Easing Part II, which means between Quantitative Easing II, the omnibus spending bill and the tax compromise your Democrat-controlled Congress will spend 4.8 trillion dollars over the next 24 months.
How will we ever dig our way out of this debt?
As Tea Party conservatives, you and I must adhere to our shared conservative values or we risk losing the support and organization we have worked so hard to build. Most of my fellow Tea Party activists oppose this bill because it does not meet the fiscally conservative principles we stand for.
Today, I'm asking you to join me in opposing this legislation.
Many Washington politicians remain deaf to November's election results and have grown more out-of-touch with American public opinion. They are ignoring the will of the people. Americans from coast to coast delivered a resounding victory for a constitutional conservative majority in the House of Representatives on Election Day and polling suggests Americans do not want to see their taxes or the national deficit increased.
But that's exactly what this bill will do if Obama, Pelosi and Reid get their way. They are trying to rush this bill through Congress straight to the President's desk and if we don't act immediately, the consequences for our shared principles could be dire. I'm working with other members and Tea Party activists to stop this tax and deficit increase from becoming law. But, there is extreme pressure from both sides to pass this law. I need to know you stand with me in opposition to this back-room deal.
How about just getting out of the way and leaving us alone?
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
When I was in high school, during deer season nearly every student's pickup truck had one or more rifles on the gun rack hanging inside the back window in the cab. Occasionally, there'd be a deer tied to the fender of the car or in the bed of the pickup.
I don't recall any shoot-outs on campus.
[Update] Sanity prevailed.
Anyone who believes the feds won’t go judge-shopping is seriously deluded.
Monday, December 13, 2010
Virginia won the first round of the constitutional fight over the federal health care law. I also told you I'd get back to you with more details later in the day, and I'm keeping my promise.There’s a long way to go, but this is an excellent start.
Arguments and Outcomes
There were two basic arguments in this case.
First, Virginia argued that the individual mandate was beyond the power of Congress and the President to impose under the Constitution. Specifically, Congress claimed that their regulatory power under the Commerce Clause allowed them to order you to buy their government-approved health insurance, even if you decide not to buy health insurance.
The judge ruled that the federal government does not have the power to compel you to buy health insurance as part of its attempt to regulate the entire field of health care and health insurance. Thus, Virginia won this argument.
Second, the federal government advanced a 'fallback' argument in case it lost on its commerce clause argument. The feds' fallback argument was that the financial penalty you have to pay if you don't buy the government mandated health insurance is a tax.
This may sound like an odd argument from a political standpoint - usually they say everything is NOT a tax (in fact, they argued the penalty was not a tax while they were trying to get the bill passed); however, they changed position after the bill became law to try and save the bill. What they were trying to do was to get the courts to agree that because the penalty would presumably raise some revenue, it was therefore a 'tax' under the taxing and spending for the General Welfare Clause of the Constitution.
No judge in the country has bought this argument, and Judge Hudson was no exception. He ruled that the taxing power of Congress does not save the bill, because the penalty for not buying the mandated health insurance is not a tax.
The federal government only had to win on either of these two arguments, while Virginia needed to win both to prevail, and we won both!
Certainly the federal government will appeal their loss in the district court to the 4th circuit court of appeals within the next 30 days. And whichever side loses in the 4th circuit will certainly appeal to the Supreme Court. And no one has any serious doubts that ultimately the constitutionality of the individual mandate will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
That could take approximately (very rough approximation) two years. We are discussing with the Department of Justice accelerating the case, and those discussions have been very cordial thus far. More on that later.
Today is a great day for the Constitution. Today the Constitution has been protected from the federal government, and remember, an important reason for the constitution in the first place was to limit the power of the federal government.
Today is also a day of a small degree of vindication. When we first filed suit, the screeching of the liberals was deafening. Everything from accusing us of playing politics instead of practicing law, to filing what they called a 'frivolous' lawsuit.
I want you to know, that our team makes decisions based on the Constitution and the laws. Period. We deal with the consequences of our decisions separately, but first and foremost we have been and will continue to be true to the Constitution and laws of the United States and Virginia, regardless of whether it's easy or hard in any particular case.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
This, from a newspaper that never saw a law it didn't like.
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Kathie Shaidle: “Liberals: your moral and intellectual superiors!"Oh, the embarrassment.
Commenter livermoron at Don Surber’s place: ”Incest sure explains a lot about the left and academia.”
Instapundit: “The best and the brightest at Columbia University.”
Obama never wanted to be President of the United States; he wanted to be Emperor of Earth.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Not surprised, I hope.
If Obama had pushed a one-year suspension of the payroll tax instead of the first stimulus, wouldn’t the country — and Obama – be much better off right now? He would have gotten money directly into the hands of the American people instead of teachers’ unions, state governments, and rent-seeking green companies. It would have been every bit as Keynesian, but infinitely more popular, including among Republicans.Instapundit comments: “Insufficient opportunities for graft.”
People watch Barbara Walters?
Since the late nineteenth century most intellectuals have identified progress with the advance of the bureaucratic, redistributionist and administrative state. The government, guided by credentialed intellectuals with scientific training and values, would lead society through the economic and political perils of the day. An ever more powerful state would play an ever larger role in achieving ever greater degrees of affluence and stability for the population at large, redistributing wealth to provide basic sustenance and justice to the poor. The social mission of intellectuals was to build political support for the development of the new order, to provide enlightened guidance based on rational and scientific thought to policymakers, to administer the state through a merit based civil service, and to train new generations of managers and administrators.For America to prosper:
Power is going to have to shift from bureaucrats to entrepreneurs, from the state to society and from qualified experts and licensed professionals to the population at large.And from the comments: “Old-school progressivism appeals to the narcissist in people in high places. They want to believe that they can and are uniquely qualified to dole out justice and mercy and goodness to the poor oppressed masses. If the new paradigm involves devolution of power to the masses, there’s no more need for narcissistic demigods.”
More: Walter Russell Mead’s “The Crisis of the American Intellectual” is here.
Hmm. Maybe because the residents of South L.A. are just poor? What’s next? Waygu beef subsidies?
[Update] "Because the last thing they need is new entry-level jobs."
Thursday, December 09, 2010
If protecting the environment is so damned important, it should also force closure of the 600,000 homes depending on it for power.
"It's for the children" rings a bit hollow, doesn't it?
From the comments following this post.
The backlash against graduates of "elite" universities seems particularly odd given that the most elite American universities have in the past two decades made the greatest effort to broaden their student bodies. Because they can offer full scholarships, the wealthier Ivy League schools in particular are far more diverse, racially and economically, than they were a few decades ago.Unfortunately, they are not more diverse intellectually - and that's the problem.
I suspect the "anti-elite-educationism" that Bell predicted is growing now not despite the rise of meritocracy but because of it.No, it's a result of the lockstep smugness of these "new elites."
I'd like to see the post-graduation employment statistics for 'Department of Victimization' graduates at traditional "non-profit" institutions.
Hmm. Of the seven members of the deficit commission who voted against the Commission's proposal, 4 were Democrats. The three Republicans (Ryan, Hensarling, and Camp) who voted against did so because the recommendations didn't go far enough to reduce spending, especially with respect to healthcare. All three, however, found elements of the recommendations appealing, and all three believed that the Commission recommendations should go to Congress for study.
On the other side, Democrat Representative Jan Schakowsky, also voting no, offered a (Democrat) alternative proposal that included more taxes, more spending.
I don't think the Tea Party is the obstacle.
And the waiver recipients are ... surprise ... Obama(care) supporters!
Well, arsenic is poisonous to nearly all forms of life on earth, so I guess that an arsenic-based lifeform is alien. But I think we already have aliens among us - we just call them "progressives."
Wednesday, December 08, 2010
In a joint appearance last week at the American Enterprise Institute with Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the conservative New York Times columnist David Brooks called him "the most intellectually formidable member of the House."Well, yes. At this time Congress is still overwhelmingly Democrat.
"That," Ryan said, interrupting, "ain't saying a whole lot."
Ryan was being modest.
With a little less snark (to which I contributed; sorry) and this could have been a decent, albeit liberal, column.
Unfortunately the latter conclusion is realistic; in Washington DC, adherence to security policies and procedures is nonexistent.
Unfortunately, I’ve had much the same thought - but from a different perspective: the sheer incompetence of the Obama administration is an open invitation for terrorists to attack en masse. It may take such an attack to wake him up - or rid ourselves of him.
Faculty Openings advertised in the E-letter:
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical UniversityEight of 28 are in the United States.
The University of Agder
Czech Technical University in Prague
Chalmers University of Technology
NTNU, Trondheim, Norway
Polytechnic Institute of New York University
National University of Ireland, Maynooth, Ireland
UT Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas
University of Alberta, Canada
University of Southampton
University of Groningen
Delft University of Technology
University of Toronto
Harbin Institute of Technology, China
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL)
University of Michigan
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou, China
University of Louisville
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
École Polytechnique de Montréal
University of Western Sydney, Australia
University of Pretoria, South Africa
Cranfield Defence and Security
University of Cambridge, UK
John Deere, Waterloo, IA
International conferences scheduled for 2011:
The 5th IEEE International Conference on Cybernetics and Intelligent Systems, Qingdao, ChinaOne of 4 is in the United States.
The 19th Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation (MED'11), Corfu, Greece
3rd International Conference on Control and Optimization with Industrial
Applications– COIA 2011, Ankara, Turkey
The 7th ASME/IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics & Embedded Systems & Applications (MESA 2011), Washington, DC, USA
For at least the last 30 years I’ve been a member of IEEE, there has always been a significant global presence in IEEE newsletters - but nothing like this. A harbinger of the future of science and engineering in the U.S., perhaps?
Tuesday, December 07, 2010
Stocks were euphorically higher most of today, thanks to the unexpectedly broad tax deal the administration hammered out with the Republicans. But during his press conference, Obama’s clear anger and call to unwind the deal in 2 years opened a trap door under prices, sending them to a negative finish. We had hope, and then it changed.I missed the Obama’s press conference, but I do note the market change. The press conference scheduled for 2:20 pm ET; the market fell sharply by 3 pm.
The progressives have long since hijacked the Democrat party. It’s time for Democrats to take it back.
Whether they will or not is still an open question.
Monday, December 06, 2010
Gokhale is correct; Sloan is wrong. Here’s a personal example.
I just retired at age 66 and began collecting Social Security last month. I worked 38 [FICA] years, paying into the Social Security system a total of $122,472.12. My employer(s) contributed an equal amount, for a total of $244,944.24. During those 38 years of FICA employment, I paid the FICA maximum for 21; therefore my monthly benefit of $2330 is near the Social Security maximum payout of $2346/month.
Now let’s suppose that all those FICA withholdings were invested in the stock market in a 401K-like account. I did just that, on paper, investing each years withholding in the stocks making up the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA), and each year “growing” the account balance by the growth - or decline - of the average for that year. As of October 29, 2010, my retirement date, my paper Social Security account had accumulated a total of $805,307.80.
Now for the comparison. My social security income is roughly equivalent to a 50% joint life growth annuity, since payments are indexed to inflation and end when both my wife and I finally die. So I found an annuity calculator online, and asked it what an $800,000.00, 50% joint life annuity would pay out. The answer: $4,417/month (level) or $3,301/month (with an annual 3% growth factor built in).
Since Social Security has an annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) component, the 3% annuity is the better comparison. Guess what? $3,301/month is 42% more than $2,330/month.
At 66, I can expect to live another 16.28 years (the standard mortality tables are here). So, I can reasonably expect a lifetime return of $455,188.80 - roughly double what my employer and I jointly contributed. That means that you, the taxpayer, are on the hook for about $210,244.56 over the next 16.28 years (remember, I’m retired; I no longer pay FICA taxes since I no longer have FICA income). But if Social Security had been privatized in 1972, you wouldn’t be on the hook for a dime - or a nickel, or a penny - and I would be better off.
Now let’s look at a few other things.
In his Washington Post article, Alan Sloan argued:
Privatization is risky, subject to “market vagaries,” and the potential retiree could be forced to retire just when the stock market bottoms out. He’s right - and I had to. The stock market collapsed in 2008, suffering a 35% drop from which it still hasn’t recovered. And the data above reflects that loss! Even with that 35% drop in 2008, I would still be better off with the privatized system than I am with today’s Social Security.Former President Bush, in calling for privatization, argued that Social Security provided only about a 2% return on FICA dollars “invested.” Actually, it’s a bit of a stretch to use the term “invested” since most FICA funds are transferred directly from you to current retirees (e.g., me) and only the excess “invested” (at around 2%) in Treasury bills - which are then paid with future taxes.
Social Security is safe. Uh, not really. It’s subject to the whims of the 535 pandering dilettantes, laughingly called Congress, who are rapidly running out of other peoples’ money to spend: the Social Security Board of Trustees report that by 2037, the Social Security Trust Fund will be exhausted and able to pay out only 78% of current benefits - which ain’t all that great to begin with.
“Most people have no idea how to invest well.” To which I respond “Nuts.” My investment philosophy (invest moderately; diversify; leave it the hell alone) certainly isn’t terribly sophisticated, yet it has worked pretty well. I've been tracking my 401K investments over the last 10 years or so, comparing my investments against the growth of both the DJIA and the NASDAQ market indices. My "diversify/leave alone" strategy consistently outperforms both indices. The “no idea how to invest” trope may have some validity in the short term, but it’s not an argument for a long (40-year) investment horizon.
Privatized Social Security is truly invested - and the long-term real growth has been relatively stable at about 3% above inflation. In my particular case, since 1972, when I first started paying FICA taxes, through last month, when I retired, the DJIA grew at an 8.11% annual rate; inflation, as measured by the Consumer Price Index (CPI), grew at an annual rate of 4.45%. Real growth (growth less inflation) averaged 3.66% over the 38-year period.
So ... privatization works. Of that, there is no doubt. It's too late for current retirees (me) to benefit, obviously, and close to too late for our children. But there is time to prevent our grandchildren from becoming poverty-stricken wards of the State.
[Update] Instapundit linked - thanks, Glenn. For those of you who followed Glenn's link, please look around; my home page is here. And please use the comments to let me know what you think of social security privatization.
Sunday, December 05, 2010
You'll have to scroll down a bit for the border arguments, but read the whole post anyway.
Linked from Instapundit.
Linked from Instapundit.
I think I’ll stick with the Tea Party, thank you.
Dated, but still worth reading.
Saturday, December 04, 2010
Yeah, why give them the $700 billion? They’ll just waste it jet-setting it around the globe. Never mind that someone has to build those corporate jets - and fuel them, and fly them, and maintain them, and ....
And who should the challenger be?
The basic platform for such a candidate is clear:
Unequivocally call for an immediate end to the presence of U.S. troops, advisers and private U.S.-based security firms in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan, and replace the "war on terror" with a Global Marshall Plan that roots homeland security in a strategy of generosity and concern for the well-being of everyone on the planet.
Domestically, call for a massive jobs program; a freeze on mortgage foreclosures; a national bank that would offer interest-free loans to those seeking to create or expand small businesses; immediate implementation of the parts of the Obama health-care plan that would benefit ordinary citizens and build support for a health plan for all citizens; dramatically lower prices for drugs that treat critical diseases such as AIDS and cancer; a strong tax on carbon emissions; and immediate prosecution of those government employees involved in torture or cover-ups to justify the invasion of Iraq.
This candidate should push for the media to provide free and equal time to all major candidates for national office as well as for constitutional amendments requiring only public financing in elections and, separately, for corporations to prove every five years to a jury of ordinary citizens that they have a satisfactory history of environmental responsibility ....
Public officials who would make excellent candidates ... include Sens. Russ Feingold, Bernie Sanders, Barbara Mikulski or Al Franken; Reps. Joe Sestak, Maxine Waters, Raul Grijalva, Alan Grayson (!), Barbara Lee, Dennis Kucinich, Lois Capps, Jim Moran and Lynn Woolsey.... Why not Rachel Maddow, Bill Moyers, ...?Are progressives totally divorced from reality?
[C]an Brown ... finally shed the old caricature of "Governor Moonbeam" and become the landmark philosopher-statesman he once promised that he would be, but was not, three decades ago? [I]f he can't, he'll be remembered as just another tax-and-spend California ideologue like hyper-partisan Rep. Nancy Pelosi or fossilized Sen. Barbara Boxer -- perpetually fiddling away in office while the redistributive state [goes] up in flames.My bet is on flames. Read it all.
Friday, December 03, 2010
Instapundit answers: “He’d lose his value. In China, he’d be just one of many journalists flacking for the regime.”