Thursday, December 31, 2009
On the first day of the New Year, the best posts of the Valley 2008 and 2009 will be posted.
Why no decade lists? Because I start the decade lists when the year starts 01 (i.e. 1990 - 2000, 2000 - 2010, etc. et. al). Enjoy the end of the Governing Year and beginning of the Campaign Year.
For now, enjoy this video of The Ramones, some old Forest Hills kids who went to my High School who got big.
Happy New Year to you and your family and friends. Next year, the fun really begins.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
No, the CIA is not perfect. Look at Iran in 1953 or Chile in 1973. Then again, their bosses, the Commander in Chief, believed in a Nixonian foreign policy. President Bush believed in Wilsonianism, so the CIA was not used to get "Dictators who love us," It could happen with President Obama, but maybe not. Read on.
Do you remember Senator Obama? Here is what he said about the CIA from the Senate floor about Michael Hayden on May 25, 2006 (h/t Congressional Record):
Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, let me start by saying that the nomination of General Hayden is a difficult one for me. I generally, as a rule, believe the President should be able to appoint members of his Cabinet, of his staff, to positions such as the one General Hayden is nominated for without undue obstruction from Congress.
General Hayden is extremely well qualified for this position. Having previously served as head of the National Security Agency and as Deputy Director of National Intelligence under John Negroponte, he has 30 years of experience in intelligence and national security matters. And he was nearly universally praised during his confirmation to Deputy DNI.
There are several members of the Intelligence Committee, including Senator Levin, who I hold in great esteem, who believe General Hayden has consistently displayed the sort of independence that would make him a fine CIA Director.
Unfortunately, General Hayden is being nominated under troubling circumstances, as the architect and chief defender of a program of wiretapping and collection of phone records outside of FISA oversight. This is a program that is still accountable to no one and no law.
Now, there is no one in Congress who does not want President Bush to have every tool at his disposal to prevent terrorist attacks--including the use of a surveillance program. Every single American--Democrat and Republican and Independent--who remembers the images of falling towers and needless death would gladly support increased surveillance in order to prevent another attack.
But over the last 6 months, Americans have learned that the National Security Agency has been spying on Americans without judicial approval. We learned about this not from the administration, not from the regular workings of the Senate Intelligence Committee, but from the New York Times and USA Today. Every time a revelation came out, President Bush refused to answer questions from Congress.
This is part of a general stance by this administration that it can operate without restraint. President Bush is interpreting article II of the Constitution as giving him authority with no bounds. The Attorney General and a handful of scholars agree with this view, and I do not doubt the sincerity with which the President and his lawyers believe in their constitutional interpretation. However, the overwhelming weight of legal authority is against the President on this one. This is not how our Constitution is designed, to give the President unbounded authority without any checks or balances.
We do not expect the President to give the American people every detail about a classified surveillance program, but we do expect him to place such a program within the rule of law and to allow members of the other two coequal branches of Government--Congress and the judiciary--to have the ability to monitor and oversee such a program. Our Constitution and our right to privacy as Americans require as much.
Unfortunately, we were never given the chance to make that examination. Time and again, President Bush has refused to come clean to Congress. Why is it that 14 of 16 members of the Intelligence Committee were kept in the dark for 4 1/2 years? The only reason that some Senators are now being briefed is because the story was made public in the newspapers. Without that information, it is impossible to make the decisions that allow us to balance the need to fight terrorism while still upholding the rule of law and privacy protections that make this country great.
Every democracy is tested when it is faced with a serious threat. As a nation, we have had to find the right balance between privacy and security, between executive authority to face threats and uncontrolled power. What protects us, and what distinguishes us, are the procedures we put in place to protect that balance; namely, judicial warrants and congressional review. These are not arbitrary ideas. They are not new ideas. These are the safeguards that make sure surveillance has not gone too far, that somebody is watching the watchers.
The exact details of these safeguards are not etched in stone. They can be reevaluated, and should be reevaluated, from time to time. The last time we had a major overhaul of the intelligence apparatus was 30 years ago in the aftermath of Watergate. After those dark days, the White House worked in a collaborative way with Congress through the Church Committee to study the issue, revise intelligence laws, and set up a system of checks and balances. It worked then, and it could work now. But, unfortunately, thus far, this administration has made no effort to reach out to Congress and tailor FISA to fit the program that has been put in place.
I have no doubt that General Hayden will be confirmed. But I am going to reluctantly vote against him to send a signal to this administration that even in these circumstances, even in these trying times, President Bush is not above the law. No President is above the law. I am voting against Mr. Hayden in the hope that he will be more humble before the great weight of responsibility that he has not only to protect our lives but to protect our democracy.
That was Senator Obama threading the needle about Executive Power and Intelligence work.
President Obama started this year by moving KSM to have a trial in New York City. The trial will not go after KSM and his compatriots, but the Bush Administration and those who worked for them in Guantanamo Bay. Who had jurisdiction over getting information out of the prisoners? The CIA.
Recently, the Obama Administration gave more power to INTERPOL overriding our Intelligence networks sovereignty. Could INTERPOL go after any Agents active in Afghanistan, Iraq or Iran during the past 8 years?
And lest you think 2008 was all smiles and flowers between Senator Obama and the US Intelligence Networks, Obama spent the election campaigning against the CIA.
Now let's wind the clocks back to the Christmas Plane Bomber. The CIA met the father and knew for six weeks prior.
The CIA is a bureaucracy and a fighting force; if they feel disrespected by an Administration, they will use their tools to go after the Administration. Period. How many leaks did the CIA give to the New York Times during the last administration?
While President Obama forgets the lessons of Sulla and Pompey about destroying a Republic (Hint: You don't send your partisans after the last guy; You chart your own path or Civil War erupts), there is pushback. If Former Vice President Cheney was wrong, wouldn't the higher level CIA operatives have complained when he speaks? Not one has gone to the mats to defend Obama, but they remain quiet on Cheney.
Quick! Someone poll the CIA on which Administration has their back!
The CIA does not declare war openly, but they defend themselves well. Unless President Obama openly and quietly defends the Intelligence Networks of this country, they might turn another blind eye. And while it might hurt the Administration, it will hurt civilians too.
Heck, the CIA has already gone to war against Speaker Pelosi. The Tea Party Movement definitely had some help, not unlike Iran in 1953 -- and they want to vote out incumbents, weakening her power. And the polls for 2010 look good for the opposition. Hmmmm......
This is a two sided question, those within the Intelligence community (answer anonymously if you must, but I can track if you are real by the StatCounter) and those outside. While everyone parties in the New Year, you can think upon this.
For those outside: Do you think the Obama Administration understands the Intellegence Community? What will be the fallout if he doesn't?
For those inside (Domestic or overseas): How do you feel about President Obama? If you are overseas, do you feel secure? if you are an analyst, do you think President Obama understands your work?
Happy New Year!
Update 1/3/10: Welcome Instapundit readers! Visit the Valley. Check out the Best Posts for 2008 and 2009. If you like what you see, follow, subscribe or hit the Tip-jar. Thanks for visiting, tell your friends.
Those of us who learned from the Old School Politicos knows that other Americans who disagree are not the ENEMY, but our opponents. Yes, there is a difference. Opponents argue, then share a drink afterword; Enemies fight until the death and then afterword. I have yet to see a Liberal say any kind words about their American opponents, but they thrive with America's enemies (like Iran).
Read Dana Losch's twitter. Read it.
Now read this Althouse post.
Rush is a communicator of the Right. It is his job. But those who wish him ill wish the Right to shut up. I say "No,"
Now is the time for President Obama to show his "bi-partisan," bonafides. If he doesn't show up at the hospital or issues no statement, then he lied in 2008. But we on the Right knew that already.
Duran Duran sang it best:
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
DD said this during the email conversation: "I do think you should write about this publicly, as I do with all of my blogging debates," So, I will.
I am going to remain true to my earlier statement of "No Blog Fights to the Right (except for tactics and strategy)," This is close to it, so pay attention. Just because Rule 4 of RS says make enemies, I only make enemies of the weak kneed so-called Republicans and those of the Left. I hate wasting valuable Blogging space arguing with the Right. It serves no purpose.
The context of the story is simple. While I was writing the Cycles of Republican Encyclicals, I was sending them out to an email list that consisted of Capitol Hill staff, Bloggers and Campaigners. Eric Golub would use the email list (without asking) to promote his Blog. I emailed him a few times privately, and he saw nothing wrong with what he did. Then I chastised him using the list, losing contacts during the argument. Thanks Eric for not asking.
Here is how I wrote it to DD:
When I was in DC in 1996, I worked for a summer at a List company. There were very specific rules when handling lists.
1. You cannot sell the original list without some benefit to the original owner;
2. If you were to use the list freely, there was a potential for you to be sued by the original purveyor of the list.
Why the tightness on lists? Because they were being shared around to raise funds for candidates. You could not take someone's list and use it for your own without acknowledging or paying the original purveyor of the list (i.e. you help one candidate, you get dunned for helping more -- they sell the list).
When I put together the list for the beginning of the Republican Encyclicals, it was created as a discussion to to counter the "JournaList," created by Ezra Klein. I found the names, I put it together. It wasn't about just selling Blog posts to those on there -- it was "I have tactical ideas here to win, are they feasible for your situation?"
Then EG started using the email lists. I have family and friends on the lists because they were interested as well. I didn't like hearing from family that they were being spammed by someone they did not know. I went private 6 times in my email saying, "just ask before use,"
There was no asking.
Some of my relatives and friends on that list were seeded even though they are not on the Right, they just wanted to see my focus again post-plague year. EG was taking a list I created and spammed family and friends with it.
I tried privacy first, then I tried using the list to say: stop. Nothing worked. Then my health problems occurred again and I stopped using the list.
My Mom and my late father's best friend did not like getting spammed by EG.
All I wanted, before he jumped on a list I worked on, was for him to ask, "Please my I use the list?" I would have said yes, and I would have promoted his stuff. The attitude I have about lists (Bloggers who create a list for others to hear from) is to ask before using, or speak to only one person on it.
And that, DD, is the explanation. I didn't want to waste my time on the Blog attacking EG when I could have attacked Andrew Sullivan.
Now Eric will be speaking at the San Fernando Valley Republican Club in January, I recommend seeing him. My problems is his lack of Blogger courtesy.
His Blog opens on "Eye of the Tiger," Cool, but unless you work in the Industry, I'm not sure how cool it is to have music blasting when you open a Blog. Secondly, he has no Hyperlinks. What are hyperlinks?
This: Read American Power daily in your Blog diet!
Not: Read American Power daily in your Blog diet! http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/
The above is why Blogs are Blogs, the lower makes it look sloppy.
Eric fights the good fight, this is all constructive criticism. If he wants to be respected, respect other peoples lists and use the Hyperlinks in your Blog.
OK, I'm done. I only want to hear from Eric Golub and Donald Douglas in the comments. Thank you.
Monday, December 28, 2009
There are two things I enjoy when I am offline (among other things): Marvel Comics and Doctor Who. I met Stan Lee at a Comic Convention with my dad back in 82; Now Stan Lee lives in LA, so someone please forward this post to him.
Let's start with Marvel. Certain comics always go to the front of the line: X-Men (all branches), the Hulk and Moon Knight to name a few. Fantastic Four were too establishment for me and Spider Man just cried "wimp," I liked Spidey when he teamed up with others, same with any member of the Fantastic Four. (The best Spidey written came after House of M was over; For the FF, the Civil War had the best writing)
After the Secret Invasion by the Skrulls (shape-shifting aliens), Norman Osbourn, Spider-man's main enemy has risen into a position that combines running SHIELD (now HAMMER) and Secretary of Superhuman affairs (appointed by President Bush, confirmed by President Obama). In other words, Osbourn is publicly a hero, while the Marvel Universe understood he was a villain.
During the American Son storyline, there is a page where Wolverine and Spider Man compare President Bush to Osborne. Whisky tango Foxtrot?! Wolverine, who is a former veteran, couldn't say a few good words about Senator McCain (R-AZ), also a veteran. After the Superhero Civil war, now Marvel is saying all their heroes voted for Obama in 2008?!?!
Doesn't fit the storyline. Most of the heroes have been fighting with each other since Avengers: Disassembled. And then they all agreed on Obama. Please let Brian Michael Bendis know, that's a crock. Just because the writer is Liberal shouldn't every member of the Marvel Universe is.
I'd like to see how Nick Fury voted since 1968.
Now my other fictional thing, Doctor Who. Remember the "Sound of Drums?" Harold Saxon (The Master) killed President-elect Winters before the Year That Never Was. Now in "The End of Time, part 1," Obama is President (and is being cited as giving a speech to fix the economy on Christmas Day -- that really is science fiction) Say, President Winters is a Southern Republican, how does Obama become president?
We're looking at United States Constitutional Law here:
Let me quote Article II, Section 1, clause 3:
"The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately choose by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner choose the President. But in choosing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; a quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two-thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall choose from them by Ballot the Vice-President."
In other words, the President and Vice president need not be of the same Political party. The Electoral College would decide who came in first and second place. But that was Amended.
The 12th Amendment was passed in 1803, and ratified the next year:
Passed by Congress December 9, 1803. Ratified June 15, 1804.
Note: A portion of Article II, section 1 of the Constitution was superseded by the 12th amendment.
"The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; -- the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; -- The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. [And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. --]* The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States,"
There were other changes too, but given the budget that the BBC and Russell T. Davies had, they could have looked it up.
What made the old Doctor Who great, was that the Doctor for all his alien nature, still fought for Queen and Country with the Brigadier first, and then they worried what the rest of the world thought. The United Kingdom used to be an Empire and they knew more then the upstart Americans during the early iterations of the show. (yes, it was cool -- because of Doctor Who I studied up on the British Empire)
Now, Russell T. Davies is supplementing their Prime Minister with an American President. If I was British, I would be pissed off.
And I say this to all the fiction writers in books, TV and Movies, if you must bring politics into it, ASK! America is a two party System, I wish that, outside of us partisans (but the Left do not, that's another post), others would cheer on that fact. Use it. Even within the Republican party, there are differences.
But watching Hollywood, you would never know.
My question: Has some fictional book, TV or Movie talked about something you knew and then got it wrong?
Sunday, December 27, 2009
That's the way mature adults handle the position of the Presidency. Not Obama.
The Nigerian who boarded the Northwest Flight from Amsterdam to Detroit nearly blew up the plane, save for the passengers intervention. The Nigerian was affiliated with Al-Queda. What the Left does not understand, just because they want to play Neville Chamberlain and bring every troop home does not mean that this Non-State based, Non-Governmental Organization named Al-Queda will throw up their arms and say "we're done,"
Only dreamers believe that.
Speaking of dreamers, Christmas was the latest outbreak of Iranian protesters wanting Democracy. Do you think the Iranians heard any speeches President Obama gave on freedom? Or have they been watching their neighbor, Iraq set up for next years elections?
And if President Obama did give any speech on the importance of Freedom Christmas week, please shoot me the link. Heh.
And where was Obama? Golfing. But, according to Ambinder of The Atlantic, Golfing was part of a "Strategy," Was the same benefit of the doubt extended to President Bush? NOPE. The Atlantic Jumped the Shark when Andrew Sullivan pursued his Trig Trutherism; Ambinder just proved that he will remain on his knees during a Democratic Administration. Time to start researching advertisers.
President Obama -- no speeches on freedom and doesn't care about Al-Queda.
Just say, "3 more years,"
My question, what should have President Obama done in both situations? Or should he play Golf instead?
Thursday, December 24, 2009
If you're a subscriber of the Valley, thank you. If you have the Valley on your reading list: Thank you. If you enjoy what you see, come on back -- more intesting posts to come.
And to all the Bloggers who linked or have me on the Blogroll, thank you.
And to everyone: Have a great Christmas and I hope in 2010 whatever dreams and goals you have come true.
Light posting till after New Years. Enjoy the music:
Now? Stephen Colbert has less reasons for a show using that format then Jar Jar Binks had for being in the Star Wars films. Yes Stephen, you are Jar Jar.
If Colbert was actually brave and "Speaking Truth to Power," on January 21, 2009, his format and style would have changed. He could have spent the next 4 years mocking President Obama and Keith Olbermann. But he can't, even Jon Stewart knocks the Obama Administration once in a while. Look below:
|The Daily Show With Jon Stewart||Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c|
|Obama's Nobel Speech|
So remember, Colbert is a Tool. Unless he changes his format, let Comedy Central know that too.
Know who isn't a tool? Lewis Black. He is a true comedian whereas Colbert remains a hack. Here's Lewis Black:
|The Daily Show With Jon Stewart||Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c|
|Back in Black - Stickle Me Elmo|
To paraphrase Catherine Tate: Bite me, Liberal boy!
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Why Every Google and Wikipedia Board member should know What candidates are on the Tea partiers Lips
At the Church of What's happening Now, the economy is in shambles. President Obama was elected because he seemed to be the most pragmatic candidate to fix the economy. However, unemployment has continued to rise, business (especially in California) continue to suffer and banks are still afraid to lend.
With the tax base shrinking due to unemployment and less business', where do Democratic presidents go to get extra funds? Remember the 90's? Clinton used the power of the State to go after Microsoft.
Since the anti-trust case, has anyone outside of Washington State been excited about the Windows upgrades or next feature? Well, with this AG and this economy, I want to recommend a tactic the Google Board (and employees) can use to get through what I call this "Harold Saxon Presidency,"
California has voted for Democrats since the 1970's. If you live in Silicon valley, ask yourself this: How the does the anti-business philosophy of Modern Democrats helped your business today? Have the coffers been opened by Venture capitalists in 2009? Why not?
I would suggest to the Google Board (and employees) get to know the Republican parties (and local Tea Party organizers) in their City and State. Heck, the tea partiers and Fiscal Conservatives (well represented in both areas) want innovation and the Private sector to succeed. Don't believe me? Compare the budget of San Diego with San Francisco. Which city is more friendly to business' and their employees in California?
The whole philosophy of the tea parties is Fiscal Conservatism. When AG Holder goes after Google for anti-trust, expecting a payout to stop the case, do you think President Obama will stop it?
If, in 2011 there is a majority Republican Congress (in both House and Senate), they can write bills that would protect the openness of the Internet. As a fan of the movie Southland Tales, the idea of a USIDENT was cute -- the fact that the Obama Administration wants to make it real is dangerous. With Google's reach into many parts of the 'Net, think about the State control of the free flow of information.
Once you get past leftist rhetoric about the Right, every person in Silicon valley will find Free Speechers and Liberterians have a home here. Yes Social Conservatives get offended sometimes, but most on the Right (including some Social Conservatives) say (and practice) "Live and let live,"
I would hope that Eric Schmidt and Sergey Brin are coming to Burbank to meet with Ron Nehring to discuss ways we can help each other. I hope that Google employees are reaching out to Conservative Blogs and activists -- for their business' to survive and thrive until 2012, you folks need Free marketers on the Right. We want to help.
With Wikipedia, we are dealing with an opposite situation. It has been discovered many times that Wikipedia Editors distort or don't mention Democratic party or allies malfeasance; In fact, any Republican woe is magnified.
If you are not playing straight with the Wiki entries of the Right, no reason why there shouldn't be a Congressional Investigation, right? Hey, keep the Politics out of the Political entries and you will possibly have some future allies. The same State that went after Microsoft (and soon Google) can go after Wikipedia on Copyright issues.
And just like I said to the Google people, reach out. We are willing to help, if you do the same in return. have Jimmy Wales address the problem of say, William Connolly, and funds and support might just flow.
Plus, between Google and Wikipedia, both groups of Board members can Lobby for the Technological Singularity. The future is coming and it does not say "Democrats," To get to William Gibson's Chiba City, speak to the Right.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
What does it mean? It means that the Democrats are changing the Rules, so that, if they ever lose the Senate, the Republicans cannot change the Health Care Bill. Erick Erickson has more here.
So, again, the left is obsequies to Power and not principle.
And the Left has very short memories, when the Republicans asked for support in Iraq (Senator Vandenbergs dictum), the only thing the Democrats offered was "NO," No help; No support and no end of politicking on foreign policy.
The Left was represented by Code Pink and ANSWER and they offered no policy statements except the Neville Chamberlain option. Andrew Sullivan, hypocrite.
For the Senate Democrats, here is a hint: If you have to change the rules to defend what you are doing (see polls of the American Public on Government Run health care here), you're wrong.
The inevitable question: Do you support the Democrats always talking of changing the Rules when things don't go their way?
Monday, December 21, 2009
A Mindless Dalek has More Original Opinions then Kathy Kattenburg -- she is not a Moderate, So Why Does She Write for TMV?
"Daleks had little to no individual personality and a strict hierarchy. They were conditioned to obey a superior's orders without question. Ultimately, the most fundamental feature of Dalek culture and psychology was an unquestioned belief in the superiority of the Daleks. Other species were either to be exterminated immediately, or enslaved and then exterminated later once they were no longer necessary. The default directive of a Dalek was to destroy all non-Dalek lifeforms."
Now what is a Kathy Kattenberg?
A Liberal who writes for the website The Moderate Voice, a feminist who despises Former Governor Palin and Blogger cannot handle any opinions other then her own. Heck, she never proposes anything new, she just repeats (in every Blog post she writes): well, if MSNBC and Steve Benan said it's good, then I think it's good. Repeat Ad Nauseum.
In the Democrats = INGSOC analogy, she would be the perfect female lifelike representation of Syme. Whomever is the decided Emmanuel Goldstein of the day, Ms. Kattenberg will post contentedly in her Two Minute Hate. Heck, even Althouse saw Ms. Kattenberg's closed mindedness.
As a partisan and a Blogger, I read and try to understand different views because how can you counter someones ideas if you don't understand them? Ms. Kattenberg doesn't even try. Every Monday, I read The Nation, American Prospect and New Republic along with magazines of the Right because I need to know what ideas are brewing. And why.
I don't mock. I study and try to understand. Ms. Kattenberg is not so enlightened.
The best and easiest example is Foreign Policy. American Foreign Policy falls under three categories, Wilsonianism (Bring Democracy Overseas to help American interests later on), Nixonian (Negotiate with dictators, thus no movement of troops by anyone. Except the dictators can massacre their own people in this belief), and Isolationism (No American support overseas whatsoever. Dictators, again, get a free ride).
Ms. Kattenberg hates, hates, hates Former Vice President Cheney and Former President Bush. Contrary to Leftist opinion, both men supported Wilsonianism. Now, when Ms. Kattenberg cries over lost children living under dictators or failed States, she has only herself to blame. By accepting Obama's Nixonian Foreign Policy, those children will continue to live under a dictators or among civil wars. Keep on living in your Two Minute Hate, Ms. Kattenberg.
When it comes to the idea of feminism, I was raised in New York during the 70's as feminism grew as an idea. When I read Reclusive Leftist (again, getting ideas from people whose views do not match to learn), Dr. Socks always talks of accepting feminists whichever Party they are from; Palin is as good as Hillary! which means whomever wins is good for feminists. In Ms. Kattenberg's world,. only certain people can be feminists. You know, leftist tolerance and all. I wonder what Dr. Socks would say about Ms. Kattenberg. (Note: Conservative fundraisers help Dr. Socks create her Justice Party -- the why is a future post)
And I speak as a Palin 2012 supporter. I pray that Dr. Socks' feminism wins over Ms. Kattenberg's version. Go Palin!
Now, why is Ms. Kattenberg less original then a mindless Dalek? To repeat: When she Blogs, she never writes any original ideas or accepts ideas that contridict her worldview. I've sparred with Jason and Octobia (either writer should be the Left Voice on TMV). Unlike Ms. Kattenberg and the mindless Dalek, they engage and try to understand. I don't expect agreement with the Left, but both Bloggers "get" that people in the world carry other opinions, belive in them and have reasons for posting about them. Ms. Kattenberg does not. To the owners of TMV, hire Jason Buckley or Octobia to fill Ms. Kattenberg shoes.
And check any Blogger on my Blogroll (look Right -->), each one writes original pieces and understands both sides of the Debate. Aren't Moderate writers supposed to do that?
For Ms. Kattenberg, politics is always 1968, or when she was 18. I've seen the cycles of politics and now the Right has started protesting with the Tea parties. Of course, Ms. Kattenberg decries that. How dare someone other then the Left protest?! The word that is on your lips is Hypocrisy. After 8 years of "BusHitler" and death threats to the former President, Ms. Kattenberg is under no condition to define civility. None.
As the mindless Dalek would follow orders, Ms. Kattenberg does the same. In her writings, she seems to think anything any Liberal does is good, and every Conservative is Evil Some Moderate, some civility. At least the Dalek would come up some ideas on how to expand the Dalek Empire; All Ms. Kattenberg does is say, "I believe what this other writer says!"
So, to the owners of TMV: Fire Ms. Kattenberg, instead hire Jason Buckley, Octobia or even Althouse.
To my readers, what makes a good Political Blogger?
And now for your enjoyment; A mindless Daleks, being smarter then Ms. Kattenberg:
Sunday, December 20, 2009
On my actual Birthday, I scouted out the Reagan Museum for the (hopefully) upcoming March Fundraiser; That night, the lovely and charming Pam Geller sang "Happy Birthday," to me. I've been smiling since then.
My Birthday post got picked up and linked.
And the week concludes with a party. What is the party about? It is not just about me celebrating another year. Since I have an inner and an outer life, it is always great to have different parts of my life meet and greet each other. Everyone I know is capable of doing something good. It is the idea of putting them together and having everyone learn new things.
Some people know of my political and policy geekiness, some of my Goth, others of my sci-fi geekiness, and of course, my family, but they all represent a committee of the whole.
Next year is my 40th, I hope to have some of my favorite people come, celebrate and network. I hope next year that there are Bloggers, politicians, Californians, New Yorkers, Beltway people, activists, family, Industry people, Goths and sci-fi geeks. They all contribute and they all learn from each other.
So, yeah, Happy Birthday to me. I just got back from Bar Sinister and next year, I will be visiting Malediction too. Hopefully, I will be DC bound or based, with a foot in the San Fernando Valley.
Some people go through their lives waiting for a purpose. My life has a few purposes, it's just finding the funding that's hard.
A new year is coming so is a new adventure (Yes, I loooved reading the Choose your Own Adventure Books). Life is supposed to be interesting.
To finish: I read biographies of successful people. The most prominent usually are able to promote their friends and family before them, and then the cycle returns. I am proud of every friend I have. And I am very proud of my family.
2010 awaits. Let's enjoy the rest of the year with a smile.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
In the meantime, watch the second Doctor Who movie, this one made in 1966. And now, ladies and gentlemen: Peter Cushing as The Doctor! And now, Daleks invading Earth! The Daleks will tie into the political portion of the Valley later this week.
And note, that Bernard Cribbins who plays in the opening scenes of the movie is currently acting in the Doctor Who TV show as Donna Noble's Grandfather. And he is the official companion for "The End of Time," You can never get too far away from the TARDIS.
Enjoy it on this cold evening!
Thursday, December 17, 2009
The rules of Governing are different from the Rules of Politicking.
The House of Representatives might be close to the people, but there was a reason the Founders created the Senate.
It was created for two reasons:
1) The Connecticut Compromise (The G-ds of Irony are laughing) to give the smaller states equal power against the larger ones; and
2) President George Washington said the Senate's job was to "cool," the passion of the House of Representatives. Or in modern language, the institution outlasts the Politics of it's time.
And, just like the examples earlier in the Valley, the Left want to rid the US of the Senate too because things don't go their way. Don't believe me? Read this article. It is written by the same person who wants to get rid of the filibuster.
What the Left fails to get (over and over again) is if you engage using Tip O'Neill's rules, comity comes forth, debates are give and take and everyone has a beer afterwords. By failing to take into account Churchill's quote, "...in Victory, magnanimity," they lose any reason for outreach by the Conservatives or Republicans.
And now, Senator Franken's asshattery.
Elections are next year, and if the Republicans take back the Senate, why shouldn't the same games be played?
Do you folks on the Left know how angry we are at how you treated President Bush and Governor Palin? I guess not.
Do you folks on the Left enjoy mocking us on the Right? I guess so.
What Senator Franken did was open up a new front in an advancing Civil war. We on the Right have put with the Two Minute Hates and Emmanuel Goldsteining of our people.
Democrats, either chastise Senator Franken or prepare for the whirlwind when you lose the Senate. This offer is only good for 24 hours starting from the publishing time of this post.
My question, will no one teach the Democrats how to make Politics a calm place in the Governing side? Or do they not know the consequences?
Now, it seems E.J. Dionne, currently with the Washington Post and American Prospect formally with the LA Weekly, consulted with the Valley before his current article. Look:
"His [Bush's] presidency was a tonic for Democrats and led to a blossoming of political creativity on the center-left not seen since the 1930s. No tactic, no program, no leader ever did more to catalyze the party than the rage Bush inspired.
"The whole effort was summarized nicely by the party's slogan in 2006, "A New Direction for America." There was no need to specify north or south, east or west, up or down. Compared with Bush, any alternative destination seemed appealing. And by becoming the apotheosis of the fresh and the new, Barack Obama emerged as the most attractive guide to this unknown promised land."
From the Valley:
"2009 was a Governing year and what did the Democrats accomplish?
*No Cap and Trade Bill;
*No Government Run Health Care(thank G-d!);
*No end of Wilsonianism in Iraq or Afghanistan; and
*Once Governor Palin stepped down after being attacked through funds via DC to Alaska, no one else left to blame.
"Many times in the Valley, the Democrats have been compared to INGSOC of Orwell's 1984. They need their Emmanuel Goldstein and Two Minute Hates. Between Yglesias and Hamsher, the Police State is coming."
E.J., if you read some more in the Valley, you will realize that I hit upon the subject of the Modern Democratic party as a copy of INGSOC many, many, many, many times. It is not a sign of political maturity that the Left needs to follow Orwell to succeed.
Here's a hint for E.J. and the Left: if you want to govern better, give up the ideas of the Two Minute Hate and Emmanuel Goldstein. And if you continue to pursue prosecution of the Last Administration, be aware that the Roman Republic went down the same path. Can you say Sulla and Marius? or Pompey and Caesar? We on the Right will not sit down for it, be ready
Don't forget to hit the Tip jar this season! Thank you.
Now, due to the harsh economy and other factors, I am asking everyone who enjoys the Valley to hit the Tip jar to help me through January.
When the fundraiser gets off the ground, I can help you with Tickets to the event. If you want something before March, I will give public Thank you on New Year's day. If your help is a large amount, I will allow you a guest Post in the New Year.
Again, thanks for all the help. And please hit the Tip jar.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Except for last year (in the midst of the Plague year), I have always written a Birthday Post (06 and 07) -- so Happy Birthday to me!
My birthday is the same day as the Boston Tea Party and the beginning of the Battle of the Bulge in WWII. Here is the history (and Births and Deaths) that occurred on December 16.
Today, I am going to the Reagan Museum to scout out for the proposed Fundraiser and Right Blogosphere meet-up. (If you Blog on the Right, clear out some time in March). Later today, I will see my Sister and my Mom to celebrate. On Saturday, the party will be in Robano's at Toluca Lake and then Bar Sinister thereafter. Woo Hoo!
And if you want to help me get to January, hit the Tip Jar!
Here is my wishlist (when I blow out the candles):
1. Work at the California Republican Party to put together the Fundraiser/Blogger Meet-up. Then, help work to put together State Conventions.
2. Work for San Diego to bring the 2012 Republican National Convention to town. And then working at the Convention itself.
3. Work on Capitol Hill doing Legislative Work in the Republican Run 112th Congress (and thereafter).
4. Get something off my Amazon Wishlist.
5. Thank Dan Riehl, RS McCain (and Smitty), the lovely and charming Pam Geller, and Dan at Gay Patriot for linking to the Valley this year. Where is my First Instalanche?
6. Get my calls through to Rush, Hannity and Levin.
7. Finish the Republican Encyclicals and publish the book after. Then write a fiction book.
8. Get my Governor Palin book (still reading) signed by President Palin.
10. Work in the next Republican White House in the White House Chief of Staff's office.
11. I would like the Fundraiser/Blog meet-up to go smoothly and to be able to it every year.
12. Find a nice Jewish girl who understands pragmatic Politics, policy, Dr. Who and Goths. Will I meet her in DC, Los Angeles or San Diego?
And now, a cool song from the Eagles, co-opted by Douglas Adams:
And if you want to help this holiday season, hit the Tip jar!
Thanks! Back to regular Blogging tomorrow!
Monday, December 14, 2009
I had the honor of interviewing Supervisor Stone this past weekend.
1. What brought you into Republican Politics?
Jeff Stone: I became a Republican when I turned 18 because I grew up in a pro-business atmosphere. I do not like paying more or higher taxes because that scares away business' from California. Look at how many business' have moved out of California this decade. Because I made my living as an entrepreneur, this issue is important. I find Entrepreneurs have a home in the Republican Party, that is why I am proud to be a Republican.
2. What issues are important to you?
JS: The first issues that I got involved in was anti-graffiti and urban decay. Graffiti could be seen near the Temecula Pharmacy [JS' business] and I was determined to make my area better. That's how I got my start running for City Council. From there, I was Mayor three times. In 2004, I ran for Riverside County Supervisor. I won, and since I won, I helped in 2006 made sure Riverside County reassessed home values so people could save their homes in the downturn. I believe in making sure that people are able to hang on to their money with little interference from the Government.
3. Why should the Tea Parties support your campaign?
JS: I am a fiscal and social Conservative and I believe that with President Obama is spending more then the country can afford, the Tea Parties are a good way to let the President know the American public is engaged and watching. I have also been a supporter of the Tea Parties in Temecula and San Diego. I would like to ask for their support for 2010.
4. What Motto do you live by?
JS: The Boy Scout Motto, "Be Prepared," It helped me become a public official who has been a local leader for 17 years. I was able to lead the way on defeating Prop1A.
5. Do you want San Diego to host the 2012 Republican National Convention?
JS: I do, because I remember how much publicity and support San Diego had in 1996. Everyone had a great time and I would recommend to the Republican National Committee come back to San Diego. The sun is always shining here.
The Valley endorses Supervisor Jeff Stone for the California State Senate. Please volunteer and/or Donate to his campaign.
Upcoming on Meet the Candidate: Kathleen "Suzy" Evans for California State Assembly (40th AD) and Mark Reed for Congress (CA-27).
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Also, back in College I studied American History. Before the Founding fathers sat down to write the Constitution, they wrote the Articles of Confederation. The Confederation nearly broke and after a long, hot summer in Philadelphia, the Constitution plus the Bill of Rights were voted and supported by the populace 222 years ago. Yay!
After 222 years, even with a slight bump called the American Civil War, the Republic survives. However, after Election 2000 Overtime the Left were debating whether the founders should have created The Electoral College. Thus the line of argument (never heard from the last generation of Democrats or Republicans) is "We lost, thus the Constitution is wrong, not our candidates or ideas,"
The Republicans, who lost a debatable election in 1960, never said "Change the Constitution," The same Republicans, who spent 40 years in the Minority in the House and Senate never said "Change the Constitution,"
Yet, the left when stymied always ask to change the Constitution. Or go all Stasi when they don't get their way. Examples:
1) Because President Obama cannot get his way with a veto proof same party majority in the Senate, America is "ungovernable," according to Matthew Yglesias. Instapundit digs deep here. Follow his links.
2) And because Senator Lieberman (I-CT) has doubts about the Health care Bill going through the Senate, Jane Hamsher (the same person who kicked Lieberman out of the party in 2006) wants to have the Susan Korman charity fire Lieberman's wife, Hadassah. Jane Hamsher, a true anti-semite the Stasi would love.
2009 was a Governing year and what did the Democrats accomplish?
- No Cap and Trade Bill;
- No Government Run Health Care Bill (thank G-d!);
- No end of Wilsonianism in Iraq or Afghanistan; and
- Once Governor Palin stepped down after being attacked through funds via DC to Alaska, no one else left to blame.
It wasn't the Republicans fault here. Liberals and Democrats (who want to purge Blue Dogs Democrats) need only look in the mirror.
The Left never says "We were wrong," about anything. Global warming numbers being massaged? Run to Copenhagen with their private jets! Nixon was moderate? Ford was right to pardon him? No apologies until after they have retired or died. The populace votes against them on a plebiscite? Find a judge to overturn it!
Many times in the Valley, the Democrats have been compared to INGSOC of Orwell's 1984. They need their Emmanuel Goldstein and Two Minute Hates. Between Yglesias and Hamsher, the Police State is coming.
I call the Obama Administration, "The Harold Saxon Presidency," but we on the Right should call today's Left, "The Modern Stasi,"
After all, Hamsher vill vant your papers!
My question, why does the Left distrust the American public and the cyclical nature of politics?