Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    January 2010
    S M T W T F S
     12
    3456789
    10111213141516
    17181920212223
    24252627282930
    31  

  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

    al qaeda barbarism big government blogging colorado congress corruption culture democrats denver economics economy elections environmentalism firearms freedom global warming gop gun control guns health care human rights humor iraq islam islamofascism israel journalism leftists liberty media bias military moonbats msm music obama politics presidential candidates republicans socialism soldiers spending terrorism war weather

  • Archives

Archive for January, 2010

« Previous Entries

The constitutional ignorance of POTUS

Posted by Richard on January 30, 2010

Of the many falsehoods, misstatements, and disturbing statements the President made in his State of the Agenda speech, one that Ed Morrissey called attention to really struck me (emphasis by Morrissey):

… HA reader Marvin K and Patriot Post notice that the Con-Law prof seems a little confused about what’s actually in the Constitution:

We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution:  the notion that we are all created equal, that no matter who you are or what you look like, if you abide by the law you should be protected by it; that if you adhere to our common values you should be treated no different than anyone else.

As Morrissey observed, this is so wrong in so many ways.

First, it's not a notion, it's a principle. But I suppose to a post-modernist Alinskyite admirer of Said and Chomsky, notions and principles are pretty much interchangeable, both just pieces of some narrative. 

Second, it's not "enshrined in our Constitution," it's from the Declaration of Independence. Epic fail.

Third, the notion that only those who "abide by the law" and "adhere to our common values" are protected by the Constitution is truly disturbing. Especially coming from someone who once taught Constitutional Law. 

And since I'm growing more paranoid by the day, I have to wonder what exactly, in Obama's eyes, qualify as "our common values."  By his criteria, I'm not at all sure I'm protected by the Constitution.

Morrissey asked an interesting question: 

And if Obama really believed what he said, then why is he trying terrorists (who clearly reject our values and refuse to recognize our laws) in criminal court with these same Constitutional guarantees?

Well, Ed, I'm sure he really believed it when he said it in the context in which he said it. It's part of his narrative for dealing with the Congress and the American people. 

Mirandizing enemy combatants who are waging a declared war on the United States and treating them as no different from convenience store robbers is part of a different narrative. Which he also really believes.

We are in deep doo-doo, folks. For three more years.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Look who’s feeding at the public trough

Posted by Richard on January 29, 2010

In Michael Moore's 2009 film, Capitalism: A Love Story, he railed against (among others) corporate greedheads lining up to get government handouts of the taxpayers' money. Talk about a great big pot calling the kettle black.

According to Watchdog.org, Michigan's Mackinac Center discovered that the movie was partly filmed in Michigan, qualifying it for a generous windfall courtesy of the state's taxpayers. And it's already been approved, despite what strikes me as a serious conflict of interest and appearance of impropriety (emphasis added): 

That windfall would come from Michigan’s refundable tax credit program for the film industry, a program that allows movie producers to apply for a tax refund of up to 42 percent of their spending in Michigan. This lavish provision means a studio can easily receive more from Michigan taxpayers than it pays in Michigan taxes.

This initially seemed to trouble Moore, and he openly questioned the program at a forum in July 2008.

“These are large multinational corporations — Viacom, GE, Rupert Murdoch — that own these studios. Why do they need our money, from Michigan, from our taxpayers, when we’re already broke here?” Moore asked.

Moore posed this question to the Michigan Film Office director who determines which movies will qualify for the program. Moore went on: “I mean, they play one state against another, and so they get all this free cash when they’re making billions already in profits. What’s the thinking behind that?”

But in November 2008, Gov. Granholm appointed Michael Moore to the Michigan Film Office Advisory Council. Which advises the Michigan Film Office. Which runs the tax refund program.

Moore filmed part of “Capitalism: A Love Story” in Michigan. And the Mackinac Center has confirmed with the film office that a “production person” associated with Moore “applied, was approved for an incentive and … will receive credits” once the state treasury department reviews and approves the audited filing.

The film office did not disclose how much the resulting payment from the state would be; however, the film office director insisted that the incentive approval posed no conflict of interest with Moore’s seat on the film office advisory council.

Oh, OK. I guess I was wrong. Nothing to see here, folks. No crony capitalism. No unseemly behavior. No hypocritical greedhead pigs feeding at the public trough. The director of the office that Moore advises, who determines which movies qualify, has assured us of that.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Republican “hip gap”

Posted by Richard on January 28, 2010

I never heard of Rep. Thaddeus G. McCotter (R-MI) (TGM or Thad to us cognoscenti) until I saw that "hip gap" link at Instapundit, clicked it, and saw his commentary at BigGovernment.com. Check it out: 

It permeates the public’s consciousness and Big Media obsessively promotes the perception to our detriment.  Yet, like a canker on a suitor, polite Republicans won’t discuss it.  No longer, however, can we pretend the issue doesn’t exist.  It does and, though painful to admit, we must confront the truth.

Republicans have a “hip gap.”

This is not to say Democrats are hip.  People who squander their precious breaths of life poring over Das Kapital, practicing rhythmic chanting with Kindergarten lyrics, chaining themselves to national monuments and/or writing memoirs prior to accomplishing anything are utter stiffs.  They can only pass themselves off as cool in comparison to…well, us.

Oh sure, we’d like to think this is just another slanderous Leftist attack on Republicans.  But, let’s be honest:  a large gaggle of GOPers have yet to put a toenail into the Twenty-First Century’s cultural crosscurrents – or, for that matter, the Nineteenth’s.

Still, let us not curse the darkness.  Let us light a cultural candle to illume our whereabouts upon the path to hipness.  Thus, the following is a True or False pop culture test.

Take a look, take the test, and report your score. If you can figure it out. 🙂

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

No State of the Union coverage here

Posted by Richard on January 27, 2010

No, I won't be watching, much less posting about, the President's State of the Union speech (or POTUS SOTUS, as we cognoscenti call it). Even if I didn't have work to do, I doubt I could persuade myself to endure the torture. Later, maybe not until tomorrow, I'll read Vodkapundit's drunkblogging of it, which will probably be as informative as and far more entertaining than watching live.

I predict, though, that the William Warren cartoon below will prove prescient (although I'm sure the presentation will be somewhat more cool and subtle than depicted).

Blame Bush cartoon by William Warren

ALG Editor's Note: William Warren's award-winning cartoons published at GetLiberty.org are a
free service of ALG News Bureau. They may be reused and redistributed free of charge.

UPDATE: Yep, the cartoon was prescient. And Vodkapundit did a fine job of drunkblogging as usual. But zombyboy had by far the most informative and amusing coverage — an absolute must-read.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

A Hayek vs. Keynes rap

Posted by Richard on January 26, 2010

This is probably the coolest economics lesson you'll ever see:

Your focus on spending is pushing on thread
In the long run, my friend, it’s your theory that’s dead
So sorry there, buddy, if that sounds like invective
Prepare to get schooled in my Austrian perspective 

Brought to you by the wacky folks at Econstories.tv, where you can watch while following along with the lyrics, download a free MP3 or AAC of the song, learn more about Keynes and Hayek, and contribute to help them with future projects.

Full disclosure: I'm a long-time supporter of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, which is behind this project, and thus helped fund it.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Stimulus spending necessarily costs jobs

Posted by Richard on January 25, 2010

Veronique de Rugy graphed employment and labor force changes against the government's "stimulus" spending, and the results aren't pretty:

Using data from the administration’s website Recovery.gov and from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, this accompanying chart shows the monthly increase in the number of unemployed workers and the shrinkage of the civilian labor force in tandem with the administration’s stimulus spending. In other words, it shows how not only that many workers have lost their jobs since the administration started spending stimulus funds, but also that many more workers have exited the labor market. The civilian labor force shrinks when individuals who were looking for work or were employed decide that their labor market prospects are not good enough to keep looking for a job or to stay employed. For instance, some people might decide to go to grad school instead of keeping a poorly paid job, while others might decide to not seek a job and instead stay home with their kids. One reason for the shrinkage could be that the current economic state is so bad that workers feel it is not worth their time and energy to keep looking for a job when there is no hope in sight.

Two things are sure. First, if it weren’t for workers’ mass exit from the labor force (600,000 workers exited in December alone), the unemployment numbers would look even worse that they already do. Second, government spending cannot create jobs.

(HT: Instapundit)

This shouldn't surprise anyone with a modicum of economics education. In fact, it's an utterly predictable result. A study released last March by researchers at Madrid's Juan Carlos University determined that each "green" job created by Spain's rush to embrace "alternative" energy (at a cost of $750,000 apiece in subsidies) cost the Spanish economy 2.2 jobs elsewhere in the economy.

The problem isn't specific to "green" energy, and it doesn't matter whether you're talking about direct government hiring, government contracts, government mandates on private activities, or government subsidies.

When government takes resources out of the economy (by increased taxing or borrowing) to fund any of these activities, it redirects resources from a more productive use to a less productive use. If that weren't the case, the heavy hand of government wouldn't have to forcibly redirect of those resources.

Ipso facto, these activities make us as a society poorer — although they certainly enrich the special interests who benefit from the redirection of those resources.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Even more Obama speeches

Posted by Richard on January 25, 2010

Mark Steyn believes that exactly no one is waiting for Obama's 412th speech and 159th interview of his presidency:

So what went wrong? According to Barack Obama, the problem is he overestimated you dumb rubes’ ability to appreciate what he’s been doing for you. “That I do think is a mistake of mine,” the president told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “I think the assumption was if I just focus on policy, if I just focus on this provision or that law or if we’re making a good rational decision here, then people will get it.”

But you schlubs aren’t that smart. You didn’t get it. And Barack Obama is determined to see that you do. So the president has decided that he needs to start “speaking directly to the American people.”

Wait, wait! Come back! Don’t all stampede for the hills! He only gave (according to CBS News’s Mark Knoller) 158 interviews and 411 speeches in his first year. That’s more than any previous president — and maybe more than all of them put together. But there may still be some show out there that didn’t get its exclusive Obama interview — I believe the top-rated Grain & Livestock Prices Report — 4 a.m. Update with Herb Torpormeister on WZZZ-AM Dead Buzzard Gulch Junction’s Newstalk Leader is still waiting to hear back from the White House.

But what will the president be saying in all these extra interviews? In that interview about how he hadn’t given enough interviews, he also explained to George Stephanopoulos what that wacky Massachusetts election was all about:

“The same thing that swept Scott into office swept me into office,” said Obama. “People are angry and they’re frustrated, not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years but what’s happened over the last eight years.”

Got it. People are so angry and frustrated at George W. Bush that they’re voting for Republicans. In Massachusetts. Boy, I can’t wait for that 159th interview.

Presumably, the president isn’t stupid enough actually to believe what he said. But it’s dispiriting to discover he’s stupid enough to think we’re stupid enough to believe it.

Read the whole, hilarious thing.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

ClimateGate, the NASA version

Posted by Richard on January 23, 2010

What little credibility the promoters of global warming hysteria had remaining has now been shredded. From Investor's Business Daily (emphasis added):

We recently commented on how our space agency for two years refused Freedom of Information requests on why it has had to repeatedly correct its climate figures.

In a report on global warming on KUSI television by Weather Channel founder and iconic TV weatherman John Coleman, that reticence has been traced to the deliberate manipulation and distortion of climate data by NASA.

As Coleman noted in a KUSI press release, NASA's two primary climate centers, the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) in Asheville, N.C., and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies at Columbia University in New York City, are accused of "creating a strong bias toward warmer temperatures through a system that dramatically trimmed the number and cherry-picked the locations of weather observation stations they use to produce the data set on which temperature record reports are based."

Joseph D'Aleo, of Icecap.us, said the analysis found NASA "systematically eliminated 75% of the world's stations with a clear bias toward removing higher-latitude, high-altitude and rural locations." The number of actual weather stations used to calculate average global temperatures was reduced from about 6,000 in the 1970s to about 1,500 today. The number of reporting stations in Canada dropped from 600 to 35.

E. Michael Smith, a computer programming expert who worked with D'Aleo, said he found "patterns in the input data from NCDC that looked liked dramatic and selective deletions of thermometers from cold locations." The more he looked, the more he found "patterns of deletion that could not be accidental."

…

Smith argues that the decrease in stations used and the selectivity of locations make NASA's data and conclusions suspect. D'Aleo goes further, saying such cherry-picking and data manipulation are a "scientific travesty" committed by activist scientists to advance the global warming agenda.

I wonder — if we graphed the amount of scientific fraud uncovered in the field of climatology over the past few decades, would it look like a hockey stick?

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Are Republicans listening?

Posted by Richard on January 23, 2010

Larry Kudlow shares my concern about whether the GOP leadership understands the lesson of the Miracle in Massachusetts. And he notes that Scott Brown owes much of his success to campaigning as a JFK Republican:

… Are the Republicans listening? Do they really understand why Scott Brown was victorious? If they do, why aren’t members of the Republican leadership loudly campaigning for an end to tax hikes, just like Scott Brown?

…

Remember that Brown ran on a JFK/Ronald Reagan platform of across-the-board tax cuts to promote economic growth. Take a look at what the senator-elect had to say during his victory speech Tuesday night:

This [health care] bill is not being debated openly and fairly. It will raise taxes, it will hurt Medicare, it will destroy jobs and run our nation deeper into debt . . . I will work in the Senate to put the government back on the side of people who create jobs and the millions of people who need jobs. And remember, as President John F. Kennedy stated, that starts with across-the-board tax cuts for businesses and families to create jobs, put more money in people’s pockets, and stimulate the economy. It’s that simple.

There you have it. Scott Brown could not have been any clearer. That’s the great thing about his message — its breathtaking clarity. Across-the-board tax cuts and a revival of free-market capitalism on the supply-side.

…

A recent Washington Post poll showed that by 58 to 38 percent, voters want smaller government and fewer government services. This, too, should be the Republican congressional message.

It is, in fact, an economic-growth message, the likes of which we haven’t heard since Jack Kemp promoted it in the late 1970s. And the brilliance of Scott Brown was to use the JFK tax cuts — an across-the-board reduction in marginal tax rates — to attract Democrats and independents to his message.

An across-the-board tax cut is the fairest pro-growth message of them all. Lower tax rates for everybody. Get out of the box of rich people and class warfare. For the Ted Kennedy Democrats, that box has been a loser for decades. But for timid Republicans always on the defensive, now is the time to break out and adopt the Scott Brown theme.

This is what Reagan did. This is why the Gipper touted JFK’s across-the-board tax cuts. Republicans must now be bold and fight for across-the-board tax relief, for families, individuals, and businesses, along with smaller government, fewer services, and across-the-board spending cuts.

That's what the Republican leadership should be talking about: across-the-board tax and spending cuts, not across-the-aisle deal-making. If they want to present a less partisan image, let them embrace the optimistic, pro-growth message of both Reagan and JFK — "across-the-board tax cuts for businesses and families to create jobs, put more money in people’s pockets, and stimulate the economy." Let them embrace JFK Republicanism.

I think that would resonate with voters. And drive the Democrats crazy. 🙂

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Fair and balanced vs. one-sided and ugly

Posted by Richard on January 22, 2010

Miami Herald TV critic Glenn Garvin undertook the unpleasant task of watching MSNBC's election-night coverage of the Massachusetts senate race, and what he found was "frothing lunacy":

If you watched CNN or Fox News last night, you got a balanced analysis of how Republican Scott Brown pulled off the political upset of the century (or, if you prefer, how Democrat Martha Coakley blew a dead solid electoral lock). Yes, I said Fox News, without irony. To be sure, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity made it clear they were rooting for Brown. But their shows also included a steady parade of liberal-leaning guests — former San Francisco mayor Willie Brown, former Dukakis campaign manager Susan Estrich, Democratic party strategist Mary Anne Marsh, NPR commentator Juan Williams and radio host Alan Colmes. And pollster Frank Luntz interviewed a panel of two dozen or so Massachusetts voters, most of them Democrats, about how they voted and why. Practically every conceivable perspective on the election was represented.

And on MSNBC, you got practically every conceivable expression of venom against Brown and anybody who voted him. From Maddow's dark suspicions that the election was rigged — she cited complaints about a grand total of six ballots out of about 2.25 million cast — to Olbermann's suggestion in the video up above that the same Massachusets voters who went for Barack Obama by a 62-28 percent margin had suddenly realized they helped elect a black guy and went Republican in repentance, the network's coverage was idiotic, one-sided and downright ugly.

Read the rest for examples from the "two hours of nonstop bilious rage." (And see update below.)

Johnny Dollar pointed out a significant difference in coverage of the candidates' speeches:

During Tuesday night's coverage of the Massachusetts special election, CNN and MSNBC aired only a fraction of the Republican candidate's speech. Fox News Channel aired both candidates' speeches in their entirety.

MSNBC ran 100% of Coakley's speech, but just over a third of Brown's. CNN ran 80% of Coakley's, but only a quarter of Brown's. Yes, he spoke longer. But he'd just pulled off a stunning upset, and thus what he had to say was news. She was simply conceding defeat and then slinking back into obscurity.

So, do TV viewers have a clear preference for election coverage? You bet they do. Fox News won the ratings battle in a landslide (emphasis added): 

• In the first of many elections night taking place in 2010, Fox News dominated the cable news networks, with its highest prime time viewership since Election Day 2008. FNC was the #1 news network by far, topping CNN, MSNBC and HLN combined in prime time and total day, total viewers and the A25-54 demographic. Sean Hannity has his best ratings ever in total viewers at 9pmET – the hour Bret Baier announced Scott Brown’s victory.

• FNC didn’t just clean up on cable. The network had more viewers during prime time than The Jay Leno Show, and Greta Van Susteren’s 10pmET show and Hannity’s 9pmET show topped all ABC prime time programs.

In the 25-54 demographic during the three hours after the polls closed, Fox News beat CNN 4-1 and MSNBC almost 5-1.

UPDATE: Olbermann's insane rants are too much even for John Stewart:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
Special Comment – Keith Olbermann's Name-Calling
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes		 Political Humor Health Care Crisis
Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

A good week for liberty

Posted by Richard on January 22, 2010

It's been a good week for Liberty, hasn't it? First Amendment rights restored, socialized medicine derailed, socialist Democrats repudiated in Massachusetts (of all places) and in trouble in California and all across the country — is that a boatload of good news, or what?

I've been in the throes of a bad cold all week, and somewhat down as a consequence, but I'm getting over it now — and feeling pretty damned good about how things have been going lately. 🙂 Don't let up, Friends of Liberty, we've got them on the run!

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Two cheers for the Supreme Court

Posted by Richard on January 21, 2010

I haven't read the 180+ pages of opinion, concurring opinion and dissenting-in-part of the Supreme Court's monumental decision in Citizens United v. FEC. But I've been reading the many posts about it at The Volokh Conspiracy and SCOTUSblog (links to main pages; just keep scrolling). The decision is not perfect (it upheld disclosure requirements, with only Thomas dissenting). But it strikes me as a huge gain for First Amendment rights and a very welcome repudiation of both McCain-Feingold and Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, along with the anti-free-speech mentality that drives such legislation and such court rulings.

Those anti-free-speech advocates are expressing outrage that corporations, which "aren't people," are granted Constitutional rights (as are unions, BTW). But as Ilya Somin observed, the owners and employees of corporations are people (as are the members of unions), and these individuals don't lose their rights by joining together to act in concert.

And the (mostly leftist) critics of free political speech conveniently forget that virtually all significant news media organizations are incorporated. If, as the critics claim, the government can restrict the free speech rights of (people joined together as) corporations, then government can restrict the free press rights of (people joined together as) corporations. Do they really want to go there? Of course not — because entities like CNN, NBC, CBS, and the New York Times are on their side. So they concoct some ridiculous argument of "special rights" for "the press." As if rights aren't universal.

The first amendment protects my right to speak and to print or publish (including modern equivalents like broadcasting, cable-casting, and online posting). It doesn't require me to meet some arbitrary standard of what constitutes a "journalist" in order to exercise those rights. And I don't lose those rights by joining with others to exercise them in concert. 

Citizens United is a significant and welcome ruling. And it's yet another ominous indication of the President's authoritarian mindset of that he reacted by essentially calling on Congress to enact legislation to restrict our Constitutional rights (as recognized by the Supreme Court). Hey, this guy taught Constitutional Law, didn't he? And he thinks Congress can, by legislation, abrogate Constitutional rights?

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Epic fail

Posted by Richard on January 20, 2010

Stephen Green had the comment of the night:

Obama can’t get concessions from the Russians, the Chinese, or the Europeans. He can’t get welfare or energy tax bills through a Democratic Congress. And now he can’t even get a Democrat elected in Massachusetts.

Jimmy Carter never had that epic a fail.

<rimshot />

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Bay state stunner — but will Dems learn?

Posted by Richard on January 20, 2010

Last week, I worried about a tight Senate race in Massachusetts, recalling Hugh Hewitt's mantra, "If it's not close, they can't cheat." Today, a huge voter turnout decisively handed "the people's seat" to Republican Scott Brown. In a state that Obama carried by 26%, where only 12% of voters are registered Republicans, and with two million votes cast, Brown leads by over 140,000 votes (with 98% of precincts reporting).

Hoo-rah!

But will the Democrats learn from this stunning repudiation of their agenda by the bluest of blue states? It doesn't sound like it. Earlier today, Nancy Pelosi insisted that they will get Obamacare done before a new senator can be seated. Administration spokespeople are insisting this race wasn't about health care — even though Brown's most-repeated campaign line was "I'm the 41st vote" against a government takeover of health care, and the President himself campaigned for Coakley, emphasizing the health care issue.

Earlier tonight on Fox News, Juan Williams reported that his White House sources are telling him the President is going to "double down."

After the 1994 election, a chastened Bill Clinton learned his lesson, tacked to the center, declared "the era of big government is over," and joined the Republicans in ending welfare as we knew it. The signs suggest that President Obama and at least some of the Democratic leadership are not similarly willing to listen to the voices of the people. They're either too arrogant or too rabidly ideological.

I'm of two minds about that. On the one hand, if the Dems persist in their hubris, they're likely to face an unprecedented thumping in November, and that would be great. On the other hand, if they push through government-controlled health care and some of their other pet socialist schemes, it will be difficult to undo the damage they do to the country. Too many timid Republicans.

Speaking of Republicans, there's a lesson in this election for them, too. Some Democratic analysts have pointed out that Brown isn't a conservative, and that's true to a degree. He's certainly not a social conservative. He's pro-choice, and he didn't campaign at all on conservatives' pet social issues.

But Brown campaigned as a rock-solid fiscal conservative — cut taxes, cut spending, stop the "stimulus" and "bailout" nonsense, and abort the Democrats' headlong rush to turn this country into a European-style sclerotic social welfare state, with the resulting permanent low growth and high unemployment.

That's the message that will carry Republicans to victory this fall. Wearing their religion on their sleeves and making abortion and gay marriage the centerpieces of their campaigns won't work. Timid, McCain-style "moderate Republicanism," ready to "reach across the aisle" and standing for nothing won't work, either.

Last year, pseudo-conservative pundits like David Brooks declared "the era of Reagan is over." In fact, Reaganism is exactly what the Republican Party needs to embrace — less government, lower taxes, individual liberty, American exceptionalism, and optimism for the future. That's how they beat Carter, and that's how they can beat today's Carter-squared Democrats. That's the message that, if clearly articulated and proudly embraced, resonates with everyone from rock-ribbed conservatives to moderate Democrats. And that's a decisive majority — even in Massachusetts.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

A musical “good riddance” to Lane Kiffin

Posted by Richard on January 15, 2010

Knoxville's most entertaining attorney (and probably one of the most entertaining in the country), Anne McKinney, offered up this musical sendoff for former/temporary Vols coach Lane Kiffin, who slunk off to USC:


[YouTube link]

Goodbye, Lane. We hardly knew you (and didn't much like what we learned during your tumultuous one-year stay). I hope you do for the Trojans what you did for the Raiders and the Vols.

HT: Instapundit

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

« Previous Entries