Combs Spouts Off

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

  • Calendar

    October 2010
    S M T W T F S
     12
    3456789
    10111213141516
    17181920212223
    24252627282930
    31  
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Archive for October, 2010

Who you gonna believe, CBS or your own lyin’ eyes?

Posted by Richard on October 31, 2010

Crowd estimates are notoriously problematic, typically all over the map, and ultimately not very meaningful. Especially when you're comparing estimates for two very dissimilar events. For instance, an event where people came at their own expense from all over the country to hear Glenn Beck and a few others speak versus essentially a rock concert featuring big-name bands to which Arianna Huffington, Oprah Winfrey, several big unions, and numerous colleges and schools provided free transportation from numerous East Coast locations — those are pretty dissimilar events.

The reporting of crowd estimates, however, can sometimes be interesting. For instance, in August CBS News claimed that 87,000 people attended Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally (by far the lowest estimate). Today, they breathlessly proclaimed that 215,000 attended the Stewart/Colbert "Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear" and pointedly made the comparison to the Beck rally. 

OK, let's compare a couple of pictures. Freeper keypro has shots of each crowd side by side. They're not at the same location, which complicates the comparison. But he or she has put a map below them with ovals outlining the area covered by each photo, and that helps. Go ahead, take a look. Compare the pictures. Compare the area covered by each. Zoom in, if your browser permits.

I'll wait until you get back. 

.
.
.

Now you tell me — does the crowd in the Stewart picture (on the right) look 2.5 times as big as the crowd in the Beck picture? Heck, does it even look as big? Even close? (OK, maybe close. Like I said, it's problematic.)

Personally, I think CBS is still operating from the Dan Rather playbook. "Fake but accurate."

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | 1 Comment »

Silencing dissent

Posted by Richard on October 30, 2010

Lisa Murkowski is a full-fledged member of the bipartisan ruling class that Angelo M. Codevilla described so well in his critically important American Spectator article. As such, she believes not only that she's entitled to rule, but that her subjects don't even have the right to make fun of her. Free speech be damned. 

Murkowski doesn't have access to SEIU goons to do her dirty work, so she relies on $1000/hr. lawyers to intimidate and silence her critics. On Friday, Sarah Palin told the tale on her Facebook page (emphasis added): 

Yesterday, Lisa Murkowski’s hired guns threatened radio host Dan Fagan, and more importantly, the station that airs Fagan’s show, with legal action for allegedly illegal “electioneering.” The station, unlike Murkowski, who is flush with millions of dollars from vested corporate interests, does not have a budget for a legal defense. So it did what any small market station would do when threatened by Beltway lawyers charging $500 to $1000 an hour – they pulled Dan Fagan off the air. 

Does all this sound heavy handed? It is. It is an interference with Dan Fagan’s constitutional right to free speech. It is also a shocking indictment against Lisa Murkowski. How low will she go to hold onto power? First, she gets the Division of Elections to change its write-in process – a process that Judge Pfiffner correctly determined had been in place without change for 50 years. She is accepting financial support from federal contractors, an act that is highly questionable and now pending before the FEC. And today, she played her last card. She made it clear that if you disagree with her and encourage others to exercise their civic rights, she’ll take you off the air.  

The concept of “electioneering” involves several issues, but typically refers to campaigning at the polls, which is appropriately banned. Under federal law, it can also mean paying for advertising on broadcast media during a federal election cycle, and it requires disclosures if done by groups and corporations. Fagan used satire to mock Murkowski’s write-in efforts and encouraged Alaskans to run as write-in candidates. That is not illegal. That is free speech.

Individuals like Dan Fagan have a fundamental right to speak their minds without threats from the incumbent Senator from Alaska. It is hard to find a constitutional right Americans cherish more than the right to free speech. This was a right Joe Miller, as a decorated combat veteran – a tank commander tested in battle, was willing to die to defend. Dan Fagan has not always agreed with me, but I will gladly defend his right to speak freely on his radio show, which he has often used to criticize me. In fact, Fagan has actually used his radio show to attack and insult me, my husband, my children, and my family in just about every way possible. He was especially insulting to my son, who left for a war zone to defend Fagan’s right to attack our family. But when I was his governor, I never would have dreamed of threatening his right to free speech. I support him in this fight because this D.C. Beltway thuggery, as exemplified by Lisa Murkowski’s latest threat, is ruining our country. The powers that be want ordinary Americans to sit down and shut up and let the ruling class ride us right off the debt cliff we’re heading towards with Obama, Pelosi, and Reid steering the nation’s car. We can’t let them. Now is the time to put aside our past differences and stand up to the establishment powers.

This whole episode confirms again why we need to elect Joe Miller. Lisa, you can sue me if you want (you won’t be the first). But I will not be intimidated from speaking my mind. Your intimidation just empowered us liberty-loving Alaskans. Are you really that out of touch?

Fortunately, Murkowski's thugs in pinstripes were too late. With some help from Dan Riehl's post at Big Government (which tells the story of the shameful election law subversion that led to this effort) and various bloggers, Fagan's call for more write-in candidates had the desired effect before he could be silenced. Riehl has the complete Alaska Division of Elections list of candidates for Senate and the story of how it came to be so large in a matter of hours just before the deadline.

Murkowski may have succeeded in getting election workers to distribute a list of write-in candidates to voters, but her name will be one of 148 on that list. Heh, indeed. 

Subscribe To Site:

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

That remarkable HillBuzz letter

Posted by Richard on October 29, 2010

Neo-neocon linked to it succinctly:

Wow. Just wow.

I couldn't agree more. Click that link and read. 

Here's an idea for a political action committee you never thought would exist: "Gay Democrats for Palin"

How about it, Kevin DuJan? Wouldn't you like to add "Founder and President of Gay Democrats for Palin" to your resumé?

UPDATE: I suppose "LGBT Democrats for Palin" would be more inclusive, but it just doesn't have the same ring to it. 🙂

HT: David Aitken, via email 

Subscribe To Site:

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

Not your father’s Republican Party

Posted by Richard on October 29, 2010

A month ago, Vice President Joe Biden, who always seems to know the wrong thing to say and then says it, uttered my favorite quote from this election season:

This is not your father’s Republican Party. This is the Republican Tea Party, no this is a different deal, guys. This is not Bob Dole. This is not Howard Baker.

No doubt the silver-tongued Biden intended that as a dire warning, a wake-up call to his troops. But I’ll bet that millions of Americans reacted with a grin and thought, “I sure hope he’s right!” I know I did.

Recently, Dick Morris affirmed Biden’s point and expanded on it (emphasis added):

A fundamental change is gripping the Republican grass roots as they animate the GOP surge to a major victory in the 2010 elections. No longer do evangelical or social issues dominate the Republican ground troops. Now economic and fiscal issues prevail. The Tea Party has made the Republican Party safe for libertarians.

There is still a litmus test for admission to the Republican Party. But no longer is it dominated by abortion, guns and gays. Now, keeping the economy free of government regulation, reducing taxation and curbing spending are the chemicals that turn the paper pink.

It is one of the fundamental planks in the Tea Party platform that the movement does not concern itself with social issues. At the Tea Parties, evangelical pro-lifers rub shoulders happily with gay libertarians. They are united by their anger at Obama’s economic policies, fear of his deficits and horror at his looming tax increases. Obama’s agenda has effectively removed the blocks that stopped tens of millions of social moderates from joining the GOP.

Read the whole thing. I sure hope he’s right!

Subscribe To Site:

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

Obama and bad faith in America

Posted by Richard on October 29, 2010

Shelby Steele:

There is an "otherness" about Mr. Obama, the sense that he is somehow not truly American. …

But Barack Obama is not an "other" so much as he is a child of the 1960s. His coming of age paralleled exactly the unfolding of a new "counterculture" American identity. And this new American identity—and the post-1960s liberalism it spawned—is grounded in a remarkable irony: bad faith in America as virtue itself, bad faith in the classic American identity of constitutional freedom and capitalism as the way to a better America. So Mr. Obama is very definitely an American, and he has a broad American constituency. He is simply the first president we have seen grounded in this counterculture American identity. When he bows to foreign leaders, he is not displaying "otherness" but the counterculture Americanism of honorable self-effacement in which America acknowledges its own capacity for evil as prelude to engagement.

Among today's liberal elite, bad faith in America is a sophistication, a kind of hipness. More importantly, it is the perfect formula for political and governmental power. It rationalizes power in the name of intervening against evil—I will use the government to intervene against the evil tendencies of American life (economic inequality, structural racism and sexism, corporate greed, neglect of the environment and so on), so I need your vote.

"Hope and Change" positioned Mr. Obama as a conduit between an old America worn down by its evil inclinations and a new America redeemed of those inclinations. There was no vision of the future in "Hope and Change." It is an expression of bad faith in America, but its great ingenuity was to turn that bad faith into political motivation, into votes.

But there is a limit to bad faith as power, and Mr. Obama and the Democratic Party may have now reached that limit.

Read the whole thing

 

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

The liberal gene

Posted by Richard on October 29, 2010

According to researchers at UCSD and Harvard, people "with a specific variant of the DRD4 gene were more likely to be liberal as adults." But only if they were also "socially active during adolescence." So there's a gene variant that predisposes people to liberalism.

Rush Limbaugh calls it a genetic defect. I'd have to agree. It clearly seems to impair reasoning ability and higher cognitive functions. 🙂 



Subscribe To Site:

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

“Call Me Senator”

Posted by Richard on October 29, 2010

Famed Hollywood director David Zucker (Airplane, Naked Gun, Naked Gun 2.5, Scary Movie 3, Scary Movie 4, An American Carol) has created a hilarious spoof of Barbara Boxer's "call me Senator" moment. Enjoy, and then share it with your friends in California. After Nov. 2, I hope we'll soon be calling her "ex-Senator."


[YouTube link]

Subscribe To Site:

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

Marco Rubio: “A Generational Choice”

Posted by Richard on October 29, 2010

Check out Senate candidate Marco Rubio's excellent two-minute ad and share it with your friends in Florida.


[YouTube link]

HT: Patterico, who also has some good commentary on those lopsidedly Democratic polls out of California — and David Aitken, who passed along the Patterico link.

Subscribe To Site:

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

The perfect country song

Posted by Richard on October 27, 2010

I hadn't heard this in years until I stumbled across it tonight: the perfect performance, by David Allan Coe, of the perfect country song, by the late great Steve Goodman and John Prine. Grab a beer and enjoy "You Never Even Called Me by My Name"!


[YouTube link]

Wait … you say you'd rather hear it sung by the guy who wrote it? OK … here's a very different live version by Steve Goodman.


[YouTube link]

What about John Prine, you say? OK, if you really want to heard a third version of the same song, there's a John Prine rendition on YouTube (sound is a bit muddy) in which he tells how the song came to be. And offers yet another version of the last verse.

But for something a bit different, here's a YouTube video that begins with Steve and John together doing a wonderful rendition of the hauntingly beautiful "Souvenirs."


[YouTube link]

Steve Goodman, whom I consider one of the finest singer-songwriters ever to walk the earth, died of leukemia at the too-young age of 36 in 1984, leaving this world a much poorer place. As if his passing weren't sad enough, the man who wrote and performed "A Dying Cubs Fan's Last Request" died four days before the Cubs won the National League Eastern Division title, sending them to the playoffs for the first time since 1945. 

John Prine survived his own bout with cancer (in 1998), and is still performing. 

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

African immigrants speak out for Tancredo

Posted by Richard on October 25, 2010

You may have seen my post supporting Tom Tancredo for Governor of Colorado, in which I described him as "sincere, principled, articulate, and funny. Not at all the angry right-wing ogre some people paint him as." And I'm sure you're familiar with the MSM's portrait of him as a racist and xenophobe. So, who to believe? Before deciding, I suggest you consider what African immigrants from the Sudan have to say.

El Marco has an enlightening post, African Immigrant Leaders Support Tancredo, Angry at Obama, that I strongly urge you to read. I can't possibly summarize or excerpt it adequately. It's full of marvelous images and compelling quotes, and you simply have to click the link. But it begins thus:

Colorado gubernatorial candidate Tom Tancredo is an extraordinary man with no shortage of friends, and detractors. Tancredo has been branded a racist by the political left for being a leading critic of illegal immigration, and yet he earned a standing ovation from the NAACP. Recently I was in New York to photograph the start of the Sudan Freedom Walk, and learned things about Tom Tancredo (and Obama) that few Americans know anything about. I discovered that while many in the Sudanese refugee community feel betrayed by President Obama, they reserve a special place in their hearts for Tom Tancredo.

Read the whole thing. Please. Seriously. And try not to get teary-eyed.

Yes, I realize that the issues of Darfur, slavery, and genocide don't have any direct relevance to how a candidate might govern Colorado. But indirectly, they do. They tell us something important about the kind of person this candidate is.

In any office you can think of, I'd rather have Tom Tancredo than the current occupant of the White House.

HT: Dan Kopelman (via email)

Subscribe To Site:

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

Colorado governor’s race gets interesting — and I switch candidates

Posted by Richard on October 23, 2010

I caught the tail end of a live debate among Colorado's top three gubernatorial candidates on KDVR tonight. For those of you not in Colorado (or not paying attention), the candidates are:

  • Dan Maes, a political neophyte with lots of baggage. He's a conservative Republican.
  • John Hickenlooper, mayor of Denver. He's a liberal Democrat who talks about "social justice."
  • Tom Tancredo, former Republican Congressman. He's the American Constitution Party candidate, and generally described as very conservative (a "right-wing extremist" according to his critics). 

When asked about marijuana, two of those candidates trotted out all the tired old anti-marijuana myths and scare stories and took a hard-line pro-drug-war stance. The other one forcefully argued that marijuana prohibition was a failure and unequivocally supported legalization. Can you guess which candidates embraced the "reefer madness" rhetoric and which was the enlightened, reasonable, and tolerant one? 

Yep, it was the "right-wing extremist" Tancredo who supported a sane approach to pot. Maes and Hickenlooper both sounded like every lame ONDCP ad you've ever seen.

A few months ago, when it became clear that Maes was a deeply flawed candidate and Tancredo jumped into the race, everyone — absolutely everyone — assumed that the race was over, and that Hickenlooper would cruise to an easy victory.

Surprise! The latest independent poll shows a statistical tie: Hickenlooper 44%, Tancredo 43%, Maes 9%. (If Maes gets less than 10% in the election, the GOP becomes a minor party under Colorado law.)

And that poll was taken before Michael Sandoval unearthed a Hickenlooper quote that's gotten a lot of negative attention. The mayor, responding to a question about why the Matthew Shepard Foundation was locating in Colorado instead of Wyoming, said (emphasis added): 

I think a couple things, I mean, you know, the tragic death of Matthew Shepard occurred in Wyoming. Colorado and Wyoming are very similar. We have some of the same, you know, backwards thinking in the kind of rural Western areas you see in, you know, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico.

According to Kelly Maher, the mayor's campaign suffers from an enthusiasm gap (and Hickenlooper himself has lamented his small crowds), while Tancredo events are "wall-to-wall packed" and full of "political energy." Tancredo seems to be surging and may peak at just the right time. If so, he could make history — a Tancredo victory would be perhaps the most stunning event in a year full of surprising political events.

If Tancredo falls short, people can point to Maes as the "spoiler," and for a change we can accuse the die-hard Republicans who voted for him of "wasting their vote" and "helping the Democrat win" — accusations they've hurled at Libertarians in the past. Oh, the delicious irony…

Me? I'd planned to vote for Libertarian Jaimes Brown, but with the race this tight, I've changed my mind. I'm going to support Tancredo. I know him somewhat — he used to speak at Denver LP meetings back when I was active in the party, and we bumped into each other at other liberty-related activities from time to time. I think he's sincere, principled, articulate, and funny. Not at all the angry right-wing ogre some people paint him as. And he definitely has a libertarian streak.

I'm inclined to agree with Rossputin, who explained why he, who wouldn't support McCain, is supporting Tancredo:

First, I believe Tancredo is much more principled than John McCain. I believe he’s a real conservative and, more importantly for me, I believe he has a libertarian streak in there somewhere.  While I’ve said repeatedly that I have a big problem with Tanc’s views on immigration, especially legal immigration, I’m hard pressed to find validity in the argument of some that I should not vote for Tancredo for an office which will have precisely zero impact on legal immigration policy, but which has huge impact on how the state of Colorado will spend its money and tax its citizens.

Second, I was OK not supporting McCain and knowing that was effectively a vote for Obama because my belief was that people need to learn what “Progressivism” really is, who “Progressives” really are – namely dictatorial haters of liberty who think that everyone but them is stupid – in order to finally rebel against it.  It was the “boiling the frog” story; McCain and Obama would both keep us on the path to big government, it’s just that Obama would drive the road so fast that it would scare the passengers whereas McCain would make our ride to our own economic death much more pleasant for the average American and therefore much more likely to be completed.

But Americans have learned that lesson (at least for a little while) and I don’t need a leftist Governor of Colorado to add an extra helping of watermelon (green on the outside, red on the inside) to the shit sandwich that is our federal government.  There is no important additional valuable lesson to be learned by electing Hickenlooper.  There is only pain and damage for the state.

Tancredo for Governor. Let's make history! 

Subscribe To Site:

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

Help the South Dakota medical marijuana initiative

Posted by Richard on October 21, 2010

Some really fine people in South Dakota are working hard to pass Measure 13, an initiative to allow qualifying patients access to medical marijuana. It's a pretty restrictive and highly regulated access — the most restrictive medical marijuana law in the country — but it's a start, and better than nothing.

The South Dakota Coalition for Compassion is waging this battle on a shoestring, and they could use some help. Even a small donation will be greatly appreciated, put to good use, and potentially make a big difference. Can you spare a few bucks? Please join me in supporting the South Dakota Coalition for Compassion.

Note: After completing your donation, you'll be taken to a 404 error page instead of a receipt. Don't worry, an email receipt is sent almost instantly.  

Subscribe To Site:

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

Free markets save miners, command economies kill them

Posted by Richard on October 20, 2010

Frank Warner:

A few pseudo-liberals tried to blame capitalism for the Chile mine cave-in, which trapped 33 men for two months before they were rescued. But if by “capitalism” the critics meant a free market with the reasonable regulations of a democracy, they were dead wrong.

The worst mine disasters have been in command-economy dictatorships, China being the most obvious example. (And by the way, if by “capitalism” you mean industrial monopolies without serious safety regulation, you are talking about China, Cuba and the other Communist-brand economies.)

On Saturday, Oct. 16, three days after the 33 Chileans were brought back safe and sound, a Chinese coal mine explosion killed 37 miners. Two years earlier, 23 Chinese were killed in the same mine. This is normal in China, where the coal mine fatality rate, per 1 million tons mined, is 37 times the U.S. miner death rate.

Protective freedom. As the Chinese dictatorship has loosened Communist control over the economy over the last two decades, mine safety has improved. And when China is free politically, safety is likely to improve a whole lot more. Never underestimate the protective, creative and healing power of liberty.

(HT: Instapundit)

Subscribe To Site:

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

Craig Ferguson on anti-depressants

Posted by Richard on October 20, 2010

From America's second-best Scottish import, after 18-year-old Caol Ila:

I don't want to be cheered up by chemicals. I want to be cheered up the old-fashioned way — by other people's misfortunes. And… and… by the music of Bobby McFerrin.

Subscribe To Site:

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

GOP’s beltway buffoons prepare to piss away victory

Posted by Richard on October 19, 2010

I've commented before that, on the eve of an anti-Democrat tsunami, the stupid leadership of the Stupid Party might just try to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Should victory come anyway, and the American people give the GOP another chance, they might just try to screw it up again. They're already signaling their willingness to do so

If they recapture the House, Republicans say they are wary of following the example of the class of 1994, which shut down the government in a standoff with President Bill Clinton. Top Republicans contend that passing legislation, or at least making a good faith effort to do so, will earn them more credibility with voters than refusing to waver from purist principles.

Three points: (1) This isn't 1994. (2) Shutting down the government wasn't the class of 1994's big mistake — failing to effectively communicate their reasons, values, and goals (and then abandoning them) was. (3) The last thing the fired-up electorate that's poised to hand them power is interested in is passing legislation — especially the kind of bipartisan BS these clowns seem to have in mind.

"It's pretty clear the American people expect us to use the existing gridlock to create compromise and advance their agenda," said Rep. Darrell Issa (R., Calif.). "They want us to come together [with the administration] after we agree to disagree."

That's got to be one of the stupidest and most incoherent quotes ever uttered. And it makes it crystal clear that Issa and those like him have no understanding of the American people, have nothing in common with the American people, and must hold the American people in contempt.

As Angelo M. Codevilla noted in his critically important American Spectator article, inside the beltway there is little difference between the leaders of the two parties. Both are part of the ruling class and very different from what Codevilla called the "country class." (If you haven't read that article, I strongly urge you to do so.)

The stupid leadership of the Stupid Party is as contemptuous of and hostile to the grass-roots Tea Party movement as their friends in Evil Party are. The establishment GOP leadership may accept Tea Party votes (except when they're cast against the Murkowskis of the party), but they're not about to let unenlightened yahoos from the hinterlands actually control the reins of power or change The Way Things Work in Washington. 

After the election, if it goes as predicted, there's going to be an even bigger battle — a battle for the soul of the Republican Party. The outcome will depend on how many "upstarts" — principled people committed to the values that the stupid leadership merely mouths insincerely — we send to Washington.

The outcome of that battle will also determine whether the Republican Party survives as a major party. Because the "country class" has awakened. And the Tea Party movement isn't going away.  

UPDATE: Read this uncharacteristically long Instapundit post. And note especially this quote from reader Cam Edwards: 

All this talk of third parties has me wondering: why wouldn’t it be easier for Tea Partiers to take over the local party apparatus of the GOP (and to a lesser extent, the Dems as well) instead of creating a third party from scratch? If the same Tea Partiers that have been attending rallies, town hall meetings, candidate forums, etc. turned that same energy post-election to both taking over parties at the local level, as well as running candidates for things like city council, school board, county commission (the offices that won’t make you famous, but can make you effective)… I think it could be shocking how much the political landscape could change by 2012. 

Sounds like a plan to me.

Subscribe To Site:

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