Back in the mid-’90s, Lincoln was riding high. Ford’s primo brand was actually outselling GM’s Cadillac division, which at the time was purveyor of stolid starter caskets to the AARP crowd. It was Lincoln that birthed the idea of taking a big SUV from the lower-key Ford line, chroming everything that wasn’t plastic and then reselling it as a kind of 4×4 McMansion to go into the garages of actual McMansions. You know, the Navigator . On the strength of this monster hit, Lincoln became A Number One, the Duke of New York (and the rest of America, too). Then… nothing. Well, nothing but miscues and debacles like the Blackwood, Aviator, and Mark LT. And misfires like the coulda-been-a-contender LS sedan. That one was genuinely sad. Not because the car was a stinker, but because it wasn’t — and because of what it might have been. It was good-looking — and it was rear-wheel-drive, with a manual transmission available. Instead of developing it, Lincoln just dropped it. Lincoln built lemons — while Cadillac built a better Navigator out of the Chevy Tahoe — and then upped the ante by revamping its entire passenger car lineup to appeal to people who have not fallen and can’t get up. Now Cadillac is A Number One . But Lincoln is apparently not croaked yet. At the Detroit Auto Show, Ford CEO Alan Mulally announced a $1 billion commitment to Lincoln’s revival, and showed the press a new concept car that bears the “DNA” of seven soon-to-be-here Lincoln models, the first reportedly based on the show car and scheduled for production circa 2014. That’s good to hear — but unfortunately, the new car has an old name: MKZ. There is already an MKZ in Lincoln showrooms and the problem is it’s not leaving Lincoln showrooms. At least, nowhere near enough of them are leaving showrooms. In 2011, about 27,529 MKZs found buyers. Total Lincoln production for the year — that is, all of Lincoln’s current models combined — added up to just 85,643 units. It’s a small number in such a big market. Part of the reason why is the current MKZ is too obviously a Ford Fusion with a higher price tag. A much higher price tag: $34k to start vs. about $20k to start for the mere Ford. Just as the current MKS is a tarted-up Taurus. And the MKX is a not-well-disguised Ford Edge. Cadillac, meanwhile, went clean sheet and renamed its new models — none of which (other than the Escalade SUV) shared any “DNA” with mere Chevys. For whatever reason, the public accepts badge-engineered big SUVs like the Tahoe-Suburban based Escalade (and the Expedition-Navigator, which Lincoln of course still sells). But when it comes to cars , not so much. Cadillac tried badge-engineering at a distance by smuggling in a rebadged European GM (Opel), the Catera — calling it the “Caddy that zigs.” Except it didn’t sell . It was only when Cadillac brought out all-new (and Cadillac-exclusive) models like the CTS that the joint really began to jump. Can Lincoln turn things around? Time will tell, of course — but it’s not going to be easy or inexpensive. The lux market is even more competitive now than it was in the ’90s — when the big-name Japanese players were still second-tier players. The MKZ show car has presence. It looks the part. It reminds me of the last Lincoln car I had any interest in — the ’80s-era Mark VII. That car was a looker and a runner. And so, it sold. Then Lincoln screwed the pooch with the Mark VIII – a bathtub-looking oddity that never caught on and which ended up killing off what had been a very successful franchise. Arguably, Lincoln’s demise as a premium car brand can be traced back to the disastrous redesign of the Mark series — which ended with the cancellation of the slow-selling Mark VIII after a mediocre five-year run in 1998. Lincoln never recovered its mojo and other than the Navigator blip, it’s been a slow-slide into also-ran status for Ford’s once-proud luxury nameplate. So, here’s to hoping the 2014 MKS is more than a really nice next gen Fusion. And maybe change the name, too.
See the article here:
Lincoln’s Future… If There’s a Future
He is still the favorite to win. He is the incumbent President of the United States. He flies on a big blue airplane that gives him free media exposure whenever he lands. He gets to bring along politicians with whom he can curry favor. It is hard to pick off an incumbent President. But there are warning signs on the horizon for Mr. Obama. It is not just a sagging economy that may actually be on the way down, not up. Battleground state voters are leaving the Democratic Party. According to National Journal , “Over 825,000 registered Democrats in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina and Pennsylvania have departed the party rolls since President Obama’s election in 2008.” USA Today reports that Republicans have become resurgent in key swing states too. “Since the heady days of 2008, a new USA TODAY/Gallup Swing States Poll finds the number of voters who identify themselves as Democratic or Democratic-leaning in these key states has eroded, down by 4 percentage points, while the ranks of Republicans have climbed by 5 points.” Republican voters are also paying more attention and are more engaged. In key swing states, Obama trails both Romney and Gingrich. “But wait,” the television pitch man might say, “there’s more!” A Harvard University survey “of more than 2,000 young voters, age 18 to 29, finds their support for Obama, so crucial to his 2008 victory, has dwindled.” The kids still like their Obamessiah more than they generic Republican, but they think he is going to lose. An Associated Press-GfK poll “finds a majority of American adults (52%) say the Democrat should be defeated come Nov. 6, while only 43% say he deserves a second term.” And Obama’s divide and conquer strategy of pitting haves and have-nots against each other might not work. In addition to it running against the grain of the individualist DNA Americans have in them, a new Gallup poll suggests Obama’s class warfare strategy might actually backfire. It is always hard to beat an incumbent. But Barack Obama is making it easier than it has been since Carter was President.
Visit link:
Bad News for Barack Obama’s Re-Election
Naturally it appears at National Review Online in Jim Geraghty’s Campaign Spot titled “Newt Gingrich Said What ?” A sample In June 2005, the New York Times raved about a “balanced and thoughtful” report from a bipartisan task force headed by Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, and George Mitchell, the former Senate majority leader, declaring, “Lawmakers should take the time to at least thumb through this report, especially those who have been demanding Secretary General Kofi Annan’s resignation, supporting the ill-conceived nomination of John Bolton as the United States ambassador to the United Nations and backing the latest benighted attempt to withhold America’s legally obligated dues.” In October 2005, Gingrich called for “universal but confidential” DNA testing. In April 2006, Gingrich appeared to suggest that too many U.S. troops were in Iraq. I’m sure there is an army of gnomes out there, this very instant, researching every exotic statement Gingrich has uttered in his career. This will be a full employment plan not only for those gnomes but their children because every time Gingrich has had a thought he has told a newspaper somewhere about it. In the long run, I think this exercise is a wash because anyone who supports Gingrich has already factored in his stream of consciousness style.
View original post here:
Latest Gingrich Oppo Dump
[Guest post by Aaron Worthing. Follow me on Twitter @AaronWorthing.] That is pretty much what Karen Finney and Touré are claiming now. On one hand, we have Finney who was last seen claiming that conservatives like Cain because he is a black man who knows his place, apparently being completely unaware of what racists have traditionally considered to be the proper station of black people (hint: it’s not as head of a major restaurant chain or the United States of America). Meanwhile we last saw Touré comparing Cain to a minstrel (yike!). And when you bring two minds of that caliber together, this is the brilliance that results: “It’s going to be fascinating to see how this story unfolds over the next several days and particularly interesting to see how our friends on the right handle the accusations from these women in conjunction with how they handled Anita Hill.” “What do you mean, Karen?” Bashir pressed. “Look, I think it will be interesting to see if these guys rally around Herman Cain with as much voracity as they have these last couple of weeks now that it’s clear that a whole other layer of black sexuality has been infused into this,” Finney explained. “Also remember these women were ten years younger than we’re seeing them now. So that whole power dynamic. This is an older man, this younger women. White women, Black man.” “It’s very jarring for the GOP, for anybody, I think, to see a black man be sexually aggressive in an unwanted way toward a blonde, white — especially a blonde, white woman,” added Touré. “One thing you have to keep in mind here is that this is not a real campaign. He is not really competing for the presidency! He’s competing for branding, television jobs, speaking jobs, book jobs. Just stay on the stage as long as possible, doesn’t matter how many arrows are in you, just stay on the stage, that’s all that matters for him.” “We need to deal with these issues about sexual harassment and how women are treated in the workplace, it is still a problem. I hope we use this as a teachable moment,” Finney opined. “There are racial issues. Not everybody is going to have the same reaction to this. I hope we will have the same reaction no matter what the race is because it’s horrible when it happens no matteer what, but it will change the dynamic we are seeing now.” I think that comment about it being “jarring” to “anyone,” meanwhile, is more revealing than Mr. Touré meant it to be. That is what this is: projection. He has hang ups about race and is presuming that the republicans are much, much worse. Touré also shared this brilliant insight: We’re going to find out how open the GOP is to this black—their ‘new black friend’—when they find out he is harassing blonde women as opposed to black women. That sort of thing of black sexuality—predatory black sexuality. Very frightening in this country, still. Very threatening. So we will see how this plays out. You can watch that stupidity, here. All of this is just insane in its strangeness. Remember all those years ago when we impeached Bill Clinton? Liberals always claimed that sexual morality was what was really behind the impeachment, and what a president does with the Dallas Cowgirls* was really none of our business, a matter of privacy if you will. And while Conservatives condemned the sexual morality involved, we maintained it was perjury that merited impeachment. And let’s not forget that part of the accusations of sexual immorality included sexual harassment (later he was accused of outright rape, but if memory serves those allegations came out after the impeachment trial was over). So according to the liberal narrative, we impeached Bill Clinton because of conduct similar to what Cain is accused of engaging in, but we would be racists if we don’t support Cain. The spin cycle is making me dizzy. (Of course that wouldn’t be the first time liberals have seen us treat a black man similarly to Bill Clinton and still called us racists. Previously it was the claim that we in the Tea Party opposed Obamacare because Obama was black, forgetting that Bill Clinton proposed a similar measure and we not only opposed it, but successfully defeated it in the Congress, too.) Look, here’s the reality of it all. What Ms. Bialek has accused him of—the only woman so far to make an accusation with enough facts to allow us to make a judgment—is wrong. It is sexual immorality, it is sexual harassment, it is abuse of power, and it is indeed solicitation of prostitution (in most states), if you believe her. And that’s the rub. As time goes on, we might hear from other women who have similar stories and conclude that Ms. Bialek must be telling the truth. Or this could be fame whore Gloria Allred up to her usual tricks. Certainly the moment I found out that Allred was involved, I decided that if this fourth accuser is telling the truth, it is only a coincidence. And that is what makes the difference in these things. Take Clarence Thomas. I am of the position that if I believed Anita Hill, he shouldn’t have been a Supreme Court Justice. But I didn’t believe her. Besides just my subjective judgment of her credibility, the stories struck me as too over the top and too neatly fitting certain stereotypes about black men. They sounded like the sort of thing Hill would think we would believe about a black man, rather than having the ring of truth. On the other hand, when Clinton was accused of sexual immorality we held it against him (although we didn’t impeach him for it), because there was no question on the matter. He admitted to what he did with Lewinsky, after all (and after he learned she kept the dress and the DNA). Do I believe this new accuser against Cain? No, and mainly because of the taint of Allred. And she is only one person, making it a he said/she said situation. She’s like a broken clock: she is right only by coincidence. But you might believe Ms. Bialek, or we might both decide to believe her as new accusers come forward. To assert that racism has anything to do with that process, has no factual support and thus tells us more about what they imagine the GOP is like, or what they think the people will believe about the GOP. But I worry that this is the beginning of a new narrative. If Herman Cain falls because of this, the left will cite this as proof that the GOP is racist, rather than noticing they were quite consistent on the subject of sexual morality/sexual harassment. ————————- Side note: By Finnney and Touré’s logic doesn’t this prove liberals are being racists, here? I mean look at the pattern. They opposed Thomas and he’s black. They supported Clinton and he’s white. And now they oppose Cain and what do you know, he’s black too. And let’s face it, the evidence against him is a tad weaker than the infamous blue dress. And do you suppose Ted Kennedy ever sexually harassed a woman? All of which is obviously ridiculous. There are obvious non-racial reasons for a liberal to oppose Thomas and Cain and support Clinton. Is it too much to ask liberals, however, to notice similar reasons when conservatives have them as their defense? ————————- * Please note that the joke about the cheerleading squad was wholly a joke. Clinton slept with a lot of women, but I don’t recall him being even accused of what I wrote. I don’t want to impugn the reputations of those women, if only because I don’t want to be beaten to death with pom-poms. [Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]
Read the original post:
New Liberal Blood Libel: If You Conservatives Don’t Support Cain Now, You’re Racists!
Michelle Malkin has this report out today about her missing cousin, Marizela Perez. This case remains heart-breaking in the extreme. It also remains infuriating, because the Seattle police seem on many occasions to suffer from don’t-give-a-damn-itis. Those who have read Malkin’s reports for the past seven months will understand her frustrations. Here’s the latest: The Lewis County Sheriff’s Office and the King County Medical Examiner’s office, by contrast, were amazingly responsive and helpful. I found out they have tried for weeks to obtain Marizela’s dental records and DNA from the Seattle Police. But for some inexplicable reason, the police have yet to provide them or the Washington State Patrol with the information. Marizela’s parents provided her dental records and their DNA samples to the Seattle police five months ago . Washington state law – RCW 68.50.320 – requires the missing person’s case detective to obtain this crucial information “within thirty days” of the person going missing and to input the data with the Washington State Patrol “as soon as possible.” … On Friday, after we proactively contacted King County and Lewis County authorities, Marizela’s dad Edgar immediately provided a summary letter from Marizela’s dentist to the medical examiner. The actual radiographs, however, are in the Seattle police department’s possession. Without them, there can be no definitive word on a match or no-match with the Morton, WA remains. What is wrong with these people? Why are they so unhelpful? I can’t imagine a police department being this negligent — especially one in a city that impressed me greatly both times I visited there. Readers in the Seattle area, please put some pressure on for these police to do their jobs!
Read more:
Shameful Lassitude re Malkin’s Cousin, Marizela
