On Super Bowl Sunday, America was treated to the most expensive political commercial in history—brought to you by Chrysler—called “It's Halftime in America.” In a series of vapid non sequiturs, Clint Eastwood's gravelly voice pinned the promise of a city—no, a nation—to government dependency, claiming that “the people of Detroit” lost almost everything but because “we” pulled together and the “Motor City is fighting again”—punching, roaring, imbued with American grit—we survived. Or, some might argue, after screwing stakeholders, discarding legal contracts, rewarding failed business models (while punishing those who employ better ones) and sticking taxpayers with the unions' fat pension tab, America got a heaping spoonful of the Obama administration's economic policy. Either way, it's odd that we didn't hear much griping about “corporatism,” oligarchies and Citizens United, though a corporate-sponsored campaign spot laid out the president's re-election narrative rather nicely. Now, I have no beef with Chrysler's running a campaign ad, but the thing is that if Obama had his way, Republicans would have a good case for banning this kind of politicking. You know, for the good of democracy. You may remember that the Supreme Court's Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision centered around the ability of a corporation to air a documentary critical of then-candidate Hillary Clinton. In her first case as solicitor general for the Obama administration, in fact, current Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan went so far as to argue that the federal government should be empowered to ban books if Washington deems that they amount to “political electioneering.” Let's just say the spirit of Voltaire is not exactly soaring in Washington these days. You may also remember that when Ford ran a TV ad praising its innovative strategy of competing without taxpayer charity (a bit of a myth itself), the White House was reportedly incensed, viewing Ford's defense of free enterprise as an attack on the president. Needless to say, upsetting this administration is bad for business, and Ford pulled the ad. What about commercials? What about commercials produced by companies that benefited (in this case, a Bush bailout supported by Obama) from policies supported by this administration? What about “It's Halftime in America”? Well, cheers all around! White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer tweeted, “Saving the (American) Auto Industry: Something Eminem and Clint Eastwood can agree on.” (Eminem apparently read a script that was written by the same people who wrote the script that Eastwood read.) Obama's campaign architect, David Axelrod, tweeted: “Powerful spot. Did Clint shoot that, or just narrate it?” Hmm. Not sure. David—if I may—maybe you could ask Clint or the agency that created the commercial, Wieden+Kennedy, because it is reportedly staffed by folks who have worked on Obama campaigns and Democratic causes for years. As for those super PACs—the main boogeyman of Citizens United— The Washington Examiner reminded me, the president once asked voters to “challenge every elected official who benefits from these ads to defend this practice or join us (in) stopping it.” Join us? Let's start with Obama, who is going to have to challenge himself, as this week, his campaign asked top fundraisers to support his own super political action committee. Admittedly, brutes like me live under a preposterously antiquated notion. We believe that citizens should be free to support any candidate with as much money as they'd like—anonymously, if they desire. But if super PACs and corporate-sponsored politicking are really jeopardizing the very fabric of American life—Obama once claimed they were a “threat to democracy”—why would the president partake in this orgy of gruesome selfishness? It was reported that Obama had one of his internal “evolving conversations” on the issue, conversations that always seem to evolve into Obama's rationalizing whatever is best for Obama. Conversations that are educational. Because the next time the administration claims that more speech is threatening democracy—corporate speech, super PACs, Citizens United—what it really will mean is that more speech is threatening its second term. David Harsanyi is a columnist at The Blaze. Follow him on Twitter @davidharsanyi. COPYRIGHT 2012 CREATORS.COM Read more here: Obama’s Halftime Hypocrisy
Originally posted here:
Obama’s Halftime Hypocrisy
The STOCK Act – which is short for the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act; honestly, I wish that they’d stop coming up with cute names for these. This particular one is not really obnoxious, but some of them have really reached for the acronym – started to get really pushed through last year, once it came out that Members of Congress, including then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, were profiting unduly from legal insider trading* . I call it ‘legal’ not in the sense that there was nothing wrong with said insider trading; I call it ‘legal’ because Congress exempted itself from the rules that the rest of us have to follow. The distinction is important. It’s perfectly legal for, say, Senator Dianne Feinstein to buy into a biostock company just before the company picks up a fat government subsidy check, even if she knew about it ahead of time. That’s the problem . Anyway, one of the more egregious things being done – again, involving then-Speaker Pelosi in at least one case – was the practice of offering Members of Congress a favorable position from which to buy into an IPO. Pelosi in particular used this practice to buy into a Visa IPO , right before credit card legislation that hampered Visa g ot somehow sidetracked in Congress for a year ; she ended up making a killing on the (again, ‘LEGAL’) deal. And, naturally, the amendment that would ban this practice in the future has been named the ‘Pelosi Provision’ by Republicans. By all accounts, the former Speaker is unhappy about this; I am uncertain whether or not that she is as unhappy about this as I am that the woman made several million unfortunately-legal dollars off of her former position to manipulate and delay legislation, but I somehow doubt it. The bill is largely expected to pass, by the way: the real fireworks will be in conference. If the thing gets defanged, it will be there – so keep an eye out for that particular problem. It wouldn’t be the first time that a troublesomely reformist piece of legislation got revised out of existence, while out of camera range… Moe Lane ( crosspost ) PS: Politico reports that the STOCK Act’s original sponsors Louise Slaughter and Tim Walz are unhappy that the Republican majority has taken away their bill and are now busily reshaping it. Alas for Rep. Slaughter, it’s not exactly Eric Cantor’s fault that she was incapable of getting it passed in the first place…
Go here to see the original:
Proposed ‘Pelosi Provision’ of the STOCK Act unveiled yesterday.
I’m traveling today, so this will be a ‘light’ edition. Today is February 8th. On this date in 1936, the first NFL draft was held. The first player drafted was Jay Berwanger, to the Eagles. Berwanger is also the first winner of the Downtown Athletic Club Trophy the year before, an award known today as the Heisman Trophy. Berwanger, a halfback, is also known for his tackling future President Gerald Ford in 1934, leaving a scar beneath Ford’s left eye. The moral of the story is, if you scar Gerald Ford, they give you a trophy, and then a job. Government Can’t Make Us Happy | John Stossel “Unfortunately, somewhere along the way, the right to pursue happiness has been perverted into a government-backed entitlement to happiness.” Who is hurt most by rising energy costs? | Hot Air “According to a new study, the hardest hit are precisely who you would expect. The poor and the elderly are having the biggest bite taken out of their checkbooks.” Sue Myrick 15th House Republican member to retire | Human Events “The decision of Myrick—a former Charlotte mayor who first came to Congress in the “Gingrich Class” of 1994—was somewhat of a surprise, in that she represents a district that has been in Republican hands without interruption since 1952 and continued re-election for her, as one local wag put it, ‘was the nearest thing to eternal life on earth.’” Today’s Word of the Day comes from Dictionary.com . piacular (pahy-AK-yuh-ler): adjective 1. Expiatory; atoning; reparatory. 2. Requiring expiation; sinful or wicked
See the article here:
Daily Links – February 8, 2012
Allllllllllllllll we are sayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyying….is give peace a chance!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! First, there is no need for an apology from Quin Hillyer to Jeff Lord. None. Conservatives are the ones who make a big deal about “character.” My friend Quin has it, has always had it, and I know it. (He can occasionally be a character too, but that’s another issue altogether!) But I confess I was baffled at first when seeing his missive, and after hearing from a number of people, more irritated than mad. I was inclined to just not respond, then, grudgingly I confess, I decided it had to be done. As someone who is always advising friends in the public eye on the importance, in the age of the eternal Internet, to respond to unfair accusations because the original charge can and will sit in cyberspace unanswered for eternity as we know it, I felt I should take my own advice. It’s my job — Quin’s job — to observe, investigate, report, opine. This is the very heart of the existence of The American Spectator , Bob Tyrrell’s great creation that will be celebrating its fiftieth anniversary a mere five years distant in 2017. What Quin and I are here to do, and in fact what the entire conservative movement is about — is to provide sharp, insightful, hopefully always clear conservative thought on the issues of the day. In the doing of this there is bound to be disagreement sharply expressed. Is Newt a conservative? I say yes, Quin says no. Bob Tyrrell himself is no Newt fan and has, in his typical and now famous style, said so. Is Christine O’Donnell the right choice in Delaware? I said yes, Quin passed out. I’m a fan of Rush, Sean and Mark and the work they do every day. I’m not a fan of Ron Paul on foreign policy. Hundreds and hundreds of Dr. Paul’s legions regularly disagree and tell me what an idiot I am. All of this is to the good. In other words, disagreement between and among conservatives is the coin of the realm here. While it understandably can get lost in dust-ups like the one Quin and I had, in fact it is a sign of intellectual vitality. If everyone agreed we could all sit at home eating, drinking and making merry knowing our only job is to pull the lever for Obama in November. Fat chance! This, to me at least, is an important thing to understand. In his wonderful Reagan book The Age of Reagan 1980-1989 , Steven F. Hayward writes this: In a manner that eludes many historians, political scientists, and reporters, the most successful presidencies tend to be those that have factional disagreements within their inner councils, whereas sycophantic administrations tend to get in the most trouble. Fractiousness in an administration is a sign of health: the Jefferson-Hamilton feud in Washington’s administration, the rivalry within Lincoln’s cabinet, and the odd combination of fervent New Dealers and conventional Democrats in FDR’s White House provided a dynamic tension that contributed to successful governance. Though the partisans of the distinct camps in the Reagan White House would be loath to admit it, their feuding probably contributed to better policy in many cases. An attempted Reaganite purge, of either the party or his own staff, might well have backfired and snuffed out the spontaneous slow-motion revolution within the party that was already under way, and which gained new momentum in the 1990′s under the spur of figures such as Newt Gingrich. Steve Hayward, I believe, has it right. And I for one believe this thought applies not just to presidencies but conservative magazines
Rick Santorum has won Colorado in addition to Missouri and Minnesota. Ron Paul finished second in Minnesota, ahead of both Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. Gingrich is only a point ahead of Paul for third place in Colorado. In terms of the delegate count, this means virtually nothing. No delegates are directly awarded tonight and Missouri’s primary is purely a beauty contest. But this is a huge embarrassment for Romney. It also raises the question of how long Gingrich can keep going as the chief anti-Romney. People who were avoiding a vote for Santorum because he wasn’t as viable as the former House speaker may rethink things going forward. No candidate will drop out after tonight. A brokered convention? I still doubt it. But we still have four active candidates for the Republican nomination who don’t seem to be going anywhere.
Continued here:
Rick Santorum Pulls the Trifecta
