Alan Grayson - Eat this!

If you follow politics (if you're reading this, you do), you know Florida Congressman Alan Grayson is as despicable as they come.  He's kind of the white Cynthia McKinney.

Anyway, he ran a hit job on his opponent, Daniel Webster (give here), where he edited a speech Webster had given and called Webster an American Taliban (ok, he called him Taliban Dan).

Anyway, watch this video, where our friend Alan, gets a little of the same treatment.  I wish it was on more than You Tube:

People do the craziest things...

One of my siblings owns a handful of vacation rentals in the NC mountains.  She recently sent me a request she received from a potential customer.  Somehow, I don't think this brain surgeon is going to be renting one of her places, but you have to give her points for chutzpah:

"We really do not need three bedrooms as my husband and I are bringing my parents for a vacation. The third bedroom and bathroom can be locked. What would your rate be?"

College Football 2010

(Update: Corrected SEC west to East for Tech/Clemson below.)

I realize it's three weeks into the 2010 college football season, so I am joining this party late, but, given that so many of my loyal readers attended or have strong ties to the University of Cheating (oops, I mean North Carolina), I wanted to get this week behind me before I decided to say anything about the CFB season.

With Georgia Tech's 30-24 dispatching of UNC yesterday (in Chapel Hill, with 12 cheaters still ineligible for UNC), Tech finally played a decent game, running up about 450 yards in offense and holding UNC to 1 TD in the second half. This makes Tech 2-1 with the embarrassing loss to Kansas (who has lost to North Dakota state and Southern Miss) standing out.

Carolina, of course, hamstrung by their NCAA restrictions, is 0-2.  They still might be, at full strength, the best team in the Coastal Division.  We'll see.

Out of conference, the ACC continues to embarrass.  Clemson played a great first half against Auburn, then sucked in the second half when Kyle Parker got hurt and their Freshman kicker missed a FG in overtime to give Auburn the come-from-behind victory.

Wake Forest got their butts handed to them by Stanford, and Maryland looked like an FCS opponent against West Virginia, and Duke against Alabama...well, it's Duke.  Only NC State shellacking a reeling Cincinnati team, FSU's rout of a rotten BYU, and Virginia Tech taking out its revenge against EZU redeemed the ACC this weekend.

Against significant competition, the ACC is 5-10 this season (5-11 if you count VT vs. James Madison).  Not good for a conference who wants to remain in the BCS.

My solution to this is for the ACC to abandon football and turn its teams loose.

I propose that Clemson, Georgia Tech and FSU join the SEC, along with one of Texas, TCU or Oklahoma.  Tech and Clemson join the SEC East and send FSU and one of those other teams to the SEC West, which really needs some competition.

Maybe the ACC needs to give it up altogether, or combine with the Big East and become a mid-major football conference and a killer basketball conference.  Everyone knows that the Big Ten wants Maryland and Maryland wants to be in the Big Ten.  Would the Big 10 also take BC?  That would leave the Tobacco road schools - VT, Virginia, the Big Four and Miami.  Would that make a massively unwieldy Big East?  Probably.

Just something has to be done about the pathetic state of ACC football..

Krauthammer busts on Angle/O'Donnell. Get with the program, Chuck!

From our good friend Gateway Pundit, comes this video of Charles Krauthammer attacking Christine O'Donnell and Sharron Angle.

Now, I happen to agree that Krauthammer is one of our great conservative minds, but, methinks he has demonstrated a tiny bit of elitism in some of his criticisms of first, the tea partiers themselves, and now of candidates, endorsed by tea party groups, who represent mainstream American values and conservative principles. Finally, in the clip, I would suggest he needs to not write off Angle/O'Donnell, but instead reiterate the anger that Americans feel that makes these compelling candidates.

Mr. Krauthammer - I respect you immensely, but, please, you need to realize the GOP's fate rest on these people taking control of a party that was moribund just 18 months ago.

Finally, I agree with Jim, "Would someone please tell these Beltway GOP elites to shut their yaps!

Delaware and the Left's Jihad against Conservative Women

Rush Limbaugh weighs in on the Republican establishment against Christine O'Donnell, Sharron Angle, and Sarah Palin in Republicans Are Blowing Their Best Chance to Beat Liberalism.

The gist of Rush's discussion today is that the GOP establishment wants establishment candidates, even where they are RINO's, because it's a status thing. I happen to think it's also because, in the case of O'Donnell and Angle, it's because more establishment-type candidates would have required less resources to win, but, that's the practical side of the thing.  Rush references this post by the Chicago Boyz which tries to explain the Left's paranoia over Sarah Palin.  I recommend their blog and Rush's analysis as well.

Regarding conservative vs. establishment (i.e. RINO) candidates, Rush says, "a Senate full of Mike Castles is not gonna get us anywhere. It's gonna get a bunch of Republicans their chairmanships on the committee but it's not going to do anything to reverse Obamaism."

Furthermore, Rush references one of my favorite blogs, Legal Insurrection, regarding conservative women and the Left's attacks on them specifically, Bill Jacobson says "The 'nuts and sluts' defense is a common employment law tactic whenever a female employee brings a claim. It doesn't matter what the claim is, the defense -- after the usual legal mumbo jumbo -- will be something like this: 'She's nuts. And by the way, pssst, she may be a slut.' That is the mode of attack Democrats use against conservative women.

As for me, my thought is that this year is going to be special and a wave election (I've said it before). Personally, I'd rather see a marginal candidate, but a real conservative (O'Donnell), get a shot, than a known RINO (Castle).  It's a tough call, and I can see how The Weekly Standard, the National Review, and the GOP establishment want to be pragmatic and take the RINO bird-in-hand and concentrate resources elsewhere.

But, if not this year, then when?  Some of the best replies and food for thought are on the Legal Insurrection post.  I recommend you read those in addition to Jacobson's excellent post.

Obama Admin Successes - Successful at ruining the economy

Hugh Hewitt provides analysis of the O Presidency in today's Washington Examiner. To wit:

• In November 2008, unemployment was 6.7 percent. In January 2009 it was 7.6 percent. That January, Christine Romer, along with Vice President Biden's top economist, Jared Bernstein, argued in a report that the economic stimulus package would keep unemployment under 8 percent.  Without the stimulus, Team Obama predicted employment would rise to about 9 percent in 2010. The "stimulus" passed, of course, unemployment is 9.6 percent.
• The country's debt at the end of 2008 was $5.8 trillion. It will be $9.8 trillion at the end of this year. The last annual deficit before the Democrats took over Congress in January 2007 was $160 billion.  As a percentage of the nation's GDP, the deficit in 2010 will be 10.64 percent. In 2008 it was 3.18 percent. [That's a 300% increase!]
• The November 2008 average price of a home in top 20 metropolitan markets in the United States, using the Case-Shiller index, was $154,500. The June 2010 average price for the same index -- the most recent data available and published in late August -- is $148,000. That number is widely believed to have been buoyed by the now-disappeared new home tax credit, and it is believed to again be falling. [So, despite the Dem's repeated attempts to do something, the expanded homeownership policies of the Left which forced banks to make bad loans, and allowed Fannie and Freddie to guarantee them, are still having an impact on the markets.  Worse still, Fannie and Freddie are practicing pretty much the same policies they practiced before the meltdown].
• The index of consumer confidence stands at 53.5 today. That number was 39 during the panic of October 2008. It dropped to 37 in January 2009. It hit 55.9 in January of this year -- before Obamacare passed and while hopes for the stimulus and the president's placebo economics persisted.
• On Thursday last week the Wall Street Journal reported that the federal centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services had recalculated their projections on health care costs in light of Obamacare. Prior to Obamacare's passage, the annual increase in total health spending in the country over the next decade was supposed to be 6.1 percent. After Obamacare, the centers now calculate that annual growth in spending at 6.3 percent. [bending the cost curve down?]
• On Wednesday, the Journal reported on a survey of major health insurance companies and found premium increases of between 1 percent and 9 percent for self-insured Americans and employees in small businesses in the next few months because of the mandate for new benefits under the law. [Did even Obama believe that adding requirements was going to decrease costs?]

Religion of Peace Strikes Again

What's more dangerous than being a Muslim in America where hate crimes and shrill voices make Muslims and the Left uncomfortable?

Try being a Coptic Christian in Egypt, where Muslims burn Christians to death, then murder their parents if they offend Muslims.

Jihad Watch has the details on a Coptic Christian who was burned to death after being accused of having a relationship with a Muslim woman, then his father was stabbed to death.

No details on the woman, but, the typical punishment for her would be death by stoning.

Religion of Peace, baby.

Charlie Cook and I agree. Dems to lose big in November.

Back on April 14th, I posted this.

Nice to see Charlie Cook coming around...

Senate, too?

Burning Koran's - Just say no.

A Florida church wants to protest the spread of radical Islam by burning the Koran on September 11th.

This is a bad idea and I'll tell you why.

1. Burning books is the act of despots and tyrants. Anyone who reads this blog knows how I feel about Islamists and the plans of the Muslim Brotherhood. But, unless we're in this for the total elimination of Islam, the burning of their Holy Book is simply a disgraceful and disrespectful act to those who practice Islam who might actually be worthy of cultivating in a reformation of the religion. On this, I agree with Hillary Clinton (gratuitous photo of "Never miss a meal" Hillary below):

2. Burning books is UnAmerican.

3. If the Florida church wanted to truly highlight some of the more egregious aspects of Islam, they would instead of burning the Koran, choose some of the more, er, interesting parts of it to read.  Well, check out a few of these.  Of particular interest to Jihadists are:

• "Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends." (Surah 5:51)
• "Fight against such as those to whom the Scriptures were given [Jews and Christians]...until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." (Surah 9:27-)
• "Say: 'Praise be to God who has never begotten a son; who has no partner in His Kingdom..." (Surah 17:111)
• "'How shall I bear a child,' she [Mary] answered, 'when I am a virgin...?' 'Such is the will of the Lord,' he replied. 'That is no difficult thing for Him...God forbid that He [God] Himself should beget a son!...Those who say: 'The Lord of Mercy has begotten a son,' preach a monstrous falsehood..." (Surah 19:12-, 29-, 88)
• "Slay them wherever you find them...Idolatry is worse than carnage...Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme." (Surah 2:190-)

So, don't burn those Koran's.  I think these people planning this should on September 11th instead say, "we were going to burn these, but we decided to read these passages instead."  Maybe with the press coverage they would get, some of this stuff would finally get reported outside the one's seeking it out.

Anger and Temper Tantrums - the left is having a hissy fit

I am making this a blog post on this subject, under the rubric of "Anger" based on a caller to Hannity's radio show yesterday.

The Left uses terms like "angry" and "temper tantrum" to describe the right's (and the electorate's) mood, because they have no explanation for it in their world.  In the Left's worldview, thier omniscience is perfect, and their policies absolutely correct, and if the hoi polloi were only intelligent enough, or less "angry" over something (in this particular case, that's usually the ascension of a black man to the presidential throne), they would just see all the great, well-meaning, and academically correct policies, procedures, and strategies that the Left is enacting.

You see, it's not the fundamental failure of their policies that has the electorate and the right frustrated, confused, and yes, righteously angry - in their minds, it can't be, because they are incapable of failure - it is our own anger and stupidity.

In that vein, it's not their fault that Obama sucks, it's ours.

---

Dear Jay,

I was reading Charles Krauthammer's column in the Post this morning when my eyes happened to shift to the column next to his, Eugene Robinson's. I cannot believe it but his entire column is about the voters having a temper tantrum this fall. Clearly Peter Jennings' statement that the 1994 election results were a voter temper tantrum made no impression on Eugene Robinson and other inside the beltway liberals. I'm pretty sure Rush et al will be talking about it today.

Well, it will be another decade before I bother looking at a Eugene Robinson column again.