Chris Christie won in New Jersey; Ken Cuccinelli lost in Virginia. Whatever can we make of that?
I was in a wonderfully interesting meeting yesterday with a man named Brian Loughnane who is the Federal Director of the Liberal Party of Australia. Under the odd-to-our-ears naming conventions, the Liberal Party of Australia is the center-right party and currently controls the government under Prime Minister Tony Abbott.
In the course of our conversation at the International Republican Institute offices in downtown DC, we got into a discussion of Tuesday’s election results. I said I could describe the results in two words: Candidates matter. Continue reading →
I awoke this morning to learn from the TV news that there are gigantic sun flares on the sun, among the largest ever recorded.
Then I turned to the Washington Post editorial page. The lead editorial was a scathing condemnation of the IRS for its treatment of conservative political groups. But it was the op-ed page that really surprised me.
The left-hand column, written by Charles Lane, criticized an energy scheme by Rep. Ed Markey, Massachusetts arch-liberal (or do I repeat myself?). In the middle of the page were two columns, one by George Will, the other by Michael Gerson. Each, in its own way, condemned the administration for the IRS scandal and President Obama for his recent (and all too typical) speech at Ohio State University in which he sneered at conservatives who “warn that [government] tyranny is just around the corner”. Continue reading →
Reading the New York Times on Sunday always reminds me what a technical and professional wonder that newspaper is. For breadth and depth of coverage, good writing, and cultural news, it has few if any real challengers. But it is so afflicted with obvious left/liberal bias in its news coverage (or, often, lack of coverage), and especially in its doctrinaire editorials, it has become a tragic case of ideological rigidity.
It is as if someone created an automobile that was a miracle of design, performance, and style, with one fatal flaw–it could only turn left.
But how can this be? How can highly educated, articulate, bright, professionally competent, ambitious people who run and staff the Times not realize the blatant prejudice that so often distorts news coverage in what they print and what they fail to print? These are people who worship at the shrine of reason and science, proclaim their own fairness, and believe, as most left/liberals do, that they are simply smarter than everyone else, especially conservatives. Continue reading →
The first presidential debate Wednesday, Oct. 3 confounded the narrative of the mainstream media that Mitt Romney was a dead man walking and that President Obama was on his way to a significant victory. It rendered that view obsolete, at best.
Never mind that the most recent surveys already had indicated the race had tightened back to something pretty close to a dead heat. In the world where the media and the liberal chattering class reside, only a nitwit could pretend that Mitt Romney stood a chance to prevail. Continue reading →
The media coverage of the 2012 political campaigns continues to flood the airwaves, like the Mississippi River in Spring time with inaccuracies, hyperbole, exaggerations, innuendo, and outright falsehoods.
It is too bad the media doesn’t have a Fact-Check.com that does such an excellent job correcting the same drivel from the campaigns and the candidates. Keeping the media honest is more than Reliable Sources host Howard Kurtz can handle. There’s too much to cover.
Just this week for example, there was the saga of Hillary B. Rosen, the liberal Democratic strategist and mouthpiece, who criticized Mrs. Romney for being a stay-at-home mom and condemned Mitt Romney for inequality toward women. Here is what she has been quoted as saying: “His (Romney’s) wife has actually never worked a day in her life. She’s never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing in terms of how do we feed our kids, how do we send them to school, and why we worry about their future.” Continue reading →
For the past few years, fear of China’s predatory mercantilism has been steadily growing in America, both amongst the public and in elite business and political circles. But last week, for the first time, one could discern the genuine possibility that America might actually do something about it — even if it means a trade war.
It’s not that anything new has been revealed about China’s practices, but rather that something new has emerged about the nature of Washington’s opposition to it. Last week, the Senate passed a bill that would force U.S. retaliation against China’s currency manipulations. The bill passed with 63 votes — including 16 Republican votes.
There is nothing new about most Democrats supporting what some might consider “protectionist” legislation. But 16 Republican Senate votes are new and revealing. There was no ideological or regional pattern to them. They included Ohio’s Rob Portman, a solid senior member of the Republican free-trade establishment who served as President George W. Bush’s trade representative and director of the Office of Management and Budget; Maine’s liberals Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins; conservative southerners such as Jeff Sessions and Lindsey Graham; and the Rocky Mountain’s conservative Mike Crapo. Continue reading →
President Obama’s post-Labor Day “jobs” speech will be his last chance to launch an economic policy with any chance of manifesting its effect – both economic and political – before the November 2012 elections. He has three options. In order of descending likelihood, they are: a timid hodgepodge of previous proposals, a bold left-of-center initiative or a turn to a free-market “nuclear option.” Continue reading →