Archive for August 10, 2010

You choose to enter a military academy knowing what the rule was and now you’ve decided that you are going out, or should I say coming out in style.

While at the academy, I have made a deliberate effort to develop myself academically, physically, and militarily, but in terms of holistic personal growth I have reached a plateau. I am unwilling to suppress an entire portion of my identity any longer because it has taken a significant personal, mental, and social toll on me and detrimentally affected my professional development.

Was Yale not good enough for you before or did you need a cause celeb to make sure you got in young lady?

If you wanted to serve the public could you not have entered a police academy after college? #9 in your class makes it even worse, it means that you should have known better.

As I’ve said before I’m for whatever makes the military stronger so on the underlying issue I don’t really care one way or the other as long as you can show that one way or the other is a net gain for the service, but this issue has been in play your entire life don’t start whining that you don’t want to play by the rules.

Go to Yale, I’m sure you’ll do well. Have a great life, but don’t go crying to the world because the military continues to follow the orders given by a democratic president and passed by a democratic congress and still maintained by another democratic congress. A military particularly one subordinate to civilian control, follows orders If you can’t follow lawful orders then do something else.

Then again I might be a little hard on you, you’re just a kid and was likely very full of yourself. If you thought you could hack it but can’t, hey it happens. I’ll pray for you and encourage others to do the same.

Memeorandum thread here.

There have been quite a few stories about faux tea party candidates being financed by Democrats to try to hurt Republican vote this fall:

Tea Party activists in New Jersey, Michigan, California, Florida and other states are suddenly seeing registered “Tea Party” independent candidates appear on the ballot and they don’t know these candidates. As they dig into the information available on public records (donations, nominating signatures, etc.) they are finding Democrat ties to these fake Tea Party candidates. Aside from challenges over just who can use the label Tea Party on the ballot, there appears little that can be done legally to stop these fake candidates.

Hearing about these things it brought to mind page 107 of Tip O’Neill’s autobiography and the story of his first race for congress:

Given the way politics worked in those days, I guess it was inevitable that the race soon developed into an ethnic battle between the Italians and the Irish. The district was approximately 40 % Irish and 35% Italian, with the rest made up of many different groups

So what do you do when the chips are down. Well in 1952 this is what you did:

Leo Diehl, my lifelong friend from the state house , took an active role in the campaign, and to help divide the Italian vote he brought in a candidate named Chris Carolina, who ran as a favor to us. LoPresti’s people had already pulled the same stunt on me with a fellow named Casey.

But Casey wasn’t Tip’s biggest problem, it was another unknown with an interesting name:

“See that fellow over there?” He (Paul Feeney) said, pointing to a stranger on the other side of Beacon Street. “Believe it or not, his name is John F. Kennedy, and he’s one of the guys running against you . Nobody knows him, but with a name like that he could cause you a lot of problems. Let’s go over and say hello.”

Somehow Feeney managed to talk Kennedy into withdrawing then and there and even had a withdrawal slip handy for him to sign. Tip had this to say:

I realized later that if Paul Feeney hadn’t pushed John Kennedy to get out, I would have lost the election. By 1952 after Jack Kennedy had served three terms in the House, the Kennedy name was so strong in our district that John Kennedy–who was not, of course, a “real” Kennedy—would have siphoned off many of the votes.

Remember both Tip & LoPresti were democrats and just a few years ago the only reason why Democrats were not exposed for fixing a delegation election in 1948 O’Neill dropping his plans to go to the Ballot Law Commission after was Paul Dever warned him:

“The party is already in bad shape. If we show people we’re a bunch of thieves, it will destroy us. In the name of party unity, please drop this fight.”(p55)

So this is a bit of democratic history. Not illegal (like the stolen ’48 delegate election) but a tactic that has been in the playbook for years. There are two choices as to what to do. Dean Chambers has one:

What can and should be done in every instance of the fakers, is for the Real Tea Party groups to out them as the fakes they are and inform their supporters to NOT be fooled by the imposters. And in addition to and while doing that, they should educate the public on the trickery Democrats are willing to use to FOOL the public into electing their candidates again. It’s more than time for the public to learn their lesson. Knowing this, are you still going to vote for the Democrats again?

This is certainly an option, daylight is the best disinfectant and in an internet age it is not possible to hide such things, but said daylight will not stop such a candidate from getting votes that would go Republican.

The other option of course is the Turnabout is fair play game, we can help get signatures for Green party candidates to take votes away from democrats. They will scream bloody murder but when the screaming is done it will still mean votes that would go to democrats

All perfectly legal. Using the same tactics as your foes is very Jacksonian. If they want a dirty fight, lets give them one, dirty but legal.

Marika gives me her take on the conference right after Thomas Peters’ speech.

You can find her here.

Ezra looks at the trend lines on President Obama and thinks liberals are worrying needlessly:

But so far as the polls go, Obama is doing okay among the left. In fact, as the graph below shows (click on it for a larger version), his approval trends among Democrats, independents and the country mirror Ronald Reagan’s ratings among Republicans, independents and the country almost exactly.

Tell you what Ezra lets make a bet. I’m a little hard up but I’m confident enough to make this wager:

You say Obama’s poll lines mirror Reagan’s? Fine. I’ll pay you $500 for every state Regain lost (including DC) in 1984 that Obama wins in 2012. You pay me $500 for every state that Obama loses in 2012 that Reagan won in 1984.

Or if those odds are too long for your trend lines, How about I pay you $10 per electoral vote that Obama gets in 2012 over Reagan’s total in 1984 and you pay me $5 for every electoral vote under Reagan’s 1984 total Obama wins in 2012. I’m broke and unemployed but I don’t mind giving you odds.

How about it Ezra, wanna put your money where your graph is?

Update: If any of you other liberals want to put your money where your confidence is come pony up