Month: November 2008

When NRO’s fearless leader declares that his magazine was not a shill for Bush, he might want to inform some of his columnists on the cruise ship: 

I think almost everyone sensed there is something liberating about being in a position of opposition; you no longer have to hold your tongue or take it easy on a figure like Bush, McCain, or congressional leaders because they’re “your guys.” On every bill, issue, and event that comes down the pike, you can call them as you see them. Third, echoing the earlier point a bit, conservatives have been spared the inevitable pain of living with the bad decisions of a President McCain. No more holding of the nose, no more looking the other way, no more   averting one’s eyes from the embarrassing out of party or ideological loyalty.

My italics. So National Review spent the last eight years holding their tongue, taking it easy on Bush, averting their eyes from failures, and deliberately backing power over truth. And they wonder why American conservatism has collapsed. How could it survive the rank dishonesty of Lowry and Kristol and Goldberg? By the way, if you missed the cruise, you missed this:

Where else can you watch Jonah doing his impression of Sarah Palin as a naughty librarian?

Almost worth the trip, no?

Anyone with any delusions that establishment conservatives are in any way eager for a real debate about the future should check the speakers at the Nation Review Institute tomorrow. It runs the gamut of opinion from A to B. On cultural policy, they have Maggie Gallagher, Ed Whelan and Jeff Bell. The liberal is Kate O’Beirne. Yes, it will get worse before it gets any better.

Margaret and Helen opine:

So the oil companies are once again boasting record profits and yet the auto makers are asking for some government cheese. Does anyone else see the irony here? So I’ve got a little trickle down theory of my own. As long as Detroit continues to make cars for the Gas-Capades let the oil companies bail them out.

Eric Holder gets the job. His rhetoric on torture:

Eric H. Holder Jr., Deputy Attorney General during the Clinton administration, asserted in a speech to the American Constitution Society (ACS) that the United States must reverse “the disastrous course” set by the Bush administration in the struggle against terrorism by closing the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, declaring without qualification that the U.S. does not torture people, ending the practice of transferring individuals involuntarily to countries that engage in torture and ceasing warrantless domestic surveillance.

“Our needlessly abusive and unlawful practices in the ‘War on Terror’ have diminished our standing in the world community and made us less, rather than more, safe,” Holder told a packed room at the ACS 2008 Convention on Friday evening. “For the sake of our safety and security, and because it is the right thing to do, the next president must move immediately to reclaim America’s standing in the world as a nation that cherishes and protects individual freedom and basic human rights.”

(hat tip: Tapped)

Just make sure not to put it on anyone else’s lawn, ok?

Ajijic, Mexico, 11.10 am.

A reader writes:

Writing as one of your readers from Cajun country (Lafayette, Louisiana) I can tell you that people of French Canadian descent have been using the word "mais" which they pronounce "meh" in exactly the same manner as you and others have used the word "meh." Of course, in French the word "mais" means "but." Cajuns casually throw the word around in all sorts of ways, sometimes all by itself to mean nothing at all. "Mais!"

Just thought you’d like to know that some people in this country have been using that word for centuries.

Suderman gets amped up by Carr’s post on a group of scientists trying to replicate a human brain inside a computer:

I’ve said for years that I’ll fight Glenn Reynolds to be the first in line to upload my consciousness, and if two academic geeks want to Xerox my brain, I’m down for that too. As for the "profound societal consequences," that sounds like an understatement to me. Since these copies would be digital, presumably it would be possible to make as many as you’d want, and then to trade and share them accordingly. Would you own the rights to scans of your brain? And how would you protect those rights? Would there be a Napster for brain copies? Would the government require everyone to log copies of their brains in some super scary database? Would you be able to carry around a copy of your brain with you, on your iPhone, or maybe just access it directly from some wireless thingy implanted in your noggin?

Here’s a helpful list of individuals and groups who donated more than $5,000 to strip gay married couples of their civil equality in California. I will do all I can to avoid spending a dime of my money in any of their businesses, and leave it to your discretion to use this information constructively. This is all public information. Use it. And quit your whining on the social right. If you want to target a minority, don’t expect to avoid blowback.

A bold, fresh piece of Kentucky:

(Hat tip: Jason Zengerle)