Read it.

SO over….

Read it.

It’s amazing how leftoids don’t like rules when it’s their ox being gored (no pun intended – I think).

For at least one priest, Kmiec’s support for a pro-choice politician made him a willing participant in a grave moral evil.

Well, duh. It has been the constant position of the Catholic church that abortion is murder. Supporting a politician who advocates freedom of abortion is morally equivalent to supporting a politician who advocates freedom to murder.

Would Cohen feel different if communion were denied to a politician who supported lynching black people? You know he would. Of course, he would whine that the situations weren’t comparable. Perhaps for him they aren’t. But for a Catholic, they are, and always have been.

Murder is murder. If supporting politicians who advocate freedom to murder isn’t “a grave moral evil”, then I don’t know what is.

Read it.

When the nation’s premier newspaper welcomes those who are breaking the law and denigrates those who attempt to uphold the law, then I suggest it is indeed time to panic.

Note what is not said: None of these problems would exist if these people had just stayed home. And the problems would disappear if they would go back where they came from. I have no sympathy for those who create problems for themselves by doing unlawful things — and, according to all the data I’ve seen, a lot of Americans agree.

On the other hand, perhaps this is an encouraging sign that enforcement is working. We can hope.

Read it.

Of course, being the New York Times, he thinks this is a bad thing. Of course, being the New York Times, it doesn’t even cross his radar that continuing state spending at its current levels might be part of the problem.

Most of the “bad” in “bad economy” is because of government spending on top of stupid government energy decisions. But not, of course, to the New York Times.

Read it.

A real moral dilemma for the Church of Gaia.

Pardon me while I snigger…..

Read it.

But the truth is that no combination of solar, wind and nuclear power, ethanol, biodiesel, tar sands and used French-fry oil will allow us to power Wal-Mart, Disney World and the interstate highway system — or even a fraction of these things — in the future. We have to make other arrangements.

In typical dhimmi fashion, Kunstler’s preferred solution is for us to suffer.

First, we’ll have to dramatically reorganize the everyday activities of American life. We’ll have to grow our food closer to home, in a manner that will require more human attention. In fact, agriculture needs to return to the center of economic life. We’ll have to restore local economic networks — the very networks that the big-box stores systematically destroyed — made of fine-grained layers of wholesalers, middlemen and retailers.

We’ll also have to occupy the landscape differently, in traditional towns, villages and small cities. Our giant metroplexes are not going to make it, and the successful places will be ones that encourage local farming.

Although he would no doubt resent the comparison, how does this differ from listening to Pat Buchannan?

I have an idea: Let’s do whatever it takes to get oil at an affordable price. If that means inconveniencing people who, before civilization intruded on them, measured their wealth in camels and goats, too bad for them.

Read it.

Slate magazine is cementing its position as home of the left-wing intellectual whore.

Why delegitimize sincere excitement that his nomination and potential election would represent a historic civil rights landmark: making an abstract right a reality at last.

Well, to start off with, this isn’t an election for Homecoming Queen, it’s supposed to be choosing the leader of the nation and the free world. There are people who think that merely being black isn’t a sufficient qualification for that. Pardon me if this comes as a shock.

Read it.

And they bitch about the title of Jonah Goldberg’s book, Liberal Fascism, even while their every action demonstrates its theme.

Read it.

Remark what it takes to make Slate use “good” and “soldier” in same phrase.

Read it.

[I]n the American media, which is to say American public life, Republicans are a despised group, much like used car salesmen, Congressmen, lawyers, or, in former times, certain ethnic and religious minorities. Anyone who watches NBC, CBS, ABC, MTV, CNN, MSNBC, or almost any other television outlet, or who reads the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, or virtually any other daily newspaper, or who reads Time or Newsweek, is exposed to a steady diet of Republican-caricaturing and Republican-bashing. We have had partisan media in this country before, but I don’t believe we have ever experienced such a unanimously one-party media at any time in our history.

Read it.

Why? If it’s just a contest to discover the best athletes, then human rights standards are irrelevant. If it’s more than that, then please explain what the point is, other than a desire to exclude people of whom the Cool Kids disapprove from The In Crowd.

Read it.

Feel free to laugh. I did.

Read it.

Since he was a Republican, of course, his party affiliation was mentioned first thing. Had he been a Democrat, we’d still be playing “Name That Party” with the article.

Read it.

No sign of an apology for the Post’s unwavering support of Marxist rebel Mugabe back in the sixties, seventies, and eighties. That was just so yesterday.

Read it.

Think about this for a bit.

When district boundaries are adjusted so as to include a greater number of people who find a particular legislator satisfactory, this is somehow “undemocratic”. Gee, I thought that the whole point of the process was to give people as much as possible a representative who, you know, represented them.

So we ought to adjust boundaries so that a little less than half of the people in the district disagree with the policies that their representative is going to push — and whose voices are therefore not going to be heard?

This is the silliest method of argumentation that I’ve ever heard of in my life.

If a representative nominally represents X number of people, then a perfectly representative system is one where each candidate signs up exactly X number of people to vote for him, and it ought not to matter where they live. So-called “Gerrymandering” attempts to adjust our territorial system, based on nothing more than history and an implicit assumption that people living in the same place have the same natural interests, to that ideal system. How is this a bad thing?

In electing local government candidates, there may be an argument for people living in the same place having the same natural interests. But for national government candidates, such as Senators and Representatives, that’s absurd. The only impact “natural local interests” have with respect to federal-level legislators is that it encourages pork-barrel earmarks, and how is that a good thing?

Read it.

But you wouldn’t know it from reading this whitewash in the Washington Post.

Note that the authors quote a lot of people who think that Wright is being misunderstood (including Wright, in his TV interview), but don’t look at all at the actual words of the sermons in question. If Wright is being misunderstood or taken out of context, it would seem an obvious thing to cite the actual words in question and point that out. But they don’t. The article boils down to “It’s a black thing. You just wouldn’t understand.”

Read it.

As if you needed one.

Want a gold-standard example of biased pseudo-journalism? Here you go.

Read it.

President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s government has supported environmental certification and carbon-trading programs, and last year offered land concessions throughout the Amazon to private logging companies that promised sustainable timber harvesting.

Apparently this eccentric definition of “capitalism” is what passes for science at the Washington Post.

Read it.

Because, you know, the best way to “twist” someone’s words is to quote them verbatim.

Read it.

EACH YEAR, more than 1,200 women in the United States are killed by their husbands or boyfriends.

That’s … what … 24 per state? And Maryland is a small state, so it’s probably even less than that. Funny that the magnificant Washington Post couldn’t come up with an exact number for Maryland, the subject of the article.

Every year more than 40,000 people are killed in motor vehicle accidents. This is 30-35 times more than the “husbands and boyfriends” toll. And yet the Post doesn’t seem all that concerned about it.

Wonder why that is?

Read it.

The Washington Post  thinks that popular mythology trumps the Constitution. In that, they do not differ from regressives across the country.

Of course, if seats in Congress could be bought, Michael Huffington would be a Senator, and his ex-wife wouldn’t be such a pain in the ass. (Hm. Well, maybe she would be.)

Question: Is it that the Washington Post is put out by idiots, or is it that they assume that their readers are idiots?

Tyler Cowan is not impressed by former-Republican-now-liberal-sellout Kevin Phillips’ new book.

Either the current market estimate of inflation is the best estimate available, or you know that it is wrong and you will be a very rich man.  I find the former scenario more plausible.

I have to say I agree with him. Kevin Phillips is the David Brock of the Nixon generation, and his books are bought mostly by Democrats who think that Republicans are on the verge of agreeing with them that America sucks and is headed for the toilet.

Read it. And feel free to laugh.

For some reason the Washington Post seems to specialize in publishing the mumblings of black columnists who no intelligent adult would take seriously. Eugene Robinson is the most egregious of these, but King is not far behind.

Anyone who could write “the New York Senator and her GOP allies” and mean it seriously has a disconnect from reality that one can only marvel at.

I do admire his ability to get paid for that kind of stuff.

Read it.

I wonder whether that strategy would work for the Republican Party? After all, who has been more consistently insulted by CNN?

Oh, right — Christians. But they’re not organized, so it doesn’t count.

Read it.

There’s a hole with no bottom….

Read it.

It’s accurate that Obama doesn’t take money from oil companies; neither do his opponents, because corporate contributions are illegal. But Obama, like Clinton and John McCain, has accepted donations from oil and gas company employees — $222,309 in Obama’s case from donors from Exxon, Shell, Chevron and others, according to campaign-finance data. Two oil company CEOs have pledged to raise at least $50,000 each as part of Obama’s fundraising team.

Read it.

A more accurate headline would have been “Special Privileges for the Chattering Class”.

THERE’S NOTHING like a presidential campaign to help renew attention to the need for a federal law to protect journalists from being compelled by the government to divulge their sources.

Well, duh. They want favorable publicity in order to get elected.

Funny, I read the Constitution fairly thoroughly in Law School, and found no mention of this “people’s right to know”. Nor of any “journalists’ right to be accessories after the fact to crime”.

Read it.

The obvious implication, which the authors are too cowardly to spell out, is that McCain is a hypocrite promising relief to “working families” while actually benefitting “corporate fatcats”. Bias in our media? No, never.

 “I wish he’d be as aggressive with tax pork as he is with spending pork,” said Leonard E. Burman, an Urban Institute tax policy analyst.

Translation: “tax pork” is tax cuts designed to get the economy moving again. Notice that the Urban Institute, a leftoid think tank, is not identified as such. Would the Cato Institute or the American Enterprise Institute get that kind of pass? It is to laugh.

Read it.

Of course, we”ve always known he was a socialist.

Too bad there isn’t a Geneva Convention against stupidity.

Read it.

Why does this come as such a surprise? Nelson Mandela, and the ANC party he founded, are Marxist revolutionaries, a fact that they have never bothered to hide. Of course they would side with Mugabe, another self-proclaimed Marxist revolutionary — and other thug states around the world.
Rogue?  Certainly. Democrat? Only to the Washington Post.

Read it.

Guess I’m not the only one looking askance at the drivy-by media’s coverage.

Read it.

After all, voter fraud is so Democratic democratic. Gotta start these kids right, eh?

Read it.

Read it.

It wouldn’t surprise me to see somebody run for President just so it would get them a book deal. I even have the perfect name for the book: “Doing It For Real”. You saw it here first.

Jerk those tears!

Another example of the persistent drumbeat of the media campaign to use examples of personal irresponsibility as an excuse to increase government intervention.

Read it.

Show us your ribbon(s) and we’ll know how much you care.

Mickey Kaus is on the case.

It’s getting so that ‘journalist’ aren’t even bothering to disguise their lies any more.

Read it.

Makes you wonder what they teach in “journalism” school.

Read it.

 Case in point, Krugman has predicted economic recession in each of the last six years. That’s 24 consecutive fiscal quarters (we’re actually up to 25 now, and 26 if we keep our heads above water for the next 6 days) without a single reading of negative growth, despite Krugman’s perennial prophecies of wreck and ruin around every corner.

Read it.

Few things are more entertaining than regressives opining on what “conservatives” ought to be doing.

Read it.

Good news, for a change, although the Post, like most newspapers, is trying to circle the wagons.

WITH A 20-page opinion handed down March 7, U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton sent a shudder through journalists and their would-be sources.

And that’s a shudder that needs to happen. “Journalists” like to think of themselves as somehow observers standing outside of the process, ready to record and “tell the story” but not get involved. This is, of course, hogwash. They are involved, and the stories they tell are seen through the warped lens of people committed to “activism”, whether beneficial or not. The basic problem is that “journalists” are biased, but don’t realize it, and are unwilling to admit it because it would mean admitting that they live a lie.

Judge Walton’s opinion removes any protection that government news sources have come to rely on.

Including the ones that reveal legitimate secrets, which no editorial discussion of the matter has deigned to address. One gets the impression, from listening to the drive-by media, that there is no such thing as a legitimate secret. Those who cannot see the obvious implications for personal privacy are mentally deficient.

If allowed to stand, it would seriously impair the ability of journalists not only to expose malfeasance and corruption but also to provide thorough coverage of institutions such as the Justice Department.

In other words, they won’t be able to be as nosy as they’d like to be.  Hint: Whenever a “journalist” utters the phrase “the public’s right to know”, what they actually mean is “my right to stick my nose into your business and put it on the front page”. They don’t really give a shit about “the public”, because if they did they wouldn’t go around undermining the public good with their inflammatory reporting.

Read it.

The press has diversity? Who knew?

Read it.

What’s potentially dangerous is that in some foreign capitals, leaders are deciding to run out the clock on the Bush years and wait for the chance to make what they hope will be a better deal with the next president.

Well, can you blame them? And just whose fault is that, David Ignatius? Perhaps you and your liberal bunkmates?

Read it.

Just in case you were wondering. I know I was.

Read it.

Or so the Washington Post would have you think.

You can believe as much or as little of that as you care to.

Read it.

I’m shocked, I tell you, shocked.

Read it.

Truth is the first victim of modern narcissistic autobiography.

Read it.

Read it.

Read it.

This is such a classic example of east-coast Brahmin thumb-sucker “journalism” that it ought to go under glass at the National Bureau of Standards. When AlGore writes down his dreams for his shrink, this is the sort of thing he would write.

Lest anyone think that I’m harshing the mellow of a Real Farmer, the author is identified at the bottom of the piece.

The writer is a food and society policy fellow and director of Appalachian Sustainable Development.