EDITOR OF REDSTATE
Morning Briefing for October 26, 2009
The White House’s attacks on Fox News, the Chamber of Commerce, Rush Limbaugh, etc. are making Democrats on Capitol Hill nervous. In particular, the Democrats who sit in districts John McCain won are incredibly nervous about these attacks. Jonathan Allen has an article on it. This is perfect timing.
Several of us were thinking it’d be fun to get these Democrats on record with their thoughts. Who wants to help?
In the post is a list of Congressmen and their phone numbers. Call and ask:
- Does the Congressman agree with the President’s attacks on Fox News and the Chamber of Commerce?
- Will the Congressman adhere to MoveOn.org’s call to boycott Fox News?
Yes or no is all they have to say. You just make the calls and leave the answers in the comments section here. If the President wants to stir up trouble for Fox and the Chamber of Commerce, let’s make it as painful as possible for his own team.
The list is in the full post. We’ll make sure local media in their home districts know whether they agree with Obama’s attacks on Fox and the business community.
In all reported versions of events about the White House blocking Fox News from a pool report, at that point when the pool insisted Fox be included, Treasury contacted Anita Dunn to make sure it was OK. Dunn, you’ll recall, is Obama’s Fox War Czar. In response to several calls and emails to the Treasury Dept asking why, if this was just a simple misunderstanding and oversight, would they need to ask Dunn for permission to correct it, the same canned “ado about nothing” response was sent. However, one Treasury source said something very interesting: “We typically coordinate high profile TV interviews with the White House, just as most Administrations do.”
Well of course they do. That’s the point, isn’t it? Fox was claiming that this was a deliberate snub in keeping with Dunn’s policy toward Fox. It is the White House who claimed to have clean hands, by telling TPM that this wasn’t a salvo in their war on Fox. The whole point is that Fox claims this was part of a coordinated administration policy. So by pointing out something so simple, Treasury is confirming.
Jack Abramoff, present jailbird, was convicted of all sorts of crooked schemes. One of his favorites was to funnel money through various organizations into the hands of other people.
It appears Dede Scozzafava is funneling RNC, NRCC, and donor dollars through her campaign account to her family.
Dede Scozzafava is or was until recently the Chief Operating Officer of her brother’s company.
Dede’s brother is Thomas W. Scozzafava and he is married to Pearl Han Ashcraft.
Dede Scozzafava’s campaign has paid $3750.00 in disclosed expenses to Pearl Han Productions, LLC for “Strategic Consulting,” the most bland of descriptions.
Here’s where it gets interesting. . .
One trillion, four hundred twenty billion dollars. It’s an astounding number. It’s more than the entire economy of India and enough to give every man, woman, and child in the United States $4700.
It is also our country’s federal budget deficit for 2009. That means that in the fiscal year 2009, which runs from October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2009, the federal government spent $1.42 trillion more than it took in. To put this in perspective, last year’s deficit was $459 billion – still an astounding number, but less than half the deficit for this year.
When our nation runs with a deficit like this year, we increase our national debt – or the total debt we owe over the life of our country. Our current national debt is $9.1 trillion, and climbing every day. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has projected that, under President Obama’s spending plans, our national debt will rise to $17.1 trillion by the year 2019, meaning an increase of $8 trillion over the next ten years. Most of this debt is held by foreign countries. China, not known for their great relations with our country, holds the most – more than $800 billion.
If numbers like this don’t shock you, maybe this will . . .
“Andrew Revkin, who reports on environmental issues for The New York Times, floated an idea last week for combating global warming: Give carbon credits to couples that limit themselves to having one child.”
Revkin calls it a “thought experiment”.
Well, isn’t that special.
Around my office, we have a few running jokes. Well, more than a few actually; we have 947 of them, to be precise.
One of the all time faves is based on truth: during a brainstorming session, a young professional prefaced his contribution with his remarks by saying, “Now, I’m not thinkin’ this, I’m just sayin’ it.”
“Not thinkin’, just sayin’” serves to absolve the “sayer” of the logical consequences of whatever words follow. Yeah, right.
Over at the Atlantic, Max Fisher writes about my involvement in New York 23.
I’m happy to serve as a proxy for you guys, but we need to be honest — you guys did this, not me. I’m sure the Hoffman campaign appreciates your efforts. I very much appreciate your efforts.
At the vanguard of the grassroots campaign has been Erick Erickson, blogger and editor of RedState.
Erickson has made NY23 his mission. Erickson called the race “a Hill to Die On” for conservatives. He accused Scozzafava of “Funnel[ing] Campaign Cash to Family.” . . . Erickson called for Scozzafava to withdraw and demanded new national GOP leadership. He even raised money for Hoffman. The wider conservative world took note, and soon endorsements for Hoffman rolled in from Sarah Palin, the Club for Growth, Steve Forbes, the Wall Street Journal, even sitting Congresswoman Michele Bachmann.
What was a small Congressional race in upstate New York has become all-out war among Republicans, one which Erickson’s grassroots movement seems to have won.
I have said all along, the effort here is, in the best outcome a Hoffman victory, but as long as Scozzafava loses, I’m happy. Note though that Mr. Fischer makes a mistake that suggests he leans left — he calls Scozzafava a “moderate” when her record and positions suggest anything but. Ms. Scozzafava is very much a liberal.
Via Drudge, the Telegraph is reporting that Obama’s Poll numbers have dropped farther and faster than any President on record over the last 50 years. Apparently, people think he’s doing a lousy job.
The failed and failing Presidency of Barack Obama appears to know no bounds when it comes to showing a lack of leadership, a fundamental inability to understand the plight of the people it routinely insists it speaks for, and the problems it naively believes it has the skills, knowledge, and expertise to solve.
As you may know, RedState has started a Great Books style program. We are rather slowly making our way through a series of books on conservative thought and ideas. We have started with Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism.
“Contrary to his relentless assertions in Mein Kampf, Hitler had no great foundational ideas or ideological system. His genius lay in the realization that people wanted to rally to ideas and symbols. . . . Time and again in Mein Kampf, Hitler makes it clear that he believed his greatest gift to the party wasn’t his ideas but his ability to speak,” Goldberg writes. I’m reminded of that story Harry Reid tells about Obama where Obama said he, Obama, had a gift. “A real gift, Harry,” he said. It was oration.
This is not to make an Obama=Hitler comparison. It is just to note that like most good demagogues, Hitler and Obama both know the public is more interested in the silver tongue and the Greco-Roman columns as a backdrop than they are in the substantive policy positions.
That, perhaps, more than anything is the take away from Chapter 2 of Liberal Fascism. Hitler stood for nothing except hatred of the Jews. He was happy to do or say anything to get elected so long as it meant extermination of the Jews and a bolstering of the Germany self.
What is also worth nothing is that contrary to left-wing myth about corporatism and the Nazis, derived in part because of the rivalry between communism and nazism, when the Nazis did put out public policy positions, they were right out of the progressive left.
According to Jonah Goldberg, the Nazi Party was “in favor of universal education, guaranteed employment, increased entitlements for the aged, the expropriation of land without compensation, the nationalization of industry, the abolition of market-based lending . . ., the expansion of health services, and the abolition of child labor.” Which party platform does that remind you of.