EDITOR OF REDSTATE
Morning Briefing for June 23, 2010
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.
It was 1:25 a.m. on November 5, 2008. The Republicans had just lost badly. Barack Obama had given his victory speech. Jesse Jackson had cried. And I was tired.
I sat down at my computer and wrote this post entitled “The After. The Before. The Future, Present, and Past.” The subtitle was “The Day After and the Day After That, We’ll Fight On.”
I was tired that night. I am tired still.
For every kind email I get, I get dozens of emails filled with hate and invective. And that’s from our own side. I was attacked for supporting Nikki Haley. RedState was attacked.
I was called crazy for beating up Bob Bennett and declaring it necessary for conservatives to replace him with Mike Lee. Republican politicos whispered to reporters about how detached I and RedState had become. They called me and you too “fringe.”
Republicans could not believe that I would expend so much energy rallying people to defeat the allegedly conservative Robert Bennett of Utah and then, horror of horrors, go all in to support Mike Lee.
This morning, as you wake up, know this: Nikki Haley is the Republican nominee for Governor of South Carolina. Tim Scott and Jeff Duncan are both Republican nominees for congress in South Carolina — they are solid conservatives.
And Mike Lee? He’ll be the next Senator from Utah. All were backed by RedState.
I am tired. I have not had a vacation in God knows win. But today, we at RedState, though we may be tired, wake up winners. We remember our losses, like with Chuck DeVore and Marlin Stutzman for the Senate, but we savor our wins. And we just won big.
So here again is my advice and my caution — the same I delivered that night a year and a half ago when things looked so bad. I have not changed a word . . .
Who’s telling the truth, Jon Kyl or Barack Obama?
Following up on Jon Kyl’s remarks, which I broke here at RedState this weekend, (that President Obama told him in a private, one-on-one meeting, in the Oval Office, that he would not secure the border because if he were to do so then “you all” would have no reason to support “comprehensive immigration reform”) and what Sen. John McCain said on the floor of the Senate today (that a few weeks ago President Obama told all 41 Republican Senators the same thing he told Sen. Kyl in the Oval Office) (hat tip to Cubachi’s blog), we learn today from Naked Emperor News (hat tip to Redstate’s Caleb Howe) that an audio tape exists from September, 2004 on which can be heard Barack Obama explaining that his strategy for solving the illegal alien immigration problem requires that “the trade off is going to have to be improved border security.”
Think of how you do your family budget. You may budget to spend $100 a week on food, $40 a week on gas, and $20 a week on entertainment. Big categories. You don’t have to budget for Cheerios versus eggs, or regular versus super unleaded, or movie night versus mini-golf. Those detailed decisions come later, as you go along in life. But the family budget sets the parameters for big categories of future spending.
The same is true for a budget resolution in Washington. It sets the parameters for big categories of spending—say, “transportation” or “international affairs.” The details of which dollars go where come later in the appropriations bills, tax bills, or direct spending bills.
In other words, a budget resolution is the most basic fiscal legislation that Washington can produce.
And get this: it’s not even binding! A budget resolution does not go to the President for signature and thus does not have the force of law.
So let’s recap: the Democrats have just admitted that they are not able to pass the most basic, almost simplistic fiscal outline that’s not even binding anyway.
Why? Because the Democrats are cowards.
President Obama should fire General Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, for a highly impolitic interview Gen. McChrystal gave to Rolling Stone magazine (of all places) mocking the Vice President and the U.S. Ambassador in Afghanistan, among others, and making evident his disdain for the Administration’s civilian management of the war effort. Obama should fire him – but he’s painted himself into a corner in which doing so would be damaging to him politically and to the nation’s war effort. Let’s review why.
President Obama’s nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court Elena Kagan “loved what happened in the Bork hearings.”
It seems there is a right-left coalition building to force nominees to answer direct questions at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing scheduled for Monday, June 28th.
As referenced in the Daily Kos post, Elena Kagan herself wrote a 1995 review of Stephen L. Carter’s book, “The Confirmation Mess.” In that article, Kagan argued that the consideration of a nominee to the Supreme Court should be a “meaningful discussion of legal issues.”
Hat tip. Link back. Trackback. These are internet terms, as well as courtesies. Another way to put it might be: attribution. Sourcing. Or how about “credit where due”? I’m a blogger. Many of you are bloggers too, and you know the same thing I do. When you repost something from another site, you attribute it. This is true of almost anything you do online. On Tumblr, reblogging automatically links to the original source. On Twitter, when you retweet someone, or get an idea from them, you include their username. It’s polite and, moreover, it’s fair. Did I mention it’s also super-easy? Well not, apparently, for Bill O’Reilly.