One of the most enjoyable things about having your own blog is the chance to immortalize your own wisecracks, like this one:
My wife: Bill Clinton's in the hospital with a heart problem of some sort.
Me: Probably a Viagra overdose.
I read that Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) has a career American Conservative Union rating of 98.4%. I hope that's good enough to get my friend Tony the Libertarian to vote for him, but sometimes I wonder. I think sometimes that T the L would probably refuse to vote for himself for office, on the grounds that he once spent his money liberally.
I have to keep better notes. I have a note I jotted down at work that says "Obama and Holocaust Deniers". I have no idea what I meant. If anyone has a theory, please let me know.
Can your hearing have a Freudian slip? I heard a radio host refer to something that would happen at the "next full session of Congress", but I thought I heard him say "the next fool session of Congress." If I was off, it wasn't by much.
Unlike some right-wingers, I never expected anything to come of the Obama birth certificate brouhaha. It's never going to get BO out, and it isn't worth the attention it has received. One facet of the "Birther" controversy, however, ought to be considered more than it has been. I find it very revealing of the character of the man who holds our chief executive office that he would rather spend more than one million dollars in legal fees than simply comply with the request that he show his birth certificate. How dare we? We are just peasants! We cannot question our ruler, our superior, our king! Of course, you and I know that he is not king, but I'm not so sure that BO knows the difference. In this, I believe, lies the explanation for so many of the events of the BO Error so far. He is offended when he is questioned, and he believes that the only obligation he has as our President is to rule us.
John Derbyshire of NationalReview.com doesn't go wrong often, but he was wrong about the importance of Honduras and their (now happily former) President and wanna-be dictator, Zelaya. (I've forgotten his first name.) Derbyshire made a running joke of it on his Friday Audio blog, Radio Derb.
It wasn't funny or insignificant, though. Anyone who loves liberty and pride loved the way that the Hondurans, showing the same spirit that animate the citizens of Kansas Territory during the Lecompton Constitution controversy in the late 1850s, held their ground against all too much of world opinion and defended their constitution and the freedom of their citizens by ousting the would-be tyrant Zelaya, and appointing an interim president to hold office until they could elect a new, constitution-respecting President in a fair election.
The second, and for an American lover of liberty much more alarming significance of the Honduras contretemps was the reaction of our own government. Here was one of the first, if not the first opportunity for the new administration and its foreign policy dream team (a nightmare is, after all, one kind of dream) to support freedom and democracy elsewhere in the world, and they chose to support the would-be dictator instead. To me, and to many others, this choice had an unsettling effect on our opinion of the new President. Maybe he really is a Marxist who distrusts and opposes letting people rule themselves.
This, too, explains a lot of what we've seen in the last year or so.
Too many conservatives are folding in the face of the renewed threat to allow gays to serve openly in the military. Hello, sailor, goodbye unit cohesion. Besides, they're forgetting the deadly pattern of militant infiltration by leftists. Once you let them into a profession or milieu which they were banned from before, can the demand for quotas and promotions be far behind. Soon they'll have the whole military wearing lavender velvet. (Boy, am I insensitive, or what?)
I've concluded that the reason that the New York Times has no comic section (despite the fact that they have a publisher, Pinch Suzlberger, whose mental development never passed the comic-book level) is that the intelligence and effect of the Times's reporting and editorializing renders the idea of "funny pages" redundant.
I read a headline in James Taranto's Best of the Web Today
that related that a lottery winner had been killed in an accident. This was a bit chilling for a New Yorker like me. His Accidency the Governor of New York, David Patterson, has been casting about for ways to close the huge budget deficit bearing down on the New York government, brought on by years of swelling budgets and a sudden dip in tax receipts due to the recession and recent tax hikes which have sent many of the richest NewYorkers fleeing to more taxpayer-friendly climes. I was tempted to suggest to him that a good way to raise funds would be to change the rules of the lottery so that every winner had to take the 26 payments in 25 years option (25 years plus a day, if I understand it correctly). Then all he would have to do is making the right to payments non-transferable, and then kill all of the winners. Millions saved for the treasury!
Then it occurred to me that he might not realize that I was joking...