Denying it makes you look guilty of something.

8 Apr

Ed Morrissey’s been talking about “the bow” all week.

Personally, I wouldn’t have immediately have thought anything of Obama’s bow to King Abdullah.  After hearing that it was going against over 200 years of American diplomatic tradition for the President to bow to royalty, I thought maybe a bigger deal, but easily forgotten.  But the combined effort of Obama’s supporters, the media, and his Administration to deal with this is like watching the Keystone Cops.

1. First, it was said he dropped something or was picking something up off the floor.  This was allegedly why the media didn’t mention the gaffe in the first place.

2. Second, primarily from Obama supporters, the defense is:  “This is so stupid. A mistake or whatever.  Who cares?”  Unfortunately, after 8 years of lectures on how the world hates us because Bush is so imbecilic, I’m no longer persuaded by such an argument.  Particularly from the loudmouth hypocrites making it.

3. Finally, it’s the White House’s outright denial:

“It wasn’t a bow. He grasped his hand with two hands, and he’s taller than King Abdullah,” said an Obama aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Please. Don’t insult our intelligence.

Remember, Obama’s following Bush here.  People harped on his international gaffes all over the place, but you never saw this kind of orchestrated response to defend him.  Honestly, if people weren’t so eager to crown Obama as a blameless miracle man, a lot more of this stuff would just roll right off.

UPDATE:  Clearly, I missed some of the explanations.  From Sisyphus:  Top 11 Possible Explanations for Why The President of the United States Appeared to Bow Down Before the King of Saudi Arabia.

My favorite:

11. Staff placed the teleprompter too low

Go read the rest.

“Green” trend, beginning of the end

8 Apr

Vanity Fair drops its annual “green” issue after only three years:

“With so much else going on relating to the global financial crisis, we have been focusing on that of late”. Environmentalists are concerned that the decision may have an unwelcome effect on the perception of green issues. “It is vital that green living is not treated as a trend that comes and goes, but that it becomes part of the way we live,” says Colin Butfield, head of campaigns at WWF.

It’s the price you pay when you rely on Hollywood and the fashion world to carry your message.  They’ve proven to be fair weather friends for nearly every special interest issue.  Remember when everyone wore red ribbons to the Academy Awards?  Or Farm Aid? Even Africa eventually faded out.

Via Tim Blair.

a Facebook detective story

8 Apr

Love this true story about a woman who tracked down her stolen computer and wallet, then claimed them in person, using Facebook.  

It turned out Bransky lived just minutes away, so Mote hopped in her car in sweats, Uggs and a super-sexy hair clip and headed to Jamie’s place. The pair drove to Bransky’s apartment, unsure of how they’d obtain her stuff but determined to investigate further. But what would they find?

Read the whole story, involving alcohol, status updates, a couple small dogs, and a grown man peeing himself.

Steyn “stupid”; issues “uncomfortable”

7 Apr

I understand Michelle Goldberg’s dilemma when challenging what is for the left-leaning, traditionally sacred tenets of the European welfare state.  Indeed, libertarians and conservatives have long pointed out the pitfalls of a social welfare system built upon a shrinking population pool sustained only immigration (libertarians dislike the paternalistic government and high taxes; conservatives dislike the progressive social agenda supporting lower birthrates, ie abortion, gay marriage, etc.)  

While introducing the conservative side of the argument, she calls Mark Steyn “deeply stupid”, and then proceeds to agree with his arguments (though not his solutions).  Not exactly the genius maneuver, Ms. Goldberg, though I’m sure it’s an attempt to protect yourself from a tar-and-feathering from your fellow leftists for betraying those sacred tenets.

Goldberg points out:

I get why liberals have shied away from this discussion, since there’s so many uncomfortable issues involved.

Might those “issues” be “uncomfortable” because facts don’t support your worldview?  In order to make reality more palatable, Goldberg encourages fellow ‘liberals’ to seek solutions which remain in solidarity with the spirit of the social welfare state.  Create more social welfare!  

Basically, the societies where birthrates have plunged to dangerous levels – Russia, Catholic countries like Poland, Spain and Italy, as well as Japan and Singapore – are all places that make it very difficult for women to combine work and family. In countries that support working mothers, like Sweden, Denmark, Norway and France, birthrates are basically fine – they’re either just at replacement, or shrinking in a very slow, totally manageable way.

I’m not sure how having an “at replacement, or shrinking” population makes these countries “fine”.  In a cradle-to-grave social welfare system, the increasing number of workers retiring absolutely require an increasing worker base to tax to pay for it all.  As for relying on the immigrants to shoulder the burden, as Goldberg put herself: “[W]ill those immigrants really support a system in which a good part of their taxes go to maintaining a bunch of old Italians who they don’t necessarily feel any connection to?”

Moving from a homogenous society indoctrinated from “cradle-to-grave” in the benefits and burdens of a welfare state, to a majority immigrant working class supporting retired native-born citizens is a powder keg whether it happens quickly as it is in Italy, or slightly slower, as in Scandinavia.

Goldberg also failed to mention how ‘liberal’ solutions to increase birthrates can be reconciled with the inevitable increase in global warming that will result…

A leading medical journal recently called for British couples to stop having so many children to ‘reduce global warming’. But much of the rest of Europe has a different problem: declining birthrates and ageing populations.

Maybe it’s better to just shy away from this one, Ms. Goldberg.  These issues are getting increasingly uncomfortable.

Hat tip, Jim Treacher.

Not Comforting

7 Apr

Mike Allen at Politico notes that the Obama Administration “is bracing for a much slower pace and big changes in his proposals as early urgency and excitement give way to the more languid rhythms that are the norm for Congress.”

A big part of their communication strategy will now focus on highlighting incremental progress on the Obama agenda, to show people Washington is working again. 

Am I hallucinating, or did Congress (at the behest of the Administration) not just pass a $789 billion stimulus bill and a $2.6 TRILLION 2010 budget?  It seems like the last reassurance we need is that Washington is working.  Great line from the last link:

Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) denounced the Democrats’ budget for its deficits. “We are spending like drunken sailors,” Mr. Ryan said. “Wait, I apologize to the drunken sailors of America for that comment.”

Love it.

Exercise in narcissism, check!

7 Apr

Eventually, I’d love for this to be a widely read blog, even by people who don’t know me.  Since that is unlikely, particularly anytime soon, I’m creating an “About Me” page that is actually a “100 totally boring things about me” page.  I figure that will keep all 4.3 readers amused for a few minutes. 

Click on the About link to the right to learn all about my alliteration problem, my double joint, and other fascinating trivia!

Finally!

7 Apr

Only took me two years to finally set this up… I’ll be tweaking the blog for the next few days, but keep in touch, and hopefully I will get this off the ground asap.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started