Energy Leninism? Or Just Plain Leninism?
As goes Energy, so goes the country.
“The worse, the better,†Vladimir Lenin is said to have observed. What Lenin meant was that the worse social conditions became in Russia, the more likely he and the Bolsheviks could foment a communist revolution. President Barrack Obama’s White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel recently updated Lenin’s maxim, saying, “Never allow a crisis to go to waste.â€Last Friday, the Democratic leadership in the House of Representatives took those maxims to heart when they pushed through their 1,200-page American Clean Energy and Security (ACES) Act by a vote 219 to 212. The bill is supposed to address the twin crises of economic recession and climate change by creating millions of new “green†jobs. Instead of an old-fashioned Soviet-style five-year plan, ACES can be thought of as 50-year plan to radically transform how Americans produce and use energy.…Well, look, Ron Bailey, this entire administration seems to me to emulate the tactics of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, in all things, not just energy… and in my view we’ve not seen nearly the worst of it yet. (A Depressing thought as we come to July 4th, isn’t it?) So why should Energy be any different? Energy, after all, is the key to our country and it’s prosperity. Which of course was why I raised such holy hell when the first thing Obama did upon being sworn in was to reverse President Bush’s sign off on offshore drilling. That action is the major reason oil prices have better than doubled in the last 6 months. The question that Ron asks, though, seems to me pertinent:
Will Americans tolerate such sweeping interventions into their lives and workplaces? … The 1994 mid-term election became a referendum on [...]
We Forgive You. Now Git.
I'm saddened, frustrated , and absolutely disappointed. The story of Mark Sanford was a roller coaster that dumped me off a cliff at the end. Allow me to take you through this sequentially.
I've spent the past 36 hours dramatically changing my thoughts about how I might speak to the unusual story of South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford's mysterious disappearance. Mark was the head of the Republican Governor's Association (now headed by Haley Barbour), and considered a potential candidate for the 2012 Presidential nomination.
First I thought, after hearing that he had been missing for several days after driving off in a bodyguard's SUV, that this guy was a little weird. I could, at that point, conceive of only one type of circumstance that might explain this behavior, and that would be some kind of kidnapping or other threat by an outside party. Barring such a circumstance, I figured running for President didn't sound like something that could be on his calendar... disappearing on purpose and intentionally avoiding everyone with no explanation just didn't sound like an event that would instill anyone's confidence. The good news, I thought, is that he certainly hadn't disappeared because of an extramarital affair. No one would draw this much attention just so they could spend time with an alternate squeeze.
Later on I heard he was hiking in the Appalachian Trail. Clearing his head, evidently. According to his staff, this was not unusual, so my thoughts about the man didn't change much, just continuing to seem very odd and unlikely to be a kidnapping but rather just some eccentricity. South Carolina officials were [...]
Specter, Principles, And Trust (Rather, the Lack of Them)
To begin with, let’s get a snip of this morning’s op-ed up on National Review:
Arlen Specter belongs to a type familiar to Congress: the time-serving hack devoid of any principle save arrogance. He has spent three decades in the Senate but is associated with no great cause, no prescient warning, no landmark legislation. Yet he imagines that the Senate needs his wisdom and judgment for a sixth term. He joined the Republican party out of expediency in the 1960s, and leaves it out of expediency this week.Indeed. At the end of the day,what we have here is the second in a line of what will be many ‘victims’ of what are now being called the Tea Party protests. The first, I think, was John McCain. Now, you’re going to be hearing, over the next weeks and months between now and the mid-term elections, how the supposed GOP swing to the extreme right has cost the Republicans the 2008 election. These charges have come from such as Lindsay Graham and Ramesh Ponnuru, among others, and of course from staunch Democrats, who it would appear are simply pulling themselves up on any available handhold. Specter, in particular blames that factor on his leaving the party. But it’s not so. In truth, the movement of the party for the time that Specter has been in office, has been to the left… The exception… Reagan.. being their wildest success. That leftward march since Reagan has damaged the party, and the country and culminated in the GOP losses in 2008. The Tea Parties have been a [...]
The Stimulus That Wasn’t Gets Passed
Bruce McQuain, this morning at Q&Q:
Well there’s an agreement on the Generational Theft Act of 2009. The squishy middle has capitulated. As expected, just enough Republicans have signed on to ensure its passage. Names? Specter for one:Which, doubtless, will be endlessly touted by the Democrats over the following two years. And, forever, for that matter, each time the amount of debt incurred by this mess turns up as a discussion point on online venues, or talking head programs. The problem is obvious; it is what Bruce describes as the “squishy middle†. I’ve been telling you people for nearly a decade now that it is the centrists among us that are going to kill us off as a nation. If this [...]Specter said Friday night that action was “very necessary,†and this bill, though not perfect, is better than inaction. “I think no one could argue with the fact that the situation would be much worse without this bill,†Specter said at a news conference.And of course, Susan Collins is the other (and Olympia Snowe is also reportedly going to vote for it). Voinavich and Martinez bailed. They’ll give this the veneer of bi-partisan legitimacy.
The Path to Victory: Grassroots Republicanism
Let’s start, with a premise:
Every Republican president candidate since 1964 has had their level of success or failure, respectively, tied directly to the degree of voter perception that they have or have not turned their back on conservatism.
Consider the history of the thing… and it all flows one way:
- Nixon billed himself a conservative, and successfully, even though in most respects he was a California Moderate, and came down more or less where John McCain was in the most recent election; to the left of George W Bush. Yet, Nixon had an electoral landslide in both elections. (Admittedly, the Democrats he ran against were a laughable lot, which didn’t hurt him.)
- Bush 41 figured if he bent over forward enough, the left would [...]
Stay in Touch
