It’s 0840 EST 21 Dec 12, and we’re still here. At what time can we officially call this whole Mayan end of the world thing bunk?
Who Got Jobs During the Obama Presidency?
Steven A. Camarota, CIS, Nov. 2012
A new analysis of government data shows that two-thirds of the net increase in employment since President Obama took office has gone to immigrant workers, primarily legal immigrants. Although the level of new immigration overall has fallen, legal immigration remains very high. While economists debate the extent to which immigrants displace natives, the new data make clear that there is no general labor shortage in the United States. This analysis calls into question the wisdom of bringing in more than a million new legal immigrants each year at a time when the employment situation remains bleak.
Among the findings of this analysis:
While discussing the matter of whom one is voting for, the air seams a bit stuffy. The rationale breaks down: voting Third Party is cool if slightly so 2004, not voting is a boring moral posture for the internet, voting Romney is gambling (for one’s eternal soul and all that); voting Obama is neocon spite.
I tend to lean that most of the major policy movements are already written and built into the system, and timing coupled with rationale being the only surprise which has always led to conservatives arguing about the last battle. That said, some other sorts of predictions:
1) If Romney wins, will there be urban “unrest”? If Obama wins will there be urban “unrest”?
2) If Obama wins, will Conservative Inc lead with the charge of voter fraud? Or will they favor blaming the Ron Paul wing and the Gary Johnson/Goode votes? Or will they blame the bete noir, socons?
3) If Obama wins, will the storyline from Conservative Inc and the MSM be that the American people like divided government so lets all move along.
4) If Romney loses, will they blame anti-Mormon feelings?
5) Easy one: will the debt ceiling be raised by a lame-duck Congress?
6) What will be unleashed by a lame duck Congress?
So Takimag still has some interesting pieces from time to time, including this one from Nicholas Farrell:
One of the reasons the West is in such deep trouble is that it has allowed “rights” to kill off what’s “right,” as in “that which is right.”
Rights are used to justify a whole series of wrongs, from the declaration of unwise or unjust wars to the condemnation of smokers to a life on the streets.
No greater Americana legend in music then Ronnie Van Zant, has been trampled on. With only one remaining member who ever played a recorded lick on a track or two, Lynyrd Skynyrd has decided to drop the Confederate flag as part of their aesthetic.
On the strength of Atlanta music scene indie heroes, Drive By Trucker’s, Southern Rock Opera, all got a fuller picture of the legend:
Now Ronnie and Neil became good friends their feud was just in song
Skynyrd was a bunch of Neil Young fans and Neil he loved that song
So He wrote “Powderfinger” for Skynyrd to record
But Ronnie ended up singing “Sweet Home Alabama” to the lord
And Neil helped carry Ronnie in his casket to the ground
And to my way of thinking, us southern men need both of them around
-”Ronnie and Neil”, Drive By Truckers
In the glam rock scene, there is much discussion, all negative, about the multiple acts using the same name–there are two Great Whites, and two LA Guns touring right now, for example. And Axl takes a load of heat for still using the Guns N Roses name, even though he is the only one left–Axl who once covered himself in the Confederate flag to sing the Midwest isolationist anthem, “Civil War”, and one who lost a relative in the late Unpleasantness that seemed to play on his mind.
But whatever have we done, to live long enough, to see the great Lynyrd Skynyrd bastardized by the corporate manager, attempting to promote an album with of all titles, “Last of a Dyin’ Breed”?
Neil Young helped lower the coffin into the ground.
The author of The Tyranny of Liberalism scrutinizes the supposed Golden Age of high ideals:
A class that rules by claiming not to rule needs to hide what it is. Our new rulers deny their identity as a class while denouncing the influence of classes that remain identifiable as such. If the Supreme Court is all white or male, that’s domination by a particular class and something must be done about it. If it’s all graduates of Yale and Harvard Law School, and recent presidential elections have all been contests between various Yale and Harvard graduates, that’s not domination by a particular class, it’s just proof that Yale and Harvard are superior and the more power we give the Supreme Court and president the better.
Canada maybe the last place on earth you expect political violence but after Wednesday’s provincial election in Quebec that’s exactly what happened. And this wasn’t the work of some deranged loner. Apparently a local businessman tried to assassinate Quebec’s new premiere Pauline Marois, killing one person and wounded one in the process. He also tried to set fire to the Montreal club the Parti Quebecois was holding its victory celebration in.
There has been violence recently in Quebec but it’s been more of the Occupy-kind, rioting students in Montreal protesting tuition hikes which helped to undermine the ruling LP government. The alleged assassin, 62-year old Richard Henry Bain, reportedly shouted anti-Quebecois slogans while being taken away into custody. Marois was trying to revive the sovereignty debate after its has fallen into the doldrums over the past decade of Liberal Party rule. Although the PQ won this was due more to the Grits mismanagement, corruption and voter fatigue with the Liberals (even outgoing Premiere Jean Charet lost his riding) more than a desire for a another referendum (which if held only 30 percent would vote for, if that.) It would be political suicide for her minority government to try something like this (and no one expects her government to last very long anyway).
Still, there is one thing which could revive the debate, and that’s the attitude the ruling Tories takes toward the PQ. If they treat them with contempt, not only could it help the PQ provincially it could help the NDP consolidate their Quebec gains from the last Federal election and truly send the Grits to the ashbin of history. How the Harper government treats Quebec with a distinctly unfriendly, leftist government will show whether Canada’s politics have become as polarized as American politics (and unavoidably so) now that the NDP is the official opposition.
Our secret Charlotte correspondent, Harrison Bergeron, files two reports. Here are his pix of Democratic bigwigs he saw, and here is his reaction to a death threat against Mitt Romney made by a Democratic delegate.
Pat Buchanan’s column on the fortunes of would-be Senator for Missouri, Todd Akin, seemed perfect. Akin, who does not believe in the so-called “rape” exception to “abortion law”, was made to look foolish with his attempt to explain, as I surmise, the rarity of rape related pregnancies that are terminated.
Right and Left, his science, or rather pseudo-science, has been mocked, one supposes, in an attempt to deflect from the actual Christian position on abortion.
All well and fair in these tactical battles–it is an election year in a battleground state.
Over at Apocalypse Cometh, an article this week in the Daily Mail was highlighted, regarding the positive nature of, ahem, ‘male fluid’ on the female psyche—typical Euro sex obsessed one supposes, but there was this highlighted nugget in the Daily Mail article:
Other recent findings from Gallup’s laboratory suggest that semen-exposed women perform better on concentration and cognitive tasks and that women’s bodies can detect ‘foreign’ semen that differs from their long-term or recurrent sexual partner’s signature semen.
They suggest the ability to detect foreign sources is an evolved system that often leads to unsuccessful pregnancies – via greater risk of preeclampsia – because it signals a disinvested male partner who is not as likely to provide for the offspring.
For the sake of argument, if the study is 100% correct, Todd Akin actually does have a scientific point to make, perhaps speculative, but reasonable.
The point being is that the Left is allowed to say what Todd Akin says, and the Republicans/Conservative Inc are the true enforcers of Political Correctness.
Jim Antle, a paleo-sympathetic voice at American Spectator, is moving to the Daily Caller. Antle brought some balance to the commentary at AS. He’ll be missed.
Daniel Larison makes an important point here. Leftist and moderate conventional wisdom is that the GOP Presidential nomination is controlled by conservative ideologues. This is simply not true. You can’t win the GOP nomination and violate certain Republican orthodoxies such as taxes, abortion and guns, but as long as you have checked all the boxes, the GOP generally nominates the relatively moderate choice of the Establishment. Part of this is because there are often a lot of conservative candidates competing in the primary against one (by nature) Establishment choice, but the conservative movement hasn’t done a good job of fielding consensus picks if such candidates even exist. 2000 was unique in that conservatives rallied around the Establishment candidate, Bush II, rather quickly.
The Republican Party has a tendency to nominate the relative moderate in any given presidential field. That has been the rule since 1988. Republican VP selections have so often been “base-pleasing moves to the right” because many conservatives are usually uninspired or even disappointed by the nominee. Republican VP nominees are usually expected to balance the ticket mostly in the sense that they are supposed to compensate for the nominee’s perceived ideological liabilities.
The principal reason that 1980 was the last time there was a moderate VP nominee on the Republican ticket is that 1980 was also the last time that a relatively more conservative contender prevailed in an open nominating contest. In every open Republican nominating contest since then, the relative moderate has prevailed over a number of conservative challengers. In every case, the relative moderate was considered the early front-runner or heir apparent, very conservative rank-and-file voters and activists were dissatisfied that the party had “settled” for the relative moderate, and the nominee sought to appease them by choosing a running mate that would satisfy them.
When will conservatives learn? They are the Republican Party’s fools. This is why I say, work in the GOP in the primary, but you have to be willing to vote third party in the general if you are dissatisfied. What else is going to change this dynamic?
The Reform Party held their convention this weekend and nominated Andre Barnett. (My IPR post here.) Barnett doesn’t sound like a bad guy, but my how the Reform Party has fallen. They will be on few ballots this year.
In some news closer to home, the California American Independent Party nominated Alan Keyes sidekick Tom Hoefling. For those unfamiliar with this sorry tale, the CA AIP was formerly affiliated with the national Constitution Party but a rump faction left in 2008 in a huff over the fact that their boy Alan Keyes didn’t get the nomination. The CA SoS sided with the rump faction in a mindless decision. Some Virgil Goode supporters had hoped that they would nominate Virgil Goode despite not being formerly affiliated with the CP any longer, but instead they nominated Hoefling. The Hoefling nomination strikes me as pure spite. See IPR discussion of this mess here, here, here, here and here. Also see the Ballot-Access News thread here.
Daniel Larison has a new column up discussing Ryan’s foreign policy. It ain’t pretty. Actually, it is all very predictable boilerplate which means no change from the current GOP consensus even if Ryan is not a true believer. He is, at the least, not a dissenter either.
Here Scott McConnell lets us know that Ryan has been getting briefings from Elliot Abrams, the Kagans, etc.
A few months back, I mentioned some advice on this site, regarding taking over the Democratic Party in the South, employing a more thoughtful set of tactics as Alvin Greene had used to win the Democratic Senate Nomination in South Carolina last cycle. When a convict took 40% for President in the West Virginia Democratic Primary, the tactics moved into protest votes. And now…
In the South, the Democratic Party apparatus is particularly weak, and following solid tactics, Mark Clayton won the Democratic Senate Nomination in Tennessee, in a seven person primary.
Mr. Clayton is not your typical Democrat: he is pro-life, favors traditional marriage, but/and believes in civil liberties and adherence to the Constitution.
His name was also first on the ballot–or that is why they say he won.
A major milestone in the Alvin Greene school of political tactics.
Though it shouldn’t have been a grand irony, it was simply a bit of Trading Places, what with Ice T getting to the Right of his old nemesis, Charlton Heston, generating headlines with a classical defense of the 2nd Amendment.
It was not too shocking—Ice T’s position is in the words of one of the songs on the Cop Killer album that so troubled the Time Warner stockholder:
You try to ban the A.K.
I got ten of ‘em stashed
With a case of hand grenades
Heston scored some rhetorical points off the more egregious lyrics on the record, appealing to the old ladies and all that; he didn’t seem to mind other acts on the Time Warner label, like Slayer who was just keeping with the times, when serial killers were all the rage..
Ice T, is should be noted, seems to be to Heston’s Right on the gun issue, no trivial maneuver. Heston supported gun control in the 60s in the wake of the Kennedy assassinations, so the story goes anyway.
What was a stop and take notice moment, was that Ice T could go out there and generate such headlines. He still sells, apparently.
I’ll note here that Ice T and Body Count toured with the original Lollapalooza—a summer concert series, (1991-92) and was generally well received by the crossover audience he attempted to appeal towards.
Also of note, was Dave Mustaine (frontman for Megadeth, and one of the more notorious alcoholics, amongst other things, of the 80s scene) to push the establishment line (Obama bad, Romney cannot be that awful) on Alex Jones show.
The new normal was pretty extreme back in the day.
I wrote a recent post on various Generals (7/3/2012: Bomber LeMay and the Waco Atrocity) that attempted to sell themselves in ‘the populist Right’ over the years (Walker, LeMay, Partin and most recently Boykin.)
The Family Research Council (call them: 1-800-225-4008 ,e-mail them ) has recently hired one such character, General Jery Boykin, as a new Exec VP.
Boykin was one of the more sinister figures of the latter 90s as a member of Delta Force involved in the planning and execution of the slaughter of men, women and children at Waco. The obvious violation of Posse Comitatus on the part of Clinton, Reno and Delta Force was the stuff of intense inquiry.
Waco: A New Relevation (part II of the Oscar nominated, Waco: Rules of Investigation) covered Delta Force at Waco (~minute 15 of Part II. )
It was standard fare on the populist Right that Boykin was right there along with Wesley Clark and Lon Horiuchi as villains in the Waco massacre.
But now, these many years on, can a “conservative” outfit really test the old saw that “conservatives” have long memories, and get away with hiring this Boykin? Just cause he speaks a new language today?
Probably, but still, it’s worth a note and phone call to the Family Research Council.
There is fear out there expressed by those in the Republican Party, the Romney for President campaign, even the Ron Paul for President campaign about the behavior of Paul supporting delegates and Paul supporters in general at the upcoming GOP National Convention in Tampa.
What does Ron Paul want? Will be speak at the convention? Will he be nominated? Will his supporters be disruptive?
In the context of the modern political convention, which instead of being a deliberative body is a really a tax-payer funded love-in for the nominated candidate, this is an important question. Because these are made-for-TV events, any kind of appearance of disruption of routine party business by parliamentary wrangling of appearance of disunity is frowned upon severely. Everything is meticulously planned and scripted and any deviation from that plan could present an image problem for the folks watching about the candidate the convention will nominate.
For example, there’s talk Ron Paul could have himself put into nomination for vice-president by his delegates forcing a roll call vote which hasn’t happened at a convention since 1972. That will throw everything off schedule if it happens. Just ask George McGovern.
Given this situation, it would seem the Paul supporters would have some leverage with the Romney campaign and the party leadership. Give us what want and we’ll give you decorum. Instead negotiations seem to be happening from the opposite direction. The party seems to be saying either give us decorum or you will have no role at the convention. This is largely due to the fact the upper-echelon of the campaign, persons-like campaign manager Jesse Benton, his string-puller Trygve Olson and the man they want to work for in 2016, Sen. Rand Paul, are looking ahead and trying to make sure Ron Paul supporters and delegates don’t come off in Republican eyes like the protestors at 1968 Democratic National Convention.
You hear the word “respect” more and more from persons in the Paul campaign. No doubt there are those within the campaign who believe their own supporters are an unruly mob and have said so publicly. They’ve gone so far as to schedule their own gathering at Tampa to keep Paul away from grassroots sponsored events festivals schedule the week. Shouldn’t respect be a two-way street? How much respect should Paul supporters be forced give while the Romney campaign forces out Paul supporters from the Massachusetts delegation, and acts in questionable if not downright illegal ways to secure delegates in Oklahoma, Louisiana and Arizona and attack and arrest Paul delegates in the process?
The only “respect” Paul delegates at the convention should show is to the taxpayers who have the fund these Nuremburg-type rallies and make them actual democratic events again. If that means things go off schedule, so be it. Paul delegates can make history by changing again the nature of a political party convention away from spectacle to an actual gathering where there’s debate and discussion and votes, the kinds of things that actually happen in democracy. If left to their own devices I’m sure these delegates would do just that. But I am worried that biggest division in Tampa will not be between Romney and Paul, it will be between and Paul supporters and their own campaign.
Raimondo is out with a column on a favorite, the War of 1812. …
Just a couple points to add:
Who knows if they were lying, as politicians do, but the Massachusetts operation was able to produce several folks, including a Congressman, who denied there was much of anything to the Impressment business. John Quincy Adams, attempting to keep the peace, argued that well, if the subject was murder, then does it really matter how many were actually impressed?
-John Henry, not the steel driving bastard, was a British spy who seemed to have had actual connections with New England Federalist elite who were flirting as pro-secessionist and alliance with Britain. President Madison bought some goods/documents off Henry that alleged there was a Federalist secessionist plot in New England. The New England Federalists denied such a thing, and Madison’s charge was made to look ridiculous when it was learned the “evidence” was purchased. Who knows, really, but an early sign of serious entrepreneurial double agent activity.
-In the year of 1812, the only Prime Minister of England to be assassinated occurred in May of 1812. While the British Empire, namely its naval power, was being challenged severely, the English populace seemed to dislike the Tory PM, seemed to understand where the assassin was coming from; the Prime Minister was killed by a…wait for it...lone gunmen with…keep waiting…a stint in Russia in the bio.
-Most importantly to recall, the Constitution was largely a Southern power move, but the Southern elite overplayed their hand, and went broke over the War of 1812, ceding power to the Yankee elite around Boston.
The embargo Mr. Jefferson had imposed in his move for autarky, coupled with Mr. Madison’s War, had led Boston elites to go long on factories, and with the post-war bust, the Yankee elite ditched their sea going merchant “free trade” thinking, and embraced “protectionism”. It’s often forgotten that protectionism began in the South and West at the beginning of the Constitutional Era Republic, only to be adopted by the Yankee elites after the War of 1812.
Cross post 6/5. Conservative Heritage Times is not necesarily a populist blog, but nevertheless, I work with the nodes of American rightwing populism. Tim Thomas has a very high standing in the local Against culture, and his recent declaration that he will not play next season to focus on “family, faith, and friends” is taken to heart.
Staying on the sporting life theme, Tim Thomas, Bruins goalie, has told the team and his fans, followers, and detractors, that he is taking next year off, to focus on family, faith, and friends.
For background, Tim Thomas played a once in a lifetime (not his, ours) goalie in the 2011 Stanley Cup Playoffs, and delivered the long suffering Boston Bruins their first Stanley Cup since the 1970s.Tim Thomas was a little different in how he got to the NHL; he was a solid college hockey goalie at the University of Vermont, Class of ’97. (College hockey in New England has always been very big, like college football in the South, and the ‘90s Era Hockey East conference was probably as corrupt.)Thomas kicked around the NHL, Europe and so forth, and finally, he had gotten a run with the Bruins. After the Stanley Cup victory, he was probably the city’s most beloved sports celebrity (Tom Brady’s act just doesn’t fit with everybody.)
That is until last January, when he refused to go to the White House and the tide turned strongly against him.
It was rumored that Tim Thomas was one us for some time, and a picture of Thomas posing with a Ron Paul supporter let us know that he was indeed, one of us.
In a way, I was not surprised to hear he was taking a year off, so to speak. One is accustomed to expect such things.
On his facebook, Thomas linked to an article on Glenn Beck’sBlaze site, which had been, most likely, lifted from the ‘Wall Street counter culture’ site, ZeroHedge, foretelling a fast approaching financial doom, rather, apocalypse—within a year’s time.
It would be a mistake to say that Thomas believes the article in a very literal sense, and is hitting the bunker like the aforementioned, Steve Carlton. Spending more time with family, faith and friends, is most likely his motivation.
But there is no question that Tim Thomas is part of our thing–setting a new bar for righteous displays of Againstist angst– and dare I say, dare I hope, likely will continue to be.
Baseball is a terrible sport for a populace to consume. Lacking all of the gentlemanly qualities of multi-day cricket matches, and with no sanctioned orderly violence, the sports simple offering is an introduction to statistics.
But nevertheless, I grew up a Red Sox fan. I can recall an early lesson in life, watching a Red Sox-Yankees game on July 4th, 1983, with my Uncle on a 19 inch black n white. One hates the Yankees at an early age, and when Boggs came up as the last batter, I was cheering for him to get a hit.
My Uncle, who had taught me Yankee hatred–for we all know hatred is taught–told me ‘no, we don’t do that. This is a no hitter, no matter who it is, you root for the pitcher.’
As the years would go by, I followed other sports but I enjoyed baseball’s ability to produce eccentric characters. The drunkards who made up the ‘86 Mets, Steve Carlton in the bunker, Carl Everett telling a reporter dinosaurs were BS–I never laughed at them, I admired them. That is, baseball was admirable because original characters were still coming up the ranks as the other sports became ever more corporate.
Enter John Rocker–a man with a professional wrestling type persona whose livelihood as a closer was eventually taken down by a reporter for Sports Illustrated.
It was good to see that he is still relatively unreconstructed, even still liberal and sentimental, and WND deserves attention for the article on John Rocker.