Search This Blog

Sunday, May 26, 2013

"He who must not be named."

Richard Fernandez says it's like a scene from Marvel comics.  Actually it's like a scene from Harry Potter where it's forbidden to actually refer to Lord Voldemort by name.

We have the President of France tell us that we should not jump to conclusions about who stabbed a French soldier.

“The lone attacker was described as a young man wearing a Muslim prayer cap and a North African-style robe called a jellabah. According to a police account, he was monitored on security cameras and seen shedding his robe and fleeing in European clothes before disappearing into the crowd in a subway and suburban train entrance.”
Who could this be? the French leader is baffled.  In Sweden the police have adopted a policy of passive bystanding, except if some Swedes try to protect their property, then they swing into action with clubs and riot gear.

The same kind of bizarre game is being played by the press in the coverage of the riots in Stockholm, now going for almost a week. The Washington Post sets out five charts to explain Sweden’s “youth riots.” “The violent youth riots that spread across Stockholm’s suburbs this week seem at odds with the public perception of Sweden as one of the world’s most liberal and tolerant countries.” We are told the “youth riots” are due to the relative underprivilege of the “foreign born.” But does the Post mean Chinese immigrants then? No they don’t. The Washington Post knows what it means and we are supposed to know what it means, but we are not supposed to admit that we know what it means.

One can only conclude that the authorities themselves jumped to conclusions before anyone else. That they were sure from the first instant what they were dealing with since they knew exactly what words or phrases nobody could refer to. And you can’t do that unless you yourself have jumped to the same conclusions nobody else should jump to.

Thus, references to Chinese, Japanese, Filipinos, or Mexicans appeared little censored. Why, you can chaff these people with no consequence. But words referring to certain identities we are not supposed to associate with the news stories are quickly punished such that the UK authorities, who lack the manpower to monitor individuals with terror files at MI5 as long as one’s arm, can still find an ample number of policemen to track down on Facebook and Twitter.
What is it that these lying weasels who head the West's democracies fear? Are they prisoners of their own delusions?
In some paradoxical way, the enemies of the West are now freer than their targets; free, by virtue of their defiance, from the mind-boggling hypocrisy and doublethink that encumber anyone who still subscribes to conventional wisdom. If radical Islamism has any merit at all, it lies in seeing a supine and defenseless culture for what it really is: a fat, idiotic target waiting to be plundered.

How does Holder survive?

Michael A. Walsh calls him Obama's alter ego. Holder says and does things that the president can't say.

By turns whiny, shifty, obfuscatory, petulant, insulting and arrogant, Holder has become a fixture before congressional investigating committees, fending off one Obama scandal after another, while proclaiming that he — the nation’s top cop — doesn’t know anything about anything and highly resents any implication that he does.

Indeed, all the Obama scandals — the murderous gunrunning scheme called Fast and Furious, the secret monitoring of the Associated Press and Fox News reporter James Rosen (personally approved by Holder), even the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative and Tea Party groups for special scrutiny — find their nexus at the top of the Justice Department.

That's true but there is a much bigger reason. Holder is more than Obama's trigger man, he's holding Obama up. There are too many bodies buried by Holder to allow someone else, perhaps with a higher threshold of corruption, to take over Justice. Obama can't take the chance that the truth of Fast and Furious, the IRS, the internal spying, come out during his administration.

Without Holder, Obama becomes vulternable to the law. Glenn Reynolds: Holder is also protection

Woman arrested in Myrtle Beach for wearing thong swimsuit

After covering up.

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2013/05/25/2786497/woman-arrested-in-myrtle-beach.html#storylink=cpy

Maoist rebels kill dozens in India

NEW DELHI (AP) -- Indian officials reacted with outrage Sunday to an audacious attack by about 200 suspected Maoist rebels who killed 24 people by setting off a bomb and firing on a convoy carrying ruling party leaders and members in an insurgency-wracked state.

Saturday's ambush, which targeted Congress party politicians returning from a campaign event with the area's indigenous tribal community, appeared to be a warning to officials to stay away from the rebels' main base of support.

Why do they hate Indians so?

What Detroit crisis? Pension fund trustees hang out in Hawaii

(Reuters) - The city of Detroit may be facing a deepening financial crisis but that hasn't stopped four trustees of its public pension funds from spending $22,000 of retirement system funds to attend a conference in Hawaii this week....

The four trustees from Detroit were among hundreds of pension officials from around the country who traveled in the past week to Honolulu for the annual convention of the National Conference on Public Employee Retirement Systems. Nowling said that Orr's team did not think they had the power to prevent the trip.

Usually the conference captures little outside attention. This year, though, it has faced criticism for its choice of venue, the Hilton Hawaiian Village Waikiki Beach Resort with its five-acre salt-water lagoon, five swimming pools, and flamingos, penguins and turtles.

Attendees claim this is NOT a vacation ashey drink expense accoutn Mai-tais at poolside.

Just a bunch of misguided individuals.

Two men who claimed they had a bomb tried to burst into the cockpit of a flight bound for Britain, triggering fighter jets to be scrambled to intercept the aircraft.


Jet diverted to Stansted after two passengers
__________________________________________________________________________________

Swedish police call in back-up after worst riots in years

Posted Sat May 25, 2013 8:20am AEST
Police in Stockholm called in reinforcements after rioters set cars and a school ablaze in a fifth night of rioting, described as the worst in years.
 
_______________________________________________________________________________
 

British Soldier Beheaded Outside London Barracks


A man believed to be a British soldier was beheaded and hacked up with a meat cleaver by two men, who were then shot by police in London Wednesday afternoon, authorities say.

The victim was cut up "like a piece of meat," said one eyewitness to the slaughter, which occurred in broad daylight near an Army barracks.

The shocking slaughter in the Woolwich area of southeast London was being treated as a possible terrorist attack.
 
____________________________________________________________________________

Richard Fernandez stitches these things together and makes the point that
So it’s only understandable that President Obama’s speech for today focuses on sexual assaults in the military while David Cameron is concentrating on the issue of gay marriage. ...

When things are tough it’s time to deal with the really important things. Count on it. From here on we’ll hear more about the troubles of reality show contestants and the wardrobe malfunctions of buxom celebrities. What else can our dear leaders do? Face the facts?

Trivia is most appealing when the substantial is least. But it’s not all escapism; excessive amounts of unspinnable tidings create a genuine saturation. Back in the days of the Cold War, naval analysts used to count the number of fire control radars on a ship to calculate the number of missiles you had to fire to sink it. If a warship had four radars the ‘price of admission’ was five missiles. The fifth it was presumed, would be one more than the defensive systems could handle. This is analogous to the situation the news is currently in. The narrative machine is overloaded.
 
Presidential roadies can't spin fast enough or claim to know nothing about anything before the next info bomb hits or the next Muslim on Jihadi does something "totally unexpected."  After as while, things begin stick to even the most resistant mind so that even editors of the Virginia Pilot have to divert their gaze from a blank stare into space to realize that their tin God has really screwed up.

Drudge: JERSEY SHORE OPEN FOR BUSINESS


JERSEY SHORE OPEN FOR BUSINESS


Good job,Barry!

Saturday, May 25, 2013

Blazing Cat Fur: They're not Riots, They're "Diversity Bonfires"

The Five



Bob Beckel says it's Muslims!

It's Not About the Nail: "Don't try to fix it. I just need you to listen."


Parking Tickets Issued on Wrecks while Stockholm Burns

It's good to know that Stockholm police have their priorities right.



Since last Sunday, May 19, rioters have taken to the streets of Stockholm’s suburbs every night, torching cars, schools, stores, office buildings and residential complexes. Yesterday, a police station in Rågsved, a suburb four kilometers south of Stockholm, was attacked and set on fire.

But while the Stockholm riots keep spreading and intensifying, Swedish police have adopted a tactic of non-interference. ”Our ambition is really to do as little as possible,” Stockholm Chief of Police Mats Löfving explained to the Swedish newspaper Expressen on Tuesday.

”We go to the crime scenes, but when we get there we stand and wait,” elaborated Lars Byström, the media relations officer of the Stockholm Police Department. ”If we see a burning car, we let it burn if there is no risk of the fire spreading to other cars or buildings nearby. By doing so we minimize the risk of having rocks thrown at us.”

Swedish parking laws, however, continue to be rigidly enforced despite the increasingly chaotic situation. Early Wednesday, while documenting the destruction after a night of rioting in the Stockholm suburb of Alby, a reporter from Fria Tider observed a parking enforcement officer writing a ticket for a burnt-out Ford.

When questioned, the officer explained that the ticket was issued because the vehicle lacked a tag showing its time of arrival. The fact that the vehicle had been effectively destroyed – its windshield smashed and the interior heavily damaged by fire – was irrelevant according to the meter maid, who asked Fria Tider’s photographer to destroy the photos he had taken. Her employer, the parking company P-service, refused to comment when Fria Tider contacted them on Wednesday afternoon.

H/T VanderLeun 

Why I Like Ted Cruz - again


They don’t want to integrate’: Fifth night of youth rioting rocks Stockholm


So how is that tolerance working out for you?

Anatomy of a liberal shakedown - the H Street Project


The Center for American Progress: where crony capitalists meet Team Obama.
What a fantastic talent liberals possess, the ability to talk out of both sides of their mouths. One side utters platitudes about campaign finance reform and the nefarious influence of money in politics, while the other whispers in the ears of oligarchs and plutocrats. One side slanders Republicans as the tools of corporate interests, while the other solicits donations from some of the largest corporations in the world. The next journalist to examine influence peddling on K Street need only walk two blocks south, to H Street. There he’ll find one heck of a story.

H Street is the home of the Center for American Progress (CAP), founded by former Clinton chief of staff John Podesta in the fall of 2003. Originally conceived as a think tank to match the conservative Heritage Foundation and American Enterprise Institute, CAP quickly dropped the thinking and became, simply, a tank. Its objective was to overpower conservatives and Republicans, to devastate them with a fusillade of government activism, to pulverize their fortifications with ammunition loaded into the progressive echo chamber.

Good weapons don’t come cheap. CAP requires considerable stimulus to acquire, track, and destroy its targets. Podesta’s fundraising methods, as one might expect from a Clintonite, were ingenious. He incorporated two entities: The Center for American Progress as a tax-deductible nonprofit 501(c)(3), and the Center for American Progress Action Fund as a tax-exempt 501(c)(4). Donations would not be disclosed, allowing contributors the protection of anonymity even as CAP called for transparency in political giving and government regulation of political speech.

CAP and CAP Action shared office space, and employees of one entity often wrote for the other, but Podesta’s media flacks always were careful to distinguish between them. CAP, for instance, is where you find the high-toned stuff, the demographic determinism of Ruy Teixeira and the collected ravings of Larry Former Reagan Official Korb.

CAP Action is of a lower brow. It publishes the ThinkProgress blog, where for a time you could read, among other critics of the “lobby,” the foreign policy analysis of one Zaid Jilani, who described his opponents on Twitter as “Israel-firsters”; the creative misspellings of amateur philosopher and terrorist impersonator Matthew Yglesias; and the factually half-baked conspiracy theories of Lee Fang. Think of them as the greats.

Like other greats, all three young men have since left the building, moving on to the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (Jilani), Slate (Yglesias), and the Nation (Fang). Funny enough, it was another Nation writer, Ken Silverstein, who published the bombshell report last week on the finances of his colleague’s former employer, exposing for the first time the identities of corporate donors to the Center for American Progress.

Silverstein’s work, like other reporting from the Los Angeles Times and Mother Jones and the WFB, explores the numerous ditches and culverts irrigated by the river of left-wing dark money that flows through American politics. Essential reading, his piece reveals the extent to which liberal groups benefit from the business community’s desire to get right with the mandarins who have the power to sue and investigate and boycott and demonize. For immunity, and for favor, companies are willing to pay a pretty penny.

Silverstein describes how CAP, in just a few years, grew from seed money provided by the secretive Democracy Alliance of progressive donors to obtain assets of more than $20 million. Its finances took a hit in 2006 despite the Democratic victory in that year’s midterm elections. The following year, CAP management created the Business Alliance, “a membership rewards program for corporate contributors.”

Money came in. And when Barack Obama was elected president in 2008, the alliance grew. “CAP’s total assets now top $44 million,” Silverstein reports, “and its Action Fund treasury holds $6 million more.” CAP’s ability to reflect and influence the opinion of liberal elites, however, is priceless.

Silverstein obtained a document CAP used in 2011 to pitch possible members of the Business Alliance. Slog past the barely literate sentences—“Recognizing the importance of the private sector perspective in the issues debate, the Business Alliance program has proven to be a successful way to keep CAP and its experts connected with and cognizant of business perspectives on the issues of highest priority on our work”—and one arrives finally at the nitty-gritty.

Three levels of membership are described. A $25,000 annual contribution gains one’s corporation entry to “regularly scheduled roundtable discussions with CAP experts, business, Hill, and national leaders”; “two opportunities to engage CAP experts in private meetings”; “invitation to VIP events with leaders from government, business, and academia”; and “updates on new CAP reports and products from Business Alliance staff relevant to your unique interests.”

For a $50,000 annual contribution, one’s corporation enjoys all of those benefits, as well as “two additional opportunities to engage CAP experts in private meetings”; an “exclusive Business Alliance overview meeting offering analyses of issues on Capitol Hill”; and a “private session with American Progress communications and outreach staff.”

And for those special interests that just can’t meet and engage and attend sessions enough, a $100,000 contribution gets one’s corporation all of those benefits, as well as a “membership in Green Energy Economy Council (GEEC)”; a “membership in International Business Council pilot program”; an “invitation to participate in Global Progress Summit”; and a “private meeting with a member of the American Progress Executive Committee.” Only in Obama’s America does it cost $100k to be called a GEEC.

Not stated directly, of course, is that what all of the briefings and interactions and councils get you is entry into the corridors of a think tank with close ties to the presidency. Podesta, whose brother is one of the most influential lobbyists in town, oversaw the transition team that staffed the Obama administration. As American Progress chairman, he watches over his empire. The current head of CAP is Neera Tanden, who has worked for Obama and Hillary Clinton. Tom Perriello, a former liberal Democratic congressman who was one of the president’s favorites, runs CAP Action. These are influential people.

So influential are they, that the Department of Energy loan program that gave us Solyndra and First Solar was largely designed in CAP’s offices. Silverstein tells the appalling story of how a CAP representative praised First Solar in congressional testimony, and promoted it in CAP publications, without revealing that the solar manufacturer was a member of the Business Alliance, and that one of CAP’s board members was also on the board of First Solar. (He left the First Solar board in 2012.)

“CAP’s promotion of the company’s interests has supplemented First Solar’s aggressive Washington lobbying efforts, on which it spent more than $800,000 during 2011 and 2012,” Silverstein writes. The investment returned dividends. Such lobbying has allowed First Solar to enjoy hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer-backed loans and subsidies.

“CAP is a strong proponent of alternative energy, so there’s no reason to doubt the sincerity of its advocacy,” Silverstein observes. No reason at all. Yet I wonder if Silverstein would have been so charitable if the organization he was describing was, say, Americans for Prosperity, and the donors Charles and David Koch.

We know already that as long as the companies belong to politically correct institutions and back politically correct causes, they are indulged and given the benefit of the doubt. But this street goes in only one direction. Travel with the wrong fellows, support the wrong causes, and you will be picketed, boycotted, tarred, feathered, and dragged through the media mud.

What First Solar and other members of the Business Alliance such as Pacific Gas and Electric, General Electric, Boeing, Lockheed, the University of Phoenix, the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office, the Confederation of Businessmen and Industrialists of Turkey, Goldman Sachs, Walmart, and Comcast are really buying, then, is not so much access but insurance. They are contributing to the Center for American Progress so that they, too, can benefit from the liberal ability to speak from both sides of the mouth. They can reap the benefits of the market, and even of government privilege, so long as they express concern, real or fake, over global warming or abortion rights or affirmative action or whatever the liberal cause of the day happens to be.

They are not participating in an intellectual project or a political movement or a trade association but a shakedown, a scam, a caper—a compelling and labyrinthine detective story that is only beginning to be unraveled.

Steyn: "To the Slaughter"

On Wednesday, Drummer Lee Rigby of the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, a man who had served Queen and country honorably in the hell of Helmand Province in Afghanistan, emerged from his barracks on Wellington Street, named after the Duke thereof, in southeast London. Minutes later, he was hacked to death in broad daylight and in full view of onlookers by two men with machetes who crowed “Allahu akbar!” as they dumped his carcass in the middle of the street like so much road kill...
 
If you’re thinking of getting steamed over all that, don’t. Simon Jenkins, the former editor of the Times of London, cautioned against “mass hysteria” over “mundane acts of violence.”
 
That’s easy for him to say. Woolwich is an unfashionable part of town, and Sir Simon is unlikely to find himself there of an afternoon stroll. Drummer Rigby had less choice in the matter. Being jumped by barbarians with machetes is certainly “mundane” in Somalia and Sudan, but it’s the sort of thing that would once have been considered somewhat unusual on a sunny afternoon in south London — at least as unusual as, say, blowing up eight-year-old boys at the Boston Marathon. It was “mundane” only in the sense that, as at weddings and kindergarten concerts, the reflexive reaction of everybody present was to get out their cell phones and start filming.
...
The BBC’s Nick Robinson accidentally described the men as being “of Muslim appearance,” but quickly walked it back lest impressionable types get the idea that there’s anything “of Muslim appearance” about a guy waving a machete and saying “Allahu akbar.” A man is on TV dripping blood in front of a dead British soldier and swearing “by Almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you,” yet it’s the BBC reporter who’s apologizing for “causing offence.” To David Cameron, Drummer Rigby’s horrific end was “not just an attack on Britain and on the British way of life, it was also a betrayal of Islam. . . . There is nothing in Islam that justifies this truly dreadful act.”

Read the whole thing.

How much of Bloomberg’s fortune was gotten from monitoring his customers?


Virtually all the major financial institutions use Bloomberg terminals.  I say virtually all because it’s possible that there may be a hold-out, but Bloomberg is indispensable to the financial world.  It now appears that the Bloomberg sales force, the guys at the bottom of the information pyramid, has access to their customer’s usage patterns and could see what they were doing.  How much more can the top guy find out about what his customers are doing? 

For people who are not in the financial industry an explantion is in order.  The Bloomberg system is like Google, Bing, Facebook and the telephone company combined.  It’s a vast data base for people who want to look up statistics and financial facts.  But it’s also a communications network that allows Bloomberg’s customer to make trades.  The people who run the Bloomberg System can monitor this, and Michael Bloomberg is at the top of that system.  The Week:
"At Bloomberg, omniscience is a feature, not a bug." Monitoring terminal users' data has long been part of an obsession with controlling and using all available data at the company, where "stalking is simply part of the culture." Employees can keep tabs on each other, checking when someone scans — or "badges" — out of an office, and management is said to log every keystroke to track staff and outside customers. That Bloomberg culture explains how hundreds of people at the company could spy on customers "without batting an eye." In fact, this suddenly "inexcusable" practice highlights a key to Bloomberg's phenomenal success. "Data comes into the company — as much as possible, from wherever possible — but it doesn't leave because, at Bloomberg, information is money."

Being able to know what a huge hedge fund manager, the traders at Goldman Sachs or the guys at the Federal Reserve are doing before they even do (log every keystroke) it is a huge advantage if someone wanted to use that information to make money.
Of course he’s not supposed to do that. 
Of course the IRS is not supposed to attack conservative groups as a way of silencing opposition to Obama, the Holder Justice Department is not supposed to spy on reporters, and the mainstream media is not supposed to be blatantly partisan, but that’s the way it is. 
Glenn Reynolds has remarked that   “In the Obama era, the question isn’t whether you’re paranoid. It’s whether you’re paranoid enough.”
I never questioned that the information that the Bloomberg terminal I was using would be misused.  The fact is that my inquiries were plain vanilla and I did not trade on the system.  But questions about the misuse of any data base are no longer related to the tin-foil-hat crowd.  So the question occurs to people who are getting very suspicious about spying and corruption: were all of the billions Michael Bloomberg accumulated just  due to the rental fees on his terminals or was some part based on the illicit use of the system he created; a system that made it possible for him to spy on his customers?  In the Obama era that question can no longer be dismissed.

Killing vs. Tweeting in England


The English legal system stood down for 20 minutes as a British soldier was run down and hacked to death on a London Street.  The unarmed police waited for the armed police. 

Meanwhile two men "tweeted" uncomplimentary comments about the practitioners of Islam who committed the murder.  Police reacted swiftly and arrested the tweeters.

The brutal murder of an off-duty soldier by two Muslim activists continues to dominate the news in Great Britain. The scene was utterly bizarre: in broad daylight, in a busy section of London, the two Muslims apparently ran the soldier down with a car, within a block or two of his barracks, and then attacked him with knives and a meat cleaver. They attempted to behead him, apparently not quite successfully, as hundreds of passers-by looked on. No one stopped them–private ownership of firearms being illegal in the U.K.–but three random women, who have been extravagantly praised for their bravery, tended to the soldier’s body and engaged the murderers in conversation, in hopes of diverting them from killing anyone else. This went on for quite a while.
I was puzzled by early reports which indicated that police were present at the scene from the beginning, but also suggested that the killers waited for something like 20 minutes for policemen to arrive, whereupon they attacked them. It turns out that the reports were not inconsistent. There were policemen on the scene from the beginning, but they were unarmed:
Although other bystanders watched in horror and police waited helplessly for armed officers to arrive, Gemini modestly insisted her [sic] and her mother were not heroes and had done what anyone else would do.
The idea of policemen in one of the world’s major cities “wait[ing] helplessly for armed officers to arrive,” while murderers parade up and down the street soaked in blood and the body of a half-beheaded soldier lies in the street, is almost unbelievable. And yet that is the state of law enforcement in Great Britain. The average American household is better armed than a London policeman, and as a result, it was left to a few women from the crowd of bystanders to try to deal with cleaver-wielding murderers.

But that doesn’t mean the British are entirely lax with respect to law enforcement. No, not at all: it just depends which laws you are talking about. If you mean laws against carving up innocent people on the street with knives, well, the Brits have a problem. But if you complain about such an outrage on Facebook or Twitter, you’re going to be crushed by the full majesty of the law.

Well, it is a lot less risky to arrest a tweeter than a killer.

Friday, May 24, 2013

The Story of Catherine Engelbrecht and the IRS, FBI, OSHA, BATF and the Chicago Way.

Peggy Noonan's article in the Wall street Journal about Catherine Engelbrecht tells you all you need to know about the Obama government.
But the most important IRS story came not from the hearings but from Mike Huckabee's program on Fox News Channel. He interviewed and told the story of Catherine Engelbrecht—a nice woman, a citizen, an American. She and her husband live in Richmond, Texas. They have a small manufacturing business. In the past few years she became interested in public policy and founded two groups, King Street Patriots, and True the Vote.

In July 2010 she sent applications to the IRS for tax-exempt status. What followed was not the harassment, intrusiveness and delay we're now used to hearing of. The US government came down on her with full force.

In December 2010 the FBI came to ask about a person who'd attended a King Street Patriots function. In January 2011 the FBI had more questions. The same month the IRS audited her business tax returns. In May 2011 the FBI called again for a general inquiry about King Street Patriots. In June 2011 Engelbrecht's personal tax returns were audited and the FBI called again. In October 2011 a round of questions on True the Vote. In November 2011 another call from the FBI. The next month, more questions from the FBI. In February 2012 a third round of IRS questions on True the Vote. In February 2012 a first round of questions on King Street Patriots. The same month the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms did an unscheduled audit of her business. (It had a license to make firearms but didn't make them.) In July 2012 the Occupational Safety and Health Administration did an unscheduled audit. In November 2012 more IRS questions on True the Vote. In March 2013, more questions. In April 2013 a second ATF audit.

All this because she requested tax-exempt status for a local conservative group and for one that registers voters and tries to get dead people off the rolls. Her attorney, Cleta Mitchell, who provided the timeline above, told me: "These people, they are just regular Americans. They try to get dead people off the voter rolls, you would think that they are serial killers."

This week Ms. Engelbrecht, who still hasn't received her exemptions, sued the IRS.
This did not come about because of some low level employee in a cubicle in Cincinnati. When that many government agencies come down on you, that's the Chicago way.
This was Chicago. And for a business owner to get involved meant one thing: It would cost you money and somebody from government could destroy you.

The health inspectors would come, and the revenue department, the building inspectors, the fire inspectors, on and on. The city code books aren't thick because politicians like to write new laws and regulations. The codes are thick because when government swings them at a citizen, they hurt.

And who swings the codes and regulations at those who'd open their mouths? A government worker. That government worker owes his or her job to the political boss. And that boss has a boss.

The worker doesn't have to be told. The worker wants a promotion. If an irritant rises, it is erased. The hack gets a promotion. This is government.

So everybody kept their mouths shut, and Chicago was hailed by national political reporters as the city that works.

I didn't understand it all back then, but I understand it now. Once there were old bosses. Now there are new bosses. And shopkeepers still keep their mouths shut. Tavern owners still keep their mouths shut.

Even billionaires keep their mouths shut.

One hard-working billionaire whose children own the Chicago Cubs dared to open his mouth. Joe Ricketts considered funding a political group critical of Obama before last year's campaign. Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Obama's former chief of staff, made it clear that if the Cubs wanted City Hall's approval to refurbish decrepit Wrigley Field, Ricketts better back off.

It happened. He backed off. It was sickening. But it was and is Chicago.

And now — with the IRS used as political muscle and the Obama administration keeping that secret until after the president was elected — America understands it too.



All the President's Men


Peggy Noonan gets it almost right

The WSJ’s Peggy Noonan lays out the known facts of the IRS case and concludes that it requires a special prosecutor. She’s right, and frankly, it’s amazing how in a week, the American media has pretty much come around from the question of if a special prosecutor is needed for the IRS investigation, to how broad should be the limits of the special prosecutor’s investigation?

But here’s where Noonan gets it wrong. Right in the last paragraph:


“Again, if what happened at the IRS is not stopped now—if the internal corruption within it is not broken—it will never stop, and never be broken. The American people will never again be able to have the slightest confidence in the revenue-gathering arm of their government. And that, actually, would be tragic.”

Actually it wouldn’t be “tragic” if the American people were not to have confidence in this or any arm of their government. It would be exactly what the Founders called for.

My favorite quotation from the entire 85 editions of the Federalist Papers is this one from Federalist 25 by Alexander Hamilton:



“The people are always most in danger when the means of injuring their rights are in the possession of those of whom they entertain the least suspicion.”


In fact, you could almost sum up the gist of the entire Constitution with that single statement,

I wish I had said that.

"Racist" Terms

Glenn Reynolds links to an article about the reason that fried chicken is now a racist term.
The article Culinary Racism gives various explanations going back to slavery.
The most obvious explanation derives from the historical fact that fried chicken dishes were popular in slave homes on Southern plantations. In many cases, chickens were the only livestock animals that slaves were permitted to raise on their own, and—given that Scots founded much of the American South—there’s speculation that African-Americans tweaked and perfected their masters’ imported tradition of frying birds.

But there's a problem with this because lots of people like fried chicken: A lot of it is regional: people in the South are perceived to like friend chicken more than their northern counterparts. The South is poorer than the North and chicken is less expensive than beef so the fondness for chicken could be explained by relative wealth. I'm a Dutch immigrant and I love fried chicken; does that make me Black? Should I avoid serving friend chicken at any gathering where Blacks are present? If my Black friends serve friend chicken are they self-hating?

Let me propose an alternative explanation. The fried chicken=racist equation was created by the very powerful Race Industry. As an illustration of how these associations are created we need only refer to some of the Liberal race hustlers of today who tell us that:
  • Lazy=racists
  • Colored=racist (ever since the RI invented other terms)
  • Negro=racist  (ever since the RI invented other terms)
  • Niggardly=racist (out of ignorance a perfectly good word was outlawed)
  • Boy=racist
  • Cotton pickin’=racist
  • Urban=racist  (this really is a euphemism when used by the "good people")
  • “shuck and jive”=racist (except when Chris Matthews or Andrew Coumo uses it)
  • “this president”=racist
  • Chicago=racist
  • References to golf (if played by Obama)=racist
  • Whitewash=racist
  • Limbaugh=racist (just because)
Before this list gets too long, let’s just go with the Chris Matthews definition of racist to include any criticism of Barack Obama. In fact, it is fair to broaden that to include any criticism of Blacks (can I say that; is that still the accepted term?) as racist. That’s why I was so shocked to see the Miami police department preparing for an "Urban Beach Weekend" without being accused of blatant racism. Now that it’s been pointed out, expect the “Justice Brothers” to hop on a plane and lead the demonstrations.