'The Last Pope': The Prophecy Of Saint Malachy

Catholicism, with a long history shrouded in myth and mystery, has oft lent itself to tales of  Doomsday and Apocalypse (remember, the original end-of-the-worlders were not deciphering the Mayan calender, but the book of revelations).  So it comes as no surprise that the lineage of the popes too is tied to a prophecy that dictates their end will be our end as well.

Meet Saint Malachy:

In 1139 he went to Rome to give an account of the affairs of his diocese to the pope, Innocent II, who promised him two palliums for the metropolitan Sees of Armagh and Cashel. While at Rome, he received (according to the Abbé Cucherat) the strange vision of the future wherein was unfolded before his mind the long list of illustrious pontiffs who were to rule the Church until the end of time. The same author tells us that St. Malachy gave his manuscript to Innocent II to console him in the midst of his tribulations, and that the document remained unknown in the Roman Archives until its discovery in 1590

These short prophetical announcements, in number 112, indicate some noticeable trait of all future popes from Celestine II, who was elected in the year 1130, until the end of the world. They are enunciated under mystical titles. Those who have undertaken to interpret and explain these symbolical prophecies have succeeded in discovering some trait, allusion, point, or similitude in their application to the individual popes, either as to their country, their name, their coat of arms or insignia, their birth-place, their talent or learning, the title of their cardinalate, the dignities which they held etc.


A Nostradamus of the Holy See, as it were. And it seems as if many believe that the soon-to-abdicate Pope Benedict is number #111. The commentary written for the pope of this enumeration was merely "Gloria olivæ":

The Benedictine order traditionally said this Pope would come from their order, since a branch of the Benedictine order is called the Olivetans. St Benedict is said to have prophesied that before the end of the world, a member of his order would be Pope and would triumphantly lead the Church in its fight against evil.


So while our once-Cardinal Ratzinger choose the name "Benedict"upon ascending to the throne, he was not a true Benedictine, which may or may not make the prophecy moot. But seeing 867 years into the future is a dicey thing at best, and one may forgive Malachy his possible confusion.

And what of the pope following Benedict, our "Gloria olivæ"? Malachy wrote, what was for him, at length:

In persecutione extrema S.R.E. sedebit Petrus Romanus, qui pascet oves in multis tribulationibus: quibus transactis civitas septicollis diruetur, & Judex tremêdus judicabit populum suum. Finis.

(In extreme persecution, the seat of the Holy Roman Church will be occupied by Peter the Roman, who will feed the sheep through many tribulations, at the term of which the city of seven hills will be destroyed, and the formidable Judge will judge his people. The End.)

The End, indeed.

Who can say? But with the uneventful passing of 2012 into 2013 without global cataclysm, we need something to worry about, right? I mean, besides global economic collapse, nuclear war, creeping socialism, and the nagging concern that everything is seemingly falling apart all around us....

Choose wisely, Cardinals...





UPDATE:   The signs keep coming...shortly after Pope Benedict's resignation,  we get  this:

Hours after Pope Benedict XVI jolted the Catholic world with the announcement of his resignation, the Boss Upstairs unleashed a shocker of his own — opening the heavens and hurling a bolt straight at St. Peter’s Basilica yesterday.

In what many saw as a sign from the Almighty, lightning struck the rod atop the dome of the more than 500-year-old basilica, one of the Catholic Church’s holiest sites, during a storm yesterday...

Pope Benedict XVI Steps Aside...

'Tis an odd thing, the resignation of a pope, an event not seen in over 600 years.  But I have a theory as to why, one that I think gets a little stronger when one reads between the lines of Benedict's letter of resignation:

I am well aware that this ministry, due to its essential spiritual nature, must be carried out not only with words and deeds, but no less with prayer and suffering. However, in today’s world, subject to so many rapid changes and shaken by questions of deep relevance for the life of faith, in order to govern the bark of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary, strength which in the last few months, has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognize my incapacity to adequately fulfill the ministry entrusted to me. For this reason, and well aware of the seriousness of this act, with full freedom I declare that I renounce the ministry of Bishop of Rome, Successor of Saint Peter, entrusted to me...


Catholicism is under fire as never before, from pogroms in the Middle East to disinterest and decay across Europe,  while in the Untied States, a radically socialist president attempts to force American Catholics to disobey the teachings of their faith and accept Big Government as their new god.

There is a tremendous battle on the horizon.  I believe Pope Benedict saw that, and perhaps realized his armies of the faithful needed a new, younger leader with the vigor to wage the fight for moral survival.  Or perhaps he prayed on it, and received such guidance from above.

But Pope Benedict does not get to pick his own successor, such duties are passed upon his Cardinals.  One wonders, with so many of them having a European bent, if they will pick a new pope who accepts the Obama/Social Democrat definition of the Church's role in a citizen's life:  As secondary to that of the needs and the will of the State.

Or will they pick a man who resists the subjugation of religious morality to government dictate, and will fight to allow Catholics - and all of mankind - to chose their own moral compass?

May I suggest such a man?  I think one Archbishop Timothy Dolan, leader of the New York flock of the faithful, would give governments worldwide fits.  And may force them to expose their true colors, and their real agenda.  Which would help enlighten everyone.

Plus, he's been a real thorn in Barack Obama's side.  See here, and here.

God always provides us with an answer.  The problem, of course, is that we're usually too dense to see it....

Residents Continue To Flee New Jersey In Droves....

Gandalf the Gray advises the people of New Jersey:




Moving company United Van Lines released its 36th annual study of customer migration patterns, analyzing a total of 125,000 moves across the 48 continental states in 2012. The study provides an up-to-date, representative snapshot of overarching moving patterns in the U.S., and reveals a mass exodus from the Northeast.

No. 1: New Jersey

Percentage of outbound moves in 2012: 62.3%
Number of exits tracked: 3,925

At No. 1, New Jersey has the highest ratio of people moving out compared to those moving in. Of the 6,300 total moves tracked in the state last year, 62% were outbound.

“New Jersey has been suffering from deindustrialization for some time now, as manufacturing moved from the Northeast to the South and West,” says economist Michael Stoll, professor and chair of the Department of Public Policy at the University of California, Los Angeles. “And because it’s tied to New York, the high housing costs may also be pushing people out.”


Yet another economist who doesn't know what the f*ck he's talking about. Tell him, Lex:




It's not the cost of housing, it's the taxation on housing. New Jersey is also #1 on the list of 10 States With the Worst Property Taxes:

Average Property Taxes as percent of Median Income: 7.28 percent (The Most)

Average Median Property Taxes Paid on Homes: $6,348 (The Most)

Percent change in Median Home value (2006-2009): -4.5 percent (8th Greatest Decrease)

New Jersey residents spend more as a percentage of their incomes on property taxes than any other state. In some New Jersey counties, the amount of the annual property tax is enormous. In Passaic County in Northern New Jersey, the property tax as a percent of income is nearly 10 percent. Residents have not been helped by the fact that property values in the state decreased 4.5 percent between 2006 and 2009, which is the 8th greatest decrease in the country over that time period.


My property tax, in Old Bridge, New Jersey - not exactly Beverly Hills, mind you - is also nearly 10% of my income. Tied to a business that is rooted in New York, I have few options. But if I could get work in Texas, I'd take the first flight out.

It's not as if  I have - or want -  beachfront property in Old Bridge...

Actually, most of the top-ten states being fled are...well, you can guess:

In fact, most of the top-10 states people are leaving are located in the Northeast and Great Lakes regions, including Illinois (60%), New York (58%), Michigan (58%), Maine (56%), Connecticut (56%) and Wisconsin (55%). According to Stoll, this reflects a consistent trend of migration from the Frost Belt to the Sun Belt states based on a combination of causes.


None of which they mention.  They've got a failing ideology to protect.

So...how long does it take a state to recover after the liberal locusts have picked it dry? Chris Christie is trying, but it may be like trying to empty the ocean with a thimble.

With enough perseverance, I'm sure it can be turned around.  But i don't blame the people of New Jersey for refusing to die waiting...

Northeast Blizzard Update, Plus: Death To The Weather Channel!

Kent Brockman, reporting live:




And by the way, this new fad of "naming winter storms" is wholly a creation & product of The Weather Channel, which is why I won't use the "Nemo" moniker, or any other name they come up with.

Here's their take:

During the upcoming 2012-13 winter season The Weather Channel will name noteworthy winter storms. Our goal is to better communicate the threat and the timing of the significant impacts that accompany these events. The fact is, a storm with a name is easier to follow, which will mean fewer surprises and more preparation...

Naming a storm raises awareness.
Attaching a name makes it much easier to follow a weather system’s progress.
A storm with a name takes on a personality all its own, which adds to awareness.
In today’s social media world, a name makes it much easier to reference in communication.
A named storm is easier to remember and refer to in the future.


There has been some, ahem, "blow-back" on this. The Gothamist:

When the Georgia-based network first announced its intention to name storms last fall, many meteorologists objected to the scheme, with NBC's Andrew Freiden wondering who died and made TWC corporate king of christening weather. As WJLA-TV’s Bob Ryan pointed out, "there was NO coordination of this decision to name winter storms with the National Weather Service or any of the professional groups such as the Weather Coalition, groups within the AMS or NWA."

Yep, the Weather Channel just went ahead and did it, like Colonel Kurtz ordering the assassination of Vietnamese double agents and amassing a Montagnard army of stupidly-named soldiers. And it fucking worked. Everyone from Mayor Bloomberg to, uh, local website Gothamist.com has been calling our current Nor'Easter "Nemo"...


As one might expect, AccuWeather Founder and President Joel N. Myers is none to pleased, and points out the danger of TWC's atmospheric power grab:

In unilaterally deciding to name winter storms, The Weather Channel has confused media spin with science and public safety. We have explored this issue for 20 years and have found that this is not good science and will mislead the public. Winter storms are very different from hurricanes.

Hurricanes are well-defined storms following a path that can be tracked. Winter storms are often erratic, affecting different areas unevenly. Their centers may not be well-defined. There may be multiple centers and they often shift. One area may get a blizzard, while places not too far away may experience rain or fog, or nothing at all. Naming a winter storm that may deliver such varied weather will create more confusion in the public and the emergency management community.


And while I usually don't mind the private sector usurping government agencies (NOAA f*ck'd up badly by not calling Sandy a hurricane), TWC should not be allowed to control the weather narrative, as they have an agenda of their own. I wrote this piece over six years ago:

The Weather Channel's most prominent climatologist is advocating that broadcast meteorologists be stripped of their scientific certification if they express skepticism about predictions of manmade catastrophic global warming. This latest call to silence skeptics follows a year (2006) in which skeptics were compared to "Holocaust Deniers" and Nuremberg-style war crimes trials were advocated by several climate alarmists.

The Weather Channel's (TWC) Heidi Cullen, who hosts the weekly global warming program "The Climate Code," is advocating that the American Meteorological Society (AMS) revoke their "Seal of Approval" for any television weatherman who expresses skepticism that human activity is creating a climate catastrophe.


If TWC has its way, their voice will be the only one reporting the weather:

TWC, in recent years, has acquired several of its competitors (WSI, Weather Underground and Weather Central) and, overwhelmingly, controls the leading share of the U.S. weather audience (from weather.com: “across all its platforms - television, online, desktop and mobile - The Weather Channel has a 76 percent share of the huge U.S. weather audience.”).

It’s somewhat unsettling that it’s apparently not enough for TWC to have a huge majority ownership of the weather reporting business, but that it must also make a play to be the guardian of the weather itself.


Don't help TWC on the road to weather tyranny.  Death to Nemo!

When Politico and The Onion are indistinguishable from each other...

I swear to God, one can barely tell the difference:

Product A:

Obama Blanks On What He's Ineffectually Urging Congress To Take Action On Now

While speaking to the White House press corps Wednesday, President Barack Obama is reported to have completely blanked on which issue he was ineffectually urging Congress to act on at the moment. “It is vitally important that our nation’s lawmakers do the job that they were elected to do, and make it a top priority to, uh, to…well, hmm,” said Obama, nervously tapping his fingers on the lectern as he frantically tried to recall whether he was making a wholly unproductive and effectively meaningless call for legislative action on global warming, gun control, immigration reform, budget compromise, or green energy. “It’s a, um, very important issue, I know that. Uh. Jeez.” After standing silently in front of the audience for several uncomfortable moments, Obama reportedly reprimanded Congress for its lack of cooperation and then walked out of the room.


Product B:

President Obama’s fill-in-the-blank sales pitch

President Barack Obama’s speeches have a familiar ring these days — no matter if it’s guns, immigration or the budget.

Tout what he’s already done. Say the public’s in his corner. Demand Congress do something. Lament Washington dysfunction. Lay out his own plan. Avoid details. Urge voters to keep up the pressure. Warn it won’t be easy. Bask in the applause...


I suppose it's easy to tell that "A" is The Onion, only because the reporting is more honest.  Although, to be fair to Politico, their piece does include a video panel mocking what it calls Obama's "Mad Libs" speeches.

Hey, we've called Obama a "mad lib" for a while now.  Nice to see Politico is finally catching on.  And catching up to The Onion.

Which may be the saddest commentary yet on the state of political media....

Republicans Not Quite As Dead As The Media Would Have You Believe...

If only the media were smart enough to play "connect the dots", they would realize that their liberal "victory" in November was pyrrhic (or perhaps pointless), and that in reality, their party is getting smoked.

Consider:

Obama campaigned on raising taxes for families making above $250K.  The best deal he was able to wrangle out of Congress was hikes on incomes over $450K, and in return, had to make the remainder of the  hated "Bush tax cuts" permanent.  Something George W. Bush wasn't able to do, mind you,  with a Republican House and Senate.

Susan Rice was blocked from becoming the next Secretary of State.  Chuck Hagel's nomination has been derailed, and while it is still possible he may become the next Secretary of Defense, he has been exposed as a bumbler and a fool, and his erstwhile boss as a man of little to no judgement.

And Obama's pick for Treasury Secretary - Jack Lew, perhaps the dumbest and most partisan of the bunch - appears to be on the ropes as well.

If Bob Menendez (D-La Raza) gets sent off to the hoosegow - which seems increasingly likely, and has been long deserved - one Christopher Christie will be the man to appoint his replacement.  And if the Big Man even wants to dream about running for president in 2016, he's gotta put forth a Republican.  And so the Democratic Senate majority will dwindle even further.

Of course, there is this lesser mentioned result of the 2012 elections:

50 states. 30 of them have Republicans governors. 25 of them have complete and total Republican control - the governorship, senate, and house.


And that's not to mention the popularity of some of these Republican governors in deep blue states - the aforementioned Chris Christie, who no one dares run against, and Scott Walker in Wisconsin, who, when forced into a recall, won by a larger margin than he did the first time.

And diversity?  We've got Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and Tim Scott.  They've got....Bob Menendez.  Which does give the Democrats the corner on statutory rapists.

I've been down in the dumps for a while now, dragging my dick through the dirt, downcast and downbeat.

But maybe it's gonna be all right after all....

Liberal's Head Explodes When Confronted With Liar's Paradox (aka Democratic Policies)

I'll quote liberally here from Robert Stacey McCain ( a 21st century Hunter S. Thompson, but without the drugs.  I think):

Everything Democrats say is a lie. Remember what they promised ObamaCare would do, now that we see what it actually does:

President Obama’s health care law will push 7 million people out of their job-based insurance coverage — nearly twice the previous estimate, according to the latest estimates from the Congressional Budget Office released Tuesday.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated Tuesday that President Obama’s signature healthcare law will cost about $1.3 trillion over the next 10 years.

Remember when they said it would actually save money for the federal government? Remember when they said nobody would lose their current insurance? Lies, lies, all lies.


The question remains: Why are liberals and the mainstream media unable to process and properly react to the bald-faced lying of Barack Obama and the Democratic party?

I thought about it for a while.  I couldn't come up with anything concrete, although, there is this...

Perhaps, instinctively, liberals know - should they dare to attempt to process the reality of the Democratic administration, and face the truth of its intents and outcomes -  they would suffer the same fate as poor Norman does here, at the hands of James Tiberius Kirk and Harcourt Fenton Mudd:






I've seen this happen to members of my synagogue, incidentally.  Usually when I point out Obama's record on Israel...

As Tax Revenues In Blue States/Blue Cities Decrease, Expect To See A Lot More Of This...

Gangsterism, plain and simple, from the liberal metropolis formerly known as the City of Brotherly Love:

Dick Yuengling may be throwing back a few of his own brews after receiving a civil lawsuit from the city that claims his brewery, D.G. Yuengling and Son Inc., has failed to pay more than $6.6 million in city taxes, interest and penalty fees.

How does a Pottsville-based beer company that doesn't have a brewery or a plant in Philadelphia come to owe millions in business-income and -receipts taxes to the city?

It's not clear, because no one from the city would comment on the suit or explain even the basic foundation of the claims.

The business-income and -receipts tax (BIRT), formerly known as the business-privilege tax (BPT), can be levied on any person or corporation that engages in taxable activity within the city, even if that business is not in the city.

What the city constitutes as a taxable activity "is essentially a factual determination made on a case-by-case basis," according to the regulations listed on the city's website.

The civil suit against Yuengling was filed in Philadelphia last week and claims that America's oldest brewery failed to pay its business tax, though the suit does not detail what activities Yuengling conducted within Philadelphia that the city determined to be taxable.


When the law is determined on a case by case basis, there is no law to be obeyed, only immunity from government malice that can only be purchased in cash from the party in power.  Which are almost always Democrats  because this is how they roll, all the way down from Barack Obama to Senator Bob Menendez.  From Tammany Hall to Mayor Daley.

Barstool Sports:

$6.6 million based on some tax they kinda just made up and decided Yuengling needs to pay while refusing to divulge even the smallest bit of detail as to why? Shady-ass city being shady.

It’s a wonder who the Yuengling guys pissed off to make this sorta thing happen. Did Dick Yuengling leave a bloody hooker in Mayor Nutter’s beach house? Are the Yuengling trucks involved in the heroin trade and the company failed to pay the city their cut? So many possibilities.

Whatever it is doesn’t matter unless the price of Black & Tan goes up. Then we have a problem.


I like the way B-Sports takes the gangsterism as a given.  And they inadvertently make the point, in their final sentence, that it's OK to beat up on the "rich", as long as nothing happens to the middle class.

Someone out to remind Philadelphia residents which brewery handed out some 10,000 free beers to city drinkers last September to thank them for their support.  I kind of have the feeling Mr. Yuengling is gonna think twice before bestowing any favors on the people who elect his extortioners...

Is that considered a "problem"?

There has already been at least one gay Scoutmaster...

...and you can see him here, in the 1995 Simpsons classic, Radioactive Man.

Don't be afraid to use your nails, boys....





I heard Barack Obama put in his two cents on the issue yesterday (seriously, this guy is like a clucking chicken. Is there anything he doesn't have an opinion on, and does he ever believe there's a moment where the world doesn't need his wisdom? A yenta, as they would have called him in the old country), saying nobody should be barred from the Boy Scouts. Of course, as a private organization, Obama's doesn't have any say in their internal affairs, although he can bring the weight of Justice to bear on them, as he has to many a political enemy. But, with the election over, and the gay vote/gay money already pocketed, why antagonize some swing voters that may decide a contested Senate seat?

Hard for it to be for the president to understand, the decision to limit the Scoutmaster role to heterosexuals is not borne out of hate, but practicality. Or to put it another way - would Barack let his daughters, Natasha and Malia, take a weekend trip in the woods with a man that he knew only causally? Or would he feel better were it a woman, and an avowed heterosexual?

Put your daughters where your mouth is, Barack, or STFU.

And breath a sigh of relief that none of your boys were tainted by The Scoutmaster, last seen dancing with a  Caped Crusader...

CBS To Air Real-Life 'Hunger Games'...

What does it say about our society - and about the social and economic trajectory of the Untied States - when the newest television reality show offers, as its final grand prize....a middle-class job?

It'll be on CBS, and I'll get to the irony of that in a moment.  Maureen Callahan tells us about the newest version of Christians and lions at the Colosseum:

But for all of the exploitations reality TV has to offer — from on-camera sex to drunken hillbillies — “The Job” may be the most offensive in television history.

We live in a time when a having a middle-class job has mutated from the American Dream to a luxury, when even those lucky enough to still have one live in perpetual fear that they’ll be fired next.

“The Job” turns this massive human toll into spectacle, dangling the prospect of an unspecified mid-level position in front of desperate contestants, who degrade themselves by telling their most pathetic personal histories in the paradoxical quest to regain some dignity.

People on “The Job,” meanwhile, are competing to become paper pushers, wine slingers, bureaucrats. The first episode’s “prize” is an assistant-manager job at a restaurant.

A middle-class job has become a bone that plutocrats toss to the starving proletariat, and “The Job” is nothing more than a first-world version of “The Hunger Games.”


Callahan call this type of programming "a long con on the middle class", who are duped into feeling warmth for the big corporations who hand out their measly job, as opposed to the armies of the unemployed who walk away - every day - empty handed.  And increasingly, empty-stomached.

How apt is it that this show is a creation of CBS?  Last week, their flagship news show ("60 Minutes") had Barack Obama on the "hot" seat, but refused to ask him any questions about the massive long-term unemployment that has become a permanent feature of his administration.   And then they bragged about not calling him out on it, or any other controversial issue of the day.

Maybe they believe they can dupe America into believing that they do not live in the days of gladiatorial combat, the Thunderdome, or the Hunger Games.   But when we see citizens forced to humiliate themselves on national television for a "9 to 5'er", I'm sure more than a few people will begin to realize what Barack Obama - and the mainstream media - are turning this nation into.

And everything CBS was trying to hide about the president, his policies, and his agenda will come into glaring focus.  Most likely accompanied with more blowback and anger than a hard-hitting interview would have generated.

It'll be fun to watch.  Unlike "The Job"...

Barack Obama Is....Michael Dukakis

We've perhaps unfairly compared Barack Obama with a number of much stronger men - Benjamin Netanyahu and Texas governor Rick Perry come to mind -and found him wanting.

But at last, we've found an American with whom Obama can stand with equally:

Although, truth be told, Obama holds his gun (assuming the picture wasn't a photoshop to begin with) much like another Democratic president:

The "liberal clutch"....?

Glenn Reynolds On "Unalienable Rights", Plus: Barack Obama as Mohamed Morsi?

The Professor is less of a blogger and more of a clearinghouse of libertarian ideas and thought, but his truncated commentary is often quite powerful.  Linking to Ilya Somin's: What to Do When Illiberal, Anti-Democratic Forces Take Power Through the Democratic Process, Glenn adds the following:

Remember: Democracy is a means, not an end. It’s valuable as a means of protecting those unalienable rights that include life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

But those rights are unalienable — incapable of being alienated, that is, bought, sold, or given away — which means that even if you live in a democracy, you haven’t surrendered them to the majority. A majority that wants to take away your unalienable rights isn’t a legitimate government. I’m gratified by how many Egyptians seem to grasp that; it’s more than I expected, though perhaps not as many as it needs to be. It’s clearly more than the Muslim Brotherhood expected, too.


Which, of course, begs the question:  Is the current administration, with their 51% "mandate", a legitimate government?   Is a government that is in the process of taking away our rights -  to religious freedom, to defend ourselves, and (with the implementation of ObamaCare, and the admittedly forthcoming Death Panels) our right to life itself -  still legitimate, despite it coming to power via a democratic system?

And if Barack Obama and the Democrats simply gamed the system using a propaganda campaign of half-truths and full lies, paid for by rich donors and propped up by a compliant media, isn't their regime as troublesome and suspect as the Muslim Brotherhood?

Of course, the Egyptians are back out on the streets.  Brave, considering that Barack Obama just supplied President Morsi with a whole fleet of F-16s, which oddly coincided with a vicious crackdown on the resurgent protesters...


And the American people?  Seems like we are beginning to get a grasp on the concept, as 53% of us now believe that the federal government threatens our own personal rights and freedoms.

And yet, we're still sitting at home, waiting and watching.  For a savoir, perhaps.

News Flash: He/she ain't coming.  And we are about to find out how "unalienable" Barack Obama and the Left think our rights are...

Slate Tells Us To Ignore...Slate

James Taranto, in his daily "Best of the Web" column for the WSJ, often has a feature entitled "Two papers in one!", in which he highlights two excerpts from the same media outlet making assertive statements that contradict each other.

Can I offer my own version?  From The Slatest, an email roundup I get daily from Slate (yes, I know, but - if you don't know the arguments of your enemies, you cannot effectively combat them), they bring us reaction to the announcement that Scott Brown will not run for John Kerry's now-vacant Senate seat in Massachusetts:


Instant Analysis I: Politico: "It’s a serious, early recruiting failure for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, and it makes the already uphill climb to a majority that much steeper for the GOP. They need six seats, and many party strategists privately counted on Massachusetts as one of them. ... [A] Republican source said that Brown really is considering a 2014 gubernatorial campaign, and that it is not just a matter of speculation. 'Scott Brown is looking at the governor’s race,' the source said." Washington Post: Four Reasons Brown May Run For Governor


Instant Analysis II: Weigel:  Do you remember those months Democrats spent panicking that Scott Brown would rise again if John Kerry's Senate seat opened up? The panic that started roughly three weeks before Brown even lost his old seat to Sen. Elizabeth Warren? All for naught. ... Endless, half-informed column inches were written about how risky it was to nominate John Kerry to run the State Department, because surely the guy who just got ethered by an Oklahoma-born law professor was going to swoop in and save his seat for Republicans. This is your daily reminder to ignore most political reporting that's based on but-what-ifs."



So Slate tells us to ignore Slate  Or it tells us to ignore Politico, which is even better.

How about we do both?

What Republicans Can Learn From Ed Koch

One of many amusing anecdotes about the Mayor for Life:

[former Deputy Mayor Stanley] Brezenoff, who served in all 12 years of the Koch administration, recalled yesterday how in later years, the former mayor would meet passers-by who would say, “We miss you. We want you back.”

“No, you don’t. You voted me out,” Koch replied. “And now you must be punished.”

“I was with him when he did that on several occasions,” Brezenoff said. “And he was only partly joking.”


Honesty is a very refreshing trait, in a political class that has such a paucity of it.  So is an in-your-face confrontational style, which quite frankly (or sadly) is suited to the times.  Just ask Chris Christie, he of the 70%+ approval rating in a blue state, how that approach is working out for him...

It is time for the Republican party, as a whole, to adopt it.  Take off the tux and tails, boys, and put on the boxing gloves.  And be ready, because everyone is gonna want to fight you, from Sandra Fluke to 60 Minutes.

It's a brawl we can win.   And as I have stated before, there is nothing wrong with starting off with a blunt "I told you so" right to the kisser.

Then explain to folks exactly how they earned their punishment, and who they need to vote for to make it stop...

Mayor Koch's Tombstone

Having actually lived in New York during Ed Koch's three terms as mayor, I remember it less fondly than many (Richard Brookhiser agrees, and has a roundup of the Koch Era).

But while Koch identified himself as mayor of New York City first, foremost, and forever, his second great cause was Israel and Judaism, often crossing party lines to endorse those whom he felt would best protect the Jewish people, wherever they may be. 

So while the epitaph he hand-picked for his gravestone is not surprising, I still found it to be incredibly touching:

With due care, he chose the words for his tombstone. He chose to say what Daniel Pearl said, before he was beheaded by terrorists: “My father is Jewish. My mother is Jewish. I am Jewish.” He also chose this: “Hear, o Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One.”

Rest In Peace, Mr. Mayor....

"I don't want to leave Manhattan, even when I'm gone. This is my home. The thought of having to go to New Jersey was so distressing to me." -- After purchasing a burial plot in Manhattan's Trinity Cemetery in 2008.

Another Reason For Obama To Hate Israel...

Once again, Benjamin Netanyahu and those pesky Jews made our president look weak, stupid, and dishonest.  Elliot Abrams:

Israel’s air strike on a Syrian weapons convoy is not the first such successful attack they have done. In September 2007, Israel attacked the nuclear reactor Syria was building (with North Korean help) and eliminated it. In both these cases, Syria’s air defenses proved worthless and Israel lost no planes.

These facts are worth noting because a major and repeated excuse for American passivity in Syria has been the claimed effectiveness of those air defenses.

Abrams references the excuse-making of the New York Times, the closest thing to a window in the mind of Barack:

....the hazards are substantial. Syria is more complicated than Libya, where NATO aided a rebel victory by establishing a no-fly zone. It has more advanced Russian air defense systems near population centers that would have to be taken out first, which could cause more civilian casualties.

Abrams, again:

We are left wondering why Israel seems to be able to dodge those “advanced,” “lethal,” “plentiful” air defenses at will. Here’s a theory. The U.S. Air Force is plenty capable of doing what the Israeli Air Force has done. Syria’s air defenses are a problem and a threat, but they are above all an excuse for inaction. They appear to be far more effective at justifying our policy of inaction than they are at bringing down attacking airplanes.


Which makes President Obama a coward.  Or a liar.  Most probably, both.

But since, above all else, Obama is petulant, angry, and vindictive, the last place he will look for fault is within himself.  Instead, I expect he is seething over the fact that  Israel's determination to stay alive has once again reflected poorly on him.

A situation he -and the Left - has been trying to rectify for over four years now...

Two Similar Men, Receiving Quite Dissimilar Coverage...

Barack Obama:  A person of color who overcame a rough upbringing to attend an Ivy League School and rise to the top of his chosen profession

Clarence Thomas:  A person of color who overcame a rough upbringing to attend an Ivy League School and rise to the top of his chosen profession

The media treats the first man as a god, while treating the second man like shit, despite the fact that more Americans have a more favorable view of the Supreme Court than they do of  politicians, regardless of their office.

I wonder...why?

Same reason, I suppose, that sex-starved Sandra Fluke is a saint who above any criticism, while these women are sluts, open to any defilement one wishes to proffer...



Hat tip: Peter Wehner

"New Republic" Dumps Their Jews...

Ah, the good old days are back.  That is, if you consider the enactment of the Nuremberg Laws something to feel nostalgic about....

Seems as if the new owner of the New Republic - wealthy dilettante Chris Hughes - has removed the names of some of the magazine's most prominent Jews from their masthead:

The New Republic has quietly dropped at least five prominent Jewish writers from its masthead in a move that may signal the publication’s continued drift away from a staunchly pro-Israel standpoint.

The names of several prominent Jewish writers from both the left and right of the political spectrum were dropped....

They include: Daily Beast reporter Eli Lake, longtime TNR columnist James Kirchick, Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer, and onetime senior editor Lawrence Kaplan. Complicating the picture, former TNR editor Peter Beinart was also dropped from the masthead. Beinart is the publisher of Open Zion, an anti-Zionist Daily Beast blog sponsored by the New America Foundation.


Gee, who else would have an interest in a key liberal magazine dropping it's "pro-Israel" standpoint, and perhaps cutting loose some of those pesky Jews?  I don't know, maybe...Barack Hussein Obama,  who Chris Hughes recently conducted a fawning interview with for his new toy, the New Republic?  For whom Hughes was the “former online campaign adviser”?   To whom Hughes contributed over $20,000 to in 2012?

No many how many times you tell a Jew that the Left is anti-Semitic, no matter how much evidence they see with their own eyes, they'll never believe you.  Which is why we always wind up huddling in cattle cars...or bomb shelters.

I'll say it, even as my brethren stop their ears and screech "Mary had a little lamb, little lamb, little lamb...." :

America 2012:  Jews Need Not Apply

Bob Menendez in Hot Water; Time To Think About A Christie Appointee?

I can't necessarily blame the average American for dismissing the story, as the only places that reported on New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez's (D-La Raza) penchant for literally and figuratively screwing teenage hookers were the Daily Caller, Breitbart, and a few wacky right-wing blogs.  Like this one.

But now that the FBI is raiding Menendez's buddies....the mainstream media may actually have to report on it (something they have assiduously refused to do).  The Daily Caller:

FBI agents have raided the West Palm Beach, Fla. eye clinic owned by Dr. Salomon Melgen, the wealthy donor to New Jersey Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez who allegedly procured prostitutes for him — some of them as young as 16 — during trips to the Dominican Republic.

The Miami Herald reported that federal agents lined up vans outside the Melgen Eye Center late Tuesday night to haul away evidence in the case.

Melgen, 58, is believed to have flown Menendez in his private jet to the Dominican Republic on several occasions for alcohol-fueled sex parties featuring prostitutes.





In case you haven't been keeping up, or you're too lazy to click the links, here's the best part:

The women appeared in videotaped interviews with the help of a translator. Each said she was promised $500 to sleep with the New Jersey lawmaker, but was ultimately paid only $100.

Additional confirmation came from a Dominican government official who told TheDC that Menendez frequents “sex, hookers and drinking” parties in the Caribbean nation.


Not only did Senator Menendez have sex with teenage girls, he refused to pay them what he promised.

What a scumbag.

I don't believe that a Democratic Senator has ever given up their position of power due to a morally shameful act, but with the FBI also investigating Menendez's campaign finances, he may not have any choice.

Which leads me to wonder who New Jersey's next Senator will be.  Chris Christie can appoint one until the next scheduled election, and if he wants a prayer of winning the Republican nomination, it has got to be an "R".

You heard it here first:  The next Senator from New Jersey will be State Senator Joe Kyrillos, who ran against Menendez in vain last year.  He's an an honest man and a solid conservative, who also happened to be a big part of Christie's 2009 campaign for governor. He wouldn't have a lot of time to make a name for himself, but a tax-cutting Senator from a taxed-to-death blue state certainly is capable of making some waves...

That is, unless Obama squashes the FBI investigation.  He is first and foremost..a Chicago politician, after all....

Two Men, Two Quotes, and the "Surge"

The year is 2007. Two Senators, on different sides of the aisle, both negative on the prospects for the success of George W. Bush's military strategy in Iraq, specifically, "The Surge".  Here are the quotes, can you guess the two men?

#1:
“I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse.”

#2:
“[The Surge is]...the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam, if it’s carried out.”

The first quote was from then-Senator Barack Hussein Obama, Democrat from Illinois.  The second was from then-Senator Chuck Hagel, Republican from Nebraska.

Both of them spectacularly wrong about the biggest military operation this nation had undertaken in half a century.  Certainly, as Commentary points out, it gave us insight into the character of our future president:

It was an early indication of Obama’s poor judgment and instinct to substitute ideological stubbornness for serious analysis.


But more importantly, it turns out these two losers have been running a foreign-policy carnival sideshow for years:

Obama and Hagel would develop a friendship, and repeat this pattern. They would travel to Iraq together, where Hagel was dismissive and suspicious of the military’s top brass. Obama would take office and do the same. Hagel would speak out against tough Iran sanctions, and Obama would work against them from the White House, opposing several iterations of them and finally watering them down when he couldn’t prevent sanctions from passing Congress. Hagel would loudly criticize even the contemplation of military action against Iran, and Obama would have his secretary of defense deliver a similar message to Israel.

The two of them don't' equal one idiot.  And they both believe they are destined to shape the New World Order, using a "fundamentally transformed" America as their vehicle.

May God save us....