Piers Morgan Imitates Galaxy Quest

CNN:

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): I thank you for caring so much about me. And I do believe that it is commonplace for someone, for an interviewer to pose a question and wait for the proper response to be completed. If you keep wanting to interrupt me, it's not an issue, it's your show, here you are and there's the camera.

MORGAN: Forgive me for my impertinence. I will allow you to answer in any way you see fit.


IMDB:

Quellek: It has been my greatest pleasure to serve with you. I have been blessed. I... I... I...

Sir Alexander Dane: Don't speak, Quellek.

Quellek: You'll forgive my impertinence, but even though we have never before met, I have always considered you as a father to me.

Gotta Love Chabad

From their somewhat new website in honor of the Ba'al ha-Tanya's 200th yahrtzeit

Visit Jewish.TV for more Jewish videos.

What the Republican Party Needs to Do Now

(With apologies to Meghan McCain.)

When my dad told me last week that Barack Obama had been elected, I cried because I was soooo excited that soon we would have a black president. But also because that means the Republican guy lost and I think my dad is a Republican and he sounded sooooo sad. But I was also sad about the Republican party which I love soooooo much. The Republican party is losing the most important voters in this country, which in order are young people, single women, minorities and gays. In order to win back these important constituencies, here is what the Republican party has to do now, or else I might consider leaving them, which will be a major blow.
1. Stop being the party of White People. If the Republican party wants to win elections they have to stop getting the votes of White People. We live in the Age of Modern Family, not the age of some show about a white family that is old. The Republican party should tell White People to stop voting for them unless they are married to a much younger Latin American woman, and have at least one son who is gay. This way, the Republican party will look more like America.
2. Appoint Sofia Vergara to the Supreme Court. Times are changing, and it is time for this country to have a hot Latina woman on the Supreme Court. Also, this will help Republicans with women, Hispanics, and men. Also consider appointing Cam or Mitch to the Supreme Court.
3. Stop talking about religion. Religion is very old. If the Republicans want the votes of young people, they should stop talking about stuff that is very old, like religion, and also the constitution which Ezra Klein said is almost a hundred years old!
4. Republicans should be pro-life, but only if they also protect a woman's right to choose. I mean, what kind of life is it if you can't choose what to do with your own body? I am pro-life, but I believe that women should always have a right to abortion, because life is complicated. This is the only type of pro-life that should be allowed.
5. Stop worrying about the future. Old people worry about the future. Young people don't worry about the future, because it is in a long time. Young people care about now. Imagine if instead of talking about the debt crisis, Paul Ryan talked about how he wants to give young people stuff now. Do you think young people would have all voted for Obama just because he's cool? Maybe, but we'll never know.
I'm a Republican, but we can't let Republican voters, who are very extreme, decide the views of the Republican party. If Republicans don't become a lot more like the Democrats, I will become a Democrat, because that is how much I love the Republican Party.

In case you were wondering whether the Democrats had 2/3 of the vote--highly unlikely.

Hezb No Allah, Part III

Brody File:

Guess what? God’s name has been removed from the Democratic National Committee platform.
This is the paragraph that was in the 2008 platform:
“We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values, and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-givenpotential.”Now the words “God-given” have been removed. The paragraph has been restructured to say this:
“We gather to reclaim the basic bargain that built the largest middle class and the most prosperous nation on Earth – the simple principle that in America, hard work should pay off, responsibility should be rewarded, and each one of us should be able to go as far as our talent and drive take us.”

(See also: here and here.)

Sorkin's The Newsroom

The opening scene from the new HBO series. Shocking that studiously non-partisan journalist is actually stereotypical liberal, I know. And it just gets better from here--even more preaching follows. I'll let Dorothy Rabinowitz take over: "the preening virtue that weighs on this Aaron Sorkin series like a great damp cloud—the right-mindedness oozing from every line—isn't going away. It's the heart of this enterprise... like all the sanctimonious twaddle here, well nigh unbearable."

There's something in the theme of journalists and news reporting that can bring out the worst in writers—though not, to be sure, one like James L. Brooks, who wrote the magnificent "Broadcast News" (1987). That something has to do with the view, which has come to be an article of faith over the past 75 years or so, that journalism is a sacred calling deserving of reverence. "The Newsroom" gives every spine-chilling sign of immersion in that faith. Which may explain some of Mr. Sorkin's apparent difficulty conceiving reasonably human characters in this saga of broadcast journalists... Still, it's clear that Mr. Sorkin's main interest in "The Newsroom" runs to concerns other than characters and storytelling. There's anchor Will—who is, we're assured, a Republican—going on camera in episode three to blast away at certain social and political forces that constitute grave dangers to the nation. (In Will's world, no danger ever emanates from the political left—it just doesn't happen.) His targets include, not surprisingly, Gov. Jan Brewer's immigration bill, Sarah Palin, the new Republican majority in Congress, Fox News—and, not least, the Tea Party. That last a subject on which Will goes to town with ferocious firepower all the more deadly for its employment of actual quotations. There's Rand Paul attempting to explain certain of his complicated social views. There's Sharron Angle, briefly a heroine of the Tea Party, complaining that the press had failed to ask the questions she wanted to answer. An episode like this one, drawing on the deep bitterness of our current political wars, brings "The Newsroom" to life. But it's a kind destined to be intermittent. The show's deeper problems—thin drama, a thick hide of smugness—would take far more than that to overcome.

Can't believe I watched that. Times like this make you grateful you don't have the job that requires you to watch 3 whole episodes. Update: Jake Tapper's TNR review:

McAvoy—and, by extension, Sorkin—preach political selflessness, but they practice pure partisanship; they extol the Fourth Estate’s democratic duty, but they believe that responsibility consists mostly of criticizing Republicans. This is done through the oldest trick in the book for a Hollywood liberal: by having McAvoy be a “sane Republican” who looks at his party with sadness and anger.

Obama's Osama Ad

In addition to the numerous reasons given for why Obama's Osama ad was a bad idea, it seems to me that the fact that the ultimate success of the mission was out of Obama's hands means that he can only take credit for rolling the dice. As president, he was responsible for the decision, that is all. The risk inherent in the mission was beyond his ability to control, and the mission's success has nothing to do with his efforts. The fact that he must portray this decision as the pinnacle of his accomplishment just ends up highlighting the fact that he lacks a notion of what actual achievement means. UPDATE: Nice video version of the criticism here.

For good or ill (and most would say ill), no one did it like Mr. Breitbart.

and if you disagree, you don't count anyways. http://bquot.com/bsk

Nein Nein Nein

Herman Cain is receiving much flak for his response to the question in this video:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

However, it seems to me that his response has been misconstrued. In responding to the question of whether he has demonstrated his weakness in foreign policy, Cain brilliantly responds "No, no, no," in German, simultaneously demonstrating his knowledge of foreign languages while also alluding to his economic plan.
UPDATE: For some reason, Baghdad Bob thinks this is funny.

A man a plan to can Obama

Wannabe cannibal explains motivation:

In an interview with Secret Service agents a few weeks later, Brockman admitted writing the letter to calm himself down. According to court papers, he told the agents he was upset about the war in Afghanistan, marijuana prohibition, and underfunding of public schools. 

Life imitates Democratic congressman imitating Forrest Gump

Those who forget history...

Karl Marx said that history repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce. But what if the first time around was a farce? Slate editor Jacob Weisberg:

As you listen to Huntsman’s blunt assessment of the country’s prospects, it’s hard not to notice the commonalities with the man he would challenge in 2012... There is, to begin with, the physical resemblance. Huntsman is slender, athletic, and stylish, with a winning smile.

Do Weisberg's insidious comments about Huntsman mean that we have forgotten the lesson Slate taught us just three short years ago?:

In the Aug. 1 Wall Street Journal, Amy Chozick asked, "[C]ould Sen. Obama's skinniness be a liability?" Most Americans, Chozick points out, aren't skinny. Fully 66 percent of all citizens who've reached voting age are overweight, and 32 percent are obese. To be thin is to be different physically. Not that there's anything wrong, mind you, with being a skinny person. But would you want your sister to marry one? Would you want a whole family of skinny people to move in next-door? "I won't vote for any beanpole guy," an "unnamed Clinton supporter" wrote on a Yahoo politics message board. My point is that any discussion of Obama's "skinniness" and its impact on the typical American voter can't avoid being interpreted as a coded discussion of race.

A whole family of skinny people. Can't we talk about Huntsman without alluding to his extreme Caucasian-ness?

Walter Russell Mead thinks Obama's best hope is to be the next Jimmy Carter, but I think Obama is the JFK of the 21st century after all.

44. CLARENCE THOMAS (85 on the 2007 list) Clarence Thomas; most influential conservatives

Supreme Court Justice

Thomas has been on the Supreme Court for nearly two decades, making him one of the longest serving justices in history as well as a reliable conservative vote on virtually every issue.

If this sounds ridiculous, that's because it is: 36 of 111 Supreme Court justices served for over twenty years, including three currently on the court. If serving "almost two decades" makes you one of the longest serving justices, I am one of the greatest unicyclists in the world.

after all, flies are a major threat to world peace

a
b
c

What they did before the internets

From Buckley's Cancel Your Own Goddam Subscription:

February 11, 1969
Dear Mr. Buckley:
I am a sixteen-year-old High School Junior who is going, slowly but inexorably, out of his mind. I have come to the conclusion that you are the only person on the face of the earth who can save my sanity. My problem, briefly, is this: for the past year I have been trying, without avail, to discover just what, in God's name, the phrase "to immanentize the eschaton" means.
I heard you speak the phrase once on Firing Line and immediately made a valiant attempt to look it up. Upon discovering that my dictionary did not list the words I instantly resolved to ask one of my teachers in the morning.
When I tried this course I drew another blank. I would ask a teacher the question, whereupon he would have me repeat it a dozen or so times and then plead ignorance. I would then be asked: "Where'd you hear it?" When I informed him that you had used it the night before he would generally give me a forlorn look, mumble something like, "Oh him eh?," and express his innermost conviction, i.e., that you had probably invented the words. I'm sure you'll be thrilled to know, Mr. Buckley, that I had faith in you. I knew you hadn't invented those words. And, sure enough, when I was reading your book The Unmaking of a Mayor I came across a passage which revealed a Mr. Eric Voegelin as the author of the phrase. Jubilant, I raced to our school library and asked the librarian for everything written by Mr. Voegelin. "Never heard of him," the woman answered. As I left, ruminating upon the intrinsic failings of the public schools, I encountered the teacher to whom I had put the original question. When I explained the matter to him he expressed the conviction that, not only did you make up the phrase, but you also contrived Mr. Voegelin!
Now, Mr. Buckley, more than anything else in the world I would like to know what that phrase means. I really think you should tell me because: 1) I have watched every one of your TV shows and have read all of your newspaper columns ever since I first heard of you. And 2) I've read all of your books (save only the last one, The Jeweler's Eye, which, curse my parsimonious soul, costs a small fortune. I'll wait 'til it comes out in paperback). Also 3) I subscribe to National Review and even read all of those silly renewal notices I keep getting.
If all of this evidence of my fidelity isn't enough then I promise you that, if you somehow communicate to me the definition, I will upon receipt of it: a) instantly proceed to use it on any and all occasions and thereby spread your fame far and wide (I make it generally known to my friends that you are the source of my esoteric bits of verbiage) and b) I will renew my subscription to NR the very next notice I get (which will, no doubt, be Valentine's Day) instead of when the thing expires as is logical.
Furthermore, I shall c) badger my school librarian until she finally breaks down and puts NR on the school subscription list. After all, if the school can subscribe to such egregious rags as The Nation and The New Republic they can at least give your fine journal equal time. Thanking you for your time in reading this
I remain

Sincerely yours,
Edward H. Vazquez
Old Bridge, N.J.

New Palin Blog

Palin for President, a more relevant blog than previously realized, has been launched: http://Palin2012.blogspot.com

On Obama and Liberal Condescension

This is a good post.

The problem for me is that I'm a Vulgar Marxist too. I've always believed that people need to eat, and want to get ahead and prosper. If you give them an avenue that lets them do that, they aren't going to let their religion, their music, their sexual habits, their families or their educational system stand in their way for long. The two most obvious contemporary applications of this economic determinism are 1) China (when the Chinese have a capitalist economy they won't be able to have a Communist government, Vulgar Marxists would say) and 2) the Muslim world (if Islam needs a Reformation in order to prosper in a global market, then Islam will eventually get a Reformation). I agree with both of those propositions.

Does that mean I'm condescending too? It's hard to avoid the charge. If a Chinese Communist Party Official somehow came to me and declared that, no, China would out-compete the West while maintaining Mao-era control over free inquiry, I'd think 'You poor deluded fool. Just wait.' I support Western policies of bringing China into the global marketplace in large part because I think that means Chinese Communism will collapse even if the Chinese Communists don't realize it. Same with fundamentalist Muslims--e.g. Pakistan, when prosperous, will no longer be such a breeding ground of jihadist fanatics. They'll be too busy making money to blow up the world. My attitude toward Pakistan is roughly parallel to Obama's attitude toward rural Pennsylvanians: if the economy really delivered for them, they'd stop clinging to their God. And their guns.

I'm especially appalled by the possibility that I'm as much of a snob as Obama because I've made a big deal about social equality--how treating people as equals, rather than redistributing income, is the essential goal of liberal politics. Condescension, needless to say, is not treating people like equals. (Obama himself seemed to be quite aware of the problem, in his 2004 Charlie Rose interview, when trotting out his "What's the Matter With Kansas" homilies:

"If we don't have plausible answers on the economic front, and we appear to be condescending towards those traditions that are giving their lives some stability, then they're gonna opt for at least that party that seems to be speaking to the things that are giving--that still provide them some solace." [E.A.]

Of course, he sounded a bit condescending when saying that. .....

Read the whole thing, but keep in mind that only a squishy liberal would be bothered by condescension toward primitive Muslim terrorists.

quote of the month

Democracy and Idolatry:

This was no ordinary love. The proof was in the posters—specifically, influential “street artist” Shephard Fairey’s iconic images of Barack Obama, which proved a huge hit at campaign rallies. Rendered in blood red and gray, with his face in silk-screened, Warholian black, the presidential hopeful gazes out toward some distant point, confident and contemplative at once. Only one word was emblazoned across the bottom, in large, block letters: “Hope,” or “Progress.” Fairey describes his work as propaganda engineering and explained that, as a staunch opponent of the Iraq War, making art about Obama, who had spoken out against the war from the start, was for him “like making art for peace.” Peace, however, is not the zeitgeist of this particular graphic style. On the contrary, it recalls Bolshevist propaganda in particular, and Third World revolutionary politics in general; it is power as spectacle, power in whose name millions have been oppressed. As Lisa Wedeen writes in her 1999 study of the cult of Bashar Assad, Ambiguities of Domination: Politics, Rhetoric, and Symbols in Contemporary Syria, such idealized, heroic portraits are meant to construct “an original founding moment that signals a new golden age and an end to the miseries of the past.” Judging by the posters raised by the ecstatic masses, the campaign was not just about Obama the Democratic presidential candidate. It was about Obama, America’s long-awaited Beloved Leader.

read the whole thing.

I'm not sure how I missed this nor how I came across it now, but the award for the best column on the torturous Obama torture debate goes to Rich Lowry here. For bonus points, the article is equally applicable to all Obama speeches ever given, even returning from Cairo bringing world peace.

caption contest

Hot Air:“Uh, Sir, that’s not the King of Saudi Arabia.”
and here's the runner up.

(One of the) stupidest quotes of the day

AP comparing barack the great to palin the pitiful, and how the latter must write a book despite her universally acknowledged illiteracy:

A memoir (or two) have become a virtual requirement for White House seekers, especially after Obama's "The Audacity of Hope" and "Dreams From My Father" established him as a stylist and storyteller with a vast following.

that's right. remember how in the elections of 2012 and 2016 everyone had written three memoirs so that they could have a chance of appearing like the greatest president ever? in fact, presidents nowadays in the twenty second century only write memoirs, following in the footsteps of the first memoirist in chief

Quote of the Day

Don't let anyone tell you that Joe Klein can't outdo himself:

Said TIME's Joe Klein: "comedy is by definition inappropriate. I mean, this is just comedy. And we're talking about a guy in Rush Limbaugh who is inappropriate half the time I hear him on the radio."

"He describes himself as an entertainer," said Klein. "Wanda Sykes -- entertainer. This is entertainment."

For a guy named Joeklein, he has a surprisingly inaccurate definition of comedy. Actually, comedy is defined as "something funny," by which Syke's comments manifestly fail.

Klein living up to his reputation is as newsworthy as "pigs still not flying" but James Taranto does a good job of providing some insight into the mindset which considers this humor:

By contrast, lots of left-wing bloggers are cheering Sykes on, and the president of the United States was visibly amused by her joke. So the question is this: Why do liberals find this joke funny when they should find it embarrassing?

The answer, it seems clear, is that this is an example of shock humor: a genre that relies on the frisson of violating taboos. By our count, Sykes runs afoul of five taboos in her Limbaugh joke: She equates dissent with treason. She likens a domestic political opponent to a foreign enemy. She makes fun of the disabled (Limbaugh's past addiction to painkillers would entitle him to protection under the Americans With Disabilities Act). She makes light of a form of interrogation that some people consider torture. And she wishes somebody dead.

Except for the last one, these are all taboos that liberals promote and enforce with especial vigor. If a conservative violated any one of them, he would be on the inside track to be named "Worst Person in the World" by that NBC blowhard (as indeed Feherty was).

What makes Sykes's joke funny to a liberal, then, is the sense of danger that accompanies her risky themes, combined with the secure knowledge that since the joke is at the expense of a liberal hate figure, the usual rules do not apply. It's the same reason people on the left evince particular glee when they attack Clarence Thomas or Michael Steele in expressly racist terms, or when they use antigay innuendo against their political opponents (regardless of the latter's sexual orientation).

Elmo Auditions for MSNBC Post

irony watch

from cnn's report on arlen specter's defection & rush limbaugh:

Earlier this month, Specter said Limbaugh did have a tendency to make "provocative" statements, but told radio host Howard Stern he didn't have a problem with the conservative talker. "Do I like Limbaugh?… yeah, I like him," he said then.

something Haredim would do well to ponder

Robert D. Kaplan explains why the Palestinians would prefer statelessness:

Grygiel explains that it is now “highly desirable” not to have a state—for a state is a target that can be destroyed or damaged, and hence pressured politically. It was the very quasi-statehood achieved by Hamas in the Gaza Strip that made it easier for Israel to bomb it. A state entails responsibilities that limit a people’s freedom of action. A group like Hezbollah in Lebanon, the author notes, could probably take over the Lebanese state today, but why would it want to? Why would it want responsibility for providing safety and services to all Lebanese? Why would it want to provide the Israelis with so many tempting targets of reprisal? Statelessness offers a level of “impunity” from retaliation.

But the most tempting aspect of statelessness is that it permits a people to savor the pleasures of religious zeal, extremist ideologies, and moral absolutes, without having to make the kinds of messy, mundane compromises that accompany the work of looking after a geographical space.