UPDATE:
Weisberg crap described previously thoroughly disembled in a way only James Taranto at the Wall Street Journal can right here:
The Weisberg Fallacy do go read it if for no other reason than a glimpse into the dark and scary recesses of an enlightened liberal mind...

Incidently, I only get 3 political RSS feeds to my personal mailbox, Taranto's Best of the Web, Hugh Hewitt's Townhall blog, and Mark Alexanders Patriot Post.  Gotta figure out how build a blog roll one of these days.....and by the way, to the the handfull that subscribe to the murmur...you cannot imagine how flattering that is.  You are truly a rare breed, and no doubt, great Americans... 

Black Bart and new hired gun Jim, played by Milwaukee native Gene Wilder, scan the landscape.

Much much commentary on the Dem veep selection and it seems, given absolutely no bump in any tracking polls, the majority shares my non-plussedness with Joe Biden.

Among the best in terms of well thought out and written critiques, on this and most subjects for that matter, is the gang at www.powerlineblog.com, a morsel:

"But if we focus on matters relating to Iraq – probably the most serious issue that has faced Biden over the years – we find of pattern of incoherence and error that belies any claim to statesmanship, or even sustained seriousness."

-Paul Mirengoff

The post is entitled Talkin' Joe Biden, the Foreign Relations Committee years.  Click above and scroll down a bit TRTWT.

Even some liberals are unhappy with Biden, particularly the PUMA (party unity my ass) crowd who just cannot accept that Hilary lost, which has morphed into its own soap opera subplot at the Dem convention.

Ron Rosenbaum at Pajamas Media had this to say:
"You wonder why I seem irate about clueless Joe. Because I think it would be an electrifying, transformative thing to elect our first non white President, the final triumph of the civil rights movement. And I think bloviating Joe could easily ruin it."

and in his post called "A Huge Mistake"

"Biden’s sagacity and earnestness act would only go over in the class of dummies that is the U.S. Senate.....But a huge mistake by Obama in choosing a self-important clown for vice president, a choice that is the gift that will keep on giving to his opponent throughout the rest of the election. Biden has proven himself incapable of opening his mouth without making you cringe at his self-congratulatory pretentiousness."

Only comment to follow that would be to say it sounds like something I'd say.  In comments to one of Rosenbaum's posts I happened across this nugget, only slightly paraphrased to correct a grammatical error, from someone calling themself Herr Morganholz:

"If the government is the answer, you’re just asking stupid questions"

That is destined to be a Heartland Axiom.  Gotta love it....

In a May 7 posting I made this prediction on the liberal narrative once Obama became the presumptive nominee : 'If he loses it's because we are a racist country.  If he wins it's because we want to move beyond racism" . 

I am no political genious and was certainly not the only guy to sense that in today's politically correct climate non-support for Obama would be unfairly translated into bullshit charges of racism.  If nothing else, Liberals certainly are predictable....Exhibit A  Racism is the only reason McCain might beat Barack Obama.

So in an amazing display of both his own bigotry and astonishing cluelessness Mr Weisberg earns his lieftime credential as a political hack.  IMHO if it weren't for Christopher Hitchens Slate would be a waste of cyberspcae altogether.

UPDATE:
Above Weisberg crap thoroughly disembled in a way only James Taranto at the Wall Street Journal can right here:
The Weisberg Fallacy do go read it if for no other reason than a glimpse into the dark and scary recesses of an enlightened liberal mind...

Incidently, I only get 3 political rss feeds to my personal mailbox, Taranto's Best of the Web, Hugh Hewitt's Townhall blog, and Mark Alexanders Patriot Post.  Gotta figure out how build a blog roll one of these days..... 

Now that's a pair to draw to if I ever saw one.  Not a lot to say about Biden as Dem Veep.  Will be good for the party - - both of them.  He does add an earthier variety of charisma to the ticket.  Hell, how can I not like a gregarious Irish Catholic family oriented storyteller?  Peggy Noonan's description of him as the garrulous uncle after he's had a one too many seems about right. And did I mention?  - -  he's not black.  

His ultimate pick may explain why Obama waited so long to let anyone know.  I mean if the best the candidate of change can come up with is a 65 year-old who has known nothing but Washington politics his entire career why hurry?  But it is entirely consistent with the "candidate of change" borne of Chicago machine politics, and shows once again that if they can believe his resume`is Presidential caliber they can believe anything.  YES THEY CAN!  
   
We are constantly reminded this decision is the first indication of a nominees judgment and decision making.  OK then, I will wholeheartedly stress it is as impressive a decision as any I have seen from the nominee so far. 
 
With all the media hype of Geraldo Rivera and Al Capone's vault the management of this message is a bit curious and a lot ridiculous.  How long will the adoring media tolerate being whip-sawed and manipulated?  Probably a reasonable strategy though, seeing how focusing on the process and all this cloak and dagger crap diverts from the substance of policy and his decreasingly attractive character.

By adding an old school career politician most famous for his verbal mis-steps to the ticket Blazing Saddles 2008 (see below) has successfully upgraded from a gaff a day to a gaff a minute. I've been saying for years this campaign is gonna be a hoot.  This virtually guarantees it.  

The Audacity of Arrogance or Blazing Saddles 2008 

   

It gets a bit tedious constantly griping about the various governmental inadequacies and screwups, it's just thats there are so damn many. (I'll address the Milwaukee Public Schools $170 million fiasco in a future post but today I wanted to accentuate the positive, seeing how those opportunities come so rarely.)

When something goes right it should be noted too. I am talking about the successsful conclusion of the Marquette Interchange road construction project here in Milwaukee. Gotta hand it to parties involved, private contractors mostly, not the government actually, but the largest highway project in state history at $810 million came in on time, under budget and with no fatalities or serious injuries. I suppose this could be a good example of how well something can work when the government just gets out of the way and let's profit oriented companies do their thing.

It is a vast improvement both aestetically and functionally.  What used to be the most intimidating motoring and arguably the ugliest feature of Milwaukee is now quite impressive, a lot friendlier to both drive and look at.  To see the end result go here Marquette Interchange Website

Now compare this to another huge roadway construction project in a town about the same size, Boston, and see how that went.  The Big Dig as it was called, not only took longer than planned but had overuns that bloated it's original budget of $2.8 billion in 1985 to over $14.6 billion when all was said and done.  Holy crap.  By my math they exceeded their budget by oh, a mere 520%. Granted, some poeple are in jail, but I seriously doubt there are any public officials doing time.

here's bit form Wikipedia: 
    The project has incurred criminal arrests, escalating costs, death, leaks, and charges of poor execution and use of substandard materials. The Massachusetts Attorney General is demanding contractors refund taxpayers $108 million for “shoddy work”.^] On January 23, 2008, it was reported that Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff, the consortium that oversaw the project, would pay $407 million in restitution for its poor oversight of subcontractors (some of whom committed outright fraud), as well as primary responsibility in the death of a motorist. However, despite admitting to poor oversight and negligence as part of the settlement, the firm is not barred from bidding for future government contracts. Several smaller companies agreed to pay a combined sum of approximately $51 million.

Yeah yeah I know the projects aren't that comparable, ones a tunnel and the other a bridge, or more accurately a network of interconnecting bridges. But still, our roadway runs about 4 times the distance of their tunnel and their orignal budget was 3 and a half times bigger, which should have more than offset additional engineering and constrcution costs.  But nooooooo.  

What's the difference?  Ours is in the Heartland, where stuff works.  We don't automatically seize a huge public project as a gigantic opportunity to pilfer the national treasury.  We see it as a necessary task that needs to be done as expeditiously and prudently as possible. So we get it done. 

I will say however that when it comes to bringing public funds back home our Feingold and Kohl are pikers compared to the likes of Kennedy and Kerry, not even the same league.  Again though, that's just the difference between us Heartlanders and them Northeasterners...   

First of all let's stipulate that oil was and always has been a key rationale behind our venture in Iraq.  Not however, to enrich neocons or other nonsense but simply because our country will fail without, albeit shamefully gluttonous amounts of, free flowing oil.  

That being said I maintain the right to ridicule the purist "no blood for oil" types who advance a particularly dangerous and, dare I say it "blame America first" agenda that displays remarkable close mindedness in steadfastly refusing to acknowledge even the possibility of nobler causes.  But then those who truly believe Barack Obama's resume`is Presidential caliber will probably believe anything - - that's what makes them so dangerous. 

But enough of that, let's step back for a wider view of the world stage where the interplay between the Eagle, Bear, and Dragon come into particularly sharp focus given recent events between Russia and Georgia - - which, given how control over 100% of oil to western Europe is now in jeopardy, is ALL about, nothing but, oil.

The Dragon
To maintain its ever increasing standard of living will require ever increasing amounts of energy. The Dragon, therefore, will stop at nothing in its quest to overtake the economic supremacy of the Eagle, after that military supremacy will become its primary focus.  It is already ramping up in that regard.  Unhindered by humanitarian concerns the Dragon will also stop at nothing to maintain its oil supply, whose main supplier is Sudan.  For anyone willing to see the connection, the slaughter and ethnic cleansing in western Sudan is largely underwritten by China. 

The Bear
Feeling threatened by pro Eagle governments in Germany, France, and most embarrassingly, its own former states, the Bear responds borrowing a page from Papa Bear, the USSR, as they did Czechoslovakia in 1968, invades a comparatively powerless neighbor to divide, conquer, and eventually rule through a puppet government.  Meanwhile, the world watches the Dragon Olympics, histories biggest most shrewdly developed and executed public relations propaganda campaign ever.  Economically reinvigorated after a decade and a half of capitalism the Bear is frisky and seeking to expand its territory. 

The Eagle
...is tired.  Tired from a prolonged war and overextended military, tired from a sluggish economy, tired of a feckless congress and President both at historically low approval ratings, and tired of being unpopular.  

Of all the excuses for weariness the popularity thing puzzles most.  Think about this: The Dragon overtly aids and abets ethnic cleansing on a scale with WWII Nazis. The Bear places its boot squarely and firmly on the neck of a non-threatening neighborhood democracy. Meanwhile the Eagle deposes a notorious tyrant and facilitates a self-governing democracy in a military operation with a casualties-to-liberated ratio so low it is likely to go down as the most humanitarian war in hisory.  All of these actions, in varying degrees, are oil-driven - - yet only the U.S. suffers the middle school curse of not being popular. 

Why? because an 800 pound bear, or even bigger dragon, can and will take a crap wherever they want, with nary a thought about what the world thinks.  The Eagle? apparently constipated out some misguided priority on world opinion.

The bottom line is, like it or not, the world is still ruled by brute force.  That said even the hardest hearted conservative joins his liberal brothers and sisters in wishing that were not the case.  But it is the case, and the problem is wishes fill peoples heads with mush - - but munitions actually turn peoples heads into mush.  Facts on the ground remind us we need to deal with the world we have - - not the world we want.   

If the United States showed even a trace of the disregard for popularity as that of Russia, Iran would have been neutered as a nuclear threat years ago. Some would argue our hesitancy is in direct proportion to the Bears new found aggression, a valid point.

Maybe the most maddening part is that, time after time, our timidity and inaction, driven by a yearn for popularity, has done precious little to enhance our world standing. When we do the "right thing", i.e. stress diplomacy and restraint, and are still considered the bad guys why does popularity factor in our policies at all?

This begs another question; those clamoring to avoid war at all cost are the same folks promoting popularity for its own sake.  Is this coincidence or simply both sides of the same page from the left-liberal foreign policy agenda?
 
This country needs to grow up and realize that popularity is the cost of being number one. Deal with it. 

Fighting and winning their wars, rebuilding their countries, perpetuating their economies through favorable trade practices, and subsidizing their lavish socialistic programs by covering their defense costs should not necessarily warrant a defacto cheerleading squad, but at the very least it should warrant the benefit of the doubt. 

Memo to world: you are ever-so cordially invited to shop a round for a better lone superpower.  We might suggest you see what the Dragon and Bear have to offer, but be sure to call Sudan and Georgia for references.

In the meantime keep your opinions on the Eagle to yourself, remember, he's still circling overhead in search of a target. When he finally let's go it could be ugly.

       
 

Peggy Noonan, a terrific conservative Wall Street Journal columnist, had this open question on The One  ...

Does he have real greatness in him? Or is he, say, a product of the self-esteem campaign, that movement within the schools and homes of our country the past 25 years that says the way to get a winner is to tell the kid he's a winner every day? You can get some true people of achievement that way, because some people need a lot of reinforcement to rise. But you can also get, not to put too fine a point of it, empty suits that take on a normal shape only because they're so puffed up with ego.

Is Mr. Obama's self-conception in line with his gifts, depth, wisdom and character? That's the big question, I suspect, on a number of minds.

You got THAT right Sister.

This article from Politico also provides some insight on the questionable inevitability of Dems taking the White house... 7 worrisome signs for Obama 

One of the signs is race because it's too hard to nail down in polls, I mean who, but an idiot, would admit to a pollster they wouldn't vote for someone because of their skin color?  I have a good buddy who believes McCain's only chance to win is if he names a black VP.  I'm not so sure. 

Obama has already broken through enough barriers for America to feel good about itself, taking 98% white Iowa comes to mind.  America also, one hopes, is mature enough to recognize that any perceived benefit, particularly at this place in history, of electing an affirmative action president to assuage white guilt is just way too risky, especially this particular affirmative action candidate. 

If he wasn't so far left we might indulge ourselves the experiment of something completely different for its own sake or the sheer novelty, but as world events like Georgia and Iran keep reminding us, as alluring as it may sound, the time for radical change just isn't ripe.   Fortunately the more they find out about the kind of change Obama is talking about, the more comfortable they can become with voting the status quo.  One hopes...  

It's both the best and worst things about the blogosphere, just when you think you have unique take or  profound revelation on something someone validates your theory but beats you to the punch.

My recent revelation was in noticing a consistent inconsistency in Democrat logic on both the war and energy policies that exposes their serious problem with linear thinking.  In Iraq they would have us believe that the sooner we pull out militarily the faster the political and economic solutions will occur  - -  when in fact only a military component can facilitate those solutions.

Likewise in energy where they want us to believe that the energy crisis can be solved without increasing our domestic oil supply - - apparently clueless to the reality that a wholesale immediate switch to all alternative energy would leave us in the dark.

It's a matter of sequencing  the proper amalgam of solutions.  Not even the most rabid hawk implied that Iraq solution was strictly military, just as the most anti-environmentalist claims domestic drilling is the sole solution to the energy mess. Most problems consist of a combination of factors so only the most naive can believe there is a single solution. 

The rhetorical trick is to cast doubt on the other side by accusing them of oversimplification.  That is the flip side of the same coin they use in deliberately over complicating an issue to the point where we clueless Heartlanders just throw up our hands in surrender because only something as big and powerful and all-knowing as government can fix it.  I've said it before but it bears repeating and will be a Heartland Axiom: most issues aren't too complicated to fix, they are fixed to look too complicated.      

Rand Simberg explores he dark intricacies of this line of thinking in Scarecrows and Bogeymen, excerpted and linked below.   

The inestimable Dr. Krauthammer says...

The green fuels the Democrats insist we should be investing in are as yet uneconomical, speculative technologies, still far more expensive than extracted oil and natural gas. We could be decades away. And our economy is teetering. Why would you not drill to provide a steady supply of proven fuels for the next few decades as we make the huge technological and economic transition to renewable energy?

Just like it took security first to allow progress in Iraq it will take more oil first to help us out of this energy crisis.

...drilling requires no government program, no newly created bureaucracy, no pie-in-the-sky technologies that no one has yet invented. It requires only one thing, only one act. Lift the moratorium. Private industry will do the rest. And far from draining the treasury, it will replenish it with direct taxes, and with the indirect taxes from the thousands of non-subsidized new jobs created. TRTWT It's Simple: Drill and Conserve

Brilliant, unfortunately in this Democrat controlled Congress the relationship of brilliance to policy is inverse.

Rand Simberg at Pajamas Media weighs in by examining two overused Democrat sound bites: "there is no military solution" and "We can't drill our way out of this crisis".  On point 1; Uh, yes there is, and it happened, and point 2; drilling is not the only way, but it is irrefutably among the most crucial, and at least as immediate as any alternative sources given the capacity requirements.   

I liked this part
...the Democrats continue to pretend that it is those who wanted to win in Iraq, and those who want to bring new supplies to market, are advocating a single solution, it is in fact they who are denying the true total solution, by preemptively excluding critical elements in both cases. Those who favored the successful Petraeus strategy have never dismissed the need for diplomacy and other counterinsurgency tactics. Those who advocate environmentally sensitive production in promising new fields don’t deny the need for other, better energy technologies. In both cases, we have to continue to move forward on every front, TRWT Democrats Throwing Up Scarecrows and Bogeymen

And no sooner does Simberg observe that Dems accuse Republicans of single solution stupidity none other than NYT Columnist Paul Krugman provides a perfect exhibit A:

is that know-nothingism — the insistence that there are simple, brute-force, instant-gratification answers to every problem, and that there’s something effeminate and weak about anyone who suggests otherwise — has become the core of Republican policy and political strategy. 

Oh really?

But hold on a minute, wasn't it Obama who came up with the doozy of all simple solutions with his roundly debunked theory that properly inflated tires will save as much oil as can be pumped from the outer continental shelf? (I have about as firm a grasp on the amount of oil under our collective continental shelves as my 5 year-old daughter but that claim sounds pretty goofy to me)
 
To my eye all it takes is a Democrat with a microphone to make the Republicans look like the party of Einsteins.

Gotta hand it to Krugman, not only does he get it wrong, he gets it EXACTLY wrong. Assuming you are not gluttons for punishment I didn't link Krugman's rant.  The charming and clever title should tell you all you need to know;  Republicans Now The Party of Stupid. Just think of the trees, ink, and hot air saved if only liberals could argue without insult. 




 

Jennifer Rubin notices how lefty pundits are beginning to notice all that Obama isn't... interesting stuff, but good news?  Not if there's still hope for a Clinton McCain matchup... as explained here by American Thinker's Denis Keohane: Could Obama still lose the nomination?

If Obama has a succession of weeks like the last one, i.e. a series of 9% drops in polls, anything could happen at the convention.  Maybe our best bet is to keep the media Obama love affair in tact for awhile.
 
samples from Rubin:

The bottom line: liberal pundits — following months of analysis by their conservative counterparts — had figured out that despite the best possible terrain for the Democrats to recapture the White House, the Democrats (with a whole lot of cheerleading from the mainstream media) have chosen a thinly experienced, irresolute, underachieving and obnoxious standard bearer. And his excuse-mongering just makes it all the more irritating.

and...
But Obama has done his share to lift the veil from the pundits’ eyes. Sometimes the accumulated evidence is too much even for the mainstream media to ignore. And it is ironic (but not altogether surprising) that the tipping point may have been the Berlin rally — an explosion of ego and meaningless rhetoric which attained the level of self-parody.

To read the whole thing: Pundits Begin to Worry About Obama

Well, the fat lady is still in the dressing room in this opera so there's plenty of time for more drama.  I believe to the core of my being that if any opportunity to attain power presents itself to Ms. Clinton it will be pounced upon like a hungry bitch on a bone, pun entirely up to the reader, but it works for me... 

Found this on Pajamas Media a while back.  Can't let an article on the Heartland, especially the Upper Great Lakes Region, go without comment but I think he pretty much nails it.  Not exactly a deep analysis but interesting nonetheless.  He's so wrong about cheese curds I can't tell you, but I'm not sure it makes his entire opinion suspect.

Upper Midwest Politics — As Blue as the Great Lakes

His conclusion:

In my final analysis, after four days and 2,200 miles through these three states, I believe Obama, like Kerry in 2004, will keep them as blue as the splendid Great Lakes, with Michigan likely being the closest. Though they’ll be close, there are too many Democrats — not willing to be wooed by McCain’s centrism or turned off by Obama’s inexperience — in the major cities, suburbs, in college and river towns, for Michigan, Wisconsin or Minnesota to flip, even in 2008.

Sad, and probably true, but not if I can help it...

I'm not sure I agree Michigan will be closest, especially if McCain taps MN Gov. Pawlenty as his running mate.  One thing he missed completely about Wisconsin, and to some extent Minnesota, the ones who elected Jesse Ventura Governor, is that we love our mavericks.  In my mind McCains close association with Feingold is a reason to vote against him but Feingold is very popular here so it might actually help.  Because of his close ties to McCain fence-sitting Feingold loyalists can vote against his presidential endorsement.  One hopes.

He really doesn't elaborate on the college campus / blue vote pattern here in Wisconsin but it is exactly what won it for Kerry in 2004.  Platteville, River Falls, LaCrosse, Oshkosh, Eau Claire, you name it, he got it.  Makes me wonder whether Democrats actually planned this way back when they granted land for all those rural (aka red area) campuses - - and thereafter began routinely populating the faculties with uber liberals.  A little too conspiratorial?  Maybe, but campus organization and activism for Democrats is definitely institutionalized, sophisticated, and intense, and that I am sure, is no accident.  Big campuses in little towns wield a hell of a lot of influence on the surrounding area.  Having grown up in one I know whereof I speak.