Anyone who is unclear on this point should compare the hopefulness of many online conservatives and libertarians with the sobering election odds displayed on Intrade. Republicans may score big gains in the coming election cycles, but they may not. And even if they win big there is no guarantee that they will behave better in office than they did during the Bush years. Meanwhile the Left, having rampaged through the universities and media, is now very deliberately restructuring the federal bureaucracies and writing legislation whose destructive effects won’t be fully apparent for years. You can bet that the inept Loony Left appointees who have garnered public attention are only the tip of the iceberg. Thousands of others, less flamboyant but equally committed, are doing their best behind the scenes to entrench themselves in power and make it difficult for their ideological opponents to reverse the changes.
Predictions
Penumbra Obliterated
I’ve got a question for any of our readers that happen to be lawyers.
Free access to abortion services appears to be a shibboleth of the Left that they hold particularly dear. That, at least, is the unmistakable conclusion one must draw when considering the actions of the Democrats.
For example, the abortion question was at the forefront of the news all during the Bush administration. Just about every time the President nominated a jurist to fill a vacancy on a court bench, it seems that the Democrats wanted to spend most of their time during the confirmation hearings endlessly grilling the potential judge on their views concerning abortion. If memory serves, it started with Priscilla Owen, who had to wait through four years of wrangling and filibuster before her nomination ever came to a vote! In fact, she would probably still be stuck in confirmation hearing limbo if it wasn’t for the so-called Gang of 14.
There were other issues that got the Dem’s fur up, but it seemed to me that the abortion issue certainly took center stage more often than any other.
You heard it here first.
How soon until the news media starts investigating, harassing and ridiculing Police Sergeant James Crowley, and his wife and family?
Obama’s media allies defend him by trying to impose personal misery, and if possible, professional destruction, on anyone who crosses him.
Obama chose to get involved in this, so it is about him now.
Sgt. Crowley and his family are next.
Watch.
UPDATE: While some of the facts are not yet in — statements from other witnesses for example, which I have not seen, though they may be on the Net somewhere — it appears for now that the police officer was doing his job and that Prof. Gates was out of line to the point that he was within the scope of the Massachusetts disorderly conduct statute. I base this on the police report, in large part, as well as the known facts, i.e. that there was a report of an attempted break-in, that there had been break-ins in the neighborhood, that Gates was locked out and trying to get into his own house, that the police arrived to investigate, and (some speculation) that Gates was probably in a foul mood, sensitive to real or imaginary racial slights, and failed to exercise self-control. Do cops lie on police reports? Yes, some do, from time to time. Do cops act abusively, or condescendingly or blusteringly? Of course, we have all seen this from time to time. Do we have any basis to say this officer did anything wrong or inappropriate? Only if you accept what Gates says and discount the police report to zero. I am inclined to see the conflicting stories as at best a wash, with Gates’ story making less sense overall. Were there witnesses to this episode? Yes, apparently there were. Can they confirm or rebut what was in the police report versus what Gates says happened? Maybe. Will this investigation continue? Apparently not formally. Will the news media keep it alive as a controversy? Likely. Will we get more clarity, or only heat and not light? Too soon to say. I am open to contrary facts, but I am not seeing them yet. So far, I see no basis to assume that Sgt. Crowley was (1) racist, (2) stupid, or (3) abusing his authority.
My point is that since Obama inserted himself into this, I predict his allies will rally to him and use all available means to smear and intimidate and harass someone who has found himself adverse to Obama.
Quote of the Day
Commenter “Lifeofthemind”, in response to this post at Belmont Club (discussing the Obama administration’s prospects if public support for its program declines):
For what it is worth, which is what the audience is paying that is exactly nothing, Soros-Axelrod-Obama do know what they are doing. It is unlikely that they will cancel elections or or do anything else spectacular that would only serve to rally the resistance. My expectation is that they do not worry unduly about the sagging poll numbers but they do intend to win the next election. How to square this circle when it is likely that in 18 months we will be experiencing 15-20% in both unemployment and inflation? They intend to do it the Chicago way, they intend to buy it with your money.
The Democrats are going to have over half a trillion dollars in slush fund money ready to pump out for the 2010 election. Acorn and an army of hacks will push to hold onto Congress in 2010 and the census will be cooked to deliver the Congress in 2012. The declining economy will drain resources from the opposition. As a side benefit the carping left will discover a new discipline that Republicans could never threaten them with. Recalcitrant academics and think tanks will be defunded and media jobs will be increasingly under the control of Obama aligned conglomerates. Immigration reform will complete the picture for Obama’s reelection. While much of this will be technically illegal, in the general sense of corruption, it does not mean that they will resort to violence or attempt to repeal the 2nd Amendment before 2012.
As I said before people should stop assuming that Obama will make a mistake and do something overtly revolutionary. Expecting or hoping that he does so puts people in a passive or reactive mode. It is like those who still expect his birth certificate or college transcripts to magically appear and then somehow force someone to invalidate the election. Anyone who is thinking that way needs to have Cher slap them in the face and yell “Snap out of it.” Can we win this battle? Yes but it will take hard sustained work.
Was Michael Jackson Murdered?
I know I shouldn’t wallow in tabloid speculation but this profile of Michael Jackson [h/t/ Instapundit] suggests that he might have been.
If the story is true, Jackson would have been worth more alive than dead to many people including his entourage. If Jackson failed to perform due to ill health, the promoters of his upcoming series of 50 London concerts would lose all the money they put in. If he died, they could recover some or all of their investment from insurance. Someone in his entourage might have feared that Jackson would be sued and wiped out if the concert promoters had learned he had been too ill to perform when he made the contract. If he died, they at least would have the estate and children to pick over (or thought they would). His Nation of Islam bodyguards might be the obvious suspects because (1) no one can murder an individual easier than their own bodyguards and (2) they may have detested Jackson for his homosexuality.
As I wrote before, we see in superstars like Jackson all the psychopathologies that used to afflict the absolute rulers of old. Assassination would be just one more parallel.
Maybe we should issue an Intrade contract for when the first murder conspiracy book will be published. I’d put my money on 30 days.