Is Mark Warner Intoxicated on Intelligence?

During a Majority Trust Retreat Dinner for the National Democrat Campaign Committee in Martha's Vineyard, Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), the Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee jested that if you gave him another glass of wine, and he would reveal tantalizing details about the Mueller Special Counsel investigation.



  While this cryptic comment can be passed off as sparkling wit during a wine, brie and rubber chicken fundraiser, this discounts the candor which is afforded to high rolling donors. Rush Limbaugh recalled attending a soiree for big donors to President George W. Bush.  Rush recalled that unlike his cautious, stammering public persona, "W" was entirely a different guy when cameras were not focused on him.  Once assured that the remarks were off the record, Mr. Bush spoke with candor and the President opined without notes for 45 minutes about serious subjects without stuttering. 

Limbaugh insists that teasing big money donors with bogus political bombshells is not done. Deceiving deep pocket donors risks alienating their pocketbooks in the future.  

This may be why President Trump chronicled Warner's supposedly tipsy insinuation.  

Taken at face value, Democrats are colluding with the Special Counsel. In addition, they are relying on precursors of impeachable offenses to base their midterm election campaign.  This could explain why Vanity Fair proclaimed that Mueller could give the GOP an October Surprise. 

If it is the case that Warner has advanced intelligence about the Mueller investigation, why is information on an active case being leaked to a key Democrat?   Is Warner intoxicated with illegal insider intelligence or just intoxicated on power?

When Swamp Rats are Dirty Rats

The revelation of sexual misconduct by Hollywood's Harvey Weinstein has transitioned to the District of Calamity.  Accusations of sexual impropriety threatens to swing two Senate seats and effect the balance of power on Capitol Hill.

Much has been made about  allegations of skivvy conduct by Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore (R-AL).  These accusations stem from conduct nearly four decades ago that were unreported to authorities, but came to light in the closing days of a special election to fill the seat vacated by now Trump Administration Attorney General Jeff Sessions.  The alluvia of allegations sound bad, but are past the statute of limitations, based she-said-he-said allegations with little to no corroborating evidence and relies upon the court of public opinion. 

From a political standpoint, Democrats are anxious to make Roy Moore a poster child for Republicans in 2018 and use the hermaneutic that Republicans condone sexual harassment as a cudgel to impeach President Donald Trump if Democrats regain the House of Representatives.  In the near term, the muck about Moore put the White House in a box.  On the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, establishment Republicans did not like a loose cannon like Judge Moore to be in the Senate chambers, when it endangers the clubby atmosphere of the Upper Chamber and he could help shake up the leadership.  So many GOP party loyalists were quick to condemn Moore for the alleged but unproven misconduct.

There are concerns that Republicans might lose this previously considered "safe" seat, as Moore is polling with a double digit deficit after these allegations have been publicized.  Since candidate Moore refuses to step aside due to this scandal, the DC GOP suggested writing in another Republican. Apparently, this did not test well and was dropped.  After a careful reading of the Alabama state statutes, centrist Republican Hugh Hewitt claims that the problem could go away if   Senator Luke Strange (R-AL) resigned, creating a new vacancy which would cancel the shaky December 12th election, and Governor Kay Ivey (R-AL) could appoint another caretaker Senator until the next general election (in November 2018).  Considering the shaky ground Jeff Sessions is in at the Department of Justice, it is possible that Sessions be appointed back to his own seat.

[L] Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) attending [R] Senator Luther Strange (R-AL) swearing in

Recently, after a pleasant Sunday brunch, we chatted about the troubling news about Roy Moore. As the topic expanded to include sexual harassment by elected officials, two ardent feminists insisted that Congress needed to do something about it and make offenders on Capitol Hill as accountable as the rest of us.  I asked who were their bosses.  The obvious answer was the people.  I maintained that voters get to fire their elected officials periodically and they should decide rather than an insider committee.  That viewpoint was not well received.

Well, it seems that when Congress pushed to make the same rules apply to them as their constituents, there were a few quirks.  Regarding charges of sexual harassment with members of staffers, there is 30 day waiting period before pressing charges.  In addition, the victim making the accusation must undergo mandatory counseling.  That sounds munificent, except the counseling comes from the employer whom someone is accusing.  It would seem that it could be made clear to accusers that going public would not be in anyone's best interests.   If I recall correctly, John Batchelor's news-maker interview indicated that this system has paid out $15 million since its advent in the 105th Congress with nary a word making the press.

Congressional Sexual Misconduct payout ledger

What took party hacks off their sexual harassment game plan was the revelation by a Los Angeles radio personality of Al Franken's inappropriate conduct during a USO mission to the Middle East in 2006, before he was elected as Senator from Minnesota.  The woman reported that she was supposed to do a skit written by Franken that involved a kiss and wanted to rehearse-- she demurred but eventually consented.  During the practice, she alleged that Franken put his tongue halfway down her throat and grabbed her head.  She immediately insisted "Don't do that again!", and she deflected his approach during the skit.

The problem with sexual conduct and Al Franken is about the contemporaneous  photographic evidence. The woman in question wanted to grab some rack time during the 36 hour military flight.  When she was asleep, Franken was seen with a coprophagic grin cupping at her breasts.  No doubt, Franken thought this was funny at the time (and probably a great way to get back at her).  Franken has been known to take outrageous photos for laughs (but the infamous Franken diaper photo was a fake).

Citizen Al Franken takes a picture with a sleeping beauty during a 2016 USO tour.

But this Al Franken moment  was captured on camera. Oops. And the accuser is Leeane Tweeden, a KABC-AM radio personality. Tweeden initially posted #MeToo, but she decided to come forth after hearing Congresswoman Speier's (D-CA 14th)  allegations that members on both side of the aisle have thrust sexual advances while in Congress.

Now this puts a kink into progressive partisans' plans. One of their prominent members stands accused. The public has been primed to always accept the word of victims.  In addition, there is photographic proof. This takes away from the rip the GOP as blanket sexual predator smear.  Rush Limbaugh points out that in this environment, Democrats will have to proverbially throw Senator Franken (D-MN) under the bus to not to seem hypocritical and prospectively use it against their ideological opponents. 

Franken publicly apologized to his victim, claiming that he thought that it was funny.  In addition, Franken submitted himself to scrutiny from his peers.  Maybe this gets it out of the headlines and it gets buried by the press.  If push comes to shove, Minnesota has a Democrat Governor Mark Dayton (D-MN), so Franken would undoubtedly be replaced by another Democrat. 

While justice is a noble pursuit, in this charged environment, the court of public opinion may well condemn non-guilty people just based on innuendo or unproven accusations which are promptly swept under the rug out of convenience.   The reform from the 105th Congress seems to allow members to slide, in a process intended to apply the peoples' law to Congress.  Although there are Ethics Committees to punish members egregious actions, I suspect that the ballot box is still the most efficacious way to punish when swamp rats act like dirty rats. 

Rush Limbaugh on the NFL Taking the Knee for the National Anthem

On Chaotic Campaigning and Ceilings

Manhattan Mogul Donald Trump's sober response to coming in second for the 2016 Republican Iowa Caucuses did not last long.  The day after, Trump seized on a sketchy story that the Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX)  campaign "cheated" by passing along media reports of Dr. Ben Carson's retreat from the campaign trail.




But then Trump linked it to the Canadian "birther" attack, which ought to tip off Carson supporters on Trump's sincerity. Later, Trump doubled down on social media to demand that the Iowa Caucuses be held over or Cruz's win nullified. So much for being dignified and concentrating on the future.

The Washington Examiner's Philip Klein offered an analysis on the primary campaign.  Metrics indicate that Mr. Trump has a solid core base of core followers which may number up to 25% of the electorate, as long as their dear leader is winning.  The record setting turnout in the Republican Iowa Caucuses did not help the populist pugilist as conventional wisdom held.  Last minute decision makers decidedly turned away from the Trump train.

In order to win the nomination, a candidate eventually must garner a majority of voters (as well as 1,237 delegates in at least six primary wins) to take the nomination.  Data indicates that Trump has a ceiling of support.  The large lump of core supporters may help him in a crowded field, but it will not take him over the top.

Trump has utilized an unconventional primary strategy, eschewing organization and retail politics for celebrity driven campaign events, earned media from outlandish statements and constantly attacking his opponents with insults and paraliptical innuendo. Now that ballots have been cast, the circus show is no longer easily winning eyeballs.  More importantly, it does not seem to be winning converts.

Rush Limbaugh had a blue collar caller who had previously been in the Trump camp for the political incorrect fighter appeal.  But the Trump supporter had been dissuaded by the renewed attacks on Cruz  by Trump over the Carson kerfluffle.  This support may ring essentially hollow as Trump had insinuated that Dr. Carson had the pathology of a child molester in November 2015).  The caller began to question if Trump is fighting for real reasons or if it is part of his show.

This sort of agonizing re-appraisal from Trump-eteers as well has the apparent hard ceiling of Trump support may not bode well for his candidacy in the future.  This is not to say that Trump should immediately be written off.  Trump's lead in New Hampshire is formidable.  In addition, the large lead that Senator Bernie Sanders has in the Granite State's Democrat primary may allow many cross over votes to a competitive race as well as "reverse Operation Chaos" by Democrats voting for their favored foe to defeat in the November General Election.

Winning a primary contest does not necessarily mean that the spotlight will fall on the victor. Ask Ted Cruz after the Iowa Caucuses.  Much of the media has focused on the over-performing Senator Marco Rubio third place finish. But with the tight timeline of primaries and stories emanating from unexpected results may mark the end of domination of the news cycle by realty show like media stunts. Not that such an inconvenient truth will dawn on everyone.  Conservative media pundit Ben Shapiro echoed Donald Trump's true tactic: "I keep whining and whining until I win."

 Time will tell if that continues to work in Election 2016.

On Being Offended and Campus Speech Codes

Welcome back to class, students! I am Mike Adams your criminology professor here at UNC-Wilmington. Before we get started with the course I need to address an issue that is causing problems here at UNCW and in higher education all across the country. I am talking about the growing minority of students who believe they have a right to be free from being offended. If we don’t reverse this dangerous trend in our society there will soon be a majority of young people who will need to walk around in plastic bubble suits to protect them in the event that they come into contact with a dissenting viewpoint. That mentality is unworthy of an American. It’s hardly worthy of a Frenchman.

 

Let’s get something straight right now. You have no right to be unoffended. You have a right to be offended with regularity. It is the price you pay for living in a free society. If you don’t understand that you are confused and dangerously so. In part, I blame your high school teachers for failing to teach you basic civics before you got your diploma. Most of you went to the public high schools, which are a disaster. Don’t tell me that offended you. I went to a public high school.

Of course, your high school might not be the problem. It is entirely possible that the main reason why so many of you are confused about free speech is that piece of paper hanging on the wall right over there. Please turn your attention to that ridiculous document that is framed and hanging by the door. In fact, take a few minutes to read it before you leave class today. It is our campus speech code. It specifically says that there is a requirement that everyone must only engage in discourse that is “respectful.” That assertion is as ludicrous as it is illegal. I plan to have that thing ripped down from every classroom on campus before I retire.

One of my grandfathers served in World War I. My step-grandfather served in World War II. My sixth great grandfather enlisted in the American Revolution when he was only thirteen. These great men did not fight so we could simply relinquish our rights to the enemy within our borders. That enemy is the Marxists who run our public universities. If you are a Marxist and I just offended you, well, that’s tough. I guess they don’t make communists like they used to.

Of course, this ban on “disrespectful” speech is really only illusory. The university that created these speech restrictions then turns around and sponsors plays like The Vagina Monologues, which is loaded with profanity including the c-word – the most offensive and disrespectful word a person could ever possibly apply to a woman. It is pure, unadulterated hypocrisy.

So, the university position can be roughly summarized as follows: Public university administrators have a First Amendment right to use disrespectful profanity but public university students do not. This turns the First Amendment on its head. The university has its free speech analysis completely backwards. And that’s why they need to be sued.

Before we go, let us take a few minutes to look at the last page of your syllabus where I explain the importance of coming to class on time, turning off your cell phone, and refraining from talking during lectures. In that section, I explain that each of you has God-given talents and that your Creator endowed you with a purpose in life that is thwarted when you develop these bad habits.

Unbelievably, a student once complained to the Department chairwoman that my mention of God and a Creator was a violation of Separation of Church and State. Let me be as clear as I possibly can: If any of you actually think that my decision to paraphrase the Declaration of Independence in the course syllabus is unconstitutional then you suffer from severe intellectual hernia.

Indeed, it takes hard work to become stupid enough to think the Declaration of Independence is unconstitutional. If you agree with the student who made that complaint then you are probably just an anti-religious zealot. Therefore, I am going to ask you to do exactly three things and do them in the exact order that I specify.

First, get out of my class. You can fill out the drop slip over at James Hall. Just tell them you don’t believe in true diversity and you want to be surrounded by people who agree with your twisted interpretation of the Constitution simply because they are the kind of people who will protect you from having your beliefs challenged or your feelings hurt. 

Second, withdraw from the university. If you find that you are actually relieved because you will no longer be in a class where your beliefs might be challenged then you aren’t ready for college. Go get a job building houses so you can work with some illegal aliens who will help you gain a better appreciation of what this country has to offer.

Finally, if this doesn’t work then I would simply ask you to get the hell out of the country. The ever-growing thinned-skinned minority you have joined is simply ruining life in this once-great nation. Please move to some place like Cuba where you can enjoy the company of communists and get excellent health care. Just hop on a leaky boat and start paddling your way towards utopia. You will not be missed.

                                                                                                                                                    

Professor Mike Adams is no stranger to controversy.  This tenured conservative professor ruffled the feathers  progressives by having the temerity to assert that marriage consists of one man and one woman.



Considering the ferocity of condemnation from his colleagues, it is a reminder that the Theory of Gender is all about intellectual totalitarianism transferred to the polity. It seems such elitists intellectuals are leaders of the idiot tribe, influencing the otherwise apathetic hoi polloi.

H/T: Mike Adams
        Townhall.com

Maverick Metaphor on Planned Parenthood

The series of expose videos from the Center for Medical Progress has focused the public on Planned Parenthood's practices of purportedly selling baby parts (fully formed fetal tissue specimens).

Planned Parenthood defenders have employed various answers to these unsavory images of abortionists in action marketing and procuring their "product". These excuses have ranged from attacking the source for being biased, entrapping the abortionists  or releasing  edited videos (even though uncut full length videos were simultaneously released).

Pro Choice proponents slightly shifted the array of excuses to play on womens' reproductive health rights, claiming that abortion is only a small portion of Planned Parenthood's mission.  In fact, pro choice people claim that only 3% of Planned Parenthood's work is actually abortion.  Well, as Rich Lowrey observed, it depends on how the statistics are complied.  For instance, when a pregnant woman comes to Planned Parenthood, she is given an initial assessment,  a STD test, a pregnancy test and an appointment for the termination of the pregnancy.  So if each of these components are separately tabulated that means that only 25%  of Planned Parenthood's procedures are abortions.  Limbaugh makes a big deal that Planned Parenthood does not do mammograms thus he contends they effectively do not really cover womens' health. 

But looking at Planned Parenthood's books, 38.4% of Planned Parenthood's income stems from abortion services.  That doesn't even count how selling fetal tissues adds to their bottom line or finances Planned Parenthood executives aspirations for Lamborghinis.

If we lived in a nation that still respected the rule of law, the Department of Justice would be investigating the numerous instances of federal law violations which the videos exposed of selling body parts, altering medical procedures to ensure procurement and possible live birth abortions (through intact cadavers being marketed). But instead, liberal applications of justice in some states have gone after the investigative journalists free speech rights  through prior restraints as well as California Attorney General Kamala Harris (and Democrat US Senate candidate) is investigating the Center for Medical Progress for prospective violations of law. 

Rush Limbaugh's mordant metaphor may make some people uneasy. But so should Planned Parenthood's barbaric modus operandi for marketing "post abortive material". These Planned Parenthood expose videos pull back the curtain on the progressive euphemisms about abortion and reveal ugly realities. The question is whether the elites will protect their conceits or deal with the displays of exposed lawlessness and inhumanity. 

Tom Nichols on the New Totalitarians

Tom Nichols is a professor at the US  Naval War College and the Harvard Extension School. His Federalist article "The New Totalitarians Are Here"  His political science analysis on de Africanizing SCOTUS Justice Clarence Thomas, by George Takei and the Christian bakers who declined to make a wedding cake for a lesbian wedding in Oregon shows the present progressive inclination towards totalitarianism.

h/t: The Federalist

      Rush Limbaugh

Louis Farrakhan on Flags

In less than a week after the racist shooting at a church in Charleston, South Carolina, there has been a remarkable public retreat regarding the Confederate Battle Flag, which the killer trumpeted as one of his racist inspirations.  

Governor Nikki Haley (R-SC) acted promptly and requested that the state legislature pass bills removing the stars and bars from the State Capitol and into a museum.  Several other states have made motions to remove the flag or insignia from state property. Major retailers such as Walmart , Ebay and Amazon have decided to stop selling the rebel banner. Warner Brothers has resolved excise the Confederate Battle Flag from all Dukes of Hazard merchandise and future public releases. 

Despite the deft political maneuvers by Republican leadership to remove Confederate symbols made prominent by anti-Civil Rights Democrats (e.g. Democrat Governor Fritz Hollings put the stars and bars on the South Carolina state capitol in 1962), such political gestures are insufficient to the perpetually aggrieved class. Rush Limbaugh predicted that the next target by makegrates would be the American Flag.  How right he was.

The Reverend Louis Farrakhan, speaking before the Metropolitan AME church in Washington DC, used a planning session for an October Millions for Justice mobilization to rail against the racism which he perceives is embodied in the Stars and Stripes. 

Farrakhan is positioning the October event as "Justice or else".

School children used to recite the Pledge of Allegiance to a flag for which it stands.  It seems that we will be determining if the American flag stands for "Justice for all" or "Just us".

Rush Limbaugh on Taxation

Feminists Pols Primed to Use #BringBackOurGirls As Partisan Cudgel

Eleven Democrat Senators jumped on the hashtag diplomacy bandwagon by posing for a #BringBackOurGirls publicity photo.  To follow up, all twenty female Senators signed a letter to President Obama deploring the abduction of 300 Nigerian schoolgirls.  In addition, this letter  urged that the Congregation of the People of Tradition for Proselytism and Jihad, more widely known as Boko Haram (loosely translated "Western education is sinful"), and offshoot group Ansaru to be considered al Qaeda associates and thereby be put on the terror watch list. Senator Amy Klobachar (D-MN) sought to expand awareness to include human trafficking both domestically and internationally. 

This sense of the Senate is interesting as it comes at a time Democrat vehemently claim that the Republicans are on a partisan witchhunt regarding the House Benghazi Select Committee.  Moreover, as prospective Presidential candidates for the 2016 run, these women are strangely silent about former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's decision to keep Boko Haram off the terror watch list during her tenure at Foggy Bottom.  

Realpolitck critics contend that this social media campaign is just an exercise in self-esteem which will have little sway on the barbarians in the wild of Nigeria.  Rush Limbaugh suggested that the hashtag campaign was a cheaper way of advertising that "you care" instead of investing in a cause ribbon  or organizing a benefit concert.

Unlike the 2012 campaign smear, the Boku Haram abductions exemplify a real "War on Women".  Yet if one does not  throw accolades to the Twitter campaigns are condemned as being "out of touch" and not savvy about how digital soft power can work.  Almost inevitably, skeptics of the efficacy of hashtag diplomacy will be cast as the villains. 

Sandra Fluke, the former Georgetown University Law student whose claim to fame was by offering Congressional testimony that she could not afford her own contraception to bolster  Obamacare's Contraception Mandate, she could not afford contraception, now is a Democrat running for California State Senate seat 26.  A satirical site carried  outrageous opinions concerning sexual oppression in America and elsewhere.

Fortunately, Fluke's attributed observations were a spoof.  But considering Fluke's "Two Futures" speech at the 2012 Democrat National Convention, such rhetoric is not beyond the pale. 

 Some celebutards vow if elections do not go their way that they'll leave the country.  Alas, few have followed up on their promises.. If they were true, Fluke's bold statements have made her a candidate for 4P draft status in the War on Terror.

However, progressive news media are poised to use this atrocity as a cudgel for finding favor for their pet causes.  MSNBC's Chris Matthews mocked the the GOP for their sudden concern about Africa.  Of course, Matthews forgot about how widely praised President George W. Bush had been for efforts in Africa during his two terms. Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC wondered aloud if a mostly male administration would have acted sooner if the abductees weren't girls.

It seems that the #BringBackOurGirls social media campaign might have an altruistic origin, but it is showy issue identification which can be refashioned into a cudgel against domestic political "enemies".

{ Editor's Note 5/15 Piece corrected regarding Sandra Fluke}

A Bit of the Book Review for Finding Mr. Righteous-- Bridget Jones Diary Does the District of Calamity

Lisa De Pasquale’s first published book is  Finding Mr. Righteous   (Post Hill Press (2014),  241 pages) which chronicles her dozen years of dating in the DC area.  De Pasquale worked in conservative circles, but the book mostly eschews politics. De Pasquale’s friend and mentor Ann Coulter blurbed about Finding Mr. Righteous as “A true Christian story, disguised as racy Chick Lit.  Her  prologue proclaims: “ This book is about the men I’ve met in a quest to know Him.”  While Chick Lit is not in my usual reading wheelhouse,  I was intrigued to learn of a faith quest which was augmented by being involved with: an atheist; a Catholic; an Evangelical;, a Quaker;  a prominent Protestant preacher; a Jew; an Asiatic Indian; as well as a non-denominational Believer.  

De Pasquale should be credited for her candor in writing about uncomfortable personal attributes.  She makes no bones about being a self described chubby girl. She is upfront about eventually engaging in Lap-Band surgery, with the recognition the surgery is not an immediate panacea.  De Paquale shared a painful memory about losing her man over facial hair. The author recognizes that she is not as outgoing as other political animals.   She does not sugar coat when she was fired and scrambling to find work.  De Pasquale also opens about about her insecurities about being able to attract and keep men in her life.  The book has the quality of being like Bridget Jones Diary Does the District of Calamity, with the caveat that the author is decidedly based in Northern Virginia and not directly in DC.


For most of the book, De Pasquale’s writing style takes a breezy, conversational tone, including her recounted email epistolary exchanges.  She had two wonderful bon mots which joyfully describe that drive to be a conservative in the belly of the beast between-the-beltways.  Noting that networking is DC speak for drinking with people in the same career field as you rings quite true.  And De Pasquale's  funny introduction of Rush Limbaugh by noting: “I became a conservative in the backseat of a Camaro” had supreme comedic chops. 

The author is skilled at injecting a local flair into her prose, eidetically detailing conversations in local watering holes and renowned local churches.  However, this street credibility becomes obscured by De Pasquale’s conscientious blurring of organizations where she worked.  It may be wise to not state forthrightly within the text that she worked for CPAC et cetera, but the non-specific synonyms conflicted with otherwise realistic style of being a raconteur.  

One of her professional challenges was politics due to association with GOProud, a group of conservative homosexuals, which had tarnished her rising star amongst movement Conservatives..  Later, De Pasquale actively associates with GOProud during the 2012 Tampa convention.  The book does not grapple with how her ideals of equality in sexual identity conflict with religious conservative conventions or it deeply impacted her faith.  Once again, it highlights a trait of  including too many insignificant details without delving deeper, which  blunts the story of  her spiritual journey.

De Pascquale was baptizes as a Catholic but had never attended Mass until her Catholic boyfriend took her to one on the Catholic University campus.   She was rebaptized at the age of ten at a Florida Southern Baptist church even though she did not feel the call.   But De Pasquale thought of herself as a Christian-In-Name-Only (CINO). Thus she was not troubled to be  being romantically involved with an atheist. The author opined that she did not feel like she was a member of the (Christian) club.

It is a pity that for most of her ecumenical amorous encounters De Pasquale seems deeply superficial.

[***]

The denouement of Finding Mr. Righteous, De Pasquale’s conscience was touched by the example of an upright Christian, and she realized that she her willing participation in affairs made her no better than the religious hypocrites with whom she was involved, yet she lets the divorced Preacher who used her for phone sex off pretty lightly. 

The style of the book shifted at the end which ceded the focus to Mr. Righteous’ recounting of the story about Bathsheba, which was told in detailed prose, punctuated by a contemporary explicative.  For the author, this non-pretentious, non-judgmental sharing was the sort of sharing which spoke to her soul. 

[***]

Read Finding Mr. Righteous if you want to enjoy a page turner piece of Chick Lit.  Alas, the book is unlikely to  satisfy an enthusiast of the New Evangelization, a conservative political junkie  or someone seeking insight on deepening one’s Christian faith.

See the full review at: DCBarroco.com 

Great Communicators Speechless?

On the eve of the launch of his new novel The Eye of Moloch (the follow-up to The Overton Window), Glenn Beck has lost his voice.  But that does not mean that Glenn Beck lost his ability to communicate and to move with his words.

It is particularly laudable that Glenn Beck used his physical challenge as an opportunity for introspection and acting upon what he perceives is of great value nowadays. 

The weak vocal cords are most likely a temporary ailment, which is a great relief to the radio and television personality. 

 But Glenn Beck's tenacity to get the good word out serves as a reminder of how great communicators will overcome adversity to have their voices heard.  

NPR talker Diane Rehm kept a loyal audience despite her spasmodic dysphonia giving her a what could be described as a rickety voice. 

It is amazing how Rush Limbaugh conducts his widely popular conservative noontime talk show with cochlear implants which make electronic sounds (like television or telephone voices) nearly impossible to decipher.  

And Roger Ebert refused to be taken off the air after complications from cancer of the jaw took away his voice and his chin. 

Personally, I'm hoping the Beck is back in good vocal form for his Sirius/XM in-studio interview in the District of Calamity (sic).   As Beck's silent BlazeTV monologue  reminded us of Dietrich Bonhoeffer's words, "Not to speech is to speak. Not to act is to act." 

Pat Caddell's Prophetic Philippic Against the Political Class

One of the most striking speeches at CPAC 2013 were Pat Caddell’s remarks on the “Should We Shoot All the Consultants Now?” panel.  Caddell indignantly observed:

When you have the Chief of Staff of the Republican National Committee and the political director of the Romney campaign, and their two companies get $152 million at the end of the campaign for the “fantastic” get-out-the-vote program… some of this borders on RICO violations. 

Rush Limbaugh was so impacted by Caddell’s caustic comments that he spent nearly twenty minutes of airtime reading the excepts, because El Rushbo could not get his hands on any audio.  

Serendipitously, Politichicks TV Michelle Moons caught Caddell’s emphatic indictments against Mitt Romney and his reliance on self-centered political consultants on video.  Unfortunately, it was shot at an unfortunate angle and has spotty audio quality.   Still, the damning appraisal deserves to be heard by anyone interested in public policy and good governance, so listen again with earphones in necessary.

With this in mind, this animation attempts to put a better face to Caddell’s prophetic condemnation of the Cocktail Party’s Political Class.   Since Caddell often would make asides during his remarks, the audio was slightly edited to keep focused the corrosive effect of crony capitalism among the GOP establishment.

h/t: Breitbart
h/t: Politichicks

Mark Steyn Pops Off About Punishing for Pop Tart Pistols

Last week, the progressive paranoia about guns combined with American public school zero tolerance policies for a bizarre result.  Joshua Welch, a seven year old boy from Ann Arundel County, Maryland nibbled  his Pop Tart into something that resembled a pistol and saying "Bang, bang".  For this grievous offense, Welch was suspended for creating a "classroom disruption" with an inappropriate gesture.

While substitute hosting Rush Limbaugh's radio program, Mark Steyn took aim at this confluence of nanny state insanity.

Sheila Jackson Lee--Free At Last?

Representative Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX 18th) made a shocking statement at the well of the House of Representatives last week.

While Congresswoman Lee gave plaudits to President Lincoln for freeing the slaves, her floor speech made two anachronistic assertions.  Firstly,  Rep.Jackson Lee presented herself as a freed slave.  Well, the Emancipation Proclamation was promulgated by President Abraham Lincoln on January 1, 1863.  As Rush Limbaugh joked,  Sheila Jackson Lee looks good for her age but she has to be over 110  years old.

 Then Rep. Jackson Lee  claimed that this Congress had freed the slaves. Not quite.    More like the 33rd Congress not the 113th Congress. The House of Representatives did pass the 13th Amendment on January 31, 1865.  It was ratified by the required 3/4ths of states on December 13, 1865.  In fact, the Mississippi legislature had approved the 13th Amendment in 1995 but had only altered the Federal Register this February.   But certainly this Congress did not free the slaves.

Maybe Representative Sheila Jackson Lee was preoccupied about coordinating with her chauffeur for her one block commute.  After all, she needed sufficient time to change outfits so that she  so could spend  up to eight hours  seat squatting waiting on the aisle  to hug President Barack Obama at the State of the Union speech.

President Barack Obama greets Rep Sheila Jackson Lee at 2013 State of the Union

Considering the regal way that Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee treats her staff, it's no wonder that so many Hill Rats yearn to say "Free at last!".

The Rush to Snap Judgment

As the national "conversation" stemming from the Sandy Hook tragedy starts, will we rush to snap judgments?

h/t: A.F. Branco

Obama and Another Bump in the Road

TEAR DOWN THE WALL!

h/t: Paul Shanklin & Excellence in Broadcasting
       Glenn Mc Coy

Huckster Exposed?

On Monday, the Mike Huckabee Show premiered on about 40 stations nationwide, syndicated by Cumulus Media (the current owners of ABC Radio).  The show is slotted to compete head to head with the Rush Limbaugh show from Noon to Three p.m.. To distinguish himself from the King of Talk Radio, former Governor Huckabee’s (R-AR) slogan is “Less Confrontation, More Conversation”, which is meant to appeal to the mushy middle of news-talk listeners.

Huckabee took his first phone call fifty minutes into the show from “Mike in San-Francisco”.  The caller chimed in:

Well Governor, let me start by saying it's great to have a different opinion and a different person on the radio and I'm very, very happy that you're doing this radio show. One of the reasons why I want to listen to your program every day is because you ran for office and you've been a politician, you have a different perspective I think.

What a wonderful way to start off your show. Unfortunately, the background behind this sterling first call may expose the Huck-ster.
READ MORE at the DCBarroco website.