All blog posts are cross posted

Thursday, July 1, 2010

Taxes, taxes, and more taxes!

I get a newsletter from NRO every morning. Some interesting articles always show up.  This one is informative.
On the New Bank Tax
by Reihan Salam

Regular readers know that I have no theological objection to bank taxes. If some kind of FTT proves workable, it could be a good way to close our enormous long-term revenue shortfall. But I do think John Carney of CNBC.com is right to raise concerns about a mystery tax:

Under the new provisions added to the bill, regulators—specifically the newly created Council for Financial Stability—will be empowered to apply the tax according to a “risk matrix” that contains no fewer than 13 factors. Some of these are rather straightforward, such as requiring regulators to consider the size, leverage and reliance on short term funding of a company.

But more than a few relate to goals less strictly tied to financial stability. One of the factors to be considered is a company’s importance as “a source of credit for low-income, minority or underserved communities.” Another tells regulators to consider whether the company is an important source of credit for state and local governments.

The bill does not tell regulators exactly how to apply these factors. It could be that banks that do a lot of lending for low-income communities would be assessed a higher fee, since the failure of those banks would be more likely to result in a bailout by government officials concerned that low-income communities would be deprived of important sources of credit.

But that does not seem likely. Far more likely is that banks that lend in ways approved by the regulators—buying municipal bonds from budget-challenged states or lending to politically favored businesses—will be assessed a lower fee. They will be given credit—rather than penalized—for being an “important source of credit” for these constituencies.
Read the rest of the article to get more information on what is, or might be going on with this bill.

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Yucca Mountain is back? Maybe for a while..

From Just One Minute:
More Change I Hope They Didn't Believe In
Despite Obama's campaign promises the Yucca mountain nuclear waste repository lives!
WASHINGTON -- The Yucca Mountain nuclear waste plan was kept alive Tuesday when a panel of judges ruled the Obama administration does not have the authority to withdraw the project without permission from Congress.
Federal law requires the Department of Energy to apply for a waste repository license and for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to evaluate the application and rule on its merits unless lawmakers decide otherwise, according to a three-judge board that hears commission licensing matters.
Of course he does have a friendly congress, but it will be interesting to see how this plays out.  Read the rest of this to see how Sen. Reid's opponent, Sharron Angle, thinks it could be used.

Elana Kagan and partial birth abortion

You won't be seeing the details on the mainstream media, any of it, but if you do a Google search you will see just how much has been written about a shameful aspect of intervention in a medical report. Apparently the report by the physicians who knew,the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, did not have any justification for partial birth abortion so their words had to be changed to reflect a need. The person who changed it was Elana Kagan.  Politics is deadly to some babies.
Here is just one of the articles, they are found only in conservative writings.
Kagan’s Abortion Distortion
How the Supreme Court nominee manipulated the statement of a medical organization to protect partial-birth abortion.
When President Obama promised in his inaugural address to “restore science to its rightful place,” he never explained what that rightful place would be. Documents recently released in connection with the Supreme Court nomination of Solicitor General Elena Kagan suggest an answer: wherever it can best be used to skew political debate and judicial outcomes.
The documents involved date from the Clinton White House. They show Miss Kagan’s willingness to manipulate medical science to fit the Democratic party’s political agenda on the hot-button issue of abortion. As such, they reflect poorly on both the author and the president who nominated her to the Supreme Court.
There is no better example of this distortion of science than the language the United States Supreme Court cited in striking down Nebraska’s ban on partial-birth abortion in 2000. This language purported to come from a “select panel” of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), a supposedly nonpartisan physicians’ group. ACOG declared that the partial-birth-abortion procedure “may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman.” The Court relied on the ACOG statement as a key example of medical opinion supporting the abortion method.
[......]
In other words, what medical science has pronounced, let no court dare question. The problem is that the critical language of the ACOG statement was not drafted by scientists and doctors. Rather, it was inserted into ACOG’s policy statement at the suggestion of then–Clinton White House policy adviser Elena Kagan.
You need to read the rest of this to get the full story.

"But has government during this time proved itself competent?"

That is the question asked by comedian Jon Stewart. Matthew Sheffield writing in the Washington Examiner calls it Jon Stewart's Walter Cronkite moment. Jon Stewart is probably immensely flattered by the comparison. This is what it's all about:
Lyndon Johnson is famous for saying that if he had lost the favorable opinion of liberal former CBS News anchor Walter Cronkite that he had lost that of most of America.
President Barack Obama may be at a similar juncture now. With his poll numbers continuing a downward trend in light of the Gulf oil leak, his unpopular health care bill, and deficit spending, liberal comedian Jon Stewart asked a question Monday that is now beginning to emerge even in the minds of stalwart Democrats: Is government capable of doing anything large and expansive ?
As chronicled by Noel Sheppard at NewsBusters, Stewart challenged top Obama adviser David Axelrod on whether or not the administration is capable of doing any of the big things it’s promised, an argument long made by conservatives and libertarians wary of government encroachment.
“It’s clear that this administration believes that government can have a stronger hand in regulating Wall Street, in regulating energy, in doing these things. But has government during this time proved itself competent?” Stewart asked.
Read the rest of the story here.

Monday, June 28, 2010

The Internet Kill Switch

I've recieved a lot of emails concerning this possiblity.  This article is from Tech World.
Obama 'Internet kill switch' plan approved by US Senate panel
President could get power to turn off Internet
by Grant Gross
A US Senate committee has approved a wide-ranging cybersecurity bill that some critics have suggested would give the US president the authority to shut down parts of the Internet during a cyberattack.
Senator Joe Lieberman and other bill sponsors have refuted the charges that the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act gives the president an Internet "kill switch." Instead, the bill puts limits on the powers the president already has to cause "the closing of any facility or stations for wire communication" in a time of war, as described in the Communications Act of 1934, they said in a breakdown of the bill published on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee website.
The committee unanimously approved an amended version of the legislation by voice vote Thursday, a committee spokeswoman said. The bill next moves to the Senate floor for a vote, which has not yet been scheduled.
Be sure to read the link to the breakdown of the bill  then read the rest of the article here. 

The G20 Summit

This Financial Times article and cartoon says it all.
Fiscal disarray is the least of the G20’s sins
By Clive Crook
Bromley illustration

The first Group of 20 summit in November 2008 proclaimed a new era of “global solutions to global problems”. Less than two years later, with the economic crisis barely contained, the partners are at odds. Reaching agreement was not the main challenge in Toronto this weekend. They knew that was not going to happen. Mainly, they hoped to put the best face they could on disunity.

How much do these divisions matter? The main bone of contention in Toronto was fiscal policy. Here, I would argue, simple ineptitude seems to be a bigger problem than disinclination to co-operate.

Read more here.

Sunday, June 27, 2010

Wizbang's Jay Tea has a little list

You would probably like to read it.
I've Got A Little List...
Wow.
It seems everyone's reading "Avertible Catastrophe," the Financial Post's amazingly analysis of the BP oil spill in the Gulf Of Mexico. As I read it, I started putting together a list of the identifiable errors and mistakes the Obama administration made. And as I made that list, I noticed that they had hit so many of the classic categories of blunders that it could almost serve as a textbook example of how NOT to do things.
1) The Perfect Is The Enemy Of The Good.
The Dutch government owns quite a few oil-skimming vessels that have tremendous capacity. They can suck up huge amounts of oil-laden water and remove most of the oil.
But the EPA won't let them work on this disaster. The Dutch ships don't meet US standards. According to those rules, water returned to the sea must be 99.9985% clean. The Dutch ships fall short of that metric, and don't have the capability to store and carry that water ashore for more thorough cleaning.
Let's say that the Dutch ships remove only 95% of the oil in the water. Isn't that still a hell of a lot better than nothing?
2) We Are The Smartest In The World.
Also known as the "NIH" syndrome -- "Not Invented Here." To acknowledge that others might have good ideas -- even, possibly, better ideas -- would be to acknowledge that the Obama administration does not have all the answers, and that others might have a good idea or two. And if those outsiders are part of the oil industry, that's even worse.
4) Never Let A Crisis Go To Waste.
There's a school of thought that every crisis is also an opportunity. Indeed, there's an old urban legend that the Chinese word for "crisis" is formed by combining the characters for "danger" and "opportunity."
The Obama administration has indeed seized on this crisis as an opportunity to push its own agenda. It's trying like hell to impose a ban on all offshore drilling in the Gulf, which will throw thousands and thousands out of work and seriously bone the US economy.
There's more. Go read it here.

UPDATE: So just after posting this, I ran into this from AJ Strata in Stratsphere:
Incompetence Writ Large: Obama Puts Top Donor In Charge
Go read it, too.  Be sure to follow the links.

Saturday, June 26, 2010

Great Words from Donald Rumsfield

From The Corner:
Rummy on Freedom by Andy McCarthy
Former Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld made remarks at a Pentagon ceremony today unveiling his portrait. Here is some of what he said:
Some might ask how our country has endured? Well, it should be no mystery. It is because we are a free people, blessed with a free political and a free economic system – Where we are: free to think and act; to believe and protest; to vote and petition; and, yes free to succeed, to fail, and to start again.
The night satellite image of the Korean Peninsula, my favorite as many of you know well, captured many miles above the earth, tells the whole story. Below the 38th parallel, South Korea is bathed in the light of dozens of cities, monuments to that nation’s freedom. In one of the most successful economies in the world, millions of South Koreans go about their work, creating opportunity and prosperity for themselves and their families. North of the DMZ is darkness. There live exactly the same people, with the same natural resources. But those millions of Koreans labor not for themselves or their families, but for a regime that enslaves them.
The stark difference between the free and the unfree is illuminated in that picture. The boundless energy of human beings is most assuredly not unleashed by governments of boundless power. That energy is unleashed only by free political institutions and free economic systems.
But because we are free, as a people, we face choices:
We can choose to engage with the world, strengthening alliances with our friends, expanding trade agreements, deterring potential foes, and taking the fight to them when necessary. Or we can retreat, or make the truly tragic mistake of modeling our country after systems that are obviously unsuccessful. If we choose the latter path, let there be no doubt, we are certain to fail the generations to follow.
On September 12, 2001, hard hats unfurled an American flag over the still burning and deeply scarred Pentagon. Joyce and I wanted to include that scene in this portrait because those traits of resilience and perseverance – while remarkable – are not uncommon for the men and women of this Department. They are what built and sustained this country. And they are what I saw every day in the men and women I served alongside in the months and years after the worst terrorist attack in our nation’s history.
To each of those who serve – military and civilian – or have served, and to your families, there will come a time when the achievements you’ve made, and the trials you’ve endured, will recede into history. But although time will pass, and memories fade, certain important things will remain always – your pride of service and the appreciation of a grateful nation.
This country – which has treated me so well, and which offers so much opportunity for us all – exists and prospers because the members of the United States armed forces, have stepped forward and volunteered to protect it. In a very real sense, America is their gift to the future.

Friday, June 25, 2010

George Will's Questions for Kagan

These are great This is from the Washington Post.
A few 'vapid' questions for Kagan
Given Elena Kagan's aversion to "vapid and hollow" confirmation hearings devoid of "legal analysis," beginning Monday she might relish answering these questions:
-- It would be naughty to ask you about litigation heading for the Supreme Court concerning this: Does Congress have the right, under its enumerated power to regulate interstate commerce, to punish the inactivity of not purchasing health insurance? So, instead answer this harmless hypothetical: If Congress decides that interstate commerce is substantially affected by the costs of obesity, may Congress require obese people to purchase participation in programs such as Weight Watchers? If not, why not?
-- The government having decided that Chrysler's survival is an urgent national necessity, could it decide that Cash for Clunkers is too indirect a subsidy and instead mandate that people buy Chrysler products?
-- If Congress concludes that ignorance has a substantial impact on interstate commerce, can it constitutionally require students to do three hours of homework nightly? If not, why not?
-- Can you name a human endeavor that Congress cannot regulate on the pretense that the endeavor affects interstate commerce? If courts reflexively defer to that congressional pretense, in what sense do we have limited government?
-- In Federalist 45, James Madison said: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite." What did the Father of the Constitution not understand about the Constitution? Are you a Madisonian? Does the doctrine of enumerated powers impose any limits on the federal government? Can you cite some things that, because of that doctrine, the federal government has no constitutional power to do?
-- Is it constitutional for Arizona to devote state resources to enforcing federal immigration laws?
There are more, read the rest here.

Oil Spill Politics Part 2

They are fed up with the feds in Louisiana.  Bureacracy has run amok. This Bayou Buzz blog tells some of it.  Notice how they feel about the bureaucrat who doesn't know how things work, um.... that would be all of them.
BP Oil Spill: Louisiana’s Nungesser Blasts Interior Officer Over Dredge Email

As the BP oil hits more of the Louisiana shore, state officials are becoming more frustrated by the day with the federal response. On Wednesday, Louisiana Plaquemines Parish President, Billy Nungesser, blasted the feds and a top Interior Department official in reaction to an email a top Interior official sent to Nungesser, state and other federal offficials. Louisiana has been in a dispute with the Obama administration and the federal government over the response to the BP oil spill. This week, Governor Bobby Jindal blasted the federal government for their stopping dredging that the state was doing to build barrier islands.
Below is a correspondence from Jane Lyder (Deputy Assistant Secretary For Fish and Wildlife and Parks, Department of the Interior) to various Louisiana and federal government officials.
After that email from Lyder, Nungesser issued the “Nungesser Dredge statement”, followed by even another statement below:
From: Lyder, Jane

Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 4:41 PM

To: Lee, Alvin B COL MVN; Garret Graves; Kyle Graham; charlie hess; Serio, Pete J MVN; Accardo, Christopher J MVN; Colletti, Jerry A MVN; Ulm, Michelle S MVN; Mayer, Martin S MVN

Cc: Robert Routon; steve mathies; Jeff Jenkins; George bevan; Mark Zimmerman; ancil taylor; Mike Flores; Harris, James

Subject: Question about manpower

I’ve been asked if we could get more people out there to help lay the pipe would it go faster. It was suggested that we should help the State find volunteers to make a 5-7 or 9-10 day job a much shorter job. Is that feasible at all? We would be willing to contact folks in Houma & round up volunteers if it would help at all. note from Rockport Conservative, are you kidding?

Jane
Nungesser Dredge Statement

Wednesday, June 23, 2010
“Every minute we waste makes us more and more vulnerable to the oil attacking the marsh and the breeding grounds for the pelicans. It’s a shame that the bureaucrats once again fight us instead of helping us in this war against the oil,” said Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser.
Below is an email from Jane Lyder of the Department of the Interior. She’s the one holding up the dredging. This is one piece of correspondence in a chain with the State of Louisiana, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DOI, and others.
(2nd Nungesser statement from June 23)

“You don’t move sediment pumping pipe with volunteers. This is the lady that Thad Allen and President Obama are allowing hold up dredging to save our wetlands—God help us. What planet is this lady from? In the conference today Lyder was worried about the pelican nesting grounds. Obviously, she hasn’t been out there to see the birds dying, covered in oil, just like the other people who make ridiculous comments. Maybe she should go sailing on a yacht in England with Tony Hayward, it would be a great place to send her on vacation. I’ll pay her way,” said President Nungesser.

Bayoubuzz Note: The above email and nungesser statements were sent to Bayoubuzz (and others) by Nungesser's press office
by Stephen Sabludowsky

They are passing another one of those "We will Know what's in it, when we get it passed" bills

This is what the headline says:
Financial overhaul details are hammered out by House and Senate leaders

This is what Chris Dodd is quoted as saying:
"It's a great moment. I'm proud to have been here," said a teary-eyed Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), who as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee led the effort in the Senate. "No one will know until this is actually in place how it works. But we believe we've done something that has been needed for a long time. It took a crisis to bring us to the point where we could actually get this job done."
Gee thanks, Mr. Dodd. I didn't think my respect for you could go any lower, but you managed to do it.  It's disgusting. Here is where you can read the whole thing.

The Green Energy People don't want you to know this

Remember that article about the high costs of the greens jobs in Spain?  Here is a scary update.  These people do not want the truth to be told.
Pajamas Media has this:
BREAKING: ‘Green’ Energy Company Threatens Economics Professor … with Package of Dismantled Bomb Parts
The author of a damning study about the failure of Spain's "green jobs" program — a story broken here at PJM — received the threatening package on Tuesday from solar energy company Thermotechnic.
Spain’s Dr. Gabriel Calzada — the author of a damning study concluding that Spain’s “green jobs” energy program has been a catastrophic economic failure — was mailed a dismantled bomb on Tuesday by solar energy company Thermotechnic.
Says Calzada:
Before opening it, I called [Thermotechnic] to know what was inside … they answered, it was their answer to my energy pieces.
Dr. Calzada contacted a terrorism expert to handle the package. The expert first performed a scan of the package, then opened it in front of a journalist, Dr. Calzada, and a private security expert.
The terrorism consultant said he had seen this before:
This time you receive unconnected pieces. Next time it can explode in your hands.
Dr. Calzada added:
[The terrorism expert] told me that this was a warning.
Read the rest, these people are desperate to keep the "green" business going, using our money to do it.

Unintended consequences re McChrystal? Or intended?

I vote for the unintended but desired, by the war hating magazine that had the story.  I have not read the story but I do not remember them ever writing a story showing any military  in a good light. (actually, if they did I would not have seen it as I never read it.)  The author says he didn't intend, nor did he expect anyone would be fired.  If that was the case what DID he intend with his story.  I'm sure he personally did not expect the repercussions to go quite this far.
This was written for Pajamas Media by Soerem Kern who is Senior Analyst for Transatlantic Relations at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group.
There's a feeling that the departure of McChrystal is an indictment of Barack Obama’s strategy in Afghanistan, and may increase the pressure on European governments to withdraw their troops from the country.
U.S. President Barack Obama’s decision to remove General Stanley McChrystal as commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan has generated considerable media commentary in Europe, where governments are facing an uphill struggle to reverse dwindling public support for the Afghan deployment.
Most European opinion-shapers say that Obama had no choice but to relieve McChrystal of his command after the general and his associates publicly ridiculed Obama’s war cabinet in a magazine article. But the overarching theme in European newspaper commentary is that McChrystal’s insubordination is a symptom of a much larger problem, namely that Obama’s counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan is not working.
Read it all along with its embedded links.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Media Bias, Liberal Press. Whatever, it was Al Gore, move on along folks, nothing to see here.

From Power Line;
This is a clear case of too much information. Is it true? Who knows; but if detail lends credibility, it certainly qualifies as credible. What is most interesting to me about the story, however, is that a Portland newspaper had the story in 2007 or 2008, but chose not to publish it:
In 2007 or 2008, then-Portland Tribune reporter Nick Budnick made a public records request and obtained the Portland police report, but the newspaper did not run a story.
Mark Garber, the Tribune's editor-in-chief, said the woman was not willing to talk on the record or press charges and the paper considered the time lapse between the incident and when the paper received the police report. "In the end, we decided not to proceed with a story that we could not document," Garber said.
I think Tipper stayed on way too long with this crazy man.  We thought he was just making money with his crazy eco scheme and he was.  I thought he was crazy like a fox.  I was wrong, he was just crazed with power.  I wonder if the Nobel people are getting this?  What a loser.  Read the rest of the PowerLine post here.

More Irony, this time in Australia

From American Thinker blog
Obama's ally ousted as Aussie PM
byThomas Lifson
President Obama's endorsement is proving to be a political kiss of death overseas as well as at home (ask Arlen Specter about the value of an Obama endorsement).
Barack Obama publicly acknowledged two months ago that Kevin Rudd, just ignominiously ousted by his own party as Prime Minister of Australia, was politically a great match for him. From the Sydney Morning Herald in April:
Read the rest here.

This strikes me as funny/irony

From the Hill blog
Harry Reid's son leaves last name out of first campaign ad
By Emily Goodin
Nevada gubernatorial candidate Rory Reid (D) is on the air with his first campaign ad and it's missing one thing: his last name.
Reid, the son of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), doesn't say his name at any point during the ad, but it prominently features his campaign logo, "Rory 2010."
Observers noticed that throughout the gubernatorial primary, Rory Reid seemed to distance himself from his father, who faced high disapproval ratings from voters.
Read the rest here.

Soros makes out like a bandit - no surprise there!

This is definitely a read it and weep piece from The Hill blog briefing room, a credible source.
GOP lawmakers echo Beck's claims against Soros
By Elise Viebeck
Two GOP lawmakers seemed to echo talking points from Fox News host Glenn Beck about a deal made by investor George Soros..
Reps. Dan Burton (R-Ind) and Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) questioned whether Soros, who backs a number of liberal causes and Democratic candidates for office, had invested in a Brazilian oil company, Petrobras, with the knowledge that President Barack Obama might temporarily ban deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
"We don’t need to be spending Mr. Soros's money in Brazil, so he can make more money by doing offshore drilling with our taxpayer’s money," Burton said.
If you don't know this whole story read it all here.

A Classmate Sums it Up - Obama's agenda: Overwhelm the system

Rahm Emanuel cynically said, "You never want a crisis to go to waste." It is now becoming clear that the crisis he was referring to is Barack Obama's presidency.

Obama is no fool. He is not incompetent. To the contrary, he is brilliant. He knows exactly what he's doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos -- thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within.

Barack Obama is my college classmate (Columbia University, class of '83). As Glenn Beck correctly predicted from day one, Obama is following the plan of Cloward & Piven, two professors at Columbia University. They outlined a plan to socialize America by overwhelming the system with government spending and entitlement demands. Add up the clues below. Taken individually they're alarming. Taken as a whole, it is a brilliant, Machiavellian game plan to turn the United States into a socialist/Marxist state with a permanent majority that desperately needs government for survival ... and can be counted on to always vote for bigger government. Why not? They have no responsibility to pay for it.

The list is long and very disconcerting. Go here to read it all.

Do You Have Confidence in the President?

I didn't think so.  Neither do many others.  This is from American Thinkers Blog.
American's confidence in Obama at an all time low
Rick Moran
A new Wall Street Journal/NBC poll out today shows the public becoming increasingly disenchanted with President Obama and his ability to address the crisis in the country:
Sixty-two percent of adults in the survey feel the country is on the wrong track, the highest level since before the 2008 election. Just one-third think the economy will get better over the next year, a 7-point drop from a month ago and the low point of Mr. Obama's tenure. 
Amid anxiety over the nation's course, support for Mr. Obama and other incumbents is eroding. For the first time, more people disapprove of Mr. Obama's job performance than approve. And 57% of voters would prefer to elect a new person to Congress than re-elect their local representatives, the highest share in 18 years.
[...]
Some 30% in the poll said they "do not really relate'' to Mr. Obama. Only 8% said that at the beginning of his presidency. Fewer than half give him positive marks when asked if he is "honest and straightforward.'' And 49% rate him positively when asked if he has "strong leadership qualities,'' down from 70% when Mr. Obama took office and a drop of 8 points since January.
Just 40% rate him positively on his "ability to handle a crisis," an 11-point drop since January. Half disapprove of Mr. Obama's handling of the oil spill, including one in four Democrats.
The precipitous drop in Obama's leadership numbers is quite significant. Coupled with the "honesty" factor, they show a public becoming distrustful of what the president says and does. The drop is most significant among independents who seem to be abandoning the president in droves.
The poll also shows a widening gap between the GOP and Democrats with 45% now wanting to see a Republican majority in Congress.
Hat Tip: Ed Lasky, who adds:
Do you think it might have something to do with being in the hands of people who lie to us, ignore our wishes, engage in tricks and bribes to get legislation passed that most Americans don't desire? The fact that we are looking at being stuck with a debt that will be a drag on us for decades (regardless of the current state of the economy)? Do you think having a President who is a hypocrite who name-calls and finger points and hectors us makes us cheerful and optimistic?
How about a President who is ashamed of America and apologizes for our history when he is overseas? How about having an Attorney General who calls us a nation of cowards on race, a First Lady who was never proud of America until her husband was nominated to be President? How about an administration that will push tax raises while enacting a raft of anti-growth initiatives? How about a President who lets our adversaries run roughshod over our allies and us?
Any of those facts induce cheer and optimism? Everyone liking that changey-thing?
The cure comes in November-one hopes.

Some McChrystal Commentary links

First, from my favorite,  Victor Davis Hanson (Pajama Media):
McChrystal’s Tragedy

Next we hear from the Washington Post:
Gen. David Petraeus: The right commander for Afghanistan
by David Ignatius
ed. note: remember to look up what he had to say re: Gen Betrayus.

The wound that Stanley McChrystal opened
by E J Dionne

McChrystal had to go
by George Will

McChrystal's lack of political skills led to downfall
by Greg Jaffe

and their final (by Rockport Conservative) editorial:
Change of Command

I suspect most of you, like me, have read enough, heard enough, so maybe, just maybe this will be the last of them.  If I find anymore you need to see I will  update this post.
1st UPDATE:
For more information on this and much more go on over and visit the NRO front page. Lots of good links and commentary, as well as true information.

2nd UPDATE:
From The Atlantic and a very important read.
Killing the Horse Midstream
by D.B. Grady is a former paratrooper with U.S. Army Special Operations Command and a veteran of Afghanistan. He is the author of Red Planet Noir.