The Nigh Seen Creeder

During the 1988 and 1992 presidential campaigns, liberals couldn't resist using George Bush's middle names at any and every turn. Calling him George Herbert Walker Bush made the Vice President/President appear patrician and, thus, less understanding of the needs and concerns of the workin' man. We conservatives took this name-calling - accurate name-calling to be sure - all in stride. That's politics, we said.

Fast forward to 2008 ...

A growing number of liberals have their panties in a twist 'cause conservative radio hosts and a small number of Republican political operatives have started referring to U.S. Senator Barack Obama by his full name: Barack Hussein Obama. That's bigotry, they say.

There are two facts that the using-"Hussein"-when-referring-to-Obama-is-racist folks have conveniently ignored: First, that former-President Bill Clinton, a fellow liberal who's never exhibited any racist tendencies, was the first person to regularly use the H-word, if you will, when referring to Senator Obama; and second, that St. Obama himself was the first person to highlight the ethnic portions of his name for political purposes.

For years B. Hussein Obama was known to family, friends and colleagues as "Barry." When he began his political career, however, Obama realized that the über-ethnic "Barack" would impress left-wing money-givers and voters more than a white bread name like "Barry" (pun absolutely intended). His ethnic name game obviously worked; indeed, he went from the Illinois State Senate to presidenial front-runner in 36 short months.

I've taken to referring to Senator Obama as "B. Hussein" 'cause, to tell the truth, it gets under liberals' skin like a two-inch syringe. If liberals have a problem with conservatives using the man's honest-to-God middle name, perhaps they should try to convince their flavor-of-the month candidate to go back to bein' plain ol' "Barry." It'd make liberals and B. Hussein, er, Barry seem a tad less hypocritical.

My Cousin David - once of Middle Tennesse, now of hot, hot, hot Arizona - has sent us a very funny political quiz.

In his sending e-mail, if you will, Cousin David asked if folks who frequently submit material to the Nigh Seen Creeder get free Yazoo beer. Sadly, the answer is no. However, I do have a gift which I send to folks who send me interesting material: a six-pack of Natural Light. (If the sent material is really, really good, I give out a six-pack of Natural Light tall boys!)

Cuz, expect a six-pack of tall boys for entertaining Creeder Readers so ...

UPDATE: Don't know why, but the above-mentioned political quiz keeps f-in' up my templates. Thus, I've taken 'er down.

If'n you wanna see the Are You A Hopless Political Nerd?, Take This Easy Quiz And Find Out! quiz, shoot an e-mail to NighSeenCreeder@aol.com. I'll drop it in your in-box faster'n B. Obama Hussein can say "change."

Now, that's fast!!!

The Hoover Institution has an archive of William F. Buckley's TV show, Firing Line. Unfortunately, there are only a few shows available online. Be sure to check out this debate with an avowed socialist:

http://vodreal.stanford.edu/firing/5min/111.ram

At one point, Buckley is told that he could easily find a place in a socialist system, to which Buckley replies, "I'm a very good typist. I'm sure you'd have a lot of forms."

The man will be missed!

Those Democrats who think implementing price controls will make any number of goods and services more widely available (pharmaceuticals, gasoline, daycare, etc.) need to consider this: Price controls never worked in the past, they're not working now, and they'll never work in the future. Dr. Thomas Sowell tells us so:

"Venezuela is currently giving us a lesson on the consequences of price controls. The government of leftist President Hugo Chavez has imposed price controls -- and seems to be surprised that lower prices have lead to reduced supplies, even though price controls have led to reduced supplies in countries around the world and for thousands of years.

"There were price controls back in the days of the Roman Empire, under the Pharaohs in Egypt, and in ancient Babylon. There is plenty of history to look at, if we bother.

"Price controls under the Roman Emperor Diocletian led to a decline in the supply of goods. The same thing happened under President Richard Nixon's price controls in the 1970s. It has happened in Zimbabwe within the past year.

"Rent control laws led to housing shortages in Cairo -- and in Berkeley, Hanoi, Paris, and other cities around the world.

"When price controls in Venezuela led to food shortages, Hugo Chavez accused companies of 'hoarding' food. The emperor Diocletian was similarly accusatory when his price controls reduced supplies, many centuries ago.

"Political leaders always find someone else to blame for the bad consequences of their own policies.

"Hugo Chavez has blamed foreign owned companies for Venezuela's food shortages and threatened to 'nationalize' them. This too is an old political game that seldom does the people of the country any good.

"What is remarkable is how little interest there is among the media and among the public in how often and how consistently this has happened in the wake of price controls.

Today is a very sad day. William F. Buckley, Jr. has passed.

I am a right-thinking man, in innumerable ways, because I was exposed to Buckley's work when I was in high school. My aunt was working for a doctor who subscribed to Buckley's National Review magazine at the time, and every so often an NR would fall into my hands when my aunt gave me the months-old sports magazines that'd accumulated in the doctor's office. I started reading those National Review mags, and I started saying to myself, "This makes a whole hell of a lot of sense."

When I entered college, I began reading every Buckley book in my school's library. I also started watching Buckley's Firing Line program on PBS. By the time I'd reached the tender age of 19, I was a certified Fan O' William F. Buckley, Jr.

In 1992, several college chums and I trekked to Vanderbilt University to see and hear William F. Buckley, Jr. in the flesh. Buckley had just published a book about national service, entitled Gratitutue: Reflections On What We Owe to Our Country, and he'd traveled to Nashville to discuss the themes he'd advanced in said book ...

After speaking - sans notes - for over an hour, Buckley asked for questions. A hairhead hipster doofus approached the mike and, in a most condescending tone, said something to this effect: "Sir, you have told us what we need to do to serve our country. What have you done to serve your country?" Buckley's lips curled to form his inimitable grin, and he said, "I'm speaking to you, aren't I?" Applause erupted, and no one - but no one - was clapping his or her hands harder or louder than I.

That said, if anyone deserved to be called a True Renaissance Man, 'twas William F. Buckley.

A former CIA agent, he could converse in several languages. He founded the journal of record for American conservative thought and opinion. He wrote dozens of books -- fiction and non-fiction -- and penned hundreds (thousands?) of op-eds. He was an expert boatsman who made several trans-Atlantic voyages on his sailboat. He and his sainted wife welcomed artists, diplomats, and politicians, of every ideological stripe, to galas held in their homes in New York City and Connecticut.

Take any 4 or 5-year period from Buckley's public career, and he did more/produced more than most folks do in a lifetime. Impressive, to say the least.

Finally, I cannot close this little tribute without discussing what I think was William F. Buckley, Jr.'s finest moment in a lifetime of fine moments.

In 1968, ABC News hired Buckley and author Gore Vidal to provide commentary during the Democratic National Convention. As the convention wore on, the exchanges between Buckley and Vidal became increasingly testy. Unable to win on points, Vidal resorted to the name-calling game, which led to his calling Buckley a "pro-crypto-Nazi." Buckley didn't take to kindly to being called a Nazi; so in retort, if you will, he uncorked a statement for the political ages: "Now listen, you queer, stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I’ll sock you in you goddamn face and you’ll stay plastered."

I long for the day when a public figure will respond to a snarky query from a left-wing know-it-all (Jon Stewart comes to mind) by saying, for the record, "Ask me that again and I'll sock you in the goddamn face." One day, someone will not only say it ... they'll follow through on their threat as well. When it happens, William F. Buckley, Jr. will smile from the heavens.

Rest In Peace, WFB.

More on Buckley's death here and here and here.

State Sen. Dan Cronin (R-IL) is not only a good man, he's a damn fine public servant. Sen. Cronin says all of the talk about B. Hussein Obama supposedly being a "post-partisan" political figure is a big bunch of hooey. He's right.

Check out and savor this bit o' dialogue from the February 25 ABC World News Tonight ('tis very good):

State Sen. Cronin: "You know, I hate to burst the bubble. There's been a lot of hype and, you know, when he [Obama] served down here, his career was not particularly distinguished. ... There were no bold solutions. There were no creative proposals to take on the establishment. He's a Cook County Democrat and he went along with the program."

ABC News' Terry Moran: "The program, Cronin and others argue, was a traditional liberal agenda and, in fact, Obama was considered a reliable liberal Democratic vote in Illinois. For instance, voting for most gun control measures, opposing efforts to ban so-called partial birth abortions and supporting hundreds of tax increases."

In case you haven't heard, Nation of Islam Minister Louis Farrakhan has given his endorsement to B. Hussein Obama's presidential bid. Speaking in Chicago on Sunday, Farrakhan said Obama is the "hope of the entire world" who will change the U.S. "for the better."

For those who're saying, "So Farrakhan endorsed Obama, big deal," take a look at this quick History o' Minister Farrakhan:

During his years as leader of the Nation of Islam, Farrakhan became notorious for calling Judaism a "gutter religion" and the "Synagogue of Satan; he suggested crack cocaine was a CIA plot to enslave blacks; he met with dictators like Moammar Gadhafi, Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussein, which prompted the State Department to rebuke him for "cavorting with dictators"; he denounced the white man as the anti-Christ; he refused to distance himself from subordinates like Khalid Muhammed, who called Pope John Paul II a "no good cracker"; he fully subscribes to the Nation of Islam's belief that an evil black scientist created the white man in a lab accident some 6,500 years ago; and he has reiterated his belief that a huge "mothership" will soon come to rain destruction and mayhem on the earth's white peoples.

Imagine what would happen if an overtly racist minister, with a 40-year record of anti-Semitic commentary, endorsed John McCain for president. Don't you think the Democrats would have a ****in' field day with that?

Lest anyone think the Farrakhan-Obama connection is superficial, consider this little bit o' tid from a recent article in the Washington Post:

"Barack Obama is a member of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama's spiritual adviser, is the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine; Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness." That man is Louis Farrakhan."

Again, substitute "McCain" for "Obama." Add a Christian Identity magazine to the mix. Throw in a pro-McCain endorsement from a racist/anti-Semite minister, and imagine - just imagine - what the Democrats would do with such information.

B. Hussein Obama needs to get him some goooood soap. His campaign has some stinks that won't be so easily washed off when they are fully exposed in a national campaign. I pity him. Really, I do.

Wise words from No Left Turns' Julie Ponzi:

"It is reported that John McCain acknowledges that one of the central things he must do as a candidate for the presidency is to convince Americans that there is a reason to continue with the war on terror. When asked what happens if he can’t do that, he is reported to have said, 'I lose.'

"I gotta say . . . I like that. I suppose there’s a 'rabbit’s foot' sense in which acknowledging the possibility of defeat can be considered the wrong way to conduct a campaign. But I like the very clear acknowledgment from McCain that this is his task before November. It is and it must be. He has to make the case for this war because we must go on fighting it."

The Members of Congress who've tried to rally support for earmark reform (see McCain, John and Flake, Jeff) certainly deserve our praise. In the grand scheme of all things fiscal, however, pork-barrel spending is but a drop in the budgetary bucket. To wit (chart provided by Say Anything Blog):


Unless and until politicians, advocacy groups, and ordinary citizens find the will to get serious about entitlement reform, the United States will stay on course for the budgetary meltdown that's coming in about, oh, 50 years. And don't hold your breath waiting for reform proposals to come out of the Democratic caucus. (Remember how they scuttled efforts to reform Medicare in 1995-96, or how they jammed a log in the spokes of Social Security reform in 2005?) Democrats spend practically all of their time crawling over one another to see who can propose the biggest expansion of the American Welfare State.

The government's long-term fiscal outlook is bleak, to say the least. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid already consume nearly half of all federal spending; and many economists predict that these three federal programs will consume more than 75 percent of federal spending when the last Baby Boomers retire. If Americans can't find the courage to start weaning themselves from the federal teat, they'll soon find themselves working 6 or 8 months of every year just to pay the confiscatory taxes needed to fund entitlements

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.

"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependence back again into bondage."

-- Professor Alexander Tytler, describing the fall of the Athenian Republic -- prior to the American War for Independence

It doesn't happen very often, but every once in a while you can catch a Florida Marlins home game on TV. The first thing you'll notice is the fact that there are more people on the playing field than there are in the stands. That's an exaggeration, I know, but it ain't too awful far from the truth. I don't have any official figures to back up my claim, but I'll go out on a limb and say that the Marlins have had the worst home attendance record in Major League Baseball at least since the Expos moved from Montréal.

As if the Marlins didn't have enough trouble putting asses in the seats, it looks like they're now determined to run off what remaining fans they have:

"The Florida Marlins are creating an all-male, plus-size cheerleading squad to be dubbed the Manatees. ...

"The team hopes to recruit seven to 10 tubby men to dance, cheer, and jiggle during Friday and Saturday home games this season."

Whenever I travel to big league cities, if you will, I always try to catch a ballgame. If, for whatever reason, I find myself in Miami this year, I don't think I'll be going to a Marlins game ... even if I get free tickets. After watching the Nashville Predators' Goal Girls all winter, I don't think my stomach could take a bunch of chubby men jiggle at the ol' ballyard.

I don't think there's a group for which I have more contempt than PETA. Sanctimonious, self-righteous, and hypocritical, the folks at PETA spend practically every waking moment telling people - in the most abrasive of ways - what they should eat, drink and wear.

You know, I just wonder how many members of PETA consider themselves pro-abortion. An overwhelming majority, I'll bet. And I wonder how many of 'em have said, "Don't like abortion? Don't have one." Thankfully, I don't come into contact with PETA people very often. If'n I did, I'd say, "Don't like steak or leather belts? Well, then, don't eat steak or wear leather belts. But lemme tell you: point your finger in my general direction while I'm doing either and I'll snatch it off your hand and shove it up your arse."

All that said, I now find myself in a position in which I never thought I'd find myself: Britney Spears defender. Please, let me explain.

Last week, PETA's "HQ" sent a letter to Britney Spears' parents suggesting that their daughter has mental issues, if you will, because she's never forsworn dairy products. Yes, according to PETA, Ms. Spears is batshit-crazy because she drinks milk. (I'm sure a lot of celebrities wish they were lucky enough to ascribe their bizarre behavior to too many glasses of milk.)

PETA's letter to Britney Spears' parents was incredibly tacky. It reminded me of Tom Cruise's unlearned Church of Scientology-approved rant against Brooke Shields' doctor-approved use of psychotropic drugs. Who the **** is PETA to think that they can cogently comment on Ms. Spears' mental health treatment -- or anyone's mental health treatment, for that matter?

I'm pretty sure PETA folks don't think. And that's their ****in' problem ... ain't it?!

The National Safety Council - www.nsc.org - has been compiling injury data for some eighty years.

The NSC publishes an annual chart to show how likely it is for a feller or gal to die as a result of certain "events" or "occurrences." Given that I have friends and family who really don't like spiders and snakes (and severe thunderstorms), I'm posting these fig'res to show that the only thing we all really need to fear -- as far as our mortality is concerned -- is fear itself.

What you see below is a list of unfortunate events, followed by the number of Americans who died because of said events in 2004. These're what I find most interesting:

Fall on and from ladder or scaffolding, 392
Fireworks discharge, 2
Contact with hot tap-water, 30
Contact with venomous snakes and lizards, 6
Bitten or stung by non-venomous insect and other arthropods, 5
Contact with venomous spiders, 14
Contact with hornets, wasps and bees, 52
Earthquake, 30
Cataclysmic storm, 63
Lightning, 46
Overexertion, travel and privation, 39
Excessive heat or cold of man-made origin, 14
Occupant of streetcar, 1
Ignition or melting of nightwear, 7

Let's all tip a Yazoo in honor of my Cousin David, who had letter published on the American Spectator's Web site today. 'Tis a pretty good geography lesson, indeed. Check it out:

Re: Quin Hillyer's Veep, Veep!:

Forgive me, gentlemen, but Mr. Hillyer's description of several states as either "Deep South" or "border states" is deeply flawed. The South is a very large place, and more complex than his terms reflect.

Just as Big Apple mayor Ed Koch denied his support for a Southerner upon his endorsement of Tennessean Al Gore in 1988 ("Tennessee didn't even secede!" Wrong.), Mr. Hillyer falls for the "small South" fallacy. While correct enough in modern terms to describe Virginia and Kentucky as border states, they are better called the Upper South. Tennessee, my home state, is considered by her citizens to be the Mid-south, with Alabama below and Kentucky above her.

Just try going to Memphis, essentially a Deep South city bordering Mississippi, and telling its people they are in a border state! You will be refused both barbecue and cornbread, and given unsweet tea for your trouble.

The term "border state" has historically been applied to those states which had divided loyalties between the United and Confederate States, and the institution of slavery at the initiation of the Civil War. They are: Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware.

Neogeologisms such as "Mid-Atlantic states" (not used by Mr. Hillyer in his article) to describe southern territory such as North Carolina and Virginia are symptomatic of the rush by modern, "progressive" Southerners, to deny their history and any personal association with the truths and the fictions, not to mention the prejudices, about Southern culture and history. These are the same people who blush should anyone detect a trace of Southern speech falling from their lips.

However, most Southerners not in the Florida panhandle (derisively called "Lower Alabama" by some) would likely agree that, though the Deepest Southern state of all, Florida is no longer Southern.

Otherwise an excellent article and those of us who know Marsha Blackburn are glad to see her getting national recognition.

Bless her, and your, heart, Mr. Hillyer.
-- David B. Allison, Sr.
Queen Creek, Arizona

Yesterday, a helicopter carrying three U.S. senators made an emergency landing in Afghanistan:

"Citing military and congressional sources, CNN said the military helicopter with U.S. senators -- Joseph Biden of Delaware, John Kerry of Massachusetts and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska -- on board was forced to land in the mountains [near Kabul] because of a snowstorm."

Reckon how long it'll take for John "Droopy" Kerry to put in for a medal to recognize his heroic actions on 21 February 2008?

"There is a joke going around Washington to the effect that Hillary is the senator from New York who was born in Illinois, while Obama is the senator from Illinois who was born in a manger."

-- Tony Blankley

On Monday's Hardball on MSNBC, Chris Matthews asked Texas State Senator Kirk Watson to name one legislative accomplishment that B. Hussein Obama can lay claim to. He couldn't do it. I'll bet a dollar to your dime that 95 percent of Obama's supporters are in the same unlearned boat.

This is hee-lary-us:

Chris Matthews: "You are a big Barack supporter, right, Senator?"

Sen. Watson: "I am. Yes, I am."

Matthews: "Well, name some of his legislative accomplishments. No, Senator, I want you to name some of Barack Obama's legislative accomplishments tonight if you can."

Watson: "Well, you know, what I will talk about is more about what he is offering the American people right now."

Matthews: "No. No. What has he accomplished, sir? You say you support him. Sir, you have to give me his accomplishments. You've supported him for president. You are on national television. Name his legislative accomplishments, Barack Obama, sir."

Watson: "Well, I'm not going to be able to name you specific items of legislative accomplishments."

Matthews: "Can you name any? Can you name anything he's accomplished as a Congressman?"

Watson: "No, I'm not going to be able to do that tonight."

Matthews: "Well, that is a problem isn't it?"

A problem, indeed!

Denizens of the far-left crowed when a recent National Intelligence Estimate concluded that Iran halted its nuclear-weaponization program in 2003. Bush's could no longer use Tehran's "nuclear arms-seeking mullahs" as a bugaboo with which to hype possible military action in Iran.

As I stated when the NIE was released, only a fool would believe that Iran is not trying to build nuclear weapons. First of all, the Iranians are busily spinning uranium like nobody's business, and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has delivered dozens of speeches in which he's stated that it is his country's destiny to have nuclear weapons. As Barney Fife might say, 2 and 2 makes 4.

Well, what serious-thinking folks such as myself have been saying for months vis-à-vis Iran is once again emerging through the fog of anti-war/anti-Bush punditry and propaganda. This morning's Wall Street Journal has all the details (subscription required to read the entire article):

"The Iranian opposition group that first exposed Iran's controversial nuclear-fuel program has given the United Nations' nuclear watchdog details of what the group says is a working nuclear-warhead-development facility.

"The facility at Khojir, a defense-ministry missile-research site on the southeast edge of Tehran, is developing a nuclear warhead for use on Iranian medium-range missiles, according to Mohammad Mohaddessin, foreign-affairs chief for the exiled Council of Resistance of Iran.

"He also said the NCRI has identified a guest house on a military compound near Khojir that the group says houses North Korean specialists working at the warhead facility. The information was finalized in recent weeks and is current, according to Mr. Mohaddessin. ...

"It wasn't possible to verify any of NCRI's claims independently. Mr. Mohaddessin passed the information, which includes satellite images, to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s Vienna-based nuclear watchdog, and asked the agency to investigate. ...

"The NCRI has at least twice given detailed information to the IAEA that IAEA inspectors later verified, including the original information that exposed Iran's uranium-enrichment program and the location of those facilities in 2002."

Back in 2004, CNS News called Mrs. John Kerry "a ticking-time-bombette with a volatile temper and acid tongue who makes [Howard] Dean look like Mr. Rogers on Prozac." Fast forward to 2008. The ticking-time-bombette of the 2008 campaign is Mrs. B. Hussein Obabma.

Volatile temper? Check. Acid tongue? Check. Mrs. Obama is beginning to look and sound like Teresa Heinz Kerry Version 2.0. Her increasingly shrill - and stupid - comments have to have the Obama campaign on high alert (and on the hunt for a sock big enouth to stuff in the Mrs.'s mouth):

"Michelle Obama:

"'For the first time in my adult lifetime I am [really] proud of my country.'

"I'm thrilled that Michelle Obama is finally really proud of her country. I assume her country is the same as my country, but she didn't actually say that so that may be an assumption which turns out to be terribly wrong. ...

"For those who might be a little thin on this, America - the America of which Mrs. Obama is finally really proud - gives people like Michelle Obama the right to say excruciatingly stupid things. And, America - the America of which I have always been proud - gives people like Barack Obama the ability to run for (and probably win) the Democratic nomination for President of the United States. ...

"Where was Michelle Obama on September 12, 2001 the day after the attacks. She was an adult in 2001. Was she embarrassed by America that day?

"Where was Michelle Obama in November 9, 1989 when the Berlin Wall came down signifying the end of the Cold War. She was an adult in 1989. Was she embarrassed that day?

"Where was Michelle Obama - 22 years old and thus an adult - on July 5, 1986 when the Statue of Liberty was re-opened after extensive refurbishing. Was she embarrassed that day as well?

"When Michelle Obama received her undergraduate degree from Princeton and her law degree from Harvard … was she embarrassed by an America which gave her the opportunity to live up to her intellectual capabilities?

"Michelle Obama owes America an apology."

Whilst reading my newspapers early this morning, I was watching "Book TV" on C-SPAN2. I was barely paying attention to Ronald Brownstein, author of The Second Civil War: How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America, who was talking politics in a D.C.-area bookstore. Until ...

My ears perked up when a Bella Abzug-looking hag - whose voice was every bit shrill as the late Ms. Azbug's - arose to state that George W. Bush from the first day of his presidency has never attempted to "work" with Democrats. "Lady, you're full of ****!" I shouted, and then I turned the channel.

Bush Never Works With Democrats is a lie leftists never tire of telling. The fact of the matter is, President Bush has reached out to - and collaborated with - Democrats in Congress throughout his term in office: He signed McCain-Feingold, which was pet legislation for Democrats during the 2000 campaign; he allowed Ted Kennedy to remove vouchers from the No Child Left Behind Act; he's championed amnesty for illegal immigrants (another pet project for Democrats); he supported a prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients, which represents the largest expansion of a federal program since LBJ's Great Society; and during the run-up to the Iraq War, he agreed to the Democrats' demand that no military operations in Iraq would begin until Congress passed pro-war legislation, which it did.

What has President Bush gotten for his "build consensus" efforts? Firm kicks between the legs on an almost daily basis, that's what. Democrats convinced themselves that Bush's operatives "stole" the 2000 presidential election. They were further enraged when Republicans gained control of the U.S. Senate 2002 and when President Bush was re-elected in 2004. To punish the president for getting their goat in 3 consecutive national elections, the Democrats arose - and continue to arise - in hyper-partisan opposition to practically everything the Bush Administration said or did.

President Bush has done his level best to "reach across the divide." The Democrats have done their level best to see that the president retrieves his hand with a few fingers missing whenever he reaches out. For Mr. Mayland Shipdit - nay, for anyone - to assert that today's toxic political environment is a result of President Bush's failure to "try to build consensus" is to propagate a tall tale of the first order.

David Brooks busts the myth of Obama the Independent:

"If he values independent thinking, why is his the most predictable liberal vote in the Senate? A People for the American Way computer program would cast the same votes for cheaper."

Brilliant!

The current issue of the American Conservative features a Ron Paul for President editorial:

"TAC believes that only one candidate has put forth a diagnosis of America’s current ills and has a vision to turn the country off its misguided course. That is Congressman Ron Paul, whom we endorse for the Republican nomination. ...

"Ron Paul has been a breath of fresh air in an otherwise desultory Republican campaign. Long may he run."

Too bad TAC didn't run its endorsement a few months ago. You know, before Paul had more or less ended his presidential effort to focus on a tough primary campaign for his congressional seat.

Yesterday, I spent as much time watching the Daytona 500 as I did cutting my fingernails down to the quick. That is to say, I spent not a second doing either activity. Truth be told, I'd rather cut my fingernails down to the quick than watch a NASCAR race, on TV or in person.

Imagine my surprise when I opened my mailbox today to find a four-page mailer promoting DirecTV's all-NASCAR-all-the-time channel. To wit:


Can you see what the mailer says at the bottom? If not, it says, "Even smell what they smell. Scratch and sniff." I did scratch and I did sniff, and I came to this conclusion: What NASCAR drivers smell whilst racin' is not unlike what a person shopping at Kroger smells in the soft drink aisle. I would've never thunk it.

In August 2000, one of my bestest buddies gave me Anthony Bourdain's cooking memoir, Kitchen Confidential, as a birthday gift.  I remember that I read it in a day, and then I proceeded to read the thing all over again.  I'd never heard of Mr. Bourdain prior to reading his book.  When I turned the last page of his book a second time, I was a confirmed Fan o' Bourdain.
 
I think what I like most about Anthony Bourdain is the fact that he speaks his mind without pulling any punches.  (He's an unashamed chain-smoker and beer-swiller, too, which I also admire.)  For example, he once called Emeril Lagasse an "Ewok."  He's shown utter disdain for people who use serrated knifes.  And in Kitchen Confidential, he penned what I think is the most accurate assessment of vegetarians ever written.  To wit:

“[V]egetarians, and their Hezbollah-like splinter faction, the vegans ... are the enemy of everything good and decent in the human spirit.” In-****in'-deed, Chef Tony!
 
Bourdain parlayed the success of Kitchen Confidential into a tour de la cuisine gig on the Food Network in 2003. His Food Network show (A Cook's Tour), and its accompanying book (A Cook's Tour), more or less made Anthony Bourdain a household name.  Thus, it was no surprise when he jumped ship to the Travel Channel in 2005 for a more lucrative TV deal. Not only has Bourdain's Travel Channel foodie show, No Reservations, exposed Bourdain to an even wider audience, he received an Emmy nomination for a 2006 show filmed during the 38-day war between Israel and the Shi'ite satanists known collectively as Hezbollah.
 
Mr. Bourdain has never let slip where he stands politically.  His deep contempt for nanny-staters who wish to dictate what we can eat/drink/puff and where we can eat, drink, and puff it leads me to believe that he has strong libertarian inclinations.  However, something Bourdain said on his most recent show gives me hope that we conservatives can also claim him as one of our own.
 
On this past week's No Reservations Bourdain visitied London, England and Edinburgh, Scotland.  In London Bourdain bedded down in the Hazlitt's Hotel, a 200-year-old hotel popular amongst authors and artists.  While scanning a bookshelf full of authors who've stayed at the hotel, he comes across a book by left-wing nut Noam Chomsky.  Bourdain groans loudly, and says, "Noam Chomsky.  I think he's been here enough." As he tosses aside Chomsky's book and replaces it with one of his own, Bourdain exclaims, " So long, America-hating crackpot."

Is there any wonder why Chef Tony Bourdain continues to be a hero o' mine?

A nasty bug that's making its way 'round Nashville has bitten Joltin' Django. While yours truly is recuperating, please to enjoy the following Creeder Classic -- which was first published during the lead-up to the 2004 presidential campaign on a now-defunct Web site:

Senator Kerry: Presidential "Whiz" kid

In 1992, the establishment media had a field day castigating President George H.W. Bush when he admitted that he'd never laid eyes on a supermarket check-out scanner. Common sense dictated that it'd been a long time since Bush - who'd served as vice-president and president for 12 years at that point - hit his local Bi-Rite on a whim. Nevertheless, we were told that the president was "hopelessly out of touch."

Fast forward to 2003. Millionaire Senator John Kerry is doing his level best to convince Americans that he's the consummate Everyman. So far, he's not having much luck. It's well known that Kerry, whose mannerisms and tastes are more befitting an effete Frenchman, had his worldview permanently shaped while cloistered in a Swiss finishing school. His refinement at the hands of the Swiss now threatens to doom his presidential campaign (if it really ever had a chance to start with).

During a recent visit to Philadelphia, Kerry visited the legendary Pat's Steaks and ordered cheesesteak -- with Swiss cheese. Kerry's faux pas was akin to someone visiting Nathan's on Coney Island and ordering a tofu dog. If Kerry's Swiss cheese gaffe wasn't bad enough, he asked that he not be photographed while eating. As the Washington Post reported, "Shutters clicked anyway, and Kerry was caught nibbling daintily at his sandwich." (At least he wasn't dumb enough to order a Perrier for washin'-down purposes.)

Anyone who's come within five miles of Philly's famous cheesesteak stands knows that Swiss cheese is not an option when ordering. Ask a small sample of Pat's customers to describe someone who makes such an error, and "out of touch" will probably trip off someone's lips. Is this a trivial point? Perhaps, but so was the endless harping over the first President Bush's supermarket epiphany.

A few months back, I busted on the host of WRVU's "College Music 101" after he uncorked this petite gemme of anti-Bush nitwittery:

"[President Bush] probably doesn't know who the Dalai Lama is."

I quickly pointed out that President Bush had met with the Dalai Lama the previous week; and I said that if Mr. Music 101 would get over to the Vandy library more often, he would be less likely to make a left-wing ass of himself on air.

My comments apparently didn't sit too well with Mr. Music 101. The following week he accused me of "sactimoniously" pegging him as "sanctimonious." (I never said any such thing. Indeed, if anything, I hinted that he's ignorant -- not sanctimonious.) And he also suggested that I'd quoted him on a non-textual basis, even though his original the-president-is-an-idiot quip came out his mouth with not a hint of context. "Pathetic," I said to myself.

Since I'm still not convinced that Mr. Music 101 is very up on current events, if you will, I'm posting the following picture - from the February Soldier of Fortune magazine - as a learnin' aid for him. To wit:


The caption at left reads:

"President Bush attended the ceremony where the Dalai Lama was presented the Congressional Gold Medal. This is the fourth time that the President has met with the Tibetan leader, whose country was invaded by the Chinese Communists in 1959." [Emphasis for Mr. College Music 101's much-needed benefit]

"A Clinton cornered is a very, very dangerous political animal. Obama's supporters would be wise not to start celebrating too early."

-- Rich Galen

As Obamania continues to sweep the nation, or at least the Democrats' primaries and caucuses, I couldn't help but be struck by something I read in the Wall Street Journal yesterday.

According to Journal columnist Mark Gongloff, the stimulus plan recently passed by Congress - and soon to be signed by President Bush - is but a bandaid on an economy that needs radical suturing.

"'In the rush to enact a timely package, politicians may have stopped a 2008 recession, but they have ignored a risky letdown -- after the election,' Lehman Brothers economist wrote Friday, warning the U.S. faces 'another brush with recession in 2009' for this reason."

The U.S. economy needs structural reform: a simplified tax code for individuals, a reduction in corporate tax rates, entitlement reform, etc. The Democrats aren't interested in enacting any of these measures; indeed, they're too busy reviving the ghost of John Maynard Keynes to do anything that'll actually help the economy. The Bush Administration ain't doing much better. Wary of being cast as uncaring, the president has gone right along with the Democrats' ridiculous we-gotta-do-something-even-if-the-something-don't-do-anything schemes.

If Obama is elected in November, he may take office just in time to take credit for a recession. And don't think Republicans won't relish the opportunity to pin the "r" word on Democratic administration. Remember that throughout 2001, Democrats endlessly harped about the Bush Recession -- a recession that began before George W. Bush even took office. If the economy does go into the tank next year, a President Obama will get an abject turn-about-is-fair-play lesson, and then some.

Democrats should be careful what they wish for. They may get their first black president, or maybe the first female president (which is looking less and less likely every day). Either way, they're likely to be blamed for a painful recession that seems immanent; and Republicans will have a great campaign theme to take into the 2010 elections: "You returned the keys to the White House to the Socialists, er, Democrats, and look what they did! Vote Republican!"

No Left Turns ain't afraid to tell the truth 'bout B. Hussein Obama:

"Tonight, Dean Barnett observed that Obama without a teleprompter is much less impressive than when he’s on top of his game. Judge for yourselves. Here’s his teleprompterless Jefferson-Jackson dinner speech in Richmond this weekend. Here’s the speech as written.

"Clearly not his most impressive effort." [Emphasis mine]

What responsible parent would allow his or her child to play with a Paris Hilton doll? "Playing with" jokes aside, the Paris Hilton doll makes Bratz look like paragons of virtue by comparison.


You know, this doll has the wrong accessories. To be true to life, a Paris Hilton doll should come with a push-up bra, thong panties, a night-vision video camera, condoms, dental dams, Valtrex, penicillin, laxatives, and empty vodka bottles.

Damn! Pastor Benny Hinn held a Training for Ministry conference (whatever that is) in Nashville last week and I missed him. "Who's Benny Hinn?" you ask. Well, he's a televangelist who puts the "huck" in religious hucksterism. He truly is a sight to behold.

I first laid eyes on Benny Hinn 'bout 10 years ago. I turned on the boob tube early one morning to catch the weather, and I spied a guy with a bad haircut - wearing an equally bad suit - healing people and putting "fire" on great masses of the 10,000 people who'd congregated to see him. "Who the hell is this guy?" I asked myself.

Over the next few weeks I started regularly watching Pastor Benny's program. I quickly learned that he was not interested, at all, in dispelling the stereotypes regularly given to TV preachers. Like I said, he had a God-awful haircut. He wore ill-fitting pinstriped suits. He had gaudy gold rings on each ring finger. And he claimed that God worked directly through him, which allowed him to heal people.

It was the healin' part of Pastor Benny's shows that kept drawing me in. He didn't just heal folks; he put the healing "fire" of God on 'em, which often led to large numbers of people writhing on the floor. I would laugh my ass off watching this spectacle, and it kept me coming back for more. [Click here to see a hilarious send-up of Hinn's healing and fire-throwing.]

I don't get to see Benny Hinn's program as often as I once did. It comes on each morning after I've left for work; and it comes on in the evening opposite Hannity & Colmes, which I ain't missin' just to watch Pastor Benny do his ridiculous thang.

Sometime before Thanksgiving, I did happen to catch the tail-end of Pastor Benny's show. He told his viewers that he was giving away free copies of his autobiography. All interested viewers had to do was send him a letter and he'd send you a book. I don't know what possessed me to do so, but I wrote to Hinn's "church" in Dallas for my free book. (Since there're no books written by televangelists amongst the 3,500+ books in my house, I guess in the back of my mind I figured I needed at least one.)

I never got my book, but I did get my name placed on Benny's beggin'-for-money mailing list -- big shock! For the past two and a half months, I've received at least one fund-raising letter a week from ol' Benny; and during the two weeks leading up to Christmas, I received five different letters from Benny, including one asking for money for upkeep of his private(!) jet. I told a friend of mine: I don't know what [Hinn] spends on direct-mail, but I'll bet he could run a soup kitchen for a year with the same amount of money.

If I'd known Benny Hinn was going to be in Nashville, I would've made plans to go see him. Not only would I have told him to take my name off his ****in' mailing list, I would've asked him when I'm going to get the free book he ****in' promised me! Don't think I wouldn't have done it, neither.

Dinesh D'Souza says certain conservative, some of whom I identified earlier this week, need to stop having John McCain-inspired hissy fits:

"Now that John McCain seems assured of being the Republican nominee for president, will I join Ann Coulter in campaigning for Hillary Clinton? Only if I've completely lost my marbles, as Coulter seems to have in this case.

"Hillary Clinton wants to raise taxes. She wants the government to take over one-sixth of the economy in the form of the health care sector. She wants to retreat in Iraq. ... She wants more social liberals of the Ruth Bader Ginsburg stripe on the Supreme Court. She loathes conservatives who represent to her a 'vast right-wing conspiracy.'

"McCain's big offense seems to be that he hasn't paid his obeisance. I cannot think of any other explanation for why [Rush] Limbaugh is so vehement against him. Consider that Rudy Giuliani got much more respectful treatment from Limbaugh, and Giuliani is a self-professed social liberal who supports abortion, embryonic stem cell research and gay rights.

"McCain is conservative not only on foreign policy but also on economic and social issues. He's at least as conservative as Bush and almost as conservative as Reagan. Yes, he disagrees with some conservative pundits on immigration and campaign finance reform. So what? Are conservatives so politically immature that they cannot distinguish the primary issues from the secondary ones?

"He has already asked his conservative critics to 'calm down' and this is the right message. The intelligent, practical-minded conservatives will line up behind McCain, as the majority of the GOP rank and file already has.

"Let's recognize that if McCain is going to win in November he also needs to reach out to moderate and independent voters. McCain's standing with swing voters might even improve if he tells Rush Limbaugh to go worship at his own shrine."

Ever the voice of reason, Rich Galen tells Rush, Sean, Steve Gill and Phil Valentine where they can stick their anti-McCain bloviations:

"With the exit of Gov. Mitt Romney there is no doubt that Sen. John McCain will be the Republican nominee.

"The Popular Press is running around in tiny circles, eyes wide, arms waving, mouths agape selling themselves on the theory that McCain's impending nomination will signal the end of the Republican Party. ...

"Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and the others are doing the work of the New York Times and the rest of the popular press by railing against McCain all day, every day.

"It appears on the surface that their goal is to make Conservatives stay home next November 4 and hand the White House to Hillary or [B. Hussein]. ...

" John McCain has nearly nine months to consolidate Republican support behind him. He will, with the aid of other Conservatives, do that.

"Hillary Clinton and [B. Hussein] Obama are going to be duking it out until at least April and maybe all the way to the Democratic National Convention in August - leaving the nominee only a couple of months to accomplish that feat on the Dem side.

"The Talk Show Set should get on board and stop doing the work of the New York & Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, Newsweek and Time." [Emphasis mine]

Republicans in the U.S. House forced a vote yesterday to consider an immediate earmark moratorium. (For those who are unfamiliar with the word "earmark," it means pork barrel spending.) The final tally was 204-196.

A "yes" vote was a vote to not consider the moratorium. All those voting "yes" were Democrats, including Rep. Lincoln "I'm A Conservative" Davis, Rep. Jim "Deficit Hawk" Cooper, and Rep. John "Debt Will Be The Death Of The U.S.A" Tanner.

Way to sniff Nancy Pelosi's throne, guys!

'Bout two weeks ago, I was accosted by a gaggle of Ron Paul supporters in front of a West End-area bookstore. I thought I'd discarded the pushcards they were distributing. Imagine my surprise when today I found one under the passenger seat in my car. Check this out:


You know, I can't imagine that there's a less politically astute group of individuals than Nashville's here today/gone tomorrow waiters and waitresses. The fact that the Paul for President campaign has been courting such folks is proof positive that Ron and Company haven't the foggiest clue as to how wage a proper presidential campaign.

Drew Carey is the only celebrity cum politico who seems to know his ass from a hole in the ground ...

"To hear the Lou Dobbses and Bill O'Reillys of the world--not to mention politicians ranging from Ron Paul to Hillary Clinton--the middle class of America (however you define that term) has never had it so tough. Between credit squeezes, out-of-control immigration, rising costs of education and health care and everything else, it's all darkness out there for those of us who are neither millionaires nor welfare cases, right?

"In 'Living Large,' Drew Carey and reason.tv examine the plight of the American middle class."

What do they find? Click here to find out.

I've taken quite a few shots at Ron Paul over the past few months, and I'll continue to do so as long as he stays in the presidential race. Even though it's now mathematically impossible for him to win the GOP nomination (he needed at least 300 delegates following Super-Duper Tuesday), I anticipate him being around for a while as he burns through the six figures-worth of dollars in his campaign bank account.

There are quite a few things on which Ron Paul and I agree: taxes are too high; the federal government spends too much; property rights in America are eroding; entitlements need immediate reform; and the right to bear arms is an individual right.

On the other hand, there are a great many public policy "things" on which Ron Paul and I disagree. For starters, I think a feller has to be imbued with a great deal of economic naiveté to think that it's in America's best interest to abandon the world-wide system of floating exchange rates in favor of a single-country gold standard. And I fail to see the logic behind Ron Paul's crusade to abolish the Federal Reserve. I shudder to think what will happen if monetary policy is taken away from independent bankers and placed in the hands of partisan elected officials. (Indeed, the American economy was regularly plagued by panics, recessions and depressions prior to establishment of an independent central bank. Who the hell wants to return to that?)

My biggest beef with Paul, however, is his hopelessly misguided views on foreign policy. Paul seems to be laboring under the illusion that America can simply retreat behind its borders and the rest of the world will simply play the "we'll leave you alone" game. The United States has economic and military interests on every corner of the globe, all of which require constant protection. Leaving "over there," as Paul proposes, will only leave American interests - as well as the interests of its allies - exposed to the fiendish machinations of terrorists, demagogic dictators, and backward peoples who've not yet discovered the joys of indoor plumbing and the rule of law.

Finally, I couldn't close a rant about Ron Paul without discussing his supporters. Even if I agreed with Paul's politics 90 percent of the time, I don't think I could support him for president just 'cause of the way his ****in' supporters behave. When they're not calling talk radio programs to warn us about the looming danger of the North American Union, or to tell us that 9/11 was an inside job, the Paul "Revolutionaries" can be found spamming blogs and messages boards with tirades about, well, the North American Union, 9/11 "truth," etc.

I came face to face with several members of Paul's Nutbucket Brigade this past Saturday. I was walking toward the Sommet Center, at which the Nashville Predators were playing, when I spied about 50 pro-Paul folks waving signs, whistling and yelling at passing cars. Now, these folks weren't just standing on a street corner near the arena, they were practically standing in the door -- the better to accost sports fans as they entered. (Why security didn't pepper spray the bastards out into the street is beyond me.) One asshole was passing out Paul for President pushcards with this exclamation: "Here's a coupon for a free beer!" Not only was this guy an un-clever asshole, he was also incredibly stupid. It would've taken but one burly apolitical sports fan, who didn't cotton to receiving fake "free beer" coupons, for "free beer" guy to get his free ass kicked, several times over.

My greatest fear at this point is that Paul will not get out of the race, thus encouraging his supporters to become more shrill and nutty now that the decorum that's expected of serious presidential candidates is no longer necessary. Paul's Pissants will no doubt show up at every McCain/Romney function waving signs, shouting inanities, and generally making mischief. (I fully expect Rep. Paul to give them subtle, if not overt, encouragement.)

Since their guy is no longer a viable candidate - was he ever a viable candidate? - I have but one message for Ron Paul and Paulites: Don't go away mad, just go away.

Methinks Willie Nelson has wrenched his braids one time too many. Or, perhaps, he's smoked one joint too many. Either way, it's pretty clear that Sir Nasal Twang has gone completely off his rocker.

Nelson has joined the ranks of noted physicists Rosie O'Donnell, Charlie Sheen, and David Lynch to insist that the Twin Towers were not brough down by planes, but were destroyed by explosives detonated on the inside of the buildings:

"Country music legend Willie Nelson compared the collapse of the World Trade Center to the controlled implosions of casinos in Las Vegas while on nationally syndicated radio this week.

"While speaking on Alex Jones' Texas-based talk show, a favorite among conspiracy theorists, the 'On the Road Again' warbler made it clear he was skeptical of the official account of the events on Sept. 11. 'I saw those towers fall and I've seen an implosion in Las Vegas,' he said. 'There was too much similarity between the two. And I saw a building fall that didn't get hit by nothing. [Audio From Stereogum.com] ...

"'The day it happened, I saw one fall and it was just so symmetrical,' Nelson said on the show. ... 'They're trying to tell me that an airplane did it and I can't go along with that.'"

Next time you hear someone insisting that no harm can come from smoking weed, just tell 'em to consider how mind-whacked Willie Nelson is.

In case you haven't heard, today is Super Tuesday. Please vote at your regular precinct location, 7 a.m. – 7 p.m. CT.

If you'd like to meet Joltin' Django in person, head over to the Nashville Public Library-Edmonson Pike. I'll be there from 4:00 'til the polls close. You won't be able to miss me; I'll be the one holding a "Vote for Mitt Romney or I'll Kick You in the Nuts" sign.

White male/sports fan Kenneth Russell published a half-page ad in the Tennessean's "Sports" section on Saturday in which he urged folks to vote for B. Hussein Obama in tomorrow's presidential primary. What struck me whilst reading the ad was not Mr. Russell's ridiculous attempt to analogize his love for Obama with his love of sports; it was Mr. Russell's misspelling of "Barack" not once, not twice, but thrice (see pics below, and apologies to C. Montgomery Burns) that really got my eyebrows to raisin'.

Call me cynical, but if a feller can't correctly spell the name of his preferred candidate, it's probably highly unlikely that he'd be able to say anything substantive about said candidate.

That said, I'm so tired of hearing "Obama" and "change" that I could spit. In its recent Obama endorsement editorial, the Los Angeles Times said that Obama is the candidate who's "most focused on steering the nation toward constructive change." He's focused on change, for sure. Hell, he uses the word practically every time he opens his mouth. But what, exactly, does he mean by "change?" Unfortunately for voters, he ain't been willin' to say.

When Obama does start talking policy, it's typical Democratic boilerplate: He's gonna "protect" these while "fighting for" those; he wants to "fully fund" a whole host of government programs; and he wants to "restore" the United States' lost prestige by kneeling at the alter of the United Nations. He jazzes up the Democratic playbook with soaring rhetoric and Oprah-esque empathy, but is that really change?

Honestly, B. Hussein Obama has but three things going for him: (1) his color; (2) his compelling multicultural upbringing; and (3) his silver tongue. If he were a liberal, white Chicago pol with but three years of experience in the U.S. Senate, his campaign would've never gotten past the trial balloon stage.

Mr. Russell's ad:

Here's some of what's been happening at A Man's Gotta Eat:

Beans, beans ... good for your heart
Two words every man longs to hear: Free Beer!
Gimme my haggis, dammit!
Pork 'n' potatoes
Best pizza in Nashville. Period.

I'm really getting sick of hearing about conservatives who say they will not vote - or will vote third party (see Valentine, Phil) - this November if John McCain is the GOP nominee. I will vote this November, and it will be for whomever the Republican Party nominates. Indeed, I'd endure a Clorox enema before I'd vote for Sen./statist B. Hussein Obama or Sen./statist Hillary Rodham (Clinton).

Rachel Lucas, whose blog I discovered just a few days ago, has a few curt words for conservatives who think they can sit this one out in anticipation of a Republican returning to the White House in 2012. A lot of Perot supporters said the same thing in '92, and look where that got us.

Check this out:

"Okay fine. [John McCain is not] your ideal Republican, despite his pro-war, pro-killin’-terrorists record. But. But. BUT.

"Just what in the hell kind of crack are Ann Coulter and lots of other conservatives (even the normally brilliant Michelle Malkin) smoking when they say they won’t vote for him if he’s the Republican nominee? Coulter actually said last night on Hannity and Colmes that she would campaign for Hillary instead. Granted, she probably didn’t mean that, but good god damn!

"I’ve read several dozen blogs yesterday and this morning, and there are even comments on my own blog, saying that if McCain is the candidate, they won’t vote at all. ARE YOU PEOPLE SERIOUS?

"Let me get this straight: you’d rather have Hillary Clinton, a bona fide socialist, liar, all-around bad person, as president. You’d rather have Obama, the senator with the most liberal voting record, as president.

"Really? I throw up my hands in disgust. I truly do. ...

"There is no way in hell that McCain is so bad that it’d be better to have any of the Democrats running right now. You don’t have to think McCain is great or even decent, but jiminy christmas, he’s a damn sight better than those socialist weasels."

You know, you could look wide and far but you'd never find an individual who's more sanctimoniously self-righteous than Jimmy Carter.

Carter got his panties in a twist this week when the Southern Baptist Convention refused an invitation to participate in his Celebration of a New Baptist Covenant confab in Atlanta. Southern Baptist Convention President Frank Page politely stated that said his group would be skipping the meeting to avoid being part of a "smokescreen left-wing liberal agenda."

Would Jimmy Carter use a supposedly all-are-welcome religious meeting to push his brand of left-wing politics? Why, of course he would. Just looks at some of the people who spoke at his little camp meeting: Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Tony Campolo Marian Wright Edelman. All he needed was for Lani Guinier, Donna Shalala, Bruce Babbitt to show up and the whole gang would've been here, um, there.

The American Spectator has more about Jimmy Carter's "covenant" in this special report. Here's a sample:

"There is a story Jimmy Carter tells in several of his books about a newly elected president of the Southern Baptist Convention paying him a visit in the Oval Office and telling the shocked -- shocked! -- Commander in Chief, 'We are praying, Mr. President, that you will abandon secular humanism as your religion.'

"'He may have said this because I was against a constitutional amendment to authorize mandatory prayer in public school and had been working on some things opposed by the religious right, such as the Panama Canal treaties, a Department of Education, and the SALT II treaty with the Soviets,' Carter theorizes in Living Faith, as if in the 1970s the "religious right" were single-issue voters fixated in the Panama Canal and maybe -- maybe -- disrupting arms treaties rather than, oh, I don't know ... abortion.

"Nevertheless, it isn't quite clear why, outside of the obvious political advantages gained by marrying delusions of grandeur to a sanctimonious religion-based piety, Carter would so object to the 'secular humanist' label. This is a man, after all, who writes in Our Endangered Values of coming to the "surprising and somewhat reluctant conclusion" that when it comes to alleviating poverty and injustice 'government officeholders and not church members [are] more likely to assume responsibility and be able to fulfill the benevolent missions.'

"Carter places the miracles of government bureaucracy ahead of those of his own church, yet still wonders why the largest single contingent of Baptists in the country is skeptical of his New Covenant. 'I treat theological arguments gingerly but am bolder when it comes to connecting my religious beliefs with life and current events in the world, even when the issues are controversial,' Carter writes in Living Faith. In other words, the details of scripture are uninteresting until they offer a rationale for Carter's left-wing predilections or somehow justify the four years of tribulation known as his presidency."

"Many ... are ready to assassinate the character of anyone with the temerity to point out that young men raised by stressed grandmothers and violent video games, indoctrinated by antisocial rap lyrics and morally instructed by street gangs, are not likely to succeed in school or society."

-- Jim Pittaway, The American Conservative, January 28, 2008