RightWave

So, scuttlebutt is that the next Obama-led “economic stimulus package” to come out of Congress may well include another increase in the minimum wage.

Really?

As if the first one wasn’t bad enough.  Let’s think this one through, shall we?

So, the economy’s in a downturn.  Employers are already making labor cuts to save costs and keep businesses afloat (and costs down for the consumers).

The government’s response?  Make labor more expensive.

Well, duh.  Cuz, you know, that makes sense.

I’m no conspiracy theorist, but if you follow the path of results down from this plan, you end up with more government payouts being funded by fewer actual taxpayers (likely paying much higher percentages of their incomes to the government).  That’s not sustainable!  Is the goal to have every industry crawling to the government for a bailout?

Anyone else thing this is sounding awfully Randian in how it’s playing out?  I’m certainly no die-hard objectivist, but come on.  I know the lefty’s are bleeding hearts, but surely they haven’t lost all capacity to process logical outcomes?

Oh, well, maybe so.

All I can say, folks, is gird up.  Get ready for the fight.  Even though things look bleak, it’s important that our side not give up – that we keep fighting and making our case to the American people and make it in a way that’s personal and folks can relate to.  If we slink away and resign ourselves to the fact that everything’s going to hell in a handbasket, well, it will.  And no one will be there to pick up the pieces on the other side.

To quote the great Winston Churchill:

“Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never, never–in nothing, great or small, large or petty–never give in, except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force. Never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.”

Or, if you prefer:

Given that Congress has an approval rating hovering around 15%, why wouldn’t the McCain campaign be saying something along the lines of:

“Do you really want the people who’ve been running Congress the past two years to be running the whole country?”

I’m sure someone else can put it better, but why wouldn’t he make the case that Democrats have run Congress through the most unpopular time in history and he’s been fighting them (and GOP leaders) every step of the way?

He’s actually got a legitimate case to make on this front, but I’m lost as to why there haven’t been more attacks (from both sides, frankly) on Congress.

Oh well.  It’ll all be over in a few days.

-All in all, I’m underwhelmed.

10:38 p.m. – Well…who knows?  I’m not sure who won that one.  I thought they were both frankly not too great.  McCain clearly dominated on the foreign policy section.  Obama probably did a little better on the economic things, which is what most people are thinking about now. But, Obama came off, to me, as a young punk.  With the “John” rather than “Senator McCain” and his pompous, knowing smiles throughout.  I think most people in America have a good solid respect for our elders, and Obama totally threw that to the wind.  I don’t know. I don’t have a clear sense of a “winner.”  Thoughts?  Also, the Cubs are losing.  Boo.

-Any of those children (save the ones in Madras schools) he speaks of who apparently look at America in a different light wouldn’t give anything to come be a part of the American dream.

-Here we go again with the Dems portraying veterans as victims rather than heroes.

-Does Senator Obama really believe that President Bush doesn’t desperately want Osama Bin Laden captured or killed?  What a disingenuous comment.

10:32 p.m. – This is a good little closing by McCain there.

-Oh, geez.  “The way we’re perceived in the world…”  This is one of the more ridiculous arguments of the Left today.  To quoth the West Wing, “They’ll like us when we win.”  Not that diplomacy doesn’t have a place.  But we’re not a target because we didn’t (again quoting WW) “take the Arab world out for ice cream.”  They hate us and everything we stand for.

-Ugh.  Reaching across the aisle again.  Don’t remind me.

-Ooh – back to energy!  C’mon McCain.  Use this to go after drilling!

-Was the “looked in Putin’s eyes” comment a dig at President Bush?  Will anyone get it if it was?

-The Russia v. Georgia conversation should throw up some sparks.

-McCain: “Oh, please.” Nice.

-Obama is so arrogant.  I wonder if it comes off that way to “normal” people? (aka. not political junkies)

-Agree with McCain on legitimizing the comments.

-”Invite them over for tea” ??  Not a beer or a drink or a ballgame?

-”Senator what about talking?”  Was a huge opportunity to say something about action vs. talking.

-Let’s talk more about trade!!  TRADE STOPS WARS!

-Good hit on Obama about the Iranian situation.

-League of Democracies?  I don’t like the sound of that Senator McCain.  Maybe as long as they don’t have any real power.  Trade agreement, maybe?

-”You don’t muddle through…” … this debate.

-”I’ve got a bracelet too.”  Is it the battle of the bracelets?

-Sorry I don’t have as much to say on the foreign policy stuff.  Obama drives me nuts.

-Interesting debate about Pakistan.

-Ha.  He’s still ticked about the strategy vs. tactics line.

-There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq before?

-Obama seems a little peeved.  He’s back to “John” though.

-”Senator Obama doesn’t understand the difference between a tactic and a strategy.”  NICE!

-Was Senator Obama there when our troops came in?  Can he prove we weren’t “greeted as liberators.” There’s evidence to show we were in some quarters.

-He really is mumbly off the cuff and has a really strange speaking rhythm.  Finally, at least, he says “Senator McCain.”

-Strong statement on Iraq from McCain.  How dove-ish will Obama be?

9:39 p.m. – First Palin reference, I think.

-”John it was YOUR President…”  Rude in so many ways.  He’s your President, too, punk.

-Seems to me McCain should focus a little more on taxes rather than spending.

-Oh no.  Not climate change… Interesting Senator Clinton reference…

-Thank you, Senator McCain, for mentioning drilling and nuclear power.  Hit him harder!

-Well, it’s nice that Senator Obama admits we can’t afford everything he wants to do.

9:27 p.m. Interesting that McCain refers to his opponent as “Senator Obama” and Obama refers to McCain as “John.”  Young whippersnapper…

-McCain needs to fight back a little more, I think.  He’s letting Obama get the better of him on this market vs. government question on health care.  Someone should mention that employee-sponsored health care is one of the root causes of the problem!

-My friends, my friends.

-Alright, some fun.  Good for McCain for mixing it up and going after Obama on earmarks.

-A friend on Twitter just notes that Obama is the third largest recipient of Fannie and Freddie funds in the Senate.

-Bring on the class warfare!

-”First we have to get spending under control.”  Amen, Brother John.

-Shouldn’t someone mention the conversion of Main Street and Wall Street with the tremendous number of Americans who are stockholders?  I like Jim Lehrer trying to get them to mix it up!

-Senator McCain, is it really Chris Cox’s fault?  Let’s not go for the figurehead to make people feel better.  Talk about the government’s role in causing this mess.

-YES, Senator Obama, we should ask how we got here.  Though he talks of the “subprime mortgage mess” as though he’s somehow removed from it.  It’s MORE government intervention that caused these problems, not the free market.  REGULATION IS (almost) ALWAYS BAD.

-Nice little shot at the end there about needing more domestic energy production!

-It does not help American confidence to make this sound any worse than it is.  It’s bad enough without all the dramatic rhetoric.  Nice little age joke from McCain, though it threw him off since the crowd apparently took a vow of silence from Jim Lehrer.

-Man, Obama struggles off the ‘prompter (at least compared with his prepared speeches).  My wife: “Is that really how he talks off the cuff?”

-First drinking game rule triggered – Wall Street and Main Street mentioned in the same train of thought.  That didn’t take long!

9:03 p.m. – Here we go.  Dispensing with the timestamps for ease of reading and typing from this point on…

9:01 p.m. – Ah, Jim Lehrer.

9:00 p.m. – Waiting for the debate to begin.  Getting my Drinking Game rules together.  Cubs/Brewers tied 1-1.

I’ve got to tell you – I’m tremendously confused as to why the “equal pay for women” issue is hot in this campaign.  There’s a new Obama ad running in Virginia that hit’s McCain on opposing equal pay.  That coupled with the prime time spot given to Lilly Ledbetter, bless her heart (see previous post), and a handful of other occurrences makes this a central attack line for the Dems this year.

Yeah, I get that he’s making a strong play for the woman’s vote given the PUMA situation.  But, really?  This is the best you can do.  Didn’t Phyllis Schlafly kick the heck out of that debate like 30-40 years ago?  Frankly, I find it a little disgusting and disingenuous (I guess it’s just politics, right?).  Sure the NOW crazies and hard left feminists have been fighting the fight on this issue, but I haven’t heard it much otherwise in mainstream debate.

Not to mention – I’m pretty darn sure it’s ALREADY illegal to pay women and men (or whites and hispanics, or Catholics and Jews, et al) differently for doing the same job.  Do we need more laws?

I guess I’m just out of touch with my inner woman.

My lovely wife went on a TIRADE in the car the other day when she heard the ad.  Hippie feminist crap makes her do that. It’s one of the reasons I love her so.  But, I suspect she’s not the only one.  It’s one in a long line of lefty ideas that tries to make women victims and tries to create a separate class for women.  (ERA anyone?)

Any women readers out there have a different viewpoint?  Is this a real issue politically (we know it’s a falsehood in real life – see Carrie Lukas’ recent commentary)?  Or a desperate attempt by the Obama campaign to attract PUMAs?  Are they THAT scared of Sarah Palin?

UPDATE: My, again, LOVELY wife, reminds me of this wonderful West Wing scene where <heart flutters> Ainsley Hayes rips into Sam Seaborn about the ERA.  One of my favorite WW scenes of all time.

I found this great blog today on Sarah Palin, giving us some insight into the Governor from Alaska.  To whet your appetite:

Sarah Palin begins every day with a moment of silence for the political enemies buried in her yard.

Sarah Palin always beats the point spread.

Sarah Palin once bit the head off a live Osprey snatched from the air as it tried to fly off with a fish she caught.

Sarah Palin uses French Canadians as bait to catch giant king salmon.

When Sarah Palin booked a flight to Europe, the French immediately surrendered.

Sarah Palin plays Whack-a-Mole with her forehead, and always gets a perfect score.

Sarah Palin knows who was on the grassy knoll.

Sarah Palin’s finishing move in the VP debate will be pulling Biden’s still beating heart from his chest & taking a bite.

In other news…  Did Barack Obama really say this?

..my understanding is, is that Governor Sarah Palin’s town of Wasilla has, I think, 50 employees. We have got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. You know, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month. So, I think that our ability to manage large systems and to execute, I think, has been made clear over the last couple of years.

Is he really comparing being governor of Alaska for two years (and being mayor and member of the state’s energy commission before that) to running for President?  And making that comparable executive experience?  Surely he jests.  Consider the following:

• Alaska produces about 25% of our nation’s oil supply.  The Obama campaign produces press releases.
• Most of America’s salmon, crab, halibut and herring come from Alaska.  The Obama campaign?  Just red herring.
• Alaska is the nation’s largest state by area, over double the size of Texas.  Senator Obama’s ego is approximately the size of Texas.
• According to the Tax Foundation, Alaska has the 4th more business friendly tax policy in the country.  The Obama campaign advocates higher taxes and bigger government.
  
• Alaska has 60,000 more residents than DNC Chairman Howard Dean’s state of Vermont (and yet the lefty blogosphere didn’t worry about HIS experience when they rallied behind him.)

The arrogance of Senator Obama really shines through that comment.  To think that running for President in and of itself is executive experience is baffling.  If I ran for President, would then I have the experience necessary in Senator Obama’s eyes?

Certainly experience is an issue (and I, frankly, wouldn’t quarrel with either Senator Obama’s or Governor Palin’s experience, per say, as it relates to their running for President or Vice President), but the key here is judgement.  We glean observations about judgement from experience, for sure, but a person’s judgement is really key here.

From a political perspective, though, is Senator Obama really getting into a debate comparing his experience with the bottom of the McCain ticket?  Shouldn’t the comparisons be between Senator Obama and Senator McCain rather than Senator Obama and Governor Palin?  Are they that afraid of her?  It’ll certainly be interesting to see how all this plays out, but it seems to me if I were the Obama campaign, I’d want to stay out of the “experience” debate.

-Would welcome your thoughts – I’m not sure what to think.  I do know that, regardless of the speech, he’s proven he’ll be the same old-line lefty politician we always thought he was.  No surprise, but he didn’t make a good case that he’d really be a “different” kind of Democrat.  Or “Post-Partisan” as he likes to call it.

-Ooh, in the background, I think I just heard Nancy Pelosi lead the crowd in a rousing round of “Yes We Can” chants!

10:07 p.m. Juan Williams has it right: “this speech was more prose than poetry.”  I think some of us expected poetry.  Maybe that’s not fair, but hey, that’s politics.  John McCain certainly can’t match that spectacle.  Can he exceed expectations?  I’m not sure.  Unfortunately, I am not sure the GOP can do as well as the Dems did, even though I don’t think this convention was that impressive.  Tomorrow’s rally in Dayton, I feel, will tell us a great deal.  We shall see. 

-ALSO, the CUBS WON!!!  WOO HOO!

-Great comment over at the liveblog on RedState: “OMG, someone just rolled the temple!” Ha!

-Are these “green” fireworks and confetti?

-Ooh.  OK.  Those fireworks are better.  Dramatic music, too.  I’m a little scared.  (my wife just turned to me: “what’s with the music?”)

-Hey, maybe they won’t have to water the field now, given all the tears.

10:59 p.m. Firewords are cool, but balloons are much better.  Much better.  (and the streamers look a little strange)

-Gut reaction: Pretty good speech.  Not great.  Not enough red meat for the 85,000 people in the stadium, but probably the right amount for the average viewer.  No soaring Ted Sorenson/Aaron Sorkin lines.  “Workmanlike” as they’ve been saying all week.  Was it “Presidential?”  Not sure.

-Wow – they’re playing BROOKS & DUNN???  Who, by the way, played at the GOP convention last time around.  That’s just wrong.

-Farms to save?

10:54 p.m. First mention of MLK, Jr. speech.  Surprising it took that long.

-More crying people.  (and they appear a little sweaty, too)

-I believe we’re now entering the “change” portion of the speech.  (the preceeding session was the “liberal Democrat socialism/government can do everything” portion of the speech.)

-There’s another “change we need.”

10:50 p.m. “If you don’t have a record to run on…” ??  From Barack Obama?  Four years ago, he was a back-bench state legislator who was sponsoring bills to protect partial birth abortion.  Hm.  Record?

-We’ve lost our sense of “common purpose?”

-He’s going to solve everything!!  I may have missed something, but I think he just claimed he could solve genocide, terrorism, poverty, climate change (ha!), and maybe even bullies in your kids’ schoolyards?  Can Barack buy me a new car?  I could use a flat screen, too.  Also, I’d like to be a little less stressed.

-Hmm.  Cheap shot on McCain’s “gates of hell” comment.  Obama knows which cave bin Laden is living in?  Shouldn’t he tell someone?  Hopefully someone with a big gun?

-Have we heard a “Yes We Can!” yet?

10:38 p.m.  OK – here we go again with the “equal pay for equal work” crap.  REALLY?? REALLY??  We’re stuck on this.  It’s like the 12th time someone has said that line at this convention.  Is this 1964?

-Now we’re getting into the meat of the liberal agenda.  More money for teachers (all teachers, mind you, not just the good ones), universal healthcare, etc. etc.  Groan.

10:36 p.m. Yet another crying person.  I lost count. 

-He’ll make it easier for Americans to afford these new cars?  Huh?  How?  Is he going to pay a portion of everyone’s car purchases himself?  (or is he going to end unionization?  yeah, probably not.)

10:33 p.m. Note he didn’t say “cut our dependence on foreign oil,” but rather “oil from the Middle East.”  Does that mean Hugo Chavez’s oil is okay still?  Note it’s still not a commitment to increased domestic production (AKA DRILL DRILL DRILL!). 

-If cutting taxes is such a good thing to do that you’re supposedly willing to cut them for 95% of Americans, why not cut them for everyone?

-You know, he keeps talking starting a small business.  And yet, still, he’d like to go ahead and raise our taxes, creating significant barriers to starting a business.

-The framing of the tight shot on the speech is good, I think.  The window-y thing in the background works against his dark suit, with the flag flying in the background.  And, the side shots with just GOBS of people is effective.  The stadium was a risk, but it may pay off.

10:25 p.m. He did not just diss the “ownership society!”  Boo.  “Even if you don’t have boots??”

-And just why, Senator Obama, did that auto plant close???  Perhaps because the heavy burden of unionization made American manufacturing too expensive to be affordable to everyday Americans!

-OK, Bill Clinton said McCain “voted with Bush” 90% of the time.  Biden said 95%.   Now Obama says 90%.  But, can someone let me know when the last time President Bush cast a vote?

-If you’re playing the drinking game – “change we can believe” – drink now.

-”Eight is enough” is a mouthful to chant.  Did I hear that right?

10:19 p.m. Crying person #5 on NBC by my count.

-Ok, a comment about Obama’s speaking rhythm.  The last syllable of each phrase happens really quickly.  Drawn out syllables throughout, and then, BAM, quickly end the phrase (and somewhat quietly).  It’s a little odd, and I’ve never really noticed it before.  There’s not much punctuation of the final words, which it seems like there should be.

-Geez – more pandering to the Clintons?  I know he needs to win over her people, but make this YOUR night, Senator – let the Clintons be in the past.

-”I accept your nomination for the presidency of the United States.”  How many times do you think he’s practiced that in front of the mirror?

-10:12 p.m. (just for some perspective) Let the crying begin.  NBC has already shown two people overcome with tears.

-And here he is.  Michelle looks nervous.  I would be too.  Wow – look at all the flashbulbs.

-I mentioned this to a colleague earlier, but it’s going to be a real challenge for Senator Obama to talk and project and fill the stadium without making it sound like he is shouting.  If it sounds like he’s shouting (which he has a tendency to do) it won’t come off as well.

-Nice “family laughing and playing cards around the table” shot.

-Michelle Obama, whatever you think of her, really is a pretty woman.  She has come off much more human/normal/middle-America this convention than during the campaign to date, I think.

-I think that’s the first time I’ve ever seen a picture of Obama’s mom. 

10:01 p.m. – OK, I’ll probably stop adding the timestamp now.  The Obama-pic is rolling.  Going to be lots of flashbacks to the ‘04 convention, I suspect.  It was indeed a good speech.  Will we hear “south side of Chicago” soon?  (which always remind me of the old Jim Croce song).

10:00 p.m. Eek.  Now 4-1 Phillies. 

9:56 p.m. I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again.  I’m jealous of Britt Hume’s wardrobe.  Also, can it really be a “Fox News Alert” that we’re “awaiting Barack Obama?”  That seems a bit much, even for Fox.

9:53 p.m. You know, honestly, I don’t get all the hubbub about the stage with the columns and what not.  I think it’s kind of nice, official classic-looking.  Would have been much worse if they went modern-crazy or something like that (though it is pretty amusing that it was designed by the people who design the sets for Britney Spears concerts).  On another note - it’s like a rock concert there.  I just heard some “whoop whoops” from the crowd.  Crazy. 

9:47 p.m. Uh-oh.  Cubs are down 2-1.  Not a good start to the evening!

9:40 p.m.  Just watching the lead-up to his greatness, flipping back and forth between CNN, Fox and PBS.  Wolf Blitzer just postulated that he “can’t overemphasize enough the gravity and historical nature of this night.”  I believe you can indeed overemphasize, and you’re about reaching the limit.  Stop now.  More later…

Good Tuesday morning!

I had planned to have something interesting and valuable to say about the opening of the Democratic National Convention this morning.  However, as it turns out, it comes on too dang late.  For this east coast guy with an infant daughter, I can’t stay up until all hours of the night watching lefty political speeches (particularly after I just spent the better part of two weeks trying to stay up late enough to see the good sports on the Olympics!).  So, alas, about five minutes into Mrs. Obama’s speech, I fell asleep.  Oh well…the best laid plans and all…

Second random thought for a Tuesday.  This morning I’ve been thinking: If I vote for John McCain, maybe Fred Thompson can be attorney general.  Ok, maybe I can do this!  Sad, no?

Finally, if you need a good scare this morning, read Rich Lowry’s post on The Corner this morning/late last night.

Y’all know I love the comic strip Mallard Fillmore.  Make sure to check out today’s issue for a good chuckle!

This shocking headline and opening courtesy of the venerable Associated Press:

McCain, Obama offer different visions on taxes
Make more than $250,000 a year? Watch out. Barack Obama wants to raise your income taxes. Social Security taxes, too.

Run a corporation? Lucky you. John McCain wants to cut your business taxes.

Those positions illustrate pieces of two vastly different approaches to the economy, an issue at the forefront of voters’ minds given that the country is teetering on the brink of – if not already in – a recession as gas prices soar and layoffs rise amid a credit crisis and a housing slump.

Obama, the Democrat, seemingly has a traditional liberal outlook of taxing the rich more while having the government help people of more modest means through tax breaks. McCain, the Republican, advocates a classic conservative vision of cutting taxes – many geared toward businesses – to promote competition within a free-market system.

I mean, wow.  Really.  Republicans and Democrats disagree on taxes?   I’m shocked.  Although, I guess, to be fair, this was in question in this election cycle. 

However, this is illustrative of one important point.  Senator McCain should keep this as the story.  He should stop talking about global warming or whatever other “straight talk” he’d like to provide us for the day.  He should keep talking about tax cuts and spending restraint.  He should talk about the expansive growth of government and how to stop it.  At least, I suppose, if he’d like conservatives to get at all excited about him this year.  Guess we’ll see…

With her most recent assertions, Hillary Clinton has sunk to a new low, even by Clintonian standards.

As usual, Peggy Noonan captures this well in her most recent column:

In case you didn’t get what was behind that exchange, Mrs. Clinton spent this week making it clear. In a jaw-dropping interview in USA Today on Thursday, she said, “I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on.” As evidence she cited an Associated Press report that, she said, “found how Sen. Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.”

White Americans? Hard-working white Americans? “Even Richard Nixon didn’t say white,” an Obama supporter said, “even with the Southern strategy.”

If John McCain said, “I got the white vote, baby!” his candidacy would be over. And rising in highest indignation against him would be the old Democratic Party.

To play the race card as Mrs. Clinton has, to highlight and encourage a sense that we are crudely divided as a nation, to make your argument a brute and cynical “the black guy can’t win but the white girl can” is — well, so vulgar, so cynical, so cold, that once again a Clinton is making us turn off the television in case the children walk by.