Links and Minifeatures 2008 10 13 (Welcome Columbus!)

One of those moments you can't stage: Ramona was taking her bath last night when Julia (our dachshund) evidently decided that she was dirty. Either that, or she just wanted into the bubble bath to play with Ramona!

About time: Boehner declares war on ACORN

The pattern seems very clear. Wherever ACORN works, they file hundreds and thousands of bogus registrations. These aren't isolated incidents, but strongly suggest a systemic effort to undermine democracy. Not only should taxpayers not fund such an organization, but the Department of Justice should treat it the same way they treat organized-crime syndicates.

Video: The implications of adding government-sponsored "rights"

When the government pays for something that everybody has to have, the government has the right to set terms of service, which means the government gets to control behavior. When government is the sole provider and sole controller, you can't opt out. In many cases, the difficulty of opting out is extreme (i.e. "free" mandatory school), which means the government controls those subject to it.

It seems to me that we as a society are trying to nibble the 13th Amendment to death. You know, the one that says "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

Political Theater: The report that claims Sarah Palin abused her authority

The Branchflower Report is a series of guess and insupportable conclusions drawn by exactly one guy, and it hasn't been approved or adopted or endorsed by so much as a single sub-committee of the Alaska Legislature, much less any kind of commission, court, jury, or other proper adjudicatory body. It contains no new bombshells in terms of factual revelations. Rather, it's just Steve Branchflower's opinion -- after being hired and directed by one of Gov. Palin's most vocal opponents and one of Alaska's staunchest Obama supporters -- that he thinks Gov. Palin had, at worst, mixed motives for an action that even Branchflower admits she unquestionably had both (a) the complete right to perform and (b) other very good reasons to perform.

and even so:

Finding Number Two

I find that, although Walt Monegan's refusal to fire Trooper Michael Wooten was not the sole reason he was fired by Governor Sarah Palin, it was likely a contributing factor to his termination as Commissioner of Public Safety. In spite of that, Governor Palin's firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads.

Hot Air has a video of a press conference of the early days of seeding the financial meltdown.

Right Wing Nut House on the disparate expectations of partisans on the right versus the left.

I think it has to do with desensitization. For the last eight years, the unhinged left has been saying anything it could think of, no matter how hate filled, to get at George Bush, who took it like the believer in the First Amendment that he is. It's both a matter of having taken eight years to build up to this level, as well as the fact that the first time someone says "Destroy America!" it's treason, the fifty-thousandth, it's passe. Now that there is a Democrat of comparable stature, the left doesn't like what happens when a pale reflection of their own behavior gets reflected back at their own candidate, and because for the first time, they are coming it for a pale shadow of their own treatment of the opposition.

Here's a prediction: Unless Mr. Obama declares martial law (something I'm not nearly as skeptical about as I would like to be, especially given his electoral tactics, and his supporters Manichean world view and religious mentality, anointing themselves "The Good Guys&trade" while the opposition is "obviously" more foul than Morgoth or Sauron), the criticism Obama hears now is nothing compared to what he's going to hear after he's elected when it becomes undeniable exactly what he wants to do, what he stands for, and who his friends are. Considering Mr. Obama's history, comparing what George Bush has been accused of to what Barack Obama has publicly said he wants to do to the Constitution is like passing gas in a hurricane.

You want insane hate? Michelle Malkin documents some real insane hate and range.

Instapundit:

NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE? So we've had nearly 8 years of lefty assassination fantasies about George W. Bush, and Bill Ayers' bombing campaign is explained away as a consequence of him having just felt so strongly about social justice, but a few people yell things at McCain rallies and suddenly it's a sign that anger is out of control in American politics? It's nice of McCain to try to tamp that down, and James Taranto sounds a proper cautionary note -- but, please, can we also note the staggering level of hypocrisy here? (And that's before we get to the Obama campaign's thuggish tactics aimed at silencing critics.)

The Angry Left has gotten away with all sorts of beyond-the-pale behavior throughout the Bush Administration. The double standards involved -- particularly on the part of the press -- are what are feeding this anger. (Indeed, as Ann Althouse and John Leo have noted, the reporting on this very issue is dubious). So while asking for McCain supporters to chill a bit, can we also ask the press to start doing its job rather than openly shilling for a Democratic victory? Self-control is for everybody, if it's for anybody. . . .

He has some links for documentation if you visit his site.

I couldn't make this up, but Howard Stern found it was real. Wizbang has the recording. Nasty language warning applies - it is Howard Stern. Nonetheless, the ignorance is mind-boggling. Nor do I believe they were just pretending to go along. What they might have been is a select, non-representative sample. But the observation remains, and these people are intending to vote. If that doesn't scare you, Steven King doesn't stand a chance.

Can't Keep A Bad Idea Down Department Obama calls for 90-day moratorium on foreclosures

Democratic Barack Obama on Monday called for more immediate steps to heal the nation's ailing economy, proposing a 90-day moratorium on home foreclosures at some banks and a two-year tax break for businesses that create new jobs.

I hammered San Diego's City Attorney for this several months ago. (sixth entry here)

Question: Will this 90 day moratorium somehow mean the people owe less money? That they will somehow miraculously be able to afford their mortgages. Keep in mind, it's not an end to the interest, the payments, or anything else. All it means is another 90 days for the bills to pile up, another 90 days that lenders have to sit on non-performing assets, another 90 days of denial.

Will this mean that homeowners will suddenly have the equity to refinance to something they can support? No. Will it mean they suddenly have the income? No. Will it mean the rates drop to enable those around the margins to refinance into something better? No, quite the opposite - it will cause rates to rise. Not only will it cause rates to rise, it will cause the underlying indices to rise, as lenders will want more money in return for lending theirs. This will mean that it will knock those on the margins away from being able to afford properties they might otherwise have been able to hand onto, dumping more properties onto the market, adjusting price equilibrium down, setting us up for another entire round of this nonsense.

This is an idea tailored to populist, class warfare appeal. But like so many ideas of that bent, it's severely stupid in that it will make the situation much worse, as in "we might as well have set that $700 billion for the bailout on fire."

Investors with large amounts of money are not our enemies. They are what provides the seed money for factories, builders, consumer goods of all kind, increase our standard of living, etcetera. I'm not rich myself, but it is past time for adults to start calling the willfully ignorant children who propose this crap to task.

It's also another piece of evidence: A vote for Obama is a vote for economic disaster. If any of his vaunted and ballyhooed advisors sat him down and explained this to him, he chose to disregard the facts. I'm a pretty easygoing sort, by and large, but one of the few things I find it difficult to have patience with is willfully blind ignorance. Just because you want it to be true doesn't mean it is.