From the Telegraph:

…Mr Obama’s ponderous response (to the Koran-burning fracas) was in stark contrast to the sure-footed approach of Hillary Clinton, his Secretary of State. Speaking earlier in the week at a Ramadan dinner for Muslim leaders, she denounced Mr Jones’s proposed stunt as “disrespectful and disgraceful”…

…Mrs Clinton’s handling of this latest drama has made Mr Obama look out of touch, seemingly lacking in the instinctive leadership qualities that Americans expect…

Clinton’s response was actually just bit of truckling to the Islamist fraud – but, no matter, it is still being held up as superior to President Obama’s. The Clinton’s have lots of friends, admirers and people who simply have to do their bidding for various reasons…the more I see stories like this, the more I figure we’re seeing on-the-sly groundwork being laid for a possible 2012 primary challenge.

Politics could get enormously fun and interesting over the next two years.

Allahpundit has the story of Palin’s Hannity-show endorsement of Christine O’Donnell in the Delaware GOP Senate primary (with audio link) – and if you listen to the audio, it is clear that Palin is just determined to endorse, in race after race, the most conservative candidate running. A lot of cyber-ink is being spilled over what this – and other – Palin endorsements mean. I think it means she’s got a conservative world-view and wants it advanced. Never ignore the possibility – even in politics – that someone is just doing what they think is right.

The big heartache here is the story that O’Donnell’s GOP opponent, Mike Castle, is the only candidate who can win. This view is held by both the GOP Establishment as well as a very large selection of conservative New Media. Nominate O’Donnell, goes the talking point, and we just about ensure the Democrats retain the seat – and that might even be the 50th seat the Democrats need to retain their majority. Castle, of course, is a RINO – something acknowledged by pretty much everybody. He voted for Cap and Trade and quibbles about moves to repeal ObamaCare on grounds that Obama will veto it.

It is an odd formulation, to say the least, to believe that something shouldn’t be done because its certain the other side will try to stop it. Aside from being just plain weird, it is also tactically unsound – it means that we’ll only go for things we think Obama likely to support. We’re not supposed to be surrendering on issues – we’re supposed to be relentlessly pressing Obama and his Democrats. Harrying them day and night and forcing them to either back down, or defend their absurd views to the electorate. That is, this is what we should be doing – if we are really trying to advance conservatism.

Are we trying to advance conservatism? Are we conservatives, at all? Do we believe that we have rights endowed by God? Do we believe in limited government? Are we insistent upon a strict interpretation of the original intent of the Constitution? Well, are we? If you answer those questions with a “yes”, then the only possible move is to back only those candidates who agree. To do otherwise just to secure someone with an “R” after their name is a negation of all we work for…all it does is ensure that in the by and by we’ll have another GOP Congress like that of 2005…and do I need to remind everyone where that wound up?

This is not to say that everyone on our side has to toe a particular line – as I’ve noted before, I’m as conservative as they come, but I’m opposed to the death penalty and I want what amounts to amnesty for at least part of the illegal population; not exactly in line with most conservatives, right? We can tolerate in our movement people like me. We can also work around a libertarian leaning conservative who has no problem with gay marriage. We can additionally deal well with someone who doesn’t want an outright ban on abortion. Heck, it is not even outside the realm of possibility to have a fellow conservative who might want a tax increase, or more money spent on social programs. But what a conservative must be is someone who strictly believes in the ideals embodied in the Declaration of Independence while also being a stickler for obeying the Constitution as it is written.

Mike Castle? He backed Cap and Trade – a horrific, unconstitutional usurpation of the rights of the American people. He doesn’t seem enthusiastic about repealing ObamaCare – a horrific, unconstitutional usurpation of the rights of the American people. Don’t get me wrong – Castle has his good points. I’d be delighted for conservatism to work with him in areas of mutual agreement…but after the Specter mess, I’m simply not inclined to just put another RINO in the Senate in order to possibly secure a GOP majority. Castle’s problem is not that he’s a bad man (he’s not); its not that he doesn’t have any good ideas (he does have some), but that he doesn’t grasp the crucial battle of our times – a fundamental conflict of visions about what government is for and what the rights of the people are. Given this, it is almost a certainty that when the chips are down and its time to stand firm for basic, American principles, Castle will defect to the Democrats and give them bi-partisan cover for some usurpation or other.

Sarah Palin understands this – in fact, of all the potential 2012 GOP candidates, she’s the only one who seems to understand it completely (here even Christie has faltered – endorsing Castle). The only person one can claim as a RINO endorsement by Palin was of John McCain – who shifted very hard towards the conservative position and, hey, he was the guy who picked Palin as VP…and loyalty is a two way street. Other than that, Palin has simply been doing all she can to ensure the largest number of people are exposed to the conservative message. Even in Delaware – because if Delaware has problems (and it does), then only conservatism will cure them…just because they routinely vote heavily liberal doesn’t mean we can’t ever reach them. And any attempt to convert States like Delaware will have to have a first step. This is it.

And this is what we must do – always seek out the most conservative candidate and do our best. Out here in Nevada, that resulted in me backing Mike Montandon in the GOP gubernatorial primary. He was, in my view, the most conservative. He lost; and now I’m backing the GOP nominee, Brian Sandoval, because between him and Harry’s little boy, Rory, it is Sandoval who is clearly the most conservative candidate. And so it will be with Delaware – conservatives should rally ’round O’Donnell…and if the good people of Delaware opt for Mike Castle, then it will be our duty as Republicans to rally ’round him…because, flaws and all, he’s still going to be miles ahead of the liberal the Democrats are set to nominate. Politics remains the art of the possible and half a loaf is better than none – but this doesn’t mean we eagerly go after the half a loaf, when the full loaf beckons.

And if O’Donnell wins the primary and then loses in the general? Then so be it – Reagan ran and lost before going on to run and and win the Presidency. Rome wasn’t built in a day – and neither will a reformed, conservative America be built in one election cycle. But win or lose, with Castle or O’Donnell, if we do this right then we’ll still have made our statement – we’ll still have made our point: that conservatism is good and true and is what America, even Delaware, needs. And even in a loss, the seeds of conservatism in Delaware will be a bit more firmly planted, to reap a rich harvest in later years and different elections.

Obsolete, as long as Democrats are in charge:

…I assume that RIGHTNETWORK readers are at least of average intelligence, but for any members of Code Pink or International ANSWER who might have stumbled over here by accident, allow me to dumb it down: the antiwar movement is faltering because it was never an antiwar movement to begin with. It was an anti-Bush, anti-Republican movement, and now that neither of those entities is running things right now it is no longer necessary to keep it going. It won’t be eliminated, of course: after all, the way things are going the Republicans are primed to take power again within in the next two or three election cycles. Once that happens, the Democrats will then revitalize whatever withered cores still remain in the antiwar groups, and then use them to attack Republicans—until the Republicans are out of power once more. Lather, rinse, repeat.

It’s hard to tell who to be more contemptuous of in that uneasy liberal-left alliance: establishment Democrats, for being such cynical opportunists, or the antiwar activists, for being such pitiful lackeys…

Democrats discovered a love for the anti-war movement on January 20th, 1969 – the day Richard Nixon was sworn in, with the Vietnam war still in full force. Up to that point, no need for the anti-war movement – might hurt Democrats. Once a Republican was in office – wow, really need that anti-war movement!

To keep going a bit with my theme from Cutting Through the Nonsense Between Islam and the West, here we have yet another example of the con job of modern times. Anyone who thinks about war realizes that it is a complex event which arises because an acute difference has developed between two or more peoples – with luck and good will, such conflicts can be defused short of actual shooting war, but some times luck is elsewhere and good will is lacking, and so war commences. Once the war starts, thinking people start trying to understand what it is about and develope means to bring it to a swift and, for their side, successful conclusion. On the other hand, there are those who are just trying to put one over on people in order to gain power and wealth for themselves…enter the Democrats and the dupes who man the anti-war movement.

Those who think try to prevent a war from starting; once a war starts, those who think work on winning it. Those who are indifferent to everything but their own position and wealth ignore impending war clouds – and if they are not in charge when the war starts, they immediately start angling for themselves. This has a long history in the United States – starting with the Copperheads during the Civil War (mostly Democrats, by the way). For the Copperheads, the fate of the Union and the plight of the slaves was irrelevant – all that mattered was securing power for themselves…it wouldn’t have mattered to them if they attained power in a truncated Union while millions of Americans continued to languish in slavery – all that mattered was personal wealth and power.

So, rather than do the patriotic thing and help work out ways to victory, they started picking apart war policy and ascribing base motives to those who were trying to win the war. They accused those fighting the war of various crimes from brutality to the enemy to the destruction of civil liberties at home (sound familiar?). They sought to undermine the war effort knowing that defeat in the field would lend credence to their expressed views about the war. They favored coddling the enemy and set impossible, ever receding standards for the people trying to win the war. All of this was duplicated during the latter part of the Vietnam war, and all through the Bush Administration. It was a con then, it is a con now – though one temporarily moribund because the people who ran the scheme are currently ensconced in power and thus don’t need it.

Ever and anon we are plagued with these people – the people who want power and wealth but don’t want to actually work for it. From relatively harmless crooks like Bernie Madoff to the most vile, criminal murderers like Josef Stalin, the theme remains the same – cook up a problem, relentlessly lie about what is happening, use resultant confusion to gain the advantage.

We’ll see the anti-war movement again – because anyone who would actually join the movement is easily duped, and as soon as Republicans are in charge of government there will be Democrats who will want to pull a fast one. As long as there are knaves to vend, there will be fools to swallow – but we, on our side, can limit the damage.

If we will resolutely state the truth and cease to play their game (which is, after all, a rigged game designed to ensure they win), then we can marginalize both the hucksters and their dupes.

From Rasmussen:

Heading into the final weeks of the congressional election season, 62% of Likely U.S. Voters believe that no matter how bad things are, Congress can always make them worse…

Gloriam in excelsis Deo! The people are fully awake.

Obviously, this is pretty good to hear. This wouldn’t have benefitted anyone, but I still feel like pointing out that the case was made that this one pastor burning a Quran would have tarnished America’s reputation worldwide… yet depsite the fact it’s now nearly 9 years after 9/11, there’s been little condemnation from the greater Muslim communities of the world, particularly in America, of the terrorists attacks, yet we are not supposed to paint Muslims with such a wide brush of mistrust?

How’s that old Summer of Recovery working out for ya?

Projected U.S. economic growth for the rest of this year and next was revised down for a third month in a row by a panel of about 50 economists.

The latest Blue Chip Economic Indicators report on Thursday said the weaker outlook for second-half 2010 growth stemmed from lower expectations for consumer spending, business investment and private construction.

“Growth in the current quarter now is expected to be little better than the disappointingly soft advance registered last quarter,” the survey said. Gross domestic product grew at a meager 1.6 percent annual rate in the second quarter, less than half the first quarter’s 3.7 percent rate…

Of course, being “experts” there has to be a rosy scenario in there somewhere…so, they expect the second half of 2011 to start showing some improvement. Keep in mind, though, that they originally thought the second half of 2010 would be pretty good. How they are deciding that things will get better later is beyond me – there are zero signs of improvement, so all predictions would have to be of flat or negative economic activity…until some sort of policy change comes along.

Unless, I guess, they are expecting a GOP win in November and thus counting on some rationality in government policy?

NRO’s The Corner links to a new ABC poll on how Americans view Islam:

…A quarter of Americans (26 percent) admit to feelings of prejudice against Muslims, and just 37 percent express a favorable opinion of Islam overall — the fewest in ABC/Post polls dating to October 2001 (albeit by just 2 points). Forty-nine percent view the religion unfavorably — essentially the same as in the spring, but well up from its lows in 2002, when many were undecided.

Just 54 percent call Islam a peaceful religion, while a substantial minority, 31 percent, thinks mainstream Islam encourages violence against non-Muslims. This view has held steady since 2003, after doubling from 2002.

Unfamiliarity is part of the picture. Fifty-five percent say they lack a good, basic understanding of the teachings and beliefs of Islam. Half say they do not personally know anyone who is a Muslim. At the same time, familiarity with Islam has grown by 18 points since 2002, and personally knowing a Muslim is up by 8 points since ‘01…

It is hard to have a favorable view of Islam – after all, the only real contact most American have with Islam is either in the form of videotaped diatribes from Moslems against America, or when we see Moslems blowing people to bits.

Part of this lack of positive news on Islam is the fact that from about mid-2002 on, the MSM gave short shrift to any reports from the Moslem world indicating support for either American policy, or for an end to terrorism (it didn’t fit the narrative – the actions of Bush were supposed to be inflaming Islam in to implacable hatred of the United States…so, when millions voted in Iraq for a non-Islamist way of life, it just couldn’t be fit in all that much). Even today, with the screwball in Florida who wants to torch a Koran, we’re still being fed the “Americans inflame Islam” meme…with no notice being taken of the fact that in Iraq and Afghanistan, tens of thousands of Moslems fight daily alongside our troops.

As I’ve said elsewhere, I’m tired of walking on eggshells around Islam. I’m tired of playing a game which has no end and, really, no point. If there is one more debate on whether or not Israel causes the conflict or whether Bush’s policies got us in to this fix, I’m going to shout. Its all so utterly worthless, such debates.

What do I want out of Islam? I want it to be that Moslems stop killing non-Moslems. We can do this two ways, in my view – kill them all, or get rid of the people who are forever inciting Moslems to go out and kill. Killing them all is out of the question for a Christian (I guess our Progressive friends could try to convince them to abort themselves out of existence, as they’ve been diligently doing to the Europeans, but I doubt Moslems are dumb enough to fall for that), so I’m left with the second alternative.

In service of this goal, it is time for a bit of reality to be injected here. A bit too much nonsense has been spread about Islam. Anti-Islam nonsense as well as pro-Islam nonsense. The most important bit of reality we can and must grasp is this: Moslems are people. Regular, old human beings.

What this means is that they are just as likely, man for man, to be as horribly screwed up, or as noble, as anyone else you’re likely to meet. Perhaps they do, to a man, despise us in the West – heck, they have good reason to do so…given how many sniveling cowards we’ve got and how we’re awash in a sea of moral depravity. But whether they do or don’t does not determine whether a fanatic will blow himself at a Western target. An action such as that is not determined by Moslem attitudes towards the West – it is determined by whether or not someone bids the terrorist to act, and whether or not we in the West do what is necessary to stop such attacks.

And so, they are trying to con their way in to power and wealth for themselves. So, they cook up stories of alleged grandeur of the past and how it was all taken away by a wicked conspiracy…but that Moslems are inherently superior and if they’ll just show their devotion by blowing themselves up, eventually the great times will return. Of course, it should be noted that the Islamist leaders never strap on a bomb and blow themselves to smithereens. No, that is for the dupes – the people who are the mere raw material for the con artists to gain power and wealth for themselves.

When we say that burning a Koran will inflame the Moslem world, we should really understand it to mean that it will be used by sharp operators to stir up fools (and, remember, Islam is not alone in having a good supply of people who can be fooled – think of the number of Americans who were convinced, unto death, that David Koresh and Jim Jones were god-like…the difference is that in America there is a better chance that a scam will be found out…thanks to our unwillingness to tackle the real problems in Islam, the people of that area of the world have much fewer chances of exposing a lie).

All that you see – all the talking heads on TV; all the calls for inter-religious and/or inter-cultural dialogue; all the hand wringing over “Islamophobia”…all of that is just so much dross. And like such things as building the mosque at Ground Zero, it just plays in to the hands of the Islamist leaders who are delighted that people in the West are willing to go along with the con.

We shouldn’t be having a controversy over the mosque – the immediate answer to the suggestion should have been, “no”, and then move on to investigate those behind it because clearly they are part of the problem. But we don’t do that – because we’ve been suckered nearly as much as the fools who blow themselves up. We’re seriously debating whether or not it really matters – that it will really effect the outcome if we prohibit the mosque! If it wasn’t the mosque, it would just be something else – it doesn’t matter what the enemy thinks. Whatever it is, it will always and ever be geared towards gaining the maximum advantage over us.

Our proper job is not to worry about whether we’ll hurt the feelings of the people of the Moslem world. We’re trying to stop a selection of them from killing us – by the time someone has been convinced to put on a suicide bomb, what we do vis a vis a mosque won’t change the outcome. Our job is to erect defenses proof against the fools who would blow themselves up at the bidding of others, while carefully identifying those who set the bombers in motion – and then kill or capture them, regardless of where they are (and, yes, this means we must work to destroy the Iranian government, among other things). Don’t get side tracked in to absurd stories that some how it was the Crusades of the 11th century which caused the problem. Don’t fall for the scam that it was European colonization which set red flames to the Moslem world. Understand that a whole complex series of events, aided and abetted by people in the West who are quite stupid and ignorant (we’re looking at you, post-modern, revisionist “progressives”), which built up a whole network of people who want power and wealth but don’t want to either work for it, nor offer the sort of leadership which convinces solid majorities to go along (and if the leaders really believe the garbage they peddle? Then there was never any way we would get them to stop – so, the policy would still be the same…find them and kill/take them).

We can’t and won’t all become scholars of Islam – we have neither the time nor inclination for such studies. But we can swiftly understand that we’re dealing with people in Islam – and some of them are wicked, and some of them are good and the overwhelming majority are caught in a web of deceit and cowardice which prevents a true development of Moslem thought and action. But they are still people – and as such, they probably want what most people want…to be left alone to live their lives as they see fit. If we will see what we’re really faced with and deal with the actual problem, then the broad masses of the Moslem world will be able to take charge of their own destiny…and even if they continue to have contempt for the West, we’ll almost certainly find they don’t have time to strap bombs on their sons and daughters to trouble us.

From Rasmussen:

For the third week in a row, just 29% of Likely Voters say the country is heading in the right direction, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey taken the week ending Sunday, September 5…

Man, you gotta be the biggest kool aid drinker in the world to figure we’re on the right path. Heck, even if you’re a dyed in the wool liberal, you can’t figure we’re on the right track because Obama still isn’t being socialist enough, right? So, who is thinking we’re on the right path?

It could be important for us to figure out – after all, by discovering just what set of circumstances allow a person to think high unemployment and national bankruptcy are good signs we can come up with ways to counteract it. I know that the immediate thought is that a 2×4 upside the head would probably be a good idea – even if it doesn’t cure idiocy, it’ll sure help rational people get their frustrations out.

But that really won’t do – outside of the personal injury lawsuits we’d all be hit with, denting a perfectly good 2×4 on a numbskull’s head is just plain and simple wasteful. But there still might be something we can do – we could start a foundation…the National Institute for Teaching Whackjobs Intelligent Thought, and hope that one day all Americans will know the difference between s*** and shinola.

From the Washington Post:

The last major GE factory making ordinary incandescent light bulbs in the United States is closing this month, marking a small, sad exit for a product and company that can trace their roots to Thomas Alva Edison’s innovations in the 1870s…

Why is the factory closing down? Because the government has mandated an end to such bulbs no later than 2014. Where are the replacement, CFL bulbs being made? Overseas – mostly in China.

Who is pleased by this? GE, which still gets to make big profits. Environmentalists who get another victory for their insane creed. Chinese oligarchs, who get to sell goods to the United States to pay for the weapons they hope one day to turn on us. The only losers – the United States of America and the American working man.

This must change.

New for 2010: the Rise of the Black Republican.

Poll: Fiorina has a slight lead in the California Senate race.

The Other McCain has a good run-down on the possibility that Murkowski will turn on the GOP.

Ed Morrisey takes a look at the Delaware Senate race and the difference between a Dem/RINO and a Dem/TEA Party match up. Jim Geraghty also looks at the race – and especially RINO Castle’s record. Me? I’d rather lose with the TEA Party than win with Castle…we’ve still got enough RINOs in the Senate in case we get lonely for them.

Obama won’t extend the Bush tax cuts. Bad news for America – but it will help simplify matters for 2012.

Obama is not a dog.