Uh, governor, the place to make such a statement is anywhere but Iowa:

Jindal to Iowa: I’m not running for president

Strictly speaking, of course, this is ok – governor Jindal is running for re-election as governor of Louisiana at the moment, and as that election happens prior to 2012, its all good. Meanwhile, however, Jindal isn’t coming in top ranked in GOP enthusiasm at the moment:

Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are most interested in seeing Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, and Mike Huckabee run for the party’s presidential nomination in 2012. Those three received the highest scores among the 10 possible candidates evaluated in a recent Gallup Panel survey.

GOPers are clearly not blaming Palin for the loss – and rightly so; without Palin it would have been a bigger loss. McCain was crushed when the financial crisis hit and, in hindsight, all the effort post-crisis was towards lessening the loss, and in this Palin did far more than McCain. Jindal, on the other hand, is still my early favorite, though his numbers are much weaker than Palin’s – on the other hand, he’s not nearly as well known as Palin and it could be that once people get a good look at him, his numbers will rise.

HAT TIP: Hot Air

Seems that the people of Venezuela are out of step with American leftists:

President Hugo Chávez’s supporters suffered defeat in several state and municipal races on Sunday, with the opposition retaining power in Zulia, the country’s most populous state, and winning crucial races here in the capital, the National Electoral Council said.

Pro-Chávez candidates won 17 of the 22 governor’s races at stake. Many of the seats that Mr. Chavez’s supporters did win were in relatively sparsely populated rural states.

The losses were Mr. Chávez’s second setback at the polls in the past year, after the defeat of a proposed constitutional overhaul last December that would have enhanced his powers. The results will put opponents of Mr. Chávez in charge of areas with more than a third of Venezuela’s 26 million people.

In the early hours of Monday, electoral officials announced opposition victories in two important states, Táchira, on the border with Colombia, and Carabobo, with a large industrial base.

An opposition candidate also won in Sucre, a municipality in Caracas with sprawling slums that had been a symbolic bastion of support for Mr. Chávez since he rose to power a decade ago.

“These victories came in the economic and political centers of the country,” said Luis Vicente León, director of Datánalisis, a polling firm here. “They represent the most important symbols in terms of cities and population.”

It is clear that the shine has worn off of Chavez – who has spent Venezuela’s wealth in foolish arms build ups and sponsoring terrorism, and now faces the economic bill as oil prices collapse. It is now hoped that Chavez will read the writing on the wall and gracefully exit the scene. Unfortunately, Chavez might not be reasonable – one of the challenges Obama might face is what to do if Venezuela, under Chavez, becomes a full blown dictatorship as Chavez refuses to step down…

And, in the end, it might prove beneficial for the United States – that is, the more Obama follows the policies of President Bush, the better off we’ll be:

In light of the downturn, Mr. Obama is also said to be reconsidering a key campaign pledge: his proposal to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. According to several people familiar with the discussions, he might instead let those tax cuts expire as scheduled in 2011, effectively delaying any tax increase while he gives his stimulus plan a chance to work.

And just figure the odds that Obama will really let them lapse a year out from his re-election bid.

You want to know what might end up annoying me most? That by 2011 we’ll have a strong economic recovery propelled by Obama holding to Bush economic policies our mindless liberals trying to convince us that Obama was the guy who figured this all out…

Ah, well, it’ll be ok if Obama does it – the main thing to be concerned about here is the United States.

Iowahawk strikes again.

It is one of the more fun aspects of being right-of-center, ya know? While our liberal friends wet their beds over what to say and wear, we on the right get to see things as they are – and Victor Davis Hanson has 10 un-PC things to say, this one striking me as most important:

The K-12 public education system is essentially wrecked. No longer can any professor expect an incoming college freshman to know what Okinawa, John Quincy Adams, Shiloh, the Parthenon, the Reformation, John Locke, the Second Amendment, or the Pythagorean Theorem is. An entire American culture, the West itself, its ideas and experiences, have simply vanished on the altar of therapy. This upcoming generation knows instead not to judge anyone by absolute standards (but not why so); to remember to say that its own Western culture is no different from, or indeed far worse than, the alternatives; that race, class, and gender are, well, important in some vague sense; that global warming is manmade and very soon will kill us all; that we must have hope and change of some undefined sort; that AIDs is no more a homosexual- than a heterosexual-prone disease; and that the following things and people for some reason must be bad, or at least must in public company be said to be bad (in no particular order): Wal-Mart, cowboys, the Vietnam War, oil companies, coal plants, nuclear power, George Bush, chemicals, leather, guns, states like Utah and Kansas, Sarah Palin, vans and SUVs.

A very large percentage of the American population is primed for slavery – to become the mere cogs in a totalitarian machine. This is because a very large percentage of Americans simply does not know what is what. I’m stunned at times at what people don’t know, and at what they do know which isn’t so…probably 9 in 10 Americans can state at least some part of one of the many bogus conspiracy theories explaining the Kennedy assassination, but I’ll bet not 1 in a 100 can identify what happened at Leyte Gulf. Too many of us know too much that didn’t happen or is irrelevant; too many of us don’t know the things necessary to make an informed decision – and thus the continuing strength of liberalism.

Part of this state of affairs is intentional, part of it the result of sheer laziness. The intentional part comes in from those elements of the left who despise, out of ignorance, the civilization they live in, the laziness part of it comes from the fact that a government employee gets paid the same regardless of whether the kids in school learn much or learn nothing…and its much easier to teach them nothing. The upshot of all this is people who think that “rights” means the right to wear strange clothes and have sex; that freedom is the ability to be irresponsible with no consequences; who believe “question authority” means “reject authority without question”; that evil doesn’t exist; who’s knowledge of history would embarrass an 8 year old of 100 years ago. Such people are easily convinced that a cartoonish, two dimensional fairy tale reflects reality – and are also people easily convinced that a particular person and/or movement has all the answers and, furthermore, that to oppose such person and/or movement is not just mistaken, but pernicious.

My view is that a majority of Americans still knows enough of what actually exists and what actually happened to control, for the moment, the ultimate destiny of the United States. I could be wrong – we could have already tipped over into majority-servile in our population. If that is the case, then the enslavement of the American population to its ultimate destruction will proceed unchecked from now until such time as an outside power raises its banner over Washington, DC and proclaims the end of the United States of America. If such is the case, then my fellow Americans will have obtained nothing more – and nothing less – than their desire. People do get the government they deserve – and usually get it good and hard, as Mencken once noted.

As for me, it is my duty to do what is right, as best as I can determine it – even if I were to end up a minority of one. There really is no reason for anyone to ever despair. Ultimately, good will triumph over evil, even if a particular nation in existence today – and which has done much good in the world – fails to survive until that ultimate victory. The torch of reason and morality is inextinguishable, no matter how obscured it can be, at times. So, into the battle I go, convinced of victory – and pitying rather than hating those who oppose me, because they have so sadly limited themselves in the enjoyment of knowledge.

And Jerry Pournelle neatly encapsulates why this is so:

It is probably irrelevant given the election results, but my remedy is simple: any company that is too large to be allowed to fail is too large, and ought to be subject to anti-trust regulation.

In the argument about whether we should or should not bail out, I think this is Q.E.D. for those who have argued against.

Bernard Chapin sets the marker:

What is most perturbing about the election carnage is that, while their victory assures that the political left can forget about the minority party entirely, they continue to be obsessed with their opposition. That few conservatives will have much of a say over what transpires during the next four years is irrelevant. The eyes of Democrats remain affixed to the starboard side of the political spectrum. Obama expects conservatives to get religion, specifically his Change.gov religion, and guarantee that their own beliefs do not venture into the samizdat-place of ideas. We must reserve spots at The One’s pride parade, learn to stop worrying, and love the left. If it takes a lobotomy for us to get with the program then so be it. No doubt Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will assist us with public funding should we require such an operation.

On his night of yore, the president-elect reminded his serfs that it was time to move beyond judging him critically: “Let us resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long.”

His partisan statement was devoid of ambiguity. When one is pole-vaulted to the top of a status hierarchy and then defines all correction as being petty and immature, then the only conceivable alternative is for us to express fealty to the leader — who, in this case, conveniently happens to be Barack Obama. I wonder if he felt the same way in 2000 and 2004 when George W. Bush sat in the position he now occupies. Ah, but to ask the question is to answer it. Sorry to disappoint the now undisputed pal of William Ayers, but his promotion will neither change water into wine nor make conservatives embrace socialism.

Several associates of mine, aware of my red-state predilections, approached me after the black day that was November 4 and demanded my allegiance — I’m serious — proclaiming, “He’s your president so you should stand behind him.” I thanked them but rebuffed their suggestion. As mentioned above, none of these individuals ever saw fit to do the same for our 40th, 41st, and 43rd presidents, so by what precedent should they expect special treatment for their Barackstar? None of which I am aware.

And neither am I. As we are about to enter the Era of The Great Hopenchange, let me lay out what will guide me over the next four years:

1. Obama will be President of the United States. In such capacity he will have my ardent prayers that he will open his heart and mind to God and seek to do His will in the world. I will pray for his health and well being. Should I ever encounter him in person, I will show him all of the awed respect due to the man who holds the Office of the President of the United States of America.

2. Obama will be Commander in Chief of the United States armed forces. In such capacity, should he determine that American service members must engage in battle with a foreign enemy, he will have my unstinting support in leading our troops to absolute victory. Any criticism I level at him in regards to military actions will be couched in terms only designed to secure victory faster and/or at lower cost.

3. Any attempt by Obama to advance the liberal agenda in social or economic policy will be opposed by me with all my strength. I will offer him no respite and will seek by whatever legal means I can obtain to thwart him at every turn.

4. Any failure by Obama to carry out the laws of the United States of America will be condemned by me – most especially, Obama will be held to an absolute standard as regards matters of political corruption on his own part, on the part of his staff and on the part of his party. That Obama and his Democrats have run against an alleged GOP corruption indicates to me that they are bound and determined to see off any corruption on their side of the aisle – and thus even the appearance of impropriety on the part of Obama and his party will be attacked relentlessly. To put it bluntly, if we don’t see Obama swiftly calling for, say, William “Cold Cash” Jefferson to resign, I will take it as proof of corruption on the part of Obama and his Democrats – turn about is fair play, and the Democrats advised us in the Abramoff affair that guilt by association is licit in American political discourse.

5. It is my determination that Obama serve only one term – or less, if we can force him out of office sooner. I oppose his policies in the strongest possible terms and I feel it is my duty to my nation to battle him relentlessly as he seeks to impose his agenda. No attempt by Obama and his Democrats to pretend the last 8 years of nastiness didn’t happen will sway me from my goal – the Democrats invented the politics of personal destruction, and now it will be turned on them. Not, let it be known, out of a desire for revenge, but simply because the Democrats have set our politics up this way, and we on the right will not unilaterally disarm just because the MSM is having a continuing orgasm over the election of Obama.

Seems that the kook left actually thought that by backing Obama, they’d be brought in to run things:

In two politically shrewd bids to begin gaining support from the over 57 million Americans who voted for his opponent only weeks ago, Barack Obama backed Senator Joseph Lieberman’s proposition to retain chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, and the president-elect is seriously considering the appointment of Hillary Clinton, the junior senator from New York, for the secretary of state cabinet position. The harshest criticism has not come from the Right (which battled Hillary Clinton for years) but from the Left.

Segments of Obama’s more radical supporters — mostly those who were quick to embrace the most liberal viable candidate — are not happy with his most recent political ploys. In their eyes, Lieberman betrayed the party by criticizing now President-elect Barack Obama and, even worse, by backing John McCain for president and speaking at the Republican Convention. And the possibility that Clinton will be added to the high level position of secretary of state is a far cry from Obama’s call for “Change.”

Kos, from the radically left DailyKos, called the decision to keep Lieberman as chairman of his committee “idiotic.” And, in another post, the radical Left’s standard bearer derided the Democratic Party as being “spineless capitulators” for allowing Lieberman to keep his post.

It is amazing, at times, what people entirely divorced from reality can convince themselves of – such as the way the left convinced itself that a product of Chicago’s hopelessly corrupt Democratic machine would be someone other than a slick operator determined, above all else, to advance his prospects and protect his viability. Sure, lefties, Obama played your favorite music early on in the primaries – because he knew you were suckers and would fall for it. But didn’t you notice that once he had it sewn up that he was moving away from you? There will be some liberalism over the next four to eight years, but if anyone out there thinks that Kossacks and Michael Moore will have a say in what gets done, then I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell ya…

There is a sucker born every five minutes – and most of them, it would seem, wind up liberals.

All in a very good day’s work:

On Thursday, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin appeared in Wasilla in order to pardon a local turkey in anticipation of Thanksgiving. This proved to be a slightly absurd but ultimately unremarkable event. But what came next was positively surreal. After the pardon Palin proceeded to do an interview with a local TV station while the turkeys were being SLAUGHTERED in the background!! Seemingly oblivious to the gruesomeness going on over her shoulder, she carries on talking for over three minutes.

Now, if they were aborting turkeys, our liberal friends would be ok with it…just how do you get to be a sissy and a hypocrite?

UPDATE: From Mark Steyn:

I didn’t think I could like Sarah Palin more than I do, but the nancy boys at MSNBC bleating all over the screen about the Great Turkey Carnage is hilarious. This is a great caption:

TURKEYS DIE AS GOVERNOR PALIN TAKES QUESTIONS FROM MEDIA

Or was it: MEDIA DIE AS GOVERNOR PALIN TAKES QUESTIONS FROM TURKEYS.

After she’s sworn in in 2013, I hope President Palin arranges for a ritual turkey slaughter to be going on behind her at every press conference, if only during David Shuster’s questions.

Sorry, but it is getting funnier all the time – who knew that the lefty media was this whipped?

Which makes him, initially, smarter than Bill Clinton but also, initially, more of a political coward than bill Clinton:

President-elect Barack Obama will not move for months, and perhaps not until 2010, to ask Congress to end the military’s decades-old ban on open homosexuals in the ranks, two people who have advised the Obama transition team on this issue say.

Repealing the ban was an Obama campaign promise. However, Mr. Obama first wants to confer with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and his new political appointees at the Pentagon to reach a consensus and then present legislation to Congress, the advisers said.

“I think 2009 is about foundation building and reaching consensus,” said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. The group supports military personnel targeted under the ban.

Mr. Sarvis told The Washington Times that he has held “informal discussions” with the Obama transition team on how the new president should proceed on the potentially explosive issue.

Lawrence Korb, an analyst at the Center for American Progress and an adviser to the Obama campaign, said the new administration should set up a Pentagon committee to make recommendations to Congress on a host of manpower issues, including the gay ban.

In other words, “we won’t do it until we figure we’ve got a time when we’ll suffer as little damage as possible over it”. My fellow Americans who are gay and supported Obama – feel proud of your vote, now?

As for me, I’m ok with gay people serving openly in the United States military – provided it is coupled with a strict regulation against in-unit, on-duty and on-base sexual relations between unmarried, active duty service member’s, straight or gay. Meaning – if you’re in the same unit; or if you’re on duty; or if your on a military base and you are an active duty service member, you can’t have sex with any other active duty service member. Gay people are my fellow Americans and just as likely to be stout patriots and brave warriors as any other of my fellow Americans. Their sexual activities don’t please me and I urge them to the life of chastity they are called to by God, but in as much as their sexual activities don’t interfere with good order and discipline, I’ve really got nothing to say about them.

Nothing disgusted me more in the early Clinton years than the way he betrayed those millions of gay Americans who gave him their all, partially based on his pledge to allow gay Americans to serve openly in the United States military. This had nothing to do with whether gays serving is a good or bad thing – it had to do with anger over the worst sort of political betrayal, and it was merely an indicator of the way Clinton would conduct affairs through the 8 years of his term. Now Obama is doing the same thing – let me tell you, I prefer an honest liberal who works diligently to boldly advance liberal causes to a liberal who chickens out and tries to triangulate himself into a second term from day one of his first term. Obama has sunk very mightily in my estimation – not as a liberal, but as a man.

Grow a pair, Barry.

UPDATE: Gay Patriot takes note:

Once again, the lilly-livered Gay Left gets punched in the face while their tongues are firmly up the backside of the Democrat Party Establishment.

High-larious politics…. yet very disappointing, however predictable, from a gay rights policy perspective.

Just HOW many issues does the Hypocrite Rights Campaign and their fellow gay comrades have to lose before they are just laughed at and completely ignored??