From the Washington Post:

A federal judge ruled Wednesday that shooting suspect Jared Lee Loughner is mentally unfit to stand trial for the Jan. 8 rampage in Tucson that wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed six, citing expert testimony that Loughner is schizophrenic and shows a paranoid distrust of his own defense attorneys…

The man developed a desire to kill, obtained the means to kill, and then killed. This requires a high level of competence…his desire to do what he did is obviously insane. Loughner is crazy as a loon – in fact, anyone who sets out to kill except in self defense is entirely ’round the bend. Doesn’t matter if you’re killing for money or because the voices in your head told you to…its crazy. But that doesn’t mean you don’t know what you’re doing. Anyone incompetent to stand trial is someone who is also incompetent to kill except by accident. Naturally, none of the assembled experts are willing to apply a bit of common sense – not even to the point of thinking that maybe Loughner’s paranoid fears of his defense attorneys is something cooked up between him and his defense attorneys.

For crying out loud, we’ve got this man cold – he’s going to fry unless he can get off on a technicality. Presto!, here comes the technicality – he’s too crazy for us to kill him as punishment for his insane shooting spree. I would really like to pinpoint the time in American history when we decided to stop thinking – when we decided to accept a plausible lie rather than burden ourselves with the truth. Welcome to modern America where up is down and black is white.

From the AP:

Egypt will open its only crossing with the Gaza Strip this weekend, the Cairo military government announced Wednesday, significantly easing a four-year blockade on the Hamas-ruled territory but setting up a potential conflict with Israel.

Egypt’s official Middle East News Agency said the Rafah border crossing would be opened permanently starting Saturday from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. every day except Fridays and holidays…

What this means is easy access by Hamas to military hardware – they’ll be able to import the means to continue attacking Israel. This is a gigantic break with the peace treaty – a clear signal of hostility to Israel and friendship with terrorism.

The only way to solve this problem is for Israel to push the Egyptians back from the border…to reconquer part of the Sinai, in order to seal off the Gaza enclave entirely. That, to put it mildly, would be a highly risky operation. But if rockets continue to rain down on Israel from a Hamas easily supplied from Egypt, what will Israel do? Allow its people to be massacred? I don’t think so.

Reviewing the GOP loss in the NY-26 special election, Chris Chicola over at NRO’s The Corner notes that the fake “TEA Party” candidate managed to siphon votes away from the GOP by campaigning against things like NAFTA – Chicola writes:

…One of Jane Corwin’s many problems was that she did not articulate a strong free-market message to voters that might have blunted the false scare tactics of Jack Davis. Corwin failed to convey a clear response to Davis’s position that protectionism and tariffs on China would protect American jobs. In fact, tariffs on Chinese goods are nothing more than a sales tax for upstate New York. Tariffs of any kind kill American jobs, and hurt our economy. Support for free trade is the principled position that’s supported by the facts, and yet the Corwin campaign didn’t seem to be in any hurry to stand on principle. In fact, in a TV ad released by the Corwin campaign at the end of March, Corwin said she would “oppose trade agreements that just aren’t fair.”

Maybe Jane Corwin really did believe in protectionism, and that’s her right. Either way, when Republicans nominate candidates who can’t articulate and won’t stand on free-market principles, they will continue to end up with the problems they are faced with in NY-26…

For all their wonderful work, it is this sort of thing coming from our more libertarian friends which makes me grind my teeth in frustration. Its all well and good to be on and on about the benefits of free trade but the fact of the matter is that there is not a bit of free trade anywhere in the world. There never has been, never will be. Each nation seeks to take whatever advantage it can. The only nation which doesn’t fully engage in this is the United States. Take, for instance, China: what does “free trade” with China mean? Well, it means that low-quality goods made by slave labor can easily enter in to the United States to crowd out higher quality goods made not only by free Americans, but by free people around the world. Additionally, it means that any American company which can offer superior bribes to Chinese government officials can open up a sweat shop in China (there is no business done in China which does not include bribery – it is as deeply ingrained in Chinese business as it is in Russian; they call it “gift giving” and “entertainment” in China…but it is just bribes to lubricate the wheels of commerce…and whomever does it best, gets the most).

In a pure world, free trade would be the way to go – if everyone out there was playing by the same rules (no bribes, no special tax or regulatory deals, may the best business win) then having no barriers to international commerce would be in our best interest. As it is not a pure world – indeed, it is a Fallen world – then a bit of prudence in trade matters is required. We can’t just allow everyone to come in to our market in service to a theory about free trade – nor can we afford to have big trading deals with all nations; some nations are enemies actual or potential and opening our market to them merely strengthens those who may wish us harm. Trade should be as free as possible – government can never decide economic matters because government has not the competence to do so…but in between the absurdities of “free trade” and “protectionism” there is a path where wise people can tread with safety. Access to the American market for foreign nations must be in relation to America’s economic and strategic needs – understanding that our economy must be strong and our national security fully protected.

In addition to the economic and foreign policy implications of trade, there is also the purely political aspect to be understood. We lost in NY-26 because a fake TEA Party candidate managed to appeal to that constituency which is not mush-mind liberal, but also not rock-ribbed GOP. There is a large – and, I believe, growing – constituency out there which is tired of America playing the sucker in world affairs. These are the people who don’t like us pouring out billions in foreign aid when our own schools are failing. Who have no problem with using the American military to crush our enemies, but have no desire for nation-building. Who are disgusted that American military and foreign policy has to be crafted in relation to the UN, or Europe, or any other foreign power or group. These are patriotic, hard working Americans who don’t go on welfare, don’t look for a disability dodge, who serve in our military and form one of the strongest supports for small, constitutional government. And they are not about to pull the GOP lever just because – they have to be given a reason to. And in NY-26 when the GOPer weakly answered the charges against NAFTA by saying she wouldn’t support agreements that aren’t fair, it wasn’t enough to swing those voters back to the GOP. What was needed was someone with a bit of Donald Trump in them to say, “you’re not going to F-ing do that!”.

If you want the support of all the people who will fight like mad for the United States of America, then you’d better show yourself willing to fight like mad for the United States of America. If you don’t – if we GOPers don’t – then some of the fighters for America will opt for a third party even if they know it means a Democrat wins…or they’ll just stay home on election day. What all this shows is that if we want to win in 2012, we’d better get our heads out of the clouds (or out of our nether regions, in some cases) and start to lay out a fighting campaign – in Can’s magnificent phrasing, we’d better become the Defending Fathers of the United States of America.

Do we want to win in 2012? Then we’d better come up with a better response to protectionism than “free trade is great”…because all some will hear is “10% unemployment and you can’t even find a pair of shoes made in the USA is great”; and those who translate it that way may well make the difference between Obama going home in 2013, or being sworn in for a second term.

From Jim Geraghty over at NRO’s Campaign Spot:

…CNN polled New Hampshire Republicans, and found more or less what we would expect: Mitt Romney at 32 percent, Ron Paul at 9 percent, Newt Gingrich and Rudy Giuliani at 6 percent, Sarah Palin at 5 percent, and a lot of candidates tied at 4 percent: Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Mitch Daniels [who announced he wasn’t running on the last day of the poll], Jon Huntsman, and Tim Pawlenty. Another 17 percent are undecided…

Geraghty’s opinion is that Romney’s numbers reflect name recognition and that everyone else needs to brush up on that. Geraghty is usually extraordinarily perceptive on these matters, but that is just silly – Palin and Giuliani have near universal name recognition in the United States and among Republicans only someone like Cain might still be a bit of an unknown. No, this isn’t name recognition – this is support. Probably soft support as it is very early and Romney’s main strength is “acceptability”…we’ll see how he does in the rough and tumble. But, still, this is good news for him.

My main issue with Romney isn’t RomneyCare or his straying in to liberal positions while he was governor of uber-liberal Massachusetts – it is that he seems a man who wants to meet the Democrats on the level and part on the square. In other words, he wants to get along with people and work across the aisle…you know, like a respectable Republican should. The problem with this that President Bush tried to do precisely that and Democrats lacerated him for his efforts and, additionally, now is not the time to be nice. It is time for a revolution – we need to gut liberalism. We need to crush it, destroy it, discredit it and remove it from power…cut off its funds, end its special privileges and so thrust it in to outer political darkness that it can never threaten the United States, again. I don’t believe Romney is up to this task – or even realizes that is the task of the next President.

Perhaps Romney can convince me otherwise. If he does wind up with the GOP nomination, I hope he does so convince me. But until he does, he won’t get my support in the primary…of course, up against Obama he’ll have my enthusiastic support because we simply must get that dunderhead out of office. But I’d rather be enthusiastically supporting a candidate who knows what needs to be done.

From USA Today:

President Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron kick off two days of diplomacy this morning by pledging to work against repressive regimes in the Middle East — by force if necessary.

In a sternly worded column in The Times of London, the two leaders liken the effort to free Arab people from authoritarianism to the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall in the 1980s.

They liken their personal efforts to two leaders who came before them: Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher…

Barry, David – you two have delusions of grandeur. I hate to break this to you, but Obama you aren’t even in the same league as Ronald Reagan and as for you, Cameron, Margaret Thatcher had more balls in her little finger than you do in your whole body. To put it mildly, ushering in Moslem Brotherhood government in the Arab world is not quite like bringing down the USSR. It is also a bit of a claim to fame to have rescued an economy from destruction – as Reagan and Thatcher did – than to have driven it towards collapse. Just sayin’.

If you two nice boys will just sit down and shut up until more competent people can replace you, we’d be very appreciative and may even allow you out in public after you leave office.

You can donate at the Red Cross, Catholic Charities, Salvation Army or any other charitable group you prefer and which is engaged in relief efforts.

Just a terrible series of disasters, and they aren’t over, yet.

From the Washington Examiner:

Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, whose presidential campaign fizzled in 2008, is leaning toward another race for the White House, according to a close associate. New York Republican Rep. Peter King, who has known Giuliani for more than 40 years, says the former mayor “is very close to saying he’s going to run.”

“If he were to make the decision today, he would run,” says King…

Giuliani has many handicaps – not least his socially liberal views in a party dominated by social conservatives – but he also brings many strengths to the table. His strongest suit is sheer executive ability to contrast with Obama’s floundering, as well as the continued luster of is performance on 9/11.

One thing no one should do is count anyone out – either as possible nominee or as possible Presidential victor. The 2012 race is anyone’s to win – all it takes is putting together the right message and showing a willingness to batter down the walls of the Ruling Class in DC. Giuliani can do that – and may be able to do it better than most as he’s a real fighter. We’ll see how this goes.

No doubt about it – from Post Politics:

In announcing his campaign for president in Iowa Monday, former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty placed a big bet on boldness.

He called for a phasing out — albeit gradual — of federal ethanol subsidies, a move long considered a political death wish in a state with such a large agricultural community.

But, Pawlenty didn’t stop there. In his speech he detailed how he will travel this week to Florida — one of the oldest (by age) states in the country — to call for fundamental reform of Medicare and Social Security, to Washington to take on alleged largess in the federal government and to New York to make clear the era of bailouts of the financial industry is over…

That does take a pair of big, brassy ones. Of course, this is what Pawlenty must do to emerge from the pack. He’s little known outside political-junkie circles and he’ll need a sudden upsurge of enthusiastic, TEA Party support to have a shot – and if being gutsy costs him early in Iowa, it may still do him well in New Hampshire and South Carolina. All in all, its a good move – and, also, the right thing to do.

Because we really do need a Presidential candidate who is pledged to take on the status quo – even those parts of its ostensibly allied with the GOP. Our nation faces a bleak, impoverished future unless we get a handle on all the wasteful government spending – especially and including such long-time sacred cows as farm subsidies and Medicare. We just can’t keep spending as we have – to put it bluntly, if we want to help farmers and elderly and sick people, then massive amounts of spending will have to stop so that we can not only balance the budget, but find the funds to provide the services people genuinely need (for instance, each person scamming Medicare for what amounts to a welfare check is preventing that much aid from going to someone who really needs it).

We’ll see how far Pawlenty goes – first in how firm he is in defending himself from the firestorm he’s probably raised, secondly in how well the GOP base responds to this bit of leadership.

From Zero Hedge:

Just because the US is having so much success convincing the world its debt is money good (but don’t anyone dare count the $6+ trillion in GSE debt to the total US debt), the good old US of A has now decided to backstop the debt of… Egypt. Bloomberg reports: “Egypt plans to raise $1 billion by selling Eurobonds this year to diversify borrowing and finance a widening budget deficit after its economy was rocked by the worst political crisis in 30 years. The five-year bonds will be backed by a U.S. “sovereign guarantee,” Finance Minister Samir Radwan said by telephone from Cairo today…President Barack Obama promised last week $2 billion in loan guarantees and debt forgiveness.” …

So, if Egypt defaults on this new debt – either via economic collapse or just the Moslem Brotherhood going “screw the infidels” – guess who picks up the tab? Yes, that’s right – you and me, dear Americans. Who in heck figured this one out? Where in the Obama Administration is the person who said, “sure, we’re teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, but it is vital for American policy that the increasingly Islamist government of Egypt get free money from us”? I’d really like this person found – so we can tar and feather him and run him out of town on a rail.

For crying out loud, its like our government is living in an alternate reality. Which, I guess, they are – it is the liberal view of the world, writ large. Doesn’t matter what is happening, someone got the idea that since Egypt is increasingly buddying up to Iran and the terrorists, it is time for Uncle Sucker to shell out some more money.

Makes me weep for our nation – and, my goodness, 2012 just can’t get here fast enough…

From a Washington Post article reviewing the various GOP candidates – a quote from the Democrats:

…Said one adviser to the Obama reelection campaign, who spoke on the condition of anonymity: “Through the process of winning that nomination, they will achieve stature, and by the reality of having won that nomination, they will be competitive with the president at fundraising.”

Added another: “Unless it’s Palin or Gingrich, we expect a very close race no matter who emerges.”

Carter’s people were certain that unless the GOP went and did something silly like nominating Reagan, it would be a close race. Given this, it is time we all reviewed Palin and Gingrich with a fresh eye…