No Runny Eggs

The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think.

Archive for May 29th, 2009

Open Blog Alert

by @ 23:49. Filed under The Blog.

This is the Emergency Blogging System. It has been activated because Steve is headed north of the border for some serious walleye fishing and some serious beer drinking. In his absence, he has lined up a heap of guest-bloggers, both familiar and new, to help Shoebox mind the place for the next week.

The average quality of posts is expected to increase exponentially until Steve returns on the 6th of June (that would be D-Day for the Normandy landings for those of you who know history).

You are instructed to treat the guest-bloggers far better than you treat the owner of this place. This concludes this posting from the Emergency Blogging System.

Pre-vacation auto upates

by @ 23:32. Tags:
Filed under Business, Politics - National.

Yes, there are a couple items, but not the big one that was expected today.

  • The UAW ratified the revised deal that will make it take modest concessions and a $10 billion reduction of a scheduled $20 billion cash payment into the VEBA retiree health-care fund it will run in exchange for 17.5% of the common stock in the new Government Motors, $585 million per year in dividends from prefered stock worth $6.5 billion, and a $2.5 billion promissory note with scheduled payments of $1.38 billion in 2013, 2015 and 2017. What is really telling are some quotes from UAW chief Ron Gettelfinger:

    “I’m regretful that we had to do anything, and I think it’s a disgrace that we had to do anything,” he added.

    Gettelfinger declined to comment on criticism from other GM creditors that the restructuring will favor the union. “This is negotiations. You go in and you do the best job that you can,” he said.

    I would comment, but I don’t want to leave a profanity-laced tirade for my guest-bloggers.

  • Speaking of the UAW, they’re getting a GM plant previously scheduled to close retooled and taken off the axe list so GM can build subcompacts here. Early reports were that they would be the next generation of the Geo Metr…er, overseas-only Chevrolet Matiz (renamed the Spark, with an 84-hp 1.2L engine replacing the 64-hp 1.0L engine), but others suggest the next-generation Chevrolet Aveo would also be part of the mix. If you think that, between the Aveo and the Metr…er, Spark, they’ll hit 160,000 sales per year, you’ve never driven either an Aveo or a Geo Metro. While I missed out on the Aveo, I did drive a Geo Metro once. To Chicago. With my younger sister and her boyfriend-at-the-time (it was his piece of crap). Talk about a frightening experience. I will never, EVER do that again.
  • The bankruptcy judge is taking his sweet-natured time to approve the $2 billion sale of Chrysler to Fiat (with all proceeds going to senior secured creditors, who would get 29 cents on the dollar), with the US and Canadian governments seizing 75% of the new company and awarding a 55% stake to the UAW. That will be delayed until Monday, which will leave 15 days for the expected challenges to be resolved before Fiat walks away from that deal.

I won’t be here to find out whether that mythical percentage of bondholders fall for the bait-and-switch, or the actual terms of the 363 “sale” of GM to the government. I left instructions to the rest of the gang to try to keep up with that.

Pre-vacation Hot Read – Lance Burri’s smackdown of Time on economics

by @ 21:24. Filed under Economy, Energy.

Lance Burri smacks down a Time story that claims oil is not subject to the laws of economics. The closing smash:

In order: expectation of increased demand; increased demand for futures; restriction of supply; more restriction of supply.

Okay, all of you who took basic economics in high school: what do the laws of economics say about those factors?

They say whoever wrote that article doesn’t understand basic economics.

The brilliance is how he uses Time’s article against its idiotic lede.

Right Wing News’ Rightosphere Temperature Check – May 2009 edition

by @ 18:01. Filed under Politics - National.

Once again, John Hawkins ran a blogger poll on the state of the blogosphere. I don’t know whether Shoebox either got an invite or was able to participate, but several friends of the blog, including Sister Toldjah, who will be filling in while I’m out catching walleyes, and Josh Schroeder were among the participants.

I will make you head over there for the results, but I’ll explain my votes:

  1. Do you think the GOP will gain or lose seats in the House in 2010? Gain. The post-election anti-Democrat tide is more-noticeable on a local level than it is on a statewide level, and the NRCC, by its absence in the moderate-v-conservative fight, is better positioned to take advantage than the NRSC.
  2. Do you think the GOP will gain or lose seats in the Senate in 2010? Lose. NRSC head John Cornyn still doesn’t get it, and despite the fact that at least nominally both parties have the same number of seats to defend, the Republicans have more open seats to defend.
  3. Colin Powell said the following, “Americans do want to pay taxes for services. Americans are looking for more government in their life, not less.” Do you agree? No. Over 8,000 who showed up in Madison on 4/15 (the largest non-anti-Vietnam War protest in the history of the Capitol), close to 3,000 who shoed up in Appleton, and hundreds of thousands nationwide who rallied against ever-higher taxes and ever-larger government in the middle of the week tend to send that message.
  4. Whose views do you think are more representative of your personal opinion: David Frum, Meghan McCain, John McCain, & Colin Powell or Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Tom Coburn, & Newt Gingrich? The Rush/Mark/Tom/Newt gang. Do I really need to pull out all the thousands of posts for you, or do I trust you to go through the archives yourself?
  5. Do you support the NRSC’s decision to endorse Charlie Crist in Florida’s Republican primary? No. If there had been a “Oh HELL NO!” option, I would have taken it.
  6. Do you think Barack Obama was born in Hawaii or elsewhere? Hawaii. That doesn’t change the fact that he’s pretty much a Communist.
  7. Do you think that Sonia Sotomayor will be confirmed? Yes. Even if the Pubbie Senators had the votes, they don’t have the balls to do what the ‘Rats did to Robert Bork and Miguel Estrada.

Point/Counterpoint – John Cornyn v. me on the Florida NRSC endorsement

by @ 17:27. Filed under Politics - National.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), head of the National Republican Senate Committee, accepted an invitation from RedState to explain why the NRSC decided to endorse Florida governor Charlie Crist over Florida Rep. Marco Rubio, who was Speaker of the House between 2006 and 2008, literally 15 minutes after Crist decided to enter the race. Without further delay, it’s time for the Point/Counterpoint:

Two and a half years ago, the Republican Party suffered a major blow in the 2006 midterm elections as the Democrats regained control of Congress and began laying the groundwork to take back the White House in 2008.

As a Party, we were stunned. Having failed to anticipate shifting national dynamics and the growing appetite for change in America, we lost critical voting constituencies including independents, Hispanics, and young voters nationwide. And with Barack Obama’s overwhelming victory in 2008, the Democrats acquired an even broader and stronger majority in Congress, leaving Republicans with very little power in Washington to fight against wasteful spending as our nation spiraled into an economic crisis.

You forgot “governmental conservatives” and “fiscal conservatives” in that, Senator. Those voters that were left, when faced with two parties that advocated ever-growing government, decided to go with the party with institutional experience in growing government over the Johnny-Come-Lately Party.

Specifically regarding Hispanics, how did the push for amnesty work out? Not so good.

Many rightfully wondered where our Party would turn to regain the ground we lost.

At the national level, I’m still wondering.

With an almost filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid at the helm in Washington, the Democrats have already successfully used their majority to grow our nation’s debt to more than $11 trillion in just four months. They’ve promised to wage a battle on card check, healthcare, and energy. And they may attempt to ram through the President’s new Supreme Court nominee before Republicans are given adequate time to review her record. After Senator Specter’s party switch earlier this month, the Democrats effectively control everything in Washington, leaving us with little power to push back on their liberal agenda.

There were no less than 17 times the Republicans could have stopped elements of this. Except on a couple minor points, they failed because “Republicans” like Arlen Specter (before he returned to his true party), Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins voted with Harry Reid and company.

If he becomes a Senator, Crist, with his less-than-conservative fiscal and governmental record, will be one of those allowing more of those failures to stop the Democrats in the next Congress. Specifically, he touted the stimulus package that kicked in close to $1 trillion of that $11 trillion deficit, and said that he would have voted for it if he had been Senator.

While this political environment appears dire and presents short-term setbacks for Republicans, I believe that it also provides us with a real opportunity for 2010. Next November could be a turning point for the future of our Party – but only if we unite and take advantage of this critical opportunity. That means holding the Democrats accountable for their records, providing real solutions, reaching out to new constituencies, and fielding candidates who can win in states where Republicans have traditionally failed to wage competitive races.

To get to 51 “Republican” Senators, they would not only need to hold onto all 18 seats they currently have (including 5-6 retirements), but get 11 of the 18 Democratic seats up for election. Specifically with regard to Florida, the “failed to wage competitive races” canard is not germaine because the seat is currently held by a “Republican”, and conservatives have won statewide races in Florida in the recent past.

Some believe that we should be a monolithic Party; I disagree. While we all might wish for a Party comprised only of people who agree with us 100 percent of the time, this is a pipedream. Each Party is fundamentally a coalition of individuals rallying around core principles with some variations along the way. My job as Chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee is to recruit candidates who have the best chance of winning and holding seats – and to do so in as many states as possible. Earlier this month, two Republicans candidates emerged for the open Senate seat being vacated by Mel Martinez in the Sunshine State: Marco Rubio, the young and talented Hispanic former Speaker of the state House, and Charlie Crist, the state’s popular Governor.

Judging by the actions of the NRSC over the last 5 years, the Party that is being built has many of the same core principles as the Democrats, if in a slightly-lower degree. Indeed, I’ve called it the bipartisan Party-In-Government, where the growth of government under “Republican” rule is used as an excuse by the Democrats to exponentially grow government.

That sure looks like an attempt to create a monolithic party.

There is no doubt both of these candidates have a bright future in the Republican Party. But with his record of leadership and astronomical approval ratings, including strong numbers among Republicans, Democrats and Independents, Charlie Crist represents the best chance for Republicans to hold this seat in Florida. That is why I endorsed Governor Crist for the U.S. Senate. That is also why Governor Crist was endorsed by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, outgoing Florida U.S. Senator Mel Martinez, U.S. Senator John McCain, and other leaders within the Republican Party.

Actually, it’s because Crist meshes well with the current “Democrat-Lite” attitude prevalent among the Senate Republicans.

The NRSC’s endorsement is not a reflection on Marco Rubio; it is a realistic assessment of both the 2010 Florida Senate race and the national map. With the Democrats standing on the precipice of a filibuster-proof majority, we cannot afford to lose this seat in 2010. Endorsing Charlie Crist will save the NRSC precious resources that can be used to fight in other states. It will also ensure that the strongest Republican candidate maintains control of this seat, and build our numbers with the resulting opportunity to shape policy.

As both my co-blogger Shoebox and I have said before, the Democrats got a filibuster-proof majority the moment the first countings of ballots back in November were over. Specifically with respect to this election, I assert that Crist will join the Democrats on filibuster-busting missions more often than the retiring Mel Martinez has.

While Rubio is certainly an up-and-comer in Florida, a recent Mason Dixon poll showed that he only has a 44 percent name ID among Republicans, which will ultimately force him to spend a lot more money introducing himself to Floridians. Govenor Crist, in contrast, has a 100 percent name ID among Republicans, according to the same poll. In a general election match-up with Democrat Congressman Kendrick Meek, Charlie Crist wins handily 55 percent to 24 percent.

Could someone tell me how far back Barack Obama was at this point in 2007? I seem to recall similar numbers.

We have a chance to field competitive candidates in Connecticut, Illinois, Nevada, California, Arkansas, and Colorado in 2010. But in order to succeed, we need candidates who fit their states. Winning back the majority requires not only that we hold the Democrats accountable, but also that we embrace the vast number of issues upon which Republicans agree. Failing to do so will hand the Democrats yet another victory in 2010, and deny the American people a check on Democrat-controlled government.

California in play? Surely you can’t be serious.

Seriously, again, this is not exactly germaine to Florida. Both moderates and conservatives have won statewide elections in Florida. This is just an excuse to recast the Republican Party in a Democrat-Lite mold.

If we succeed in electing Republican Senators in 2010, issues like relocating Gitmo detainees to the United States, socializing healthcare, and eliminating workers’ secret ballots may never reach the floor of the United States Senate. But we have to work together to make that a reality. The tides are turning, and Republicans have an opportunity in 2010. However, we cannot win if we are focused on tearing each other down.

Again, I point out that Crist is more likely than Martinez has (not) been to join the Democrats on several of those issues. Thus, the argument sort of rings hollow.

As for the teardown argument, by picking this fight, you and the NRSC are engaged in tearing those that want actual differences between the Republicans and the Democrats out of the Republican Party.

We have a chance in 2010 to unite around our common goal to rebuild the Republican Party and fight against the Democrats’ agenda. I hope that all Republicans will join me in that fight.

Question – if Rubio does beat Crist in the primary, will the NRSC step into Florida, or will it abandon it like it abandoned Wisconsin in 2004 when Tim Michels upset Russ Darrow in the primary here?

If you prefer, I could quote Ed Morrissey’s exit question – “If Crist has such soaring support, then he doesn’t need the NRSC to throw around its weight in the primary on his behalf. Why not let Florida decide who should represent them in the general election, and have the NRSC do its job at that point?”

[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]