I’d sat on this for a week and a half, and had bookmarked it but neglected it, but was reminded of it again today.
Rush Limbaugh read this column by The Aspen Times Weekly’s Gary Hubbell on his show on February 19th, and I think it’s dead on. I’d almost forgotten about it until Glenn Beck interviewed the column’s author Wednesday morning. A few snippets:
There is one group no one has recognized, and it is the group that will decide the election: the Angry White Man. The Angry White Man comes from all economic backgrounds, from dirt-poor to filthy rich. He represents all geographic areas in America, from urban sophisticate to rural redneck, deep South to mountain West, left Coast to Eastern Seaboard.
The Angry White Man is not a metrosexual, a homosexual or a victim. Nobody like him drowned in Hurricane Katrina â€” he got his people together and got the hell out, then went back in to rescue those too helpless and stupid to help themselves, often as a police officer, a National Guard soldier or a volunteer firefighter.
He also votes, and the Angry White Man loathes Hillary Clinton. Her voice reminds him of a shovel scraping a rock. He recoils at the mere sight of her on television. Her very image disgusts him, and he cannot fathom why anyone would want her as their leader. Itâ€™s not that she is a woman. Itâ€™s that she is who she is. Itâ€™s the liberal victim groups she panders to, the â€œpoor meâ€ attitude that she represents, her inability to give a straight answer to an honest question, his tax dollars that she wants to give to people who refuse to do anything for themselves.
Go have a look, it’s worth the read.
Biggest news of the day, hell of the year so far, was– no, not the iPod shuffle price drop. Fidel Castro announced his intention not to seek reelection by Cuba’s parliament this weekend. His younger (albiet only by five years) brother Raul will likely take over, though who knows how much longer he’ll be around either?
Raul says he wants to implement reforms, but I’m skeptical until I see it, or until someone who isn’t a Castro or any other member of his party takes control through democratic election. Scott Ott, though, thinks he has the perfect successors:
Rumors in Cuba carry the currency of mainstream media coverage in the U.S., and many Castro-supporters are eager to find new leadership that combines Castro-like charisma with iron-fisted leadership tactics and revolutionary support for government-run health care, education and industry.
â€œA Clinton-Obama ticket,â€ said one unnamed Cuba scholar, â€œcombines the power and the glory that was Fidel Castro, with the unshakable commitment to collectivism, controlled economies, and virulent resistance to the United States as a superpower.â€
I don’t know all the details on this story, so I’m opening up to commentary on the issue.
Yesterday the US Senate rejected an amendment to S.2248 (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2007) that would have removed language from the bill granting immunity to the telecommunications industry regarding wiretapping of terrorist communications, thus, essentially, granting such immunity. The bill was passed shortly thereafter. This language did not appear in the House version of the bill, so this will be hashed out in conference committee soon.
The measure will, if I’m reading this right, close up any ambiguity as to the legality of the NSA warrantless wiretapping program that President Bush enacted shortly after September 11, 2001. The imminity language, again, if I’m following this correctly, would protect the telecommunications industry from prosecution if any laws were broken before this legislation comes into effect.
I’m not sure where to come down on this issue. Maybe my understanding of criminal law is flawed, but if this bill makes the program legal, doesn’t it no longer matter if their activities were against the law before? The Bush Administration and the industry both keep saying it was legal before anyway, so if that were the case, wouldn’t the courts find in their favor anyway?
I open the topic up to your discussion, as it’s confusing the hell out of me. Keep your comments civil, or I reserve the right to edit or delete them, and I will be the sole arbiter of such.