Patterico's Pontifications


Monday’s Dinner in Chicago

Filed under: General — DRJ @ 9:19 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

An invitation from JD:

“There is a group of us meeting for dinner tomorrow night in the Chicagoland area. We are having dinner with happyfeet, daleyrocks, nk, myself, Karl, geoffb, and hopefully Dmac and carlitos as well. Anyone that would like to join us just let me know, and I will shoot you the info.”

Contact JD (johndallenATsbcglobalDOTnet) or nk (njkritAThotmailDOTcom) if you are interested. NK says bring your own bail money and daleyrocks said something about a kilt


Happy Birthday, Leviticus (Updated: and Apogee)

Filed under: General — DRJ @ 8:46 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

Happy 20th Birthday to Leviticus.

UPDATE: Happy Birthday to Apogee, too.


Kim Jong-Il May Have Pancreatic Cancer

Filed under: International — DRJ @ 7:18 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

South Korean YTN television reports North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il has pancreatic cancer.

The Mayo Clinic says pancreatic cancer often has a poor prognosis and is the leading cause of cancer deaths, while the National Cancer Institute states pancreatic cancer can only be treated if it is discovered before it has spread, “when it can be removed by surgery.”

The top-ranked U.S. News cancer hospital, the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center states that “more than 95% of patients diagnosed with the disease die from it, and one-half of those deaths occur in the first six months after diagnosis.” But there is some hope as noted at the M.D. Anderson link, and I assume Kim could go to China for this treatment.


This Week, Obama’s Lucky Number is Not 7

Filed under: Obama — DRJ @ 3:34 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

Seven is often considered a lucky number: In gambling, 3 sevens are a winner on old Vegas-style poker machines and they total 21, a winning hand in blackjack. In religion, Hindus have the seven major chakras, Jews and Christians honor the seventh day as God’s day of rest, and Catholics have the seven virtues, deadly sins, and sacraments. Seven is repeated on religious calendars and in history, and Microsoft hopes seven is lucky as it releases its new operating system Windows 7.

But, for now, seven is not Barack Obama’s lucky number. His Daily Presidential Approval Index has been minus 7 for three consecutive days and in negative territory for nine straight days, excluding the July 4th holiday.

Obama is concluding a highly publicized week-long trip to Russia, Italy, and Ghana. In July 2008, as a candidate, Obama also traveled overseas on a highly publicized trip but it didn’t do much for his polls then either. I don’t think many Americans care what the world thinks about our Presidents. As James Carville said during Bill Clinton’s Presidential campaign, it’s the economy, stupid.


Obama Decides the German Election

Filed under: International,Obama — DRJ @ 1:28 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

German Chancellor Angela Merkel is running for re-election in 3 months and according to Barack Obama she’s sure to be re-elected:

“Walking to a joint press conference on June 26, Merkel told Obama that she “was preparing her election campaign”, according to news magazine Spiegel, citing footage captured by public television channel ZDF but only partially released.

Turning to Merkel with a grin, Obama is quoted as saying: “Oh, you’ve already won. I don’t know you’re always worrying.”

According to Spiegel, a surprised-looking Merkel laughed briefly.”

Does this count as meddling? It might to Merkel’s opponent:

“But for her challenger in the September 27 election, Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the reported comments are no laughing matter.

Spiegel reports a source close to Steinmeier as saying the minister “thinks a great deal of Obama but even an American president is not a prophet”.

Diplomacy and flexibility regarding foreign affairs are not Obama’s strong suit. Supporting the status quo abroad is.


Democrats Looking Backwards (Updated x2)

Filed under: Government,Obama — DRJ @ 12:22 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

The AP reports Attorney General Eric Holder is considering a special prosecutor for a criminal investigation of Bush-era CIA torture allegations. An anonymous Justice Department source claims Holder will decide in the next few weeks, but Justice Department spokesman Matt Miller said Holder acknowledged “it would be unfair to prosecute any official who acted in good faith based on legal guidance from the Justice Department.”

This suggests to me the Obama Administration wants to go after the big Bush Administration fish, not the little CIA fish. The mere possibility of a Bush-related investigation is red meat that will keep the liberal base satiated during a time of sinking polls and bad economic news.

In addition, Democratic Senators Feinstein and Durbin are considering investigations into whether VP Cheney and Bush administration “broke the law by concealing a CIA counterterrorism program from Congress.” GOP Senator John Cornyn responded that the Cheney assertion “looks to me suspiciously like an attempt to provide political cover” to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who accused the CIA of lying to her about its use of waterboarding.

UPDATE 1: Sweetness & Light on how quickly the Democrats leaked information on the counterterrorism program to the New York Times:

“And less than two weeks later this information shows up on the front page of the New York Times. What a triumph for all involved.

Oh, and never mind that this secret counter terrorism program never even was implemented. We must warn the terrorists, just in case. And we must excoriate those who were trying to protect us.”

UPDATE 2Jules Crittenden has a lot more thoughts on Cheney, plus this great Crittenden quote on what may be motivating Obama:

“John Cole at Balloon-Juice is indignant no one’s been indicted yet.

I’m not sure what the point of Obama even having an agenda if they don’t go about holding people accountable for what they have done here. Otherwise, we’ll just be going through this again in the future.

Someone tell Cole it might be because Obama doesn’t want to push for indictments is because he doesn’t want to get indicted himself. Especially since he got on board with Bush’s GWOT or whatever they are calling these days. Then, there’s the question of whether you can indict someone for not breaking the law.”


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0638 secs.