One Voice: "Literally" Slip-Slidin' Away!

Ahhhh, yes! Remember? That "ONE VOICE" thingy?

"I need ya! Jon needs ya! . . . Are ya fired up? Are you ready to go?"



And now there is this one from the RNC, below . . . featuring a frenzied Sheriff Joe, telling us how, right at the beginning, Jon Corzine was "literally" the "first guy I called!"

Sez Joe:

"He's the smartest guy that I know, in terms of the economy and on finance. I really mean this!"

And how about Joe's priceless closer, huh?

"Jon was right ... C'mon, I could start a mantra ... Jon was right! Jon WAS RIGHT!"

(ht: Tina Korbe at HotAir here.)

And then, you'll want to go here, starting at 928 to hear the "one recent voice" of Jon Corzine:

" . . . Obviously, on the forefront of everyone's mind, including mine, are the varying reports that customer accounts have not been reconciled. I was stunned when I was told on Sunday October 30th, two-thousand and eleven, that MF could not -- MF Global could not account for many hundreds of millions of dollars of client money. I remain deeply concerned about the impact of the unreconciled frozen funds have on MF Global's customers, and others. I simply do not know where the money is, or why the accounts have not been reconciled to date. As the chief executive officer of the MF Global holding company, I ultimately had overall responsibility for the firm. . . ."

" . . . literally . . . ?"

Makes you kind of wonder what these guys know that he didn't know.

Joe, Stand Up, Joe! Let 'Em See Ya!

UPDATE: below:

03/23/2011: Anyone heard from Mr. "I teach separation of powers" Joe Biden today?

Here's what he said he and his experts believed, back in 2007 . . . that a Congressionally unauthorized attack on Iran would have been an "impeachable offense" unless we were attacked or unless there were proof that we were about to be attacked, and that he would have personally "led the effort" to pursue the matter and to seek the impeachment of the President.



Did you catch that? He told Chris Matthews,

"I want to stand by that comment. The reason I made the comment was as a warning."

Okay. Stand up, Joe! Let's hear from you about the military attack on Libya, the one that has no congressional authorization.

UPDATE: John Hinderaker at Powerline has now posted the video too. He notes wrily,

"I'm beginning to understand why liberals believe so fervently in a 'living' Constitution. They need it to change from year to year, depending on who is in office."

Indeed.

Mayor Harry, Joe Biden, and the Baaaaaaby Ruth Man

UPDATE III: 03/22/2011: Here was an item I had missed from Michael Falcone, the ABC reporter who got this story. He questioned the Amtrak CEO, Joseph Boardman who, among others, bailed from the Amtrack train when it stalled in Baltimore. Boardman admitted they had pulled one faulty transformer off line for maintenance when a second one then punked out on them. So, they have applied for more federal funds to fix the problem! (ht, Daily Caller, here.)

@michaelpfalcone
Before he abandoned ship #Amtrak CEO said they took 1 transformer offline for wknd maintenance. 2nd one died

When he asked Boardman about it, the CEO said Amtrack would go back and seek additional federal funds for the "fix" to ensure that would not happen again. Of course they will! And Wilmington Station's new namesake, Joe Biden will no doubt work to find the funds for them!

Here was Falcone's tweet on the subject back on the 19th:

@michaelpfalcone
#Amtrak CEO tells me he has applied for extra federal funding to ensure that outages like today's don't happen

UPDATE II: 03/21/2011: Yet another great capper to a story that will just not quit! As if the considerable cost overruns from the federal "Stimulus" project being named for VP Joe Biden were not maddening enough, we now learn that, because of an electrical outage, an Amtrak train became indefinitely stalled in Baltimore on Saturday. It was carrying a few Wilmington-bound Amtrak and other railroad officials as passengers, who had to get off the stalled train in Baltimore, and drive by car, in order to make it on time to their destination -- the dedication ceremony in Wilmington of the new Joe Biden train station . . . owned by Amtrak!

ABC's Michael Falcone points out that (ht Ed Morrissey @ Hot Air) because of an electrical power outage in Baltimore, in order to make the Saturday dedication of the Joe Biden train station party on time, three railroad "bigs" -- Amtrak President and CEO Joseph Boardman, Federal Railroad Administration chief, Joseph Szabo, and another Amtrak board member, Jeff Moreland -- all had to get off the station-stalled train, and actually drive the remaining distance by car to make it on time for the newly-refurbished train station dedication ceremony in Wilmington, DE!

Falcone also noted that because of the electrical outage, passengers who remained on the stalled train were further inconvenienced by the inablity to use the toilets on the train.

That, of course, was an immediate reminder to me of a funny little "ditty" which was at some point improvidently set to the tune of an otherwise perfectly lovely musical piece by Antonin Dvorák, Humoresque Op. 101, No. 7 in G Flat Major, which ditty I recall from my childhood, and (along with a very minor and relevant amendment which I have just supplied) the first verse went something like this:

♫ Passengers will please refrain, ♪
From flushing toilets while the train, ♬
Is standing stranded in the station,
I love you! ♪

♫ We encourage constipation, ♪
While the train is in the station, ♬
Darling, moonlight makes me
Think of you! ♪

UPDATE: below, 03/17/2011: Amtrak owned and federal stimulus-funded train station rehab in Wilmington, DE, just named for Vice-President Joe Biden, came in $5.7 million OVER budget. The rehabilitated train station is being named for long-time train rider, "Amtrak" Joe Biden.

Two stories dominate the perceived "inappropriate naming" of places of public accommodation news today, one out of Fort Wayne, Indiana, and the other out of Wilmington, Delaware.

The Indiana story has been around for a while, and arises out of the reluctance on the part of the current town fathers of Fort Wayne to honor the results of an "on-line" public poll that had resulted in a majority of votes cast in favor of naming the new government facility for a former mayor of the City, one Harry Baals.

Harry, a Republican, who was born in 1886, was indeed the long-time Mayor of Fort Wayne, having served between 1934 and 1947, and then again from 1951 until his death in 1954. Surely, he was a man deserving of an honor for his long service.

There really only seems to have been one glitch. According to the Fox News story (ht, The Daily Caller here:

"The former mayor pronounced his name "balls," although his descendants pronounce their name 'bales.'"

That was apparently enough to convince the current administration that calling the new government facility the "Harry Baals Government Center" might lead to some measure of ridicule. Though a City Hall spokesman stated that the reason was a reluctance to name the facility after a person, they also rejected the second-place recommendation from the digital plebiscite, which was to call it "Thunder Dome." Instead the new facility will henceforth be known simply as "Citizens Square."

The second story, however, is truly obscene. It involves the newly refurbished train station in Wilmington, Delaware, a project which was paid for using federal "stimulus funds" obtained from the Obama/Biden Administration under the jurisdiction of the federal ARPA program. According to the somewhat obsequious story -- "Biden's Name to Grace New Rail Station" -- posted by Catherine Brown of the Philadelphia NBC affiliate, the station is being named the Joseph R. Biden Railroad Station "in honor" of the sitting Vice-President, a perennial train-rider. She also notes that an "open-house" party for the public will mark the re-opening occasion.

"Wilmington Station underwent a nearly two-year, $37.7-million renovation. Funding for the project included $20 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act."

This incident is obviously replete with conflict of interest, both on it's face and through a series of conflicting connections to the Vice President. For example, consider the following according to a recent post on the Family Security Matters blog by Michelle Malkin, entitled "Who's Policing Amtrak Joe Biden's Rail Boondoggles?":

"Compounding matters now, cronyism runs rampant in the federal rail bureaucracy. Biden's lobbyist son, Hunter, sits on the Amtrak board of directors. Amtrak Vice President Eleanor Acheson is a close pal of -- you guessed it -- Joe Biden. She oversees the very Law Department accused of interfering repeatedly with the taxpayer advocates in the inspector general's office. Acheson hired Biden's former Senate staffer Jonathan Meyer as her deputy general counsel. Meyer called it a 'happy coincidence.'"

To put it bluntly, Joe Biden would be an utter embarrassment for allowing this kind of self-congratulatory nonsense to happen. But his connections throughout the "federal rail bureaucracy" make it an absolute scandal.

Knowing of Biden's embarrassing and thoroughly unearned ego, one can imagine he'd probably even consider pushing to add in a digital kiosk, say one where visitors might have an opportunity to listen to any of a series of selections . . . recorded quotations from Joe.

Just think about it, if you will. You push a button and hear . . . "I think I probably have a much higher I.Q. than you do, I suspect . . ."

This kind of official self-praise, of having buildings named after yourself is what they used to do in communist countries – e.g., for Uncle Joe Stalin back in the old Soviet Union -- or today in other authoritarian or totalitarian regimes, or for royalty, where fostering the cult of the personality of the "leader" as the object of public affection.

I grew up in the State of Delaware, in an area called Edgemoor, just north of Wilmington. As a child, I took the train to Philadelphia or New York on occasion, or down to Washington every once in a while. During several years I spent working, or in college, most of them in and around New York, I rode the train from Wilmington Station quite frequently.

It is a quiet station along the Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington line.

The one stand out train-related memory I have, from all those years ago, was of a guy who would board the train at the 30th street Station in South Philly, and who would ride up to the North Philadelphia station (or visa-versa if the train was headed south), hawking a few impulse items to the passengers between those two stops, eking out a bare living for himself and his family.

"Maaaagazines!" he'd announce, drawing out the word as he entered each train car with his bag of stuff. And then he would blurt out his almost magical come-on . . . "Clark Bar, Baaaaaaby Ruth!" he’d temptingly drone. Of course, every child passenger alive wanted a "Baby Ruth" a candy bar with its own storied history. I’d bet that over the years thousands of kids happily agreed to ride the train, on the outside chance they might end up with one of those tempting chocolate-covered peanut, caramel and nougat candy treats.

Now there was a working man who deserved to have a train station named after him! I never knew his name, but generations of train riders were entertained and surely tempted by the man with the "Baaaaaaaby Ruth!"

He'd be my vote for the honor.

UPDATE: below, 03/17/2011: According to the Washington Times, the train station in Wilmington, Delaware which re-opened in December, but which is being officially re-opened at a ceremony and party to be held on Saturday, was lavishly renovated in the course of a project that was heavily underwritten by federal funds ($20 million of $37.7) using American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), or "Stimulus Act" funds.

In the end, reports the paper, the project came in $5.7 million over budget.

The rehabilitation project for the Amtrak station was a pet project of long-time train rider, Vice-President Joe Biden, the so-called Obama Administration "stimulus sheriff," whose family members and political friends heavily populate the political table of organization for Amtrak (see above).

According to the paper, the exact breakdown of the costs remains quite "murky."

Not only did the White House cite the projected cost at $32 million, but Amtrak used that figure in a 2009 press release documenting its Delaware projects.

But Ms. Hunter, the Amtrak spokeswoman, said the company’s original budget for the renovation was actually $35.7 million: with $20 million from stimulus money; $12 million from Delaware’s Department of Transportation; and $3.7 million from Amtrak itself. Ms. Hunter said the final cost reached $37.7 million when Amtrak added $2 million worth of work that was not part of the original scope of the project.

In its official Recovery Act report, Amtrak gave a different figure altogether - $36 million to the dollar - for the refurbishing project. And it said the breakdown in funding was $20 million in stimulus funds and $4 million from a 2009 federal grant, in addition to the $12 million from Delaware DOT.

Joker Joe Joltin' BO's "Mo?"

UPDATE, below (hint - Pandora's Box"):

Apparently Joe Biden's public gaffes and his private antics within the White House have become enough of a problem that the Obama administration has publicly let the cat out of the bag to Newsweek journalist, Richard Wolffe, who has been given significant interview access in the White House, including with the President himself. He has a new book set for release on June 2nd, to be entitled:

Renegade: The Making of a President

Well, here's a little beauty for you . . . that new book according to Fox News reporter, Bill Sammon, includes details about how President Obama has actually had to privately dress down Joe Biden for his lack of discipline, including for having made what the President viewed as out-of-line comments during cabinet meetings.

Sammon's FOXNews.com article today is:

Obama 'Distracted' by Biden's 'Indiscipline,' Book Asserts

The president is so "distracted by his vice president's indiscipline" that he has been forced to rebuke privately Vice President Biden, according to a new book by Richard Wolffe

Thursday, May 21, 2009 President Obama is so "distracted by his vice president's indiscipline" that he has been forced to rebuke privately Vice President Joe Biden, according to a new book by Newsweek journalist Richard Wolffe, who interviewed Obama a dozen times.

"He can't keep his mouth shut," Wolffe quotes a "senior Obama aide" as saying of the gaffe-prone Biden in "Renegade: The Making of a President," set for release June 2.
. . .

(more)

You have to read the whole thing. Sammon gets into a few of the juicy details, including about the dressing down.

Well, something just seems wrong with that book title, no? Hmmmm . . . let me think . . . okay.

Here it is . . . my recommended alternative title for Wolffe's book:

Judgment: The Selection of a Vice-President

There. Now it makes much more sense!

UPDATE: Joe has blurted again, this time in favor of the position taken by his predecessor, Dick Cheney! As pointed out by the U.S. Editor for the British newspaper, the Telegraph, Joe, who confirmed he was "out of the loop," has now said:

"But, look, what the president said is that this is going to be hard. It's like opening Pandora's Box. We don't know what's inside the box."

He also said that "to the best of my knowledge" the number of prisoners "who are a real danger who are not able to returned or tried" has "not been established" by the Obama administration.

So he basically just confirmed his predecessor Dick Cheney's analysis that the decision was taken "with little deliberation, and no plan". (emphasis added to identify quotes)

Yep. Thanks, and a shout out to Joe from Dick Cheney will no doubt soon be forthcoming! Makes you wonder if there is a woodshed on the grounds of the United States Naval Observatory?

"The Heart of the American Dream is Aspiration"

Others have said it, but few so persuasively as Mark Steyn, as he had also elaborated in an interview with Hugh Hewitt last Thursday. So, I'll say this. By damn, Mark Steyn is a great American, even if he is a Canadian! It was there where he and Macleans Magazine were recently officially accused by the Canadian authorities of . . . well, telling the truth! Now Mark points out that Joe the Plumber has managed, where all else had failed, to penetrate through the fog and, at least momentarily, induce Senator Obama to blurt out a little truth.

To Mark, the brief conversation between the two men revealed the contrast between Joe's world and the

hermetically-sealed environment that Obama lives in, in which his contact with the real world involves getting $50 million dollars from William Ayers through the Annenberg Challenge to spread, radicalizing Chicago schoolchildren. That’s not how real people spread the wealth around. And I would go back, you know, to Joe the Plumber’s point, that actually, if you just let people spread their own wealth around, they’ll make more sensible decisions than, for example, Congress interfering in the mortgage and credit market by making certain requirements of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and all the rest of it. Joe the Plumber, the three hundred million Joe the Plumbers across the land, will make better decisions on that than the federal government will.

Mark elaborates further in National Review Online:

The heart of the American Dream is aspiration. That’s why people came here from all over the world. Back in eastern Europe, the Joe Bidens and Diane Sawyers of the day were telling Joe the Peasant: "Hey, look, man. You’re a peasant in the 19th century, just like your forebears were peasants in the 12th century and your descendants will be peasants in the 26th century. So you’re never gonna be earning 250 groats a year. Don’t worry about it. Leave it to us. We know better." And Joe the Peasant eventually figured that one day he’d like to be able to afford the Premium Gruel with just a hint of arugula and got on the boat to Ellis Island. Because America is the land where a guy who doesn’t have a 250-grand business today might just have one in five or ten years' time.

I'm with Joe the Plumber, not Joe the Hair-Plugger. He's articulated the animating principles of America better than anyone on either side in this campaign. Which is why the O-Bots need to destroy him.

Months and months of examination by the campaign by John McCain, and by the campaign of Hillary Clinton before him, had fundamentally failed to penetrate to the core of what makes Barack Obama tick. And the mainstream press has largely provided him ample cover. As a result, in spite of all that probing, the candidate had essentially remained a mystery about what really motivates him, even regarding his plans for economic recovery.

But in one small, and actually very friendly conversation along a rope line in Ohio the other day, Joe the Plumber asked the candidate for a justification of his proposed tax plan. Mind you, he did not go seeking Obama. Obama's campaign came to Joe's neighborhood. At one point in the conversation, Joe even asked him why not a flat tax. Make no mistake, by what he asked, Joe was challenging the very core of Obama's economic "vision" for America. And Barack Obama uncharacteristically let his guard down just a little bit when he responded candidly and told Joe the Plumber at one point,

"I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody!"

Of course, what he meant by that is when the government spreads the wealth around, not when the economy grows because government gets out of the way.

I was curious to find out if any other well-known personality had slipped like that. You know, whether someone blurted out something similar.

So, I linked to Brainy Quote and searched for anyone who had made a similar comment, any quote containing the phrase, "spread the wealth around," or even "spread the wealth."

No dice.

Then I tried the "Quote Garden." Nothing there either.

Nor at "Quoteland." As for any matches, "none found" they said, to both searches.

Back in very early 2002, the leftwing site, The Democratic Underground, posted an opinion piece under this title: "Enron Spread the Wealth Around Washington" which obviously put any such activity in a very bad light indeed. Spreading the wealth to those in government -- nothing good about that!

About the closest I could come to a parallel quotation, was from famous utopian thinker ("New Atlantis"), Sir Francis Bacon, 1561-1626, who did contribute rather significantly to the development of the scientific method. On the general subject at hand -- spreading money -- he once reputedly said (ht. Oxford Dictionary of Quotations, 2 Ed.):

"Money is like muck, not good except to be spread."

But that too does not really seem to be the exact point Barack Obama was making. Bacon , who was appointed the Lord Chancellor in 1621, certainly did not specify that the spreader-in-chief should be the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who in his day was one Fulke Grenville.

And, for all of his contributions to the development of scientific thinking, that negative sounding comment is entirely understandable, as Bacon was notoriously bad with money throughout his entire life. As pointed out at Wikipedia,

"In spite of a generous income, old debts and spendthrift ways kept him indebted."

Bacon's public career ended in disgrace when he was accused of bribery (there's that "spreading the wealth" to those in government again), for which he paid significant fines, and narrowly avoided being stripped of all his titles.

So, it would seem that we can conclude this particular formula of Obama's -- that governmental "spreading the wealth" that is "good for everybody," is an original characterization by our newly coined, "Senator Government."

He owns it.

Looks like Barack Obama did not inadvertently pull a Joe Biden plagiarism when he let that one rip!

"The Funniest Fifteen Minutes
of Your Life, or Any Other!"

Below are the intentionally comedic routines of both Senators John McCain and Barack Obama delivered at the annual Al Smith Dinner, held at the Waldorf Astoria in New York last night.

Each man delivered a good routine, and both were punctuated by self-deprecating humor, as well as friendly jibes aimed at the other fellow.

We thought John's performance was stellar. Great delivery, and a boffo finish.

Obama was good, but perhaps just a little too much giggling at his own punch lines. One of the great ephemisms of humor is that when a comic is succeeding, he's killing the audience, while the comic himself remains deadpan. But if he has to chuckle in order to telegraph the punch lines, the humor has obviously fallen flat.

Our title, above, is taken from the closer of the routine delivered by Senator John McCain, who went first. At the point where he delivered that line, John was pretending to have gotten a peek at a copy of the upcoming Obama routine. And he was warming up the crowd for what they should expect from the impending comedy debut of Senator Obama.

Of course by doing so, he was mockingly setting up the Illinois Senator, with wildly over-stated expectations, right after saying that to do so would be completely unfair.

Great stuff!

P.S. In each case, you should watch the first embed all the way to the end, and then click on the second embed. There is no need to click on the ghost white "switch" internally embeded right near the end of the first McCain video clip.

The first half of John McCain's routine begins here, with the second half posted embedded just below it.



The second half of John's routine begins here:



John was followed by Barack Obama, with the first half posted here:



The second half of Senator Obama's routine is posted here:



In addition to the McCain closer, there was one other telling moment during the evening which you may have noticed as well. After paying his obligatory personal respects to Al Smith, Senator McCain began talking about the wonderful work of the foundation named after the man.

It comes at about 4:04 of the second McCain clip. McCain ticked off all the foundation's work for the poor and needy, including their abiding respect for the dignity of life, and "especially your gallant defense of the unborn" all work which John said he can be counted on to support as "an ally."

His comment was followed by very warm general applause from the audience, and the camera panned over (at about 4:27) to record the reaction of Senator Obama. Note that he was indeed applauding, but very inconspicuously so, with his hands, for the first time, under the table.

Nicety?

A Switch in the Offing . . . Or Hillary As Paladin?

The Anti-Joementum Declaration Against Interest

Update: On 9/11, 4 pm, below.

Why did Joe Biden go out yesterday and make a big point of saying that Hillary Clinton would be a better candidate, Presidential or Vice Presidential, than he would? On the surface, it was as if Joe was saying, "Vote for me! I'm the Best Man for the job . . . just NOT the Best Person!"

A stranger year in American politics would be hard to imagine -- pun intended. That's because two relative strangers have been dominating the limelight of our national political landscape, each with rising star power -- first we had Barack Obama, and now we have Sarah Palin.

Less than one year ago, few pundits would have opined that Hillary Clinton would not end up as the Democrat nominee for President. It would have been like betting against the Yankees during Grapefruit. While Barack Obama had rising appeal within the Democrat party, who would have guessed he would snatch the nomination away from the Clinton machine? Who, other than his inside operators who recognized the inherent short-sightedness in the front-loaded Clinton plan that depended on her being "crowned" right after Super Tuesday. Hillary was simply the inevitable candidate. Oh, he might end up as a daring choice for her for the number two slot . . . but as the nominee?

Seemingly impossible. Yet he did it.

And on the side of the political coin, one year ago John McCain's political star appeared to be fading. Politics abhors a has-been, and that's what he seemed to be at the time. While others had supported the counter-insurgency strategy in Iraq, John McCain had very demonstrably and personally gone out on a limb in support of the strategy, in what had become a very unpopular war with an impatient public. Hell, he even doggedly propped the "surge" up as a centerpiece of his campaign. As for his staff, he cleaned house. His campaign began to look uncomfortably like a white elephant sale.

But John came back in spades, securing the nomination surprisingly fast. Then, having become the unlikely candidate early in the primary season, who would have seriously guessed a few weeks ago that John McCain would select a woman as his running mate, let alone the hitherto largely unknown Sarah Palin, the first-term Governor of Alaska?

Finally, to me the strangest story of all was the selection of Joe Biden as Barack Obama's running mate. What -- the pundits legitimately wondered -- did Joe bring to the ticket? And in the process, Obama had also badly dissed Hillary by not even vetting her. The stars were beginning to realign.

Which brings me back to the question. Why did Joe Biden make such a big point of saying yesterday that Hillary Clinton would be a better candidate, Presidential or Vice Presidential, than he would?

The obvious political problem with the statement is that it casts serious doubt on Barack Obama's judgment, which is pretty much all he is running on. If, in making his first major decision, Barack Obama screwed up and picked a self-admitted also-ran, why should anyone want to vote for him? Or, for the also-ran? Was it an uncomfortable reminder of Admiral Stockdale's famous opening line in the 1992 Vice Presidential debates in Atlanta, "Who am I?" . . . "Why am I here?"

If the Presidential Election were a jury trial -- which it actually resembles in a very, very general sense -- and if Joe's strange comment yesterday was a proffer of evidence in that trial, it would likely be fully admissible in evidence, even if it was hearsay.

Why? Because it has ultimate credibility . . . as, lawyers say, it is an "admission against interest." Joe Biden is not the sort of fellow to volunteer that he is not quite up to par with any other living human being. Now, remember that the inherent truthfulness of the statement does not take into account why it was said. That remains the real mystery.

Are the Democrats about to try and pull a Bob Torricelli "bait and switch" with their Vice Presidential selection? Was Joe just laying the groundwork for the final big surprise of this year's strange Presidential campaign? Or was Joe busy kissing the Clinton ring because the Obama/Biden ticket needs something.

What would cause him to blurt out that comment? Two general possibilities come to mind.

Falling on his sword: Perhaps there is a bad story about Joe Biden that is about to go to print. It would have to be a real doozy, but that is certainly not out of the realm of possibility in American politics. That would in some ways explain his willingness to go out and publicly lay the groundwork for Hillary redux. He drops out, and Hillary joins the ticket.

Having been found guilty of ethics violations by his own colleagues back in September of 2002, then Senator Robert Torricelli, who was running for re-election that year, concluded that he simply could not win against Republican Doug Forrester. It was a national issue at the time because the Democrats thought they were poised to take over control of the United States Senate.

Bob had to go, so he withdrew. The problem was that the state statutory deadline for replacing a candidate on the ballot had passed. So the Democrats went to court and obtained one of the most controversial decisions in the history of the New Jersey Supreme Court, allowing the Democrats to enter a new name, a ruling interpreting the New Jersey state law. The Republicans appealed in early October, but the United States Supreme Court declined to interfere with the state court ruling. The switch having been permitted, Torricelli's name was stricken from the ballot, as the Democrats had trotted Frank Lautenberg back out of retirement to fill the slot.

A switch now, at the Vice Presidential level, would likely require similar rulings, perhaps in a number of states. That would be an enormous hurdle to overcome. Sounds too risky.

Hillary As Paladin?: "Have Gun -- Will Travel" was the card printed motto of television's most famous western gentleman regulator for hire, starring Richard Boone. Paladin was a refined and educated San Francisco gentleman, yet quick-on-the-draw traveling gunslinger when necessary. A knight dressed in black, he was hired to resolve conflicts, and had a gift of gab that included a sharp intelligence. But he could also mete out rough justice where necessary -- including relying on a concealed derringer for close in-fighting.

So, a second, and most likely explanation for this strange praise from Biden, is that right now the Democrat ticket need help from Hillary in the form of attacks on Sarah Palin. They need a prominent female to take Sarah Palin to the woodshed, so to speak. Hillary has declined the invitation thus far, perhaps waiting for the invitation. She has preferred instead to limit her election participation to positive praise for Barack Obama. These latest words of praise from Biden could be an unmistakable signal from the Presidential team that they really need Hillary to step back onto the stage, and to help pull their irons out of the fire.

Yesterday, David Paul Kuhn and Bill Nichols at Politico laid out some opinion evidence for what they term "Autumn angst" among prominent Democrats . . . that there is real concern over the current prospects for the Obama/Biden ticket. While some Democrats described the state of the race to them in candid but tactical terms, one unnamed but apparently high level Democrat fundraiser pushed the panic button:

A major Democratic fundraiser described it a good bit more starkly after digesting the polls of recent days: "I'm so depressed. It's happening again. It's a nightmare."

Today, September 11th, is bipartisan day, as the major candidates have agreed "suspend" public campaigning, and they will appear together at a 9/11 forum sponsored by Time Magazine and CNN, to be held at Columbia University this evening. Earlier in the afternoon they will jointly appear at a memorial service at "ground zero" in New York, though neither of them will speak. John McCain also visited the Shanksville, PA, memorial site earlier in the day, and he spoke briefly. Barack Obama's campaign released a general statement earlier.

Prior to the ceremonies, Barack Obama and Bill Clinton were reportedly getting together for lunch . . . at Bill Clinton's invitation, at his office, with the official line that they will be discussing the "issues." Is one topic, what "price" for Hillary's active participation in drawing a bead on Sarah Palin?

If it isn't, then "pigs have wings" . . . with or without lipstick!

One might be tempted to wish to be a fly on the wall for that meeting between the Walrus & the Carpenter, but surely one would not wish to be an oyster at that picnic!

The question naturally arises, what do they want -- these Clintons? A promise from Obama not to run again in four years if he loses? A Supreme Court appointment for Bill, or perhaps more to the point, an appointment for Hillary, should Obama win?

As for Joe Biden, he may have already thrown in the towel on running himself in four years, with that opening gambit of praise for Hillary. As for the oysters, it's a little too late to call a cab!

"O Oysters," said the Carpenter,
"You've had a pleasant run!
Shall we be trotting home again?'
But answer came there none--
And this was scarcely odd, because
They'd eaten every one.

Update: Glenn Thrush and Martin Kady II posted a piece at Politico yeaterday, entitled, "Could Clinton have Palin-proofed Dems?" which we just noticed.

It concludes:

Clinton has said she'll hit the road for Obama, but her team says she refuses to be an anti-Palin "attack dog." Further complicating matters for Obama, Hillaryland fundraiser Susie Tompkins Buell is leading a group that will fight media sexism against the Alaska governor.

We'll see where Hillary continues to draw the line following that "issues" lunch meeting between Bill and Barack today.

Also, yesterday Ace of Spades posted the snarky view of the Torricelli switch-out scenario. (h.t., Allahpundit at HotAir, here.)

Also, Ed Morrissey at HotAir noticed something that puzzled me as well. On Greta's show at Fox, Geraldine Ferraro suddenly developed a mouth full of mush when it came to criticizing Obama's campaign for sexism. Ed has the video. That also supports the theory that Obama & Bill Clinton were getting ready to cut a deal today . . . Hillary alone can and will go after Palin.

How About A Real Senate Debate?

Update: See below.

Three out of four of the contenders for higher national office this year, including both candidates for the Presidency, are current members of the world's most famous debating club, the United States Senate. It was created by the founders of our Constitution for the expressed purpose of engaging in sober public debate on the great issues facing our nation. What more fitting exercise of self-government could their be, what greater tribute to the wisdom of the founders of our Republic, than to have a great televised debate this fall, within those hallowed halls, on the most important single national security issue facing our nation today -- how to reduce our dependence on foreign energy resources, including oil?

Across the board, and having lost that public debate so far, Democrats are insisting that the way to the future is to block any additional drilling, and to threaten to tax domestic oil companies, with the promise that from the revenues thereby garnered, a whole new "alternative fuels" future can be created. They don't like to talk so much about what will likely happen in the meantime, however long that may prove to be. Consider, for example, this winter. Or, think about the potential for Americans minds being further alerted to the problem over the next few weeks, especially when the first home heating bills arrive from the first "fill-up" of the season? That is a particularly uncomfortable topic for the Democrats because, unlike the semi-coercive "voluntarism" that people can engage in by driving less, it is not so easy to "voluntarily" turn off the furnace in your home, especially if we have a cold winter.

But let's be fair. Why not give the Democrats a second bite at the apple? A rematch, if you will. Some are even suggesting the alternative to a vote on drilling, might be a federal shutdown. Well, who wants the Congress playing "chicken" with our future?

Our first Congress, way back in 1789, created the basis for a free press within the framework of the First Amendment, but they did not create it with the idea that certain unbeknownst media outlets would thereafter be given an institutional monopoly -- a controlling filter of the first-hand information coming from those soon-to-be elected public officials. After all, why should Brian Williams, Katie Couric, Charlie Gibson, or Jim Leaher be automatically accorded the whip hand and a stop watch on what topics we are to hear about this fall? At the very least, why should they be accorded such control on the most important single national security issue facing us today? Now, Senator Barack Obama at first seemed to agree to, but then backed out of townhall style debates, as were proposed by John McCain. It is not hard to understand why. With the early fundfaising advantage, Obama hopes to essentially buy the election with more advertising, without taking the risk of losing a debate. He already lost the first one at Saddleback Church, with Rick Warren moderating. Hence, if anything he is more disinclined to cooperate now.

So, what about the Republicans putting up their bill on energy independence, with John McCain as the prime sponsor, and floor manager, and the Democrats putting up theirs, with Barack Obama as the prime sponsor, and floor manager, and the United States Senate holding a lengthy debate, with a prior commitment from leadership on both sides to allowing votes on each bill, including a commitment to votes on amendments being proposed by both sides? Why not require them to actually do their job -- the one for which we hired them?

So far -- perhaps because of their losses in the sharp public debate over additional drilling -- Democrats have been reduced to having their acolytes in the press write the most ridiculous and irresponsible polemics you can imagine, as exemplified by this one by Fatimah Ali, just published two days ago in the Philadelphia Daily News, (ht, Drudge).

It began thusly:

"AMERICA is on the brink of a long, harsh and bitterly cold winter, with a looming recession that the GOP won't even admit to."

Really? Setting aside the obvious question of what happened to global warming in the mind of Ms. Ali, an obvious question arises, assuming (without conceding) that she is correct:

How then does she explain the failure of Barack Obama and his party to prepare for that bitter winter by opening up new drilling resources for both oil and natural gas during the entire time they have been in complete control of the Congress for the past two years?

After then parroting virtually every false canard she would think of, Ms. Ali capped her shrill and irresponsible claims with the threat that the election of John McCain would plunge the country into a race war and economic chaos!

"If McCain wins, look for a full-fledged race and class war, fueled by a deflated and depressed country, soaring crime, homelessness - and hopelessness!"

So now one of Obama's cheerleaders in the press is promising a race war if we don't elect him? Remind us again who brought up the subject of race.

But back to reality, if I may.

The fact is that the most important national security issue facing Americans today is how to reduce our dependence on foreign energy resources. Many of us just plain folks think that one obvious way, is by allowing additional drilling of our own ample resources here at home.

The Democrats in Congress have boxed us all into a corner on the issue by refusing to allow any such additional drilling, for either resource. Those Democrats, incuding Barack Obama -- who has himself actually indicated that he is not displeased with the high gasoline prices -- have absolutely no workable or sensible plan, the public knows it, and the Democrats have taken a drubbing in the polls as a result. They should be winning this election, but it has recently been neck-and-neck, and that was before John McCain's acceptance speech.

For her part, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is so woefully (and repeatedly) ignorant on the subject, that she does not even seem to realize that natural gas is a fossil fuel! All she and the Democrats want to talk about is development of "alternative resources," which are not available today, paid for with additional taxes on domestic oil companies, and by currently irresponsibly tapping the strategic oil reserve. That could mean more than a few very cold winters for some, spiraling gasoline prices for everyone who intends to drive a car in the meantime, and a devastatingly whip-sawed economy to boot. We saw that in the late '70s with Jimmy Carter, as many of us recall with horror. No thanks!

Anyone with any sense who accepts that such "alternative sources" need to be developed, also recognizes the need for a bridge to the development of those resources. Otherwise, the economy and the public will suffer mightily from high prices, leveraged even higher by the Democrats' promised higher taxes on domestic energy companies.

Those liberal taxes would not even touch the thirteen largest oil companies in the world! Those oil companies, the non-domestic ones no one ever talks about, would continue to laugh at us all the way to the bank. So the Democrats in Congress refused to act in the spring and, and instead they went on vacation for the entire summer, while we all paid the higher gasoline prices. Think of that as a sort of "intentional inaction tax" the Democrats willingly imposed on us all in the meantime.

Consider this as well. By way of her hands-on executive experience as Governor of Alaska, there is simply no public figure in the country who is more knowledgable on the subject, or who has greater ability to point to the resources that we can exploit in order to start building that resource bridge now, than Sarah Palin. In Alaska, she rejected the bridge to nowhere, opting instead to press for a bridge to energy independence by pressing for additional drilling. So, if there is a better reason for making someone the Vice Presidental candidate, I'd like to hear it! Frank Gaffney at the Center for Security Policy (CSP) makes a very persuasive case for the importance of her national security credentials in that regard. Too bad she's not in the Senate right now, but she could be the interview guest for any number of cable or network shows, while the Senate debate is ongoing.

Who better to make the case to the American people that we need to drill now in order to ensure sufficient affordable resources for home heating resources for winter and for controlling the price gasoline? When the sticker shock of the first bill for home heating fuel hits any day now, in millions of homes, look for people to become even more annoyed at Democrats who have controlled Congress, and who have refused to allow any additional domestic drilling for the two years they have been in control of Congress, despite repeated calls for new drilling from the Administration.

It seems that all they want to do is talk about nonsense, like the fact that Sarah's 17 year old daughter is pregnant and is not going to have an abortion. Well, Barack Obama's mother was pregnant at 17 as well. What ridiculous crud these lefites have tried to dredge up! For once, at least on that topic Senator Obama is telling his crazed followers to shut up on the subject of Palin's daughter. Perhaps he should have a word with a few of his acolytes in the press as well.

Who knows, maybe he would also do what is really in the long term interest of the country, and respond affirmatively to a Republican call to have a Senate debate this fall on energy independence bills. In any event, he would be hard pressed to claim that such a call is "contrived" as his campaign did earlier in the summer McCain challenged him to a full series of townhall debates. After all, how could he possibly say that a public request to actually do his job is "contrived?"

And, in the House, perhaps Nancy Pelosi would finally learn that natural gas is a fossil fuel that we need to drill for the natural gas she and her husband are so heavily invested in. Who knows, perhaps we could get the House to debate and vote as well, and they wouldn't inevitably become known to history as the biggest do-nothing Congress of all time.

But don't necessarily count on it. The one thing the Democrats have in the form of a trump card, is that if they don't have a floor debate on energy policy this fall, they won't have to vote on it, either. That would allow Democrats favoring additional drilling to say so, but at the same time allow Democrat leadership to "run out the clock."

The downside for them is that they must have some debate on the subject, or the drilling moratorium will run out at the end of September. That's why they want to include a pass on the moratorium in the motion to recess on September 30th. Republicans should, therefore, be calling for a full-fledged floor debate on energy policy this fall -- bill for bill.

Update: The sentence and link in the text above to Frank Gaffney's analysis of the significance of Sarah Palin's national security credentials. He correctly notes that her credentials even go well beyond her experience as Governor:

Gov. Palin has spent much of her adult life dealing with matters long central to the Alaskan experience and now of surpassing importance to the nation as a whole – namely, energy security and how we can provide for it. Having managed her state's department responsible for oil and gas exploration and exploitation, having negotiated a long-delayed natural gas pipeline through Canada to the Lower 48 and having been married for nearly two decades to a blue-collar worker in Alaska's North Slope oil fields, she knows more about the subject than all three of the others on the two parties' tickets put together.

If Gov. Palin can bring to bear her insights into the need for expanded, yet environmentally sensitive drilling, including in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) – together with an appreciation of the need to introduce fuel-choice in our transportation sector, the object of the bipartisan Open Fuel Standard Act introduced in both the House and Senate shortly before the August recess – she will demonstrate unsurpassed leadership in what is, arguably, the single most important national security challenge of our time.

Joe Biden on Joe Biden

Updates (2), below:

Here was Joe, speaking to just plain folks at a small reception on April 3, 1987, specifically in a blowhard response to a man identified only as "Frank," at a home in Claremont, New Hampshire.*

Joe dropped out of that race once the recounting of this story, and especially the several plagiarism allegations hit hard on the MSM circuit in the very early fall of that year.

At his blog, Brendan Nyhan gives the background of this, Joe's most famous dissembling moment. He also linked to the Micky Kaus take at Slate, and he reposted a subsequent New York Times story about the incident.

Here is the actual link to the New York Times takedown story from September of '87, by E.J Dionne, recounting and parsing all the details of Joe's blowhard claims to "Frank." That story was also recently re-posted here on The NRO Corner.

Ouch.

Really, no further explanation needed . . . except to say that this is going to be a colorful fall campaign!

Update 4:55 pm: Here's a thought. Perhaps Joe and the Vice-Presidential Presidential candidate should consider anointing themselves as, The TWO? Ed Morrissey at HotAir has posted the Obama gaffe at the rollout today! And, the Biden gaffe -- "Barack America."

Update II: The entire exchange between Joe and the questioner named "Frank" at that Democrat coffee klatch up in Claremont, New Hampshire, has now been posted on YouTube.** You can hear the question, Joe's defensive and blustering answer, together with all the boasts that were later proven false.

It is also interesting to hear him belittle the question about his plans, and call Democrats "heartless technocrats" for always being so concerned about 12 or 14 or 19 point plans.

Here it is:



* Source: a news rebroadcast of a CSPAN feed of the event, posted by 9195340, at YouTube)

** Source: C-Span.org