These scandals represent the deterioration of the rule of law in this country.  No leadership accountability, no controls or audits or policies or standard operating procedures to avoid government abuse. James Taranto at the WSJ has a great comment today:

If, as Axelrod implies, agents of the government did all this without the president's direction or even knowledge, that is even more frightening. That would mean, to quote a great orator, that the federal government has become "some separate, sinister entity" in which the leaders we entrust with authority cannot be held accountable for its abuse.

And these bureaucrats in our federal government are 99%  liberal democrats and progressives.  So who do you think they would target?

Everyone get a grip.  Stop overanalyzing the election.  It has become obvious that the Presidential contest has degenerated into a High School Student Body President race.  When we run likeable, personal candidates that can relate to real people (Bush 43, Reagan), we win.  When we run stiff phonies (Bush 41, Romney), or over the hill re-treds (McCain, Dole) we lose.  I know a lot of campaign consultants and pundits would lose a ton of money if they admitted this, so it will never happen. 

We are in the age of celebrity Presidents.    The media will hate our candidate no matter what—and our candidate has to be ‘cool’ enough not to care.

Two words: property taxes.  Real estate values (and thus property tax revenue) are higher when located adjacent to a golf course.  The corresponding decrease in property tax revenues wash away any savings you would realize by plowing under the golf course and putting in housing developments.

Blazing Saddles and Caddyshack provide endless rifs during inappropriate moments.  The list of quotes is endless...

"We don't need no stinkin' badges!"

"But this is my shootin' hand."

"...at Augusta...its a Cinderalla story...."

"Gunga-gungungala."

"In the lumberyard, Danny."

Bush couldn't do it. What makes you think President Romney would?  I agree that theoretically the "tough love," line in the sand ultimatum would be the most free-market-oriented.  But I don't think that the political will to do nothing exists in Washington (either Republican or Democrat).  Rand Paul, yes.  Romney?

Along with the Canadian banks, Texas banks (which are more heavily regulated than NY or Delaware banks--TEXAS!) are stable and profitable, as well. 

I'm amazed that the Tea Party has given up on changing the current abomination of our government-banking 'Solyndra' deal with thse mega-institutions.

Does 'The Wild Bunch' count? Aging stars such as William Holden, Ernest Borgnine and Robert Ryan perform a robbery during the end of the wild west phase of American expansion.  Ultra-violence and criminal mischief in copious amounts of slo-mo camera action.

Perhaps that is why we gravitate to the sensational and emotional--because the "big stuff" isn't being dealt with in a satisfying manner.  Thus the daily twitter/new cycle "outrage of the day" we are stuck with.

It's sad that the city of Denver will be losing a man as giving and selfless as Tebow, who spent more time in Denver hospitals than the Vicodin rep. Then again, Denver is getting a man who has a children's hospital in Indianapolis named after him.

The Occupy Wall Street mentality:  free for me, but paid by someone else.

Mark Steyn is a genius.  I watched his brilliant C-SPAN2 three hour discussion prior to the Superbowl.

The real problem is that there is no "fight in this dog" that is Romney's anemic campaign.  Brombides and no red meat for conservatives.  SC reacted to Newt's fire and passion. 

Mark Styen over at the Corner has it exactly right.

And where, among all the dough he’s handing out, is the rapid-response team? Newt’s “spontaneous” indignation at John King was carefully crafted by Gingrich himself. By contrast, Mitt has a ton of consultants, and not one of them thought he needed a credible answer on Bain or taxes? For a guy running as a chief exec applying proven private-sector solutions, his campaign looks awfully like an unreformable government bureaucracy: big, bloated, overstaffed, burning money, slow to react, and all but impossible to change...Mitt needs to get good real fast: A real speech, real plan, real responses, and real fire in the belly. Does he have it in him?

 I refer Peter to John Podhoretz's column today in the New York Post:

Those of us who are professionally or avocationally conservative get into the weeds when it comes to politicians’ view. So for us, it isn’t enough that Mitt Romney now says he is pro-life; we know that in 1994 he ran for senator in Massachusetts as an unapologetic abortion supporter. He says flatly that he changed his mind, but people for whom the pro-life cause is central find such a record untrustworthy.

But that isn’t true of the conservative voter. That voter listens to Romney, and she hears Romney say he’s pro-life. That’s more than likely enough for her if the issue is important to her...

In the end, she has to make the judgment: Do I trust that he means what he says now? He says he’d repeal ObamaCare. She doesn’t like ObamaCare. What more does she have to hear?

That’s the call. And it turns out to be a lower hurdle for Romney to clear than many of us expected.

I spent a few moments on the google machine to reassess my statement.  And I stand by it.

Thatcher: her accent was phony (per Claire Berlinski) 

http://www.berlinski.com/?q=node/165

Reagan and his opposition to the Panama Canal treaty = Phony

All politicians dissemble and spin on certain issues to get the results they want.  That was my only point.

Remember when National Review and Rush Limbaugh sang the praises of Mitt Romney during the 2008 primaries in order to stop the aspiring ‘Rino in Chief’ John McCain?  I have two questions—why was Romney so acceptable then, and not now, and 2) who is better in the current field?

Remember 2008 when all of the other Republican candidates hated Romney because of his bare knuckle campaign commercials?  Look at Newt Gingrich crying like a school girl to the media because of Romney’s super-pac ad campaign.  I want a bare knuckle politician to go up against Obama and the Media.  Ann Coulter is right—Romney is the best out of the current field of candidates.

• Perry can’t talk his way out of a paper bag, and has run an incompetent, unprepared campaign.
• Newt Gingrich is a 90’s retread with more baggage than Michelle Obama going on a Hawaii vacation.
• Ron Paul is a fringe candidate with dope smokers and isolationist dreamers as his only constituency.
• Rick Santorum couldn’t win his home state, and is too focused on bible thumping instead of the economy.
• Michelle Bauchman is not yet ready to be President.
• John Huntsman.  Really?

All politicians are phonies.