Latest Headlines on OCRegister.com
[x] Close
Orange Punch ~ Opinion blog maintained by editorial writers Alan Bock, Mark Landsbaum and Steven Greenhut

Obama Memorabilia Banned in China?

November 17th, 2009, 1:04 pm by Brian Calle

In preparation for the American President’s visit to China, Chinese authorities cracked down on the sale of merchandise bearing President Obama’s image. Another example of the censorship coming from Beijing.

But interestingly enough not all of Obama memorabilia was banned, just items that might be construed  as controversial. For example, Obama in Superman garb was allowed to be sold, but Obama in Red Guard attire was banned. I guess that was a little too taboo for Chinese regulators.

Apparently government officials visited stores that were well known for selling Obama memorabilia and forced them to stop selling controversial items. One of the most popular items that was banned was imagery that blended the likenesses of President Obama and Communist Leader Mao Zedong, which has been dubbed “ObaMao.” The ObaMao image takes an image of President Obama and dresses him the famous green jacket and cap worn by the Communist legend.

Obama has spoke in china about the importance of openness fro free society. I guess the bureaucrats missed the memo.

obamao

Share this post:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Fark
  • NewsVine
  • Slashdot
  • TwitThis

Palintology: a sample

November 17th, 2009, 11:53 am by by Alan Bock, Register editorial writer

I confess, I haven’t read Sarah Palin’s book — somehow they managed not to send us a review copy, possibly because they don’t need newspaper reviewers to insure a best-seller and possibly because they thought that reviews might not only not help but hurt. But here is a small sample of comments from others who have read, or claim to have read, the book (or at least significant excerpts), without any particular comments.

First up is Politico’s “guide to who gets whacked,” a crib sheet for Washington insiders who can’t look their names up in the index because there is no index. Chief villains are McCain campaign “headquarters,” especially campaign manager Steve Schmidt and Mark and Nicolle Wallace, though McCain himself is praised effusively. A WaPo review focuses on her love for God and Todd and eating wildlife. Gotta go to a meeting. More later.

Share this post:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Fark
  • NewsVine
  • Slashdot
  • TwitThis

Assembly District Special Election Today (A Prediction)

November 17th, 2009, 10:42 am by Brian Calle

If you are in the 72nd Assembly District don’t forget to get out and vote today.

The only consequential race in the primary is on the GOP side where the two front runner, Supervisor Chris Norby and Linda Ackerman are vying for the Republican nomination. With the nature of that heavily gerrymandered district whichever Republican wins the nomination will like when the general election in January.

If I were a betting man I would put my money on Norby to pull out the victory. Even though he has suffered a barrage of attacks leading up to the campaign, he still remains a popular elected official on the Orange County Board of Supervisors and has a much stronger ballot designation going into the election.

This prediction of course is not to discount the political acumen of Linda Ackerman. the Ackerman name goes a long way in Orange County and her campaign definitely has many of the part mainstays behind it. But in the end Norby’s ballot designation, experience, and history living in the district should win out.

I doubt Norby will win by a landslide but I think the margin will be sufficient. But I have, of course, been wrong once or twice before.

Share this post:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Fark
  • NewsVine
  • Slashdot
  • TwitThis

Obamacare is off just a teeny bit. Oops.

November 16th, 2009, 4:09 pm by Mark Landsbaum

The Heritage Foundation reminds us of President Barack Obama’s grand promise back in the Rose Garden on Nov. 7:

“The Affordable Health Care for America Act is a piece of legislation that will provide stability and security for Americans who have insurance; quality, affordable options for those who don’t; and bring down the cost of health care for families, businesses, and our government, while strengthening the financial health of Medicare.”

You might call this an Obama Oops Moment.

A report released Friday by the non-partisan and independent Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the guys who run Medicare and Medicaid, finds things, shall we say, not quite as the prez promised. On every point.

  • costs will go up, not down.
  • millions will lose their private insurance
  • 18 million will have to pay a new tax for getting nothing - or go to jail
  • 8.5 million will lose existing private coverage
  • more than half who get new insurance coverage will get it from the welfare’s Medicaid
  • Medicare cuts will be so much that many hospitals are likely to drop senior patients
  • 21 million people new to Medicaid will have a tough time finding a doctor

Other than that, everything should be just as the president promised.

RELATED POSTS:

  • Hopeful Wall Street flinches at Obama’s change
  • Can the federal government do that?
  • Arnold says the worst is over, then boom!
  • Jerry Brown the libertarian?
  • Just a minute congressman, you may not be one
  • How many believe politicians’ promises?
  • Freedom Quote of the Day
  • Share this post:
    • E-mail this story to a friend!
    • Digg
    • del.icio.us
    • Facebook
    • Google
    • Fark
    • NewsVine
    • Slashdot
    • TwitThis

    Obama slow on judicial nominations

    November 16th, 2009, 3:57 pm by by Alan Bock, Register editorial writer

    Law professor Jonathan Adler over at the Volokh Conspiracy, notes that the Obama administration has been much slower nominating federal judges than the Bush administration was at a comparable point in time. As the NYT has also noted, by this point Bush had nominated 28 appellate judges and 36 district court judges, whereas Obama has nominated only 12 and 14 respectively. Administration spokescritters say what matters is confirmations not nominations, and they are simply proceeding more methodically than the Bushies did, but the departure of White House counsel Greg Craig and cacancies in some other positions make it unlikely that they’ll pick up the pace anytime soon. It hasn’t been mentioned in news stories I’ve seen, but I wonder if Obama, a former law professor, isn’t a bit of a micromanager in this area.

    I confess to raging ambivalence on this burning issue. Judges viewed as “liberal” are generally congenial to civil liberties and due process, but have virtually abandoned any notion the the Constitution imposes any real limits on government power otherwise. “Conservative” judges will sometimes protect economic liberties and property rights and question overweening use of government power, but are often terrible on civil liberties and war powers and see no reason to question most anything police officers do. Neither is satisfactory to me.

    There are law professors and think-tankers who advocate a fairly consistent libertarian jurispudence, but hardly any judges — though Richard Sanders on the Washington state supreme court does. The closest we have to a libertarian on the federal bench is probably Richard Posner, though he would probably dispute being labeled libertarian.

    Share this post:
    • E-mail this story to a friend!
    • Digg
    • del.icio.us
    • Facebook
    • Google
    • Fark
    • NewsVine
    • Slashdot
    • TwitThis

    Arnold says the worst is over, then boom!

    November 16th, 2009, 3:39 pm by Mark Landsbaum

    There’s a new movie out about the end of the world: 2012. Our own governor is portrayed at a press conference just after a series of massive earthquakes hit.

    The guv is shown reassuring Californians. He says he thinks “the worst is over.” That’s the cue. In the next instant California crumbles into the sea.

    Funny how real life imitates the movies, isn’t it? Or is it the other way around? The real governor has been assuring us for years everything will be just peachy. Then ka-pow! The next catastrophe hits the Golden State.

    The picture’s fiction of,course. Everyone knows the earth won’t crumble. Global warming will cook us. But we noticed another flaw. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger can’t be governor in 2012. His term is up next year. Maybe the worst is over.

    RELATED POSTS:

  • Hopeful Wall Street flinches at Obama’s change
  • Can the federal government do that?
  • Jerry Brown the libertarian?
  • Just a minute congressman, you may not be one
  • How many believe politicians’ promises?
  • Freedom Quote of the Day
  • Share this post:
    • E-mail this story to a friend!
    • Digg
    • del.icio.us
    • Facebook
    • Google
    • Fark
    • NewsVine
    • Slashdot
    • TwitThis

    What makes jihadis tick?

    November 16th, 2009, 2:00 pm by by Alan Bock, Register editorial writer

    Well, those of us who are not jihadis may never really know for sure. But this article by the UK journalist Johann Hari, based on interviews with Brits who had jumped into the jihadi movement with both feet (one claims to have converted Omar Sheikh, who beheaded Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl), then became disenchanted, offers interesting insights. Interestingly, few recent immigrants to Britain seem attracted to fundamentalism or jihadism (survey suggest only 7% of British Muslims are), they’re more interested in taking advantage of opportunities denied them in Pakistan or wherever the immigrated from. Jihadis tend to be second-generation, Muslims who grew up in Britain, experienced discrimination and worse (one had several friends actually killed by skinheads) and found in fundamentalist Islam an ideology that seemed to explain the whole world and gave them a sense of empowerment, that the coming of the caliphate was imminent and they could play a key role in restoring righteousness. Disillusionment stemmed from various observed hypocrisies of jihadis — seeing jihadis killing fellow Muslims, observing that Taliban rule in Afghanistan hadn’t exactly produced paradise, etc.

    I still can’t claim to understand jihadis entirely, but I know a little I didn’t know before. And it is encouraging that former jihadis in Britain are “coming out” and organizing a movement to weaken the hold of jihadism on British Muslim youth.

    Share this post:
    • E-mail this story to a friend!
    • Digg
    • del.icio.us
    • Facebook
    • Google
    • Fark
    • NewsVine
    • Slashdot
    • TwitThis

    Hasan’s imam talks

    November 16th, 2009, 12:58 pm by by Alan Bock, Register editorial writer

    That Yemeni-American Muslim cleric whose mosque Maj. Hasan attended some eight years ago in Virginia and with whom he was exchanging e-mails (the cleric is in Yemen now) has given an interview. He says he was simply a confidant to Hasan but didn’t urge him to action. But he isn’t backing off calling Hasan a “hero,” saying it’s because he attacked soldiers slated to go to Iraq and Afghanistan.

    I was reluctant to draw conclusions too quickly, but with all that has come out recently, it’s becoming pretty clear that there were red flags regarding Hasan that somebody in the army or somewhere in the government should have noticed. I recognize that there might have been reluctance to seem to be discriminating against a Muslim, and I’m not sure exactly what should have been done, but he did seem to have gone beyond mere loyalty to his religion in ways that should have seemed at least mildly alarming then, not just alarming in retrospect. I still don’t think he should be called a “terrorist” since that term traditionally has applied to people who kill civilians for political reasons and expanding the meaning of the term threatens to drain it of meaning. But he should have been on somebody’s watch list.

    Share this post:
    • E-mail this story to a friend!
    • Digg
    • del.icio.us
    • Facebook
    • Google
    • Fark
    • NewsVine
    • Slashdot
    • TwitThis

    Another Global Warming Oops Moment

    November 13th, 2009, 5:20 pm by Mark Landsbaum

    Today’s Global Warming Oops Moment (aren’t they persistent?) comes courtesy of the London Times:

    “Alarming predictions that climate change will lead to the extinction of hundreds of species may be exaggerated, according to Oxford scientists.”

    Darn. We thought that science was settled. Guess not.

    As the Times reported, many biodiversity forecasts haven’t considered complexities of the landscape and have frequently underestimate plants and animals’ ability to adapt to environmental changes. Go figure.

    “The evidence of climate change-driven extinctions have really been overplayed,” said Professor Kathy Willis, a long-term ecologist at the University of Oxford and lead author of the article.

    Oh those pesky nuances. Stay tuned. Many more  “oops” to come. Hey, anyone still want to sign on to that multi-hundred billion dollar climate change tax and cap?

    RELATED POSTS:

  • Hopeful Wall Street flinches at Obama’s change
  • You too can sue over global warmingOops.
  • Another global warming OOPS moment
  • Pay up, prosperous nations. Global warming bill is due
  • It seems the global warmists are disagreeing
  • Share this post:
    • E-mail this story to a friend!
    • Digg
    • del.icio.us
    • Facebook
    • Google
    • Fark
    • NewsVine
    • Slashdot
    • TwitThis

    Can the federal government do that?

    November 13th, 2009, 4:57 pm by Mark Landsbaum

    Almost without anyone noticing (OK, we noticed) the federal government has become daddy, mommy, nanny, teacher, employer, boss, doctor and who knows what else. Did it occur to anyone to ask at some point, “Can the federal government do that?”

    Now, the federal government wants to force you to buy insurance. Got that? The government insists it can demand that you spend your own money the way it thinks is best. Not content with taking your money to spend however it wants to, now the government will dictate to you how to spend what it graciously permits you to keep.

    Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) told CNSNews.com he’s not a constitutional scholar so he is “not going to be able to answer” where the Constitution authorizes Congress to mandate that people must purchase health insurance.

    You’d think if lawmakers are going to make a law, they might have a clue as to whether they have the authority to do what they want to do. Apparently not.

    Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii) told CNSNews.com he is “not aware” of the Constitution giving Congress authority to force individuals to buy health insurance. Of course, health care bills in both the House and Senate would require that.

    “But what we’re trying to do is to provide for people who have needs and that’s where the accessibility comes in, and one of the goals that we’re trying to present here is to make it accessible,” he said. “…But in ways to help citizens in our country to live a good life, let me say it that way, is what we’re trying to do, and in this case, we’re trying to help them with their health.”

    Ah, they’re just trying to help. By ordering you to spend your money on what they want you to buy. Hm. Then there’s this: When CNSNews.com asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi where the Constitution authorizes Congress to order Americans to buy health insurance, her response was simply:

    “Are you serious? Are you serious?”

    Guess that settles that.

    RELATED POSTS:

  • Hopeful Wall Street flinches at Obama’s change
  • Jerry Brown the libertarian?
  • Just a minute congressman, you may not be one
  • How many believe politicians’ promises?
  • Freedom Quote of the Day
  • Government invents “rights,” forces you to engage in them
  • Share this post:
    • E-mail this story to a friend!
    • Digg
    • del.icio.us
    • Facebook
    • Google
    • Fark
    • NewsVine
    • Slashdot
    • TwitThis