Is Stacy McCain losing it?

First off, let me tell you that I like Stacy McCain. His "The Other McCain" blog is very informative and entertaining. I've contributed to his "shoe-leather" fund on a number of occasions. But I am completely confused by his recent rant about not having access to what he calls "Team Sarah". I presume he means Sarah's inner circle. In a recent post, he wrote this:

I’m feeling like a mushroom here. IYKWIMAITYD.

UPDATE III: Dan Riehl rushes to join the Worldwide Universal Association of People Smarter Than Stacy McCain:

Whatever Palin is doing by way of preparation for a run is not what one is accustomed to seeing. Stacy is looking for the expected, not seeing it and concluding it’s too late for her. I’m looking at what I know and don’t know, while leaving a little room for what I don’t know I don’t know and concluding she’s running. Simple, isn’t it?

When I talked to Dan by phone a few minutes ago, he said, “Stacy don’t take it personally.” But when I am insulted — and to be purposefully excluded is to be insulted — it would compound my humiliation not to take notice of the insult.

Bear in mind that the people on Team Sarah have my phone number and e-mail address, and I know they read this blog. It wasn’t exactly a secret that I was in Iowa last week, and it was possible for them to let me know their itinerary. Instead, as always, they allow other news organizations — including liberal news organizations inimicable to their own interests — break exclusive news about their Iowa trip, while purposefully keeping me out of the loop. And when I dare take notice of these unsubtle backhands, I’m accused of being “too sensitive.”

When I want to make a fool out of myself, I don’t usually ask for help in doing so, and appreciate all this volunteer assistance from Team Sarah.

Okay, this started out as one of Stacy's articles on The American Spectator.

What I took exception to was the headline of his blog piece: Blogging About Pathetic Perverts and Also Andrew Sullivan’s Sarah Palin Toe Fetish. This was a blatant attempt to put Sarah in a headline that was very demeaning and I wrote Stacy to tell him about it.

So, what happened in the meantime? Well, Dan Riehl responded in a post on his blog titled Stacy McCain Declares, Palin Not Running. In the post, Dan says this:

He is correct as to my being as, if not more cynical than anyone. Hmm So, if that's true, how can I be urging her to run when, in his, evidently, unique genius, Stacy knows it's obviously already too late for her to do so? See, in essence, he is calling me a Palinista, that, or simply dumb. I suspect he didn't realize that when he wrote it. Which is it, Stacy, am I dumb, or obsessed, ... inquiring minds want to know? ; )

My friend Dan Riehl seems to think otherwise — his post “Why Sarah Palin Needs To Run For President In 2012”was also re-Tweeted by Iowa for Palin — andit would be hard to conceive that I (or anyone else) could be more cynical about politics than Dan Riehl. Yet if there is any urge I find irresistible, it is my urge to avoid being a chump, a True Believer living on irrational hopes and dreams.

Now, Stacy could have worked the logic the other way and done what reporters usually do, pick up the phone. "Dan, you're as cynical as anyone I know, how can you possibly believe she will run?" Alas, the poor young man didn't do that, now did he?

Oops, there's the phone now. Great, I can tell Stacy a thing, or two first hand. Be right back.

I'm back. Yes, Stacy did call ... in response to a Tweet of mine, I gather. The wrong question referred to below is the one I mentioned just above. If I'm so cynical, why do I think as I do regarding Palin and a possible run?

@jimmiebjr a gd post, y? Looks lk link bait. @rsmccain 's asking the wrong Qstion, gets the wrong answer, as Xpctd. ; ) is.gd/6FrzX5

Of some relatively small number of people in politics I genuinely admire, Donald Rumsfeld is one of them. I think I'll wrap this up with a little Rumsfeldian logic for now.

[T]here are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.

I, too, have my unknown unknowns on this topic. So, as with any potential candidate, until Sarah Palin comes out publically and makes it clear one way, or the other, for all anyone can know, she may not run. I'd be surprised, but it is possible. However, based upon what I do know and what I know I don't know, the only conclusion I can reach is, she's running.

Good Grief! I knew that Sarah was driving the lamestream media crazy, but I never thought the right-wing blogosphere (of which I consider myself a member) would go crazy as well!

Cross-posted from Roderic Deane

Rollercoaster Ho-Hum

Here is my opening monologue from today's The Roderic Deane Show.

The title for today’s show is “Rollercoaster Ho-Hum”. It comes from two observations I had of last week’s events. The first relates to Wall Street and the New York Stock Exchange. I was prepared to see a gloomy Monday and predicted that the DOW would not react well to Standard and Poor’s debt downgrade from Friday after the markets closed. Man, I was right on that one as the DOW dropped almost 635 points. I can’t begin to understand what happened over the rest of the week. On Tuesday it was up 430, on Wednesday, down 520, Thursday, up 423 and on Friday it was up again, 126 points. If that ain’t the definition of a rollercoaster ride, I don’t know what is.

A Friday article by Kate Gibson from The Wall Street Journal’s Market Watch had this to say:

U.S. stocks dialed back on [early] Friday gains after a [report was published that showed a] gauge of consumer confidence illustrated a sharp fall in sentiment early this month, curbing enthusiasm that came with an encouraging report on the nation’s retail sales.

The University of Michigan/Thomson Reuters index of consumer sentiment dropped to 54.9 in August — the lowest in 31 years.

The preliminary figure “mostly captures the craziness of the week and certainly the week before as the survey likely ended this Wednesday,” [blah, blah, blah].

In other words, just when the markets begin to gain a little traction, some other bad news comes out and rattles the market again. But let’s take another look at that index of consumer sentiment. “The lowest in 31 years”! Let’s see, that would take us back to who’s presidency? You guessed it: Jimmy Carter. Coincidence? I think not.

I’ve long believed that the present economic environment could only be compared to the economy during the Carter years from the perspective of my lifetime, but keep one thing in mind. Carter hit that low point 51.7 in his 4th year. Barack Obama has managed to pull it off in his 3rd. And the news just isn’t getting better.

Of course, we are constantly told by Obama himself that he inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression. Although he may have inherited a lousy economy, he sure hasn’t helped it in any way. Consider this: at this same point in Reagan’s first term, the consumer confidence index had risen to 90.9. It remained above 90 for the remainder of Reagan’s time in office, with the exception of just a handful of months.

Now, let’s look at something different. Carter inherited a consumer confidence index of 87.1, Reagan inherited 66.9 and Barack Obama 56.3. So, three years into their presidencies, Carter saw a 26% decline in consumer confidence, Reagan saw a 36% increase and Obama has remained fairly steady with a 2% decline.

I’ll provide a link to the historical data on my blog.

Now for the Ho-Hum part. The announced Republican candidates squared off in a debate in Ames, Iowa last Thursday night. I didn’t watch it, because I was totally absorbed in configuring a new website. I’ll tell you more about the new website when I’m ready. As for the Ames debate, I was underwhelmed by the reports I read after it ended. I posted my impressions on my blog and forwarded that blog post to Conservatives4Palin. The next morning, I saw that Nicole Coulter had written C4P’s immediate reaction to the debate in a post titled “My Ridiculous Summary of the Fox News GOP Debate From Iowa”. As I read her post, to my surprise, she had included my entire post in hers! Good Grief, I was just hoping that C4P would consider my post as a reader submission.

You can read what I posted here.

Friends, the campaign season is just beginning. Enjoy the ride. It should be a good one!

...and that my two-cents worth for the week.

Featured items:

Historical trends of the Consumer Confidence Index

Iowa Straw Poll results, from Hot Air

Rick Perry's announcement in South Carolina, from PalinTV

Cross-posted on Roderic Deane.

Why not Sarah Palin?

When all has been written about the outcome of the 2012 Presidential election and all the pundits and prognosticators have "spun" their reasons for being wrong, we will still be left with the gargantuan task of reining in the Federal government. After all, that is the primary task ahead of us.

I will only predict one thing and that is the likelihood of a Republican winner. Barack Obama has done more to destroy our Constitutional Republic than any President in our history. When Obama is defeated, it will allow him to pursue his real goal of leading the United Nations. After his installation as Secretary-General, we can promptly curtail our funding of the United Nations. What a fitting tribute THAT would be!

Amongst the present slate of Republican candidates, who has shown the ability to take on special interests, like oil companies? Who has a proven ability to take on their own party to effect reform? Who has worked in an executive role to break long-existing roadblocks and effect positive change for their constituency? Who has enlisted the support of countless fiscal and social conservatives without once asking for that support? Who has the ability to stand up and state their convictions without fear? Who has a proven ability to "reach across the aisle" to craft bipartisan legislation?

If you can answer those questions honestly, you know who should be the next President of The United States.