Honestly. What’s left to say? Other than I guess we should be glad he didn’t appoint a “czar” for going after official enemies critics of the regime. At least we’re being spared that delicious bit of irony. (thanks to JD)

After which he had himself a Guinness at a pub in Ireland and screamed “yes we can!” in Gaelic to a bunch of college students. Next, it’s on to Buckingham Palace, where the President is bringing his own safety windows for the luxury Belgian suite, and where the size of his entourage will displace many of the Queen’s staff. But before you become indignant, remember: George Bush let black people

Which, in and of itself, means only that he’s correctly gauged the political winds, should he wish to appeal to TEA Party conservatives. But then to follow up your promise to tell the truth with a speech in Iowa calling for the end to ethanol subsidies? That suggests that perhaps he (unlike, say, Newt Gingrich and the politics of local pander) has seen the light. And so that marks Pawlenty

Reason: Now that Osama bin Laden is dead, we can turn our attention to another remorseless enemy who for years has sown death and destruction among blameless innocents. I refer, of course, to Ronald McDonald. The McDonald’s mascot may qualify as one of the more annoying characters on the planet. But to his credit, he doesn’t compound his unappealing personality by bossing you around. In that respect, he is far

My bet? A Huntsman push. But what do I know? For what it’s worth, here’s Byron York’s take: How will that affect the race for the Republican presidential nomination? Discussing the matter with representatives of the various candidates Sunday morning, most think it will help their own candidate. No surprises there. But the most important point the campaign reps make is that they now believe, regardless of how much some

Confronted with the odor of establishment GOP flop sweats — an all-too-frequent occurrence in these staunch and heady days of unforced Republican retreats — the WSJ notes, “Paul Ryan’s GOP critics are ObamaCare’s best friends”: Underneath Newt Gingrich’s rhetoric last week about Paul Ryan’s “right-wing social engineering” was a common anxiety about the politics of Medicare: Is this the right moment for entitlement reform? Did the GOP endanger its House

Philip Klein, “Beltway Confidential,” highlights the obvious contradiction in Obama’s AIPAC speech: […] the most alarming aspect of the speech was when Obama managed to completely contradict himself within just two paragraphs. In one, he said that Israel couldn’t be expected to negotiate with a government that includes Hamas, while in the very next paragraph he said not negotiating wasn’t an option. Here are the relevant paragraphs (emphasis mine): Now,

— At least, that’s the new spin coming from the leftist sharks and at least one “rightwing” Trig truther who clings to their bellies like some hirsute drug-addled Remora. And if you think about it, a lot of people did immediately conclude that Obama and his talk of a “contiguous” Palestinian state, which is to be made possible by Israel’s relinquishing of the buffer land it uses to guard against

Because I’m assuming there’s at least one person who has the President’s ear who knows what “contiguous” means, I’m going to conclude that what is happening here is that Israel is being set up — that when they are inevitably attacked (likely, following a September UN declaration that the Palestinians “deserve” a state, and that that state should come at the expense of some of Israel’s land, as opposed to

Karl Rove, the Bushes, and most of the fellas at National Review wept. The truth is, at some other moment in time, Daniels may have made a good GOP candidate. But this is an election where, win or lose, conservatives have to make their case and present a clear, unambiguous, and unapologetic defense of liberty, individualism, free market capitalism, natural rights, and the rule of law proceeding from the Constitution.