Guns, Rape, and Government Insiderdom....

"Diverse weights and diverse measures,
They are both alike, an abomination to the Lord."
Proverbs 20:10

Update: It's also worth pointing out that Marc Ott is the same City Manager who held a training session earlier this year on how to handle female bosses.

-----

Remember these comments from February?!?



And what, pray tell, is happening now?!?

Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo will remain in Austin with a 5 percent pay raise and a new separation agreement should he be fired, Acevedo and City Manager Marc Ott said Wednesday.

Acevedo said he had withdrawn from the San Antonio Police Department’s search for a new police chief. Last month, he had announced that he was one of that city’s five finalists for the job, for which San Antonio had recruited him, Acevedo said Wednesday.

Ott told the American-Statesman he offered Acevedo the retention package as an incentive for Acevedo to withdraw from the San Antonio pool.

Under the agreement, Acevedo’s pay will rise to about $216,000 and he would receive three months’ severance pay should he be fired. If Acevedo didn’t find new employment within three months, he would receive another three months in severance pay. Acevedo’s current salary is $206,086.

....

“We’ve got the Black Lives Matter movement here in Austin; there’s a support march coming up for a fallen police officer,” Acevedo said. “I really want to put energy into bridging the gap and doing the best we can not to fall short. With the current tone of this discussion in the country, I didn’t feel good leaving my community and my department at the height of this discussion at the local and national level.”

Ott said he and the chief have a good working relationship, which is one of the reasons he wanted to keep him in Austin.

“I think that, in many respects, he’s accomplished what many had hoped he would, in terms of bringing transparency to the department — the way they do things and why they do things the way they do,” Ott said. “I think he’s brought structured discipline and accountability that resonates with the community and the people they serve. I do think we still have work to do.”

So if you make an outrageous comment about rape in pursuit of an anti-Second Amendment agenda you get...A BIG RAISE!!!

By contrast, in 2012 a United States' Senate candidate in Missouri made a similarly asinine statement about rape, but drew a pro-Life conclusion and was subsequently drummed out of polite society.

Bottom Line: It's not a secret that government insiders reward their cronies.  Art Acevedo getting a big raise following horrific pro-rape comments is simply the latest example.  Still, shame on City Manager Marc Ott....

The One Texas Democrat who frightens us

Let's rewind to the night of Wendy's filibuster and recall this moment:



Good demagoguery, especially since a female Texas Senator had been speaking for ten hours.

But that's the point.  In 2014, Texas Democrats are going to play victim.  That's why they're running the two women ticket in the first place.

Following yesterday's revelations, Wendy has a ceiling on how far the victim schtick will take her (especially considering that her opponent is in a wheelchair). That's not true in the Lt. Governor's race.  The sky's the limit for whiny gender and race based psuedo-anguish from Leticia running against any white male.  In person, she's much friendlier than Wendy.  And she gets along well with the Lobby.

Which brings us to the uninspiring Republican Lt. Gov field.  During the general election, Leticia and her media allies are going to bait the Republican nominee into saying something stupid. Before any policy consideration, Republican voters need to pick someone who won't take that bait.  Unfortunately, the Republican field doesn't inspire confidence.  One particular candidate is likely to become Todd Akin 2.0.

If Leticia were to pull off the upset, she'd become an instant hero to Democrats. She'd legitimize Battleground.  And that's before she derails our agenda in the Texas Senate.

Choose your Lt. Governor candidate wisely, Texas Republicans....

Tea Party will tame Mitt; an open letter to James Taranto

Dear Sir,

Yesterday, in your Best of the Web column, you engaged in the following speculation:

Since the House is expected to stay under Republican control, Romney may actually turn out to be the one who has the skills to tame the Tea Party.

Over my dead body.

The Tea Party is currently pulling Mitt, along with a number of U.S. Senate candidates, across the finish line.  When Mitt wins, which he will, Mitt will owe us.  We intend to collect.

One dirty little secret about the Tea Party is that we didn't arise in response to Barack Obama, we arose in response to TARP.  To be sure, Obamacare resistance put us on the national radar, but we were around before that.  The Tea Party cannot wait to hold a Republican President accountable.

I addressed this topic at length last month, but once we get into year two and three of President Mitt's administration, policy will take a major Tea Party shift.  We'll probably pass Paul Ryan's budget in year one, but in year two we will come back and demand Congress pass Rand Paul's budget followed by the Uproot and Overhaul proposal from Rick Perry's Presidential campaign.  Over the next decade, the Tea Party will follow Ted Kennedy's legislative strategy in reverse; take what you can get, then immediately ask for more.

In his speech at FreePAC Dallas July, Sen. Mike Lee pointed out that it took 15 years to get from the original Boston Tea Party to ratification of the Constitution.  America's founders got the country where it needed to get, but it didn't happen overnight.  This is a long-term fight, and the Tea Party is not going anywhere.

Sincerely,
Adam Cahn
Austin, TX
November 1, 2012

Todd Akin can still Win

Mark Levin interviews the indefatigable Todd Akin:



Highlights:

•  One out of Six people in Missouri are in Poverty.

• McCaskill's Ethical Problems haven't gone away.

• The New York Times knew about McCaskill's ethical problems and covered them up.

• Akin voted no on No Child Left Behind and TARP

• Levin: "Anytime I hear the word stimulus, it makes me want to hand onto my Wallet."

Donate here.

Republicans (surprisingly easy) path to 60 Senators

One of my pet peeves this election season is that people aren't being aggressive enough in U.S. Senate races.  Of the 33 seats up this cycle, two thirds are held by Democrats.  Of the seats held by Democrats, thirteen are in states that are neither in New England or on the West Coast.

The Republican 'thumpin' of 2006 was six years ago; all those seats are up.

(Author's note: Obviously, this analysis is based on the Republicans holding the seats they currently possess; with the possible exception of the open seat in Maine, they should do that without breaking a sweat.)

Consider the following races:

• Nebraska (open) -- Bob Kerrey vs. Deb Fischer -- Retiring Democrat Ben Nelson was the man behind the infamous Cornhusker Kickback, which gave us Obamacare.  Mitt and Fisher are up 10 in the most recent poll I could find.  Case closed.

• Montana -- Sen. Jon Tester vs. Denny Rehberg -- From the stimulus, to Obamacare, to Dodd-Frank, Jon Tester has voted for every horrific piece of legislation that Obama has signed.  Mitt's up 9 in the most recent poll I could find.  Case closed.

• North Dakota (open) -- Heidi Heitkamp vs. Rick Berg -- This race is similar to the Nebraska race listed above.  Barack Obama is so hated in this state that incumbent Democrat Kent Conrad chose to retire.  This is also a state with a massive oil boom.  Barack Obama, obviously, hates oil.  Mitt's coattails alone should get Berg across the finish line.

• Virginia (open) -- (Former Gov.) Tim Kaine vs. (Former Gov and Sen) George Allen -- In 2006, retiring Sen. Jim Webb barely squeaked by following a manufactured media hit job against (then incumbent Sen.) George Allen.  Furthermore, two years as Barack Obama's DNC chair publicly exposed former Gov. Tim Kaine as a blithering idiot.  In a state where Republicans have been ascendant since Obama took office, and where Mitt is surging, Allen will win.

Keep in mind, with these four easy races, Republicans already have the majority.

• Missouri -- Sen. Claire McCaskill vs. Todd Akin -- Todd Akin can still pull this off; donate here.

This will get Republicans to the majority even if they lose Maine.

•  Wisconsin (open) -- Tammy Baldwin vs. (former Gov. and Bush HHS. Sec'y) Tommy Thompson -- Two words: Scott Walker.  Two more words: Paul Ryan.  Mitt's also surging.

• Ohio -- Sen. Sherrod Brown vs. Josh Mandel -- Sherrod Brown is the most liberal Senator in America (just like Obama).  Josh Mandel is an Iraq vet and a bit of a Wunderkind.  Considering how closely tied Sherrod Brown and Obama are, there will be very few ticket splitters.  Ohio is outperforming the nation economically, and the entire election could come down to whether Ohio voters give Obama or Gov. John Kasich credit.  Republicans seem to be winning that argument.

• Florida -- Sen. Bill Nelson vs. Connie Mack -- Obamacare remains despised in Florida, and Bill Nelson voted for it.  Much like reports of Mark Twain's death, Florida's status as a swing state is greatly exaggerated.  Republicans currently hold every statewide office (except Nelson's) and a massive super-majority in the state legislature.  Connie Mack has a past, but so what?!?  Mitt's gonna win Florida and he'll have coattails.

• Pennsylvania -- Sen. Bob Casey Jr. vs. Tom Smith -- Obama's war on energy development has devastated Pennsylvania.  The Western part of the state, home to the famous 'bitter-clingers,' could swing 80-20 against Obama. Republicans kicked ass in Pennsylvania in 2010 and Tom Smith has been endorsed by DeMint.  Bob Casey is obviously scared.

• West Virginia -- Sen. Joe Manchin vs. John Raese -- Joe Manchin used to be a popular governor.  Then he went to Washington and became a cheap apologist for Obama.  As you read this, Manchin is refusing to cut off foreign aid to Egypt and Libya.  In the Democrat primary, 40% of West Virginia Democrats voted for a convicted felon over Barack Obama.  This is war on coal country.

The Final three seats are longer shots, but they're very winnable.

• Michigan -- Sen. Debbie Stabenow vs. Pete Hoekstra -- Republicans picked up the Governor's seat and a couple U.S. House seats in 2010.  Mitt's within striking distance in the state.  13% undecided.

• Minnesota -- Sen Amy Kloubouchar vs. Kurt Bills -- Minnesota has voted Democrat in every Presidential election since 1976.  That being said, in 2002 Minnesota elected Tim Pawlenty Governor and Norm Coleman to the U.S. Senate.  2012 is going to be a much bigger Republican year than 2002.

• New Mexico (open) -- Martin Heinrich vs. Heather Wilson -- This race is why I really hate Gary Johnson.  Gary Johnson would have been the perfect candidate for this race, but instead he's gone off on his idiotic Presidential campaign.  Instead, we're stuck with uber-RINO Heather Wilson.  Too bad.  New Mexico elected Susana Martinez in 2010.

 Think big people.

Who called it?!?

Having established this forum almost eight months ago, I'd like to review some of my calls in that time:

• Barack Obama's strategic objectives.

• Ted Cruz will win the U.S. Senate race.

• Obama wants chaos.

• Treyvon Martin was a hoax.

• Why Obama REALLY needs his political base.

• Legacy Media lied about the new Libyan government.

• Barack Obama ended Julian Castro's career.

• Erick Stackelbeck on Global Terror Trends.

• Democrats will overreact to Todd Akin.

• Sending Kira Davis to Charlotte.

• Obama's admin will attempt to release the Blind Sheikh.

Not a bad record; I've got a few others that I'm pretty sure will materialize in early November!!!

The Prideful Arrogance of Democrats

Last week, I wrote about the Democrats overreaction to the Todd Akin kerfuffle.  I was going to leave it at that.  Then Tropical Storm Isaac caused the GOP to postpone day one of the convention.

Apparently, Democrats think a tropical storm is some sort of anti-Republican Divine intervention.  Former Michigan Governor (and moron) Jennifer Granholm thinks so.  Illinois congressman Danny Davis apparently agrees.  So does Obama supporter actor Samuel L. Jackson.

Democrats are turning their convention into abortion-palooza.  Democrats are redefining marriage.  Now, Democrats are speaking for God.

Keep in mind, Democrats aren't speculating about God's intent with humility (which would be fine); they're presuming to speak for Him.

Consider yourself warned, Democrats; this won't end well.

Update: Jonathan Gurwitz has more.

The Coming Democrat Akin Overreaction

Todd Akin is an idiot.  While I agree that he's getting a raw deal, the bottom line is that he flubbed a predictable question for which any pro-life male has to prepare.  Akin's comment, however, is paving the way for a Democrat overreaction that will hurt Democrats far more than Akin's comment will hurt Republicans.

In reaction to Akin, Democrats have already turned their convention into abortionpalooza.  They're going to feature the heads of Planned Parenthood and NARAL; they've even managed to draw Marxist skank "Reproductive Rights Activist" Sandy Fluke back from whatever rock she originally crawled out from under. This won't end well for Democrats.

Abortion isn't popular.

What Democrats fail to understand is that the Sexual Revolution was a massive lie, and that women bore the brunt of its consequences.  When wealthy liberals like Sandy Fluke promote the doctrine of consequence-free, government-subsidized fornication, normal women see through that lie.  Normal women are concerned about the economy, not in having the government protect either gender from the consequences of poor sexual decisions.

The frustrating thing is that there's a major economic issue embedded in this discussion.  Sexual promiscuity often leads to welfare, which leads to government spending and debt, with predictable consequences for economic growth and employment.  Unfortunately, Republicans would never have the cojones to argue that promiscuity begets poverty.

Sandy Fluke is a uniquely unattractive figure, and that's not a dig at her physical appearance.  Sandy Fluke is protected from the consequences of the lifestyle she promotes.  Normal women aren't.  Normal women understand poor sexual choices lead to horrific consequences.  Government subsidies cannot alter the wages of sin.

Todd Akin messed up.  He flubbed an obvious and predictable question, and he deserves to suffer the consequences.  That being said, if Democrats want to turn this into a fight between Todd Akin's inartful attempt to save lives, and everything Sandy Fluke represents; I'm not afraid of that fight.

On Todd Akin

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you;
Before you were born, I sanctified you;
I ordained you a prophet unto the nations."
- Jeremiah 1:5

I have two thoughts on the Todd Akin kerfuffle; one moral, one political.  On a moral level, Claire McCaskill's willingness to murder unborn babies is far more offensive than Todd Akin's in-artful comment.  On a political level, however, Akin fell into an obvious trap, which questions his competence.

No politician who supports murdering unborn babies should get to claim the moral high ground on anything.  Unborn babies deserve to live.  Claire McCaskill wants to murder unborn babies.  Todd Akin, as in-artfully as he may have said it, wants to save lives.  Which is worse?!?

Upon hearing about this incident, my first instinct was to circle the wagons around Akin and indignantly counterattack.  That does not, however, strike me as the prudent course.  This comment illustrates an inability to focus on the basic moral issue.

When you run for office on a pro-life platform, especially as a male, you need to prepare for the 'abortion in the case of rape question.'  During his Presidential campaign, Rick Santorum gave the model response: "the rape isn't the baby's fault."  You then direct follow up questions to James Robison.  Todd Akin, by contrast, gave a meandering answer about 'legitimate rape' (whatever that is) and the likelihood of conception.  By falling into such a predictable trap, I worry about what trap Akin falls into next.

Todd Akin allowed irrelevant contingencies to distract from the question of murdering unborn children.  Claire McCaskill, like all Democrats, needs to be hammered on this issue.  Unfortunately, I no longer trust Todd Akin to competently challenge her on this, or any, issue.  God is just.  If Todd Akin falls on his sword now, he will be rewarded in the future.

Update: It looks like Akin's staying in; he better go on offense against "Claire McCaskill Child-Murderer."

"Admit nothing, Deny Everything, Counterattack." Roger Stone

Update II: Welcome Caffeinated Thoughts readers.