Sunday morning witter

Steyn:

Mitt's caricature [...] is that he's an insipid technocrat Ken doll propped up by a lavishly funded campaign.

Hinderaker:

Romney was great: commanding, articulate, assured, a superb communicator. I've never seen anyone better, either in business or in politics......If every voter spent a half hour in a small group with Romney, he would win the election in a landslide. Unfortunately, virtually all voters will get to know him only through television, where he is least effective.

As I write this I'm crossing my fingers, toes and eyes, but chances are we're going to get a clown for President. McCain is a cunning moron, Billary are beyond parody, nakedly corrupt, and Obama is a triumph of appearance over substance. 'The audacity of hope' is junk food for the soul. Mick's right, Obama is only credible because he's sort of black. You can see it now, the buyers' remorse as after the event America registers that it's stuck with a charlatan for 4 years instead of a real man (and the admirable Ann Romney).

This could work out fine in the bigger scheme. Thatcher and Reagan derived their mandates from the absurdities of the preceding administration. In or out of office Romney will become better appreciated over the next 4 years. Either way, Romney 2012!

PS Where in tarnation is Fred Thompson at this hour ? It's his duty, his duty, to endorse the candidate who best represents his, Fred's, beliefs. As the Father of Anglo-American conservatism is said to have said:

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

At least the Clintons know when they lie

Coulter

Fingerspitzengefühl my foot!

I said I'd report back on NYT today. They announced feeble results with the usual lower ad revenues as their business migrates to Craigslist and elsewhere. I'd forecast a positive surprise. The stock slumped 8% immediately. Then, lo, it clawed its way back up to flat by the close. Rallying on bear news,eh? It won't take long for that signal to reach the conscious minds of the bozos* who shorted NYT down here and below. Duh! It's an asset play! And by the way the NYT endorsed the 2 most probable Nominees, both of whom know how to return a favour. Slimy, yet satisfying.

*Some of these bozos are identified here. It figures.

Mad Money, Mitt Romney

I like Jim Cramer. When he sits down and stops yelling, he's a terrific communicator of how markets work. Here he is in show-biz mode:
This unrelated clip shows Cramer at his best and baddest giving a masterclass on market manipulation:

Fingerspitzengefühl

Mick wonders sometimes what he's doing wrong: ..

Some people seem to make the big bucks in their spare time while vigorously pursuing extracurricular activities. I have a tough time finding a day to go skiing.

8 days ago I wrote that the New York Times is 'a lying, treacherous, cowardly thing' and placed a long spread bet on its stock at $14.30. The stock's up 13% so I'm letting the bet run. The timing was pure luck really, but I fantasize there's some fingerspitzengefühl to it. In the spirit of voodoo economics I hereby pre-announce that tomorrow's earnings report for the NYT group will contain a positive surprise to boost the stock towards $20, where I'll close the position. Of course I thought Florida would do that for Romney. Ay caramba! I'll report back tomorrow.

McCain wins Florida

If the nominee is McCain, America and the world are in for a bad few years, probably with the Clintons. I think then the best outcome will be Presidents Clinton followed by Romney in 2012 when he'll have better recognition and may start as the front-runner. I'm suffering from sense of humour loss. I'm queasy at he thought of Giuliani endorsing this mean-spirited, small-brained, beltway-bound, old man. Presumably Giuliani will run as VP. Ay caramba!

Powerlying

The admirable Powerline Blog has commentary which consistently refutes McCainism on substance, yet strokes the fellow like an errant puppy. I think they've been schmoozed up the wazoo to bring them to a contorted compliance. Here John Hinderaker. my favourite, on McCain on the report by John Fund that McCain said that he might not appoint a judge like Sam Alito who "wore his conservatism on his sleeve."

Absent more information, I'm inclined to take McCain at his word, as he certainly supported Justice Alito's nomination and, like all or nearly all of the Republican candidates, has held up Roberts and Alito as model nominees.

For the rest of the call, the Senator was his usual charming self.

The previous day Paul Mingeroff wrote in Powerline:

McCain’s twisting of Romney’s words came during the same week that McCain falsely implied that he had not denigrated his own expertise in economics. Indeed, the smear on Romney may have been part of an attempt to change the subject from the economy, and to deflect attention from McCain’s past admissions about his level of knowledge in this area.

That says McCain is a liar. John Fund stands by his story, so why prefer the word of a liar? Presumably because he stroked you and you admire his heroism as a young man. Well, Mr Hinderaker, the conservative worldview is both tougher and more tragic than that. Get a grip.

Making money out of misery contd.

6 days ago I wrote that the New York Times is 'a lying, treacherous, cowardly thing' and placed a long spread bet on its stock at $14.30. Today the stock went up 9% to $16.07 thanks to the news that a couple of funds have bought 4.9% of the stock and are massaging the egos of the Sulzbergers (who control the voting stock) with a view to reshaping the group's asset base and financing, but not the the voting rights. This subtler approach may well succeed where Morgan Stanley's attempt to enfranchise the B stock crashed against the family's self-importance. Pinch Sulzberger, what is that tolling bell?

Barracking Barack

One steely-minded conservative blogger:

..when I look at the man, I see a charming, gifted politician who happens to be black...I like the guy..

Another steely-minded conservative blogger:

I dunno, I must be missing a gene or two. Everybody, including even some conservatives, is telling me what a fine uplifting orator Barack Obama is. All I see is great gusts of hot air. When he says something that actually has any semantic content, either it is just false, or else it is naked socialism.

This steely-minded conservative blogger: I'm with John Derbyshire. Obama is an alien designed by artificial intelligence to win the nomination by charm and the stupidity of crowds. He's a real threat. If he can beat the Clintons, he can certainly beat McCain who looks and sounds unattractive, but, as crucially, lacks a clearcut political philosophy.

Pants on fire

The polls for the Florida Primary have shown Romney moving up to and maybe past McCain, but it on paper it can go either way. Then McCain said Romney wanted a timetable to leave Iraq, a charge easily smashed in the blogosphere and then boomeranged back with quotes from the Straight Talker that, if anything, he wants to threaten the Iraqis with US withdrawal if benchmarks aren't met to which the Dem reaction at the time was:

"We Catholics call that an epiphany," said Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Joseph Biden, D-Del., who is sponsoring the main Democratic resolution opposing the troop buildup.
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said: "I called for that . . . several weeks ago. I'm glad that John McCain agrees with me.

So far, so self-destructive for McCain. But the kind of coverage below from CNN's legal analyst will be seen everywhere and may turn Florida into a debacle for McCain. I predict that soon will be discovered some dirty trick against McCain thought to originate from the Romney camp.

The hard part for Romney..

..is to beat McCain. Hillary Clinton will be easy. Romney hit the mother lode when he cited " the idea of Bill Clinton back in The White House with nothing to do." My first thought was of a red-faced, white-haired, wheezy, old lecher with a quadruple heart bypass getting a blowjob in the Oval Office from a woman who is not his President. But even less of a vote-winner may be the realization that President Clinton disapproves the 22nd Amendment.

I think since people are living much longer . . . the 22nd Amendment should probably be modified to say two consecutive terms instead of two terms for a lifetime.