Hillary Clinton has been strangely silent for the last several days. Given the State Department’s possible role in failing to prevent the Christmas Day terror incident, that might be understandable.
My prediction for 2010: Hillary will resign her position as Secretary of State, and rebuild her own promotional machine, a la Sarah Palin, to restore her political fortune. It must really chafe her to watch Palin waltz about the country, free as a bird, appearing before large, adoring crowds, while she is stuck on a diplomatic mission to Lower Slobovia. She will position herself as the anti-Obama, the progressive who has all the right credentials, but also the experience and competence to do the job right.
Environmental scientist Kenneth Green counters the claim that the Climategate scandal is much ado about nothing.
Climategate reveals skulduggery the general public can understand: that a tightly-linked clique of scientists were behaving as crusaders. Their letters reveal they were working in what they repeatedly labelled a “cause” to promote a political agenda.
That’s not science, that’s a crusade. When you cherry-pick, discard, nip, tuck, and tape disparate bits of data into the most alarming portrayal you can in the name of a “cause,” you’re not engaged in science, but in the production of propaganda. And this clique tried to subvert the peer-review process as well. They attempted to prevent others from getting into peer reviewed journals — thus letting them claim skeptic research wasn’t peer-reviewed — a convenient circular (and dishonest) way to discredit skeptics.
The dishonesty exposed by the Climategate data is not an isolated aberration. Rather, it is symptomatic of a wider disease that has infected all of Western culture. “Truth” is no longer an objective standard that should be sought and honored. Instead, it has become whatever the individual wants it to be. In this case, the “whatever” is a one-world utopia governed by technocrats who know what’s best for the rest of us.
Patrick Poole catalogues the incidents of Islamist terrorism in 2009, and concludes with a disturbing prediction about the year ahead.
What 2009 has taught us is how rapidly the nature of the threat from Islamic jihadists is evolving and how utterly unable our government is to recognize and respond to that threat. Sadly, I predict that the coming year will show us how bold, aggressive, and inventive our enemies have become and how little we have learned from the events of the past year.
A Wall Street Journal editorial describes a new legal tactic being used by greenies to bypass the legislative roadblocks to moving their environmental agenda forward: sue the CO2 polluters for contributing to global warming.
Of course, this strategy opens up a whole new can of worms, since every human on the planet produces CO2 simply by breathing.
In other words, the courts would become a venue for a carbon war of all against all. Not only might businesses sue to shackle their competitors—could we sue the New York Times for deforestation?—but judges would decide the remedies against specific defendants. In practice this would mean ad hoc command-and-control regulation against any industries that happen to catch the green lobby’s eye.
J. R. Dunn explains the linkage between China’s snub of Obama at the Copenhagen conference, and Barry’s earlier bow to the Japanese emperor. The sobering lesson: diplomatic protocol matters.
This only goes to underline the reason why diplomatic protocol exists in the first place — to exclude through ritual actions all possibilities that error, misunderstanding, or personal pique might interfere with matters of state. Obama has yet to learn this. His insistence on winging it, on reinventing established practice on his own terms, is potentially far more than simply embarrassing. It could be actively dangerous. His refusal to go by the rules may well have cost him the opportunity to pose as Savior of Gaia in Copenhagen. It may cost him — and the country — far more at some future time.
UPDATE: From Victor Davis Hanson, a prediction for 2010:
I think the overseas bowing, apologizing, and kowtowing will stop in 2010—it brought no tangible results. Indeed, Obama is one bow away from global caricature and humiliation.
Jamie Glazov explains why the Left in this country cannot bring themselves to admit the obvious regarding the Ft. Hood shooter:
To recognize the evil of Nidal Hasan and his ideology, to admit the existence of pernicious enemies, is to concede that there are societies, cultures, and systems that are much more unjust than ours. This is an untenable step for leftists to take, because it means acknowledging that there is something superior about our civilization that’s worth saving and defending.
The Left’s infatuation with multiculturalism has led it to a point where reality has been turned on its head: Our own society is evil and deserves to be knocked down a few notches, while Islamic fanatics are merely victims who must be understood in light of the oppressive imperialism forced upon their societies.
As you may (or may not) know, Maureen Dowd is a typical New York Times lefty whose columns make great bird cage liner. However, she has an older brother, Kevin, whose conservative views must make for some interesting family reunions. Once a year, Maureen turns over her column to Kevin, who takes full advantage of the opportunity to undo all the damage inflicted by his sister during the previous year. This year’s column is no exception. A must read.
From the comments:
There are all kinds of theories to explain you and Kevin, including birth order (eldest child generally conservative in order to maintain the status quo), Remember that Nature shuffles about 30,000 cards upon the fertilization of an egg during the process of known as genetic recombination which can make siblings seem almost unrelated at the end. Of course, dropping a baby on the head doesn’t help (ask mom or dad this New Years to finally fess up which one of you they dropped). While you’re asking, you may pull mom off to a corner and ask her if she now regrets that thing she had for the milkman. Does Kevin have red hair? Let’s just say that you both keep the Nature versus Nurture debate alive and well. To both you and Kevin, I bid you peace on earth and goodwill to all men (and women).
It’s reassuring to know that, at least in some families, the bonds of love are stronger than politics.