Global Warming Hits Buenos Aires

Snow is falling in the Argentine capital city:

Argentina’s capital, Buenos Aires, has seen snow for the first time in 89 years, as a cold snap continues to grip several South American nations.

Temperatures plunged to -22C (-8F) in parts of Argentina’s province of Rio Negro, while snow fell on Buenos Aires for several hours on Monday.

I guess Gov. Sanford's "soul mate" must be wearing a coat these days.

Gov. Sanford: God Wants Me to Stay in Office

Hard to argue with logic like that:

In a written message to supporters Monday, Mark Sanford asserted that God’s plan for him includes finishing his term as South Carolina governor.

Sanford is facing calls for his resignation after disappearing to Argentina then returning last week to admit an affair.

“Immediately after all this unfolded last week I had thought I would resign – as I believe in the military model of leadership and when trust of any form is broken one lays down the sword,” Sanford wrote in the message, which he posted on his personal website http://www.governorsanford.com and Facebook page, and broadcast via Twitter.

“A long list of close friends have suggested otherwise – that for God to really work in my life I shouldn’t be getting off so lightly. While it would be personally easier to exit stage left, their point has been that my larger sin was the sin of pride.”

Sanford writes that those friends asserted that “if I walked in with a real spirit of humility then this last legislative term could well be our most productive one - and that outside this term, I would ultimately be a better person and of more service in whatever doors God opened next in life if I stuck around to learn lessons rather than running and hiding down at the farm.”

If Sanford's national ambitions weren't completely shot before this, I'm pretty sure they're toast now.

Democrats Need Better Joke Writers

Democrats are the most humorless bunch, and whoever writes their "jokes" for them needs to be fired. On my worst day I can outwrite those guys when it come to biting responses. Here's one example:

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) had a few choice words about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) landmark climate-change bill after its passage Friday.

When asked why he read portions of the cap-and-trade bill on the floor Friday night, Boehner told The Hill, "Hey, people deserve to know what's in this pile of s--t."

Using his privilege as leader to speak for an unlimited time on the House floor, Boehner spent an hour reading from the 1200-plus page bill that was amended 20 hours before the lower chamber voted 219-212 to approve it.

Eight Republicans voted with Democrats to pass the bill; 44 House Democrats voted against it.

Pelosi's office declined to comment on Boehner's jab. But one Democratic aide quipped, "What do you expect from a guy who thinks global warming is caused by cow manure?"

That's the best response to Boehner they can come up with? Pathetic. Besides that, Republicans don't believe global warming is even occurring. Get it right, Dems.

Of course, it's hard to respond to the truth, and what Boehner said is right on the money.

Let's look at another example from John F'ing Kerry, the 2004 Dem presidential loser. Five years later and the good news is: He's still a loser.

During the height of South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford's mysterious disappearance Kerry tried to make a funny:

“Too bad if a governor had to go missing it couldn’t have been the governor of Alaska. You know, Sarah Palin.”

When you have to explain your jokes, you've failed.

However, Sarah Palin is not humor-impaired as is Kerry. Here was her response:

Former GOP vice-presidential candidate Palin, in Kosovo visiting troops, said yesterday she wanted to reach out to the Bay State Democratic senator.

“He looked quite frustrated and he looked so sad,” she told the troops in comments later posted on YouTube. “I just wanted to reach out to the TV and say: ‘John Kerry, why the long face?’ ”

Nicely done, and given with just the right amount of snark.

However, it didn't end there. Kerry's lackey felt a response was necessary, and it was as lame as the first attempt:

"We stand corrected, the truth is every Democrat hopes Governor Palin is in the public eye for a long, long time, especially on the 2012 presidential ballot," Kerry spokeswoman Jodi Seth says. "Lately it's been Vice President Cheney that everyone hopes would lose the cameras and go for a long leisurely hike on the Appalachian Trail. And good grief, if anyone thinks John Kerry is afraid of strong, smart women, they sure haven't met his brilliant wife and two independent daughters. It sounds like getting crushed these last two election cycles cost some of these Republicans their sense of humor."

Kerry was obviously stung by Palin's remark to come back with such a pained response. It isn't the Republicans lacking a sense of humor. Our jokes are actually funny. They're not cries of pain as we see from the Democrats.

A GOP Sex Scandal a Week Will Guarantee Nationalized Health Care

Don't see the connection? Let Mark Steyn help:

In a lousy week, Mark Sanford had one stroke of luck: Michael Jackson chose the day after the governor's news conference to moonwalk into eternity, and thus gave the media's pop therapists a more rewarding subject to feast on – or at any rate one of the few stories whose salient points are weirder than Sanford's. Not that the governor didn't do his best to keep his end up on the pop culture allusions: "I've spent the last five days crying in Argentina," he revealed, in presumably unconscious hommage to Evita.

The plot owed less to Tim Rice and Andrew Lloyd Webber than to one of those Fox movies of the early Forties in which some wholesome All-American type escapes the stress and strain of modern life by taking off for a quiet weekend in Latin America, and the next thing you know they're doing the rhumba on the floor of a Rio nightclub surrounded by Carmen Miranda and 200 gay caballeros prancing around waving giant bananas. In this case, the gentlemen of the South Carolina Press were the befuddled caballeros and Gov. Sanford was bananas.

There is a rather large point to all this. As my National Review colleague Kathryn Jean Lopez observed, a sex scandal a week from the Republicans will guarantee us government health care by the fall – in the same way that the British Tories' boundlessly versatile sexual predilections helped deliver the Blair landslide of 1997. And once government health care's in place the game's over: Socialized medicine redefines the relationship between the citizen and the state in all the wrong ways, and, if you cross that bridge, it's all but impossible to go back. So, if ever there were a season for GOP philanderers not to unpeel their bananas, this summer is it.

The reality is that Democrats never get punished for these things. They can have whatever sordid affairs they want to have and their voters and the press will just shrug and say "it's just sex". However, when Republicans do this stuff it becomes the scandal of the year and everyone demands their resignation or ouster at the polls. It's not fair, but that's the way it is.

If prominent Republicans keep thinking with their dipstick, they will ensure that the Democrat socialist agenda will be passed into law.

Gov. Sanford and the Girl From Ipanema

I mentioned the other day the South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford's mysterious disappearance. According to information coming from his mea culpa press conference, he's been a busy boy. Here are some tweets from news reporters covering the presser:

From Mark Ambinder: Sanford concedes affair with Argentinian woman; says it began innocently and evolved over the past year.

From Jonathan Serrie: SC Gov admits to extramarital affair, apologizes to wife, children and people of South Carolina.

From Allahpundit: This is one of the most amazing political implosions ever. Not only adultery but mysterious intercontinental flights

From Breaking News: During an emotional news conference, SC Gov. Stanford said he is resigning as chairman of the Republican Governors Association.

From Jim Geraghty: I'd like those who thought I was too tough on Sanford yesterday to shut the hell up right now.

His political future is now official torched. He was one of the bright lights among conservatives, but that's all over now.

Of course, as Rush says if Sanford was a Democrat this would all have been considered a resume' enhancement.

Gov. Sanford's Big Adventure

This is a bit odd:

Where is South Carolina's governor?

The lieutenant governor doesn't know, and neither does a state senator who's a close confidante. Even Gov. Mark Sanford's wife is in the dark.

Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer said he's been told the governor's staff is in contact with the second-term Republican, but Sanford's wife said she hasn't heard from him in several days, including Father's Day.

"He was writing something and wanted some space to get away from the kids," Jenny Sanford told The Associated Press while vacationing with the couple's four sons at their Sullivans Island beach house. She said she didn't know where he was, but wasn't concerned.

Sanford, who's also chairman of the Republican Governors Association, earned a reputation as the nation's most vocal anti-bailout governor by refusing $700 million in federal stimulus money for schools until he lost a court battle earlier this month.

His spokesman Joel Sawyer released a statement saying the governor was taking a break after losing the fight.

"Gov. Sanford is taking some time away from the office this week to recharge after the stimulus battle and the legislative session and to work on a couple of projects that have fallen by the wayside," Sawyer said.

Sawyer wouldn't say where the Sanford was, but said in another release the governor let his staff know where he was going before he left last week and said he would check in.

A post-session wind-down isn't uncommon and he goes "out of pocket for a few days at a time to clear his head," Sawyer said. "Obviously, that's going to be somewhat out of the question this time given the attention this particular absence has gotten."

Gov. Sanford's name has come up lately as a potential presidential nominee, but this episode will hurt him regardless of his reasoning. Chief executives can't just disappear when they want to. I can already see the ads that will be used against him.

UPDATE: Don't bother making any attack ads. The governor's career is over.

The Tea Party Cover Band

Don Surber and others report on the plan by two GOP governors to start a Tea Party movement of their own:

Politico reported: “Hoping to recapture the grassroots energy of last month’s tea parties, Republican Govs. Mark Sanford of South Carolina and Rick Perry of Texas will host a tele-town hall Thursday that’s being dubbed ‘Tea Party 2.0′.”

I’ll wait until it is beta-tested.

Oh, I am a Republican all right. I do hope they recapture the House of Representatives next year.

But this is a time for Republican leaders to listen to conservatives.

Republicans ran a moderate at the top of the ticket last year and he was clubbed like a baby seal. Conservatives held their noses and voted for him. Moderates went for the cute guy who looks good in swim trunks.

And now they want to come back and demand that conservative Republicans abandon their principles?

I think not.

As to spending — and the Tea Parties are about first and foremost about the spending — Republicans had better start saying no.

To their credit, every Republican in the House and all but two in the Senate voted against the $787 billion stimulus.

But there are fences to be mended. The more Republicans say no to this socialistic agenda, the better for the party.

As to Tea Party 2.0, Glenn Reynolds said it is not a sequel: “I’d say it’s more like a Tea Party tribute — you know, like a Beatles cover band, or an Elvis impersonator, or all those Grateful Dead imitators. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but they’ll be playing a tune that originated with someone else.”

For Republicans, it is a good place to start. Learn the chords. Learn the lyrics.

There's no way an event put on by a couple of GOP officeholders will have the same energy and vitality as the original Tea Parties which were a grassroots movement by people fed up not only with the direction the Democrats are going, but the direction the Republicans went when they had control. That's why many of the Tea Party organizers would not allow GOP officeholders to speak at their events.

This is a classic example of a politician seeing a parade in progress and jumping in front of it so he appears to be leading the way.

Gov. Sanford Will Reject Some Porkulus Funds

Good:

WASHINGTON — South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford is expected Wednesday to become the first governor to formally reject some of the federal stimulus money earmarked by Congress for his state.

The move will cement Sanford's growing reputation as a political powerhouse among Republican party stalwarts nationwide — though how much of the estimated $8 billion in stimulus funds destined for South Carolina will be affected is unclear. The law allows state legislative leaders to accept funds the governor rejects.

"Our objections to the so-called stimulus bill have been well-chronicled for the way it spends money that we don't have and for the way this printing of money could ultimately devalue the American dollar," Sanford said on Tuesday, even as he acknowledged that he'll accept some.

"Those of us opposed to this package lost the debate on these merits, and I now think it is important we look for creative ways to apply and use these monies in accordance with the long-term interests of our state," he said.

Still, Sanford's formal rejection will enhance his standing as a Republican willing to challenge President Barack Obama, a position Sanford first took Dec. 1, when he traveled to Philadelphia to challenge the then president-elect directly at a meeting with the nation's governors.

Since then, a handful of other governors — all Republicans, all talked about as possible 2012 presidential candidates — have joined Sanford in saying they'd reject at least some of their states' stimulus shares.

Unfortunately, there is a provision in the bill which allows the state legislature to overrule the governor, and in South Carolina, that will probably happen. That provision was inserted in the bill by a South Carolina congressman.

GOP Governors Who Don't Support Porkulus Payments Are Racist

Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina has a theory about GOP Governors who aren't excited about accepting Porkulus payments:

Representative James Clyburn held a roundtable meeting to discuss how the newly-signed stimulus package will affect South Carolina.

He said not only would it create jobs, but also repair roads and bridges around the state.

Clyburn also had some strong comments for Gov. Mark Sanford on why he thinks he opposed the stimulus.

“The governor of Louisiana expressed opposition. Has the highest African-American population in the country. Governor of Mississippi expressed opposition. The governor of Texas, and the governor of South Carolina. These four governor’s represent states that are in the black belt. I was insulted by that,” Clyburn said. “All of this was a slap in the face of African-Americans. It had nothing to do with Governor Sanford.”

The U.S. has a black belt? So what does that make Michigan, Illinois and Indiana, the black collar?

And, are we going to have to go through this nonsense every time a GOP official shows less than total love and adoration for something Obama wants to do?

This is going to get very annoying.

Political Quote of the Day

From South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford:

“We’re moving precipitously close to what I would call a savior-based economy.”

Read the interview. Gov. Sanford has been especially good on the whole Porkulus and bailout issue from the start.

Blaming Social Conservatives for GOP's Ills

Ramesh Ponnuru has an important piece on the impact of social conservatives on the GOP and the efforts to blame them the party's problems:

In 2002 and 2004, Republicans ran hard on social issues and the courts — and scored victories at every level of politics. In 2006 and 2008, they left those issues off the table, and got walloped. It follows, naturally, that the social issues are to blame for the Republican defeats.

At least, that’s the conclusion that a chorus of commentators has reached. They are attempting to persuade Republicans to soften or downplay their party’s social conservatism and hide its social conservatives in order to resume winning elections. About this campaign to sideline the social Right, three things can be said with a fairly high degree of confidence: It is predictable; it will fail; and it is wrong.

The impulse to blame social conservatives arises nearly every time Republicans fail. They were blamed for the elder Bush’s 1992 defeat, as though he would have won if only Pat Robertson had not spoken at the Republican convention. They were blamed for losses in the House in 1998. And now they are being blamed for McCain’s rout.

Republicans’ social conservatism provokes more intense and angry opposition than their positions on other issues do. In some parts of the country — places where political writers tend to congregate, for example — social conservatives are so thin on the ground that it is easy to underestimate how widespread their views are. So it is understandable that many people would leap to the conclusion that Republicans would have more support if they backed off on social issues.

Yet there is no real likelihood that the party is going to abandon or reduce its opposition to abortion in particular or kick aside the social conservatives in general. Social conservatives are, for one thing, too woven into the structure of the party to be ejected. In 2004, the Republican convention showcased pro-choicers such as Arnold Schwarzenegger, Rudolph Giuliani, George Pataki, and Colin Powell. So far, the only candidates anyone is mentioning for 2012 are Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, Bobby Jindal, Mark Sanford, and Tim Pawlenty. All are pro-life.

Read the whole thing. When the GOP emphasizes conservative issues (whether social or otherwise), they win and often win big. When they decide to run to the center to appeal to the great unwashed "moderates", they fail.

Just look at Georgia. Saxby Chambliss is a McCain-type Republican. In the general election he led by only 3%. Many social conservatives voted for the libertarian candidate in the general election. Introduce social conservative Sarah Palin into the campaign to spark interest on that side of the party (and eliminate the libertarian who came in third in the general) and Chambliss wins by 15%.

The pointy-headed GOP Beltway crowd loves to blame the evangelicals or social conservatives for the party's electoral failures, but it's the failure to appeal the issues that social conservatives value that has actually hurt them.

Romney's Campaign for VP

John Heilemann writes about the obvious campaign that Mitt Romney is running to be John McCain's VP:

That Mitt Romney wishes to occupy the VP slot on the Republican ticket with John McCain comes as no surprise — but the blatantness of his campaign is highly amusing. As a general rule, the way one goes about these things is to be more or less subtle. You hint. You nudge. You get your pals to lobby quietly, behind the scenes. What you don’t do, for heaven’s sake, is just come out and ask. But basically this is what Romney has done — or, rather, is doing.

In the middle of March, he went on Fox News and declared, “I think any Republican leader in this country would be honored to be asked to serve as the vice-presidential nominee, myself included.” A couple of weeks later, he accompanied McCain on the trail, attending some fund-raisers with him out West and showering the Arizonan with praise. And now Mitt is stumping for McCain in Pennsylvania, keynoting a Republican dinner in Lancaster tonight — a turn that the guys over at NBC’s First Read label an “audition.”

What does McCain think of all this? He seems as amused by it as I am. The day after Romney’s Fox News turn, McCain was asked on his campaign jet if he thought Romney was angling for the gig. He replied, “I got that impression from him watching his interview last night, I got that impression” — cackling the whole time. But that doesn’t mean McCain isn’t taking the concept seriously. His veep-selection process in still in its early days, as his people run down lists that include governors from pivotal states such as Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, Charlie Crist of Florida, and Mark Sanford of South Carolina, as well as outside-the-box choices such as Condi Rice. But I can report that Romney has some powerful advocates in his corner. In fact, according to a well-informed, highly placed Republican insider, two of them are Karl Rove and George Herbert Walker Bush — individuals who are especially influential in tandem, because they represent such different generations, outlooks, and brands of Republicanism.

The arguments for and against Romney as McCain’s VP can be summed up pretty easily. On the positive side: (a) his business background and ability to talk about the economy fluently, which McCain manifestly lacks; (b) his fund-raising prowess and his ginormous bank account — though God knows Tag and the other Romney kids would weep at the prospect of seeing more of their inheritances poured into politics; (c) his capacity to help McCain in Michigan and New Hampshire, and potentially to offset some of Barack Obama’s strength in the Rocky Mountain West. On the negative side: (a) his flip-floppery on issues, which the press would scrutinize more heavily than they did during the primaries because of the chance he might wind up sitting in the Big Chair either during or after McCain’s first term; (b) his Mormonism, for the same reasons; and (c) the fact that the Democrats and the media would replay endlessly the vicious bickering and snide potshots between him and McCain during the primaries.

This last point is of particular importance. If you were paying even cursory attention to the Republican primaries, you know that McCain and Romney don’t seem to enjoy each other’s company much. And the truth is that the degree of animus they evinced in public conveyed only a fraction of the bad feeling that existed between them. (As for their aides, well, the words that come to mind to describe their mutual disregard run along the lines of “despise,” “detest,” and “loathe.") When asked about whether this might make it, um, awkward for them to run together, McCain has said that warm personal feelings aren’t required for running mates: “I don’t think you have a personal relationship, but you have to have a comfortable, professional relationship.”

I'm not at all in favor of Mitt Romney for VP. I think McCain would do much better with a running mate who hasn't been running for president for the last couple of years. The voters are tired of this whole thing and a fresh face is going to be needed if McCain is to have a chance to win.