Three Thursday Crybabies

(Note: I said a day or so ago that posting would be problematic, but I’ve been able to do so more than I thought. However, tomorrow is anyone’s guess.)

The Inky wingnuttery has been relentless; yesterday, Smerky told us that political correctness is causing the current baby boom in this country (not to rival the post WWII “surge,” if you will, but still statistically significant), and today, Former Senator Eye of Mordor criticizes Barack Obama twice for knowing how to use a TelePrompTer (here).

He also says…

Obama doesn't limit his denial of human rights just to babies in the womb. When he was an Illinois state senator, it was within his pay grade to vote against the Illinois version of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (a bill I authored that passed unanimously in the U.S. Senate). It prohibits the killing of a child after it is born.

Until last week, Obama contended that he never voted against such a bill. He even called those of us who said he did liars. Now, his campaign concedes that Obama voted against - and was the only senator to speak against - legislation to stop infanticide.

I don’t know who in the Obama camp said that; Little Ricky of course doesn’t cite his source and I’m not going to do any research for him on that. However, I should point out that he apparently “didn’t get the memo,” because I already chastised his ideological “sister” Christine Flowers for repeating what is at best a half truth by not pointing out that Obama voted “present” for SB 1095 and other iterations in the Illinois legislature here because, though he objected to the “personhood” provisions of the bill, if you will, he did not wish to kill it outright (a compromise bill was achieved in 2005).

And Little Ricky was also unhappy for the Dem presidential nominee for the following:

(Reporter Cathleen) Falsani (of the Chicago Sun-Times) asked the candidate, "What is sin?" Obama's response: "Being out of alignment with my values."

Santorum was unhappy with Obama’s invocation of “(his own personal) values” instead of those of God, you see.

Which is funny because, upon reading this, it’s obvious Former Senator Man-On-Dog embodies neither.

I simply must share with you the latest from conservative icon Richard Viguerie in response to John W. McBush’s search for a running mate (got this in my Email - sorry, no linky; Viguerie is just a tad full of himself, for the uninitiated)…

An Open Letter from Richard Viguerie to John McCain: Conservatives Can Also Play the Maverick Game

(Manassas, Virginia) The following is an open letter from Richard A. Viguerie, Chairman of ConservativeHQ.com, to Senator John McCain in regard to news reports that the Republican presidential candidate may select a vice presidential running mate who supports abortions rights:

Dear Senator McCain:

The buzz in recent days has been that some of your key aides were calling national and state GOP leaders to alert them to the possibility that you were seriously considering a pro-abortion running mate and to take their temperature on such a selection.

As Dan Henninger of the Wall Street Journal asked: Are you politically “stupid” or do you care little for conservative principles?

It also shows that you don’t understand why the Republican brand has taken a massive beating in recent years. You clearly don’t comprehend why millions of conservatives are off the Republican reservation and sitting on the political sidelines.

Your indication that you’re willing to put a person who has a clear, unequivocal pro-abortion record within a heartbeat of the presidency is alarming.

Pro-life conservatives understand that, to change the laws to protect innocent life, first and foremost, we need good, articulate leadership--from the president and vice president.

To put it as simply and clearly as I can, most Republican leaders at the national and state level have betrayed, abandoned, and sold out the principles that define conservatism. Talk of selecting a pro-abortion liberal Republican (Tom Ridge) or, even worse, a pro-abortion liberal Democrat (Joe Lieberman) drives the Republican brand lower and lower.

Your apparent interest in selecting a running mate who is out of sync ideologically with the vast majority of conservatives reinforces the image of the Republican Party as a party without principle and dedicated to one proposition above all others – the seeking, acquiring, obtaining, and holding onto power.

Senator McCain, you are exceedingly proud of being a political maverick – you wear it as a badge of honor.

Well, poke the base of the Republican Party – the conservatives – in the eye one more time by choosing a pro-abortion vice presidential candidate and conservatives will show you that two can play the maverick game.

Conservatives are people with proudly held principles. We’re now waiting to see if you share our principles.

Sincerely,

Richard A. Viguerie
Chairman, ConservativeHQ.com

And here I always thought “conservative principles” was an oxymoron; color me astonished (and I’m so “on board” with Attaturk concerning this possible veep selection).

This Inquirer article tells us the following about Unisys Corporation and its intent to place a sign with its hideous logo atop Two Liberty Place (this and the Viguerie thing are a day or so old, I’ll admit).

The story tells us that Unisys CEO Joseph McGrath has threatened to halt its plans to move employees from its Blue Bell, PA offices downtown because the city zoning board ruled against him.

However, as Inquirer architecture writer Inga Saffron notes here…

The best towers, I'd argue, don't need signs in the sky; the design is the sign. But when companies insist, it's not unreasonable to expect them to earn their bragging rights.

Philadelphia has traditionally allowed "major tenants" to advertise their presence with big signs on their building facades. Usually, they're expected to place those signs just above the first level. But if you look skyward, you'll see more corporate logos than you might expect in our self-effacing, taste-conscious town - from the historic, sans-serif graphic masterpiece of PSFS to the brand new, acid-green ExcelleRx logo that crowns the 20-story Three Parkway building.

Unisys, however, is leasing a mere 31/2 floors at Two Liberty, or 7 percent of the building. It calls these offices its "global corporate headquarters," although it expects to send only 225 of its 1,700 Blue Bell employees to Center City. The token presence means the Fortune 500 company won't pay a whole lot in business taxes, while it's the employees who will bear the extra wage-tax burden. Sounds like Unisys got a great deal on a billboard.

I think that’s “the skinny” here too. And since McGrath and his cohorts have decided to kick and scream about their precious sign (though, again, as Saffron notes, they’ll represent little more than a token presence in Two Liberty Place), the city should require the company to sublet the leased space (McGrath apparently noted that as a possibility) with an outplacement service, so this corporate mistake will have to compete for its employees.

I’d love to see Mayor Nutter send a message like that to these other ego-inflated members of the “pay no price, bear no burden” investor class the next time one of them tries to bully his or her way into getting what they want. It won’t happen, I know, but it would be nice for a change.

Update 10/08/08: So the new Unisys CEO has experience "restructuring companies before selling them off," huh (here)? Looks like they definitely won't get that sign now (or maybe under another name?)