FROM ABC's THE NOTE (hat tip KATHYRN at NRO):
If the Bush White House weren't so completely distracted by the Wilson leak investigation, perhaps the President would be able to actually get something done — besides sign CAFTA, the highway bill, and the energy bill into law; read all the improving economic figures; celebrate his still-bullet-proof Supreme Court nomination; and continue along semi-stealthily on 2006 fundraising and candidate recruitment. And if the Democrats weren't so sure that a one-sentence party platform ("Karl Rove should be in jail.") was a sure winner, perhaps they would Notice that the Republican majority is likely to get at least some credit with voters for passing these laws; that the Bill Clinton Democratic Party of free trade just might have been dead and buried shortly after midnight; and that the AFL thing — along with the America Coming Together thing, along with the DNC thing — leaves the party with some serious money and organization questions.
And/but there's still the Iraq war and Social Security for the White House to deal with, but does anyone think Democrats are scoring political points galore on those? And/but perhaps Democrats will be able to convince the country by votin' time that Washington is a corrupt, Republican-dominated cesspool of special interest greed and that the macro economic numbers mean nothing. (Just like in 2002 an7d 2004. . .) So completes our snap-shot summary of everything you have to know about American politics in fewer than 250 words.
And from POWERLINE:
It must be very strange to be President Bush. A man of extraordinary vision and brilliance approaching to genius, he can't get anyone to notice. He is like a great painter or musician who is ahead of his time, and who unveils one masterpiece after another to a reception that, when not bored, is hostile. Hyperbolic? Well, maybe. But consider Bush's latest master stroke: the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. The pact includes the U.S., Japan, Australia, China, India and South Korea; these six countries account for most of the world's carbon emissions. The treaty is, in essence, a technology transfer agreement. The U.S., Japan and Australia will share advanced pollution control technology, and the pact's members will contribute to a fund that will help implement the technologies. The details are still sketchy and more countries may be admitted to the group later on. The pact's stated goal is to cut production of "greenhouse gases" in half by the end of the century.
What distinguishes this plan from the Kyoto protocol is that it will actually lead to a major reduction in carbon emissions! This substitution of practical impact for well-crafted verbiage stunned and infuriated European observers. I doubt that the pact will make any difference to the earth's climate, which will be determined, as always, by variations in the energy emitted by the sun. But when the real cause of a phenomenon is inaccessible, it makes people feel better to tinker with something that they can control. Unlike Kyoto, this agreement won't devastate the U.S. economy, and, also unlike Kyoto, the agreement will reduce carbon emissions in the countries where they are now rising most rapidly, India and China. Brilliant. But I don't suppose President Bush is holding his breath, waiting for the crowd to start applauding.
And more from POLIPUNDIT:
... Back in mid-July 1997, during the liberal media’s self-proclaimed “greatest economic expansion of all time,” the four-week moving average of initial claims for state jobless benefits (i.e., layoffs) stood at 324,000. At that point in time the employed workforce totaled 129.822 million persons. Therefore, layoffs were 0.25% of the employed workforce back then.
On the other hand, as of the end of last week the moving average of initial jobless claims was 318,000. As of June 30, 2005, the employed workforce amounted to 141.638 million persons. Ergo, layoffs presently are right around 0.22% of the employed workforce.
A similar result would be reached if you compared June 2005 with June 1997. And with May 2005 versus May 1997. And then April 2005 vs. April 1997.
Yeah, that’s correct, Krugman-Dobbs: As a percentage of the employed workforce fewer people are getting laid off from their jobs, this Spring and Summer, when compared to the exact same portions of Saint Bill’s second term. Heck, as of right now there are fewer *nominal* layoffs, by way of comparison, despite the fact nearly 12 million more people gainfully are employed. I blame the economy for that. ... Data: here, here, and here. And, let's not forget that Georgia and Ukraine and Afghanistan and Iraq and Lebanon and Egypt are becoming more democratic than ever, too. And not ALL of that can be credited to Arafat's death or Hariri's assissination, either!
In other words: Bush - in just 5 years - has accomplished more than Clinton in 8! (But that's NOT a fair comparison because BJ Clinton sucked. Let's just say that Bush has accomplished more in 5 years than most presidents did in 8!) And I didn't even mention passing the Patriot Act (and renewing it), or the tax cuts, or the re-organization of the DOD, or the Energy Bill, or turning Qaddafy, or exposing the AQ Kahn Network, or the Medicare drug plan, or the No Child Left Behind Act.
SO... IF Bush is a "smirking chimp", then the dems are slugs and the MSM are amoebas.
