The Washington Post reports on President Obama’s West Point graduation speech:

President Obama on Saturday offered a glimpse of a new national security doctrine that distances his administration from George W. Bush’s policy of preemptive war, emphasizing global institutions and America’s role in promoting democratic values.

That’s the first paragraph of the Post summary, and already it’s clear Obama’s national security doctrine stretches no further than whatever was programmed into the teleprompter yesterday. How has America promoted democratic values on Obama’s watch? By waiting months before even paying lip service to Iranian dissidents dying in the streets? By criticizing Arizona to the hapless Mexican president, the Communist government in China, and anyone else who will listen? By betraying the Poles, Czechs, and Israelis at every opportunity?

“Yes, we are clear-eyed about the shortfalls of our international system. But America has not succeeded by stepping outside the currents of international cooperation,” he said. “We have succeeded by steering those currents in the direction of liberty and justice — so nations thrive by meeting their responsibilities, and face consequences when they don’t.”

This is, to apply my favorite British phrase, bollocks on stilts. The currents of international cooperation are flowing nicely for anyone President Obama fears may not support toothless UN sanctions against Iran. If you’re wondering what sort of consequences nations face for failing to meet their responsibilities, just ask the Iranian mullahs.

And yet, as he calls for global cooperation, Obama has intensified the U.S. war in Afghanistan. And his administration has repeatedly confronted the dangers of Islamic terrorism on U.S. soil, including unsuccessful attempts to down a Detroit-bound airliner and explode a car bomb in New York’s Times Square.

Emphasis mine. The Obama administration has done everything in its power to avoid confronting the danger of Islamic terrorism. The Attorney General is scarcely willing to utter the phrase “radical Islam.” Based on the Post’s summary, Obama’s West Point speech was an exercise in revisionist history and empty rhetoric.

Turning to the full transcript, one sentence in particular stands out:

“But more than any other nation, the United States of America has underwritten global security for over six decades — a time that, for all its problems, has seen walls come down, and markets open, and billions lifted from poverty, unparalleled scientific progress and advancing frontiers of human liberty.”

This is absolutely true, and incredibly important. And President Obama, whose domestic goals guarantee America will no longer be able to afford anywhere near the military might necessary to assist allies and deter enemies, does not care.

My contribution to today’s geeky online defense of free speech, for reasons I discussed here, here, and here:

You’ve been reading every item I share under “read this” and watching everything I favorite on YouTube… right? Good – I knew it! Seriously though, this is something you don’t want to miss.

I’ve been enjoying a five-part Uncommon Knowledge interview with Mark Steyn, hosted by Peter Robinson at the Hoover Institution. The clips are, like everything featuring Steyn, very relevant and very interesting. Last week the complete interview was released as a single YouTube video, which is 38 minutes long but all kinds of worth it:

Robinson and Steyn’s discussion centers on America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It, which is available in paperback now and which I could not recommend more emphatically. Steyn’s mastery of historic facts and current events is mixed with just enough funny anecdotes to keep his writing from being the most depressing stuff on earth… which is no small feat given much of his subject matter!

America Alone (like the interview linked here) is packed with facts that establish the effects of mass immigration on European nations, and warns of how different classically liberal democratic states will be after imbalanced birth rates take their toll. It’s a subject that gets more important each day, with Greece leading the European nanny-states off the fiscal waterfall and American media & politicians refusing to mention Islamic extremism as a possible motive for a Pakistani’s attempted New York City bombing.

Check out the interview, and buy the book! Because I said so, and that’s… what counts?

Finally, a border state takes serious action to turn back the tide of illegal immigration:

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer on Friday signed into law a controversial bill that seeks to crack down on illegal immigration.

The sweeping measure will make it a crime under state law to be in the country illegally. It will also require local police officers to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are in the country illegally.

Requiring police to question potentially illegal immigrants sounds harsh even to my ears, but it depends on how “a reason to suspect they are in the country illegally” is defined. With the assumption that Arizona’s local authorities will behave rationally, this bill marks a big improvement over the leftist approach of making it nearly impossible for police to identify illegal immigrants.

Predictably, leftists are in an uproar over Arizona’s legislature tackling Arizona’s problem like adults:

“Our failure to act responsibly at the federal level will only open the door to irresponsibility by others,” Obama said. “That includes, for example, the recent efforts in Arizona, which threatened to undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans, as well as the trust between police and their communities that is so crucial to keeping us safe.”

Yes, that is the President of the United States, whining like an ACLU lawyer about how enforcing laws will ruin our trust in the authorities. Illegal immigrants are breaking the law by being in Arizona – right? Isn’t that what it means when you put the words “illegal” and “immigrant” side by side?

As far as President Obama is concerned, dealing with illegal immigration in any manner that doesn’t convert a lawbreaking interest group into permanent Democrat voters is irresponsible. Given Obama’s definition of what’s not irresponsible, it’s tough to share his concern. Federalism: sorry D.C. hippies, but we’ve still got some.

Friday, April 9^th is Tax Freedom Day, when the average American has earned enough to pay Uncle Sam and Uncle Sam’s various relatives what they demand. Ohio is somehow a day ahead of the average, so in honor of the big day tomorrow I thought I’d dig through some salary info for public administrators here in Franklin County. As boring as I am, I ought to make an effort to avoid any talk of numbers or statistics. As stubborn as I am, I won’t!

With employment and the economy in general down for the past year and a half, I wanted to see how the smallest of government big-shots were rewarding themselves relative to 2007 and 2008. Despite widespread populist railing against private industry salaries and bonuses, I expected to see pay increases for the insulated local bureaucrats our tax dollars keep employed. Given some of the things I’ve read recently, I was pleasantly surprised by the data.

A helpful CPA in the Franklin County Auditor’s office responded to my public records request promptly, with salary data on all Franklin County employees from 2007-2010. Download the Excel file if you’d like to check my numbers or do some analysis of your own. I’ll list hourly rates instead of annual salaries, as 2009 contained 27 pay periods instead of the usual 26. Let’s start with the highest branch on the Franklin County tree, shall we?

Commissioner’s Office

Commendably, the two highest-paid administrators in the Commissioner’s office received no pay raises this year. That makes 2008′s 6% increases in their six-figure salaries a little easier to swallow.

Department of Job and Family Services

Job and Family Services (which you’ll notice is under the Commissioner’s office on the county org chart) is more complicated because of new hires, departures, and title changes. I should also note that David Migliore, who was Chief Deputy in the Clerk of Courts office while I was employed there from 2005-2007, is hardly my favorite person. I spent my last 6 months – as a Programmer Analyst 1 doing Programmer Analyst 2 work – waiting to hear back about a pay raise request that Migliore ignored literally until the day I resigned.

⁽¹⁾ – Drop in Director’s pay from 2008-2009 reflects a change from Douglas E. Lumpkin to David E. Migliore. I don’t know who decided Migliore should be making around $130,000, but it’s nice that he started at a lower salary than the outgoing Director and didn’t get a raise in 2010.

⁽²⁾ – In 2008 the Department of Job & Family Services added a new Assistant Director, Anthony S. Trotman. The 2009 data list Trotman as a second Director, salaried at $62.37 – equivalent to a 27.86% raise. Trotman isn’t listed at all for 2010, but the additional Assistant Director position remains.

As I said, this is more complicated than the Commissioner’s Office, where the two highest-paid employees were the same guys with the same titles from 2007-2010. I won’t pretend to understand why a second Assistant Director was added to the Department of Job and Family Services in 2008, but I’ll assume Trotman served as some sort of Interim Director in 2009.

Clerk of Courts

⁽³⁾ – In 2008, Maryellen O’Shaughnessy was elected Clerk of Courts. When David Migliore departed for the Department of Job and Family Services, O’Shaughnessy brought in Mary Austin Palmer – and immediately gave her a huge raise in a poor economy. Either Mary Austin Palmer is some kind of management wiz, or Maryellen O’Shaughnessy doesn’t think much of the taxpayers’ money. See (4).

⁽⁴⁾ – Yes, I skipped down the list of Clerk’s office employees; this observation is too ridiculous to exclude. In 2007, before he departed for Columbus City Council, Hearcel Craig was paid $25.49 an hour as the Clerk’s Director of Customer Service. The position remained unfilled (to no ill effect, so far as I could tell) until David E. Black was hired. In 2009, Black’s salary as Director of Customer Service was $24.96. In 2010, Black’s title changed to Director of Business Operations and his salary increased by nearly 50%. Why, all of a sudden, is it necessary for the Franklin County Clerk of Courts to employ a Director of Business Operations? Isn’t that what the Chief Deputy is for? How does O’Shaughnessy justify creating a $77,625.60 business operations role while also paying her Chief Deputy $95,409.60?

Skimming through the other Franklin County salary information, it looks like our highly-paid bureaucrats are at least politically intelligent enough not to give themselves raises when unemployment in the Columbus metro area is somewhere between 9 and 10 percent. Except for the Clerk of Courts office, which seems to have suffered from John O’Grady’s move to the Commissioner’s office.

Happy Tax Freedom Day!

[Update: Additional follow-up on the Clerk of Courts available here and here.]

The folks behind Chuck seem to have completed their quota of dumb, repetitive love triangle episodes for season 3, and the show has bounced back in a big way. Tonight’s episode was another very entertaining one.

According to TV By The Numbers, tonight was actually intended to be the season 3 finale. Chuck is on the bubble again, it would seem? Allow me to refer you to last spring’s cutting insights on the topic of cancellation. Anyway, what would’ve made a great finale could also make for a good segue into what this season should have been all about: butt-kicking and laughs courtesy of a fun duo with a great cast of co-stars. Chuck as this guy. Sarah as this hot mama.

I didn’t think of this until my roommate said something a few months ago, but the relationship between those characters is the perfect template. Chuck’s got ridiculous talents, and is more of a clown than a tough guy (though admittedly about .04% as terrific as Wash from Firefly). Sarah is also extremely talented, but her sense of humor takes a back seat to all the skull-cracking she’s got to do. Like Zoe. They’re different but made for each other, blah blah etc etc.

So, yeah… if you’ve given up on Chuck as I nearly did during that string of lame episodes earlier this season, catch up! With any luck, the remaining filmed season 3 episodes feature a sturdy, non-high-school relationship between the show’s namesake and leading lady! Better late than never, and there’s still plenty the writers could conjure up besides everyone breaking everyone elses’ hearts and making sad faces 10 minutes per episode.

It doesn’t hurt that Adam Baldwin maintains a steady level of awesome.

The past two election cycles, we’ve put some heavy-duty hippies in Ohio congressional seats. Senator Brown and Representative Kilroy wanted to remind us of that, so they gave a fun Obamacare pep rally to a union group on Thursday. I personally find myself taking the lazy, jaded, “I prefer conservatives, but a politician’s a politician” mindset more often than I should. Mary Jo Kilroy sharpens the mind:

Kilroy said the health-care measures, such as extending coverage to the uninsured and eliminating insurance restrictions based on pre-existing conditions, will “improve the lives of all Americans.”

“It is paid for and will lower the deficit,” Kilroy said. “What is not to like about that?

“This is the beta version. We’re going to keep working.”

And let’s not forget Sherrod Brown’s contribution to this conversation:

Brown called the health-care reforms the most important cause since civil rights in the 1960s.

“The main reason people are living longer is because of activists and progressives getting the government to fight for things that matter to them,” the senator said.

Representative Kilroy describes as “paid for” a bill that uses 10 years of taxes, fines, and mythical cuts to pay for 6 years of outlays. Senator Brown literally thinks we owe our lives to the government and to the politicians dedicated to its limitless expansion. When our taxes go even higher, remember that Kilroy and Brown were shoveling more coal as the Democrats’ entitlement train went off a cliff. More handouts! More debt! More big-government rhetoric with no connection to reality!

Read those quotes again and let ‘em sink in. We elected these people. We probably should not have.

You’ve got to hand it to President Obama, he knows what he’s good at and he sticks with it. Obama is a terrific speaker when he’s reading from a prompter and the media acts as if finally, the spoken word lives up to its potential. Because we have so much more than politics going on in our lives, meaningless soundbites will always be well-received by a certain percentage of the electorate.

During an enthusiastic, campaign-style appearance in Maine’s largest city, Obama mocked the pundits and pollsters who say he isn’t getting a boost from his yearlong campaign to pass the sweeping reform.

Every story about President Obama contains some variation of this sentence. Obama continues to talk as if he can solve any problem at no cost, while promoting legislation that increases the federal government’s bulk without an honest number in sight. It’s difficult to defend life while catering to the abortion lobby; difficult to curb unemployment when your advisers are union goons and lifetime politicians; difficult to write bipartisan legislation in a room containing half a dozen left-of-left Democrats. It may also be challenging to save money by expanding entitlements, but I’m reaching a little here. At any rate, gravity eventually takes its toll.

That doesn’t mean Obama will abandon his “I’m from the government and I’m here to help — let me prove it by handing you these other suckers’ money” bit:

“Can you imagine if some of these reporters were working on a farm and you planted some seeds, and they came out the next day and they looked and – ‘Nothing’s happened. There’s no crop. We’re going to starve. Oh, no! It’s a disaster!’ It’s been a week, folks. So, before we find out if people like health care reform, we should wait to see what happens when we actually put it into place. Just a thought.”

This is exactly like that, if seeds cost $2,000,000,000.

National Review has an interview with Rep. Paul Ryan, one of a few bright lights on the right side of the aisle in Congress:

“We need to become the party of liberty and freedom,” Ryan argues. “We’re not doing enough. We can do better, and we will — because we have no choice. If we’re going to offer the country a completely different vision, we can’t be Democratic-lite or resign ourselves to be slightly more efficient managers and tax-collectors for the welfare state. We have to break with that and give people a clear and distinct difference.”

Hope and change as defined by President Obama are exactly what all of us wild-eyed conservatives said they’d be – schlocky advertising and accelerated government growth. That’s clearer today than at any other point this past year. Obama has demonstrated no interest in transparency, no patient bipartisanship, no meaningful variation from the leftist playbook of demonizing private employers while promising unsustainable entitlements to “the middle class.”

Congressman Ryan has been at the forefront of the GOP for months, suggesting solutions to America’s domestic problems that don’t require more spending, more IRS agents, more regulation and taxation. The Democrats’ solution to every domestic problem is to throw more of our money at it, which fits perfectly with a foreign policy of shrinking defense spending as yet another way to show our enemies how cuddly and disinterested we are.

Ryan’s speech yesterday on the House floor is an important summary of what the entire Republican Party ought to stand for:

In November we’re going to have very clearly defined options – I hope Ryan means what he says, and I hope he finds no shortage of trustworthy allies in D.C. over the coming months and years.

If you’re wondering what sort of valuable services the Senate health care bill could be providing this time next decade, see the future in the leftist bastion that is California’s state government:

The six-member California Division of Occupational Safety and Health standards board voted unanimously on the advice of staff to create an advisory committee to report back on whether to change state law to require safe-sex protections for adult-film actors and actresses.

This is an article from the LA Times, not The Onion. I’m sure. I double-checked.

Should porn “actors” use protection when “performing” their “acts?” Probably, unless they’re in the mood for some sexually transmitted diseases. This is obvious even to a science-hatin’ Christian with a running total of zero “partners.” But, the sort of thing that’s clear to a loser in Ohio is cause for a new advisory committee in California, where unionized state workers have run the government into the ground even without a committee to study whether it’s wise to have copious amounts of unprotected sex.

“We believe the state of California has a responsibility to regulate these workplaces as they do every other workplace,” AIDS Healthcare Foundation President Michael Weinstein told the board.

The state of California has a responsibility to regulate everything, as far as the state of California is concerned. Small wonder the vote to form a committee was unanimous. Imagine being asked this question: Should we form a new committee that will help justify the existence of your cushy job? Not many people would answer “No,” which is why the size of government trends in only one direction.

A former porn star points out that they don’t go into this business due to an abundance of brains:

“You think you’re safe but you’re not; in between scenes, you don’t know what other actors are doing,” James told the board.

While filming a porno, it’s difficult to be sure whether the people you’re having promiscuous sex with for money might be making unhealthy decisions off camera. The nanny-staters want you to know your concerns will be tended to, and as they venture into uncharted regulatory waters it’s clear that even a stupid law like mandated STD testing for the porn industry means a convoluted, money-burning process.

The Senate health bill creates dozens of federal boards, councils, and committees. Think these will be staffed entirely by health care and insurance professionals who know what’s best? Certainly only rational, fiscally sound decisions will be made by these new government employees. Decisions like the rational, fiscally sound decisions Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid make on a daily basis.

Congressman Boehner shared a graph last November displaying the mess of bureaucracy created by the House version of the bill as it stood at the time. Add one, subtract one, change a name here and there – this is what the leftist elites running Washington want. Countless new boards with the power to form committees with the power to impose regulations. All of their salaries coming out of our paychecks. Few of them producing anything of value.

Call. Your. Representatives.