So about what can we be gloomy?

How about Eric Holder’s Justice Department? They have just announced the release from Gitmo of Hassan Zumiri, a guy who wanted to bomb Los Angeles Airport in 2000. To Algeria. Gee, that sounds like a great idea. And let’s not  forget that this is the same Justice Department that has decided that those who plotted 9/11 — like the mastermind of it all Kalid Sheik Mohammad — should be tried in civilian court. Even though he already confessed and said he wanted to be executed. Military commissions are apparently okay for lesser-known terrorists, but the big guys deserve respect.

Here are former Bush official John Yoo’s comments about what the U.S. Constitution will now offer our enemies::

The Constitution requires that we have an open public trial for any criminal defendant tried by our government, and one of the rights that every defendant has is to force a government to open up its files and provide all the information it has on the defendant.This is going to be terrible for our efforts against al-Qaeda because we will have to explain, for example, how we knew where Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was, how we were able to intercept his cell phone calls, how we were able to read his e-mails, and how we captured him. All of this is going to have to be made public.

Feel better? Let’s not rest on a couple victories, friends.

Amazing history made tonight in Massachusetts. Scott Brown is the first Republican elected to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts in 38 years.  40-55% voter turnout — in a special election. In January.

What’s more ironic? That a Republican won in Massachusetts on a platform, in part, against Obama’s healthcare plan, or that he replaces the very man who pushed so hard for so long for that very bill, and for whom the bill is named??

And in case you were watching MSNBC or CNN and therefore missed Senator-elect Brown’s acceptance speech, see this text  (from The Corner). (It is missing his jokes about his daughters, alas.)

as prepared for delivery:

Thank you very much.  I’ll bet they can hear all this cheering down in Washington, D.C.

And I hope they’re paying close attention, because tonight the independent voice of Massachusetts has spoken.

From the Berkshires to Boston, from Springfield to Cape Cod, the voters of this Commonwealth defied the odds and the experts. And tonight, the independent majority has delivered a great victory.

I thank the people of Massachusetts for electing me as your next United States senator.

Every day I hold this office, I will give all that is in me to serve you well and make you proud.

Most of all, I will remember that while the honor is mine, this Senate seat belongs to no one person and no political party - and as I have said before, and you said loud and clear today, it is the people’s seat.

Interim Senator Paul Kirk has completed his work as a senator by appointment of the governor, and for the work he has done, I thank him.  The people, by their votes, have now filled the office themselves, and I am ready to go to Washington without delay.

I also want to thank Martha Coakley for her call of congratulations.  A hard contest is now behind us, and now we must come together as a Commonwealth.

This special election came about because we lost someone very dear to Massachusetts, and to America. Senator Ted Kennedy was a tireless and big-hearted public servant, and for most of my lifetime was a force like no other in this state.  His name will always command the affection and respect by the people of Massachusetts, and the same goes for his wife Vicki.  There’s no replacing a man like that, but tonight I honor his memory, and I pledge my very best to be a worthy successor.

I said at the very beginning, when I sat down at the dinner table with my family, that win or lose we would run a race which would make us all proud. I kept my word and we ran a clean, issues oriented, upbeat campaign - and I wouldn’t trade that for anything.

When I first started running, I asked for a lot of help, because I knew it was going to be me against the machine. I was wrong, it was all of us against the machine. And after tonight we have shown everyone that - now - you are the machine.

I’m glad my mom and dad, brothers, sisters, and so many family members are here tonight.

Once again, before I go any further, I want to introduce somebody very special… That is my wife, Gail.

And as you know, my wife Gail couldn’t join me on the campaign trail because of her work as a Boston TV journalist. But I will let you in on a little secret. She didn’t stay neutral today, and she voted for the winner. I rely as always, on Gail’s love and support and that of our beautiful daughters.

Arianna will be returning a day or two late to her pre-med studies at Syracuse, because she’s been giving her all to this campaign.  As always, Arianna and her sister Ayla have been a joy to Gail and me, and we’re so grateful to them both.  Even before her campaign performances, millions of Americans had already heard Ayla’s amazing voice on “American Idol.”  As Boston College basketball fans know, she’s also pretty good on the court.

If the President thinks they’ve got basketball talent at the White House, I ask him to pick his best teammate and find some time to play two-on-two with Ayla and me.

I’m grateful to all those from across Massachusetts who came through for me even when I was a long shot.  I especially thank a friend who was there with encouragement from the very beginning, and helped show us the way to victory - former Governor Mitt Romney.

I’ll never forget the help of another man who took the time to meet with me months ago - who told me I could win, and gave me confidence for the fight.  It was all so characteristic of a truly great and heroic American, and tonight I thank my new colleague, Senator John McCain.

On a night like this, when so many people mark your name on a statewide ballot, you think back to the first people who gave you a chance and believed.  For the trust they placed in me, and for all they have taught me, I thank my neighbors and friends in my Senate district and especially my hometown of Wrentham.  The cause and victory that all America has seen tonight started right there with all of you.

Let me tell you when I first got the feeling something big was happening in this campaign. It was when I was driving along and spotted a handmade, Scott Brown yard sign that I hadn’t actually put there myself.

This little campaign of ours was destined for greater things than any of us knew, and the message went far beyond the name on the sign.

It all started with me, my truck, and a few dedicated volunteers.  It ended with Air Force One making an emergency run to Logan. I didn’t mind when President Obama came here and criticized me - that happens in campaigns. But when he criticized my truck, that’s where I draw the line.

We had the machine scared and scrambling, and for them it is just the beginning of an election year filled with surprises.  They will be challenged again and again across this country.  When there’s trouble in Massachusetts, there’s trouble everywhere - and now they know it.

In every corner of our state, I met with people, looked them in the eye, shook their hand, and asked them for their vote. I didn’t worry about their party affiliation, and they didn’t worry about mine. It was simply shared conviction that brought us all together.

One thing is clear, voters do not want the trillion-dollar health care bill that is being forced on the American people.

This bill is not being debated openly and fairly. It will raise taxes, hurt Medicare, destroy jobs, and run our nation deeper into debt.  It is not in the interest of our state or country - we can do better.

When in Washington, I will work in the Senate with Democrats and Republicans to reform health care in an open and honest way.  No more closed-door meetings or back room deals by an out of touch party leadership.  No more hiding costs, concealing taxes, collaborating with special interests, and leaving more trillions in debt for our children to pay.

In health care, we need to start fresh, work together, and do the job right. Once again, we can do better.

I will work in the Senate to put government back on the side of people who create jobs, and the millions of people who need jobs - and as President John F. Kennedy taught us, that starts with an across the board tax cut for individuals and businesses that will create jobs and stimulate the economy. It’s that simple!

I will work in the Senate to defend our nation’s interests and to keep our military second to none.  As a lieutenant colonel and 30-year member of the Army National Guard, I will keep faith with all who serve, and get our veterans all the benefits they deserve.

And let me say this, with respect to those who wish to harm us, I believe that our Constitution and laws exist to protect this nation - they do not grant rights and privileges to enemies in wartime. In dealing with terrorists, our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them, not lawyers to defend them.

Raising taxes, taking over our health care, and giving new rights to terrorists is the wrong agenda for our country. What I’ve heard again and again on the campaign trail, is that our political leaders have grown aloof from the people, impatient with dissent, and comfortable in the back room making deals. And we can do better.

They thought you were on board with all of their ambitions.  They thought they owned your vote.  They thought they couldn’t lose.  But tonight, you and you and you have set them straight.

Across this country, we are united by basic convictions that need only to be clearly stated to win a majority.  If anyone still doubts that, in the election season just beginning, let them look to Massachusetts.

Fellow citizens, what happened in this election can happen all over America. We are witnesses, you and I, to the truth that ideals, hard work, and strength of heart can overcome any political machine. We ran a campaign never to be forgotten, and led a cause that deserved and received all that we could give it.

And now, because of your independence, and your trust, I will hold for a time the seat once filled by patriots from John Quincy Adams to John F. Kennedy and his brother Ted.  As I proudly take up the duty you have given me, I promise to do my best for Massachusetts and America every time the roll is called.

I go to Washington as the representative of no faction or interest, answering only to my conscience and to the people. I’ve got a lot to learn in the Senate, but I know who I am and I know who I serve.

I’m Scott Brown,

I’m from Wrentham,

I drive a truck, and I am nobody’s senator but yours.

Thank you very much.

Meanwhile, he is booed in Pizza Hut in Nebraska.  He seems to misunderstand their anger.

Does anyone — ANYONE — really know what is in the bill? And if  you do, HOW could you in good conscience vote for it? As James Taranto noted last week in the Wall Street Journal, even socialist Bernie Sanders was (at least at one time) opposed to it because it is simply not socialist enough.

But here’s this, from Yuval Levin on the Corner:

The CBO assessment of the bill tells the appalling story. We are going to raise taxes by half a trillion dollars over the next ten years, increase spending by more than a trillion dollars, cut Medicare by $470 billion but use that money to fund a new entitlement rather than to fix Medicare itself, bend the health care cost curve up rather than down, insert layers of bureaucracy between doctors and patients, and compel and subsidize universal participation in a failed system of health insurance rather than reform or improve it.

Again, we must wonder WHY Democrats are in such a panic? I mean, don’t they believe they have a mandate from the people? If so, what are they so worried about? Maybe it’s because what the bill will really do and who it will affect is leaking out. See this Sunday evening Wall Street Journal editorial:

Never in our memory has so unpopular a bill been on the verge of passing Congress, never has social and economic legislation of this magnitude been forced through on a purely partisan vote, and never has a party exhibited more sheer political willfulness that is reckless even for Washington or had more warning about the consequences of its actions.

Democrats say that Republicans have no alternatives. That is, of course, hogwash. How about making more minor adjustments to current insurance coverage so that it is portable, available across state lines, gives the same tax benefits to individuals as companies receive, and still ensures coverage for those with preexisting conditions? I HAVE in fact read many ideas from conservatives and Republicans that espouse just this route, and give details on how this could be done, at FAR less cost to taxpayers and patients alike.

Let’s hope the House members want to go home to a HAPPY holiday, and not one where their tax-paying constituents will be openly rioting.

This is the price we must pay so that white liberals could soothe their racial guilt? I feel sick. Guess I should call my doctor before another layer of bureaucracy wants to know WHY.

See, for example, this post by David Huffman of Chicago Young Republicans, wherein he is shocked to agree with Paul Krugman that the recent “good news” of 11,000 new jobs isn’t that good. But then the agreement with Krugman ends there, as Krugman argues for even more stimulus funds, etc etc.

And then the following note,  by Loyola University Chicago student Elizabeth Davidson about a Wall Street Journal video, reveals an understanding of Keynesian versus supply-side economics, and a thirst for rational thought:

The Wall Street Journal video concerning the federal government’s involvement of increasing economic job growth, “Pressure Builds on Obama for Jobs Creation,” compels me to evaluate the comments of Economic Editor Wessel with knowledge gained in my Microeconomics class.  It is imperative for the pubic to understand the government’s interventions intentions, it terms of graphical relationships between resource and production supply and demand.

Wessell states the debate centers around whether or not the government can, should, or will do something to improve the economy.  Currently, lack of employment growth is the most detrimental circumstance.  The first view is the laissez fair approach of “just let it be.”  There are fluctuations in every economy.  Proponents of this view assert that lack of growth is natural and occurs regardless of external factors. Therefore, no action should be taken.  This falls under more of a macroeconomics theme.

The editor then asserts there are two devices for those who desire action.  The first is to stimulate demand.  The way the government attempts stimulating demand is to give money to citizens to spend on products.  This effort will lead to production of more goods and services because demand increases.   In the labor model, and as suggested, more demand of a product will increase demand for labor.  Increased demand for labor results in increased job availability.  More jobs are available due to increased demand for products bas is exhibited in the fact that the market resource curve is derived from the product demand curve. This increases demand for the products which require labor for production, thereby giving money to citizens to buy the products.  Editor Wessell states that this was the rationale which led to the Fiscal Stimulus last year.

The other view is to act directly within the unemployment problem, or labor market.  This is done by tax cuts and rewards for hiring for businesses.  By making it financially beneficial for employers to hire labor, the firms are more likely to do so.  Instead of terminating employees, due to the costs, firms will choose to hire.  Tax cuts will also reduce the cost of production and increase supply.  This will thus increase the quantity of labor demanded. This option is more direct because it is dealing with the labor supply, which has closer correlation to the core of unemployment than the previous course of action.

The informational video provided unbiased reasoning behind the motivation of the government’s actions, which is not spelled out habitually.  It is valuable to hear from a neutral source that the motivation for these actions might not be to expand the economy; these actions are preformed out of appeasement.

And this brings us to healthcare, and the passage last night in the House of the most “sweeping overhaul” of healthcare in our nation…ever.

Here’s a simple analogy. You have a yard that is 85% green and growing, but 15%  is in the shade and doesn’t get the water or sunlight it needs. To fix this, you tear up the entire yard with a bulldozer. And so there is no grass and nothing grows. Only Uncle Sam can plant the seeds now. And the seeds he will plant will be dictated by what’s politically useful and popular, not by what people need or, heaven forbid, want.

Rep. Paul Ryan put it well: “Does this bill mean the government will take over running health care? Yes. But what’s worse, this bill replaces the American idea with a European-style social welfare state.”

Socialism, friends is bad. If you’re under 25, you might just know this in theory. But it is bad. It seems like a good idea at the time, because it means you’ve appointed a middle man.  You’ve “done something” to help, but all you’ve done is passed the buck. You don’t have to take care of anyone. Someone else — Uncle Sam (or his appointed and unelected bureaucracy)– will do it.  When we take the choice and, frankly, burden away from individuals to help or serve other individuals, we have done something dangerous to the fabric of who we are as human beings. We have fed our most selfish whims. We have become something less than human. We are like those who stand by while someone is robbed and cheated, and hold up our hands and say “not my problem” and point to the government.

If you believe  that the best way to ensure everyone has access to healthcare is by making it the law (requiring all but the smallest employers to provide healthcare or pay an 8% fine), jobs will be fewer, and  good healthcare hard to come by. Pharmaceutical innovations will wither. And instead, research funding will be handed out like defense contracts are now, and pulled at whim depending on who is in office. And people will die or be crippled because of it.

It is a testament to our humanity if we wish to help others. We should help our brothers and sisters. We should care for them when they are sick. But this is the role of family and friends. Or if we don’t have those, others who we pay to help us.  And if we have no money, friends, or family — private charity.  And if you think private charities are like char houses, start your own or band with others to do the same.  And there would be more charity if people who had money were free to use it to fund what they wish — churches, local community centers, etc. The point is — it’s not someone else’s job to help someone. It’s YOUR job. The government will be happy to do your job for you for now. But, like Faust,  you will pay in the end.

Comfort can be taken by those of us who cherish freedom and liberty in that the bill passed on a narrow margin — 5 votes.  Would have been 4 had Rep.  Cao of Louisiana not crumbled. But may this socialist healthcare “wall” against freedom and innovation crumble before it’s even had a chance to be built.

It seems to me that the politics of liberal reform, in recent years, shows many of the same characteristics as amateur poetry. It has been more concerned with the kind of symbolic action that gratifies the passions of the reformer rather than with the efficacy of the reforms themselves. Indeed, the outstanding characteristic of what we call ‘the New Politics’ is precisely its insistence on the overwhelming importance of revealing, in the public realm, one’s intense feelings — we must ‘care,’ we must ‘be concerned,’ we must be ‘committed.’ Unsurprisingly, this goes along with an immense indifference to consequences, to positive results or the lack thereof.

And knowing the truth of this, as we do, is it any shocker that we distrust ‘healthcare reform’?

In any case, RIP to a great thinker and man.

Probably not as memorable a moment as some of our friends may think. Hopefully not. They may ask terse questions of the Prime Minister in Parliament, but we do not have that tradition here, and the office of the President does deserve respect. But the sentiment was no doubt echoed at other moments during the speech in living rooms across America.

And perhaps Obama can start respecting Congress (and us!) by not wasting our time with more boilerplate speeches.