First up, a cool video from the Military Channel, comparing Mark46/Mark 48 machine guns.

(w00t!)

Next is a piece from Christopher Hitchens, describing the argument from the Left — it’s apples and oranges –

Iraq: Worth the Price

Think how many candy-canes and vacations I could have if it were not for the space program, or the cost of carrier-groups or special forces or — I don’t know — Black Hawk helicopters. (If you think I am being unkind or frivolous, see if you can detect the thread of reasoning that connects Iraq expenditures with the crisis in the mortgage system.) There are days when I think that the money raised by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama might have been better spent on the alleviation of poverty, but I can still tell an apple from an orange and am not hopelessly stuck on the zero-sum fixation. Once again, the economic “experts” turn out to know the price of some things but not the value of anything.

Time to start moving dirt…. the Toyota deal is bringing the beginnings of a boom in north Mississippi …

Auto parts maker Vuteq USA plans to build a $31 million plant in New Albany to supply molded plastic pieces and other components for Toyota’s assembly plant in Blue Springs.Vuteq, a Japanese company with seven facilities in North America, will hire 130 people to work at the New Albany plant and up to 500 to prepare parts kits at the Toyota plant.

Vuteq’s building will be the first in the Martintown Industrial Park, open land Union County bought with Toyota suppliers in mind.

Primary day in the Magnolia State … Beagle Scout who lives down on the coast in MS 1st district, is calling for voters to cross over and vote for Hillary. I live in the 3rd, and I won’t be crossing over. We’ve got a pretty good selection of hopefuls vying for the Pickering seat. The Club for Growth jumped in and endorsed Charlie Ross, to which I say, “forget Charlie Ross.” I’m pulling for David Landrum. So is Mrs. Nuke. Sure hope he makes the runoff.

U.S. House, 3rd District. For the Democratic nomination, Randall Eads of Starkville will meet Joel Gill of Pickens. On the Republican side, voters will choose between Gregg Harper of Pearl, Charlie Ross of Brandon, David Landrum of Madison County, John Rounsaville of Madison, Bill Marcy of Meridian, Gregory Hatcher of Meridian and the Rev. James Broadwater of Flowood.

So what’s going on in your neck of the woods?

Just how much would a Hillary Clinton administration raise taxes?

It depends on who you ask, and lately, it also depends on when you ask. Mrs. Clinton has previously touted her version of fiscal responsibility, “I have a million ideas. I can’t do all of them. I happen to think in running a disciplined campaign - especially when it comes to fiscal responsibility, which is what I’m trying to do - everything I propose I have to pay for.”

Today, Team Clinton unveiled her “economic blueprint” which would include an additional $820 billion in taxes over the next decade, aimed at oil companies, drug companies, and corporations which “ship jobs overseas.” This is in addition to allowing the Bush tax cuts expire, which would increase taxes by a staggering $4.3 Trillion, according to estimates provided by the National Women’sLaw Center.

Do the math.

Hillary Clinton is proposing $5.1 trillion in new taxes over the next decade.

Since she is proposing new spending programs to match the tax increases, the growth of Federal spending poised to grow dramatically under a Clinton Administration.

Update: So, where are the pro-growth groups when you need them? Glad you asked. They’re still attacking Republicans.

“I would also suggest that one needs to look very carefully at exactly what the business record is,” Huckabee said.”If it’s taking companies that are in serious trouble, buying them when they are in pain, selling off their assets, then making huge profit off of it then that’s not something a lot of Americans can relate to, except those that have lost their jobs because of those kind of transactions.If that’s the turnaround then there are a lot of Americans who do not want to see their lives turned around like that.” source

Before taking a morning jog in Ft. Lauderdale, Mike Huckabee’s remarks regarding Mitt Romney’s business record drew a very sharp distinction between the vision of conservatism espoused by Wall Street Republicans and Main Street Republicans. It is a distinction drawn previously by both Huckabee and Duncan Hunter, and one that has come into increasing focus as the economy emerges as the top issue in the campaign.

Ironically, it is the success of the Bush national security policy, and the counter-insurgency strategy in Iraq that has diminished the war and national security as the primary focus of the campaign. But, if the economy is Romney’s supposed strong suit, a closer look at his record in the private equity business is warranted.

…as the leader of private equity firm Bain Capital from 1984 to 1999, Romney’s record shows that while some of the firm’s investments helped companies grow, others ended in thousands of layoffs, and in some cases, bankruptcy.

Layoffs are a common result of private equity takeovers, with Bain Capital no exception….

Companies such as office supplier Staples Inc. and pizza company Domino’s were successful Bain investments under Romney.

But medical test maker Dade Behring, circuit board maker DDi, American Pad & Paper and auto parts company Cambridge Industries are among the companies that went bankrupt after Bain invested in them with Romney at the helm….

The private equity model is built on loading companies up with debt — which can ultimately prove too heavy a load for the business, as was the case with DDi.

Bain invested $46 million in DDi in October 1997 and later sold shares worth at least $93 million, according to a report by the Orange County Register newspaper. The Anaheim, California, company ultimately went bankrupt, laying off 2,100 employees. source

“It always makes sense to fight for every single good job.”

This was Mitt’s campaign rhetoric in Michigan and SC. It makes perfect sense for a candidate for President to say this.

But, if this had been his attitude as a businessman, this is certain: He would not have amassed the personal fortune that is financing his run for the Presidency, and thousands of “good jobs” at DDI, American Pad and Paper, Cambridge Industries, and others might still be around.

It does help to explain, however the club for growth’s enthusiastic support for Romney, despite his less than sterling fiscal record as governor of Massachusetts — he’s one of their own.

“his support for broad-based tax cuts in liberal Massachusetts together with his enthusiastic embrace of the Bush tax cuts on the campaign trail offers hope that Governor Romney’s previous ambivalence on tax policy is more a function of Massachusetts politics than his core beliefs.”

Ah yes. hope!

The fiscal record of Romney is somewhat similar to Huckabee. They both governed Democrat majority states as pragmatic conservatives. But Romney comports himself as a fiscon, so establishment Republicans give him a pass, and praise his record as offering hope.

He’s one of their own. More “identity politics?”

Over the next few days, we will hear a great deal about the meaning of the Iowa Caucuses, as pundits and bloggers will sift through the demographic data to interpret trends, and voter preferences. There were two obvious winners. There were several losers.

The Big Loser tonight in Iowa: The Club for Growth.

I’ve written quite a bit about The Club for Growth’s ongoing jihad against Mike Huckabee.

With each salvo launched by Pat Toomey and the Club for Growth, the Huck has seemed to gain additional momentum. Each time a new “White Paper” has been released (there have been three so far) the level of skepticism towards CfG has grown. Among a large portion of the conservative coalition, the Club for Growth is no longer viewed as an honest broker. After spending upwards of $700,000 in attack advertising with the stated aim of derailing Huckabee, and future buys pending in Carolina, Huckabee went from low single digits in the polls to this solid victory in the opening act of the 08 election.

Toomey will, no doubt, claim that the message just isn’t getting out, and will order his troops to increase the volume, exaggerations, demonizations, polarizations, and continue the promotion of small-tent conservatism that continues to drive the Club towards irrelevance. In fact, I noticed today over on the CfG blog that they were still looking for reasons to explain Toomey’s primary loss to Arlen Specter.

This time? “Did Specter break the law to beat Toomey?”

Last time? Well, Toomey blamed it on Stephen Moore’s lack of managerial acumen, despite the Club for Growth spending over a million dollars in negative advertising aimed at Specter.

After his election defeat, Toomey was able to build alliances on the Board in order to force out Moore and the rest of the brainpower that was originally responsible for the rise, relevance, and prominence of the Club for Growth.

There is only one reason Toomey was unable to beat Specter: Pat Toomey executed a poor strategy. Sooner or later, Steve Stephens and the rest of the big boys on the CfG Board are going to realize that Toomey’s execution during this election cycle has been equally poor. Frankly, I haven’t seen any really good stuff from CfG since the “Blowing in the Wind” ad.

Hopefully, along with that realization will come the affirmation that social conservatives are their allies, not their enemies. I’d love to see them go after the Democrats with the same fervor that they’ve gone after Huckabee. Oh, and while y’all are at it, how about using some of that supposed expertise to do a fair critique of The Fair Tax?

Also at ConservaBlogs

NRO says bring it on

Glen Johnson of AP is covering the Mitt Romney campaign. His analysis of mitt Romney’s campaign includes this take:

This past week, Romney did it again over questions about whether he was planning to air negative ads — in particular on the subject of illegal immigration — against John McCain. The Arizona senator has been surging in New Hampshire, where Romney is angling for back-to-back victories after a hoped-for win in this week’s Iowa caucuses.

“I haven’t made any decisions on what issue ads might come forward, down the road, but those aren’t what we shot today,” Romney told reporters on Wednesday. “What we shot today was just me to camera.”

On Friday, his campaign went on TV with a new commercial, a so-called contrast ad that did not feature Romney speaking, but a narrator comparing his record to McCain’s on immigration and tax matters. On Saturday, the campaign announced a second spot, focused entirely on McCain’s immigration record. In between Romney also released a third commercial, criticizing Huckabee for increasing spending and pardoning criminals while he was governor of Arkansas.

The ads Romney mentioned to reporters — the “closing arguments” in which he speaks directly to Iowa and New Hampshire voters — have yet to air. LINK

McCain and Huckabee aren’t taking the attacks laying down. Whether or not McCain decides to use the devastating ad that is waiting in the can, just the fact that it is out, and likely to go viral on the net is enough to cause team Romney some worry. In addition, team Huckabee is reportedly in the studio this afternoon preparing another salvo to answer the attacks from Willard and the Club for Growth. I doubt any TV ad will be as effective as Huck’s own words…

“If a person is dishonest in his approach to get the job, do you believe he will be honest in telling you the truth when he does get the job?”

Heading into the home stretch, it’s still anybody’s contest.