- Jan 1–7 8–14 15–21 22–28 29–31
- Feb 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–28
- Mar 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–31
- Apr 1 2–8 9–15 16–22 23–29 30
- May 1–6 7–13 14–20 21–27 28–31
- Jun 1–3 4–10 11–17 18–24 25–30
- Jul 1 2–8 9–15 16–22 23–29 30–31
- Aug 1–5 6–12 13–19 20–26 27–31
- Sep 1–2 3–9 10–16 17–23 24–30
- Oct 1–7 8–14 15–21 22–28 29–31
- Nov 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–30
- Dec 1–2 3–9 10–16 17–23 24–30
Saturday, May 27, 2006
EUnuchs in India?
Posted by on 5.27.06 @ 8:52PM
According to the Sunday Telegraph there are EUnuchs in India. I didn't know that. I thought they were all in EUrope.
Indonesian Quake
Posted by on 5.27.06 @ 7:57PM
Having been to Yogyakarta, I'm not at all surprised to see death tolls climbing rapidly. The city is surrounded by a massive sprawl of flimsy-looking shanties, and the earthquake made thousands of people's homes collapse on them while they slept. If you're feeling charitable, the Red Cross is aiding the relief effort.
A silver lining: The amazing Borobudur temple, the largest Buddhist monument in the word, is unharmed. But some of the shrines at the Hindu Prambanan temple have been damaged.
Ticket to Free-Ride
Posted by on 5.27.06 @ 11:24AM
Some unsparing weekend reflections of mine on "traffic ticket amnesty."
Sessions on the Immigration Bill
Posted by on 5.27.06 @ 8:44AM
As promised on the Hugh Hewitt Show last night, here's the link to the great speech by Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama on the massive problems with the immigration bill. If that doesn't convince you to start yelling at your senators, nothing will.
And as to Sessions, as they say in my old neighborhood, 'dis guy is da real thing. Is it too early to think about Allen and Sessions as a twofer in '08? Not in my book, it's not.
The DoJ and FBI's Line in the Sand
Posted by on 5.27.06 @ 12:24AM
NYT:
WASHINGTON, May 26 - Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, F.B.I. Director Robert S. Mueller III and senior officials and career prosecutors at the Justice Department told associates this week that they were prepared to quit if the White House directed them to relinquish evidence seized in a bitterly disputed search of a House member's office, government officials said Friday.Mr. Gonzales was joined in raising the possibility of resignation by the deputy attorney general, Paul J. McNulty, the officials said. Mr. Gonzales and Mr. McNulty told associates that they had an obligation to protect evidence in a criminal case and would be unwilling to carry out any White House order to return the material to Congress.
The potential showdown was averted Thursday when President Bush ordered the evidence to be sealed for 45 days to give Congress and the Justice Department a chance to work out a deal.
Friday, May 26, 2006
Round-up From Other Sites
Posted by on 5.26.06 @ 6:04PM
Via this link at Amy Ridenhour's National Center Blog, I discoverd that Bizzy Blog does excellent reporting on the (infamous) Kelo vs. New London "eminent domain" (property seizure) case. Well worth a read. Also, Donkey Cons has good reporting on an excellent event put on by the estimable Bradley Foundation, namely on a question about whether there is now a "conservative elite that is similarly out of touch" as the liberal elites have been for so long. For those to whom the abortion issue is paramount, Abortion Watch links to a moving series of filmed interviews. Finally, as this is the weekend of Memorial day, Red State does a service by linking to a wonderful tribute by photographer Michael Yon, who also filed this report that shows the "excellence of our service members" in a Baghdad E.R. Bless all our men and women in uniform!
Is Frist Still the Leader?
Posted by on 5.26.06 @ 5:45PM
Bill Frist says he is waiting for Arlen Specter's cues on judicial nominees, Human Events reports.
Today on the Hugh Hewitt Show
Posted by on 5.26.06 @ 5:24PM
I'll be subbing for Hugh again today (6-9 pm on Salem Radio Network). We'll have the Beltway Boys -- Mort Kondracke and Fred Barnes -- Larry Kudlow, Asst. Sec. Def. Peter Rodman on China, TAS columnist John Tabin on the Congressional office search and lots more. Hope you can tune in.
The Week on the Hill
Posted by on 5.26.06 @ 5:18PM
Though there was plenty nonsense to go around (a few times) in
Washington this week, let's review the good news:
-Kavanaugh confirmed.
-Hayden confirmed. (I share Jed's concerns, but am pleased that partisanship did not trump excellent qualifications and the President's prerogative.)
-The absurd Spanish-American war phone tax is no more, after the Bush administration finally gave up the fight. (Via Taranto)
Outside politics:
- The economy surged ahead at 5.3 percent in the first quarter,
according to revised numbers. Still the Chicago
Tribune whines "lower than expected."
-Gas prices are down in Northern Virginia. And by down, I mean by 2 to 3 percent.
Could be worse...
Disappointing Hastert
Posted by on 5.26.06 @ 4:09PM
Okay, this is in some ways a repeat of my earliest reactions to Hastert and company yelling bloody murder about the PERFECTLY LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL SEARCH of Rep. William Jefferson's office, but now that I see that Hastert is claiming the ABC report amounts to FBI payback against him for his temper tantrum on the search, it's worth saying again: Mr. Speaker, please, uh, stop speaking! On legal grounds, you are embarrassing yourself and your whole institution; politically, your yelling has been doubly disastrous (first because it takes the focus off of Jeff -- as Jefferson is commonly known in person, and second because it actually puts the GOP on the defensive again because the yelling itself is so deservedly and hideously unpopular). And now to charge the FBI with a political leak based on this whole shouting match does even more to tie the alleged investigation of you with the investigation of Jefferson in the public mind -- which harms not just you, but your whole caucus, because the public does see you as the titular head of, and as representative of, the entire congressional GOP.
Nuff said.
Smearing Their Fans
Posted by on 5.26.06 @ 3:26PM
Even the New York Times Arts page is finding it difficult to defend the snotty Dixie Chicks. The classy Reba McEntire is publicly teasing them. The Chicks have responded to the backlash by casting all of their critics as rednecks:
The Nashville establishment is not politically monolithic. The most depressing thing about this whole episode is the way the Dixie Chicks have conflated politics and culture, Bush supporters and "rednecks." The unintended implication is that only sophisticated city folk oppose the war in Iraq, and only "rednecks" support the president....
The Dixie Chicks are still a joy to hear, and they'll have plenty of fans no matter what. The Nashville game is hard work; it brings out the best in some singers and frustrates others. If the Dixie Chicks don't want to play that game, that's certainly their prerogative. But they might at least acknowledge that they've been playing it for years, and reaping its rewards. And they shouldn't be too surprised if some fans jeer - angry, but also disappointed - as they walk off the court.
The Times understands America better than the Dixie Chicks. Now that's a statement.
Like AmSpecBlog, But With Talking
Posted by on 5.26.06 @ 3:11PM
Jed Babbin is guest-hosting for Hugh Hewitt today, and I'll be joining him about 20 minutes into the first hour to talk about the Jefferson office raid. Station list here. Stations with internet feeds here. (For some reason those two pages don't look right when I load them, but scroll down and the info is all there.)
Re: George Galloway
Posted by on 5.26.06 @ 3:07PM
John Tabin linked below to a sufficiently informative rendition of the Right Honorable George Galloway's latest manifestation of fugacity.
But the AP version is enriched by these two gems. 1) It quotes "Blair's official spokesman, who speaks only on condition of anonymity." 2) Delightfully enough, the AP's stringer is named... Stringer.
Roll Breakdowns
Posted by on 5.26.06 @ 1:55PM
The vote for Kavanaugh, incidentally, was 57-36, comparable to the 58-42 vote by which Samuel Alito was confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Four Democrats backed Kavanaugh, two of whom, Carper and Landrieu, had opposed Alito. Conrad, who backed Alito, sat this one out; Johnson, who supported Alito, voted against Kavanaugh. Meanwhile, Carper backed Alito having opposed Kavanaugh. Only Byrd and Ben Nelson voted for both.
Meanwhile, Michael Hayden had an easier time of it in winning confirmation to head the CIA by 78-15. Arlen Specter was the only Republican to vote against him; Hillary Clinton joined a strong liberal cohort to oppose him. Schumer, Leahy, Mikulski, Harry Reid did not. Barbara Boxer abstained -- okay, that's cheap; she was merely absent, one of seven senators who did not participate in today's voting.
Incidentally, at the Washington Post's site, you can check the roll call votes not only according to party affiliation, but also, "By state," "By region, "By boomer status," "By gender," and "By astrological sign." Nothing yet about race, sexual preference, or past drug use.
Capitol Incident
Posted by on 5.26.06 @ 1:52PM
If you've been watching the news, you'll know that shots were reported in the garage of the Rayburn House Office Building about 10:30 am. The Capitol was locked down briefly, and Rayburn remains so while a room-by-room search continues. There are no reports of injuries except one young lady who was evacuated after suffering an anxiety attack.
The search of the Rayburn building is a non-trivial affair. What the television coverage isn't telling you is that the whole Capitol complex -- the Capitol itself, the House and Senate office buildings -- are all connected by a network of underground tunnels. Searching them, if it is to be done, would take many hours.
Capitol Police are supposed to have a news con in a couple of minutes. Not much news is to be expected.
Judge Kavanaugh
Posted by on 5.26.06 @ 1:11PM
Finally, finally, Brett Kavanaugh has won Senate confirmation to serve on the mightily influential U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Now it can be revealed. He's long wanted Congress to do the right thing and not evade its responsibilities. Here's what he wrote in a post-Clinton impeachment and acquittal symposium in The American Spectator's April 1999 issue:
The most important policy question emerging from the Lewinsky saga is how to investigate a president accused of illegal conduct. As both the Lewinsky and Whitewater matters demonstrated yet again, the ironic legacy of Watergate -- a scandal in which aggressive congressional inquiries helped uncover presidential crimes -- is that we no longer count on Congress to lead an investigation into possible presidential wrongdoing. During the Clinton presidency, for example, the main witnesses regarding the president's possible misconduct -- David Hale, Jim McDougal, Susan McDougal, Monica Lewinsky, and Betty Currie -- never testified in public hearings held during Congress's Whitewater and Lewinsky inquiries.The primary responsibility for investigating the president has migrated from Congress to a criminal prosecutor, the independent counsel. This transfer of investigative responsibility not only is constitutionally dubious, it is illogical. If we assume that a sitting president cannot or should not be criminally indicted, a criminal prosecution of a president could occur only after he left office. As a result, the fundamental question is not whether a president accused of illegalities should be criminally prosecuted, but whether he should continue to hold office. Because Congress is the entity constitutionally assigned to determine whether the president should remain in office, it follows that a congressional inquiry should take precedence over a criminal investigation of the president.
Indeed, if there is an allegation of presidential wrongdoing, a congressional inquiry coupled with the threat of perjury prosecutions afterwards also should take precedence over the criminal investigation of any presidential associates (except, perhaps, in violent crime cases) -- even if the congressional inquiry would require immunity for those associates. It is more important for Congress to determine whether the president has committed impeachable offenses or otherwise acted in a manner inconsistent with the presidency than for any individual to be criminally prosecuted and sentenced to a few years in prison.
Virginia Senate Race
Posted by on 5.26.06 @ 9:25AM
SurveyUSA has new poll numbers out on Sen. George Allen, Jim Webb, and Harris Miller. Of registered voters with a margin of error of 4.6% (pretty high), 47% have a favorable opinion of Allen. That's nothing to write home about, but neither are the numbers for his Democratic challengers, Miller and Webb, Kilo writes. While most Virginians know who they are, the majority also has an unfavorable opinion of them.
Thursday, May 25, 2006
NR's Top Fifty Makes ABC
Posted by on 5.25.06 @ 6:23PM
Shet mah mouth. A 30-second feature story just appeared on the nationwide top of the hour ABC radio news report (6:00 p.m. EDT). Subject: National Review's article in the current issue on the top 50 conservative rock songs of all time. Congrats to the magazine and to John J. Miller.
There's a moral in here somewhere...
Re: Bush Seals Docs
Posted by on 5.25.06 @ 4:37PM
Dave: I only wish I knew what was going on in the White House. No vetoes, extraordinary pork in the budget, the war languishing and the immigration disaster being pushed through the Senate. I'm not ready to give up on President Bush. But I don't see why conservatives should line up with him on almost any issue. Almost, not quite.
Re: Bush Seals Docs?
Posted by on 5.25.06 @ 3:54PM
Jed, No vetoes, no legal searches of a criminal offices? Does this President only believe in the power of his office in theory?
Bush Seals Docs?
Posted by on 5.25.06 @ 3:45PM
According to Breitbart's report President Bush ordered that the documents seized by the FBI in executing the search warrant of Rep. William Jefferson's office be sealed for 45 days. What the president is doing is baffling. Why is there even an issue of these documents being kept from investigators? Something is badly wrong here.
Diagnosis: Contagious
Posted by on 5.25.06 @ 10:52AM
Jed, I've been hearing exactly the same thing. Sigh.
Outrage? Not So Much.
Posted by on 5.25.06 @ 9:20AM
The Post is unmoved by Pelosi/Hastert protests. The editorial points out the extraordinary lengths to which the FBI went to protect congressioanl privilege in the search.
Also, Sen. John Warner, usually not one to shy from congressional groupthink, says Congress "should be treated no differently than the average citizen when it comes to criminal matters."
Re: Jesse Macbeth
Posted by on 5.25.06 @ 8:38AM
Sorry, all. Let's try this one more time. See IowaHawk's sendup of Jesse Macbeth at Hawk's blog here. Scroll down to "Stop the Lies."
Re: Jesse Macbeth
Posted by on 5.25.06 @ 8:13AM
Jed, check out Internet humorist extraordinaire IowaHawk's sendup of Jesse Macbeth
Diagnosis, please
Posted by on 5.25.06 @ 6:25AM
I think there's something wrong with my hearing. Every time I hear someone say, "The FBI searched the offices of William Jefferson," my brain registers it as, "The FBI searched the offices of William Jefferson Clinton." Is anyone else suffering this malady?
Re: American Idol Dream
Posted by on 5.25.06 @ 3:59AM
Lady G: It wasn't the winner who got 63 million votes; that was the total number of votes cast, i.e. for Taylor and for Kat. In 2004, Bush got 62 million votes (the highest popular vote total in history) and Kerry got 59 million. And remember, Idol allows and even encourages multiple voting. I'm not one who fetishizes turnout (if you're not interested enough to make it to the polls, you probably shouldn't be voting anyway), but it would be a bit depressing to see the Idol electorate overtake that of the presidency. Fortunately we've not hit that point.
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
American Idol Dream
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 10:59PM
(I thought I would start this thread as no one else has yet jumped in...) Well, as Ryan Seacrest was kind enough to point out, this evening's American Idol winner got more votes than any president in U.S. history. Over 63 million. Wow! As Taylor Hicks said, "I am living the American Dream." Double wow.
Da Commish
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 10:21PM
Dear Prowler: I am shocked. Shocked, I say. How could you deny Condi Rice her life's dream? If Jeb or anyone else should step in front, she'd be sentenced to more time in Foggy Bottom. And we'd be sentenced to more anguished cries from those who want us to equate her with Maggie Thatcher. 'Tis not devoutly to be wish'd.
Spitzer and Milberg Weiss
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 9:56PM
Many are asking why Eliot Spitzer didn't target the now-indicted class action lawsuit firm Milberg Weiss. Some suggest it is because their execs gave his campaign money. I would guess it was more ideological -- Eliot Spitzer is what lawsuit-happy, anti-business lawyers would be if they got their hands on the New York state attorney general's office.
That's the Ticket
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 9:49PM
Someone is raising money for a Denny Hastert/House GOP spine insertion on eBay. (Via RedState)
Quixotic, silly, but that is the state of things.
Da Commish
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 4:21PM
Interesting that Florida Gov. Jeb Bush so publicly discussed the early feeler put forward by representatives of the National Football League, who are in what can only be termed the "exploratory" phases of a search to replace outgoing commissioner, Paul Tagliabue.
Bush denied any interest in the position, though he admitted to speaking in general terms about the job with emissaries from the NFL ownership ranks. When Bush's term ends, the assumption is that he will dive back into real estate and the family business of laying the groundwork for another political run in the future.
He has been clear in his lack of interest in jumpstarting a Presidential run for 2008, though there remains hope in some quarters of his being arm-twisted into joining the bottom of a GOP ticket, or perhaps allowing a "Draft Jeb" operation to proceed. Given the effort Bush is putting forward for Sen. John McCain in Florida, there is little doubt there would be opportunities for Jeb in a McCain campaign and administration.
As for who should be the next commissioner of the NFL, we know they need to be a fan, have a sense of history and respect for the game, and have a keen understanding of the egos who own the teams and play on the field. Our choice: Rush Limbaugh.
Penc-iveness on Immigration Bill
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 4:12PM
Okay, finally my report, belatedly, on the terrific speech Mike
Pence made at Heritage yesterday -- about which, by the way, he
also will talk in a few hours on these shows: The Sean Hannity Radio Show, 4:30 p.m. EST
Fox News' Big Story With John
Gibson, 5:00 p.m.
EST
CNBC's Kudlow and Company,
5:15
p.m.
EST
What Pence proposes really is the best solution so far to the immigration dilemma. It combines two things: 1) the already-passed House bill, MINUS the provision making illegal immigrants into felons (which would overwhelm our court and prison system) and minus the provision that Catholic bishops feared (the fears were WAY overblown) would punish good Samaritans; and 2) the basic thrust of the proposal by Helen Krieble to which I've linked before, favorably but vaguely, about which more in a moment.
My handwritten notes highlighted the following quotes I found most valuable from the speech (please check the accuracy of my shorthand against Pence's prepared text):
"I disagree with the president that amnesty is the middle ground," (and the Senate bill is indeed amnesty)."First and foremost, let us be clear on this point: We CAN control our borders." "A nation without borders is not a nation." (the president's proposed 6,000 National Guardsmen is not enough to do the job)
Pence proposes "a no-amnesty program... run by the private market instead of government."
"Let me say emphatically that this has nothing to do with race or ethnic background.... (It's about) LAW and ORDER."
We must "encourage illegal aliens to self-deport." "Their visas will only be issued outside the United States of America" (at what he calls "Ellis Island Centers" run by private corporations which contract with employers to match available jobs with applicants)
Employers who continue to employ illegals would be subject to STRICT fines and penalties ("To continue to employ an unverifiable person will be subject to serious penalties and fines"), and the number of guest visas would be limited after the first three years, plus the visas would only be for a specified time limited period. Also, the guest workers would have to bass a basic English proficiency test after two years.
There would be a nationwide electronic verification system combined with foolproof biometric ID cards for the guest workers, and there would be "enforcement at the workplace first." "All this technology is possible because we aren't looking to government to do it." Instead, private companies competing with each other would develop the program to allow cross-checks (here's the only place the government really comes in) with the national crime registery and the homeland security terrorist watch list (or something like that; my notes are a little vague here).
Okay, now I've gone to the prepared speech text itself for Pence's own shorthand summation:
I see the solution as a four-step process. Securing our border is the first step. The second step is to make the decision, once and for all, to deny amnesty to people whose first act in the United States was a violation of the law. The third step is to put in place a guest worker program, without amnesty, that will efficiently provide American employers with willing guest workers who come to America legally. The final step is tough employer sanctions that ensure a full partnership between American business and the American government in the enforcement of our laws on immigration and guest workers.
The point of all this is to give you a taste of what Pence is proposing. Especially when compared to this terrific Pence bill, it's no wonder that some senators and critics have labeled the existing Senate bill little better than garbage ("the worst piece of legislation to come before the Senate since I've been here," said Alabama's U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions, as quoted by the WashPost's Dana Milbank). Take a look for yourself at the whole Pence speech. Perhaps his bill may need some tweaking along the way, but it's the kind of rare proposal from which real legislative accomplishments come.
Post Gets It Wrong on Pence
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 2:26PM
I still haven't done my big posts on the Pence immigration bill, but the Washington Post's Charles Babington gets a HUGE aspect of it wrong. "Pence's plan would require all illegal immigrants in the United States to be deported...," wrote Babington. Well, no. That sentence implies force. Instead, it would require that in order to get guest worker cards, the current illegals would have to "self-deport" in order to apply at "Ellis Island Centers" outside our own borders, presumably in Mexico. No government official would deport the people; the people would take advantage of the incentives to return to Mexico in order to become legal, under their own power and authority. The distinction is huge, and it's key to the whole bill.
Today on Kudlow & Co.
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 1:47PM
I'll be on with Larry Kudlow today talking about China, the Iran missile test and the story that Negroponte is allowing secret projects to stay outside SEC reports. Shocking, shocking. Secrets being kept secret?
Mad House
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 11:15AM
Neither Orin Kerr nor his very smart commenters (Kerr moderates his comment section with an eye toward keeping the discussion at a high level) can figure out how the raid on William Jefferson's office could possibly be unconstitutional. As for the politics of House leaders' complaints, John Podhoretz nails it: Hastert is an idiot.
Jessie MacBeth
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 11:05AM
Well, well, well. It seems that the John Kerry model of the “Winter Soldier” – his infamously phony “investigation” into Vietnam war crimes that featured the testimony of several men who never served in
On the Military.com website, to which anyone can contribute, a profile of MacBeth claimed he had three basic combat jumps, service in
There's just one problem: According to Department of the Army spokesman Paul Boyce, there is no record of "Jessie MacBeth," a.k.a. Jesse Adam MacBeth, having served in either the Rangers or the Special Forces -- or in any part of the Army at all. Boyce told me Tuesday that a check on MacBeth's credentials came up empty. "At a minimum, this appears to have been concocted" and "some sort of hoax," Boyce said. Special Operations Command and the State Department have been alerted.
If MacBeth is actually wearing the Bronze Star and Purple Heart he never earned, he’s breaking the law. Title 18 Section 704 of the US Code makes it a crime punishable by at least six months in prison to wear medals or decorations you’re not entitled to wear. Federal prosecutors should be looking at MacBeth’s claims. If he’s violating the law, he should be punished quickly and firmly.
Levin Also Agrees Search Was OK
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 10:51AM
Last night, several hours after I weighed in on the search of Wm Jefferson's office (to the effect that the caterwauling about the search was misplaced and that the search was okay), the highly esteemed Mark Levin said the same thing, and explained it very well, over at NRO. Methinks Hastert and Company ought to listen to Levin and Viet Dinh and stop their self-destructive complaints.
Addendum: Now catching up with lots of related material from yesterday, NRO's Byron York and Andy McCarthy both also say the same thing.
On House "Raid," Just Shut Up
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 10:34AM
Today in The Hill, House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Majority Leader John Boehner continue their public moaning about the supposed unconstitutionality of the FBI search last weekend of the office of troubled Rep. William Jefferson, D-LA. As Archie Bunker would say, they should stifle themselves. Their complaints are going over VERY badly politically with an American public increasingly outraged about horrible congressional ethics and Congress' mentality of being entitled to favors and special deference. Even if they truly believe there is a constitutional problem with the search, they should pursue their complaints less publicly; their moaning makes them look as if they care more about their own prerogatives than they do about what appears to be horrible bribery in their midst. Meanwhile, they probably need a refresher on the COnstitution itself: A carefully crafted search warrant will not, on its face, violate the "speech and debate" clause in the COnstitution that protects Congressmen from prosecution for political speech or action. That clause gives individual members freedom to vote their conscience and speak their minds -- not to use public office buildings to hide evidence of rank corruption.
'Gray Charles'
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 9:30AM
James, Is that an original moniker for Mr. Hicks?
After resisting Idol for years, I finally gave in this season. Slate's music critic surmises that curmudgeons like me are coming around because its quality has increased. Maybe so. But at the end of the day/show, it is good, fun, clean television.
I offer a third prediction for Taylor Hicks. He has the spirit and the voice despite his cheesiness. Katherine McPhee, despite her looks and potential, just falls flat.
Postal Stamp = Brand Canvas
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 7:45AM
In another stroke of genius, the Congress this year threw out our longstanding prohibition against turning stamps into bite-sized pieces of junk mail. Here come the little billboards, one for each envelope, another open-ended burst of perpetual marketing in what only a fool can think is really a saturated market. When the public and the private sector sell each other out, diversity meets totalitarianism and the sky's the limit. I'm saying, then, that this is a bad thing...?
Lovebirds
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 1:36AM
AOL News, I see, has picked up yesterday's front page New York Times story on the Clintons' marriage, or as the paper put it, their "Delicate Dance of Married and Public Lives." Drudge teased the story on Monday, though in a way that suggests his leakers might have misled him. "NYT: STATE OF CLINTON MARRIAGE A QUESTION FOR DEMS," his headline announced. While raising this point, the story essentially declares there's no need for such concern. Leon Panetta, the first prominent figure quoted, dutifully notes, "...you know there's something there that basically bonds them."
The Times interviewed some 50 people for the piece -- the consensus finding being that while the couple "have built largely separate lives," that's only because of "their distinct career paths" and certain "political calculations." Bill keeps his appearances with Hillary to a minimum, so as not to hog the spotlight which should be focused on her as she moves toward a possible presidential run. Nonetheless, they see each other a lot in private -- roughly on 14 days out of every month. The piece turns out to be rather adoring, with all usual references to their long sought "zone of privacy," the "natural evolution" of a marriage that "has had plenty of stresses and betrayals," Hillary's revelation in her memoirs that they had "sought counseling."
Has Bill been behaving himself? The Times covers for him by noting that the time he was spotted with a prominent Canadian woman, "the two were among roughly a dozen people at a dinner, but it still was enough to fuel coverage in the gossip pages." One insider in fact notes that Bill recently gave Hillary a diamond ring, and describes her reaction thus: "When someone shows you something like that, 'This is what Bill bought me,' kind of gleaming, it meant something to get it -- it meant more to her that he bought it for her than what it actually was."
By the way, 59% of AOL's online poll responders say they are "not at all" intrigued by the Clintons as a couple.
Re: Idol
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 1:20AM
Tabin, on this we can both agree. Hot off my bets on Cheney, Prodi, and Montenegro, rolling with "Gray Charles" seems like easy money. The idea that a pop star can also be an adult is so crazy it just might work.
UPDATE: credit where credit is due on the Gray Charles moniker.
American Idol: Kat vs. Taylor
Posted by on 5.24.06 @ 12:07AM
As Henry Kissinger said of the Iran-Iraq war, it's a pity they can't both lose.
My prediction: Taylor takes it. Since Katherine Jean Lopez has made the opposite prediction, we have here an objective litmus test of which right-wing magazine's house blog is better. At Idol predictions.
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
A Promise to Return to Pence
Posted by on 5.23.06 @ 6:46PM
As y'all will see from my posts below, I got waylaid from my original intention to report on the Pence immigration speech at Heritage. I promise I'll do so by noon tomorrow:It's important! For now, though, here is a link to his speech. I really do think it is the answer, in terms of a smart and true middle ground that offers a way out of the legislative morass on immigration.
On Kasich and the WashPost
Posted by on 5.23.06 @ 6:42PM
Okay, the often-reliable Eric Pianin of the Washington Post has a book review in the front section today on the new book by former House Budget Chairman John Kasich that offers a skewed version of history. First, while Kasich deserves a lot of the credit in the successful fight to balance the budget, he never deserved quite SO MUCH of the amount of credit he was given then and that Pianin gives him today. Pianini writes: "Kasich was responsible for translating into reality the GOP's plans for balancing the budget, reforming welfare and slashing taxes." Not exactly. Kasich helped, but the budget committee is merely responsible for a broad fiscal outline. The nitty gritty is done by the Approps Committee and by the Ways and Means Committee; with a large GOP majority, the Budget Committee's work was the easy part. Go back and look at how many subcommittee hearings and how many pages of legislation Approps and W&M produced in 1995, versus the much lighter number from the Budget Committee, and you'll see what I mean. The credit, therefore, belongs more to Approps Chair Bob Livingston (my former boss, who REALLY did major heavy lifting to cut $50 billion in actual dollars in domestic discretionary spending in two years) and W& M Chair Bill Archer -- along with, on welfare, W& M key member Clay Shaw of Florida, who far too long has been an unsung hero and gotten far too little credit.
I would disagree with Pianin that Clinton joined the GOP in "want(ing) to balance the budet, but the question was how to get there." That's just bullfeathers.Clinton never once, all through 1995, submitted a balanced budget to Congress. All he did was continually veto or otherwise block GOP legislation to accomplish that task. In fact, the FY 1996 budget that Clinton gave Congress in early 1995 called for $200 billion deficits as far as the eye could see. That was his official, and ONLY, actual submission of numbers. After that, all he did was say no and no and no again, all while claiming to want a balanced budget, until he finally accepted a plan the GOP gave him while at the same time warning that it still was too draconian. In other words, he had his cake while eating it too.
Pianin also said that the government shutdown in 1995 not only was a "colossal blunder for Republicans" (generally accepted wisdom, but at least semi-debatable, although it would take too long to outline the debate here) that "hurt Bob Dole's 1996 presidential campaign" (which is, sort of, true, but as an explanation for Dole's loss is way overblown) "and cost the GOP dearly in the 1998 midterm House races -- forcing Gingrich's deprture from Congress soon after."
It is that last claim that is utterly tendentious nonsense. The 1995 shutdown had as much impact on the 1998 races as the 1940 pledge by FDR to "keep us out of war" had to do with the elections of 1942. By 1998, the gov't shutdown was just about the farthest thing from voters' minds. The loss of five House seats by the GOP, in fact, had more to do with the Republicans' SURRENDER to big spending in the fall of 1998 than it did to the fight against big spending that it waged in 1995. It also had to do, of course, with the utterly hamhanded way Gingrich and company handled the early part of the impeachment process, turning what had been a big negative for Clinton into a net positive for the Dems because the GOP looked as if it had bloodlust and a high degree of prurience rather than a sober concern about the seriousness of allegations of presidential perjury and obstruction of justice.
Indeed, the elections of 1998 were all about those two things: 1) The middle and left were turned off by the overeagerness for impeachment--NOT, mind you, by the very thought of impeachment, nor of punishing Clinton for misdeeds, but by the overzealous attitude of Gingrich and Company, expressed in both word and deed, the deeds including a rejection of what actually was a fairly reasonable proposal from Gephardt to govern how the impeachment inquiry was to be conducted. 2) The right was demoralized by the capitulation on spending (which in turn was Gingrich's trade-off to House GOP moderates in return for holding their feet to the fire on EVERY jot and tittle of his impeachment plans). Hence the result of a five seat loss, when almost every pundit in America was predicting at least a 15-seat GOP gain in the House that year, while Gingrich predicted a 25-seat gain. In fact, if the 1995 government shutdown were responsible for the loss, why did all the pundits not PREDICT the loss for weeks leading up to the election?
Here I run the risk of self-aggrandizement, but feel I need to establish the bona fides of the analysis above of the 1998 elections. You see, unless I misremember, and unless the Post's own Al Kamen missed it, Eric Pianin never saw the GOP loss coming back in 1998. Nobody in print saw it (with the exception, very late in the game, of, if I remember correctly, Mark Shields, who predicted an exact net wash, no gains or losses for either party in the House), EXCEPT YOURS TRULY. Kamen actually wrote about it the Friday after the election, noting that I seemed to be the only person in print in the entire country to get it right -- and not only right that the GOP would lose any seats at all, but the exact number lost, namely five.
How did I get it right: By using, well in advance (as early as late September of that year) the exact analysis above, regarding the energizing of the Demo base and the moderate independents combined with the demoralization of the GOP base by the spending capitulation. And, to the point here, with regard to the Pianin book review, to repeat: THOSE RESULTS HAD ALMOST NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN BATTLE THREE WHOLE YEARS EARLIER; WAY TOO MUCH HAD HAPPENED IN THE MEANTIME FOR VOTERS WITH SHORT MEMORIES TO CONCERN THEMSELVES WITH THE 1995 EVENTS.
Why is this important? Because the myths about the destructiveness of the 1995 shutdown continue to have profound effects today, because politicians, unlike most voters, have long memories -- especially for useful myths. By swallowing the myth, hook, line and sinker, that the entire idea of fighting for smaller government in 1995 was disastrous for Republicans, today's congressional Republicans (and the majority thereof since the spending binge began in 1998!) have given themselves cover to give up the fight against big government and become K Street lackeys and pork specialists. Deflate the myth of the supposed "Disaster of the Shutdown," and the GOP may well regain a collective spine.
Pianin is a good reporter. But his take on the history of all this is not just mistaken, but (unintentionally, I believe) damaging to conservatives' causes.
China Military Power - 2006
Posted by on 5.23.06 @ 5:46PM
DoD sent the new report on Chinese Military Power to the Hill today. (The best report on it is in WSJ). It's much like last year's (see Showdown for the full discussion) but has a few new items of considerable significance.
One of the points I've been arguing is that we can derive China's intents from the capabilities it is acquiring in its hell-for-leather military buildup. The new report contains as direct a proof as I could imagine. Here's the money quote from Lt. Gen. Liu Yazhou, deputy political commissar of the PLA Air Force:
"When a nation grows strong enough, it practices hegemony. The sole purpose of power is to pursue even greater power...Geography is destiny...when a country begins to rise, it should first set itself in an invincible position."
Now what was all that about "peaceful rise" we heard from Hu Jintao last month?
Viet agrees with me
Posted by on 5.23.06 @ 5:46PM
I just read more deeply into the Wash Post story on the William Jefferson alleged bribery search warrant, and note with pleasure that my old friend Viet Dinh, former head of the Office of Legal Policy at the Department of Justice and a highly respected GU Law Professor, agrees with me that the search does indeed pass constitutional muster. I don't ALWAYS agree with Viet -- for instance, I think he is mistaken in saying that Congress can give full voting rights to Wash DC's congressional representative without a constitutional amendment -- but on probably 19 of 20 issues, I'll gladly defer to his legal judgment. He's brilliant and principled, and he knows his stuff!
FBI Raid Was Okay
Posted by on 5.23.06 @ 5:21PM
I think congressional leaders are absolutely goofy to complain about the FBI search of Rep. William Jefferson's office. To be clear, I am generally a legislative supremacist: The Founders clearly saw Congress as a sort of "first among equals" of the three branches of the national government, as the late great Willmoore Kendall and George Carey made perfectly clear in their classic, "The Basic Symbols of the American Political Tradition." Nevertheless, Madisonian that I am, I argue strongly that there is NO separation of powers issue involved in the search of a congressman's office pursuant to a legally issued search warrant. Government property is not immune to searches for evidence of criminal wrongdoing. And why would it be? It belongs to us, the people of the United States, not to Congress itself. To quote from Madison in Federalist 47, he wrote that when Montesquieu wrote of separating the three major departments of government, "he did not mean that these departments ought to have no partial agency in, or no control over, the acts of each other." And in Federalist 48: "Unless these departments be so far connected and blended as to give to each a constitutional control over the others, the degree of separation which the maxim requires, as essential to a free government, can never in practice be duly maintained.... None of them ought to possess, directly or indirectly, an overruling influence over the others in the administration of their respective powers." He then goes on to say that there is a particular danger in having the Legislature amass too much independence from or indifference to the other two branches. In Federalist 57 Madison notes that the House "can make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends,a s well as on the great mass of the society" -- and that presumably includes the laws governing search warrants.
And so on.
So here we have the same Congress that, even after the stench of scandal, STILL refuses to pass laws that disallow lobbyists from wining and dining them (in obvious return for special access, at the very least), yet wants to consider itself immune from a search warrent ordered by a judge (the third branch of government) and carried out by the FBI (representing the executive, the second branch of government) under laws governing search warrants, pursuant to the COnsitution, passed by Congress itself.
Give me a break. Hastert, Dreier, and Frist should worry about other things than whether Bill Jefferson's office is somehow immune from a legal search.
More on Flake
Posted by on 5.23.06 @ 3:11PM
I had a chance to visit with Rep. Flake today, along with several other bloggers. His remarks and questions stuck to spending and immigration.
As I mentioned below, Flake plans to challenge individual earmarks in the Agriculture Appropriations Bill on the House floor this week. While the list of earmarks he will challenge is off the record, he did say he would offer about a dozen amendments to the bill. He said this sort of sunlight and asking questions about earmarks could have stopped Duke Cunningham's corruption in its tracks. Among the questions he will ask: where is the federal nexus for the earmark? Is it authorized? Who requested this? Does the Member requesting the earmark have financial ties to the beneficiary?
Flake said he has felt some heat over his plans from fellow Members, including Republican Study Committee members.
On the President's veto threat of the emergency supplemental, Flake said Members are "taking the President a little more seriously on this veto threat."
Flake argued firmly for a comprehensive immigration bill: one that combines enforcement at the border with tough employer enforcement. He acknowledges concerns over a national ID card, but said one would probably be necessary for employer enforcement. Flake hangs this argument on statistics showing as many as 50 percent of illegal immigrants did not cross the border illegally, but rather overstayed their legal visit. Thus, border enforcement would only solve half the problem.
Everything But the Voters
Posted by on 5.23.06 @ 3:03PM
Sen. Chris Dodd (sad to say, Providence College, class of 1966) is considering a presidential run. Between the skeletons in the closet and the lack of a public demand, this makes as much sense as Gary Hart taking a look at a campaign for 2004.
Battling Earmarks
Posted by on 5.23.06 @ 2:59PM
Keep an eye on Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) this week as he challenges earmarks on the Agriculture Appropriations Bill on the House floor.
The House appropriations "cardinals" are still placing earmarks into the committee reports without revealing who requested them. There are over 400 in this bill. In other words, not a thing has changed in the House.
Pence Wins on Immigration
Posted by on 5.23.06 @ 1:54PM
Just got back from a speech at the Heritage Foundation by Mike Pence, on immigration.I really think he has the answer. I'll post a much lengthier commentary on it in about an hour, but for now let me just note that it combines the best parts of the House border-control act with the Krieble FOundation proposal I've touted here several times.
And let me also note this: Pence was very impressive. I'm sure that if he ran for president, for instance, a lot of Americans would welcome his candidacy. Just an observation, not an endorsement.
Leak Prosecutions?
Posted by on 5.23.06 @ 11:48AM
The New York Times, the Washington Post and law professor Jonathan Turley are suffering a severe case of nerves about Attorney General Gonzales's statement that the law may require prosecution of reporters who publish government secrets. Today's WaPo editorial refers, again, to the wrong part of the law in the growing hysteria about the libs idea that the Bush administration is trying to violate the First Amendment and do something the law has never allowed. (Hat tip to the PowerLine guys for a reminder on what's really the law).
The law that governs the James Risen - NSA terrorist surveillance leak situation is 18
(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes,
transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person,
or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or
interest of the
government to the detriment of the
information -
(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code,
cipher, or cryptographic system of the
foreign government; or
(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or
repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or
planned for use by the
for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the
(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence
from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the
same to have been obtained by such processes -
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten
years, or both.
So if a reporter receives, like Risen did, top-secret information about the creation, use and probable success of a system like the NSA one and writes a story about it that reveals the system to the detriment of the
New Orleans explained
Posted by on 5.23.06 @ 11:36AM
If anybody really wants to understand what happened in the New Orleans mayoral race, this column explains it all very impressively and accurately. President Bush and longtime Republican office-seeker Rob Couhig put Mayor Nagin over the top. New Orleans will suffer as a result.
Lloyd Bentsen, in memoriam
Posted by on 5.23.06 @ 11:33AM
The AP reports that former Democratic senator, treasury secretary and vice-presidential candidate Lloyd Bentsen has died. He wasn't a conservative, but he was one of the old-style, gentlemanly, public-spirited, moderate Democrats whose kind are sorely missed these days. May he rest in the Lord's peace, and may his family know the Lord's grace.
Monday, May 22, 2006
Sometimes a Plane is Just a Plane ...
Posted by on 5.22.06 @ 3:19PM
ABC News' "The Note" wonders what Karl Rove was doing in the airport in Chicago last week. The question no doubt sent three-quarters of the Daily Kos-sacks into a tizzy. After all, Joe Wilson scandal prosecutor Pat Fitzgerald is based there.
It is true that sometimes you're at the airport for a secret meeting to determine who the Supreme Court nominee will be later this summer to replace Justice Ginsburg.
Sometimes you're at the airport to plot how best to rig ballot machines to give your party landslide victories in an election year when your party is supposed to lose both the House and the Senate.
But sometimes you're at the airport just because your connecting flight happens to be there ... at an airport. Where planes take off and land. We know it's a difficult concept.
Lincoln-Douglas Once Graced Their Campus
Posted by on 5.22.06 @ 2:38PM
And now Illinois's Knox College boasts snooze-inducing comedian Stephen Colbert as its graduation speaker.
That's no joke. But it does speak volumes about the state of education, the intellectual life, and American pop culture.
Weenie of the Week
Posted by on 5.22.06 @ 2:32PM
From a Virginia Democratic blog goes to Rep. Thelma Drake for not attending President Bush's fundraiser for her own campaign.
Didn't Tom Kean attribute his absence at an event this spring to traffic problems?
What Gouging?
Posted by on 5.22.06 @ 2:26PM
The FTC found that gasoline price spikes met local or regional market trends last year after Hurricane Katrina. Which makes sense, because gouging does not exist.
Showdown Debut Day
Posted by on 5.22.06 @ 12:45PM
My new book, Showdown: Why China Wants War with the United States, debuts today. I'll be doing a lot of tv and radio, including the MSNBC "Situation" show with Tucker Carlson late tonight and the John Batchelor ABC radio show just a bit earlier.
Lots of other SGO today. If you didn't read Starobin's "Of Mullahs and MADness" on Saturday, please do. It's so terribly wrong, there shall be more on it later. Much more. Is there a nuclear deterrent that can affect Iran? Perhaps. But it's nothing like the one Starobin posits. It's much tougher, much uglier. And possibly just what we need.
More Dixie
Posted by on 5.22.06 @ 11:55AM
Billboard reports that the Dixie Chicks' new album is receiving a cold shoulder on country radio. It is no surprise that stations aren't too keen on the first single, "Not Ready to Make Nice," an in-your-face comeback.
But one pertinent fact is missing from this story (and I haven't seen it reported elsewhere): old Dixie Chicks songs are retaking the country airwaves. There was a time after their London stunt that the Dixie Chicks were as common on country stations as Metallica. Now, their old stuff is back with fairly routine airplay.
So maybe country stations are not still punishing the Chicks for their left-wing politics, but for individual poor songs?
Vet Cards and Oil Canards
Posted by on 5.22.06 @ 10:56AM
In today's Washington Times Brendan Conway delivers a fascinating bit on Democratic U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards' attempts to head off a challenge by Republican Van Taylor, a 33-year-old Iraq war veteran who is apparently getting too close for comfort if one is to judge by Edwards' eagerness to throw him in bed with Big Oil. Anyway, it's a great piece on a race that's sure to get more attention in the coming weeks.
Re: Colonial's Finest
Posted by on 5.22.06 @ 8:02AM
'Fraid I'll have to disagree with Reid Collins' suggestion that Ben Hogan missed a 3-foot putt on purpose in order to pocket an extra several hundred dollars from an eighteen-hole playoff the following day. In 1959, Ben Hogan's career was just about through, and he was known to stand frozen over putts for two minutes at a time, unable to focus one eye, damaged in his terrible auto accident. And it was not at all unusual for him to miss short putts. He blew at least two Masters crowns that way.
Sunday, May 21, 2006
The End Of Greater Serbia
Posted by on 5.21.06 @ 11:50PM
You heard it here first, foax. Montenegro, by rights, is out of the doddering Frankenstein of modern-day Serbia, and Kosovo cannot be far behind. How could the EU let the one go and force the other to stay -- particularly when a vote in Kosovo would blow away the 55.5% that Europe's statesmen allowed to pass muster for making Montenegro sovereign. The twin children of Wilsonianism, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, are ghosts now. But self-determination -- done peacefully -- lives on.
Joementum!
Posted by on 5.21.06 @ 4:24PM
If you doubt that the Lieberman for Senate campaign is charging toward victory, check out this bizarre ad for Lieberman's anti-war primary challenger Ned Lamont. Yup, that's Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas guest-starring.
Allahpundit recasts the ad as a Mentos spot. Tim Blair does a hilarious script-doctoring job. Ron Chusid of The Democratic Daily sighs, "Conservative bloggers are having lots of fun with this. I can't say I blame them this time."
P.S. Even if Lamont somehow won the Democratic nomination, polls suggest that Lieberman could still win as an independent.
Thanks a Billion
Posted by on 5.21.06 @ 2:11PM
The Marion Barry of New Orleans wins re-election in New Orleans, and how does the White House Communications Office react? It send out this statement, with these words in the "Subject" space: "IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: Mayor Nagin: 'I Want To Thank You, Mr. President.'" The actual text:
In Case You Missed It …Mayor Nagin: "I Want To Thank You, Mr. President"
Remarks By New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin
May 20, 2006
MAYOR NAGIN: "I want to thank you, Mr. President. You and I have probably been the most vilified politicians in the country. But I want to thank you for moving that promise that you made in Jackson Square forward. We now have $3 billion for levees. We have $8 billion for incentives. We have $10 billion for housing. You are delivering on your promise, and I want to thank you for all the citizens of the City of New Orleans."
Your tax dollars at work, re-electing a clown backed by a Republican president. Wonder what Mary Landrieu will threaten to do to President Bush now!
I Hope Neil Young Will Remember
Posted by on 5.21.06 @ 10:58AM
“A Southern man don’t need him around anyhow,” sang Lynyrd Skynyrd in the 1970s, in response to Young’s South-bashing “
Teaching Johnny About Islam
Posted by on 5.21.06 @ 8:33AM
A hat tip to Internet activist JulieRNR21, who spotted and circulated an invaluable Investor's Business Daily editorial here. Seems the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals thinks it's just fine to have a two-week indoctrination and role-playing course of Islam in California public schools. Key grafs:
In the California course on world religions, Christianity is not
presented equally. It's covered in just two days and doesn't
involve kids in any role-playing activities. But kids do get a good
dose of skepticism about the Christian faith, including a biting
history of its persecution of other peoples. In contrast, Islam
gets a pass from critical review. Even jihad is presented as an
"internal personal struggle to do one's best to resist temptation,"
and not holy war.
The ed consultant's name is Susan L. Douglass. No, she's not a
Christian scholar. She's a devout Muslim activist on the Saudi
government payroll, according to an investigation by Paul Sperry,
author of "Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have
Penetrated Washington." He found that for years Douglass taught
social studies at the Islamic Saudi Academy just outside
Washington, D.C. Her husband still teaches there.
Interesting tidbit here. Paul Sperry used to be the Washington bureau chief for IBD; he was let go for excessive zeal, as I understand it.
- Herbert Hoover's Long-Awaited Magnum Opus
- Common Prayer, Uncommon Beauty
- Facing Up to Darwin
- Digital Subscription (Save 78%)
- Buy a single issue (Save 50%)
- Send Spectator as a gift
