- Home
- About Us
- Contributors
- Departments
- Topics
- Back Issues
- Weekly Archives
- AmSpecBlog
- Subscribe
- Newsletter
- Advertise
- Donate
- Contact Us
- Daily Digest
- Templeton Essays
- Jan 6–12 13–19 20–26 27–31
- Feb 1–2 3–9 10–16 17–23 24–29
- Mar 1 2–8 9–15 16–22 23–29 30–31
- Apr 1–5 6–12 13–19 20–26 27–30
- May 1–3 4–10 11–17 18–24 25–31
- Jun 1–7 8–14 15–21 22–28 29–30
- Jul 1–5 6–12 13–19 20–26 27–31
- Aug 1–2 3–9 10–16 17–23 24–30 31
- Sep 1–6 7–13 14–20 21–27 28–30
- Oct 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–31
- Nov 1 2–8 9–15 16–22 23–29 30
- Dec 1–6 7–13 14–20 21–27 28–31
Saturday, December 6, 2008
The Agony of Defeat
Posted by on 12.6.08 @ 8:11PM
Win 12 games in a row, and somehow losing Game 13 seems to hurt far worse. Alabama lost the SEC championship game to Florida, 31-20. The Crimson Tide led 20-17 going into the fourth quarter. But Gator QB Tim Tebow then led Florida on a six-minute, 11-play drive that put Florida ahead 24-20 and followed with a five-minute drive to make the lead 31-20 with less than three minutes to play. Oh, the heartbreak of being 12-1!
Ayers Remains Unrepentant
Posted by on 12.6.08 @ 1:42PM
Bill Ayers' defense of his Weather Underground career is the most dishonest thing the New York Times has published since they got rid of Jayson Blair. The blogosphere reacts.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Plaxico Burress to Yellowstone
Posted by on 12.5.08 @ 9:17PM
The troubled New York Giants wide receiver should start hanging out in national parks, where they have just liberalized rules regarding the concealed carry of firearms.
A Coffin for Kathleen Parker
Posted by on 12.5.08 @ 4:13PM
No, I'm not advocating death for the increasingly obnoxious columnist, but just noting that the superb Shannen Coffin today took Parker to task for her latest jeremiad against anything having to do with religious faith. The most offensive passage in Parker's screed is this: "How about social conservatives make their arguments without bringing God into it? By all means, let faith inform one’s values, but let reason inform one’s public arguments."
To which Coffin responds: "For many, Republican and Democrat, a belief in the Divine informs reason. So it is a little difficult to remove one from the other."
Now it would not be absurd for Parker to write that social conservatives ought not expect to persuade the non-faithful if they base their arguments entirely on God. That would be a rather straightforward (and factual) observation. But what Ms. Anti-Oogedy-Boogedy writes is that social conservatives should not even bring God into the discussion at all. That's jsut great. It's like telling an atheist he can't argue AGAINST a Ten Commandments display by citing his atheism. It's like asking a Frenchman not to argue about foreign policy without citing his his interest in France's national interests. It's just absurd. Religion may not substitute for reason when talking to a person who disdains religion, but there is no reason why it can't be an important part of the reasoning process and the persuasive process.
Coffin is right: Parker is way out of line.
Facebook Strikes Again
Posted by on 12.5.08 @ 3:53PM
That would be Barack Obama's speechwriter with his hand groping cardboard Hillary's chest.
Coleman Wins Recount (For Now)
Posted by on 12.5.08 @ 2:10PM
All the precincts in Minnesota have finished their recounting, and as of now the Star Tribune numbers have Norm Coleman ahead by 238 votes, up from the 215 vote lead he had going into the recount. There are several wrinkles left, however. One is the outstanding issue of 133 ballots reportedly missing in a Democratic leaning precinct that the Franken campaign argues would mean a net gain for them of as many as 46 votes. The second issue is the more than 6,000 ballots being challenged by the campaigns. The campaigns have begun to pare down that number and the Coleman campaign has proposed that the two sides sit down to further reduce the number of challenges. It's hard to predict how the challenged ballots will affect the outcome of the race, because different types of challenges will affect the vote margin in different ways. Based on the ballots I've seen, most of the challenges appear to be frivolous ones that will likely be thrown out by the state Canvassing Board. As of this writing, Coleman has challenged more ballots than Franken, and given that challenges currently count as "no votes," odds are that Coleman's lead will be reduced once the Board makes the final ruling on the ballots. But even if you factor in the so-called 133 "mystery" ballots, and assume Franken makes some gains once the challenges are all in, the math still seems difficult for Franken. That's why, in the end, the race may hinge on how far Franken is willing to go to fight over rejected absentee ballots -- of the thousands of such rejected ballots, the Franken campaign argues that up to 1,000 should be ligitimately counted. He has the option of taking the matter to the courts, and -- if that fails -- proceding to the U.S. Senate, where Democrats may or may not want to take on a bitter partisan floor fight. So, in other words, sit tight. Things are looking positive for Coleman right now, but there are several of bumps along the road in the next few weeks. For what it's worth, a poll shows that 67 percent of Minnesotans expect Coleman to win the recount.
UPDATE: The Franken campaign is claiming they're up by four votes, according to TPM. That's based on assumptions about how the Canvassing Board will rule on the challenges, and also anticipates a 46-vote gain from the 133 "mystery" ballots.
Change Harvard Law Can Believe In
Posted by on 12.5.08 @ 12:49PM
An entirely different tide of Crimson:
As Barack Obama puts together his administration, more than 20 Harvard Law School classmates dot the ranks of his transition team - solidifying the Crimson connection as his most enduring, yet least-known, personal network.
Eyeing the presidency as a freshman senator, Obama turned to his classmates first for their high-level contacts, and then to help raise campaign cash. Now, they're putting their day jobs on the backburner to help their friend build a government.
So control of the White House goes from Yale Law (Clinton) to Harvard MBA (Bush) to Harvard Law (Obama). Oh, beware this ugly resurgence of populism David Brooks keeps warning us about!
This is Tom Daschle Speaking
Posted by on 12.5.08 @ 10:10AM
The Wall Street Journal has a report on a speech Tom Daschle is supposed to give in Denver today, which is highly anticipated in the policy community because Obama's health care czar will be discussing the push for reform. There's been hope among some conservatives that Obama's hands would be tied as a result of spending on the economic crisis, thus limiting the amount of money available for a major government expansion in health care. But unsuprisingly, according to the WSJ, Daschle is exploiting the economic crisis by arguing that it will only reinforce the need to do something about health care, highlighting the pressure that health care costs put on businesses. Also, in keeping with the idea of trying to mobolize the grassroots as Obama did during the campaign, Daschle "will suggest that Americans hold holiday-season house parties to brainstorm over how best to overhaul the U.S. health-care system."
Daily Must Reads
Posted by on 12.5.08 @ 9:59AM
- It's hard to define a term when it's utter nonsense, Ms. Parker (Washington Post)
- An efficient Labor Department isn't good enough for the Dems.
They want it to work better -- for them
(NRO)
- Policing Afghanistan, with an ethnically divided force (New Yorker)
- Harvard Law, setting up the government (Politico)
- The culture of the rich starts to vanish (Vanity Fair)
- What day to celebrate Christmas this year (Touchstone)
A Potential Silver Lining
Posted by on 12.5.08 @ 9:09AM
There isn't much good news in the latest economic indicators. Employers shed 533,000 jobs in November, driving the unemployment rate up to 6.7 percent, the highest in 15 years. Meanwhile, retail sales dropped for the second straight month. But one of the drivers of the dire retail sales was a slow down in credit card purchases. As I've written before, in my view, America's instant gratification culture was at the heart of this crisis, so though it may hurt retailers in the short-term, I think it's better in the long-term that Americans are slowing down their purchases of stuff that they cannot afford. Also, what you see here is markets working. People are spending less because they either have less money, they are uncertain about their future, or credit is harder to come by. What this means is that the overwhelming majority of Americans who won't lose their jobs will end up accumulating more savings, eventually reaching a point at which they are more comfortable spending money, especially when stuff around their house starts breaking down. This is just one of the many ways in which the business cycle works itself out, meaning that the best solution to the economic crisis is for the government to do absolutely nothing. Unfortunately, that's the one option that's politically unacceptable.
Planned Parenthood Exposed
Posted by on 12.5.08 @ 8:58AM
Victor Morton of The Washington Times reports:
Planned Parenthood of Indiana has suspended a nurse after the release of an undercover videotape showing her coaching a supposed 13-year-old on how to duck Indiana's laws about parental-consent on abortion and the reporting of child sex-abuse.
The videotape shows Lila Rose, the president of a university pro-life group and a brunette, posing as a blonde 13-year-old girl named "Brianna" and telling the Planned Parenthood nurse at the clinic in Bloomington, Ind., that she is pregnant by a 31-year-old man.
"I am supposed to report [you] to Child Protective Services," says the nurse on the videotape, though assuring "Brianna" she will not do so if she can tell a plausible different story.
"I didn't hear the age. I don't want to know the age," the nurse says at a later point on the tape.
The nurse, who is referred to on the video as "Diana" but whose face is blurred out, knew neither that the session was being taped nor that "Brianna" really was Miss Rose, a 20-year-old pro-life activist at UCLA.
And an ironic note:
A city spokesman said Thursday that the Bloomington City Police is not investigating the clinic or the nurse for possibly violating the statutory-rape notification law, but is beefing up security around the facility to protect it from a possible backlash.
So the potential criminality at the clinic elicits no police interest, but watch out for those deranged pro-lifers!
The video:
>
In June, Students for Life of America (SFLA) did a very similar video about Planned Parenthood of North Carolina:
SFLA has an online petition to end taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood.
Jay and The American Spectator
Posted by on 12.5.08 @ 4:50AM
Our funny and wise contributor Jay Homnick has done a nicely astute report on our annual Robert L. Bartley dinner for today's Human Events. We may be in the wilderness again, as Bob Tyrrell noted, yet if the superb Justice Alito is right, we may be better positioned than we realize. The conservative mind is a wonderful thing not to waste.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Blame Al Gore . . .
Posted by on 12.4.08 @ 9:57PM
. . . for the "new American political tradition: the quadrennial early-winter attempt to overturn presidential results by any means necessary," says Dave Weigel
.
Where Football Is Serious
Posted by on 12.4.08 @ 9:30PM
Auburn Coach Tommy Tuberville won 85 games in 10 seasons and beat Alabama six years in a row, but a 5-7 season ending with last week's 36-0 shutout at the hands of the Crimson Tide was all it took for him to get the heave-ho.
Alito's Revenge
Posted by on 12.4.08 @ 7:50PM
Justice Samuel Alito gots some payback on Joe Biden at last night's Spectator soiree, as the Politico's Alexander Burns notes:
At a gala dinner hosted by the American Spectator Wednesday, Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. cracked wise at Vice President-elect Joe Biden's expense, raising the Delaware senator's past brushes with academic dishonesty to the delight of his conservative audience. . . .
"To coin a phrase, in the spirit of the vice president-elect," Alito began, "you don't always get what you want, but you get what you need."
Alito paused before continuing: "Did somebody say that before?" . . .
Biden, who clashed with Alito during the associate justice's 2005 confirmation hearings, dropped out of the 1988 Democratic nominating contest amid allegations that he had plagiarized both law school papers and his campaign trail stump speech.
The Associated Press has more on the gala.
Is Coleman All That Stands In The Way of Card Check?
Posted by on 12.4.08 @ 5:04PM
When card check legislation came up for a vote in June of 2007, it sailed through the House, but 48 Republican Senators joined to support a filibuster, effectively killing it. One Republican -- Arlen Specter -- voted against it. When you add Specter's vote to the 58 votes Democrats will now have, you get up to 59, just one Minnesota seat shy of ensuring easy passage. That isn't to say that Republicans will definitely be able to block the legislation should card check opponent Norm Coleman hang on, but it may be their only fighting chance.
The NFL Sucks Eggs
Posted by on 12.4.08 @ 4:53PM
Just to vent a little here, off topic.... I think sports leagues are absolutely right to crack down HARD against steroid use. But the NFL, in doing so, has shown the common sense of a horse's rear end and the fairness of a Soviet commissar. New Orleans Saints players are afraid to voice their opinions on the issue, so I'll voice it for them: The NFL can go straight to Hades, and its enforcement people can $@&^&*$^@*^$(&..
There.
So, you ask, why so angry? Because one of the classiest players in the entire league, EVER, has been suspended from the league, for NO GOOD REASON. Here's the story of Deuce McAllister, a warrior's warrior, a guy who plays hurt, who has returned from two knee surgeries and another serious leg surgery without complaint, who is an incredibly generous public citizen with his money and especially his time, and who did as much as anybody anywhere to rally to the aid and emotional support of New Orleanians after Katrina when almost nobody else, including the owner of the team, was willing to do so.
Why suspended? NOT for taking steroids. There doesn't seem to be a soul alive, including at the NFL offices, who thinks Deuce took steroids. Instead, he took a diuretic -- a weight-loss pill -- that turned out to contain an ingredient that can be used to mask steroid use, and the ingredient itself is banned by the NFL for that reason. But there is ample evidence to support Deuce's contention that he had no way of knowing that the pill contained that banned ingredient. Why? Because the pill packaging claimed that the product was "all natural," and listed all its supposed ingredients on the package -- and did NOT list the banned ingredient among them. In other words, the makers of the pill lied about what was in it. Now, here's where it gets even more interesting. Deuce had taken the pills a few years before, and had sent them off to the league itself to make sure it was okay, AND had called the league's hotline to double-check -- and the league did NOT object to the pill.
So, the question is, if Deuce did all that due diligence, and then the pillmaker subsequently started including an ingredient that it didn't acknowledge including (apparently the ingredient enhances the weight-loss results), how in the Lord's good name was Deuce supposed to know it had become illegal?
Yes, the NFL rules say players are responsible for what they put in their bodies, no matter what caused it. But in this case the substance involved gave Deuce no competitive advantage, AND he didn't know it was in there. And he was taking it in a diligent effort to rehab after surgery -- and everybody knows that if you have a bad knee you want to have as little weight to carry around as possible so as not to put too much prssure on it as you are beginning to walk and then run again. There is NOTHING else, nothing at all, that Deuce could have done to be more careful about not breaking league rules. For the league to nevertheless impose a four-week suspension, without pay, is not just wrongheaded, it is morally obtuse, indeed it is sick.
Self-Quotafication
Posted by on 12.4.08 @ 12:59PM
OK, suppose you're a Vanilla-American, trying to figure out how to game the affirmative-action quota formula by which Democrats choose Cabinet officers. Take inspiration from this Labor Secretary wannabe:
For the rainbow cabinet of the nation's first African American president, Mary Beth Maxwell is the perfect labor secretary you've probably never heard of: a gay woman, community organizer and labor leader with an adopted African American son.
Don't despair, homogenous honkies: You're only one same-sex relationship and one transracial adoption away from having Cabinet-worthy "diversity" credentials. Further commentary at Newsbusters and Ace of Spades HQ.
The First Fight
Posted by on 12.4.08 @ 12:00PM
Quin Hillyer's excellent column urging Republican opposition to Hillary Clinton's nomination as Secretary of State offers interesting political possibilities.
First, tough questioning during Hillary's confirmation hearings would give Republicans a chance to play on familiar turf, emptying out the oppo-research files (see Amanda Carpenter's Dossier, for starters). The New York-based media loves any Hillary-related news and so, at a bare minimum, the GOP could get a week's worth of front-page headlines out of the hearings.
Second, a real fight over Hillary's nomination would give Republicans a chance to establish the "corruption" meme at the outset of the Obama administration. The Clinton connection -- including all of Bill's shadowy conflicts of interest -- ties Obama to the politics of the past (rather than Hope and Change) and a confirmation fight will help cement that connection in the public mind.
Hillary is less popular than Obama, and so opposition to Clinton's confirmation presents an opportunity for the GOP to score points indirectly against the Messiah. And there are enough Clinton-hating "progressives" among Obama's supporters that Republican senators could count on a certain amount of grassroots Democratic support in the confirmation fight.
Could Senate Republicans actually defeat the Clinton nomination? Probably not, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth trying. Remember that Clinton was more or less imposed on Obama as the price of "solidarity" during the fall campaign. If the confirmation hearings were to turn up anything really damaging against Hillary, Obama wouldn't really regret having to withdraw her nomination.
Health Care Fight Looking Tougher
Posted by on 12.4.08 @ 11:26AM
Evidence continues to mount that it will be much more difficult to stop the Democrats from enacting some kind of universal healthcare than it was in 1993/1994. The Washington Post reports that Tom Daschle, who hasn't even been formally named Secretary of Health and Human Services yet, is already engaging activists on the issue, asking for their input, and hoping build on the success that the Obama campaign had in mobilizing the grassroots during the campaign. This is not somebody who is taking the HHS job to manage its day-to-day bureaucracy.
Meanwhile, yesterday, America's Health Insurance Plans, the largest trade group of insurance companies, proposed its own universal health care plan, declaring that, "now is the time for health care reform." This is a stunning development, given that the insurance industry played a major role in the defeat of HillaryCare. In the proposal, insurers agree to cover individuals with pre-existing conditions, if the government imposes a mandate requiring that every American purchase health insurance. Meanwhile, to control costs, the group proposes "a public-private advisory group be created to provide specific policy recommendations to Congress on reducing health care costs" – which is similar to Daschle's idea of a Federal Health Board. They also endorse an expansion of S-CHIP. Liberals are a bit less enthused by the group's support for portable coverage that would be available to all states. But it will be difficult for conservatives to make the argument that the Obama administration plans a government takeover of health care if private insurers are on board with some of its major elements.
On the other hand, this does create a different sort of opportunity for conservatives. The individual insurance coverage mandate is typically the least popular element of any universal health care plan. Obama realizes this, which is why he astutely argued against a mandate during the campaign. Insurers want one because they need to be able to bring healthy people into the system to balance out their risk and offset the cost of treating the very ill. So if Obama reverses course, conservatives will be able argue that the big insurance companies are getting government to force Americans to purchase their products.
Daily Must Reads
Posted by on 12.4.08 @ 10:37AM
- Obama's brilliant team seems to have modest goals (Washington Post)
- War on Poverty more like war on cities (City Journal)
- As a candidate, Obama played by the Golden Rule (WSJ)
- If the Big Three took out an ad in the newspaper... (Cafe Hayek)
- There's no problem a big ol' laser can't fix (Wired)
- If Jews were singled out for torture in Mumbai, why isn't it being reported? (Huffington Post)
Added: I'm alerted by someone who scorns valedictorians to this piece by Joseph Epstein in The Weekly Standard
Gala Notes
Posted by on 12.4.08 @ 1:59AM
The American Spectator's annual soiree -- the Robert L. Bartley Dinner -- was a grand success. The guests arrived to find copies of the L.L. Bean catalog at their tables. What could this mean? It was not until after dinner that R. Emmett Tyrrell explained that this catalog is full of clothing and supplies for the wilderness, which is where conservatives are now.
Gala guests were roughing it Wednesday night in the rustic environs of the Mandarin Oriental Hotel, dining on roasted duck. The meal was prepared in the manner of nouvelle cuisine, which is French for "expensive." Most chefs go to cooking school. But to prepare nouvelle cuisine, you must study modern art. The salad was abstract expressionist, and the dessert was apparently inspired by Modigliani.
Mr. Tyrrell explained that conservatives have been banished to a long exile in the wilderness, and that it is fortunate we will be joined there by the governor of Alaska, who is reportedly an excellent moose-hunter. Mr. Tyrrell also noted that our next president's promise to "fix the broken government in Washington" is significant, considering that Obama comes from Mayor Daley's Chicago, a place where "the word 'fix' is pregnant with meaning."
Our editor's stern and sober warnings about the wilderness were followed with light-hearted entertainment -- a speech by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who told the story of how the American Spectator had once rejected an article he submitted in the early 1980s.
Afterwards, all the guests seemed to agree with Mr. Tyrrell's assertion that this wilderness excursion should prove to be "quite amusing" for conservatives. Especially now that the Spectator has convinced Andrew Sullivan that Joe the Plumber is among our contributors.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Beggars Can't Be Free
Posted by on 12.3.08 @ 2:16PM
The auto execitives have declared that "there is no Plan B" if government doesn't come to their aid and that their failure "could spark a depression." If they accept a a handout under such desperate circumstances, they will have to be accountable to chairman Nancy Pelosi, who is demanding that they present Congress with "a new business model, a new business plan." Right now, corporate executives are systematically aiding and abedding the destruction of the free market. When they cannot manage themselves and need government to step in, they open the door for more regulation and interference in the economy, while the rest of us pick up the tab.
The day after the $30 billion Bear Stearns bailout -- which now seems quaint -- I wrote:
The extraordinary intrusion into the free market over the past several days by the Federal Reserve Board under Chairman Ben Bernanke should send shudders down the spines of conservatives everywhere....
The Fed's actions will also give advocates of big government another argument to use against free marketers. If taxpayers end up footing the bill when Wall Street banks get into trouble, they will ask, why shouldn't the government be able to impose more regulations on them preemptively?
That's exactly what is happening, only on an increasingly broader scale than I envisioned.
Worst Paragraph of the Day
Posted by on 12.3.08 @ 2:07PM
Today, the greatest threats to conservative interests come . . . from too much individual freedom. Look around you: Americans have been poor stewards of our economic liberty, owing to cultural values that celebrate unfettered materialism. Our families and communities have fragmented, in part because we have embraced an ethic of extreme individualism. Climate change and a peak in oil production threaten our future because we have been irresponsible caretakers of the natural world and its resources.
What do you mean, "we," Kemosabe? I don't "celebrate unfettered materialism," I just don't want government in charge of the fetters. My family is not fragmented. And as to "climate change," perhaps Dreher can refer me to the passage of Deuteronomy that establishes the high priesthood of climatologists.
That Wasn't Hard, Was It?
Posted by on 12.3.08 @ 1:20PM
I said yesterday that it wouldn't be hard to find someone who could fire up Florida Republicans better than Mel Martinez. A familiar name has already emerged.
Sportsmen of the Year
Posted by on 12.3.08 @ 12:39PM
Sports Illustrated has named Olympics hero Michael Phelps its Sportsman of the Year. A fine choice, no doubt, though I would have gone with Tiger Woods. Phelps, after all, didn't have to compete on a broken leg and torn-up knee. At least the prize didn't go to our President-elect for the three-point shot he hit in Kuwait last summer.
Kicking Hitler in the Panzers
Posted by on 12.3.08 @ 12:24PM
I have to take issue with Stacy's dissing of folk music. Just because most of its prominent musicians were liberals, even socialists, it doesn't take away from the quality of their work. When it comes to art, I think you have to set aside politics.
Besides, as leftist folk musicians go, Woody Guthrie knew how to stick it to the Nazis:
There was a man across the ocean, I guess you knew him well,
His name was Adolf Hitler, goddam his soul to hell;
We kicked him in the panzers and put him on the run,
And that was about the biggest thing that man has ever done.
Re: Odetta, RIP
Posted by on 12.3.08 @ 11:40AM
The death of Odetta reminds me of the scene in "Animal House" where the Deltas go on a road trip and pick up girls at Emily Dickinson College, who are in mourning ("Sophomore Dies in Kiln Explosion") as the soundtrack features Odetta singing a sad spiritual.
The folk-music boom of the 1950s and early '60s that elevated Odetta to star status was a left-wing phenomenon. Pete Seeger and other comrades pushed the Leninist idea that folk was the only authentic revolutionary music. So you had all these lefty boho college kids sitting around digging Bolshevik wannabes trying to play bluegrass at "hootenannies" in Village coffee bars.
Meanwhile, of course, the lowbrow greaser youth of the lumpenproletariat were listening to that crass, commercialized, reactionary music known as rock 'n' roll.
More Cold Water on Georgia
Posted by on 12.3.08 @ 11:32AM
I agree with Jim, and I'd go a bit further—this is the latest example of Barack Obama playing the long game and ignoring the conventional wisdom du jour.
Cast your mind back to May, after Obama won North Carolina and basically tied Hillary Clinton in Indiana, closing out her chances of winning a delegate majority in the primaries. Clinton responded by pounding the pavement in West Virginia, Kentucky, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Dakota, and Montana. She won four of these contests, three of them in landslides. Amazingly, it didn't seem like Obama was trying to win any of the states except for Oregon, South Dakota, and Montana. He only campaigned one day in West Virginia. He let South Dakota slip away even after George McGovern un-endorsed Clinton and endorsed him. Instead, he started raising money for the general election and campaigning in swing states like Iowa and Missouri.
Obama took his knocks from reporters and pundits. Hillary "won the fourth quarter" of the primaries. She got close (or won, if you count the Michigan sham primary) in the popular vote. PUMAS were emboldened. Tongues wagged about how Obama "couldn't close the deal." And yet, in retrospect, Obama was completely right. He got a head start on organizing for the general election, which was the only thing he cared about.
I see the same thing here. Martin, let's remember, was never expected to win this election. He had lost a race for lieutenant governor in 2006 and was pulled out of mothballs to stop crooked DeKalb County CEO Vernon Jones from winning the Senate nomination and dragging down the ticket. (It's never a good sign when your candidate has to answer rape charges.) Not until the bailout vote did Chambliss start to slip, and even then I don't think he slipped below Martin in any poll.
What were Obama's choices here? Either he could stump for Martin and pull out, maybe, a few more percentage points for him. Martin would have lost and Obama would have been directly linked to the loss. It would have been a replay of 1992, when Bill Clinton used his political capital to try and save Sen. Wyche Fowler in his runoff against Paul Coverdell. Clinton looked like a fool when Fowler lost, and it fueled the idea that he only won the election because of Ross Perot. Senate Republicans, who have so far not been combative towards Obama, would have been personally affronted.
Obviously, a Chambliss loss would have been a shocking death blow to Republican hopes. But Chambliss's survival hasn't altered Democratic plans at all.
Today, We Are All Georgians
Posted by on 12.3.08 @ 10:53AM
Just one more thought on the Obama turnout machine in the wake of the Georgia runoff results: Whatever organization he had in place on the ground and however strong the black voter turnout, Barack Obama did not win Georgia on Election Day. Jim Martin ran slightly behind Obama. The only reason this went to a runoff in the first place is because Saxby Chamliss ran behind John McCain, due in part to a Libertarian candidate.
Take away the high black turnout and the Libertarian candidate, and it was always going to be difficult for Martin to win. Anybody who thought he could just Facebook and Twitter his way to victory didn't pay attention to the results in November. The only shot Martin had was that a good Obama-organized ground game could shift the runoff turnout in directions more favorable to him. That, combined with lingering conservative discontent with Chambliss's votes on immigration and the bailout, gave Martin a slender reed upon which to hang his hopes. But it didn't happen. Given that Obama himself lost the state, I don't think it's the best test of whether his get-out-the-vote operations are transferrable to other candidates. It does show some states are as impervious to these tactics as they are Obama's charm, however.
Georgia and the Obama Machine
Posted by on 12.3.08 @ 9:14AM
In the wake of Barack Obama's victory last month, there was a lot of hand-wringing among Republicans about the strength of Obama's turnout operation just as after 2004, Democrats were lamenting the smooth Republican organization and savvy microtargeting. But for the Georgia run-off, Obama kept offices open and was lending his turnout operation to Democrat Jim Martin, yet Saxby Chambliss still won handily. This is a good indication of what I've believed for a long time -- that all of the emphasis on organization distracts us from facing the reality that candidates win when they give voters a reason to vote for them and/or against their opponent, not because of the superior use of the latest technology. The final national turnout numbers now confirm that this election did not produce the record turnout that was widely expected, and that the youth vote was widely exaggerated (yes, Obama did win a higher percentage of them than Kerry, but they didn't go to the polls in the numbers that were anticipated). But at the same time, Republicans stayed home, because they weren't given a good enough reason to vote for John McCain. In short, Obama did not win because his campaign was better at text messaging and using Facebook, but because his message had more resonance to the electorate in this political environment.
Chambliss and the Growth Factor
Posted by on 12.3.08 @ 8:45AM
In analyzing Sen. Saxby Chambliss' impressive victory in Georgia -- he defeated Democrat Jim Martin by more than 300,000 votes in Tuesday's runoff -- it is important to understand where that Republican margin comes from. While liberals will try to explain Martin's defeat as a product of retrograde rural backlash, the decisive factor for Chambliss was his large margins in the prosperous, fast-growing suburban and exurban counties around Atlanta.
As usual for Republicans in Georgia, Chambliss piled up huge margins in the mega-suburban counties of Cobb and Gwinnett, beating Martin by nearly 50,000 votes in each. But Chambliss also piled up a combined margin of nearly 150,000 votes in nine "outer ring" exurban counties. Here are those counties, showing Chambliss' margin and each county's population growth rate (April 2000-July 2006) according to the Census Bureau:
County... Margin...Growth
Barrow......7,184.......38.1%
Bartow.....10,948.....20.1%
Carroll.......6,642......23.0%
Cherokee...33,274......37.6%
Coweta......15,002......29.2%
Forsyth......30,624.....53.4%
Hall...........20,625.....24.4%
Paulding
....12,795.....48.9%
Walton.......12,681....30.8%
Please note that the margins are based on results available at 8 a.m., when 97% of precincts statewide were reporting, and the vote is not complete in all counties.
(Cross-posted at The Other McCain.)
Restrict Dawson
Posted by on 12.3.08 @ 8:24AM
I'm with Jennifer Rubin. Katon Dawson's long membership in a country club that excluded blacks and Jews from being members should disqualify him from serious consideration as chairman of the RNC. This is not the direction the Republican Party needs to go in after a second-straight electoral thumping. According to the State newspaper, Dawson resigned from the club -- but only in August of this year, just a few months before he launched his candidacy for chairman -- even though he had been a member of the club for 12 years. I know I find this deeply offensive, and can only imagine how moderate voters would perceive it, let alone the growing minority popuation. It's time to give Dawson a taste of his own medicine.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Solid Win for Chambliss
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 9:42PM
With 88% of precincts reporting by 9:40 p.m., Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss leads by more than 300,000 votes over his Democratic challenger Jim Martin in the runoff election. Still more than 100 precincts unreported in Fulton County, but the numbers so far look like a typical Republican victory -- solid margins in Cobb and Gwinnett counties, plus North Georgia and the fast-growing "outer ring" exurban counties. Based on partial reports, here are some of those exurban margins:
Carroll .........2.2-to-1
Cherokee .....4.5-to-1
Coweta ........2.8-to-1
Fayette .......2.3-to-1
Forsyth ........5.3-to-1
Hall .............3.3-to-1
Paulding ......3.2-to-1
Walton ........3.7-to-1
Will update with further results.
Hillsdale Lectures Look Good
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 4:38PM
Hillsdale College's new program in DC will be hosting a series of Friday breakfast lectures that promise to be quite interesting. The first one is Friday. Hillsdale should prove to be a very nice addition to the DC scene.
Ensign: Dems Would Pay "Heavy Political Price" If Franken Disputes Election in Senate
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 4:37PM
Sen. John Ensign, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said in a conference call that Senate Democrats were unlikely to take the political risk of contesting the Minnesota election results in the U.S. Senate.
"I think that the Democratic majority will not want to see this come to the Senate," Ensign said this afternoon. He added that, "there will be a heavy political price to pay" if they try to overturn the choice of Minnesota voters.
Ensign said he faced a similar decision in his 1998 Senate race, when he went through a recount but still trailed Harry Reid by about 400 votes. "I was in the exact same position that Al Franken is in today," Ensign said. He said he conceded the race without taking it to the courts or to the Senate even though there were irregularities in the election.
"It's pretty clear that Norm Coleman is going to win this race in the recount, just like he did on election day," Ensign said.
As for the Georgia race, based on tracking polling, Ensign said Republicans expected Saxby Chambliss to win by 5 to 6 percent. He also said Sarah Palin's appearance provided a late boost.
"She was able to get a lot of people excited, and make sure they were focused on the race," he said. Especially helpful, according to Ensign, was all the press attention generated by her celebrity, which helped remind voters who may not have been paying attention that there was a run-off today.
How Obama Can Lead Us to Recovery
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 2:22PM
I have been part of an email correspondence group for a couple of years now which includes a number of strong public policy thinkers. One of the best is a man named Francis Cianfrocca (aka "Blackhedd") who writes regularly at Redstate. He has been spot on with regard to the current financial crisis. I've read far better stuff from him in my inbox than I've been able to find at CNBC or Fox Business News. All of this is to say that he is plugged in to the financial community and has a strong analytical mind for making sense of it all.
Here is his latest. And here is a taste:
Obama could sweep away a lot of this uncertainty and unreasoning fear with no more than a ten-minute news conference.
He could stand up, with the towering Paul Volcker, the sour-pussed Larry Summers and the sardonic-looking Tim Geithner standing behind him, and say the following:
"Ladies and gentlemen, I've consulted at length with my economic team. We're acutely aware that our economy is facing great uncertainty. We understand that our system is a capitalistic one. We intend to do whatever it takes to get business and capital working again, for the sake of every consumer and working person in America.
We also recognize our critical responsibility to the rest of the world. As the pre-eminent economic power, it's up to us to lead global markets back to health and prosperity.
I'm announcing the following key decisions, which we will stand by until our markets are back to normal, employment is growing, and our economy is healthy again:
All tax increases on capital, dividends, and business income are OFF THE TABLE.
All protectionist legislation, including increased tariffs and import duties, are OFF THE TABLE.
All new regulations, mandated costs and taxes on businesses, including export businesses, are OFF THE TABLE.
That is all. Thank you."
If Obama were to give this speech, you'd see explosive market rallies, and everyone would heave a big sigh of relief.
So how about it, Mr. President-elect?
Sounds like some first class "Nixon goes to China" action to me.
Re: Govs. Perry and Sanford
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 2:14PM
Joseph Lawler notes as one of today's "Must Reads" that in a Wall Street Journal piece, Republican Govs. Mark Sanford (S.C.) and Rick Perry (Texas) are "putting their money where their mouth is." Unfortunately in some ways they do not put their actions where their mouths are, primarily when it comes to taxpayer subsidies for individual businesses. The two state executives co-write:
The bailout mentality threatens Americans' sense of personal responsibility.
In a free-market system, competition and one's own personal stake motivate people to do their best. In this process, the winners create wealth, jobs and new investment, while others go back to the drawing board better prepared to try again.
To an unprecedented degree, government is currently picking winners and losers in the private marketplace, and throwing good money after bad. A prudent investor takes money from low-yield investments and puts them in those that yield better returns. Recent government intervention is doing the opposite -- taking capital generated from productive activities and throwing it at enterprises that in many cases need to reorganize their business model.
Too bad that Govs. Sanford and Perry fail to follow their own advice, as their states have doled out millions (maybe billions) of dollars-worth of tax breaks and incentives to specific companies, ostensibly to attract "investment" to their states. South Carolina is very proud that it attracted BMW to the state in the early 1990s, and still periodically subsidizes plant expansions -- even as recently as this year. The Palmetto State (as do just about all states) regularly announces new plant expansions, relocations of businesses, new job creation, etc., many of which politicians take credit for because of the targeted incentive programs. Almost none are as big as BMW but many smaller companies get tax breaks and credits that their competitors are often not entitled to. Big business has figured out how to maximize this scam to their benefit, as I reported a few years ago.
So, good times or bad times, whether it's a "bailout" or an "incentive," government is still picking the winners and losers. Govs. Sanford and Perry ought not to pretend like they are above it all.
The RNC: Membership Has Its Privileges
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 11:50AM
In a bloggers' conference call not too long ago, Michael Steele downplayed reports that some members of the Republican National Committee would prefer to be led by a current nember. But it appears that some committeemen do in fact have that preference.
Mel Martinez Retiring
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 11:29AM
Republican Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida is retiring after only one term. President Bush and Karl Rove plucked him from the Cabinet in 2004 to run in the Sunshine State's competitive Senate race, helping to build the GOP's (short-lived) 55-seat majority.
On the one hand, this looks like more of the same: Another Republican who could conceivably be reelected is throwing a seat to the wolves rather than toiling in the minority. On the other, it shouldn't be too difficult to find a Republican candidate who fires up the party's base -- still a significant force in Florida -- better than Mel Martinez.
'Dead Wood' and New Republicans
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 11:26AM
Red State's Erick Erickson has some provocative thoughts today on "dead wood" in the conservative movement:
Inside the conservative movement, there is a lot of deadwood -- institutions and personalities who continue sucking up resources long after the usefulness of the organization is over. . . .
There are few truly indispensable people in the movement and far too many dispensable people who think they are indispensable. Likewise, there are too many conservative organizations that operate as employment vehicles for out of work politicians still needing their egos stroked.
Conservatism must be about the advancement of freedom and opportunity, not the advancement of any one person. Thus we need to rebuild the movement and burn up the dead wood.
A more constructive approach might be to invigorate the movement by the formation of new institutions, an approach that University of Georgia law student Steven Lee is taking with his Internet-based group, The New Republican.
Holder the Yes Man
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 11:03AM
At least as the media likes to frame it, Barack Obama wants to build a "Team of Rivals" with conflicting views who won't be shy about telling him when they think he's off base -- a step away from the cronyism and uniformity that the Bush administration has been associated with. But details continue to emerge that Eric Holder was more intimately involved in the Marc Rich pardon than Democrats would like to have us believe, as even the New York Times acknowledges.
And in today's Washington Post, Richard Cohen puts it this way: "the pardon cannot be excepted. It suggests that Holder, whatever his other qualifications, could not say no to power. The Rich pardon request had power written all over it -- the patronage of important Democratic fundraisers, for instance."
Whatever Holder's qualifications, the idea that he will stand up to Obama and tell him when he's wrong, is undermined by the Rich episode.
All Eyes on Georgia
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 10:56AM
Polls close at 7 p.m. EST tonight in the run-off race between Saxby Chambliss and Jim Martin, in which Republicans hope to officially keep the Democrats from hitting 60 seats. Chambliss has the lead in polls, but turnout is notoriously difficult to gauge in a run-off race, and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports low turn-out this morning. For what it's worth, I'd be really surprised if Chambliss loses this one.
Daily Must Reads
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 10:20AM
- Perry and Sanford, putting their money where their mouth is (WSJ)
- Russia has no friends left (Slate)
- Jindal v. Obama: who's more extreme? (Atlantic)
- Obama is starting to bring reform to DC, Chicago-style (NRO)
- From inside the Taj on Thanksgiving (Forbes)
- Discriminating against Mormons, from people complaining of discrimination (LA Times)
Obama Doctrine
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 9:16AM
Barack Obama talks about terrorism:
"My administration will remain steadfast in support of India's effort to catch perpetrators and bring them to justice."
Jules Crittenden likes it, but notes:
I sure hope India's intelligence isn't bad, if they follow up on Obama's advice. Especially since it could lead to the world's first third-world nuclear war.
But isn't the "bring them to justice" line a return to a pre-9/11 concept of terrorism as a law-enforcement issue, rather than as an act of war?
In Defense of Bush
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 9:10AM
Chris Wallace of Fox News stood up last night after a screening of Ron Howard's new "Frost/Nixon" movie (opening Friday) to refute the notion put forth by the moviemakers that President Bush is guilty of abuses of power similar to (or even worse than) those of the former president. The Washington Times reports:
"Richard Nixon's crimes were committed purely in the interest of his own political gain," Mr. Wallace told Mr. Howard before an audience of a few hundred after viewing the filmmakers new film "Frost/Nixon," which is about the only U.S. president to resign from office.
"I think to compare what Nixon did, and the abuses of power for pure political self preservation, to George W. Bush trying to protect this country — even if you disagree with rendition or waterboarding — it seems to me is both a gross misreading of history both then and now," Mr. Wallace said.
If you can stomach it, watch for similar allegations later this week when CNN airs Christiane Amanpour's special series on genocide, in which she likens the atrocities committed by Cambodia's Khmer Rouge in the 1970s to the present-day U.S. practice of waterboarding.
Dynastic Politics Lives in New York
Posted by on 12.2.08 @ 9:08AM
One of the silver linings of this presidential election was that it broke the Bush-Clinton lock on the White House (though granted, you'd hardly know it by Barack Obama's appointments). Now, with his wife set to become Secretary of State, CNN is reporting that Bill Clinton is being considered for her soon to be vacated Senate seat, to be chosen by NY Gov. David Patterson. The story goes on:
Paterson has a strong bench to choose from. There are a number of contenders, including at least eight members of New York's delegation in the House of Representatives, New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown, Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion, Nassau County Executive Thomas Suozzi, Caroline Kennedy, and her cousin, Robert Kennedy Jr.
So, to review, among those on this "strong bench," you have: Bill Clinton, who we can only assume would merely be keeping the seat warm until it's Chelsea's turn to takeover the family Senate post; RFK Jr. and Caroline, who would be reclaiming their father/uncle's seat for the Kennedy clan; and Andrew Cuomo, whose father did so much damage to New York state that it even elected Republican George Pataki for three terms. It's a good thing we broke with the British.
Monday, December 1, 2008
Ala. Dems Charged With Corruption
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 11:54PM
Birmingham, Ala., Mayor Larry Langford has been charged with accepting nearly $250,000 in bribes from two former top officials of Alabama's Democratic Party. Both former state party chairman William Blount, a Montgomery investment banker, and former state party executive director Al LaPierre also have been charged in connection with the alleged scheme:
The charges stem from a long-running federal investigation surrounding bond deals that were at the center of Jefferson County's upgrade of its sewer system, deals that have left the county billions of dollars in debt and on the verge of bankruptcy.
The 80-page federal indictment in this case is online, and the Birmingham News has a special page about the Langford case. Democrats have claimed for months that the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman was a politically motivated "witch hunt" orchestrated by Karl Rove. We'll see if they'll try the same defense for Langford, Blount and LaPierre.
All these (allegedly) corrupt Democrats -- somebody ought to write a book about it.
Coin Flip
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 8:37PM
Which has been worse in the NFL this season: pass catching or officiating?
Krugman Argues Against Raising Taxes
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 7:05PM
Well, not exactly. But in his column from today, which Jim posted earlier, Krugman makes the case for massive government spending, arguing that balancing the budget during an economic downturn would lead to dire consequences.
But the two instances he gives from history have another thing in common (emphasis mine):
The first took place in 1937, when Franklin Roosevelt mistakenly heeded the advice of his own era's deficit worriers. He sharply reduced government spending, among other things cutting the Works Progress Administration in half, and also raised taxes. The result was a severe recession, and a steep fall in private investment.
The second episode took place 60 years later, in Japan. In 1996-97 the Japanese government tried to balance its budget, cutting spending and raising taxes. And again the recession that followed led to a steep fall in private investment.
Cao Can Win
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 5:03PM
I wouldn't necessarily put as much stock in the poll listed in his column as Times-Picayune columnist James Gill does, but Gill says Republican Joseph Cao has a real shot at beating Dollar Bill Jefferson in the New Orleans race for Congress this coming Saturday. And the Picayune has strongly endorsed Cao. This is the race I wrote about a few weeks back. It definitely bears watching.
Misunderstanding Monetarism
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 4:33PM
Ezra Klein has suggested that Ben Bernanke's "extremely aggressive" moves during the financial crisis have undermined the case for Milton Friedman's monetarism, but Ezra is working off of an inaccurate understanding of monetarism. Friedman's argument wasn't that we need more aggressive monetary policy, but actually, quite the opposite. He believed that no matter how brilliant its board members may be, the Fed will always be playing a guessing game and making decisions based on outdated information, or choosing among competing policy goals. Friedman famously compared the Fed attempting manage monetary policy to a "fool in the shower" who keeps turning the temperature from one extreme to another because there is a lag time between turning the faucet, and having the water adjust from hot to cold, or vice versa. It's true that he criticized the Fed for allowing our money supply to contract dramatically in the early stages of the Great Depression, but he used that example not to make the case that the Fed needs to be more aggressive, but to demonstrate why it was dangerous to give so much power to the Fed in the first place. What he advocated was to set a constant rate of growth for the money supply that wouldn't be subject to the whims of Fed members, and that would be predictable to businesses and investors. As Friedman's imagined it, such a system could be run by computers. If anything, the erratic, constantly-shifting strategies being employed by Paulson and Bernanke prove Friedman's criticisms to be quite astute.
Franken's Nuclear Option
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 4:09PM
In 2005, Northwestern professor Jeffery Jenkins wrote a paper on the history of contested elections in the Senate, and he found:
Of the 132 contested election cases, the contestee has emerged victorious in ninety-three cases (or 70.5 percent), the contestant has won two cases (or 1.5 percent), and the seat has been vacated in thirty-seven cases (28 percent). Thus, in just over two of every three cases, the contestee has retained his seat.
Palin for Chambliss
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 1:49PM
Obama's opting out of looking too partisan, what with his cabinet picks earning him the title of "centrist." Hence he's not headed to Georgia himself, instead ushering his top political advisers to help get Jim Martin elected over Saxby Chambliss.
On the other hand, Sarah Palin is leveraging her own amount of political momentum. This photo from sometime-AmSpec reader Chris Cree shows that she's not going to disappear from the national stage even if flights from Alaska tend to be kind of long.
Thanks for the pic, Chris.
Al Franken and the McCloskey Precedent
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 1:11PM
It wouldn't be entirely unprecedented for congressional Democrats to overturn an election result on behalf of one of their own, however. In 1984, the election results certified by the state of Indiana showed Congressman Frank McCloskey (D-Ind.) losing his reelection bid. The Democrats argued that disputed absentee ballots should be counted making McCloskey the winner. The Democratic House, after its own "recount," voted to seat McCloskey rather than his Republican challenger, though nearly twenty Democrats -- including Barney Frank -- voted with the Republicans.
Minnesota Senate Update
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 12:25PM
With 88 percent of ballots now recounted, Norm Coleman's lead over Al Franken has swelled to 282 (from 215 when the recount started). There are still over 5,600 ballots being challenged by both campaigns, but an analysis by the Star Tribune has indicated that Franken will have a difficult time making up his deficit with these challenged ballots.
Franken's prospects of gaining enough votes became more grim when the state's Canvassing Board rebuffed his campaign's push to include rejected absentee ballots in the recount. So, assuming the Star Tribune's analysis is correct, there will be two remaining avenues for Franken -- one would be to fight in court for the rejected absentee ballots to be counted, or, alternatively, to take the the fight to the floor of the U.S. Senate, something that both Franken's lawyer and Harry Reid have suggested could be a possibility. The nuclear option would be a startling overreach by Senate Democrats, and one that would be out of sync with Obama's pledge to end partisan bickering as well as a departure from the pragmatism exhibited by keeping Joe Lieberman in the Democratic tent. It would be one thing if control of the Senate hung in the balance or if there weren't other priorities, but Democrats will have a solid majority in the Senate either way, and they're eager to present Obama with a stimulus package he can sign immediately upon taking office. It would be a huge mistake for them to spend the early stages of Obama's administration instigating a partisan floor fight in which Democrats try to overrule the verdict of Minnesota voters, reaffirmed by an orderly recount process supervised by a liberal Secretary of State and by courts, in a desperate attempt to gain one extra Senate seat when they already have 58 others.
Conventional Washington Obama?
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 11:30AM
Barack Obama just officially announced his choice of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. At one point during the press conference, Obama was asked to comment on some of his quotes during the campaign undermining Clinton's credentials on foreign policy, including the statement that her world travel amounted to "having teas" with foreign leaders. Obama said that he understood that the press would be having fun "stirring up" quotes from the heated campaign, when in reality he's always admired and respected Clinton. However, I think by focusing on some of the choice quotes, the media is understating the differences between the two on foreign policy during the primaries. Obama's argument against Clinton during was not rooted in the idea that she was exaggerating her accomplishments -- that was just one of many side arguments. The central critique Obama offered was that America needed to fundamentally change the direction of its foreign policy, not just change the party in power. Obama spoke of moving beyond "conventional Washington thinking" -- personified by Hillary Clinton and her support for the Iraq War. So one of two things happened. Either Clinton has embraced Obama's vision for fundamental change, or Obama has succumbed to "conventional Washington thinking."
Keynes Lives
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 11:08AM
This Paul Krugman column is an indication that old-fashioned tax-and-spend liberalism is back in the debate, replacing the pretense that higher taxes are all about balancing the budget. If the Obama administration follows Krugman's advice, even if his economic advisers are mostly Clinton holdovers we'll see something much worse than Rubinomics.
Daily Must Reads
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 10:21AM
- Krugman's recipe for Depression calls for a dash of misused statistics (WSJ)
- 9/11's lessons about Mumbai's terrorists (Slate)
- The GOP and social conservatism go hand-in-hand (USA Today)
- Lefties keep waiting for Obama to break left (Weekly Standard)
- Reporting on warming or the lack thereof (Townhall)
- "Islamic Terrorist" -- now a racist term? (Daily Beast)
Pessimists Beware!
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 10:11AM
Latvia's innovative economic strategy:
Hammered by economic woe, this former Soviet republic recently took a novel step to contain the crisis. Its counterespionage agency busted an economist for being too downbeat.
"All I did was say what everyone knows," says Dmitrijs Smirnovs, a 32-year-old university lecturer detained by Latvia's Security Police. The force is responsible for hunting down spies, terrorists and other threats to this Baltic nation of 2.3 million people and 26 banks.
Ah, if only the Bush administration had adopted this "Blame the Economists" policy, Paul Krugman would be cooling his heels at Guantanamo. On the other hand, if the Obama administration follows suit, we can expect them to round up the economics faculty at George Mason University.
The Blame Israel First Crowd
Posted by on 12.1.08 @ 10:05AM
Roger Cohen urges presumed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to show "tough love" toward Israel in his latest column. His argument rests on the premise that if only Israel compromises more --withdraws from the West Bank and East Jerusalem -- there can be peace. The article is based around some comments made by outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, whose administration was an abject failure and whose approval ratings were in the single digits even before it was rocked by scandal that will likely lead to his indictment. If making peace were as simple as this, then we would have had it 40 years ago, but the problem has always been that a large enough segment of the Palestinian people do not want to accept any Israeli state at all. As I wrote a few weeks ago, no matter how earnest you assume that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is in his desire for peace, as long as he exerts no influence over Hamas in Gaza, there can be no security for Israelis, and thus, no peace. Cohen does not even bother mentioning Hamas.
Throughout his column, Cohen repeats several times that Israelis have to be willing to give up parts of Jerusalem, as if this were a bold new suggestion. But we've already been down this road before. The 2000 peace offer made by Ehud Barak divided Jerusalem, giving the Palestinians the eastern part of the city, and the Palestinians rejected it. Unfortunately, it's not as easy as merely dividing up Jerusalem. The most contentious area comes when you get to the holy sites, and when you visit the city and see how the competing holy sites are physically on top of and intertwined with each other, you get a good sense of why peace has been so elusive.
Let me be clear about something: I'm not one of those dead-enders who believes that Israel should never give up an inch of land. I think a two-state solution with Palestinians in control of the West Bank and Gaza is the best of many imperfect alternatives. But I also recognize that getting there is a lot easier said than done. And I have little patience when writers such as Cohen completely oversimplify everything, especially by arguing that peace would be at hand if only Israel does exactly what it tried to do eight years ago.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Terrorists Tortured Mombai Hostages
Posted by on 11.30.08 @ 2:57PM
"Bombay has a long history of terror. I have seen bodies of riot victims, gang war and previous terror attacks like bomb blasts. But this was entirely different. It was shocking and disturbing," a doctor said. . . .
"It was apparent that most of the dead were tortured. What shocked me were the telltale signs showing clearly how the hostages were executed in cold blood," one doctor said.
The other doctor, who had also conducted the post-mortem of the victims, said: "Of all the bodies, the Israeli victims bore the maximum torture marks. It was clear that they were killed on the 26th itself. It was obvious that they were tied up and tortured before they were killed. It was so bad that I do not want to go over the details even in my head again," he said.
(Via The Jawa Report.)
Gator Bait
Posted by on 11.30.08 @ 2:30PM
Having laid a 36-0 whupping on Auburn (the largest Iron Bowl margin since 1962), now the No. 1 Alabama Crimson Tide gets ready for the SEC championship game against Florida, ranked No. 2 in the latest Associated Press poll. Despite the Gators' previous loss to Ole Miss, undefeated Alabama will almost certainly be the underdog going into Saturday's showdown in Atlanta's Georgia Dome. At least one sports pundit thinks 'Bama can win:
Florida might be the fastest team in the history of college football. . . .
Florida also has quarterback Tim Tebow, the reigning Heisman Trophy winner, and one of the country's most improved defenses. . . .
But the Gators won't beat Alabama in Saturday's SEC championship game in Atlanta's Georgia Dome. . . .
Nothing will be more gratifying for Alabama than beating the Gators on Saturday night. . . .
Alabama has the necessary ingredients -- a stifling, physical defense and a punishing, ball-control offense -- to slow the Gators down. . . .
[T]he Crimson Tide will win by doing what they've done all along: playing great defense and controlling the clock with their running game. . . .
And the Gators haven't seen a team as strong or menacing as the Crimson Tide.
This is the cue for all Florida fans to start trashing 'Bama in the comments.
- Barney and Friends
- Obama's Foreign Policy Problems, Personified
- Michael Ledeen on Iran and Democracy