- Home
- About Us
- Contributors
- Departments
- Topics
- Back Issues
- Weekly Archives
- AmSpecBlog
- Subscribe
- Newsletter
- Advertise
- Donate
- Contact Us
- Daily Digest
- Templeton Essays
- Jan 4–10 11–17 18–24 25–31
- Feb 1–7 8–14 15–21 22–28
- Mar 1–7 8–14 15–21 22–28 29–31
- Apr 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–30
- May 1–2 3–9 10–16 17–23 24–30 31
- Jun 1–6 7–13 14–20 21–27 28–30
- Jul 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–31
- Aug 1 2–8 9–15 16–22 23–29 30–31
- Sep 1–5 6–12 13–19 20–26 27–30
- Oct 1–3 4–10 11–17 18–24 25–31
- Nov 1–7 8–14 15–21
Saturday, February 7, 2009
The Latest on the Stimulus
Posted by on 2.7.09 @ 9:06PM
Searchable text of the Senate stimulus bill can be downloaded from the Senate Conservatives Fund website, which also contains a helpful summary of the Nelson-Collins changes. CNN has posted a list of spending that has been cut as a result of the compromise. House Democrats have been making noises about fighting to restore some of that spending in conference, even though (talk about $100 billion in cuts notwithstanding) the final pricetag may not be much altered by the moderates' maneuvering.
$827 Billion and Counting
Posted by on 2.7.09 @ 6:17PM
An e-mail from the Senate Republican Conference points out that there is now near-unanimity in press reports that the Senate version of the stimulus package weighs in at $827 billion -- and they've yet to see the bill. They have point in saying, "This is not timely, targeted, or temporary."
The Joys of Firing Line
Posted by on 2.7.09 @ 2:41PM
I recently bought a couple of the old Firing Line episodes with William F. Buckley interviewing Tom Wolfe (on modern architecture) and Malcolm Muggeridge (on the culture of the left). Just watched the Wolf episode.
I am stunned.
So mature, so lacking in ersatz showmanship, and so edifying. It is very much like enjoying a dinner with two very learned people.
And no big applause from the audience at any point. They simply listen respectfully.
Cuts, Shmuts
Posted by on 2.7.09 @ 2:13PM
Despite all the fanfare that has greeted the cuts won by the GOP's moderate dealmakers, with interest this is still a $1 trillion bill. According to Republican aides, the Senate stimulus compromise will end up costing at least $7 billion more than the House bill. So the dealmakers haven't exactly struck a blow for fiscal responsibility here. Useful idiots indeed. Now we'll see if the Democrats have their own defectors.
GOP Useful Idiots
Posted by on 2.7.09 @ 7:38AM
Obviously, the Republican Party still has a role to play. GOP legislators can best be described as "useful idiots" who make Democratic proposals seem moderate and responsible. Consider the "compromise" stimulus package.
The compromise represented a dramatic finale to a tumultuous and frustrating week for Democrats pushing the package, as Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) saw the limitations of an expanded majority and a band of GOP centrists came to appreciate the very high price they can extract for their votes on key measures.
The bipartisan deal was cut after two days of talks and would cut more than $100 billion from the $920 billion bill, dropping its cost to about $820 billion, if amendments added on the Senate floor are retained.
The Democrats suggest more than $900 billion in pork. So Republican "centrists" cut a few billion here and there, and everyone can now embrace $800 billion in pork. The economy is saved. Fiscal probity is maintained. Millions (or is that hundreds of millions, per Nancy Pelosi?) of Americans will go back to work. Such a victory!
Do you think we could sell the Republican Party to some country overseas that is looking for a completely useless, faux opposition party?
Friday, February 6, 2009
Axelrod Puzzled By Biden's Fuzzy Math
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 5:49PM
VP Biden continues to bee the gift that keeps on giving. Here's a transcript from an interview Wolf Blitzer conducted with David Axelrod earlier this afternoon, with video below:
BLITZER: it was intriguing to hear what the Vice President Joe Biden said earlier today. I'll play this little clip for you because i'm anxious to get your response. Listen to what Joe Biden said.
VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN (clip): if we do everything right, with absolutely certainty, we stand up there and we make really tough decisions, there's still a 30% chance we're going to get it wrong.
BLITZER: That's not very encouraging. A one out of three chance that even if you get everything you want, David -- the President gets everything he wants, it's still going to be wrong?
AXELROD: Well, I don't know - I don't know exactly about what that math was.
Anti-Socialism and Antiquity
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 5:42PM
Writing well over 2000 years ago, Aristotle answered Plato, whose Republic advocated a form of socialism, thusly:
What is common to the greatest number gets the least amount of care. People pay most attention to what is their own: they care less for what is common; or, at any rate, they care for it only to the extent to which each is individually concerned. Even when there is no other cause for inattention, people are more prone to neglect their duty when they think that another attending to it . . .
The Republic advocated that women and children also be
common property. What Aristotle wrote about sons applies to other
things, as well:
[Under the plan of The Republic] each citizen will have a thousand sons; they will not be the sons of each citizen individually; any son whatever will be equally the son of any father whatever. The result will be that all will neglect all.
In other words, the word “son” loses its meaning when abused in
this fashion. The same is true of the concept of property.
Aristotle is right. We love the particular, not the general. Good philosophies of government will recognize that and will thus operate on a human scale as much as possible. Socialism fails in that regard and thus loses all the non-coercive power of simple affection and care.
Four Reasons to Miss Ronald Reagan
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 4:49PM
George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama.
Re: Dunkin Delish
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 2:57PM
I dunno, J.P.: I've thought waffles were unappetizing ever since Doonesbury made them an icon.
Dunkin Delish -- Continued
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 2:35PM
You may notice a trend here at AmSpec. We like Dunkin Donuts (some more than others). We'll even reference their products to make free market arguments or rip apart Canadian cities. If only we could get them to donate coffee, or giftcards. But I digress. I'm really here to tell you about their new Frankenstein concoction, so villainous and evil in its origin, that I doubt its origins lie anywhere but in the fires of Hell.
Bacon egg and cheese sandwich. On waffle.
Waffle, friends. This be serious. If we're to get past the obesity "epidemic" in the United States, production on the Dunkin' Donuts waffle-feuled calorie-bomb must be stopped. Just think what happens when a person gets their hand on one of these things, and unleashes it in Times Square? Where was this during the campaign? You get a 4 a.m. phone call, and you find out somebody's wolfing one of these down without you? WHAT DO YOU DO? Do you get Jack Bauer to torture someone to death? To torture himself?
Harrowing.
Mooseburger Chili
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 2:24PM
Sarah Palin explains:
The secret to chili is you gotta have good mooseburger in there. I don't know if you can get moose commercially in New York. You'd have to come up here and visit me in my home, and I'll prepare it for ya.
More from her Esquire interview here.
There's A Reason for the Permanent Campaign
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 12:42PM
The "permanent campaign" is going to be a permanent fixture in American politics. But it is becoming increasingly clear that this president is going to rely on it more than any other, even including Bill Clinton. There's a reason for that: it's all he's got. Barack Obama is a masterful campaigner. He has been incredibly adept at climbing the greasy pole of American politics, from Chicago to Springfield, Illinois all the way to the White House after just four years in the U.S. Senate.
But he's never run anything bigger than a campaign or done much of anything. He's got the swagger. He's got the speechmaking ability. And for now, he's got the fired-up crowds. If the day ever comes where the audience on the other end of the microphone isn't with him, Barack Obama has got nothing. He is less than a month into his presidency and we are already seeing reruns from the 2008 season of the "Barack Obama Show."
Obama's Desperate for Stimulus
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 12:00PM
There are shovel-ready projects a-waiting' to go, and Biden's got a shovel. Spiegel is reporting "Obama Sends Vice President to Build Bridges."
Watch out Hillary, you're next. Pay attention or you'll end up doing construction on smart grids in Ohio or something.
Onward to a More Substantive Imitation?
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 11:29AM
DoubleThink online is holding a symposium on the legacy of Reagan in the age of Obama this week, and they couldn't kick it off with a more thoughtful, clear-eyed piece than the one by the always brilliant James Poulos. Here's a bite:
Reagan’s legacy is a rough draft for Obama’s largely to the extent that the American people want it to be. And they want it to be to the extent that they want—now, more than ever—clarity, optimism, and a renewed sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship! Note: a sense of a thing is not that thing [emphasis added]. But often we want both to have the thing and the reflective feeling of experiencing it—what use is dynamism if we can’t feel ourselves being dynamic? Consider, however, that this attitude can encourage us therapeutically to live in denial. Just how little real freedom, we might ask subtly, do we actually need to retain an inspiring-enoughsense of freedom?
Indeed, we frenetic Americans—now, more than ever—know that we must surrender and outsource many of our daily activities in order to ensure that daily life isn’t a raw deal. Who has time, as Obama’s nominees can attest, to do their own taxes? Who has time to raise their own children? Who has time to do the petty, slow work of local citizenship? We shore up our fragments of faith with the audacity of ‘senses of’: faith in the sense of civic-mindedness that persists when we are not doing civic-minded things; faith in the sense of parenthood that persists when we are not parenting; faith in the sense of citizenship that persists when we elect and celebrate leaders who promise that a sense is enough because attitude, just as we needed to hear, is the one needful thing.
See also Phil's great "Happy Birthday Reagan" post.
And the Winner Is…
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 10:49AM
Between this column by Rich Lowry and this one by Charles Krauthammer, it's impossible to decide which does the better demolition job on the puny president who wears no clothes.
Daily Must-Reads
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 10:39AM
- Stop the presses! Too much debt, too much cash for the U.S. (WSJ)
- Another beast fed by the downturn: Amazon.com (Slate)
- Barro comes up punching! Economist lashes back at Krugman et al. in an interview (Atlantic)
- Niall Ferguson: "America is Argentina. Europe is Argentina" (LA Times)
- World leaders wonder who have forgotten the meaning of saving send in questions (Asia Times)
- Liberals: good luck finding your Scalia -- it's not possible (American Scene)
- Inner city students don't need comparisons between Lil' Wayne and Shakespeare. They just need... knowledge (New Majority)
Happy Birthday Ronald Reagan
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 9:51AM
President Reagan would have been 98 today. Tonight, I'm attending a screening of "Ronald Reagan: Rendezvous With Destiny," a new Citizens' United documentary featuring Newt Gingrich. I thought, to celebrate his birthday at AmSpecBlog, I'd post a clip from this May 15, 1967 debate that Reagan had with Robert F. Kennedy about the Vietnam War. For as much as liberals wanted to portray Reagan as an intellectual lightweight who was only comfortable when reading from a script, this demonstrates that even a few months into his time as governor, he was able to debate international affairs with confidence and command of the facts.
Paul Kengor wrote of the debate:
Reagan performed so well that his presidential boosters sought to use clips from the debate during the 1968 Oregon presidential primary, and requested a copy from CBS. Kennedy, however, reportedly did not want the video to be made available; CBS, naturally, acceded to his request. Kennedy himself conceded defeat to Reagan, telling his aides after the debate to never again put him on the same stage with “that son-of-a-bitch.” Kennedy was heard to ask immediately after the debate, “Who the f—- got me into this?” Frank Mankiewicz was that aide, as Kennedy was quick to remind him a few weeks later: “You’re the guy who got me into that Reagan thing.”
In this clip from the town hall meeting, Reagan mixes it up with an angry British student. A full transcript of the debate is available here.
Obama: If You Agree With Me, It's Bipartisan
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 9:15AM
You know President Obama is getting frustrated when he's forced to fall back on tired old campaign lines to try and rally support for the stimulus package (yes, even "Fired up? Ready to go" made a comeback).
Speaking at a Democratic retreat in Williamsburg, Virginia Obama said, "I welcome this debate, but we are not going to get relief by turning back to the same policies that for the last eight years doubled the national debt and threw our economy into a tailspin."
"The American people are watching," he continued. "They didn't send us here to get bogged down with the same old delays, the same old distractions, the same talking points, the same cable chatter. I mean, aren't y'all tired of that stuff? They didn't vote for the false theories of the past and they didn't vote for phoney arguments and petty politics."
Then he said, mockingly, "What do you think a stimulus is? It’s spending — that's the whole point! Seriously.”
So in other words, Obama welcomes a bipartisan debate, but only if Republicans reject their own policies in favor of his spending priorities, only if that debate doesn't delay passage of the bill that he wants, and as long as cable news shows don't scrutinize what is actually in the legislation he's proposing.
Time for a Real Stimulus Project
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 7:06AM
President Barack Obama and the congressional Dems have been thinking too small on the economy. Why not go all the way and stimulate the world's economy? Heck, why not the solar system's economy? How about building a Death Star? Rysgard Gold makes the case. And the cost? Only about $15 septillion dollars, but remember--if we don't act, America might lost 500 million jobs, or thereabouts according to Nancy Pelosi.
They Came, They Saw, They Stimulated
Posted by on 2.6.09 @ 6:01AM
American Spectator staffers, contributors, friends, admirers, groupies, sycophants and hangers-on crowded into the Continental Lounge last night for the Rosslyn Stimulus Happy Hour. Photos were taken. ("Seriously.")
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Another Democrat Finally Pays His Taxes
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 9:19PM
Gee, how convenient. The husband of Labor nominee Hilda Solis has just settled his outstanding tax bill. Reports USA Today:
The husband of President Obama's choice to head the Labor Department paid about $6,400 Wednesday to settle tax liens that had been outstanding for as long as 16 years against his business, the Obama administration said Thursday.
The disclosure came shortly before a scheduled 2 p.m. meeting of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which will vote on U.S. Rep. Hilda Solis' nomination as Labor secretary. The hearing was postponed to give the administration time to look into the tax matter and report back to the committee, said Anthony Coley, a spokesman for Sen. Edward Kennedy, the committee chairman. Solis is a California Democrat.
At a news conference, Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs said of Solis: "I read the story in USA TODAY and it quotes somebody who works here. Obviously we know about the story. We reviewed her tax returns and her tax returns are in order. Her husband had an issue."
"She's not a partner in that business," Gibbs said. "We're not going to penalize her for her husband's business mistakes."
Gibbs said he thought Solis' husband, Sam Sayyad, paid the liens because he owed the taxes, not because of White House pressure. "The White House believes that if you owe taxes you should pay them," Gibbs added.
Well, remember. Democrats get to raise taxes. Republicans get to pay them. That seens like a fair apportionment of responsibilities!
Will COBRA Bite Back?
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 5:45PM
Former AmSpecBlog contributor David Hogberg has a piece in IBD exploring whether the extension of COBRA health benefits that is part of the stimulus package could actually encourage employers to drop health-care coverage, and de-incentivize hiring.
Maybe Small Is Beautiful
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 4:37PM
Yesterday, William Kristol seemed to be doing some gloating over the fact that public support for the stimulus has eroded. This is the man who just this past December wrote a column titled "Small Isn't Beautiful," instructing us that "conservatives should think twice before charging into battle against Obama under the banner of 'small-government conservatism.'" The column was part of a larger effort by the Brooks/Kristol/Frum brigade to portray those of us who are still commited to limiting the size of government as Neanderthals, desperately clinging to ideas whose best days have passed.
Yet by focusing on the reckless spending provisions in the stimulus bill, as well as the fact that the price tag is approaching nearly a trillion dollars, Republicans actually have the vaunted Obama messaging machine on its heels at a time when the new president is at the apex of his power.
I don't want to overstate things. President Obama still has huge majorities in both chambers of Congress, and Democrats will end up passing some kind of bill that he can sign, allowing him to claim a victory. And I wouldn't confuse a few polls suggesting waning support for the stimulus bill with a public outcry for a new Reaganism. But what this experience has demonstrated is that there still is a bit of a libertarian streak running through this country, and Americans are still skeptical about massive government spending. This sentiment will only grow in the coming years as the government consistently racks up trillion dollar deficts. Republicans lack credibility right now, but if they return to being consistent critics of bigger government, they'll eventually return to power. Either way, it's certainly too early for limited-government conservatives to roll over and cede the movement to those who argue that the only way for conservatism to move forward is to embrace bigger government while focusing on ways to make it more efficient.
It's Grow-Up Time, with Robert Gibbs
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 4:00PM
Robert Gibbs, whose idea of seducing the press is making snide remarks and then ignoring questions out of sheer pettiness, is off to a great start so far. Here's a video where Jake Tapper blows the lid on Obama's supposed pledge to transparency, and only gets a fist full of eye-rolling in response.
It's a hard accomplishment, but he's coming in a close second to Scott McClellan as "Presidential Press Secretary The White House Press Corps Wants To Punch."
ALSO: Does Tapper almost drop the f-bomb in there?
CBO: 'It Won't Work'
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 3:15PM
President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday. CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.
Who told you this first, huh?
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 2:58PM
My best wishes to Justice Ginsburg. I wouldn't wish pancreatic cancer on anyone. Pray, everyone, for a recovery.
Donate!
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 2:43PM
Now that our donation page is a fully-operational battlestation, why don't you mosey on over to donate a few bucks? Think of it this way: The American Spectator pulls in more young writers than most other conservative magazines on the market. Many great journalists got their starts here and are continuing to do so. Now, with this economy, it's difficult to pay them, just when they need the money most. So click here and donate to ensure that the next generation of conservatives keep contributing!
Rosslyn Happy Hour this evening
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 1:28PM
Stimulus not stimulating enough? Worried about how your tax problems might force you to leave your job? Or maybe you're worried that maybe that free healthcare Obama promised isn't on the way after all? Well, our monthly (or so) happy hour is happening at the Continental Lounge in Rosslyn, Virginia. If you're an intern looking to meet some editors who can help you out, or if you want to mingle with your favorite writers (which is far more likely), join us.
The paternalistic paws of the government haven't yet made their way to Northern Virginia, so you can smoke indoors (and it's well-ventillated so it's not overwhelming). The happy hour specials are also substantial. We'll be joined by friends from the TownHall.com, the American Conservative, The Next Right, and others.
Time: 6:00pm - 9:00pm
Location: Continental, 1911 N. Fort Myer Drive, Rosslyn, VA
Drudge: Justice Ginsberg Hospitalized
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 1:02PM
Drudge is reporting that, "US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg hospitalized for surgery for pancreatic cancer..." No more details than that at this time.
UPDATE: More details here. It appears it was caught in the early stages. We wish her well.
"We're gonna be in the Hudson"
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 12:45PM
The FAA has just released the audio of the US Airways Flight 1549 air traffic control recording, which reinforces how remarkably well pilot Chesley Sullenberger performed after a double bird strike took out the thrust in both engines. What's clear from the tape is how quickly Sullenberger had to eliminate various options --returning to LaGuardia and landing in New Jersey's Teterboro-- before deciding to land the plane on the river. It was literally just two minutes between the time when he says the plane's engines were taken out and the time he definitively said he was ditiching in the Hudson. Sullenberger's voice is entirely calm the whole time, as if he were just encountering some minor turbulence.
Service With a Smile
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 12:42PM
"Turned to Life of Service After Killing," the startling headline in my N.Y. Times says today, over its tender obituary of Warren Kimbro, former Black Panther, who has died at 74. The opening paragraph alone is an unsatirizable classic:
Warren Kimbro, who as a fledgling member of the Black Panther Party shot and killed a suspected police informer in New Haven in 1969, prompting a series of trials that made national headlines, but who later earned a Harvard degree and became a respected community leader, died in New Haven on Tuesday.
No word if he ever visited Leonard Bernstein at his apartment. Or if Bill Ayers reached out to him.
Scenes From the CEI Soiree
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 12:33PM
The Competitive Enteprise Institute held an open house Wednesday to display their new digs at 1899 L Street. The man with the pink camera was there.
Not Exactly a Rousing Endorsement
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 12:19PM
The Washington Post's lead editorial today, while polite about the Obama op-ed appearing nearby (and which Phil Klein discussed here this morning), also punctures many of its and his stimulus package's pretensions:
As credible experts, including some Democrats, have pointed out, much of this "long-term" spending either won't stimulate the economy now, is of questionable merit, or both. Even potentially meritorious items, such as $2.1 billion for Head Start, or billions more to computerize medical records, do not belong in legislation whose reason for being is to give U.S. economic growth a "jolt," as Mr. Obama himself has put it. All other policy priorities should pass through the normal budget process, which involves hearings, debate and -- crucially -- competition with other programs.
Too bad the editorial goes on to explain how Sen. Susan Collins could help Obama out of this mess.
The Wrong Kind of Alternative
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 11:22AM
In what the Washington Post called a "significant victory for Republicans," the Senate adopted a housing tax subsidy amendment to the stimulus package. Proposed by Sen. Isakson of Georgia, it "would offer a tax credit of up to $15,000 for any home bought as a primary residence, for one year after the stimulus bill is signed into law." Just because Republicans choose to call something a "tax credit" it doesn't mean it is any better than government spending. In fact, this particular provision boosts the price tag of the stimulus bill by $19 billion.
We got into this mess, in large part, as a result of government policies that encouraged people to purchase homes, which in many cases they couldn't afford. It would be unwise to create new incentives for irresponsible behavior as a way of digging ourselves out of this crisis. The proper way for the housing market to recover is to let prices keep falling until they get low enough to tempt new buyers. There are plenty of people out there who missed out on buying a home during the housing boom, but who would be lured into the market if prices drop to a certain level. This would just artificially prop up housing prices, at taxpayer expense.
Mark Kilmer
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 11:21AM
This breaks my heart: Red State's Mark Kilmer becomes the latest on a growing list, just in the past 15 months, of conservatives called home too soon. Erick Erickson has a heartfelt and eloquent post about Mark here. I never met Mark, but I invariably liked his stuff. He and I agreed on most things, including most things involving intra-conservative disagreements. More than that, he was knowledgeable, thoughtful and witty -- and all of that came through on his blog posts, which is the only way (other than I think two quick email exchanges) that I knew him. This is a big loss. May Mark rest in God's love.
Decline of the Washington Monthly
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 10:27AM
There was a time when the Washington Monthly was a thoughtful magazine -- perhaps a bit left of center, but mostly radically centrist, fresh, fairminded. But now I keep seeing Steve Benen there show not freshness, but sheer nastiness. Witness this little unsupported bit of character assassination yesterday: "* Barbara Comstock, known for her work as a right-wing smear artist, is running for the Virginia House of Delegates."
Calling somebody a "smear artist" is calumnious. In the case of Comstock, it's also deeply untrue. A smear by its nature is a falsehood or at least a misrepresentation. But Comstock is one of the most fact-based people I know. She is relentlessly precise and careful.
Yes, she is running for office. What that means is that now she will be the victim of smears, such as the one Benen just leveled at her. I guess that makes Benen a smear artist.
Obama's Doom and Gloom
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 10:01AM
One other note about that Obama op-ed I commented on earlier. As far as the tone goes, it's filled with doom and gloom, and lacks the optimism that oozed through his campaign rhetoric. Toward the end, he writes that if we don't pass the stimulus bill, "[o]ur nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse." It's one thing to argue that we need to do something to jump start the economy so that it recovers sooner. But does the man who inspired millions with his message of hope really believe it's possible that the American economy could never recover from this economic crisis? Does he really think that America is so fragile that we're at a tipping point between being the world's number one economy, and some sort of third world country?
Daily Must-Reads
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 9:55AM
- The Republican stimulus alternative needs to be more Republican (WSJ)
- Just get out of the way, Obama, and let entrepreneurs do their thing (Reason)
- War robots are the wave of the future (New Atlantis)
- Obama's "near epic" communications advantage is nowhere to be found regarding the stimulus (Politico)
- Amy Wellborn's husband's last column (Charlotte Was Both)
- Look who's discoverd how to use the internets: the GOP! (Ars Technica)
Dumping on Carnahan
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 9:45AM
Gateway Pundit is going to town against the latest Carnahan candidate in Missouri. Wow. This is brutal.
Obama and the Fierce Urgency of Now
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 9:33AM
With public support for the stimulus package eroding with every passing day while the legislation is bogged down in the Senate, President Obama has taken to the pages of the Washington Post to argue for immediate action on the bill, suggesting that this is what the American people want:
What Americans expect from Washington is action that matches the urgency they feel in their daily lives -- action that's swift, bold and wise enough for us to climb out of this crisis.
And:
These are the actions Americans expect us to take without delay. They're patient enough to know that our economic recovery will be measured in years, not months. But they have no patience for the same old partisan gridlock that stands in the way of action while our economy continues to slide.
In fact, the Gallup poll showed the exact opposite of what Obama claims. It found that only 38 percent of Americans want the stimulus plan to pass as proposed, while 37 percent say it should be passed only with "major changes," and 17 percent want it to be rejected all together. In other words, a majority of Americans don't have a problem with the delay.
Obama also writes that:
[E]ach day we wait to begin the work of turning our economy around, more people lose their jobs, their savings and their homes. And if nothing is done, this recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.
So in other words, if we don't enact the exact policies that President Obama advocates, then we will face dire consequences. Isn't that what candidate Obama used to call the "politics of fear"?
Robin Toner, missed
Posted by on 2.5.09 @ 7:05AM
Sitting in the Bethesda family living room of two friends from college, I chatted with a priest who was talking about the goings on at his parish. He mentioned a funeral for someone at the New York Times. My eyebrows perked up -- I hadn't heard anything about anyone passing away in that newsroom. "Robin Toner," he said.
Robin, a tough veteran political reporter, had always been kind to me, one of the lowest rungs on the totem pole in the DC bureau. When it came time for me to leave (the columnist was leaving the page, thus relieving me of my usefulness), Robin came to me looking concerned about what I might do. "If you need anything, tell me." When I came back to visit, she asked me how things were. Not in that small talk way. In that way that belies a sentiment so often shielded by the whole "tough reporter" shtick.
Her passing was a surprise to me, especially learning of it that way. But life is full of surprises -- some bad, some good. On the good side falls the surprise of opening Mike Allen's morning round-up email, to find DC bureau chief Dean Baquet's remarks from last night, eulogizing Robin:
At the 65th annual Congressional Dinner of the Washington Press Club Foundation, a slide saying "In Memory of Robin Toner" shone from the Ritz-Carlton screens as New York Times Washington Bureau Chief Dean Baquet spoke: "One thing about Robin: She was stubborn, and she knew when she was right and her editors were wrong, which was MOST of the time. There were many Friday nights, when she was covering the 2000 midterms, when she'd be working on Sunday stories - in particular, one story the Sunday before the elections - in which her editors (not me, by the way) were trying to predict the outcome of that Tuesday's vote. Every hour, a new set of instructions on what the story should say came from New York, believe it or not. [Murmurs.] And she would pull her hair and say: ‘These guys don't know what they're talking about. This is so a) conventional wisdom, or b) horserace, or c) just plain wrong.' But she hung on right through the end, till late Friday night. And the next day, she'd be the first to admit if the story got better for some of the meddling. But it hurt her to say it. And I have to admit it didn't happen all that often. I miss Robin in deeply personal ways. But what I miss most of all is what Robin would have done with the story we're covering now. I miss what she'd say about Obama and Daschle. I miss her telling me to cover the issues. And I miss her telling me to remember the history before writing the story. I miss her tremendously, as does the whole Bureau. Thank you so much."
That hair pulling moment was so typical for a woman whose exasperation only reflected her inspiration. RIP.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Fair and Balanced
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 8:42PM
I've already asked if some Ralph Peters columns are really paleocon parodies of the neocons. Is this crazed Paul Craig Roberts column a neocon parody of the paleocons? One can always hope.
Middlebury and Financial Aid
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 7:01PM
The all-knowing Scott Jaschik at InsideHigherEd notes that Middlebury is one of a few colleges to consider taking "drastic measures" in dealing with a budget shortfall:
When Middlebury College announced its plans to deal with a budget shortfall last week, however, it announced that financial aid was on the table; that a little more would be asked of students on financial aid and their parents; and that aid for international students would be scaled back a bit. Middlebury remains need-blind and pledged to meeting the full need of admitted applicants, but it may be unique among the competitive private colleges and universities that have faced large losses of endowment income in that it is publicly including financial aid among the areas in which downward adjustments are being made.
Thus we have evidence of one of the strangest things about American culture: Even in hard economic times, the market demands you go to a big named school, rather than attend a community college for a few years and transfer (if you really feel the need to transfer). The implicit assertion is that being needs-blind is important, but also giving students the support they need to attend a particular college is sort of a moral duty. But why? To fund a "first year experience"?
So what else is being done?
Salaries are being frozen — with modest increases for those on the low end of the salary scale and cuts for the president and vice presidents. Positions are being eliminated. Programs, too. But mixed in among the lists of cuts are changes in financial aid policies.
I'll be writing more on this in the coming weeks, but the idea of "positions being eliminated" is yet another problem with administration efforts. Every year, the number of administrators at colleges go up, while the number of tenured faculty goes down. Fortunately, Middlebury is one of the few schools where this is not the case -- faculty numbers have increased, at a rate much higher than staff has been hired. The question is whether that will remain the case. Other schools have had the opposite effect -- like the University of Massachusetts, where the ratio of administrators to tenure-seeking faculty is 5 to 1.
Next Up, Panetta
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 6:10PM
The WSJ reports:
WASHINGTON -- The White House's nominee for director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Leon Panetta, has earned more than $700,000 in speaking and consulting fees since the beginning of 2008, with some of the payments coming from troubled banks and an investment firm that owns companies that do business with federal national security agencies.
I found this part particularly noteworthy:
Mr. Panetta also received a $28,000 honorarium from the Carlyle Group, which owns a number of companies that do business with the national-security agencies of the U.S. government.
Remember that making hay of the Bush family's ties to the Carlyle Group was popular in far left conspiracy circles, and figured prominently in Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11.
60% of Statistics are Just Made Up on the Spot
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 5:32PM
This economy is worse than you thought!
Hat-tip: Jeff Emanuel.
More on Toys and Lead
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 5:05PM
As per the column of mine on the new anti-lead requirments for all children's good, now I find that all over the Internet, people are blogging about the same topic. This is really important. The law takes effect next Tuesday. It could devastate huge numbers of small businesses. Please read up on it.
Ah, Photo Ops
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 4:43PM
One of my favorite blogs (and from my homestate to boot), PowerLine, had this to say about this great little photo taken yesterday of our newest Mr. & Mrs. Messiah:
It's a fantasy, I know, but wouldn't it be nice if the President had called on one of those kids, and she had said: "Why is our school good enough for a photo-op for you and Mrs. Obama, but not good enough for Sasha and Malia?...Why is that?"School choice is one of several conservative ideals that remain almost wholly unrealized after a couple of decades. (Emphasis, mine.)
Bring Dean On
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 4:09PM
Howard Dean appears to be the favored candidate of the netroots to replace Tom Daschle as either HHS Secretary or White House health-care czar. Over at the Huffington Post, Cenk Uygur goes as far as to write, "At this point, if Howard Dean is not selected for at least one of these positions, it is a clear snub." Based on what I've seen of President Obama thus far, I can't imagine that he'd be so stupid as to pick Dean, because it would be an absolute gift to opponents of government-run health care. For one thing, Dean is an arrogant, brash and undisciplined figure who is more likely to alienate lawmakers than win them over. But beyond that, many of Dean's health-care reforms in Vermont were similar to what Obama wants to do on the national level, and they demonstrably failed.
Dean passed regulations known as "community rating" and "guaranteed issue," which force insurers to cover everybody who applies for insurance and charge everybody the same rate, regardless of age or other risk factors. Dean also expanded Medicaid eligibility (something that Obama's proposed stimulus bill would do at least on a temporary basis). In the end, premiums skyrocketed, healthy people exited the market, and private insurers left the state in droves. I know what you might be thinking: the number of uninsured Vermonters shrank, right? Actually, that would be wrong. A 2004 review of the Dean record by the Heartland institute noted that the state's uninsured rate went from 9.5 percent in 1992 to a 9.7 percent average in 1999-2001, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. More recent Census data showed the rate jumping to an 11 percent average in the 2005-2007 time period.
Meanwhile, below is a chart from an August 2004 PowerPoint presentation from the Vermont's Joint Fiscal Office showing the relative growth of the state's Medicaid spending (red line), total health spending (green line), personal income (blue line), and the gross state product (pink line). Notice how Medicaid spending growth accelerated at an alarming rate.
The bottom line is that by giving Dean a prominent role in his administration's health-care push, President Obama would be providing conservatives with a big fat target, and opponents of the effort would be able to run ads demonstrating the disastrous real world implications of some of what Obama has proposed at the national level.
The Dead Right
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 3:07PM
I've been prodded to read and comment on this Sam Tanenhaus essay pronouncing conservatism dead. Tanenhaus is a smart guy who knows quite a bit about the conservative movement, much more than most liberal writers. But I'm not terribly impressed by his eulogy for the right. Uncharacteristically, Tanenhaus makes little effort to understand conservatives on their own terms. Instead we get embarrassingly tendentious liberal cliches like this:
Today, the situation is much bleaker. After George W. Bush's two terms, conservatives must reckon with the consequences of a presidency that failed, in large part, because of its fervent commitment to movement ideology: the aggressively unilateralist foreign policy; the blind faith in a deregulated, Wall Street-centric market; the harshly punitive "culture war" waged against liberal "elites."
This completely airbrushes out the "responsible" center-left's initial support for the Iraq war, the fact that the biggest "deregulation" relevant to banking was signed into law by Bill Clinton, the left's own role in the "harshly punitive 'culture war'" (which side imposed their will on the electorate via the courts?), and of course any distinctions between Bush's crony capitalism meets Sarbanes-Oxley meets bailouts and the laissez faire wild west of Tanenhaus' fevered imagination.
Then there's this:
There is instead almost universal agreement--reinforced by the penitential testimony of Alan Greenspan and, more recently, by grudgingly conciliatory Republicans--that the most plausible economic rescue will involve massive government intervention, quite possibly on the scale of the New Deal/Fair Deal of the 1930s and '40s and perhaps even the New Frontier/Great Society of the 1960s. All this suggests that movement doctrine has not only been defeated but discredited.
But the reason the wingnuts of the conservative movement gained power in the first place was because the mangerial liberalism of the New Frontier/Great Society ultimately did not solve problems that confronted millions of Americans at the time: stagflation, social unrest, family breakdown, crime, concern about the United States' power. I'm obviously not arguing that Bush proved equal to the challenges of his time either, but it is telling that liberals don't have anything more to offer than warmed-over versions of the programs that helped throw them out of power in the first place. Is liberalism dead too?
Of course, Tanenhaus doesn't even acknowledge the problems liberalism failed to solve. The "culture war" is presented as if it reflected nothing more than resentments of the "liberal elite." Clinton's work on welfare reform is just "collaborating" with the Republicans. The closest we get to an acknowledgment of liberal failure is a lament that "liberals unwittingly squeezed themselves into the stereotypes conservatives had invented." For an essay recommending a less ideological conservatism, a pragmatic application of Disraeli and Burke, Tanenhaus has more to say about ideological politics than he does about right or wrong, good policy and bad policy, and problems or solutions.
I'll post more later on some areas where I think Tanenhaus is closer to the mark.
Simplifying Governance
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 3:00PM
In remarks at the White House, Obama argued that recalcitrant lawmakers need to get behind his approach, saying the American people embraced his ideas when they elected him president in November.
Sadly, it will likely take more than Hope (TM) to disband Congress and crown us an emperor, the results of November's presidential election notwithstanding. Sure, Obama counters, you can dissent--it'll just be "a catastrophe." It's the President's prerogative to call it like he sees it, but isn't such a disputable dire pronouncement pretty much exactly the excuse Democrats gave after the fact for having been deceived/forced into voting for the Patriot Act and the Iraq war against their self-proclaimed better separation-of-powers instincts? This sort of the-Executive-Branch-speaks-you-shut-up-and-follow routine must come as a disappointment to people like CNN anchor Jami Floyd, who lectured on the occasion of Barack Obama's visit to the Supreme Court scant weeks ago that:
Barack Obama knows what President Bush apparently does not—that ours is a constitutional system of government; that the president serves at the pleasure of the American public; that the rule of law applies to all Americans even our chief executive; and, that presidential powers do not give the president unlimited authority to undermine our Constitution. There are three branches of government, after all, and with good reason. The executive is just one of those. With today’s visit our next President signals that he will fully respect the role of the other two—the legislative, with whom he must work everyday to best serve the American people, and the judiciary to which we all must answer.
In fairness to President Obama, it would be easier to fully respect the legislative branch if they'd just go ahead and do what he says already. Hopefully it's a lesson the Supreme Court is taking to heart. Until then--aw, sorry Jami, looks like the Cult of the Presidency lives!
UPDATE: As she notes in the comments section (presuming it is her!), Floyd is actually a contributor to the AC360 blog and anchors her own show on trueTV ("Not Reality. Actuality.") I sincerely apologize for suggesting she might be a CNN anchor rather than an anchor for a reality television network who moonlights as a blogger for a certain silver-haired fox of a CNN anchor, which, as our most recent ex-president might say, is...awesome! With regard to the merits of working for both Al Gore and Hillary Clinton before becoming a journalist, however, Floyd is entirely on her own.
Support for Stimulus Bill Continues to Sink
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 3:00PM
The latest Rasmussen poll has support for the stimulus dropping to 37 percent of Americans, with a plurality of 43 percent now opposed. Meanwhile, the polling firm also found that 50 percent believe that the stimulus bill will make things worse.
The Gallup result is a bit more nuanced. It found that three out of four Americans want some form of a stimulus package passed. However, only 38 percent want the package to be passed as is, with another 37 percent saying it should be passed only after "major changes" and 17 percent saying it should be rejected all together.
Remember, this was supposed to be a slam dunk. Early in the transition process, the Obama team had hoped to have a finished bill signed on his first day in office. Yet two weeks into his presidency, the front page of the Washington Post has a story about how Democrats have now conceded that they don't have enough votes to pass the package -- even though they have 58 Senators. Meanwhile, President Obama had to do five television interviews yesterday to boost support for the legislation. Obama will inevitably sign something, which will probably be touted as a "victory" in the media. But I think it's fair to say that this stimulus push has not gone as smoothly as expected
Daschle Fallout
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 12:40PM
I have a story up on the main site about how Tom Daschle's sudden withdrawal will hinder the Obama administration's health-care reform efforts. In today's New York Times, Obama adviser David Axelrod bluntly declares, "There was no plan B."
In addition to leading HHS, Daschle was supposed to head the White House Office of Health Reform. The administration now seems likely to divide those jobs. President Obama could nominate a governor to lead HHS (Kathleen Sebelius, Ed Rendell, Jennifer M. Granholm, John Kitzhaber and netroots favorite Howard Dean have been named as possibilities), while promoting Jeanne M. Lambrew to lead efforts out of the White House. Lambrew, the co-author of Daschle's health-care book and former senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress, has already been serving as deputy director of the White House office. The problem is, none of those possible options would be able to play the legislative role that was planned for Daschle. Anybody can come up with a health care plan, but the big trick is getting that plan through Congress by pushing the buttons of all of the lawmakers and all the interest groups who have a stake in the health-care debate. That's where Daschle's experience and skill set was expected to prove crucial, and that's why anybody who has been following this closely knows what a big blow his withdrawal was to the Obama administration.
A Point of Family Pride
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 12:37PM
This year marks the 40th anniversaries of the Apollo 10 (up close look at the moon) and Apollo 11 (1st lunar landing) space missions, and over the weekend the Charles M. Schulz Museum in Santa Rosa hosted a mini-reunion of those who were involved in Apollo 10, including astronauts Tom Stafford and Gene Cernan. Also participating was my uncle, Wes Chesser, who was a recovery swimmer on the splashdown team for both missions, and helped pull the astronauts to safety.
Creeping Socialism Watch
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 12:15PM
The idea that the President of the United States is calling for a maximum wage of $500,000 for top executives in private companies is a disturbing development for those of us who still believe in a free market economy. At the same time, it's hard to argue with the basic idea that any company living off of taxpayer dollars should be more frugal when it comes to executive compensation. This is how creeping socialism happens. Once the government comes to the rescue of the private market under the guise that it's merely an emergency, it opens the door for all sorts of new and unprecedented intrusions into the free market. I would argue (and in fact did argue at the time) that the die was cast as soon as the Fed decided to bailout Bear Stearns last March. Everything that President Obama wants to do to socialize the market naturally flows from actions taken by his Republican predecessor. And honestly, given his campaign screeds against corporate greed, do we really think that John McCain would have acted any differently than President Obama has today?
Planet Afghanistan
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 11:10AM
If I didn't know better, I'd sometimes be tempted to think Ralph Peters was the nom de plume of a paleocon satirist doing a really over-the-top impression of a neocon.
Coleman: "Reports of Al Franken's victory are greatly exaggerated"
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 11:04AM
A buoyant Norm Coleman just held a conference call with lawyer Ben Ginsberg, celebrating yesterday's decision by a three-judge panel in Minnesota that will allow 4,800 rejected absentee ballots to be reconsidered in the election contest.
Coleman said he was optimistic that he would win once all valid votes are counted, because the initially rejected absentee ballots that were included in the current count skewed Democratic.
"The rest of this universe is a universe that comes from areas that are heavily Republican because the other ones are already in," Coleman said, while cautioning that one can never know how any given individual would have voted.
Furthermore, Coleman said in reality, he only has to make up a gap of less than 150 votes rather than the frequently-cited 225 figure, because he expects that 80 to 100 Franken votes will be washed away once the court fixes the double-counting of ballots that took place.
"Reports of Al Franken's victory are greatly exaggerated," Coleman said, repeatedly emphasizing that the former comedian's lead was "artificial."
Ginsberg, who also played a central role in the Florida 2000 recount, said that yesterday's ruling was key in "reshaping" the contest, because Franken wanted to limit the universe of reconsidered absentee ballots to 650.
"Basically, this is what we asked for," he said.
At issue was the lack of uniform standards in determining whether some absentee ballots were improperly rejected on Election Day. For instance, Minnesota law requires a signature on the envelope of every absentee ballot, but in some cases voters signed in a different place than the box designated for their signatures. Due to a legal gray area, some counties counted those ballots and others rejected them.
"Either way wasn't necessarily right or wrong, just different," Ginsberg said. This ruling, he said, would ensure that all ballots get counted based on one standard.
As for the separate issue of the duplicate ballots, Ginsberg expects the court to rule on that matter later in the process, because right now there will be a county-by-county review of the 4,800 rejected absentee ballots.
Asked whether he expected Harry Reid to refuse to seat him, Coleman was dismissive. No matter what statements Reid makes publicly, he said, the seating of Ronald Burris shows that ultimately he'd have to relent.
"Harry Reid isn't going to be in a position to block me from being a U.S. Senator if I am certified as the winner," he said.
Not a Hand for Carnahan
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 10:35AM
Yet another Carnahan is the presumed front-runner for the Demo nod for Senate from Missouri for the seat currently held by GOPer Kit Bond. Some people are not impressed. Do read all the internal links.
"The Party of No and Status Quo"
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 10:04AM
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is launching a pro-stimulus ad campaign targeting 28 Republican-held House districts. The ads zing Republicans for "putting bank bail outs and building schools in Iraq before the needs of the Americans in the struggling economy" and for celebrating their unanimous vote agains the stimulus. (No word on the 11 Democrats who also voted against the stimulus bill, since the Blue Dogs who ran on "fiscal responsibility" are getting a pass from leadership.)
Here's another tidbit from the press release:
"These are serious times, hard working families are worried about keeping their jobs, health care and homes - they want action, not House Republicans cheering about doing nothing," said Brian Wolff, Executive Director of the DCCC. "Republicans' champagne wishes and caviar dreams simply don't connect with middle class families struggling to make ends meet and furious that their tax dollars are going to bail out banks, build schools in Iraq, or send American jobs overseas. The Putting Families First campaign is only the first step, we will continue to go district by district to hold Republicans who continue to vote in lockstep with party leaders and against the folks in their districts accountable."
The targeted Republicans include most of those who faced tough elections in 2008, as well as leadership team members Eric Cantor, Thaddeus McCotter, and Pete Sessions.
More on the Scary Toy Story
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 10:02AM
At Forbes, Richard Epstein writes on the same subject I wrote on yesterday, while Walter Olson continues his sterling coverage here. In short, a "consumer product safety" bill that goes into effect next week, supposedly protecting children from the dangers of lead, is so overbroad and poorly targeted that it could cause severe economic dislocation across a huge spectrum of businesses small and large.
What Congress OUGHT to do is replace this terrible new law with a much more simple law in the spirit of caveat emptor. It could do the job well with just two basic clauses. The first would, by a date certain (perhaps Jan. 1, 2011, to give manufacturers time to comply) ban all NEW domestic manufacture of any product intended for the regular use of a child 10 or under with a lead content greater than x percent, with an express permission for the CPSC to make individual product exceptions for products it deems "entirely unlikely to result in ingestion or direct absoprtion of lead" -- or somesuch language. This would not apply to products produced before the start date, or to those produced abroad.
For all those other products, a simple rule ought to be adopted: Any foreign producer of such a product must certify that it meets the same standards (with a ban of all products by that company if any such certification is found to be fraudulent), AND the retailer of any product not covered by the new-manufacture ban should be required to attach a sticker or tag to each such item that says: "WARNING: May contain lead. Ingestion may cause serious health problems. Do not let children put in mouth!"
There. That's common sense. Unfortunately, it is sorely lacking in Washington these days.
Democrats and 'Civility'
Posted by on 2.4.09 @ 5:30AM
Two words that should seldom be used together, especially by someone like Lanny Davis, says Peter J. Parisi of The Washington Times.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Obama Needs To Read His Shakespeare
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 5:44PM
Do not, as some ungracious pastors do,
Show me the steep and thorny way to heaven;
Whiles, like a puff'd and reckless libertine,
Himself the primrose path of dalliance treads,
And recks not his own rede.
Hamlet, I, iii
Today, the AP reports:
Robert Gibbs told reporters Tuesday, "The bar that we set is the highest that any administration in the country has ever set."
During a briefing filled with questions about Tom Daschle's decision to withdraw from consideration to be Health and Human Services secretary, Gibbs pointed to experts who describe the administration's ethics rules as the strongest in history.
He also said those experts recognized that Obama would need to make exceptions to his pledge to run an administration free of former lobbyists.
Rubin Goes the Next Step
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 5:25PM
Jennifer Rubin has been on fire with multiple great posts on the Obama nominee follies. Now she reminds us that it's not just the nominees, but the Dem candidates (and maybe electees) as well. She gives us Al Franken. (We won't take him, but she gives him to us anyway.) Good stuff.
Coleman Gets A Break
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 5:13PM
Norm Coleman got a bit of good news today, as a three judge panel ruled in favor of expanding the universe of rejected absentee ballots to be reconsidered, potentially bringing as many as 4,800 ballots back into the mix with Franken clinging to a narrow 225-vote lead.
Delta is Just One Airline That Stinks
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 5:10PM
For anybody who travels by air, there is a tremendously important article in today's Wall Street Journal in the Personal Journal section. It explains the inexplicable, namely how it is that airlines get away with such a bizarre and bewildering set of rules, including rules that seem to change from airport to airport and airline to airline. Basically, it's a racket. Most interesting is the part that says some airlines seem to be enforcing carry-on rules more strictly now that they are charging for "checked" luggage -- i.e. if you try to avoid their luggage fee, they tell you that you can't carry your bag on the plane with you and MUST check it -- and, of course, must then pay the fee.
Also, there's this:
Many travelers say they don't understand why airlines don't refund baggage fees they collect when they don't deliver bags to travelers with their flight. Should you have to pay for the service if the airline loses your bag?
With a restaurant, plumber or electrician, you don't pay if the service doesn't get done, notes Ray Hawk of Phoenix. "If you have to pay for the service, you should get that particular service," he said.
To many travelers, it's a question of fairness. Rules often seem to work against them, not airlines. Travelers often end up paying a penalty if they miss a flight because they don't show up on time, for example, but if the airline doesn't get their baggage delivered on time, there's no penalty for the airline other than the cost of delivering it to you later.
Airlines say the baggage fee is actually a "handling charge," and unlike some package shipping companies, they don't guarantee their service. Most bags that don't get delivered on time eventually are delivered to owners. And some carriers say customers who have paid baggage fees may get a little more in compensation if they complain about a lost bag -- a slightly larger voucher toward future travel, for example. "The fee is taken into account when we compensate our guest for the disservice," said a United spokeswoman.
Most airlines do say that if the bag never gets delivered and the airline has to reimburse the customer for the value of the contents, the fee will be accounted for, too. But there's no rule specifying that.
Nice work: DON'T perform the service properly, but keep the money!
Well, I am here to report that Delta Airlines is a particularly egregious offender. WHen my wife and I flew home to Mobile for Christmas, our luggage didn't make it until the next day BOTH for the trip to Mobile AND the trip back up to DC. (!!!) BOTH times. And both times we were treated to surly agents taking down the info about our (temporarily) lost luggage, even though we were incredibly polite (almost obsequious) by design just so we would ensure the best service possible. Even worse, the phone number Delta provides to check on the status of your luggage is busy ALL THE TIME. Between the two occaions of lost luggage within 12 days of each other, I must have called that line about 70 times. NEVER was it anything but busy.
Then I tried calling the reservations line to get a human being. NO luck. Endless loop. Then endless "hold." Then abruptly disconnected.
This was the single most incompetent airline I have ever dealt with. Nothing worked. Nobody was polite. Nobody was anything more than marginally helpful. And nobody could give me any real answers.
Finally, late the afternoon after we arrived in Mobile, our luggage arrived -- in the back of an open-cab pickup truck, IN THE RAIN. Wet luggage ... well, it ain't no fun.
Delta stinks. And so does our whole air-travel system (with the possible exception of Southwest Airlines).
There. I've said it. It was so fun, I'll say it again: Delta stinks.
Daschle's Demise
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 4:34PM
I now have an article up on the main site about what Tom Daschle's withdrawal means for the prospects of health-care reform. It's important to keep in mind that Daschle was a central part of the Obama administration's strategy for passing reform, and at the very minimum, his withdrawal will mean a potentially costly delay.
You know what America needs? Bike paths
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 3:39PM
I'm having a fun time sorting through the stimulus package. In fact, I'm especially liking this site called Stimulus Watch. It helps remind me what really matters in our economy. Who knew that bike paths and golf courses are the way to get the American economy back on track?
The War on Phelps
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 3:38PM
The sheriff of Richland County may charge Olympic gold medalist Michael Phelps if he can find evidence that the swimmer smoked marijuana under his jursdiction. One could see this as a brave stand for law and order, without regard to fame or station. From my perspective, it is just another example of the waste and pointlessness of much of what goes on in the name of the War on Drugs. Asks Bill Anderson, "What is worse, an athlete smoking pot or a sheriff arresting people so he can get publicity?"
You're Out, Tom
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 1:44PM
Tom Daschle's decision to withdraw his nomination as HHS Secretary over a failure to pay taxes no doubt raises further questions about the Obama administration's vetting procedures. But the most important aspect of this story is how much of a blow it deals to President Obama's push for health-care reform. As I noted yesterday, Daschle figured to play a prominent role in the effort, not just in terms of crafting a proposal, but in getting it through Congress. He was tapped because of his passion for health care and his vast legislative experience. It will be interesting to see who Obama chooses to replace Daschle, but either way, the administration will now have to completely rethink it's health-care strategy.
UPDATE: "It really sets us back a step," Sen. Dick Durbin said, according to the AP. "Because he was such a talent. I mean he understood Congress, serving in the House and Senate he certainly had the confidence of the president."
Re: Toy Story
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 1:35PM
Only four members of Congress voted against the absurd bill Quin mentions below: Tom Coburn, Jim DeMint, Jon Kyl, and Ron Paul, all Republicans.
Blackwell: Let's Get Back to Basics
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 1:26PM
Ken Blackwell has issued a statement in the wake of his unsuccessful bid for chairman of the Republican National Committee, addressing his endorsement of Michael Steele and other issues:
I would like to thank all of my friends in the conservative community for their humbling support in my bid for Chairman of the Republican National Committee. I know my late entry and lack of membership on the committee made it an uphill battle for us, but with your help and your voice, we made a major national impact and re-affirmed that conservative principles are alive and well in the Republican Party.
Just because the race is over doesn’t mean our jobs are finished. Now is the time to take our message of reform, especially the need to return the party to the grassroots, to the new leadership team at party headquarters.
Last week, the 168 members of the Republican National Committee elected Michael Steele as their national chairman. I was proud to be a significant part of that effort, not only by encouraging my supporters to elect him, but also by assuring the members of the RNC, and Republicans following the race nationwide, that Michael Steele is taken seriously by conservatives like us. Governor Ronald Reagan once told his staff, “the person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally — not a 20 percent traitor.” While Michael Steele and I may differ on our approach to some aspects of conservatism, he is still a strong ally in the fight to defeat Democrats and a supporter of the conservative Republican platform, and I look forward to working with him as we energize, inspire, and expand the base.
This election was a battle to see who can best unite these members – or at least 85 of them – to capture a majority of the votes in the short term. But in the long term, we need a plan that will rebuild the party by articulating conservative principles, inspiring our base, decentralizing authority, and building the technical infrastructure that will unite the millions of Republican voters behind a common goal of a conservative resurgence across the country.
Republican voters have spoken – at the ballot box, with their donations, through grassroots activities, and in online communication. We’ve all heard and echoed their message: let’s get back to basics. Now we have someone on the national stage who can do something about it, including returning party operations to the state and local leadership, dominating technology in order to position us to win, and preparing for our toughest redistricting battle yet. Michael Steele has assured members of the conservative community that we will not only have a voice, but a place at the table as decisions directing the RNC are made. And I don’t know about all of you, but I’m ready to be put back to work.
A nice place to start might be with working to ensure greater conservative control of state party organizations and representation on the RNC.
The Kmiecian Case for Obama
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 1:20PM
I dissect it at length in the Catholic World Report.
Dissing Heroes While Pumping Up Pols
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 1:08PM
Symbolically, this is dynamite! Please read this. Demo leaders actually have blocked bills that would forbid tax money to fund projects named after congressmen, AND blocked bills that WOULD name projects after fallen military or first responders. It's an outrage. Make some noise!
Toy Story
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 1:05PM
This is yet another example of a horrendous bill that GW Bush signed into law without a squeak of protest. Next Tuesday will be Armageddon for anybody who makes or sells goods for children. Read all about it -- and weep.
Three-fer
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 1:04PM
With today's Daschle and Killefer withdrawals, the principle has been established that tax cheats have no business serving in a presidential administration. Timothy Geithner may have snuck through, but he is now permanently damaged. There's only one honorable thing for him to do -- resign.
York Moves On
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 12:42PM
Lest it go without comment, Byron York's departure from National Review is sad news, though by his account, mutual and entirely amicable. York's reportage helped NR really step up its coverage of politics, rather than contribute analysis. In the NR Washington Bureau, York does leaves behind a few excellent reporters in his wake -- Mark Hemingway (yet another Spectator alum) and David Freddoso (whose first book was a New York Times Bestseller, and who is getting married this week).
He's also set an excellent example, not only for his colleagues (who have plenty of excellent examples anyway), but for young writers looking to find their place in journalism. Whenever a big name like York goes from a conservative magazine to a mainstream print publication, it should be viewed as a positive development for both. Conservative reporting mustn't be limited to the conservative publishing ghetto where the mainstream press isn't likely to look (or look with respect). It's a testament to the quality of his reporting that he is so widely cited in spite of being ideologically affiliated. When York was writing for AmSpec, this was the case. The man has journalistic gravitas.
The DC Examiner has recently been ramping up its news coverage and as chief political correspondent, York will undoubtedly pull the Examiner back into competition against Politico. Best of luck to him.
The Permanent Campaign
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 11:57AM
I missed this last week, but this is a great account of Obama's permanent campaign -- and of the issues it raises. Credit Whitney Blake of Fox News.
Big Shot
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 10:53AM
Tom Daschle looks mighty cocky in this photo, part of an adoring Annie Leibovitz/Vanity Fair shoot of the new team now available for ogling. From the sounds of it, though, Tom may not be standing tall for long.
More Tax Woes for Obama
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 10:40AM
Okay, so Tim Geithner owed $35,000 in taxes, and his nomination
sails through because he is uniquely qualified for a position
that is of utmost importance at this time. Tom Daschle owed more
like $140,000, but President Obama and Senate Democrats have thus
far rallied behind the man, because he's part of the exclusive
club of former U.S. Senators. Now we get news that Nancy
Killefer was forced to withdraw her nomination as "chief
performance officer" for the federal government because in 2005
the District of Columbia filed a mere $946.69 lien on her home
for her failure to pay taxes on her household help. I'd
say Killefer is getting shafted.
Daily Must-Reads
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 9:46AM
- Daniel Pearl's father reflects on whether his son died in vain (WSJ)
- DC bureaucrats impose their own moral code, complete with a very specific ressentiment (NY Times)
- Tough electoral math for Michael Steele to figure out (NRO)
- Economists differ over whether stimulus is digging up holes or building bridges (Boston Globe)
- Iraq credit where credit is due (Guardian)
The Daschle-Klein Plan
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 7:11AM
It goes like this: Tom Daschle gets confirmed and his universal health-care plan is adopted, but I don't pay the taxes required to finance the program. I get caught, but simply write a letter apologizing for the oversight and am promptly rewarded with a high-profile government job.
The Gregg Pick Is A Political Masterstroke By Obama
Posted by on 2.3.09 @ 6:37AM
Yesterday, I speculated on some of the possible reasons why Sen. Judd Gregg would make the puzzling decision to give up his Senate seat and put Republicans in a precarious position for a meaningless cabinet post. But for President Obama, this was an absolutely brilliant political move. After Bill Richardson was forced to withdraw his nomination as Commerce Secretary due to an investigation, the post became a huge headache for the new administration. Yet somehow, Obama managed to turn the position into pure gold. By appointing Gregg, it means that in the best case scenario for Republicans, a conservative Senator will be replaced by a moderate who will be vulnerable for reelection in 2010. And Obama gets to weaken the Republican caucus in the Senate while at the same time appearing bipartisan by having appointed a conservative to fill a cabinet position. It's stunning that Gregg would agree to this, but demonstrates once again how creative and politically savvy Obama is.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Eric Holder Confirmed
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 7:47PM
Eric Holder is now attorney general of the United States. Twenty-one Republicans voted against him.
What is Gregg Thinking?
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 6:10PM
If Judd Gregg were to leave the Senate to join the Obama administration, it would clearly be a slap in the face to Republicans. Even were New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch to agree to appoint a Republican, anybody Lynch picked would be a moderate who would likely be more vulnerable than Gregg in 2010. So what is Gregg thinking? Obviously, only he knows, but last July, The American Spectator hosted a dinner attended by Gregg, and looking back at my blog account from that time left me with a few possible insights.
At the time, Gregg was much more optimistic about the Republicans chances in the fall's Senate races than most political observers. He thought John Sununu would win in New Hampshire and that in the end, Republicans would only lose two or three seats. Of course, Sununu went down and Republicans ended up losing 7 or 8 seats (pending the official outcome of Norm Coleman's contest in Minnesota). The Sununu loss may have spooked him about his own chances of retaking his Senate seat in the increasingly blue New Hampshire in 2010.
In addition, Gregg may not be relishing the thought of life in the minority. During our dinner, Gregg complained about how under Harry Reid's leadership, the minority party was becoming as marginalized as it was in the House, which was a source of real frustration for Gregg. I can only imagine that feeling being deeper given how much more diminished Republicans are in this Congress. Whatever his frustrations are with being in the Senate, though, I don't see how things would be any better for him as a conservative Commerce Secretary in a very liberal administration.
One thing that was interesting was that as of last July, when I asked Gregg about his experiences working with Obama in the Senate, he said he saw very little of Obama:
He used to see him in the gym in the morning, and said Obama was in "great shape." But he didn't see him on the floor much, because Obama started running for president so soon into his freshman Senate term.
"I don't know who he is or what he stands for better than anybody else," Gregg said. "He's a blank page."
He did concede, however, that one has to respect Obama for what he's been able to accomplish having come out of nowhere.
Gregg later added that when people walked into the voting booth in November, they may ask themselves, ""Do I really want somebody three years removed from the state senate to be president?"He also said Obama had the potential to be a "transcendent figure."
Have Obama's transcendent powers gotten the better of Gregg?
That Game that Happened Between the Doritos Commercials
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 5:05PM
The penalties were bad and many of the calls botched -- including the last-second fumble that looked more like an incomplete pass -- but if it weren't for Kurt Warner throwing that interception that was returned for a touchdown in the first half, the Arizona Cardinals probably would have won. They should have either tried to run it in or settled for the field goal. I know the same play worked twice in the game, once before the interception and once after, but gimme a break. Warner had his eyes locked on Boldin while playing the number-one ranked defense in the NFL. He was begging for a Pittsburgh Steelers pick and he got one.
Abortion and the Race Issue
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 4:56PM
Some years ago, I testified at the Georgia state capitol in Atlanta on the subject of abortion regulations and their constitutionality. I will never forget the testimony that day of women who have had abortions and have come to greatly regret that choice. In particular, there was a young, black woman who tearfully recounted her dreams of a son who asked her why she ended his life. Moving past the intense power of her story, she went on to tell what she knew about the disparate racial impact of abortion on the African-American community. Afterwards, an African-American state senator from the Democrat party questioned her about whether her claims were really true.
Do African-Americans have more abortions? The answer is yes. A number of pro-life academics have created the website Moral Accountability to encourage the group of evangelical and Catholic intellectuals who supported Obama on the basis that he would reduce the incidence of abortion to keep him morally accountable. Writing for that website, Union University's Micah Watson (a former student of Princeton's Robert George) offers detailed statistics on African-Americans and abortion.
Read it all, but here's a sample:
Consider the following: African-Americans make up 26% of the population of Alabama; they account for 54.7% of the abortions; 29.6% of Georgia’s roughly 8 million citizens are African-Americans yet African-Americans make up 57.8% of the abortions; in North Carolina the population percentage is 21.3% while the proportion of black abortions is 44.2%; in my adopted home state of Tennessee, African-Americans are 16.6% of the population yet make up 41.6% of the abortions; most egregious, however, is Mississippi where African-Americans make up 37.1% of the population and a mind-boggling 77.2% of the abortions. In fact, in every state where African-Americans make up more than 10% of the population, the black abortion rate far exceeds the population percentage, often by a factor of two or three.
News You Might Have Missed
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 4:26PM
While all you right-wing troglodytes were hypnotized by that oppressive hypermasculine ritual display of patriarchal aggession, History Was Made.
Dachle's Tax Votes
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 4:09PM
Americans for Tax Reform notes that Tom Daschle has earned a lifetime 7 percent rating from the group for his voting record over the years, which includes the following:
- In 2004, Daschle voted against keeping the Internet free of all sales taxes.
- In 2003, Daschle voted against reducing the capital gains and dividend rates to 15%.
- In 2003, Daschle voted against permanently killing the Death Tax.
- In 2002, Daschle voted against permanently killing the Death Tax.
- In 2001, Daschle voted against cutting income tax rates for all taxpayers, ending the marriage penalty, doubling the child tax credit, and killing the Death Tax.
- In 2000, Daschle voted against ending the marriage penalty, killing the Death Tax, and a gas tax cut for consumers.
- In 1999, Daschle voted against expanding Medical Savings Accounts despite endorsing the concept less than a decade earlier.
- In 1999, Daschle voted against an across-the-board 10% income tax cut, a capital gains tax cut, and killing the Death Tax.
- In 1998, Daschle voted against ending the marriage penalty and against tax-free education savings accounts for children.
- In 1997, Daschle voted against the creation of the Roth IRA.
- In 1995, Daschle voted against a constitutional amendment that would have required a supermajority to raise taxes.
- In 1993, Daschle voted for the Clinton income tax increase.
ATR President Grover Norquist quips, “Tom Daschle, like Leona Helmsley, believes only ‘the little people’ should pay taxes."
Obama and Unions
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 3:59PM
Robert Kuttner, who wrote a book last year on Barack Obama's potential to be a transformational liberal president, is thrilled with Obama's Task Force on Middle Class Working Families, and his corresponding statement, which Kuttner called, "the kind of explicit endorsement that we literally haven't heard from a president since FDR's day." Among other things, Obama declared, "I do not view the labor movement as part of the problem, to me it's part of the solution."
There has been a lot of talk about the relative moderation of Obama's economic team, but it's been abundantly clear that he doesn't plan on forgetting the big unions that helped him get to the White House.
Re: The Penalty Bowl
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 2:41PM
Philip, I utterly agree about the penalties. But I would go farther: I think the refs were FAR too obtrusive AND far too often wrong. I think they blew some calls, especially on the sorts of calls that involved plays that were "no harm/no foul" type of situations.
The roughing the passer call against the Cards was terrible, for instance. Outrageously bad. If a man that big is moving that fast, he can't be expected to stop short. When he hit Roethlisberger, he did extend his hands -- but he also actually pulled up, rather than continuing to plow into Roethlisberger. he didn't pile on; he just stopped himself. This is football, not pattie-cakes. The call stunk.
The holding call in the endzone on the Steelers stunk, too. The defensive player was bowling over the guard. The guard fell backwards. The defensive guy fell on top. The defensive guy was going down regardless. The guard no more "held" him than he did a deliberate pratfall. He did NOT pull the defensive guy on top of him on purpose. THe call stunk.
The rushing-into-the-holder call against the Cards stunk, too. It was, at worst, an unintentional foul, not a personal foul. At worst it should have been five yards and no automatic first down. The call stunk.
The final fumble by Warner ought to have been reviewed, with an official stoppage of play. The officials in the booth may well have taken a quick look and been convinced, but on a play that important, they ought to have taken their time, ordered a stop in play, and reviewed it in very slow motion to be absolutely sure. The whole game rode in the balance. The call (the refusal to stop play to do a review) stunk.
The personal foul against the Steelers DB on the sideline in the fourth quarter was iffy. Yes, he held on a little long after he had pushed the guy out of bounds. Yes, when the runner objected by chopping at the DB's arms, the DB retaliated with a tiny little shove. But it wasn't a punch, wasn't a swing, wasn't anything more than a harmless skirmish -- and the DB was surrounded by Cards who were at least as aggressively challenging him as he was challenging them. MAYBE it was a personal foul, technically, but if so it barely qualified. Considering the circumstances, the call stunk.
And I just did all that from memory. There were three or four other times when I thought the officials should have just let the players play the damn game. Other than the late personal foul by James Harrison -- RE-knocking over the Card blocker who alread was on the ground, after the play was over -- I thought it was a comparatively clean game. It was NOT out of control in a way that required such refereeing intervention.
Finally, I still remain unconvinced that Roethlisberger's knee actually touched ground on his first would-be touchdown. I bet that as the NFL goes over and over that play again in the days to come, and uses all the technology at their disposal, they will find that his knee never actually touched. Unless the original call was CLEARLY and UNAMBIGUOUSLY wrong, there should not be an overrule. That's the rule. But the rule was ignored.
Overall, then, the officiating stunk. But the game was absolutely awesome despite it all.
Hunting the Blue Dogs
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 2:13PM
Kirsten Gillibrand's apparent about-face on immigration leads to a larger question of how effective these moderate to conservative House Democrats can be. A Democrat can vote like Heath Shuler, Brad Ellsworth or even Gene Taylor if they stick to a congressional district that would otherwise vote Republican. But there isn't much evidence that a Democrat to the right of Bill Clinton can have a much more promising political future than that. Politicians are ambitious people and some of these red-district Blue Dogs will want to seek higher office. How conservative will they be then? Ask Jim Webb.
Taking the Permanent Campaign to a New Extreme
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 1:00PM
This recently appeared in my email inbox:
Philip --
The economic crisis is growing more serious every day, and the time for action has come.
Last week, the House of Representatives passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which will jumpstart our economy and put more than 3 million people back to work.
I hope to sign the recovery plan into law in the next few weeks. But I need your help to spread the word and build support.
It's not enough for this bill to simply pass Congress. Americans need to know how it will affect their lives -- they need to know that help is on the way and that this administration is investing in economic growth and stability.
Governor Tim Kaine has agreed to record a video outlining the recovery plan and answering questions about what it means for your community. You can submit your questions online and then invite your friends, family, and neighbors to watch the video with you at an Economic Recovery House Meeting.
The stakes are too high to allow partisan politics to get in the way.
That's why I've consulted with Republicans as well as Democrats to put together a plan that will address the crisis we face.I've also taken steps to ensure an unprecedented level of transparency and accountability. Once it's passed, you will be able to see how every penny in this plan is being spent.
You can help restore confidence in our economy by making sure your friends, family, and neighbors understand how the recovery plan will impact your community.
Sign up to host or attend an Economic Recovery House Meeting and submit your question for the video now:
http://my.barackobama.com/recovery
Our ability to come together as a nation in difficult times has never been more important.
I know I can rely on your spirit and resolve as we lead our country to recovery.
Thank you,
President Barack Obama
P.S. -- If you can't host or attend an Economic Recovery House Meeting, you can still submit your questions for Governor Kaine and then share the video with your friends and family this weekend. Learn more here:
The Penalty Bowl
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 12:33PM
After last year's Super Bowl, I made a case for it being the greatest ever. Now I'm hearing some people argue that last night's was even better, but I don't think so. To be sure, the game had a lot of great plays (James Harrison's 100-yard interception return, Larry Fitzgerald's touchdowns, and Santonio Holmes' winning catch). The fourth quarter got really exciting. But what tainted the experience for me was the amount of penalties. I'm not faulting the refs for this, because the Cardinals made some absolutely bone-headed mistakes, ending up with 11 penalties that added up to a Super Bowl record 106 yards (Pittsburgh had 7 for 56 yards). Even though I didn't have a dog in this fight, I found it incredibly frustrating as a viewer, because there was a stretch when it seemed like every play resulted in a flag. You just hate to see that in a game like this. So, overall, it was a lot of fun to watch, but I think it loses some points because of the sloppy play.
The Democrats' Iraq
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 12:12PM
Christopher Caldwell says the stimulus bill could end up being the Democrats' Iraq. I don't know about that -- does that mean President Obama will end up calling for a new "surge" of spending? -- but I do agree with Jesse Walker there are similarities in how all emergency responses by the federal government gain the assent of Serious People. Eric Heidenreich made a similar point on our site about the bailout.
Daschle's Woes Complicate Obama's Health Care Push
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 11:46AM
What interests me most about Tom Daschle's tax problems is how it will affect the upcoming push on health care. Remember that Daschle was not merely tapped by President Obama to be Secretary of Health and Human Services, but to head up the newly created White House Office of Health Reform. It's a symbolic position, but it sent a signal that Daschle wasn't intended to be somebody who would merely run the bureaucracy of HHS, but who would lead Obama's effort to craft a health-care proposal and shepherd it through Congress. Aside from his close relationship with Obama and his passion for health care, the former Senate Majority Leader was tapped because of his vast legislative experience and talent and getting things passed. This was touted as a major contrast to Bill Clinton's failed attempt at reform, which was led by Hillary Clinton and Ira Magaziner, neither of whom had any legislative experience. If Daschle is forced to withdraw his nomination only to be replaced by a more conventional pick, it would be a setback for Obama's efforts on health care. But even if Daschle somehow survives, he'll be damaged goods. He won't have the same clout on the Hill, and he won't have as much credibility with the general public. During the transition process, Daschle was put out as the public face of the Obama health care effort, traveling around the country to lead discussions on the issue, and recording YouTube videos that were posted on the change.gov transition website. Are people going to trust a man to reorganize our $2 trillion health-care system who has received hundreds of thousands in speaking fees from health-care interests, and who failed to pay $140,000 in taxes?
Froman Under Hire
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 11:42AM
Today's announcement that former Citi executive and Obama Harvard Law buddy Michael Froman had joined the White House team as a member of the National Security Council, advising on global finance issues, has some Republicans in the Senate minority leadership wondering if it's a hire worth investigating further.
Froman helped direct a Citi hedge fund and focused on infrastructure investments. "Beyond being Barack Obama's best friend at Harvard, if that Citi job is something that folks over at the White House think makes him an attractive choice, maybe we need to look into just what he did at Citi that contributed to the mess we're in. That's a national security issue, for sure," says the GOP aide.
Monday Cartoon and Quote of the Day
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 10:42AM
"Make no mistake, tax cheaters cheat us all, and the IRS should enforce our laws to the letter." --Senator Tom Daschle, May 7, 1998.
Daily Must-Reads
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 9:52AM
- Game theory for Obama: convince Tehran that you're happy to let negotiations fail (NY Times)
- The hodge-podge stimulus bill reflects a lack of hard choices made (Washington Post)
- Obama is beginning to look a lot like -- wait for it -- George W. Bush (NRO)
- By the way, people who aren't bankers or celebrities pretty much hate what's happening (Real Clear Politics)
- Pelosi becomes embittered, and the veneer of bipartisanship wears thin (Politico)
- It's getting harder to talk about free speech violations, for obvious reasons (Washington Times)
- Say it again: the New Deal didn't work, and FDR was not a good economist (Washington Post)
USA Today
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 9:44AM
I see I got paraphrased in the USA Today story on Michael Steele's election to head the RNC. And I do like being cited. And I can't complain that the citation is inaccurate. Here's what they wrote:
Some Republicans had concerns about what The American Spectator's Quin Hillyer called Steele's thin record of organizing, fundraising and electoral results. Steele calls that "laughable" and says he's proven himself in many posts.
Yes, those are exactly the doubts that I expressed. But I had far more to say that was good about Steele than bad. Here's the full context of what I wrote:
First, many congratulations to Michael Steele. He is a good man, a great communicator, and a breath of fresh air in attitude and outlook. The downside risks with Steele are that he was probably the least conservative of the six announced candidates, AND the one with the thinnest record of nuts-and-bolts organizing, fundraising and electoral success. Those are significant concerns -- but I think he is sincerely more conservative than not, that he has a fairly good ear for political tone, that he will be a good representative for the party, and that he has all the potential in the world to put to rest doubts about his organizational bona fides. The tests will be if he spends more money on the grassroots than on consultants, if he takes an aggressive posture on candidate recruitment rather than leaving it to the NRCC and RSC, and if he serves an an honest broker ideologically while doing everything in his power to nurture the conservative grass roots. My hopes for him are much higher than my doubts.
For the purposes of the USA Today story, there was nothing wrong with what the reporter wrote; she was just using my sentence as an example concisely summarizing some widespread concerns. But for purposes of making sure I myself am not misunderstood, and just to set the record straight: My hopes for him ARE much higher than my doubts. I think he can be an excellent chairman, and indeed that he probably will be.
I also wrote this, shortly before the final balloting. So I repeat that I am a fan of Steele's and am enthusiastic about his chairmanship.
Quoting J.P. Freire
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 8:16AM
Opposition to - or, perhaps more accurately, skepticism about - Steele was repeatedly mischaracterized by the media as a battle between conservatives and moderates. In truth, the doubters were more concerned with the question of whether Steele has the managerial prowess needed to organize winning unity among Republicans, a difficult feat Trent Lott famously likened to "herding cats."
American Spectator managing editor J.P. Freire summarized this issue before the RNC convened last week in Washington: "What has he done to demonstrate that he has the sort of executive ability needed to lead the RNC? The GOP is in deep trouble, and no more mistakes are necessary. . . . Did Maryland pick up seats in the legislature during his tenure [as state party chairman]? Not really. How was he as a fundraiser, one of the main jobs of a chairman? Middling. Out of power and in a bad economy, committeemen need to ask how Steele will be able to pull in the big bucks for the party."
Those are the doubts Steele must overcome and, as Freire observed, he must overcome them in the midst of an economic crisis for the nation and a political crisis for his party. . . .
Dems Like Markets--For Themselves
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 6:10AM
The other charming aspect of the Daschle affair is that it demonstrates how tax-hiking Dems like markets when they are delivering wealth to tax-hiking Dems. And because their political connections are of value in a world in which government policy can create and destroy industries and divert taxpayer wealth to influential interests, the Dems are only too happy to collect on their newfound "talents."
The New York Times looks at Daschle:
Tom Daschle, the former Democratic Senate leader, had been voted out of office. His close friend Leo Hindery, a Democratic donor and media mogul, was out of a job too, having just sold his latest company, Yes Networks.
So in early 2005 the two men decided to team up. Mr. Daschle agreed to become the founding chairman of "a world-class executive advisory board" of "industry and regulatory experts" for a new investment firm run by Mr. Hindery, according to a news release announcing its inception and seeking investors. The Daschle-led board, the release said, would help provide a "collective depth of industry knowledge and expertise that will allow us to pursue unique and high-value opportunities."
In addition to lending the prestige of his name, Mr. Daschle traveled to help raise money from investors for Mr. Hindery's new venture, said Jenny Backus, a spokeswoman for Mr. Daschle. And in exchange, over the next four years the firm compensated Mr. Daschle with over $2 million, and Mr. Hindery lent Mr. Daschle the use of a chauffeured limousine in Washington.
What a system. You get elected to the Senate. You expand the state, making it even more important for private companies to lobby and suck up to politicians. Then you go out and get those very same businesses to pay you to help them wend their way through the political thicket that you helped create! Is this a great country, or what?
Tax-Hiking Dems Defend Daschle
Posted by on 2.2.09 @ 5:44AM
The theory must be that it's okay to raise taxes if you can take your own private tax cut. At least, that would explain why the Dems, who almost all want most of us--you know, "rich" people who earn more than the minimum wage--to pay more in taxes, are defending Tom Daschle. Reports the Washington Post:
Many Democrats rose to his defense yesterday.
"If all you knew about Tom Daschle was that he used to be a senator and he made a mistake and had to pay over $100,000 in back taxes, you would have a right to be skeptical, even cynical," said Sen. Richard J. Durbin (Ill.). "But if you know Tom Daschle, you know better."
One longtime friend blamed Hindery's company, InterMedia Advisors, for the tax oversight. Daschle did report the $1 million annual consulting fee he received from the private equity firm. He asked his accountant last summer to look into whether the Internal Revenue Service considers the free car and driver to be compensation, Washington lawyer Frederick Graefe said.
"If there was no 1099 [form] from his employer for the car and driver, how was he to know it was taxable?" Graefe said. "His integrity is beyond reproach."
Maybe it all is innocent. But we know what the Dems would be saying about a GOP nominee--even worse, two GOP nominees--who hadn't paid up until his or her nomination was moving forward.
Maybe Republicans should vote yes if the Dems agree to support legislative giving the rest of us the right to "forget" to pay our taxes until we are nominated for high office. Seem fair enough?
Sunday, February 1, 2009
First, They Came for the Pythons . . .
Posted by on 2.1.09 @ 6:53PM
Democrats in Congress are pushing legislation that would devastate the hobby -- and damage the small businesses -- of a group of American hobbyists: Snake collectors.
The Nonnative Wildlife Invasion Prevention Act (HR669), sponsored by Del. Madeleine Bordallo (D-Guam.) and co-sponsored by several House Democrats including Alcee Hastings and Ron Klein of Florida, has got the "reptile geeks" up in arms:
If passed as written this bill will BAN the import, purchase, sale, trade and breeding of many, many reptiles and amphibians... including Boa, Python and Eunectes. If this bill passes it will destroy the reptile community and industry overnight!
The U.S. Association of Reptile Keepers says this bill, although promoted as an "environmental" measure, is being pushed in response to an alarmist report, "Broken Screens," published in 2007 by the animal-rights group Defenders of Wildlife. In their petition to stop HR669, USARK says:
-- There is NO evidence to support the premise that the continued import of Boa, Python & Eunectes would negatively impact the economy, environment, or human or animal species health.
-- Broken Screens, the report which is the basis for the writing of H.R. 669, is not a science based document. It is a propaganda piece produced by a radical environmentalist group in league with the Animal Rights Movement.
-- The so called Risk Assessment measures in this bill take a Guilty Until Proven Innocent approach that flies in the face of reason and promotes prejudicial treatment of all animals listed.
-- Citizens of the United States are appalled that well funded special interest groups are able to promote fiction as fact and we demand Boa, Python and Eunectes be removed from H.R. 669.
I was alerted to HR669 by a well-informed source -- my 16-year-old son, Jim, whose snake collection includes pythond.
As with CPSIA -- which threatens independent American businesses with "National Bankruptcy Day" if it goes into effect -- HR669 looks like another example of the Democratic congressional majority's appetite for unthinking regulation that creates burdens for businesses and individuals.
If
the Republican Party's new chairman
Michael Steele is looking for an issue to move forward, maybe
the "snake geeks" are a constituency worth cultivating. "Save Our
Snakes" might be an unlikely rallying cry, so how about:
"Don't Tread On Me!"
UPDATE: Just got off the phone with Andrew Wyatt, president of the U.S. Association of Reptile Keepers, who says that the H.R. 669 ban isn't just about snakes, but will also affect other species of exotic pets.
"There's all kinds of animals involved in it," said Wyatt. "It's an attempt to ban almost every animal that's not native to the United States."
Wyatt certainly can't be accused of being "anti-environment." A lifetime outdoorsman, he runs Outer Banks Wild, an eco-tourism and education enterprise based in North Carolina's Outer Banks. "I love my environment -- I live in the outdoors," Wyatt says.
However, Wyatt says ordinary pro-environment activists like him are trying to raise public awareness of the "very radical agenda" of the Human Society of the United States, which he calls a "powerful animal-rights extremist" group.
HSUS is "hiding behind the facade" of mainstream concerns about "kittens and puppies" while actually pursuing radicalism, Wyatt says. And, he says, HSUS is attempting to ban boas and pythons because that exploits "prejudice against reptiles."
"They are anti-human. . . . It's crazy," Wyatt says.
Putnam IS Finishing His Term
Posted by on 2.1.09 @ 4:22PM
I offer abject apologies to the excellent Rep. Adam Putnam. Based on several reports (in newspapers I won't name, because the fault is mine for not double-checking) with terribly misleading wording, I had commented below on the idea that Putnam would be resigning from Congress to run for state Ag. Commissioner in Florida. I was rather angry, as you can see. I am happy to report (although embarrassed) that Putnam WILL, repeat WILL, fill out his current term in the House. So he is not being derelict in his duty at all. I still hate to lose him from the House -- he clearly was a rising star, and a good guy -- but at least he is setting himself up, and his conservative supporters up, for higher things, WITHOUT letting down his current constituents.
Putnam's communications director Keith Lee Rupp contacted me and corrected the record -- and said that he is trying to get it corrected in the other papers that misreported it, as well. I hereby correct it here, and again apologize for relying on second-hand info.
Kay Yow's Funeral
Posted by on 2.1.09 @ 4:17PM
If you missed last Friday's funeral (held at my church in the Raleigh area) of legendary North Carolina State University coach Kay Yow, who passed away last week, make sure you catch this 20-minute video she made for the ceremony when she knew her time was short. Amazing, humble, and God-honoring.
Dereliction of Duty
Posted by on 2.1.09 @ 1:27PM
UPDATE: BASED ON MISLEADING REPORTING ELSEWHERE THAT I DIDN'T DOUBLE-CHECK, I ERRED: PUTNAM is SERVING OUT HIS TERM! (THE BASIC POINT I MAKE PHILOSOPHICALLY DOESN'T CHANGE, THOUGH.)
So now we see Judd Gregg of New Hampshire apparently leaving an almost entirely safe Senate seat to become Commerce Secretary, at a time when his party is just one vote from losing its ability to filibuster -- and now we also see Rep. Adam Putnam planning to leave Congress to run for Ag Secretary of Florida. Both are examples of a growing epidemic of serious dereliction of duty. I have complained about this in the past, but now the complaint is becoming a fury. Here's the deal: When you put yourself up for election before the voters, you are promising them that you will take the job to which they elect you for the duration of the term for which you are elected. You therefore have a duty to serve out that term -- yes, dammit, a DUTY -- unless you suffer some sort of tragedy or big family problem, or you are ill, or you are promoted to a clearly higher office that your constituents would approve. Otherwise, leaving an office in the middle of a term is a dereliction of duty.
Leaving deprives your constituents of the representation they voted for. It necessitates a special election, which costs taxpayers' money. And it inconveniences just about everybody. Also, in the case of Gregg, it hurts the party that gave him its backing, at a time when it can least afford to be hurt. In the case of Putnam, it makes no sense: He could run for Ag Sec while he serves in Congress; voters know that when they elect politicians, those politicians will spend time politiciking. THe implicit promise is that you will do the actual public-office job thoroughly and well even if you are spending time trying to get elected to another office. If you can't do that, then don't run for your current office in the first place.
Gregg and Putnam are being self-centered and selfish. They merit loud raspberries. Very loud. Plus ostracism. And maybe worse.
We Need Managers
Posted by on 2.1.09 @ 12:23PM
I can think of all sorts of conservative organizations that need better management skills. Maybe they should try to learn something here.
Gee, Quin, Why Don't You Tell Us What You Really Think?
Posted by on 2.1.09 @ 1:11AM
Quin, your denunciation of "the lickspittle, pathetic, obsequious RNC" is a keeper, a fine specimen of classic Southern invective. An angry Southerner can be a frightening thing to behold. Exactly once in my adult lifetime I made my older brother Kirby genuinely angry, and I pray never to see him angry again.
The all-time championship of enraged Southern rhetoric is still held by Nathan Bedford Forrest, for his famous farewell to Braxton Bragg:
"I have stood your meanness as long as I intend to. You have played the part of a damned scoundrel, and are a coward, and if you were any part of a man I would slap your jaws and force you to resent it. You may as well not issue any orders to me, for I will not obey them, and I will hold you personally responsible for any further indignities you endeavor to inflict upon me... and I say to you that if you ever again try to interfere with me or cross my path it will be at the peril of you life."
The guiding priniciple in such discourse is: If you're going to cut a man, eviscerate him.
- Obama's Foreign Policy Problems, Personified
- Breaking Fast With Bill Safire
- The Right of Conscience in the Age of Obama