The American Spectator

The Government Can

Posted by Paul Chesser on 8.29.09 @ 7:36AM

Here's a Saturday morning funny from hilarious comedian Tim Hawkins:

topics: Government Spending

The Bush administration and Republican Congress created a limited voucher program for kids in Washington, D.C., which has one of the worst school systems in the U.S. This effort was opposed by, among others, the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, who was one of the famed limousine liberals who sent his kids to expensive private schools while opposing giving poor families any choice in education. Indeed, he even launched a filibuster against District children when the idea was first proposed in 1997, calling the measure a "foolish ideological experiment."

Sen. Kennedy was wrong. Patrick J. Wolf of the University of Arkansas explains:

The achievement results from the D.C. voucher evaluation are also striking when compared to the results from other experimental evaluations of education policies. The National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE) at the IES has sponsored and overseen 11 studies that are RCTs, including the OSP evaluation. Only 3 of the 11 education interventions tested, when subjected to such a rigorous evaluation, have demonstrated statistically significant achievement impacts overall in either reading or math. The reading impact of the D.C. voucher program is the largest achievement impact yet reported in an RCT evaluation overseen by the NCEE. A second program was found to increase reading outcomes by about 40 percent less than the reading gain from the DC OSP. The third intervention was reported to have boosted math achievement by less than half the amount of the reading gain from the D.C. voucher program. Of the remaining eight NCEE-sponsored RCTs, six of them found no statistically significant achievement impacts overall and the other two showed a mix of no impacts and actual achievement losses from their programs. Many of these studies are in their early stages and might report more impressive achievement results in the future. Still, the D.C. voucher program has proven to be the most effective education policy evaluated by the federal government's official education research arm so far.

This is the federal initiative which most helps improve educational achievement of the kids who most desperately need help. So the Democratic Congress naturally plans on killing it. When forced to choose between children and teachers' unions, the Dems know to go with the folks who make campaign contributions. Sorry kids!

16 Comments | Add a Comment

Van Jones and His STORMtroopers Denounced America the Night After 9/11

Posted by Matthew Vadum on 8.29.09 @ 2:01AM

Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM), the revolutionary group formed by self-described "communist" and "rowdy black nationalist" Van Jones, held a vigil in Oakland, California, "mourning the victims of U.S. imperialism around the world" on the night after Sept. 11, 2001.

The reason this is important is because Van Jones is now President Obama's green jobs czar. He does not appear to have distanced himself from his past communist activities and is now part of the Obama administration's push to turn Sept. 11 into a National Day of Service focused on the promotion of the radical environmentalist agenda.

The vigil was reported by World Net Daily which excerpted parts of a history of the now-disbanded group.

Apparently, after the WND article was posted online, the website on which the original document was posted was overwhelmed by visitors and unavailable. I found the article in the "Way Back Machine" website (web.archive.org), an archival resource. The 2004 document, called "Reclaiming Revolution: history, summation & lessons from the work of Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM)," may be found on the archival site here. (In case that becomes unavailable, the document "Reclaiming Revolution" is available at the link embedded in this sentence.)

Jones also founded the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, which joined in the vigil according to an Ella Baker Center press release from 2001. The press release contained this passage that quoted Jones:

"Anti-Arab hostility is already reaching a fever pitch as pundits and common people alike rush to judgment that an Arab group is responsible for this tragedy," said Van Jones, national executive director of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights. "We fear that an atmosphere is being created that will result in official and street violence against Arab men, women and children."

"Reclaiming Revolution" also blamed the U.S. for 9/11. A passage on page 45 (27 of the PDF file) reads:

That night, STORM and the other movement leaders expressed sadness and anger at the deaths of innocent working class people. We were angry, first and foremost, with the U.S. government, whose worldwide aggression had engendered such hate across the globe that working class people were not safe at home. We honored those who had lost their lives in the attack -- and those who would surely lose their lives in subsequent U.S. attacks overseas.

Michelle Malkin discussed STORM and "Reclaiming Revolution" on the "Glenn Beck Program" on Aug. 25.

29 Comments | Add a Comment

Investigation in Vegas

Posted by Paul Chesser on 8.28.09 @ 9:24PM

Bemoaning the downfall of traditional newspapers (and the diminished dedication of their dwindling resources to local and investigative reporting) has become common, but new information delivery vehicles (besides the obvious bloggers) have arisen, as have innovative collaborations.

One example is an initiative among several state-level free-market/limited government think tanks, who associate with one another under the State Policy Network. A lot of these policy groups, known for their wonkiness (wonkishness? wonkability?) in the past, have initiated government transparency projects and also hired their own investigative reporters (until recently I was one for the John Locke Foundation's Carolina Journal), often from the ranks of the recently unemployed traditional journalists.

This month's issue of SPN News has a great article (click link to download PDF, it's the cover story) by the Nevada Policy Research Institute's Andy Matthews, who explains how his organization started investigating the publicly-funded Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, for reasons he explains:

The LVCVA receives hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars annually to [promote Southern Nevada tourism] while receiving almost no genuine oversight....NPRI sent the Authority hundreds of public-records requests, gaining access to thousands of pages of LVCVA financial documents. The documents revealed a pattern of extravagant spending, lax accounting, shoddy oversight — and an alarmingly cozy relationship with the Authority’s largest subcontractor, R&R Partners, a private advertising and publicaffairs firm.

How cozy? The LVCVA provided the literal rubber stamp bearing its finance director’s signature to R&R so R&R could approve expenses above $500 without LVCVA review, in violation of the parties’ contract, not to mention common sense.

What's great about this story is that NPRI did not seek all the glory for itself, but instead sought to get maximum exposure, so it worked with the Las Vegas Review-Journal to release the documents and findings. NPRI did reports on its analysis of the documents and LVRJ did interviews and wrote stories, which then led to attention from broadcast media also.

But that's not the whole story, as many journalistic outlets decided that because of NPRI's ideological worldview, that they needed to be scrutinized as much -- if not more -- than the LVCVA, as Matthews explains:

The chief reason for this is Las Vegas’ political culture. In many ways, Southern Nevada politicians and policymakers still operate within the paradigms that dominated during the mob-influence years beginning in the 1950s. The LVCVA’s managers, and R&R’s, were therefore beyond simply annoyed upon being exposed — they were downright offended that anyone had the chutzpah to scrutinize them in the first place. Used to politicians ignoring or even encouraging dubious behavior, the LVCVA’s managers considered it out of bounds for anyone to question them.

The deference many reporters still pay the Old Guard was reflected in their complacency about LVCVA and R&R efforts to make the story about NPRI. Their strategy: label NPRI as right-wing zealots with a sinister agenda, and pawns for the Las Vegas Sands Corp., which operates a private convention center that competes with the LVCVA’s public convention center. The Las Vegas Sands’ then-president sits on NPRI ’s board.

Matthews goes on to detail visits by private investigators "representing the other side" in attempts to intimidate; NPRI's measures to improve security; pressuring of (and resignation by) NPRI board members; and ultimate reforms that LVCVA had to make thanks to NPRI's and LVRJ's reporting.

Great stuff from the public policy world, where many want to make a difference in cleaning up government. I've seen it work well in North Carolina (where even some left-leaning individuals and organizations have joined in support of stopping corruption), and it's good to see it start working well elsewhere. The transformation of the newspaper industry does not have to mean the end of government accountability to the public. It just will look different.

7 Comments | Add a Comment

topics: Corruption, Newspapers in Decline

Chavez Friend and Communist Lover Joe Kennedy May Seek Uncle's Senate Seat

Posted by Matthew Vadum on 8.28.09 @ 6:28PM

Political pundits say former Rep. Joe Kennedy II (D-Massachusetts) may be in the running to be successor in the U.S. Senate to his leftist uncle Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) who died earlier this week.

Kennedy is a friend and ally of Hugo Chavez, who as Venezuela's head of state controls Petroleos de Venezuela SA which in turn controls the U.S.-chartered CITGO.

Just like Uncle Ted, Joe Kennedy is a communist enabler too.

At the direction of Chavez, CITGO provides low-cost fuel to Kennedy's nonprofit, Citizens Energy Corporation, which he created in 1979 to provide discounted home heating oil to low-income people in Massachusetts. The CITGO effort is part of Venezuela's campaign in the U.S. to put a smiley face on Chavez's iron-fisted rule.

In one TV ad about the fuel oil program, Kennedy praised CITGO and condemned U.S. oil companies and the U.S. government: "Some people say it's bad politics to do this. I say it's a crime against humanity not to because no one - no one - should be left out in the cold."

29 Comments | Add a Comment

What's it all about, Barry?

Posted by Chris Horner on 8.28.09 @ 5:35PM

Well, lookee here: EIA has updated the numbers, and U.S. CO2 emissions are plummeting. In 2008, they dropped all the way back down to about 2001 levels. So far through 2009, emissions are on track to drop even further - likely to 1999 levels.

We signed Kyoto in November 1998, notwithstanding media confusion about that in theri anti-Bush struggle.

Since then, emissions have turned around - and it's cooling. [So what if this GHG-emissions reduction was accomplished the old-fashioned (and only proven) way - economic recession, and not recession-inducing energy rationing that Kyoto favors and cap-and-trade denands?]

So, can we declare victory and call our "climate envoy" (really) home? Of course, this dangerous cooling -- at this rate it will kill us all! -- cooling started well before the decline in emissions...ahem...but I'm willing to eschew claiming that one caused the other, no matter how much traction the even more specious claims about emission increases driving temperature have in this context.

Or is it really necessary to "spread the wealth around" to those countries whose emissions are rapidly rising?

Ted Kennedy and Treason

Posted by Matthew Vadum on 8.28.09 @ 4:57PM

The late Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) was an incredibly powerful and influential politician whose impact on America will be felt forever but none of this changes the fact that he was a terrible person.

I feel for him in a way because he must have been tormented by all the tragedies in his family. All that pain and pressure surely got to him. This doesn't excuse his behavior. Plenty of other people have lived through hell without embracing recklessness as a lifestyle choice, but I understand how these devastating events must have twisted him.

May his tortured soul rest in peace.

With that said, why is hardly anybody talking about the credible allegations that the late senator may have committed a form of treason against the United States?

Connie Hair at Human Events spells it out in an article.

But Kennedy's private outreach to the KGB Soviet intelligence agency in attempts to undermine first President Jimmy Carter then President Ronald Reagan say as much as Chappaquiddick did about the man who appeared to have no moral restraints whatsoever on his personal pursuit of raw political power.

Documents found in Soviet archives after the fall of the Iron Curtain revealed a great deal about the character of Ted Kennedy. [...]

Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the London Times, found contemporaneous KGB documentation and published a story in February of 1992 of an additional communiqué by Ted Kennedy to the Soviet intelligence agency through Tunney. Full text of the letter from the appendix of Paul Kengor's book The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism can be found here.

This time it was President Reagan in Kennedy's crosshairs as he attempted to arrange a meeting between Kennedy and General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Yuri Andropov.

Without diminishing the death of Mary Jo Kopechne, I suspect the fact that Sen. Kennedy caused her death will ultimately be regarded by historians as one of his lesser offenses.

44 Comments | Add a Comment

Popular Temperature of Health Reform: Stable but Opposed

Posted by Doug Bandow on 8.28.09 @ 2:00PM

Rasmussen Reports tells us the current state of public opinion on health care--stable, but still opposed. Explains Rasmussen Reports:

As August winds down, the good news for President Obama and congressional Democrats is that support for their proposed health care legislation has stopped falling. The bad news is that most voters oppose the plan.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey show that 43% of voters nationwide favor the plan working its way through Congress while 53% are opposed. Those figures are virtually identical to results from two weeks ago.

As has been true since the debate began, those opposed to the congressional overhaul feel more strongly about the legislation than supporters. Forty-three percent (43%) now Strongly Oppose the legislation while 23% Strongly Favor it. Those figures, too, are similar to results from earlier in August.

9 Comments | Add a Comment

'One Derives a Foolproof Plan; the Universe Produces a Bigger Fool'

Posted by Robert Stacy McCain on 8.28.09 @ 1:31PM

About two weeks ago, Smitty -- a constitutional scholar who is co-blogger at my personal blog -- called me to suggest an idea that seemed insane. Which meant, of course, that I loved it.

As a student, Smitty had sometimes dabbled as an amateur playwright, and now proposed a satire. Seizing on the so-called "Birther" conspiracy theory of President Obama's allegedly unproven American nativity, Smitty explained his idea to write a spoof on Sophocles' classic tragedy, Oedipus Rex.

By one of those grandly ironic cosmic coincidences -- which progressive paranoiacs would attribute to "an orchestrated movement" -- the first scene of OediPOTUS Wrecks was scheduled for publication at noon Monday, and scarcely 12 hours later, the liberally lamented Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Chappaquiddick) departed this vale of tears. Thus, breaking news related rather tragically to a plot device of Smitty's farce, which involves a metaphorical allusion to the ancestry of OediPOTUS as just another liberal Democrat.

Today, Smitty published the fifth and final scene of OediPOTUS Wrecks, which includes this diabolic dialogue, spoken by the mysterious Rosor:

OediPOTUS, you ignorant slut. You have managed to destroy everything. One derives a foolproof plan; the universe produces a bigger fool.

It's a happy ending. Evil triumphs over evil, and Joe Bi . . . er, Folderol ascends to the throne.

Read the whole thing. The talented Smitty is already hard at work on his Beckett-inspired send-up of the "stimulus" economic absurdity, Waiting For O-Dough. And you probably think I'm kidding . . .

At Least One Mass Pol Won't Run for Kennedy's Seat

Posted by W. James Antle, III on 8.28.09 @ 12:04PM

Mitt Romney won't run for Senate again. "Gov. Romney's focus right now is on helping other Republicans run for office, and that is how he will be spending his time," spokesman Eric Fehnstrom told Politico. Romney's numbers in the state took a hit by the end of his term and he did not seek reelection in 2006, but they have rebounded somewhat during Deval Patrick's tenure. Of course, Romney is likely to make another run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012.

Climate Chains

Posted by Chris Horner on 8.28.09 @ 11:49AM

Check out this trailer for a new flick coming out just in time for the September Senate "cap-and-trade" dance.

I've spoken at the invitation of Members at a half a dozen or more town hall meetings, and a 4^th of July Tea Party in Philadelphia where cap-and-trade posters dominated, and I feel safe saying that the public is already tuned in to this outrage. From this short bit (featuring yours truly and several friends and colleagues I'm pleased to note), it seems that if as many people watch what's presented as hear Barbara Boxer et al's ,plaintive wails promoting their scheme, it won't be much of a fight though it certainly would further help clarify things for 2010 voters.

10 Comments | Add a Comment

Crist's Insult to Florida Voters

Posted by Quin Hillyer on 8.28.09 @ 11:45AM

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist has compounded the insult to Florida voters that U.S. Sen. Mel Martinez imposed on them by failing to fill out his term of office. For just about 16 months, Florida will be served by a caretaker senator. Okay, sometimes that happens. At the least, though, the caretake should be more than just a stalking horse for the governor who wants the seat. Crist's choice of this guy LeMieux clearly is more political than substantive. This is a guy who will do Crist's bidding first, rather than Florida's. If somebody is to be in the Senate for only 16 months, it should be somebody who can hit the ground running, somebody who already understands how the place works. LeMieux has no Washington experience, and no real experience of his own independent of being Crist's surrogate and deputy. He might be a fine fella, but it takes more than a fine fella to representa big state in the Senate with no transition period, no real orientation, and no experience. Crist should have chosen somebody like former U.S. Rep. Clay Shaw, a truly good man and solid public servant. In fact, Shaw may be one of the two or three most unfairly unappreciated congressmen, by the conservative movement, in the past several decades. It was Clay Shaw, more than any other individual, who finally put together the welfare reform package that passed Congress and became the single biggest achievement of the GOP's management of Congress and perhaps the single most successful major domestic policy bill of hte past forty years.

But I digress. Whether Shaw or somebody else, the choice should have been somebody who can take over the office without missing a beat. The Senate is a complicated institution. If it is to be served by a caretaker, it at least merits a caretaker who won't be lost in the hallways, confounded by the rules, and hobbled by the expectation that he is not his own man but the governor's man instead.

10 Comments | Add a Comment

Senator Michael Dukakis!

Posted by W. James Antle, III on 8.28.09 @ 11:30AM

At least on an interim basis, advises the Boston Globe in an editorial urging the legislature to go back to the pre-2004 succession law for Ted Kennedy's seat. But credit where it's due: the Globe called the change in the law five years ago a "naked effort to block former governor Romney from appointing a fellow Republican if Senator John Kerry were to win the presidency." At the time, the newspaper urged legislators to "scuttle this undeniably partisan bill."

Daily Must-Reads

Posted by Brian O'Connell on 8.28.09 @ 11:12AM

Despite the talk of a brutal coup in Honduras, interim President Micheletti offers to resign if ousted President Zelaya agrees not to seek power again (Washington Times)
Free room and board. LA county tries to crack down on the thousands of inmates living here illegally (LA Times)
GOP not shy about privately seeking stimulus money that it denounced publicly (Associated Press)
The not-very Golden State's economic woes continue as Toyota announces shutdown of Fremont plant (Bloomberg)

1 Comment | Add a Comment

Business Groups Push Back Against Cap and Tax

Posted by W. James Antle, III on 8.28.09 @ 10:24AM

The National Association of Manufactures (NAM) and the National Federation of Independent Business have gone up on the air with a multimillion dollar ad buy against the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade climate change bill. The initial phase of the campaign will be concentrated in Alaska, Arkansas, Indiana, Missouri, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, Ohio, Virginia, and West Virginia -- the states that would hardest hit and fit the politicla profile of the districts represented by the 44 Democrats who voted against Waxman-Markey in the House.

"Our message to senators is that the Waxman-Markey bill is an ‘anti-jobs, anti-energy' piece of legislation," said NAM Executive Vice President Jay Timmons in a statement. "It will shrink our nation's economy, make us less competitive with foreign countries, raise energy costs for consumers and businesses, take away disposable income for Americans and cause significant job loss." This campaign is larger than the comparable one launched by MoveOn.org and other liberal groups to advertise against Republicans who voted no on Waxman-Markey in the House.

Gawande and Friends

Posted by Greg Scandlen on 8.28.09 @ 9:50AM

Atul Gawande is back with another op-ed, but this one is co-authored with Don Berwick, Elliott Fisher, and Mark McClellanin the New York Times. His co-authors, all physicians, have done a good job in balancing his views. This time, the argument is not that we should all move to Rochester, MN and sign up for the Mayo Clinic. It is far more reasoned.

The authors say, “We have reached a sobering point in our national health-reform debate” in how to lower costs and expand coverage. “We have really discussed only two options: raising taxes or rationing care. The public is understandably alarmed.” They say we have to find a way to deliver care more effectively and less expensively, but “evidence that places like the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota or the Cleveland Clinic are doing it is likewise dismissed because their unique structures make them seem as far from Middle America as Sweden is.”

Well, thank you very much for acknowledging that Americans are justly apprehensive about what the social planners are up to.

In this article, the authors concede a lot. For instance, that Medicare data may not be representative of the entire population. More importantly, they look at ten different locations across the United States that seem to be doing a pretty good job. But each of these areas is doing it DIFFERENTLY. There is no one cookie cutter approach for everybody. They write, “In their own ways, each of these successful communities tells the same simple story: better, safer, lower-cost care is within reach.”

The one thing the authors fail to do is acknowledge that all of these areas are improving their systems under the payment system AS IT EXISTS TODAY! So, apparently massively changing the health financing system is NOT a prerequisite for outstanding care. Is it possible – just maybe – that what is needed is not some Washington-dictated massive health reform, but to allow and encourage innovation at the local level? As things are tried out locally, word spreads and other communities duplicate and improve on the model. That is how effective change usually comes about. Why not in health care?

I Got Killed For Ted Kennedy's Career? OMG--Awesome!

Posted by Shawn Macomber on 8.28.09 @ 9:41AM

Mark Hemingway unearths this demented bit from The Huffington Post, discovered under the unbelievable headline What Would Mary Jo Kopechne Have Thought of Ted's Career?:

We don't know how much Kennedy was affected by her death, or what she'd have thought about arguably being a catalyst for the most successful Senate career in history. What we don't know, as always, could fill a Metrodome.

Still, ignorance doesn't preclude a right to wonder. So it doesn't automatically make someone (aka, me) a Limbaugh-loving, aerial-wolf-hunting NRA troll for asking what Mary Jo Kopechne would have had to say about Ted's death, and what she'd have thought of the life and career that are being (rightfully) heralded.

Who knows—maybe she'd feel it was worth it.

Maybe! I know my personal dream has always been to be martyred for the sake of increasing the political power of a braying narcissist who somehow found a way to jeopardize his seat on the nepotism gravy train. That's cool right? What more can the little people hope for, really, than to play a small part in the Great Man drama around them?

Maybe Ted knew she'd think it was worth it. Maybe that's why he apparently got such a kick out of Chappaquiddick jokes!

Sen. Ted Kennedy's Final Hypocrisy

Posted by Doug Bandow on 8.28.09 @ 7:50AM

It's a curious spectable. The Left turns someone who left a young lady to die in a car accident into an icon. Then after some of us remember the bad as well as the good about the man's life and character, his groupies shout outrage. They might want to ponder just a minute the life that Mary Jo Kopechne might have led had she not died as a result of Sen. Kennedy's recklessness and negligence 40 Julys ago. As Stacy McCain observed:

When news broke that Ted Kennedy had died, many people had a reaction quite similar to my own: "Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment." It's an old line I'd used often over the years whenever Teddy made news. While I thought I'd stolen it from Ann Coulter, someone else said it actually originated more than two decades ago as a Chevy Chase punchline on Saturday Night Live.

Far more current is the political, rather than moral, scandal of the Senator's last public utterance: his hypocritical call for the selection of his replacement by the governor through appointment rather than by the people through special election. Even a few Democrats are uncomfortable with this rush to let the politicians substitute their preferences for that of the public--the very people who Sen. Kennedy and others supposedly spent their lives defending. Reports the Wall Street Journal:

The question of how to fill Mr. Kennedy's seat is vexing Democrats. In 2004, Mr. Kennedy supported a special election rather than a gubernatorial appointment. Yet more recently, he wrote to Mr. Patrick and legislative leaders, urging that Massachusetts give the governor the power to appoint an interim successor.

Mr. Kennedy wrote that the governor should receive "an explicit personal commitment" from the appointee not to become a candidate in the special election. Mr. Patrick has supported the idea, and brushes aside concerns that Democrats were being inconsistent: "Massachusetts needs two voices in the United States Senate," he said this week.

In 2004, Democrats took the opposite tack. When some Republicans complained of the cost of a special election, Democratic Rep. William Straus said such reasoning might have been used in a "totalitarian country" and that "one person, whoever happens to be governor, will not make the decision for you."

In an interview Thursday, Mr. Straus stood by his words, saying he recently heard from many other Democrats who feel Mr. Patrick is making a mistake.

Mr. Straus said there always will be a pressing issue in Washington that seems more important than having an election. "We need to hold ourselves to the higher principles of democracy," he said.

Massachusetts state Sen. Brian A. Joyce, a Democrat who headed the election-laws committee in 2004, agreed. "If we were to allow an appointment, it would be wholly undemocratic," he said. "When you cut through the rhetoric on both sides, it's pure partisan politics."

There's nothing new about politicians switching sides for rank political purposes. But the Senator's conduct should be kept in mind as the encomiums about his "principles" flow. Yes, he was an ideological liberal. But he also was a hypocritical pol little different than so many of his colleagues in Washington and Massachusetts. And his final public action was to push to strip his constituents of their right to decide on his successor.

"Obama's Plan to Desecrate 9/11" Article on The O'Reilly Factor

Posted by Matthew Vadum on 8.27.09 @ 11:44PM

My article "Obama's Plan to Desecrate 9/11" that ran in the Monday edition of TAS, was discussed on "The O'Reilly Factor" Thursday night by guest host Laura Ingraham and guest Alan Colmes.

Here is the video:

On his radio show Wednesday, Glenn Beck also discussed the article.

7 Comments | Add a Comment

Ted Kennedy and Career Politicians

Posted by David N. Bass on 8.27.09 @ 2:03PM

Much has been written about Edward M. Kennedy in the last 24 hours, most of it laudatory. Chappaquiddick is mentioned in passing by the MSM; the main focus, as it should be shortly after the death of any political public figure, is positive.

But more than remind me of Kennedy's stance on government-controlled health-care or big government, his passing brought to mind how many career politicians inhabit Washington right now -- and the big problems that it breeds.

Kennedy was sworn into the Senate in 1962. He served nine terms -- nearly half a century -- in that body. Robert Byrd has been in the Senate since 1959, making this year his half-century mark. The habit of pols getting and then keeping power until they expire is not peculiar to one party, either. Strom Thurmond, first elected to the Senate in 1954, was the only Senator to reach over 100 years old while still in office. That's to say nothing of the House members who have served 50 years or more.

Regardless of their party affiliation, something is amiss when a lawmaker serves half a century in the same office. Such entrenched incumbency can't help but breed corruption, in small ways if not in large. Ted Stevens is one example. The corrupt Republican served 40 years in the Senate before getting busted. We need fresh faces, often.

This standard applies to politicians who are more aligned with my own beliefs, too. Unfortunately, corruption is blind to party and ideological identity. It tends to follow concentrated power more than anything else. That's not to say that all long-serving lawmakers are self-serving, but it increases the temptation, and with it the likelihood.

19 Comments | Add a Comment

The Ted Kennedy Approach to Health Care

Posted by W. James Antle, III on 8.27.09 @ 11:57AM

Over on the main site, Jeffrey Lord argues that conservatives would not be honoring Ted Kennedy by letting the Democrats ram through a health care bill. Another point to consider is that this is not the approach Kennedy himself usually used in passing important legislation, especially on health care. He preferred to find at least a small number of Republicans in order to pass an incremental bill in a bipartisan way -- see Kennedy-Kassebaum and his partnership with Orrin Hatch on SCHIP.

That's not to say Ted Kennedy wouldn't have preferred the biggest-government health care plan possible, or even that his incremental pieces of legislation were good policy. But people talking about the Ted Kennedy way are ignoring a lot of what made him not just a liberal ideologue but also a successful legislator.

15 Comments | Add a Comment

Re: Conservative Leaders on Costly Lawsuits and Health Care Reform

Posted by Quin Hillyer on 8.27.09 @ 11:26AM

The conservative leaders' message on lawsuit reform is right on target. At the Washington Times, we editorialized about it today, because Howard Dean admitted the other night that the Democrats are the lackeys of the plaintiffs' bar. We hit the same topic on Aug. 23, Aug. 6, and July 1. This is important stuff.

Daily Must-Reads

Posted by Brian O'Connell on 8.27.09 @ 10:59AM

The border checkpoint to nowhere, Obama spends $15 million on a station in Montana that averages three people per day (Associated Press)
To some in Britain, Kennedy was a terrorist sympathizer (Telegraph.co.uk)
Saving lives in China through organ "donations," one executed prisoner at a time (BBC News)
It's good to have friends in high places, Richardson is off the hook in pay-to-play probe (FoxNews)

Conservative Leaders on Costly Lawsuits and Health Care Reform

8.27.09 @ 10:54AM

MEMO FOR THE MOVEMENT

RE: Costly lawsuit abuses drive up medical expenses and add billions of dollars to the cost of healthcare, but provide only marginal assistance to injured patients. Yet Congress refuses to address this problem or to make it part of meaningful healthcare reform. Concerned citizens need to raise the issue with Members of Congress and insist it be addressed in any health care reform legislation.

Requiescat In Pace.

It's Not As Catchy As Amnesty, Abortion and Acid, But...

Posted by Shawn Macomber on 8.27.09 @ 10:09AM

Frances Kissling wants to know why Catholics are so fixated on abortion when there's a hobby horse as hip and happening as Obamacare to ride.

26 Comments | Add a Comment

The End of Secularism

Posted by Hunter Baker on 8.27.09 @ 8:51AM

My new book, The End of Secularism, came out a few days ago. I doubt it would have been written had Wlady Pleszczynski not reached out to a young writer several years ago and given him a chance.

The book is a hard critique of secularism (defined as public life without God). In it, I demonstrate that secularism is not neutral, doesn't solve the problem of religious difference, and is not some kind of super rational public philosophy to trump all the rest. Along the way, I examine the politico-religious history of the west, the American founding, the so-called "war" between religion and science, and an underreported story of church-state mixing in Alabama I first wrote about for this web site in 2003. The Alabama story shows that secularists aren't principled. They applaud religious political action from the left and condemn it from the right.

If you have ever tired of hearing men like Robert Reich, Garry Wills, or the New Atheists act as though Christians pose some kind of existential threat to freedom, this is the book for you.

Thanks again to Wlady for giving me my first chance way back when.

13 Comments | Add a Comment

Why Did Sen. Kennedy Remain in the Senate Until his Death?

Posted by Doug Bandow on 8.27.09 @ 5:57AM

The papers are filled with stories on Sen. Ted Kennedy. Even the Washington Times devotes its entire front page to the "Liberal Lion."

Yet politics can't wait. Democrats are in a hurry to fill Sen. Kennedy's seat. That comes as no surprise in Washington. Whatever his colleagues in the Democratic caucus really think of him, they can count votes. And they want that 60th Democratic seat filled.

But would it be too churlish to note that the reason the seat is presently vacant is because Sen. Kennedy insisted on remaining in office until his death? He was diagnosed with brain cancer 15 months ago. Although he made a few celebrated public appearances, most dramatically at the Democratic National Convention, he has essentially been absent from the Senate, and his duties, for more than a year. If he, and his colleagues, had been truly concerned about maintaining representation for the people of Massachusetts, he could have quit months ago, allowing the special election to already have been run.

I'm not begrudging him his decision to hang on. He's not the first nor will he be the last legislator to do so. And the majority of his constituents probably supported his decision. But elected office is not personal property, something that is yours irrespective of circumstances. When your illness prevents you from carrying out the minimal duties of the office, and your diagnosis is terminal, shouldn't you resign?

I know, I know, it seems crass to ask. But I wouldn't bring it up had not Sen. Kennedy himself urged Massachusetts legislators to replace special election--the very "reform" he successfully advocated in 2004 to prevent then Gov. Mitt Romney from filling Sen. John Kerry's seat if Sen. Kerry had defeated George W. Bush in the presidential race--with gubernatorial appointment in the name of maintaining Senate representation for the people of Massachusetts. The hypocrisy is glaring, but not at all unusual in Washington. But the fact that Sen. Kennedy's actions are what deprived his constituents of representation at this time is unusual.

28 Comments | Add a Comment

Chinese Organ-Harvesters Lead the Way in Healthcare Cost Containment!

Posted by Matthew Vadum on 8.26.09 @ 9:00PM

China's on the cutting edge --literally-- of cost-containment in government healthcare systems.

That nation finally admitted it harvests the organs of executed prisoners and uses those organs for transplantation. The organs account for two-thirds of China's transplant organs.

Perhaps ObamaCare would actually work if America started doing the same thing.

Just trying to help.

17 Comments | Add a Comment

Solemn Respect for a Civil Rights Legacy

Posted by Robert Stacy McCain on 8.26.09 @ 6:39PM

A sincere liberal whose commitment to racial equality was pursued with courageous action. Today, of all days, appropriate respect must be paid.

"Mary Jo Kopechne wasn't a scion of one of American's wealthiest families; she was just a girl from an average, middle class family, whose idealism led her to Birmingham, Alabama, during the Civil Rights era . . . We'll never know, of course, what direction her life would have taken . . ."

30 Comments | Add a Comment

MoveOn Already Using Ted Kennedy's Death To Promote Government Healthcare Takeover

Posted by Matthew Vadum on 8.26.09 @ 3:03PM

Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) hasn't been dead for 24 hours yet MoveOn.org is already invoking his memory to press for the Sovietization of America's healthcare system.

I received the following in my email inbox a half hour ago:

Dear MoveOn member,

The Lion is at rest.

Senator Teddy Kennedy passed away last night and our movement lost a hero. His leadership, his vision, and his passion will never be forgotten.

As we grieve, we must honor his memory and re-dedicate ourselves to his fight. Right now, let's listen to his words. Below is a powerful video that lots of MoveOn members are passing around this morning:

[LINK TO VIDEO OF KENNEDY SPEECH ON MOVEON WEBSITE]

Tonight, please light a candle in your window to memorialize him.

Tomorrow, as Senator Kennedy said, "...the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."

Tomorrow, let's re-commit ourselves to achieving the thing that mattered most to him: Quality, affordable health care for every single American.

Thank you for all you do. –Justin, Adam, Amy, Anna, Annie, Carrie, Christopher, Daniel, Danielle, Eli, Emily, Gail, Ian, Ilya, Ilyse, Joan, Jodeen, Julie, Kat, Keauna, Laura, Lenore, Marika, Matt E., Matt S., Matthew, Melanie, Michael, Nita, Noah, Peter, Sasha, Scott, Stephen, Steven, Susannah, Wes, and the entire MoveOn team

------------------ PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. [...]

18 Comments | Add a Comment

A Fitting Memorial . . .

Posted by Robert Stacy McCain on 8.26.09 @ 1:22PM

. . . to a Democrat who worked tirelessly to advance the progressive cause of social justice. On this day, every patriotic American should mourn the death of a liberal activist who diligently labored to continue the Kennedy family's noble legacy of public service.

Until the day she died in 1969.

41 Comments | Add a Comment

Daily Must-Reads

Posted by Brian O'Connell on 8.26.09 @ 12:45PM

$219,000 of federal stimulus money being used to study the sexual habits of college students (Syracuse Daily Post)
Did $780,000 fall under the sofa? Rangel fails to report money in disclosure form (New York Post)
Asian SAT takers on average beat white students by 51 points on Math section. Will there need to be affirmative action for white people? (Wall Street Journal)
President Obama: Kennedy "Greatest senator of our time" (Washington Times)

Department of Corrections

Posted by W. James Antle, III on 8.26.09 @ 11:51AM

A statement by Congressman George Miller (D-Calif.) on Senator Kennedy's passing contained this slip-up: "At the core of everything Senator Kennedy fought for was a profound sense of injustice."

It has been corrected.

Ted Kennedy & Deregulation

Posted by John Tabin on 8.26.09 @ 11:47AM

Nick Gillespie finds something nice to say:

There is, buried deep within Kennedy's legislative legacy, a different set of policies worth exhuming and examining, precisely because they were truly a break with the normal way of doing business in Washington. During the 1970s, Kennedy was instrumental in deregulating the interstate trucking industry and airline ticket prices, two innovations that have vastly improved the quality of life in America even as-or more precisely, because-they pushed power out of D.C. and into the pocketbooks of everyday Americans. We are incalculably richer and better off because something like actual prices replaced regulatory fiat in trucking and flying. Because they do not fit the Ted Kennedy narrative preferred by his admirers and detractors alike, these accomplishments rarely get mentioned in stories about the late senator. But they are exactly the sort of legislation that we should be celebrating in his honor, and using as a model in today's debates about health care, education, and virtually every aspect of government action.

Edward Moore Kennedy

Posted by Quin Hillyer on 8.26.09 @ 9:53AM

Decent people do not take potshots at others (unless the other is a Hitler or Stalin) in the 24 hours of the other's death. I have never, literally never, written any good words about Ted Kennedy. But there was one time when I was impressed and in a weird way inspired by him. At the Democratic convention last year, when he willed himself out of the hospital, in a terribly weakened condition, to make what truly was a superbly written and even, despite his ailments, a well delivered speech in support of the man, Obama, who WOULD NOT have been about to be the nominee without Kennedy's support, Kennedy's speech -- with its deliberate echoes of his 1980 convention speech, "the dream shall never die" -- was a triumph of courage and commitment. Sitting in the convention hall covering it for the Washington Examiner, I literally got chill-bumps. In terms of valiance, it was like seeing Willis Reed hobble onto the court in the NBA finals against the Lakers, only to an even greater Nth degree.

In a reckless life spent pursuing the wrong goals through wrong and often vicious means, it was a magnificent moment of grace.

53 Comments | Add a Comment

Henry Waxman: Let's Not Make a Deal!

Posted by Doug Bandow on 8.26.09 @ 7:51AM

The pharmaceutical industry believes that it has bought itself protection by supporting the Obama health care plan, but House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman begs to differ. Reports the New York Times:

As the health care debate focuses on whether cost cuts are looming in Medicare coverage, Representative Henry A. Waxman is on a crusade to save Medicare billions of dollars - in a way that he says would end up helping the elderly.

That is because the money would come from the drug industry, which is why Mr. Waxman may have a fight on his hands.

Drug makers contend they have already worked out a 10-year, $80 billion cost-savings deal with the White House and crucial Senate gatekeepers on the trillion-dollar health care overhaul. The industry says that trying to add Mr. Waxman's provision could scuttle that agreement.

"You not only break the deal, but you break the bank for us," said Billy Tauzin, chief executive of the drug industry's trade group, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, known as PhRMA.

At issue is a multibillion-dollar "windfall" that Mr. Waxman contends the drug industry received when drug benefits were added to Medicare coverage in 2006. Mr. Waxman, Democrat of California, is chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and is central to the House's legislative efforts on health care.

Does the pharmaceutical industry really believe that the deal would survive conference committee, in which Rep. Waxman will play an influential role? And if the drugmakers get double-crossed, do they really believe the administration would raise a finger to save them? Not likely.

In fact, a lot of Democrats might be persuaded by Rep. Waxman's arguments. Concludes the Times:

"We don't have any deal with them, and the whole enterprise of doing health insurance for all Americans isn't to make the drug companies happy, or wealthier," Mr. Waxman said. "They're going to make a lot of money when we insure all Americans. There's no argument for them to get a windfall."

Reports the Detroit Free Press:

Safety Valve for American Patients?

Posted by Doug Bandow on 8.26.09 @ 4:20AM

The U.S. acts as a safety valve for Canada when it can't provide adequate health care for its citizens. If Congress nationalizes the American system, who will act as a safety valve for us?

Hospitals in border cities, including Detroit, are forging lucrative arrangements with Canadian health agencies to provide care not widely available across the border.

Agreements between Detroit hospitals and the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care for heart, imaging tests, bariatric and other services provide access to some services not immediately available in the province, said ministry spokesman David Jensen.

The agreements show how a country with a national care system -- a proposal not part of the health care changes under discussion in Congress -- copes with demand for care with U.S. partnerships, rather than building new facilities.

Michael Vujovich, 61, of Windsor was taken to Detroit's Henry Ford Hospital for an angioplasty procedure after he went to a Windsor hospital in April. Vujovich said the U.S. backup doesn't show a gap in Canada's system, but shows how it works.

"I go to the hospital in Windsor and two hours later, I'm done having angioplasty in Detroit," he said. His $38,000 bill was covered by the Ontario health ministry.

If President Barack Obama succeeds in extending government control over American medicine, sick Canadians may be just as disappointed as American patients!

11 Comments | Add a Comment

Edward M. Kennedy, RIP

Posted by Doug Bandow on 8.26.09 @ 2:36AM

Sen. Ted Kennedy has died of brain cancer at age 77.

There is much to criticize in his career, particularly leaving Mary Jo Kopechne to die after the auto accident on Chappaquiddick Island in July 1969. The ensuing cover-up kept him out of jail and preserved his Senatorial career, but effectively ended his presidential hopes. Even in the twilight of his career he failed to take responsibility for his actions, which tragically and unnecessarily ended another life. The result is an indelible stain on his legacy, which should disturb even liberals, whose cause he so effectively (and unfortunately) championed.

But today our thoughts and prayers should go out to his family. Edward M. Kennedy, RIP.

Update: Jim beat me to the punch, posting while I was writing. He is right about the complexity of Sen. Kennedy's character. It is tragic that someone who could do good had such tragic flaws.

12 Comments | Add a Comment

Ted Kennedy, RIP

Posted by W. James Antle, III on 8.26.09 @ 2:29AM

I am from Massachusetts. I am a conservative. So I understand the reaction to Ted Kennedy's death from brain cancer at age 77 on both levels. I hope to have more to say about this later, but for now I'll say this: Ted Kennedy is beloved and earned the love of those who admire him. Ted Kennedy was hated and while I can't say anyone deserves hatred, he certainly earned that too. He stood for many things with which I disagree and his irresponsible behavior led to a young woman's death, without him ever paying the price. Yet he was also generous to those in need both with public funds and his personal commitment to children who lost too many fathers. Both stories ought to be told.

31 Comments | Add a Comment

Arguing With Doctor Zero

Posted by Robert Stacy McCain on 8.25.09 @ 7:39PM

"Doctor Zero" is one of the most articulate contributors to the Green Room group blog at Michelle Malkin's Hot Air site. Referring to the uproar over the Justice Department report on alleged Bush-era CIA abuses, Doctor Zero writes today:

Apparently Obama and his accomplices decided to distract their liberal base from the fiery Hindenburg crash of socialized medicine, by offering them a relaxing cruise on the Titanic of leftist foreign policy. . . .
A weary public allowed itself to be badgered into electing the first black president, after they ran out of patience waiting for John McCain to explain why they shouldn't. Normal people don't define their relationship with the government by taking pleasure in the humiliation of political figures they dislike. We're six months past the point where American voters can be kept quiet by suffocating them with the pillow of Bush hatred.

OK, so far, so good. One of Bill Clinton's most insightful mantras was that successful politics is always forward-looking. A politics that spends its time arguing over the past is, by definition, a losing proposition. So the attempt of the Obama administration and its allies to score points by discrediting post-9/11 counterterrorism policy is a guaranteed loser, politically.

However, having made that valid point, Doctor Zero then adds:

We're about a month past the point where anyone capable of independent thought believes Obama is a better president than Bush was.

This is a bad argument, setting up an unnecessary comparison which does nothing to bolster the opposition to Obama. Furthermore, one can easily argue that George W. Bush was a very bad president and that one of the worst aspects of his presidency was that Bush confused people about the meaning of "conservatism" in a way that damaged the Republican Party and made possible Obama's election.

In this regard, I am fond of quoting our publisher, Al Regnery, who told me last year in an interview:

"You look back in the earlier times, there were no opportunities, so there were no opportunists," Regnery says, noting how liberals heaped abusive epithets on Buckley, Goldwater, and other early conservative leaders. "Later on, you have all these people who figure it's probably a pretty good political thing to do. And so they start talking about being conservative when they're running [for office], but they really aren't. So when they get to Congress or wherever they go, they're pretty easily dissuaded."

Insofar as the Obama administration is a political failure, that failure will damage the Democratic Party and the progressive cause with which Democrats are identified. Whatever harm to the national interest is inflicted by that failure, it is a harm for which Obama's opponents cannot be blamed.

If we believe that the success of conservatism is synonymous with the good of the nation -- as every conservative certainly ought to believe -- then the damage to the reputation of conservatism for which the Bush administration was responsible is, ultimately, more harmful than whatever short-term damage to the nation Obama's (hopefully brief) misrule may cause.

We ought not engage in a backward-looking politics, but we should study and benefit from the lessons of failures past. It must be recognized the extent to which the Bush administration was a failure, or we risk further damage from future repetitions.

17 Comments | Add a Comment

Monorail, monorail!

Posted by Chris Horner on 8.25.09 @ 6:52PM

Two stories Tuesday caught my eye and demand a quick refresher of the absurdity of the rhetoric - presently on the ascendancy - promoting the "green jobs" boondoggles. First came E&E Daily's contribution (subscription required):

RENEWABLE ENERGY: Favorable political winds blow E.U. turbine producers to the U.S.

COPENHAGEN -- It was a scene familiar to many a Western labor activist: manufacturing workers in a developed country protesting in vain the outsourcing of their jobs overseas. Earlier this month, workers barricaded themselves in Vestas Wind Systems' wind turbine blade factory on Britain's Isle of Wight to try to convince the company not to shut down the plant, dismiss 425 workers and move production to another country.

Ahem, move to another country? So those "jobs that can't be exported" are in fact exported once a country has polluted its landscape with the contraptions, packing up the carnival tents and moving on to the next town (Lyle Lanley and Ogdenville ring any bells?) The only ones that cannot be exported are the temporary installation contracts that Dr. Gabriel Calzada exposed as being created at a fraction of the pace and at more than twice the cost of the real jobs are destroyed by these schemes, and which are "bubble" jobs requiring constant and increased infusions of taxpayer money into the bubble simply to sustain.

Altogether now, Monorail, monorail...

Then, from the New York Times, "China Racing Ahead of U.S. in the Drive to Go Solar", on the heels of a few similar stories about their aggressive entry into manufacturing "renewables". It opens:

WUXI, China - President Obama wants to make the United States "the world's leading exporter of renewable energy," but in his seven months in office, it is China that has stepped on the gas in an effort to become the dominant player in green energy - especially in solar power, and even in the United States."

Good grief, people. This is one of the silliest narratives imaginable supposedly in support of these schemes, that, well, even China is racing to the renewables bandwagon. If the Middle Kingdom is planning to become leader in renewables so you know it's a money-maker!

Beyond childish. Please note the co-incidence with Obama coming into office when noting this translation: they see you coming. Not only have the Chinese stopped from being coal exporters to major importers, with a billion people suddenly moving from poverty into the mid-20th century they need every electron they can produce. That doesn't suddenly make renewable electricity reliable, any more than a guy crawling out of a desert who agrees to drink a Clamato after finishing the glass of water he's handed proves Clamato's poised to take over the beverage market. It proves it's a supplement when you need all you can get.

But more insidious is this rather forced ignorance of the simple fact that your policymakers are behaving absurdly, with your money jobs and economy, and the Chinese are taking advantage of it. I will speak slowly so the journalists can pick this up: rich countries have promised to spend hundreds and hundreds of billions of taxpayer (involuntary) dollars on the things, mandating them even.

Of course China's going to sit at that trough: it's guaranteed money for heaven's sake! Soemtimes at a 500% guaranteed return. While we're on this "teaching moment" I might as well point out that the mob has also gotten into the windmill business in Europe. Why? It's guaranteed rent and there's no business better than guaranteed business.

Oh. But with one hitch. As in Spain, governments do find out they run out of other people's money, unwisely spent. Until then, don't be surprised that China will take advantage of certain political leaders' vanity. But please stop insulting our intelligence.

Will Rudy Run?

Posted by W. James Antle, III on 8.25.09 @ 2:12PM

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani spent almost a year atop national polls of registered Republicans but as 2007 turned into 2008, his presidential campaign imploded. Now he is taking a serious look at running for governor of New York. Giuliani would be the favorite against the Democratic incumbent, David Paterson, but there is a strong possibility that Andrew Cuomo or another Democrat will get to Paterson first. It will be interesting to see whether Giuliani's 2008 presidential campaign has much impact on his standing in New York and whether he has to move to the left again on some social issues where he crept ever so slightly rightward on the national scene.

15 Comments | Add a Comment

On Holder and the CIA

Posted by Quin Hillyer on 8.25.09 @ 1:51PM

Leon Panetta, a good man (albeit too liberal) serving a bad administration, really ought to resign. And Eric Holder, a very bad man proving himself even worse than was expected, ought to be hounded out of office. Panetta's resignation should be in protest, of course, of Holder's decision to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate CIA interrogation methcds despite explicit promises not to do so. Panetta clearly is on the outs with this outrageous administration anyway, so he ought to go down ina blaze of glory, over a matter of principle rather than hanging on to provide cover to these thugs and Alinskyites.

As for Holder, the man is a menace to this nation. He helps secure pardons for rich, awful cretins like Marc Rich, and for murderous Puerto Rican terrorists. He promises not to do "midnight raids" to steal Elian Gonzalez from his family, then justified breaking his pledge by saying it was "almost dawn." He refuses to prosecute New Black Panthers for voter intimidation and then sends out his flacks to lie about who made the decision. He calls the United States a "nation of cowards." He goes back on his word on numerous fronts, catalyzing Republicans who voted to confirm him to rake him over the coals in committee hearings because of his rank dishonesty. He promises to honor the Office of Legal Counsel, but instead overrides its considered legal opinion at the first opportunity. And so on, ad infinitum. Now he endangers the country and breaks his word again by appointing this special prosecutor, putting a terrible chilling effect on CIA operatives worldwide who now KNOW that Washington does not have their backs even when they have already been assured otherwise.

I repeat: Eric Holder is a menace to this nation. He is a bad man, a bad human being. And the president who stands by him is, by doing so, completely complicit in his perfidy.

16 Comments | Add a Comment

Comparing 24 to Life

Posted by W. James Antle, III on 8.25.09 @ 1:23PM

I understand what Jonah Goldberg is getting at here -- that despite the controversies about torture allegations, popular culture suggests that most Americans don't instinctively mind rough stuff being done to bad guys. But there are some important qualifications here. In a TV show or movie, the audience "knows" to a moral certainty that the person being dealt with harshly is guilty. And the audience usually "knows" that the torture is preventing some forseeable evil. Neither of those things are always known in the real world.

9 Comments | Add a Comment

Debatable Points Are "Myths"

Posted by W. James Antle, III on 8.25.09 @ 10:36AM

Well waddya know? A majority of Americans believe "myths" about health care reform. The story frequently puts the word "myth" in scare quotes and is careful to qualify it as "assertions the White House has called myths" and arguments that are "considered a myth by the White House." As well they should, because many of them are just debatable points. They should have gone one better and quoted experts arguing that the some of these myths have at least some factual basis.

For example, I've argued at length (both in the post itself and in the comments thread) that if the final health care bill does not expressly prohibit taxpayer funding of abortion, it will fund abortions over time. This is acknowleged by some Democratic supporters of the bill and is implicit in the one amendment to clear a major House committee that even nominally restricts the flow of taxpayer funds to abortion.

The House bill sets up funding streams that are not clearly covered by the Hyde Amendment. It is not subject to the same restrictions as abortion coverage for federal civilian employees or military personnel. The distinction between taxpayer funds and government-collected premiums that the "myth" claim hangs upon is at the very least debatable. And the Senate bill is less cagy about abortion than the House bill.

Most of the "myths" are similar -- they describe debatable effects of the health care bill. And in some cases, I think the facts are more clearly on the side of the supposed "myth" makers. I was recently on a radio talk show where the liberal guests were in high dugeon over people calling Obamacare a "federal government takeover of health care." But this is at worst a hyperbolic claim. By creating a public option, imposing an individual mandate, expanding regulations of who and what insurers must cover, expanding Medicaid, and offering new subsidies, this approach to health care reform at the very least enlarges the federal government's role in health care. Would straight single payer not qualify as a "federal government takeover" because there are even more socialistic approaches?

Myths, they explained.

Daily Must-Reads

Posted by Brian O'Connell on 8.25.09 @ 10:29AM

Apparently a job well done, Bernanke gets second term (FoxNews)
Cooking the books: former CBO Budget Director says we're way worse than Obama's predicted $1.58 trillion deficit (Washington Examiner)
Washington Post: Obama administration needs to call out Chavez for illegally supporting FARC.
Is the public option not cool? Young Obama backers are largely absent from healthcare debate (Associated Press)

Reports the New York Times:

President George W. Ma Meets Typhoon Katrina

Posted by Doug Bandow on 8.25.09 @ 7:05AM

Taiwan's President Ma ying-jeou met Typhoon Morakot and seems to have channeled U.S. President George W. Bush and Hurricane Katrina.

Flags are flying at half-staff during three days of national mourning to honor those killed by Typhoon Morakot two weeks ago. But anger, not sadness, remains the prevailing sentiment across Taiwan as President Ma Ying-jeou grapples with his worst political crisis since taking office last year.

Despite repeated apologies for a slow response to the storm - which left at least 650 people dead or missing after record rain caused huge landslides - Mr. Ma has been kept busy warding off the skeptical news media and his political opponents, and calming furious survivors.

"The government is sorry," Mr. Ma said Saturday. "It failed to fulfill its responsibility to protect you."

Political analysts and even Mr. Ma's allies in the governing Nationalist Party worry that Typhoon Morakot could become his "Katrina moment," a blot on his legacy and perhaps an irreversible turning point just 15 months into his administration. But while the post-Morakot posturing makes for great political theater in Taiwan, the outside world is watching to see whether the episode will affect Mr. Ma's efforts to bring Taiwan closer to China.

The issue clearly is hurting President Ma and lifting the Democratic Progressive Party which, much like the Republican Party in America, has recently suffered devastating electoral losses. The issue also might end up affecting China-Taiwan relations, which President Ma was pushing to improve more rapidly than many Taiwanese thought prudent.

Such are the unpredictable political impacts of weather around the globe.

Reports the Washington Post:

Now the Auto Industry is Worried About Clunkers

Posted by Doug Bandow on 8.25.09 @ 6:45AM

Duh. After fleecing the taxpayers of $3 billion in the form of "Cash for Clunkers," the auto industry has woken up to ugly reality: the program likely accelerated rather than increased sales. After the bout of binge drinking comes the hangover.

Many auto industry analysts and dealers expect sales volumes to fall now that the program is over. They worry that many people who took advantage of the program were merely accelerating purchases they would have made later in the year.

If that's true, the premature sales could hurt automakers, which increased production in the third quarter to replenish clunker-depleted inventories that had already grown low because of factory shutdowns over the summer.

Because there's a lag time between production and getting a vehicle to a dealership, the new vehicles "will hit when there's a lower demand," said Jeff Schuster, executive director of forecasting at the auto industry research firm J.D. Power and associates.

"There might not be as many people to buy because they bought during the clunker program," he said. "And if at the same time there's less of an incentive program from carmakers, you could have fewer people buying. That could stall the recovery we're in."

Jeremy Anwyl, chief executive of Edmunds.com, another automotive research group, agreed.

" 'Cash for Clunkers' created a nice little blip," he said. "We'll look back and say, 'Nice party, but the hangover is awful.' "

Suckers!

10 Comments | Add a Comment

We Do Not Exist To Serve The State

Posted by Matthew Vadum on 8.25.09 @ 5:30AM

The whole idea of a National Day of Service on Sept. 11, whether voluntary or not and regardless of who is promoting the idea, ought to make advocates of limited government jittery. I mean, aren't taxes, by which the productive subsidize the nonproductive, enough? How much more service to the government is needed? Where does it end? It reminds me of something that Michelle Obama, in her unintentional imitation of Evita Peron last year, said.

Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you…move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed.

It turns out the First Lady might have meant it. This all reminds me of the Reich Labor Service, a program instituted to help "green" the Third Reich. The members of the Reich Labor Service appeared prominently in the classic Nazi propaganda film, Triumph of the Will, (I had to watch it in college) bearing shovels in place of rifles.

Throughout this post are some screen grabs from the Leni Riefenstahl film that are worth pondering as we're urged to plant community gardens and organize welfare recipients on Sept. 11. I know this blog post will be misrepresented by liberals (and maybe a few conservatives) so for the record, I don't think President Obama is intent on turning America into Nazi Germany but he is clearly an advocate of virtually unlimited government. The concept of national service as a duty generally does not gain a foothold in free countries nowadays. Note how many countries in socialist Europe require military service. President Obama has definite Fascist (i.e. corporatist) tendencies in his economic policies, though, as did President Bush in the closing months of his presidency when he got nervous about his legacy and took leave of his senses. (Of course, I am assuming the circumstances made President Bush a corporatist. Perhaps he was one all along.) Apparently, as a commenter at the American Spectator website just noted, President Bush also urged Americans to do community service. The linked Bush administration press release doesn't, however, say to do it on Sept. 11 specifically and, unlike the Obama administration, doesn't seem to put the power (for lack of a better word) of 9/11 to work promoting a particular political party or ideology. Nor does it try to suck all the meaning out of 9/11.

So, to the commenter I can only reply: Nice try. A National Day of Service (which isn't actually referenced in the Bush document) is a creepy idea no matter who is advancing it. We do not exist to serve the state. Politicians of both parties nowadays, though especially the Democrats, don't seem to understand this.

65 Comments | Add a Comment

Reconciliation, and Civil Unrest

Posted by Quin Hillyer on 8.24.09 @ 4:56PM

Despite what Phil has been reporting -- and Phil's analysis has been spot on, but this is a new wrinkle -- the Huffington Post features a piece saying that the entire health care bill might be pushed through in one fell swoop, without being subject to a filibuster, in a form of legislative hardball almost never seen even in the oft-harsh realms of Congress. In short, no matter what the public says, and no matter what the normal rules are, the Dem leadership and the White House would force an unpopular health bill down the throats of the people.

A prediction: If they do so, it will lead to major civil unrest. And the anger itself, even if not the unrest, will be more than justified.

The problem is that, if Obama controls the levers of state power, civil unrest merely plays into his hands because he has the guns to beat it down. From his bible, Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals (dedicated to "the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history... the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer”), we learn this: "The first step in community organization is community disorganization. The disruption of the present organization is the first step toward community organization. Present arrangements must be disorganized if they are to be displace by new patterns.... All change means disorganization of the old and organization of the new." p.116 And this: ""An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent."

The battle, then, is to defeat the effort to nationalize health care by winning enough moderate congressmen to the good side, the side that opposes Obamacare -- so that this one-step ram-through will be defeated. Because once it is imposed, almost ANY reaction will play right into Obama's hands. The goal is to keep him from winning on the front end, keeping in mind the moderates who must be convinced, because once opponents have lost, they wll have lost forever. Civil unrest cannot succeed. Obama has the guns, the power of the Leviathan state. He merely seeks an excuse to use them.

32 Comments | Add a Comment

Paul Krugman Clears Throat, New York Times Publishes Phlegm

Posted by W. James Antle, III on 8.24.09 @ 4:10PM

Paul Krugman's bizarre screed attacking "Reaganism" is an embarrassingly shoddy partisan hatchet job. If Krugman wants to argue that most people would be better off if we returned the marginal tax rates, regulatory levels, and inflation rates that preceded Ronald Reagan, that would at least be interesting. But "Reaganism" just turns out to be the word he shouts repeatedly in a disjointed temper tantrum over the fact that some people disagree with the health care "public option."

Regarding income growth since Reagan, Krugman claims, "Moreover, most of whatever gains ordinary Americans achieved came during the Clinton years." Then he turns and argues that "politicians in the thrall of Reaganite ideology dismantled the New Deal regulations that had prevented banking crises for half a century, believing that financial markets could take care of themselves."

But the politician in "thrall of Reaganite ideology" who signed into law a partial repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act was Bill Clinton, through the bipartisan Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. One of the Democratic senators who originally voted for it was Joe Biden. The previous major provision to be repealed was Regulation Q, in 1980 before Reagan was even elected. Personally, I think there are arguments on both sides of this issue. On the one hand, the legislation did create a moral hazard. On the other, the deregulated and more diversified banks weren't the biggest contributors to the financial crisis. Either way, however, it isn't the simple red team versus blue team morality tale Krugman makes it out to be.

Second, where was the "anti-government fundamentalism" of George W. Bush? He presided over an increase in defense spending, an increase in non-defense discretionary spending, created the biggest new entitlement since LBJ in the form of the Medicare prescription drug benefit, and signed the $700 billion TARP bailout Krugman tells us in the next few paragraphs "averted" a total financial "collapse." Bush increased

Even Reagan, God love him for his tax cuts, disinflation, and deregulation, wasn't exactly an anti-government fundamentalist. His reductions in the cost of the federal government as a percentage of GDP were minor, he ended up adding a new Cabinet-level department rather than abolishing two as he set out to do, and Reagan actually signed the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act into law in 1988 -- an expansion of a "public option" that proved such a disaster it was swiftly repealed in early 1989.

Finally, Krugman can't be bothered to accurately summarize the arguments of those who oppose the public option. Never mind whether it can truly be called fair competition when the referee decides to enter the game as a competitor -- for example, the public option will be able to force health care providers to accept much lower levels of reimbursement than the private insurers. The argument isn't that people will necessarily abandon their private coverage en masse for the public option -- it is that employers offering private insurance will have an incentive to dump their employees onto the public plan. Even a skeptic of the unfettered free market can see how that doesn't reflect competition and free choice.

11 Comments | Add a Comment

Pat Toomey's Sestak Strategy

Posted by W. James Antle, III on 8.24.09 @ 1:31PM

In the Pennsylvania Senate race, Republican Pat Toomey is clearly positioning himself to run against either Arlen Specter or Joe Sestak, rather than taking any particular Democratic primary outcome for granted. But Toomey is also cleverly using Sestak against Specter.

On Friday, Toomey accepted the Sestak campaign's invitation to participiate in a joint health care town hall meeting. "I eagerly accept Congressman Sestak's gracious invitation, and look forward to our respective campaigns working out the logistics over the next couple of days," Toomey said in a statement. "I'm happy to welcome Joe to the great city of Allentown and I'd extend to him an invitation to share a beer with me at one of our fine local establishments after the town hall meeting."

Toomey continues: "While I look forward to a substantive debate about honest differences with Congressman Sestak, I wish such an exchange was possible with Arlen Specter. Unfortunately, with Senator Specter, one never knows which Arlen Specter will show up-the May 2009 version who opposed a public health care option, or the August 2009 version who ardently supports it."

The implication is clear: Toomey is portraying Sestak as an honest liberal with whom he has philosophical and policy disagreements, in contrast with Specter the party-switching, inconsistent opportunist. It leaves Toomey open to running an ideological campaign against Sestak while making a Specter-Toomey matchup about the incumbent's reliability and desire for power.

Prison Rec, Bernie Madoff Style

Posted by Shawn Macomber on 8.24.09 @ 12:44PM

Okay, this New York Post story gets pretty crazy in its second half:

Meanwhile, a bare-chested Bernie has been killing time at the prison participating in Native American religious purification ceremonies held at an on-grounds "sweat lodge," other sources said. He accepted invitations from Native American inmates to join them at their weekly prayer services. The ceremonies involve praying, using heated rocks to induce sweat and smoking from a ceremonial pipe.

It is unclear whether the 71-year-old Madoff checked out the ceremony because of health reasons. For centuries, Native Americans have used sweat lodges to help detoxify the body mentally, spiritually and physically. Inmates who participate are usually shirtless, and Madoff was no exception earlier this month during the first ceremony he attended, according to the prisoners.

Madoff is also making new friends at the prison complex through another unlikely clique -- the homosexual posse, although the relationships are purely platonic, according to the sources. "In prison, you stick to your own kind, but he's doing the exact opposite by hanging with the Indians and [homosexuals] -- so who is going to have his back?" wondered one jailbird.

Another inmate said various "gangs" at the prison are trying to recruit Bernie to their crews. Some prisoners are also bending over backward trying to satisfy his hearty appetite by regularly cooking sandwich wraps for him back at their cells. "They're trying to kiss his butt," said one source.

Gay posse frolicking, home(cell) cooked wraps, heat rock massages, shirtless tokes on the ceremonial peace pipe—it sounds like Madoff got out of this whole debacle better than many of his victims! It almost makes me want to start my own Ponzi scheme! (Almost!)

A Rose By That Other Name?

Posted by Shawn Macomber on 8.24.09 @ 12:05PM

A liberal love story.

Daily Must-Reads

Posted by Brian O'Connell on 8.24.09 @ 10:57AM

A black day for free speech; UK government organizations are banning everyday "racist" phrases (TimesOnline)
Playing a bad hand. Senator Reid's unpopularity keeping son's gubernatorial campaign from being competitive (Las Vegas Review Journal)
Dissent is no longer patriotic for 25,000 liberal Whole Foods customers (Washington Times)
Venezuelan police teargas thousands of protesters upset at socialist teachings in schools (BBC)

Harry Reid: Still in Trouble

Posted by W. James Antle, III on 8.24.09 @ 10:41AM

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has looked vulnerable in the polls for months. Now a new Mason-Dixon poll shows him trailing two Republican challengers. Danny Tarkanian, a former basketball player at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas, would beat Reid by 11 points and is just shy of the 50 percent mark. The race is closer against state GOP chairwoman Sue Lowden, who leads Reid by 45 percent to 40 percent.

John Ensign, Nevada's Republican junior senator and the man who nearly unseated Reid in 1998, doesn't fare much better in the poll. Thirty-seven percent of voters said they planned to vote against him and 23 percent said they'd consider backing a challenger, compared to 30 percent who intend to vote for him in 2012. Ensign has recently admitted to an extramarital affair with a former staffer, but these numbers also suggest that Republicans are benefiting from an anti-incumbent mood rather than a sustained revival of their own party brand.

The King of Boston

Posted by Joseph Lawler on 8.24.09 @ 9:59AM

Sunday's Boston Globe had an interesting profile of Boston mayor Thomas Menino and his governing strategy. This strategy could be described as "hands-on," as in the article, or more simply as tyrannical. A representative sample:

[Menino] said he wants the flexibility and discretion to govern Boston’s diverse and changing neighborhoods as he sees fit.

“If you have hard-and-fast rules,’’ he said, “it’s not going to work.’’

It's amazing that city politics allow people like Menino not only to grasp so much power, but also to revel openly in it in the press.

Luntz: Anger Not Fake

Posted by Paul Chesser on 8.24.09 @ 9:38AM

The Southern Governors Association got together over the weekend to talk mostly about climate and energy, but they also dedicated a little time to discuss health care and invited pollster Frank Luntz to explain the pulse of the nation. He debunked any notion that "astroturfing" is behind the anger-filled townhalls. From The Virginian-Pilot:

"The public is mad," [Luntz] said. "It's not fake.... People spit on me when I do focus groups, and it's not because they don't like me. They're really angry."

Ironically, he said, a majority of those polled say they are satisfied with their own health care. He suggested that the public anger springs from a more generalized dissatisfaction with the way things are going in America - with the sputtering economy at the top of the list.

"Only 34 percent of Americans believe their kids will be better off than them," he said. "If you want to understand what this economy has done, this is what it has done to people...."

"Nobody trusts government," he said. "More people believe in the existence of UFOs than believe that Social Security will still exist when they retire.... More people would rather be mugged than audited by the IRS. And 5 percent say there's no difference."

Yet there's a contradictory sentiment:

"The public has come to the belief that everyone has the right to health care, no matter what their physical condition and no matter what their income," he said.

"Make no mistake," he said. "And as I say this I look you straight in the eye. The American people want you to fix health care.

"They want you to fix it - and not break what isn't broken."

Sounds like all Americans, and not just politicians, want everything paid for with "other peoples' money."

7 Comments | Add a Comment

topics: Health Care

Building Health Care Without Wiring or Plumbing

Posted by W. James Antle, III on 8.24.09 @ 9:07AM

Byron York writes that the Democrats might ram a health care bill through the Senate using reconciliation, even if that means not getting everything they want. He quotes "one old Senate hand" as saying, "You can build a building that's missing certain features. Maybe the plumbing's not there, or the wiring. But the bottom line is, you have laid the foundation, and built the structure, and it becomes easier later on to add the plumbing, and add the wiring. You have set up a structure so that all you have to do in the future is make incremental changes."

The problem with this is that reconciliation probably can't be used to create health insurance exchanges or to require insurers to cover people with pre-existing conditions, among other things. Those two provisions are more fundamental to the Obama approach to health care reform than the public option. You can be missing the plumbing and the wiring, but without those elements you haven't laid the foundation or set up the structure.

Second, while I think an incremental strategy would serve the Democrats well, that doesn't seem to be where their base is right now. They don't want another SCHIP or an expansion of Medicaid. They want federal universal health care. And for single payer advocates among them, the public option is the incremental compromise. Take that element away and the plan's poll numbers dip, its grassroots support melts away, and some liberal House members' votes are lost (or at least that's what they are claiming right now). Plus, a stripped down health care bill that would be worth passing from the perspective of an Obamacare supporter would politically be all pain -- it would have to contain an individual mandate now while saving the public option for later.

Granted, the Democrats could still go this route. And maybe they'll be able to roll the parliamentarian, so that things that are technically extraneous to the budget process still get passed through reconciliation. But to move away from the building metaphor, they seem to want to go for the touchdown rather than call in the field goal unit.

Reports the New York Times:

Get Ready for the Next Bank Bail-Out--of the FDIC

Posted by Doug Bandow on 8.24.09 @ 7:36AM

So what if the bank fund is running out of money? I mean, the president ordered administration officials to save $100 million in administrative expenses. So what's the big deal? A million, a billion, a trillion. Who can keep up?

So far this year, 77 lenders have been closed, compared with 25 in 2008. Of those, the F.D.I.C. has found buyers for 69.

Analysts are bracing for dozens of additional failures, especially among small and medium-size banks that have made huge numbers of real estate loans that are not being paid back.

The bulk of the fund's decline so far this year has come from about $28.5 billion the agency set aside to cover the expected losses from future bank failures.

Analysts are increasingly concerned the fund could be wiped out if more bank failures drained the money the agency has set aside to cover them. That could require the F.D.I.C. to tap a multibillion-dollar lifeline from taxpayers, through an emergency borrowing program run by the Treasury Department, to finance loan sales and other short-term obligations.

Oh well, a few billion dollars here, a few billion dollars there. The rich can pay for it, just like they can pay for health care "reform," cap-and-trade, and everything else the Democrats want to do!

Reports the New York Times:

Wasting Energy at the Department of Energy

Posted by Doug Bandow on 8.24.09 @ 7:33AM

The government loves to lecture us about saving energy. But how do the bureaucrats themselves do? Not good, it seems.

The Energy Department strives to be a leader in championing energy efficiency. Its Web site lists energy-saving tips, while Secretary Steven Chu calls conservation one of the department's most important goals.

But at many of the agency's buildings, even at national laboratories where talented scientists seek technological breakthroughs to save energy, the department has failed to use one of the most effective tools available to any ordinary household: thermostats that automatically dial back the temperature when nobody is around.

A recent audit found that the department could save more than $11.5 million annually in energy costs by properly employing these "setback" controls to adjust the heat and air conditioning at night or on weekends.

The Energy Department's inspector general found that the department, which spends almost $300 million annually on utilities, could save enough energy to power more than 9,800 homes each year by doing what experts say every household in the country should also be doing.

I guess it's just "do as I say, not as I do."

A Multi-Billion Dollar Clunker of a Program

Posted by Doug Bandow on 8.24.09 @ 6:50AM

Paying people to destroy perfectly good cars. That is Congress and the president in action.

It turns out that "Cash for Clunkers," which mercifully ends at 8 pm today, doesn't do much for the environment--contrary to claims made when the legislation was approved. Reports ABC News:

[Christopher] Knittel, the economist at Davis who has studied gas prices and their effects on driving behavior, found that while the program might benefit the economy, it is an inefficient way to take older cars off the road, to lower carbon emissions and to reduce gasoline consumption.

"The fuel economy increase from the trade-in to new car seems large, but it doesn't have that big of impact on environment," he said.

Knittle calculated the program will save approximately 270 gallons of gasoline per car, per year. If a total of 750,000 vehicles are sold, as appears likely, approximately 12,000 barrels of oil a day will be saved in a country that consumes 9 million a day.

"It really is just a drop in bucket in terms of gasoline consumption or vehicle turnover," said Knittle. "Within the U.S. there are about 250 million cars on the road. When we are playing around with only 700,000, it is hard to get any large impact."

Ed Morse, director of economic research at LCM who has closely studied the energy industry, agreed. "It's a nice test case, but it has limited application today."

Morse pointed out that the current national car fleet turns over, on average, every 12 years.

The best point, of course, is the fact that the program mostly caused people who were inclined to buy new cars anyway to either delay or speed up their purchases to qualify for a $4500 government check. Thus, the subsidy won't even do the auto industry much good since it largely shifted rather than increased sales. At the same time, the program reduced the supply and increased the cost of used cars, which will most hurt people of limited means.

Great work all around!

A Visit from the Founders

Posted by Yogi Love on 8.24.09 @ 6:04AM

Astroturf Liberals vs. Grassroots Conservatives

Posted by Robert Stacy McCain on 8.23.09 @ 11:42AM

Watch this video and notice the difference between the professionally printed "official" pro-ObamaCare signs and the homemade unofficial anti-ObamaCare signs:

Hat-tip to Moe Lane.

11 Comments | Add a Comment

Obama Staffers Profit from Obama Health Care Plan

Posted by Doug Bandow on 8.23.09 @ 6:17AM

It turns out that President Barack "Change" Obama isn't changing things that much after all. At least not for David Axelfod, who appears to be playing the classic Washington insider's game for fun and profit.

Explains Ellen Carmichael of Americans for Prosperity:

While Axelrod worked behind the scenes to craft policy that would lead to a government overhaul of the medical industry, his firm in Chicago lobbied special interest groups to earn massive media contracts that would help dictate political discourse during the debate. According to an August 19, 2009 Associated Press report, President Obama's efforts to push his health care reform agenda have created a "financial windfall in the election offseason to Democratic consulting firms that are closely connected" to the President and Axelrod.

These coalition groups are currently running "at least $24 million in pro-overhaul ads" with the help of GMMB, a consulting group led by a "top Obama campaign strategist" and AKPD Message and Media, the firm owned by none other than David Axelrod. Michael Axelrod, David's son, now manages the day-to-day affairs of his father's AKPD Message and Media, aided in part by his employee, David Plouffe, Obama's presidential campaign manager.

One of their biggest clients, Americans for Stable Quality Care, is comprised of political and financial heavyweights like the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), American Medical Association (AMA), FamiliesUSA and PhRMA, the last promising to pony up $150 million to promote the President's health care reform agenda.

While the Associated Press concedes that there is "no evidence that Axelrod directly profited from the group's ads," they also admit that he will draw $2 million from the firm over the next four years. The larger issue, Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, contends, is a "network of relationships and overlapping interests" that could become a "problem as Obama tries to win the public over on health care and fulfill his promise to change the way Washington works."

Nice work if you can find it. The recession obviously never really hit Mr. Axelrod!