A Second Hand Conjecture

Blagojevich’s senate appointment might not be as valuable to a political career as he seemed to believe. Nate Silver takes a systematic look at senators who were appointed to fill vacant seats by governors over the last fifty years, and discovers that a minority of 49% of them were eventually reelected. Well below the traditional 80%+ incumbent reelection advantage.

No Comments »

I found myself complaining to a Libertarian colleague of mine today (note the capital ‘L’), about the deplorable political consensus that has emerged on the bailout strategy for economic resuscitation. The bipartisan policy is a ghastly trifecta of the ineffective, unpopular and unstoppable. It is precisely the sort of situation that makes me slightly more sympathetic to the appeals of my third-party advocating friends.

My Libertarian colleague in this case gleefully protested, as he always does, that it was ultimately the voters fault, for having continued to vote Republican or Democrat despite his warnings. And yes, Joseph Heller was invoked once again to support the blame game. Voters won’t vote LP because the LP is powerless, but the LP is powerless because voters won’t vote LP. You’ve heard this little argument before of course, but how accurate is it really?

(more…)

1 Comment »

The vacuous Draft Bloomberg movement has made a viral video. I have no idea how this is supposed to make me support him. I’m not sure they even know why they support him. No policy proposals, no platform, no definable ideology, no ideas at all. At least Ross Perot had plans and proposals (and lots of charts). Silly though it was, the Draft Perot movement could at least come up with reasons to support him. The Bloomberg people have absolutely nothing. “He was an entrepreneur and a mayor and…time is running out, sign the petition!” Predictably, so far only about 8,200 people have decided they want a candidate with no ideas, no purpose and the charisma of a rock.

No Comments »

Huckabee was interviewed on MSNBC on the day Fred Thompson withdrew. The liberation theologist took the opportunity to further ridicule and attack Fred and his supporters for supposedly injuring his campaign in South Carolina. Smart move Huck, really should endear you even further to Fred Thompson people who are now looking for a new candidate. Personally, I’m eagerly awaiting the bankrupt and collapsing Huckabee campaign’s political annihilation on Super Tuesday.

1 Comment »

Bill Clinton’s recent emergence as Hillary’s principal anti-Obama attack dog has left a lot of people somewhat uncomfortable. We’re not generally accustomed to seeing this sort of bare knuckled political brawling from a former president (all the effort seems to be wearing Bill out too). Eugene Robinson supplies a reason for Bill’s furious anti-Obama rhetoric: “Obama’s candidacy not only threatens to obliterate the dream of a Clinton Restoration. It also fundamentally calls into question Bill Clinton’s legacy by making it seem . . . not really such a big deal.” Robinson notices that Barack’s remarks on Reagan possess a deeper subtext. While Clinton merely repositioned the Democrats in the post-Reagan era, Obama wants to transform the landscape like Reagan did, leaving Bill’s accomplishments a historical footnote.

No Comments »

The “Mittosphere”? Ugh.

No Comments »

Michael Goldfarb thinks that the unexpected Hillary win in Nevada despite the Culinary Workers Union endorsement of Obama, could represent the beginning of a substantial diminution in union political power: “If they can’t even affect the votes of their members when those members must vote in public, in front of their colleagues, and under the watchful eye of management, what kind of premium are candidates likely to put on union endorsements in the future?”

No Comments »

Fausta is fed up with the pundit’s question “who will be the next Reagan?” She mocks the impulse by asking “who will be the next Abraham Lincoln?” The genuine “next Reagan” of course wouldn’t be looking to the past at all, but to the future.

No Comments »

Hillary and Edwards are slamming Obama after he heaped praise on Ronald Reagan –something that may not play well with the leftist base of their party, but was doubtlessly well received by the general electorate. One wonders if Obama shouldn’t have waited to express that opinion until after he had the nomination wrapped up however.

1 Comment »

At this point it’s worth asking: Is Rudy Giuliani running a presidential campaign, or a Florida vacation? Of course, not that I’d blame him for the later.

No Comments »

Hotair has video of Chris Matthews talking about Barack Obama on the Tonight Show, in which he tosses objectivity to the wind and replaces it with a kind of turbid political idolatry. He suggests to us that he wouldn’t be an honest reporter if he failed to tell us about the “spiritual experience” one supposedly must have at an Obama rally. Toward that he argues that if one does not cry at said rallies, they are not American.

Charles Feldman has a quote from Democratic media strategist Dan Payne on the same themes:

“We don’t know much about him. He’s almost like a spirit. People like the feeling they get when they’re in his presence.”
(The Feldman Blog)

Between Matthews and Payne, there you have the tripartite ideology of the Obama movement: an unfocused yet visceral emotional reaction, a transcendent supernatural magnetism, and an essential enigmatic vagueness.

Looking at this as a campaign, I’m inclined to agree with the others on ASHC who have suggested that there is something subterraneously unhealthy about these characteristics in Barack’s accelerating personality cult. It’s both too easy too much to compare this combination of emotion, spirituality and ambiguity with the authoritarian personality cults. But it’s also difficult to think of leaders who predicated their entire political purposes on such animating properties, and then delivered sound leadership for their countries.

No Comments »

Kenyan Justice Minister Martha Karua has charged Barack Obama’s cousin, ODM leader Raila Odinga, with ethnic cleansing. Tourist bookings to Kenya have suffered 90 percent cancellations. Kenyan blogger Girl in the Meadow wonders why the election dispute is being settled in the streets instead of the courts. Why indeed. And such a pity that all this is happening just as Kenya is emerging into sustainable economic growth (or perhaps because of it?).

No Comments »

Remember Unity08? It was “open source politics,” the internet-based third party with tech buzzwords in place of rhetoric. They captured press attention for awhile by talking a lot about “revolutionizing” the election with a web-based nominating convention and other silly gimmicks. Well, in the end it didn’t work out so well and was suspended due to lack of money and interest. Fear not though, its founders are back! They’re pledging to “revolutionize” the race once again with a new organization dedicated to drafting Michael Bloomberg. Basically it’s a pretty tired looking, not-very-revolutionary online petition. Someone needs to give their PR firm an award.

No Comments »

Video clip of Mike Huckabee arguing that “what we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards.” Hmm. Is that really in accord with anyone’s notion of Founders intent? I know committed social conservatives who do not share such a false and extreme view of the Constitution. Aside from that, can you imagine this kind of rhetoric in the context of a general election? Automatic defeat.

H/T: Pamela Leavey

1 Comment »

According to SurveyUSA polling, Bloomberg would do best in NYC in a three-cornered presidential race against Obama and Huckabee. Even then though he only manages 28%. Via: Politicalwire

No Comments »

Here’s some splendid news for those of us not delighted by the prospect of a liberation theologist takeover of the Republican Party. Rasmussen is reporting their new South Carolina numbers and Mike Huckabee has lost five points and Fred Thompson gained four since last week. Thompson now stands at 16%, Huckabee at 19%, with McCain reaping the rewards at 28%.

If Huckabee can be stopped in South Carolina, it’s quite probable that will be the end of him. Until of course John McCain’s advisers convince him to name Huckabee as his Vice Presidential nominee in order to appease the soc-con voting bloc (traditionally his strongest adversaries within the party).

Indeed, my friend Jason over at postpolitical (who is an ardent Huckabee supporter) is holding out hope for McCain to win the nomination if Huckabee fails, for precisely this eventuality. Even the slimmest chance of getting Huckabee anywhere near the levers of power is apparently enormously important to his supporters. But is it as important to his opponents to prevent that? It should be.

(more…)

1 Comment »

I was watching the booing of John McCain at the Prosperity Summit in Livonia, Michigan (video clip at Ian Schwartz). Now I can’t be entirely certain, but it sure sounds like a woman in the audience exclaims: “Happy Birthday Warsaw!” at the climax of the jeers. Don’t ask me what it means, but give it a listen.

No Comments »

The Tyra Banks Show emailed Michelle Malkin with some quotes from Tyra’s interview with Hillary Clinton (to be broadcast Friday). Hill proposes a nationwide reality show to determine what to call the First Husband…with dancing! And you thought the 90s were tawdry.

No Comments »

What does socialism smell like? At first blush I can’t be much more specific than “pungent and bad.” Luckily the enterprising Catalan Socialist Party has brewed up a concoction as a campaign stunt that promises to answer this confounding quandary:

Election campaigns have witnessed some strange political strategies over the years, but the Catalan Socialist Party (PSC) surely broke new ground today when it launched its very own perfume.

At a press conference today, the PSC answered the question on everybody’s noses since the party announced last week it had created the fragrance: what does socialism smell like?

Apparently, it mixes Mediterranean herbs and fruits such as Bergamot orange and white tea with base notes from the Orient, which come together to produced an aroma of “confidence, equality, progress and efficiency”.

I’ll just note an appalling dearth of blood, rotting food and jack boot polish. But, I’m no perfume expert.

Oddly, it also smells a little like air freshener. One journalist at the press conference said the smell was so strong that he was practically overwhelmed and left feeling faint.

Hmm, maybe the PSC is on to something here. Air freshener is used to hide unpleasant odiferous realities and too much of it can leave one feeling lightheaded. In comparison, socialism has been known to mask certain economic realities with an air of fruitful abundance, and too much socialism has caused millions of people to pass out. Permanently.

The creator, Albert Majós, told Cadena Ser radio station today that it was neither a “perfume nor air-freshener” but the aromatic representation of socialism’s values.

Well, I’m glad he cleared that up.

The vice-president of the PSC, Manuela de Madre, argued that overall “it would be no bad thing if Catalan politics could relax a little using this fragrance” and recommended “the aromatic and relaxing herbs” to the conservative opposition People’s Party (PP).

De Madre said the PSC would be sending a sample to all the political parties in the Catalan parliament.

The fragrance, which comes in little bags to be placed in all good leftwing wardrobes, will go on sale at the PSC headquarters in Barcelona and its other offices, as well as at party meetings.

For his next fragrance, De Madre plans to create “the sweet smell of Irony.”

A spokesman for the PSC said it could also be used in offices to create a pleasant environment of equality and fairness.

I think that one already exists. It’s called Neutra Air.

* The Soviet Era poster above is from here, which provides the following comment:

No Comments »

Mike Huckabee outlined his vision for a social conservative / “populist” takeover of the GOP to an Evangelical audience in Michigan. Mark Levin calls it deplorable, DiscerningTexan calls it destructive, and Riehl calls it theocratic. Well, well. It’s beginning to look like Fred Thompson’s aggressive criticism of Huckabee’s views may have inaugurated the removal of many gloves.

4 Comments »

The NYT thinks Fred Thompson may be making a comeback. Some Republicans seem to be warming to his message that Huckabee’s statist policies are unwelcome in the GOP. Imagine that.

4 Comments »

Mark Steyn surveys the election in contrast with the replacement of compact discs by MP3s. Observing the swift and dynamic change that characterizes the free market, he rightly mocks the notion of government as an “agent of change.” Huckabee, Edwards, McCain and Obama all take their lumps in turn.

No Comments »

It seems Daniel Hannan has been getting some email of the “what the heck is wrong with you?” variety over his support for Barack Obama. Today he argues that he’s thrown his support behind the rather vague candidate because of his policy vacuity and favoritism for style over substance:

Isn’t it possible to argue that we want a relatively supine president, at least in the sense that a strong legislature is preferable to a strong executive, and that strong states are preferable to both?

The Republican heyday was arguably the last three decades of the 19th century, when they controlled 14 out of 16 congresses and generally held the White House, too. The party of that era believed in building up Congress at the expense of the presidency. Who were the presidents of that time? James Garfield, Benjamin Harrison, Rutherford B Hayes. (Rutherford B who? Exactly.) Yet these were the years when the US grew from a weakling among nations to a colossus.

To put it another way, I’d rather have a president who was decorative than one who was over-active. And Obama is certainly decorative.
(The Daily Telegraph)

Never mind the fact that the congress is very likely to be retained by the Democrats in 2008, and that a weak president led around by Nancy Pelosi, isn’t something anyone right-of-center should dream of. But there is nevertheless a certain logic to this from Daniel’s point of view.

Daniel is afterall unpersuaded that Iraq is an issue of any real significance to the national security of the United States, and he is highly sympathetic to Ron Paul’s isolationist views. When you don’t need or want a strong foreign policy, you don’t need or want a strong presidency occupied by a sharp and experienced leader with loads of specific plans. The bigger the boob, the less the interventionism, you might say. Marshalling public and political support for an aggressive foreign policy is no task for a man more comfortable weighing the advice of image consultants than that of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Therefore it might be an interesting political question to ask how many other current Republican Ron Paul supporters could be persuaded to vote similarly, were Obama facing an advocate of a vigorous foreign and national security policy.

1 Comment »

“It’s like everyone is drunk over something you can’t understand.”

While our own seemingly endless election season grinds on (and on), Kenya’s recently ended, sparking massive instability, rioting and protests:

Kenya’s main opposition party said Friday it plans three days of mass rallies next week to protest President Mwai Kibaki’s disputed re-election, which has sparked waves of deadly violence across the East African nation. Police said they would not permit the protests.

The African Union president, who had been trying to mediate a compromise between the opposition leader Raila Odinga and Kibaki, left Kenya on Friday after failing to persuade the two even to meet.

More than 500 people have died in protests and ethnic violence since the Dec. 27 elections and ensuring vote tally that foreign observers say was rigged. The election returned Kibaki to power for another five-year term; Odinga came in second.

Here’s a brief synopsis of what’s led to this tragedy:

The tragedy is due in no small part to the Kenyan presidential candidates, one of whom — Mwai Kibaki — appears to have rigged the voting in his favor. Raila Odinga, his challenger (who may simply have rigged the elections less effectively), spewed nothing but inflammatory bile as the unrest began, and his supporters — mostly the very, very poor — began to kill neighbors who were members of Kibaki’s traditionally privileged Kikuyu tribe, driving thousands of them from their homes in slums where the tribes had lived together peaceably for years. Immediately, Kikuyu gangs began to form and wreak retributive violence. More than 500 people are dead so far, and 250,000 displaced.

Three weeks ago, Kenya was one of the most peaceful and economically promising countries in Africa. It was a standing lesson to neighbors like Sudan and Somalia, whose internal troubles prevent them from thriving. As of today, large swaths of the beautiful Rift Valley have been abandoned by people whose homes have been burned to the ground or whose last names make it too dangerous for them to stay there.

The quote at the top of this post crystallizing the current events is from “Mary, a 31-year-old Kikuyu from Kenya’s Rift Valley province,” who provides an up close and personal look at the situation on the ground:

She had been living in Limuru, 35km northwest of the Kenyan capital Nairobi, for eight years. After the announcement of the election results, pro-opposition ethnic groups started driving Kikuyus – the ethnic group of President Mwai Kibaki – out of Rift Valley. Many fled to Limuru, a predominantly Kikuyu area. In revenge, Kikuyu gangs in Limuru began targeting non-Kikuyus, including Mary’s husband and in-laws.

“There was a lot of tension. We were sensing that something was not right after they delayed the announcement [of the presidential election result].

“On Sunday at around 4pm, people with stones surrounded the house, shouting and yelling, ‘Luos must go! Luos must go!’ They were so many you couldn’t count them. It was an organised thing. They had brand new axes and machetes. Where do you get a new machete on a Sunday? Shops are closed. They had prepared themselves.

“I had gone to the market. My sister-in-law was in the house with her twins and my nine-year-old brother. There were screams everywhere. I heard one of the Kikuyus saying to me: ‘We are eliminating the Luos’. I ran towards the house. I found the police had already come. They were asking people, ‘What tribe are you?’ If you say you are a Luo, they tell you to enter their lorry. They brought us here to the police station.

“I’m very surprised. We saw this violence in other countries. We thought we are a stable country, Kenya is an island of peace. But we have destroyed that island.

“It’s because of the Kikuyus from Rift Valley who have fled [post-election violence]. Many have come this way. So they [Kikuyus in Limuru] now have a reason to attack us [Luos]. They are like, ‘let them go because our people are suffering there [in Rift Valley]‘.

“It’s like everyone is drunk over something you can’t understand. I’ve lived with you all my life. Then all of a sudden I’m your enemy. How can you take a machete and cut me?

Much more on this can be found at Baldilocks who has been following this pretty closely.

2 Comments »

I seem to have caused some confusion with my previous post, “Putting the Question to the Bishop,” by an inartful use of the term “small-government libertarian.” The more I think about, the clearer it becomes to me that this term is redundant — libertarians are, by definition, in favor of small government. To me, the term has always been a way to distinguish between the minarchist (such as Hayek or Friedman styled libertarians) and anarcho-capitalist (such as fans of Murray Rothbard or Robert Nozick) flavors of libertarianism. Minarchists find value in some minimal level of government, whereas anarcho-capitalists are usually anti-state in nearly every form. However, when the term “small-government libertarian” is used in any other context it just becomes confusing. Frankly, I was simply wrong to employ it the way I did.

The intended point of my previous post was to highlight the choice being forced on the Democratic Party by the netroots crowd — those who support the war vs. those who don’t — and to suggest an alternate choice: the anti-war left vs. the pro-small government electorate. The choice I envision does not involve the war, but instead hinges on how one views the State. Of course, anti-war views are well represented amongst those who prefer small government, and that’s fine. A good argument can (and has been) made that if Congress and the Executive branches were filled with small-government types, there would be no War in Iraq. But, in my view, the Democratic Party needs to focus less on netroots voters who would hold their support of the war against them, and more on voters who are (justifiably) wary of the Democrats’ propensity for big government. The latter have been abandoned by the Republican Party. If the Democrats decided to occupy that small-government ground that the Republicans vacated, such small-government voters could easily be swayed to vote Democratic.

In short, instead of “small-government libertarian” I should have simply said “small-government voters.” My underlying premise is this: as the two major parties continue to cater their policies of governance to increasingly smaller and divisive, albeit increasingly more vocal, special interest groups, they are creating an ever-growing swath of independent voters.

If you think about it, don’t you hear more and more people claiming to be libertarians today, despite their seemingly disparate views? I surely do. I believe this is the natural result of the Democrats and Republicans being more concerned with single-issue voters (e.g., pro-choice vs. pro-life; homosexual rights vs. anti-gay marriage; anti-war vs. pro-strong defense; etc.), than with broad policy measures. Eventually all you have left are moneyed special-interests who promise to get out the vote. Left in the wake of this rush to divvy up the battleground into pro and anti groups are those who feel the government is foisting itself too much on ordinary citizens. Most people just want to be left alone, even though they gladly take free goodies when they are a member of a favored interest group (which is, of course, quite rational). In my opinion, a significant number of voters are out there who will choose small-government policies over single-issue candidates (such as pro-defense/anti-war). I only wish one of the two parties would act on that.

22 Comments »