Random header image... Refresh for more!

Question of the Day

by Mark Thompson

Brad Warbiany:
“What are the odds that the media will understand that the true problem is not that Obama is to blame or that Obama is our savior, but that this economy is the reckoning of 30+ years of bad government policy by both parties, and is not some transient moment?”
I just don’t understand why Brad – a libertarian – felt compelled to limit the scope of his question to the last 30+ years.

February 18, 2010   26 Comments

“The First Draft, Not the Compromised Second Draft”

by Mark Thompson

Like Allahpundit - and, surprisingly to me, for the same reasons - I have no idea whatsoever what the newly-released Mount Vernon Statement is supposed to accomplish.  It amounts to a statement that the old Three-Legged Stool remains coherent and relevant.  Why?  Because they said so, that’s why.  There are no details, no attempt to resolve the conflicting interests of social conservatives, economic conservatives, hawks, and libertarians.  Just a blanket statement that somehow these groups all have the exact same interests, and all agree with a very generalized vision of the Constitution.  As Allahpundit points out, “the principles here are so broad as to be almost meaningless,” and noting further that the Statement doesn’t even attempt to provide a framework for bridging the gap between libertarians/paleocons and neo-conservatives on foreign policy (see Larison for a more fully developed argument on this point), nor does it provide any guidance as to how one would determine whether a particular policy fits within the notion of “Constitutional conservatism.” 

Compare this Mount Vernon statement, drafted by the old lions of movement conservatism, with the Tea Partiers’ proposed “Contract From America,” which doesn’t attempt to reconcile the irreconcilable but instead tries to keep a tight focus on fiscal and economic issues, and you get the feeling that the old school movement conservative leaders have ceased to be relevant in any meaningful way.

February 17, 2010   111 Comments

“We Are the World”

by Mark Thompson

On the whole, I’m fairly ambivalent about the “We Are the World” remake – some of the more dramatic changes from the (overrated to begin with) original seemed appropriate in the context of current pop culture.  But, strong objections to the use of auto-tuning as a “safety net” aside, can we all agree that the active and exagerrated use of auto-tuning as a song feature in and of itself has gone way too far?

February 16, 2010   14 Comments

Credit Where It’s Due

by Mark Thompson

Governor Christie starts making the tough decisions.  They won’t be popular decisions, and I take issue with the use of the “state of emergency” device from a distrust-of-power standpoint, but it’s pretty clear the Governor is taking his job seriously.  Good for him, although I’ll wait for state paleocon treasure Paul Mulshine to weigh in before I make my final judgment.  The true test will come when the governor has to put forward and fight for a budget for next fiscal year, but this is an encouraging (to me, at least) first step.

February 11, 2010   Comments Off

Jaybird Bait

by Mark Thompson

Yes, this is real.  No, it is not a joke.  Via Patrick, via TJIC.

February 9, 2010   14 Comments

More on Constitutional Powers

by Mark Thompson

The other, other Publius describes the way in which the categories of persons subject to denial of due process rights has regularly and rapidly expanded over the last 9 years.  We are perilously close, suggests Publius, to making it official policy to deny due process rights to American citizens detained on American soil whenever an ill-defined accusation of “terrorism” is brought up.

February 9, 2010   17 Comments

Executive Power, 2010 Edition

by Mark Thompson

Transplanted Lawyer wonders where the outrage is over the recent claim by the Obama Administration that it has the authority to assassinate US citizens believed to be terrorist participants, noting that this is an even more remarkable assertion than anything Bush ever claimed.  He further states: [Read more →]

February 9, 2010   12 Comments

Separation of Powers and the Filibuster

by Mark Thompson

I go back and forth on what I think about the propriety of the filibuster for legislative purposes, although I’m inclined towards the view that the filibuster is on the whole a good thing under those circumstances.

The announcement by Sen. Ben Nelson that he would not only oppose but filibuster Obama’s nominee for the National Labor Relations Board, however, provides an opportunity to discuss an area where I think the filibuster is not only inappropriate but also undermines the spirit, though perhaps not the letter, of the Constitution.

In circumstances such as executive and judicial nominations, the filibuster is to my mind utterly inappropriate and even outright toxic.  The power to nominate and appoint federal executive and judicial officers is Constitutionally vested in the President under Article II, although certain appointments are to be made with the “advice and consent” of the Senate.  [Read more →]

February 9, 2010   13 Comments

Hooray for Hops

by Mark Thompson

Add this to the list of studies showing that beer, in moderation, is good for your health.  That, in and of itself, is unremarkable.  What is remarkable, however, is that we finally have undeniable scientific proof that hoppier beers really are better.

February 8, 2010   5 Comments

Why Is It….

by Mark Thompson

That we continue to take Sarah Palin seriously?

February 7, 2010   51 Comments

Keep It Simple Stupid

by Mark Thompson

Daniel Larison makes a point that should be blindingly obvious were it not for the need for our talking heads to turn every single election into a referendum on the talking heads’ own framing of the President’s agenda:

“What we have been seeing in all of the elections over the last year is a readiness on the part of the electorate to oust the parties that have traditionally held sway in the district or state in question….The candidates that could best address the local concerns of voters prevailed. Those identified with distrusted political establishments or discredited national parties failed.”

I assure you, the average New Jerseyan is smart enough to recognize that their state governor has approximately no relevance to the President of the United States.  I am quite certain that the foibles of the New Jersey state Democratic Party and of former Governor Corzine, and the state’s own economic problems had about 1000 times more to do with why there is a Republican in the Governor’s Mansion right now than anything related to President Obama or Democrats in Congress.  As early as March or April of last year, Democrats in this state were already certain that Corzine would lose.  Indeed, Christie led in every single poll taken between January and September of last year, almost always well outside the margin of error.   Even casting aside that this was a governor’s race, it seems rather unlikely that New Jersey voters were already looking forward to sending President Obama a message a week after he was sworn, and less than 3 months after they had overwhelmingly voted him into office. 

 It was only in September and October, when it became clear that Christie was just another establishment Republican, that Corzine caught up in the polls and turned it into a meaningful race again.  Ultimately, Christie pulled it out by four points, but this was a far cry from the 10-15 point leads he was consistently polling in July and August.  For anyone who had actually been following this race, the shocking thing wasn’t that the People’s Republic of New Jersey elected a Republican; it was that a Republican with a reputation for fighting political corruption almost blew an opportunity to rout a Democratic Party and administration known primarily for its corruption and incompetence.  Yet somehow the meme that came out was something along the lines of “New Jersey Voters Send Obama a Message.”

But most importantly, as Larison points out, when times are tough, voters blame incumbents.  They don’t just blame the party in power in Washington – they blame the people who are supposed to represent them, they seek out more competent candidates, or they savage the establishment of whatever party is most relevant.  That’s what happened in NJ, it’s what happened in NY-23 (both with respect to Hoffman’s destruction of Scozzafava and the Dems’ ultimate victory), and it’s at least arguably a big part of what happened in Massachusetts, where angry voters combined with a terrible Dem candidate and a very good Republican candidate to create a perfect storm. 

To the extent voters are sending a message to Washington, it’s simply this: It’s not all about you.

February 5, 2010   9 Comments

Paul Ryan Week Continues

by Mark Thompson

Ross Douthat’s piece on Paul Ryan’s position within the Republican Party is almost as worthwhile as the Ezra Klein interview I linked earlier.  I know that we’re rapidly reaching overkill on Paul Ryan this week, but I couldn’t let this dose of reality pass, coming as it does from a GOP politician: [Read more →]

February 3, 2010   6 Comments

Page 2 of 2312345678...Last »