Tragedy in Africa

In terms of shear poignancy and conciseness regarding the causes of Africa's plight, I can't think of anything more telling than this headline from the AP:

No public criticism for Mugabe at African summit

Heller: Originalism Triumphant

Make no mistake about it, the Supreme Court's affirmation that the Second Amendment does, indeed, protect individual gun rights was a momentous development in the law. Besides aligning constitutional jurisprudence with the public understanding of America's founding document, the decision also demonstrated the powerful influence of originalism on legal culture in the past 20 years.

As Prof. Dale Carpenter of the University of Minnesota noted recently, it is remarkable that not only the Heller majority, but also the dissenting Justices, relied on historical and textual arguments to support their preferred interpretation of the Second Amendment. Had the Heller case decided in the 70s, both the majority and dissenting opinions would have far more closely resembled Justice Breyer's policy-driven approach.

One man, of course, deserves most of the credit for this revolution in Constitutional Law: Justice Antonin Scalia. Without his perserverence, the Court's sweeping affirmation of the right to keep and bear arms would have been unthinkable. As corny as it sounds, the country owes him its thanks.

How is the system unfair?

It continues to boggle my mind why liberals think that the current tax system is unfair.

Look at the numbers: the US clearly has a graduated tax structure. The top 5% of income earners pay fully 58.8% of all income taxes. And note that the average income tax rate on the bottom HALF of taxpayers is a mere 3.1%. Is there another country in the world where the bottom half of taxpayers pay income taxes at a rate of only 3.1%?

And yet, I ask you all to recall an item that has dropped out of the news cycle, but which is still highly relevant to the election. When it was pointed out to the Junior Senator from Illinois that every time the capital gains tax has been lowered, there has in fact been an INCREASE in government revenues, he said HE DOESN'T CARE. It's a matter of "fairness".

Seriously, when we already have a graduated system of taxation, adopting a tax policy which will arguably LOWER government revenues, in the interest of "fairness" - that is definitely not sound tax policy - that's nothing but hardcore liberal ideology, willing to sacrifice the economic health of the nation in the interest of unnecessary and unproductive class warfare.

Not to mention the problems with adopting a set of policies that will impede capital formation in the midst of an economic downturn. This is Economics 101. Grr - why is McCain not taking Obama on more forcefully over his woefully inadequate tax policy? I find this so frustrating.

Heller: Criminals Lose, Citizens Win

I'm still processing the Supreme Court's landmark Heller decision and will write considerably more about it tomorrow. For now, let me just respond to Washington Post columnist Colbert King's criticism of the opinion as a victory for "D.C. thugs."

Ummm... no Mr. King. In spite of the District's handgun ban, the thugs are already armed. How else, pray tell, have they continued perpetrating their thuggery? Now, though, law-abiding citizens like Mr. Heller will have the ability to defend themselves. Sounds just to me.

HT: National Review

Bob Barr Spoiler Alert

With Libertarian candidate Bob Barr polling 3-6% in several close states, what are the chances that Barr will prove to be 2008's Ralph Nader?

So Who Does He Like?

Check out this nugget from The Audacity of Hope (recently discussed on National Review's Campaign Spot blog) in which Obama paints an unflattering picture of his wealthy liberal donors:

Increasingly, I found myself spending time with people of means - law firm partners and investment bankers, hedge fund managers and venture capitalists. As a rule, they were smart,interesting people, knowledgeable about public policy, liberal in their politics, expecting nothing more than a hearing of their opinions in exchange for checks. But they reflected, almost uniformly, the perspectives of their class; the top 1 percent or so of the income scale that can afford to write a $2,000 check to a political candidate. They believed in the free market and an educational meritocracy; they found it hard to imagine that there might be any social ill that could not be cured with a high SAT score. They had no patience with protectionism, found unions troublesome, and were not particularly sympathetic to those whose lives were upended by movements of global capital. Most were adamantly prochoice and were vaguely suspicious of deep religious sentiment...

Now, I don't find too much to disagree with in Obama's description of these limousine liberals. Consider, though, that this description of affluent Democrats comes from a man who described rural Pennsylvanians and mid-westerners as people who "cling" to guns and religion out of economic "bitterness." So... Obama doesn't like his wealthy urban donors and he doesn't like the "bitter-cling" rural voters.

So who does Obama like?

The Polls Giveth and the Polls Taketh Away

Only a day after I was celebrating some upbeat polling data for McCain, a new poll has come out showing Big Mac tied with Obama in Indiana, a state that should be safely Republican. While I'm pretty sure that Indiana will stay red this cycle, it looks like McCain may have to spend some money shoring up this would-be base state.

Barack Obama is Rupert Murdoch

The more I learn about the Junior Senator from Illinois, the more I'm growing convinced that he's the Rupert Murdoch of Politics. By which I mean that I think there's a parallel between the Audacity of Hope and the Audacity of Fox. Rupert Murdoch famously launched two Fox television networks. One of them has done more to keep this country slouching towards Gomorrah than any other recent cultural phenomenon, foisting onto the airwaves such immoral tripe as "Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?" (and who could forget the follow-up with Darva Conger's appearance on "Celebrity Boxing" to take on some washed-up 1970s gymnast as part of the undercard to the main event of John Wayne Bobbitt vs. Joey Buttafuoco?) and Temptation Island. The other network provided the platform for Bill O'Reilly to become the nation's true vox populi by denouncing exactly the type of cultural garbage purveyed by Fox TV. It's really a brilliant model, backing a horse on either side of the culture wars. Cynical? Perhaps, but at the end of the day, it's all about the money, and Murdoch's made plenty of it.

Obama is audaciously trying to follow this model. Thus, he is running as a candidate of faith even though he's more pro-choice than NARAL. He's the candidate of racial reconciliation, even though he gave tens of thousands of dollars to the race-bating, Black Liberation theology-spewing Jeremiah Wright. He speaks out against corporate America at the same time he's appointing Jim Johnson to his VP Search Committee.

It's really quite amazing, and if he pulls this off, will certainly be impressive. Though for a candidate who routinely praises public service and denigrates the business world, it's somewhat ironic to note that he's behaving just like Rupert Murdoch.

Obama the Idea Man?

In discussing Barack Obama's do-nothing, Jimmy Carter-esque approach to energy policy, Jennifer Rubin at Contentions noted that this ideological torpor is at odds with the Junior Senator's usual willingness to promote new ideas. While I am big fan of Ms. Rubin's, I have to take issue with her characterization of Obama. Sure, the Apostle of Hope-Change speaks generally about his plans for America. Yet, throughout this long campaign season, I have been struck by Obama's lack of specific "big ideas" for transforming the country. Am I missing something?

I get dissed by Obama

Having been raised in a lower middle class family, let me just say: I love the lower middle class. I think that their values, their commitment to family, their general approach to life is something I respect and admire. On the other hand, I certainly would never romanticize the lower middle class or the working class. As someone who has watched his parents struggle financially, have a hard time paying bills, even declare bankruptcy as my parents had to a few years ago - and experience all of the strain on a family that that entails - I've always thought that I would work hard so that I could avoid being in that situation. You know in my experience: when you don't have money, you spend all of your time worrying about money; when you do have money, you can get on with actually living your life.

So, I've never been particularly embarrassed about wanting to be able to live a comfortable life without having to constantly worry about money, and when I got into Harvard, I jumped at an opportunity to dramatically increase my earning potential.

So, I have to say that I find it really offensive when I find the Junior Senator from Illinois saying:

There's no community service requirement in the real world; no one forcing you to care. You can take your diploma, walk off this stage, and chase only after the big house and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should live by. You can choose to narrow your concerns and live your life in a way that tries to keep your story separate from America's.

But I hope you don't. Not because you have an obligation to those who are less fortunate, though you do have that obligation. Not because you have a debt to all those who helped you get here, though you do have that debt.

It's because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition. Because it's only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential and discover the role you'll play in writing the next great chapter in America's story.

Now, I don't personally feel like I'm "keeping my story separate from America's." Quite the contrary, I think I'm living the American Dream - that, through hard work, anyone in this Land of Opportunity can have a prosperous, comfortable life.

Nor am I so narcissistic that I think that I could achieve "collective salvation" for the nation if I were to forego a good job next year and instead do Teach for America or become a "community organizer" like the Junior Senator. In fact, I think that neither our collective nor my own individual salvation would be advanced by such a course. Just the opposite: I think that the thought that a 25-year-old - even one with a good education - could somehow solve the world's problems isn't just naive - it's usually premised upon self-centeredness and totally unjustified positive opinions about oneself. I for one don't think I could move to an impoverished neighbourhood and have anything particularly valuable to teach the people there - these neighbourhoods are, after all, populated by mature adults who have experienced far more of the "real world" than I ever will. I don't subscribe to the Left's paternalism - I think that, generally, people - even poor people - are far better at living their lives without my input than they would be with my input. So, I just want to go about pursuing a good life for myself, and supporting a social system in which other people are also able to pursue a good life for themselves. I'm not so arrogant as to say that I know what path is right for anyone else, nor do I particularly think I have the right to impose my opinions on others. I'm sorry, Senator, but that isn't a "poverty of ambition" on my part. That's actually respecting people in difficult situations and having the humility to admit that I don't have the ability to solve everyone's problems.

Though I guess that's why I'm not the Obamessiah.

It's a classic He-Said-He-Said.

John McCain: You tortured me.

Tran Trong Duyet: Torture? Come on, that was nothing.

And yet Duyet has endorsed McCain for president. What a wonderful, bizarre world we live in.

Good Polls for Big Mac

According to some recent polling, Obama is up by only 3 points in Oregon and he is up by only 4 points in Pennsylvania. Given the lingering goodwill and positive media attention surround the Junior Senator's clinching of the Democratic nomination, I think that this data should give Team Maverick a cause for optimism. If McCain could snag either Oregon or Pennsylvania, two states that both voted Dem in 2004, the Obamesiah would be finished.

Palin to Harry: Drill Away!

Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska (my pick for McCain's VP) just sent a letter to Harry Reid advocating drilling for oil in ANWR. I think I'm in love.

Usury Laws? In the 21st Century? Seriously?

It's now thirty years since that well-known right-wing firebrand, Justice Brennan, handed down the Supreme Court's decision in Marquette National Bank v. First of Omaha Service Corp. For the past decade, Elizabeth Warren has been castigating Marquette because the decision lets South Dakota impose Shylockian credit conditions on the innocent and unsuspecting American middle class. The middle class's reaction to this Cassandra of Credit has largely been a collective yawn, followed by a trip to the store to buy a big-screen TV or to take an extra vacation in the Bahamas, all financed by the creditors who are allegedly fleecing them and laughing all the way to the bank.

Now, up until now, I had generally thought of Elizabeth Warren as basically similar to my mother: well-intentioned but something of a killjoy. Yes, Mom, I did just sign up for another credit card - I'm sure I'll be able to pay it back someday, and if not I'll just get a new credit card and take a cash advance on it to make my credit card payments. Carpe diem - you only live once, so you might as well live it up.

Well, it now turns out that Elizabeth Warren has caught the ear of the Junior Senator from Illinois. Yes, it looks like Obama can cut another notch in his hyper-liberal belt, since he is now considering re-regulating the credit card industry. So that we can all relive the economic utopia that prevailed in this country before Justice Brennan handed down Marquette in 1978. I seriously don't get why Obama and the Democrats want to return this country to the 1970s. From my study of American history, it seems like the 1970s were pretty much the worst decade of the postwar era, and not one that most Americans look back on fondly. After the mean 1980s, the mean 1990s, and the mean 2000s, it's time to get back to the 1970s. Oh well, maybe after the country elects the neo-Carter, it'll elect a neo-Reagan in 2012.

Palin for VP

Politico reports that the McCain campaign is actively considering three women for the position of vice president. While Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson is certainly an impressive politician, I believe that she is a bit too old for the post, particularly given McCain's advanced age. Former Hewlett Packard CEO Carley Fiorina would be an interesting pick, but her lack of political skills could pose a problem.

Which leaves Alaska governor Sarah Palin, my personal choice for VP. Palin is a young, effective, popular Republican who has built her reputation on fighting corruption, a challenging task in the Last Frontier. Palin would bring much-needed youth and dynamism to the ticket, and she could woo disaffected Hillary voters much more effectively than could, for example, Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty.

Sure, Palin is a bit inexperienced, but Obama is not one to talk on that issue. Palin for VP!

Habeas and Handguns: The Supreme Court and the Election

According to a new Washington Post poll, 61% of Americans disagree with the Supreme Court's recent Boumediene decision, in which the Justices extended habeas corpus rights to the detainees at Guantanamo Bay. In the short run, the decision seems to have helped McCain, as Obama's embrace of the Court's meddling made him look soft on national security.

Even more than Boumediene, however, the Court's upcoming decision in Heller, the DC guns case, will have a tremendous impact on the 2008 race. If, as I believe is likely, the Supreme Court affirms that the Second Amendment does, in fact, protect the rights of citizens to own weapons, Obama will be forced to take a concrete stand on this delicate issue. Given that Obama has, as an Illinois legislator, supported banning all handguns, this should be fun to watch.

I predict that Obama will waffle again. More syrup, please.

Bubba To Endorse Big Mac?

Maybe, but probably not. It would be fun, though, and Bill does love being the center of attention...

Waffles

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air reports that Senator Obama is now threatening to block the FISA compromise bill that just passed the House. This would be the Junior Senator's third flip-flop on the issue (impressive even by Democratic candidate standards). First, Obama opposed any authorization of warrantless wiretapping. Next, Obama signalled that he supported the current compromise. Now, however, Obama is flipping yet again under sustained criticism from MoveOn.org and the liberal "netroots."

This looks like just another example of Mr. Obama's commitment to change. Pass the syrup.

Smokin' Dutch

It turns out that the Netherlands has just banned indoor smoking. Don't worry, though: marijuana is exempted from the ban. Good to see that the Dutch haven't lost their famous pragmatism.

Which brings me to my exit question: why is it that conservatives tend to prefer tobacco and demonize pot, whereas liberals tend to celebrate pot and demonize tobacco?

Canada Soon More Capitalist Than US

It appears that for the first time since the pre-Trudeau era, Canada is poised to be more capitalist than the US. Perhaps this might explain why the Canadian economy is doing "quite well", while the US economy is "stagnating".

I predict that, should Obama become president and raise taxes and increase government spending (as he wants so desperately to do), the result will be: 1) prolonged US recession; 2) Canada finally taking its place as the one true bastion of capitalism on the continent, thus reversing the bizarre trend of American liberals who wanted to move to Canada after Kerry's defeat in 2004. Yes, soon it will be the conservatives hankering to move to Canada after the US economy is decimated in the name of "fairness" and "social justice".

Breaking News: Obama is Black

Well, it appears that Senator Obama has learned well the lessons taught by his race-baiting Black Power pastor. Yesterday, he told his supporters that the GOP is going to use his race to "stoke fear". No doubt all those bitter-clingers out there are on the verge of going all KKK as soon as they find out Obama's black.

This is really slanderous (or is it libellous? - grr, with the bar exam fast approaching, I really need to figure this out). It is seriously outrageous that Obama is making comments like this.

Riding the Rails

I'm glad to hear that ridership on Amtrak has surged in the wake of record-high gas prices. I've long thought that this country's intercity rail system needed an overhaul, and hopefully this spike in usage will provide the political impetus for such an improvement. Nevertheless, I'm disappointed to see that President Bush has not embraced the idea of expanding and modernizing Amtrak. Unlike the President, I see no problem with government ownership of the intercity rails. Just look at Europe, whose clean, comfortable, and efficient trains put those in the US to shame.

Why can't the federal government subsidize train travel with at least the same zeal with which it supports highways?

Vero Possumus

I find the new Obama "presidential seal" both ridiculous and mildly offensive. The presidential seal is intended to convey the power and prestige of the US presidency to both the American people and foreign nations. By co-opting and modifying the seal, Obama has presumptuously appropriated a symbol of national unity for narrow partisan purposes. And the addition of the Latin motto is just silly.

Obama: Two-Faced Rhetoric We Can Believe In

Today's New York Times op-ed by David Brooks accurately describes Obama as a politician with a split personality. On the one hand, Obama waxes eloquent about new politics and the fierce urgency of now. On the other, Obama has no problem disingenuously attacking McCain on the "100 years in Iraq" comment and refusing to accept public campaign funding after promising that he would.

While Obama's record in public service is not long enough for him to be painted as a John Kerry-style flip-flopper, I do think that we're now seeing the beginning of a new anti-Obama narrative. Specifically, Obama is a traditional pol hiding behind a facade of inspirational "hope-n-change" rhetoric. Coming from McCain, who is nothing if not honest, I think that this could be effective.

Gender Bias at Wikipedia?

As a frequent, and, if I do say so myself, prolific contributor to Wikipedia, the election that I'm most concerned with at present is the ongoing election to the Wikimedia Board of Trustees.

But it just struck me that, going through the candidate statements, while trying, painfully, to figure out who to vote for, there is not a single female candidate running for the Wikimedia Board of Trustees. Fifteen male candidates, not one female. (Sidenote: note how the candidate statements come up in randomized order, so that the order is different every time you refresh the page. Almost as cool as the fact that the elections use the Schulze Method to determine the winner. But I digress.)

Any thoughts as to why Wikipedia is so gendered male? Do women just have a genetic aversion to freely-provided factual information, or is there actually something deeply misogynistic about the entire wiki-universe? Please help me unravel this mystery.

Also, if you have any thoughts as to who I should vote for, please let me know.

God Bless the Electoral College

According to Politico, Barack Obama may pull an Al Gore this year by winning the popular vote and losing the electoral college. This would happen, for example, if Obama racked up huge margins on the coasts while Maverick McCain won narrow victories in the Republican heartland and the South.

This sounds plausible. It also sounds like an example of the Electoral College working as it was intended. When the Framers eschewed direct popular voting for the presidency and chose the Electoral College instead, one of their aims was to ensure that every president would be truly national figure. Indeed, not until the election of Abraham Lincoln did a US president come to power on the basis of support from only one region of the country.

Sure, the Framers are racist, sexist, classist dead-white-guys. But they were right on occasion. Imagine that.

Buid, McCain, Build!

I'm glad to hear that McCain has advocated the construction of 45 new nuclear power plants to help address the high price of energy. With gas at $4 per gallon, I'm willing to bet that the public will be ready to embrace nuclear power in a way that they haven't before.

Furthermore, I think that McCain is uniquely well-positioned to advocate an expansion of the country's nuclear facilities. As a long-time supporter of alternative energies, McCain can effectively rebut the Democrats' idea that nuclear and renewable energies cannot co-exist as alternatives to oil. Why can't we both increase our use of nuclear power and expand tax credits for renewable energy?

Simpson > OBL

Last summer, I attended a speech by Patrick Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald was the prosecutor in US v. Usama bin Laden, the case which the Junior Senator from Illinois now points up as the model for fighting the War on Terror (not that the Senator would use that term, which he no doubt regards as fearmongering). Fitzgerald made the point that at the time that case was going on, it received virtually no press coverage. Why? Because that was right smack in the middle of the O. J. Simpson trial. The press couldn't care less about the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

On a sidenote: much as I like Patrick Fitzgerald (though not as a speaker - the man is damn boring), I don't actually think that US v. Usama bin Laden was that effective at fighting al-Qaeda. After all, bin Laden had already been convicted in absentia long before 9/11 occurred. Nevertheless, Obama feels this approach was good enough. What a disgraceful, September 10 approach.

Opportunity for McCain

The New York Times has just reported that Barack Obama has officially decided to opt out of the public financing system, thereby freeing himself to raise unlimited amounts of donor money. Given the Obama campaigns efforts to portray McCain as a tool of the Washington establishment, this presents Big Mac with an opportunity. Obama promised earlier in the campaign to accept public funding. By reneging now, it is he, and not McCain, who looks like a conventional pol.

Obama's First Term

Preview of Obama's first term.

Watch all 10 minutes of the clip. The similarities are eerie..

Right Idea, Wrong Country

British mercenary Simon Mann, currently on trial in Equatorial Guinea, has testified that the governments of Spain and South America attempted to overthrow that oil-rich country's dictator, Teodoro Obiang, in 2004. To be sure, Mr. Obiang probably had it coming. He has ruled Equatorial Guinea ruthlessly for near 30 years, and his reign has seen such atrocities as the near-genocidal murder of many members of the country's Bubi minority.

Still, I have to ask why South Africa would be willing to unseat Obiang at the same time it has remained wholly unwilling to confront Zimbabwean tyrant Robert Mugabe. In considering the fate of Simon Mann, we should consider whether regime change in Zimbabwe might be more urgent and more justified.

New Politics or New Pandering?

So, Barack Obama has just admitted that his anti-NAFTA rhetoric while campaigning for the votes of those bitter-clingers in Ohio and Pennsylvania was "overheated."

Is this an example of the vaunted New Politics? Is blatant pandering less offensive if the candidate admits afterwards that he was, in fact, pandering?

Still, I'm glad that Obama has come around and is not as antitrade as I had once feared. Looks like Goolsbee was right all along.

Thus Spake Tom Wolfe: Dan Rather = Idiot

Tom Wolfe speaks truth to power:

CHARLIE ROSE: You are at the stage in your fourth decade where people want you to give one last great lecture. I know you do them too. So if you were giving one last lecture about journalism.

TOM WOLFE: About journalism.

CHARLIE ROSE: Not just about finance but about journalism, what would you say because you`ve seen so much of it?

TOM WOLFE: I think what I would say is today as newspapers are declining rapidly, they`re losing money. I would just point out that all news today comes from the newspapers. All of it. Television has never initiated a successful story in its life. When they have a big story it`s always wrong. They had something about Israelis and atomic bombs. Absolutely wrong. They have George Bush being criticized in some letter — The so- called Dan Rather ...

CHARLIE ROSE: About George Bush`s... How he got into the National Guard.

TOM WOLFE: Right. Idiots. They should have looked at the piece of paper. Obviously not written by a typewriter.

"La plus ça change" we can believe in

It is fast becoming apparent that all of Obama's talk about changing the way Washington works is pure rhetoric. Whenever he has to actually do something, like make an important appointment, we're getting the same tired old Democratic faces. Heck, he appointed Walter Mondale's campaign manager to his VP search committee.

Today, the Obama campaign announced the formation of a National Security Working Group which includes blasts from the past such as Madeleine Albright, William Perry, and Warren Christopher (pictured).

Why not Jimmy Carter for VP?

Advice Falls On Deaf Ears

Hoshyar Zebari to Obama:

"We have a deadly enemy. When he sees that you commit yourself to a certain timetable, he will use this to increase pressure and attacks, to make it look as though he is forcing you out. We have many actors who would love to take advantage of that opportunity."

I appreciate Mr. Zebari doing his job, but I'm sure that Obama couldn't care less what he has to say. In fact, I'd be surprised if Obama even knows who he is.

It's so sad that, just as the corner is being turned in Iraq, the Democrats want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and pack up and go home.

Not a Muslim - We Get It, Already

"Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised as a Muslim, and is a committed Christian."

Heck, he won't even be photographed with Muslims.

On the other hand, doesn't that sound suspiciously like something that a secret Muslim would do? Hmm.

Political Spouses: A Jury Question

In recent weeks, I've grown tired of the debate over whether the wives of the presidential candidates should be topics of political discussion. My answer is that of course they should. In a democracy, the issue of what is relevant in electing a president should be left to the jury (i.e., the people) and not to the parties (i.e., the candidates) or to the judge (i.e., the elite media).

Speaking of Bacon... It's Baconhenge!

This speaks for itself. Made of bacon and french toast sticks.

Giuliani vs. Kerry

Who'd you rather have on your side in the debate over national security: the hard-charging prosecutor turned hero of 9/11 or the Vietnam veteran turned anti-war activist? I suspect that a poll asking only this question would do more than most to reveal the country's ideological leanings.

Michelle My Belle

The following teaser just appeared on Drudge:

NEW YORK TIMES to detail how Michelle Obama will get subtle makeover; new speech in works to stress humble roots... Editors planning publication in next 48 hours, newsroom sources tell DRUDGE... Developing...

Now, as a big fan of Ms. Obama's, I would be disappointed to see her change at all. I am, however, skeptical that any makeover will succeed given Michelle's, ummm, tenacity. Even if it does, it has to be good for McCain to have Barack's charming better half out on the stump, where she can continue making outrageous anti-American gaffes. I think I'm in love.

Furmanmania

Well, no sooner did I speculate on whether the appointment of that knife-juggler, Jason Furman, as Obama's senior economic adviser means that Obama's economic policy is tacking in the direction of the Rubin rather than the Reich wing of the Democratic Party, when we have this clarification from the candidate's mouth:

"I've got Bob Rubin on one hand [as an adviser] and [former Labor Secretary] Bob Reich on the other....I tend to be eclectic."

Now, just a minute. We have for some time known that the Junior Senator from Illinois intends to imitate the Apostle by becoming all things to all men, but isn't that a bit of a dodge? Now, as I read it, Obama's platform is now: increasing spending, slash the deficit, and lower taxes for average Americans all at the same time. If only economic policy were that simple. Real leaders, however, have to make tough choices, and Obama is increasingly looking like your average, old-school politician - willing to say anything to get elected, unwilling to do the hard thinking necessary to governing.

Obama: Vanguard of the Proletariat

This quote from Obama's Wall Street Journal interview, in which the Illinois Senator mourns the deleterious effects of globalization on the American worker, nicely sums up Obama's economic and cultural worldview:

"Globalization and technology and automation all weaken the position of workers," he said, and a strong government hand is needed to assure that wealth is distributed more equitably. He spoke aboard his campaign bus, where a big-screen TV was tuned to the final holes of the U.S. Open golf tournament.

There is a long history on the academic left of criticizing the harshness of capitalism while enjoying its fruits. Obama is in good company.

Mmmm.... Bacon....

I was struck by this quote from Al Gore at his endorsement of Obama the other day:

“If you care about food safety, if you like a “T” on your B.L.T., you know that elections matter."

It strikes me that blaming the Bush administration for a fairly routine and short-lived agricultural problem is a bit unfair. Besides, how will Gore's celebration of the BLT sit with the vegans?

Soft on Terror? Yes, he is.

I am pleased to see that McCain surrogates are finally picking the low-hanging fruit and criticizing Obama for his naivete regarding terrorism:

Former CIA head James Woosley: “This is an extremely dangerous and an extremely naive approach to terrorism.”

McCain aide Randy Scheunemann: “He really does not understand the nature of the enemies we face.”

I have long believed that McCain's odds in this election are better than is widely believed. Democrats are simply not serious on issues of national security, and haven't been for at least 30 years. By emphasizing that we do, in fact, live in a dangerous world, McCain can expose Obama's kumbaya approach to world affairs for what it is.

Pay No Attention to that Partisan Record Behind the Curtain

On reading this fascinating interview of Obama, I can't help but wonder whether the public will actually believe his claim to be a "post-partisan" figure. As Obama acknowledges, John McCain has a long record of opposing Republican leadership on several high profile issues. By contrast, the best bipartisan achievement Obama can point to is his support for generally uncontroversial ethics reform legislation. Pretty weak stuff. Reminds me of Obama's claim awhile back on Fox News that his commitment to bipartisanship led him to speak out in favor of the John Roberts nomination, even though he towed the hard-left line and voted against the Chief Justice.

Preview of the Obama Supreme Court?

Check out this picture of Judge James Burge of the Lorain County Court of Common Pleas in Ohio. Judge Burge recently struck down the state's death penalty as unconstitutional. Is this the sort of caring and empathetic Justice we can expect a President Obama to appoint? Yes, we can. Viva la revolucion.

Perot Back in the Saddle

A tip of my hat to H. Ross Perot for once again undertaking to educate the electorate via the use of simple charts and graphs.

The chart I've reproduced here, for example, is the best visual representation I've ever seen of the budget deficit. Eliminating the deficit means either expanding the box on the right (Obama's approach) or decreasing the box on the left (McCain's approach).

Anyhow, that's just one of dozens of useful and informative charts available here. I'll doubtless be making future use of them when I comment on fiscal matters..

Breaking News from Obama's Family: He is a Muslim After All

Malik Obama, Barack Obama's half-brother, today confirmed that Senator Obama was raised Muslim.

Not that this is really news. We've already had reports of Obama being raised Muslim (Islam is patrilineal, meaning that since his father was Muslim, Obama was born Muslim), he was registered as Muslim for grade school, where he received Muslim instruction (including learning how to recite the Koran in Arabic), and regularly accompanied his step-father, Lolo Soetoro, to mosque.

Now, my response to Obama being raised a Muslim is basically "So what?" There's no religious test for the presidency - I'd be fine if he were still a Muslim.

But it does bother me that his campaign insists on lying about his background, claiming that "Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised as a Muslim, and is a committed Christian."

Now, why does the campaign insist on lying about this? No doubt because of their low opinion of the American people. To their mind, if the bitter-clingers out there knew that Obama were raised Muslim, the Bible-thumping, gun-toting rednecks who make up the country would be so outraged that Obama's chances of being president would be sunk. Note: I don't actually think this is the case, but Obama's campaign team is a group of elitists who look down their noses at average Americans.

Oh well, I'm sure that in the next day or two, Obama will disown Malik Obama, just like Jeremiah Wright, Jim Johnson, etc., etc. "This is not the half-brother I knew."

Strategery

According to Obama campaign manager David Plouffe, the freshman senator from Illinois can win the presidency even if he loses both Ohio and Florida. Best of luck with that, Senator Obama. I, for one, strongly doubt that even the ersatz "Reagan of the Left" can flip such red states as Kansas, Nebraska, or the Dakotas to the Democratic column in November. Combined with Obama's paltry and evaporating bounce from clinching the nomination, this strategy should give Democrats cause to squirm.

Doubting Net Neutrality

While I am certainly not an expert on the issue, I have come to doubt whether "net neutrality" is an unambiguously correct policy goal. This piece from the New York Times sheds considerable light on the debate, and the broadband providers, usually cast as the villains in this morality play, come across as wholly reasonable. Heavy users of limited resources like drinking water or electricity have to pay more for their use. Why shouldn't heavy users of bandwidth?