Gagging the EPA
It isn't often I find much worthwhile in the Post-Dispatch. St. Louis's supposedly liberal paper is poorly written and poorly edited. Today, is an exception, though I still think the editorial could have been stronger. Today they discuss the administration's efforts to Gag the EPA.
One could claim that science has been politicized for some time as some recently have, but that doesn't address the amount of politicization in one administration versus another. It is a postmodern cop-out. Either way, isn't it time for a different way of doing busines?
archpundit 12/31/2002 11:30:46 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Huh?
Reynolds often invites scorn by rather juvenile coded messages that ignore the point of the blogosphere--pointing towards the original source. Often this is followed by a descent into more juvenile jibes being thrown about. The problem is that when he does say things that are absurd, too many names are being called.
Here he argues that humanitarian aid is apparently of no use to projecting America abroad. The money qu0te is:
It doesn't matter if you're a humanitarian: you're still just a target to these people.
Well, unless these people are all of the Arab/Muslim world there are a lot of those other people to impact and turn into allies on the side of human dignity. Apparently, after Murray was defended by say, people who have actually studied Al Qaeda, there had to be another way to smear Murray and just throwing up his hands and saying humanitarian aid was pointless was the method for Reynolds.
The real question for the US is how do he aid in developing democratic institutions in the Middle East and what tools will most help such a process. Humanitarian aid, infrastructure and other social services don't solve the problem alone, but they do build up good will and civil society. Good will provides fewer recruits and fewer places to hide for violent Islamists. Strong civil societies lead to greater freedom.
Or you can just be a knee jerk know nothing. Everyone has a choice, I guess.
archpundit 12/31/2002 3:59:52 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Fitzgerald vows to create a viable Republican Opponent!
Quick--put a bullseye on my forehead!
While conservatives near O'Hare are against expansion, Peter's continued insistence will embolden a revolt by the Republican business interests. Keep up the good work Pete!
archpundit 12/31/2002 1:54:03 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
G-Ry Indictment Countdown
I'm pretty sure that no one is surprised, but with the election in hind-sight, G-Ry is about to be indicted. Rich Miller covers the essential details.
There was some question as to whether G-Ry's daughter was the key or Fawell. Apparently Fawell will bring down his old boss.
Never trust a man who hires a $2 hooker.
Read the story above for a good start, but this story could break much harder over the next couple years. Both parties in Illinois have a lot they don't want anyone to know about, but one issue that may yet come out with someone like Fawell on the hook is the ties of Republican to black street gangs. Everyone understands that Democrats have some ties to such gangs through GOTV efforts. Because the story is tough to nail even on the modest efforts of Democrats, nothing much has broken publicly.
Gator Bradley and Larry Hoover, Gangster Disciples, are tied to the 1990 Edgar election. No one will say exactly what was going on, but the conspiracy theory alledges that Hoover and Bradley worked with Edgar's people to get him elected. It is hard to imagine Jim Edgar knowing about this personally, but the key question no one that I know of has nailed down is whether these guys were flown around on election day 1990 on state planes. The payoff was supposedly continued control of the Illinois Prison system by the gangs.
Some of this started to come out when the Richard Speck tapes emerged and the public got an inside look at how out of control the state's prisons were. If anyone remembers the hearings, they were stopped pretty quickly. No one in any either party wanted to know what would come out.
Fawell is the kind of guy who can probably lead federal prosecutors to ask the right questions of the right people. I have little doubt Patrick Fitzgerald has the guts to do so. The people of Illinois deserve a full investigation. I doubt there is a tie to that and the Harold Washington Party stalking horse candidate that some Republicans employed, but I guess it is possible. If so, this could hit hard and fast beginning in January.
Chalk one up for Petey.
archpundit 12/31/2002 1:41:38 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Kaus and half-full glasses
While I applaud any references to Gregg Easterbrook's environmental reporting, Kaus seems to have missed one of the bigger environmental stories broken about the Bush administration and it is damn ugly
The administration stopped the issuance of a danger warning to consumers for a particular type of asbestos. I normally find little in the P-D of use, but this story is a must read that carefully deconstructs the political meddling in a situation in which science should determine EPA choices.
The money is here:
Martyak, chief EPA spokesman, argues that the agency has informed the public of the potential dangers. "It's on our Web site," he said.
archpundit 12/31/2002 1:04:18 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Steve Chapman and Hope
Every year Steve Chapman write an end of the year column about freedom. It is a fine way to end the year.
There is always work to do, but it is nice to note, the human race is slowly progressing. Let's work towards the invasion of Iraq leading to greater freedom, and not another convenient dicator for economic interests.
archpundit 12/31/2002 12:47:35 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Some Questions
Joshua Grossman had some questions. Some of which I'll answer now and others I do more with later.
1) Now that Demos have Gov + both houses of legis. in Ill., what
legislation can we expect to see passed??
Not too much given the $5 Billion hole in the state budget. As noted below by Rich Miller revenue enhancement will occur. The next two years will be budget, budget, and less budget.
Union issues will be at the front, but only of the costless variety for a couple years. A minimum wage hike can be expected to be an issue, but it may not make it. Chicago school reform is off the table fortunately. The union had been bucking to repeal the reform from the 90's, but Duncan came up with a compromise.
Ultimately, rural school district and other not so wealthy district funding will have to come up. I've been saying that since 1990 so sooner or later I'll be right. From what I can tell Madigan doesn't want to touch it so I'm not sure it will rise to the top.
2)Can Demos recruit serious candidate to run against Jerry Weller(who I
see as only even THEORETICALLY vulnerable incumbent U.S.House member of eitherparty from IL or MO for that matter.
Weller probably is safer than you think. He snakes into McLean County so his parents can vote for him (lame redistricting reason of the cycle). His district is largely rural and conservative. A bit of labor, but McLean and the rural areas outpoll labor pretty easily. Of potentially vulnerable, Kirk is first on the list and sometime in the distant future, Hyde's seat might become competitive or Hasterts. Neither is in trouble anytime soon, but trends are moving especially in 6 (Hyde). Kirk is safe for now and until he retires (don't get me wrong there). Biggert's district might be competitive in a few years as well.
The person who didn't draw a fight that surprised me was Tim Johnson. That district should be strong Republican, but that guy is such a dirtbag it is hard to imagine someone couldn't have just stood up and pointed that out repeatedly and gotten 48% of the vote at least. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets primaried at some point--like after a DUI or something.
So no, I don't see anyone vulnerable in Illinois.
3)Can a Kirk type win statewide Repub. primary in IL????---if not I
wonder if Repubs. r doomed statewide unless Demos recruit felons or Mosely-Braun.
Ask Andrew McKenna the summer of '04. I tend to think not if you are new to the scene. I don't doubt that Edgar or Big Jim Thompson could do it, but the ground operation of the wingnuts is consistently beating out moderates. There best shot would be to target lessor offices and move up from there.
4)And finally do Wellstonian type Demos in state leg. in either IL or MO
have a "Progressive Caucus" a la U.S. House???
Missouri. Don't make me laugh. Actually there is a black caucus in both states. I'm not sure of other interest groups in Missouri. Missouri legislature is a rather strange bird and given many people who would normally have the same interests hate each other, not much organizing goes on. Maybe someone else is more familiar with it.
In Illinois there certainly are legislative interest groups and I forget how they are organized. Traditionally, goo-goos in the Democratic Party are often around and quickly run over. Dawn Clark Netsch is a great example.
5) Why have the Cook County SUBURBS of Chicago---taken en toto---trended much more to Dems(e.g. state leg. elections) than have the other burbs (e.g.DuPage, Kane etc.) which continue to elect almost exclusively Repubs.
Demographics and DuPage is starting to follow, though it will take a while. Read the Emerging Democratic Majority and it is the same old story. Inner ring burbs are going Democratic on social issues. Either they are labor towns or the liberal elites of lore. Places like Oak Park are beautiful old towns that are populated by liberals who love nice houses.
Kane is exurbia exemplified. Mega Churches (Willow Creek is just over the Cook border), malls, congestion and a mediocre standard of living.
DuPage avoided some reallignment for a long time by the existence of an iron tight machine. With the retirement of Pate Philip, defeat of J-Ry and the containment of Birkett in DuPage, that will start to change. They are losing their positions and as such, they won't have much to spread around the county. It won't be a solid Democratic area by any means, but it will become more competitive.
Will County is heading towards the Republicans as it becomes more exurban in nature instead of being a hotbed of labor. Will isn't growing in the good way though. Think of those clowns who jumped out of the stands at Comiskey and you are seeing the unfortunate future of Will County (save your whining about my description Will residents--I was born there).
6)Why do rural/small town counties in Iowa, including ones that border Missouri, vote for Dems. Gov.Vilsack AND Sen.Harkin in 2002(almost all did for both except for far west of state by Nebraska) & for Gore+Nader over Bush + Buchanan in 2000 (many did , though definitely fewer than Vilsack/ Harkin won), while rural/small town counties in Missouri almost all(including those on border w/Iowa) voted for Talent in 2002,Bush in 2000.
Because Iowans have infinitely better judgment and more class than Miserians. I've lived both places and I choose Iowa for niceness, culture and style. Iowa has a strange prairie progressive streak similar to Minnesota and Wisconsin and it goes that far south. Missouri outside of KC and St. Louis is a southern state looking for some southern manners. Part of it might be the quality of the farming and the strength of the communities. Part of it probably is that Iowa hasn't traditionally been divided on class issues like Missouri. Iowa is very homogenous and so there are fewer tensions historically based on race. Iowa's churches probably promote social justice more.
These really aren't answers because they don't answer why Iowa is the way it is. I don't know. As one state official put it in discussing why Iowa was successful in ag outreach projects for environmental quality, "They are just good people."
That doesn't mean Republicans are bad, but there is something about Iowa that overcomes partisan divisions and allows people to switch between parties easier. I think. When does Hogberg come back anyway?
archpundit 12/31/2002 12:43:24 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
My one Award of the Year
Dude, if you are going to rip off the taxpayer, you can do better than a $2 Hooker in Costa Rica. It isn't that you rip us off, it is that you do it for so little.
Winner: Scott Falwell.
archpundit 12/30/2002 11:21:38 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Suburban Pols
Betty Loren-Maltese is out in Cicero and the good fight continues. Two community activists--read not mobbed up and trying to clean up the garbage that has hung on since Capone's death--vie to be Mayor of Cicero. The Dark Side has also tapped a Latino hoping to keep power just a bit longer. My guess is they will be successful, but with the growing Latino population the dark sides days are numbered. Well, that and an aggressive US Attorney.
And just how many Italians are even left in Chicago Heights?
archpundit 12/30/2002 11:07:26 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Chicago Alderman
I have to admit that minus a few favorite alderman, I'm not wired into the Chicago Aldermanic races well enough to give tight discussions of the politics involved. Then again, as has been previously noted, most alderman are pretty much bobbleheads in Chicago so who the hell cares. As long as they answer the phones and fill out the work orders everyone is happy. In a couple interesting races there is some mild interest.
First, Bob Love is running in the 15th. With his connections and access to money he'll put up a challenge.
Second, in the most humorous race of the year Benard Stone's son is running and Stone is endorsing the other guy.
archpundit 12/30/2002 11:03:27 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Mosely-Braun Delusional, Field's up get it for the taking
Can the Dems challenge her name on the ballot for impaired mental capacity?
Some important side information:
If Moseley-Braun becomes a candidate, she may face another black candidate, state Sen. Barack Obama, D-Chicago, who already has begun raising money. But she said Obama told her earlier this year that if she got in the race, he would get out.
"We don't know what Senator Moseley-Braun is going to do, but we're in," countered Obama campaign manager Dan Shomon.
Obama is in. This is interesting, but I have to wonder if reality hits him if he realizes that his support in the African-American community will dissipate leaving him intellectual liberals and a far cry from a plurality he finds a way out.
Other Democrats, Blair Hull, a wealthy Chicago businessman, and Gery Chico, a former Chicago school board president, have also put together campaign teams. U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky of Chicago, Illinois Comptroller Dan Hynes and Cook County Treasurer Maria Pappas are also weighing entry into the field
Schakowsky won't run. She has no machine backing and downstate she is an unknown. Her polling numbers will come back poor and she'll realize it will be a waste. I don't take here that seriously. She is a nice liberal and all, but largely unplugged from the combine and thus not a serious contender currently. Think Dawn Clark Netsch updated. Much like Netsch she is north shore liberal.
I'd be surprised if Pappas runs. She could be an interesting candidate, but Daley is pretty wishy washy on her. Madigan has no special relationship with her and she isn't especially close to G-Rod so there isn't much traction. The one possibility is that the party asks her to run to pull female votes from Mosely-Braun.
Dan Hynes is an up and comer, but my sense is this won't be the right race for him. The original idea was he'd run in '06 for governor, but with G-Rod that is out. He may have to move up to Secretary of State then and build his patronage army up and wait for 2010 Senate depending upon who has the seat or 2010 Governor with G-Rod moving to the Senate, or in his dreams the White House.
Hynes is remarkably talented and besides the horrifying bowl cut he sported in this years commercials he'll move up soon enough. With a race including Mosely-Braun, Chico and Hull, he doesn't have a niche--especially with Daley backing Hull. Chico gets a lot of corporate types and Latinos. Moseley-Braun gets African-Americans and some women. Hull takes the machine apparatus and lots of money he is willing to spend. Hynes is left with decent fundraising as a sitting Constitutional Officer, but not much of constituency to win. Look for a deal to be struck with him getting the machine backing for SOS in '06 and a higher profile. This benefits Madigan, Daley and G-Rod so they'll make it happen.
Chico is a connected guy with good money connections and probably Luis Guitierez's support. He'll pull in the Latino community and some Democratic business support. He should do well with labor (depending on Hynes choice) except possibly the Chicago Teachers Union who didn't have much use for him as President of the Chicago Board of Education.
Hull is interesting because he isn't well known statewide, but he has the money and connections to become well known pretty damn quickly. He is a version of the millionaire strategy the Democratic Party likes to use. Recruit a talented, TV friendly, candidate with several million dollars burning a hole in his ego and let him go at it. Given Petey is the same kind of guy, the issue is neutralized in the general election. It is hard to get a read on the guy given he doesn't have much of an elective office track record, but the Daley thumbs up that seems to be accepted as truth means he is a serious challenger with some smart things to say.
Mosely-Braun has the black vote locked up and some women. However, after her disastrous first run, don't expect suburban Democratic women to give a damn about her. She ran a sleazy office, a sleazy campaign and sleaze oozed from most of her actions. Her minimum is 24% in the primary, but more likely in the mid-to-high 30s. The machine, rightfully, thinks she is toxic, but doesn't know how to go after her without offending African-Americans. Look to Jesse White, Illinois Secretary of State, for a possible machine offensive. He won't denounce her and may even endorse her, but the question is does he as chief of patronage in the SOS office, go to work for her.
For those confused about why Secretary of State is such a big deal in Illinois look G-Ry and Edgar. Two former governors who moved to that post to make their gubernatorial runs. Why? SOS has the highest number of usable patronage posts (and G-Ry's legal downfall) and your name is in every wallet. Past SOSs include Alan Dixon and Paul Simon as well.
SOS's have had more success at moving up then other positions in Illinois. In many states the Attorney General has been the stepping stone, but in Illinois we see what just happened to J-Ry. Further in the past Roland Burris got rolled three times running for governor, Ty Fahner is in Chicago at Mayer, Platt and Brown, and Neil Hartigan got his butt kicked by Edgar, then the SOS.
The real question is can the machine clear the field for one serious candidate against Moseley-Braun. Hull has the early Daley backing, but Madigan and G-Rod Father-In-Law are keeping their cards close to their vest. Chico could do well in with some backing from them, but Chico-Moseley-Braun-Hull, gets awfully close to a Moseley-Braun victory. With Obama, there might be some room to still defeat her in the primary. Hynes-Hull-Chico leads to a Mosely-Braun win. Obama, while probably the brightest, has little chance with her in the race, though the machine could offer him a Constitutional Office in '06 to run a credible race.
Hull-Moseley-Braun. Hull wins with at least 55% of the primary vote.
Chico-Moseley-Braun. Pick em. Slight advantage to Chico with Obama in the race.
Chico, Hull, Hynes all beat Fitzgerald with 10 points. Moseley-Braun loses by 6-20 depending on what new campaign finance scandal hits her. Obama wins a squeaker. Schakowsky loses by 10 and Pappas pick 'em (though a strong campaign by her wins).
One of the more interesting notes in the original article is this:
But Simon added, "She clearly has a residue of public relations problems," among them, her trips to Nigeria to visit that country's brutal former military dictator, the late Gen. Sani Abacha.
It isn't a good sign when Saint Paul takes a shot at you before the campaign begins.
Correction: I thought I posted this last night, but Paul Simon was not SOS. My mistake and thanks to Tiger for pointing it out.
archpundit 12/30/2002 10:57:02 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
What, do you want me to do, take off my pants?
Da Mare has four, count 'em four opponents. They have a slight chance. But not much of one with modern medicine. He is younger, in better health, and monitored much better than J.
Challenger 1: Robert Floid Plump
So far, we know he filed 1100 signatures and "Plump, who calls himself the "spiritual son of Harold Washington,""
Challenger 2: Patricia McAllister
Software engineer, 11,000 signatures.
Challenger 3: Rev. Joseph McAfee
???
Challenger 4: Rev. Paul Jakes
He filed 20,000 signatures. I like to call him the uniter, not the divider. You see, he is so wildly unpopular with Chicago cops that they will vote for Daley even though they are upset about labor relations. Jakes crusades against police brutality.
Daley's refusal to debate has not been made yet. Just remember challengers, always keep your back to a building during a snowstorm press conference.
archpundit 12/30/2002 10:20:33 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
The party of the future
probably isn't going to do well in the areas of the country most left behind by the increasing prosperity of America.
archpundit 12/30/2002 9:48:30 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Marshall on North Korea
The problematic policy choices made by the 'adults' are reviewed at Talking Points Memo.
archpundit 12/30/2002 9:44:51 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
I like it
From the Capitol Fax
THE HOLE Despite the threat of massive deficits, Governor-elect Rod Blagojevich continues to cling to his campaign promise to reopen several shuttered state facilities. G-Rod has asked Illinois Central College not to open a branch office at the now-closed Zeller Mental Developmental Center. Governor Ryan signed a long-term lease with ICC for the Zeller property, but Blago is threatening to break the lease. It should be fascinating to watch how this guy patches the deficit, reopens facilities and implements new programs. No way can he do this without more gaming or higher taxes or both. The other day, Blago said the deficit was larger than he thought. Whenever a politician says something like that, you can bet revenue enhancements are not far off.
The substance is no surprise. Anyone who didn't realize Blago and J-Ry weren't lying about taxes is amazingly stupid.
What I like is G-Rod. It fits so well. New nickname.
archpundit 12/30/2002 1:08:01 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
For those whining about Patty Murray's comments
you might chastise her for attributing every action of those groups in his terrorist network to him, but let's remember that Islamic Jihad is a part of Al Qaeda, and one of Atta's big complaints about the Egyptian government was that they shut down Islamist day care facilities (NYT October 10, 2001).
Now if anyone wants to complain that she was being stupid for just saying Bin Laden, remember the current occupant of the White House has been happy to spread the idea that Iraq and Al Qaeda are closely linked. If Iraq is somehow responsible for Al Qaeda, certainly Islamic Jihad qualifies as a branch of Al Qaeda given Ayman al-Zawahiri is OBL's second in command.
The right wing circus has made even the normally combative Tom Spence lay down on this one. Right wing lies and ignorance tried to take the day again. Murray was largely accurate if imprecise in her comments. In fact, an author on Al Qaeda, had this to say:
Michael Swetnam, co-author of a book on bin Laden and al-Qaida, said Murray's comments were mostly on the mark. He said bin Laden since 1988 has been on a mission to build schools, roads and homes for widows of those killed in the fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan.
In a fuller article he says she got it right. Of course, slandering someone is more fun than knowing what the hell one is talking about.
archpundit 12/30/2002 1:04:37 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Why do we know the Raelians are lying?
Because they are fruitcakes like all creationists--well actually some creationists are just lying sacks of garbage trying to make money.
So people who don't understand the rather complex and compelling bio-chemical evidence for evolution were the first to clone a human. My ass.
archpundit 12/30/2002 12:52:15 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Note to Kevin Drum
If you don't know who Jack Chick is read Scoobie who has an interest in all things wacky fundamentalist even more than me. Chick is a riot. His stuff on evolution is the best.
archpundit 12/30/2002 12:48:46 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Did I say I'd be back when?
To ramp myself up to regular posting, I just wanted to pass along this gem--there is no need for an apology for slavery because God used it to deliver Africans from idolatry.
Call me whacky, but I think God had other means at his disposal--then again the local Prebytary is Giddings-Lovejoy. (bonus points and a no-prize for anyone who knows why that is important.
archpundit 12/30/2002 12:45:31 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Sad News:
Carmella Hartigan, Cub Fan Extraordinaire passed away. Strom Thurmond only wishes he had as much class as she had.
archpundit 12/23/2002 11:34:24 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Moseley-Braun everything bad about the Republican Party?
I received some feedback asking how I could use Moseley-Braun as an example of everything wrong with the Republican Party. From the original post there are several things she has done that I would like to have only occur in the Republican Party:
1) coddling murderous dictators
2) Corporate tax breaks for no purpose besides coddling favor with corporate leaders
3) Campaign Finance Fraud--errrr...irregularities
4) Backing a political hack over a decent human being to curry favor with an group of political hacks
5) blatant patronage politics
I'm happy to admit that many Democrats do these things, but as a Democrat, why should I tolerate it.
archpundit 12/23/2002 10:05:52 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Back tomorrow
Swamped with holidays, family and work. Back sometime tomorrow.
For those having problems with Blogger, consider blogstudio--a free version is available and for $15/year you get comments and RSS. I believe stats are being tested, but might be more than the $15 when introduced. No problems with the archives like Blogger is having--though you have to generate them everyone once in a while. Blogstudio isn't perfect and has some down time, but nothing like what I experienced with Blogger.
Illinois News is amazing
--Ryan Tied to scandal finally--indictments sure to follow
--Moseley-Braun tries for a rematch
--Fitzgerald pulls head out of butt and realizes he may be facing black woman and criticizes Lott
--Rolando Cruz and others pardoned. Birkett still doesn't get it
--Long series on a death row lawyer in Trib
--Series on Murder in Chicago in Trib Editorial pages
--Daley has one token opponent who is running on police brutality--damn, even the police and firefighters might vote for Daley this time
archpundit 12/23/2002 9:55:17 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Who is the Senate's Jim Leach?
As much as I appreciate Joe Conason's plug the other day, there is one person I disagree strongly with him over and that is Jim Leach. In 1998 Leach brought down Gingrich by refusing to vote for him as Speaker. This would mean that Leach and some of his allies would abstain or vote for Bob Michels. In doing so, they would have thrown the plurality to Dick Gephardt.
Is there a Jim Leach amongst the Senate Republicans? You'd think Chafee would refuse to vote for Lott or Nickles. Does he have a backbone? Probably not, he is a bit of a flake. What about Susan Collins? Hagel? Lugar? Warner? Snowe?
I guess I still think Lott has a shot unless someone pulls a Leach. As I have mentioned before the Senate is a chummy place and taking out a leader is pretty tough.
archpundit 12/19/2002 12:26:09 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
If anyone at Blogstudio Reads this
Ummm..that wasn't a denial of service attack, that was me trying to access the site. My connection was down today because of a report by blogstudio, so most posting will begin again tomorrow. Well, if I get my connection back.
archpundit 12/19/2002 12:00:57 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
CofCC Funny?
While we all should be concerned about these fruitcakes having some actual influence, looking around the St. Louis chapter's web site turns up some great pics.
Go here and scroll all the way down. I mean, with that goatee and purple jacket don't we have the survivalist meets the Joker pretty well down?
Go here and see how white people are also significantly affected by lead poisoning in St. Louis.
archpundit 12/18/2002 12:55:00 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
In a desperate effort to get flamed in the most wordy manner
possible Kevin Drum pokes fun:
POSTSCRIPT: As long as we're on the subject, my all-time most detested writing advice is: write the way you talk. Have you ever read a transcript of an impromptu discussion? It's practically unreadable, sort of like a Steven Den Beste essay. So whatever else you do, please don't write the way you talk. Write better than you talk.
archpundit 12/18/2002 12:21:02 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Ashcroft's Revisionist History
No not in the Southern Partisan, but in the history of his own campaigns.
Via Calpundit on Larry King Live tonight (no transcript yet):
"Can I call you John?" Sure, no problem. "Any comment on the Trent Lott situation?" Not really. You know, in Missouri we integrated pretty easily after the court decision.
Lest we forget this September 7, 1990 gem from the Post-Dispatch:
As attorney general and governor, Ashcroft has complained about the costs of desegregation programs in St. Louis and Kansas City and called them ''educationally counterproductive and bankrupt.''
For those with any doubt, Ashcroft rode the wave of resentment in rural Missourah and South Saint Louis over the outrage of providing equal resources for the urban districts. This is a bipartisan sport with current AG Jeremiah Jay Nixon doing the same later. However, Ashcroft had been a particularly strong advocate against court ordered desegregation efforts.
archpundit 12/18/2002 12:11:28 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Thanks and be patient
First, thanks to Joe Conason for the link--scroll down for the post. Unfortunately, Blogstudio, which I have praised in the past, is having connectivity issues with its vendors. I'll be back tonight or tomorrow. Expect continuing problems through Thursday. Impeccable timing.
archpundit 12/17/2002 3:16:49 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
What Lott Really Meant
The Good Dr. Luntz just pronounced that what Lott meant when he said a Thurmond Presidency would have avoided all these problems was that Bill Clinton and his loose moral standards wouldn't have occurred. We could have avoided them with a Thurmond Presidency. IOW, Bill Clinton's genitalia wouldn't have become the cause of every modern problem.
The problem is that Strom was so randy, he'd put Bill to shame. Besides marrying very young women, he also is reported to have slept with a woman on the way to her execution. His behavior as a younger man was well known. If Bill Clinton's moral failings were a problem, imagine if we'd had a segregationist serial adulterer as President. So the Good Dr. Luntz seems to have a Polisci degree without knowing any history.
Update:
From the transcript:
MATTHEWS: ... because you?re an analyst of public opinion. We?re going to have a poll in a few moments about what?s going on here. He was asked by Ed Gordon, a very effective, I thought, interviewer tonight on Black Entertainment Television. What problems were you talking about when you said we wouldn?t have them if we?d voted for a segregationist back in ?48. What do you believe he thinks those problems are that we?ve avoided or that we?ve incurred because we didn?t vote racist back in ?48?
LUNTZ: It has to do with problems that we?ve had over the last eight or nine years. I don?t want to speak...
MATTHEWS: He said we wouldn?t have these problems if we had voted for Strom Thurmond in ?48 for president, a segregationist who ran against Harry Truman. What is he talking about there?
LUNTZ: I think that some of the issues that he?s talking about, quite frankly, and I don?t know if he would agree or disagree, but I think some of it has to do with Bill Clinton and the things that happened in the 1990s, the moral decay of the country. The acceptance of certain types of behavior. If...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) come on.
LUNTZ: ... you-if you...
So there you have it, voting for a man who had probably slept with a death row inmate, would have solved the problem of Bill Clinton's genitalia.
archpundit 12/16/2002 8:45:20 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Mike Royko Memorial Award
Today goes to Best of the Web:
Now, what's "white" about names like Laurie and Jill? Wouldn't a fair comparison have included some odd-sounding white names, like Dweezil or Moon Unit? And if employers discriminate against people with "black" names, how come Latonyas and Latoyas were more likely to get called back than Emilys were?
Let's see
Kenya vs. Moon Unit. Raise your hand if you can see a difference. Thousands of Horseshacks are beating out Taranto here.
One should ask oneself why a name other than Fucknuts Dipshit should matter in who gets a call back. What reason besides race accounts for the difference?
Mike Royko wrote a rather stupid column years ago that made the same argument. He was then hit on the head and reminded of folks from the neighborhood named Stanislav. Perhaps they don't have people with 'weird' names where Taranto's upbringing occurred.
archpundit 12/16/2002 3:42:09 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Contest
What is wrong with this story?
Interestingly, CNN was notified of the problem the day it was published and have never corrected it.
archpundit 12/16/2002 3:30:47 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Via Eschaton: Federal flood insurance is going on hiatus. It would be nice if it just went away
Via Eschaton:
Federal flood insurance is going on hiatus. It would be nice if it just went away. The program subsidizes insurance so flood prone areas can develop. The question no one besides Steve Chapman (no longer available) seems to want to ask is why do we want areas that are prone to floods to develop? Let people pay for their own insurance and flood prone areas will see far less development--a good thing for those who value wetlands and don't value subsidizing sprawl.
archpundit 12/16/2002 2:48:23 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Ashcroft, Talent, Bond and the Cof CC
Conason starts the next crusade. It is interesting to watch a meme get started without any blast faxes. Tells you a lot about how the press in general works, doesn't it?
He reports that Ashcroft had relations with a guy named Thomas Bugel, a former member of the St. Louis School Board, and a member of the CofCC.
By now, you are asking what the hell goes on in St. Louis. And you should. Given Tom Spencer has written a book much of which is about racial politics in St. Louis he might have some good stuff to report here.
Bugel, Earl P. Holt III, Louis Fister, and Shirley Kiel were white supremacists who ran in the 1989 School Board Election and won with stealth candidacies. They officially called themselves "members of the Metro South Citizens Council, a group that says it promotes ''racial integrity'' and the interests of white citizens." (P-D March 29, 1991).
They often used the euphemism that they were anti-busing, but busing was only the most vocal issue they liked to talk about. Scratch beneath the surface, and they were and are simply racists.
Civic Progress took over the 1993 election and decided they had enough. They ran a slate and swept out the CofCC faction. For Ashcroft to not know what these clowns were about would be impossible. They had been a prominent story in the one of the two major state papers.
Even stranger though, is this tidbit from the P-D on January 21, 2000:
A group of St. Louisans is pushing for a federal investigation into the treatment of a prisoner at the U.S. medical center in Springfield, Mo.
The group, led by former St. Louis School Board member Thomas Bugel, is asking area lawmakers for their "immediate assistance in ending the torture of Dr. Charles T. Sell." The group has gathered 1,000 signatures on petitions seeking congressional help. On Thursday, Bugel and Mark Sell, the inmate's brother, met with Rep. Jim Talent, R-Chesterfield, whose district includes Sell's home address. Bugel also gave copies of the petition to one of Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond's assistants.
Talent's office released a statement saying, "It's clear Dr. Sell's situation has the support of many in the community. These are serious charges and my office will review them closely and take appropriate action."
Patrick Werner, district office director for Sen. Bond's office in Clayton, said the staff will make a formal request for information about Sell's case and review it for possible action.
"support of many in the community"
Yeah, I suppose so Jim.
To be fair, Gephardt and Gene McNary also visited with the organization in the 1980s before they were as well known. Both have publicly blasted the organization since.
Oops: All but Holt ran in '87 and finished their term in '91. Holt was in office from '89-93. Fact checking my own ass.
Oops 2: First, some grammar was fixed above. Second, the School Board Members except Holt served from '87-'93. Holt did serve from '89-'93. The reason for my confusion is that before the passage of Senate Bill 781 in 1998, terms for the SLPS Board were six years. SB 781 changed that to four years. I do not know the reason why Holt served for only four. My apologies for the confusion. Not surprisingly, on this matter no one had yet contacted me. Finally, the slate technically refused to run when they were targeted by Civic Progess, an uber-Chamber of Commerce in the Saint Louis region, claiming the vote was rigged.
archpundit 12/16/2002 2:11:28 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
The Dark Prince Revises History
As usual the Dark Prince of the Right just makes up the facts over the outrage over Lott's remarks. The CBC largely ignored the story as was reported on Reliable Sources over the weekend. But it makes a nice argument for conservative victimhood by the Dark Prince.
archpundit 12/16/2002 1:32:05 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Fitz, Lott, Lahood
Kristin McQueary points out the dangerous game Fitzgerald plays by backing Lott. Admittedly, African-Americans and Latinos aren't voting for the guy, but this kind of thing helps turn them out.
McQueary also reports the meeting between Pete and LaHood went nowhere and Dan Proft of the Illinois Leader is trying to build a conservative coalition of wingnuts to 'win' elections. Keep up the good work, Dan. The Dems love you for it.
archpundit 12/16/2002 1:27:55 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
IL School Funding Crisis
Usually I refer to the problems in funding Illinois Schools as largely a rural problem. In fact, it is a broader problem with many suburban areas outside of the wealthy north or growing west experiencing the same issues. Phil Kadner does a good job in describing the political problems of any solution and the paralysis gripping southwest suburban officials.
archpundit 12/16/2002 1:23:31 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
January 6th?
Sweet, Trent stays in the news cycle for 3 more weeks
archpundit 12/16/2002 1:13:17 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Too Many Women In Media Management
I'm not kidding. Don't believe me, read Media Watch at the Illinois Leader. The fascinating thing about the column is it doesn't connect this 'imbalance' to any actual problems, but just asserts it exists.
archpundit 12/16/2002 1:08:21 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Bragging about being irrelevant?
First, he brags about a student getting a paper published on the environment ethics of terraforming Mars and now he cites an old article in which he is credited with nominating Arthur C. Clarke for the Nobel Peace Prize
Next up, "I'm in News of the Weird!"
archpundit 12/16/2002 11:56:43 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
A rather effective look at Lott's problem
by Steve Chapman.
Just passin' by ma'am
archpundit 12/16/2002 11:22:54 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Big Fat Greek Ass Showing
Reason to Vote for a Big Fat Greek Guy for Mayor
We won't have to see his Big Fat Hairy Greek Ass.
archpundit 12/16/2002 11:20:01 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Here piggy-piggy
The depths of pork in Illinois is explored. It explains a lot about how Illinois works, but I won't go into it more for now.
archpundit 12/16/2002 11:17:33 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Mosely-Braun Takedown
Carol Marin is one of the more respected, if not heavily watched, news people in Chicago and she sets out the case against Carol Mosely-Braun.
Some choice graphs:
One example. Before freshmen senators go to work in Washington, there is an orientation program to help them learn the lay of the land. You skipped it. Rather than roll up your sleeves right away and show you were both symbol and substance, you hopped a flight to Nigeria and paid your respects to the dictator of the most populous country in Africa, Gen. Sani Abacha. Despite Abacha's hideous record on human rights, including the assassination of his enemies, you remained a periodic visitor to the country and you were the lone member of the Senate and the lone member of the Congressional Black Caucus who opposed sanctions against that repressive regime.
Then there was the campaign finance mess. The Criminal Investigation Division of the Internal Revenue Service argued that you and your campaign manager and then-fiance, Kgosie Matthews, spent as much as $270,000 of campaign donations on Armani outfits, jewelry, Jeeps and vacations. Three times IRS investigators tried to impanel a grand jury. But the Justice Department did something experts say it virtually never does in this type of case. Citing "insufficient evidence," it refused to grant the IRS the subpoena power it requested in order to gather the evidence. You dismissed the whole thing as a witch hunt.
That's all in the past, of course. So what about today? Two words: Bill Shaw. Voters only have to look at this most recent election to scratch their heads and ask, "What were you thinking?" OK, as President Bill Clinton's ambassador to New Zealand, you'd been away for awhile. But why would you choose the Nov. 5 election to mark your re-entry to Chicago politics with radio and newspaper ads supporting Bill Shaw, of the politically notorious Shaw brothers, over Rev. James Meeks for a seat in the Illinois Senate? This is progressive politics?
Adding to this fine column, let's not forget when she left her position in Cook County she fired the entire staff on one of the last days and replaced them with political hacks. This was gratuitous even by Chicago Standards.
And the best example of poor policy and strategy analysis was getting the Trib company a big tax break. Why a giant corporation needed it is unclear other than someone was trying to curry favor with the editorial board. But that didn't work. The Trib blasted her for it.
She is another example of everything I hate about the Republican Party. I'll post more on this later.
archpundit 12/16/2002 11:14:39 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
ahhhh...the irony
Dennis Byrne spews his usual column light on substance, heavy on aspersions. In it, he makes a point of backing Everett Dirksen for his support of the Civil Rights Act. Then he trashes the elites for trying to take out Fitzgerald. Has it occurred to him that Dirksen was actually the kind of character he is complaining about?
archpundit 12/16/2002 11:01:41 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Communists at the Tribune
are suggesting Pete Rose might get a second chance if he confesses. Like hell. He bet on the game and his own team. Screw him. None of this liberal mamby pamby nonsense about redemption. He screwed with my game and he is out.
archpundit 12/16/2002 10:57:35 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
BJU and how it fits in the Republican Party
Virginia Postrel posts on why BJU has such a hold on Republican Candidates from a while ago and it is good reading given current events. I don't quite see the Democrats as darkly trying to remake society, but otherwise good reading.
archpundit 12/16/2002 10:53:04 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Big Jim for 9/11 Panel?
WTF? Jim Thompson knows just about zilch about terrorism. Besides being well-connected this makes no sense. Well, actually it does. He won't rock any boats.
archpundit 12/16/2002 10:48:02 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
What kind of Fruitcake would give Gordon Lee Baum a show?
This kind. A few out of the area folks asked what kind of radio station would give the CofCC a radio show and I think this article sums it up pretty well. The same kind that would give Lizz Brown a show.
archpundit 12/16/2002 10:24:29 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
CoCC Radio
Alas, my hopes were dashed. Primarly Gordon Lee Baum and Earl Holt III were relegated to whining about how Lott isn't nearly as conservative as a people think. Though Baum did mention that he had visited Lott's office before he was majority leader. Apparently Baum made an appearance of Fox News last night...did anyone catch that? Otherwise, an unpleasant evening of race-baiting.
The South St. Louis accent is too much on that clown. But he has the nerve to whine about African-American speech. I'll be linking to the photos of the CofCC protests at some point this week. If you want evidence of lead poisoning....
archpundit 12/16/2002 10:13:09 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Make up your mind
The Washington Post has Nickels on the front page of the on-line version, but Nickles in the story. It is:
Nickles
Update: Not that I want to revisit the Hines-Hynes affair ;)
archpundit 12/16/2002 10:08:17 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Boondocks Boondoggle
What could cause Aaron MacGruder, Boondocks creator, to salivate more than having Trent Lott on BET? It is truly a perfect storm.
archpundit 12/16/2002 10:06:14 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
A Nickles for your thoughts
I don't believe it is a coincidence that Don Nickles' name is so easy to confuse with Don Rickles. I believe it is a sign from God to the Republican Party to choose Bill Frist whether Bill Frist likes it or not.
As a Democrat, let me wholeheartedly endorse Don Nickles. I don't believe there could be two better party leaders than Nickles and Delay for the 2004 election for Democrats to run against. Nickles is a conservative twit who happens to be the leftist in a the bizzarro world of the Oklahoma Senate Delegation. While he might be smart enough (editor: errr...slipped there I guess, add 'not') to endorse segregation and the CofCC, he is certainly enough of a wingnut to push through a whole wad of policies assured of pissing off suburban white women.
My prediction, is Lott stays. Frist doesn't want it and the rest of the Senate Republican Caucus knows Nickles' tin ear is as bad as Lott's. Cochran would be the natural candidate, but it is unlikely he wants to take another charge at a Senator from his home state, no matter how much he hates the guy.
archpundit 12/16/2002 10:00:27 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Instant Iowa Analysis
With Gore out, Iowa's organization people probably go to Gephardt. He is incredibly popular there, has a strong ground operation and did I mention labor loves the guy.
Gephardt probably just locked up 30-35% of the caucus vote with Gore's announcement. Labor is important in the caucus and the only thing that could counteract that is if Harkin starts pulling the strings for someone else, but I don't see that happening. Harkin is a creature of labor and he and Gephardt are close ideologically and a natural fit. The only other person with a shot at much of the labor vote is Daschle. Even then Gephardt has effectively been on the ground since 1988 and should garner much of that support.
My current prediction is Dean in second as the quirky intellectual candidate that wins the liberal arts college towns and the strange prairie intellectual populist vote that is far more important in Iowa than people think. With those two in the prime position, the next key is who can get to Vilsack. If Gephardt does it becomes a race to beat Dean in second place. If Edwards does it becomes a three way tie with Kerry and Lieberman opting to compete in New Hampshire. Kerry and Lieberman aren't going to do anything in Iowa. Kerry simply doesn't fit the state that isn't into haughty. Lieberman doesn't have a natural constituency.
In the end, Iowa's primary importance will be whether Howard Dean can ride it to a strong second place and carry that momentum to New Hampshire where a strong second place to Kerry puts, ummmm...straight money, into the coffers and makes him competitive for the nomination. Look at a dog fight elsewhere between him, Lieberman and Gephardt. Edwards is possible, but he has to get a message that works and he is crowded out of the first two states. People working on a strategy are hoping for a Vilsack endorsement and lots and lots of legwork.
archpundit 12/16/2002 9:52:52 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
no more Goring
Al takes one for the team. Thank goodness. Having known several people involved in Iowa and New Hampshire during the last cycle, I've been a bit puzzled at the notion that Al Gore is a good guy and that he should win the nomination. Al Gore is everything I hate about the Republican Party.
To digress for one moment, the man ran one of the worst campaigns I've ever seen. We can wring our hands over the press and how much they hate him, but ultimately that is because he is a loathesome fellow. The campaign was a mish mash of ideas that avoided the key principles of the Democratic Party and seemed to forget that the last 8 years had been pretty damn good.
However, back to the loathesome character, Al Gore. Gore played hardball with Bradley in Iowa and New Hampshire in a manner Shrub would have been happy to have done. In Iowa, his minions sent out labor to disrupt Bradley campaign events. If it weren't for how human of a person Bradley was this could have been a disaster. Instead of getting upset, Bradley rolled with it. At one event, a bunch of union guys stood along the aisles making it hard to get through for supporters. Bradley went up to every one of them held out his hand, told them he was Bill Bradley and he wanted their vote. Every one of them shook his hand and most had a story about how he was their hero back when he played for the Knicks (a character flaw of Bradley's I overlook). Gore's people ignored having anything to do with this garbage, but is one to really believe that?
In other instances they had guys follow Bradley around to every event. Finally the political director broke and swore at the clown and the NY Times picked up the story. The Political Director was fired, but the press ignored the ties to Gore.
The most despicable act came when Bradley had a surrogate in New Hampshire. Bob Kerrey was speaking when he started getting heckled with shouts of "cripple". Gore's people made sure they weren't directly tied to the garbage, but who else sent out those people?
Gore would have been better than the current twit occupying the oval office and I would have voted for him again if he had won the nomination. However, his bowing out should be cause for celebration amongst those of us who believe our party should be a party of principles and not cheap knock offs of Republican Dirty Tricks campaigns. Al Gore is a political hack who forgot what was important. I won't miss him in the least. Now back to the right wings discussion of Clinton's genitalia.
But wasn't that Lott skit sweet?
archpundit 12/16/2002 9:40:24 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Who am I, Why am I here?
Traffic here has upticked lately so I thought I'd do a quick post describing the site. The primary blog is Archpundit. There, I cover national, international, and state politics, especially Illinois. Additionally, I hope to blog more frequently on welfare, the environment and education policy. I also have a weakness for wingnuts similar to Scoobie Davis' enjoyment of Jack Chick. This interest has suffered with my wife's growing concern that either I will fall prey to Trinity Broadcasting Network and Jack Van Impe or our children will.
I have a second blog that I write that concerns itself exclusively with the Saint Louis region and Missouri that I have named Blog Saint Louis (link to the opposite site at the top of the blogroll). Blog Saint Louis is heavy on local politics and I have separated the two. First, many of the people I know who read Blog Saint Louis aren't terribly interested in my views on national politics, at least on a daily basis. Second, many intereted in this blog aren't interested in the minutia of Sa
int Louis politics. From time to time I do double post to both sites.
What are my views? I'm a liberal, though not always a predictable one. I also hate cliches unless I write them. I believe government can have an important role in providing opportunities to all. This is certainly true of my life in which I have benefited from free public education and access to a small liberal arts college largely available to me because of federal assistance. I'm also a strong advocate of using markets to make government intervention as efficient as possible.
Now, who the hell am I? Well, I blog anonymously for a couple reasons. One, it allows me plausible deniability at work. Anyone who reads these blogs from Saint Louis can probably figure out who I am pretty quickly, so let's not confirm my employer's suspicions. Second, my work does involve working on some projects related to local St. Louis politics and by blogging anonymously I don't have to concern myself with whether a project will be endangered by a snarky comment.
A bunch of people have requested specific topics and I'm hoping to oblige in the next couple weeks. For the next week I hope to spend some time discussing the 2004 Illinois Senate Race and go into some detail of the challengers. Work is heavy, so there will be some erratic posting, but keep checking in. In addition to that topic, I hope to return to some big picture issues the 2002 elections raise.
On a final note, those of you sick of Blogger and Blogspot, consider Blogstudio. For only $15/yr you receive more functions and far fewer down times. It is available free as well minus a couple features like comments and RSS feed (feel free to access mine for other sites if you so wish--Blog Saint Louis is on stlouist.com). Stats are apparently coming. After starting with Blogger I have found Blogstudio to be a huge improvement and quite easy to use if you want a simple web interface. It also works better with Mozilla and Netscape.
Oh, and feel free to correct my spelling. After getting Blagojevich correct most of my time blogging I was notified I was spelling Hynes incorrectly. I'm fully capable of being an idiot.
archpundit 12/15/2002 12:30:14 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Site Update
I've updated the blogroll adding and moving several blogs. For this post refer to the blogroll for links.
Of note is a relatively new blog by Nathan Bierma. He is a writer for the Chicago Tribune and resides in my favorite city. I'm not sure if he is a Cubs, fan, but two out of three at least is a decent start.
Ted Barlow moves back up to favorite reads with his return and Charles Kuffner joins him. If you think I'd be interested in your blog and should include it shoot me a note. Assuming you aren't Gordon Baum or Earl Holt and don't believe in strange conspiracy theories, I'll probably add you. As far as 'my policy', I link to people I read and I think are interesting. In a couple cases I don't find people interesting, but they are referenced enough, that I feel the need to include them. The ordering is generally how I'm reading people at the time. IOW, more than anything, my blogroll is an organizational tool for me.
Some high quality blogs aren't in my favorite reads because they tend not to post several times a day or it takes a bit of digesting when I do read them. Perfect examples of this include William Burton and the Bloviator. I consider them excellent reads, but on average William posts about once a day and so once a day does it. Ross at the Bloviator posts incredible posts on a topic I know little about and so I read it once a day when I can take the time to digest the posts.
I also want to thank those who have added me to their blogroll recently including:
Bloviator
Talk Left
Rittenhouse Review
Cooped Up
Off the Kuff
Max Speak
Two Tears in a Bucket
Smythe's World
David Hogberg (only dropped down due to the hiatus, write and come back to us)
Thoughts on the Eve of the Apocalypse
I hope I haven't missed anyone.
And of course those who linked earlier in the life of this blog.
Oh, and the best new blog name: The Bitter Shack of Resentment.
archpundit 12/15/2002 12:09:17 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Belleville House Inspections
Quick link to original story
archpundit 12/13/2002 11:19:55 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Weekend Updates
I have a lot to cover this weekend. Today is busy so don't expect much until late.
See Atrios for a Belleville story,
See Atrio for Lott stuff and his campaign to introduce America to one of the two loons in the US Senate from Oklahoma
For the weekend
More on Belleville and St. Louis EHOC complaints
Illinois Leader picks up on above
Carol Mosely Braun seems to be running for US Senate again (at Political Wire)
Lott is going to search his soul or is that for a soul at 4:30.
Blog updates, announcements and a bunch of new content for the Illinois Senate race and a return to the topics I mentioned right after the election
archpundit 12/13/2002 11:13:05 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
CofCC Radio Tonight!
And it is in streaming audio here. While it might just be wishfunl thinking on my part, I can't help but think Gordon Lee Baum might just be obtuse enough to say something to give the Lott story more legs. The show starts at 10 PM for those interested and one can call in at 1-877-920-WGNU.
My prediction is Lott stays. No one has challenged him and the outrage is a political class outrage. That is until African-American turnout in the '04 race is spiked by this and Sonny Perdue's flag initiative.
archpundit 12/13/2002 9:51:05 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
The military?
From the Washington Post:
In an interview with conservative radio talk show host Sean Hannity, Lott said his remarks "conveyed an impression that is not accurate." He said that his reference to the idea of the country's being better off was not about race and segregation but about Thurmond's support for "a strong national defense and economic development and balanced budgets and opportunity"
You have to be friggin' kidding me, Trent. A strong national defense? You must mean a segregated national defense. No one is pointing out that in 1948 the reason for Thurmond's candidacy was the desegregation of the military and Hubert Humphrey. A strong military to Strom Thurmond was a segregated one that ignored the great efforts of African-Americans during World War II.
The first rule of finding oneself in a hole is to stop digging. If anyone was paying attention, Lott's defense of himself is even more absurd in context of his original comments.
Light blogging through today. Back tomorrow.
archpundit 12/12/2002 10:24:45 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Why did Daschle defend Lott?
A note on Daschle's defense of Lott. How many people out there have worked with a racist? For those claiming not to have--yeah, right.
When you work closely with someone as Daschle and Lott have over time one tends to give them the benefit of the doubt. That is important currency in a chummy body like the Senate where personal relationships grease the wheels of legislation. Perhaps Daschle is trying to prop up an ineffective leader as Virginia Postrel suggests here, or maybe, just maybe they are friends and Daschle doesn't believe he is a racist. From all available evidence Daschle is probably wrong, but personal relationships often develop across partisan lines believe it or not. If Daschle thinks Lott has been straightforward with him, he probably views Lott as often wrong, but honorable and assumes he misspoke.
During the Clinton impeachment, both Lott and Daschle worked well together and seem to have developed a level of trust between themselves. Being skeptical of public pronouncements from political leaders is the best way to proceed in most cases. However, sometimes those pronouncements are simply human reactions to a friend.
archpundit 12/10/2002 3:23:28 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Get Ready, Get Set, Bork away with Permission
Andrew Sullivan seems to think pledge week (of which I have no criticism nor donation) is equal opportunity week for bashing. He point out that Doug Kmiec is a right wing loon. This is no surprise to anyone who reads the Chicago Tribs Commentary page.
archpundit 12/10/2002 2:49:16 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
The Sliming of Edmund Burke
Atrios and Tom Spencer point out that an editor for the Washington Times is a neo-Confederate. Even worse he uses Edmund Burke as an explanation of his ideology. What a twit, Burke spoke out against discrimination and while he was skeptical utopian visions of equality, he strongly supported humane treatment of minorities.
And let me remind everyone again (though I've been told this speaks poorly of St. Louis), Gordon Baum has a radio show here. It is streaming radio. If you are like me it is kind of funny. Unless you think too much about Lott writing a column for these buffoons or that an editor at a major paper thinks Gordon Baum is worthy of respect.
Why is the Washington Times taken more seriously than the Chicago Tribune?
For a conservative counterweight to the NY Times it is dismissed. Why? Because it isn't reliably conservative? Isn't the complaint concerning the New York Times that it is too reliably liberal? I understand that the Trib doesn't do the foreign reporting like the Time and its Washington reporting is less. However, for a natural counterweight to the Times, why isn't it the model with professionalism and integrity?
archpundit 12/10/2002 2:31:01 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Illinois Leader nails it
No, I haven't lost my mind, but the Illinois Leader has an excellent article on how pension benefits are determined in Illinois. For those not familiar with the process, the article should be an eye opener.
To be fair, most state workers don't have these options available to them and the system works reasonably well. Those who are politically connected have found numerous ways to fix the system in their benefit.
archpundit 12/10/2002 10:27:10 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Leave No Child in the City
For locals the notion that interdistrict school choice will solve the problems with inner-city districts should draw laughs. The Department of Education is pushing for interdistrict choice for failing schools.
How unserious the administration is about these issues should be apparent in there is no money for interdistrict transfers and the good people of Saint Louis know exactly how expensive such transfers are. I would argue they are a good use of money in many cases, but given the largest example of public school choice has done nothing to improve the education of the kids not in the program, one has to wonder why one would expect this to work or how it would be paid for in most states.
Double posted at Blog Saint Louis
archpundit 12/10/2002 10:19:14 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Restoring Faith in Foreign Policy Sanity
It appears that without a wingnut running the Senate Foreign Relations committee, Otto Reich is having problems. Apparently some of the Republicans view Latin America as more than Cuba. Never mind that he consorted with and supported Orlando Bosch, a terrorist.
Have I mentioned before, Thank God for Dick Lugar! Jesse Helms was one of the most useless morons running that committee and while I disagree with Dick Lugar on many issues (though not much in foreign policy), he is sane, responsible and focused on real concerns like the security of the United States instead of a banana republic that is dying 90 miles off the coast of Florida. More Nunn-Lugar less Burton-Helms.
archpundit 12/10/2002 9:34:06 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Lott Resign? God I hope not
Quasipundit (via Instapundit) thinks the piling on of Trent Lott and calling on him to resign is partisan politics. Well, here is one Democrat hoping he doesn't resign.
Can you imagine the turnout commercials we can run next cycle with that quote!
(of course, I want him to apologize and put such marks beyond the pale, but hey!)
Correction: My apologies to Tony Adragna who pointed out in my comment section:
That's "Will Vehrs of QuasiPundit" - the other half of QuasiPunit [myself] says it's Lott is a racist and he ought suffer the same fate as John Cooksey.
He makes another good point as well. Thanks and my apologies for not being clear the first time.
archpundit 12/09/2002 1:30:16 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Coming Soon: State Politics Blog
In the interest of promoting Daily Kos' new project, I'll turn you over to Jeff Cooper. Sometime after the beginning of the year, a blog covering state politics will be going on-line. Check out the description at Jeff's who has done the work and I don't feel like replicating it. Stay tuned here, I'll announce as soon as it goes live.
archpundit 12/09/2002 1:21:24 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
I forgot about the CCC
Calpundit reminds everyone of the Council of Conservative Citizens. They are a particular brand of racist wingnuts here in St. Louis who even have a radio show on WGNU Friday nights at 10. Take a listen (streaming available) and see what they are all about or visit the CCC web site. One of the racists served on the SLPS Board.
One other note, Real Clear Politics cited by Kevin claims Democrats are the party of racial division. I think any political party will play the race card to their advantage and it is an equal opportunity game. However, if you have problems attracting African-Americans, one might stay away from endorsing segregationist views and the Confederate Flag. Just a thought.
Quick Update: Oh and here is the local chapter of the scum.
Republicans don't have to disavow these guys. They are well beyond the vast majority of conservatives and conservatives think they are scumbags too. Unfortunately, one particularly prominent Republican seems to hold a different view.
archpundit 12/09/2002 1:16:16 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
African-Americans and the GOP
After this last cycle and ~90% support of African Americans for Democratic candidates, the typical handwringing over such high levels of support took place. I absolutely believe Republicans competing for African-American votes is a good thing for African-Americans and the country as a whole. I just don't buy it. Why not?
Duh. Add to it Sonny Perdue and the Confederate Flag and Ronnie White or any other stupid move and every time the Republicans make a step forward, they take a step backward. Not two steps backward, mind you. They are not trying to roll back integration or other blatantly racist policies, but they just can't connnect.
archpundit 12/09/2002 11:46:31 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Best Pop Culture References of the Day
Goes to today's Note:
David Greenberg's must-read Washington Post Outlook piece on Sunday about why President Bush keeps giving jobs to star Watergate and Iran-Contra players was written, we assume, for two purposes: 1) to make loopy those Democrats in the El Sid Grassy Knoll camp ("We are doomed, doomed, I say!"); and 2) to inspire those in the Senator Clinton camp ("We MUST fight back!") LINK
It's not The Stugots, but something noisy sure is going on in Vice President Cheney's yard, and it's rattling the neighbors. LINK
And really do check out David Greenberg's piece. Everyone looking through my tiny window to the outer office thinks I've gone totally mad.
I said when Bush won the Presidency that one has to look for the silver lining. Doonesbury was great, and with this stuff it can only get better. And now we even have The Boondocks which, if MacGruder ever gets on schedule, should be a riot as well. If you can't beat 'em, at least laugh at 'em.
archpundit 12/09/2002 11:23:10 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
New Secretary of the Treasury
same as the old Secretary of the Treasury. For a party that celebrates Ronald Reagan, it sure is going back to the administration of the guy Reagan hated for personnel an awful lot.
archpundit 12/09/2002 10:59:19 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Interesting Analysis on Fitzgerald
Rich Miller argues that attacking Fitzgerald as LaHood and Hastert are plays into his hands.
Miller is correct. If they continue this path, they are going to build him up into a folk hero amongst social conservatives who have the better ground operation especially downstate. Andrew McKenna could well take the suburbs and lose badly in the primary. I have little doubt that Fitzgerald will win the nomination. However, payback is a bitch and a bruising primary fight for the man who refused to intercede in the Governor's race between J-Ry and O'Malley should be expected to as a whole lot of hunka burning love payback. Fitzgerald had the chance to try and move O'Malley to the AG race to avoid a bitter primary feud and he refused.
The ICFST is in a circle of retribution between the Combine/moderate elements and the social conservatives. The only people this cycle benefits are Democrats. Keep up the good work boys.
archpundit 12/06/2002 2:13:18 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Allowing the Market to work
For too long state and federal officials have coddled airlines and given into their every request regardless of the effect on consumbers. From the ridiculous Wright Amendment, to Saint Louis and Missouri's coddling of they dying TWA, to the Kansas City gate disaster, big airlines have received benefits when their problem was poor management. The Bush administration has demonstrated one of those few benefits for those periods when Republican administrations are safe, legal and rare by declinining United Airlines request for federal loans. Jackson is complaing along with the unions, but if United and the other large carriers aren't forced to deal with their inefficiency, consumers will be hurt again.
archpundit 12/06/2002 1:18:52 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Morons, absolute morons
Via Jeff:
Wired reports the Department of Homeland Security sees Wi-Fi as a potential threat and will consider mandating security procedures. Right, like the government is going to understand the best way to secure proprietary networks. Gotcha. Sure. And I'm a member of the Party of Big Government? Not a chance.
archpundit 12/06/2002 11:51:05 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Chicago Budget
Benevolent dictator charges bring laughs:
Burke (14th) waited for a resolution honoring Ald. Burton Natarus' 31 years in the council. Coincidentally, Natarus (42nd) had already planned to give his colleagues Natarus bobblehead dolls, a tribute dreamed up by a public relations company.
"This could be a new economy move for the Chicago City Council," smirked Burke, holding up his Natarus doll. "All we need to do is get these bubble [sic] heads to go up and down, say `yes,' we can reduce the size of the City Council ..."
Burke paused as the aldermen loudly booed. An expert at timing, he waited for Mayor Daley to finish scoffing, "Awwww!" "... from 50 to three!" Burke continued. "We'd only need three aldermen, one for each aisle, to start these things going, nodding up and down!"
Wrought Iron! More Wrought Iron I Said!
archpundit 12/06/2002 10:57:43 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Just when I wonder if I'm too harsh
The Chicago Tribune puts my mind at ease over trashing Pate.
archpundit 12/06/2002 10:51:02 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Strategic Account of Judicial Politic
Below Kevin asks for on-line references to strategic accounts of judicial politics. I'd recommend starting with this review essay by Epstein and Knight. Their book is also a good starter.
From there I'd recommend hitting the literature starting with Eskridge's '91 paper in the bibliography.
"Overriding Supreme Court Statutory Interpretation Decisions," 101 Yale L.J. 331 (1991)
Caldiera, Wright and Zorn
Other selected articles that I don't believe are freely available on the web include
1998. "Marshalling the Court: Bargaining and Accommodation on the United States Supreme Court." Spriggs, Maltzman and Wahlbeck American Journal of Political Science 42(January):294-315.
This is only a small sampling, but they are the best places to start.
archpundit 12/06/2002 10:47:50 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Wow, screwed that one up
Frank Watson of Greenville was elected to the Senate Minority Leader position. Watson has largely flown below my radar so I don't have much analysis in terms of his personality or interests. He does appear to have more of an interest in policy which is a good thing in general--not that I want any of those policies.
Geographically, it might be an important shift. As DuPage County grew, it took over the state Republican Party apparatus from downstate communities and suburban Cook. Suburban Cook has now gone Democratic, and DuPage isn't as solid as it once was. With Cross an exurban legislator and Watson a true downstater, we may see an increase in urban rural tensions. This would not bode well for the Republicans because rural issues such as concealed carry and concern over suspect classification based on sexual orientation do not play well overall. Given Cross has strong Chicagoland ties, that might be overstating the immediate impact, but if the divide in Illinois moves more and more towards an urban/rural split, the Republicans will lose in an increasingly urban/suburban state.
Much to the chagrin of many in outstate, the county Republican Party operations have largely been hijacked by the Christian Right. If Watson is a continuation of this, the Illinois Republican Party may actually be in more trouble than even I thought in the long term.
archpundit 12/06/2002 10:17:31 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
What Google turns up
Apparently Dust in the Light feels he is in need of an apology for my comments regarding his pot kettle issues over finding a white guy. Ummmm..actually, the strategy he kept pushing (searching for Arab/Muslim terrorists) would have been just as ineffective as searching for a white guy. Hence, he had pot-kettle issues. Unless he is still trying to sell the stale idea that these two clowns were terrorists?
archpundit 12/05/2002 11:50:31 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Let Me Recommend
A series,The Chicago Crime, by the Chicago Tribune. In a series of indepth editorials, the Chicago Tribune addresses homicide in Chicago, why it is so high, what can be done about it, and how it should be addressed. I'm a little surprised Talk Left hasn't covered it. I'll have more comments on it later, but I thought it was important to point out.
archpundit 12/05/2002 4:05:44 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Pate backs Fitzgerald
Pate takes a shot at LaHood and back Fitzgerald.
One of the more interesting issues will be who replaces Philip. It appears the main race is between Rauschenberger and Dillard. Dillard is a DuPage County Senator and Rauschenberger is western-Cook/Lake County (I haven't seen the most recent boundary). Both are socially conservative and well respected by the wingnuts so regardless of who wins the race, there won't be the bitter feelings that the Cross election created.
Rauschenberger is a serious guy and a budget expert. Dillard is more of the Philip kind of guy. Fiscally conservative with other people's districts and fiscally liberal in DuPage. To add a little bit of intrigue, Rauschenberger is one of the few guys who gets along with the moderates and the wingnuts. The Illinois Leader likes him and Hastert used him to funnel cash to Illinois Senate races this fall. Additionally, he is probably the only person who can call himself a close ally of Fitzgerald. They were close in the lege.
My sense at this point is that if Philip has anything left, he'll pass on his sceptre to Dillard in order to maintain DuPage's influence. Nearly all of the caucus owes Philip so Dillard is the frontrunner. Given his ability to reach across the party and his detailed understanding of the state budget, Rauschenberger would be a better strategic choice in the coming budget battles.
archpundit 12/05/2002 3:54:43 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Philip is out
The longest serving legislative leader of the Illinois Lege is stepping down.
On the one hand, he won't be missed. He is a back-slapping deal maker who thinks middle class American suburbanites are all that matter and has little real interest beyond pork for DuPage County. On the other hand, he said such spectacularly stupid things, it will be less fun having him around to quote.
While discussing problems in the Department of Family Services he once said a big part of the problem was that minority social workers don't have the same work ethic as 'you and I'. That Philip thought this was no surprise. That he said it was a surprise. Especially who he said it to: the Chicago Tribune Editorial Board. He was then surprised when it ended up on the front page. I believe he apologized at least.
More later on the race to replace him.
UPDATE: ThePost-Dispatch has the quote. I missed the end
He once said of minorities: ``It's probably a terrible thing to say but I'll say it -- some of them do not have the work ethic we have.''
archpundit 12/05/2002 1:25:47 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Why aren't Lawyers taken seriously by social scientists?
Reynolds has complained in the past that social scientists don't take legal research seriously. This is true and not true. Social scientists take rigorous research seriously and the problem with some/much legal research is that it isn't rigorous. William Eskridge is well respected by political scientists because his research is rigorous. Maybe Glenn should read it after posting this:
Or, if you're one of those people who see the Court as a largely political animal, you might think that justices on the court who support other "right-wing" outcomes like ending affirmative action might think it useful to balance those by overturning Bowers. I don't think the Court looks at cases that way, myself, but many people do and I suppose I could be wrong.
Why does Reynolds not address the evidence? There is a growing body of work on strategic behavior by justices. How is it wrong? Or is this a faith based claim by him? Or does he even understand the literature? The hypothesis is testable, has been tested, and has been confirmed by most tests to date. Most of the work criticizing strategic decision-making by courts takes a non-rigorous approach. So why does Reynolds think it is wrong?
archpundit 12/03/2002 11:59:39 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
One more for the night
I just can't help myself, but the Illinois Leader is full of stuff and I've been behind in linking to it. What is a liberal to the Illinois Leader? Tom Cross, Bill O'Conner, and Skip Saviano. There are legitimate issues to take with Saviano and his, ummm..., ties to interesting people. But that doesn't make him liberal, it makes him....
But proteges of Denny Hastert aren't liberal. I suppose if by liberal you mean, not nativist Eagle Forum fruitcakes, yes they are liberal. But not by any reasonable standard.
archpundit 12/03/2002 11:31:01 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
I Just Can't Help Myself
And I can't make this crap up. Someone named their kid John Birch? Or is this fruitcake a descendant?
archpundit 12/03/2002 11:11:47 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Before calling someone stupid
Back from the edge of the wingnut One World Goverment/Religion portion of the Illinois Leader is Kevin McCollough. Kev decides to call the moderate/Combine Republicans stupid. Then he says:
At one point, Speaker Hastert was actually trying to wrestle the constitutional duty of naming the U.S. Attorneys away from Fitzgerald - a contest that the Senator easily won.
A No-Prize to the first person who can name that Constitutional provision. Preferably from the US Constitution, but another one might do.
Additionally, instead of finding something relevant to attack about Steve Neal, like his accuracy, Kev makes several allusions to his drinking habits. Calling a reporter a drunk is like calling a minister religious.
Finally, Good 'ole Kev seems to not understand the 11th Commandment of Republican Politics--Thou Shall Not Speak Badly of Fellow Republicans. As a side note, I always wondered what Ford thought of this saying? More importantly, Pat O'Malley ran a wingnut campaign that villified J-Ry. J-Ry probably would have lost without that given the deck of cards he was dealt, but McCollough seems not understand that by shifting O'Malley to AG race, the bitter primary would have been avoided and all the money could have been spent attacking Lisa Madigan and the Dem nominee. Instead of wounding their better candidate, they could have had a competitive J-Ry and O'Malley. But no, stupid is as stupid does.
archpundit 12/03/2002 10:58:58 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
How To Spot a True Paranoid
Going to the well again tonight...
Joyce Morrison, one of my favorites at the Illinois Leader, writes about the grave dangers of the What Would Jesus Drive backers to those dimwitted Christians being duped by Gaia worshiping false prophets. The entire screed is amusing, but the amazing thing is there is no evidence of the conspiracy. There are some out of context Al Gore quotes and then smears by association to those out of context questions.
By the end, if one argues for responsible stewardship of the Earth one is either a Gaia worshipper or a dimwit being manipulated by the hordes. Even more strangely is the notion that these 'radical environmentalists' are trying to overtake mainline denominations and how horrid such a movement would be. After all, conservatives have been doing the same organizing for years.
archpundit 12/03/2002 9:27:46 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Bragging about being dense?
Posted on the Illinois Leader web site as the quote of the day, is the following:
"Last week, (Dennis] Hastert's candidate, Treasurer Judy Baar Topinka, was elected state Republican Party chairman. Topinka and Hastert ousted Gary MacDougal, a conservative fall guy, in the process. MacDougal and his conservative allies never saw this coming. They figured that after his appointment last summer, he could somehow hold on to the power. But he was handed the job mainly to silence the right wing.... Everyone but MacDougal and the right-wingers knew he would be ousted after the election. This was a setup from the beginning."
~ Rich Miller, Daily Southtown, December 1
If someone knows any good irony meters out there, I just blew mine.
archpundit 12/03/2002 9:07:49 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
I want to say something...
about L'affaire de Dilulio, but I can't stop giggling long enough.
First, most academics probably would find it too political. I grant that, but also don't think we should assume he is necessarily wrong because of that. There is a lot of evidence this administration is one of the most politicized administrations. I don't find this realization to be News at 11. Changes in media scope and speed mean this is going to be more true as time goes along regardless of party. The problem as I see it is that much of the mainstream press accepts this silly notion that the administration isn't highly politicized. I don't blame Rove/Bush for the media's laziness.
What is interesting about this story is how ham-handed the administration was. What is the worst thing that could happen if the story breaks and Dilulio says virtually nothing? A couple news cycles with some handwringing by pundits. No big deal.
What happens when Dilulio claims the story is groundless and baseless, but there is a letter? A lot of questioning of the administrations' trustworthiness that last for several news cycles. If the administration had simply let this story die, the information would have been lost on the general public as background noise. Now it gets thrown into the public debate for a longer period. The adults are back in charge.
But what does the denial do? It keeps the story alive in the news cycle.
archpundit 12/03/2002 3:34:20 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Jesus is pissed
Warner broke his hand.
archpundit 12/02/2002 4:21:45 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
CCADL: Circus Clown Anti-Defamation League
Is a fine column by Joe Conason:
How should the Senator have replied? He could have noted how odd it is for Mr. Limbaugh, who avoided the Vietnam draft, to question the patriotism of an Air Force veteran like himself. Or he could have adopted the strategy of Senator John McCain, another frequent target of the radio demagogue?s bombast.
After comparing Mr. Limbaugh to a "circus clown," the Arizona Republican apologized. "I regret that statement," he told an interviewer on Fox News the other night, "because my office has been flooded with angry phone calls from circus clowns all over America. They resent that comparison, and so I would like to extend my apologies to Bozo, Chuckles and Krusty."
archpundit 12/02/2002 3:58:50 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Back to Free Trade
Before the unexpected break over the holiday, William Burton made a comment that the Bush's efforts really stuck it to the developing world because it limited itself to manufactured goods. Brad DeLong's post today on the effect of NAFTA on agriculture in Mexico.
By and large, I'm for prying open markets throughout the world. In agriculture this has to happen slowly for developing countries to survive and this is an example of why. Opening up world agricultural markets quickly, as the administration is trying to do with manufactured goods, would hurt developing countries' populations. The United States, save sugar, is a very efficent producer of agricultural products and would overrun many of the developing economies. That doesn't mean we shouldn't open up such markets, just that it will take longer.
Opening manufactured goods up would be a huge boon for developing nations especially given textiles are included. The United States is at a comparative disadvantage for manufactured goods that are relatively low skill. Are workers cannot afford to work for the low wages that provide modest incomes in other countries and so they do much, much better through free trade. Worse, in the long term, developing too protected of an industry means that industry becomes irrelevant when barriers do fall.
Who does poorly is Europe and Europe is also the chief barrier to the further opening of agricultural markets. This is a second reason the administration is pursuing the right policy. Bundling all three markets together means certain death. Taking them separately means a good chance for a deal.
So, yes, I'd like to see the administration decrease trade restrictions in those areas as well, but this agreement will benefit many developing countries if it is successful.
archpundit 12/02/2002 3:43:47 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Seven Degrees of Separation
The great thing about conspiracy theories is that they don't need any actual evidence (Salon Premium sorry). The usual pattern of conspiracy theories is that they rely on various relationships that make the 'theory' sound plausible.
The strange reaction to Oklahoma City to me is that people find it so hard to accept humans of any nationality are capable of great cruelty. It always seems that these arguments are based on some assumption that an American couldn't act alone in such cases. Americans, unfortunately, are not immune from lunacy anymore than Arabs. They just happen to live in a country that funnels most people towards prosperity, freedom and opportunity.
archpundit 12/02/2002 1:07:21 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Rainesian Screeds
I wonder if Howell Raines even bothered to read this story.
If one were to read Sullivan or Kaus one would have to imagine Howell Raines as the sole writer and editor at a the paper. Was this a sloppy piece, yes. Was it evidence of Howell Raines being the antichrist. Ummm...no.
archpundit 12/02/2002 12:49:31 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Atrocious Behavior
I can't believe the Nicarico murder case just became more of a farce.
archpundit 12/02/2002 11:02:55 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Pissing on Legs
It is hard to tell who Steve Neal dislikes more: Durbin or Fitzgerald. But for the next two years, Fitzgerald will face his wrath because he will be up for election and Neal starts the barrage today.
Fitzgerald has made a Senate career out of going it alone. He has abused his office to prevent a federal endorsement of the expansion of O'Hare Airport. His folly could have cost this region more than 100,000 jobs and an annual loss of more than $10 billion. He is unique among U.S. senators in working against the economic interests of his home state.
To the astonishment of colleagues in the Illinois delegation, Fitzgerald last year declined to sign a letter with other delegation members seeking President Bush's help for Illinois projects. He wrote a silly letter back that "the mere fact that a project is located somewhere in Illinois does not mean that it is inherently meritorious and necessarily worthy of support."
Fitzgerald has sought to undercut House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Yorkville). He recklessly accused Hastert of moral and ethical misconduct because Hastert outmaneuvered Fitzgerald in protecting funds for the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library.
It is fine to piss on people's legs, but don't expect them not to do it back to you. What is amazing about the letter is that he didn't write a letter that specified specific issues he had a problem with and then supported the portions of the package he supported.
Maybe Pete has fashioned himself as a Paul Tsongas type of character. "I'm not Santa Claus," was one of Tsongas' themes in 1992. He isn't President either. Pete won't be Senator in 2005 either.
archpundit 12/02/2002 11:00:04 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Chicago School Reform
Pate Philip is thinking of tanking some school legislation that would increase the number of charter schools in Chicago. First, there is no reason not to allow 100 charter schools in Chicago as long as an accountability body is created that can handle that many.
More importantly, he is thinking of tanking it because of union provisions. Just as the Trib was skeptical of repealling the union limitations, I was also. However, the specific deal reached may actually be a progressive way to bring about teacher input while allowing reform to continue.
Or as the paraphrased cliche goes, if you pass one bill this veto session don't miss this one.
archpundit 12/02/2002 10:51:21 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
California Circular Firing Squad Team
Via Calpundit
Ken Layne channels the future of the ICFST.
archpundit 12/02/2002 10:38:48 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Roll Call misses the mark
When journalists decide to do a piece on local politics they inevitably miss the nuances of the race. In the case of today's article in Roll Call, they miss the point. Social conservatives aren't mad at Fitzgerald. In fact, they consider him their boy in the state party apparatus. Of the major mouthpieces for the social conservatives, Byrne at the Trib, Roesser at the Sun-Times, Pat O'Malley, Steve Rauschenberger, and the whole wing-nut collection at the Illinois Leader, Pete can do almost no wrong. They might complain mildly on his positions that he has moderated including gun control and ANWR, but he is their boy and they sell him as the Messiah of the Illinois Circular Firing Squad Team.
The McKenna challenge should be considered either a moderate Republican challenge or a Combine challenge. Combine, in the parlance of Illinois politics, is defined as the deal-maker portions of both political parties in Illinois. Members of their respective parties, these folks are the mysterious THEY referred to by conspiracy theorists everywhere. They are not dark conspiratorial forces, though. They simply practice Ubi Est Mea (mandatory Royko reference) or 'Where's Mine?' and they do it inside or outside the confines of the parties. The Combine isn't some vast conspiracy as the Illinois Leader or John Kass on a bad day try to portray it. It is a group of people who put pork over policy.
The Daleys are the most prominent members to those outside the state, but Big Jim Thompson is probably the consumate Combine guy. G-Ry was also a Combine guy. Lee Daniels and his successor Tom Cross are Combine guys. Pate Philip and his tollway authority chief brother are Combine players. LaHood is sort of a Combine guy, but not as much. Dan Hynes is a Combine guy and Blago is a Combine guy. Da Speaker, AKA Madigan, is majorly a Combine guy.
If you are true believer, Combine guys are the enemy. They dole out money to their friends and many don't give two hoots about policy. They don't push the ideological issues and look to big money when unsure of what to do. They also have their advantages. They get things done. Compare Misery's roads to Illinois and you learn a lot about the advantages of pork.
What does the Combine think of Pete? Primarily, they think he is weird. Why such deep analysis of him? He doesn't play ball and he makes things harder than they have to be. Leaders like Pate Philip in the Illinois Senate where Pete was before he became US Senator understand that conservatives have views that are inconvenient and are happy to resolve those problems when they come up and they don't cost the party too much. It is an inconvenient fact of doing business that when an ideologue comes along and actually cares about policy you have to bargain with them. Pete doesn't believe in bargaining. Unlike Rauschenberger and some other conservatives, Pete took a liking to pissing on Pate's leg just to piss on it. Pate didn't understand this and sure as hell didn't like it.
This seemingly irrational behavior in an organization designed around the concept of Ubi Est Mea, was not without its audience. The nativist, wingnut ICFST party faction had long been angry that these moderate deal makers had run their party and wanted it back. Pete's routine attracted them just as Pat O'Malley did in the gubernatorial primary. He won the primary on the back of those wingnuts over Loleta Didrickson, a moderate GOP woman.
Slowly the social conservatives had been organizing. Jack Roesser ran against Edgar in 1994 and was handily beaten. Some argue Rich Williamson's run in 1990 was the first volley, but that is misreading of Williamson and forgets that he was supposed to be a sacrifice to Alan Dixon for his vote on Clarence Thomas. Al Salvi won the nomination for Senator in 1996 and was handily beaten in the general by Durbin. Finally, in 1998 a perfect storm arose. Carol Mosely Braun was a black woman and a member of the Combine. She was none too bright and was caught in a series of ethical problems that made her position worse. The conservatives were pissed at years of being the crazy aunt in the attic and out organized the machine in the primary. Pete's habit of pissing on people's legs appealed to them. In the general election, their boy Pete, avoided saying anything causing a whole lot of airtime being spent on Mosely Braun's ethics. Scratch that--Mosely Braun's lack of ethics. Pete rode that to a win.
Now the Combine is just annoyed. Pete is holding up the single most important vote for Illinois in O'Hare expansion. Previously quiet and unassertive in state politics, Hastert has actively worked within the Combine to thwart Pete. Pete won't play ball on other issues and he gets in the way of important projects in other ways and he has pissed on the leg of the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Some of these efforts are admirable. Appointing Patrick Fitzgerald and Miquelon as US Attorneys was a great feat and should be applauded. The Combine didn't like it because it means their friends will undergo long-needed scrutiny. In another case, he took on the Governor regarding pork barrel excess on the Lincoln Library.
In other cases, his opposition is silly and petty. He will most likely win the nomination for 2004. The wingnuts simply have a better ground operation than does the party apparatus. When he wins the nomination, barring Mosely Braun as the Democratic candidate, perfunctory talk of party unity will be heard, while the Combine Republicans knife him in the back and get a Democrat elected. The Daley family has done it for years to Democrats who didn't play ball and the Republicans are fully capable of doing the same.
archpundit 12/02/2002 10:34:33 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
When only your mom gets satire
John Kass wrote a column claiming to not know what a bong is. It was satire. It was clearly satire.
The response is here in John's version of Slacker Friday.
You see, it isn't an ideological problem of missing satire, it is an intelligence problem.
Indeed.
archpundit 11/27/2002 1:56:48 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
The Adults are Back in Charge
The point of democracy is that information flows the most freely. There are many reasons why some information should be restricted. If one's privacy is going to be damaged or national security is at stake, by all means, some information should be kept from the public. The rest of the time there is no excuse for a public agency to not let information flow freely. Even worse, is when information doesn't flow because of organized interests.
archpundit 11/27/2002 1:34:52 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Will all that smoking and drinking get to Hitchens when...
he sees this?
archpundit 11/27/2002 1:19:53 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
For Nelson Algren Fans
A colorful story on Chicago's Nicest Crook.
archpundit 11/27/2002 12:38:14 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Blago has a plan
A bemused Steve Neal reports on Blagojevich's 6 year plan to become President of the United States.
Blago is okay. He has a lot on his plate in trying to solve the state's fiscal problems and if he is successful, all the more power to him.
But, as my candidate said in 2000, "What is your dream?"
It sure as hell isn't a pandering twit who doesn't seriously tackle hard issues and Blag has shown no ability or desire to solve difficult problems. Illinois' fiscal problems aren't a result of tax phobia, but of an outdated taxing structure. He has proposed no serious reform for this problem.
Illinois' education problem is the result of too much reliance on property taxes and he won't tackle that issue. What issue will he tackle?
I don't know and that is the problem.
archpundit 11/27/2002 11:33:55 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
I'll Miss G-Ry Greatly
George Ryan has truly been a gift to those who enjoy political chicanery. While making some of the most important infrastructure improvements since Build Illinois, he takes the time to loot the public trough every chance he gets. The audacity of his moves boggle the mind. The most recent was on the Capitol Fax:
GOING FOR THE GOLD Governor Ryan proposed a pension sweetener for his top staff yesterday. The package effected about 60 staffers, according to sources, and would increase their pensions substantially. "It was ridiculous," said one legislative leader yesterday.
The idea was rejected by the four legislative leaders, but there are some retiring legislators who have an interest in opening up some new pension "windows," and Senate President Pate Philip continues to push for enhanced pensions for senior legislative staff, so keep an eye on this one.
archpundit 11/27/2002 11:09:07 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Incestuous post by Den Beste or incestuous Post by Reynolds or Incestuous Post by Hesiod Who is
Incestuous post by Den Beste or incestuous Post by Reynolds or Incestuous Post by Hesiod
Who is the biggest turd in the punch bowl? I don't care. As Josh Marshall points out this is a bit ridiculous.
I was tempted to include the original post by RR, but I figured one post on the subject was about right. Let's be real here and admit one vanity web site refusing to link to a another vanity site that links to a third vanity web site is not worth the bandwidth being devoted to it. So why am I? I find this one hysterical. At least it is providing humor.
However, there are some great lines that should make anyone laugh who has noticed the habit of bloggers taking themselves too seriously:
SDB: Initial examination of RR's site instantly conveys an unmistakable pomposity anyway.
SDB: Of course, there are always people who take themselves too seriously and who think they are more important than they truly are. And an unfortunately large number of those are on the political left, where there is a rising horror at the way that we bloodthirsty rabid warbloggers are perverting their medium to deliver the wrong message.
SDB: This strikes me as a beautiful example modern leftist activity: it's public, it's in-your-face, it demonstrates moral and ideological purity, and it will have negligible practical effect. It's pragmatically null. It's a tempest in a teapot.
SDB: The material posted on the site equally projects an impression that the author is rather full of himself. One example is the following entry, quoted in its entirety:
It is fortunate that RR's gesture is empty and meaningless because if it were actually effective it would be a serious threat to freedom of expression."
Hesiod caugth the Den Beste disease of writing a long, boring article that could have been done in two paragraphs. What up with that?
Another advantage of blogging is that it produces real time satire, that isn't satire.
archpundit 11/26/2002 4:58:41 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Classless Warfare
One of the more amusing charges by the babbling class is that when Democrats argue one policy or another is unfair to the poor because it disproportionately impacts them, a chorus of, "CLASS WARFARE!" is heard throughout the airwaves. This, of course, misses the point that disproportionately affecting poor people is class warfare.
But rarely do we see such blatant example as Tim Noah points out. Especially laughable is the argument that because an individual only pays 4% of their income to federal income taxes they are undertaxed. If one looks at their total tax burden it is much higher given the impact of sales taxes.
archpundit 11/26/2002 11:34:07 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Gasket Blowing
Remember to be careful out there when the gaskets start blowing over this.
archpundit 11/26/2002 11:21:01 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Bobo Dolls
One of the things I admire about Kit Bond is that he knows his weaknesses. At public events where alcohol is served, Bond reportedly has a drink counter to ensure he doesn't take his shoe off and bang it on the podium. This isn't a perfect solution as anyone who watched the 2000 election night tantrum, but generally it keeps him out of trouble.
Is there a way to institute such a watcher for Pat Robertson's mouth? You know, something like a miniature electric shock to his groin when he just won't stop saying stupid things. I mean really...the President of the United States and the Secretary of State slap you around on the international stage and like a Bobo Doll, you pop back up to take more abuse. Maybe he is reading Little Green Footballs and thinks it is representative of America.
The public would be better served, Mr. Robertson said, if the media would investigate the content of the Koran and what he says are many passages that incite Muslims to kill nonbelievers. But reporting on that, he said, "is not politically correct."
It wouldn't be politically correct to take on the more militant passages of the Bible either. The Koran and the Bible were written in different times and so their message is delivered in a different context. Leaders of either religion can use it to inspire the best in us, or to promote violence.
archpundit 11/26/2002 11:09:11 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Rawls Death
Perhaps he'll be behind the great veil now, but in nice tribute with some links, Jacob Levy discusses the impact of John Rawls.
And for entertainment go to Sullivan's site see his comments.
Update: Levy also has some intelligent comments on academic ideological imbalance. The comments on Campus Watch are interesting.
archpundit 11/26/2002 10:33:03 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
What Republicans are Good for
Brad DeLong explained why Republicans should be like abortion; safe, legal, and rare. Free trade is one of the most vital policies for the United States to pursue and generally Democrats aren't as strong on it as I would like. So today I actually have nice things to say about the administration. A proposal has been made to significantly reduce tariffs on manufactured goods. Even better, this includes textiles which have been a sticking point for many Southern Republicans.
archpundit 11/26/2002 10:25:19 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Not exactly Anti-Semtic, but...
The Prince of Darkness, um, ahem, well, um, just read it from Jonah Goldberg on The Corner.
BOB NOVAK: Mr. May, I wonder if we can cut through all of this because I've been around this town a long time. I've never seen such an attack on Saudi Arabia. Isn't this all part of a plot that is hatched in Israel that, what you do is you attack Iraq, you get the oil supplies from Iraq, that means you don't have to -- the United States doesn't have to rely on the Saudi Arabian oil supplies. You destabilize the Saudi Arabian government, change the balance of power in the Middle East, and you change the ratio of oil politics? Isn't that what is going on
archpundit 11/26/2002 9:57:08 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Republican Dysfunction
No, not Bod Dole. Given the hysterics over the Democrats changing leaders I thought this was a decent lead. &c does a nice job describing another example of how the Republicans are facing tensions between business and social conservatives. Just one big happy dysfunctional family.
archpundit 11/25/2002 11:39:52 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
LaHood Targets Fitzgerald
Oh my, the Fitzgerald challenge is getting ugly.
"I'm thinking about trying to make sure Peter has an opponent," LaHood told the Sun-Times. "I think we can do better than him."
This is very interesting. The feud between Hastert and Fitzgerald has been well publicized. This indicates, Hastert is probably actively targeting Fitzgerald in the primary. LaHood is a very low key guy who learned at the hand of Bob Michel as his long-time chief-of-staff. A move like this doesn't happen by LaHood without serious consideration of the impact and consultations with others. It is hard to imagine this occuring without Rove and Hastert signing off.
This is an especially risky maneuver. If it fails, Fitzgerald is hurt in the primary with a bruising battle setting him up to lose in the general if a decent Democratic candidate is selected (largely meaning not Carol Mosely Braun). If it is successful, Andrew McKenna loses the right wing base for the general election, meaning they stay home and don't vote for Bush or McKenna. I can't imagine Bush or Rove being able to signal opposition to Fitzgerald and maintaining the conservative base of voters in Illinois. Without a strong conservative base vote, Illinois is unwinnable for Bush. It is a stretch with the conservative base.
In many ways this is more difficult than California. Riordan was a sure winner in the general election. Simon wasn't an incumbent either and realistically California isn't voting for Bush, but Riordan as Governor would have made the Democrats spend money in the state in 2004. There was nothing to lose. In this case there is a potential downfall. If McKenna is on the ticket, Illinois may be out of play for the presidential race, but Republicans will have to spend a lot of money on McKenna, a likely loser.
There is a bit of intrigue on the Democratic side as well. I've got a full day so I'll post more tonight.
archpundit 11/25/2002 10:49:06 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Speaking of David Hogberg
David is taking a break from blogging to work on his dissertation. Write, man, write. It is too bad, he is one of the most interesting, if underrated, conservative bloggers out there. While everyone gets excited around election time, his blog offered up some interesting and detailed policy critiques and seldom resorted to the boilerplate whining that overtakes nearly all of us around elections.
archpundit 11/22/2002 5:01:22 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
my thoughts
I think David presents a good case and pretty convincing case other than a few minor quibbles.
The first thing I should point out is that I do think more ideological balance would be better. That isn't clear on earlier postings and I think that is an important point. I agree with David that I don't think most professors are that concerned with ideology, but that he is absolutely correct in stating some specific fields are probably more concerned than others. His example of women's studies and African-American studies are very good. I'd say their uniformity varies by department and probably by department chair. Gerald Early, for example, (formerly Af-Am Studies Chair at Washington University in St. Louis) probably isn't concerned with ideology, but with work. Whether he is representative is a good question, and I'd have to say probably not.
David's point that some may use ideology is a good point and one that is probably not clear to me not having to think about it. While I would argue that most don't care, even a small number of faculty or events can make being hired difficult or discourage one from trying the academic market. I haven't seen it personally, but given the pettiness of many academics, I shouldn't discount it occurring. Even more important is the realization that small numbers of cases might be discouraging.
Of course, the most damning thing I know of at a dinner with a candidate was when the candidate wouldn't eat a roast beef sandwich after several suggestions. Strange place academia. Academics are known for all sorts of no-nos during the hiring process. One of the more amazing for a 'liberal profession' is the habit of asking about family status. In some departments, chairs have to send out yearly reminders about what is and is not acceptable.
On socialization, I do disagree with David a bit. While I agree most come in with distinct views, I have seen several friends who were at least to the right of the average social scientist become more liberal over time. The reason seems to be from having constant discussions on politics with people who were more liberal. I wouldn't call this a majority or even a large number, but examples of why not only is their a majority of liberals, but a supermajority. I don't have any way to quantify that, but it is a hunch I have.
Lott is a good example of the problem. I think there are some serious problems with Lott's work (most of them voiced by Gary Kleck), but that is true of many professors out there . IOW, there wouldn't be many professors at all using that standard.
The problem is I don't know how solve that imbalance and neither does anyone else from what I have read. An ideological affirmative action is unlikely to work because the problem is very similar to getting minorities into disciplines--there simply isn't the supply available even if they are sought out. Trying to get 12% African-American profs would damn near be impossible because 12% of the PhDs aren't African-Americans. The number of conservatives with PhDs is also below the background population of conservatives. Perhaps a mentoring process would be in order, but much like with African-Americans, such efforts haven't worked well because an institution who does the initial mentoring, doesn't receive the benefit since individuals move on to other universities.
The first step, I suppose, would be to make academia a nicer place.
Okay, stop laughing.
This is at the core of the problem. Academia needs to be a place of vigorous disagreement over ideas. Naturally, this leads to the issues David points out below because when people disagree and a particular view is underrepresented, those with those views are likely to exit the institution creating even further unbalance. Being nicer to conservatives is a nice statement, but in a place that can be quite competitive, I'm not sure how realistic this is. IOW, yeah, ideological imbalance is a problem, but I don't know of any way to correct it.
Any ideas out there?
archpundit 11/22/2002 4:31:55 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
More on Conservatives and Liberals in Academia
From David Hogberg concerning his thoughts on conservative/liberal imbalance in academia:
(Note: I did some minor editing due to problems with my e-mail program, so if there are mistakes below, it is safe to assume they are mine and not David's)
I looked over your posts on the liberal-conservative (im)balance in academia and found them quite interesting.
First, let me say that I don?t think discrimination against conservatives is as widespread as it often hyped up to be. Certainly, some disciplines are far more hostile to conservatives in their midst?women and minority studies?than others. However, I don?t think there is an overwhelming amount of professors in academia who are determined to keep conservatives from becoming faculty.
That said, it is there, and does rear its ugly head on occasion?the case of John Lott, Jr. and his inability to find a tenure-track job comes to mind. And it plays a part in the fact that there are more liberals than conservatives. To explain, let me start with Stanley Fish?s thoughts. I think Fish was being a bit disingenuous with his editorial. Of course, ideology isn?t a part of the interview process; it would be way too easy for an aggrieved party to sue if it was. But surely Fish must know that
the hiring process is more than just interviews. For example, a prospective hire is often taken out to dinner by faculty, or to a party at a faculty member?s house. It isn?t too difficult to use such situations to discover the prospective hire?s ideology. Simply engage him or her in conversation, make remarks like ?Bush is a terrible president,? and chances are you?ll figure out their political proclivities. Do faculty members then bring such considerations to the decision to hire? Hopefully most do not, but surely some do.
Fish also ignores a huge part of the process, that of tenure. By the time a professor comes up for tenure, everyone in the department will know his or her ideology, unless that professor has made titanic efforts to be discreet. Do faculty members then bring such considerations to tenure decisions? Again, hopefully most do not, but surely some do.
As I said above, I doubt that such instances are widespread. They do occur often enough that it likely has a discouraging effect on many conservatives considering academia. They either avoid graduate school altogether or they get their degrees and seek employment elsewhere.
On your point of socialization I have to adamantly disagree. I don?t think most academic liberals are socialized as they continue on in the profession. The vast majority have their views well formed by the time they enter graduate school. The question, then, is why does the profession attract so many liberals? Frankly, I haven?t a clue. Why do so many conservatives go into business, why do so many liberals go into journalism, etc., etc.? I?d
really like to know the answer to such questions.
That leads me to the other reason why I think so few conservatives are in academia. I suspect that many of them feel like the turd in the punchbowl when they enter graduate school. They find themselves in a situation where they are in a very small minority, and they routinely encounter a lot of stereotypes about their political views. Not too many people are going to stay in that type of environment for the long haul.
To sum up, I think the stories about the occasional academic being denied a job because of his or her ideology, along with an often inhospitable environment in graduate school result in fewer conservatives in academia.
Even if these factors weren?t present, there would still be an imbalance (as I noted, the profession just seems to attract liberals.) It just wouldn?t be as severe as it is now.
As for me, I don?t intend to pursue work in academia. There are a lot of reasons, not the least of which is I?m pretty happy working in a think-tank. Two others are:
1. I had no success getting published in academic journals, which suggests I?m not very good at that type of research and writing.
2. I initially went to graduate school because I wanted to teach. After acouple of years, I was burnt out on teaching. I had lost most of my patience with students. I found myself correcting exams or essays, and screeching like Mr. Hand ?Is everyone on dope?!? Definitely not a good thing.
archpundit 11/22/2002 3:58:46 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
He forgot?
Falwell (Scott not Jerry) apparently got free pot for favors. When he goes to testify I guess he can claim short term memory loss.
archpundit 11/21/2002 4:38:54 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
More on Liberal Academics
Mike Finley takes on an ideological hack complaining about faculty partisan identifications
I don't have a lot more to say other than what I said here.
Stanley Fish wrote an op-ed pointing out that partisan ID doesn't come up in academic job interviews and described the process. It is a process that is mind-numbingly boring and has little to do with ideology in terms of liberal vs conservative. I can only think of one case where an issue of ideology came up at all and that was in relation to teaching style. The individual played an advocate role in teaching instead of using the Socratic Method. Most of the time if ideology is at stake, that ideology fight is over schools of thought which are theoretical points, not conservative vs liberal.
The assumption made by FrontPage magazine is that hiring decisions are made by ideology. There are several problems with this. PhDs are more liberal than the population as a whole regardless of field. If one examines voting behavior, for a long time there has been a relationship between increasing education and an increase in likelihood of being Republican until one gets to the PhD level and then it turns into an increase in the likelihood of being Democratic. As the parties have realligned, education doesn't have the same impact on partisan ID anymore, but PhDs are still overwhelmingly Democratic.
The real issue is that as one is socialized into the education, one tends to change their views because of their political context. If you are a business exec you talk to other execs about your political beliefs and, not surprisingly, this affects your views. The same happens amongst PhDs and academics in general. It isn't a dark conspiracy, it is political context. In the 1960s evangelicals voted for both parties. In 2002, evangelicals vote in high proportions for Republicans because their political context reinforces such choices. For studies on political context see Huckfeldt and Sprague.
The study itself was deeply flawed by not including those within other areas of the university. While I'm guessing the engineering and chemistry professors aren't as liberal, they are still registered Democratic at much higher numbers than the population as a whole. Knowing this bit of information gives one something to compare the rates while controlling for education's effect alone.
More troubling is what are we supposed to do about this? The lambasting of liberal faculty that are instilling their left wing agenda is a nice whine (and inaccurate for most classes), but it doesn't tell us how to solve the problem. I defy anyone to demonstrate de jure discrimination. De facto imbalance may occur, but to solve such a problem, one would need to identify why this imbalance occurs.
From my experience in political science, conseratives don't last in programs. It isn't because they aren't smart, it is because they see graduate education as a way to become advocates and not scientists. This isn't universal, but for those who enter programs and are conservative, they are far less concerned with determing what is than they are advocating policy. Thus, they have less interest in becoming practicing social scientists. As an example, David Hogberg works for a think tank and hates doing professional conferences. He isn't dumb, he just has a different interest from his public comments.
Update: Instead of assuming what David thinks I asked him. He said he'd reply later. Also some minor edits have been made above.
archpundit 11/21/2002 1:01:05 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
NYT Calls for no reform in Illinois
The Times gets on a high horse and calls for commutation fo all death row inmates. As a strong opponent of capital punishment I think we ought to end the death penalty. But a cheap stunt like the Times is proposing will end reform in Illinois. Blagojevich is already reluctant to look at any serious reform and the legislature is dragging its feet. A blanket commutation will inflame the incoming Governor and the legislature and stop them from passing any substantive reform. We don't need a pyrrhic victory, we need reform.
Even better would be if some paper besides the Chicago Tribune put its money where its mouth is and actually investigate the death penalty in other states.
archpundit 11/21/2002 12:29:05 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Terrorists are scouring vanity web sites for ideas
The aptly named USS Clueless is warning that terrorists are using warnings of vulnerabilities to think of new attacks.
I've known about many of these for a long time but have refused to discuss them for fear of giving our enemies ideas. One in particular is the idea of importing and releasing crop and livestock diseases and releasing them here to attack our agriculture.
I'm pretty sure that terrorists don't spend a ton of time reading vanity web sites characterized correctly as full of "endless rambling diatribe"s.
More importantly, democracies work better than authoritarian regimes because they are able to circumvent hierarchies that often suppress such information through a free press.
archpundit 11/21/2002 11:45:33 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Real University Politics
The Trib takes George Ryan to task for his crony appointments to the university system.
He is sort of a soulmate with Jeb, isn't he?
archpundit 11/21/2002 10:38:23 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
But What I Still Want to Know is...
Why should Augusta stay segregated?
The defenses so far:
1) Tradition
Tradition isn't a reason for continuing discriminatory practices. Not admitting African-Americans was tradition too.
2) There are more important issues
There are always more important issues to almost any single problem. This is on the agenda.
3) Legal Right
I have a legal right to be an asshole and practice that right quite frequently. However, that is not a defense of my behavior.
4) Other groups are segregated
Yes, and they should either integrate or they are substantially different. Augusta is a rich guy networking club. I find no reason why it shouldn't be a rich person networking club. What is it about networking and being chums that requires segregation by gender?
archpundit 11/21/2002 10:35:14 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
The Problem with Fisking
Jeff Cooper demonstrates why I have him on my regular reads by giving the perfect example of why fisking is pointless.
Jeff also makes a good point that the technique (preferably without the name fisking) can be useful. I would point out it is very useful when used to combat creationists and others who make a wide number of unsupportable claims in a minimal amount of writing. talk.origins is full of such examples largely because creationists tend to lie, misrepresent, or simply are too confused to know what they are talking about. In that case, the only effective way to discredit their writing is to take each minute claim apart.
In most articles there is a structure. Attention getter/introduction, thesis, supporting evidence and conclusion. Taking apart a single sentence away from that structure is often either pedantic or a misrepresenation of the actual point. Somewhere around 6th grade most people learn that they make a point with a paragraph, not a sentence.
archpundit 11/20/2002 5:35:41 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Gasket Blowing
Reynolds is still insisting:
TAPPED still has its panties in a wad over the Martha Burk fertility-control "satire" issue, which McElroy also mentions. But I repeat: a non-lefty white male wouldn't be allowed to claim "satire" as a defense for writing something similar about fertility control in women -- any more than he would be allowed to claim "Halloween" as a defense for appearing in blackface.
The problem is it is irrelevant to the point. The work was misrepresented by several people including Lopez. Somehow Reynolds has decided that in a hypothetical other situation, an author who did a satire wouldn't be allowed to claim satire as a defense. So what? In this case it was obviously a satire and people are misrepresenting it. If, in another case, someone misrepresents a satire that would be wrong as well. The Halloween example is assanine since those involved aren't claiming it was a satire, but frat hijinks (I agree the incident shouldn't be seen as a disciplinary issue, but an educational one). The individual with his panties in a wad is the guy obscuring the issue.
First, one can claim any excuse they care to claim. Whether that is a legitimate claim or a believable claim is dependent on the work in question. No one with a brain should be questioning that Burk was writing satire. In the hypothetical other situation, one would have to see the work. Assuming it was as clear as Burk's work, the people misrepresenting it would be wrong to claim it wasn't a satire. Others could still argue it was a bad satire or in bad taste. If Lopez or Schlussel had made such an argument, there could have been a debate over the merits. Instead, they lied.
Second, if the situation happened with a conservative author, that would be stupid too. Unfortunately Reynolds isn't giving an example of this occurring and is instead claiming victimhood. Though Mike Royko was a liberal (not lefty given that is a silly phrase), he certainly got blasted by Latino groups for his satire of Buchanan. That was stupid on the part of Latino groups. As is just about every whine about something Mark Twain ever wrote.
Third, it is entirely possible to argue the satire is unfunny or a poor satire when refuting it. This is different than misrepresenting it as not satire. Lopez, Schlussel and other morons argue that it wasn't a satire. This is false.
Reynolds is trying to make a point that isn't analogous to what actually occurred. He is making a PC point when the entire issue came up because Schlussel and Lopez were lying. If Reynolds wanted to make a case about a PC double standard, an example where it was occuring would be nice. Instead, he has tried to change the subject concerning an example of lying and obscure the point to being some screed about PC. Before accusing others of having their panties in a wad, he should untangle his own.
The normally well-spoken
Tom Spencer has 5 points subtracted for using the line 'doesn't get it.' Only idiots like Sullivan are allowed to use rhetorical nonsense like that. Tom isn't an idiot.
Update: Reynolds is still whining about a double standard.
UPDATE: TAPPED has another post on this, and -- even after a long and cordial series of emails with Armed Liberal, who shares TAPPED's view -- all I can say is "you guys just don't get it." It's not about Martha Burk. It never was about Martha Burk. (Though if you think that calling Burk's piece "satire" changes the face of feminism you're showing your ignorance.
Actually, the entire discussion has been about Burk. Reynolds tried to change the subject and still is. Burk did a satire Lopez, Schlussel and others tried to represent it as not a satire. That is a lie.
There are other writings by academic feminists calling for the elimination of men and similar absurdities in dead earnest, though at nearly midnight I'm not going to run them down. But as a guy who once edited Catharine MacKinnon, I know a bit about this stuff). It's all about a double standard. Your "admit you were wrong about the satire" point is (1) utterly inconsistent with my original post; and (2) a conscious or unconscious effort to dodge the real issue,
No, lying was the real issue. An analogous case would be if a conservative white male wrote a satire and those criticizing him, pulled it out as evidence of his 'wacky' views. I don't know of an example of this occurring, but it probably has somewhere in the history of humanity. If someone can pull up an example I'd be happy to say that dishonesty is wrong as well.
As to being wrong about the satire, he has refused to call out Lopez for misrepresenting the work despite a series of posts on the subject. Instead of admitting Lopez was wrong and then making a point about a separate problem, he has continued to whine about a double standard. A double standard doesn't excuse Lopez, Schlussel or others for lying.
a double standard about speech that everyone knows exists, but that the left dare not admit -- because its whole existence depends on both the double standard, and not admitting it.
Nice rhetorical trick, but it doesn't address the situation as it occurred. Nor does it represent a fair representation of reality. Both Christopher Buckley and PJ O'Rourke do satire quite frequently and they are 'allowed'. Do some have a double standard? Probably. And I'm happy to call them on it. I'm consistent and I think Reynolds ought to be. Reynolds confuses lying about whether something is satire and arguing over whether the satire is appropriate.
Update II: Instapundit Watch has
been revived by the issue.
archpundit 11/20/2002 5:25:17 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
CAFE Joke
Reportedly the Bush Administration is going to try and raise the CAFE Standards for light trucks and SUVS by 1.5 mpg. The full story is at the WSJ. It should be at the Onion.
archpundit 11/20/2002 1:24:29 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
New ANWR Strategy
From Greenwire:
The incoming chairmen of the Senate Budget and Energy committees said Tuesday they may try to move Arctic National Wildlife Refuge drilling provisions early next year as part of the FY '04 budget reconciliation bill. If pursued, the strategy means Republicans could circumvent Democratic filibuster threats to open the Alaskan refuge with only 51 votes, as opposed to having to muster the 60 votes necessary to overcome a filibuster.
Because reconciliation bills cannot be filibustered, and because Senate Democrats have guaranteed to block ANWR, attaching an Alaska drilling provision to the reconciliation bill appears to have emerged as the ideal strategy for Republicans who have long been frustrated by procedural tactics in the Senate. ANWR passed Congress in 1995 as part of reconciliation only to be vetoed by then-President Clinton. But this time around, President Bush eagerly awaits the domestic policy victory he could ultimately claim if ANWR passes the Republican-controlled Congress.
If Republicans choose to roll ANWR into a reconciliation package, the primary obstacle standing in the way is the Senate parliamentarian, who has to rule in favor of including ANWR as "a substantial revenue measure," according to a Senate rule called the Byrd Rule that limits how policy gets included in reconciliation bills. If the parliamentarian rules against ANWR, the Senate needs 60 votes to bypass the Byrd Rule, but all indications point to ANWR passing the test, as it did in 1995, because of the billions of dollars in federal oil royalties the refuge would potentially net.
The question is are there 50 votes + Cheney. I don't think they do. Reconciliation bills can be amended.
Democrats voting for ANWR
Miller
Akaka
Inouye
Landreau
Breaux
Republicans voting No
Smith-NH
Smith OR
Snowe
Collins
Chafee
Dewine
Fitzgerald
McCain
The vote was 54-46
Now, we lose three votes clearly:
Carnahan
Smith-NH
Cleland
Gain 1
Pryor
Leaving us at 50-49 against drilling.
Coleman has claimed to be opposed to drilling. Or will he flop? Terrel-Landreau is irrelevant because they are both for drilling.
One possibility is it gets stuck back in a conference committee and then he votes 'to move the budget forward' like a weasel. But on the face of it, and if Norm keeps his promise, ANWR drilling doesn't pass.
archpundit 11/20/2002 1:18:16 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Tightening the Noose
George Ryan's daughters have been given immunity. No wonder he came to Da Speaker's defense when she said she'd investigate her father.
archpundit 11/20/2002 10:58:23 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
No pressure to overreach
When you win a close one, the conventional wisdom is to stay in the center. Fortunately, centrifugal forces counteract the rush to the middle and one of those centrifugal forces is Phyllis Schlafly. For those expecting a latino resurgence in the Republican Party, Ms. (I couldn't resist) Schlafly throws some cold water on immigration.
More fun is:
But 89 percent of the nation's children attend public schools, Schlafly added. "If they turn out to be illiterate little savages who don't know right from wrong - we need to care about what's being taught."
archpundit 11/20/2002 10:38:24 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
They flavor cough syrup, don't they?
Kathryn Jean Lopez is lambasting Planned Parenthood over chocolate birth control pills. Is this any different than flavored cough syrup? And the money the government gave to Planned Parenthood goes to health care for poor women. The horror.
archpundit 11/20/2002 10:25:17 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Semantic Vandals Strike Again
Calpundit takes issue with Reynolds again, but he really misses the greater problem with the post.
From the article Reynolds is commenting on:
We face, now and for the foreseeable future, the threat of a new barbarism. The new barbarians, like those of old, consist of groups in which every member is a potential warrior. Like their predecessors, the new barbarians rely on their ability to outmaneuver their civilized adversaries, to concentrate deadly force at vulnerable spots. But unlike the old steppe nomads, the new barbarians seek neither booty nor conquest. Our new barbarian adversaries pursue a strategy of pure and perfect nihilism: They seek destruction for destruction's sake. Their strategy, in other words, is terrorism.
Pure and simple claptrap. Al Qaeda has specific goals and they use terrorism to obtain those goals. They don't use terrorism for destructions sake, they use it to obtain political goals. Using violence against civilians to obtain political goals is generally the definition of terrorism. Writing garbage for the sake of drama should consign one to the category of drama queen and not serious commentator.
archpundit 11/19/2002 5:06:08 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Blogging recommendation
As most of you visiting have probably figured out, I recently moved my site to Blog Studio (if you need a link to figure out how to get to the home page--just don't bother). I am very, very pleased with both their interface and hosting. And it is all for $15. Even better, they are going to be adding stats to the paid sites soon. If you are tired of Blogger and all of the problems with it, consider giving Blog Studio a try. Most features can be tried out for free.
archpundit 11/19/2002 4:53:21 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Right Wing Paranoia
My favorite group of wingnuts have moved beyond the election and are now complaining about the passing of the Conservation and Reinvestment Act. The writer seems (seems because her argument is heavy on allusion and light on substance) to think the Constitution doesn't allow government to take land. Actually the Constitution is quite clear in allowing the government to take land, but compensation is required when the government does so.
archpundit 11/19/2002 2:20:06 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Not Overreaching?
I can't believethis passed in the current form. This may well be beating the record for overreaching established in '94.
Let's drop the fiction about Pelosi being an extremist and notice that for all of the decent Republicans out there, the friggen party has been hijacked by a bunch of wingnuts and business schills.
archpundit 11/19/2002 2:08:58 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Should have seen this one coming
*looks at the current world's population* You must have a lot of frustration then.
What pisses you off?
Created by ptocheia
archpundit 11/19/2002 1:58:12 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Hope on the Northside
Dusty is cleaning house.
We'll be ignoring the Bears for the rest of the season. McCaskey couldn't have done this badly.
And I only hope the return of the twit from Cedar Rapids means the end of the Rams successful comeback.
archpundit 11/19/2002 10:18:50 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
The Return of the Jedi
Gary MacDougal is having a hard time after being hit hard on the head.
"(MacDougal) was the right person at the right time, but now we have to move onto other things," said MaryAlice Erickson, a member of the Republican State Central Committee from Peoria. "We don't want to embarrass anyone ... but the graceful thing is for him to write his letter of resignation and we can move on."
But alas, don't fear dear reader, because the ICFST has a plan to screw itself quite well:
But his victory may have come with a price. Tenhouse may attempt to lead his own caucus within the Republican minority, potentially forcing Cross and his supporters to deal with him on major issues and legislation.
archpundit 11/19/2002 10:15:39 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Good for Business, bad for the Economy
David Broder writes the article that anyone who has every seriously studied the institution of Congress was expecting. The Republicans are already loading up bills with garbage and it is pretty damn funny, well if it wasn't sad. And despite all of the high-minded nonsense about Tom DeLay learning from Gingrich's fall, Broder points out the Republicans and DeLay haven't.
There is a gem buried in the article that could spawn several books:
On another pair of questions, most said a Republican Congress would be good for business but bad for the economy.
While all evidence is that the American people have little understanding of complex issues, amazingly they are quite astute at understanding the big picture.
archpundit 11/19/2002 9:21:34 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
DeLay's hand-picked guy is a liberal, Really!!
The Illinois Leader has decided that the Speaker of the House of Representatives has decided to go left. They get a dig in on Skip Saviano, but strangely don't address his, ahem, ties to organized groups. So everyone to the left of Denny Hastert is a bad Republican? That is one hell of a coalition they are trying to put together.
archpundit 11/18/2002 3:56:16 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Topinka an enigma?
Possibly the most humorous aspect of the Illinois conservatives is the inability to grasp why Judy Barr Topinka does well. The problem stems from them not understanding that most of America isn't populated by fire-breathing weenies. The final cited source understands her outreach is what appeals to so many. Roeser, as usual, seems to see this as a sign she has sold herself to the devil. One can argue it is inclusiveness or selling out, but either way she is successful.
archpundit 11/18/2002 3:40:01 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
SMS hires lobbyist to get federal funds
SMS has decided with the decreases coming in state aid, to directly lobby the federal government. What a state!
archpundit 11/18/2002 2:39:23 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
But they liked Bradley more
&c has a complaint with a profile of Al Gore that is legitimate. However, let me point out that Gore got his butt kicked at Cornell College and in Mt. Vernon during the '00 caucuses. Bradley had his best campaign event there.
Pulling into his next stop, the small college town of Mount Vernon, Gore notices a motorcycle that has apparently shown up to lead him onto the campus of Cornell College. "Behold the tattered remnants of the imperial retinue," Gore says, half-joking, half, it seems, genuinely bitter.
He should be bitter there--they saw through his half-ass act.
archpundit 11/18/2002 2:19:51 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
The War against Boys or Victimology 101
Instapundit is on a tear recently, boldly proclaiming those who might disagree with him are not credible.
Cute rhetorical trick, but it isn't very useful. He seems to think boys are being kept down by THE WOMAN. That really isn't the humorous part though. One can argue that we don't take boys problems very seriously and I think there is something to that. Much like some African-American kids face pressures to not achieve, boys as a class face similar pressures. The funny part is the screed proclaiming those who disagree with him are ridiculous:
You can disagree with this if you like -- though, frankly, I think doing so is a confession of utter blindness to reality -- but quit telling me that this is some creation of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. It's not, and you only diminish your credibility by pretending (or, more embarrassingly, actually believing) otherwise.
Most of what we see him cite with the exception of Christina Hoff Sommers are further screeds with little systematic support. Sure, some people say really stupid things, but that doesn't make a dominant feature of a culture. One thing we do understand about human behavior is that humans tend to search out views that reinforce their impressions. This seems like a prime case of seeking evidence for what one wants to believe is true and not trying to evaluate the degree of the problem. Glenn would improve himself to understand that problems occur by degree.
There are lots of dumb things done on college campuses, but part of the educational process is learning to distinguish between strong and weak arguments and questioning assertions. Because one takes issue with an assertion or disagrees with a professor isn't the sign of a hostile environment. It is a sign of a place where teaching and learning are taking place.
Colleges aren't monolithic thought machines despite what some would like to insist. Students are, not surprisingly, quite capable of evaluating arguments made by those teaching them and often discard those they find silly.
The real problem with this line of argument is how men and boys are being made into victims. Saying they are not going to college because of anti-male bias misses the mark on several levels. One would need to look at the alternatives to college that many men are choosing. Are people seriously trying to argue that working a crappy half-ass job with low pay and little future is better than listening to people abstractly blame men? Or the horror of facing viewpoints they disagree with?
I always found the middle class orientation of feminism at college the most surreal. Discussions of who does the housework seemed a little strange to the guy coming from a single-parent trailer park household. The argument that college is so tough for men falls into the same category of class based ignorance of most people's lives. Existing in a closed tunnel that ignores the rest of the world causese one to lose the alternatives.
Men who fail out of college or leave aren't doing so because of anti-male bias at the college level. The problems of male educational achievement start before college and simply follow from there. There is a problem and it is how we socialize boys to value education. That doesn't make men in college victims, it makes the ones not going victims of low expectations.
archpundit 11/18/2002 1:13:49 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
PC and Satire
Instapundit is upset that people don't see the world through the same paranoid filter he does. To go back to the beginning of the Burk mess he said:
Sounds pretty creepy to me. In the Corner post linked above, Kathryn Jean Lopez says that this is exaggeration for effect. Perhaps. But I can only imagine the response in, say, Ms. if some conservative male engaged in similar exaggeration where women's reproductive rights were concerned.
Perhaps? What Glenn seems unable to grasp is that he was joining in the bashing of Burk based on what might have happened if someone else had written a similar parody. His excuse of his behavior is that he was making another point about how PC leads to the messenger depends on the acceptability of the language. This is, of course, irrelevant. In a piece like Burk's the point is blood obvious. 'Perhaps' demonstrates one accepting that it wasn't satire. A little personal responsibility would be nice out of someone who can't let academic dishonesty go for a second. It is a spoof and Lopez refused to concede this point. Worse, it is pretty clear that someone (Hootie) is sending out this meme and hacks are repeating it.
More troubling is the notion that Burk is wrong because of a hypothetical or even a real example of satire being condemed if it is right leaning and not PC. Burk doesn't deserve to be attacked for what others might do. If someone gets their panties twisted over one of two similar satirical pieces, the ninny getting the panties in a wad deserves to be criticized, not Burk for her work. This is a logical point completely lost on him.
A perfect example is when Mike Royko wrote one of the finest satirical pieces on Pat Buchanan. I kept going back to it all day it was so funny and dead on in pointing out what a bastard Buchanan was. If one read it straight one might get the sense that he was supporting Buchanan. However, to do so would mean one was a ninny. What did Royko get for that? Protests, protests and protests and a hell of a defense from the Tribune, to their credit. Those protesters were ninnies who didn't understand he was standing up for Latinos (well Hispanics in Royko's world ;) ). Other ninnies are those who don't get Mark Twain. Kathryn Jean Lopez is another ninny.
Instead of taking Lopez to task for stupidity, Glenn decided to play identity politics victimhood with conservative white males being the ohhh sooo great victim. It is a cheap ploy and rather useless unless one wants to change the subject. Instead of whining about what might occur in another case, why not call everyone on their lies?
I'm at a loss as to how Lopez wasn't lying about Burk. Maybe she is simply too dumb to grasp the satire, but that isn't much of a defense, is it?
archpundit 11/18/2002 12:12:25 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Why Government Matters
For those who have only tangentially heard about the addition of a nasty piece of the Homeland Security Act which protects vaccine makers from liability, see PLA. Far more rational than I would be in his position, he describes the possibility of potential links between mercury in vaccines and autism. Currently, Dick Armey has decided one of his last acts in Congress should center on being a schill for the drug industry. The effect of this bill will be to remove effective liability over using higher amounts of mercury than the EPA guidelines allow with no information as to what the effect would be. This is horribly irresponsible conduct and falls neatly into the category of a information assymetry given parents aren't able to pay attention to every ingredient of a vaccine.
Government on the cheap produces these sort of problems. Government then trying to protect a company that was so careless is the height of cynicism.
Regardless of the ultimate resolution of the issue of whether or not thimerosal causes autism, one aspect of this controversy is not subject to dispute. Our public health system gave mercury to 30,000,000 children in amounts that exceed EPA guidelines. It did so without calculating the amount of mercury being given. It did so without knowing the medical effects of giving that quantity of mercury. A public health system that behaves in that manner is broken. It needs to be fixed.
archpundit 11/18/2002 9:46:53 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Funny Money
Ministry Watch reports the results for their study of financial openness for Christian organizations. Several well known wingnuts have flunked including:
Benny Hinn
Joyce Meyer's Life in the Word
T.D. Jakes Ministries
Robert Schuller's Crystal Cathedral Ministries
Anne Graham Lotz's AnGeL Ministries
Gideon's
Kenneth Copeland Ministries
The Rutherford Institute
Wingnuts, wingnuts and more wingnuts...and wingnuts who won't tell you how they spend money.
archpundit 11/15/2002 4:04:48 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Taoism and Islam together!
Jim Henley wonders why Islamistsare reading an introduction to Taoism. I wish other people would wonder as well.
archpundit 11/15/2002 3:23:41 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
More Vote Fraud accusations
Desperate to be outraged about something, the Wall Street Journal reports on claims of vote fraud in South Dakota.
The problem the Journal faces is that the evidence of widespread fraud doesn't exist. There is evidence of small-scale fraud with 4 native-americans being paid to vote. This should be prosecuted.
What is amusing is the use of a post-doc at the Harvard-MIT data center for authority. Most of the folks who get that job are bright, but certainly not authorities on vote fraud. One should focus on the argument made, and I do below, but if one is truly interested in a statistical analysis one should ask a scholar with a background in such issues, like, oh, I don't know...Gary King at Harvard. This is especially true since ecological inference was developed by King and would be especially well suited to the problem.
But Michael New, a post-doctoral fellow at the Harvard-MIT Data Center, has inspected the South Dakota Secretary of State's Web site to discover other striking facts: While Democrat Tim Johnson ran statewide about 12 percentage points behind what Mr. Daschle got in his 1998 Senate victory, in Shannon County Mr. Johnson ran about 12 percentage points ahead. He got 92% of the vote compared with Mr. Daschle's 80%. Nowhere else in the state did Mr. Johnson improve his vote share relative to Mr. Daschle.
Senate voter turnout was up 27% statewide for this year's close contest compared with 1998, but in Shannon County turnout increased by 89%. Again, no other county in the state showed comparable turnout increases. Shannon County is largely Indian country, home to the Oglala Sioux nation, and is heavily Democratic. But Mr. Thune managed to receive only nine more votes there than did Mr. Daschle's opponent in 1998, notwithstanding the much larger turnout.
Why didn't New compare registration rates to the final results? Because he wouldn't like the results. In Shannon County, South Dakota, 7.2% percent of registered voters are Republican. 7.8% of the voters in Shannon County voted for Thune. There is a higher proportion of other registered voters in Shannon which I assume are independents, but given Native American voters often vote almost 90% Democratic unless John McCain is on the ballot, the overall results aren't that surprising. Indeed, it appears that for a county with 94.2% Native Americans, the numbers are to be expected.
Mr. New points out that this is just a 4% increase in GOP votes over 1998. In the other three South Dakota counties where Indians constitute more than two-thirds of the population, Mr. Thune gained between 23% and 43% more votes than the GOP candidate in 1998. The Oglala Sioux would seem to give new meaning to the phrase "bloc voting."
But this doesn't give us the relevant information. Who voted in those places? Were Native Americans turning out? Or were other people in the county? Given there are 505 registered Republicans in Shannon County is it that absurd that half turned out? Not only that, but the turnout virtually mirrors the 1998 Senate race and the 2000 Presidential race. He is assuming the marginals should stay the same if turnout increases. But targeting specific types of turnout certainly alters the marginals.
In fact, the story is more obvious. Democrats put a lot into turning out Shannon County for a reason. They had a lot of potential votes there. Republicans probably didn't bother because they have not broken 252 votes in the county for statewide offices. The Republican vote has been constant while Democratic vote has been increasing. Given the Democrats were doing voter registration and GOTV in Shannon, unless the Democrats were complete idiots and targeted Republicans, this is as expected.
As a clue to those unfamiliar with how to evaluate stats, if there is a new variable one should expect a change in the behavior. Given there was a massive voter registration drive and significant GOTV efforts by Democrats only in this county, one should expect a very different effect on the relative proportion of the vote.
As Mr. New concedes, "this could all be a coincidence." But "this trifecta of late results, high turnout and unusually strong support for the Democratic nominee should, if nothing else, arouse suspicion." >
But Mr. New has a problem, no one in their right mind would call it a coincidence, they would call it a voter drive. Treating a significant effort to turnout voters sympathetic to the Democratic Party as a coincidence is malpractice for one who is trained in statistics.
New wants to look at this issue from the electorate being a constant proportion. In other words, if turnout increases there should be proportional increases in both parties votes. This is not necessarily the case, especially in a county like Shannon. In 1998, 2000, and 2002, about 250 votes were cast for Republican Senator or President in each year. This is almost exactly 50% of the registered Republicans in Shannon County, South Dakota. Given Thune would have been stupid to spend turnout dollars on so few votes, he didn't. One might argue a voter drive amongst Native Americans should have at least stayed constant in the proportion of Republican votes amongst Native Americans. Such an assumption is unwarranted. Voter drives usually target voters less likely to vote and almost by definition, less likely to be informed on voting. They would look to peers for cues as to how to vote because of their low level of political sophistication and in a one-party reservation, that is likely to result in near unanimity amongst picked up voters. There is a way for Republicans to get around this. Work for Native American voters?like John McCain does.
The calculus is entirely different for Democrats than for Republicans. If one assumes the 917 independent registered voters are heavily Native Americans (a reasonable assumption in a county that is 94.2% Native American) that means total, likely Democratic voters are around 92.6% of registered voters in the county at around 6473 voters. In a state where an election is going to be close those votes are something to concentrate upon and the Democrats did. Shannon County did deliver the election to Tim Johnson, but that isn?t something dark and devious behind it. It was working your base and getting people to the polls. There were 2856 votes for Johnson in Shannon County this year meaning a turnout of around 44% of likely Democrats and I find that low number depressing.
Nothing in the county affected Republican turnout and so it was constant. However, a variable was introduced into the Democratic turnout and this changed the proportion of votes between the parties. This isn't rocket science, it is obvious.
Now, if widespread fraud occurred, present legal evidence. If not, stop whining because people exercised their right and celebrate democracy in action.
And the cheap shot about the Ashcroft election at the end of the election is stupid. Ashcroft lost by 40,000 votes. Vote fraud didn?t produce that difference.
Substantially edited from the first posting
archpundit 11/15/2002 2:08:26 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
The Schwartzkopf Evaluation
As if asked whether Gary MacDougal was a good party leader like Schwartzkopf was asked if Saddam Hussein was a good military leader, Steve Neal points out Gary McDougal is not a good tactician, not a good grass roots organizer and not a good fundraiser.
A great line:
Among the reasons that Illinois Republicans held the governorship for 26 years is that their party has been led by common-sense moderates. MacDougal, who has close ties to the right-wing eccentric Jack Roeser, has embraced the ideologues and true believers. If the party swings too far to the right, the Illinois GOP could be reduced to permanent minority status.
Neal further describes efforts to install Topinka as Party Leader.
What is stunning is that the ICFST party leader had to be circumvented by almost every major candidate.
archpundit 11/15/2002 11:40:42 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Keillor's smear
Spinsanity takes on Garrison Keillor's comments about Norm. The strange thing about Keillor's column was how out of place both comments were. Both columns rightly identified Coleman as a vacuous twit, but then went on to make strange statements that aren't supported or, in the case of the crash comment, sane.
archpundit 11/15/2002 10:11:22 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
I love the Onion
For this sort of thing
archpundit 11/15/2002 10:04:19 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Bush to Fruitcakes: Bite me
Not one to often praise the President, because of his message of tolerance and open acceptance of Islam as a faith and most, importantly, Muslims as good Americans, I'm proud of the man and Colin Powell who have taken shots at the Christian Right in the last few days. Bush does here and Powell does here. And I'll take the Guardian to task for saying Bush is doing it because the election allows him more freedom from the fruitcakes on the right. Bush seems to see this as an issue of right and wrong--and he is on the right side. Good for him.
Muslims came to America because it is a tolerant nation based on the dignity of the individual. It is a damn shame when the dimmer element of the United States population fail to grasp the best defense against Islamists is to provide an alternative that inspires hope.
archpundit 11/15/2002 10:00:31 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Roving Polls
Steve Chapman writes a fine column illustrating the growing problems with political polls. Most interesting is this quote:
"Forty-five percent of the people think Bush's proposals for reforming accounting go too far or are about right," he noted, "versus 39 percent who say they do not go far enough. Now that's compared to 39 percent who said they go too far or are about right a month ago, and 43 who said they do not go far enough."
Then Rove stopped, realizing he was making his boss look like a human windsock. "Not that we spend a lot of time on these," he assured his listener.
For all the gnashing of teeth over the increasing use of polls, I fail to see too much of a problem. Information is good and while it might scare off the bold move from time to time, does anyone think George Bush or Bill Clinton were bold to begin with? Polling has more of an effect in how to sell your programs in most cases than it does with what one believes.
archpundit 11/14/2002 4:52:28 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Cross fire breaks out
That name should be fun for the next few years. The Sun-Times covers the Illinois House Republican leadership race and confirms McQueary's report that Cross looks like a winner. Interestingly, the article points out the women in the caucus are backing Cross which if you were a Republican should be a big giant flag about what you need to reduce the gender gap.
Does Jack Roesser take it that way? Hell no:
"Despite Cross being in leadership under Lee Daniels and once being his roommate, he turned on him with a snarl," conservative activist Jack Roeser said. "He's a rat."
Never make permanent enemies unless you want to be a permanent minority.
archpundit 11/14/2002 4:44:52 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Naive Tapped
TAPPED is shocked that the new minority leader has some not so great ties to special interest money. How exactly does TAPPED think she got to be minority whip? Was anyone paying attention to the dual PAC set-up she had?
I like TAPPED a lot, but this is a bit silly to think she got to where she is because she was smart and liberal. Those are true, but it is also true she is a shrewd money raiser who distributes those funds strategically. The manner in which parties are currently organized almost guarantee that someone who is good at raising money does better. Notice Marci Kaptur didn't get far.
archpundit 11/14/2002 4:40:29 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Hootieing
Tapped picks up more on the Burk satire. Calpundit wisely brings back the point. Why would a club such as Augusta want to exclude women? Didn't people stop doing this when they stopped having super secret treehouse clubs? (Tom Tomorrow doesn't have his posts on this up right now, but pretend there is a link). Apparently not since a bunch of bloggers insist that proclaiming someone 'gets it' is an argument.
The strangest thing that no one seems to be picking up on is the sheer mendacity shown by Lopez in claiming Burk is trying to rid Augusta of men.
Almost as strange is the notion that Burk is trying to attack a right. One has a right to exclude people from a private organization in most cases. Burk was quite clear she supports that right in the discussion on Crossfire. She even conceded that some organizations should be gender exclusive and in this case she isn't pursuing a law or legal action to force change, she is simply asking them to change and applying economic pressure. Her distinction between this case and others is that Augusta National is essentially a business and networking organization rolled into one and by shutting out women is shutting out half the population from those benefits of membership.
If one disagrees with this, start chatting with the religious right groups boycotting Disney for giving gay partners benefits.
The ideal resolution is Hootie allows women in, and they have the good sense to not join.
archpundit 11/14/2002 4:35:14 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
WTF?
Who let Poindexter back in government? There truly is nothing one can do anymore that will disqualify one from serving in the government. And that isn't even the worst part of th story! Normally I find Safire a bit paranoid, but this is a good subject to be paranoid about.
archpundit 11/14/2002 8:01:55 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Before Jim Henley does a better job than me again...
Instapundit is trying to sell the Islamic connection to the snipers still. The reference is to the Moonie Times and as usual, there is no actual evidence. This shouldn't be a surprise. Given we have evidence of attacks all across the country that fit the amazing non-pattern of a spree and reasons for the cross country killing trek, one would generally conclude, we have two nuts on a killing spree.
That would be the case if it wasn't for repeating the mantra "Everything has changed now" caused one's brain to fall out.
The reality is the world hasn't changed a bit other than some big craters being created. The perception of safety may have changed, but the world is no more or no less dangerous than before 9-11. The inability to grasp this basic point has lead to paranoia looking for Islamist terrorism where it doesn't exist. The conclusion of the more rabid paranoid individuals is that barring clear disproof, Islamist terrorist must be the cause of any evil act. If only the world was that simple. The number of dangers hasn't changed and a whole bunch were present before that aren't Islamist in nature. Those dangers haven't gone anywhere.
A lot of paranoia isn't a big deal for a group of people on vanity web sites, but it sure would be a bad way to run a country. The world is a dangerous place in more than one way. Assuming the cause of any particular act is automatically Islamist doesn't help a rational evaluation of different threats. Fortunately, vanity web sites aren't that influential.
archpundit 11/13/2002 9:03:00 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Help Wanted: House Dem Puppet
Slate has a good point on Pelosi
But despite her formidable political skills?even the Wall Street Journal acknowledged that she's smart and telegenic and hard-working?her tenure as House Democratic leader, which hasn't even begun yet, has been a complete disaster from a PR standpoint. Perhaps the Democrats would be best advised to once again take a page from the Republicans: The GOP has an effective leader and party strategist who fires up the party base. His name is Tom DeLay, and he's not the No. 1 House Republican. Pelosi needs a puppet. Too bad Denny Hastert is already spoken for.
archpundit 11/13/2002 5:32:05 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
WWJD (DRIVE)
In the election and efforts to start up the new site, I hadn't been able to link to the new Christian movement to ask What Would Jesus Drive. Michelle Cottle has a good piece at TNR on the movement.
archpundit 11/13/2002 2:17:21 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Not to be outdone
The Instapundit links to another twit. The best line here is the addendum:
"Maybe she was aware of the swiftian connotations of making a modest proposal, but it sure doesn't seem like it"
Actually, it seems like she did, but thanks for playing. And it is Burk, not Burke.
Update: Apparently terrorists have attacked our water supply and infected select portions of the population with the idiot disease. I thought it was pretty weak on Crossfire, but the fact that it continues amazes me.
Sounds pretty creepy to me. In the Corner post linked above, Kathryn Jean Lopez says that this is exaggeration for effect. Perhaps. But I can only imagine the response in, say, Ms. if some conservative male engaged in similar exaggeration where women's reproductive rights were concerned.
Actually, the whole point of the article appears to be a critique of conservative arguments restricting female reproductive freedom. The point is that often conservative magazines say very similar things about women's fertility. The literary device of satire is used to point out how ridiculous such claims would be were the situation reversed. Who let's that man loose on a college campus?
Satire (from Dictionary.com): Irony, sarcasm, or caustic wit used to attack or expose folly, vice, or stupidity.
archpundit 11/13/2002 11:44:46 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Lopez 'Clarifies'
Here.
The problem is it doesn't deal with the "to rid Augusta of Men". Worse, she tries to tar Burk for the satirical piece and even in the 'retraction' Lopez says "I also suspected Burk didn't really want to sterilize all men."
So why did Lopez present the article as serious? More strangely she claims the piece focuses on the poll claiming little support for Burk's position. Only two paragraphs effectively deal with it compared to five for the Ms. article.
archpundit 11/13/2002 11:35:43 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Jeb in 2008
The Grapefruit is reporting Jeb is moving to the right for 2008. While 2004 is still up in the air I'd be a bit more circumspect about the American people wanting a 3rd Bush in 20 years.
Then again, I thought 2 was unlikely. Shrug.
archpundit 11/13/2002 11:08:52 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Hastert a Moderate?
How screwed up is the Illinois Circular Firing Squad Team? Denny Hastert is now considered a moderate along with Judy Barr Topinka according to Rich Miller. Is Tom DeLay's boy a moderate like Topinka? ROTFLMAO. No. However, in the coming civil war, he apparently is smart enough to realize Illinois isn't a conservative state making him an enemy of the True Conservatives TM. The TC TM are also known as the Illinois Democratic Party's best friends.
More interesting is the decline of the DuPage GOP's patronage operations--especially the Tollway Authority.
archpundit 11/13/2002 11:02:35 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Cross likely the New GOP House Leader?
Kristen McQueary reports that Tom Cross is the likely winner of the House GOP leadership race. The Illinois Leader will like that.
archpundit 11/13/2002 10:58:01 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Peeing on Peotone
Rod has already talked of ending purchases of land for the Peotone airport.
archpundit 11/13/2002 10:54:20 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Things Really Don't Change That Much
Is how Phil Kadner's column should be titled. Business as usual in Springfield.
archpundit 11/13/2002 10:51:50 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Flag Rubes
This is too much. Joe Conason points out Sonny Perdue is already backing off of his call for a referendum on the Confederate Flag.
You know, for all the whining about racial politics by some conservatives, you would think the Republican Party would stop exciting the Democratic base. Hell, the Republicans might just pick up a vote or two if they got a clue.
archpundit 11/13/2002 10:49:21 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Claptrap on NRO
Calpundit points out a particularly inane article at NRO by Kathryn Jean Lopez. The first clue to a satirical piece is that it starts out as "A modest proposal....". So much for the classical education many at NRO profess to have.
Kevin misses another line that is quite telling:
Serious debate pretty much does not exist when it comes to the all-male policy of Augusta National Golf Club, the home of the Masters Tournament. Augusta head Hootie Johnson's willingness to announce that he has no intention of budging on that policy has meant a new media tour for Martha Burk, the woman who started the controversy-her one-woman crusade, backed up by a pliable media, to rid Augusta of men.
Serious debate is impossible when one makes the statement that Martha Burk is trying to 'rid Augusta of men.'. Augusta is nominally a private club and as such has a right to exclude women. But what kind of twits belong to such a club? Ones named Hootie, I guess.
Even better was this was brought up on Crossfire last night (watching it is not something I endorse, but it was on). Debbie Schlussel was on and tried to argue the same thing. Tucker started ignoring her. Why he ignored her is unclear. Between her habit of breathing through her mouth on TV and her sheer stupidity she is grating. " BURK: ... what a spoof is? S-P-O-O-F -- spoof. Spoof -- come on, come on."
archpundit 11/13/2002 10:14:21 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Welcome
To the new site. Blogging will soon commence. Thanks for your patience.
archpundit 11/13/2002 12:12:04 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
Up and Running NO MORE BLOGGER! Well, except until I get Blog Saint Louis moved over.
Up and Running
NO MORE BLOGGER! Well, except until I get Blog Saint Louis moved over.
archpundit 11/11/2002 10:44:46 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
test
test
archpundit 11/01/2002 10:00:44 AM - [Link] - Comments ()
test
test
archpundit 10/31/2002 9:53:05 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
Test Post
Test Post
System 10/22/2002 3:26:02 PM - [Link] - Comments ()
