Quote of the Day

Based on the quote below, I'd say the Senate health care debate is off to a terrific start:

"Well, I don't know what's more preposterous: saying that this plan 'saves Medicare' or thinking that people will actually believe you." 

[Link]

-- Sen. Mitch McConnell on Majority Leader Harry Reid's claim that the Dems health care reform bill will 'save Medicare'.

Stoops Stays at OU

With Charlie Weiss out at Notre Dame, Oklahoma Sooners coach Bob Stoops formally took himself out of the running for the now vacant head coaching gig in South Bend, IN.
"What I'm saying is I'm going to be at Oklahoma next year, so I can't be in two places at once," Stoops said on a conference call. [Link]
We called this one last week, though Stoops did little to clarify matters during the lead up to the bedlam game with OSU. But the anouncement today makes Stoops's position crystal clear: Bob Stoops stays at Oklahoma.

When Stuffed Animal Dog Shows Go Awry...

Perhaps the onset of finals has made me jaded at life. But, for whatever reason, the video below is both hilarious, and maliciously addictive.

Enjoy!

Thomas Friedman on Muslims and Jihadists

Rare is the day when Thomas Friedman has a column that actually makes sense.  In fact, so rare is this blue moon that I felt it deserves a post. 

In brief, NYT columnist Thomas Friedman had a provocative column yesterday discussing competing narratives in the Muslim world about America.

The rub of Friedman’s piece is that if Muslims claim that the image of Islam is not that of the Jihadists, then Americans should believe them. 

And, in turn, Muslims should explain to Americans exactly what the positive image of Islam is, and how it is being promoted.

[Link]

Fair enough, Friedman. Fair enough.

Rick Warren Discusses Faith, Politics, and Society on Meet the Press

Pastor Rick Warren of California's Saddleback Church gave a fascinating interview with David Gregory on "Meet the Press" this morning. Addressing the topic of thanksgiving, Warren also fielded questions from Gregory on a myriad of issues including- AIDS, abortion, the economy, fulfillment, gay marriage, homosexuality, and leadership among others.

I have watched the entire interview twice, and read the transcript in its entirety. And even after having absorbed much of Warren's interview, I remain stunned by its content. In fact, Warren's interview offers the statement of faith and politics mostly closely mirroring my own of any public official that I have ever heard. 

Naturally, the clip is a fascinating watch for your Sunday afternoon, and Warren speaks well for himself.  From this corner, it’s nice to find a kindred spirit of sorts, albeit a famous one. It makes me wonder whether more Christians are also moving in this same direction as regards faith and politics…   


Obama on the American Dream

President Obama lamented the decline of the American dream in yesterday's Thanksgiving address to the Nation.

[Link]

Conspicuously, the President made no mention of his Administration's role in killing the American dream by his big government policies...

How Long is the Health Care Reform Bill?

HealthCareReformBillv.War&Peace In a recent AP article titled SPIN METER: ‘War and Peace’ in 209 Pages by Calvin Woodward and Douglass K. Daniel, the authors purport to correct the ‘theatrical legislation inflation’ put forward by GOP members of Congress regarding the length of the health care reform bill.


But while masquerading their opinion piece as analysis, Woodward and Daniel took some creative license of their own:
The actual Senate bill, which Majority Leader Harry Reid introduced last week, came in at 2,074 double-spaced pages, 84 more pages than the House version, which was already being ridiculed for its size.

"That's larger than the novel 'War and Peace,'" Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah said of the Senate bill.

"Exceeding even 'War and Peace' in length," Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., said of the House bill.

Said Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas: "'War and Peace' — some people consider it the greatest book ever written, but most people recognize the novel because at 1,284 pages its length is often the butt of jokes. Now imagine trying to read something that long overnight."

Actually, Leo Tolstoy's tome is longer than either bill. Full translated versions are nearly twice as long.

[Link]
Though the critique seems snarky, and hard-hitting, it simply isn’t true.

The definitive English translation of War and Peace released by Pevear & Volokhonsky in 2007  is exactly 1,215 pages – or a pithy 1,273 pages if one reads all of the footnotes.

Unless Messrs. Woodward and Daniel are reading the original Russian, the length of the bill well exceeds that of Tolstoy’s masterpiece.

Thus, for most Americans who read and speak English, the GOP critique is apt.


Disclosure: While yours truly is no scholar of Russian literature, I am a bit of an expert on the length of War and Peace. The novel is the only book that I have started in earnest yet failed to finish – a failure thrice over, no less.

Obama and Pax Plena

A quick check of the traffic this afternoon revealed an interesting visitor to our slice of the web.  Pax Plena is glad to welcome President Obama (via his staff).  Here’s hoping our musings add some sorely needed wisdom to your policy deliberations. 

The salutation is all in good fun of course – though the sighting isn’t.  Apparently, the White House still uses Internet Explorer 7.0, and hasn’t sprung for a Windows update since Windows XP. 

Regardless, I cannot help wondering why anyone in the Obama Administration would have any interest whatsoever in the Dartmouth mascot controversy…

 

Obama & Pax Plena

The Black Friday Hoax

With my family set to visit us here in Tucson, I can only imagine that black Friday shopping will be on the agenda. For those with similar aims, the article below from CNN Money offers a helpful reminder:

Read the fine print.

[Link]

The problem, according to the piece, is that advertiser are apt to advertise products at obscene discounts, while restricting the quantities available for purchase.

Specifically, if an ads reads something along the lines of 'limit 3 per store' the implication is that the deal extends to only the first three items sold at any particular store.

So, unless you are one of the first three customers in the door to buy the discounted merchandise, you will not enjoy the benefit of the advertised price.

Pretty crafty, isn't it?

It's also economically perverse on the part of the seller, but that's a longer post for another day. For now, be warned that all may not be what it seems as regards post-Thanksgiving sales.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Ghosts of Dartmouth's Past

Jeff Smith My buddy and St. Louis denizen Matt Frederick had an interesting take on former Dartmouth Professor-cum-Missouri State Senator-cum-convicted felon, Jeff Smith. 

[Link]

By way of background, Mr. Smith (couldn’t resist) was a mainstay in Hanover throughout my college years.  He was easily the envy of male political dorks everywhere.  Besides wielding a formative wit, and an abundance of charisma, Smith was also known as a first-rate professor of government, and for his dalliances with some of the hottest co-eds on our campus. It was not a stretch to say that Prof. Smith epitomized the Dartmouth lifestyle – work hard, play hard.

More to the point, following his 2004 race for Congress, Smith was accused of some fairly routine violations of federal elections law.  Specifically, the Smith campaign was said to have ‘coordinated’ with outside entities in the production of a campaign mailer in violation of federal campaign finance law. While the penalties for such violations are fairly inconsequential (Matt rightly points out that both Obama and McCain had several hundred such complaints lodged between the two of them), Smith lied to federal prosecutors, rather than come clean. Even though the case was initially dropped, the matter was re-opened earlier this year, and the fib earned Smith one year and one day in the federal penitentiary. 

[Link]

I suppose for those without ties to St. Louis or Hanover, NH the account is probably uninteresting. But Matt helpfully added some needed dimension to the story, discussing Smith’s work in the Missouri Senate and in his district.  Smith had apparently done a great deal to improve race relations in the highly stratified, Midwest city. Matt also predictes a bit of a political comeback for Smith who is widely acknowledged as a ‘show me state’ political talent.

Perhaps the assessment is not far off. 

Fellow convicted felon, James Traficant is also said to be mulling a political comeback in his former Youngstown, OH congressional district. If an aging politico with a rat toupee can climb the political ranks fresh out of prison, then surely a true political talent (who had actually done some good) can do the same.

The Disappearing Template

As you can see, the digs here at Pax Plena have changed once again.  Earlier this evening, while posting a quick meme on the Gap commercial below, my blog template suddenly and mysteriously vanished. 

After scouring the internet, the beauteous layout you see was the best I could find.  It has most of the features that the other one had.  The lone addition is a list of tags for the various lolcats of the week, songs of the week, and the nascent Ira Hayes Series.  And of course, the content remains the product of yours truly.

So, apologies for yet another change.  Here’s hoping this template makes it the rest of this year and well into the next.

Worst Commercial Ever: The Gap's 'Cheery Night'

I'm not exactly sure what it is about the commercial below that makes my stomach churn. But when I saw the holiday commercial below for the GAP, I became both nauseated and livid all at once.

Perhaps it's the phrase: 'Happy do whatever you wanukkah, and to all a cheery night' that draws my ire?

At any rate, I would wager that the 30 second spot is easily the worst commercial of the year, and perhaps somewhere in the top five worst commercials of all-time.

Well done GAP. From now on I'll be shopping at J. Crew, and your shoddy efforts at marketing are the reason why.

The clip appears below. Watch at your own risk.



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Obama in Asia

No real story here, but our great leader spent this past week in Asia, talking much while accomplishing little.

Even the Politico was forced to concede that the President's trip elevated style over substance.

President Obama's trip: Style over substance

[Link]

Unfortunately, the Politico wasn't being entirely fair to the President.

The characterization isn't true only of Obama's trip to Asia.

It's true of his whole Presidency.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Studying the Haters

It never occurred to me that the concept of hate could be a field of academic study. 

But according to Gonzaga University it is exactly this.

[Link]

Besides Keith Olbermann, one cannot help wondering who would attend college to ‘major in hate’.

Lolcat of the Week

Implicit in the lolcat of the week below is a message to finals regarding Thanksgiving.

Don’t steal my holiday.

funny pictures of cats with captions
see more Lolcats and funny pictures

Bob Stoops to Notre Dame? Ridiculous.

Pressed today whether he was a candidate for Notre Dame's non-vacant head coaching gig, Oklahoma's Bob Stoops described the rumor as 'ridiculous.'

[Link]

My quick reaction: Sooner Nation needs to settle down. One bad season in which everything that could have possibly gone wrong did, does not break a head coaching career.

Most programs would be thrilled with an 8 - 4 finish.

Ridiculous indeed.

Gender Norms and Statutory Rape

I paid little attention to the criminal case below out of Tennessee over the weekend. It was only today when a couple of lengthy posts from the Volokh Conspiracy caught my eye that I came across the story below in The Tennessean.

The sordid tale is an increasingly familiar one. A female teacher was convicted of having sex with her 17year-old, male teacher's aide. While this is not an oddity, really, the story is noteworthy because the teacher was sentenced to 12 years in prison as a result of her crimes. This easily fell on the upward range of Tennessee's mandatory sentencing laws.

[Link]

I would guess that 12 years in prison for having sex with a 17 year-old male student might also strike some others as high. But the question is why? This point was raised by Volokh in his analysis of the case. He concludes the matter as follows:

Partly this is because I suspect that sex between an adult woman and a 17-year-old boy is much less likely to be emotionally or physically damaging than sex between an adult man and a 17-year-old girl.

[Link]


Naturally, the conclusion sparked a bit of hissback on Mr. Volokh's blog.

My inclination is to agree with Volokh. Being a male and having been 17 once, I am not certain that the young man in question would have sustained much in the way of 'emotional' or physical harm at all.

But a part of me wonders what role our society's gender norms play in prompting such a conclusion. Do we make assumptions about teenage males that we ought not to make? Or is such an inference, in fact, just common sense?

Regardless, I cannot help but conclude that sending an adult woman to prison for 12 years on a conviction for having sex with a 17 year-old male is a bit much. Even in the worst light the male was only months away from the age of consent. Assuming the the dalliance was consensual, the lines are morally gray at best.

Any reactions? What if the young man, or teacher in question were a relative? Are our statutory rape laws intended to protect 'vulnerable' 17 year-old guys? If so, should they be?


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Eschatology & 2012

Over the weekend, as a birthday night out with my wife (on Friday the 13th, no less), I caught the newly minted blockbuster film "2012."

The movie was nothing if not gripping. The special effects were uncanny on the big screen. And the plotline was extremely accessible. In brief, we were blown away. Unlike most cheesy thrillers, we left the theater with much on our minds.

I didn't realize, until today, how typical our reaction was.

According to Reuters, 2012 netted Columbia Pictures a handsome $225 million,world-wide profit in its first weekend out.

[Link]

Having seen the film, and having had my mind imbued with nearly a semester's worth of globalization and 'atrocities', it was difficult not to have a pedantic reaction, and look for lessons in the genius of Roland Emmerich

I won't give away any key details, but a major theme of the movie deals with the entitlement of survival, and the decisions implicit in every allocation of resources that society makes.

Simply put, how does a group of people decide collectively or severally who has the right to live? And along with this, how should one respond to one's emminent destruction?

Harkening back to my days as a religion major at Dartmouth, it struck me that the questions above have their origins in the bygone philosophy and theology of eschatology - the study of the end of time.

Today, of course, the field is really more the pet interest of seminarians than your rank-in-file scientist. Yet, there is something fairly universal about the study as borne out in the world-wide fascination surrounding this film.

Given the reaction, I think it fair to conclude that as a species, we humans are inexorably perplexed by the limits of our own mortailty. We are fascinated about the ways in which our terrestrial reality might just fall apart. Cue REM's 'It's the end of the world as we know it (and I feel fine).'

When taken from this perspective, the movie is really just the latest iteration of a practice that has occured at various times, and with varied prevalence since the dawn of time. After all, nearly every civilization has some thesis regarding the end of the world. Columbia Pictures was just more deft at communicating its tale to the masses.

And so the big questions remain.

Knowing, as we must, that our existence is finite, how then do we navigate the arduous vicissitudes of life? When the ledger is settled, assuming it is, what makes for a life well-lived? And most importantly, how does one find meaning in a world that could well be destroyed at any moment?

See the movie - but don't expect answers to any of the above.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Al Gore's 'Inconvenient Youth'

While watching 'The Tonight Show' with Conan O'Brien, I was stunned to learn during an interview that former Vice-president Al Gore has a youth operation as a part of his non-profit 'The Climate Project'.

The name of the group?
Inconvenient Youth.

www.inconvenientyouth.org
Perhaps the group could also double as an arm of Planned Parenthood?


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

The ABA Backs Law School Loan Relief

Now this is change I can believe in!

The legal website (perhaps blog?) law.com notes the American Bar Association's recent agreement to support legislation aimed at providing law student's who cannot find employment (cough, cough, me!) some relief from their looming student loan repayments.

[Link]

Can we help law students in this ailing economy?

Yes we can! Maybe.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Four Options for Afghanistan?

The AP wires are reporting that President Obama is weighing 'four options' for retooling American military strategy in Afghanistan.

“President Barack Obama is considering four options for realigning U.S. strategy in Afghanistan, his spokesman said Tuesday, while military officials said the choices involve several ways the president could employ additional U.S. forces next year.

[Link]


Four options for Afghanistan? Pray tell. In fact, there are only two options for Afghanistan.

Either we can fufill Gen. McChrystal's request for more troops, or we can rebuff his strategy.

The President would be wise to listen to his commanders on the ground. Now is not the time to half-ass a plan for victory


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Oklahoma's Dr. No

The Washington Post featured a surprisingly complimentary article in today's paper on Oklahoma Senator, Dr. Tom Coburn.

[Link]

While this ordinarily is not a postworthy event, that the WaPo would say anything that isn't snide or condescending about Senator Coburn is fairly remarkable.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Announcing “The Ira Hayes Series”

Ira Hayes Every now and again, the genesis of a good idea hails from the most unexpected of places. I can probably count on one hand the number of times that I have made any positive reference to Salon Magazine, and yet their writing has prompted me to begin an experiment that I suspect my readers will find insightful, if not mildly amusing.

In brief, Salon magazine ran an utterly provocative piece of investigative journalism detailing the obscure origins of country music legend Johnny Cash's 1964 album "Bitter Tears: Ballads of the American Indian."

Although I have long considered myself a fan of the late 'Man in Black', I had little idea about the particular interest Cash paid to Native American issues. Surprisingly (or perhaps unsurprisingly given the music industry’s reaction to the album), I had neither heard, nor heard of most of its songs.

[Link]

While the story is a good read for the additional dimension it provides to a certifiable country legend, the Salon piece’s real insight is the way it handles the evils of alcoholism, and its effect on Native American populations. As presented in the article, the story behind Johnny Cash's The Ballad of Ira Hayes readily conjures up the broader problem of societal 'indifference' toward Native Americans. The critique impliedly levied is that society is still indifferent to the struggles of Native Americans, even as it was indifferent to Ira Hayes so many years ago.

As any guest of this site, however infrequent, will understand, I’m far from the crusader. My bent is more toward the practical, and the pragmatic (if not the sarcastic) on most aspects of life. From theology, to politics, I tend to reject the extremes. But for once, I am inclined to believe that Salon’s ‘activist’ analysis identifies precisely the issue in question. Examples of indifference toward Native American issues are all too abundant to conclude otherwise.

This summer, for instance, I attended every hearing held by the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. At no hearing was every member of the committee present. In fact, not even one-quarter of the members of the committee took the time to attend any given hearing. Yet, at the health care reform mark up in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, scarce did a day pass when any of that committee’s members were absent.

Admittedly, the example is anecdotal. Health care dominated debate on the Hill all summer long, and was by far the highest legislative priority set by the Senate Majority Leader. Yet, one could not help wondering why so little interest was paid to the lone population to whom the Federal government owes a fiduciary, trust obligation. The simple fact, as the Salon piece intimates, is that society is no more interested in Native American issues today than it was when Johnny Cash sang about Ira Hayes in 1964.

So, what are the issues? Why are issues related to Native Americans even relevant concerns in a time of global recession, multiple theaters of war, and an era of unprecedented government expansion into everything from health care to your home radio? Again, bear in mind that Native Americans comprise all of 1% of the U.S. population. In the coming weeks, and in recognition of Native American Heritage Month, I hope to address some of these questions.

I intend to run a series of columns called “The Ira Hayes Series” which will explore some of the most pressing issues facing Indian Country today. The intent is to explain for a general audience what issues are relevant to Indian Country, and to suggest solutions that are consistent with the principles of limited government, fiscal responsibility, and tribal tradition. If nothing else, it will be an interesting exercise in melding the worlds of conservative thought, and tribal interests – an exercise that has seldom occurred for mass consumption.

Naturally, I recognize that this will not appeal to everyone’s ideological cup of tea. Some readers frequent these ramparts for my typically, snide analysis of our hapless Administration. Others will reject my premise that conservative principles, and tribal interests are commensurable. Both could be valid criticisms.

But to the skeptics, I invite your open-mind to allow me to persuade it otherwise. And for the regulars, to quote Sean Hannity, ‘let not your heart be troubled’ - blogging will continue apace. The Ira Hayes Series will simply be in addition to our usually scheduled programming.

For now, however, please enjoy the inspiration behind our eponymous series - Johnny Cash’s The Ballad of Ira Hayes.

Who Is Joe Biden?

The world may never know…

Right in the Middle

Newsweek International editor Fareed Zakaria had an interesting piece this morning regarding the world-wide rise of conservatism.

After outlining conservative gains in France, Germany, and the UK, Zakaria tackles the status of American conservatism, and the results of last week's elections.

He writes:
The United States has always been one step to the right of Europe, but even here the center held. The Republicans who won did so by emphasizing mainstream issues and traditional GOP criticisms of Obama—on spending and taxes. They did not espouse radical economic ideas or highlight their conservatism on social issues. When they did, it alienated voters, as in upstate New York.

[Link]
It is fairly rare that I have anything good to say of Mr. Zakaria's analysis. Zakaria generally represents the more extremist elements of leftist internationalism in the opinion pieces that Newsweek, alas, feels obligated to publish.

But in this simple, elegant paragraph Zakaria accurately sums up the state of American politics today: America is in the middle, and slightly to the right.

Any other assessment is simply wishful thinking on the part of the political the margins.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Republicans Win! Democrats Can Suck It!

Relax, the headline isn’t mine. 

Still producing some of today’s finest political satire, Redstate Update’s video on Tuesday’s elections had the title above. 

After making the bold taunt, naturally, the duo of Dunlap and Jackie went on to explain in the course of their conversation exactly why their suppositions were incorrect: Swine Flu. Add in a comparison between NJ Gov. Elect Chris Christie and Winston Churchill’s struggle with obesity, and you have all the makings of hilarity. Enjoy!

South Carolinians and Buggery

The news is a bit off the beaten path, but a South Carolina man was convicted yesterday afternoon of the somewhat obscure offense of ‘buggery’.

More specifically, Mr. Rodell Vereen was convicted of buggery and sentenced to three years in the state pen for having sex with a horse.  This is Mr. Vereen’s second offense in as many years.

[Link]

What is it with South Carolinians and unfortunate, sexual predilections?

The Problem of Health Care Rationing

Early this morning, with only a few days remaining before the House votes on the Democrats’ health care reform legislation, the AP finally opted to engage in a bit of critical analysis of the proposal.

The piece takes aim at the Democrats’ plan to pool uninsurable people into a high-risk category of government insurees, providing them with health insurance that they cannot otherwise procure in the private market.

The $5 billion problem is simply stated in three words: health care rationing.

Under the Democrats’ legislation, uninsurable patients would only qualify for the pool only in the event that they had been without health insurance for six months. Obvious concerns arise when one considers the potential harm of a six month wait for those requiring treatment for serious illnesses.

"If you are a cancer patient and have cancer now, you can't wait six months to go into a plan because your condition can go from bad to death," said Stephen Finan, a policy expert with the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network. He called the waiting period in the Senate bill "unacceptable."

[Link]

Let me say first, that it is difficult not to sympathize with plan’s objective.  Uninsurable people who are too poor to afford health insurance has long been a perennial problem for health care reform efforts.

But the bottom line is that the Democrats plans will require a rationing of health care that most Americans with pre-existing conditions would rather avoid. The promise of health insurance in six months means little to the indigent cancer patient with a narrow window of opportunity for successful treatment.

For Democrats, a glaring question remains: how will a government nationalization of the health care system solve the quandary of providing high-quality, affordable health care, in a fiscally responsible manner?

The obvious answer is that it cannot.  Under this proposal, the service provided would fail on all three. 

Lolcat of the Week

The lolcat of the week below is basically this semester's message to me.

Where is 3L going?

funny pictures of cats with captions
see more Lolcats and funny pictures


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Parsing Hoffman’s Loss

The results from yesterday’s elections went about as expected. The GOP netted an impressive win in VA, and eked out a narrow, but welcomed victory in NJ, thus securing a strong rebuke against President Obama’s leftist policies.

The GOP sweep, and my prognostications were, nonetheless, incomplete. In NY-23, with Republican candidate Dede Sozzafava’s exit from the race, Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman was unable to pull off the win. Mr. Hoffman captured 45% of the vote to Democrat Bill Owens’ 49%.

So what of New York’s 23rd Congressional District?

Well, if you listen to some right-wing blogs such as Redstate, you may well come away believing that Hoffman’s loss last night was somehow a ‘win’ for the ‘cause’. Spinning the conservatives’ loss as a win, Redstate’s Erik Erikson made the following argument:

First, the GOP now must recognize it will either lose without conservatives or will win with conservatives. In 2008, many conservatives sat home instead of voting for John McCain. Now, in NY-23, conservatives rallied and destroyed the Republican candidate the establishment chose.

[Link]

Make no mistake, if Hoffman’s loss is somehow a win for conservatism, then the victory is merely pyrrhic.

For starters, Sozzafava’s withdrawal from the race, left the GOP saddled with easily the most the conservative candidate in the race - for a seat in a moderate district to boot. Because Hoffman’s positions were unappealing to the district’s voters, he lost. Shocking, I know.

At best, then, Redstate’s analysis is off. When the most conservative candidate runs in a centrist, swing district, that candidate tends not to win. The natural question, of course, is how the conservative movement is advanced by relegating itself to the role of perennial loser?

Fortunately, a better-reasoned analysis of the NY-23 fiasco was actually written only a few hours before the election by David Frum. Frum’s piece analyzes the stakes in NY-23, and notes that Hoffman’s candidacy did little to advance the conservative cause because it so deeply divided the party.

[Link]

If there is a conclusion to draw at all, I think it’s an odd amalgam of both points. Simply put, Redstate’s critique cuts both ways. Sure, the GOP needs conservatives, but conservatives also need the GOP.

As Doug Hoffman demonstrates third-party candidates stand virtually no chance of winning. Any talk of a conservative exodus from the GOP to form a third party is not really a viable solution. Compounding the problem is the fact that ideological litmus tests imposed by conservative purists make it extremely difficult for the GOP to broaden its appeal.

To be successful, moderate Republicans and conservatives must reach a stasis. As they did while orchestrating the ascendancy of Ronald Reagan, the two factions will have to strike a compromise.

Unfortunately, to many conservatives, ‘compromise’ remains a four-letter word.

Happy Election Day

The cartoon below courtesy of Getliberty.org is strangely appropriate for today's elections. Enjoy!




- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Political High Noon for Obama

vote The gubernatorial races in NJ, VA, and the perennial campaign for NY-23 have been called ‘early tests’ of the President’s political capital in many a quarter.

Today, even the AP is willing to admit as much.
In a very early test of President Barack Obama's political influence, two states are choosing whether to continue Democratic rule while voters elsewhere elect a handful of congressmen and big-city mayors.

Elected just a year ago, the president has spent a considerable amount of time and energy trying to ensure that Democrats win governor's races in Virginia and New Jersey and pick up a GOP-held congressional seat in upstate New York.

In doing so, Obama raised the stakes of a low-enthusiasm off-year election season — and risked political embarrassment if any lost.

All three could.

[Link]
That the races are a test for Obama seems clear enough, but lost in the piece is any mention of how mightily the political winds have shifted. Given the President’s astronomical approval rating earlier this winter, that Republicans are poised to pick up two, blue-trending states on the Eastern seaboard is nothing short of amazing.

Of course, should the President’s party, indeed, take a beating at the polls today, you can expect the Democrats to lower expectations. They will chalk the loss up to a rough economy- that was ubiquitously the fault of former President George W. Bush, no doubt.

Democrat spin notwithstanding, the rub is that this election was President Obama’s to lose. His party controls the levers of power. He is the Democrats chief of party. And the Dems bear responsibility for all policy decisions made within the past year. In a few hours, voters will have their own referendum on exactly these policies, and I suspect a majority will give the Democrats poor marks across the board.

By way of prediction, I’m forecasting a big day for the GOP.

Race
Outcome
Virginia:

Governor
Look for the GOP to pick this one up fairly handily. All of the polls show Bob McDonnell out front with a comfortable lead over the hapless Creigh Deeds.

NY – 23:

Congress
The campaign that never ends will finally reach its dénouement later today. I see Doug Hoffman winning here on the basis of consolidated support, and a visceral reaction to Dede Scozzafava’s betrayal of the GOP.


New Jersey:

Governor
The Garden State gets it first elected Republican Governor since Christine Todd Whitman. Chris Christie pulls this one out. But only by the tiniest hair on Jon Corzine’s chinny, chin, chin.


We won’t say ‘I told you so’ once the final numbers come in. Just remember, you heard it here first!

Update: Below is an interesting summary of today's races bringing together multiple news perspectives from all of the major networks. Thanks to Newsy.com for the video and tip!

Al Hunt's Idea of Success in Afghanistan

Veteran DC columnist, and leftist provocateur Al Hunt had an interesting piece in Bloomberg early this morning. Hunt's column offers a, generally, tortured explanation for why President Obama's failed strategy in Afghanistan, and his subsequent reluctance to act, isn't 'dithering'- to quote our erstwhile Vice President.

The effort is all well and good. Someone must defend the indefensible, after all. But Mr. Hunt's last stand goes the way of Custer in his final stab at erudition. Like all good folly, it is precisely this bit of cognitive dissonance that makes the column an interesting read. Hunt writes:
All the oft-cited analogies -- Iraq, the Russians in Afghanistan, even Vietnam -- are imperfect. One example Obama may want to think about: that of a U.S. president who reversed his harder-line campaign posture and settled for a compromise course that was attacked by conservative Republicans as “appeasement.”

That was Dwight D. Eisenhower and Korea in 1953. The U.S. still has 28,500 troops on the Peninsula more than a half century later, and it’s worked out fairly well.

[Link]
Just to recap, a now nuclear-armed North Korea, that has created security headaches for each US administration since 1953, that had its genesis in President Eisenhower's decision to reverse course on the Korean penninsula is Al Hunt's idea of foreign policy working out 'fairly well.'

Given the blurred distinction between victory and defeat, is there even a meaningful definition of victory in Al Hunt's foreign policy universe?

With so a low bar, maybe Mr. Hunt thinks the Vietnam War is a shining example of foreign policy gone right? Perhaps Napoleon's invasion of Russia, and his tactics at Waterloo are also examples of foreign policy working out fairly well? Maybe even General George Armstrong Custer himself can find redemption for the Little Bighorn at the Al Hunt School of Foreign Policy?

Whatever the case, the President must surely realize that the status quo in Afghanistan is unacceptable. Contrary to Mr. Hunt's assertion, the bottom line remains this: the sooner we send our generals the troops necessary to carry out the counter-insurgency, the sooner we can conclude that the Afghan matter has worked out 'fairly well.'


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
 

Pax Plena Copyright © 2011 -- Template created by O Pregador -- Powered by Blogger