• Why Russ Could Win

    Shakes here, doing the salon thing with a follow-up to Neil’s post on Why Hillary Will Lose . I agree whole-heartedly with Neil’s assessment of Hillary, and his conclusions. Americans on the Left and the Right, any who aren’t blind ideologues, have a natural distaste for disingenuous rhetoric clearly designed to appeal to a crowd they haven’t previously; it’s the worst kind of artificial politicking, that which helps no one but (ostensibly) the person who’s doing it. If you need any evidence, try to find anyone who enthusiastically supported Hillary’s devolution into culture vulturism to take on the makers of Grand Theft Auto. That said, I’m not sure that Russ Feingold’s liberalism will have as limited appeal as it might seem at first blush. It’s true that Feingold is now ranked the most liberal Senator (tied with Boxer) in the Senate, which would likely be, under typical circumstances, a liability. But with the opportunity having presented itself to hold accountable not just the Bush...
  • This Won't Hurt a Bit

    Posted by Jedmunds Doug Lederman of Inside Higher Ed reports that the Department of Defense is enforcing the Solomon Amendment, which bars federal funds to universities who prohibit military recruiting on campuses usually due to enforcing a non-discrimination policy against gays, against New York Law School and possibly two other law schools that are also unaffiliated with larger universities. Yale Law School, which successfully won an injunction against enforcement of the Solomon amendment in the third circuit will also continue to bar military recruiters from campus, but interestingly, the Department of Defense has indicated no interest in penalizing Harvard who's Law School has also announced it will bar military recruiters, but is not located in the third circuit, and so is still subject to the heavy penalties the Solomon amendment imposes. Because it bans all federal funding except financial aid for students to law schools in violation as well as any DOD funding in terms of...
  • Why Hillary Will Lose

    By Neil the Ethical Werewolf The old CW on Hillary's presidential aspirations was that they'd be crushed under her liberal reputation. The "socialized medicine" attacks on her health care reform plan stuck to her more than they stuck to Bill. And while Bill's upbringing and red-state governorship made him acceptable to Southern regionalists, Hillary's Chicago roots and New York Senate seat marked her as someone from the strange liberal cities that many small-town folk still regard as foreign to their way of life. The new CW is that she's moving to the center and leaving the old liberal reputation behind. She supports the Defense of Marriage Act, repositions herself on abortion, and has an incomprehensible position on flag burning that allows her to vote for a ban. But I doubt that she's actually gained any lasting political support through these moves. A candidate just coming onto the political scene might use these positions to get a genuine reputation as a moderate on the issues,...
  • Trailer Sweet Trailer

    By Pepper In his big Katrina speech, it looked like George II would pull a magic trick and fade his blue torso right into a blue background. But it seems like he really does want to whip up a magic trick by rebuilding the Gulf Coast into a bigger, better place without having to pay for it . Bush and economics have had an uneasy relationship. Now, the nation has three choices when it comes to paying for the Katrina disaster: 1. Raise taxes; 2. Go into increased debt; or 3. Do the job on the cheap. Bush has clearly does not like the first option and is in denial regarding the second : "[Rebuilding is] going to mean that we're going to have to make sure we cut unnecessary spending. It's going to mean we've got to maintain economic growth, and therefore we should not raise taxes." Therefore, the third option is the way to go for Bush and Co. And the solution is the trailer park, for why have a home when you can have a trailer?
  • On Not Being a Good Democrat

    Posted by Jedmunds I’d like to begin my inaugural post here by thanking Ezra for inviting me to join his weekend crew. It’s an honor to join such a great cast that includes some of my favorite bloggers. I hope to prove a worthy addition to the team and that I am somehow able to pull my weight among such a talented group. Now with the smooches out of the way, as sincere as they are - and they are sincere – I’d like to discuss the role and viability of the “single issue” group in today’s political climate, specifically “single issue” groups that are considered part of the larger progressive movement. Kos of dailykos , who you may have heard of, has long argued that “single issue” groups are outdated and even counterproductive in this contemporary political environment of conservative ascendancy. I disagree, for reasons I’ll go into detail below.
  • Cheney To Go Under the Knife

    Shakes here... Nothing to worry about. Just a little aneurysm . In his knee.
  • Duck, And Something That Rhymes With It

    Says O'Reilly: O'REILLY: The secular progressive movement would like to have marriage abolished, in my opinion. They don't want it, because it is not diverse enough. You know, that's what this gay marriage thing is all about. But now, you know, the poly-amorphous marriage, whatever they call it, you can marry 18 people, you can marry a duck, I mean -- LIS WIEHL (co-host): A duck? Quack, quack. O'REILLY: Well, why, you know, if you're in love with the duck, who is the society to tell you you can't do that? I think Bill is spending too much time in front of the VCR. He seems to have mixed up support for civil rights with a Woody Allen flick: In any case, this strikes me as a good time to link to the article I wrote, or at least collected, on O'Reilly. Awhile back I went through his court records to collect the, err, juicy parts. And for someone scared of duck sex, Bill has some fun kinks of his own. So here you are: Bill Gone Wild .
  • Make Them Eat Their Words

    Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot of Electoral Math Ezra's finishing up college this week, so the weekend crew is coming in a bit early. And just in time for Tom Reynolds (R-NY) to suggest that the GOP give up on Social Security. Reynolds runs the NRCC, the body responsible for coordinating recruiting and campaigning for all the House Republicans. And he has no interest in forcing increasingly vulnerable House Republicans to go into re-election having voted to tear Social Security into pieces. Without a vote, it's time to dig through all the public statements from Bush's winter and spring tour where he kept touting privatization. Anyone who stood on a podium with Bush and shilled for his plans, anyone who said they supported tweaking Social Security, anyone who suggested we haved a "gender adjustment" to benefits, needs to have his or her statments crammed down his or her throat from August to November of 2006. So start combing through Nexis searches now, so that we're ready when the bell...
  • Heads Up

    I've got finals to do today, so no blogging from me. I'll invite my weekenders to start now or, in any case, there'll be plenty of original content again tomorrow. For now, if you're bored, read the post below this one, my parody of Glenn Reynolds, or my bit on Privatizing FEMA.
  • Reconstruction Czar Rove

    Sometimes it genuinely feels like Bush sits in a back room and makes decisions based on what would piss off Democrats the most . Bolton fit that category, and making Rove special reconstruction head does as well: Republicans said Karl Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff and Mr. Bush's chief political adviser, was in charge of the reconstruction effort, which reaches across many agencies of government and includes the direct involvement of Alphonso R. Jackson, secretary of housing and urban development. Josh , blood pressure rising and steam beginning to pool in his eardrums, says this proves that the reconstruction will be a wholly inefficient and politically-run effort. Well, yes, but only because this administrations' DNA happens to be a double helix with one strand inefficient and the other being blatantly political. But I don't think they're making a special effort here. If they were, Karl Rove would from behind the scenes while Rudy, Colin, Clinton, Rice, Zinni, someone...