The International House of Bacon

All while wondering whether Sufjan Stevens is cursing himself with knowing that there may be 10 more states for him to write about…

* Jeff Flake, Republican from Arizona, is one of my favorite Congressfolk. He proves it again this week by introducing the Remove Incentives to Produce Ethanol Act of 2008, which will essentially end the government ethanol handouts. This bill is such a good idea, I doubt it’ll get to the floor for a vote. After all, we know that the ethanol production isn’t working, so between this and Harry Reid’s proposal for $300b more for farms with ethanol as a point, which makes more sense?

* More polling problems for Obama. According to the Pew polling results, “[h]e is perceived as a liberal. He is perceived by many voters as not well grounded on foreign policy and not tough enough . . . and he has a potential problem, distinct from race, of being seen as an elitist, an intellectual.” When you have Obama facing an opponent who has centrist credentials, this is not a good formula for success.

* Of course, we are already seeing evidence of Obama’s race to the center now that the common wisdom is that he’s got the nomination locked up. The new tack is saying that McCain is lying when he says that Obama advocates meeting with folks such as Adminijad unconditionally. The problem is that Obama has said that. Multiple times, it appears. Same old Washington politics, folks.

* Yes, they are Crooks and Liars and we have the proof. Well, maybe not crooks, but definitely liars.

* Students suspended for not reciting the pledge of allegiance. Sigh.

* Considering how much Obama’s a fan of expanding government intervention in as many facets of American life as possible, how does one explain his support of ending federal oversight on union activity? How does this fit into Obama’s narrative, exactly?

* Patrick Ruffini on the left and the idiotic attacks they’re attempting to make on McCain. He points out that, contrary to popular belief in some areas of the left, Republicans most fed up with Bush tend to support McCain the strongest, he lists some examples of opposition, and he doesn’t even touch upon issues such as the Gang of 14. But, again, why should we be shocked by this?

* Is the New Hampshire school funding proposal unconstitutional? We’re talking the state Constitution, for the record.

* Hugo Chavez aiding a Colombian terror group. Naw, really?

* More judicial lunacy from Obama. And this guy taught Constitutional law?

* I was reminded of one of my favorite bizarre stories from college this weekend, about a teacher in 1966 and the “Third Wave,” his experiment to show how easy it was to get people caught up in the fervor of Nazi Germany. I’ve been familiar with his story about it for a long time, but this weekend was the first time I had read accounts from the students. There’s some creepy stuff in here if you look at it with a modern context, but it’s still a fascinating read no matter what.

* Obama also lacks the facts on taxes, but that shouldn’t come as a surprise. To go back to Clinton-era levels (as Obama advocates) would result in a much higher tax burden than what was experienced back in the 1990s.

I think that’s all for now.

Time really gets away from me.

* More economists back McCain’s economic plans than Obama or Clinton. It’s not without its problems - fewer than 50 economists responded with a preference, and many had some interesting reasoning (calling McCain the “least horrible,” which I agree with, and the Obama supporter who apparently based his position solely on the gas tax holiday) - but this is still fairly important to note, and something McCain should really explore further and hammer home.

* Also, the McCain camp responded to Obama’s little mention of McCain “losing his bearings” with a pretty damning indictment of his campaign style: “We have all become familiar with Senator Obama’s new brand of politics. First, you demand civility from your opponent, then you attack him, distort his record and send out surrogates to question his integrity. It is called hypocrisy, and it is the oldest kind of politics there is.” If McCain and his staff can continue with these sort of responses, they’ll do quite well for themselves.

* Adventures in conservation: because the people of Fulton County did so well with the conservation efforts during the drought, the county will raise rates to make up for the lost revenue during the conservation. There are no words.

* The best editorial I’ve seen addressing those who compare the Wright situation to McCain’s endorsing evangelical, John Hagee. The best line for me:

Hagee is not McCain’s pastor and never has been. Nor has the pastor of San Antonio’s Cornerstone Church been McCain’s mentor or spiritual adviser. Not for 20 years. Not for two seconds…McCain didn’t have his children baptized by Hagee. Or donate thousands of dollars to Hagee’s church. Or name Hagee to a prominent position in his campaign. In sum, McCain did none of the things that would make for an apples-to-apples comparison to the Obama-Wright connection.

But don’t expect Obama and his supporters - or the media - to note this.

* Victor Davis Hansen has the right prescription on conservatism: “not an abandonment of conservative principles, but a smarter, more articulate defense of even more conservativism, not less.” It’s a fairly blunt, yet completely rational, listing of what needs to be presented, often to a new voting bloc who have no understanding of the principles outside of the distorted view they get from the press and from left-wing pundits, and while the problem may not be something McCain is equipped to address in a useful way, this line is absolutely true: “In an honest debate, Obama’s alternatives to the above would be to turn toward more government, higher taxes, more bureacracies, more dependence of the individual upon the state, etc. And I can’t believe the public wants a prescription that historically simply doesn’t work.” The one flaw is that Obama has at least convinced a large segment of the population that his prescription does work, regardless of the evidence to the contrary. The issue is breaking through that barrier with some simple facts and evidence, which is going to take longer than a single election cycle.

* Barack Obama, strengthening relationships with our allies.

* Things are apparently quite dull in Nebraska.

That’s all I’ve got.

* So, we all know the story from last night, with Obama showing some surprising resiliency and Clinton hitting a pretty rough patch. Looks like she’s still going, though, which isn’t surprising at all.

* Interesting exit poll out of Indiana: half of voters were influenced by Wright, and 75% of those voters broke for Clinton.

* John Edwards on Barack Obama: “Sometimes I want to see more substance under the rhetoric.” Because if anyone could recognize a complete lack of substance, it’s John Edwards. I love it.

* An interesting piece on libertarian paternalism. I don’t like it for a lot of the same reasons the folks at Reason don’t, but it’s still more enticing than the alternatives that get thrown out there.

* The continued annoyance of the McCain candidacy: on one hand, he again vows to push for Alito/Roberts-style judges, a very good thing. On the other, he praises the Gang of 14 as allowing for the existence of them. Uh, wha? I wonder if he simply knows that the vast majority of conservatives will have to hold their nose, so he’s just sticking to the same old script. The only bright side is Obama’s response, which continues to sound completely tone deaf on what is one of the more important issues of the campaign.

* An interesting timeline of Obama’s electoral history. This is likely to be his first race contested to the finish, and those are some pretty neat tricks he pulled in some cases to cruise into office.

* Substitute teacher does a magic trick, and was accused of wizardry.

‘Tis all for now.

All while dreaming of GTA IV and Mario Kart Wii…

* I’ve said all that needs to be aid about Wright at this point, I’m just glad the left is finally waking up on this. Kinda.

* Evidence that gas price predictions are completely useless.

* From the Club for Growth, the economics of panhandling.

* Barack Obama wants to raise capital gains taxes? Here’s a likely scenario if that occurs. And McCain is allegedly the one without economic knowledge?

* The Supreme Court upheld a voter ID requirement. I’m not against this, and I’m surprised that it was upheld, moreso that Stevens came on board with it. A voter ID is free in Indiana, which aids in the situation, but as long as the state doesn’t put any roadblocks up in terms of ability to get a voter ID (i.e., money or transportation issues), I see no reason why we shouldn’t require it.

* Unexpectedly funny shopping bags from Oddee, one of the more fun blogs out there.

* Free Tibet flags made in China. The jokes write themselves.

* I have to laugh at how organized the Ron Paul people are even at this stage of the game. This may be the bite in the rear end the GOP needs to rekindle its roots a bit.

* Child services removes kid from father’s custody after he mistakenly gives his son a Mike’s Hard Lemonade. I wish this was a joke, it’s completely pathetic.

* Harkening back to yesterday’s question, a Pennsylvania Wal-Mart cannot sell generic prescription drugs for less than $9 or it will violate anti-trust regulations. Who are they helping here, exactly?

* I’m not a fan of McCain’s health care plan. While it’s a step in the right direction, it’s not enough to really make a legitimate impact at this point. In situations where the health insurance is costing upwards of $1000/month combined employer/employee, a $5000 tax credit isn’t going to make a difference and isn’t going to change the employer/employee relationship. McCain’s been a pleasant surprise economically thus far, but he’s not quite there yet on health care.

* Is Jimmy Carter our worst ex-President? I’m starting to wonder.

* Finally, GraniteGrok on governmental disdain for citizen-approved budget votes. It’s a cool quirk of the New Hampshire system in some places that we get to vote on the budget - and thus make it easier to say “no!” to worthless increases. Naturally, town officials are appalled by the activity, and accuse the townspeople of not knowing what they’re doing. Classy.

* It appears that Obama and Clinton are just as misguided on vaccines as McCain is. Great.

* I don’t know what was more puzzling about the ruling in Virginia v. Moore yesterday: the fact that it came out the way it did, or the fact that it was unanimous. Sigh.

* Citizen justice at its finest.

* It had to happen at some point: White Stuff People Like. For the record, mayonnaise is gross.

* Obama discusses how he’s not into the negative campaigning. He then changes his mind 30 minutes later. How lovely.

* You can also write a breakup letter to Hillary Clinton here.

* An awesome list for baseball junkies: retired numbers, who has them, and some information on why. Pretty cool.

* A fun gallery of World War I propaganda posters.

Gah!

* So the FLDS tipster? Apparently, just some woman from Colorado. This sort of thing really pisses me off. In retrospect so much didn’t add up and now look what’s happening. Are the one or two hits they might make on this enough to justify the situation in reality? I dunno. Interesting aside - the accused hoaxer? Pledged Obama delegate.

* This article at Reason was a little eye-opening to me, and might explain why Obama’s connections to Wright/Rezko/Ayers don’t seem to matter to Democrats. Makes sense in a way, even if I disagree.

* Damn Interesting on Operation Pastorius. Cool history story of the day.

* A couple interesting posts at Volokh about a recent overturn of a sex offender registry law that was based in post-New Deal jurisprudence on interstate commerce. The law, which required sex offenders to register when they crossed state lines, was overturned as it had nothing to do with interstate commerce. If there’s anything I’d love to see, it’d be that we go back to a basic concept of what interstate commerce actually means as opposed to the whole “if X crosses state lines, it’s commerce” concept we currently deal with.

* Obama taking nods from Jay-Z. I’ll give Obama credit - he is “with it.”

* The story of a Wisconsin town, an anonymous blogger, and the police attempting to harass him. Really crazy stuff.

* Global warming? Voters don’t care. Meanwhile, another huge oil field is discovered, this time in Brazil, and I paid $3.29/gallon yesterday.

* A great piece on the debate last week:

Debates are held not just to learn the details of the candidates’ health care plans — which given the complexity of the issue will probably be considerably altered if they are ever actually put on the table — but also to learn who the candidates are. And that includes learning about which guys who live in their neighborhood they chose to befriend.

* Jimmy Carter: “When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” While I know what he was getting at here…

* I’m not a big Karl Rove fan, but he absolutely destroyed MSNBC and 60 Minutes over the weekend.

* Barack Obama’s costly Senate bill. It’d be nice for someone in power to stand up against this…

* It’s been 10 years since El Salvador moved to a private social security system, to excellent results. Why can’t we have that here?

Happy Patriots Day! Go Bruins!

Ignoring the fingergate controversy because someone like Obama could never stoop to that level…

* Not that I’m one for pimping my own work, but my ideology post from this morning (LJ link might help some newcomers understand where I’m coming from, generally speaking.

* So, Pelosi took communion at the Papal mass today, even though the Pope has essentially said that pro-abortion types shouldn’t take communion. I mean, yeah, there’s more than a little arrogance to defy the Pope when he’s standing right there, but this is also a great example of the American (and perhaps Western) mindset when it comes to religion. I suppose it’s annoying to no one but the religious and me, though.

* I can’t decide what’s better: A college masculinist group, or the fact that their charter has a detailed section regarding calling Shenanigans.

* Interesting story about the sinking of the Titanic, with new scholarship.

* The Wall Street Journal pretty much eviscerates Obama on the capital gains issue:

As the nearby chart shows, when the tax rate has risen over the past half century, capital gains realizations have fallen and along with them tax revenue. The most recent such episode was in the early 1990s, when Mr. Obama was old enough to be paying attention. That’s one reason Jack Kennedy proposed cutting the capital gains rate. And it’s one reason Bill Clinton went along with a rate cut to 20% from 28% in 1997.

Either the young Illinois Senator is ignorant of this revenue data, or he doesn’t really care because he’s a true income redistributionist who prefers high tax rates as a matter of ideological dogma regardless of the revenue consequences. Neither one is a recommendation for President.

It also covers how Obama is either outright lying or is generally unserious about his pledge to not raise taxes for people under a certain income threshold. One of the best pieces of mainstream opinion journalism I’ve seen about Obama yet.

* Elephant 6 band The Minders are no more. I never got to see them, either - a shame.

* FiveThirtyEight discusses the recent SurveyUSA numbers for Obama v. McCain. This is why Obama’s getting hurt by issues like Wright - even though they don’t show up in the Democratic numbers (which is really a scary concept in itself), they do head to head:

As you can see, Obama’s win percentage against John McCain has declined to its lowest ever number, 41.4%, which leaves him essentially tied with Hillary Clinton, who is presently at 40.2%. When we began this project, the polls indicated that Obama was at a hair over 60% to win an election against John McCain; that number has now fallen by more than 20 points.

That’s a 20 point swing in this indicator since the beginning of March - the Wright issue reared its ugly head midway through March. Also, this SurveyUSA poll was taken before the whole “bitter” controversy came about, and before the debate earlier this week. It’ll be interesting to see how this works out.

* An interesting study suggests that it’s cheaper to treat an illness than prevent it. I.E., one in four high cholesterol, overweight people will have a heart attack, but we treat them all the same preventatively. It’s an interesting study in the context of the health care debate, which focuses so much on preventative care.

Yay weekend!

I’ve had a pile of smaller posts that I can’t expand upon much further, so an omnibus might be better. Yeah.

1) If there’s anything that Adam’s rabble-rousing has positively done as of late, it’s gotten me to think a little more about ideology, and my personal positions on the matter. I’ve spent some time on my voting practices, but it doesn’t really address myself at all.

I’ve kind of fashioned myself a Goldwaterian conservative for lack of a better term - after all, he’s a pretty stand-up figure, people generally know who he is, and it’s a good contrast from neoconservatism or Bush-style big-government conservatism. The problem with that is that it’s a little vague and a little inaccurate. After all, the idea of Goldwater is one of small government conservatism, and has achieved a somewhat Obama-ish tone in where his words have gotten somewhat construed to mean whatever people want them to as opposed to what they’re actually saying. Goldwater was anti-religion in government! Goldwater was a warmonger! Etc etc.

As I’ve not been shy about, I spent some good time with the Libertarian Party shortly after becoming voting age until shortly after 11 September. A lot of those ideals I still connect with - strong preference for individual rights, weak centralized power, minimal regulatory influence. On the other hand, there’s a lot that I wasn’t in favor of, such as the full privatization across the boards (I’m generally in favor of public schooling, but on a local level, for an example), and the blowback-style excuses trotted out following the attacks and the bizarre notion that going after bin Laden was the wrong idea.

Either way, I think I may have found a term that better matches my ideological bent at this point: Neolibertarianism. Essentially, for me, it takes the best parts of libertarianism (localized control, a focus on liberty) while pushing for a more realistic foriegn policy (the thing that turned me off from the Libertarian Party to begin with). While neoconservatism has gotten a bad rap over the last few years (truly more due to the characters involved and a misunderstanding of the basic ideology rather than the actual things it stands for), I think this simply better fits my point of view, and, in its limited appeal, appears to allow for a wide range of beliefs and a better dialogue about appropriateness as compared to the more monolithic libertarian ideals. More on the concept here and here.

2) The whole FDLS raid thing has left me super-conflicted, and it’s interesting that it comes so close to the 15th anniversary of the Branch Davadian raids by the FBI. The whole FDLS situation is obviously more complicated than the David Koresh-thinks-he’s-Jesus one, but I can’t help but thinking back a bit when news of the FDLS raid came out.

While I consider the Clinton impeachment my first real political awakening, watching the Waco situation unfold on CNN live as it happened was probably my news-event awakening, as I didn’t really understand what was going on, but, hey, the Branch Davidians were a cult and the government’s here to help, right? Obviously, as time has worn on, the “facts,” as they were, have become much more clear, and I still think that the raid itself is one of the more shameful periods of this nation’s post-civil-rights-era history, especially considering how the government could of handled this.

So bringing this back around a bit, my natural skepticism is tempered by knowing how problematic the FDLS sect of Mormonism is, and the further fine line between a firm tolerance for religious freedom and an equally firm intolerance of child abuse and forced marriage - especially the apparent intersection thereof. I’m immensely thankful that there was no significant violence to speak of in this situation, but still…

I mean, there’s very good evidence to suggest the entire Branch Davidian thing could have been avoided, even if Koresh was an abusive madman, and the treatment of the FDLS situation seems to at least be inadvertantly cognizant of this. At the same time, the Mormons are arguably one of the most persecuted religious groups in American history, forcing much of this sort of thing underground. Decades of religious persecution causes distrust of the government, and then the government acts when they’re acting outside of what the government considers okay? I’m not entirely comfortable with that.

The facts are these - forced child marriage is wrong, wrong,wrong, but so is not giving broad allowance to religious groups. The FDLS crossed a significant line, but how much of that crossing has to do with a response to the type of issues they’ve faced from their fellow countrymen and government? I don’t know, and it’s a tough place to sit. Some other posts that kind of cover my problems with this are here and here.

3) Interestingly to no one, I’m sure, the common theme that’s been going through my head is a general distrust of government in general. It’s why I’m especially down on an Obama presidency, it’s why I generally like New Hampshire, it’s why I’m attracted to libertarian-style philosophy and uncomfortable with the FDLS raid. Cass Sunstein had an excellent post at The Volokh Conspiracy about this concept that’s worth highlighting a bit.

The concept that resonated the most with me is the idea of libertarian paternalism - that, in the existence of rules, the default should be the choice that does the most for what is called the “choice environment.” The examples Sunstein uses are things like allowing for malpractice insurance waivers to help lower costs and create a contract between patient and doctor - things that allow for individual choice and reasoning as opposed to the one-size-fits-all regulatory structure in place. It allows for more flexibility and specificity that the current structure simply cannot provide.

This conceptualization is ultimately what confuses me about liberalism in general - the idea that individuals will usually have a better idea as to what works best in their situations seems like a big heaping pile of common sense to me, and yet the answer from the left - and ultimately from the government in general, regardless of whether it’s the left or “the right” in power - ends up being exactly the opposite of that. Harken back to the malpractice waiver concept - if health care costs are so high right now, talk about an easy way to reduce costs by contractually creating the scenarios that would reduce the ways to encourage litigation. I mean, my wife spent 4 hours in the ER with a gallbladder attack and it never dawned on any of the doctors to perform an ultrasound, and we could theoretically waste everyone’s time with a lawsuit and perhaps even win - how is that really, truly, right?

Yesterday, a discussion ensued regarding my general distrust of law enforcement, and it’s the same deal here - what reason do I ultimately have to trust people who are not working for my best interests, but instead working for the interests of people who are arbitrarily deciding what is right for everyone regardless of the circumstances surrounding it? This same sort of nannying pervades law enforcement, smoking bans, and even the forms of religious persecution we see in the United States in the last 20 years. It seems so counterintuitive to promote these things, and yet the most popular Democratic candidate at this point seems hell bent on expanding that sort of state, and to what ends? I don’t get it, folks, I really don’t.

Two days worth in one bite-sized package!

* My favorite piece from the debate the other night? Obama conceding that the capital gains cut had a positive effect on revenues, but thinks the rate should rise anyway. How completely, utterly foolish. He’s your candidate, folks. I’m sure the promise to halve poverty in ten years will work out great when revenues start stalling. My second favorite part? Obama throwing Tom Coburn under the bus - one guy is a distinguished senator, the other blew things up in terroristic acts. Great comparison, that’ll go a long way toward unity, throwing out those “same old Washington politics.”

* The Supreme Court made a ruling yesterday about whether lethal injection was cruel and unusual, and 7 justices agreed it wasn’t. What was cruel, not at all unusual, and quite lovely to see, was Scalia eviscerating Stevens in his concurrance. Patterico highlighted one part, but the whole thing was a fun read, as was Thomas’s opinion.

* Who didn’t see this coming?

* When I talk about the alienation Obama has called, I’m not talking about dyed-in-the-wool liberals, but rather people like this guy, who sounds somewhat conservative, consistently votes Democrat, and is unlikely to shift to Obama if he’s the nominee when someone like McCain is the opponent. It’s why polls like this are telling - McCain is a better choice for some voters than the alternative Democratic candidate, regardless of how closely they may match policy-wise. When Obama has his spiritual mentors spewing hateful invective and views religion as a coping mechanism rather than a value, it’s going to turn off people who you might otherwise snag. Period. While Jonah Goldberg is an instant turnoff to a lot of you, he properly encapsulates the situation here. If you don’t get why the comment is a problem, read that.

* Jim McGovern (D-MA): Ethanol bill was probably a mistake.

* It’s not the United States media saying it: Iraqis feel safer once Iraqi troops flooded Basra. Kind of sounds different than the spin we heard from before?

* Obama also plans to further waste everyone’s time before his butt warms the chair in the Oval Office.

* Why should I trust law enforcement again?

Expect more later.

* Not surprisingly, Obama’s “bitter” statement isn’t dying out. It’s quickly becoming a larger problem for him, and mostly due to his own statements on the matter, now attacking Clinton and McCain rather than admitting he was completely off base. Lance touched on the initial issues with the statement better than I could (short answer: focusing on the “bitter” aspect isn’t the problem), but it really continues to feed into a wider meme that Obama (and perhaps Democrats as a general group) are, at best, out of touch with who they’re trying to help, and at worst unable to comprehend anything that isn’t within their worldview. Obama didn’t see the problem with Wright, and he doesn’t see why people are upset when he says people value their rights or beliefs not due to thought or community, but rather due to a reaction to their lot in life. It’s a really negative view of people.

The worst part is that Obama’s not hurting in the polls with Democrats on this. He’s unlikely to hurt himself any worse in Pennsylvania against Clinton (a state he was unlikely to win anyway), and that says a lot about the Democratic electorate and about Obama in general - is it that these sorts of statements aren’t controversial to them because it’s the only reason they can comprehend some of these positions?

I’m generalizing here, I know, but as wrong as I believe many liberal positions to be, I know I don’t see it as some sort of position borne out of bitterness or resentment, and most mainstream conservatives don’t buy into that sort of rhetoric either (although it does exist on the more radical areas). Imagine if John McCain came out today and said that Democrats were in favor of national health care and abortion rights because they were bitter, clinging to these issues in response to their own life events? He’d be absolutely savaged by everyone involved. But, for whatever reason, it’s apparently okay and “in touch” to say that about religion and guns. Okay then.

I’ve not been more bullish on the ability of McCain to win the Presidency as I am this week. If McCain actually goes on the attack, Obama’s going to have to find a way to talk himself out of this, and he’s already whiffed big time once.

* Along the same notes, a piece at Politico notches a couple more instances of Obama being “in touch.” My favorite parts? That Obama feels he “understand[s] the world better…than John McCain” and that he feels that he’s “still almost normal.” If his appeal is that he’s like you or I, and he’s this completely out of touch right now, where is he going to be in a year?

* QandO on the progressive backlash on Obama.

* More great energy news, this time out of Japan.

* I’m not going to lie - it’s either McCain or Bob Barr for me.

* Most fascinating story of the day - Stalin’s body double.

* Radley Balko at Reason on the Jefferson Memorial arrests. The memorial is open 24 hours a day, so about 20 people decided to have a 10 minute dance party. Cops showed up, arrested one person, and dispersed the crowd. Why? Who knows.

* Judicial Watch is trying to get Hillary Clinton in trouble for the Elton John concert, which may be an FEC violation. Our campaign laws are insane.

* Finally, a great blog post compendium on the rich getting richer, poor getting poorer canard. Someday this information will become the common knowledge as opposed to what is currently out there.

Still battling a head cold, still wondering why the Red Sox are so high on Jon Lester…

* High school seniors dumb on basic financial information. On one hand, I probably wouldn’t have known the answers to a lot of those questions ten years ago. On the other, why couldn’t I?

* McCain on pre-emptive war: “I don’t think you can make a blanket statement about preemptive war because obviously it depends on the threat that the United States of America faces.” On the face of it, it’s an obvious, “duh” statement. But then you think about how the “100 years in Iraq” comment has been completely twisted out of context, and I fear for how this comment will play, even though it’s the most realistic foriegn policy statement any current Presidential candidate has made. McCain doesn’t consistently deserve the straight talk moniker, but it’s statements like this that keep that concept alive - brutally honest, an answer even he probably doesn’t like, and one that’s certain to get twisted by his opponents, who are really only interested in straight talk when it fits the percieved narrative.

* Time on the shifting gender gap in colleges in favor of women.

* More corruption via red light cameras. It appears that one locality has seven of its ten red light cameras at intersections where the yellow light is quicker than mandated by law.

* Obama, “Constitutional scholar,” supports the Washington, DC gun ban.

* The Volokh Conspiracy had an interesting post about genocide and international law.

* Thomas Sowell nails it: “Nothing is more fraudulent than calls for a ‘dialogue on race.’ Those who issue such calls are usually quick to cry ‘racism’ at any frank criticism. They are almost invariably seeking a monologue on race, to which others are supposed to listen.”

* Also via Volokh, religious accomodations and business collide. A company is reprimanded by the government of New Mexico for refusing to photograph a same-sex union.

* Power Line reports on Pelosi having the rules changed to allow Congress to table the Colombian Free Trade Agreement. So many snarky comments I could make, but perhaps this playing of politics merely speaks for itself.

* Boy, does Michelle Obama sound familiar or what?

* Finally, a good move in a follow up from yesterday: The woman dismissed from Obama’s delegate camp for referring to children in trees as “monkeys” has been reinstated.

* Radly Balko has started a series on the effect of Zero Tolerance regulations in our schools, and the one that got me today was the 8 year old who was suspended for sniffing a Sharpie. Why was he sniffing the Sharpie? “It smelled good.” Sigh.

* A new study suggests a link between drunk driving and smoking bans. Who knows how this will pan out under scrutiny remains to be seen, but it’s still pretty interesting. I have a feeling we won’t see MADD dive on this one.

* For all the crap I take from some of the blogs I read, Matthew Yglesias is one of the few liberal bloggers I can handle, but he’s being a bit of a dick here. The boiling down of Confederate pride to racism is a bit disingenuous to say the least, regardless of your positions on the Civil War. For all the discussion in this election about race and divisiveness, it’s interesting to see this sort of antiquated ignorance coming from the left.

* Is Obama being honest about the Iraq plans? If his own advisors don’t support a rapid withdrawal, and he still goes through with it, will the left criticize him for “ignoring experts?”

* The 9th Circuit Court does it again. How ridiculous is this?

* Here’s something interesting I didn’t know - John McCain has kids in the military, a 19 year old son who just got back from Iraq and a 21 year old son who could very well see service there following his graduation from the Naval Academy.

* Barack Obama is “not in favor of concealed weapons.” 39 states have laws allowing for it in various degrees. Will this disconnect hurt him if it gets publicized? I currently live in an open-carry state, I know I don’t feel less safe.

* Barack Obama is a smoker, but so what? I’m actually surprised more people haven’t pounded on that one. I’m more concerned about bills like this.

* A neat story about a Make-A-Wish child’s dream to join the military, and the Army helping make that happen. Really great story.

Today is slipping away from me…

* Interesting possibilities out of the Dakotas, where a possibly massive oil field has been discovered. It’ll be interesting to see how this pans out - the high end estimation is at 500 billion barrels, and even if we place it at 200 billion (a little higher than the low end), if we were able to pump out our daily usage as of 2004 and keep it domestically, it would cover us for over 20 years.

This is ultimately why I get annoyed by the whole alternative energy/ANWR drilling issue - do we need to develop alternative fuels at some point? Absolutely. Not even the oil companies would doubt that, as they will invariably pioneer any fuel advances we see that make logical financial sense (the most major hold up in alternative fuels as is). Instead, the peak oil myth is allowed to take hold, we haven’t built a new refinery in my lifetime, and the drivel we get from Congress and the Democratic candidates for President is that we need to tax the oil companies that hold very little of the world’s oil more to, I dunno, teach them a lesson?

The truth of the matter is that the government - both on state and local levels - doesn’t really care one bit about the energy situation in the United States. They’re screwing the poor and middle class by artificially keeping prices high with a gas tax that, minimum, eats up $2.00 per tank of gas you fill right off the bat, they’re screwing us by not pushing for more refineries, for blocking drilling in places we can get oil easily, by blocking alternative energies that do work like nuclear power. Instead, we see charades like this. A complete waste of time, and ultimately deals with nothing.

Biofuels aren’t the answer, people - smart drilling, smart use of the resources available to us, and realistic policy rooted in what’s actually happening in the world rather than pessimistic predictions lacking strong evidence is is more helpful.

* I liked this TownHall column by Mary Katherine Ham profiling Bobby Jindal, the young governor of Louisiana. Hey, Bridget, any LA-based insight you can offer?

* Jane Fonda endorses Barack Obama. This is interesting more because of, again, the Wright issue. For one, Obama’s supporters have largely had to play the “but…” card - with Hagee, with Parsley, and other people who have endorsed McCain and have somewhat unsavory views. If these people are, in reality, worth talking about, the fact that Obama has a number of high-profile endorsements of people with various hatred for America - whether it be rhetorical like Wright or actual like Fonda - is not going to help Obama, whether the issue is fair or not. How exactly can Obama respond to the fact that he attracts people who aided in propaganda to an enemy that was holding his Presidential opponent hostage, exactly? God, this is gonna get messy.

* On the other hand, elections + the internet = awesome. Hillary Clinton decided to revisit the 3am phone call, this time going after McCain and the economy. Never mind the rhetorical…oddity that the President would be recieving phone calls at 3am about economic issues, but we’ll run with it. Apparently, only six hours later, McCain’s team had a response out. Absolutely incredible. Whether it will work is another thing - I much prefer McCain’s approach to the economic situation right now than Clinton or Obama’s, as I’ve read too many histories of the Great Depression over the years and fear any wide-scale tinkering during a downturn at this point - but you have to give the McCain people credit for a job well done on this one. If McCain loses this election, it won’t be due to lack of trying.

* Columbia isn’t pleased with Obama’s trade rhetoric. What was that about other countries under Bush again? At least he waited until he was in office to allegedly alienate them.

* A little late, but hey - top 100 April Fools Day hoaxes of all time.

* Will Obama’s position on abortion hurt him in November? An interesting read from Michael Gerson at the Washington Post.

* Posing as a professional football player for fun and profit. The odd story of Ed McCabe, who was not a member of the 1980 Raiders.

* Of all the legacies of the Clinton Presidency, it’s sad that free trade is the one the Democrats are most willing to abandon. Furthermore, of all the legacies of the JFK Presidency, it’s equally sad that the Democrats can’t seem to grasp his basics, either.

* Ilya Somin on what the Presidential candidates can do to protect property rights. In a post-Kelo government, this is a really important issue that’s not getting enough play.

* I’m still new enough to New Hampshire that I cannot be held responsible for the rank stupidity of this specific legislator. The sooner we can oust Shea-Porter, the better.

* The big story in some circles earlier this week was the breathless story from the UK about the amount of people in the United States on food stamps. Apparently, that’s supposed to mean something. Even if it did, there’s a good reason why that number is up - the 2002 Farm Bill greatly expanded those who can be covered by food stamps. That Farm Bill looks worse and worse every time I look at it.

* This story literally made me sick to my stomach. Wow.

* More evidence that this economic situation may be regional in nature.

* Congressional Quarterly’s Ground Game blog lays out a) a great example why the Richardson endorsement irked me, and b) why Clinton is just foolish at this point about it.

Whew.

I’m so behind. Or something.

* Budget situation in New Hampshire worse than feared. The worst part is that there’s no way in hell we’ll be able to vote Lynch out this year. Absolutely pathetic stuff here.

* Some crazy video from North Korea. Rarely do you get to see such first-hand images from there, really crazy stuff.

* Peter Bagge’s cartoons in Reason are always fun, but his illustrated log of his time during the New Hampshire primary is fun. Mostly non-political, it’s worth a read.

* Will Obama get in trouble for misstating charitable contributions on his tax returns? He apparently filed an amended return, but what does that one say? It’ll be interesting to see if there’s much follow up on this.

* Also via Reason, a question posed by the Christian Science Monitor regarding the Constitutionality of mandated health insurance. I think it’s a little cowardly that they consider single-payer capable of passing muster, but as for the topic at hand, it’s a neat argument I hadn’t thought of.

* Speaking of single-payer, more horror stories. At what point do these stop becoming the exception?

* The United States’s corporate tax rate just got more uncompetitive, as New Zealand drops its rate a bit. John McCain’s the only person even considering a corporate tax rate cut, one of the few things we really need from the government currently. Barack Obama wants to essentially charge corporations more. Does this make sense to you?

* Hillary Clinton - willing to force you to buy health insurance while ignoring the bills for the health insurance her campaign is responsible for. Class act.

* GraniteGrok offers a great statement on why conservatives should vote for McCain. It’s similar to other statements on the matter, but this one really resonated with me a bit.

* The top ten most unreasonable parking tickets.

* And the final tally on “Earth Hour?” No significant fall in power use.

* I’m interested in seeing how Obama rectifies the differences between his Illinois Senate position survey and today. Not that changing one’s mind is a bad thing, but an explanation of how one gets there would be nice.

* Speaking of, here’s more detail on a dishonest Obama ad. Populism kills.

* I’ve said it before that Rev. Wright is different than Rev. Hagee because Wright was involved by invitation with Obama’s political career and Hagee was not. Well, Barack Obama has his Hagee now, and it’ll be interesting to see how Obama’s supporters spin this one.

* Civil disobedience at its finest. Hell, it’s hardly disobedience as much as a protest of ridiculousness from a local high school who punished some students for having pictures with plastic cups on their Facebook pages, implying underage drinking. So some students get together, rent a root beer keg, and have a party. Cops show up, everyone blows 0.0s, and it gets on YouTube. Lovin’ it.

* FactCheck appears to side with me regarding Obama and lobbyist money. FactCheck is hardly a extreme right-wing source, for the record. The FactCheck.org piece is here.

* Christopher Hitchens savages Hillary Clinton. It’s sometimes hard to remember that Clinton is only marginally better than Obama in the grand scheme of things.

* Best hockey fight of recent memory. I grew up hating Patrick Roy, I’m glad his son is a tough guy.

* What every American should know about the Middle East. I didn’t know two of these things.

* Finally, a note about how corporations helped in the Katrina aftermath. An interesting thing to recall in a year of populist claptrap about corporate America during an election year.

* Chrono Trigger a better investment than Apple. I was amused. And rightfully so, actually - Chrono Trigger is much better than anything Apple put out.

* I thought you couldn’t disown a crazy uncle?:

White House hopeful Barack Obama suggests he would have left his Chicago church had his longtime pastor, whose fiery anti-American comments about U.S. foreign policy and race relations threatened Obama’s campaign, not stepped down. “Had the reverend not retired, and had he not acknowledged that what he had said had deeply offended people and were inappropriate and mischaracterized what I believe is the greatness of this country, for all its flaws, then I wouldn’t have felt comfortable staying at the church.”

So after two weeks, the story doesn’t fade (and why should it when more comments such as the “bombs were built to kill blacks” and “garlic noses” come out), and Obama has to change his tune again. His numbers have gone to hell against McCain, the only polls he’s showing no harm on the Democratic side is a barely-reliable Gallup and a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll that has, for some points, a +/-7% margin of error in the oversampled groups that favor him the most. This is getting craaaazy.

* New Hampshire has its cake and eats it, too. Congrats to being one of the few states that refused to comply with Real ID and still got an “extension” from the Department of Homeland Security.

* What is with the Los Angeles Times? For those not aware, the Times published a story about Sean Combs (Puff Daddy, P. Diddy, etc) being linked to the Tupac Shakur murder. The problem? It was based entirely on fabricated documents. You’d think the media would learn after the Rather debacle in 2004.

* Obviously, they’re an advocacy group, but a study published at NORML notes that 70% of people who are getting treated for marijuana addiction do so through court-mandated programs. This means that we’re seeing people take treatment as opposed to prison time, and seeing the anti-legalization forces point to the treatment number as if it means something. Sigh. I made a prediction in 2000 that marijuana would be legal by 2010 - that ain’t happening.

* Also, The New York Times sorta gets RickRolled. Hoaxes are fun. Radly Balko linked both of these earlier, always worth a look.

* An interesting situation might be cropping up in Pennsylvania, where gun control may become an issue in the upcoming primary. Especially with the Supreme Court opinion on the Washington, DC gun ban coming up, this could cause some further pain to the eventual Democratic candidate against McCain if it comes up.

* Barack Obama’s doing some more detailing of his economic plan, and you know it’s rough when a guy who says he needs to learn more about economics has a much more sustainable plan than a guy who’s at least acting as if he has a clue. A capital gains tax hike (which would negatively impact investment, which is already hurting in the current climate), more regulation in banking (not that, you know, regulation isn’t part of what’s causing the credit crunch right now), and handouts for those who signed bad mortgages they can’t pay are all things that won’t address a single issue we’re facing, and could very well make things worse long term. This isn’t to say that Clinton or McCain are adequately addressing the problems in the economy right now (our uncompetitive corporate tax rates, the straight costs of doing business, etc), but Obama’s looking at sending us down a potentially hazardous path.

The speech in full is here, and the almost immediate praise of Alexander Hamilton should set off huge, huge warning flags to anyone with knowledge of Hamilton’s role in the formation of this country pre-Federalist papers. Economic populism like Obama’s spouting ends up benefiting no one except the person spouting it, and the worst economic situations that we’ve ended up in have, in part, stemmed from policies that grow from those areas. Obama should know better, but he, of course, does not. Example? “If we can extend a hand to banks on Wall Street, we can extend a hand to Americans who are struggling through no fault of their own,” was a line Obama put out there. Is he really taking the position that those who signed and initialed the 40-odd pages on their mortgages that they now can’t pay aren’t at fault? Really? Besides that, he’s on the opposite side of public opinion when it comes to the Dodd-style bailout program that Obama’s endorses, and that’s not even covering the fact that the rough draft we’re seeing probably won’t work. Mistake after mistake after mistake.

As a humorous aside, Obama went to a fundraising event, $1000 a plate, following the speech. Where was it held? Credit Suisse’s building, one of the top ten subprime lenders in the United States. Disconnect much?

* Children of Men as a television show? On one hand, the movie (which I thought was phenomenal) worked because it was a crazy ride through a bizarre setting, and didn’t let up. I’m not sure a serial television show will work quite the same way. On the other hand, one of the co-creators of the Battlestar Galactica reboot is behind it, so it’s likely worth a shot.

* More stupidity from Obama. The National Review notes the problems inherent in the IRS doing your taxes for you. I’ve probably had a more visceral negative reaction to this proposal than much else on Obama’s platform.

* Linked everywhere, a horrible b-movie waiting to happen comes to life in Mexico, as vigilantes storm cities and towns looking for emo kids to kill.

* The US media doesn’t have a huge presence in Iraq. Then we wonder why the negative stories are the ones that gain traction.

* What’s the proper response when people are leaving your state in part because of taxes and regulations? If the answer is “spend more money, and then propose to fill the gap via tax hikes and regulation,” your name must be Massachusetts. And Hillary Clinton wants to expand MassCare-style health planning nationwide?

* Finally, my new favorite blog? Photoshop Disasters, which is exactly what the name implies. My personal favorite examples? Lady Guenivere’s mutant hand and Imagine Watermarks.

Have a good weekend.

OMG SO BUSY ALL TEH TIME.

* A new show on HBO with Bob Odenkirk and David Cross? Yes, please.

* I have no idea why Governor Lynch’s approval rating is so high in New Hampshire. He’s killed the budget (and plans to bury it completely after he gets re-elected), he’s actively working to restrict the rights of New Hampshire citizens, and yet 55% of people polled support him. Plus, with his likely challenger not running, it’s impossible to be able to tell at this point if we could oust him in November. If anything, my little time in New Hampshire has shown me that, even in areas where the government is better, you still get morons involved, whether they’re the governor or just a representative from your home city who never intended to serve in the first place and, thus, never showed up. Sigh.

* Thomas Sowell on Barack Obama. I’d call this a must read, but every Thomas Sowell piece is must read.

* Also, a telling story on Obama’s actions when it counts. Barack Obama is often very fraudulent, this is just another story to add to the list. Is this what we can expect?

* Russell Roberts at Cafe Hayek parses the recent story about benefit costs and how they’re allegedly hurting workers. I agree with his analysis, to be frank.

* Fox deserves a massive amount of respect for refusing to pay an FCC fine for indecency. The sooner the FCC gets knocked down a peg, the better off we all are.

* The other big news I’m two days behind on is the Supreme Court ruling in Medellin v. Texas. A pretty complicated case, I think I’m happy with the outcome, but the most interesting wrinkle that will probably be looked over? Alito, Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas all ruled against President Bush, and Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer with the President. Go figure. More here, if this is as confusing as you think.

* Hugo Chavez says anyone but McCain. Sounds like a reason to vote for McCain to me…

More later…

Gah!

* Michael Barone breaks down the superdelegate issue. I think it’s going to be impossible for the Democrats to finish up things before the convention - either they’re going to go with a known commodity in Clinton or an unknown in Obama, and if they’re leaning toward the unknown, they’re going to wait until he’s as fully vetted as possible - the Democrats can’t afford for Obama to have another Wright skeleton in his closet, and I’d imagine that fear is palpable, if not unspoken. That’s what the superdelegates are for, right? Don’t buy the Politico hype - the superdelegates have a role, and never underestimate the ability of the Democratic Party to shoot itself in the foot.

* QandO on why Glen Greenwald is a hack.

* Patterico had two excellent posts this weekend: First, a little straight talk on McCain and the whole Saddam/Al Queda thing that the Los Angeles Times decided to hammer home. Even I didn’t know of many of the quotes coming directly from the 9/11 Commission. Secondly, a great takedown of an Obama endorsement from a so-called Republican. Makes me wish I didn’t have such a visceral reaction to John McCain.

* Massachusetts schools aren’t failing, they’re simply “Commonwealth priorities.” I hate self-esteem sugarcoating.

* Many of you were right: Albany’s screwed. Spitzer’s replacement may have to step down for his own corruption issues, and the next guy in line is close to being indicted as well? Yikes.

* The Washington Post on a possible reality of an Obama presidency. I must say - calling your allies “so-called” won’t help matters, he’s right.

* My favorite story in ages: red light cameras are being shut down in some places because they’re too effective and end up being a drain on revenues as a result. Again: why do people wonder why I don’t trust law enforcement?

* Heavy but cool if you can parse it: a look at a possible fall in oil prices. Lots of stuff on petrodollars and investment and peak oil and on and on.

*