* Switches - “Drama Queen”: At least to my ear, this band is like the perfect hybrid between the Dandy Warhols and Electric Light Orchestra, and I’m in love with this song. Great, wonderful British indie rock all around, and they appear to be consistent from the two songs I’ve heard so far. Really good stuff.

* Roky Erickson - “I Walked With a Zombie”: Okay, yeah, I’m roughly 30 years behind on this one, at least, but goodness. I knew that R.E.M. covered it way back, and thought it was something silly, and then Elf Power covered it at the show I went to last month which reminded me that they did a version of it (and quite a good one at that), and that caused me to explore Erickson a bit more. The most annoying part of this? You cannot find a studio version of this song on CD anywhere in print at present. You cannot buy it from the Amazon mp3 store, you cannot get it on iTunes. That’s incredible to me. Dear record companies - don’t complain about theft when you’re not making music available to people. Or something.

* Death Cab for Cutie - “I Will Possess Your Heart“: Considering the bizarro “rape rock” allegations concerning the Decemberists, this song just makes me wonder whether Colin Meloy and Ben Gibbard have a secret competition to see who can make the creepier song. I think Meloy needs to counter with a ditty about Chtuhlu before it’s too late.

* 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.

* 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.

* Want my superdelegate vote? That’ll be $20m, please.

* A blog post I read reminded me of the craziness coming from the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003, and the toppling of the statue. I recall a lot of people looking at the wide view picture and automatically assuming the event was staged because, well, the crowd was small and the pictures were tight and the tanks were everywhere, ignoring the point that anyone came out to begin with. I’m wondering if we’ll see any sort of similar commentary on this Obama rally, which was presented as a full house. Of course, major events in war do have a difference of scale to a campaign stop and context is clearly necessary, but considering the Obama narrative of the campaign from the media, surely this is a clear manipulation of the situation. The question is - for what?

* A story and video of the treatment of an anti-abortion demonstration at a college. This is kind of shameful, regardless of what side you fall on.

* The CQPolitics blog puts some context in the Republicans voting against McCain in the primary meme being floated.

* Power Line on Obama’s improbable history. There are a lot of problems with Obama’s position on “speaking with our enemies” beyond historical context, but that’s for another time.

* Finally, Israel turns 60 today. Happy birthday.

Battlestar Galactica: The first disappointing episode of the season was last week, but even then, this season has been really good so far. I fear the inevitable cliffhanger in June that will signal the 10 month layoff at this point…

Mad Men: A shake of the fist to AMC for showing the first two episodes in the series over again, and then stopping. Way to let us catch up if our DVR failed us, really. This, by the way, is an awesome show everyone should be watching.

Atheist readers, what if you were to suddenly find out tomorrow that the God of the Christian Evangelicals was real?

…

I’m not asking HOW it would happen (see Frank’s earlier blog on this) but IF it happened, how would you react?

I don’t know if the “what if” question for atheists is a universal one, or simply goes with the stereotypical Catholic guilt that makes me still shudder at the thought of hell, not enjoy pleasurable experiences as much, etc etc. However, it at least seems to be somewhat different where I don’t come to it from a place of anger (i.e., prayer failed me, something bad happened, etc).

At least for me, my positioning comes from a place of needing more evidence. Thus, if this evidence comes forth that I’m dead wrong about this, do I have any other choice? I wonder how many atheists would say “yes, I still have a choice here.” Not saying that there’s no extra choice to “follow” or whatever, but just on the existence angle.

The more interesting concept for me, actually, involves more of the free will aspect of the discussion - if the God in the discussion is real as we’ve been told to believe, we’ve also got the free will argument to run with, and a broader discussion about the ideologies and the way we got to that point and whatever else is created as well. While advancing the debate significantly, it also brings up a lot of other odd questions.

So yeah. It’s an interesting concept, and one that probably would require more thought if it were something that could realistically occur.

* 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.

* Jonah Goldberg on the Tuskegee experiments, separating the myths from the reality. I learned something here.

* I’m pretty sick of our marijuana laws. This has to be a new low. It was prescribed, you morons!

* New Zealand’s laws are so insane that it’s illegal to buy Grand Theft Auto IV for your child. As bad as it gets here…

* Heh.

* CNN’s decided that the news isn’t really important anymore. In the tank, indeed.

* I think I’m gonna throw up.

Prediction for today? Clinton by more than 5 in Indiana, Obama by no more than 7 in North Carolina. I wouldn’t be shocked to see Clinton pull within 5 in North Carolina, but there are a lot of African American voters in that primary, and I assume they’ll continue to break in favor of Obama the way they have.

1) There’s a fatal flaw in Mario Kart Wii’s online play, and that’s wheelies. The introduction of bikes allows you to get a speed increase by doing a wheelie on straightaways - increases speed while drastically sacrificing steering. You can, of course, pop out at any time, so it’s not that much of a sacrifice - twice now, I’ve played people who jump out to half track leads by the midpoint of the match simply by doing wheelies all the time. I mean, I suppose it’s kudos to them for exploiting an otherwise reasonable speed alternative, but as more people become used to the concept, it’s really going to remove the whole kart element, and that could be rough. Then again, maybe it won’t, but there’s my annoyance.

2) Grand Theft Auto IV is great. In terms of sheer scope and everything, the reviews are spot on, and the small things that people seem to be complaining about (minus the car complaints, which make sense since the cars handle like cars and not Mario Karts) are very enjoyable for me. With that said, the fact that I can get a girlfriend and get her to invite me up to her place after running over two pedestrians and knocking off the fire hydrant outside her apartment seems a little bit off. Then again, she was pissed that we left the magic act early, so what does she know?

* A small piece on GraniteGrok about one of my favorite Senators, John Sununu. He’s currently trailing behind Shaheen by uncomfortable amounts, and his campaign seems incredibly slow to get rolling, considering that it’s May now and no one’s heard as much as a peep, but here goes nothing…

* Also, Sununu’s name coming up in the VP talks for McCain. He’d be a great choice if we didn’t need Sununu in the Senate.

* From Urgent Agenda, Jeff Greenfield’s piece on Orwell and elitism. Provides a nifty contrast to the current race.

* I love this concept.

* More problems for Obama: people aren’t buying is comments about Wright. This is at least more plausible than the “closet Muslim” smear that went out there, which is why Obama can’t ignore this. Although, it appears, he just might anyway.

* Remember, these are being touted as improvements to Canada’s health care. No thanks…

* Is the media really taking it easy on McCain? Power Line puts another notch in the no column, thanks to the New York Times.

That’s all for now…

* I hope I can be rich enough to do stupid stuff like this someday.

* The news I forgot about is that the looming recession might not be that looming. Not great growth by any stretch, but considering we’ve been hearing about this “coming recession” for as many quarters as there hasn’t been a recession, there’s at least reason to be somewhat optimistic that we’re experiencing a slowdown rather than a full-blown recession. Talk about a wrench in the election rhetoric, though.

* More FCC idiocy.

* Really, one of the best sports stories I’ve read in a while: The story of the injured softball player’s home run, and the sportsmanship of the opponents. Really interesting.

* Jacob Sullum at Reason maps out my relative discomfort with the FLDS craziness.

* Congrats to Capcom’s inclusion in Guinness for holding the record for “Most Number of Games in a Series” with the Mega Man franchise. Further kudos for Capcom taking it in stride and being able to laugh at itself a bit.

* Organic food myths.

* Robert Samullsen at the Washington Post nails the oil issue.

* Yesterday was May Day, so it’s a good time to remember the victims.

* Should Seattle declare its independence?

That’s it for now.

Books:

Ultimate Spider-Man: Venom/Irresponsible - Brian Michael Bendis: Still lovin’ the Spidey. Irresponsible may have been the first one I was genuinely shaky on, though.

Pandora’s Star - Peter F. Hamilton: An 800 page sci-fi tome that doesn’t even get into the meat of the story until almost halfway through. Oh, and then it makes you wait for the sequel. This is not damning a book with praise, however - it’s really exactly the kind of sci-fi epic I’ve been hungering for, and I’m honestly loving every page of the two book series. Highly, highly recommended.

Sarah Simpson’s Rules for Living - Rebecca Rupp: I’m not sure if it’s just so close to Allie Finkle’s Rules for Girls or what, but this book didn’t do it for me at all. A kids book about a child working her way through, it just felt kind of stilted and empty, especially compared to Allie Finkle’s vibrancy or the endearing quirks of A Crooked Kind of Perfect. Too many threads left unresolved, and it just didn’t work for me.

Scott Pilgrim’s Precious Little Life/vs. The World - Bryan Lee O’Malley: I started reading these in part because I thought they’d be a good fit for my library (they are) and because Michael Cera’s signed on to be the title role in the film version. They’re fun, a little different, perhaps a wee bit more manga than I prefer, but still really good.

Someday This Pain Will Be Useful to You - Peter Cameron: A great, great YA book about an older teenager dealing with his life and therapy and whatever else. I really enjoyed this, it took some time to get into and suffers from Somewhat Unsatisfactory YA Book Ending, but still worked out great.

The Ten-Cent Plague: The Great Comic Book Scare and How It Changed America - David Hajdu: The title of the book says it all - a very academic look at the government’s war on comic books in the 1940s-1950s. Some things never change.

Heroes: Volume 1: Published anthology of the free Heroes webcomics posted on NBC.com. Not essential, but a fun diversion nonetheless.

The Gollywhopper Games - Jody Feldman: Take Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, put it in a toy company, and add in a dash of social commentary, and you get this book. Not a bad read, even with the obvious nods to past ideas, and it’s one I’ll give to kids in a flash.

The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian - Sherman Alexie: I loved this book. Loved it loved it loved it. The story of a kid on an Indian Reservation who strives for things greater than what’s around him, and it works. I understand Alexie gets a lot of flack from American Indians, and I think I can see why, but this is still a really great book.

The Disreputable History of Frankie Landau-Banks - E. Lockhart: If Wes Anderson was to write a young adult novel about Massachusetts boarding schools, I somehow feel like this book might be it. I’m a big Lockhart fan, and I feel like this story and writing was a big step above anything she’s put out at this point. An interesting narrative, a fun story, and it just works really, really well for me.

Movies:

Forgetting Sarah Marshall: I apparently forgot to get the memo that Judd Apatow’s crew isn’t funny anymore, because this movie was hilarious. Paced a lot better than a lot of efforts along the same line, and had plenty going for it from start to finish. High marks for this one.

Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle: A rewatch for the inevitable viewing of the sequel. Yes, it’s absurd. Yes, Ann & I inadvertently watched it on 4/20. Yes, I love this movie a bit too much for someone who never touched illicit substances in college.

Baby Mama: Tina Fey is awesome, this movie was just okay. The funny parts were VERY funny, but it got dragged down a lot by the more touching parts, and that’s always tough. Not a bad watch, but I could have waited for the DVD.

* 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.

2) We picked up Mario Kart Wii today, because when you own a system that only has 5 great games, you make sure you pick them up as soon as possible. Honestly? The Wiimote controls are difficult and literally painful, the Wii Wheel is ridiculous and I don’t use it after trying once race (and I then sold it on Amazon for $10, which boggles my mind), the handling on even the most highly-rated carts is incredibly hard, and they’ve made turbo sliding very tough. With that said, it’s still Mario Kart, and that means it’s pretty much awesome. Playing it online is probably the best part, and once I can get my controllers to sync up again, I’ll post my friend code. So I like it - a lot more than Brawl, not as much as Galaxy.

3) I beat Blue Dragon a couple weeks ago, which was nice. I think it’s the first game (outside of You Have To Burn the Rope) that I’ve played and beated in quite a long time. The ending was decent, I suppose. What was interesting to me, however, is the relative impossibility of some of the achievements. Yes, I’m an achievement whore, but not nearly enough of one to, say, rent a game just to bump my score up or play through another 40 hours to make sure I kill every last enemy in a role playing game that doesn’t allow you to skip cinematics. I have to say, the game was a blast and achievements are fun, but there’s very little chance of me going back to get 1000 points on that one.

4) Speaking of very little chance of getting 1000 achievement points, I finally decided to try my hand at Eternal Sonata. What a disappointment this game is to me early on! It takes the more annoying parts of Tales of Symphonia, ties in a storyline that’s boring me to tears, and either makes the battles way too easy or way too difficult, with no significant ease of leveling up that I’ve found yet. For those of you who have played it - does it improve? Is there hope?

5) Super Smash Bros. Brawl? Honestly? After a few days with it, it’s not really all that amazing to me. If GameStop is still offering $35 for it + 20% for Grand Theft Auto IV, I might actually jump at that. The game isn’t bad per se as much as it ended up not being that interesting to me, and many of the levels make the characters so small that it’s hard to play, and the solo “Subspace Emissary” mission is really, really poor compared to the solo mission on Melee. Color me disappointed.

6) I admit it - Viva Pinata is strangely fun.

7) Rainbow Six Vegas is good, too. I only play it multiplayer when I can catch up with Rick or Mark, because the solo is too hard and I do too much Team Fortress-style “run in with guns blazing” stuff, but I never thought I’d like a game like that, and I do.

I think that’s it for now.

* The growing cigarette black market in Massachusetts. I’d say “what are they thinking,” but that implies there’s any serious thought going on at the state level of government in Massachusetts.

* Power Line covers another source of discomfort with me regarding McCain. It has nothing to do with him criticizing the President and everything to do with his apparent acceptance of how opponents of the right perceive the right - note to McCain: being like Teddy Roosevelt isn’t really something to embrace. In a way, it’s a decent campaign tool - use the names of revered Americans to try and counter the more insane quarters of the left when securing the center, but it’s obviously at the extent of the solid right, the ideological base that needs more solidification at this point. It’s especially infuriating when he can have that and this in the same campaign cycle.

* There’s only one word I can use to describe this post: Yes.

* Joystiq’s Mario Kart Retrospective. I haven’t played about half of these, actually.

* 10 reasons the superdelegates should pick Clinton.

* Finally, this must have been uncomfortable.

* A fairly chilling (for me, anyway) column about the FLDS raid has been linked all over the place. It kind of brings into focus what’s being faced at this point - over 400 kids being removed from their homes based on an anonymous, and probably false, tip. The pregnant and married 16 year olds can technically exist under Texas law, and the immediate danger of the younger ones or the males of the group are completely without evidence at this point. This isn’t to say that there aren’t some legitimate dangers to the sort of fundamentalism that has occurred in some of these extreme sects, or that there may actually be some problems, but evidence matters, no? The problem is the cultish aspect/perception, I think, even if some in charge might not admit it. A good analogy is here.

* To steal a line from the 2004 election, Obama was for the gas tax holiday before he was against it. Apparently, we’re not yet at extraordinary circumstances, even though gas is three times as high as it was when he voted for it initially.

* Humans on the brink of extinction 70000 years ago? Interesting.

* Drew Carey on a subject near and dear to my heart: the right to sell bacon. Okay, in all seriousness (or should I say “frankly”), it’s more about basic economic rights (psst, paft), but you can take my bacon-wrapped hot dog from my cold, dead hands.

* EconLog on basic fiscal reality.

Yay Friday!

* 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!

1) What Made Milwaukee Famous - “Sultan” (video): I talked about this a bit last time, but I’m still pretty much completely obsessed with this song. Ultra-poppy, and it turns out the video is fun, too. The rest of the CD is pretty decent as well, but “Sultan” really does the trick.

2) Flight of the Conchords - “Rhymnocerous v. Hiphopapotamus”(mp3): I’m a big Flight of the Conchords fan back when I saw some HBO/Comedy Central special. The series is excellent as well, and they’re pretty great musically. The humor sticks around long after the novelty wears off (see: “Business Time”) and this song in particular still cracks me up.

3) R.E.M. - “Man-Sized Wreath” (video): If I had to choose one song off of Accelerate that I like more than the rest, it’s “Man-Sized Wreath.” Hugely addictive chorus, the song gets right to the point, it’s nearly flawless.

4) Los Campesinos - “You! Me! Dancing!” (mp3): I resisted this song for quite a while, and I’m not sure why, in retrospect. The intro is kind of weak, but the song itself is very fun and somewhat different than the other things I’ve been hearing lately.

5) Colin Meloy - “The Engine Driver (live) (stream): This was easily one of my favorite songs off of Picaresque, and that it comes from what may be the only live album in my collection that contains songs recorded at a show I was at is kind of cool for me, too. “The Engine Driver” was not one of them, but I remembered loving his solo version anyway. If you’re not into the Decemberists, I’m not sure this will convince you otherwise, but it’s still a great version.

6) She & Him - “Why Do You Let Me Stay Here?” (mp3): Another one of those songs I talked about a while back, but is still haunting me in mysterious ways. I don’t know what it is about this song that I love, exactly, but the point is that it’s absolutely infectious and I think it’s really awesome. So there.

7) The Motion Sick - “Satellite” (mp3): Excuse the mp3 intro on this one, it’s the only semi-legit mp3 I could find. Regardless, this song is just fun - a rare song that catches me lyrically and musically, and the rest of the disc is great, too. Gotta love it.

* Pennsylvania forces the Democratic primary to keep going another month, surprise surprise. Most telling stat from the exit polls? One in four Clinton voters would decline to vote for Obama if he’s the nominee, many switching to McCain. I’m sure that number will decline if Obama’s the nominee and the general campaign begins, but in a closely contested matchup, a 3% swing in either direction would make a huge difference.

* Someone’ll have to explain to the Truthers that Al Queda is working for the United States government. Or Mossad. Or something.

That’s all I’ve got today, actually. Slow day, I suppose, post-Pennsylvania…

If the videos are dead by the time this posts, all the candidates were on WWE Raw last night. Uh, yeah…

Thanks to Bull for this one.

* Obama dropped out of the 27 April debate “couldn’t agree to terms” on a debate originally planned for the end of the month. Not that he necessarily has to debate anymore, or that it would actually do much for him if he did have to, but the timing is really classic, is it not? EDIT: Technically, saying Obama dropped out of the debate is incorrect, so I’ve fixed it for the sake of accuracy. I think we all know what the story is, though.

* McCain is taking public funding. Knock against him, for sure, but how else will he catch up?

* PowerLine on the problems with the McCain temperament issue. Putting aside this single-source/no-source reporting we’re getting from the press as of late, is there even any evidence that this is a continuing issue?

* A good read from Reason regarding the inevitable Supreme Court vacancies. I don’t agree with all of it, but it’s an interesting look at one of the more important issues coming up.

* A great column on the ethanol folly.

* It’s not a perfect op-ed y any stretch, but this post on ways the environmental movement has hurt people is still interesting enough for a look.

* The war on passive drinking. When will it end?

Back to the inevitable Bruins loss…

I don’t typically discuss abortion for a number of reasons:

a) Everything that could possibly be said about abortion has been said anyway, and I’m highly unlikely to change anyone’s mind on it based on that fact alone.
b) My position on the matter inevitably pleases no one.
c) The issue is way too important to some people, and I don’t like wading in those waters.
d) It’s so hyper-politicized that it’s not worth diving into anyway.

A lot of the discussion ended up being over my statement of being “pro-abortion.” Regardless of what Webster might have to say about it, I feel there’s a precise difference between being “pro-abortion” and “pro-choice: - the former is a statement of being for a political issue, much like people are “pro-gun” or “pro-religion” or “pro-Israel,” while the latter is a statement of the act (in this case, of “choosing” to have an abortion).

I’m not a fan of abortion or abortion rights. I recognize the necessity of them not because of some reproductive rights motive, but rather because the alternative (illegal abortion) is more dangerous. In my mind, it’s better to do everything in our abilities to discourage that choice than to simply paint ourselves into a corner where suddenly we’re forced to say that a 14 year old can get an abortion without speaking to her parents, but not take an aspirin for a headache. It creates a ridiculous rhetorical situation which then bleeds over into public policy in ways that perhaps even most abortion rights supporters might not be entirely comfortable with (and not that it’s a problem in itself - I’m in support of legalizing heroin even though it makes me very uncomfortable).

The best reason (for me, at least) to stick with “pro-abortion” is that it’s simple - I’m in favor of political abortion. I then don’t get caught up in the rhetoric about choice, as it’s not a factor, and no one can pull the opposite on me like folks do regarding people who are “pro-life” and “pro-death penalty” - i.e., they’re only for life when it’s the unborn. After all, the “pro-choice” people - where does the line of choice end for you? If anyone can do anything they want to themselves, is there a line to draw? It’s kind of a weasely political point to make, so I try to avoid it, but most “pro-choice” people have their limits to what kind of “choice” is allowable, and it’s quite easier and more exact to avoid that altogether - especially since I’m generally for any choice that doesn’t unavoidably hurt another human being.

Plus, as a male, the situation gets dicier - although we account for 50% of the creation of the unborn, we’re delegated to the sidelines for 100% of the pregnancy duration, but cannot opt out once the child is born. It’s dangerous for me to even mention this - the typical response usually ranges from “you want control over a woman’s body” to “you just want to have all the sex with none of the responsibility,” neither of which is even close to the truth. However, it falls right back into the thought of choice for me but not for thee - one can choose to abort over the wishes of a father, but a father cannot “abort” once the child is born.

Essentially, where I’m going with this? It’s a huge, huge mess. Roe v. Wade, in my mind, only makes the situation worse, being a poor ruling that ends up dividing the nation in ways that go beyond abortion rights. I tend to avoid it, and I plan on continuing to avoid it once this post heads into the darkness. But the reasons why I am what I am on the issue should be made as clear as possible, given the apparent confusion.

I had more to go on about than just this issue, but this got plenty long enough.

* 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!

* 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!

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.

* Battlestar Galactica: So say we all. It’s been long enough without Battlestar, and the first two episodes haven’t disappointed me at all. The intensity has definitely been kicked up a notch, and even with the overall inevitabilities of how the show will likely end, the how is paramount in unexpected ways. God, I love this show.

* It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia: I’ve been looking to watch this show for a while, and we finally set the DVR to tape these when they played. What a completely screwed up show, lacking any clear redeeming value yet still hysterical in so many ways. My current favorite is “Charlie Gets Cancer,” but they’ve all been great so far.

* Scrubs: Oh dear god they’re forcing the JD/Eliott thing again dear god make it stop.

I want to like the guy. I desperately want to like him, I want to support his candidacy, I want to be able to ignore the whole Campaign Finance Reform Act and the Gang of 14 and just dive right in. And when he presents this, I want to stand up and cheer from the rooftops:

* A one-year freeze on the amount of money Congress allocates to discretionary programs.. Imagine if we got that any of the last 8 years. Or during either of the tax cuts.

* An alternative tax system that would consist of just two tax rates and a larger standard deduction than under the current code.. Yes, yes, YES. Further simplification helps everyone - the 2001 cuts did a great job of this, and if you don’t like it, you can stick to the old one!

* A suspension of the federal gas tax from Memorial Day to Labor Day. I’m in favor of scrapping the poor-crunching gas tax altogether, but bully for him for saying what needs to be said on the matter.

* A corporate tax cut. Also not quite far enough, but considering the alternative, again, we need this.

I mean, his plan is far from perfect - any bailout on mortgages is a bad idea - but it’s amazingly, incredibly good for someone who a) admitted to needing to learn about the economy, and b) brought on people who have apparently taught him very well.

But then we get stuff like this:

KUDLOW: Let me begin, in your speech today, and also in recent speeches, you’re really blasting corporate greed and reckless corporate conduct. It sounds a little bit like the business attacks by Senator Clinton and Senator Obama. Can you tell us, what do you mean by these criticisms? What are you driving at?

Sen. McCAIN: I’m driving at the people who get compensation which is not approved of by the stockholders, even a nonbinding fashion. I’m talking about people like Mr. Cayne, who the day–right around the time the government took over Bear Stearns–or bailed out, excuse me, bail–Bear Stearns–who went to the market and got $11 a share rather than $10 a share. I’m talking about people that when their corporation has losses, that they are rewarded with exorbitantly high pay packages. And it gives Wall Street a bad name, Larry. And that’s–and that’s pure and simple. I do not believe in government intervention, I do not believe in government control, I do not believe that. But I do believe we should take steps to increase transparency and also
shareholder input into the compensation of CEOs. After all, that’s who the CEOs work for. And I also think CEOs and chairmen should have–be different people.

…

KUDLOW: When you are criticizing these corporations, I mean, there’s 140 million Americans work for corporations, in rough numbers. Companies are the ones who create jobs in America, they’re the ones who really generate the family incomes, and of course companies need capital investment. Do you ever worry that you’re sending a very tough anti-business message to the firms, to the work force and to investors?

Sen. McCAIN: Larry, in all due respect, don’t you think that when corporate executives take exorbitant pay packages that are not justified by the–by the performance of the corporations that they have stewardship of and millions of–and 250,000 Americans in the last short period of time have lost their jobs, that that gives corporate America a bad name and then increases the
influence of those who are basically anti-business? Don’t you think that is also one of the–one of the spillovers here?

It goes on a bit, and kudos to Kudlow for holding McCain’s feet to the fire a little bit, but this sort of ignorant economic populism is dangerous. It’s inconsistent, it’s ill-thought out, and it’s yet another thing that gives me great, great pause when it comes to this man. I know I’m unlikely to find a candidate to fit my ideological mold perfectly, but I also don’t think that you have to pander to economic idiocy to get votes in this case. It doesn’t benefit his candidacy in any specific way against Obama, which leads me to believe that he actually buys into it, and that’s troublesome.

So I dunno. Consider me more conflicted today than I was on Monday. I don’t know, folks - help!

* 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.