Libertarian Leanings

The Bachmann Effect?

From a Rasmussen polll which found that 73% believe a woman will become President of the United States within the next ten years:

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 82% of Likely U.S. Voters say they are willing to vote for a woman president. Just nine percent (9%) are not. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

In December 2006, 78% of voters said they were willing to vote for a woman president, but that number fell slightly to 71% in February 2008 as Hillary Clinton battled Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination. 

Did poll respondents have Michelle Bachmann in mind when they answered the questions?  Or maybe Sarah Palin.

On The Beach This Week

Playa Del Carmen, Quintana Roo, Mexico

Blue Smoke and Mirrors Won't Cut It

Jay Cost sees very little hope for survival of the Obama administration beyond 2012. 

If we've learned anything in the last 50 years of the modern campaign, it's that the billion dollar efforts of campaign technocrats, who now dominate our politics, cannot convince people that the sun rises in the west. 

So, when we peel back the spin, the boasting, and the partisan hyperbole, we get the following: The president is going to need real improvement on at least one of those four items, or he is going to lose next year, and the race will be over before midnight on the East Coast. And there won't be a single thing David Axelrod, Jim Messina, or David Plouffe can do to stop it.

Bruins Win The Cup

Last night the Boston Bruins won the Stanley Cup with a 4-0 victory over the Vancouver Canucks in the seventh and deciding game in Vancouver.  In my private prediction I had the Bruins jumping out to a three or four goal lead, then fending off a Vanvouver comeback to win 4-3, or maybe 5-3 with an empty net goal to seal it.  I had it right except for the Vancouver comeback, which never materialized. Update:  I confess to some disappointment in our neighbors to the north.

Goldberg On Lefty Cognitive Dissonance

Jonah Goldberg takes up the case of "A Gay Girl In Damascus."

I'd barely followed "A Gay Girl In Damascus" until last week, when Daily Beast columnist Peter Beinart posted something to Twitter: "This is really important -- this woman is a hero," with a link to a story about Amina Abdallah Arraf, a Syrian-American woman and the author of the blog "A Gay Girl In Damascus." According to the story, Amina had been seized by Syrian security forces for her dissident writing.

A couple of problems here.  For one thing she was a he.  Further, he was an American not a Syrian.  And then there was "her" story.

...how dare "advocates of war, occupation, dispossession and apartheid" use Arab and Muslim hostility to gays as "'evidence' that the primitive sand-people don't deserve anything other than killing by the enlightened children of the West."

Besides, "she" has never been harassed by Arabs for being gay. But in America, "she" has been "struck by strangers for being an Arab" and "had dung thrown at me" for wearing the hijab.

Except that is a lie.

Worse, it's propaganda. McMaster's fake-but-accurate lesbian was perfectly pitched to Western liberals desperate to alleviate the pain of cognitive dissonance. No longer must you think too hard or make tough choices if you're, say, anti-Israel and pro-democracy, or pro-gay rights and in favor of the self-determination of Muslim fanatics. Heck, you can even stop worrying and love a lesbian feminist who sees no big deal in wearing a religiously required sack over her head. With Amina, all contradictions are resolved -- in favor of the incoherent biases of the anti-America and anti-Israel left.

But that's what they do on the left.  They make stuff up.

Wisconsin Law Upheld

Wisconsin voters carried the day for Governor Scott Walker back on April 5th when they returned Justice David Prosser to the Wisconsin Supreme Court over the union favored Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg.  The Wisconsin high court quickly upheld Walker's bill, which put limits on government employee unions' collective bargaining.

Madison - Acting with unusual speed, the state Supreme Court on Tuesday reinstated Gov. Scott Walker's plan to all but end collective bargaining for tens of thousands of public workers.

The court found a committee of lawmakers was not subject to the state's open meetings law, and so did not violate that law when they hastily approved the measure and made it possible for the Senate to take it up. In doing so, the Supreme Court overruled a Dane County judge who had struck down the legislation, ending one challenge to the law even as new challenges are likely to emerge.

The majority opinion was by Justices Michael Gableman, David Prosser, Patience Roggensack and Annette Ziegler. The other three justices - Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson and Justices Ann Walsh Bradley and N. Patrick Crooks - concurred in part and dissented in part.

The opinion voided all orders in the case from the lower court. It came just before 5 p.m., sparing Republicans who control the Legislature from taking up the contentious issue of collective bargaining again.

You may recall the Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi issued a restraining order forbidding implementation of the law, saying that the legislature failed to abide by the state's open meetings law.

The court ruled that Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi's ruling, which had held up implementation of the collective bargaining law, was void ab initio, or invalid from the outset.

In its decision, the state's high court concluded that "choices about what laws represent wise public policy for the state of Wisconsin are not within the constitutional purview of the courts."

The court concluded that Sumi exceeded her jurisdiction, "invaded" the Legislature's constitutional powers and erred in halting the publication and implementation of the collective bargaining law.

The court added that its role is limited to determining whether the Legislature employed a "constitutionally violative process in the enactment of the act. We conclude that the Legislature did not violate the Wisconsin Constitution by the process it used."

The way is now clear for Wisconsin to attack the underlying issue to the collective bargaining legislation, which is to get its fiscal house in order.

Update:  Legal Insurrection spikes the football.

Okay, analysis done, now I spike the football by referencing my prior posts:

• Judge Sumi's Mess ("Judge Maryann Sumi preemptively issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) which she thought ... would stop the publication of the budget repair bill, and therefore prevent the bill from becoming law.  This was an unprecedented move, and none of the legal arguments which attacked the validity of the law necessitated such interference in the legislative process.")
• Judge Sumi Throws Out Wisconsin Collective Bargaining Law ("It is one thing for a court to rule on the validity of a law, but quite another thing for a court to stop the legislature from making law. Judge Sumi gives short shrift (at pp. 13-14) to the key Wisconsin case which says courts must await a law coming into effect before ruling on the law, Goodland v. Zimmerman. Judge Sumi summarily dismisses the import of Goodland by stating that it was a pre-Open Meetings law ruling. Well, chronologically yes, but the principle is the same; courts rule on legislation, courts do not stop legislation from being made.")

From the lefty blog Crooks and Liars, one Karoli claims to have discovered partisan language in the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision.

Some examples from the decision -- no partisan language here, oh no:

This court has granted the petition for an original action because one of the courts that we are charged with supervising has usurped the legislative power which the Wisconsin Constitution grants exclusively to the legislature.

...the legislature did not employ a process that violated Article IV, Section 10 of the Wisconsin Constitution, which provides in relevant part: “The doors of each house shall be kept open except when the public welfare shall require secrecy.” The doors of the senate and assembly were kept open to the press and members of the public during the enactment of the Act. The doors of the senate parlor, where the joint committee on conference met, were open to the press and members of the public. WisconsinEye broadcast the proceedings live. Access was not denied.

I don't get what's partisan about the language in the decision, unless in Karoli's view any language in disagreement with progressive dogma is by definition partisan.

And The Winner Is...

There were seven winners of the Republican Presidential Debate that was held last night in Manchester, New Hampshire.  All of the candidates acquitted themselves well.  The minor gaffe I predicted from Herman Cain never developed, and with one exception candidates answered all the questions.  What they refused to do was go on the attack against each other, though invited to do so time and again by CNN moderator, John King.

GOFFSTOWN – The contenders in the Republican presidential primary spent Monday's debate at St. Anselm College talking about themselves, the economy, job creation, tax cuts and beating up on President Barack Obama.

The seven candidates for president – U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota used the debate to officially announce her candidacy – continuously attacked the president on health care, spending and taxes, but also continued to avoid any pointed attacks on each other.

“Any person on this stage would be a better president than President Obama,” said former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

I thought each of them had at least one good answer, one applause line.  But none of those lines came at the expense of any of their fellows on stage last night.  In that regard that debaters presented a united front against Obama, his administration, and his policies. 

Of course, that's not going to last.  It's simply too early to risk attacks against fellow Republicans by playing the pit bull, but as we get further into the campaign the attacks will materialize.  For now, though, there's the sense that this election is too important to waste, and the focus is on getting Obama out.  I anticipate that that focus will disappear over the next several months then re-emerge when the ultimate nominee finally locks it up, and that spells trouble for Obama and the Democrats. 

But the really big winners for the night were the Boston Bruins who sent the Stanley Cup finals to game seven, which will be tomorrow night in Vancouver at 8:00pm EDT.

Republican Presidential Debate

Seven Republican presidential contenders will take the stage in Manchester, New Hampshire this evening at 8:00pm.

The debate is sponsored by the New Hampshire Union Leader, CNN and WMUR and runs tonight from 8 to 10 p.m. at St. Anselm College's Sullivan Arena.

Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, businessman Herman Cain, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Texas Rep. Ron Paul, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum are scheduled to participate.

... 

Tonight's debate has some competition for viewers, as the sixth game of the Stanley Cup playoff finals between the Boston Bruins and Vancouver Canucks begins at 8 p.m., which is when the debate kicks off.

I'll be switching between channels.  I wasn't that interested in the South Carolina debate, but this one is different.  It's closer to home, for one thing, and for another, Mitt Romney will be there.  Romney is the front runner at this point, even though it's really too early to even think about front runners.  An awful lot can happen between now and November 2012, but it starts happening now.

I've never seen Michele Bachmann in a debate, but I've read that she can be very persuasive, and that she has a history of winning against long odds.  I'm very much looking forward to seeing her in action.

Herman Cain is less likely to be the surprise that he was in South Carolina, but he's going to have an impact.  I predict a minor gaffe by Cain tonight.  He doesn't always have the ready answer.  But he will do well because he has message the resonates with his approach to solving problems.

It's hard for me to imagine Newt Gingrich winning over any new support after first trashing the Ryan Medicare solution, and then watching virtually his entire campaign staff quit on him.

Ron Paul will do what Ron Paul always does.  He will appeal to the libertarian crowd, and that will ultimately be the extent of his support.

Tim Pawlenty made a good showing yesterday on Fox News Sunday under some pretty tough questioning by Chris Wallace.  He has an aggressive plan for attacking our fiscal problems through a combination of spending cuts, regulatory relief, and tax cuts that are designed to promote economic growth.  There is no way we get the nation out of this mess without serious economic growth.  I think he will do well tonight.

Romney always does well, but he has got to come up with some credible answers on the topic of RomneyCare vs. ObamaCare.  The case cannot be made that RomneyCare was OK but ObamaCare is not.  He's painted himself into a corner by insisting that RomneyCare was somehow the right thing for Massachusetts.  I know some Massachusetts consumers who disagree.

I have never been impressed by Rick Santorum and I don't expect him to change that this evening.  I've always been more of a libertarian than a conservative, and Santorum has always been a religious conservative.  I prefer the candidate who can articulate the underlying economic theory to the conservative position.  I'm not sure he can do that.

And finally, I expect the Boston Bruins to extend the Stanley Cup series to seven games.  Go Bruins!

Shutting Down Yucca Mountain Nuclear Repository

Since 2002 Yucca Mountain in Nevada has been designated by law as a storage site for the nation's high-level nuclear waste, but construction on it has stalled.  Opposition comes from Nevada's congressional delegation, led by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and the Obama administration.  According to the Wall Street Journal, a directive from Nuclear Regulatory Commission chairman Gregory Jaczko effectively halted work.

At issue is a directive by Mr. Jaczko to agency staffers that effectively halted work on a key NRC report about a proposed waste repository at Nevada's Yucca Mountain. The inspector general alleges that Mr. Jaczko wasn't forthcoming with his fellow NRC commissioners about the implications of his directive.

In a June 6 report Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspector General Hubert T. Bell accused Mr. Jaczko "strategically" withholding information.

The dispute stems from a decision Mr. Jaczko made last fall to direct commission staffers to wind down the NRC's technical review of an application in favor of the proposed Yucca repository. A memorandum issued by Mr. Jaczko's office to NRC staffers said that because Congress hadn't passed a budget for fiscal 2011, which began last Oct. 1, the staff should use instead Mr. Obama's budget request, which called for terminating the project.

After Mr. Jaczko's directive was made public, Kenneth Rogers, a former NRC commissioner and Reagan appointee, called on Mr. Bell to investigate Mr. Jaczko's actions to determine "whether any legal or other improprieties have been committed." On Thursday, Mr. Rogers said he hadn't seen the inspector general's report.

Mr. Jaczko has said the directive was legal and was reviewed by the agency's general counsel. Mr. Bell's report, which is based on interviews with Mr. Jaczko and multiple agency staffers, concurs on those points.

But it also says Mr. Jaczko "was not forthcoming with" his fellow commissioners about his intent to use the budget guidance to halt work on the Yucca report.

The safety evaluation would have determined whether Yucca met NRC health and safety regulations. Yucca's supporters have long hoped to see the safety report made public, because they believe it will support the technical and scientific case for the repository.

Curious that the rationale for halting the evaluation was that Congress had not passed a budget.  Which leads me to the observation that Senator Reid had a vested interest in not not passing a budget.  Also, as the article quoted above notes, Mr. Jaczko was once a science-policy adviser for Senator Reid. 

President George W. Bush, after some initial resistance, appointed Mr. Jaczko to a seat on the NRC in 2005 after Mr. Reid blocked Bush nominees for dozens of positions. President Barack Obama elevated Mr. Jaczko to the chairmanship in 2009.

Isn't it fascinating how a plan comes together.  Whether by accident or be design, failing to pass a budget has become the means by which a former Reid adviser was able to delay a project that Reid opposes.

The Texas Model

With two of his key advisers becoming available, having recently left the Gingrich campaign, Texas Governor Rick Perry is reconsidering something that he once dismissed — a run for the presidency.

Perry was reluctant to run for the nomination without key advisers, including his former campaign manager Rob Johnson and his top political consultant Dave Carney, both of whom were working on the presidential campaign of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

Johnson and Carney announced their resignations from the Gingrich campaign Thursday as part of a huge shake-up of the organization.

But now, according to CBS News, he's serious about a run for the White House.  And one thing he's got going for him is his record in Texas.  He's been the governor there since 2000, and while the nation's economy has been limping along for the past four years, Texas is open for business.

Using Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data, Dallas Fed economists looked at state-by-state employment changes since June 2009, when the recession ended. Texas added 265,300 net jobs, out of the 722,200 nationwide, and by far outpaced every other state. New York was second with 98,200, Pennsylvania added 93,000, and it falls off from there. Nine states created fewer than 10,000 jobs, while Maine, Hawaii, Delaware and Wyoming created fewer than 1,000. Eighteen states have lost jobs since the recovery began.

The data are even more notable because they're calculated on a "sum of states" basis, which the BLS does not use because they can have sampling errors. Using straight nonfarm payroll employment, Texas accounts for 45% of net U.S. job creation. Modesty is not typically considered a Texas virtue, but the results speak for themselves.

Texas is also among the few states that are home to more jobs than when the recession began in December 2007.

Richard Fisher, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, believes he understands why Texas has done so much better than the rest of the country.

Mr. Fisher argues that Texas is doing so well relative to other states precisely because it has rejected the economic model that now prevails in Washington...

...Texas stands out for its free market and business-friendly climate.

Capital—both human and investment—is highly mobile, and it migrates all the time to the places where the opportunities are larger and the burdens are lower. Texas has no state income tax. Its regulatory conditions are contained and flexible. It is fiscally responsible and government is small. Its right-to-work law doesn't impose unions on businesses or employees. It is open to global trade and competition: Houston, San Antonio and El Paso are entrepôts for commerce, especially in the wake of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Based on his conversations with CEOs and other business leaders, Mr. Fisher says one of Texas's huge competitive advantages is its ongoing reform of the tort system, which has driven litigation costs to record lows. He also cited a rule in place since 1998 in the backwash of the S&L debacle that limits mortgage borrowing to 80% of the appraised value of a home. Like a minimum down payment, this reduces overleveraging and means Texas wasn't hurt as badly by the housing crash as other states.

Governor Perry would make a formidable opponent for President Obama.  Voters comparing Perry's accomplishments in Texas to Obama's failures at the national level would have an easy choice.