Politics – Page 101 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Good Political Sense

I really have to wonder about the Democrat running against Mike Fitzpatrick in our Congressional district. She is having a fundraiser at a nightclub that has stripping nights & sexually-themed group contests. Even more interesting is that the fundraiser was promoted with the poster for said stripping nights & sexually-themed contests, though the Party wants you to be assured that they aren’t taking place the same night.

I am very tempted to put this in the “Politicians Suck” category on this site, but I fear with the “deep throat contest” advertised alongside her fundraiser, well, that could be taken in a completely new light.

Game Changer?

All I keep reading in the conservative media is how McCain has made a bold choice, and how the veep pick is just totally reshaping the whole race. It’s a different dynamic! A game changer! It’s not just McCain now, it’s a ticket! Lines around the corner to see the newly selected Veep! We’ll have this election in the bag!

Wait, did I say McCain? I meant Romney. I guess a bit too much deja-vu today.

Paul Who?

Ilya Somin has another excellent post illustrating the rational ignorance of most voters, most of whom seem to have no idea who Paul Ryan is:

Public ignorance about federal spending isÂ widespread. One of the challenges that Ryan faces in selling his entitlement reform proposals is that most AmericansÂ donâ€™t realize how large a proportion of federal spending is devoted to these programs, and therefore donâ€™t understand that it is impossible to get the budget crisis under control without cutting back in this area.

One of the reasons I often feel we’re doomed is that the only place many of these low-information voters get their information from is the traditional media, which is so far in the tank for this Administration, it’s highly unlikely they’ll learn anything about Ryan’s ideas, other than they are bad and will destroy America.

I continue to be relatively un-optimistic about this coming election, and think Obama has a better than even chance of being re-elected.

It’s Ryan

All I can say is this is going to make the Vice Presidential debates a thing to watch. Paul Ryan v. Joe Biden? That’s almost worth getting cable again for. But here I am, I once again, as I have for every race since 1996, wishing the ticket were reversed. GOP candidates seem to do a better job picking leaders than GOP primary voters.

UPDATE: Ryan on guns.

Context for SCOTUS Nominations

If you think that Supreme Court nominations shouldn’t be a factor in this year’s elections, here’s an interesting way to look at the future of any issue you care about that could face serious court challenges:

…the fact is that Supreme Court nominations matter more than ever, for several reasons.

First is the soaring value of lifetime tenure. When our republic was created, the average age of Supreme Court nominees was older than average life expectancy. That has changed dramatically with increased human longevity. And presidents are catching on, naming ever-younger Justices.

The result is that the average term of a Supreme Court Justice today is nearly twenty-five years â€“ spanning more than six presidential terms. Ronald Reagan last appeared on the ballot seven elections ago, yet two of his appointees (Anthony Kennedy and Antonin Scalia) still serve on the Court. If Clarence Thomas remains on the Court until the retirement age of his predecessor, he will have served for forty years. If Elena Kagan remains on the Court until her current life expectancy, she will serve until the year 2045. …

We have not had a significant change in the Courtâ€™s philosophical balance since Thomas replaced Marshall more than two decades ago. In the six subsequent appointments, liberals replaced liberals or conservatives replaced conservatives. But in the next administration, the president may well have the opportunity either to shift the Courtâ€™s majority from conservative to liberal or to reinforce the conservative majority. And given the number of years most Justices now serve, the majority created or reinforced in the next administration may endure for a generation.

That’s freakin’ scary to think about what a long-term difference each of the candidates can make. I mean I emphasize to people that state elections matter more during census years because of redistricting that impacts politics for a decade.

Go read the entire article at by Clint Bolick. It’s quite an interesting look at the lasting impacts of modern court appointments.

We Are Entering a Dangerous Time for our Gun Rights

Our opponents have been speaking of a groundswell of support coming to their side since the two mass shootings, and getting uppity that our day in the sun will soon be at and end, and that they will proceed to destroy our precious right. That’s a lot of nonsense, but that’s not to say things are all coming up roses. As long as the Democratic Party had to protect its blue dog flank, speaking about gun control, even for deep blue state politicians, was going to be problematic.

The Blue Dog flank was all but destroyed in the 2010 midterms, and the base of support Democrats often enjoy among Independents is looking weak. The Democrats can’t honestly afford to have an unenthusiastic base, so they are circling the wagons and trying to defend what they have. Governor Quinn is now enthusiastically supporting another Assault Weapons Ban in Illinois, and facing off against the NRA, ISRA, and downstate gun makers. Andrew Cuomo, once a staunch supporter of gun control and architect of the strategy in the 90s for HUD to sue gun makers, eventually settling with Smith & Wesson, has been timid about supporting gun control as Governor so far. That no longer appears to be the case.

Democrats in blue states are re-embracing gun control. Cuomo’s plan would appear to be an attempt to snatch the number one Brady spot from California, and California is obviously advancing more draconian gun bansÂ of its own. Some folks might suggest that this is bad news only for the states whose gun laws already suck, but a prevailing Democratic culture of gun control is going to screw us over the long term here in Pennsylvania. Everyone in this state should be particularly concerned that we lost Tim Holden, a solid pro-gun Democrat, to a far left radical anti-gunner in a primary:

Democrat Matt Cartwright, a Scranton lawyer, said he does support an assault weapons ban, saying Americans don’t need such weapons in their homes. He would also support “reasonable” ammunition purchase limits, according to a statement released by his campaign.

Cartwright said he is strongly in favor of Americans’ right to bear arms.

This isn’t a Philadelphia Democrat, folks, this is Schuylkill County! I’ve long believed Pennsylvania is a hair’s breath from becoming strongly anti-gun, just like New York and New Jersey. Why? The western part of Pennsylvania has traditionally been our bulwark against gun control in this state, and the western part of Pennsylvania is rapidly depopulating. In addition, both Northeastern Pennsylvania and Southeastern Pennsylvania are taking a lot of transplants from New Jersey and New York. The Philadelphia suburbs are growing and becoming more left-leaning and Democratic. Even Philadelphia has stopped losing population. Pennsylvania as a whole is getting less purple, and more blue, and given that Democratic political culture is starting to swing anti-gun, our gooses may end up cooked. The political center of the fight for gun rights in Pennsylvania is going to swing from the West to the East, and while there are plenty of gun owners in the suburbs here, I’ve never gotten the impression very many of them will stand up and fight, or quite honestly lift a finger to help promote a healthy shooting community. We are poorly equipped for the fight that’s coming, and we’ll be able to depend on our western brethren less and less as changing demographics keep reshaping this commonwealth.

White House Statement after Temple Shooting

I’ll summarize this for you. The administration’s official position is that it wants the Assault Weapons Ban renewed. But the White House is not going to push for it in Congress. Too many other more important things. In the mean time, they’ll be improving the background checks, though they offer no specifics on how exactly they plan to do that.

Government at Work

Blocking their own web sites.

Gun Control Groups Putting Pressure on Scott Brown

They think they can get Brown to capitulate. They might be right. Scott Brown already stabbed us in the back on reciprocity:

An aide to the Massachusetts Republican said Brown believes that states are the appropriate venue for weapons bans. Brown said he supports Massachusettsâ€™ assault weapons ban.

As much as people might be angry, and as much as I might disagree with Brown’s position here, because the Second Amendment is not a state to state kind of deal, you have to admit this guy has some room to be “not as bad as the other guy”, or woman, as the case may be. What do you think? Is it a victory to replace staunch anti-gun Senator and gun control leader Ted Kennedy with a Republican who’s wishy washy on gun rights at best? I don’t think Senator Brown should carry any further NRA endorsements, but I have to admit I’m having a hard time figuring out, if my alternative is another Ted Kennedy, why keeping Brown in that seat isn’t better for us overall.

I Did Not Go to Chick-Fil-A Today

The whole thing kind of angers me, really, because I think both sides are wrong. I support government recognizing homosexual couples having the same legal rights as heterosexual couples when it comes to marriage. But I also support the Cathy family, owners of Chick-Fil-A, having religious believes that compel them to support traditional marriage, and being able to hold fast to those beliefs without being victims of thuggery by the likes of Boston Mayor Tom “Mumbles” Menino and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel.

And as for Mumbles and his partner in tyranny Rahm, there is a special spot in hell, as far as I’m concerned. Because what they did by engaging in their thuggish behavior was expand the pro-Chick-Fil-A coalition enough that the message being sent to Dan Cathy is that he has nothing to lose and everything to gain by taking a strong and firm position on social issues.

Let me play a bit of Devil’s advocacy for those on the left for whom social issues like gay marriage are important. Rahm and Mumbles just screwed you guys by taking things a step too far. Whatever you may think, they are not your allies. They have energized the right coalition in ways you can’t imagine. First Amendment and small government advocates are rightly just as outraged as opponents of gay marriage in how Chick-Fil-A has been treated. If these people will wait in long lines to buy chicken, in large enough numbers that the chickens can’t be killed and deliciously deep fried fast enough, what do you think they are going to do in November?

Bill Clinton’s real political genius was in understanding and exploiting the divisions in the right coalition. After having his posterior handed to him in 1994, he did what he was best at doing; he triangulated. Clinton decided to concede on a large part of the right’s economic plan, and in some cases actively embraced it, and made it his own. He then proceeded to fight culture wars on social issues, and the GOP took the bait. Under the Clinton strategy, I watched the Philadelphia ring counties go from Republican (though never very socially conservative) strongholds to favoring center-left Democrats.

Today, having driven around to see how busy our Chick-Fil-As were, just half an hour before closing, I think I may be watching the death of the Clinton strategy. Not because this strategy doesn’t work, but because the hard-core urban leftists like Barack Obama just can’t help themselves. Like a lot of big city politicians, they don’t understand that the political landscape is really driven by suburbs, and those politicians are rapidly tearing the Clinton strategy to pieces in their ignorance.