April 01, 2004
Lawyers, Guns and Money
After the Trib suggested he trade the bills, it appears that is what Blagojevich is going to do. 18 year olds can get a FOID card without parental permission, but a state ban on assault weapons is put in place.
Dumb, dumb dumb. First, the assault weapons ban is pretty damn near useless. The differences between weapons allowed and banned are miniscule. Worse, at a state level, it won't do any good because someone can go to Indiana and buy the same gun. Or Missouri or .......
Second, there is a bigger problem--that of non-dealer sales at gun shows. Already, Illinois has pretty restrictive laws regarding gun shows--compared to virtually no laws in Missouri. But one thing that can happen legally is an unlicensed dealer can sell without a background check. This should be closed. To buy a gun in Illinois you essentially need to meet the minimal federal rules, have an FOID, and have a background check. It's been a while, but that background check used to cost $3 and be done through a 900 phone call to a state police line. None of these requirements hinder legitimate gun owners who want to hunt or defend themselves. There is no excuse not to require every gun transaction to go through a background check--private sale or not. It is cheap and easy to do and does nothing to threaten responsible gun owners.
Other possibilities mentioned in the Trib article are really not that helpful unless they are national policy. The reality is that putting limits on gun sales other than checking the eligibility of buyers doesn't work well given other states don't have similar restrictions. This just results in gunrunning of the type mentioned in this article.
A law on private sales could go along way to making the obtaining of illegal firearms difficult. Beyond that, making cross state transactions difficult is a national issue that Illinois cannot effectively deal with alone. If the Governor wants to trade, trade for mandatory background checks and put pressure on the Congressional Delegation for other laws. Responsible Illinois gun owners are simply held to reasonable laws and allowed to continue on their own.
The Note on DSCC Fundraising
Glenn Brown pointed out the Note's Obama mention today in comments:
On a day when Washington is focused on confusion and horror in Iraq, tomorrow's key job numbers, Sen. John Kerry's expected $40 million+ (+++++++++!!!!!!!!!!!!!) quarterly take, the DSCC's $7 million March haul (Thanks, Mr. Obama!), continued GOP fundraising prowess, and on highway bill and welfare reform deliberations -- President Bush signs a base-strengthening bill in the Rose Garden at the White House, Sen. Kerry recovers from surgery, and The Note is looking slightly further into the future.
Rauschenberger's Future
The Illinois Leader slobbers over Steve Rauschenberger in a piece that suggests he'd be a good candidate for Governor.
That's okay because he would be a good candidate and really the best antidote to a flip and ever campaigning Governor for the Republicans. Staying out of whether he could beat Blagojevich in general, he would seem best positioned to put up a credible challenge. The press loves him. He bridges moderates and conservatives in the Republican Party well--not alienating either group. He is a clear voice and a goo-goo. Normally goo-goos are assumed to be liberal, but Steve has certainly shown himself to believe in basic good government issues. He also has an encyclopedic knowledge of state government in general and the budget specifically.
Compared to potential rivals he'd be in the best position. Topinka is hated by social conservatives or at least enough to call into question whether she could unite the party for a general election. Fitzgerald has all sorts of problem with the public. Mostly centered on the public doesn't know who he is and he is a sitting Senator. O'Malley is the favorite candidate of Blagojevich because the I'm Mad as Hell bit doesn't actually work in the general election. O'Malley also alienates what is left of moderate Republicans. Though I do think the Combine wouldn't mind him being the nominee so they could teach him a lesson by handing him one of the most lopsided defeats in Illinois history.
What's the Issue for the GOP if Ryan goes down in flames?
It isn't keeping the seat, they expect to lose it. If Ryan can keep it that is a bonus, but not the key. Bush is down by double digits to Kerry in Illinois and the Bush Campaign is already making noises about pulling out. Ryan was recruited because he could partially self-fund and make it a decent race. Even if he didn't win, he'd be leading the ticket and pull out Republican voters so the down ballot races didn't suffer. So state lege members in tight races wouldn't have to worry about turnout sinking their chance. If he goes down in flames too late to be replaced, it could create huge problems for the Party in those Lege races.
And while most of the big news media outlets are avoiding the story, Rich Miller is covering it and getting referenced in the Hotline for it. Miller's reporting is in a for pay daily newsletter and so I'll only briefly summarize the work here--he does this for a living, I don't.
1) Hastert has warned Ryan D.C. money will dry up if Ryan doesn't deal with the issue.
2) Senate Minority Leader Watson and House Minority Leader Cross pressed the issue as well (and they are really worried). Ryan refused to answer questions about whether he'd appeal if the judge rules against him.
Knowing how this will work, even if information is only mildly embarrassing Ryan has probably lost any favors from these folks later in the race. They aren't going to put themselves out there for a guy who won't go along with them.
Ryan's problems at this point are many. He is spending what should be a press honeymoon, talking about something that is not on message. His opponent is being fawned over in the press nationally and locally more than a candidate usually gets in that honeymoon after a primary.
Ryan is making party elders nervous and whether he realizes it or not, they are threatening to cut him off. He run as independent, he can't run with a party shunning him.
He is making the press annoyed. The press, out of lots of experience, don't trust candidates when they say "trust me". The more they do it, the more cynical and jaded the press becomes. Ryan's short term press problem could easily be turned into a permanent problem. Ask Hull.
Combine that with a potential appeal against the Tribune and Channel 7 and the press relationship spirals down what will seem like a black hole.
His entire outreach to the African-American community is going in the toilet. First, his opponent is black. Second, he is tied to a President who is not well liked in the African-American community. Third, even if he didn't expect actual numbers in the African-American community, the image such a courting produces could help him elsewhere. Without it being the story, but instead a "Hollywood Divorce" with a beautiful actress being the story, Jack! goes from a compelling story of giving back to the community to a story about privilege in the court system.
None of this may be fair. He may have nothing to hide, but is deeply concerned about his son's welfare. And that is all irrelevant. He needs to put this story to bed and do it fast.
Money Problems? LOL
One of the whispers is that Obama is going to have problems raising money. DSCC has to target other races including Colorado, South Carolina, Oklahoma and nominally Missouri (where sources say the DSCC is going to dump a bit of cash and pretend like they care before moving on) and all the money is going to Kerry.
Now, it is still early, but I didn't buy it. I could be wrong. But liberal big money donors are generally guilty white people who would be more than happy to throw money at a viable black candidate. The Hotline reports Obama, an open seat candidate who would normally be relying on the DSCC, raised nearly $130,000 in 30 minutes for the DSCC.
Obama is making the smart move though in raising those funds. First it gets him good relations with sitting Senators if he gets there and if a pinch comes, he gets help.
March 31, 2004
Obama in the WSJ
Small bit from the Hotline summarizing it:
Wall Street Journal's Harwood writes Obama "flavors orthodox" Dem "liberalism with support for welfare reform, charter schools and an overhauled death penalty." But "his message isn't milquetoast. He embraced Howard Dean's antiwar themes, in contrast to the cautious support" that John Kerry provided the WH on Iraq and other Bush initiatives that Kerry now criticizes. Obama: "Democrats make a mistake when we get steamrolled on the front end and then whine about it on the back end." Given IL's increasingly Dem cast, "it isn't likely" that Obama "will stumble. But he could." Ryan is credible, "and the issue of race remains a wild card anywhere" (3/31).
Speaking of the Onion
Josh Marshall says it all.
Reading the lede of this piece from Reuters, I had to wonder whether I might actually be reading a spoof from The Onion ...An emotional former President George H.W. Bush on Tuesday defended his son's Iraq war and lashed out at White House critics.
It is "deeply offensive and contemptible" to hear "elites and intellectuals on the campaign trail" dismiss progress in Iraq since last year's overthrow of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, the elder Bush said in a speech to the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association annual convention.
Defies parody ...
Blog Bits
Just to let you know, the blog roll is in flux as I finish the expanded blogroll which won't be on the front page in the interest of a clean look and quick download time. How do you make the front page? My whim. Really it is a combination of who I think updates regularly in their category and who people will most enjoy. It doesn't mean that there aren't great blogs on the expanded page, just that there is limited space.
Radio Bits
Collective Interest's show tonight will include:
Collective Interest radio will broadcast tonight (Wed, 31 March, 2004) at 8:05-9:55 PM (Central). You can listen at http://uicradio.ws. Tonight will be an open phone discussion on two topics: taxation and the Iraq War. To participate in the conversation call 312-413-2191 during the program.
The taxation discussion will begin with the federal income tax.
The Iraq War discussion will begin with a speech I gave in Dekalb, Illinois on the first anniversary of the US invasion of Iraq entitled “Republicans, Democrats and the Media.”
There is a possibility the show will be a few minutes late beginning. If you tune-in and get music or the preceding show, please be patient.
Also, you are invited to visit the Collective Interest website, http://CollectiveInterest.net, and post your thoughts.
Carl Nyberg
Collective Interest radio
============
And remember the new liberal radio network is premiering today at 11 AM Central on WNTD 950 AM in Chicago, or on-line for the rest of us.
March 30, 2004
A Lesson In Knowing Who Is Talking
I have and continue to spend a fair amount of my time finding effective ways of demonstrating data visually. Over at Crooked Timber there is a post that tracks the President's Approval ratings and it is quite dramatic. Perhaps unrepresentative given the war spike after 9/11 if one wants to quibble, but it certainly passes what I call the interocular test (Henry calls it the interocular trauma test). It is a good graph. Now notice what happens when angry little statboi enters into a comments discussion with people trained in data visualization techniques. My first comment took less time to compose than this post because the damn page in Cleveland is well worn. The moral of the story is asking questions is good. Challenging information isn't bad. Pretending you know the F*$&##*& literature, linking to it, and directly contradicting the two biggest experts in the field when you are clueless just makes you look like an ass.
BTW, Henry is a PhD in Political Science and a quite gifted scholar so it isn't like the result couldn't be anticipated. And wait! I have another political science post for tomorrow! You can't wait, I know.
Right Reverend Batshit
Moon declares himself the Messiah, Washington Times notes that he said, "work harder than anyone else until the day ... guns in the Middle East fall silent and give way to fireworks of peace and joy."
The five great saints and many other leaders in the spirit world, including even Communist leaders such as Marx and Lenin, who committed all manner of barbarity and murders on earth, and dictators such as Hitler and Stalin, have found strength in my teachings, mended their ways and been reborn as new persons. Emperors, kings and presidents who enjoyed opulence and power on earth, and even journalists who had worldwide fame, have now placed themselves at the forefront of the column of the true love revolution. Together they have sent to earth a resolution expressing their determination in the light of my teaching of the true family ideal. They have declared to all Heaven and Earth that Reverend Sun Myung Moon is none other than humanity's Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent. This resolution has been announced on every corner of the globe.
Which quote is more noteworthy? A generic comment about peace, or the batty owner of UPI and the Washington Times and head of a cult declaring himself the Messiah?
I'll give Danny Davis and Phil Crane a pass for being a part of this assuming they didn't know the old loon was this far over the cliff--then again I've never understood why a cult leader is accepted in D.C.
Via Atrios
Not a bad Defense
Lauzen defends himself on the breastfeeding bill for which he was the sole dissenter. Other than the persecution complex at the end, not a bad defense of his choice. It isn't like his voted mattered that much anyway.
I promise I will not defend Lauze twice in a row again. Actually Lauzen pretty much takes care of that most days.
Joyce is On Fire
AIDS is a plot of those advocating the depopulation agenda. No, really....
A very intriguing article entitled, "AIDS and The History of Depopulation Policies" by Rolf A. F. Witzsche said: "AIDS emerged in full force, by which it was regarded as a new disease, in the 1980/81 time-frame."Although early traces were found as far back as 1950, Witzsche says the HIV infection does not readily explain the explosive outbreak of the infection in the 1980/81 time-frame, and its immediate spread to almost every country on the planet. He suggests the outbreak "might have been engineered by one of the many strongly motivated depopulation advocates."
"To date, over 30 million people have died of AIDS world-wide, five times as many as have perished in Hitler's holocaust. Of those who have died of the disease, almost 70% have died in Africa which happens to be one of the main targets on the depopulation agenda," Witzche writes.
I think we can call this LaRouche like since British royalty is included.
Why does the Leader publish this garbage?
What Is Your Dream?
When Bill Bradley visited here in 2000, he asked the crowd in Joe Edward's Blueberry Hill what was their dream. My answer is intertwined with the man who set-up that event for Bill Bradley, Jeff Smith.
My dream is an America that includes all Americans whatever their race, their gender or their sexual orientation. My dream is an America that leads the world through moral suasion and not deception. My dream is an America that believes conserving our resources is an intergenerational contract and not a short term profit for the connected. My dream is an America where my daughters and wife have control of their own bodies. My dream is an America where our urban schools are incubators of hope and not wharehouses of despair. My dream is an America where health care is available to all, not just to those who are lucky.
If your dreams are similar, there is a way to help. The 1st quarter fundraising is coming to an end tomorrow. If you believe as I do, give to Jeff Smith today so he can remain competitive in a crowded field of competitors. He is the candidate who can best deliver our dreams of a progressive nation that seeks to build on our hope for the future and not the cynicism of making do. Donate today!
UPDATE: Justin points out after donating to Jeff give to Obama too. That is a good idea as well, but Jeff is facing a reporting deadline that will help to determine viability. So plan to do both!
I Personally Prefer My Normal Reference
Sneed reports on where Karen Hughes got her book title--from being 10 minutes out of Normal on a train. Frankly, I like my bit on Normal in my college yearbook.
I end here today, in the place where I began. A place called Normal.
The younger ones may not get the reference.
why it should be the policy of the state to deny beer, but not guns, to a teenager
I agree with the Trib---legal adults should be able to drink beer.
And actually 18 year olds could buy long guns in the State of Illinois before this bill. They couldn't get the FOID card without parental permission. This is a very small change and really of no substance. While I'm for gun control including 1 handgun a month and closing loopholes at gun shows, gangbangers aren't getting FOIDs. Hunters are and having a parental signature for the FOID card is silly for an adult. Not to mention, you have to be 21 to buy a handgun.
In an Effort to Avoid Me Ranting Endlessly
Just go donate ot Obama and the DCCC--ads at the right. AustinMayor made the point and given Clarke analysis could take a whole blog to itself--you can visit such a blog at the right as well.
Bush Ballot Access
I was going to comment on the bill to give Bush access to the Illinois ballot, but Jeff Trigg seems to be on top of it quite well.
You know, if you are going to exploit 9-11 and push your convention back--don't come asking for favors about ballot access unless you are going to reform the whole deal. What will be interesting is if Madigan decides to not give Bush a break, who will be at fault in the spinning--the people sticking to the law or the people trying to skirt the law to exploit a tragedy?
Dembski/Lott Half Dozen the other
Via Tim Lambert
It appears that both pseudoscientific gun researchers and pseodoscientific intelligent design proponents tend to fake Amazon reviews.
Groan. Sigh. Why?
Open Thread With A Provocative Question
Let's say that the administration would attempt a smear on a critics sexual orientation to defend itself against that critic's charges. Would that strategy:
A) Be Preposterous
B) Be Beyond Ridiculous-no one would ever do it
C) Have the potential to boomerang
D) Cause everyone to drop their jaws and stare at their stupidity in wonder
E) Be A sign of the apocalypse as recounted in the most recent Left Behind Book
F) Be Business as usual for the current morons who keep lowering the level to which I think they'll sink
G) All of the above
What Would Happen if Newsgroup Got A Blog?
We no longer have to ask as the best posters from talk.origins have joined the blogosphere in a fantastic undertaking: The Panda's Thumb
Contributors to talk.origins who I recognize are:
Wesley R. Elsberry
PZ Myer (who owns his own blog)
Ian Musgrave
John Wilkins
Dave Thomas
I'm sure some of the others have spent some time in talk.origins, but I haven't visited in a while. I hope Gans, Louann and Pat James play in comments.
Can Nyikos and the idiot Schlafly boys be far behind.
Has the Onion Switched Web Sites?
Via Josh Marshall
U.S. officials told NBC News that the full record of Clarke’s testimony two years ago would not be declassified. They said that at the request of the White House, however, the CIA was going through the transcript to see what could be declassified, with an eye toward pointing out contradictions.
Not to overstate this, but this is a gross and egregious misuse of the security apparatus. In other words, WRONG! I'm quickly becoming radicalized by the events of the last few days.
Turow on Obama
It helps to have an excellent writer profile you who happens to like you a lot.
I find the most interesting to be his ability to analyze legislation
In retrospect, that walk through the political shadows proved a turning point in Obama's career. He recommitted himself to the Illinois Senate, where his intelligence and his growing savvy about the legislative process were combining to make him increasingly formidable. When Democrats took over the chamber in 2003, Obama won General Assembly approval of 26 bills, including legislation to expand healthcare benefits for uninsured children and adults, an earned income tax credit for low earners, and major criminal justice reforms.The latter measures were of particular interest to me. In the summer of 2002, Obama had called me to get together to talk about death-penalty reform. For more than two years, I had sat as one of the 14 members of the Commission on Capital Punishment, a body that Gov. Ryan had appointed in 2000, after declaring a moratorium on executions in Illinois because of a growing record of mistakes in the capital process, most notably the death sentences of 13 individuals who were subsequently exonerated. In April 2002, the commission issued its report, including 85 recommendations for reform of Illinois' laws.
Despite Ryan's support for our recommendations, resistance to the measures ran deep in the General Assembly, due in large part to the barely tempered rage that had been been expressed by many Illinois prosecutors. After appearing at legislative hearings that spring, I grew skeptical that any of the proposals would become law. When I met Obama the following summer, he went through the recommendations with me, analyzing which proposed reforms had a chance of passing and which did not. I was impressed not only by the shrewdness of his analysis but also by his lack of rancor about those who disagreed with him and, most of all, by his refusal to bow to conventional wisdom about what was possible. There were a couple of provisions that had essentially been pronounced DOA, where I remember Obama saying, We might be able to do something there.
Oh, and no I haven't seen any polls, but I check the Hotline every day so as soon as I see 'em, so will you.
March 29, 2004
A Tale of Two Web Sites
On the one hand we have a web site done by 1871 Media, a quite good on-line company that does sites such as Georgia's Political Vine, The Illinois House Republicans, Jack Ryan for Senate, Chris Lauzen's site, and the Illinois Leader. They produce the Illinois GOP site.
On the other, we have the Illinois Democratic Party.
Trending Demcratic or not, Illinois Dems need better than this. Feel free to send this to Steve Brown in Madigan's office and see if the problem registers with him.
What Should They Have Done Differently?
OneMan is also running a good series on what Republican candidates should have done differently in the primary. The last is Jim Oberweis with the others linked from that entry. I hope he'll continue to some of the others. I was thinking of the same for the Dems, but I think it is obvious so I'm leaning towards not ripping off his schtick. Any comments?
Public Lactation
Via OneMan
Public lactation must be allowed and lactation consultants must be covered by insurance.
One no vote. Unlike OneMan, I really don't respect Lauzen, but I'm not sure his opposition is that horrible. I'm guessing he doesn't like adding requirements to insurance. In the sense that issue by issue addition creates problems I agree somewhat, though I do think lactation consultants should be included. I won't make fun of him for this one because it is a serious objection even if I'd go the other way. Those who have gone through the troubling periods around lactation (well, okay, my wife did) understand why this is important. More so because it should lead to healthier kids later in life.
That public places object to breastfeeding is asinine though and this law is long overdue.
Ryan Divorce Files Go to A Referree
The telling part is the lameness of the arguments put forward by Ryan's lawyer:
Ryan's lawyer, Larry Ginsberg, said the situation has changed since Schnider's original ruling."The detriment to the child is even more evident now,'' he said. "The respondent is now the nominee for Senate for the Republican Party.''
Ryan won the Republican nomination in the March 16 Illinois primary. Some of his GOP opponents raised the issue of the sealed papers in the primary.
He said that the level of interest in the case has escalated and "it is now in the absolute worst interest of the child because it will be spun and reported.''
The judge commented at one point: "That's the price of living in a free society that has open records, and Mr. Ryan is going to have to deal with that.''
I say lame because the interest of the child is only if there is information that damages the child. So information pertaining to the child's whereabouts or his personal life separate from his parents is reasonable to exclude from the public only because it affects a party not included in the case, but the child trying to be protected. The rest is fair game and should be available because the courts should be an open institution. Protecting parents from embarrassment is not an acceptable reason to close files (or shouldn't be).
In this case, the judge seems to be making very prudent decisions.
It is important to note that Jeri Ryan is now in favor of keeping the files closed. I've been somewhat reluctant to bring up some of this before, but I think it is important to note that the family did face a very serious and dangerous stalker some years ago. Jack Ryan's fear of people misusing personal information isn't without grounds. For some background on this there are some usenet discussions that detail the problems. As a warning they are not pretty and demonstrate a man who is clearly dangerous and in desperate need of treatment. Access his statements about Ryan here and for some of the Usenet commentary try here.
Not only did he do this on Usenet, he apparently sent many sexually explicit e-mails to Jeri Ryan and threatened her boyfriend Brannon Braga. So the concerns aren't baseless, but instead of weeding out the material that is a concern from the rest, Ryan has created an issue that isn't dying.
FOID Change to 21
Blagojevich will sign a bill allowing 18 year olds to get an Firearm Owner Identification Card. The change in the law makes sense. 18 year olds with an FOID can already by long guns. They will still be prohibited from buying handguns, but now they simply don't have to have parental permission for getting the FOID. The change is consistent with making gun laws more consistent.
Blagojevich will veto concealed carry legislation for retired police officers and a rather strange piece of legislation to overrule local laws if a gun is used in self-defense. Concealed carry isn't the scary thing most opponents paint it as, but it won't come to be in Illinois. Illinois has long had relatively restrictive gun control laws that allow legitimate gun owners to have firearms. Those share broad support and until recently that was across party lines.
Synergy Alert
Not only do I pontificate here, but I have a couple other venues. The most common of those is a local St. Louis paper where I write on educational reform in the Saint Louis Public Schools. This week I have an article on the current fiscal condition of the District and the options available. There is another article I'd recommend as well on homeless shelters in urban areas by Rachelle L'Ecuyer.
Shameless Commerce Division
And another advertiser comes on board with the Capitol Net hawking a bunch of practical books for political junkies.
On top of that though are those who have been with us for a while--to the right is a picture of Barack that goes to his donation page and web site take a look at that.
Second down is Storm Front, which I've come to like quite a bit from discovering them through the link. They have some up on Clarke's appearance on Meet the Press which was apparently very good. I have it on videotape, but haven't had a chance to watch--so check that out.
And most surprisingly is the third advertiser down has stalled on the number of hits--The DCCC--go to their ad, click on it, and fill out the form to join. You will receive the Stake in your e-mail box which tells you the important house races and they'll have local Congressional races contact you. While I don't promise good coverage for advertisers, this and Obama are especially important for readers to take a look at. The other two I think you might enjoy.
Remember, the DCCC needs cash (as does Obama). If you can spare some, give them some. In Illinois, Melissa Bean should receive help from them and in other states close races make this election more important than most of us first thought. We never know if a wave will hit until the last 10 days of an election. Having the money and being in position by then puts a political party into position to win big. Not being in position wastes a perfect opportunity.
The Surprising Ms. Madigan
Who would have thought someone named Madigan could play hardball so well against insiders and do so for the citizens of Illinois. Stephens is the ultimate combine guy so while he is nominally a Republican, he is happy to help out Democrats when it suits his needs. He helped Blagojevich and has helped the Madigans out on many occasions.
But that hasn't stopped Lisa Madigan from pointing out that Stephens and Rosemont have ties to the Outfit and questioning the sanity of the Gaming Board.
The biggest advantage of all of this is that it keeps Blagojevich on his toes, though Rich Miller points out how that has led to suspicions from Madigan's people about what he is doing. Holder supported Madigan's primary opponent John Schmidt, as they both came out of the Clinton Administration's justice department. Schmidt was clearly more qualified in terms of experience, but such a move is strange given the odd relationship Blagojevich has with the Madigans and that Lisa has full power to investigate the Gaming Commission.
The reality is that the Gaming Commission is now probably going to tie up the 10th license into a lot of litigation.
Jim Thompson is no Trial Lawyer
Well, actually he was a gifted prosecutor who rose to fame and the Governor's Office by attacking corruption in Illinois. Unfortunately, 14 years in the Mansion and 14 more as a rainmaker appear to have deadened his skills at cross-examination. His cross examination of Clarke was a disaster.
You can try and call it just a questioning, but that was just embarrassing either way.
When Thompson was first appointed to the Commission I wasn't paying much attention, but it was clear that he was the Hastert appointment. Now we know that as the Hastert appointment, his job was to take on the unsavory business of defending the administration to the best of his ability. I'm sure the Democrats have a similar, but opposite member, but the other day clarifies what Thompson is doing there.
Update: Austin Mayor points out the Kass' take on Jim Thompson's bit about not understanding the whole bit because he is from the Midwest
Thompson's quote was:
"Pleading ignorance to the ways of political insiders, Thompson said, "I'm from the Midwest, so I guess I'll just leave it at that." "
Which is one of the funniest things I've ever read. Thompson is Mr. Insider.
Looking Down the Game Tree
For those who have read ArchPundit for a long time, you will remember my penchant for looking down the game tree before choosing a strategy. The phrase comes game theory, but essentially is shorthand for thinking through what will happen once you act. How will others respond is the key thing to think about in such circumstances. Politics is usually made interesting by two kinds of mistakes.
One, is a gaffe, or as Michael Kinsley points out, the mistake of telling the truth. Trent Lott made a gaffe when he said a lot of people think the country would have been better if Thurmond had won the Presidency. This is true because there are a lot of racists out there, and they largely support Trent Lott.
Two, is not looking down the game tree and making a rash decision out of anger. Say if you were Senate Majority Leader and you are angry at a former administration official and you make vague threats about declassifying testimony to determine if a former official had perjured themselves. The hope of such a move is to intimidate the former official. Of course, if you look down the game tree and think it through, said former official has probably anticipated this and is going to say, "Sure, open it up, but open everything up." Thus leaving said Senate Majority Leader looking around trying to figure out what the hell is going on. Of course, the first to suggest this strategy was Bob Graham who should be well on his way to being the next Vice-President at this point.
Clarke's Subtle Criticism
I haven't been talking much about the ongoing hearings, though I certainly have a few things to say about a former Illinois Governor's performance during them, but one thing that strikes me about Clarke's point isn't how explosive it is, but how the actual criticism is very subtle.
Most of the focus on his testimony has focused on his specific charges against the Bush administration. Of those, his claims that they ignored or at least put terrorism on the back burner are the most focused upon.
This shouldn't be surprising to the American public though. Americans weren't concerned about large scale terrorism despite having a federal building blown up just a few years ago. Bush ran a campaign that focused on strategic threats of nation-states. In fact, this is one of my many criticisms of his candidacy in 2000. It was a foreign policy borne out the past where nation states were the primary security threat.
Worse, was the choice of Condi Rice for national security. While a very bright and competent woman in her field, her field is the problem--Kremlinology. Kremlinology is a word used in Political Science to deride those who studied the Kremlin and its personalities more than using the scientific method. While Kremlinology was somewhat useful in conducting foreign policy, it wasn't really a useful field. It was outdated by 2000 on top of everything else.
All that said, the American people don't care about the above. They didn't vote for Bush or Gore because of their foreign policy except for a small portion of the public. They didn't see a threat and so foreign policy was a secondary debate amongst political junkies and the foreign policy establishment.
I doubt most Americans care much if Bush did not put terrorism on the frontburner after the 2000 election. The people didn't so why should he? Obviously we hope our leaders stay ahead of the curve, but in general, Al Qaeda seemed like a distant threat while more traditional nation-states had been tremendous problems and were projected to be tremendous problems in the future.
So taking 8 months to develop a nearly identical policy to that of the Clinton Administration isn't that bizarre of a move. Silly and petty yes. Unusual or careless--not really. Every administration thinks they will be far more effective than the last and they think they can come up with solutions that are far superior. The reality is that in the complex world, the options chosen are usually the least worst under the constraints imposed on a nation and inevitably the same least worst solutions are found.
What is subtle about Clarke's claims as I interpret them is that everyone failed and that is horrible, but it happens. What he seems truly upset about is that Bush is now running on his record of combating terrorism when Bush was ineffective in Clarke's view. Clarke seems to accept that such things happen, but then can't believe the chutzpah of running on an ineffective policy.
So far, the news media has avoided what I think is a subtle, but perhaps more damning argument from Clarke, that while Bush made a mistake, that is forgivable, but running on that mistake is bizarre.
