Huckabee says he will not challenge Pryor

Arkansas News Bureau - Huckabee says he will not challenge Pryor: "WASHINGTON - Despite modest fundraising that continues to trail well behind Republican frontrunners, Mike Huckabee said Friday he remains focused on his 2008 presidential bid and will not challenge Sen. Mark Pryor next year.

'The rumors have been out there and I need to put them to bed. I don't see it happening,' Huckabee said of the possibility he would drop out of his run for president to take on Pryor, a first-term Democrat.

'There are no ifs on this one. I have a race I'm in, and I'm committed to it.'"

Whaddya mean, "Hollywood Values"?!

There are some interesting points in this LATimes article (Clooney steps cautiously into Obama's camp)--and a reference to the Ford/Corker Race!!, but I'm amused at the reporter's premise: the phrase "Hollywood Values" is ludicrous, mean-spirited, just-plain-false

"George Clooney can't decide what role he'd like to play.

This has nothing to do with his flourishing movie career and everything to do with the 2008 presidential campaign, where the involvement of even a widely admired star can be the subject of a serious dilemma.

On the one hand, the actor said in an interview, he would love to throw himself into campaigning for his friend, Sen. Barack Obama, a politician he compares to President Kennedy.

But Clooney is too shrewd a political observer to discount the negative effect celebrity can have on a campaign, especially in a red state. (Look what happened last year when industry favorite Rep. Harold Ford Jr. ran for the Senate in 2006. The Tennessee Democrat's foes called him 'Fancy Ford' and portrayed him as a habitué of Hollywood's decadent soirees. It might have been what cost him the election in a close race.)

At the moment Clooney is playing it close to the vest, waiting to see if he can play a part without become a distracting sideshow. His quandary is a measure of Hollywood's growing political sophistication; celebs are beginning to understand that their support can be a double-edged sword."

Brownback's pork-busting bona fides

While this isn't quite "pork," (though some third party supporters might disagree) Sam Brownback attempted to bust some pork in the recent vote on the Dems' Pork and Pacifist Act: (article here)

The majority of the Senate's presidential candidates voted yesterday to keep $100 million in an "emergency" funding bill to provide security at the 2008 Democratic and Republican national conventions.

Two declared candidates -- Sen. Barack Obama, Illinois Democrat, and Sen. Sam Brownback, Kansas Republican -- voted to strip the funding because they thought it did not belong in an emergency spending measure to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Because I know some of you will insist that Obama's vote be acknowledged . . . I acknowledge that he appears to have supported the GOP measure.

Children taken hostage in Tennessee Budget

Although this is a common Liberal tactic, it is always news when Democrats hold children (or spending on "children") hostage and demand some manner of tax increase. Drew Johnson and the folks at the Tennessee Center for Policy Research make the argument here. Here's a teaser from the op/ed:

"When it comes to education, it sure seems that Governor Phil Bredesen has his priorities in order. In January, he kicked off the legislative session with a State of the State Address featuring only one topic: education. He followed that up by recommending an “education first” budget stuffed with $407 million in new state education spending, including $120 million for at-risk students.

Despite all the education-first grandstanding, a closer look at the budget and Bredesen’s solution for funding his education policy goals reveals there is nothing less important to the Governor than educating children."

Thompson and Religious Conservatives

Here's an interesting NY Sun article about a possible Fred Thompson candidacy. Key quote:

But there's one candidate whose campaign he could end almost instantaneously, should he choose to run: that of Mr. Romney. Mr. Thompson is pro-life, pro-gun, anti-gay marriage, and anti-tax — like Mr. Romney. But he has one advantage over the former governor: He didn't just come to these positions over the last year or so, in a "Road to Des Moines" conversion.

That quote not only points to one Romney weakness, it also references Des Moines, where I sit typing this post. this sitting in a Des Moines.

But note a reference to Gary Bauer, who famously (at least to me) endorsed John McCain after dropping his longshot bid at the 2000 GOP nomination . . . Bauer seems to ignore Brownback and Huckabee in commenting on how Religious Conservatives are viewing the 2008 race.

Hat tip, GetReligion

UPDATE: For the record, I was out of the loop for the Dobson/Thompson controversy and still haven't had a chance to read about it. I agree with Kleinheider's assertion that Evangelicals need to be shrewd in picking candidates . . . that being said, every perceived political interest group is prone to fawn over a candidate willing to identify with said group.

Reagan ankle-biter in hot water

Well, I never liked this loser anyway . . .

David Stockman in trouble. (here)

Life is too short

Cathy Seipp passed away from lung cancer this week. Here's a touching tribute from National Review contributor Rob Long. It's powerful writing, and the last three lines will stick with me for a while; I hope.

Justice Breyer goes 0-3 on NPR news quiz

This story's headline Justice Breyer goes 0-3 on NPR news quiz didn't bother me, because it actually cut against my view of Breyer and other "Liberal"* Justices who I perceive are reading op/eds and Michael Lerner books to keep up with how they should be "interpreting" the Constitution on a week-to-week basis.

As an aside, I stumbled across this show last week while on a business roadtrip and it is very enjoyable.

But the most interesting quotation was from Paula Poundstone, who--I'll concede, is not a legal scholar, even though she certainly represents a Center-Left view of the Courts:

"But Breyer struck out when it came to the 'Not My Job' questions, failing to answer any correctly about strange moments in the lives of rock stars David Bowie, Ozzy Osbourne and Iggy Pop.

In the end, the NPR regulars confessed they were relieved that Breyer didn't know Bowie once tried to exorcise Satan from his swimming pool, Iggy Pop spent a year eating nothing but German sausages or Osbourne once asked for directions to the bar immediately after checking in to rehab.

'I feel more and more confident about your ability to protect our Constitution knowing that you didn't know the answers to any of those three questions,' Poundstone said."

(emphasis added). Poundstone apparently doesn't realize that, while Breyer's jurisprudence arguably "protect[s]" Civil Liberties, it has only theoretical interest in protecting the actual Constitution. Of course, she could have just been making a joke and referring to the general role of a Supreme Court justice . . . hey, maybe she's a Conservative?!



*This refers to judicial as opposed to political "Liberalism," though the two often overlap.

German Judge Tells Battered Muslim Wife: Koran Says 'Men Are in Charge of Women'

My lovely wife (maybe she's trying to tell me something?) alerted me to this AP article (here) about a German judge's rejection of a Muslim woman's request for an expedited divorce is raising interesting questions about multiculturalism and Muslim fundamentalism. Some interesting snippets from the article:

While the Koranic verse cited does say that husbands are allowed to beat their wives if they are disobedient, Germany's Institute for Islamic Questions noted that such an interpretation was no longer standard.

"Of course not all Muslims use violence against their wives," the group said in a statement.

. . . .

The latest uproar comes amid an ongoing debate in Germany about integrating its more than 3 million Muslims, most of them from Turkey.

. . . .

Justice Minister Brigitte Zypries condemned the judge's decision. . . .

Lawmakers from Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats said traditional Islamic law, or Sharia, had no place in Germany.

"The legal and moral concepts of Sharia have nothing to do with German jurisprudence," Wolfgang Bosbach, a lawmaker with the Christian Democrats, told N24 television.

"One thing must be clear: In Germany, only German law applies. Period."

Ronald Pofalla, the party's general secretary, told Bild: "When the Koran is put above the German constitution, I can only say: Good night, Germany."

Indeed.

California Flexes Its Muscle

This article (RealClearPolitics - California Flexes Its Muscle) about Cahleeforneeya's decision to move it's primary to February makes the important point that the traditional deference paid to NH and IA (particularly by aspiring presidential candidates who needed to have favor with voters and power brokers in those respective states) is probably a thing of the past, now that the issue is literally open to debate and they (the candidates) didn't raise the issue:

"Of course, notwithstanding the threats of the party national committees prohibiting them from doing so, this will no doubt provoke Iowa and New Hampshire to reschedule their caucus and primary to an even earlier date, possibly even to December, 2007. They understandably want to preserve their distinction of being 'first in the nation,' and remaining as kingmakers in the presidential nominating process.

But the cat is now out of the political bag. While some momentum can still be gained from wins in these traditional early states, every major campaign for president will have to revise drastically, if they have not already, their strategy to win their party's nomination."

Miss Tennessee Crowned Miss USA 2007

A military brat makes good. Miss Tennessee Crowned Miss USA 2007 Congrats to Belmont grad Rachel Smith.

**Check out Donald Trump's cheesy smile (and why exactly is he pictured?)

the Thinking (vs. Money) Primary

Here's an insightful op/ed from former OH Secretary of State (and GOP gubernatorial candidate) Ken Blackwell Winning the Thinking Primary:

"One hundred days ago there was widespread talk about who would win the 'money primary' as candidates made their entry into the fray and began the process of raising millions for their campaigns.

. . . .

Now, as the first quarter of 2007 ends, the truth has begun to settle in that there will be no early winner of the GOP nomination (the Democrats have fewer likely candidates but are no closer to a clear victor themselves). The money and consultants' resume primaries have not resolved, and will not resolve, whom the Republican Party will select as its standard-bearer for at least the next four years.

There appears to be every possibility that ideas will ultimately decide the nomination, perhaps for both parties. The thinking primary has begun. That's a welcome sign, because this is the primary that matters, and if there is any advantage to having our presidential competitions start almost two years away from Election Day it's the opportunity to examine and think about our options."

Another "Evangelical" perspective on Climate Change

Just learned about a group named The Interfaith Stewardship Alliance, (here) offering a rational Evangelical perspective on the Anthropogenic Climate Change debate.

The simple fact, as ISA notes in its statement, "Dominion, Stewardship, Conservation," is that among the scientific community, the opinion is varied as to how much the global climate is changing and what effect mankind has had on that change. As ISA points out, the jury is out as to how much is truly understood about global climate change.

. . . .

[The scholars at ISA] say, "Let's assume that the climate is changing and that we might be a cause of it. What does a changing climate mean?"

. . . .

While global climate change might be real, its consequences are, with the help of the scientific community, manageable. We should respond to any challenges global warming presents by promoting economic development based on market principles. It's not just good business, it's good science.

Free markets give us the resources to provide real solutions to problems that arise. Knee-jerk regulation forces a non-solution to a possible problem and makes the world poorer in the process. And if the true goal here is to help the poor, we should be sure that the policy attacks real problems without hurting the people it's supposed to help.

The "Gay Gene" and tolerance

Albert Mohler has an interesting article (Is Your Baby Gay? What If You Could Know? What If You Could Do Something About It?) about the implications of finding a biological basis for homosexual attraction: if this trait is proven to be a genetic orientation and is found to be correctable, how will it affect social perceptions about "homosexuals"? It's an interesting question of the tension between tolerance and approbation, and the fact that tolerance is rarely sufficient for the multiculturalist or moral relativist.

This reminded me of a similar discussion with a friend today in relation to people in the deaf community who refuse to provide their deaf children the benefits (in my estimation) of things like cochlear implants. I can only conclude that this attitude of deaf adults is related to concerns about the possible diminution of deaf persons. Can we not all agree that a deaf person--even though handicapped or physically deficient (in regard to the five senses), is worthy of respect and can have dignity?

Blanco going down swinging . . . sort of

Gov. Blanco of Louisiana is showing herself to be a sore loser (quitter?). (Blanco says she wishes she had switched to GOP):

"Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco, who dropped out of the governor's race Tuesday amid widespread dissatisfaction with her job performance, told a group of Louisiana newspapers today her biggest failure was not switching to the Republican Party after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita devastated the state.

'When I look back at the storms, if I had had the knowledge that I would be treated as a pariah by the national Republicans in office, I would have joined the Republican Party to save my state,' Blanco said in an interview with a reporter for Gannett newspapers around the state, including The Times in Shreveport.

'Then I would have been hugged and kissed and lifted, and I would have been declared the best governor in this whole country,' Blanco said. 'I wish I had realized that earlier. I think that was the fatal error.'"

"Pay no attention to the incompetent, pompous woman behind the curtain!!!"

Actually, resigning probably would have been the best thing for her state. But Blanco demonstrated before, during and after the Hurricanes in the Gulf that she was either too arrogant to admit javascript:void(0)
Publishshe needed help or too petty and partisan to accept help from a Republican. There is NO substance to this complaint.

Gingrich's legacy

For whatever reason, there exists a great deal of mis-information (online) about Newt Gingrich, the Republican Revolution and the Contract with America. Freddie (at Liberadio) posted a not-unflattering report of the Gingrich appearance at Vanderbilt on Monday night (here), and, as I commented over there, Newt is many things--some good and some bad, but he has always been an "idea man" and "visionary."

Though I'm speaking up for Newt in this post and came to the defense of him (his legacy, actually) in an earlier post, I think his past crises in character do undermine his authority/credibility with me and many others. Ironically, though, Newt's personal failings may have helped him from 1994 to now, to be more focused on issues and ideas.

CPAC '07 speeches

From Ann Coulter's comment to John McCain's snubbing to Reagan References ad infinitum, the 2007 CPAC conference was certainly in the news.

Here (cpac 2007 speeches)is a link to transcripts for all the conferences Presidential candidates who spoke.

Here are videos at C-Span.org, too.

Blanco Will Not Seek Re-Election

Blanco Will Not Seek Re-Election.

Dang; this woman deserved a serious electoral whupping.

UPDATE: Interesting analysis (here) of the LA gubernatorial landscape in light of Blanco's decision.

So, War Supporter, weren't you wrong about Iraq? - By Christopher Hitchens - Slate Magazine

Christopher Hitchens has a great piece (So, Mr. Hitchens, weren't you wrong about Iraq?) addressing difficult--and legitimate, questions for supporters of the Bush strategy in Iraq:

"Four years after the first coalition soldiers crossed the Iraqi border, one can attract pitying looks (at best) if one does not take the view that the whole engagement could have been and should have been avoided. Those who were opposed to the operation from the beginning now claim vindication, and many of those who supported it say that if they had known then what they know now, they would have spoken or voted differently.

What exactly does it mean to take the latter position? At what point, in other words, ought the putative supporter to have stepped off the train?"

I encourage you to read his answers.

Apolitical nature of U.S. Attorneys' offices

18-year Federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy sheds some light about the apolitical nature of Federal prosecutions. (here)