A Lean but not particularly Green Dean Machine

From USAToday:

Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean advised party activists Thursday to reach out to evangelicals and voters in all 50 states, but then risked alienating potential GOP converts . . .  .  Dean's comment came as he recalled conditions at crowded Ohio polling stations last fall. He wondered who could expect voters to work all day and then stand in line for eight hours to vote. “Well, Republicans, I guess, can do that because a lot of them have never made an honest living in their lives,” he said, drawing some surprised “oohs” from his audience.

This strikes one as rather odd, considering that the Man who the Democrats last nominated for President has seven homes.  Apparently Howard Dean considers a lot (more than half?) of the majority of voters to be either dishonest or lazy. 

This may help to explain why Dean is lagging so far behind his GOP counterpart in fund raising. From Business Week:

Dean wowed the faithful in '04 with his Web-based fund-raising magic. But major business donors still count, and in his new role as party honcho, the feisty doctor seems to be struggling to connect. After achieving money parity with the GOP in 2004, Democrats have fallen far behind. According to the Federal Election Commission, the DNC raised $14.1 million in the first quarter of 2005, vs. the Republican National Committee's $32.3 million. Dean drew about 20,000 new donors, while his rivals picked up 68,200. The bottom line: Republicans have $26.2 million in the bank vs. $7.2 million for the Dems.

The reason for this may be simple.  Big donors may be either Democrat or Republican, but they probably all share a fear of handing over cash to a man who is five kinds of crackers. 

Hildebrand

Roll Call, May 3, 2004 :

Hildebrand, 43, grew up in Mitchell, S.D. His father, who built roads, was killed in an accident when Hildebrand, the youngest of nine children, was 5 years old.

After college, Hildebrand went to work for Senate candidate Daschle, as the then-Congressman's state finance director. He also worked on Senate campaigns for Minnesota Attorney General Skip Humphrey and businessman Ted Muenster (D-S.D.), and for unsuccessful South Dakota gubernatorial candidate Jim Beddow.

Hildebrand served as executive director of the Democratic parties in Minnesota and South Dakota, and as Midwest political director for the Democratic National Committee during President Bill Clinton's re-election campaign.

After a cycle as political director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, another at EMILY's List and some time as state director for Al Gore's presidential campaign in Iowa, Hildebrand returned to South Dakota to manage Sen. Johnson's re-election effort in 2001-2002. He took the reins of Daschle's re-election effort last year.

WaPo on Daschle

This Washington Post story seems like it could be a big deal: 

Lobbyist Jack Abramoff and an associate famously collected $82 million in lobbying and public relations fees from six Indian tribes and devoted a lot of their time to trying to persuade Republican lawmakers to act on their clients' behalf.

But Abramoff didn't work just with Republicans. He oversaw a team of two dozen lobbyists at the law firm Greenberg Traurig that included many Democrats. Moreover, the campaign contributions that Abramoff directed from the tribes went to Democratic as well as Republican legislators.

Among the biggest beneficiaries were Capitol Hill's most powerful Democrats, including Thomas A. Daschle (S.D.) and Harry M. Reid (Nev.), the top two Senate Democrats at the time, Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.), then-leader of the House Democrats, and the two lawmakers in charge of raising funds for their Democratic colleagues in both chambers, according to a Washington Post study. Reid succeeded Daschle as Democratic leader after Daschle lost his Senate seat last November. ...

Democratic lawmakers sought to distance themselves from Abramoff.

A spokesman for Kennedy said the congressman's donations from the tribes "have nothing to do with Abramoff." Kennedy traces the money's genesis to his family's long-standing commitment to Indian causes, to the fact that he co-founded the Congressional Native American Caucus in 1997, and to his personal relationship with Mississippi Choctaw Chief Philip Martin, whom Kennedy met in 1999 on a fundraising trip for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "They just became close friends," said Kennedy spokesman Sean Richardson.

James Patrick Manley, Reid's spokesman, also asserted that Reid's connection to tribes was remote from Abramoff. He said that Reid does not know Abramoff. But Abramoff did hire as one of his lobbyists Edward P. Ayoob, a veteran Reid legislative aide. Manley acknowledged that Ayoob helped raise campaign money for his former boss. Lawyers close to the Abramoff operation said that Ayoob held a fundraising reception for Reid at Greenberg Traurig's offices here.

"There's nothing sinister here," Manley said. Reid is a member of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee with strong relations with Indian tribes, he explained.

Daschle was familiar with another of Abramoff's Democratic lobbyists, Michael Smith. According to Steve Hildebrand, who was Daschle's campaign manager last year, Smith "helped with a lot of Democratic campaigns." In addition, Daschle was a favorite of Indian tribes and received donations from 64, including five Abramoff clients. "We took about $150,000 in this last election cycle from Indian tribes around the country," Hildebrand said. "Tom is viewed as a champion of Indian issues. We have nine tribes in South Dakota, and they worked hard for him."

Murray also was said to have never laid eyes on Abramoff. "Our office has not had any contact with Jack Abramoff," said the senator's spokeswoman, Alex Glass. "She's been active in Indian health care and in supporting their sovereign governments; that is why they decided to contribute to her. They see her as an advocate."

During the time Murray chaired the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Abramoff's major tribes were significant contributors. Election reports show that the grand total from the tribes to that committee in 2001-2002 reached $175,500.

In March 2001, Dorgan held a fundraising event during a hockey game in a skybox leased by an Abramoff company at MCI Center. But the senator said he believed that the box was controlled by Greenberg Traurig. The event was organized by Smith, the Democratic fundraiser, he added.

"I was unaware that Abramoff was involved," Dorgan said.

More on the Perpetual Campaign

The FEC report for Daschle's campaign and for Daschle's political action committee indicate that Daschle's former campaign manager Steve Hildebrand has received almost $20,000 from the two Daschle entities this spring.  Hildebrand is also leading the group calling itself "Americans United to Protect Social Security," which is, presumably, also paying him.  No press outlets have dug into the financing of AUPSS.  In addition to Hildebrand, AUPSS is headed by former Daschle staffer Jeremy Funk, who is now famous for promoting these on his website.  Some also believe that former Daschle staffer Chad Schuldt is working for AUPSS, but he won't reveal who he's consulting for so nobody can know for sure.  Seems like some reporter digging is in order here.  Sibby has more. 

Defense of Certainty

Charles Krauthammer has a piece defending those with moral certitude, including conservative Christians (Krauthammer himself is the former, but, of course, not the latter).  While I believe all truth claims must be made modestly, there is great, well, truth in what Krauthammer argues. 

The Op-Ed pages are filled with jeremiads about believers--principally evangelical Christians and traditional Catholics--bent on turning the U.S. into a theocracy. Now I am not much of a believer, but there is something deeply wrong--indeed, deeply un-American--about fearing people simply because they believe. It seems perfectly O.K. for secularists to impose their secular views on America, such as, say, legalized abortion or gay marriage. But when someone takes the contrary view, all of a sudden he is trying to impose his view on you. And if that contrary view happens to be rooted in Scripture or some kind of religious belief system, the very public advocacy of that view becomes a violation of the U.S. constitutional order...

Nothing has more aroused and infuriated the sophisticates than the foreign policy of a religiously inclined President, based on the notion of a universal aspiration to freedom and of America's need and duty to advance it around the world. Such liberationism, confident and unapologetic, is portrayed as arrogant crusading, a deep violation of the tradition of American pluralism, ecumenism, modesty and skeptical restraint.

That widespread portrayal is invention masquerading as history. You want certainty? You want religiosity? How about a people who overthrow the political order of the ages, go to war and occasion thousands of deaths in the name of self-evident truths and unalienable rights endowed by the Creator? That was 1776. The universality, the sacredness and the divine origin of freedom are enshrined in our founding document. The Founders, believers all, signed it. Thomas Jefferson wrote it. And not even Jefferson, the most skeptical of the lot, had the slightest doubt about it.

 

Democracy is Wasted on the Voters

Judith Armstrong, of the Contemporary European Research Centre at Melbourne University, has this to say about the French "non":

America's belief in democratic values stood itself and the world in good stead for a long time. The invasion of Iraq and the subsequent failure to mend what was broken should not destroy our gratitude for US intervention in World War II, or the magnificent generosity of the Marshall Plan. The leaders of the new Europe saw their proposed constitution as a way of strengthening those values, by its ranking of human dignity as the most important and most precious quality their union could nurture. In the event, a clear majority of the supposedly civilised French and Dutch populations have put fear and self-protection ahead of global balance. If, as the adage goes, education is wasted on the young, it is tempting to wonder whether democracy is not wasted on voters.

I owe this quote to Professor Bunyip, to whom I was directed by Ryne McClaren. 

Indian Country

Cecelia Fire Thunder has been suspended of her duties as the Oglala Sioux Tribe's president, the first women elected to this position.  She had won over Russel Means for the election and many had strongly endorsed her. From the Argus Leader:

PINE RIDGE, S.D. - The tribal council on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation has suspended the Oglala Sioux Tribe's new president.

Cecelia Fire Thunder was elected in November and is the first woman to serve in the top post.

The Oglala Sioux Tribal Council said the suspension stems from allegations of mismanagement of the Head Start program, mismanagement of tribal properties and disrespect of tribal elders.

The suspension will last 20 days so the council can review the charges and Fire Thunder can answer them.

Shut Up, They Explained.

From the International Herald Tribune:

The ratification of the European Union constitutional treaty must go on, Europe's leaders declared on Wednesday even after the Netherlands followed France and overwhelmingly rejected the treaty in a national referendum.  Seeking to play down the sense of crisis, the European Union refused to pronounce the constitution dead. "The debate must continue," said Jean-Claude Juncker, prime minister of Luxembourg and the current holder of the rotating EU presidency.

Neither the terms of the very law they are seeking to enact, nor the manifest will of popular majorities gets any respect from the European elite.

Update: Britain has shelved plans for a referendum on the European Constitution.  From the Telegraph:

Plans for a referendum on the EU Constitution will be shelved by Jack Straw next week in a move aimed at persuading fellow European leaders to recognise that their ambitions for deeper integration are dead.

The Foreign Secretary will tell MPs in the House of Commons on Monday that the emphatic No votes in France and the Netherlands cannot be ignored and that the people of Europe appear not to want the constitutional treaty.

At least some public officials on the yonder side of the Atlantic are not contemptuous of popular will.  But of course, these are British politicians and they're not exactly on the continent, are they?

 

McGovern & Deep Throat

I laughed when I read this.  From Yahoo! News:

The US media needs a modern-day "Deep Throat" within the administration of President George W. Bush to reveal how America was "misled" on Iraq, former presidential contender George McGovern said. ...

"I wish there were somebody of the Deep Throat time in this administration who are aware of what's going on," McGovern told Fox News Radio. ...

McGovern said Nixon was undoubtedly "tricky," but said of Bush: "This man claims to be Christian, following the will of God, and then he misleads the whole nation on a totally fraudulent enterprise in Iraq that we should have never been attached to."

So we have another Democrat wishing to see the demise of President Bush; no suprises here (the "misled" term is right in line with Senator Ted Kennedy calling President Bush a "liar" about Iraq).  My question is this:  Do Dems embrace these comments?  I want to know if the Democrats are really supporting individuals that call the President a "liar", that he "misled" us, that call the President a "loser", that mock others in the Republican party (such as Dean mocking Limbaugh's drug dependency).  The list goes on and on.  Rather than attempt to entice open, honest, and intellectually stimulating debate, the Democratic party leadership simply resorts to attacking the President's plans (rather than come up with new ideas) and stimulating the myths.

My biggest issue with McGovern's comments is that he resorted to attacking the President personally by questioning his religious beliefs.  I think it is absolutely unjustfied for anybody to be attacked personally.  Does McGovern still wonder why South Dakota voted against him when he ran for president?  I think the answer is obvious:  he's still out of touch with South Dakotans.

Dean

BusinessWeek:

One hundred days into his tenure as the high-energy, higher-decibel chairman of the Democratic Party, Howard Dean is in trouble with party moneybags. The former Vermont governor seems to be doing a better job flaying the Republicans than bridging the cash chasm between the parties. Given Dean's 2004 run as a populist crusader, moderates were never wild about his takeover of the Democratic National Committee. So some big donors are sitting on their wallets.

... After achieving money parity with the GOP in 2004, Democrats have fallen far behind. According to the Federal Election Commission, the DNC raised $14.1 million in the first quarter of 2005, vs. the Republican National Committee's $32.3 million. Dean drew about 20,000 new donors, while his rivals picked up 68,200. The bottom line: Republicans have $26.2 million in the bank vs. $7.2 million for the Dems. ...

Personality factors aside, Dean's business-bashing '04 campaign makes him a hard sell in corporate circles. ...

Recent evidence of big-donor discomfort: A DNC event scheduled for May 25 at Manhattan's cavernous Jacob K. Javits Convention Center was scaled back to a smaller venue at the Essex House hotel. Bridget Siegel, the DNC's New York finance chair, says the event was moved because the new room "just worked better."

Poor Poor Pitiful D.

D as in Democrats, that is.  The fondest lulluby of sleepy Democrats is how the big bad wolf stole the election by questioning their patriotism.  Or by some other dirty trick.  Our intrepid former Senator knows the tune quite well, and is now singing it for the sake of hopeful Democrats in Virginia.  From Raising Kaine,  a "non-affiliated" Tim Kaine for Governor Website.

Tom Daschle, the former Senate Democratic leader who Jerry Kilgore’s media advisor Scott Howell smeared last year in South Dakota, has struck back hard. Check out the letter Daschle has written on behalf of Tim Kaine (extended excerpts below), and against Howell-style gutter poltiics, at “It Stops in Virginia!”   And thank you, Senator Daschle!

Well, whatever strengths Raising Kaine may have, sentence construction isn't one of them.  Here are some exerpts from Daschle's melody of melancholy.

Questioning patriotism – like they did with Senator Max Cleland, who lost three limbs defending our country.  These are the patterns of Republican campaigns these days. You might think it’s politics as usual, but it’s not. It’s different – they’ve made it intensely personal.

Now, the very same political operatives responsible for the attacks in South Dakota last year and Max Cleland’s loss in 2002 are “on the ground” in Virginia making personal attacks against Tim Kaine, the Democratic nominee for Governor in Virginia this November. These people are dangerous and must be stopped.

Daschle is repeating myths that are held so deeply to heart by many Democrats that they cannot imagine questioning them, or even inquiring as to what the evidence is.  But in fact, they are nothing more than myths. The link above to "It stops in Virginia" contains the campaign commerical that is the sole piece of evidence against the Republicans in the campaign against Max Cleland..  But in that commerical raises no questions about Cleland's patriotism.  Instead, it criticizes his voting record on the Homeland Security Act.  News flash!  Criticising an opponent's voting record is not dirty politics.  It is exactly what a campaign is supposed to be about.

Cleland was not only a patriot but a hero, and for that reason deserves the highest honors from his country.  But he was by all accounts a mediocre Senator and a Democrat in a state trending strongly Republican.  The terrrible truth is that the Democrats lost Cleland and Daschle's seats the old fashioned way: they got beat fair and square. 

Daschle Campaign Watch

Much has been said by my colleagues regarding Daschle's continued campaign.  Into the foray comes these two documents:

Item 1:  Schedule B (FEC Form 3)  Itemized Disbursements [Size:  440 KB]
Item 2:  Schedule B (FEC Form 3)  Itemized Disbursements [Size:  447 KB]

The Daschle campaign (A Lot of People Supporting Tom Daschle) sent $2,304 to Gall Uses The Knife and $8,025 that went to Hildebrand's consulting company.  Now, as Jon Schaff noted earlier, there is nothing unlawful about any of this, but it does raise questions as to why people are still receiving money from the campaign.  Keep in mind that Daschle hasn't shut the door on his future political career and that certain individuals may be funded to continue the campaign against John Thune and "soften him up."

Footnote:  I don't know who Gall Uses The Knife is yet or how he's connected to Daschle; if anybody knows, pass along the information.

Just Say Nee.

As expected, the Dutch have dealt a second blow to the European constitution.  From the Timesonline (London):

Only three days after French voters rejected the document, an exit poll broadcast by NOS television said that the Dutch, voting in their first-ever national referendum, had voted “nee” by 63 per cent to 37 against the constitution. Early results backed up the poll.

What is not easily grasped by Americans is the governments of Europe are much less directly Democratic than in the U.S.  Of the nine countries that ratified the new charter, only Spain did so by popular vote.  It is highly unlikely that any popular referendum will now be pro-constitution.

Consider Ann Applebaum's comment on the French vote, from the Washington Post.

On the Sunday evening and Monday morning after the French voters' definitive non to the European constitution, the French president worked the phones. According to his spokesman, he called, among others, the German chancellor, the British prime minister, and sundry European bureaucrats and commissioners, assuring all of them of France's commitment to the construction of Europe and urging all of them to keep the ratification process on track. Everyone should go on, in other words, as if nothing important had happened.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose : In 1992, after the French ha d held what turned out to be an extraordinarily close, nail-biting vote on the treaty that set up the common European currency, the then-president, Francois Mitterand, declared the 51.4 percent oui majority a great victory, and he, too, went on as if nothing had happened. The French are not unique in this respect. Indeed, one of the most remarkable characteristics of the European Union is the ability of its leaders to keep building their institutions and expanding their power, not only ignoring but self-righteously ignoring European voters. In the months before its adoption, when opinion polls showed that most Germans were also opposed to a single European currency, I asked a German politician whether this bothered him. No, he said: The job of a politician is to explain to the people what is good for them, not the other way around.

 

Thoughts on Hypocrisy

Hypocrisy is one of the lamest charges in politics.  First, if you are in politics long enough at some point you will take positions that are inconsistent with each other.  But the weakness of the hypocrisy charge goes deeper, especially when it comes to those in the public square, politicians or not, who ask us to be better people.  One might call them the preachers of morality.  You often hear or see these people attacked because of this or that personal failing that they have (remember the grief Bill Bennet caught when it came out that he really liked to gamble).  But taken to its logical conclusion it means that no one can ever be held accountable for his actions. 

Here's an example.  Like many of you out there in blogland, I sometimes violate traffic rules, such as the speed limit for example.  Does that mean I must be silent on the public benefit of traffic laws?   To be perfectly consistent must I advocate their removal, since I sometimes violate them?  This is what I would have to do to avoid the charge of hypocrisy, since I actually think people should obey traffic laws, even though I sometimes do not.  Should we get rid of all traffic laws, since most of us violate them from time to time?  Another example.  I bet most of us, at some point in our lives, have taken things that don't belong to us.  Maybe you took that stapler from work home with you.  That's called stealing, and in some cases (such as taking the stapler) it's the crime of theft.  Again, I confess that at certain times of my life I have taken things that didn't belong to me. Does that mean I can never tell anyone it's wrong to take things that aren't yours?  After all, wouldn't that make me a hypocrite?  Isn't every parent in the world a hypocrite, since they all tell their children not to do things that the parents themselves have done, or maybe even continue to do?  How can any minister encourage us to forsake our sins without being a hypocrite?   

The hypocrisy charge demands that you be a saint before you can say something is morally wrong.  This seems to be doubly true for public persons who call us to change our sinful ways, since their hypocrisy is so publicly exposed.  The only way to avoid hypocrisy is to be perfect, which is impossible, or to have no convictions you can fall short of, which is deplorable.  You see, there are worse things than being a hypocrite.  Being a moral cipher is one of them.  Perhaps we should listen respectfully to those who call us to the better angels of our natures, be compassionate towards their inevitable failings, and yet, recognizing our own failings, also be modest and charitable ourselves when we criticize the moral behavior of others.  The first two suggestions are especially pertinent to the permissive left, and the last could be a lesson for the moralistic right. 

Love Will Find A Way

Insightful post by Peter Schramm over at No Left Turns about the brain chemistry of love.  Tell these people that love is merely a primitive drive; nothing more than a bunch of chemicals in your brain.  Try that one next Valentine's Day or anniversary: "Honey, you really stimulate my brain chemistry and get my 'reward and aversion' instinct excited. The love I  feel for you  is simillar to homestatic rewards such as food, warmth, and craving for drugs." Now I don't doubt that everything these guys find is true, in fact what they are saying is love is a biological need, and I agree.  Let's just hope that science does not replace poetry as the primary language of love.  For my very deep thoughts on this matter, read this talk I gave (Warning: heavy handed Catholic moralizing is involved).   

I Heart Wal-Mart

Aberdeen votes next Tuesday on whether to alter city regulations and allow Super Wal-Mart to build here.  I post this in full from Realclearpolitics:

DEAR JOHN: John Edwards is guest blogging over at the new  TPMCafe site.  One of his first posts cites this Brookings Institute report to highlight the idea that "being  poor is expensive."

Assuming the Brookings study is true and that the poor really do pay more for goods and services including groceries, insurance, appliances, etc., then one would have to conclude Edwards is fully in favor of organizations that provide consumers (but especially the poor)          with low-priced products that allow them to stretch their dollars  further. So again we have to ask: why is the left so vehemently  opposed to a company like Wal-Mart? - T. Bevan 9:35 am

History Opens its Mouth and Says AHHHH

From the New York Times:

WASHINGTON, May 31 - Deep Throat, the mystery man who reigned as Washington's best-kept secret source for more than 30 years, was not just any shadowy, cigarette-smoking tipster in a raincoat. He was the No. 2 official of the F.B.I., W. Mark Felt, who helped The Washington Post unravel the Watergate scandal and the presidency of Richard M. Nixon, a feat that he lived to see disclosed on Tuesday, frail but smiling at 91.

This guy is Deep Throat?

Having watched Star Wars and one or two X Files, this is quite a disappointment.  You'd think he'd be wearing a hood and maybe carrying a light saber, or at least wearing a rain coat.  Such is the stuff that history is made of.

The FEC and Blogs

The FEC is getting involved with political blogs:

Web loggers, who pride themselves on freewheeling political activism, might face new federal rules on candidate endorsements, online fundraising and political ads, though bloggers who don't take money from political groups would not be affected.

Draft rules from the Federal Election Commission, which enforces campaign finance laws, would require that paid political advertisements on the Internet declare who funded the ad, as television spots do.

Similar disclaimers would be placed on political Web sites, as well as on e-mails sent to people on purchased lists containing more than 500 addresses. The FEC also is considering whether to require Web loggers, called bloggers, to disclose whether they get money from a campaign committee or a candidate and to reveal whether they are being paid to write about certain candidates or solicit contributions on their behalf.

These rules would not affect citizens who don't take money from political action committees or parties.

The FEC long has been reluctant to craft rules for the Internet, and it has exempted the online world from many regulations that apply to other media such as television and radio. But a court ruling last fall required the agency to include the Internet in its definition of public communications and to begin regulating activities there.

I Love You Letter "Q"

Here's a video short story about someone who really likes Scrabble. I mean really likes Scrabble.  Hat tip, NRO. 

Fiddling While The World Starves

Evidently the Spice Girls will not be allowed to play at the Live Aid II concert coming up because their brand of music is too shallow for the enlightened pop stars.  But evidently Eminem, Outkast and Linkin Park are exactly what the starving kids of the world need.  I guess their music is what passes for deep thinking in pop music these days. 

After the original Live Aid concert (I was 14 and stupid, so I loved it) PJ O'Rourke wrote one of the funniest essays I have ever read, entitled "Fiddling While Africa Starves."  You owe it to yourself to find his book Give War A Chance and give this essay a read (as well as the essay on Jimmy Carter that is pee in your pants funny).  The idea that what the world's poor need is stupid and solipsistic rock stars to sing their crappy music in order enlighten the masses in the name of abstract goodness is an idea that only, well, a stupid solipsistic rock star could hold.  Does "Sir" Bob Geldof really think world leaders will change policy because Eminem "sings" another song about beating up his ex-wife?  What the poor of the world really need to do is get rid of the corrupt murderous leaders, stop killing each other, and try to enter into the world economy (that means free markets).  Interestingly, this is exactly what the United States is trying to help the nation of Iraq do.  You can read more about it in Thomas P.M. Barnett's brilliant (but flawed) The Pentagon's New Map. 

Daschle's Permanent Campaign Update

Over the weekend, the Argus Leader ran a story about the "eternal campaign" against Senator Thune run by former Daschle staffers which is spearheaded by Daschle's former campaign manager, Steve Hildebrand, who is being paid from Daschle's campaign account AND Daschle's political action committee.  The Argus also quotes Todd Epp saying this campaign is based on "bitterness" is designed, with respect to Thune, to "'soften him up for a future election,' Epp says. 'And it's good sport, it's fun.'"  There are also more thoughts on the unprecedented nature of Daschle's continued funding of an anti-Thune campaign here.  In a well-researched blast from the past, Sibby notes that "David Kranz and Steve Hildebrand had a different take when it was Senator Daschle who was going to be held accountable." 

C'est What?

After the Bureaucrats in Brussels defined jelly as consisting of fruit preserves, they were informed that the French make a jelly out of carrots.  Instead of back tracking to change their original mistake, they officially redefined carrots as fruit.  This is the body that would govern Europe had the new constitution been ratified. 

After the crushing defeat of that Constitution in the French referendum (55% non to 45% oui, according to final count) the constitutional process in Europe is now like a chicken with its head cut off: too stupid to lay down and die. 

Gerhard Schröder, the German chancellor, said: "The outcome of the referendum is a setback for the process of ratifying the constitution, but not its end."

Many Eurocrats are urging Chirac to do something, perhaps announce a second referendum.  But a government this badly discredited scarcely has the strength to do such a thing, and it would only further convince French voters, even many who voted yes, that the instincts of their national establishment are profoundly undemocratic.

One of the few things that the proposed constitution is clear about is that every member state must ratify it before it comes into effect.  Nine, I believe, have already done so, but France was the first to submit  it to the voters in a binding election.  Moreover, the Dutch are set to vote tomorrow, and they too are expected to vote no.  Britain has scheduled a referendum, but two no votes in three days, effectively killing the ratification process, will leave Tony Blair  little choice but to cancel it.  The same will be true of the Czech Republic and Poland. The chicken is dead.

Why is the European Constitutional process collapsing?  To begin with, the document itself is a mess.  Consider by way of contrast the Constitution of the United States.  It consists of seven articles and can be printed on one page (though granted, its a big honkin page).  The European Constitution contains 448 articles and is two or three hundred pages long, depending on how it is printed. 

But the bigger problem is illustrated by the fact that voters in France and Britain are opposed to it for the opposite reasons.  The French thought it would expose them to "anglo-saxon values," which is French for having to work in order to get paid.  The British think it would take away much of the competitive advantage that the British economy has over its European rivals.  "But so what," says Mark Steyn.

Britain's naysayers don't have to reject the constitution for the same reason as France's commies, fascists, racists, eco-nutters, anachronistic unionists, featherbedded farmers, middle-aged "students", Trot professors and welfare queens, bless 'em all. If they want to go down the Eurinal of history clinging to their unaffordable welfare state, their 30-hour work weeks, 10-month work years and seven-year work decades, that's up to them. If Britain doesn't, that should be up to Britain.

That is the rub.  Neither people want to give up national independence to a body of unelected pinheads who think that carrots are fruit. 

Worse still, there is a bad idea at the bottom of the whole European project.  The French began it hoping that a United States of Europe would be able to compete on equal footing with the United States of America, and of course that France would dominate the former.  Steyn explains what is wrong with this Gallic reasoning.

I mentioned to a theatre chum the other day that the EU reminded me of Garth Drabinsky's Livent company. They were the big theatre producers in the Nineties: they revived Show Boat and produced Kiss of the Spider Woman and Ragtime and Sweet Smell of Success in Toronto and on Broadway and brought most of them to the West End. And they were all critically admired, yet didn't seem to make any money. But Livent took the view that somehow if you produced a big enough range of flops they would add up to one smash hit.

They're gone now. But their spirit lives on in the EU, critically admired (at least by the Guardian and Le Monde) but not making any money, and clinging to the theory that if you merge enough weak economies they add up to one global superpower. The big story of the past three decades is that the more it's mired itself in the creation of a centralised pseudo-state, the more "Europe" has fallen behind America in every important long-term indicator, from economic growth to demographics. "Europe" is an indulgence the real Europe can't afford. The followers recognise that, even if the leaders don't.

Herseth's Debacles

Stephanie Herseth has gotten into a pinch over highway funding legislation.  From Bob Mercer out of the Capitol Bureau in Pierre:

After two years of deadlock, Congress appears close to agreement on a new national highway and transit funding plan, a state Department of Transportation official said Thursday.

South Dakota would receive millions of dollars more in federal highway aid under either of the two competing approaches, but the Senate version treats South Dakota better over the long run, according to Leon Schochenmaier, DOT's director of planning and engineering. ...

The next step in the process calls for House and Senate negotiators to meet in conference. The House worked on appointing its conference members Thursday, but the Senate hasn't announced its team yet. ...

South Dakota currently gets about $200 million annually in federal highway funding.

The Senate version would increase that by an average of about $61 million per year, according to Republican U.S. Sen. John Thune of South Dakota. [emphasis by the author]

The House plan calls for $35 million in one-time funding for various special projects and an annual increase averaging about $35 million per year, according to Democratic U.S. Rep. Stephanie Herseth, the state's lone member of the House. [emphasis by the author]

Thune said South Dakota would come out $134 million better under the Senate bill.

In another article by Mercer:

With 15 to 30 percent more federal funding at stake for the state's roads and bridges, South Dakota's two U.S. senators will be among the negotiators shaping the new national highway and transit program. ...

Johnson and Thune were among the sweeping majority when the Senate voted 89-11 for a $295 billion package two weeks ago that was $11 billion higher than the Bush administration said it was willing to accept. The House passed a $284 billion six-year package that the White House supports. ...

The leading Democrat in the House on the issue, Rep. Jim Oberstar of Minnesota, asked the House to instruct its negotiators to guarantee that each state receive funding equal to at least 92 percent of the taxes paid into the federal highway fund from that state, while no state would get less than what was already set in the House bill.

On a nearly perfect party-line vote the House Republican majority defeated the Oberstar motion, 223-189. South Dakota's one member of the House, Democratic Rep. Stephanie Herseth, joined other Democrats and supported Oberstar.

In addition to potentially ruining the highway bill, Herseth also has voted against a law prohibiting taking minors across state lines for abortions, she couldn't get the BRAC bill through the House, she voted for the killing of frozen embryos for their scientific value (with your tax dollars, mind you), and suddenly she's beginning to look a lot weaker.  Also keep in mind that NSF letter debacle that even Kranz wrote about.

Tortured Logic

On of the local blogs (yawn) totally confuses issues regarding the Bush Administration's policy regarding torture and the Geneva Accords.  First of all, the administration has consistently held that the Geneva Accords do not apply to terrorists who fight for groups such as Al Qaeda. Why? Al Queda is a terrorist group, not a nation, and is thus not a signatory to the Geneva Accords.  Second, terrorists are not soldiers as they wear no uniform and attempt to blend into the civilian community in an attempt to do their murderous deeds.  Terrorists are not soldiers and they are not civilians.  They have no designation under Geneva.  Thus Geneva Accords would apply to Sadaam, who as a head of state has a legal definition under the Accords, but not to the terrorists who are being held by the US in Iraqi prisons (this is as distinct from Iraqi soldiers, who would have legal rights).  All this said, the United States has chosen to extend Geneva rights to terrorists  as matter of policy, but not as a matter of law.  The policy is to treat them like soldiers, even though they aren't.   I would point out that those who violated policy in Iraq are being prosecuted. 

Regarding the use of torture. The Bush administration never condoned torture.  It merely asked (in the infamous "torture memos") "what is torture?"  I think we all agree that between beating prisoners with fluffy pillows and hooking up battery cables to sensitive body parts there is an acceptable level of vigorous questioning that may involve making prisoners uncomfortable, either physically or psychologically.  The Bush administration followed previous policy by saying inflicting physical pain or injury is "torture" and unacceptable.  Again, those violating this policy are being prosecuted. 

As evidence that these are not easy questions, two of the most respected legal minds in American, and on opposite ends of the political spectrum, Alan Dershowitz and Richard Posner, have both written books suggesting that sometimes torture is acceptable in the name of national security.  That's something the Bush administration has never claimed.  One could seriously grapple with these difficult questions of what do we owe our enemies in times of war, but that would require thinking and it isn't as much fun as simply calling Bush names. 

For a serious discussion on this issue, see this discussion stream at The Volokh Conspiracy. 

Happy Memorial Day. 

Remember Our Fallen Heroes

The top picture is from the American military cemetery at Meuse-Argonne River in France.  It was such a major victory for allied forces during WWI that a small town in Miner County, South Dakota changed its name from St. Mary's to Argonne.  The second picture is of the American cemetary at St. Mihiel.  We forget how many South Dakotans perished in WWI.  For an idea of how many served, go see the memorial in front of the courthouse in Winner, SD in Tripp County.  Not to confuse wars, but Memorial Day is, of course, a product of the Civil War and the advocacy of the Grand Army of the Republic.  The Civil War and the GAR were extremely important in the world views of the early founders of South Dakota.  The GAR was very powerful and we ended up with counties such as Lincoln, Union, Grant, Meade, McPherson and towns such as Gettysburg, Appomattox, Shiloh...

Daschle's Perpetual Campaign

A former campaign official who worked on the 1980 McGovern-Abdnor race offers a comment in response to a Kevin Woster post on Rapid City Journal's Mt. Blogmore:

Kevin, you raise some interesting points that deserve a little historical perspective. What Dick Wadhams did in the last campaign is not particularly new in South Dakota, but he may have just done it better and with more money. On the other hand, what the Daschlites are doing right now is, to the best of my knowledge, unprecedented in SD politics. Whether it is a good thing will, of course, be in the eye of the beholder.

When Jim Abdnor ran against George McGovern in 1980, our staff and consultants did the same thing Wadhams did in 2004. We analyzed years worth of McGovern statements and actions and used them in advertisements. When Tom Daschle ran against Abdnor in ‘86, he had film crews following Abdnor around to public events for at least two years prior to Election Day to seize upon any misstatement that could be used in a TV ad. There is nothing wrong with these tactics. An incumbent’s statements and actions are and should be fair game in a re-election campaign.

But no matter who has won a Senate race in the last three decades, be it Jim Abdnor, Tom Daschle, Larry Pressler or Tim Johnson, none of them were subject to a perpetual attack campaign that began immediately after Election Day. McGovern didn’t do it to us. We didn’t do it to Daschle. Pressler didn’t do it to Johnson.

Having said that, I would be surprised if this sore losers campaign has much of an impact. It’s preaching to a relatively small choir of people like a few on this blog who go all googly-eyed over left-wing websites.

That’s not to say that John Thune’s record shouldn’t be held up to public scrutiny. Of course it should. But, I don’t think that’s really the focus of groups that peddle “F— John Thune” t-shirts and simply condemn everything Senator Thune does without any regard to intellectual honesty.

May the Frist be with You

Mickey Kaus with his trademark humor:

There has been a lot of overhyped talk about how the new Star Wars movie, Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, is an allegory for President Bush and the Iraq War. I've just seen the film, and can declare with some certainty that the idea that Episode III is a Bush/Iraq allegory is silly. Isn't it obvious the movie is really an allegory for the filibuster fight? The Sith are judicial activists who would use the Force to satisfy their passions. The Jedi are the believers in judicial restraint (hence their concern with rules and democracy, their quasi-Buddhist self-denial, etc.). The story initially promises a climactic showdown between these two factions, but the violent battle turns out to merely set up the later, definitive conflict in Episodes IV, V and VI. It kicks the can down the road! ... 12:06 A.M.

Hitchens as "drink-sodden ex-Trotskyist popinjay"

If you don't read Christopher Hitchens, you should know it's worth it, as his latest report on UK MP George Galloway surely proves.  Excerpt:

His short, cocky frame was enveloped in a thicket of recording equipment, and he was holding forth almost uninterrupted until I asked him about his endorsement of Saddam Hussein's payment for suicide-murderers in Israel and the occupied territories. He had evidently been admirably consistent in his attention to my humble work, because he changed tone and said that this was just what he'd expect from a "drink-sodden ex-Trotskyist popinjay." It takes a little more than this to wound your correspondent--I could still hold a martini without spilling it when I was "the greatest polemicist of our age" in 2001 [according to Galloway]--but please note that the real thrust is contained in the word "Trotskyist." Galloway says that the worst day of his entire life was the day the Soviet Union fell. His existence since that dreadful event has involved the pathetic search for an alternative fatherland. He has recently written that, "just as Stalin industrialised the Soviet Union, so on a different scale Saddam plotted Iraq's own Great Leap Forward." I love the word "scale" in that sentence. I also admire the use of the word "plotted."

Cowboys, The Decline of the Western, "Deadwood," Buffalo Bill, and Fascism

Larry McMurtry makes some odd comments in an interview in today's New York Times Magazine:

But cowboys aren't always popular. You can look at the rise and demise of the western movie. It's not like there are hundreds of westerns being made now, as there were in the 40's and 50's.

How do you explain their decline?

There's no money to be made in them anymore. It costs too much to deal with animals. If you want a bear in your movie, it costs you $60,000 for one day.

Still, there's ''Deadwood'' on HBO. And we now even have a White House West. You're a native Texan -- what do you think of the president's ranch in Crawford?

I find it hard to think of it as a ranch. Crawford is basically a suburb of Waco, and I have been through it a million times. The president has this obsession, which he inherited from Reagan, of brush clearing. I don't get it. What do you get when you clear brush? You get a photograph of yourself with a chain saw and a cowboy hat.

What, exactly, do you think cowboys represent, other than the triumph of alpha males?

Cowboys are a symbol of a freer time, when people could go all the way from Canada to Mexico without seeing a fence. They stand for good ol' American values, like self-reliance.

Maybe some American values, but you can't say that cowboys were ever interested in spreading democracy.

No, they were interested in spreading fascism.

If you put it that way, how do you explain your own fascination with Buffalo Bill?

I never thought about it.

You should probably come up with a better answer, because I'm sure you'll be asked the question many times on your book tour.

No, I won't. This is the only time I am talking about this book. Why write a book and then talk about it? It doesn't make any sense. I can get another book done in the time it takes to do a book tour. I don't want to sit around reliving last year's book in conversation.

Les Francais Say Nay

From the International Herald Tribune:

French voters dealt a crushing defeat to the European Constitution today, demonstrating their determination to punish the leaders of France and of Europe after a bitter campaign that split the country in two.

 

As the polls closed, the French Interior Ministry said the no camp had 57.26 percent, compared to 42.74 for yes, with nearly 83 percent of the votes counted.

Crazy Horse Monument

Fundraising has begun at the Crazy Horse monument.  This story was one of the most popular on Yahoo! today:

Nearly six decades have passed since work began on the Crazy Horse Memorial, a granite mountain being carved into a colossal sculpture of the Sioux warrior, arm outstretched toward his ancestral homeland, astride a stallion more than two football fields long.

When it's finished — and no one is predicting when that will be — the sculpture will be 563 feet high and 641 feet long. It will be taller than the Washington Monument, and so large that the four presidential heads on Mount Rushmore, 17 miles away, would fit inside the nine-story-high warrior's head.

But with $17 million spent so far, raised largely from visitors and others familiar with the project, only a portion of the monument is finished. Now, for the first time, a national fundraising drive is being quietly started in hopes of accelerating the pace.

To learn of the history of the project, check out the article.

NYT's Praises Bush Education Policy

No, really.  Kausfiles directs us to Eduwonk, who gives us some taste of the singularity of the event.

Eduwonk says: Stockpile canned goods and firearms! That guy by the subway station was right...the apocalypse is upon us! Key indicator? Pro-charter school NYT story here...front page NYT Sam Dillon pro-NCLB story here!

As Eduwonk says, make sure you are sitting down for this one.

BOSTON - Spurred by President Bush's No Child Left Behind law, educators across the nation are putting extraordinary effort into improving the achievement of minority students, who lag so sharply that by 12th grade, the average black or Hispanic student can read and do arithmetic only as well as the average eighth-grade white student.

In short, Bush's NCLB policy is doing exactly what it was designed to do: force educators to find ways to reach the least educable. 

Here in Boston, low-achieving students, most of them blacks and Hispanics, are seeing tutors during lunch hours for help with math. In a Sacramento junior high, low-achieving students are barred from orchestra and chorus to free up time for remedial English and math. And in Minnesota, where American Indian students, on average, score lower than whites on standardized tests, educators rearranged schedules so that Chippewa teenagers who once sewed beads onto native costumes during school now work on grammar and algebra.

"People all over the country are suddenly scrambling around trying to find ways to close this gap," said Ronald Ferguson, a Harvard professor who for more than a decade has been researching school practices that could help improve minority achievement. He said he recently has received many requests for advice. "Superintendents are calling and saying, 'Can you help us?' "

I draw your attention to the word suddenly in the last paragraph.  When the education industry  does anything at a pace that is visible without stop motion photography, that is indeed front page news. 

Of course this recognition by the NYT's is bound to be ignored by the paper itself as soon as its editors come back from vacation.  Kaus suggests that

Friday before a holiday is the classic time to bury good news! ...

But the article is astoundingly honest.  Consider the next paragraph.

No Child Left Behind requires schools to bring all students to grade level over the next decade. The law has aroused a backlash from teachers' unions and state lawmakers, who call some of its provisions unreasonable, like one that punishes schools where test scores of disabled students remain lower than other students'. But even critics acknowledge that the requirement that schools release scores categorized by students' race and ethnic group has obliged educators to work harder to narrow the achievement gap.

Isn't it precisely the fact that educators are obliged to work harder that explains the backlash?