Remembering Those Who Served

Remember  

Memorial Day, National Cemetary at Rock Island Arsenal 

France Votes "No" on EU Constitution

Power Line's got up a nice post on the beating the EU Constitution took in France on Sunday, including a nice map of France showing how each of France's internal divisions voted.

Final tally: 54.87% against; 45.13% in favor.

Light Posting

Sorry about the light posting this past week. Early in the week I was hip-deep in wedding planning stuff. Specifically, I was helping my fiance do thank you cards from her shower last weekend. For the last couple three days, one of my best friends from law school who I haven't seen for a couple of years is in town.

As we get headed into June, regular posting should commence.

Principle Riverwalk Update

The corporate donations keep coming in and the Principle Riverwalk has now doubled in funding size, to $57 million. Specific sponsors have been found for a couple of features and a couple of new features have been added as well.

I'm curious to see if the execution on this will live up to the promise.

New Whack Job Site of the Week

You can find the previous one here.

This one is fairly worksafe (as long as you don't mind your IT guys thinking that you are a nutcase). It's Prison Planet and its sister site InfoWars. You may have heard Mancow interviewing Alex Jones, the proprietor, on a few occasions. It's good stuff.

If you look around enough you'll find some very disturbing pictures of Jack Kemp at the Bohemian Grove giving a speech at a lectern. I shiver just thinking about it.

Snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory

My God. Harry Reid was all but ready to concede that the minority can't stop the GOP from getting an up/down vote on all judicial nominees when who should come riding to his rescue but seven GOP dwarfs: Snowe, Collins, Chafee, DeWine, Graham, Warner, and the camera-loving McWhore McCain.

This bunch of losers just killed the GOP. Let me count the ways.

1.) They gave up the principled argument that all nominees deserve an up or down vote. They can't get it back. Ever. Next time the Dems are fillibustering a judge or nominee for the executive branch, what will the GOP say? That all nominees deserve an up and down, except for those Saad and Myers guys? Wizzed their best argument right down their legs.

2.) They gave up the right to bring up a vote on a rules change that would guarantee an up or down vote on all nominees. What did they get in return? A promise that the Dems will only fillibuster in extreme cases? Pffft. You and I know that every nominee to the right of Teddy Kennedy is considered an extremist by Senate Dems. I almost guarantee that the Dems will be fillibustering other nominees before the end of the summer. Some out in the blogosphere are arguing that by allowing votes on Priscilla Ownes and Janice Rogers Brown that we've established that being conservative isn't and "extraordinary" circumstance. Pffft. Write it down--heck, etch it in stone--when we see that Dem fillibuster, the MSM will take the Dems' side, agreeing that the nominee is at least of questionable fitness. Then, if the GOP disagrees and brings up a rules change, the MSM will scream bloody murder that the GOP is going back on the deal.

Even if that didn't happen, there is no reason to believe that these seven spineless dinks won't cave in again. They will.

3.) The base of the GOP passionately cares about this issue. Caving assures that some percentage of money just dried up. Some percentage of the grass roots in Ohio, Virginia, and South Carolina just said, "Screw it. I'm not stuffing envelopes next election. I'm not going door to door. I'm not sending money. I'm not monitoring a poll station. None of that. To hell with it. Why bother electing GOP majorities when they can't even get judges confirmed?"

There's commentary out there arguing that you have to give a little to get a little. You can't grow your majority if you lose the political middle. Uh, note to people making this argument. The GOP has a ten-seat majority in the Senate. TEN SEATS. They don't need to grow the majority. They need to act like the majority that they already are.

Time and time again we've seen this argument put forth. The GOP has to moderate its edge to maintain the middle. But it never really seems to work out. Note to the GOP. It's the MSM that screams about moderating. The MSM is not your friend. When you are winning and people who are against you are telling you that you really, really, REALLY, need to change, they are probably telling you to change in a way that is bad for you.

The Dems will continue to say that the GOP is radically out of the mainstream. The GOP will get no credit from the other side of the aisle for the compromise. Harry Reid will at least weekly manage to get off a dig about how the GOP wanted to destroy "long-standing" Senate precedent. The GOP will get no credit from the MSM for the compromise. If you aren't going to get any credit, if you are still going to be castigated as being too extreme, why bother with the compromise at all.

4.) The Memmorandum of Understanding lectures the President on how he should come to the Senate ahead of time for advice prior to nominating. That is a total shredding of the actual provision in the Constitution that allows for the President to nominate freely and then allow for the advice and consent of the Senate in the confirmation process. The GOP gave away the farm on this one when it comes to the next Supreme Court nominee. The Dems will howl when Bush nominates a traditional conservative, probably claiming that the Memmorandum of Understanding was violated by not coming to the Senators for advice before making the nomination, thus liberating them from their promise not to fillibuster the nominee.

5.) John Bolton is toast. His fillibuster is being planned right now. This deal doesn't deal with non-judicial positions in any way.

What a bunch of linquini-spined fools.

What a bunch of chicken shit worthless Senators

Well, rather than stick to their principals (What are those?) the RINOs have been blinded by the light of "bipartisanship." They have been played the fool, snookered, hornswaggled, tricked, deceived, led astray, rooked, and bullshitted. This is an inexcusable deal, made under inexcusable circumstances, with inexcusable people. I hate waiting for the other shoe to drop. The great betrayal, on a national stage, where the Democrat demagogues get to unleash the full power of their media arsenal on some unsuspecting "extreme" Supreme Court nominee. While the RINOs cower in the corner pleading "We didn't know. They promised they wouldn't do this anymore." It's some form of battered wife/Stockholm syndrome. That's the only explanation.

You can read about the deal here where Republicans get absolutely nothing they wouldn't have already gotten while Democrats get to crow to their base and the American people about how much smarter they are than Republicans. It ain't bragging, if you can back it up. I thought only Bill Clinton could pull something like this off.

John Hinderaker has more at the Powerline.

Will “New Urbanism” sell in Iowa?

The troubled Prairie Heights sub-division in northeast Davenport has encountered a new critic according to Sunday’s Quad City Times.

“One of the owners, Davenport attorney Joe Polaschek, who is part owner of 70 acres in the area near 53rd Street and Eastern Avenue, said he withdrew a proposal to develop 40 acres in the style because city rules are too restrictive and canceled out the benefit of the more densely packed housing he would have been allowed to build.
.
‘I wouldn’t build it myself,” Polaschek said of the city plan. “I don’t think it will sell.’

New urbanism emphasizes small lots, small yards, houses crammed close together, front porches close to the street, detached garages on alleyways and streets and neighborhoods that are scaled for people instead of cars so that there is more walking and more interaction among neighbors.”

The city bought into a project involving a square mile of vacant farm land several years back and announced plans for a golf course, an industrial park and mixed-use residential areas. Subsequently, several members of the city council that approved what a skeptical electorate saw as a boondoggle got tossed out of office, and the city has been trying to salvage something from the concept ever since.

Recently the city agreed that to avoid a possible lawsuit, it would pave a four-lane connection from one edge of the vacant land to the other side. Needing some reason to justify the $6 million road to beleaguered taxpayers, the city is hoping to interest private developers, but with limited success as a similar project a few miles away in the Iowa City area has sold few houses. Reluctant developers point to the availability of housing in fashionable inner city neighborhoods for the limited number of buyers for this type of property, while proponents insist there is demand for fairly dense new construction that is pedestrian/bicycle friendly.

---EDITORIAL AND INVITATION FOR COMMENT---
Needing to relocate a few years ago, my wife and I looked at several houses in the “fashionable inner city neighborhoods” (referenced above) because of the charm, the character and the potential of some of these older homes. In the end, we bought a typical suburban home on a cul-de-sac. Had we wanted minimum front and side yards, we could have gotten an apartment, and who wants to interact with neighbors anyway?

Yes, concern about maintenance and restoration of an older house was a factor in our decision, but the house we did buy was thirty years-old. The fatal flaw in most of the f.i.c.n. houses (in addition to not enough bathrooms) was the lack of an attached multi-car garage. Furthermore, on-street parking is too limited when houses are crammed together. How did people make do, back when these houses were built, without at least one car per adult?

Make no mistake; we love our cars - for good reasons or not-so-good - and having gotten used to having them, we’re not about to do without. Maybe some New Yorkers or Bostonians, who I’ve heard sometimes lack a vehicle of their own, can do it, but I’m skeptical as to how bike paths and walkways can reduce the need for a car. On at least one occasion, I rode my bike down to the grocery store for a loaf of bread. Fine. But I wouldn’t have done it in January. I wouldn’t have done it if I had needed a week’s worth of groceries.

I really question how workable this neighborhood-centric lifestyle is, but I've been told that I’m not necessarily normal typical. To my fellow Iowa-bloggers who have recently moved, or are currently in the process of moving. Would housing as described in the QCT article be of interest to you, assuming pricing is competitive? Davenport (and Iowa City) needs to know.

Hmm...Why Haven't the Democrats Thought of This

The Labor Party in Great Britain is apparently preparing to plans to prop up the financially suspect pension system in that country. One key component may be raising the retirement age for the wealthy to age 70, or at least prevent the wealthy from getting their pension until age 70.

The non-wealthy would continue to get benefits at age 65.

One of the arguments to support this plan is that the "wealthy" live longer, so it really all works out okay.

Couple of interesting things.

First off, while we are quite familiar with the solvency issues facing Social Security, we don't often hear too much about the similar issues facing pension plans throughout Europe.

Second, doesn't this seem likely to, on the margins, deincentivize success. Some percentage of people absolutely will forego good investment opportunities or forego promotions in the latter part of a carrer in order to have access to the pension five years earlier. That doesn't strike me as particularly beneficial to an economy.

Maytag sells out

Well, Maytag's Board of Directors was apparently unable to convince the state of Iowa to nationalize their factory so they did the next best thing. The found a white knight to come in an turn the place around by the name of "Ripplewood Holdings LLC." It looks like Ripplewood is a pretty legit outfit who can and probably will turn Maytag's prospects around.

One thing I wouldn't count on is any loyalty to the community of Newton or the State of Iowa. (Though I can't wait to see the bribes, ahem financial incentives, the State trucks over there to keep them.) The union there better pull it's head out of its ass and come hat in hand to deal. These new investors will yank that plant out of Newton faster than a burning cat. Maytag is all Newton has. It's a factory town. It's sad really. If workers there had just been ready to deal with modern manufacturing reality regarding the costs of their compensation and benefits this likely could have been avoided.

Juarez is licking its chops to produce Neptune washers and dryers at $4/hour.

The Duke of Earle

For those of you who don't know Ronnie Earle is the Texas DA who is harassing Tom Delay and his staff over fundraising "irregularities." He's the man upon whom Howard Dean apparently has pinned his hopes to give Delay a nice 8x10 cell for a few years.

Recently Ronnie gave a speech to a Democratic fundraiser wherein he made the following statements: "This case is not just about Tom DeLay. If it isn't this Tom DeLay, it'll be another one, just like one bully replaces the one before" and "This is a structural problem involving the combination of money and power. Money brings power and power corrupts. When asked if Delay was the target of the probe he stated: "We are investigating anybody who has committed a crime." These statements both explicitly and implicitly attacked the character and innocence of an uncharged man.

Captain Ed over at Captains Quarters has speculated whether Ronnie's rather intemperate statements are a violation of the ABA Model Code of Professional Conduct. While the ABA can't enforce anything against Ronnies license and the Model Code is antiquated, the State of Texas can act against his license and do so under the Texas Rules of Professional Conduct (based on the ABA's Model Rules of Professional Conduct). Captain Ed is right that Ronnie probably would have violated the Model Code DR7-107(A) (DR stands for Disciplinary Rule, meaning it is a binding rule) by making his statements (though contrary to Captain Ed's assertion, probably not DR7-107(B) because no indictment has been filed against Delay). Ed also cites a violation of EC8-8 (though the EC's "Ethical Consideration" were non-binding).

Examining the matter on the more modern and more comprehensive Texas Rules of Professional Conduct may shed some light. The relevant portion is Rule 3.07--Trial Publicity (though Earle may also have violated 3.01 prohibiting frivolous claims). Here is the redacted rule:

Rule 3.07 Trial Publicity
(a) In the course of representing a client, a lawyer shall not make an extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication if the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that it will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicatory proceeding. A lawyer shall not counsel or assist another person to make such a statement.
(b) A lawyer ordinarily will violate paragraph (a), and the likelihood of a violation increases if the adjudication is ongoing or imminent, by making an extrajudicial statement of the type referred to in
that paragraph when the statement refers to:
(1) the character, credibility, reputation or criminal record of a party, suspect in a criminal investigation or witness; or the expected testimony of a party or witness;
(2) in a criminal case or proceeding that could result in incarceration, the possibility of a plea of guilty to the offense; the existence or contents of any confession, admission, or statement given by a defendant or suspect; or that persons refusal or failure to make a statement;
***

(4) any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of a defendant or suspect in a criminal case or proceeding that could result in incarceration; or

In addition the commentary states:

3. The existence of material prejudice normally depends on the circumstances in
which a particular statement is made. For example, an otherwise objectionable
statement may be excusable if reasonably calculated to counter the unfair
prejudicial effect of another public statement. Applicable constitutional
principles require that the disciplinary standard in this area retain the
flexibility needed to take such unique considerations into account.

So, while Ronnie's statements were clearly inappropriate, the liklihood of a finding of "material prejudice" is low for a number of reasons. First, Ronnie can always claim that the pissing match between Delay and the prosecutors office precipitated the statements thus entering us into the wonderful world of balancing. Second, Ronnie is such a partisan hack that it's hard for anyone to take him seriously. Third, Delay is a public figure also who has eminent capability to defend himself in the public domain. As much as I wish it were otherwise, Ronnie can probably rest easy at least on this account.

Sorry, oh Captain, my Captain.

Decorah's In Flames....

...Okay, not really. But, Iowa Hawk does do a good job of crystalizing the both the fecklessness of Newsweek and the inexcusable behavior of Pakistani extremists in what is sure to become another of his classic parodies.

In the wake of the incident, American military spokespeople have taken pains to defend handling of prisoners at Okoboji. A series of new guidelines instruct guards to “respect the rituals and traditions of our valued Lutheran prison guests,” including “dietary needs, Wednesday Nite Bingo, and twice daily viewing of Wheel of Fortune.”

“It is important that we remember that Lutheranism is a religion of peace,” said Army spokesman Maj. Richard Lehrman. “And we need to remember to avoid insensitive behavior and remarks that will cause these peaceful Lutherans to go on another bloody killing rampage.”

Your "I'm From the Government and I'm Here to Help" Moment of the Day

The Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance sends a letter to a taxpayer seeking an explanation for missing tax filings. Sounds fair, until you realize that IDORF wants the taxpayer to explain how IDORF itself lost the filings.

The Tax Update has the story, and a linked pdf of the actual letter.

NEW FEATURE: Whack Job Site of the Week

The title is self-explanatory. This feature will focus on conspiracy theories, religious fanatics, and left wing lunacy. I'll try to provide warning if it is clearly not work appropriate but I can't be held responsible for what these nuts have on their site. While I'm tempted to make Kos the first recipient I'm going to resist.

Here is a site laying out the connection between missing Des Moines paper boy Johnny Gosch, Jeff Gannon (the right wing gay escort reporter), Hunter S. Thompson, and a child sex slave ring run out of the Reagan Whitehouse. Wow.

Love for the peeps

By the way. I didn't mean to tick anyone off by excluding them. I'm just running out of time to blog tonight and had to stop somewhere. I'll get out some more love later.

Caution on the Newsweek Story

I know a lot of people have been saying "Oh, conservatives shouldn't crow about the Koran flushing deal because it might wind up being true." I don't think this particular caution holds any water because even if it turns out to be true, the fact is that Michael Isikoff had a single sourced story that couldn't be verified and went ahead with printing it with either knowledge or reckless disregard for the predictible outcome in the Arab world.

The caution I offer is one of hypocrisy. Is what Newsweek did really any different than what the Whitehouse did in pushing the case for war in Iraq? Now, I'm not going wobbly on anyone here. Saddam needed a good bitch slappin' and we were in a slappin' mood. But insofar as one of the justifications for war (or casus belli, si vou plait) was Saddam's alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction and such allegations which were single sourced, from a biased and unreliable source no less (And yes, I know all the caveats about his pursuit of weapons, and his own people lying to him, and the fact that he did have them and use them at one point, and that the Niger story was true, etc.)

What I offer is this: no one in the administration has paid any serious price for this horrible failure in our intelligence, even if this failure was not a material inducement to war. Shit happens. Sometimes our guys get it wrong and we've got to be willing to back them up if they've demonstrated dedication and trustworthyness throughout their career.

Likewise, Michael Isikoff royally screwed the pooch. Does he have a political bias that guides his selection of the stories he pursues and publishes? Almost certainly yes. Has he demonstrated over the course of his career an almost unmatched level of ethics in his pursuit of accurate and internally fair stories? Again, I have to say yes. Isikoff writes good stuff. He's a bright spot at an otherwise dismal periodical. He is not a friend to conservatives but he is not always an enemy. While it's a pretty low standard for mainstream media journalists, outside of Fox News and the WSJ, Isikoff is one of the best we've got. Newsweek shouldn't shit can him anymore than Bush or Rummy or anyone else should go for the WMD reports.

Some love for our peeps

We here at Tusk & Talon don't do nearly enough to recognize some of our fellow Iowa Bloggers. In light of this, let me begin by pointing our literally dozens of readers to a few favorites.

Brent at Cop Talk apparently got sick of not having saddle sores and is back on the horse. Welcome back, Brent.

An Iowa blogger I just discovered (though I'm sure all of you are already aware of him) is Iowa Voice. He's been all over the Newsweek story like a cheap shirt. If you want a good primer on everthing that is about go there.

Kris at Random Mentality has been around almost as long as we have and has great stuff on Iowa court decisions for you legal geeks.

I check Roth CPA every day. Always good stuff even if your not a tax nerd like me.

I would be remiss not to mention State 29, Iowa's most virulently moderate voice. I may not always agree but I always like whether he's going off on "bankrupt" dead beats, our useless Iowa legislature, or pimping Ed Fallon. As one of our law profs used to say "He's a provaceteur."

Yin Blog is also good as long as Kevin Jon isn't ranting about some leftwing conspiracy theory. Yin also does a good job of keeping me up to date on culturally relevant reality TV. (With three kids I'm just treading water on pop culture.)

All the rest on our Iowa blogroll are great reads. I'd also like to point out Dr. Hogberg's site. Even though he isn't posting anything other than links to his articles you're doing yourself a disservice not to visit occasionally and pick a fight with one of the trolls in his comments. His latest article on Health Savings Accounts is excellent. Given that health insurance is one of my (and Jeff's) area of expertise we'll try to post some more on this in the coming weeks. The level of ignorance (especially among doctors) regarding how health care gets paid for in this country is astonishing.

On the non-Iowa side, I check Belmont Club every day. Wretchard is just smarter than me. I can handle that. Really I can. What pisses me off is he's so much better at writing too.

And, of course, the Powerline. These guys get major play now, but I remember when they were just a wee little blog tilting at the mighty Strib windmill.

The International English-Speaking Media

So, we roll into Cancun to attend a wedding that was happening early Wednesday evening. The reception took place after. Long story short, I didn't catch any television until Thursday morning.

While the hotel had some sort of cable package, you can't really expect a whole lot of content in English when you're in another country at a hotel that caters to people from around the world. In this case, there were only a couple of channels in English...BBC World and CNN International.

By blogosphere reputation, I was familiar with the fact that the BBC's reputation was solidly left. Domestically, CNN is a cornerstone of the liberally-biased MSM. But, I didn't really have any experience with either of these channels directly.

Oh. My. God.

Both of these channels have content that might as well be lifted from the Noam Chomsky reader.

Seriously. They are that bad.

While we were down there, both channels basically had a continously loop playback of the Koran desecaration "story" . There'd be a dour-faced Brit reciting the "facts" of how U.S. military interogators flushed a Koran down a toilet. Then, there'd be a concerned-looking guy in the field, reporting on how this "complicated" American efforts in the Middle East. Then an interview with a protester in Jalabad, always carrying a protest sign in English, who denounced the U.S. Then more analysis of how this would cause the Arab street to rise up.

Then we'd see something about the European soccer league finals. Five minutes later, we'd replay the entire segment on the Koran again. From what I could see, it was the lead story every segment.

I know that the above doesn't sound much different than how the MSM here reacts to anything that might be bad news. It's hard to explain, but it was the tone of the coverage as much as everything. While conservatives decry, correctly I believe, the liberal bias in the domestic MSM, the international sources are engaged in what amounts to outright advocacy against the U.S.

I can't imagine that al Jazeera is any worse.

Now, for me, as soon as I heard that the main allegation was that a Koran was "flushed" down a toilet, my B.S. detector went off. Low flow toilets, and I just about guarantee that Gitmo prison toilets are low-flow, are essentially unable to successfully flush toilet paper, let alone the entirety of a book. How any editor looked at this story, saw that, and didn't say, "This is bull puckey," is beyond me.

So, last night when I got back, I was interested to see if there was any mention of the story in the blogosphere on Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday. From what I could tell, there wasn't much. About the only mentions that I came across were from today when a Instapundit and Power Line have posts up on how the story was, oops, wrong.

So, Newsweek, oops, rushed a story that was likely to damage the President. The story is pounced on by the international media who run it on a coninuous loop playback. People who are actually are almost certainly active participants in terrorism use it as an excuse to cause murder and mayhem in Afghanistan and elsewhere. The reports on the mayhem are then used as justification by other thugs to commit their own destruction.

They ought to be ashamed of themselves. They aren't; but they should be.

Home Again, Home Again

Got back late last night from a short, but restful, trip to Cancun. It was my first real trip to Mexico and I was only down there fore a couple of days, but I did form a few initial impressions that I'm mulling over for posts, including

1.) Foreign media coverage of the War on Terror, specifically, and the U.S., in general.

2.) Mexico and it's affluency (or lack thereof).

Unfortunately, I gotta run some errands right now, but I'm hoping I'll have a little time to get some more stuff up yet today.

This Ought to be a Crime

I'm a Corvette freak. I've wanted one since I was about seven years old. About fifteen years ago the cable television channel VH1 had a contest where the prize was a Corvette from each model year then made, 1953 to 1989. I thought that was the coolest prize ever. Momma Talon thought that was pretty cool too. I remember the two of us discussing which model years you'd have to keep if you won the grand prize. I think we settled on keeping the '53, one from the late 50's, a 63' with the famous split window in the rear, and at least one of the Stingray designs from the late 60's.

I never really heard much about the winner of the contest, but there was one. He sold the whole lot of the cars to hippy dippy 60's artist Peter Max. Max had some hippy dippy idea to paint smiley faces and sunflowers or some damned thing on all of the Vettes and then sell them as collector's editions. (Arrgghhhh!!!. Would we allow Andy Warhol to paint repetitive soup cans on the surface of Michelangelo's David? I think not.)

Anyway, after purchasing the entire collection, Max sort of lost steam on the whole project and put the Vette's in a basement where they sit to this day, mired in dust and grime. (Again, I say, arrgghhhh!!!!)

Looking at the picture in the newspaper article linked above almost makes me cry. The International Criminal Court is a terrible idea, but if they dragged Peter Max in front of it, charged with crimes against humanity, I'd stand and cheer.

Oh the humanity.

Idiotic Register Editorial #7,356,862

Well El Reg is at it again. This time writing an editorial that attempts to link the United Airlines bankruptcy and consequent pension restructuring with the W's attempts at social security reform. The Register's position is that because United's pension plan is tits up Congress shouldn't mess with Social Security because private accounts are too risky (BOO! Did I scare you?). This kind of dime store financial analysis isn't worthy of the kids who rode the short bus to school nonetheless a major metropolitan newspaper.

Both the United pension and Social Security are defined benefit programs. Both rely on the good performance and character of the organizations sponsoring them (i.e. both United and the Feds have to do well financially to meet their obligations and have to have the moral character to do so when they are capable). Unlike United, the Feds have been robbing SSI blind for the last 70 years. Unlike United there are no funds backing up the long term obligations of SSI. Unlike United there is no guarantor of the promises made under SSI other than the taxpayers.

The problem with United's pension program and SSI is that in neither instance do individuals have any definable interest in the assets of the program. They merely have an expectancy based on a formula that can be changed at any time. Private accounts like a 401(k) and like the proposed accounts in SSI reform are the individual's property. It can't be taken away by an act of Congress or an amendment to the ERISA plan. The problem with both organizations is that they have an outdated retirement security system that is in desperate need of reform.

El Reg ignores that absent reform SSI will be in the exact same position as the United pension just a few short years from now. It was immoral of United to underfund or fail to reform their pension (though in United's defense, their union would have bankrupted them for trying to avoid this trainwreck 20 years ago). It is just as immoral for Congress to continue prancing down the primrose path to SSI bankruptcy.

Bolton voted out of committee to full Senate

George Voinovich, (R?-OH) voted to let the Senate as a whole decide on whether John Bolton should be made UN Ambassador today, despite his scathingly delivered misgivings. He promised to vote against final approval for Bolton, but said he was unwilling to cast the deciding vote in committee.

What’s interesting is the way the news media reported it: On Brit Hume’s Fox News show, it was said that President Bush got some good news in his nominee getting through the committee, although it could have been better, as the vote did not include a recommendation for approval. Paula Zahn’s CNN show characterized the vote as a blow to Bolton’s chances, however, based on Voinovich’s criticism. The Zahn show also nominated Voinovich for their interactive ‘Person of the Day’ award poll. Nope, no bias here.

Which show’s presentation was more accurate? Was the committee’s action good news or bad for Bolton and the president? It all depends on how the full Senate votes.

Is Dan Rather still running CBS?

Earlier this week, Gloria Borger of CBS news reported on the battle - excuse me, they called it Armageddon - over the filibustered judicial nominees. In the segment (click here to find the video) two sound bites from a Ken Starr interview are used so as to make it seem Starr thinks ending the filibuster would be a "radical departure" from [Senate] tradition and an assault on the judiciary, which would boomerang against the Republicans. Bob Schieffer expressed surprise at “seeing Ken Starr, of all people, coming out on what looks like the opposite side of many in the conservative wing of the Republican Party…”

As well he should be surprised. It turns out Starr’s first quote about the “radical departure” was directed at what the Democrats are currently doing and the second quote about the boomerang effect could apply to both parties. In an e-mail to Ramesh Ponnuru of the Corner (and others) he explains, "[O]ur friends are way off base in assuming that the CBS snippets, as used, represent (a) my views, or (b) what I in fact said." Ouch.

Rush Limbaugh may have received the same e-mail, for in discussing the matter, he summed up that now when you hear something on CBS News, you find yourself thinking, “I wonder if that’s true.”

UPDATE
Powerline must have gotten the Starr e-mail too. They also say that rumor has it that Starr asked CBS for a copy of the interview tape and CBS turned him down. Very interesting.

Every Vote Must Count

Yeah, right.
Remember how the Democrats’ mantra of 2000 and 2004 was that every vote must be counted? Apparently that doesn’t apply to judicial confirmation votes in the Senate, where they are doing their darndest not to let any counting begin. The latest news I’ve seen (via Rich Lowry, the Corner) has an unnamed senator surmising that Minority Leader Harry Reid would really like to make a deal to confirm a few judges, reject the others and retain the filibuster only for extremely unprecedented utterly bizarre unpredictable circumstances, such as an opening occurring on the Supreme Court.

…Frist, in contrast, “wants to pull the trigger.” That's partly a matter of politics: “Our base views this as a huge issue.” Partly a matter of personal vindication in the struggle with the Dems: “They've just been jerking him around in terms of his leadership.” And it's partly because the merits of the case for ending the judicial filibuster are strong.

Conventional Wisdom, based on a few bogus opinion polls says the Republicans will be hurt if they invoke the ‘nuclear option’. At this point, they may be hurt more if they back down. Many conservatives, including this writer, are more than a little disgusted with the lack of either leadership or backbone that’s been shown so far.

Here’s an idea: Two of the nominees (Janice Rogers Brown and Priscilla Owen) have cleared the Judiciary Committee. Start the floor debate on those two and let the Democrats have as much time as they need to bring up their concerns, and likewise Republicans can rebut. I believe it’s called “unlimited debate”, and if you want to call that a filibuster, fine, but I think that sooner or later even the media will have to say, “Go ahead and vote, already.”

The Republicans’ problem is that they have let the focus of the issue be the filibuster, rather than the qualifications of the nominees. They should do what is necessary to make the Dems explain precisely what is wrong with these nominees, when even the American Bar Association – definitely not a bunch of right wing extremists – has said they are qualified. Then the votes can be counted.

The Register Believes in the Marketplace!!!!!!!

Stunning development. The Register has had a conversion on the road to Damascus. It no longer holds fast to its undying faith in the power and wisdom of big government bureaucracy. No, El Reg has decided that markets should determine how many casinos Iowa should have and where such casinos should be located. I couldn't be happier about the Prairie Pravda's new found appreciation for the genius of Milton Friedman and Adam Smith. However, the Reg was whistling a slightly different tune when it came to a hospital in West Des Moines. The ever mysterious State 29, as always, also has a good take.

Apparently, the "markets" are perfectly capable of determining whether there should be a slot machine in every Casey's (we could call them Caseynos) but evil developers (like those darn Catholic nuns at Mercy) would simply overbuild hospital beds in West Des Moines, driving Wellmark into near bankruptcy and creating a rift in the space time continuum that, left unchecked, could cause the multi-verse to sponataneously implode. (That may be hyperbolic. rifts in the space-time continuum generally fold in on themselves creating a destructive singularity in local space. Just bear with me.)

What possible distinction can the Register make between these two different types of developments that doesn't weaken their argument.

For instance, one would improve the health care delivery in the western suburbs. The other would bring entertainment and gambling addiction to a variety of locations in urban and suburban Iowa. (Why do I know it wouldn't be rural Iowa? Well, because markets dictate that you hunt turkeys where the turkeys are. Under the Register's free market theory Casinos wouldn't locate in Boondocks, Iowa. They would cluster around Des Moines, D'port, Waterloo, etc. In other words, kiss rural economic development adios).

Another example, one was going to be almost entirely paid for through private donations. The other would probably be begging Iowa Values or our defective state legislature for a bailout in a few years.

One will create a large number of high paying quality jobs for professionals like doctors and nurses. One will create a large number of part-time, low wage jobs for people who know such high level skills as shuffling cards, schleping drinks, emptying cigarette trays, and restocking all you can eat buffets.

What else? One will be a not-for-profit entity existing solely for the public good. The other, well, not so much.

Why the Register even urged West Des Moines to reject a casino just last summer!!

Isn't the internet a bitch? Even though El Reg doesn't allow people to search its archives I found all this stuff. For our earlier kvetching about the West Des Moines Hospital see here, here, here, a stemwinder here, and finally here.

Trump on the Freedom Tower

I don't really think of Donald Trump as an architecture critic, but I think he's spot on with this assessment of the buildings proposed for the site of the World Trade Center in New York:

They should duplicate the World Trade Center and not build something that looks like an empty skeleton.

He also added.

The design for the Freedom Tower is an egghead design, designed by an egghead, which has no practical application and which, frankly, didn't look very good.

Here. Here.

I pretty much thought from the beginning that you go back and build, if not identical, something similar to the World Trade Center, but taller and stronger.

Well I know it's a little early in the election cycle to begin complaining but frankly I've had it up to here (visualize me holding my hand 30 feet above my head) with the spineless, feckless, weak, and moronic appeasementof Gov. Vilsack and the Democrats by our nominally Republican state legislators. While I personally like and respect my State Senator (JerryBehn) and State Representative (Ralph Watts) I am quickly approaching the point where I cannot pull the lever for any state level Republican.

I know intellectually that I should not let the perfect be the enemy of the goodand that politics is the art of the possible. However, after 20+ years ofRepublicans controlling all or part of the state legislature (and excludingthe last 8 years with a Republican governor) shouldn't we expect some marginally conservative actions out of our representatives? Is it too much to ask that Republicans lead when it comes to ideas? To wit, what follows is a relatively comprehensive listing of general gripes and suggestions for Republicans which, if properly responded to, will retain my continued allegiance (in no particular order).

Tax Cuts: Why have there been no substantial tax cuts in recent memory? Please don't tell me that everything the state does is so important that it justifies a continuing theft of my money to fund it. Iowa has more government employees at all levels per capita than almost any other state in the union. We are the France of America. To top it off, our tax structure discourages new business and drives retirees out. It is absolutely shameful and inexcusable that our Republican legislators have not eased the tax burden in this state.

Death Penalty: Every time a serious crime happens the legislators get all puffed up and propose a death penalty. Every time the proposal loses horribly. There is simply no justification for a lack of a death penalty in this state for first degree murder, multiple felons, and felony murder. NONE. Frankly, I'd just settle for one for child rapists and cop killers.

Retarded Corporate Giveaways (a/k/a Iowa Values): We've beaten this issue to death here but it still frosts my ass every time I see some multimillion dollar company go hat in hand to some weasely bureaucracy begging for a handout. Why has there not been any ideological debate over the proper role of government? How much money will it take to bribe Maytag into sticking around another 18 months?

Shiny Baubles (a/k/a Vision Iowa): See above. How did the majority of our legislators get sold on a proposal that rapes and pillages the countryside so that the metros can fund pet projects that benefit only them? How did anyone ever think that Iowa should become the center of fake rainforest research in upper midwestern states lying exclusively between two major rivers?

7 to 7.5% increase in state funding: Our House folks agree to 7% and the Senate reaches a compromise with the governor for 7.5%. House Leader Rants accuses the Senate of irresponsible profligacy. Huh? How about freezing the State budget for a couple of years. Lets just keep the increases below inflation and population growth/shrinkage. What a freaking joke.

Balance Budget Monkey Business: Look we all know that the balanced budget is bunkum. Don't pee on my head and tell me it's raining. The Rs are just as bad as the Ds, if not worse. At least the Ds occasionally muster the courage to tell us they want to raise taxes to pay for their programs. When it happens it's intellectually honest. The Rs on the other hand can't ever advocate raising taxes, nor would I want them to. But they also don't have the testicular fortitude to actually propose cutting programs. Instead they conspire with the governor to engage in accounting tricks that would make Arthur Anderson blush and then blow sunshine up our ass about how dandy everything is. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

County Consolidation: 99 counties is a ridiculous number. We could probably get by with 6. I'm willing to split the difference and make it 49. Counties were originally planned so that the county seat was no more than one day's horse ride away. Given the prevalence of these new fangled automobiles I think that a county seat could be nearly 180 miles away and still serve its purpose. It doesn't even have to be mandated. Just do thesame thing we did with schools. Give each one a per capita $ amount for budget and encourage them to consolidate services. Sue me for wanting to drag state government into the early 20th century.

Vouchers and charter schools: I realize that most of Iowa doesn't have the population to support robust private schools or charter schools. Our public school open enrollment goes a long way toward improving educational prospects in rural Iowa. But some of the metro schools are just bad. Minority parents especially would benefit from being able to send their kids to Dowling or Davenport Assumption. We should be pushing the boundaries of educational excellence before Iowa slips any further.

Ruth Harkin: Come on. Neither she nor her husband is a resident of this State. What is she doing on the Board of Regents? Why not just nominate HILLARY!?

Defense of Marriage Amendment: It's just a matter of time until our goofy Iowa Supreme Court makes some idiotic decision that we either have to allow or recognize gay "marriages" in this State. Stop them now. It's politically popular and it's the right thing to do.

Racial Discrimination in University Admissions: While we're at it, amend the Iowa Constitution to shut down the state universities covert and overt discrimination in favor of minority students in admissions. It's downright un-American.

English as the State language: End ESL programs in state schools. Require immigrants, whether they be Bosnian, Mexican, Swahili, Dutch, or other, to learn English in their first year here and ensure they do so by requiring all state business be conducted exclusively in English.

Mental Health Parity: Quite bitching about the cost of health coverage while simultaneously imposing expensive benefit mandates on carriers. Allow carriers to sell a cheap group insurance policy without any benefit mandates to improve the number of insured.

Dildo Tax: I don't support any new tax schemes, sin or otherwise. The libertarian in me recoils at this kind of micromanagement of our morality.

State Liquor Wholesaling: Get the state out of the business of liquor wholesaling. What are we, the Soviet Union? Is there any legitimate state interest here? Any? Bueller?

Strengthen Abortion Informed Consent: Pass a law requiring that abortionists provide women with information regarding a fetus's developmental status before authorizing an abortion. Better yet requirethat they get a 4D ultrasound before consent. God forbid any woman havetrue knowledge of what the unviable tissue mass they are having removed actually is.

Iowa Courts' Budget issues: Tell the Iowa courts and the Iowa State Bar Association that if they want more money for courts they shouldn't have built a Taj Mahal for a Supreme Court building. You can also take out a few dollars by removing a couple of Supreme Court justices who think it is their job to usurp the state legislature's judgment on casino taxes. There may be three equal branches but the legislature is more equal and should make damn sure the court knows it. Further reduce their workload by passing a cap on non-economic damages and creating a loser pays system for frivolous lawsuits. See also County Consolidation.

Most if not all of these things would enjoy popular support and, double bonus, would be the right thing to do for all Iowans. Like Michael Ledeen says "Faster, please."

UPDATE: Register Reader commented on Jeff's post below that I screwed up and mismatched Retarded Corporate Giveaways and Shiny Baubles with Vision Iowa and Iowa Values. Correction is made above (demonstrating the awesome error correcting power of the blogosphere). Thanks RR. If that is your real name.

Testing

Just testing a new feature to see if works. Supposedly I can send an email
to a special address and then publish the whole thing later. We'll see.

A Question

Chad posed an interesting question to me yesterday. But, before I give it to you, I need to give just a couple of lines of background.

Remember a year or two ago when the Iowa Supreme Court announced that it was a violation of equal protection to tax riverboat-based casinoes at a lower tax rate than land-based casinoes? The Supreme Court said that the state legislature could not possibly have had a rational basis for drawing the distinction they did.

Well, Chad's question is--and I have to admit I think it's a good one--shouldn't it also be a violation of equal protection to allow the proposed race track outside of Newton to avoid certain taxes when other race tracks in Iowa don't get that advantage?

If I owned Hawkeye Downs over by Cedar Rapids, I'd be filing my suit yesterday.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating in favor of the tax break for Newton. I hate all these tax loopholes, developmental credits, and otherwise targeted cuts. As Don said a couple of days ago, here at Tusk and Talon, the editorial position is that we should just lower the marginal rates for everyone rather than have the government attempt to pick winners and losers in the business world through the tax code. But, that being said, I still think the legislature has the power to do so. It's foolish and their wrong, but they have the power to set tax rates as they please.

I'm BAAACK

Well I've returned safely from across the ocean blue. Our 16 hour return trip turned into a lovely 24 hour straight marathon. We got to JFK to find that our return flight (on an airline that I will not mention other than to say its name rhymes with Worthless (long 'o' sound)) had been delayed such that there was no metaphysical way for us to connect to the last flight out of Detroit. Solution: take a frightening cab ride (for which the airline refused to pay) from JFK to LaGuardia in evening rush traffic to catch a flight to Minneapolis. Once in Minneapolis (fer sure, you betcha) wait 3 hours for a connection to Des Moines.

Needless to say I've taken today off work to recover. Poor Jeff however is slaving away. HA HA HA HA HA!

Glad to see little has changed. Jeff, Don, State29, and Roth all still hate our atrocious Aid to Dependent Corporations/What Iowa Companies? (ADC/WIC) programs. Our "republican" state legislators are still weenies. And the weather here sucks. It's good to be back.