Patterico's Pontifications

3/20/2015

Scott Walker: I’m Glad I Fired My Consultant for Speaking the Truth About Iowa

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:38 am



He’ll fight unions, and he’ll fight ISIS, but there’s no fighting the Iowa voters:

Gov. Scott Walker brought his Wisconsin story to South Carolina on Thursday, telling voters how he overcame protests and a recall effort, and suggesting the departure of a campaign aide this week was rooted in the need to respect voters.

In a speech to about 200 people at the TD Convention Center in Greenville, Walker indirectly addressed the departure of social media aide Liz Mair after news spread about tweets she posted before she was hired that disparaged Iowa and its caucuses, the first in the nation.

“One of my clear rules is, if you’re going to be on our team, whether on the paid staff or a volunteer, what I always say is you need to respect the voters,” he said. “Because really if you think about campaigns, it’s not about the candidate or the staff. It’s about the voter. It’s about how to help people’s lives be better.

“One of the things I’ve stressed … in the last few days as I’ve looked at the possibility of running is you have my firm commitment that I’m going to focus on making sure that the people on my team, should we go forward, are people who respect voters.”

Mair stepped down Tuesday just hours after her hiring had been announced — and shortly after the head of the Iowa Republican Party said Walker should fire her.

The offending tweets by Mair were these:

Note the dates. The tweets were written by Mair before she was hired, but apparently having those opinions to begin with was fatal to her consulting deal with Walker.

Upon reflection, I think Mair is wrong. I think having Iowa first is just fine, because you get to find out from jump street whether a politician is craven: i.e. do they support ethanol subsidies or not? (It’s this sort of lunacy, I believe, that caused Mair to tweet what she did.) Scott Walker supports them. Ted Cruz (and, to his credit, Rand Paul) do not.

Ethanol subsidies, like any agricultural subsidies, are a distortion of the marketplace and create all sorts of crazy incentives. It’s a policy that would make a wanna-be socialist like FDR proud, and only craven vote-seekers in the GOP (that’s most people) support them.

Like his support for ethanol subsidies, firing Mair (her resignation was clearly not voluntary) was a disappointing action for Walker to take. But hey, sometimes you gotta bow to reality, as Gil Fulbright hilariously reminded us last year:

217 Responses to “Scott Walker: I’m Glad I Fired My Consultant for Speaking the Truth About Iowa”

  1. another mouthy hooch undid by incontinent tweeting

    how many is this now

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  2. Unfortunately, as funny as he is, Gil Fulbright has the conventional Jon Stewartish-smart-young-person take on Net Neutrality. Amazing that people who see through political incentives as demonstrated by the video above can’t see the incentives at work with Net Neutrality.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  3. another mouthy hooch undid by incontinent tweeting

    Indeed, a woman was central to the post. Which, naturally, means yet another golden opportunity for happyfeet to use a word demeaning to women, right on cue.

    I know Leviticus thinks it’s “flipping out” to notice this, but it’s become somewhat compulsive behavior.

    I’m not moderating it, but I am commenting on it.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  4. i demean mens all the time fair is fair

    have you read any of my comments about meghan’s coward daddy for example or about the marco sleazio

    there’s nothing remotely special about women in politics in failmerica

    they’re just as nasty and useless as the mens

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  5. “Politics is a hoor’s game.” — Ken, Democratic precinct captain, 35th Ward, Chicago, c. 1977

    (That is a slur, if any, on Walker, not the lady.

    nk (dbc370)

  6. and i don’t understand why we have to carry a torch for professional political flunkies male or female

    a.) it’s very inside baseball

    b.) they’re professional political flunkies

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  7. GOP on spending reminds me of the young Augustine (obviously in his pre-episcopal, pre-saint days):
    Lord,give me chastity, but not just yet.

    kishnevi (9c4b9c)

  8. I think ethanol subsidies and, worse, mandates are bad because 1) we’re burning topsoil which is not really renewable except over 3,000 years or so; and 2) ethanol has 2/3 the energy per gallon of gasoline and it costs 1/3 more per gallon than gasoline; for a 50% net loss* to the present day consumer and incalculable loss to future generations. The “capitalist cronies” that it’s making rich are secondary — we can always hang them and seize their ill-gotten gains.

    *Somewhere there.

    nk (dbc370)

  9. Miss Mair was dismissed for the same reasons that Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan had such short tenures as campaign blogesses for John Edwards: her past writing caught up with her. Mr Edwards had somewhat less excuse: everyone knew that the two young ladies were foul-mouthed radicals, but it seems as though Mr Walker didn’t do his due diligence before hiring Miss Mair.

    Actually, if you are a politician, if you hire anyone who posts or tweets something other than home improvement tips or recipes, you’ve made a mistake.

    The Dana with the long memory (f6a568)

  10. developing the infrastructure for storage and distribution and maintaining a certain amount of ethanol production made some sense for national security reasons back in the day

    but that was many many moons ago

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  11. Ms. Mair committed the most unforgivable of sins in American politics; telling the truth. Ethanol and farm supports are part of the budget being a mess. If Walker won’t tell hard truths with a soft voice to Iowans, he will be as nancified and worthless as McCain and Romney before him.

    Bugg (aace18)

  12. is ethanol subsidized anymore?

    i think it just benefits from a mandate anymore, which is a stupid market distortion but a change in policy from when it was actually subsidized with tax monies

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  13. good, clear-thinking take on this here: http://www.redstate.com/2015/03/19/breitbart-malkin-scott-walker-strategery/

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  14. Looking at those tweets (and that pic), I think I can make room for Mair on my team!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  15. Breitbart is racing Daily Caller to see who can get underneath the bottom-feeding bottom the fastest

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  16. omg Mr. Colonel that is sexist, objectifying, and borderline massageyness, what you said

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  17. no, feets, just a sharp eye for (and keen appreciation of) talent. Say, didn’t she front a gurl rock band? No, wait… that was Liz Phair.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  18. Can no longer afford to vote for lesser of evils slower PC socialism. If we are stuck with Hillary! or Fauxachontas vs. happytalk Chamber of Commerce entrepenueraplaooza nation of immigrants idiocy,then let it burn.

    Bugg (aace18)

  19. ok Mr. Colonel but i got my eye on you mister

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  20. i think it just benefits from a mandate anymore, which is a stupid market distortion but a change in policy from when it was actually subsidized with tax monies

    A mandate is a subsidy. It’s just less direct. But let’s call it what it is.

    As for “carrying a torch for political flunkies” I do not know Ms. Mair and from reading her tweets it sounds like I do not agree with many of her positions, but she sounds honest and forthright and her firing IMO says something about Walker and it’s not good.

    Patterico (89b3da)

  21. Our esteemed host wrote:

    As for “carrying a torch for political flunkies” I do not know Ms. Mair and from reading her tweets it sounds like I do not agree with many of her positions, but she sounds honest and forthright and her firing IMO says something about Walker and it’s not good.

    What it says is that Governor Walker is a politician, concerned with winning elections. John Edwards had to dump his two foul-mouthed bloggesses, because his campaign was being saddled with their previous messages. Mr Walker had the same problem: if he had retained Miss Mair, her previous messages would be hanged on him.

    Before the internet, this wasn’t a problem; now it is. Heck, if Scott Walker or Ted Cruz wanted to pay me $250,000 a year to work for him, I’d have to turn it down . . . unless it could all be done anonymously.

    The realistic Dana (f6a568)

  22. A mandate is a subsidy. It’s just less direct.

    yes yes but in the comment before mine Mr. Bugg said that Ethanol and farm supports are part of the budget being a mess.

    I don’t think the ethanol mandate per se can be fairly said to significantly contribute to failmerica’s significant budget woes anymore

    back in the day they were a line item to the tune of billions of dollars a year

    it’s just different now is all

    But anyways I don’t mind that Mr. Governor Scott Walker fired this person. I also would not have minded if Mr. Governor Scott Walker had not fired this person.

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  23. Colonel – Red State certainly thinks very highly of itself for a low wattage website.

    http://www.redflagnews.com/top-100-conservative

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  24. Despite what she wrote, she stands by it. Liz Mair has a long history of working with candidates that she might now ideologically agree with 100%, including Governor Walker. But she has NEVER done anything but push out their message exactly and precisely and 100% professionally. This was the Walker team overreacting. This was Rick Wiley not knowing how to manage and jumping the gun and proving HE isn’t ready for prime time as a manager. Wiley lays out some ridiculous press statement saying they need to be all encompassing of all the US. Well, most of the US thinks Iowa is ludicrous.
    Stop overreacting. Learn to manage.

    Conservative Chick on the right (c87221)

  25. this is just so incredibly micro i can’t even belieber it’s a topic

    on a side note NPR has like the most adorable terrorism picture ever up today

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  26. @21– Dana: Structure that to include a signing bonus. Hope the check clears before they discover what they should have known before…

    I don’t know about what ethanol does to the Fed budget, but those of us who have to buy hay by the bail have seen prices skyrocket as land once producing hay now supports corn. And the mandated use of corn in motor fuel is taking that corn (at a reasonable price) away from the guy who uses it for cow and hog fuel. This does cause some chaos in the super-market, not to mention one’s often happy home when Mrs. Gramps arrives with news of the latest “super-market chaos.

    Gramps, the original (9e1415)

  27. Liz Mair is a professional political flak or hack whichever you prefer–the non- physical combat version of a professional hired gun or mercenary who works for various causes and people in a spokesman or communications capacity over a lifetime. It is a profession that requires some skill and judgement and one that is absolutely necessary in our political system. But let’s be honest and call it what it is. These people move from candidate to candidate and campaign to campaign just like political advisers and campaign managers do. What most of us consider as loyalty and personal honesty are different for these people because these communicators are supposed to represent their employers’ narrative not their own, and are supposed to know when they maybe should not hire on with a candidate if their personal views are sufficiently at odds that it would be difficult for them to stay on- message.

    Twitter has vastly complicated this profession for its practitioners. Tweeting, as I believe I have warned once or twice before, is especially bad for people in these hired gun professions. Tweeting always comes back to haunt. Especially in politics. In short, I have no sympathy either for Mair *or* for Walker in this boondoggle but we have at least learned some about how both of them operate from this experience, and it is not reassuring. Entirely putting aside her tweets before she was hired which may or may not represent her personal beliefs, Mair’s angry tweet rampage after she was fired was remarkably unprofessional and should give any future employer pause. Walker’s hiring of her, clearly without adequate vetting of what might be out there in prior tweets or TV appearances from her that could potentially cause his nascent campaign heartburn, suggests his campaign is struggling and needs to ramp up to play on the national stage.

    I’ll further add that it is the Dem oppo machine that “uncovered” her pre-employment tweets and got them into the public eye as part of their early” take down of Walker” strategy. And I’ll even further add to make you go “hmmm” that many of Mair’s most fierce defenders in the last few days are those who many here often deride as RINO or establishment type bloggers and columnists. I believe Walker might soon have come to realize that Mair’s personal take and previous exposition on several social issues may have caused him heartburn too.

    elissa (12a0cd)

  28. 8-nk
    Dead on target. I have seen the topsoil used for stupid trial and error practices my entire life. Switch Grass is a renewable that costs far less than corn. But the corn companies have been paying the way for these farmers forever. Seed Corn companies and soybean companies dominate the landscape. Obama resigning is far more plausible than farmers doing the right thing and growing switch grass in mass.

    mg (31009b)

  29. here is the problem with Liz Mair, no need to gratuitously insult the base, whereas ethanol should be properly derided

    narciso (ee1f88)

  30. Wow! Hat tip to mr. feets, who managed to get his comment in before the “Ding!”

    creeper (cd5d97)

  31. Walker used up his quota of politica courage when he fought the public employer unions – besides that didn’t cost him votes, but just energized political activity against him. And he really had no choice.

    Sammy Finkelman (9f1a19)

  32. a caveat that Wisconsin paper is as reliable as the Texas Tribune is to Perry, or the Dog Trainer is to anyone besides Obama and Red Squaw

    narciso (ee1f88)

  33. I agree with elissa.

    I know Iowa is important because it’s first but this is ridiculous. If Walker is willing to sacrifice paid staff simply because one disagrees with him on ethanol, where does it end? Get a backbone, man. What if someone disagrees about abortion, Iraq, the budget, or any number of other issues – will they all have to be fired, too?

    DRJ (e80d46)

  34. Here is what Carly Fiorina says:

    The right answer ultimately is that the government shouldn’t be in the business of subsidizing anything. Subsidies and a variety of tax credits distort the markets. But we need to phase out subsidies for sugar, oil and renewable fuels but do it at the same time so that we’re not disadvantaging any one state or industry.

    She is right.

    elissa (12a0cd)

  35. Subsidies distort the market but it will never be painless to change. We just need to do it.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  36. Yay, Carly! She’d make a great senator, governor or VP.

    Colonel Haiku (97712e)

  37. We’ll never not subsidize sugar. Even if we were forced to import all of it, the government would bear part of the cost to make it cheap to the consumer at the supermarket. Trust me on this. Sugar is one of the “opiates of the masses”. Look anywhere in the world. The poorest countries subsidize consumer prices of sugar.

    nk (dbc370)

  38. I never paid attention to Iowa until Obama vs. Hillary. My conclusion is that it’s a test of organization. The winner is the one who lines up and deploys his soldiers best. It’s important to the big backers, money and political, to know that they are backing the most competent political machine, I suppose.

    nk (dbc370)

  39. well it gave us Carter and Obama, consider that enemy action, with the latter it was more serious, because his momentum was much less after Iowa.

    narciso (ee1f88)

  40. Quite apart from the market distortion, subsidizing sugar is like subsidizing poison.

    elissa (12a0cd)

  41. There is no candidate that I agree with 100%. Walker is pretty good, even though he is a lot more SoCon than I am. Everyone who needs Iowa is going to say what Walker is saying and be sensitive to their employee’s mutterings.

    Cruz doesn’t need Iowa because he’s not seriously running in 2016 — he has a longer game. Rand can’t support anything of the sort and remain credible, but Iowans know it isn’t personal, it’s just the way he is.

    Right now, the contest seems to be Walker vs Bush, and we know that Bush has no problem with ethanol subsidies or any other form of rent seeking. Doling out rents is the family business. Walker cannot seem at any point to be falling behind Bush, so he cannot alienate Iowans. Yes, the place Iowa takes in the primaries is unfortunate, but the time to say so is not while campaigning there.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  42. We don’t subsidize sugar. We just prevent its import at market prices. This effectively subsidizes HFCS through tariff barriers, and also keeps cheap ethanol, made from cheap sugar, from driving down the price of corn ethanol.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  43. Long live social media.

    The Emperor (2da086)

  44. Now I realize the reason I read this blog is so that you can do my serious reflecting for me. Up until just a few moments ago, I was in the Liz Mair camp, but then I read this:

    “Upon reflection, I think Mair is wrong. I think having Iowa first is just fine, because you get to find out from jump street whether a politician is craven: i.e. do they support ethanol subsidies or not? (It’s this sort of lunacy, I believe, that caused Mair to tweet what she did.) Scott Walker supports them. Ted Cruz (and, to his credit, Rand Paul) do not.”

    Absolutely! From square one, we get to know who panders and who does not. It will be months before the first debate and I have already cut my list down to two candidates. Thank you Iowa and thank you, too, Patterico.

    ThOR (a52560)

  45. I am glad I fired my cat for making me know I have a rat problem.

    The Emperor (2da086)

  46. How come Chimperor only shows up on Scott Walker threads?

    nk (dbc370)

  47. Ted Cruz may well have to wait to be the nominee but he is definitely running in 2016.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  48. I think things are aligning well for Cruz to be the nominee this time.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  49. How so, DRJ? The alignment you see, I mean.

    elissa (12a0cd)

  50. teh Chimperor picks his spots to go sapper-mode behind teh enemy lines…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  51. Cruz will never be the nominee… IMHO. I like the guy and what he says for the most part, but the way he says them can grate on people.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  52. there’s no shame in being a senator

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  53. hah jk

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  54. I don’t think, the first tweet was about ethanol,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  55. aren’t the issues of concern, common core, amnesty and obamacre,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  56. Carly had no problem using “Steve” from Bangalore being HP’s customer service. Another GOP hack who has no use for American workers. PASS. She will get barbequed in any race for that kind of crap. And it’s why I will never buy an HP product ever. HP’s stock price also went into a death spiral under her leadership.

    IS THERE ANY GOP POL WHO CARES ABOUT AMERICANS?Even one?

    … BUELLER?

    Bugg (aace18)

  57. “Indeed, a woman was central to the post. Which, naturally, means yet another golden opportunity for happyfeet to use a word demeaning to women, right on cue.

    I know Leviticus thinks it’s “flipping out” to notice this, but it’s become somewhat compulsive behavior.”

    – Patterico

    And yet the objections only seem to be made when the target is a conservative, and a favored one at that. Either the objections are about chivalry and we can start talking about all the lovely chivalrous things that commenters on this site say about Hillary Clinton, or the objections are about politics and lose their weight.

    I invite people to flip out on a nonpartisan basis, to little avail.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  58. It grasps them with its talons and then uses its razor-sharp beak to rip its victims to shreds, to basically tear it apart limb by limb, and I guess the shame about making this a state bird is it would serve as a much better mascot for Planned Parenthood,” Groen said.

    i hate this person because he’s stupid and because he’s creepy

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  59. I think things are aligning well for Cruz to be the nominee this time.

    I think that he would lose as the nominee and everyone knows that. He is too big a change and too deep into the Teas. He would be much better off following a Walker presidency when the electorate has moved to the right. He would also do better after he has sanded down some of his rough edges. He would do WAY better if he served as Texas governor for a term, but these half-term Senators have proven a bust so far.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  60. And I think Cruz knows most of this. He is doing a turn on stage for a later effort. Just like Obama was until the wave caught him.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  61. because Hillary Clinton doesn’t have enough defenders, seriously what has she done, except coast on her husband’s coat tails, while bodies pile up to Crimea to Cyreniaca, taking in money from every too bit oligarch along the way. Don’t even get me started on ‘Madame Lafarge’ Warren.

    narciso (ee1f88)

  62. the Dems made a point of pride, not to vote for Condi Rice, for Janice Rogers Brown,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  63. Cruz is also very very very hard on the eyes

    he’s just really not attractive

    feo, I believe his people call it

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  64. many of the same person funded ‘nominal’ republican Chuck Hagel

    narciso (ee1f88)

  65. 54. Narciso, I’m not sure what “first tweet” you are referring to, but you are right that she was not just limiting her Iowa tweeting to be about ethanol. Tweets standing on their own have no context which is why they are so dangerous. Here is one of the statements that made some question her professional judgement in tweeting it:

    In January, Mair took to Twitter to complain about an event in the state hosted by Iowa Rep. Steve King, a favorite of the GOP’s far-right flank. “In other news, I see Iowa is once again embarrassing itself, and the GOP, this morning. Thanks, guys,” Mair wrote and later added, “The sooner we remove Iowa’s front-running status, the better off American politics and policy will be.”

    That was a nasty, pointless, inarticulate tweet for her to issue and was bound to come up in oppo research no matter what candidate she ultimately signed with. It had the effect of insulting everyday Iowans in a way they will not forget, without moving the anti-subsidy policy ball forward, or moving a change in primary dates/locations ball forward in any measurable way. Just stupid.

    elissa (12a0cd)

  66. therein lies the real problem, elissa, one can be critical but clever and not gratuitous,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  67. First you stop the bleeding by tourniquet. Then you stitch the wound. Much later on, you worry over what the mugger with the knife is forcing the patient to burn in their fireplace or gas tank.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  68. Walker has to be a glutton for punishment. 3 elections against the union elites and now idiots like me dissecting him.
    Poor man.

    mg (31009b)

  69. ‘it’s not a tumor’ just some more vetting in the future,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  70. 41.
    Baker is part of the reason I refused to call Obama the most antiIsraeli president. In fact, in terms of trying to directly force Israel to do things the Israeli government did not want to do, Bush I is still worse than Obama.

    kishnevi (91d5c6)

  71. 66. I read that tweet as an attack on the Tea Party, with Maair complaining the GOP was being moved to far to the right.

    kishnevi (9c4b9c)

  72. on balance, the GOP is more pro Israel than the Dems, Baker and Scowcroft are the outliers,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  73. clearly that was the intent,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  74. 72 Kish, –it was the second tweet in that sequence to which I was referring. Sorry if that was not clear. To your comment, I’m not entirely sure what her first tweet that day about “embarrassing itself” referred to. See-that’s the whole biggest problem with tweets right there.

    elissa (12a0cd)

  75. elissa:

    49.How so, DRJ? The alignment you see, I mean

    At this point in any election, candidates need to avoid gaffes and identify potential funds. Cruz has no real gaffes that I’m aware of, and is doing well in political and entertainment events. He’s had a Sister Souljah moment in Iowa. Also, he has significant potential fundraising from Tea Party sources, a few high profile givers, and Texas. He already has his campaign and fundraising personnel in place, and he has at least one PAC.

    Looking ahead, Cruz is better positioned than the other candidates to impress voters. First, he’s a better speaker than most and as good as Christie and Rubio — and maybe better when it comes to the base because Christie has his Obama hug problem and Rubio has an immigration problem. Second, I don’t think this election will be about the economy and jobs (nor was the last, unfortunately, or Mitt would have won). I think foreign policy will be a big issue, and Governors will have a harder time convincing the voters they can handle foreign policy. Senators like Paul and Cruz have talked about foreign policy and thought about the issues more, but Paul’s positions on foreign policy will pale next to Cruz’s. Cruz is and always has been in the conservative sweet spot on foreign policy, even when it didn’t help him, so I think it’s what he really believes and that record will help him in 2016.

    There may be other years for Cruz and he’s young enough to wait, but this election is shaping up to be ideal for him. I know he won’t waste it.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  76. The girl is right. Don’t throw her under the bus.

    The Emperor (2da086)

  77. Cruz is overqualified and would be wasted as a Texas Governor. I would, however, welcome him as President of the Republic of Texas.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  78. As good or better than Sam Houston, but without the military victory.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  79. I would, however, welcome him as President of the Republic of Texas.

    I’d move there, although it might be hard, coming from LaLaLand.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  80. I’m not sure what the election will be about in 2016. Just about everything will be in the crapper, including the economy once this asset bubble bursts.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  81. Reagan was deemed too extreme and unelectable by many Republicans too (primarily Rockerfeller Republicans). And Cruz is very much in the Reagan mold. “Unelectable” is simply not a very persuasive argument.

    Besides, how does “unelectable” differentiate Cruz from past GOP nominees or present contenders? I see plenty of equally unelectable contenders who lack Cruz’s ethics and intellect. Does a lack of intellect and ethics somehow make the others more electable? I know it makes them more presentable to corporate/K Street interests, but to average voters? I doubt it.

    I won’t, however, argue with those who contend it will be an uphill slog for Cruz to get the nomination. With big money and the Republican Party apparatus against him, it will be tough going.

    ThOR (a52560)

  82. Kevin M.,

    Texas is actually a plain state. A lot of people come here and then want to get out, either back to civilization or to the prettier places they came from. The towns aren’t that special and the rural areas are fairly desolate. There’s a reason you only see photos of the Hill Country and the San Antonio River Walk.

    Also, it can be a harsh life in Texas so you quickly learn two things — don’t depend on other people, and (paradoxically) be willing to help out others because you may need it someday. It’s libertarianism with a dash of Scots-Irish “get off my lawn,” and it works for us.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  83. Walker screwed up, imo. Getting rid of Mair was a mistake. If the resignation was submitted of her own free will, then he should have rejected it. A guy that’s built his reputation on standing up to the trouble makers in his state shouldn’t have rolled over for something this minor.

    On another note, Ace mentioned over on his blog that all of the suits – save one – by a certain individual who shall remain unnamed, have been dismissed. Congrats! And good luck with the last one!

    junior (79e744)

  84. DRJ,

    I’ve spend a few weeks in Houston in the late spring and summer, so I’m not really keen on the climate. I hear that’s a garden spot, too. Southern California has the best weather in the country, but the political climate is among the worst. I was so hoping we’d break up the state and I could live free in Orange County.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  85. these people help to make texas more nicer to look at

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  86. it was not about ethanol, it was about everything else, that provokes ‘oikophobia’

    narciso (ee1f88)

  87. These people make Texas look nicer, too.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  88. Reagan was deemed too extreme and unelectable by many Republicans too (primarily Rockerfeller Republicans). And Cruz is very much in the Reagan mold. “Unelectable” is simply not a very persuasive argument.

    Actually, Walker is a LOT closer to Reagan than Cruz is.

    I lived in CA under Gov Reagan and of course under President Reagan, and saw him in person twice, once in each role. Yes, TIME famously called him “unelectable” and he might have been had Carter not been such a doofus, but he had political instincts that Cruz does not have.

    Cruz would not have raised the sales tax (to 5%!) as governor.

    Cruz would not have compromised with Tip O’Neil, trading social spending for the arms buildup and Star Wars that broke the Soviet economy trying to keep up.

    Cruz would not have agreed to amnesty.

    Cruz would not have let Dole jack up FICA taxes.

    Cruz would not have used humor to disarm his critics “There you go again!”

    And Cruz would not ever have appealed to the common man, as Reagan did.

    Sure, not all of these things were good ideas, but some were and all got done. Reagan was the master of a game Cruz hasn’t yet learned the rules of. Sometimes when they say people are unelectable, they’re right. I like Cruz from a policy point of view, but the lone-sane-man-in-DC schtick is tiresome.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  89. We’ll never not subsidize sugar. Even if we were forced to import all of it, the government would bear part of the cost to make it cheap to the consumer at the supermarket. Trust me on this. Sugar is one of the “opiates of the masses”. Look anywhere in the world. The poorest countries subsidize consumer prices of sugar.

    You’ve got that backwards. Sugar in the USA costs about three times more than on the open world market, because of tarriffs. That’s why Life Savers moved across the lake to Canada.

    Milhouse (9d71c3)

  90. PS: And that’s why we’re the only country that uses HFCS instead of sugar, because the artificially high price of sugar makes it worthwhile.

    Milhouse (9d71c3)

  91. I think that he would lose as the nominee and everyone knows that.

    I think he would actually doing much better than, say Mitt did. He’s a much more compassionate person, and you can tell he is talking about his true beliefs. Americans respond to that kind of leadership. That’s why moderate republicans have done so poorly in elections even though they are
    closer to the voters on an ideological graph. Those who position themselves for advantage are weak leaders, and they don’t care about this country. Most Americans recognized this about Mitt and he lost so, so badly (and predictably).

    It’s time for those who actually thought Mitt had a shot to reconsider how presidential elections really work.

    Dustin (2a8be7)

  92. remind me who was the insurgent candidate in the Senate race again, who read ‘green eggs and ham’ on the Senate floor,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  93. But we need to phase out subsidies for sugar, oil and renewable fuels

    As far as I know there are no subsidies for sugar; sugar farmers are protected by tarriffs that can’t be justified by anything except their electoral clout. And as far as I know the only so-called “subsidy” for oil is that producers are allowed to depreciate the value of their wells a little faster than some other industries get to depreciate their assets. This is mostly because oil wells do depreciate, as the oil runs out! A well with no oil in it is worthless.

    Milhouse (9d71c3)

  94. I think Ted Cruz is pretty funny.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  95. it’s a peculiar model they followed, unmatched in quite some time, not to say it may not have succeeded in 1880

    narciso (ee1f88)

  96. Righteous post.

    Walker is, after all, a loyal Republican who unusually attracts both some of the elites and some of the unwashed.

    A Cruz with exec experience he is not.

    DNF (2964fc)

  97. Kevin, Cruz also agrees with you about the need for humor.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  98. Mr. Governor Walker is the future not unlike Mars colonies, vastly extended lifespans, an Empire spin-off, and them cheerleaders DRJ discovered

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  99. Mitt had a chance to win and I think he ran a credible campaign that would have won in an off-year election year. But Obama had an a better and more targeted turnout effort. The GOP nominee should do the same thing in 2016.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  100. Baker is part of the reason I refused to call Obama the most antiIsraeli president. In fact, in terms of trying to directly force Israel to do things the Israeli government did not want to do, Bush I is still worse than Obama.

    The worst US president for Israel, by far, was Eisenhower.

    Milhouse (9d71c3)

  101. I would be happy with Walker as the nominee. Not ecstatic but happy, and far happier than some of the other options.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  102. ==He’s a much more compassionate person, and you can tell he is talking about his true beliefs.==

    Cruz is a politician. Any human being who ever thinks he or she can “tell” what a politician’s “true beliefs” are is naive to the core. Cruz is impressive in many respects and I think he has much to offer. But he’s a crafty politician who has great personal goals for himself. Never forget that.

    elissa (12a0cd)

  103. It’s way too early to fall in love with any presidential candidate. There’s still much we need to learn– good and not so good–about every one of them in order to even gauge who is in serious contention.

    elissa (12a0cd)

  104. my love for Mr. Governor Walker is immeasurable and my respect for him immense – he’s ageless timeless lace and fineness

    he’s beauty

    and elegance

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  105. unlike Ted Cruz who’s a lil hard on the old ojos

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  106. The notion of oil and gas “subsidies” is another Obama lie. In fact, some oil and gas operators/businesses can claim a tax deduction (not a subsidy) that Big Oil hasn’t been able to take the deduction since 1975:

    So how did all of this misinformation get started? It all began in 2009. Within days of being sworn in as the nation’s 44th President, Barack Obama ordered his staff to scour the tax code for any provision that was relevant to the oil and gas industry, and promptly began proposing them for repeal. The oil and gas industry has always been an easy target for political demagoguery, and that dynamic has played out repeatedly and consistently in this Administration.

    Unfortunately, most media outlets and reporters have chosen to basically repeat the Administration’s mantra that these tax treatments – several of which have been in the tax code for almost a century – are somehow unique, specific to the oil and gas industry, and are “subsidies” for “big oil”. A great example of just how inaccurate this depiction is applies to Percentage Depletion, which has been a feature of the tax code since 1913, meaning it will be a full century old this year.

    Basically, Percentage Depletion is the oil and gas industry’s version of a depreciation deduction for its main asset, which is the oil and natural gas in the ground, commonly known as its reserves. Every industry of any kind is allowed a depreciation deduction on its assets under the U.S. Tax Code, but, far from being a “subsidy” for “big oil”, this tax treatment was in fact repealed for all integrated oil companies, i.e., ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, etc., in 1975, and is today available only to independent producers and royalty owners. So repeal of this extremely long-standing, completely common tax treatment would have no effect on “big oil” at all, and would in fact hit small producers and royalty owners harder than anyone else.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  107. you a big plagerizer, feets.

    elissa (12a0cd)

  108. Amy Walter says that the ultimate nominee will have to unite at least four of the 5 factions of the right and there are only 2 candidates among the top 5 at this point who might possibly be able occupy that space. Rubio and Walker. Cruz is not listed in the top 5 so obviously many will dispute these findings. Interesting charts and read, though.

    http://cookpolitical.com/story/8288

    elissa (12a0cd)

  109. Walker has the best shot. Cruz is too grating. Again, he has excellent ideas, let alone principles, but his mannerisms, mincing delivery and soapboxing do not play well.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  110. Cruz wouldn’t have a snowball’s chance in Jacinto City, Texas of winning the nomination, let alone elected.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  111. Someone’s remarks on Twitter were cause for apprehension and confusion and offense?

    I’m shocked — shocked!

    I wish some GOP candidate would say, “Twitter is for the Twitteratti, and I’m not one, and my campaign isn’t going to be based on Twitter. America is too important to limit our discussion to 140-character smartass remarks.”

    As for Ms. Mair, her liberal use of f-bombs shows she lacks the maturity to have any kind of public role with a political campaign. I swear like a sailor in private; I don’t in public, and especially not in court. I expect more of Republican staffers than I do of White House morons who call our foreign allies things like “chickensh*t” for public consumption.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  112. Two years away and I’m hoping for a big popcorn harvest this fall.

    mg (31009b)

  113. I was over by Lufkin TX a while back. It rained and was cold and some people said said that they wished they’d have winter – I mean “cold fronts” year round.
    One thing I’ve always liked about lower income rural Texans is the attitude that they might be poor, but they are proud. In particular, proud to be Texan… they may live in a small house with a lot of wear and tear, but something around the house is painted like the state flag (if not the whole house) or there is a star somewhere.

    I like that the “Come and Take it” slogan involves a cannon and I respect that Texans will line a highway for hundreds of miles to honor a fallen warrior.

    My opinion is that outside the coasts, the urban centers, and university towns, most Americans have more in common with Texans than they do with Washington DC

    steveg (794291)

  114. Colonel, I agree with you that sometimes Cruz’s “mincing delivery” comes across as elitist, but it’s ironic to see you say that since you like Romney and he’s the poster boy for elitism. Or maybe that was code for saying Cruz comes across as effeminate. Is that what you meant?

    DRJ (e80d46)

  115. steveg- I’m jealous of all you Texans. Have been since I worked on a house in Lake Travis back in the 70’s.

    mg (31009b)

  116. No, not effeminate, DRJ. His dramatic pauses, general delivery and body language detract from what could be very effective. I would never be the poor self-esteem sort of arrogant sod who’d impugn his motives or his empathy, he seems like a good guy, but – to me and more than a few of my far-right-leaning friends – the negative combination is unsettling.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  117. I wish some GOP candidate would say, “Twitter is for the Twitteratti, and I’m not one, and my campaign isn’t going to be based on Twitter. America is too important to limit our discussion to 140-character smartass remarks.”

    If you want to reach young voters, Twitter is the probably a necessity. This generation’s attention span has been conditioned to a limited 140 characters. Long-winded speeches are a death knell.

    Dana (86e864)

  118. I have been in Texas for a total of three days, all in Houston, and my chief memory is an evening rush hour that was worse than that on the Palmetto Expressway in Miami, which is saying a lot.
    On other fronts, I had coffee at Barnes and Noble today, and depressed to find the cafe there is now a Starbucks. But while it was the usual rotten Starbucks coffee, no one wrote on my cup, and no one offered to discuss anything with me. Albeit in that corner of Fort Lauderdale, the more meaningful topic would have been cistransheteronormativegenderism.

    Re Elissa at 104
    Do we want people to ever fall in love with a candidate? After all, that is how Obama got elected.

    kishnevi (adea75)

  119. Ted Cruz is a man with the right ideas who expresses himself well; Scott Walker is a man with the right ideas who actually got some of them put into governing practice.

    The practical Dana (1b79fa)

  120. Texas in the Summer can be quite miserable. I recall traveling to San Antonio in late 90s for a business conference and staying at a place not far off the Riverwalk. Walked over to a BBQ place on the ‘walk to meet friends in the early evening and remember standing at a traffic intersection waiting to cross and watching the waves of heat coming up off the street. Standing there, sweating and wiping my brow, I thought this is as close to Vietnam-type conditions as I ever want to be. It ain’t a dry heat. A dry heat I can take.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  121. I’m not Texan.
    Friends with a bunch, except when UT played USC in the National Championship game…and I’m almost over that… kinda

    steveg (794291)

  122. R.I.P. A.J. Pero, drummer for Twisted Sister during their hit-making years

    Icy (797871)

  123. Col., I take it that you do not vacation in Florida.
    According to WeatherBug it reached 88F and 100% humidity this afternoon, although the overnight low will be in the mid60s.

    kishnevi (9c4b9c)

  124. Ted Cruz has won precisely two political campaigns (one was a primary against the fop David Dewhurst). I doubt Cruz has shown Americans that he’s a successful politician. He seems to have taken some of the stereotypes about an insincere tent revivalist to the next level. Perhaps he will be tested, and we’ll see whether he has what it takes to win the nomination or anything outside the red state of Texas.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  125. Kish, I’ve only visited Florida two times and both during early Spring. I’m sure Summers are no picnic, though.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  126. I do like the state of Texas (and most Texans I’ve met, worked or done business with). Austin ain’t my favorite place, but I do like the Hill country, San Antonio and Dallas.FTW area. I have a cousin who lives in Richardson and he and his family absolutely love the place.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  127. ==Re Elissa at 104 Do we want people to ever fall in love with a candidate? After all, that is how Obama got elected.==

    No Kishnevi, we don’t. And that’s why my comment to which you refer suggested people should not be hasty to declare their support.

    “It’s way too early to fall in love with any presidential candidate. There’s still much we need to learn– good and not so good–about every one of them in order to even gauge who is in serious contention.”

    In my humble opinion a populace should never fall in love with a political candidate and yes, Obama is the prime example as to why. My caution that the 2016 election is almost 2 years away was aimed at people here who at least seem to already be in love and are declaring for certain candidates.

    elissa (12a0cd)

  128. Col., that’s why God created air conditioning.
    But it is actually worse further south, in the Caribbean. And worst humidity I ever met was in Cartagena, in May. They told us it gets worse in summer…

    kishnevi (9c4b9c)

  129. So the folks who said Romney was super electable are saying Cruz isn’t.

    Cool beans.

    Dustin (2a8be7)

  130. == that’s why God created air conditioning.==

    Ah, but when the grid goes down….. 🙂

    elissa (12a0cd)

  131. I do not think Cruz is electable because the MSM has him tagged as a lunatic from almost his first day in the Senate, and his first task must be to destroy that false image. Which, the MSM being what it is, is Sisyphean.
    Walker at least is only stereotyped as a hater of labor unions.

    kishnevi (adea75)

  132. 131.
    That is why he made backup generators.

    kishnevi (adea75)

  133. And some people can’t take that dang heat, the sissies!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  134. Obama offers us no lessons re which candidate we should pick. No decent polity should have ever considered him. Considering the 95 and on races it’s arguable how much he was

    narciso (3ebfe9)

  135. Sugar in the U.S. benefits from price supports, tariffs, and other controls that drive up the price, causing companies to flee the country or turn to high-fructose corn syrup (as Milhouse notes above). I made this point recently, in this post:

    A QUICK ASIDE: This, by the way, is why you have to buy Coke from Mexico to get tasty actual sugar in the drink. Here in the United States, sugar magnates have convinced the U.S. Government — through a careful program of persuasion, and certainly not through bribery, no sir! — to enact giant trade barriers that drive up the price of sugar. So you get that delicious and nutritious high-fructose corn syrup instead. Other countries like Mexico don’t have the same laws, and their sugar prices are more reasonable. (END QUICK ASIDE.)

    Anyone remember that post?

    Patterico (9c670f)

  136. And Romney won one and lost another, and quit a third. Rhetorical.

    narciso (3ebfe9)

  137. Yes invective should be used sparingly.

    narciso (3ebfe9)

  138. Yep, narciso, that’s old news. Give the past the slip.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  139. My mistake. America should not be expected to need cheap sugar to keep the proletariat happy. The subsidies, according to the following, actually drive up consumer sugar prices.


    The program that supports the American sugar industry has many facets. Most infamous is a subsidy program in which the U.S. Department of Agriculture gives loans to sugar farmers and allows them to repay those loans with raw sugar if sugar prices fall below 20.9 cents per pound. This program functions as an effective mass purchase of sugar, which drives up prices for consumers and thus doubly subsidizes the industry. The USDA then sells this sugar at a steeply discounted price to ethanol producers. Last year the USDA spent $53.3 million on the program. Including the loans that could not be repaid, the government spent $171.5 million.

    The government also enforces a system of tariffs and quotas on imported sugar, limiting the supply of cheaper sugar that can be imported from abroad. This results in wide spreads between global and domestic sugar prices. In the absence of protection, consumers and sugar-using producers alike could save several cents a pound on sugar bought from other countries.

    http://www.economics21.org/commentary/sugar-subsidies-are-bitter-deal-american-consumers

    nk (dbc370)

  140. In the video above, “Honest Gil” refers to “these things” and lists “balanced budget, education reform, and health care reform.” He then says:

    These are the things that are important to me, and these are the fine people who financed my campaign. Now, in order to do these things, I have to stay in office — and to stay in office, I have to keep these guys happy. Now if any of these things make these guys unhappy . . . well, my hands are tied.

    It’s very cute, and it’s true.

    The thing is, instead of “the fine people who financed my campaign” you could substitute “a majority of the voters” and the statement would be equally true. And when you get enough people on the government dole, “a majority of the voters” may want policies that rob our children of tomorrow’s money, so they can sit on their duffs today.

    In other words, the problem is not just with money in politics. It’s with democracy itself.

    Democracy — rule by the majority — is drilled into our heads from a young age as being wonderful. It’s not. It’s a terrible, awful system. The best you can say about it (channeling Winston Churchill) is that nobody can think of anything better. But, although people quote that humorous saying as if to praise democracy, in my view it is faint praise for a terrible system.

    The people who make the “Honest Gil” videos are part of the hipster Jon Stewart crowd who think the problem is money in politics. I guess their solution would be some sort of public financing, which a) cannot work unless you trample free speech rights and b) simply empowers Big Media as the sole providers of information on candidates, with no competition. Sorry, hipsters. It won’t work.

    What is the solution? We’re in a Catch-22. The goal? Realizing that government is hopeless, and democracy fundamentally flawed, the goal must be to make government as small as possible, with power as distributed as possible. That way, the harm it can do is minimized.

    We can’t vote that scenario into existence, however.

    Despite my misgivings about an Article V convention — like my worries that we’ll write liberal dreams into the text of our document, or my concerns that no document can ultimately restrain the intellectually dishonest — I think it may be our best chance. Even with an ideal outcome, it would be a temporary solution — but every solution is.

    I may make this comment into a post.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  141. Walker has shown he has the stuff winners are made of. Repeatedly.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  142. Universal suffrage is the problem. When the country was founded, voting was limited to relatively young, relatively prosperous (at the very least self-supporting) men. The kind of voters that build, not bleed, a nation.

    nk (dbc370)

  143. 144 posts about nothing that matters. I’m not trying to be a jerk, but really?

    Actually, I am being a jerk because the left is long gone and the right has nothing because it listens too hard.

    Patterico is correct. However, I am afraid that the size of government has already passed the tipping point.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  144. Note that John McCain also dissed ethanol in Iowa in 2008 and came in 4th, behind Huckabee, Romney and Fred Thompson. It isn’t always a measure of the man.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  145. The thing about Walker is that he is acceptable to the mainstream GOP and to the Teas and to the SoCOns. If you want to win the nomination being everyone’s first or second choice cannot hurt. IF you want to unify the party (as did not happen since 1994), this isn’t a bad choice.

    So of course the Democrats are going to do their best to destroy him, and it will take a lot less than what Hillary has been caught doing for that to happen.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  146. Folks, here’s a story about Minnie the Moocher
    She was a lowdown hoochie coocher
    She was the roughest, toughest frail
    But Minnie had a heart as big as a whale

    Hidee hidee hidee hi
    Hode hode hode ho
    Hee dee hee dee hee dee hee
    A hidee hidee hidee ho

    Cab Calloway – Minnie The Moocher Lyrics

    The hoochie coochie was a sexually provocative belly dance term that originated at the Philadelphia Centennial Exhibition in 1876. It became wildly popular during and after the Chicago World’s Fair in 1893. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoochie_coochie

    nk (dbc370)

  147. that minnie is bad news big-ass whale-heart notwithstanding save yourself some trouble pal and just keep on waliking

    happyfeet (831175)

  148. *walking* i mean

    happyfeet (831175)

  149. Should I tell my daughter that “swag”, as used by by young people these days, is a ghettoesque corruption of “swank”, or is that the kind of thing that young people should learn by themselves as a coming of age whatchamacallit?

    nk (dbc370)

  150. 143.Universal suffrage is the problem. When the country was founded, voting was limited to relatively young, relatively prosperous (at the very least self-supporting) men. The kind of voters that build, not bleed, a nation.

    nk, I will be quoting you on that one. “The kind of voters that build, not bleed, a nation”. Indeed!

    Hoagie (58a3ec)

  151. well that never stopped the millions of slain electrons over McDonnell, the Delaware shibboleth, the difference between Walker and other victims of lawfare, is he had the tools to defend himself,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  152. No back-stabbers either.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  153. well Churchill might have echoed your sentiment, re the flaws in representative republics, and trollope might have reflected on the same point, three quarters of a century earlier.

    narciso (ee1f88)

  154. Damn, but this Komodo Dragon blend coffee is tasting good on this fine Saturday morning.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  155. Colonel, that Red State link was good. I liked her but she was undisciplined for a political strategist.

    A major reason why we keep nominating moderates for the Presidency is that these kinds of attacks on viable conservative alternatives leave the moderate as the only plausible alternative standing. While conservatives are dividing their support into increasingly narrow slices, the moderate voters unify early behind a single candidate and don’t go to pieces over one or two differences of opinion.

    This is going to be a huge problem as we go into next year. I like Walker and wonder if he will hold up. JEB is poison to me but he may survive in spite of everything. Cruz is a first term Senator and we should know enough about those by now.

    I don’t see Christie going national. He is sort of a modern Al Smith. I like Jindal but he seems unable to break through so far. Perry will never live down that debate meltdown. It’s too bad Mitch Daniels is not available because of his family situation. Mike Pence is not the brain although he seems OK.

    I was very enthusiastic about Romney in 2012 and feel it was a tragedy he lost. I’m not sure the situation is salvageable now as Obama will destroy so much in the next two years. Of course, I can say that at my age. I still worry about my grandkids, though. One of my favorite moves is Grace Kelly’s last, called “The Swan.” It is set in a small European country in 1910 and every time I see it I think about what is coming in four years. That’s sort of how I feel about now.

    Romney had the skills to save the economy and the right instincts about foreign policy. He, like so many Republicans, was weak on immigration but there is nothing like an economic crash to solve the immigration problem.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  156. well we don’t really want a downturn, in our weakened state;

    http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/seeking-transfiguration-of-the-actual-by-the-imagination-of-the-possible-competency-in-context/

    mind arson, is the greater issue

    narciso (ee1f88)

  157. Mike K, I’m no sailor, but I like the cut of your jib. No love for Christie here, but I like what I’ve seen and heard about Walker and could support most of the others. Like you, I fear for the future of my kids, grandchild and God willing, future grandchildren. The country had an important choice to make in November of 2012 and a poor choice it made.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  158. If Liz Mair were really candid and honest about reality she’d have said that America (referring to all its voters who lean left or are squish-squishes) has embarrassed itself by installing the banana-republic junk now in the White House back in 2008 and 2012. So now there’s no turning back, since basic trends, particularly huge immigration numbers — of the “undocumented” — which supersede the past 6 years, likely mean this nation is going to increasingly look and vote like a bigger version of Mexico/Argentina with a dash of France/Greece thrown in for good measure.

    Vive le hope and change!

    Mark (c160ec)

  159. One thing that will be a major concern is the tendency of some to promote dissension, rant about the correct direction they believe should be taken and how the time is ripe for a third party challenge. This is a surefire recipe for a disaster. As we watch the horrible events (unthinkable just 6 short years ago) unfold all around us, the importance of November 2016 grows every day.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  160. A QUICK ASIDE: This, by the way, is why you have to buy Coke from Mexico to get tasty actual sugar in the drink.

    Obama’s wife is such a big-nothing loud-mouth because instead of fussing over children and their school lunches she could have used the “bully pulpit” of the First Lady’s office to point out exactly what you’ve highlighted. She shouldn’t have been harassing little Johnny and Susie and their local school boards throughout the US, she should have been aiming her ire at big-moneyed corporations in love with crummy food, crummy sugars, fake sugars, inflated sugars. She could have initiated sort of a “just say no” campaign.

    The astounding ignorance that most Americans have about just how harmful sugars are, particularly the high-fructose type and all the artificial sugars (which aren’t even worth a damn in reducing caloric intake), is to the food and medical industries what Obama and liberals are to the government and a decent society.

    Mark (c160ec)

  161. While conservatives are dividing their support into increasingly narrow slices, the moderate voters unify early behind a single candidate and don’t go to pieces over one or two differences of opinion.

    Mike K – I’m not sure I see the same unifying early with such a long campaign process, but I do agree with your point about conservatives getting outraged over minor differences of opinion. At times they act as thin-skinned, petulant and whiny as President Stompy Foot. The oft stated opinion that somehow we should not have nominated candidates who have prevailed through the primary process to me remains the ultimate expression of sour grapes and hindsight heroism.

    Get better candidates, change the system or live with the results.

    Woulda, coulda, shoulda solves nothing.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  162. The world would be just great if everybody voted the way I want them to.

    Why can’t they see what I see.

    I’m a victim!!!!!

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  163. except the medici will be opening up on walker or cruz, or any other non blanc mange candidate, and his retainers like Baker, have on balance, been a bane to public policy, before and after elections,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  164. NY Times goes after Scott Walker, again:

    http://althouse.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-nyt-accuses-scott-walker-of.html

    AZ Bob (34bb80)

  165. If that’s all the NYT has, he’s golden. Big discussion at Althouse about Wisconsin accents. Better that than a New Yawk accent.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  166. O/T, can you use two stroke fuel in modern four stroke engine?

    I had to delimb a tree back in January and the chainsaw didn’t require the entire gallon, which was basically the minimal amount I had to mix with the oil per the instructions.

    Can I just pour the rest into my Toyota or will I ruin the fuel injectors?

    Steve57 (88b05c)

  167. wild n’ wicked… http://youtu.be/OfgF1o6A8xM

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  168. Yep, leave it to the NYT to go after the big stories, while the world burns all around the incompetent Obama.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  169. and then Mr. Governor Scott Walker saved America the end

    happyfeet (831175)

  170. Elizabeth Warren’s foreign policy credentials are fantastic

    steveg (794291)

  171. The world would be just great if everybody voted the way I want them to.

    Why can’t they see what I see.

    I’m a victim!!!!!

    I started “The Myth of the Rational Voter” this morning and largely agree with most of the assertions that form the premise of the book. Part of that premise is that voters are prejudiced against market solutions, do not understand economics, and pay close to no penalty for voting according to irrational prejudices based on a misunderstanding of economics.

    Do you disagree?

    Patterico (9c670f)

  172. E.g. why do most voters support protectionism, and candidates who support it? Is there actually a logical argument in favor of its benefits outweighing its costs? Or is it because it feels good to say you’re sticking it to other countries?

    The answer is obvious, in my view.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  173. I’m sorry if I offended anyone with the “suck it” comment.

    It was perhaps a bit too much heartfelt.

    Steve57 (ab9703)

  174. You can be opposed to the 2.7 turbo and still be a Christian.

    Steve57 (ab9703)

  175. I like just about all of ’em, Steve. Lightweight, great handling, low displacement sportscars and big block cars that go better when driven in a straight line.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  176. The best of them look almost like pieces of art and their designs (and lines) are timeless.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  177. 175.
    Part of protectionism is sticking it to other countries. Part of it is patriotic and neighborly..it is perceived rightly or wrongly as helping the country economically. And sometimes it might make sense, in dealing with other countries whose import and export policies are hurting us. But that would be on a case by case basis, not a default position.

    kishnevi (9c4b9c)

  178. Some protections make sense to voters because of the human cost to displaced labor.
    Big Sugar down in Florida could say that X number of people will be laid off directly if protections are lifted and Y number will lose jobs indirectly. This would be true at least in the near term. The market may be efficient, but it isn’t often very fast to add new jobs at the same or better pay in locations where the jobs were lost and most voters are sympathetic to people facing displacement. So positioning myself as a populist there might get me elected and re-elected

    There are some good reasons to protect some heavy industries like ship and aircraft building, but those are different than Big Sugar.

    (Just to be clear, not bashing sugar. I think High Fructose Corn Sweetener and Cane sugar are equally as bad for me (and equally as good) They taste different, but 5000 cal of Cane Sugar burns the same as 5000 cal of High Fructose)

    steveg (794291)

  179. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laOSLhGCSf4

    A Tribute to U.S. Army 1st. Lt. Ivan Lechowich

    God speed, Ivan Lechowich.

    Steve57 (ab9703)

  180. You mind if I steal all of the above, coronello?

    Steve57 (ab9703)

  181. It’s all Teh Narrative and narcissism, Patterico. People vote their “feels” far more than on facts.

    Simon Jester (7082b9)

  182. Part of protectionism is sticking it to other countries. Part of it is patriotic and neighborly..it is perceived rightly or wrongly as helping the country economically.

    Wrongly.

    And sometimes it might make sense, in dealing with other countries whose import and export policies are hurting us. But that would be on a case by case basis, not a default position.

    I don’t view it the way you do. To me, voluntary transactions are good because they benefit both parties to the transaction. If a country is limiting the number of voluntary transactions going one way (imports), it reduces the total number of voluntary transactions, which is bad. It is good only if the action (or threat of such an action) causes another country to stop its own protectionism, leading to a greater volume of voluntary transactions overall.

    Arguments about trade “imbalances” miss the mark. People have this weird idea that if we import more than we export, this is somehow a bad thing. Nonsense. The ability to buy more and cheaper goods from other countries only makes us wealthier. Adam Smith said: “Nothing can be more absurd than this whole doctrine of the balance of trade.”

    Patterico (9c670f)

  183. Some protections make sense to voters because of the human cost to displaced labor.
    Big Sugar down in Florida could say that X number of people will be laid off directly if protections are lifted and Y number will lose jobs indirectly. This would be true at least in the near term. The market may be efficient, but it isn’t often very fast to add new jobs at the same or better pay in locations where the jobs were lost and most voters are sympathetic to people facing displacement. So positioning myself as a populist there might get me elected and re-elected

    There are some good reasons to protect some heavy industries like ship and aircraft building, but those are different than Big Sugar.

    There are no good reasons to protect any industries. They should rise and fall on their merits.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  184. It seems to me the person was being insulting to the voters, not critical of a position. I do not think there is a place for that unless you don’t mind being known as caustic or/and arrogant.

    And Walker cannot be held responsible for every hasty decision by people down the chain of command.

    But it would be nice not to see it happen.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  185. The merits are that the USA needs the capacity to build its own ships and airplanes.
    We can’t outsource military aircraft and warships to the lowest bidder and need to retain the capacity build our own

    steveg (794291)

  186. I think our democracy would work as the Founders intended if people understood the “pursuit of happiness” doesn’t mean doing what makes you happy. It means striving to make yourself a better, more virtuous person. We can have different ideas of virtue just as we have different ideas about religion — indeed, they go together — but I think the main problem is that it’s too easy to devote oneself to leisure and self-centered concerns.

    We are all naturally lazy and self-centered but civilization is supposed to steer us away from those qualities. Instead, our civilization encourages those qualities through its emphasis on today’s nebulous values and criticizes anyone who thinks traditional values matter.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  187. Well said, DRJ. And far too many people look for fulfillment in the meaningless material things in this life. That is not why we were put on this earth.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  188. Being more targeted, Rush for years (if not forever) has said that if the Left actually told the truth about what they wished to do, no one would vote for them. This just takes that to a broader audience.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  189. The “Pursuit of Happiness” was a substitution for “Property”, which the Founders thought typified the achievement of success and accomplishment. I believe that Adams asked for the change, probably due to his Calvinist roots, and wishing to not seem “greedy” like the “Gordon Gecko’s” of his age.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  190. That may be true.I agree that historians like James Q. Wilson thought happiness = property but I think the Founders were more likely to believe happiness = civic-mindedness or virtue.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  191. well it’s derived from Locke, and it’s in keeping with the understandings befitting a republic,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  192. To put it simply, America’s problem is moral relativism. If there are no truths, then anything and everything is acceptable. But nations and people don’t succeed when there are no truths and everything is acceptable.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  193. “why do most voters support protectionism, and candidates who support it? Is there actually a logical argument in favor of its benefits outweighing its costs? Or is it because it feels good to say you’re sticking it to other countries?

    The answer is obvious, in my view.”

    – Patterico

    This is relevant to the conversation I was hoping to have on the other thread where people were discussing the possibility of foreign corporations contributing to American political candidates. If we ought to move away from seeing ourselves as a protectionist nation, and strive toward becoming a nation purely integrated into a global free market, why should we oppose foreign investment in American politics?

    Leviticus (087a4a)

  194. It’s not meant to be a rhetorical question. It’s very interesting to witness your theories on these things crystalize and converge, Patterico, and I’m glad you are striving to articulate them and share them with us.

    Leviticus (087a4a)

  195. Land makes me happy. The only thing here is the lousy bastards in charge of California won’t let me do anything…

    steveg (794291)

  196. nk @37 What we’re doing is raising the price of sugar (and keeping it lower than what it would otherwise be in the rest of the world.)

    Sammy Finkelman (9f1a19)

  197. 38. That’s really true for the Iowa straw poll. A victory i the caucuses is more a reflection , or to some degree a reflection, of campaigning in the state.

    Sammy Finkelman (033fec)

  198. I think our democracy would work as the Founders intended if people understood the “pursuit of happiness” doesn’t mean doing what makes you happy. It means striving to make yourself a better, more virtuous person. We can have different ideas of virtue just as we have different ideas about religion — indeed, they go together — but I think the main problem is that it’s too easy to devote oneself to leisure and self-centered concerns.

    We are all naturally lazy and self-centered but civilization is supposed to steer us away from those qualities. Instead, our civilization encourages those qualities through its emphasis on today’s nebulous values and criticizes anyone who thinks traditional values matter.

    It seems right that our society does not emphasize Aristotelian happiness but rather self-centered non-virtuous activity. Whether this is unique to our current society or a normal state of human nature, I don’t feel qualified to say. I feel like our society is worse than many others, but I also think similar concerns have been expressed in past societies, perhaps with some justification.

    In any event, we agree that, given the society we have, democracy isn’t working as the Founders intended. I love arguing for a better understanding of economics and for better values but I wonder if it is as pointless as eternally pushing a rock up a hill. I know that trusting in markets is better than trusting in government and always arguing for a smaller scope of government is better for freedom.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  199. 184. steveg (794291) — 3/21/2015 @ 3:07 pm

    (Just to be clear, not bashing sugar. I think High Fructose Corn Sweetener and Cane sugar are equally as bad for me (and equally as good) They taste different, but 5000 cal of Cane Sugar burns the same as 5000 cal of High Fructose

    I think high fructse corn syrup is wotse, and it’s certainly sticky, and I don’t think all calories are equal, or that calories matter too much.

    Sammy Finkelman (033fec)

  200. 163. Mark (c160ec) — 3/21/2015 @ 9:29 am

    A QUICK ASIDE: This, by the way, is why you have to buy Coke from Mexico to get tasty actual sugar in the drink.

    You don’t have to buy Coke from Mexico to get actual sugar in the drink. You can also buy regular *not diet) coke that kosher for Passover. (that’s because corn is considered kitniyos, and there’s something sstronger than acustom not to eat kitnoyos – some things that resemble flour – on Passover, and this extends also to the syrup. This does not apply to Sephardic Jews, but most Jews in the United Statea are not.

    Sammy Finkelman (033fec)

  201. Leviticus says:

    This is relevant to the conversation I was hoping to have on the other thread where people were discussing the possibility of foreign corporations contributing to American political candidates. If we ought to move away from seeing ourselves as a protectionist nation, and strive toward becoming a nation purely integrated into a global free market, why should we oppose foreign investment in American politics?

    Interesting question. I think the difference lies in the difference between the market and government. I know that somewhere I discussed this, but it’s hard to find these posts, and I find myself repeatedly trying to say the same thing in different words. Here goes again.

    The market works because people make voluntary exchanges, and in so doing, they believe (at least at the time of the exchange) that they are improving their position — on both sides. There may be occasional issues of buyer’s remorse — nothing is perfect — but in general these voluntary transactions are the greatest engine for the production of human happiness known to man.

    To me, there is absolutely no reason to limit such transactions only to people on one side of an artificial border. The law of comparative advantage (look it up if it’s not familiar) and the related and more familiar concept of the division of labor are critical to efficiency and ultimately to human comfort and happiness. Artificially restricting the operation of these laws is a bad idea.

    (Note that this is not an argument for open borders. Junk the welfare state and, on a purely economic level, the additional labor would probably be a boon — but with a welfare state and the potential for admitting criminals and the diseased, we need to control our borders.)

    By contrast, government operates through coercion. There is no analogy between government and the market.

    Now, there is another issue that makes the question surprisingly vexing – and I had not thought about it much before. Political lobbying is necessary in a society that allows free speech. What’s more — and this is a controversial view, but it is my view — free speech means that people should be allowed to spend unlimited amounts of money advocating a political position, or even the merits of a politician, in my view. Now, this inevitably leads to corruption (in the loose sense of the word, at a minimum) and political decisionmaking that is a net drag on society — but I believe this is an inevitable consequence of having both democracy and a First Amendment. To me, the solution is not limiting speech (or money, which amounts to the same thing) but rather in limiting the scope of government.

    If we’re not going to do that, I’m instinctively comfortable with rules that limit foreign contributions. But given the principles articulated above, I admit that your comment has caused me to rethink, for the first time, the issue of the applicability of the First Amendment to foreign campaign contributions. Maybe my instinctive view is wrong. If it is, it has nothing to do with the global economy, or an analogy between government and the markets — rather, it has everything to do with the issue of imposing restrictions on foreign governments that might violate the First Amendment. This will require some further thought.

    Thought experiment: should a foreign newspaper be disallowed from editorializing in favor of an issue, or even a candidate? What if the foreign paper is beholden to a foreign government? What if it is owned by a foreign government? Can the U.S. government order a newspaper not to publish a newspaper advertisement, bought by a foreign citizen, arguing in favor of a particular issue or candidate? If the issue of prior restraint is bothering you when you consider such a question, then ask yourself: can it bring a criminal action after the fact based on such facts? I admit I had not thought about such issues before in such terms.

    Again, this will require some reflection.

    So: I am entirely comfortable separating the issue of political contributions from the issue of market freedoms. But the First Amendment complicates the issue in my mind.

    I enjoy your comments as usual. You are actively thinking through these issues, you are intellectually honest, and you are applying some brainpower to the questions. You may sometimes be more cynical than I am (I said “may”), but I have always enjoyed the discussions.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  202. My contribution toward purchasing a platform for free speech has to be done with dollars that have been taxed.
    Depending on my tax bracket, it seems like a foreign citizen would be able to buy up to 40% more speech platform than I can.
    If so they should be taxed at 40 cents on the dollar to level the playing field
    I do think the Federal Government should not allow the publishing of an ad without tax collected, full disclosure of who is buying the ad, and also maybe add some home court advantage to the Americans and require the foreign ads to be purchased and run before Oct. 1.

    There was an article in the Jewish Press about tax exempt organizations violating their status and US law here: “according to IRS rulings, a tax-exempt organization cannot engage in efforts to influence or change laws of the U.S. or that of a foreign country.

    Yet that is exactly what the State Dept. grants to OneVoice were for. During a State Dept. press briefing on Jan. 29, 2015, a journalist asked the State Dept. spokesperson Jen Psaki for what purpose was the $233,500 grant (its most recent one) to OneVoice. Psaki said the grant lasted from Sept. 23, 2013 until Nov. 30, 2014, and that it was funding “to support efforts to support a two-state solution….Apparently the State Department forgot that under current Israeli law there is no such thing as the country of “Palestine.” Israeli law would have to be changed to recognize such an entity, if it ever were to come into existence.”

    http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/us-orchestrated-anti-bibi-bomb-may-bite-its-backers/2015/03/16/0/

    steveg (794291)

  203. No foreign money in elections – unless it will be used against conservatives.

    mg (31009b)

  204. 174, 175. While i am confident that a practical, orthodox mensch like Walker can win with the support of superior conservative explcators like Cruz, Rubio and Paul preparing the ground in our current socioeconomic context it will be but a battle won and in no way signify a swing in tendention of the overall war.

    We are bound for a world of hurt.

    DNF (7d551e)

  205. 204. Agreed. The global economic foundation is coming down as we speak and will be ground to dust.

    DNF (7d551e)

  206. It is tempting to say foreigners should be able to give money to campaigns since they can legally express opinions and urge people to vote for specific politicians, work on campaigns, make donations on ballot issues, and lobby. But the right to govern, and picking who our leaders are is central to that right, is reserved to citizens.

    This subject was discussed more thoroughly by the District Court in Bluman v FEC, and affirmed by the Supreme Court. Here’s a law firm summary and there are many other discussions via Google.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  207. Of course, being a citizen (by birth or naturalized) implies a loyalty to the U.S. Constitution and to the success of America. Foreigners have no right to govern because they don’t have that loyalty.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  208. That seems right, DRJ. Voting (or, as some have noted in response to Obama’s musing about mandatory voting, the act of not voting) could be seen as an act of speech — yet it would be absurd to suggest we cannot limit that right to citizens.

    Meaning that, at some point, the First Amendment (as least as applied to noncitizens) must give way to our right to govern ourselves, for the interests of citizens.

    Preventing direct campaign contributions seems justified under this reasoning.

    What about limitations on speech by foreign newspapers or citizens, as I mentioned above? That seems like a line-drawing exercise balancing two important principles with no easy answer.

    Patterico (dbc0c2)

  209. Granting foreign citizens or foreign corporations 1st Amendment Rights without reservation is nonsensical. In countries that ascribe to the Rule of Law and to the idea that our 1st Amendment Rights are inherent in our existence, then we should consider granting this as a form of reciprocity. However, for the countries dominated by islam, or by other forms of tyranny, their citizens ascribe to the idea that these rights are granted by government. Which is to say they can only exercise these “rights” with the consent of the government, which implies their actions or speech support that government’s policies and interests. Thus they should have no access to our forums other than what our citizens choose to discover for themselves. This would seem to apply to all issues, ranging from political, to commercial, to philosophical.

    Discussions that bear on political issues fall into a more circumscribed category. The right to engage in such matters should be reserved for those who have sworn an interest in preserving our form of government, which must necessarily exclude foreigners since they are by definition agents of another government. Like it or not, governments are sovereign, and they must pursue their own interests period. As is only too clear, many other governments would readily extinguish the freedoms English speaking people generally enjoy. This is not a fight we can ignore.

    This is a little like the foolishness that has caused our military to treat terrorists and other combatants that wear no uniform nor abide by any “rules of war” as though they were uniformed combatants of another sovereign. They are pirates, plain and simple. And baring some benefit to us, they should be executed when captured.

    bobathome (ef0d3a)

  210. Foreign newspapers can endorse candidates already — the Financial Times and the Economist both endorsed Obama — and how likely is it that newspapers would realize ads were being placed by foreigners? They probably are if we’re talking about Soros’ money, but it seems to me that requiring disclosure of who is paying for ads is better than trying to police the source.

    The place to draw the line is voting. That’s what we need to rigorously protect to make sure only citizens vote, and that they only vote once.

    DRJ (e80d46)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1599 secs.