RAG Perspective: An American Pro-Liberty Conservative: Miscellany: 4/09/10

Friday, April 9, 2010

Miscellany: 4/09/10

Quote of the Day
The meeting of two personalities is like
the contact of two chemical substances:
if there is any reaction,
both are transformed.
Carl Jung

Obama's ad hominem Attack on Sarah Palin

Pathetic, Mr. President. I have been one of the most consistent conservative critics against Sarah Palin, but for Obama to ignore Palin's legitimate question regarding Obama's puzzling policy of advance disclosure of a restrictive response to future attacks on America and instead to dismiss her opinion as incompetent, is unconscionable and unworthy of the Office of the Presidency:

Last I checked, Palin's not an expert on nukes. If the secretary of defense and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are comfortable, I'll take my advice from them and not Sarah Palin.

Now, personally, I think Palin's description of a schoolboy taunt for another to hit him without fear of retribution is not as good as my analogy of fighting someone with an arm tied behind your back. The principles of military deterrence do not require the expertise of a nuclear physicist, career diplomat, or military leadership--and certainly Obama is no more of an expert than Palin is in these regards.

I'm not persuaded by the President's reference to Secretary Gates or Joint Chiefs Chair Admiral Mullen; after all, the President makes policy and it's their responsibility to publicly support the strategy, even if they privately disagree with it. They also served under President Bush, whom was notorious for listening to the brass, and Bush maintained a flexible military response strategy. On the other hand, Obama made his policy for cuts in military research and development and against nuclear weapons part of his Presidential campaign

Colin Powell, in response to the Gulf wars, spoke of a military operating with overwhelming force. It is clear the same principles apply to a robust military defense. If another country decides to attack ours, they need to remember in the back of their minds that the United States will respond with overwhelming force, with possible use of any and all weapons at its disposal.

Bart Stupak (D-MI) and Justice Stevens Resign
at the End of Their Current Sessions

Stupak, who led the House pro-life holdouts for Obama's executive order on prohibitions on federal funding of abortion, had a number of advance parting shots at the GOP (saying that the Republican opposition for his seat is weak and sneering at his Tea Party opponents for wasting their money on someone whom had decided to retire), while rationalizing his departure for having fulfilled his 1992 initial Congressional campaign promise of health care reform with the Democratic Party Health Care Bill and bitterly disputing the liberation of Iraq as an "illegal war". About half his district voted for McCain in 2008, and he's confident one of the conservative Democrat candidates will retain the seat. I'm not ready to put this one in the GOP camp this fall, but let me point out that I think conservative Democrats this fall across the board will be hard pressed to point their ability to influence Pelosi and Obama's progressive agenda and trillions added to the federal debt.

Justice John Paul Stevens, one of the oldest justices in American history (he turns 90 later this month) was nominated by Gerald Ford. Initially considered a conservative judge, his views on the court shifted from stands against pornography, reverse discrimination, and support for the death penalty to influential leadership of the liberal wing of the Supreme Court. Of the speculated names for Stevens' replacement, the unquestioned front runner has to be Elena Kagan, the current solicitor general who won 61 votes in her confirmation last year, former dean of the Harvard Law School, will turn 50 later this month; she has a reputation of not being an ideologue. This should be a no-brainer, because the last thing Obama needs heading into the fall elections is the polarizing selection of a progressive Supreme Court pick. Kagan will pick up opposition from pro-life groups because her views defending federal funding to clinics providing abortion services. Although I disagree with Kagan's positions on abortion, I am generally inclined to believe a President is entitled to confirmation of a properly qualified judge. (I did oppose Judge Sotomayor, but that dealt more her handling of the Ricci case and her lack of judgment in making the "wise Latina" comment. In the case of the Ricci case, it wasn't so much her final vote against Ricci (overturned by the Supreme Court) but the way she and two other judges had earlier tried to bury the case without a full hearing.) Barring some other things that didn't surface in her initial hearing, I think Kagan is probably the best that conservatives can hope for from an Obama list of judicial picks.

Charlie Crist: What Are You Thinking?

Republican Charlie Crist, Jeb Bush's successor as Florida governor, is perhaps best known for providing a late, influential endorsement of McCain in the 2008 Presidential primary, facilitating a key victory which cemented McCain's front-runner status for the nomination. When Florida US Senator Mel Martinez decided to retire and resign, the party leadership asked Crist to run for the seat (versus run for reelection). After Crist agreed to run, it appeared that he had a lock not only on the nomination, but the election.

I have been one of the strongest proponents in my posts of a big tent policy, including pragmatic Republicans like Colin Powell, Giuliani, Pataki, Mark Kirk, Scott Brown, the Maine senators, and Crist. (A number of pragmatic or independent Republicans may advocate positions at variance with media conservative orthodoxy on issues like the social welfare, the environment, and immigration.)

Something unexpected happened on what should have been a walk to the nomination and almost certain election to the US Senate: Crist was one of the few Republicans nationwide to support the Democratic Party Stimulus Bill. I understand why state funding in the bloated bill would make life easier for governors (especially given unfunded federal mandates), but there's a moral hazard there: you establish a "rainy day" fund during good times, not ratchet up government spending on a permanent basis.

Then there was Governor Crist's signature conservation attempt to shore up the Everglades by buying up to 82,000 acres at $1.75B from struggling US Sugar (now reduced by two-thirds and on life support), with adversaries, such as Crist's main competition for the GOP nomination, former House Speaker Marco Rubio, questioning whether US Sugar is getting too good a deal and whether funds for this project detract from other conservation project funding.

More recently, Crist is wavering over whether to pass a GOP-supported teacher reform bill, which would eliminate tenure for new teachers and establish merit-based pay increases based on learning performance. (The details of performance is delegated to the Department of Education.) He is wavering, despite initial support, because of his uncertainty of how merit pay would be decided, e.g., in the case of special education students. GOVERNOR CRIST, READ MY LIPS: SIGN THE BILL. (There are rumors if he vetoes the bill, Jeb Bush may endorse Rubio for the Senate seat.)

The Senate primary race began with a 2-1 lead for Crist less than a year ago to Rubio pulling even by year end to pulling away with an RCP average lead of about 25 points. Crist still outperforms Rubio against the likely Democratic nominee, Congressman Meek. The most recent Mason-Dixon polls shows the race tightening up to an 11-point lead by Rubio as Crist raised questions over Rubio's spending of campaign contributions.

There is still a lot of time left on the clock until the primary vote in August. There is no doubt that Rubio has had the wind at his back since New Year's, just this week gaining the endorsement of a pragmatic Republican, Rudy Giuliani and adding millions to his campaign contribution, getting a great deal of support from the Tea Party. No matter what Giuliani says, this looks like payback to Crist after Crist decided to endorse McCain instead of Giuliani in the 2008 Presidential primary. Giuliani had a high-risk game plan of bypassing the early caucus and primary states, aiming to win Florida and use that as a springboard to the Super Tuesday contests.

The remaining issue is whether Crist might simply withdraw or run as an independent (caucusing with the Republicans), similar to what Lieberman did after his 2006 narrow loss to Ned Lamont, an anti-Iraq candidate or even pull an Arlen Specter and battle Meek for the Democratic nomination. The difference is that if Crist wants to file independent he must do so by the end of the month; he can't wait until after the August election. Crist has made it very clear that he is in the Republican race to win it. Do we really want to a repeat of the famous NY-23 special election where the Republican/conservative vote split between 2 candidates, letting the Democrat win?

I am firmly in the Crist camp as of the time of this post. He has broader experience in terms of public service (education, state senate, attorney general, and regulation), he has some significant accomplishments as governor, including a unanimously passed state health plan, comprehensive property tax reform, state spending reductions of over $7B, recidivism reform, and improved enforcement against child predators. His platform is consistent across the board with mainstream conservative positions, especially fiscal conservatism. He also has broader appeal to independents and moderates, and I have no doubt he will work in a pragmatic fashion to work across the aisle instead of hyper-partisan analysis paralysis. Rubio is long on rhetoric and short on accomplishments, and he comes across as more of an ideologue. I am a conservative, but I'm a problem solver by nature; hence, I identify with Crist.

Political Cartoon

Steve Kelley reminds us that even children can see that the emperor is wearing no clothes.