Saturday again, time for some FMJRA catch up
I apologize for last week, things just got more hectic than planned, but here in all it’s glory and in no particular order are the links for the last two weeks.
Mind Numbed Robot linked me linking him on what to do with Libertarians. (which reminds me Mind Numbed Robot has been added to the blogroll)
Curses! Foiled Again! linked regarding HHS concealing data before the Health Care Reform vote.
The Classic Liberal linked about economists expecting no hyperinflation.
Have you ever had one of those arguments in a bar that start around eleven and wind up when the bartender kicks you out? It starts off on some perfectly reasonable topic, but as the hours and the drinks mount up, the participants are forced to stake out some clear logical positions, and in doing so, crawl farther and farther out along the limb they are defending . . . until suddenly you reach a point at which one of the debaters can either abandon their initial commitment, or endorse the slaughter of 30,000 Guatemalan orphans. And there’s this long pause, and then he says, “Look, it’s not like I want to kill those orphans . . . ”
This is our nation’s drug enforcement in a nutshell. We started out by banning the things. And people kept taking them. So we made the punishments more draconian. But people kept selling them. So we pushed the markets deep into black market territory, and got the predictable violence . . . and then we upped our game, turning drug squads into quasi-paramilitary raiders. Somewhere along the way, we got so focused on enforcing the law that we lost sight of the purpose of the law, which is to make life in America better.
Whatever the reasons behind the endorsement, it’s clear that some tea party activists see it as grounds to scrutinize her future moves. Several of her Facebook detractors used the expression “Strike 2” — the first strike being Palin’s support for McCain — with the clear implication that a third lurch into the GOP mainstream would fatally harm her credibility among tea partiers.
Some pundits suggest that moment may have already arrived. “Bottom line is that this is yet another endorsement for a non-grassroots candidate, and she’s going to take another significant hit to her credibility with her base in exchange for picking a winner,” Tabitha Hale wrote on the conservative site RedState.com.
Or it could be that Sarah has actually run for office and has an idea of who can and can’t win and again using Reagan’s 80% rule has made her choice. The people criticizing her on this don’t really have much of a leg to stand on.
Related – The last poll I have seen on Hayworth has him down 12 and DeVore (according to the May 8th LA Times) is trailing a distant third against Fiorina and Tom Campbell.
Two idiots (Glenn Greenwald and David Frum) debating whether Bush was right on National Security. I haven’t watched it because I can’t stand either one of them.