Saturday, April 28, 2012

Friday, April 27, 2012

#When(I was)InDC

I figured that my last post that I write while in DC should be something other than finding a biased article and saying something snarky, which I've certainly been guilty of in the past, so I decided to find a few gems from WhenInDC that we could all relate to and try to sign off on a good note. Keep in mind these are all in good fun, here we go...

To those who in the group who work for our esteemed officials in the Senate and House and Committees...

"When someone tells me how exciting their job is on the Hill."

 For everyone making that killer commute every morning...

"When I make it onto the Metro just before the doors close."
For Boole and every other bitter and foolish Bruins fan in the group...
"When Braden Holtby stares down Rich Peverly like a boss."

And this last one's for Fearless, because I know you like to tear it up when you get the chance...
"When I'm making my way through Mad Hatters on a Saturday night."

Keep it real, see everyone back on the Hill. NO, NOT THAT HILL. THE ONE COVERED IN SNOW.

American Crossroads "Too Cool" advertisement backfires, according to Trump

This American Crossroads advertisement portrays Obama as being "too cool," and calls for an end to our celebrity president.  According to Donald Trump, however, it sends the completely wrong message by bolstering Obama's appeal to diverse audiences.

Campaign Funds or Taxpayer's Money?

How much is the DNC actually reimbersing the Federal Government?
It would be nice if they were open and released the information.

Thursday, April 26, 2012

THE Dinner

Cuomo or Hillary? Two prominent New York politicians could duke it out in 2016

According to this Politico article, both Hillary Clinton and Governor Andrew Cuomo could make a bid for the 2016 Democratic nomination.  If this happens, two New York political titans -- both with outstanding approval ratings -- could present an interesting decision for Democratic voters.  Some believe that Cuomo might step aside out of respect if Clinton runs; however, others believe that Cuomo's own political aspirations might be too great to bow out in deference.  Either way, both potential candidates present an excellent option for the Democratic Party.

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

Who will run with Romney?

Now that it's pretty much certain that Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee, the discussion is turning to who he might choose as a running mate. Here's a CNN breakdown of some possible choices.  Any predictions?

Odd couple

Dylan Wulderk and WSJ's James Taranto agree about the slogan "We Can't Wait!"

SCOTUS Immigration

In an age old debate over states vs. federal rights, the Supreme Court will hear arguments about the legality of Arizona's controversial immigration law tomorrow. The case is huge and its opinion is schedule to come out in the summer at the height of the Presidential election. As usual, SCOTUS Blog has an excellent summary of what to expect tomorrow. Looks like the S12 group was a week too early; this would've been a dandy!

Criminal or just a cad?

Skepticism about government's case from Bradley Smith.

Nancy Pelosi wishes the poor 'earned more so they can pay more'...

Apparently, Nancy Pelosi does not want lower income families to earn higher wages to better support their families or for upward mobility.. She hopes for higher earnings so that they can contribute to her government funded projects as she sees fit..

Nice choice of words Nancy!

Obama uses slush fund to camouflage Medicare cuts
Map for World Bank. We'll meet on Thursday at 12:15PM outside Visitors Entrance.

To boldly go where no man has gone before

End of space shuttle makes one pundit praise Newt. What do you think, Mr. Prior?

Is DOJ overreaching?

Yes, says conservative pundit.

Just go Home!

Judd Greg tells do-nothing Congress and President to get out of town.

Monday, April 23, 2012

WE Can't Wait!

Do you like this campaign slogan?

Let Teddy win makes HC news feed!

Story about our night at the Nats.

"We Can't Wait"

“I refuse to take ‘no’ for an answer,” Mr. Obama declared, beneath a “We Can’t Wait” banner. “When Congress refuses to act and — as a result — hurts our economy and puts people at risk, I have an obligation as president to do what I can without them.”     

According to this New York Times article, President Obama has propagated his political agenda over the past year through executive orders.  Citing his "We Can't Wait" mentality, Obama has used Congress's inability to reach consensus as a justification for his actions.  After criticising George W. Bush for similar actions, Obama now finds himself following in W's footsteps.  But what else is a president supposed to do when his administration is riddled with a Congress that is more interested in partisan-politicking than consensus-building?  Clinton did it, Bush did it, and now Obama is following suit. 

Returning to our analysis of Confidence Men, some might laud Obama for taking control of his presidency and making active decisions.  It is encouraging to see a more decisive chief executive willing to make bold decisions, despite this Congress's shameful ineffectiveness.  Others might call it a blatant overreach of presidential power.  Thoughts?

The People's Rights Amendment

would have made for a good debate.

6 Things to Watch for on the Edwards Trial

A Question for Samples

I believe in limited government. I believe that every law, good or bad, pushes us further and further from an individualistic society to a a corporatist society. This doesn't mean we shouldn't pass laws. It means that we should think - think deeply - about what bills we sign into law.

This mindset does not make me particularly receptive to proposals for new laws. And it makes me somewhat sympathetic to arguments that we should reduce existing regulation. John Samples, the author of The Fallacy of Campaign Finance Reform, clearly feels even stronger than I do. As we all know, he espouses a vision of an entirely unregulated campaign finance system, but devotes most of the book to refuting our current system.

But beneath the studies and the charts and the data he presents to counter even the basic concept that money affects politicians, Samples devotes bafflingly few pages to discussing how the current system actually works. Could that perhaps be because the concrete facts don't look as nice as the all-too-easily-manipulated abstract numbers? At least one outstanding journalist seems to think so. 

Of course, interest groups deserve a say in our governing process. There's no way to argue that many, if not most, of these groups represent genuine needs of constituents. I'm not saying that the campaign finance system is wrong, or in need of dramatic reform, or anything close to that. I'm also not saying that the system is right, or doesn't need dramatic reform. I'm merely saying that the problem is clearly more nuanced than Samples makes it out to be. And also promoting an awesome show.