NPR – GARBAGE NEWS
- So, I am scanning through my FM stations while driving through downtown Knoxville yesterday, and I happened to be unfortunate enough to stumble upon the local National Public Radio station. All Things Considered, a poor excuse for a radio program, was in the midst of a piece about Democrat Representative Betty Sutton of Ohio’s 13th Congressional District. The whiny rag by Robert Siegel lamented that she is in a unexpectedly tight race against Republican Tom Ganley, due to the tsunami of discontent with pseudo-socialist policies being rammed down Americans’ throats–ehh, that last part was paraphrased. In any case, the district is supposed to be safe for Democrats, according to political scientist Dave Cohen: “This is a seat that should not be in play. This is a seat that should be on nobody’s radar… [and the reason] is that a few years ago, a very popular Democratic Congressman here was making noises about running for Governor, against then-Republican Governor Bob Taft. The Republicans were in the process of re-districting…and so, the Republicans decided to make this district more safe for him as an encouragement for him to stay right there in the U.S. Congress and not challenge Taft for the governorship.” (NPR)
- This tale by the ever-so-objective NPR reminded me of a minute fact that I’d run across regarding gerrymandering of Congressional Districts. Not only do Democrats gerrymander to make Democrat seats safer, Republicans do the same for their Democrat colleagues! So much so, in fact, that a Slate article last year documented the most gerrymandered districts in America. Finding? Well, by golly, apparently 16 of the 20 most gerrymandered districts in America belong to those ethically inebriated Democrats! Including none other than everyone’s favorite Banking Committee Chairman, Barney ‘F’ Frank… Not surprising at all, actually, now that I think of it.
ON DELAWARE AND THE REPUBLICAN REVOLUTION
- Mike Castle is exactly the type of Republican that the establishment Republicans told us in 2008 that the Party needed to become. This, after the ‘transformative’ election of Barack Obama. I remember it all over the punditry; gleeful accounts of conservatism’s hull, creaking and bowing, the last gasp before breaking up completely and sinking to the bottom of the proverbial ocean. Now, they said, the Colin Powells, Lindsey Grahams and Al DaMatos and the rest of the Rockefeller Republicans could paddle out in their dinghies, to take back the Party–or the junk heap that would be left–preferably as a permanent minority–y’know, all the golfing and celebrity benefits but none of the responsibility. The old Republicans that “got stuff done”, but never did anything? Those ones. We work best as a permanent majority, right?
- Think back. Which types of candidates are the first to be ousted from office in liberal leaning states like Delaware when Republican electoral momentum wanes? Is it the right-wing Christine O’Donnell types, or the moderate Mike Castle ones? The conservative fire-brands or the squishy liberals? Of course, everyone remembers how in 2006 and 2008 all of those right wing Republicans were thrown out on their kiesters in places like Rhode Island and Ohio… Err, wait, I think it was the other way around… It was the liberal Republicans, like Lincoln Chafee in Rhode Island, Mike DeWine in Ohio, Ted Stevens in Alaska, Norm Coleman in Minnesota, and a long list of other moderate to liberal Republicans who lost their jobs. Not those crazy conservatives.
- In any case, we are now to believe that conservatives are best served by nominating John McCains, Lisa Murkowskis, Charlie Crists, Mike Castles and other liberal establishment Republicans. We’re told this by… establishment… Republicans… Hmm. In any case, these guys lose elections, they don’t win them–and if they do win, they don’t do a darned bit of good from a policy perspective, a la six years from 2000-2006 under Republican control when we got nothing done of note. Karl Rove is the most ardent of the numbers guys to espouse this notion, that nominating moderates who presumably stand a better chance of getting elected gives Republicans just barely enough seats for majority power. True? Maybe, yeah. But what kind of power? Will those moderates go along with policy initiatives to enact real, tangible conservative changes? The kind that work? No. They won’t. But Republicans will get Chairmanships and Speakerships back, short term, and long term we will lose elections, because moderate policies suck. And, if you follow political parties like you do your favorite football team–that is, rooting for them to win, sans ideological investment–then that is great (hello D.C. establishment, talkin’ ’bout you!). And that is what Karl Rove is. He is a good guy, don’t get me wrong, and it was a pleasure working under him. But he is a math guy. His job is to get Republicans power–not to enact transformative changes. To right America’s current wrongs, we need transformative people. Not Mike Castles. Isn’t it about time to let the unelectable likes of Sharon Angle, Scott Brown, Ron Johnson, Rand Paul, Chris Christie, Joe Miller, Bob McDonnell, Marco Rubio and Christine O’Donnell have a shot at this thing? I think so.
THOUGHT OF THE DAY
- Representation without taxation is more nefarious than taxation without representation. The latter depends merely on the good intentions of the few, wherein a benevolent oligarchy may in fact benefit the people, for a time. The former empowers the tyranny of the mob, and falls victim to the Law of Averages in regard to human nature, ensuring misery for all.