May 2003

Council of Conservative Citizens does Cinco de Mayo

ArchPundit May 6, 2003 0 Comment

Gordon Baum and his band of racist ne’er do wells showed up to protest immigration at Cinco de Mayo at, I kid you not, West County Shopping Center.

Wait a sec.

Okay, really, it was in Des Peres.

A note of caution–these aren’t pretty people.

A couple theories here:
1) They thought they were protesting the French immigrants in Des Peres
2) Because they are inbred they assume Cherokee Street is full of Native Americans
3) They figured the hard working and wonderfully talented immigrants around Cherokee might kick their ass

Is Dean Just a Press Darling

ArchPundit May 5, 2003 0 Comment

Or will he have legs after some initial success? Dean’s blog points towards an LA Times article that suggests he might be ahead of the curve due to his electronic organization.">article that suggests he might be ahead of the curve due to his electronic organization.

One has to wonder whether Dean has taken Carter’s strategy and had it updated for 2004. So far, the campaign is an impressive organization of openness and close contact with supporters instead of having the media act as the prime contact. It performs well with Kerry and others fighting media sniping contests from Drudge and the others.

The challenge is reaching voters not connected and my understanding is that his organizing in Iowa is going relatively well. The problem is that he won’t get labor in Iowa and so he won’t have the foot soldiers to win. He doesn’t seem to be attempting for a clear win there though and so his strategy might do well enough.

Dean’s Iowa campaign needs to be closest to Bradley’s. Bradley relied on the liberal goo goos of Iowa and college towns to provide a counterweight against the organization and labor support Gore got. Dean has three advantages Bradley did not.

First, Iowa’s vote will be split in several directions. Gephardt, Kerry, and Edwards will all get some support there and to do well won’t require as much as against the siting Vice-President. Gore cornered nearly all of the organization people and put Bradley in a hole. Bradley did very well in a caucus where he did not have a major union behind him. This year at least two campaigns will split labor.

Two, the process is going to be different with several states in-line after New Hampshire and while Iowa and New Hampshire are still important, they will be less important. Not winning the first two won’t have the effect it had on Bradley as long as Dean does well.

Third, Bradley spent too much time in Iowa, but he had no choice given he was the only other candidate. With a crowded field, the press won’t kill Dean if he spends less time in Iowa.

Of course, if Kerry is adopting the Gore Strategy we can expect to see a variety of stupid tricks such as the walking corn cob and disruption of rallies.

A new Blog

ArchPundit May 5, 2003 0 Comment

I’ll be introducing a new blogroll soon, but one will be Blog Baby who spends a lot of time taking on environmental issues. I have seldom had time to here even though it is one of my prime interests, so take a look at her site. She has some interesting links to multiple use privileging extractive corporations over recreation and other uses.

Repeat After Me:

ArchPundit May 5, 2003 0 Comment

You Can’t Discriminate Based on the Content of the Speech even if the Secret Service says so.

This is quite disturbing and Andrew Sullivan even pointed it out last week.

Essentially the Secret Service is getting local police agencies to move demonstrators to free speech zones out of view of the President and the people supporting the President, but not doing the same for those who are supporters of the President or demonstrating about another issue. You can’t do that.

While you might be able to quarantine everyone–why should we? The security threat isn’t that great and there is nothing wrong with dissent. As the article points out, a smart assassin wouldn’t be advertising the dislike of the President–even a dumb one could figure that out.

I talked with one of the arrestees and surprisingly, they weren’t looking to be arrested in an act of civil disobedience, they were literally trying to be seen around the event. In fact, they were quite surprised at the system set-up to control war protesters while other protesters were ignored.

While I question the efficacy of such protests, they must be allowed. Even worse for the localities is that they will lose monetarily if these cases go to court. So will the Secret Service, but it can afford that penalty, many local police departments cannot.

What is even more amusing is that in St. Charles a few people are charged with trespassing on private land while also being charged with blocking a public highway. A judge with half a brain would see the contradiction, but in St. Charles they don’t pick judges on that criteria and thus, the charges were allowed even though they contradict each other.

So Poshard was Wishful Thinking

ArchPundit May 5, 2003 0 Comment

Bernard Schoenburg points out that Poshard never had any intention of running.

?I haven?t even considered the Senate seat at this point,? Poshard told me, adding he has no intention of doing so and has politely given that message to people who have encouraged him to run. Incumbent U.S.

Translation–Downstate labor and organizations are still in Hynes’ corner.

Edgar Alternatives

ArchPundit May 5, 2003 0 Comment

Up at the Political State Report

Harold

ArchPundit May 5, 2003 0 Comment

A reader pointed me towards a great tribute to Harold Washington from This American Life. Take a listen. Especially interesting are comments by Eugene Sawyer (IIRC) about Harold’s electability if he had been white. Since he had significant tax problems in the late 1960 and early 1970s it points to a difference in how black and white politicians were judged at the time. I would argue this has changed over times, but it is an interesting point.

An Illinois political operative who was white, but had worked for statewide black candidates once told me that white America doesn’t understand what it takes to make it as a black candidate with the African-American community. It was constant skirting of the law to appease different interests and inevitably this led to problems with the general electorate.

But this isn’t really different than other ethnic minorities, it just happens during a time when corruption isn’t as tolerated handicapping some politicians rising as fast as other ethnicities did back when corruption was all a part of the process. Men like Washington got stuck between two generations, but came out okay. And now we see a new generation of those like Barack Obama who are clean as a whistle.

Calling Pat Quinn

ArchPundit May 5, 2003 0 Comment

Perhaps the Phone Cops have him under arrest. From the Capitol Fax:

The festivities begin today when a special meeting of the two legislative committees which deal with Telco issues to hear testimony on a proposal by SBC to double the wholesale rate it charges its competitors. That’s what you call clout. You don’t see House and Senate committees meeting in joint session very often – if ever.

The committees could vote on the SBC bill as early as Wednesday, with floor votes as early as Friday, if the bills pass. Wednesday is also the day that the ICC will decide whether to allow the company into the long-distance market.

So, why is SBC so bound and determined to raise its wholesale rates? The company insists that the rates the ICC allows it to charge are below the cost of providing the service. . . .

[I]t would stand to reason that if SBC could raise its wholesale DSL rate, it could accomplish two things: 1) Price the resellers out of a bargain-driven market; and 2) Subsidize its new, lower price with more money from the remaining resellers. Just a thought.

Lotta Lateness

ArchPundit May 5, 2003 0 Comment

Ugh–the cold is almost over and I’m back to regular schedule. That being said, Mark Kleiman has the definitive post on the most recent Lott shenanigans.

Mark makes an important point that I’ve tried to keep in front of the discussion, but it gets lost in Lott’s evasions and bizarre claims. I originally was very wary of concealed carry laws because of concerns with potential increases in violence. Being a cyclist, I have enjoyed a fair share of road rage incidents and thinking of those morons as armed (even though many probably are already) is scary. After reviewing the literature on this issue, it seems to me that concealed carry laws are not likely to increase or decrease crime and I have become primarily agnostic on the question. And the chances of dealing with any armed idiot probably isn’t that much different with or without permits. In fact, the training might increase the number of idiots who think before they act given they know their legal responsibilities.

Ayres and Donohue argue there is a small increase, but I find it hard to believe that is from increasing legal concealed carry permit holders. I may well be wrong, but I think any judgement on this issue should await further research. They point out some decent theoretical reasons why that might be so, but to eliminate multicollinearity problems in such data sets is nearly impossible.

Go read Tim Lambert for the full updates including a bit on weighting that really calls into question Lott’s truthfullness, well again.

More interesting is the response of others to some of the most recent allegations. Reynolds has a very funny reaction:

By way of full disclosure, I went to law school with Ayres and Donohue, and regard them both as honest, straight-up guys notwithstanding that they have a political position that in many cases would be different from mine. Unlike some of Lott’s other critics, these guys are real scholars, writing in the Stanford Law Review, which gives their criticism considerable weight. I am, however, entirely incompetent to judge the underlying dispute on its merits, and hope that people who have the relevant expertise will weigh in.

Reynolds doesn’t have the ability to evaluate the work on the merits and so he continues to argue it by way of political positions. As I said before, " They assume everyone is a hack and so the point of a panel like this is that hacks from both sides should be included."

Reynolds argues by reputation and not evidence which completely misses the point of social science–though this cluelessness isn’t reserved to him as Kieran Healy points out. The arguments Kieran is addressing are especially disturbing given that much of McArdle’s argument could have been made by a creationist.

Note To Bill Bennett

ArchPundit May 5, 2003 0 Comment

When they say the slots are loose–they are fibbing. As has been pointed out at just about every site, Bennett didn’t come close to even if he is playing slots and video poker. Both games pay out poorly because, well, that’s how they are designed. Go figure–casinos are in the business of making money.

David Hogberg makes a good point about whether Bennett has a problem:

It reminds of the shock that some people expressed when it was revealed that Michael Jordan lost $10,000 gambling on one hole in golf. As Mike Royko pointed out, that was pocket change for Jordan. If you make ten times what you gamble every time you sneeze, it doesn?t matter how much you gamble.

I don’t know if the guy has a problem or not. But his inability to connect this to other forms of entertainment that he screams about is amazingly hypocritical. I’m not a big fan of strip clubs or pot–indeed, I find a good game of baccarat more fun than either of those, that is an individual choice or should be. My choice of games should be interesting to those of you who know gaming. My goal is to lose a little so that the free/cheap drinks pretty much make the evening a wash with what I’d normally spend. I could play blackjack, but frankly, my card counting skills go to hell when I’m drinking.