ArchPundit

Shameless Commerce Division

ArchPundit March 29, 2004 No Comments

And another advertiser comes on board with the Capitol Net hawking a bunch of practical books for political junkies.

On top of that though are those who have been with us for a while–to the right is a picture of Barack that goes to his donation page and web site take a look at that.

Second down is Storm Front, which I’ve come to like quite a bit from discovering them through the link. They have some up on Clarke’s appearance on Meet the Press which was apparently very good. I have it on videotape, but haven’t had a chance to watch–so check that out.

And most surprisingly is the third advertiser down has stalled on the number of hits–The DCCC–go to their ad, click on it, and fill out the form to join. You will receive the Stake in your e-mail box which tells you the important house races and they’ll have local Congressional races contact you. While I don’t promise good coverage for advertisers, this and Obama are especially important for readers to take a look at. The other two I think you might enjoy.

Remember, the DCCC needs cash (as does Obama). If you can spare some, give them some. In Illinois, Melissa Bean should receive help from them and in other states close races make this election more important than most of us first thought. We never know if a wave will hit until the last 10 days of an election. Having the money and being in position by then puts a political party into position to win big. Not being in position wastes a perfect opportunity.

The Surprising Ms. Madigan

ArchPundit March 29, 2004 No Comments

Who would have thought someone named Madigan could play hardball so well against insiders and do so for the citizens of Illinois. Stephens is the ultimate combine guy so while he is nominally a Republican, he is happy to help out Democrats when it suits his needs. He helped Blagojevich and has helped the Madigans out on many occasions.

But that hasn’t stopped Lisa Madigan from pointing out that Stephens and Rosemont have ties to the Outfit and questioning the sanity of the Gaming Board.

The biggest advantage of all of this is that it keeps Blagojevich on his toes, though Rich Miller points out how that has led to suspicions from Madigan’s people about what he is doing. Holder supported Madigan’s primary opponent John Schmidt, as they both came out of the Clinton Administration’s justice department. Schmidt was clearly more qualified in terms of experience, but such a move is strange given the odd relationship Blagojevich has with the Madigans and that Lisa has full power to investigate the Gaming Commission.

The reality is that the Gaming Commission is now probably going to tie up the 10th license into a lot of litigation.

Jim Thompson is no Trial Lawyer

ArchPundit March 29, 2004 1 Comment

Well, actually he was a gifted prosecutor who rose to fame and the Governor’s Office by attacking corruption in Illinois. Unfortunately, 14 years in the Mansion and 14 more as a rainmaker appear to have deadened his skills at cross-examination. His cross examination of Clarke was a disaster.

You can try and call it just a questioning, but that was just embarrassing either way.

When Thompson was first appointed to the Commission I wasn’t paying much attention, but it was clear that he was the Hastert appointment. Now we know that as the Hastert appointment, his job was to take on the unsavory business of defending the administration to the best of his ability. I’m sure the Democrats have a similar, but opposite member, but the other day clarifies what Thompson is doing there.

Update: Austin Mayor points out the Kass’ take on Jim Thompson’s bit about not understanding the whole bit because he is from the Midwest

Thompson’s quote was:
“Pleading ignorance to the ways of political insiders, Thompson said, “I’m from the Midwest, so I guess I’ll just leave it at that.” ”

Which is one of the funniest things I’ve ever read. Thompson is Mr. Insider.

Looking Down the Game Tree

ArchPundit March 29, 2004 No Comments

For those who have read ArchPundit for a long time, you will remember my penchant for looking down the game tree before choosing a strategy. The phrase comes game theory, but essentially is shorthand for thinking through what will happen once you act. How will others respond is the key thing to think about in such circumstances. Politics is usually made interesting by two kinds of mistakes.

One, is a gaffe, or as Michael Kinsley points out, the mistake of telling the truth. Trent Lott made a gaffe when he said a lot of people think the country would have been better if Thurmond had won the Presidency. This is true because there are a lot of racists out there, and they largely support Trent Lott.

Two, is not looking down the game tree and making a rash decision out of anger. Say if you were Senate Majority Leader and you are angry at a former administration official and you make vague threats about declassifying testimony to determine if a former official had perjured themselves. The hope of such a move is to intimidate the former official. Of course, if you look down the game tree and think it through, said former official has probably anticipated this and is going to say, “Sure, open it up, but open everything up.” Thus leaving said Senate Majority Leader looking around trying to figure out what the hell is going on. Of course, the first to suggest this strategy was Bob Graham who should be well on his way to being the next Vice-President at this point.

Clarke’s Subtle Criticism

ArchPundit March 29, 2004 2 Comments

I haven’t been talking much about the ongoing hearings, though I certainly have a few things to say about a former Illinois Governor’s performance during them, but one thing that strikes me about Clarke’s point isn’t how explosive it is, but how the actual criticism is very subtle.

Most of the focus on his testimony has focused on his specific charges against the Bush administration. Of those, his claims that they ignored or at least put terrorism on the back burner are the most focused upon.

This shouldn’t be surprising to the American public though. Americans weren’t concerned about large scale terrorism despite having a federal building blown up just a few years ago. Bush ran a campaign that focused on strategic threats of nation-states. In fact, this is one of my many criticisms of his candidacy in 2000. It was a foreign policy borne out the past where nation states were the primary security threat.

Worse, was the choice of Condi Rice for national security. While a very bright and competent woman in her field, her field is the problem–Kremlinology. Kremlinology is a word used in Political Science to deride those who studied the Kremlin and its personalities more than using the scientific method. While Kremlinology was somewhat useful in conducting foreign policy, it wasn’t really a useful field. It was outdated by 2000 on top of everything else.

All that said, the American people don’t care about the above. They didn’t vote for Bush or Gore because of their foreign policy except for a small portion of the public. They didn’t see a threat and so foreign policy was a secondary debate amongst political junkies and the foreign policy establishment.

I doubt most Americans care much if Bush did not put terrorism on the frontburner after the 2000 election. The people didn’t so why should he? Obviously we hope our leaders stay ahead of the curve, but in general, Al Qaeda seemed like a distant threat while more traditional nation-states had been tremendous problems and were projected to be tremendous problems in the future.

So taking 8 months to develop a nearly identical policy to that of the Clinton Administration isn’t that bizarre of a move. Silly and petty yes. Unusual or careless–not really. Every administration thinks they will be far more effective than the last and they think they can come up with solutions that are far superior. The reality is that in the complex world, the options chosen are usually the least worst under the constraints imposed on a nation and inevitably the same least worst solutions are found.

What is subtle about Clarke’s claims as I interpret them is that everyone failed and that is horrible, but it happens. What he seems truly upset about is that Bush is now running on his record of combating terrorism when Bush was ineffective in Clarke’s view. Clarke seems to accept that such things happen, but then can’t believe the chutzpah of running on an ineffective policy.

So far, the news media has avoided what I think is a subtle, but perhaps more damning argument from Clarke, that while Bush made a mistake, that is forgivable, but running on that mistake is bizarre.

And People Thought He was Dumb

ArchPundit March 23, 2004 No Comments

Dan got there first, but Emil Jones shows his wit again.

Senate President Emil Jones ? who backed Obama ? wasn’t as cordial when asked later about Rush’s attendance: “I should have told him not to come: Bobby ‘Price is Right’ Rush.”

Emil had the line of 2003 when he addressed Phyllis Schlafly during ERA hearings:

“My only regret about bringing up this proposed constitutional amendment is that it has resurrected you.”