From the adults are back

From the adults are back in charge file:
I missed this one by Molly Ivins. I’ve become increasingly bored by her columns in general. Her brillance is writing on the subject she knows more than anything else-Texas. The columns on international relations and a lot of national issues aren’t very insightful. However, this one asks one of those questions that the rest of the media doesn’t seem to think is important even though it really is. Cheney’s, the head adult, was either the most incompetent CEO ever or was involved in rebuilding a Iraq’s oil fields illegally.

Krugman hits the nail on

Krugman hits the nail on the head. The Powell-Cheney fiasco was hysterical and the privatization debate is a joke–and a pretty funny one. However, Tapped played a fun game a week ago and bet that Kaus and Sullivan would have coniptions over a pretty damn inocuous passage, and I’ll take shot today.

This passage:

Is it inaccurate to say that personal accounts equal privatization? We could argue on the merits. Under the Bush plan, a worker’s personal account reflects any gains or losses on the stocks it represents. When risks and rewards accrue entirely to the individual, isn’t that privatization?

But wait, we can do better. The push to convert Social Security into a system of personal accounts has been led by the Cato Institute. The Bush plan emerged directly from Cato’s project on the subject, several members of Mr. Bush’s commission on Social Security reform had close Cato ties, and much of the commission’s staff came straight from Cato. You can read all about Cato’s role on the special Web site the institute set up, socialsecurity.org.

And what’s the name of the Cato project to promote personal accounts? Why, the Project on Social Security Privatization, of course.”

Let’s start the countdown to numerous complaints about how Bush has always varied just a teenie-weenie bit from the CATO line and so Krugman is unfair and part of the Rainesian conspiracy…and the NEA is involved somehow.

The Back Room is back

The Back Room is back at the Sun-Times and they have a great line from Jim Ryan’s campaign:

“The Democratic candidates are, for the most part, inexperienced political hacks who are all family members of the old ‘Chicago Machine.”

First, before addressing him anymore, let’s call him J-Ry since he is so terribly concerned about voter confusion. Generally, J-Ry isn’t a bad guy. A bit too conservative for my tastes, but he is generally honest and no more of a blowhole than the average pol. But come on J-Ry, let’s whine about your real problem–G-Ry.

After yesterday it is clear the two of you are far more at fault for the state of your campaign than those big bad Chicago pols (and it isn’t like DuPage is r’ral now is it?). The Capitol Fax dissects the problem well (no archive so get it while it lasts).

The New York Times has

The New York Times has a couple good Op-Eds today.

First up, Thomas Friedman with a wonderful column that both hits the reasons to love the US and the reasons to undestand the problems the US faces.

Dowd also has a good column. I never ‘got her columns for the longest time. They are often devoid of a point and of little substance. The one thing they do, on occasion at least, is capture the essence of the subjects at times. She does a good job today, though, a little more substance day-to-day would be nice. And nice Peter Gerety reference. It is nice to know that watcihing too much HBO at least preps me for the NY Times…

From the Adults Are Back

From the Adults Are Back in Charge Files:
Josh Marshall does a good job pointing out the administration’s problem. The administration.

Conason points out the obvious–Fleischer has issues with honesty. It used to be that Press Secretaries never, ever lied or they lost their credibility. Why is this clown still around? There are several strategies that could have prevented him from saying that there was no conflict, but instead he went ahead and jumped right in to a big fat lie.

So this post turns out

So this post turns out to be the conventional wisdom. Dionne and one of the Florida papers linked below both point out the problem of nailing an opponent. Doaks’ strategy in California probably wasn’t the deciding factor for Republicans. The California GOP are true believers and they voted like it. The pulled what could be called a New Jersey and decided being right was more important than getting rid of the pompous blowhole of a governor with a socially liberal fiscal conservative. Running the ads had little to do with it. The ads in Florida have backfired because it is a flawed strategy. Those who try and practice this are doing it at their own peril.