falls church auto body
The Corner
- Liberal Advice
From a reader: As a liberal I appreciate your efforts and those of other conservatives to keep things clear in the aftermath of the Republican defeat. As a political scientist, I think "reformist" Republicans are generally not developing a very sound analysis of their party's problems. Any party, left, right, or anything else, would have been seriously affected by the economic crisis of today if it had a president in office at the time. There was really no way McCain could avoid being lumped together with Bush, and thus get tarred with the same brush. As for social conservatism as a problem, I think just the opposite is true. Social conservatives are the core of the party and the party's strategists and professional chatterers should never get too far from that core. My advice to the Republicans is this: Now is the time to cull insufficiently conservative politicians and opinion leaders from the party. The party needs to become much more self-consciously right-wing and ideologically intransigent. Between now and the next presidential election, conservatives need to complete their full take-over of the party and need to do everything they can to mobilize Americans in the name of conservatism. By 2012, party strategists should have a very clear idea about what they want to do. They should have several right-wing potential candidates willing and able to broaden the appeal of the party. But the appeal of the party should be understood as the appeal of conservatism, not some opportunistic set of compromises with the left. Such an approach won't work. While I certainly do not wish conservatives or Republicans well, I want them to stand for what they truly believe, and make their appeal to the American voting public on that basis. Think right, run right, govern right. Anything less will only disappoint all of you. - Stocking Stuffer
The official National Review Tee Shirt. Get yours here. - Re: Learned Foote
Commenting on a WSJ op-ed the other day, I wrote about the byline: "At first I assumed that 'Learned Foote' must be a pseudonym chosen to pay homage to Learned Hand, but apparently it isn't." It turns out that while it isn't a pseudonym, it is an homage. - Hindu Extremism
generates a transition-team controversy. - Hot Rod Is More than Hot
We don't know to what degree Blagogate affects members of Obama's team, and hope only that after a too long election, we get on with our new president and looming crises. But the continual mishmash of "misspokes" is growing alarming. More worrisome is why we are even here weeks before the Inauguration. We learned everything about McCain down to his wife's private temperament, and we were forced to endure the daily speculations about the Palin pregnancy and clothes. But far too much about far more important things about Obama in his Chicago years were simply off limits: the disturbing legal action in his state campaign that eliminated all opponents by having African-American petitioners declared null and void, the mysterious leaking of sealed divorce papers to eliminate the Democratic Senate rival, and the lightning-strikes-twice reoccurrence of that in the general election against his likely Republican opponent. When collated with the Chicago Circle (Rezko, Wright, Pfleger, Ayers, Khalidi, etc.) his past was a lot to swallow. But no matter -- the election is over, and that was then. Yet now, rather than pursuing leads the last few weeks about the swirling rumors concerning Blago, the media continues to discourse on their Constitutional frustration that President-elect Obama simply could not assume power right now! To outsiders, they all seem eager to audition for parts in a Sophoclean tragedy of their own making. Again, the media treatment of Obama the last two years has been ethically reprehensible and absolutely derelict, and now the media will be left scrambling to ponder a number of Chicago synapses. Given the long and close ties in the past (cf. especially 2002) between Blagojevich and Axlerod/Emanuel/Obama, it was very unwise of Obama to offer those initial sweeping disclaimers about an absence of contact between the two parties, given that they will inevitably have to be rendered "inoperative". We know that later there will be corrections coming, since there were contacts between Blagojevich and members of the Obama transition team (if for no other reason than Blago's profanity-ridden frustrations with the negotiations). I fear throwing Hot Rod under the bus will make Rev. Wright look like the toss of a blow-up doll. - "I Have Never Spoken To The Governor On This Subject" -- OK, Why Not?
The Times runs a transcript of Obama's remarks this morning, including this: I have never spoken to the governor on this subject. I'm confident that no representatives of mine would have any part of any deals related to this seat. I think the materials released by the U.S. attorney reflect that fact. I've asked my team to gather the facts of any contacts with the governor's office about this vacancy so that we can share them with you over the next few days. Finally, on this matter, let me say that this Senate seat does not belong to any politician to trade. It belongs to the people of Illinois, and they deserve the best possible representation. They also deserve to know that any vacancy will be filled in an appropriate way so that whoever is sent to Washington is going to be fighting for the people of Illinois. I hope and expect that the leaders of the legislature will take these steps to ensure that this is so. ME: This seems passing strange. Until January 20 gets here, Obama is still the sitting U.S. senator occupying that seat. Obviously, it would be wrong for Obama to get involved in a corrupt deal to trade his seat. But what would be wrong about speaking to Blagojevich about who would be replacing him? He says the people of Illinois "deserve the best possible representation." OK, well don't they deserve it now, while he is still in office? What would possibly be more important to them than making sure the extraordinarily influential incumbent weighed in with the governor -- a governor whom he twice was very instrumental in getting elected -- to try to influence that governor's selection? Obama would have been derelict not to weigh in. U.S. senators weigh in with presidents all the time -- even presidents of the opposite party -- about what federal judges and U.S. attorneys should be appointed in their state. There's nothing wrong with that -- it's the way things are done, and it allows senators to exercise some quality control on behalf of their constituents. If Dick Durbin wouldn't hesitate to lean on President Bush in the making of an appointment in Illinois, what conceivable chance is there that Barack Obama wouldn't weigh in with his old ally Rod Blagojevich over who should replace Barack Obama in representing Barack Obama's constituents? Over who would work most effectively for Barack Obama's constituents with Barack Obama's administration? When David Axelrod "misspoke" a couple of weeks ago, he said of Obama, "I know he's talked to the governor and there are a whole range of names many of which have surfaced, and I think he has a fondness for a lot of them." No one, of course, batted an eye at the time because it is exactly what you would expect. What would be really weird would be if Obama hadn't weighed in. How foolish for Obama and his people to tee this up so that if it turns out -- when it inevitably turns out -- that either Obama or someone on his behalf communicated Obama's wishes about his replacement to Blago or some Blago aide, they will now look either like liars or amateurs. The only thing for Obama to say was something like: "Of course I made my views about several fine candidates known to the governor -- I owe the people I still represent of Illinois nothing less than my best judgment about that. But of course I had no part in any deal, and I think that's pretty clear from the very lengthy complaint and the remarks made by the U.S. attorney.  I'm obviously appalled by the governor's very strange views about how he should carry out his responsibilities, but I'm not at all confused about mine." CORRECTION: I apologize for being unaware that Obama had resigned his senate seat on November 16. (On that, while I see what's in it for Obama in terms of avoiding uncomfortable votes before he assumes the presidency, I don't see what's in it for the people he was elected to represent, who are left without a senator for two months.) It doesn't change my mind about anything I said in the post. Obama is still the closest thing the people of Illinois have to an incumbent, he properly has a long-standing alliance with the governor of his home state, he has a great interest in the composition of the senate (which is why he did not hesitate in the slightest to lean on Harry Reid to keep Joe Lieberman as a committee chairman), and he has a very strong interest -- both personally and on behalf of the people who elected him to the senate -- in who replaces him. It is in