Skip to content

10 More Days

Saturday, January 10, 2009


via Tom Tomorrow


Filed in Humour | | Comments (0)

Legalities

Saturday, January 10, 2009

One must wonder if the Democrats have given any thought to the implications of the position they are taking regarding the Burris appointment to the Senate. At this point, they are clinging to the claim that a gubernatorial appointment isn’t legal until it is certified by the Secretary of State of Illinois. The Illinois Supreme Court has already ruled that this claim is bogus, and that pesky little document, the Constitution, doesn’t lend the argument much support. The Seventeenth Amendment seems clear:

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of each State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

For better or worse, and we can all agree it’s for the worse, Blagojevich is the executive of Illinois. The constitution didn’t give a veto to the Secretary of State, and the Senate can’t impose additional requirements. It’s not within their powers.

But let’s think a little bit about this. Let’s accept the Reid/Durbin argument for a moment. That means that the Illinois Secretary of State does have a veto over the governor’s selection. It also means every other Secretary of State in any other state has a veto over his or her governor’s selection. The Secretary of State is not always a member of the same party as the sitting governor. Consider Colorado’s situation. It happens that the former Republican Secretary of State won election to the Congress, and the Democratic governor has the right to name a replacement. But, what if the Republican had lost his election? Do the Democrats contend that he could have vetoed the Salazar replacement by refusing to certify the selection? After all, they are relying on a Senate rule that appears to require such a certification, not on any peculiar quirk of Illinois law. Do they really think it’s a good idea to let a partisan Republican Secretary of State frustrate a Democratic governor? As things stand now, Obama can’t appoint any Senator from a state with a Republican governor (sorry, Chris). If the Democrats get their way, any Senator from a state with a Democratic governor and a Republican Secretary of State will be scratched from the list of potential appointees.

This is one of the reasons we are supposed to follow the law. It may be convenient to bend it in our favor in a given situation, but refraining from doing so lessens the chance that it will be bent against us in the future.


Filed in Politics | | Comments (0)

Econ 101

Saturday, January 10, 2009

This pretty much sums it up:


Thanks to the folks who passed this on to my wife, who passed it on to me, who probably had it passed to them from someone else.

(Click on the image to see a larger, readable version)


Filed in Economics | | Comments (0)

Friday Night Music-Los Lobos

Friday, January 9, 2009

Once again, thanks to a reader/Liberal Drinker, who suggested this performance. A great band.


Filed in Music | | Comments (0)

A new local blog

Thursday, January 8, 2009

We live in an old (1791) house. Sometimes things gradually go wrong, and it takes us a while to realize we have been living with something for a long time that really ought to be fixed. Then, six or seven months later, we actually get it fixed. Today was one of those days.

The light fixture in our downstairs bathroom had three bulbs. It was installed about three years ago, and almost immediately one bulb stopped working (it wasn’t the bulb, it was something in the fixture). Sometime in the last few months, another bulb stopped working. Around the first of the year, the last bulb started to give out, so we sprang into action. We figured, that in addition to dealing with the emergency situation, it might be a good time to get a number of other long deferred electrical problems fixed, like the light in the upstairs bathroom, which showed signs of emulating its downstairs cousin.

We have a friend, a good Democrat, who’s a contractor, and we called him to recommend someone to do the work. He brought a fellow to the house today, and wouldn’t you know, he’s got a blog. Doesn’t everybody? Unlike yours truly, he writes about something he knows something about: energy use in our daily lives. He just started posting toward the end of December. Check him out at Helios at Home.

By the way, he does good work. Our fixture with the pull cord is no more, we now have a functioning light and a wall switch. This may not sound like much to you folks with 20th century homes, but those inhabiting relics from the 18th century may understand.


Filed in Local issues | | Comments (0)

Deliver us from Harry Reid

Wednesday, January 7, 2009

The Democrats have a real problem with Harry Reid. Right now we can see the pattern being set for weak, ineffectual, vacillating “leadership” of the Senate, which will inevitably lead to a failure to pass and implement Obama’s programs. The same people who rolled over to give Bush, an unelected President, carte blanche for eight years will join the Republicans to cripple Obama in the early going

First, let us pause to consider where Reid chooses to make a stand. Whatever you think of the Burris appointment, the fact is that there is no legal way that he can be refused a seat. Posturing prior to the appointment was acceptable, but posturing now makes no sense. It is particularly depressing that the Democrats can’t simply come forward and say that the law is the law, like it or not, and that Burris gets the seat. He’s an odd duck, but from all appearances, far superior to what passes for Senators from most of the red states. Reid has managed to make a bad situation far worse by fighting a battle that he must inevitably lose. He will inevitably have to back down, something he’s actually pretty good at, but Burris may be the first Democrat that’s ever made him do it.

Meanwhile, we have the spectacle of Harry Reid, the long time Bush enabler, signaling that he will by no means be enabling Obama:

Reid stated, “I don’t believe in the executive power trumping everything… I believe in our Constitution, three separate but equal branches of government.”

“If Obama steps over the bounds, I will tell him. … I do not work for Barack Obama. I work with him,” he said.

Those are actually very laudable sentiments. Who can disagree? Harry may even have endorsed them during the Bush presidency, but if he ever talked the talk, he never walked the walk. Somehow, he couldn’t bring himself to actually face down the man he says was the worst president in history. Unfortunately, there’s little doubt that he’ll walk the walk now, frustrating Obama while continuing to roll over and spout his “It takes 60 votes to pass anything in the Senate” nonsense whenever the Republicans decide to be obstructionist, which will, by the way, be always.

The Democrats and Obama have about a 6 month window of opportunity to prove that they can govern effectively. The Republicans are going to try to shut that window, but they needn’t go to a great deal of effort. The Democrats, with Reid in the “lead”, will shut it for them.

Reid, by the way, also believes that poor Ted Stevens should be spared jail time. According to Reid, poor Ted just didn’t understand that we’re living in a different world from the graft ridden one in which he rose to power, and that he’s been punished enough. As far as I know, so far he’s only lost an election. I’ve probably lost more elections than Stevens. Maybe I should get some get out of jail free card for a crime of my choice.

I hazard a prediction: every major piece of legislation proposed by Obama will die or be maimed in the Senate.

Filed in Democrats | | Comments (0)

Caroline Kennedy’s candidacy

Tuesday, January 6, 2009

By no means am I a Caroline Kennedy partisan. I will lose no sleep if she is not appointed to the Senate. Nonetheless I’m a bit mystified at the heated opposition her “candidacy” has generated in certain corners of the blogosphere, particularly at Firedoglake. In the latest piece on the subject, “Eli” argues that a potential Senator needs some minor league seasoning before hitting the big time:

The record shows that making the jump to the big leagues without any experience is not a recipe for prolonged success. Mike Morgan,the only one of those four players who sustained any kind of career, did spend two years in the minors after a terrible start. There is value to seasoning and experience, especially when it comes to high-pressure jobs like United States Senator or, yes, major-league pitcher.

In truth and in fact, plenty of people have made perfectly good Senators without serving time in the minors. It really isn’t like baseball. Baseball is harder. Just ask Jim Bunning, who had to retire when he lost his fastball, but who satisfies his constituents as a Senator, despite his senility. Moreover, if memory serves, Firedoglake was a big Lamont supporter, about whom the same argument was made by Joltin’ Joe (to extend the baseball analogy) Lieberman.

I can understand the anti-dynasty argument, and I’m sympathetic to it, but it seems that the anti-Kennedyites are becoming a bit rabid on this subject.


Filed in Politics | | Comments (0)

I want one

Tuesday, January 6, 2009


Filed in Humour, Video | | Comments (0)

Coming Events

Tuesday, January 6, 2009

It’s that time again. While we ordinarily hold our Drinking Liberally Meetings on the first Thursday of the month, we decided that wouldn’t be such a good idea this month, considering the first Thursday was a holiday. So this month, and this month only, we will meet on the Second Thursday of the Month, once again at the Bulkeley House, 111 Bank Street in New London. We start at 6:30, though latecomers (within reason) are always welcome.

Also on the horizon is the end of our national nightmare, scheduled to take place at the stroke of noon, Eastern Standard Time on the 20th. We in Groton are going to be celebrating on the 20th at the Par Four restaurant at 93 Plant Street. We plan to be there starting at around 11:30. Even people from outside our fair city are invited. Here’s a critical excerpt from the mass mailing that my spouse sent out:

Please understand —we have not made reservations for food…since we don’t know how many people will be coming. We’ve simply arranged for at least one of the large screen TV’s to broadcast the event, and agreed a few of us will definitely be there and we hope many others will join us!!! But if you want to, you can choose and purchase your own food and drink.

Just as you should not drink alone, you should not watch this inauguration alone. You need to be with like minded people, so come to the Par Four and enjoy this historic day.


Filed in Announcements, Local issues | | Comments (0)

Unmitigated gall

Monday, January 5, 2009

It’s hard to decide which is more egregious: the gall of John Yoo and John Bolton warning Barack Obama to stay within the constitutional limitations of the presidency, or the outrageousness of the New York Times decision to give these two fascists a platform.

I have said on numerous occasions that both the courts and the Republicans would suddenly discover that the president’s powers are limited, once a Democrat was elected. It will take a while for the courts to weigh in, but the Republicans are starting even before the inauguration. Imagine John Yoo, the torture enabler, the man who said that George Bush could make and unmake law at will, telling Barack Obama that he should avoid cutting constitutional corners. The article is in the opinion section of the New York Times. I refuse to provide a link, as a tiny protest against the irresponsibility of the Times giving these two a forum.

And who are Bolton and Yoo? Well, according to the Times:

John R. Bolton, the ambassador to the United Nations from 2005 to 2006, is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of “Surrender Is Not an Option.” John Yoo, a deputy assistant attorney general from 2001 to 2003, is a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley and a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

Just a few facts are missing. Among them: John R. Bolton is also the man who became ambassador to the United Nations because George Bush chose to cut constitutional corners by giving him a recess appointment after his nomination failed to pass the Senate. John Yoo is the guy who authored the torture memo, which Kevin drum aptly summed up as follows:

Basically, the president can authorize any action at all as commander-in-chief in wartime. Congress can’t bind him, treaties can’t bind him, and the courts can’t bind him. The scope of power the memos suggest is, almost literally, absolute. And since this is a war without end, the grant of power is also without end.

The New York Times gives these guys space to lecture Obama on constitutional niceties. Will there ever come a time when the “liberal” media will stop enabling these people?


Filed in Creeping Totalitarianism, Media | | Comments (0)