Hold Onto Your Hats!

OK, today's market break was big, yes? The biggest in history in nominal index points, at least.

Listening to Speaker Pelosi's "pep talk" speech calling for passage of the hasty bailout was sickening in its revisionism. Majority Leader Boehner's counter equally sickening, claiming that 12 Rs woulda voted for it had Pelosi not given such a "partisan" speech.

Give me a break!

Silly season is on parade in DC. These folks can't help but make this a campaign issue, and for that, I guess I'm pleased. The Paulsen Plan stinks, and his rhetoric for it was repulsive. Do This Or Else comes across as a threat. The Ds, mostly, say, OK, we'll do this but only with This, or else. This game of Counter Chicken is so unbecoming, and yet these putative adults say these things with a straight face. Impressive in its pathology, I suppose.

My lean at the moment is for a big drop in the markets tomorrow. We've already given back to '05 S&P 500 levels, why not '04, too?

Cleansing must happen. Excess cannot stand. Things must return to equilibrium, on way or another.

-RC

Price Gougers Wanted

The Bush years are looking more and more like the Nixon years: a dishonest executive, a military quagmire, paranoia, upset hippies, ballooning size of government, and now...gas lines – at least if you live in the mountains of Western North Carolina. Last night on the way to the organic grocery store I counted 12 closed gas stations and one that was open.

What gas that is available is going for close to $4/gallon, and people are angry. Some complain of “price gouging.”

I complain too: we don’t have enough price gouging!

The Colonial Pipeline, which supplies my area, is fed by refineries hit by hurricanes Gustav and Ike. Trucking in gasoline from other sources is expensive because we are uphill. Prices should be high in order to encourage conservation, and pay people to truck more gas uphill.

But NOOOOO! North Carolina has laws against “price gouging.” So instead of temporary $6 gasoline, we have no gasoline at most stations. When a station does open, people line up and fill their tanks to the top. The market is stockpiling after the production shortfall.

Price gouging should be legal. Let the prices rise high enough and people will start delivering gas in plastic tanks in the back of their pickup trucks, if that’s what it takes. With high prices and assurance that gas will be available, people will buy just what they need until the shortage ends. If price gouging was legal, wholesalers would have stockpiled before hurricane season in order to make a windfall.

Stupid politicians.

Maybe the Peak Oil disaster mongers are right. Maybe Peak Oil will destroy the economy and end civilization – if our politicians are too economically ignorant to allow prices to rise in times of shortage.

Saving the Environment and Avoiding Taxes

Google has been one of the most innovative companies in the world for some time now. Their web browser is used by hundreds of millions of people every day and I couldn't get around town without their maps. According to recent news stories, however, their most recent innovation may take the cake...at least as far as combining environmental and bottom line benefits are concerned.

The company is considering deploying the supercomputers necessary to operate its internet search engines on barges anchored up to seven miles (11km) offshore.

The “water-based data centres” would use wave energy to power and cool their computers, reducing Google’s costs. Their offshore status would also mean the company would no longer have to pay property taxes on its data centres, which are sited across the world, including in Britain.

So, use ocean water to save massive amounts of electricity (an expected $9 million worth of it annually) and hang onto more revenue at the same time. What a beautiful concept. We'll see if google's floating data center idea "floats" and whether it can keep politicians' grubby hands away from these platforms or if they'll find some way to tax.

Barney Frank and the Gold (I mean "Energy") Standard

Caught part of an interview by C-SPAN with Barney Frank (one of the hardest-to-listen-to voices on the Hill) in which Frank flubbed a response to a caller who suggested the dollar should be on some kind of real standard.

The caller's favorite idea seemed to be that the standard be energy ("kilowatt-hours" I believe was the term used).

Frank though the caller meant we should do away with the dollar and spend energy instead.

Has anyone considered if an "energy standard" would work, how it would work, and how it would stack up against a Pauline gold standard?

Pensions as Golden Parachutes

As the Paulsen Bailout Plan seems to be shaping up as more or less predicted, I got to thinking:

While I certainly don't like taxpayer financing of lavish (if contractual) golden parachutes of inept bankers and Wall Streeters, why stop there? Congress, the Administration, and many regulators were clearly asleep at the switch, or even prime movers of the financial dominoes that are thudding to Earth as we speak.

Why not takeaway their pensions? Why should taxpayers pay for such ineptitude?

Might be karmic justice....

-RC

"It's the End of the World...

...as we know it. And I feel fine."

-REM

Well, alrighty, then. Washington Mutual went down last night, whilst Bush and The Boys and Girl had what must've been scintillating conversation yesterday. Did they get a good night's sleep last night, or were their heads and egos swelled beyond recognition? (WAMU holds my mortgage...maybe JP Morgan will lose the records!)

Add to the mix that Monday is Rosh Hashanah (Jewish New Year) begins at sundown on Monday, September 29. Generally, this trading day is slow, but who knows this year?

My guess is today will be a game of chicken. I'm predicting (guessing) a "small" bailout of, say, $100 billion vs. $700. They'll position it as a "tranche" for the MOST at risk mortgage-backed securities.

Who needs soap operas when we can watch As the Potomac Turns 24x7x365?

-RC

Is This Any Way to "Run" an Economy?

Who'd a thunk it? The economy is 7 billion people making decisions moment by moment, and we're all waiting with baited breath on a few old dudes and one dudette to craft a package to save us all.

The pathos is just too thick for this observer.

No one wants the blame. No one REALLY wants the responsibility. Oddly enough, none should get either.

That's precisely the problem. Mismatching roles. Reluctant usurpers. Damned if you do or don't.

Que sera.

-RC

Obama and Barr to Debate

James Plummer asks, "Who will debate Obama."

Obama could most certainly help himself by choosing to debate Bob Barr. One, it promotes Bob Barr, who has been campaigning rightward and will certainly take votes from disaffected McCain voters. McCain's suggestion of "working on the economy" versus campaigning is utterly ludicrous and no doubt turns fiscal conservatives off. Two, by debating Barr, Obama can showcase his economic policies and highlight that the old man (McCain) cannot handle multiple tasks simultaneously -- not a good flaw in the age of terrorism.

Nader can be excluded by the commission for not providing "balance" to the debate (even though I think the idea of a one-dimensional spectrum to be flat wrong.)

/KDR

Who will debate Obama?

So John McCain is ducking out of the debate Friday night, apparently. Will Bob Barr, Ralph Nader or another candidate show up in Florida offering to fill McCain's seat and challenge the Chosen One to a debate? It's an obvious move to make here.

Blame Government for Current Financial Problems

These are dark days for those who believe in free markets and limited government. Each day brings a new story of a new, major financial company in trouble and now Congress is dickering over a $700 billion taxpayer-financed bailout package. Many on the left like EJ Dionne and even the supposedly conservative presidential candidate John McCain is blaming "greed." Unfortunately, the conventional wisdom seems to be that massive government intervention is necessary because the financial markets are "broken." Of course, the implication is that we have a free market and it is capitalism, not government, that has created the problem.

The reality could not be more different. Back in 2000, my former colleague Jeff Dircksen at the National Taxpayers Union stated that:

The secret of (Fannie's and Freddie's) success --subsidies-- could also prove to be their undoing. Given their market dominance, Fannie and Freddie may need to pursue increasingly risky loans to maintain a portfolio that has grown at 18 percent per year over the past decade. An economic downturn or a change in interest rates could cause substantial numbers of higher-risk borrowers to default, sending Fannie and Freddie’s stock prices tumbling, and leaving taxpayers holding the bag.

NTU is not alone in blaming Fannie and Freddie for being at the heart of the crisis. The Wall Street Journal carried an excellent article yesterday that pinned blame on the two mortgage giants. Economic analyst Peter Ferrara has also said much the same thing.

Unfortunately, offering the correct analysis is not always enough when the media has fixated on "greed" and the misdeeds of Wall Street titans. We who understand the reality of the situation must simply keep hammering away with the truth and it will set us free.

Oh, and if you are opposed to the current plan to use 700 billion taxpayer dollars to bail out Wall Street, click here to sign this petition from the National Taxpayers Union.

Malinvestment Implications

Prof. Bill Anderson suggests here that government-induced malinvestment cannot be countered with less-unsound intervention to cushion the unwinding of the initial malinvestment.

I would like to see proof of this. It strikes me that one can agree with the diagnosis, but not the cure -- in Anderson's case, let the crash happen, then rebuild from the ashes, it appears.

I'm just not sure that a recession or a crash are inevitable. Sometimes, bridge loans work. Sometimes, growth can overcome short-term dislocations.

This is not to say that the Paulsen Plan is something to support. I don't. I'm just not convinced that shock therapy is the only righteous course here.

-RC

If I Were a Cynical Democratic Strategist...

...I would be counseling the leaders of my party to act as if we were onboard the Paulsen Plan, but to load it up with as many Christmas Tree ornaments as possible. Executive compensation, foreclosure relief, stimulus packages, more regulation. Just as they have done. Then I would say to up the ante, require more oversight of the Treasury. Or perhaps create a new czar of mortgage-backed securities. Talk like you're with the Administration to save Wall Street AND Main Street, but that this must be done responsibly. Haste makes waste, after all.

Such a head fake could induce the fawning herd on Wall Street to believe that the deal won't get done. Those affluent sufferers of ADD would panic, and cause the Dow to plunge perhaps another 1000 points...a big (if inflated) number.

Now, were I a Republican strategist, the only thing that trumps economic insecurity is physical insecurity. War tends to trigger intense feelings of physical unsafety. That billion dollars of aid to Georgia had to have some strings. Pakistan is a boiling cauldron. Lebanon or Syria? Good candidates. Perhaps even Venezuela. This would cast foreign policy expert John McCain in a whole new light, backed up by Sarah Palin's rifle. The yin/yang of it all is just too winning.

Thankfully, I'm neither. Frighteningly, these are likely not original thoughts. Heaven help us.

-RC

Economic Reality Explained

Rarely will you ever see a more fact-base and easy to understand analysis of everyday economic issues than RGF Board member and Director of Research Ken Brown's opinion piece on the pages of the Albuquerque Journal today.

Brown explains the "broken window fallacy" and why so-called "economic development" simply does not work. Copies of this piece should be mandatory reading for all elected officials in New Mexico and beyond. The Rio Grande Foundation will distribute this piece to all New Mexico legislators before the 2009 session.

Baldly for McCain

WTNT, a talk radio station in the DC area, now calls out "McCain" during its station ID. Home of William Bennett, Laura Ingraham, and Dennis Miller, I bristle when I hear this blatant political endorsement.

You?

-RC

Sarah Palin's Flaws

Much of the mainstream media is focused on her inexperience (or lack thereof, her religious views, and her attempts to play both sides of the pork issue, but Sarah Palin has some more serious flaws from a libertarian or free liberal perspective. First and foremost is her willingness to be completely co-opted by the neoconservative wing of the Republican Party despite views on other issues that would be considered more grass-roots conservative or even populist rather than neo-con.

Another major flaw (as Jacob Sullum over at Reason points out) is her efforts to undermine Alaska's liberal marijuana laws. She may be the conservatives' darling, but those two major flaws on what I consider to be core libertarian issues make the so-called "libertarian case for Palin" rather weak.

We're from the Government and We're here to "protect" you

If you think the government has any interest in protecting you or your health, this article should give you pause. It turns out that the feds are prohibiting a meat packer from testing every cow for mad cow disease.

Lest you think the problem here is big, bad, corporations, it would seem that lobbyists and political donations will always hold sway over government and its agencies. Might we move to a Consumer Reports or Good Housekeeping seal model with organizations genuinely dedicated to protecting consumers?

Strangelove-onomics

The Palin Bounce seems to have started to wane. Identity politics gets you a lot, but it don't necessarily win you the prize. So, while national polls are still averaging a slight edge for Strangelove McCain, we have a dead heat brewing.

In three days, the Dow is down 7%. Lehman, Merrill, AIG are associated with Republicans, fair or not. Sarah Palin's rifle cannot undo that. Another shock to the system could convert current market jitters into the equivalent of a psychotic break.

If that happens, Strangelove should consider a beach chair next to Bob Dole. The Old Lions of the Senate can muse wistfully about what could have been....

-RC

Mark to Model

You'll no doubt wake to the news that Lehman Brothers -- a Wall Street powerhouse -- is declaring bankruptcy. And that Bank of America is acquiring Merrill Lynch. This is huge news. A few months ago, Bear Stearns was "rescued," so the dominos are falling more and more heavily.

No clue where this is going. Perhaps it's another example of darkness before the dawn.

But it does for me illustrate the difference between "intellect" and "wisdom." Wall Streeters invent very sophisticated investment vehicles that sound good in theory but prove unwise. This last round was all about creating synthetic securities that were derived from risky mortgage portfolios. Pooled, the risk goes down, right?

Yes, in theory. If the market in the underlying value in real estate is going up, the few bad apples can be stomached. But when the entire portfolio goes down, no one -- not Merrill, not Lehman, not Bear -- is immune.

The brilliant Wall Streeters lost all sense of balance. Rather than checking their portfolios against a real market, they relied on a practice called "marking to model." They layered on synthetic element onto another. On a chalkboard, it seemed coherent at the time.

But it's proving incoherent.

Time for some humility and authenticity. At least some!

Hey, maybe Sarah Palin's just the ticket....nah, six months in Oz by the Potomac and she'll be experted to death, intimidated by legions of experts.

Obama will lead us to the Promised Land, perhaps? The speeches will be better. But he will be handled into corruption and special-interest politics like the rest.

Back to the markets...today we'll see a big sell off...but soon the leaves will turn orange and red and a chill will be in the air. Life will go on. And so it goes.

-RC

The Difference between Love and Taxes

Jeff Jacoby tries to help Obama understand on the Boston Globe's site today:

Seeing through Obamanomics

Every time a prominent progressive like Obama displays such totalitarian thinking as to mistake taxes for charity, articles like Jacoby's need to be written.

It's the basics. But the basics are always vitally relevant.

UPDATE

For a more in-depth examination of Obama's tax plans, as well as some good background on the state of taxation in America, see "Tax Cuts, Real and Imaginary," by Gingrich and Ferrara on The Weekly Standard's site.

(h/t Barnett)

Reason Mag for Palin?

In addition to the article that both Mr. Gessing and myself have linked to, there seems to be at least one other that explicitly takes up the libertarian case for Palin.

And this one is by none other than Reason's Radley Balko.

I think Mr. Balko misses the fact (which I discussed here) that it is Palin's treatment of state earmarks ("Palin, for example, vetoed 300 pork projects in Alaska in her first year in office" -Harsanyi) that is most indicative of what her approach to federal earmarks would be as VP

But he brings out a number of issues which I haven't seen many (if any) people discuss. At least not in the positive light Mr. Balko puts on them.

I'd suggest reading the whole thing.

The Libertarian Case for Palin

I'm not saying I agree with it (I would never consider someone a libertarian who supports unnecessary wars like the one in Iraq), but here is the libertarian case for VP candidate Sarah Palin.

As an Alaskan, she certainly lives a more "libertarian" life-style than any of the three Senators in the race. Is a quasi-libertarian VP candidate enough to attract many libertarian votes?

George Stephanopoulis on Racism

This Jan Helfeld interview raises the question of how we define racism. Is racism the practice of using race (as a factor or the only factor) to determine a person's worthiness for inclusion in a group or does it require something more? A friend of mine claims that racism can only flow from people with power (the privileged group) to the oppressed group. So, in my friend's formulation, white people in American can be racist, but black people cannot. What do you think?

/KDR

More Jan Helfeld videos here.

Want Offshore Drilling and Lower Gas Prices: Comment Here!

The US Minerals Management Service recently announced that it intends to prepare a new Five Year Leasing Plan for the Outer Continental Shelf. This is a vital first step in initiating more exploration and production on OCS lands that MMS estimates could hold 86 billion barrels of oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

MMS has opened the process for taking public comments. I’m writing to you, in hope that you will take a few minutes form your hectic day to write a brief note or letter to MMS, underscoring your support for leasing these lands and producing more of the oil and gas that are the foundation for our economy, living standards and opportunities.

Already, a number of environmental pressure groups have mobilized their extensive financial and networking resources, to deluge MMS with comments OPPOSING any plan that opens up more OCS acreage for leasing and drilling. I’ve heard that comments to MMS are currently running at approximately 15 to 1 AGAINST opening new OCS areas – and thus in favor of continuing the unconscionable Energy War on Poor Families.

To make it easier for you to write a letter to MMS, I’ve attached a sample letter (click on the link below) that provides some facts and ideas you can use, and that you can tailor to your own taste. Also attached are a couple of background papers by MMS and the National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA) that provide useful information about the OCS program and the laws and technologies that enable us to extract even more energy, from even deeper waters, with even greater care for the environmental values we all cherish.

You can send a detailed letter like this. But even a brief letter supporting a full analysis and expanded leasing program will help greatly.

All comment letters must REACH MMS by SEPTEMBER 15, when the comment period closes.

Letters can be snail-mailed to the addresses on the sample MMS letter – or they can be submitted by going to the MMS website (http://www.mms.gov/5-year/5-YearProgramComments.htm) and using either of the following links:

via the web: Public Commenting System

via e-mail: 5YearRFIComments@mms.gov

Comments on 5-Year OCS Oil & Gas Leasing Program for 2010-2015

Ms. Renee Orr
5-Year Program Manager
Minerals Management Service (MS-4010)
Room 3120
381 Elden Street
Herndon, VA 20170

Mr. James F. Bennett
Chief, Branch of Environmental Assessment
Minerals Management Service (MS-4042)
381 Elden Street
Herndon, VA 20170

Dear Ms. Orr and Mr. Bennett:

I am writing to express my strong support for MMS plans to initiate a new five year leasing program, and for expanded leasing on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) during the 2010-2015 five-year period. I urge you to fully consider and carefully analyze all planning areas of the OCS, leaving none off the table, as you prepare the draft proposed program and environmental impact statement.

Energy is the foundation of modern society and the living standards we enjoy. It is the key to actually securing the rights and opportunities guaranteed by our Constitution. Abundant, reliable, affordable energy is essential for jobs, food, heating and transportation. Reducing the soaring cost of energy is especially important for America’s small businesses, minorities and poorest families.

Right now, the United States is spending almost $700 billion a year to import foreign oil and gas – because we have made the vast majority of our lands and resources off limits to drilling. As T. Boone Pickens constantly reminds us in his ads, this is rapidly becoming the largest transfer of wealth from one nation to another in the history of mankind. It can not, must not, and need not continue.

On top of that, as Investor’s Business Daily notes, “America is nearly helpless in the face of a resurgent Russia intent on reclaiming its czarist empire, an Iran hellbent on acquiring nuclear weapons, a China making common cause with dictators to acquire energy, and a menacing Venezuela aligning with Russia and Cuba to control sea lanes in the Caribbean, where 64 percent of all US-bound tanker traffic passes.”

The oil and natural gas beneath the 1.76 billion acres of the OCS are vitally needed resources that belong to all Americans. Nearly one-third of US domestic production already comes from the OCS, and the Minerals Management Service has conservatively estimated that undiscovered, technically recoverable resources could total 86 billion barrels of oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

The long record of OCS operations demonstrates that this energy can be produced without harming the marine environment – thanks to new rules, technologies, and commitments by government and industry alike to environmental safeguards. In fact, there has not been a major spill from an OCS production platform in nearly 30 years, and MMS data show that only 101,995 barrels of oil were spilled during all operations on the OCS between 1980 and 2007, out of 11,855,000,000 barrels produced.

MMS is required by law to prepare a schedule of OCS lease sales that “best meet national energy needs for the 5-year period.” To achieve this goal, the agency must develop a schedule that has maximum flexibility, and include as much acreage as possible, so that it can respond to our nation’s changing and growing energy needs, population and economic growth, and economic and national security.

Growing US and world demands for oil and gas are not being met with adequately expanding supplies. As a result, gasoline and other energy prices have more than doubled in recent years – and far too many families have had to make painful choices between heating, eating, medical care, transportation, and rent or mortgage payments. Many have little money left over at the end of the month for vacations, college or retirement. This is both intolerable and unnecessary.

A major reason for this situation is that our own government has closed numerous areas to leasing – and denied us access to energy resources that belong to the American people. In fact, for decades now, Congress has imposed “temporary” moratoria that prohibit oil and gas leasing, drilling and production on 85 percent of the Outer Continental Shelf off Alaska and the Lower 48 States.

Over the past year, however, people have begun to realize that government has become the cause of, rather than the solution to, high prices and other energy problems. By margins of 2:1 and even 3:1, they are now demanding that these moratoria be lifted, and drilling resumed on the OCS.

President Bush recently reversed the Executive Branch prohibitions on leasing and drilling, and Americans are demanding that Congress now lift its prohibitions. I am optimistic that Congress will ultimately listen to the will of the people and act responsibly, to end the needless moratoria.

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has already removed restrictions on drilling for 30 billion barrels of oil in the Chukchi Sea and all the natural gas in the Beaufort Sea off Alaska’s shores. She has already finished the environmental impact studies, so that shipments to the Lower 48 can start in as little as a year or two – if MMS and Congress do their jobs.

I therefore believe MMS has a responsibility to take a long-term view, assume the moratoria will end, and include in its analyses and plans all the Outer Continental Shelf lands and resources that We the People of the United States own off our shores: in the Atlantic, Pacific, Gulf of Mexico and Alaska. The new MMS plan will be in effect until 2015 – and I ask simply that MMS devise its plan accordingly, to reflect continually changing global conditions and steadily rising energy demands.

That means including all areas, off all our coasts in the new Outer Continental Shelf leasing plan.

Thank you for providing this opportunity to comment, and for making the 2010-2015 OCS plan a truly comprehensive plan that does exactly that.

Sincerely,

Biden knows when life begins for him, but it's a private issue

That's what he claimed on "Meet the Press" today.

I'd just like to say that I'm glad a big-government politician like him still recognizes the public/private distinction.

But really: if when life begins is different for you than for me . . . if it's a private issue . . . then who is the government supposed to protect from being killed?

"What are you cops doing here?"

"We're here to stop that murder behind you, Sir."

"How did you find out I was alive? That's a private matter. For all you know I might consider myself undead."

"Well, you filled out the 'I'm Alive Form' down at the Department of Life, Sir."

"Oh, right. I forgot about that. Well, I guess I've given up my right to privacy on the issue of when my life began. Carry on then."

$1 Billion for Georgia?

In case you missed it, earlier this week President Bush proposed that US taxpayers should send $1 billion to the Republic of Georgia which was recently engaged in a brief war with Russia. The aid would dwarf the $63 million the United States provided to Georgia last year.

I'd have a problem if Bush wanted the rest of us to send $1 billion to the State of Georgia where lots of taxpayers reside, much less another country. Worse, it seems that between the foreign aid and the out-of-control rhetoric from the Administration, Bush Administration policy seems hellbent on re-igniting the Cold War for the benefit of a country that is at best on the periphery of US interests.

If Obama and the Democrats take a strong stance of opposition to these absurd and dangerous policies, those who have rational foreign policy beliefs might have someone to vote for, but it seems unlikely.

Analyzing Barack Obama's Tax Plan

We at the Rio Grande Foundation spend a vast majority of our time analyzing and discussing New Mexico-specific issues and policies. But, I was given a chance recently by a national syndicate to write an opinion piece on Barack Obama's tax plan.

With wall-to-wall coverage of the conventions and the campaigns, I humbly submit my $.02. Check the article out here.

"Being There" in '08

2008 reminds me of 1979, when the Peter Sellers film Being There was released. About a simple-minded gardener named Chance who somehow is propelled into a position of power and celebrity, one's thoughts turn to this year's line-up of pols wanting to "serve" the People of the United States of America.

Obama, for example, is someone I'd like to play hoops with, seems like a smart, decent enough fellow. Not especially accomplished, and not ready for president by any contemporary metric.

McCain? All I can say is watch his eyes VERY closely next time he's on TV. There is something not quite right there. He can make jokes about his age, but in times of troubled waters, an angry old man in the White House isn't a scenario to relish.

Palin? Charming, attractive, strong, possibly even principled by pol standards. One gets the sense she knows who she is, a big plus in my book. Ready for the crushingly complex world of the White House? Maybe...in four years. The extreme social views concern me, though, a lot.

Biden seems least like Chance Gardener to me. The fact that he's a self-admitted windbag gives me pause, too, as it indicates potential megalomania. NOT a quality one likes to see with actual power.

Somehow, we'll muddle through, but there's GOT to be a better way to select a president.

-RC

Motivated by Obama

There's a great little ad running on Facebook. It says,

"Register to Vote."

Above it is a picture of Senator Obama.

This election is *about* Barack Obama. We are not voting for or against McCain, we are voting for or against Obama.

Americans are motivated by Obama.

Except those pesky third party people. :-)

/KDR

The Libertarian Case for Palin

David Harsanyi makes a good case (though his thesis is limited).

He even throws in a Paul-Palin comparison I hadn't heard before.

Not that I'd heard any Paul-Palin comparisons before.

-MT

(h/t Adler)

Rearguard Action

Gene Healy of the Cato Institute seems to have become a leading critic of the Imperial Presidency. He's written a book called The Cult of the Presidency and an op-ed entitled A President, Not a Savior.

From a legalistic, technical perspective, he makes a great point: The Constitution is not a call for the President to be a sort of national pastor. It's a nation of laws, not men, and of limited government.

Still, while I'm a big fan of Calvin Coolidge's style, Silent Cal would likely not get elected in the modern context. Eisenhower's hours on the golf course would today be called detached and even lazy.

Today's pols need to appear engaged and energetic. They need to display leadership qualities, and to uphold a certain ethical and moral reputation. In fact, virtually all don't, but they do spend a lot of time cultivating qualities that they don't actually have. Hypocrisy is never attractive, yet they try to maintain a virtuous image.

Shakespeare told us "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." An Athenian in Rome may well prefer to play by Athenian rules, but it won't sell in Rome.

Can a pol be a principled advocate for limited government and yet display the sort of public character necessary on today's stage? Methinks yes. Ron Paul has done it. Bob Barr is doing it. Are they perfect? Are they consequential? No, and not so much...yet.

Politicians, including presidents, need to convince broad cross-sections of the population that their ideas are both virtuous and practical. Healy seems to fight a rearguard action, in which the president just stops the wheels of government by dryly stating, in effect, "Not our job." I'm not liking the odds of such an approach working.

Stay tuned for the next decade or so. People, in their hearts, yearn to breathe free.

-RC