So says Rich Lowry. He’s right, but of course not because there’s something uniquely corrupt about Republicans per se (though there is something uniquely hypocritical about their corruption, because they were supposed to be the party of smaller government, and present fewer opportunities to seek rent, as George Will eloquently points out). It’s because Lord Acton had it largely right–power does indeed corrupt.
The Republicans should view this as an opportunity to get back to their small government roots. Unfortunately, they probably won’t. Not that I’m inclined to vote for Democrats in preference, of course, because we know they’d be even worse. There is a “culture of corruption,” but it’s a culture of power, not of party.
…when I read that there is now a federal law against annoying people via the Internet. I mean, I’d probably get fifty to life. Or consecutive life terms, to judge by some of my commenters.
But then I saw the loophole, that says it’s OK to do it, as long as you don’t do so anonymously.
It seems to be possible to read the law as applying to Internet telephony only (perhaps to extend existing anti-harassment laws that apply to phone calls to VOIP, but it’s vague enough that we can be assured of some pretty broad prosecutions that will result in court interpretations (hopefully interpretations that the law is unconstitutional nonsense).
Clinton, however, had no…lofty ideals in his self-made scandal. He brought sex into the arena by first lying to the public during the campaign over Jennifer Flowers; then again by attempting to hush Paula Jones in her civil suit; then finally by giving false testimony to a Grand Jury. In the process, he managed to become the only president ever to be disbarred by allowing his attorney to submit a false statement to a federal judge. (There must be a standing joke here to the effect that if you aren
Clinton, however, had no…lofty ideals in his self-made scandal. He brought sex into the arena by first lying to the public during the campaign over Jennifer Flowers; then again by attempting to hush Paula Jones in her civil suit; then finally by giving false testimony to a Grand Jury. In the process, he managed to become the only president ever to be disbarred by allowing his attorney to submit a false statement to a federal judge. (There must be a standing joke here to the effect that if you aren
Clinton, however, had no…lofty ideals in his self-made scandal. He brought sex into the arena by first lying to the public during the campaign over Jennifer Flowers; then again by attempting to hush Paula Jones in her civil suit; then finally by giving false testimony to a Grand Jury. In the process, he managed to become the only president ever to be disbarred by allowing his attorney to submit a false statement to a federal judge. (There must be a standing joke here to the effect that if you aren
I’m sure that all the people (many of whom were no doubt self-styled feminists) who were wailing and keening about Tookie Williams will be protesting this any minute now:
An Iranian court has sentenced a teenage rape victim to death by hanging after she weepingly confessed that she had unintentionally killed a man who had tried to rape both her and her niece.
[crickets chirping]
Well, maybe tomorrow.
But it’s probably not the Iranian government’s fault. I’m sure they just do things like this out of an inferiority complex, and in response to the evil Western influences, and McDonalds, and Britney.
I’m sure they’ll behave better when they get nukes.
[Sunday evening update]
Just for the record, I don’t agree in any way with the commenter who is pining for a “Curtis LeMay type, who won’t care who’s in office.”
In today’s New York Times, the article “Go Ahead, Try to Stop K Street,” an argument is quoted from Newt Gingrich that you have to shrink government to curb lobbyists. “There is $2.6 trillion spent in Washington, with the authority to regulate everything in your life,” he said. “Guess what? People will spend unheard-of amounts of money to influence that. The underlying problems are big government and big money.”
Curbing the budget will only reduce the acceleration of lobbying, not reduce lobbying. It is a bargain. The Indian tribes are just smart to get in on it (if not in their choice of representation). In my joint paper with Livingston and Jurist, we say the following:
National lobbying of Congress and the President in 2004 totaled $1 billion. That may seem like a lot, but it is a pittance compared to the $2.3 trillion in Federal outlays. Congress and the President also pass laws and make executive orders that implicitly subsidize through loan guarantees, forbid activities altogether, impose work and investment rules that implicitly tax certain activities, and establish through the courts and federal agencies how property rights are defined. Thus, it is possible that Congress and the President influence perhaps twice as much of the economy as the Federal Government spends. Given that, $1 billion to buy influence on Capitol Hill is surely a bargain. With 589 bills passing both houses of Congress (enrolled) in the 108th Congress, that works out to about $3.3 million of lobbying per enrolled bill. Adding in campaign contributions per enrolled bill (about $400 million per session for the President
Congressman Murtha, the Dems’ new favorite war hero (now that they’ve given up on Senator Kerry), is concerned that it might look like a victory for us in Iraq. Yes, that would be terrible. How would the Democrats make gains in the House next year if that happened?
Congressman Murtha, the Dems’ new favorite war hero (now that they’ve given up on Senator Kerry), is concerned that it might look like a victory for us in Iraq. Yes, that would be terrible. How would the Democrats make gains in the House next year if that happened?
Congressman Murtha, the Dems’ new favorite war hero (now that they’ve given up on Senator Kerry), is concerned that it might look like a victory for us in Iraq. Yes, that would be terrible. How would the Democrats make gains in the House next year if that happened?