McCain sets himself up the bomb

Kimberley Strassel:

...McCain-Feingold’s biggest “accomplishment” these past five years has been the flowering of those shadowy operations known as 527s, which abide by no rules. Democrats have fine-tuned these outfits, and are gearing up to unload hundreds of millions in negative advertising on none other than Mr. McCain...

In light of all this, the McCain camp has come up with a plan that it hopes will tighten the score. It has filed to create the “McCain Victory ’08” fund, a “hybrid legal structure” that includes the campaign, the Republican National Committee, and [committees in?] four battleground states.

Mr. McCain’s own law restricts individuals to donations of $2,300 per candidate, but those individuals can also contribute much bigger amounts to different party funds. So, with “McCain Victory ’08,” donors can write a check for $70,000.

Technically, the money is divided up between Mr. McCain, the RNC ($28,500) and the four states ($10,000 each). In reality, it will in effect all be used for the candidate’s benefit.

Strassel laments that McCain wouldn’t be faced with the prospect of weaseling around his own law if he “had fought instead for simple transparency– and trusted Americans to decide how much to give and to whom.”

But that’s water under the bridge.  Thanks to Congress, George Bush, and the Supreme Court, the law is the law, and the McCain campaign is attempting to get around the law’s $2,300 limit by gaming the system. Should ordinary folks try tricks like this, the government is quick to register its disapproval; as Bill Quick pointed out (in another context):

...Law enforcement views attempts to game the system as evidence of a crime if not a crime in itself. (Search the first link for “structure,” as in structured deposit or structured transaction. Search the second link for the Structured Transactions section, about 40% of the way down.)

If Mr. McCain doesn’t possess the integrity to instruct his supporters to abide by the spirit of his own law, maybe this finagling should be referred for prosecution.

(Hah.  Not likely!)

But what is likely is that the MSM and all of those evil Democrat 527s will be all over this, come next fall.  

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 16:03:04 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 362 words, total size 4 kb.

The General Electric business model?

1. Invest in something for which there isn’t much demand;
2. Lobby the government to mandate or subsidize it;
3. Profit!
   

NBC’s ‘Green Week’ and GE’s green

Via: IP

Posted by: Old Grouch in Linkage at 14:47:11 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 30 words, total size 1 kb.

Deconstructionist claptrap at Yale

...from an “artist”

The reality of miscarriage is very much a linguistic and political reality, an act of reading constructed by an act of naming - an authorial act. It is the intention of this piece to destablilze the locus of that authorial act, and in doing so, reclaim it from the heteronormative structures that seek to naturalize it.

Says all you really need to know, dunnit?

For more on Shvarts, this.

UPDATE 080528: Margaret Soltan fisks Shvarts so I don’t have to.

For the original post, HT to Michael Lewis, who featured the quote in his column in today’s Wall Street Journal: “Art and (Wo)man at Yale”. (No link, as it doesn’t seem to be online.)

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 19:00:04 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 119 words, total size 2 kb.

The so-con wing is heard from

Every time that I want to step in and assure someone that the “social conservatives” aren’t really dangerous to liberty, they go and do something like this:

Concerned that the military is selling pornography in exchange stores in spite of a ban, one lawmaker has introduced a bill to clean up the matter.

“Our troops should not see their honor sullied so that the moguls behind magazines like Playboy and Penthouse can profit,” said Rep. Paul Broun, R-Ga., unveiling his House bill April 16.

His Military Honor and Decency Act would amend a provision of the 1997 Defense Authorization Act that banned sales of “sexually explicit material” on military bases. - “Bill: Stop selling Playboy, Penthouse on base” by Karen Jowers, Army Times

National Review’s Kathryn Lopez, channeling Mrs. Grundy, eagerly jumps in:

...I like the idea of the American military having nothing official to do with porn. We train our servicemen to protect and defend, in situations in which they often have to face perilous choices as who to protect and defend. Pornography is a grave indignity and degradation of the human person. If a soldier wants to view pornography, it's his right, but the U.S. military need not provide it to him.

(Ohmygawd, can't you just hear the sanctimony!)

Then, to top things off, there’s this piece of arrogance:

Exchange officials noted that tax dollars are not used to procure magazines in the system’s largely self-funded operations.

But Broun’s spokesman John Kennedy contended that taxpayer dollars are involved — “used to pay military salaries, so taxpayer money is, in effect, being used to buy these materials,” he said.

...a rationalization worthy of Nancy Pelosi.

Well let’s see:  Broun and Lopez dishonestly conflate Playboy (which, last time I looked, you could buy at your neighborhood Borders) with hard-core porn (which, last time I looked, you could find all over the internet).  And then Kennedy proposes that,  just because the government touches somebody’s salary, it has the right to control how that money is spent!

As one poster on the Army Times forum says,

Now that's the slipperiest slope I've ever seen. Since we in the military are paid with tax dollars, these people believe they have a say in what LEGAL goods and services we are allowed to purchase.  Take that argument to a few examples like foods, evironmentally friendly goods, etc.  How do we find such freedom-depriving politicians to "serve" us in government?

And that’s the whole point: Our troops are adults. Playboy and Penthouse are legal goods. Congressional busybodies should butt out.

Oh, and tell me again, what’s the difference between left-wing meddlers and the right-wing social engineers?

Geez. No wonder some people are afraid of Republicans.


Naming names:

Broun’s bill has 16 co-sponsors. Any of them your congress-critter?

Elsewhere:

Via: Ace, where there’s a LARGE discussion.

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 17:09:08 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 572 words, total size 8 kb.

From the vasty deep

Restaurant owner evokes the spirit of Jimmy:

...Prices for eggs, wheat, and vegetables were spiking, causing what Mr. Keymer^[1] called “Carter-esque inflation hits.” - The Wall Street Journal^[2]

Now we’re really in trouble.

---------
^[1] Ken Keymer, CEO of Vicorp, owner of Village Inn and Bakers Square restaurants.
^[2] “Restaurant Chains Feel the Heat of Surging Costs and Debt,” front page, April 24, 2008.

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 14:40:18 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 64 words, total size 1 kb.

Spotters’ guide for primary voters

Just in case you have trouble keeping them straight, a poster:

Expanded Obama list here.


Malkin link via: Ace, Nice Deb link via Malkin.

Posted by: Old Grouch in Linkage at 17:08:24 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.

Caught again!

Instapundit:

The Atlantic’s photo editors show their feelings - the McCain Photo above the story has this name:
http://thecurrent.theatlantic.com/McCain loser.jpg.

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 14:48:13 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.

One way it’s changed

Lileks spotted this front page in 1933’s Lady Killer (Jimmy Cagney - Mae Clarke - Margaret Lindsay), and then wondered

...look at all that copy. Eight stories^[1] above the fold.  Why can't we do that today?

Good question.


----------
^[1] Actually, probably more than eight.  The “Post” has an eight-column layout (you can tell because the masthead should be centered on the page).  We don’t see the gutter column (on the left).

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 21:27:08 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 74 words, total size 1 kb.

Spring tulips

Outside my office.

Posted by: Old Grouch in Dear Diary... at 17:00:32 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 5 words, total size 1 kb.

The gentlemen of England are asleep...

“Tis a sad day indeed when Yorkshiremen worried about offending anyone!” - Dan Maloney

Elsewhere:

Not exactly related, except in a “decline-and-fall” sense:

A householder has been left with a £225 bill and a criminal conviction after over-filling his bin. [trash can]

Via: Gateway Pundit

Posted by: Old Grouch in Linkage at 16:41:24 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 54 words, total size 2 kb.