Erick Erickson's Blog, page 200

Morning Briefing for December 13, 2010

RedState Morning Briefing

For December 13, 2010

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

1. Killing the Tax Compromise

2. Like it or Not: Mexico is America's Next Afghanistan

3. Wikileaks on Iraqi WMD

4. Gov. Christie and the Fight over Judicial Reform

———————————————————————-

1. Killing the Tax Compromise

I think the GOP needs to kill the tax compromise.

This is not a hill to die on. It is certainly a gamble. Those who support the deal argue that it is too great a gamble to assume we could get a better deal next year when the number of Republicans in Congress increase and the GOP takes over the House.

I am willing to take the gamble that any deal we get next year will be far better than any deal we get this year, when such a deal depends on making it palatable to Nancy Pelosi. Congress can fix any tax increase with a retroactive tax decrease.

I've made it easy for you. You can click here to call your Senator and tell him to vote against the tax compromise.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. Like it or Not: Mexico is America's Next Afghanistan

With the exception of, perhaps, Texas governor Rick Perry, no public official wants to publicly admit an obvious fact: The United States of America will likely be forced to invade Mexico. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. The question then becomes: What to do with Mexico after we invade it and wipe out the drug cartels (as much as can be). Does the United States merely return Mexico to a nation state of corrupt politicians, failed economic policies, and lawlessness, or do we annex Mexico and turn it into the 51st state?

For many of us, there is a certain false security in believing that, since most of America's streets are not filled with the murder and mayhem that is going on just South of our borders, we have nothing to worry about. The feeling that most Americans likely have is: Well, it's their problem, not ours. However, that illusion of security is quickly being eroded with the stories of American police officers being threatened by Mexican drug cartels, of kidnappings and drug murders in Arizona and Texas, of control of certain parts of Arizona and forays into New Mexico and Colorado by drug cartels, of teenagers being turned into hitmen, and American tourists being kidnapped or killed while on vacation in Mexico.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. Wikileaks on Iraqi WMD

During the Iraq War much was made by the left of the failure to locate stockpiles of chemical agents or nuclear materials. Despite the obvious duplicity of the Saddam Hussein regime and the childlike incredulity and fecklessness of Hans Blix and his merry men we were supposed to believe that the failure to find these weapons and materials meant they didn't exist.

Now enters Wikileaks.

Noah Schachtman at Wired's Danger Room (a credible and creditable source before it's inexplicable decision to hire the cretinous Spencer Ackerman) has the run down.

Without recounting each incident, suffice it to say that chemical munitions were encountered with monotonous regularity during combat operations from 2003 forward and on at least two occasions foreign chemical weapons specialists were apprehended.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. Gov. Christie and the Fight over Judicial Reform

Chris Christie's fights with the teachers' unions in New Jersey have been well documented in the national press and conservative blogosphere. However, Christie has been engaged in another, possibly more significant fight over reforming the New Jersey Supreme Court that has, until now received relatively scant amounts of national attention. As detailed in the New York Times and the WSJ ($), the fight erupted in May when Christie exercised his (admittedly seldom-used) prerogative to not re-appoint the liberal John E. Wallace to the New Jersey State Supreme Court.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

Sarah Palin's Alaska

As much as it pains some of my liberal friends (and some Republican friends too), I am a huge Sarah Palin fan and can't wait to see her mop the floor with Barack Obama.

At least she released her college transcripts unlike Acting President Logan . . . um . . . I mean Bill Clinton's warm up act.

In any event, I watched her TLC show tonight for the first time. I'm sorry, but as much as I like the good Governor, I cannot bring myself to watch TLC with its bevy of hoarding midgets and polygamous cretins and Kate Gosselin.

But while I was away getting hot chocolate at the local coffeehouse for my wife, she'd flipped over and when I returned not only was Sarah Palin on, but Kate Gosselin and her small army of rug rats was there too.

Wow. Well done, Governor. There will always be a contingent of leftwing wackos who will despise you just for breathing — let alone breeding and not aborting — but many people are now going to have a second chance to check you out.

I suspect they'll like what they see. Oh, and having Kate Gosselin on makes you look even better!

Season 4 of 24 Open Thread

In Season 4 of 24, acting President Logan is so incompetent and bush league that he brings back President Palmer to take charge of the situation.

Today in Washington, Barack Obama stole that playbook and brought back Bill Clinton.

Consider this your open thread.

Senator McConnell's Office Peddling Talking Points That Contradict Senate Rules

Senator Mitch McConnell has sent out an email with talking points from Americans for Tax Reform on why "tax extenders" are not earmarks.

But it is all nonsense. How do we know? Well, just look at Senate Rule XLIV, which deals with earmarks and lists not just spending items as an earmark, but also "limited tax benefits" and "limited tariff benefits."

Look, I realize ATR and other groups get money from Time Warner, Pfizer, and other major corporations — not that there's anything wrong with that or its actually related to getting ATR to take a stand on something — but to say it is not an earmark when a lobbyist carves out an exception for his business, see e.g. the Hollywood tax benefit in the TARP Baby, and not yours is (a) b.s. and (b) one of the major reasons why our tax code has become so screwed up.

Anyone who thinks tax policy cannot be used as an earmark is smoking dope, coin operated, or naive, whether willfully or otherwise. By the way, ATR also said the same thing about the earmarks loaded into TARP.

Limited tax benefits, like that to Star Kist Tuna in American Samoa, are earmarks regardless of how much some want to kick and scream and say otherwise.

If you or I or small business X cannot get it without hiring an army of lobbyists and dropping major coin on congressmen, it is an earmark. At a minimum, Senate Rule XLIV says so.

2012 Brackets Round 2

Round One is closed. Let's get to the second round today.

Business v. Wild Card




Herman Cain




David Petraeus





  




Free polls from Pollhost.com

John v. Mike




John Bolton




Mike Pence





  




Free polls from Pollhost.com

North vs. South




Tim Pawlenty




Haley Barbour





  




Free polls from Pollhost.com

Other vs. Former




Sarah Palin




Rick Santorum





  




Free polls from Pollhost.com

The Tax Compromise Must Now Die

House Democrats have rejected the Senate's negotiated tax compromise. In a rowdy meeting in which one Democratic Congressman said loudly "F— the President," the House Democrats turned Nancy Reagan and just said no.

Barney Frank still thinks it would pass, most likely with House Republicans.

But the deal must now die. It must now be opposed by Republicans. Released now in print, the legislation is loaded up with budget busting pork of ridiculously absurd levels. The attachments to the compromise represent everything wrong with Washington. Many of them mirror the same porkulus spending in TARP.

The GOP must now say no. GO TO THE REDSTATE ACTION CENTER RIGHT NOW and call your Senator.

The legislation contains a huge amount of pork, some in the form of tax extenders that only the most coin-operated of conservatives can really defend. It even has ethanol subsidies. Put it to you this way — with the logic of those vocally calling for support of these earmarks, if the Democrats gave a tax credit for abortion, you'd have these same conservative groups defending them. No, that is not an exaggeration.

The tax compromise already busted the budget with the unemployment extension. Ultimately, all the Republicans were getting anyway was keeping current income tax rates.

They now need to walk away from the table. Call now.

NOTE: Senator Mitch McConnell's office is now doing a full court press saying that the tax breaks for particular companies are not "earmarks." Friends, an earmark is not necessarily spending money, but is a line item put into legislation or a committee report without full congressional review typically from one member of Congress on behalf of a lobbyist or donor to benefit the lobbyist's client or the donor. How the hell is a line item related to Starkist Tuna in American Samoa carved out just for them not an earmark for one of the major employers in Nancy Pelosi's congressional district?

The 2012 Brackets

Just for a bit of fun and frivolousness for a Friday, let's start up some brackets for 2012. You vote in each bracket and we'll just keep narrowing it down over the next few days.

The Businessmen




Herman Cain




Donald Trump





  




Free polls from Pollhost.com

The Wild Cards




Jeb Bush




David Petraeus





  




Free polls from Pollhost.com

The Johns




John Bolton




John Thune





  




Free polls from Pollhost.com

The Mikes




Mike Huckabee




Mike Pence





  




Free polls from Pollhost.com

The Northern Governors




Tim Pawlenty




Mitt Romney





  




Free polls from Pollhost.com

The Southern Governors




Haley Barbour




Rick Perry





  




Free polls from Pollhost.com

The Other Governors




Mitch Daniels




Sarah Palin





  




Free polls from Pollhost.com

The Former Politicos




Newt Gingrich




Rick Santorum





  




Free polls from Pollhost.com

RedState Morning Briefing for December 10, 2010

RedState Morning Briefing

For December 10, 2010

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

1. The Lamest Duck?

2. The Race

3. An Earmark Solution to Nowhere

———————————————————————-

1. The Lamest Duck?

What will happen to Barack Obama's presidency if his tax compromise is shot down with the help of his own party? The House Democratic caucus just voted against it, which puts the deal on life support, at best. Can Obama recover from that?

One of the great questions of the past two years, ever since it became obvious that Democrats would suffer significant setbacks in the 2010 elections, was how President Obama would respond to life with a Republican Congress (or, as it turns out, a Republican House and a weakened Democratic majority in the Senate). On the one hand, you have the fact that Bill Clinton managed to use the "triangulation" strategy to win re-election in 1996, and surely Obama is capable of being equally cold-bloodedly dismissive of his now-depleted Congressional troops. On the other hand, Obama is naturally much more ideological than Clinton and doesn't have Clinton's deft political touch, his decade-long track record as an executive or his experience winning multiple elections outside deep-blue territory, all of which suggests that even if the spirit is willing, Obama may not be competent at executing the same strategy.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. The Race

Barack Obama is likely to face a primary challenge in 2012, but the question of the day is whether it will be some minor fringe-like protest candidate like Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel or a more serious challenger like Howard Dean or Russ Feingold. Jamelle Bouie, an African-American columnist for the liberal magazine The American Prospect, says what other Democrats may be thinking but afraid to vocalize: Obama's race is the biggest obstacle to a serious primary challenge to the president in 2012 because black voters would look at such a challenge through the lens of race. The Politico flags the issue.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. An Earmark Solution to Nowhere

It's time to nip something right in the bud. Some Republican members of Congress have been complaining about how the House earmark is too restrictive because it will not allow for Members to get federal funding for their roads and bridges. They want them exempted from the moratorium.

The members of Congress pushing this are essentially calling for an earmark moratorium that still allows for the infamous Bridge to Nowhere and exempts all earmarks in the highway bill. That would completely vitiate the House earmark ban, and all talk of it needs to be dropped immediately.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

An Earmark Solution to Nowhere

It's time to nip something right in the bud. Michelle Bachmann and others have been complaining about how the House earmark is too restrictive because it will not allow for Members to get federal funding for their roads and bridges. She wants them exempted from the moratorium.

Bachmann says Congress should exempt "roads, bridges and interchanges" and recommends that if a town, city, county or state approves a project, a lawmaker in Washington should be able to submit a request — a practice she says she has followed. Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio) says Congress should earn back the public's trust before considering a new definition but concedes the earmark ban will bring about "unintended consequences."

Bachmann is essentially calling for an earmark moratorium that still allows for the infamous Bridge to Nowhere and exempts all earmarks in the highway bill. That would completely vitiate the House earmark ban, and all talk of it needs to be dropped immediately.

What to do about federal highway spending? In the absence of highway earmarks, the funds still flow to the state transportation departments by formula to be distributed by them. Without earmarks, States are not getting less money, but Congress is rightfully giving up the corrupting power to spend that money wherever they like. But the real solution, and it doesn't have to be on the long-term horizon if conservatives put their mind to it, is to have the federal government get out of the highway business and devolve it back to the States on federalism principles. That would give the people who know the infrastructure needs of a State the most the opportunity to address those needs, and it would fix the current inequity whereby some States get more for their fair share of highway gas tax revenues. Each State would get what they collected.

If House Republicans exempt highway spending from their ban, then they were never serious about it in the first place, and it will be further proof that they just don't get it. Michelle Bachmann of all people needs to have a better grasp of that, because the last thing we need is for her colleagues to think that the tea party doesn't care about actually cutting spending both big and small.

Putting the TARP Band Back Together

Opinions are varied and divided over whether the tax compromise plan is worthwhile. Some see it as the best the GOP can hope to get. Others see it as the GOP settling for keeping current income tax rates while voting to raise other taxes and increase spending on unemployment benefits, a program that has become a general welfare program.

Whether you are for it or against it, I do think it is worth pointing out this morning that with few exceptions, those parties advocating the tax compromise are precisely the same parties who advocated TARP.

Last time, they told us we were going to have a Second Great Depression if we did not pass TARP. This time they tell us we will have a Double Dip Recession if we don't pass the tax compromise.

But pay attention here to one key point.

It is the GOP that has been advocating all along that we keep current tax rates steady and it has been the Democrats advocating a tax increase. The GOP, in compromising, is not getting a tax cut. The GOP is getting the status quo.

I'm still having a hard time figuring out why the GOP needs to compromise just to keep the status quo on the income tax, while see other taxes and spending increase.