The Rich Irony, Part 5: Second Amendment

The Supreme Court just handed down a landmark decision on the Second Amendment. They determined that the right to keep and bear arms was a right granted by the Constitution to the individual, ,basically claiming that "the right of the people" means the same thing in the Second Amendment as it does in the First Amendment.

The rich irony is that many of the liberals who applauded the Supreme Court for taking an expansive view of the right to habeas corpus (having it extend to non-enemy combatants apprehended on foreign soil) are furious the the Court is taking the more extensive view of the Second Amendment. They are the people who have attacked the Bush administration for using a very narrow interpretation of the Fourth and Sixth Amendment, "in the name of public safety." Yet they are demanding the narrowest possible reading of the Second Amendment also "in the name of public safety."It is perfectly reasonable to have a debate if gun ownership is no longer necessary and/or too dangerous in a modern society. But if we want to completely deny all law abiding citizens the right to keep and bear arms, we need to amend the Constitution. Simply because we would be "safer" if we denied people their Constitutional rights is not a reasonable justification. We would be safer if we allowed the police to search anyone at random, did not let anyone use inflammatory language, and put cameras inside everyone's home. Our freedoms put us in danger but being free is worth the risk.

Freedoms are hard to gain and easy to lose. That is why we should look with suspicion at anyone who wants a very narrow interpretation of our Constitutional rights, whether those rights are laid out in the Fourth, Sixth, or the Second Amendment.

The Oracle of Walker, Part 1: Three Surprisingly Interesting States

Everyone is currently focused on the traditional battleground states. Most of the talk, polling, and coverage have been about the normally competitive Great Lakes states and Florida. Thanks to rapid demographic changes, the southwest has also gained some interest. But there are three red states that I suspect will be very interesting: Alaska, Montana, and Mississippi.

Alaska

Republican Ted "Bridge to Nowhere" Stevens' senate seat is currently being challenged by Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich. Ted Stevens has become the poster child for corruption and pork barrel spending. In fact, John McCain has often boasted about his part in putting a stop to the Bridge to Nowhere. As a result, the Alaska senate race has so far been remarkably close. Polling has shown the race neck-and-neck.

Because Obama left the public financing system, he can afford and has promised to campaign in all fifty states. He has already started running ads in Alaska and will send at least one paid staffer to the state. He can even try putting pressure on John McCain to denounce Ted Stevens for his past pork barrel mischief. Libertarian candidate Bob Barr might do well ins this traditionally very libertarian state.

Even with Bob Barr stealing some votes from the right and Obama spending money, it is unlikely that John McCain will lose Alaska. He will probably not waste his limited resources in the far north. But in a state of only 600,000 people, a few extra paid staffers and some money spent on voter registration could make a big difference. Obama's injection of money might be enough to help put Mark Begich over the top.

Montana

Montana's Democratic governor Brian Schweitzer remains very popular and will likely win reelection easily. Democratic Senator Max Baucus' opponent is Republican Bob Kelleher. Bob Kelleher is a perennial candidate who has run repeated quixotic campaigns as part of both the Green and Democratic Party. He has zero support from the GOP party as a whole.

The Obama campaign claims that they are going to actively campaign in Montana. With no other big races bringing in Republicans, Obama might be able to drive up his poll numbers. While Obama will probably not win Montana, he could force John McCain to divert precious time and money to this normally red state.

Mississippi

Mississippi has the highest percentage of African Americans of any state. Over 37% of all Mississippians are black. If Barack Obama can dramatically increase African American turnout in Mississippi, he might make the state competitive. He would have an uphill battle. John Kerry only carried 14% of white votes in 2004. At the least, Obama could again force McCain to waste resources in a traditionally red state.

Even if massive African American turnout is not enough to allow Barack Obama to carry the state it could have a huge impact on the special senate race. Polling shows David Musgrove and Roger Wicker are currently dead even. Winning this senate seat could get the Democrats their long-hoped for 60-vote veto-proof majority.

The Rich Irony, Part 4: Campaign Finance Reform

Barack Obama has decided to forgo public campaign financing, despite saying earlier that he wanted to preserve the public campaign financing system. The rich irony is that now the Republicans are all over Obama for going back on his promise to take public campaign financing.

For years the Republicans have been rallying against campaign finance reform. They have spoken against, voted against, filibustered against, and campaigned against campaign financing reform. In fact, it was John McCain's support for the McCain-Feingold bill that created much of the bad blood within his own party. Now that for the first time in decades Democrats have a fundraising advantage, many Republicans are crying crocodile tears.

The irony does not stop there. The numerous campaign reform activists on the left are remaining conspicuously silent while Barack Obama becomes the first candidate since Watergate to back out of the public finance system. In a single day, Obama has done more to undermine the public campaign financing than all the PAC's and 527's combined, and the silence on the left is deafening.

The greatest irony of all is the reaction of John McCain. McCain is taking public financing not because of some deep-seated principle; if that were the case, he would not have opted out of public financing (in a legally questionable manner) during the primary. John McCain is taking public financing because he needs to. There is no way that McCain can match Obama's fundraising, so he needs to take a government handout. That is the rich irony. John McCain, a hardcore free trade capitalist, needs the government to intervene to even the playing field.

Goodbye, Mr. Russert

Tim Russert passed away on Friday, June 13th. He was one of the greatest journalists of all times and set the gold standard for television interviews.

He showed that fairness in journalism was always asking the tough questions, but never with malice or anger. He gave every guest the opportunity to explain themselves, but never let them dodge the issue.

With his passing, the nation will become a slightly less informed and civil place. Mr. Russert, you left us just when we needed you the most.

Barack Obama, King of Democrats

To paraphrase Shelley's Ozymandias:
My name is Barack Obama, king of Democrats.

Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair.

What should not be overlooked is how truly amazing Barack Obama's victory is. Leaving aside issues of race and gender, what Obama did as a campaigner is truly amazing. He has proven himself a force to be feared.

Although Hillary Clinton did make several mistakes during the primary, she did not lose-- she was beaten. In almost every state, there was record turnout. Hillary Clinton raised more money and received substantially more votes than any other primary candidate before her. Hillary Clinton is like an Olympic hurdler who set a new world record but loses the gold when Barack Obama beats her record only minutes later during the next heat.

Countless Republican pundits, candidates, lawyers, special investigators, and congressmen have spent decades trying to best the Clintons. Yet over the years, they won election after election. After spending millions investigating the Clinton's questionable business dealings, the Republican party was only ever able to prove that Clinton lied under oath. A highly charged impeachment failed to remove Bill Clinton from office or even dramatically affect their popularity. What the whole Republican establishment failed to do has just been accomplished by a one-term African-American Senator.