With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

But then again the Republicans will do their utmost to lose the house in 2006.

Leadership: When Darwinian stirrings replace moral epiphanies

There was a three-ton dinosaur, the stegosaurus, so neurologically sluggish that when its tail was injured, significant time elapsed before news of the trauma meandered up its long spine to its walnut-size brain. This primitive beast, not the dignified elephant, should be the symbol of House Republicans.


Why, perhaps half a dozen of the 231 Republican representatives authored none of the transportation bill's 6,371 earmarks — pork projects. And now among House Republicans there are Darwinian stirrings, prompted by concerns about survival.


In Washington, such concerns often are confused with and substitute for moral epiphanies. Tom DeLay will not return as leader of House Republicans, whose new fastidiousness is not yet so severe that they are impatient with Ohio Rep. Bob Ney's continuing chairmanship of the Committee on House Administration, in spite of services he rendered to Jack Abramoff. Ney has explained, by way of extenuation — yes, extenuation — that he did not know what he was doing.


Anyway, catalyzed by DeLay's decision to recede, House Republicans, perhaps emboldened by the examples of Afghanistan and Iraq, are going to risk elections. When they elect their leaders, they should consider the following:


The national pastime is no longer baseball, it is rent-seeking — bending public power for private advantage. There are two reasons why rent-seeking has become so lurid, but those reasons for today's dystopian politics are reasons why most suggested cures seem utopian.


The first reason is big government — the regulatory state. This year Washington will disperse $2.6 trillion, which is a small portion of Washington's economic consequences, considering the costs and benefits distributed by incessant fiddling with the tax code, and by government's regulatory fidgets.


Second, House Republicans, after 40 years in the minority, have, since 1994, wallowed in the pleasures of power. They have practiced DeLayism, or "K Street conservatism.'' This involves exuberantly serving rent-seekers, who hire K Street lobbyists as helpers. For House Republicans the aim of the game is to build political support. But Republicans shed their conservatism in the process of securing their seats in the service, they say, of conservatism.



Liberals practice "K Street liberalism'' with an easy conscience because they believe government should do as much as possible for as many interests as possible. But "K Street conservatism'' compounds unseemliness with hypocrisy. Until the Bush administration, with its incontinent spending, unleashed an especially conscienceless Republican control of both political branches, conservatives pretended to believe in limited government. The last five years, during which the number of registered lobbyists more than doubled, have proved that, for some Republicans, conservative virtue was merely the absence of opportunity for vice.


The way to reduce rent-seeking is to reduce the government's role in the allocation of wealth and opportunity. People serious about reducing the role of money in politics should be serious about reducing the role of politics in distributing money. But those most eager to do the former — liberals, generally — are the least eager to do the latter.


A surgical reform would be congressional term limits, which would end careerism, thereby changing the incentives for entering politics and for becoming, when in office, an enabler of rent-seekers in exchange for their help in retaining office forever. The movement for limits — a Madisonian reform to alter the dynamic of interestedness that inevitably animates politics — was surging until four months after Republicans took control of the House. In May 1995 the Supreme Court ruled, 5-4, that congressional terms could not be limited by states' statutes. Hence a constitutional amendment is necessary. Hence Congress must initiate limits on itself. That will never happen.


Although bribery already is a crime and lobbying is constitutionally protected (the First Amendment right "to petition the government for a redress of grievances'') a few institutional reforms milder than term limits might be useful. But none will be more than marginally important, absent the philosophical renewal of conservatism. To which end, who should Republicans elect?


Roy Blunt of Missouri, the man who was selected, not elected, to replace DeLay, is a champion of earmarks as a form of constituent service. If, as one member says, "the problem is not just DeLay but 'DeLay, Inc.,''' Blunt is not the solution. So far — the field may expand — the choice for majority leader is between Blunt and John Boehner of Ohio. A salient fact: In 15 years in the House, Boehner has never put an earmark in an appropriations bill.

With enemies likes these who needs friends?
 

I was going to attend myself, but instead decided on hanging with Cytherea and Felecia at the AVN Awards that day.

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

Your earlier post today was about the fringe left, whereas this one is about the Republican political establishment. Bad for you, good for them.

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

2 quick questions:

1) i know mikey M. isn't someone you support and Teddy isn't and Dean isn't and etc. Which Dem can we look at as being someone you guys think isn't a complete Space-fuck?

2) Is Teddy getting alzheimered? did you catch his statemanship today?

With enemies likes these who needs friends?
 

You went to Yale, I mean, the porno awards? No way! Who knew?

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

John McCain.

Barrack Obama?

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

"you guys"? I can only speak for me - it's a big tent. You know what I'm talking about? How about the next Senator from Pennsylvania, Bob Casey Jr.

Do all you guys think Ted Nugent would make a great governor of Michigan? What statements made by Pat Robertson do you guys reject, if any?

I'm sure you missed it when Teddy introduced Specter's letter replying to Teddy's letter that Arlen never got.

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

Mark Warner
Barack Obama
Probably some others that don't occur to me at the moment.

As usual, Teddy's not doing himself any favors in these hearings.

From periodic listening and watching, I've made the following observations and conclusions:

* I'm pleased to see that Jeff Sessions is as much the drooling idiot as he was for the Roberts hearings.

* Leahy is the only one on the Democratic side who seems to have something approaching a thoughtful set of questions.

* God, Senators can bloviate. How can anyone stand to listen to them for any extended period?

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

so you look at the t as a solid Dem?

And it seemed to me Arlen was saying "let me consider it, I don't know if I got the letter" and the Fatster was starting to go into cry mode. loved him in the PBS-shown Reagan bio- Ted was making speaches and warning everybody Reagan was going to end up blowing up the World- Wise man!

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

If he were running against anyone but a lunatic as unpopular and politically suicidal as Santorum he'd be 20 pts behind. Lightweight is a unwarranted compliment for BC, Jr.

And you'd better hope BC, Jr. doesn't have to open his mouth or flesh out any of his contradictory positions. Every sentence out of his mouth in a debate against Santosum is a point off his "lead."

Stiff, stuffed shirt. Charisma of oatmeal. Couldn't sell bullets in Baghdad.

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

This cat could be Bubba II. But he's got a long road to convince the idiots running the party to dump Hill and give him the wheel.

I watched Paul Begala whimper about how wonderful Hill would be on TV yesterday morning. He gives me this uncontrollable urge to slap him in the lips. how a Casper Milquetoast sycphant like that can reach the exec branch of any party is beyond me, and shows just how fucked the Dems are. Unless they find a sack, they're fucked. Hill ain't "it."

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

If they weren't senators no one would listen to them.

NY Times had a fun chart today comparing the number of words used by each senator during "questioning" compared with the number used by Alito. All but Kohl and one other spoke more words than Alito during their 30 mins. Biden had a 4:1 ratio or more, IIRC.

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

Didn't say that, now did I.

That was what he was saying. Since Teddy introduced Specter's letter replying to Teddy's letter that Arlen never got, which of them needs the 10-word recall test?

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

Warner's probably a better choice than Casey. I didn't think of him, but I should have.

Obama - too early to tell.

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

In many respects yes. But even at this early stage, I think Obama clears Hank's bar of not being "a complete Space-fuck."