E!! The True Conservative Story™

September 17, 2008

Hi,

I finally figured it out!

I have decided to settle down and get serious about a career in Public
Garden Management and Horticulture.  This decision allows me to work in
areas where public transportation is readily available, work in a greenhouse
environment, avoid the stress of production related capitalism, contribute
to the beauty of urban areas, preserve plants for future generations, and
educate people who are really interested in plants.  It also solves the
dilemma about what I want to do when I grow up, because this way I can do a
little of everything.

Cornell and the University of Delaware both have fellowship only programs
for Master’s degrees (both fully funded with a living stipend).  There are
other programs out there as well.

I have joined the Horticulture club as an active member (I might consider
running for an office) and am taking an extracurricular Urban Gardeners
Program with a 40-hour community service requirement at the local community
greenhouse (Hunter Park in Lansing – 2 minutes from my door walking).  I am
working on a proposal for an internship with Beal Gardens here at MSU,
probably revamping the website and working on grant acquisition as we all
know that I can weed just fine.

Now to 4.0 everything and do well on the GRE.

 Love,

 Me

“Cultivated plants are neatly planted; wild plants flourish in chaos.”

– Susun Weed

Here are the most recent stories and alerts:

This one in the Lansing State Journal has a good (better) photo of Krista than the previous piece; also her house:

http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20081120/NEWS01/811200373

This one was written by a reporter at MSU’s The State News:

http://www.statenews.com/index.php/article/2008/11/family_friends_shocked_after_student_goes_missing

This one is a brief online alert:

http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showthread.php?p=12443140

And here’s a photo taken a few Thanksgivings ago with our maternal grandmother in Florida:

E!! is on hold until further notice.

My sister, Krista Lueth, is missing.  She was last seen on Tuesday, Nov. 11, at her home in Lansing, MI near the intersection of Pennsylvania Ave. and Michigan Ave.  She was reported to the police as missing this past Saturday, Nov. 15.

She is a student at Michigan State University; the school has been notified and is cooperating.

(updated since original post)  Here is the Lansing newspaper story:  http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20081118/NEWS01/811180342

For any who may be in her Facebook networks, this is her Facebook profile:  www.facebook.com/people/Krista_Lueth/723027485

And MySpace:  http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=69627212

This is an online alert that was posted over the weekend (includes a photo):  www.powerfulintent.ning.com/profiles/blogs/missing-sister-can-you-help

The police are involved and are following every possible lead.  If you know people in the Lansing, Michigan area please forward this to them.  If you know anyone in the media willing to get the word out, please have them contact me via email (on my Contact page here).

If not, please pray.

Andrea Mitchell/MSNBC, Pajamas Media and Media Blog on NRO are discussing the possibility of Hillary for Secretary of State. 

An SOS appointment is a political dead end; therefore, RHC will say no.  She still has ambition, and she’s just not that dumb.

(The fact that she’s not qualified may have little or no bearing on Obama trying to slide her in – and consequently get her out of his hair in the Senate.)

I highly recommend this long but excellent piece, “Wall Street Lays Another Egg,” by Niall Ferguson in Vanity Fair. You’ll be smarter if you read even half.

Hat Tip: Ralph Hancock on the Postmodern Conservative blog @ Culture11

Love you!!

(Today is the 10th anniversary of my marriage to The Venerable Mr. Crum. Tonight there will be champagne and peking duck with plum sauce.)

Strange that a British writer - Peter Hitchens - is the one to re-break my heart re: election night with this piece in the Daily Mail. 

Hat Tip:  Derb, who provides the column’s four paragraph close

I think this will be the E!! last word on the GM thing:  what Jim Manzi says.

Ronald Kessler with Newsmax has a good piece on Obama and the courts – and how fast the changes could happen. An excerpt:

Because Democrats dragged their heels on President Bush’s judicial nominations, 14 seats are open on appeals courts or will be by the end of January. Democratic nominees now are a majority on only one of the 13 federal appeals courts, the ultra-liberal U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco. Within four years, Obama could name enough judges to give Democrats a majority on nine of the 13 appeals courts.

RTWT (Read the whole thing)

The LVSun reports that Assembly Speaker Barbara Buckley wants to put two cents from every dollar of state revenue into the Nevada’s rainy day fund. Says the Sun:

Buckley said Wednesday that in the upcoming legislative session, she will propose a “forced savings account” into which 2 cents of every “new dollar” of state revenue would be deposited. New dollars would be any money that comes in above existing revenue levels.

Taking the pennies from new dollars would prevent this system from siphoning funding from existing programs, she said.

Having talked with state Sen. Bill Raggio, R-Reno, and Democrat Steve Horsford, the state Senate’s new majority leader, among others, Buckley said she has not “found one person who does not think it’s a good idea.”

It’s also been reported that (1) Democratic Sen. Bob Coffin has suggested a “temporary” tax that would cease when certain savings goals are met, and (2) our “no new taxes” governor Jim Gibbons has said he might agree to approve a temporary new or increased tax if it has an expiration date.

If Coffin’s plan flies and Gibbons signs off, I guess we’ll have to call him the ”no new taxes unless you pinky swear they won’t last forever” governor.

The LVSun reports that BMI, the second largest carrier at Heathrow International Airport, is pulling out of McCarran. BMI has been providing non-stop flights from Vegas to London since 2004.

Far Right Democrat reminds us about George Orwell’s 1984ian government organization, the Ministry of Truth, and wonders how quickly KOS will do likewise in the way of rewriting history (i.e. change the official story) on mandated health care when Obama reverses himself and endorses it.

Of course, the modern day Ministry of Truth – the mainstream media – does this all the time.  As do nearly all politicians, especially during election cycles. 

Revisionist history:  it’s what’s for breakfast.

David Frum urges us not to bailout automakers on Marketplace.publicradio.org.

And then on NRO, he posts this:

Time was when General Motors alone ranked among the largest employers in the United States.

Today, UPS employs almost four times as many people as the two big U.S. companies, Ford and GM, combined. While the Big Two decline, Toyota USA, Nissan USA, BMW, KIA are all expanding — and not asking for any bailout.

The Big Two remain important employers. Their troubles are felt up and down the manufacturing supply chain. But of course that is true for every industry.

Last week, the stock of Las Vegas Sands Corporation collapsed. Bankruptcy seems a real possibility. Indeed, the whole casino gambling industry in Nevada is facing the worst crisis in at least a generation, maybe ever. Casino gambling directly employs more people than the domestic automobile industry. Add in the supply chain for both industries, and casinos still employ almost half as many people as the automobile sector.

So what about a bailout for the casino industry? Ridiculous! Right? But why right?

Unfreakinbelievable.

Brace yourself and then then read Larry Kudlow’s post on Paulson today, various bailout stuff, and the auto industry.

Setting aside the fact that Paulson has changed the whole bailout game, is Obama’s first policy decision really going to be a GM bailout? Maybe, because apparently a UAW rescue is favored by Pelosi and Reid.

Before you decide what you think, consider this amazing stat:

Total compensation per hour for the big-three carmakers is $73.20. That’s a 52 percent differential from Toyota’s (Detroit South) $48 compensation (wages + health and retirement benefits). In fact, the oversized UAW-driven pay package for Detroit is 132 percent higher than that of the entire manufacturing sector of the U.S., which comes in at $31.59.

At $73 per hour, GM ain’t gonna be competitive no matter what is done. Let them cut their wages to industry norms.

King George of the Let Them Eat Cake blog has noted that Obama’s change.gov site invites his beloved citizens to contact him and “share their vision” with his administration. George snarkily suggests how O might process and manage the millions of bright ideas coming in.  You can click thru for his thoughts (which are very amusing) and my cake-inspired sample letter just below his post.

Nicky Cheese clicked around and noted that change.gov also invites people to fill out an O admin job application online.  Nic is super excited about working for the new Obamastration and has already applied and begun apartment hunting in D.C.  This afternoon he forwarded me the touchingly personal note he received from Obama:

“Thank you for your interest in joining the Obama-Biden Administration. Within a few days, you will receive an email with a link to the more complete on-line application. Please be patient, as we are trying to respond promptly to the large number of people who are interested in working in the Administration.”

I am so inspired that I am also going to apply.  Suggest you do the same before all the good jobs are gone.

(Nic ~ can you convince the powers that be to throw up a Blogivists discussion board on this so we can all compare notes?  I suspect we can have some fun with this.)

Obama visits the White House while the echoes of McCain’s can’t-say-that (or That either) (and definitely not THAT!) protestulations and admonishments still ring in our heads. 

This makes it hard to understand why The Maverick has been so quiet on the snarkfest re: Palin.

Says a new blog pal:  Your silence, sir, is deafening!

This morning Megyn Kelly on Fox News reported that Norm Coleman was protesting the counting of absentee ballots in the recount for his senate race with Al Franken.  I couldn’t imagine how Coleman could object if the ballots were valid so assumed they had already been rejected for one reason or another

I now have a more detailed report in my Inbox saying the Hennepin County Canvassing Board unanimously rejected Franken’s demands that absentee ballots which had been previously invalidated/rejected now be validated and counted. 

Cullen Sheehan, a staffer in Norm Coleman’s MN campaign, also sent out this brief release:

“The Al Franken campaign today tried to stuff new ballots into the ballot box in a brazen, last minute act of desperation.  We have raised concerns repeatedly about these types of tactics by the Franken campaign.  Today is further evidence of their intent to use whatever means necessary to counter the decision of the people of Minnesota.  We applaud the actions of the Hennepin County Canvassing Board in rejecting this blatant, desperate act.”

I’ve said it before, though not on this blog: 

It is amazing to me that the MN senate race was/is so close considering what a snarky, dishonest tax-evading louse Al has proven himself to be.  Even worse, he was a terrible talk radio host during his brief stint with the short-stinted Air America.  (Memo from E!! to Franken and Friends:  Nasty is never funny.) 

Newt says he will chair the RNC, if asked.

I’ve always liked Newt. If you don’t know him well, read this.

Obama has created a website laying out his big plans:  http://change.gov/

He might want to have his writers/editors proofread their copy before they post pages to the site, though.  This page:  http://change.gov/agenda/economy/ duplicates paragraphs 3/4 in paragraphs 5/6.

I’m available for hire if none of his staffers have the time or ability.

Vis a vis my Spreading the Wealth post and the differences between Sebelius and I on who-should-vote-how-and-why, I was delighted to run across this piece from Jonah Goldberg.  I quote:

Another example of a tactic masquerading as a principle is contemporary liberalism’s fixation with the idea that the working and middle class should “vote their interests,” by which they mean vote for the most government goodies. This was the point of Obama’s “bitter” and “clinging” comments last summer. Those poor deluded souls in western Pennsylvania don’t understand that their real interests lie with Obama’s economic agenda.

For all the liberal protests claiming that Obama’s “bitter” comments were misunderstood, his remarks were, in fact, mainstream on the Left. For instance, Thomas Frank, something of a guru to angry liberals, wrote in his book What’s the Matter with Kansas? that, “People getting their fundamental interests wrong is what American political life is all about. This species of derangement is the bedrock of our civic order; it is the foundation on which all else rests.” And, he added at great length, it is the reason so many deluded working- and middle-class Americans vote Republican (or at least why so many did when Frank wrote his book).

This has always struck me as hypocritical, pernicious lunacy. Legitimate election issues are those issues voters decide are legitimate. Americans who cling to religion and guns don’t do so out of bitterness, but because they consider such things central to their understanding of the good life and resent what they perceive as hostility to their lifestyle from their own government. And no liberal opposes voting on values issues — including gay rights — when they think they’re right or if they believe it helps get liberals elected. Liberals denounce rich people who vote their interests as “greedy” and celebrate limousine liberals who vote against their own interests as heroes.

I was interested to see Jonah’s mention of Thomas Frank’s book because I linked up to it in my earlier post (because Steve Sebelius mentioned it the other day on KNPR when making his point).  As soon as WTMWKansas was invoked, I shook my head and knew right where we were headed.  Guys like Frank think conservative Heartland voters are too dumb, deluded, or simple to vote the “right” way.  Right being to say Yes to higher taxes on the wealthy and Yes to more breaks and government handouts for themselves.

Frank & Co. cannot comprehend why some poor sap would rather live poor on what he legitimately earns and dutifully pay his fair share of taxes than get a pass or take a handout from his fellow (richer) taxpayers.  They insist on shoving their leftist But-We-Are-Here-to-Help-You agenda down poor Kansas Man’s throat – and delight in calling him dumb when he spits it out.

The Muthster lays it out clean in his post “Turning the Bush-McCain Lemon Into Lemonade.”

And I LOVE the idea of Michael Steele as national chair of the RNC.  (Or Newt.)

A reader emails:

Is it possible that by “freeing” the poor from paying any tax at all, they are, in essence, being completely disenfranchised?  That they do not care where the tax money goes because it doesn’t come out of their pockets?  That not being required to pay taxes sends the subtle message that they are inferior?  Thus perpetuating the victim and “gimme gimme” mentality?

I’ve often wondered whether even the poorest among us should pay some taxes in order to keep them in the game, so to speak.

Keep in mind that the poorest citizens not only pay no taxes but receive income “credits” from the government (i.e. our taxpayer dollars).  A mother earning minimum wage ($13,624 annually) with one dependent child taking the standard deduction not only owes “0″ tax, she also gets a check for $3,850 through the Earned Income Credit and Child Tax Credit.  And with two children that number jumps to $6,710, so at year end she has “earned” $20,334 in combined income and credits while having contributed nothing to the tax base (though her employer has paid some payroll tax).

.

Wednesday morning during our KNPR panel discussion, LV City Life editor Steve Sebelius ridiculed the anti-socialist sentiments of Joe the Plumber and reminded listeners that America already “spreads the wealth around” via our existing social democracy and graduated tax system.  Steve also commented on the strange (to him) fact that Heartland voters like Joe will often self-defeatingly vote “against their own self interest” by opposing tax increases on hgher income famlies that would enable tax cuts for themselves and/or the funding of entitlement programs that would benefit them.

It seems that Steve and others of like mind have trouble understanding a man who votes based on principle – even if that principle might not benefit him immediately and/or directly.

So:  is Joe the Plumber, who one day hopes to own his own business and does not want to be taxed to death when he does, a big dummy for voting against the candidate who promised him a tax cut based on his present income?  He’s recently answered questions about this, as well as his general opposition to wealth redistribution, and here is the gist of what he said:

He understands that he’s earning less than $100K right now and that Obama’s tax plan would therefore benefit him in the short term.  But he also believes Obama’s tax plan and health care mandate will make it more difficult for him to succeed in the future (i.e. to start and then profit from a small business).  Joe says he is content to pay his taxes, if they are fair and reasonable.  He is willing to work hard and wants to earn his future wealth.  He does not want special breaks or handouts that he knows come out of another man’s pocket.  He does not want to pay less in taxes so another man has to pay more, and he does not want to be the man who someday pays more while others pay far less.  He believes that lower taxes on businesses create jobs, which benefits everyone (because companies that make money will generally invest profits and expand).

But yesterday Jonah Goldberg echoed Sebelius in reminding us that whatever our principles and ideals, the U.S. is a social democracy with a progressive, redistributionist tax system.  Our poorest citizens pay somewhere between 0 and 10 percent in federal income tax; the middle class pays 15 to 28 percent; and the highest earners pay 33 or 35 percent.  He writes:

A new study by the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development reveals that the United States “has the most progressive tax system and collects the largest share of taxes from the richest 10 percent of the population.” Our tax system is, in fact, the most “pro-poor,” according to a Tax Foundation analysis of that study, of any developed country’s save Ireland. That’s right, we’re more progressive than France and Sweden.

The bottom 40 percent of income earners receive more from the federal income tax system than they pay into it. Meanwhile, the top 10 percent pay 71 percent of all income tax, despite only earning 39 percent of our pretax income. Taxes on the top 1 percent constitute 40 percent of tax dollars.

So here’s my question:  Is sweeping tax reform a necessary part of a truly conservative agenda and should we therefore be pushing for a flat (or flatter) tax system?  Or are we resigned to things as they are and content to squabble over the difference between 35 and 39%? 

.

Update:  Steve Sebelius emails with the following:

Actually, if you listen to the [KNKPR] tape again, you’ll see I went out of my way to make it clear that IF a voter considers his own economic self-interest a factor, then a voter of Joe the Plumber’s situation would have voted for Obama. I did not necessarily endorse using one’s own economic situation as a guide to voting; surely, plenty of very wealthy people who would be taxed more heavily voted for Obama, and plenty of less well-off people voted for McCain. I don’t condemn them for voting on principle, and made that clear on the show.  

Me:  I guess I’ll have to listen to the tape.  My impression in the moment was that Steve said guys like Joe are foolish and/or unintelligent and/or wrong for not voting in their own immediate economic self interest. 

Update 2:  Steve’s exact words were:  “There are people voting the wrong way by not voting their economic interests.” 

At least in that sentence, Steve was priveleging present economic interests over other factors, and indicating that voters (who don’t see it that way) are making a mistake.

However, Steve also says that the rich people who voted for Obama were voting against their own economic interest, and it was “the right thing to do.”

So, if someone like Joe votes against his own economic interest with a conservative/Republican vote, he’s voting wrong; but if a rich person votes against his own economic interest with a liberal/Democrat vote, he’s voting right…?

???

 Leslie Carbone has a very moving post up over at dontgomovement.com.  I like her passion.

.

.

You know, if you don’t have a blog and have been thinking about starting one, or if you are blogging somewhere else and getting few (or no) hits, I highly recommend joining Blogivists.  It’s easy to sign up, fun to choose your design template, and a breeze to start posting.

Blogivists offers four things you won’t find on a lot of other blog sites:

Instant Audience – If a blog post falls in the forest but nobody hears it, does it make a difference?  Blogging can be a lonely pursuit when you first begin, but with Blogivists your blog will be added to the group directory on Day One.  Also, the most recent Blogivists posts are jumped to the front page for all to see.  Right from the start, my E!! blog got hits and comments galore – thanks to the support of the Blogivists community.

Instant Search Rankings – Because Blogivists is already ranked in Google and other search engines as well as on Technorati and other blog ranking sites, your blog will catch the attention of the web spiders and other bloggers.  This means you’ll be elevated up the rankings much faster than if you’re operating alone.  Every time your latest post pops up on the Blogivists front page or another Blogivist links to your blog, you earn rank and authority points. 

For example, when I started my E!! blog in June 2008 I was ranked #5 million or so among active blogs on Technorati, yet today I am ranked at 220,559 which is top 5%.  Also, if you Google “Elizabeth Crum” or “Nevada conservative blogs” my blog now comes up #1 on page one.  Pretty amazing for someone who’s been blogging for less than 5 months!

Support – The Blogivists IT team is nice and very helpful.  It’s easy to fill out an online support ticket, and you’ll get personal attention whenever you have questions or issues.  Also there are Help pages and webinars to guide you along as you learn the blogropes.

Awards – Besides the $250 Blogivist of the Month award, there are the Sammies and other prizes available for bloggers who want to shoot for something big.  It’s motivation to stay passionate and keep at it, which is really what it’s all about.

A reader reminds me:  “Don’t forget about the email alerts, too.  I wouldn’t have known about your blog had I of not been a subscriber to Blogivists.”

 I am delighted to have been awarded the first Ever Blogivist of the Month award by the Sam Adams Alliance Blogivists group. 

Cash prize:  $250

Warm, happy feeling:  Priceless

Being part of Blogivists has been more fun that any blogger should rightfully have.  There are many skilled (and funny) bloggers in the group, and it’s been big fun to blog, click-o-vate, comment, and make merry.  I feel honored to have been picked for the first monthly award and look forward to seeing who wins for November!

Thanks to all – and Blog On!

Remember my post on the unsustainability of the Canadian health care system?  Well here’s a link to an article including a true story from a Canadian woman suffering with cancer.  Read it and weep – for her.

Unbelievable. Client #9: guilty as sin, free as a bird.

A few of you know I recently signed on as Director of Policy at All American Blogger.  I also agreed to manage and edit AAB’s Nevada Edition multi-author blog which you can now enjoy. 

It is my hope that NE can be a Corneresque forum for Nevada readers:  a hodgepodge of news and opinion; lively and informed conservative-libertarian viewpoints; at times serious; at times silly; and hopefully never boring.

There are also other AAB state blogs both existing and coming online soon.

The dialogue has begun.  Mahmoud informs Obama that the world expects a major “overhaul.”

CEI’s Iain Murry corrects (UK) Times‘ writer Danny Finklestein on our recent election and American politics.  Worth reading no matter which side of the Pond you reside on.

The comic genius and killer sarcasm of Iowahawk knows no bounds.  He’s supercalifragalistic, folks!

Read about it here on Boston.com.

Like many Americans last week, I tuned in for the 30-minute Barack-o-mercial. 

In between the anecdotal close-ups of struggling American families – a widow working two jobs and raising two kids; a husband and father worried about his job at the Ford plant – I noted that Obama’s megacommercial failed to present hard data on the cost of his proposed programs and said nothing about our huge federal deficit and the corresponding budget pressures he will face once in office. 

Obam’s description of his health care plan – which “includes improving information technology, requires coverage for preventive care and pre-existing conditions, and lowers health care costs for the typical family by $2,500 a year” – sounds very nice, but there has been no independent economic analysis confirming that costs will really be reduced by that (or any) amount.

Obama simply Hopes that spending $50 billion on his proposed Changes over the next five years will save the system money.  But even if his optimistic estimates prove out, Obama’s plan does not stipulate that the net savings by insurance and health care providers will result in lower premiums for consumers.

And then we have Obama’s promises to “cut taxes for every working family making less than $200,000 a year…  Give businesses a tax credit for every new employee they hire…  Eliminate tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas…  Help homeowners by freezing foreclosures for 90 days… Provide low-cost loans to help small businesses pay their workers and keep their doors open…”

Independent analysts have estimated that combined with our current budget shortfalls, these and other of Obama’s proposals will likely result in a $1 trillion deficit next year.  That being unthinkable, some purging will be necessary.  But which of his programs will Obama cut, and why has he been promising all of them if he knows at least some must go?

Though much of his infomercial focused on the “hard realities” of life for select American families, Obama seems unwilling or unable to face reality himself.  It seems he could stand to learn something from that widowed mother of two who has to settle for half instead of whole gallons of milk when the money runs short – and doesn’t promise her family otherwise on the way to the store.

This post is very well done.

Hat Tip:  Conor Friedersdorf @ Culture11

Don’t miss Joe Carter’s post on Culture11. And (most of) the comments are worth reading, too. It is interesting how people see these things – and to note the corresponding assumptions they make about what “everyone” else thinks or believes.

I’m grateful to blog for an online magazine that encourages these kinds of discussions. Thanks, Joe!

Many are saying this election was a failure of Conservatism.  Not so.  It was the product of poor Republican leadership and big government policies.  Fiscal discipline went out the window.  Earmarks were snatched up eagerly.  Corruption scandals sprang up too often.  Communication and message management were poor.

In short, the Republican party became undisciplined, greedy, weak and ineffective.  This dirtied and eroded the Republican brand such that it became unrecognizable and uninspiring. 

We need new leadership.  We need new voices and/or the renewing and rejuvination of existing voices.  Our elected officials need to stop concerning themselves with power grabs, pandering, and placating.  We must unapologetically and unashamedly stand on True Conservative values.

We need to get back to basics and get on message, recognizing that effective and persuasive communication matters.  As Laura Ingraham said today, “We must cultivate a new generation of leaders who are both proud of their conservative beliefs and comfortable articulating them with vision, clarify and optimism.” 

I hereby invoke part of Russell Kirk’s introduction to Ten Conservative Principles:

Perhaps it would be well, most of the time, to use this word “conservative” as an adjective chiefly. For there exists no Model Conservative, and conservatism is the negation of ideology: it is a state of mind, a type of character, a way of looking at the civil social order.

The attitude we call conservatism is sustained by a body of sentiments, rather than by a system of ideological dogmata. It is almost true that a conservative may be defined as a person who thinks himself such. The conservative movement or body of opinion can accommodate a considerable diversity of views on a good many subjects, there being no Test Act or Thirty-Nine Articles of the conservative creed.

In essence, the conservative person is simply one who finds the permanent things more pleasing than Chaos and Old Night. (Yet conservatives know, with Burke, that healthy “change is the means of our preservation.”) A people’s historic continuity of experience, says the conservative, offers a guide to policy far better than the abstract designs of coffee-house philosophers.

I have always loved Kirk’s Ten and that intro.  Not an ideology but ”a state of mind, a type of character, a way of looking at the social order.”

Conservatives are skeptical of change for its own sake and will always pause to ask, “but what are the unintended consequences?”  Conservatives value that which has been good, and is good, and are not eager to dismiss that good in favor of untested new ideas.  Conservatives are open minded but cautious.  Social experiments are looked upon with great skepticism.  As Kirk later writes:

Therefore the intelligent conservative endeavors to reconcile the claims of Permanence and the claims of Progression. He thinks that the liberal and the radical, blind to the just claims of Permanence, would endanger the heritage bequeathed to us, in an endeavor to hurry us into some dubious Terrestrial Paradise. The conservative, in short, favors reasoned and temperate progress; he is opposed to the cult of Progress, whose votaries believe that everything new necessarily is superior to everything old.

Just so.

It should be acknowledged that The Pew Research and Rasmussen Reports polls had the presidential race right at 52 to 46 percent, a 6 point spread.

The polls at Gallup and Reuters/Zogby had the race at an 11 point spread which is outside the margin of error so problematic.  ABC/Washington Post and CBS had Obama up by 9 which is just at the +/- 3 point margin of error. 

NBC/WSJ and IBD had a spread of 8 which isn’t bad, and CNN and FOX had the spread at 7 points which is/was close enough for me.

Source:  Newsmax

Forgot to mention that Rove’s electoral map prediction was the closest of any I found in my internet and blogosphere travels.  He called it perfectly with the exception of giving Indiana to McCain (so had called it 338 – 200).  Impressive.

(If you know of a site, blog or map that had it 100% right, please let me know.)

In light of his promises to be a new kind of president running a new kind of White House, Obama’s choice of Rahm Emanuel for White House chief of staff is surprising.

It is said by those who have worked with him, or know people who have, that although Emanuel is a brilliant mind he is also viciously partisan, aggressive, and impatient. Why, then, would Obama choose him for a job which primarily entails managing people and facilitating decision processes?

Obama needs staffers who can and will help him be decisive, and Emanuel can do that – but at what cost? If Emanuel is as expert at alienating and offending as is reported, he will be helping in one way but hurting in another.

Surely there were better choices?