411 Politics Fact or Fiction: Week 121

Posted by Brandon Crow on 03.12.2009

Is Romney the man in 2012? Should major newspapers be bailed out? Would Arnold Schwarzenegger be happier as a Democrat? Is Obama continuing Bush's "enemy combatants have no rights" policy disappointing?

Welcome to Week 121 everybody! This week, we have readers Matt Hanna and Patrick Taylor, both of whom consistently post comments in our zone, so you know they are up on their politics and current events. Let's see what Matt and Patrick have to say.

Ding! Ding!

1. Former Massachusetts Governor, Mitt Romney won this year's CPAC straw poll. It was his third straight win. Third time's the charm and Romney's going to the big dance in 2012.

Matt Hanna: FICTION. Its too early to tell whether Mitt is going to the dance or not but I wouldn't hold my breath. This is the third straight year that he has won the straw poll which means that he was the winner heading into last year's primaries which did not go well for him. Romney is a favorite of the pro-business side of the party due to his successful business career and policy views. However, he likely won't fare well in the heavily red bible belt due to his Mormon religion, which while completely idiotic is true. He also has a tendency to come off as a disingenous, plastic politician which will turn off moderate/independent types who vote in the primaries. The guy is basically straight out of central casting as far as a politician goes and seems to have a problem connecting with voters.

Fact is, the guy couldn't even beat McCain in the primaries who was a pretty weak candidate himself in spite of the Scrooge McDuckian level of money he spent. Granted, the Republican field is not exactly over flowing w/ top prospects for 2012, but I would be surprised if Romney pulled it off.

Patrick Taylor: FICTION. The CPAC performance may have been stellar, but who really cares? I wouldn't have even known the CPAC event existed without President Obama's post-partisan functionaries spending the past week relentlessly whining about it. I can't quibble with Matt's take.

I certainly may be idiotic, yet I would never vote for a Mormon. I personally can not support a candidate who belongs to an organization with a history of conspiracy and armed insurrection against the United States of America. I also have a person disdain for aristocracy.

Finally, and most importantly, I work on the Institutional Side of the securities business and those bastards at Baine Capital have never paid me a flipping dime during the past ten years.

1 for 1. Apparently, Mormonism is still a handicap for Romney. Maybe it's time Romney took the G.W. route and became born again…

NEXT WEEK: BOO!!!!!!!!!

2. Major American newspapers should be placed on the priority list for a bailout.

Matt Hanna: FICTION. I am not a fan of the bailouts but putting my own personal grudges aside I see no reason for major newspapers to receive one. In theory, bailouts should be going to companies going through a rough patch but still have a sustainable business model and future. Newspapers are dead. They've been effectively replaced by the web similar to how CD stores have been replaced by mp3 downloads. I cannot name one person that I know under 50 that has a newspaper subscription.

There may still be a niche market in the future for newspapers (old timers, people who just like to have something to pick up & read in the morning, crossword nerds, etc) but the days of newspapers being big business are over and throwing money at it is not going to change anything. They are better off cutting costs and learning how to turn a profit via their own websites.

Patrick Taylor: FICTION. Extra, Extra read all about what you already know. Under no circumstance should newspapers receive any funding from any governmental unit.

By definition a bailout means that a bail has been posted to get a person out of jail while waiting for trial. The bail is returned upon appearance at trial; otherwise bail is not returned. Given Matt's points above, I believe the newspaper business "poses a significant flight risk" in that they are being replaced by a better mouse trap and will never "report for trial".

The ticker-tape machine so loved by Gomez Adams is a quaint method to get stock price information but of little use for those who "follow the tape" today. Newspapers are no different.

Although efficiency argues against government subsidy of traditional newspapers, there is probably a more compelling reason not being discussed. Doesn't everyone see the inherent conflict-of- interest in having newspapers funded by the Federal Government. I mean it is one thing to be informally complicit in regurgitating the daily jive emanating from Robert Gibbs, its quite another to have your livelihood directly dependent upon it.

2 for 2. I'm not a big fan of bailouts, but to have major US cities without newspapers, well, isn't that the most valuable commodity out there—accurate, unbiased information?

NEXT WEEK: AAAAAAAAAGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

Switch!

3. In a recent interview, one of Arnold Schwarzenegger's staffers said that this past year, "the Ah-nold" nearly switched parties. He should have; he would have been much happier as a Democrat.

Patrick Taylor: FICTION. I can't speak to the man's happiness but I doubt any political benefit would accrue to anyone in California as a result. I mean the guy seems to be equally hated by both Republican and Democrat alike. He hoped to be a post-partisan political actor. As he has come to find out, post-partisanship provides use-value in campaigning but is of little value in governing.

Governor Schwarzenegger finds himself in very similar situation with former President George Herbert Walker Busch. Both gained their Republican "street cred" through campaign pledges of no new taxes while both inheriting budgets with enormous structural deficits that would require additional revenue sans significant program cuts; in other words, Girly-man Economics. Both mistakenly thought breaking their "no new tax" pledge would be met with similar political sacrifice from opposing legislative interests. For all intents and purposes, Schwarzenegger breaking his pledge has had the same political result as changing parties and nobody is happy.

Something has to give in California, the economy does not generate enough tax revenue to pay for the level of government service the State currently provides. Just as Bush, the mounting bills have become so large that there is no easy answer. Arnold came to power when Grey Davis began issuing warrants to vendors as settlement for government purchases. After five years of Schwarzenegger administration, tax refund checks are not being distributed and the IOUs will soon be hitting the streets. Arnold will be joining G.Herbert Bush and Grey Davis soon. His party really didn't matter.

Matt Hanna: FACT. Arnold has basically been slowly turning into a Democrat anyways. I live in California and most Republicans can't stand the guy. He was elected on a pledge on reduce taxes and the hated California license tax which is amazingly high. He has now gone back on both of those pledges. He has always leaned more Democrat on social issues as well such as abortion, conservation, & gay marriage to a degree. With his recent decisions, its hard to see why this guy considers himself a Republican. Granted, most Democrats seem to think he is a joke too but he seems to have more in common with them nowadays. It seems Skeletor Shriver may have converted him.

On a side note, California is a complete disaster as Patrick alluded too. Years of bloated state contracts, unchecked illegal immigration, and black hole public works projects have put the state in serious jeopardy. As most politicians are too spineless to go after the root of the problem, they just insist on increasing revenues via more taxes. The sales tax in LA is approaching 10% on top of the high state income tax and other fees. Combine that w/ the high cost of living and its easy to see why middle class and businesses are leaving the state in droves. Soon the state will be left with the rich who will take the high tax tradeoff for the great weather/scene and poor who benefit from the high level of services. The middle class is getting squeezed right out.

2 for 3.

NEXT WEEK: SSSHHRRIIIEEEEEKKKKK!!!!!!!!!

4. The Justice Department, under President Obama, recently stated that detainees in Afghanistan have no constitutional rights. This position—essentially reaffirming and reinforcing Bush—is just plain wrong, pure and simple.

Patrick Taylor: FICTION. The issue of Constitutional authority has never been plain, pure or simple throughout the entire history of the United States. Therefore I must say that President Obama's continuation of the Bush Policy is not plain wrong, nor pure and not simple. On the face of it, the Bagram Airfield is not a US Territory and therefore not subject to Constitutional authority. But the Constitution is purposely vague on the question of who is subject of Constitutional authority. The Constitution does not define citizenship nor whether Constitution applies to those outside US territory serving the US government. What I do think is plain wrong, pure and simple, is Barack "constitutional scholar" Obama, arguing Bush's policy was un-Constitutional as candidate, but is Constitutional when President. Or, "Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal."

Matt Hanna: FICTION. I don't think that these detainees are subject to constitutional rights. I think a more accurate description would be to label them as POWs which would give them rights under the various POW treaties but not necessarily the same constitutional rights given to someone in the US Criminal Court system. We are fighting a war, thus the prisoners should be treated as such. I think President Obama is slowly realizing that things are not as black & white as some in the media like to paint it in the War on Terror. It will be interesting to see how many more of GW's "facist" policies are continued under the Obama administration when it comes to handling the war and national security.

3 for 4. Yes, it will be interesting to see how Obama swings/sways on these difficult issues now that he's president.

NEXT WEEK: BBBWWWUUUHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!

That's it for Week 121. WEEK 122 will simply be downright scary! See you all in seven.