Tweet of the day, from Jim Geraghty:


Tweet of the day, from Jim Geraghty:

If you support the notion of free speech, it is most important to support it during elections . . . but not everyone feels this way:
The Associated Press reports that California’s Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) is considering “how to regulate new forms of political activity such as appeals on a voter’s Facebook page or in a text message.
Not whether to regulate these new forms of political speech, but how.
The recommendations apparently include “requiring tweets and texts to link to a website that includes . . . full disclosures, although some people feel the disclosure should be in the text itself no matter how brief . . . .”
To paraphrase Chief Justice John Roberts, this is why we don’t leave our free speech rights in the hands of FPPC bureaucrats. To bureaucrats like those at the FPPC, the Federal Election Commission or their analogues, there seems to be no need to show any evidence that Twitter, Facebook or text messages actually pose any threat to the public. It is enough that they these new forms of low-cost media aren’t currently regulated, but could be. Their primary concern, apparently, is that the regulation of political speech be as comprehensive as possible.
Free speech can be a messy thing — but censorship is worse.
H/T to “Inkless” Paul Wells for the link.
I don’t know what it is, but when you go all the way down the libertarian path, it leads to complete insanity. Just look at Ron Paul followers — they’re pretend-to-be-Spock-and-bite-each-other crazy. The libertarian philosophy seems reasonable enough, but it somehow always leads to candidates who accidentally dye themselves blue or carry around a pet ferret named Gustav.
So anyway, let’s definitely get someone in 2012 sympathetic to libertarian ideals who is adamantly against fiscal irresponsibility and government expansion — and for individualism — but if any candidates start foaming at the mouth, screaming “FIAT MONEY!!!!!”, back away and don’t make eye contact. Still, pure libertarians have a place in the GOP, but they’re sort of like Murdoch to the Republican A-Team: They keep breaking him out of the insane asylum because he’s useful for certain situations, but they’re not going to put him in charge of anything. Or there will be much fool pitying.
Frank J. Fleming, “Libertarians and the Republican Party”, IMAO 2010-06-25
Frank J. considers what his campaign video would be like if he was running for office:
This makes me think of the ad I might run if I one day campaigned for an office. I think I could improve on his ad, though. Here’s what I would do in my campaign ad:
* Ride into the commercial on a Liger.
* Every scene, I’d be stroking a different gun.
* Vow that if elected, our enemies will be eaten by genetically resurrected dinosaurs.
* In the middle of the ad, pause to shoot a hippy dead.
* Not only call the other politicians “thugs and criminals” but also promise to lock them in a room with a bear.
* Draw a picture of Muhammad while talking.
* Look up at the moon and yell, “You’re going down!”
* End with an awesome guitar solo while my farm explodes behind me.Yeah, I’d be so awesome commissioning agriculture or whatever.
By the last item, I was already seeing it . . . someone’s got to make this video. It doesn’t even matter what he’s running for!
Occasional commenter Chris Greaves sent me this link, saying
Read down towards the bottom:
“Duffy told the Mail she wasn’t impressed. “Sorry is a very easy word, isn’t it,” she was quoted as saying, adding that she would not be casting her vote for Brown — or anyone else — in the election.”
Herein lie the seeds for the Greaves Underdog Strategy:
* If you are the underdog, insult as many bigoted voters as you can reach; it inoculates them against voting, thereby reducing the overdog’s lead.
Gordon Brown is right on track . . .
After British PM Gordon Brown accidentally threw himself into the political woodchipper with a remark about a “bigoted woman”, the spin doctors are having a time with it:
Matthew Taylor, former chief adviser on political strategy to Tony Blair
“It is clearly disastrous and also a terrible thing to happen before the final leaders’ debate, which Gordon Brown has to win. He’s given Clegg and Cameron ammunition. The only thing is that expectations now will be so low. They won’t be on the floor, they will be in the cellar. Rock bottom. He’ll have to pull off the performance of the century.”
Olly Grender, former director of communications for the Lib Dems:
“This is the second electric moment in the campaign, the first being the first leaders’ debate. It is going to dominate every news bulletin and will be trailed particularly by the rightwing media. It was classic Gordon Brown, speaking to somebody, giving her a list of six things without asking her anything.
[. . .]
Iain Dale, Conservative political commentator and former political lobbyist
“I can’t remember any politician doing anything this crass. We’ve had this sort of thing before. Who would have thought that when Prescott punched someone it would do his reputation good? But he called a 66-year-old woman a bigot. If we call anyone a bigot who mentions immigration, then that covers thousands of people.
[. . .]
Charlie Whelan, former press secretary for Gordon Brown
“It’s all media clatter rubbish. What makes this story exciting is the media are involved. You’ve got human interest, then you fling in the media and, hey bingo: the wonderful moment the media have been looking for. It’s wonderful to talk about it and to Twitter about it, but normal people looking at it don’t see it in the same way.
Actually, Whelan may have the right idea: the whole situation has galvanized the British media, but it’s not yet clear if it will cause anything more than a temporary blip on the radar as far as the actual voting public is concerned.
The leader of Britain’s Liberal Democrats may have a lot of apologizing to do after an article he wrote as a member of the European parliament came to light:
A rattled Nick Clegg today sought to defend himself over his claim that the British people have a ‘more insidious cross to bear’ than Germany over World War II.
The Lib Dem leader attempted to laugh off criticism of his astonishing attack on our national pride — in which he said we suffered ‘delusions of grandeur’ and a ‘misplaced sense of superiority’ over having defeated the horrors of Nazism.
Campaigning ahead of tonight’s crucial second live TV showdown with party leaders, Mr Clegg said: ‘I must be the only politician who has gone from being Churchill to being a Nazi in under a week.’
Then again, despite the apparent anti-British taint, it might gain him votes in some crucial swing ridings where anti-British feelings are treasured and welcomed.
Update: Sorry about the original headline . . . must have started a cut-and-paste and then forgotten to fix it. Fixed now.
The UK Independence Party (UKIP) says Sod the lot:

The UK Independence party said “sod the lot” today as it launched its manifesto, telling voters it was time to ditch the three main parties in favour of an alternative proposing no cuts at all.
The party’s new poster features the faces of Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg alongside the slogan “sod the lot”.
Lord Pearson of Rannoch, Ukip’s leader, said it was time for a new politics and argued that leaving the EU would save up to £120bn a year — with no jobs or trade lost from Britain.
Pearson also revealed that his party would put up billboards urging voters to back Labour and Conservative candidates who were “committed” Eurosceptics as part of its strategy to mobilise support for a referendum on Britain’s role in Europe.
The choice on offer to British voters is Gordon Brown, Gordon Brown Lite, and Gordon Brown Extra Lite: that is, there’s very little to choose amongst ’em except for party colours.
Come the next election, it’d be tempting to steal the notion and put Harper, Ignatieff, and Layton on the poster . . . but we don’t have a viable Canadian Independence Party at the moment.
Royson James sums up the Adam Giambrone scandal pretty well:
Mayoral candidate Adam Giambrone can be gay if he wants to, or bisexual. This is Toronto.
Giambrone the playboy can have a 19-year-old girlfriend on the side, a common practice among the political elite of the day.
Giambrone the TTC chair can use the couch in his city hall office to bed Kristen Lucas late at night when he should have been using the office to solve customer-relations problems at the TTC.
Giambrone the defender of the public purse can even give his girl and her mother inside information about an upcoming transit fare hike while barring commuters from hoarding tokens in advance of the said fare hike.
And when caught with his pants on the ground, the man with the clean-cut, fresh, youthful image can admit only to having an “inappropriate” text message relationship with the girlfriend, as if it amounted to mere digital sex, a peccadillo.
But the 32-year-old city councillor can’t do all that and expect Torontonians to embrace him as their mayor.
Update: Giambrone seems to have realized it’s over: he’s announced that his bid for mayor is over.
It’s early for this kind of media-friendly scandal to break, which makes it unlikely to actually affect the outcome of the election (that is, it’s a self-inflicted wound, no partisan assistance required). Adam Giambrone gets to try to finesse his way out of an “inappropriate relationship with a young woman.”
Giambrone, who currently lives with long-time partner Sarah McQuarrie, admitted to the relationship with university student Kristen Lucas after she forwarded a series of text messages to the Toronto Star. Lucas said she had been in a relationship with Giambrone for about a year.
Andrew Coyne has been sending lots of twitter updates on the matter:
I can’t decide whether this Adam Giambrone business is funnier than it is creepy, or creepier than it is funny.
As always, the issue isn’t the sex — that’s the funny part — it’s the multiple, multiple lies.
Was he lying when he told his teenage paramour the “live-in partner” at his mayoral launch was just “someone political… for the campaign”?
Or is he lying to us when he publicly apologizes to the “partner,” as if she were anything more than a flag of convenience?
Did he lie to her too? Or did he tell her I need you to pretend to be my lover, but don’t worry I’ll be shtupping a teenager the whole time?
[. . .]
And best of all: the “threatening email” he showed the Star, purportedly from her, in which she misspells her own name.
So the question for Toronto voters is not, do you want a serial liar for mayor, but do you want an incompetent one?
As for me, I’m sticking with my initial reaction: What a maroon.
Powered by WordPress