Democrats are just doing what the Republicans would have done had the situation been reversed.  They are siezing on something that is perfectly legitimate but smells funny in order to hammer the administration and, quite frankly, the administration has not done themselves any favors (did they think nobody would ask any questions!?!?!).  This issue is purely a political power play over some fake notion of justice that is, in fact, no less political than the whole stupid scandal and developing Constitutional crisis. 

The real issue is that we should eliminate most of the unnecessary intrusion of the Federal government into our lives and focus on core laws and regulations that make sense and that we can actually enforce with reasonable resources.  I wish that we would fire more prosecutors and deal with the real issues rather than have our political process hijacked by ridiculous political scandals.

I couldn’t help but fall back on to a very cynical view of the whole thing.  Mr. Ed himself is just so insincere that I couldn’t help but think that this whole cancer story is buying him a bunch of free press that includes a bunch of journalists talking about how strong and courageous he and his wife are and how strong their marriage is and blah, blah, blah.  Unfortunately for Mr. Ed, the return of his wife’s cancer does not change the fact that he is a pompous, scum-sucking plaintiff’s lawyer selling a muppets version of the The Communist Manifesto with his stupid ”two Americas” class struggle garbage.  I hope Mrs. Edwards’ doctors demanded a few extra liability waivers because their patient’s husband is to blame for a big chunk of their malpractice insurance costs and, if he becomes President, we’ll all be working on collective farms and gritting our teeth during State of the Union addresses that sound like NASCAR victory speeches. 

We need to find a cure for cancer but we also need to find a cure for John Edwards.

Another article in today’s Wall Street Journal correctly points out that the real lesson of this case is to plead the 5th whenever a prosecutor ever wants you to answer any questions.

I didn’t really follow the Libby trial that much.  It just seemed like the garden variety politically motivated case that makes anyone who might be remotely qualified for government service to run screaming.  However, it just gets clearer by the day that Iraq, and everything surrounding the decision to go in and the post-invasion aftermath, was a giant mistake.  And, to make matters worse, our soldiers who get injured over there can’t get even basic medical care in a honorable fashion.

What has our country come to?

Deficits generally don’t bother me that much.  The Federal government can borrow so cheaply and has esstentially created the backbone of the financial system with treasury bonds.  It doesn’t make too much sense to raise taxes in years where expenses are high (e.g., we have to build an aircraft carrier or fight a war) and then lower them when expenses are low (something that never happens anyway), so it makes sense to borrow the money and, while we are at it, provide a robust bond market.  Eventually, if we don’t raise taxes, deficits will ultimately consume all available resources to make interest payments which would then deprive the Federal government of its life blood.

However, there is absolutely no excuse for raising taxes.  The Federal government already swims in way too much money that is routinely and systematically wasted (e.g., the $13 billion military shuttle launch pad that was never used, the $10 billion IRS computer system that never made it past the specifications stage, etc.).  The Federal government should be no more than 20% to 30% of its current size so it has far more money than it ever should need and there is absolutely no reason to give it even a single dollar more. 

Up until this point I have felt that I would have voted for W again given the choices that I had and I still think I would.  However, it is going to make me very mad if he gives in now and lets the Democrats raise taxes.  Apparently, the way that W is justifying his support is by allowing a trade of a reduced AMT for middle class for increased taxes on the “wealthy” so long as there is no net increase in taxes.  Frankly, that is just bullshit.  Any increase in taxes on anyone is an increase in taxes and a trade like the one W is considering now is just a politically motivated transfer of wealth.  Politicians love to tax the rich when they need money but when there is a surplus, as there was a few years ago, the Dems don’t want to give it back (Al Gore would rather spend the money and claim that it doesn’t make sense to give it back because it would only be enough to buy Diet Coke).

43 is already on the path to be considered at best a mediocre president (and more likely a failure) but if he gives up on his promise to reduce taxes only to then raise them on the “wealthy” (especially if he defines “wealthy” like John Kerry tried to do) in a desperate trade for an AMT reduction for the “middle class” will mean that the last remaining reason to justify my votes in 2000 and 2004 will fall away.  Of course, the sad thing is that, given our worthless political system I would still vote the way I did given the choices that were available.

The problem with Obama and others like him is that they either believe that the government is capable of good things or they are just saying that to grab power for themselves and those who pay their bills.  Given that Obama is (a) a lawyer and (b) a politician, I find it hard to believe that he is anything other than just another self-interested ego maniac with good rhetorical skills.  I’ll give him props, though, for doin’ a little blow in the 80s and just admitting it early.

So, Obama doesn’t like me and I’m starting not to like him.  That works out better because games are fun to watch when you really like one of the teams but they are much more fun when you have a strong dislike for one of the teams.

Now, normally, any article about Bill Lerach would make me immediately lose my appetite or, even worse, feel as if any previous meal might need to come back up.  But this article, as have many recent Lerach articles have been lately. was different.  Bill Lerach is one of the lowest life forms on earth: a class action plaintiff lawyer.  Lerach has been known for years for filing mostly baseless securities class action lawsuits and shaking down public companies for hundreds of millions of dollars in the name of investors (he was appointed lead counsel for the shareholders of Enron).  But Billy hasn’t always played straight and is in some really hot water, along with the law firm that he used to work for, for paying plaintiffs to get involved in these lawsuits.  All of this makes me happy.  Rarely am I ever pulling for prosecutors who are generally as useless to the general public as Lerach is to shareholders.  However, I really, really, really, really want to see Lerach the subject of a perp walk.

So, as I was eating my dinner, reading about Lerach and not throwing up, I wondered who I disliked more, Lerach or Hillbillary.  I thought I woudl start off this posting with “the only person I dislike more than Hillbillary is Bill Lerach.”  But, I am not sure if that is true.  Hillbillary and Lerach are both completely self-absorbed, useless lawyers who are dangerous for what is left of our democracy.  Both of them actually think they are doing us all a favor but, in reality, they are just costing us money in order to advance their own ambissions.  However, as much as I can stand what Bill Lerach stands for, I really can’t blame him for finding an opportunity and exploting it.  Hillbillary, on the other hand, really is just of no use to society whatsoever yet seems to think that she deserves to be the president.

I can’t stand either of these morons but I actually hate Bill Lerach ever so slightly less than Hillbillary.

1.  Hilbillary says something that is calculated to generate one response but instead generates another response that she doesn’t approve of.

2.  The comment gets repeated 8 billion times over a two day period.

3.  Hilbillary (a) chastises the poor, stupid electorate for misunderstanding her or (b) blames a vast [insert ideology different than Clintonian poll-watching nothingness] conspiracy.

4.  People like me get a good chuckle for a day or two, liberals protest in front of the White House, conservatives proclaim her unelectable and the general public ignores the whole thing.

It would be nice if the candidates and the press that follow them would spend a few hours talking about real issues but I have long since given up any hope for that and, instead, look forward to firing up Bloglines every morning in hopes of a repeat of the Hilbillary cycle.