” … maybe Cindy should be on the ticket.”

James Ledbetter, writing in Slate, deconstructs McCain’s personal economic experience. Or, rather, lack of it. When McCain tells us he’s lived his life “not for profit, but for patriotism” believe him. It’s his wife who has lived a life for profit, for both of them, God bless her.

McCain’s financial inexperience may explain why his attempts to discuss economics—such as his rapid flip-flop on the need for bailing out homeowners, his pandering suggestion to suspend the gasoline tax, or his happy talk on balancing the budget—sound so tin-eared.

It’s hard — for me, at least — not to view McCain’s admission of economic illiteracy (at a time when Republicans need a candidate who can, at the very least, feign such proficiency) an admission of having absolutely no guiding economic principles. His voting record sure doesn’t produce a tangible fiscal philosophy, only a haphazard collection of pandering and expediency. And with McCain’s recent populist assault on “profit,” I can imagine many Republicans are wondering what exactly they’ve gotten themselves into.

How to make a lefty movie right

I’m not embarrassed. I’ve been a fan of David O. Russell films. Spanking the Monkey, Three Kings, Flirting with Disaster were all worthwhile. In small doses, I even enjoyed the existential (or so I’m told) I Heart Huckabees – though I found his legendary meltdown during the filming vastly more entertaining than the movie itself.

His next one, though, sounds particularly brilliant.

Nailed is the story of a waitress (played by Jessica Biel) who is shot in the head with a nail gun. From there, she goes on a bender of irresponsible behavior and wild sexual conquests while battling Washington for better health-care.

With many progressive “message” movies failing to put people in the seats, Russell has come up with an inspired solution. Preaching in favor of government-provided health care is one thing. Working yourself into a self-righteous frenzy over callous Washington capitalists and watching Jessica Biel engaged in irresponsible behavior and wild sexual conquests is quite another.

Oh, and cast Tracy Morgan from 30 Rock.

Now, we’re talking message flick.

Are you kidding? We love negativity

The New York Times edit board claims:

The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it.

Voters are getting tired of it; it is demeaning the political process; and it does not work. It is past time for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to acknowledge that the negativity, for which she is mostly responsible, does nothing but harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election.

Are voters really getting “tired of it”? How would the NYT editorial board know? Common sense and cable ratings tell us (though they may not admit it) voters love a mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled political race. I’ve never spoken to as many civilians about politics as I have since this race began to get nasty. Though I wouldn’t call the contest exceptionally “mean.” It’s just unusual. And the negativity — or “distractions,” as Obama likes to call them — are quite often a handy way to learn useful tidbits about a candidate which would otherwise be ignored. Those things may seem “vacuous” to some. To other, clingy types, those negative revelations could be a deal breaker.

Politically, “negativity” is a winner. Hillary just took Pennsylvania – and Ohio and Texas. Her so-called negativity has done nothing but help her survive in this race, if only for a couple of more weeks.

The NYT board is grousing because this thing is dragging on and has the potential to hurt the Democrats in the general election. That concern is overblown. But “demeaning”? A genuine primary race only enhances the political process, it doesn’t demean it. And when the combatants have so little to quarrel about on policy matters, what else are they going to do?

Peace and free trade

A wonderful post from one of my favorite economists, Don Boudreaux. (What kind of geek has “favorite” economists? Don’t ask.):

On this Earth Day, I celebrate capitalism — the institution that, far more than any other, has made human lives clean, safe, dignified, and culturally rich. Capitalism is also responsible for giving people the wealth and leisure to permit them to mis-perceive nature as loving and bountiful, and to enjoy nature in a way that few of our pre-industrial ancestors could ever have enjoyed it.

McCain-Trotsky

“And if Republicans can forgive McCain-Feingold, McCain-Lieberman, McCain-Kennedy — and probably McCain-Trotsky — surely Democrats will get over a little bickering.” Or, at least, that’s the theory I forward in today’s column.

It’s difficult to believe residual outrage over the nominating process will bleed into the general election. For one, I don’t believe the average voter is paying much attention yet. Clearly, though, perception matters and Obama’s halo has been knocked around a bit. As Ross Douthat reminds us despite the Democratic infighting, McCain still struggles.

Yet even with all this going for him, McCain’s poll numbers are bumping up against the same 45 percent ceiling that they’ve been hitting since December. If the election were held today - a pretty good day for McCain, all things considered - he’d probably lose to Obama, and might lose to Clinton as well.

Would he “probably lose to Obama, and might lose to Clinton as well”? Sure, McCain has a lot of work to do. Sure, despising Republicans is now a national pastime. But the election isn’t about national poll numbers, it’s about Ohio, Florida (maybe), Colorado, New Mexico, etc … McCain polls well with independents in many of those states.

The Flag

Via Hit & Run, a sometimes humorous collection of potential flags for the coming nanny state from FARK.

Dropout rate “catastrophe”

“According to a new study by America’s Promise Alliance, 17 of the nation’s 50 largest cities had high school graduation rates lower than 50 percent. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, whose wife, Alma, chairs the alliance, calls it a “catastrophe.”

To fix the mess, education leaders have sprung into action. Yep, they’re going to have meetings. Fifty state “summits,” where local experts — you know, the ones who have reliably failed before — can chew the fat. And rest assured, teachers unions, the chief obstruction to progress, will seldom be mentioned by participants.”

Rest.

Is McCain now a Lieberman Democrat? Or is Lieberman a McCain Republican?

… Or, is there any difference? We all know, of course, that Lieberman and McCain are on the same page when it comes to Iraq. And we know many Democrats are in high spirits now that Joe has completely bolted for the Dark Side. But Republicans might be wise to ask themselves: Do you want him? After all, Lieberman’s recent I-didn’t-leave-them-they-left-me speech was a strike at the entire Democratic Party rather than a shot at some weak-kneed foreign policy position. Does Lieberman’s broadside mean he feels more comfortable in the GOP now. And if so, what does that say about the GOP?

“Well, I say that the Democratic Party changed,” Lieberman told ABC’s “This Week” this past Sunday. “The Democratic Party today was not the party it was in 2000. It’s not the Bill Clinton-Al Gore party, which was strong internationalists, strong on defense, pro-trade, pro-reform in our domestic government. It’s been effectively taken over by a small group on the left of the party that is protectionist, isolationist . . . and very, very hyperpartisan.”

Some observations:

–Partisanship only seems “very very hyper” when the rabble is focusing on you. Partisanship is the natural byproduct of joining a party. And if you’re a member of the party why not be hyper about it? If God wanted bipartisanship he wouldn’t have created Lee Atwater or Ragin’ Cajun.

–The Democratic Party has indeed moved left over the past decade, but it certainly hasn’t been hijacked by a “small group”. It’s a huge group. Such a huge group that they can no longer even be considered hijackers.

–Though Lieberman hasn’t been Eugene V. Debs, he’s not been an “internationalist” (whatever that means) or a free-trader or pro-reform, either. On a whole host of issues, he’s been solidly mainstream left. Sidling up to McCain won’t change that history, though it may remind conservatives that the Maverick has reworked his image these past few months … or, actually, his whole life.

From the “Constitution itself”

“Should the World Court be imbued with the authority to determine how Texans run their justice system? Does the president have the authority to impose an international court ruling on a state? Would such a notification have altered the outcome of the trial?”

Not really.

Sex, lies and corrupt politicians

“Are we too puritanical when it comes to sex? Europeans, we are told, will often have a great laugh at our squeamish expense. Why do Americans, they wonder, worry about the sexual antics of elected officials? Who cares?

How prudish are we, really? Read the news lately and you will have fodder for a riveting three-act porno screenplay. Our recent political scandals are completely filthy, and if they were only about the sex, we’d all be laughing. (OK, some of us are laughing anyway.) ”

Rest of the column.

Obama wants it both ways

My take.

Olympic boycott would at least be interesting

“Why any rational person would spend time watching the summer Olympic Games is a mystery. But, according to event organizers, around 3.2 billion earthlings will tune in to catch water polo, archery and other assorted oddities.

Sure, one supposes, the Olympics can hold geopolitical rooting interests (Go Estonia!). And the Games are unavoidably tied to politics, whether we’re talking about Hitler’s 1936 extravaganza, the Soviets’ socialist super athlete, or even the majestic Lake Placid hockey gold. For this reason, the 2008 Beijing Games are of paramount significance to China.”

Entire column here.

For voters, race indeed matters - but so what?

Today I chime in on one of the latest kerfuffles.

Obama’s connections are fair game

Or so I say in today’s column.

Are Heroes (Super and Otherwise) Truly Gone?

Elisabeth Rappe at Cinematical believes I have it all wrong on superheroes. She makes some good points.

First, she points to recent adaptations of X-Men, Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four and Superman — and the myriad of other superhero movies on the horizon — as proof of how wrong I am. And actually, the X-Men movies in many ways epitomize precisely what I’m writing about. Rather than a fight between Good and Evil we are presented with a complex narrative and, quite often, heavy-handed moralizing (humans are often mutant-phobic, read: racist …) that plays in the politically murkiness I see so often these days. (This complexity, incidentally, appeals to me as an adult.) Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four and Superman all deal with self-involved revenge fantasies or dealing with existential threats to mankind beyond traditional themes of good and evil.

She goes on …

But heroes don’t always need super powers — even if they do seem to have a penchant for capes. We’ve had our fair share in the past few years. What about Aragorn or Frodo? King Leonidas? Even when all seemed lost, they soldiered on to defend their homeland. Or do such heroes not count because they fought for Middle Earth and ancient Sparta? Is the implication in Harsanyi’s article that the only good heroes are American ones? (I think it is, but as he claims the 80’s were a time when “revenge and justice, in fact, could be unearthed everywhere in pop culture,” I think Hobbits and Spartans are worthy examples as to where heroism can be found today.)

The Hobbits and Spartans are superb illustrations of decency and wickedness I was writing about. Then again, much of the Lord of the Rings series was created during World War 2, it’s moral fault lines are created by now-historic battles rather than contemporary ones. And, obviously, the Spartans had their days thousands of years ago. In fact, “300″ was widely panned for very same politically incorrect themes I speak of in the piece.

Finally, I made no judgment call on whether I think the lack of simplistic heroes is a positive development or a negative one. I understand there are generalizations here. But I think overall my theory stands.

Where have all the superheroes gone?

( Marvel Comics, The Associated Press )

My Sunday prespective piece.

On Buckley

“You cannot paint the Mona Lisa by assigning one dab each to a thousand painters.”

No country for grouchy old white men

My column.

The truth about Castro

“Cuba features a universal health care system, a minuscule 1.9 percent unemployment rate, near-total literacy, complete political “unity” — and hundreds of thousands of people ready to risk their lives to get the hell out.”

A little late, but here I weigh in on Castro.

More Hillarinomics

I realize this sort of talk from Hillary is election-time populism and means nothing in practical terms, but the socialist overtones creep me out.

“We also have to reward work more,” Clinton told a small group of Ohio residents today. “and by that, I mean, I have people in New York working on Wall Street as investment managers, as hedge fund executives. Under the tax code, they can pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes on $50 million dollars, than a teacher, or a nurse, or a truck driver in Parma pays on $50,000. That’s very discouraging to people.”

I’m not an economist, but I’m relatively certain “we” don’t “reward” anyone for work, per se. Last I heard, folks negotiate the worth of a service or item in a competitive marketplace. (Though teachers typically work in a monopoly, but that’s another story.) You’re worth as much as someone is willing to pay you. There is no way to remedy this truth without destroying the economy and allowing the government to decide who is worth what. And, you know, I suspect being a slimeball hedge fund executive takes a certain level of skill and expertise, making it a pretty tough business to break into.

Moreover, I find Hillary’s contention that a hedge fund executive pays less in taxes than a nurse – even percentage-wise – remarkably dubious. A hedge fund hotshot, at the very least, is double taxed on his earning and pays a higher rate of income tax due to our progressive tax system.

But like I said, this is just election talk. I hope.