Well, Linda Sanchez should have looked into the career of Nora Dannahey before putting on her tinfoil beanie. Unfortunately, uninformed commentary like this is all too common in the House.

I now have far more confidence in Nora Dannahey's ability to complete her assigned task than I do in Ms. Sanchez'. Competence matters.

Thanks.

mp

Posted at October 4, 2008 5:03 PM in response to House Dems Question Prosecutor's Independence in U.S. Attorney Probe

Well, this article from factcheck.org puts the lie to the advertising claim, to wit: if a fetus delivered during a late-term abortion is determined to be viable, it is a felony under existing Illinois law for the doctor to allow that fetus to die.

That being the case, the arguments on this issue in this thread and the arguments presented by the Right to Birth organization are false, and at the very least, the Right to Birth people know they're false. Whether or not the proponents of this theory on this thread are knowledgeable about the facts is unknown to me.

Born Alive

Thanks.

mp

Posted at October 2, 2008 4:36 PM in response to Pro-Life Group Preparing Big Ad Assault Charging Obama Allowed Babies To Die

By most common definition, a "troll" is a visitor who posts with the intention of taking a discussion offtopic, usually with some provocative or insulting messaging. Trolls generally do not participate in discussions -- they post one message, in order to "start something," and then leave.

In FidoNet, back in the day, the rule was, "Thou shalt not be easily annoyed, and thou shalt not be excessively annoying." This rule could be profitably applied to most forms of online exchanges.

Many people seem unable to scroll past the provocative or insulting message, thereby greatly contributing to the problem. "Trolling" only works as long as there are others in the group as willing to go offtopic as the troll.

Thanks.

mp

Posted at September 30, 2008 10:23 AM in response to Who is a troll here? Yes, I'm talking to you!

Nora Dannahey is a career Federal prosecutor with almost 20 years on the job. Explain to me how she "owes her position to the White House." Her father was a CT state Supreme Court justice and by all accounts was a stiffnecked and upright jurist.

She has a long history of successfully prosecuting cases against rogue public officials. Here is a description from a news account of one of these cases:

"But it was old-school Dannehy who was still standing after what amounted to a three-year legal knife fight with top members of Boston's defense bar in a case that grew out of the Silvester prosecution. She was outnumbered. The defense lawyers repeatedly tried to disqualify her after she threatened to indict one of them for obstruction of justice. All but three of Connecticut's federal judges removed themselves from the case over potential conflicts of interest. Another withdrew in frustration.

When it was over, Frederick McCarthy, owner of the Boston bond house accused of bribing Silvester, was fined $40,000 and incarcerated. His investment company was fined $4 million and driven out of business."

It sounds to me like she is exactly the person we want on this job.

Thanks.

mp

Posted at September 30, 2008 9:37 AM in response to Iglesias: Information on My Firing "Is Going To Have To Be Forced Out Of The Administration."

This article from The Economist gives some background that may be useful. I have found this magazine to be sufficiently clearsighted in its analyses over the years that I subscribe.

"http://www.economist.com/finance/displayStory.cfm?source=hptextfeature&story_id=12305746">The doctors' bill

Posted at September 28, 2008 9:39 AM in response to Is the Crisis Real?

Outstanding impressions for me: 1) Obama's style of saying "I agree with John" right before he rips off his head and pisses down his neck was subtly effective -- making the harshest criticisms seem polite. I think this style really does set Obama apart from most other politicians we watch. 2) McCain's rudeness, refusal to look at Obama while speaking about him and to him, frequently seeming to sneer.

As usual, McCain spouted politician's platitudes and Obama gave detail-specific answers. I hope this plays well with the general public as it does with me.

Thanks.

mp

Posted at September 26, 2008 11:52 PM in response to Presidential Debate Number One

Actually, I think Fiorina is probably right. Running a gov't is not the equivalent of running a company and does require a different set of skills. Although it's true that Fiorina ultimately dropped the ball at HP, it also is true that she did a tremendous amount of reorganization and restructuring to make the HP-Compaq union actually work. There are people who simply are better at some aspects of corporate rule than others.

In fact, there is a whole category of CEOs known as "interim CEOs," who sole job is to take over a company for 12-18 months, reorg it, get it running profitably -- and then they're done. The company owners/board then hire a permanent CEO to run the newly remade company.

The notion of POTUS == CEO should be repugnant to all thinking citizens and especially progressives. Gov't is in the business of helping people, not turning profits.

McCain is just a doofus, cut from the same mould as our current POTUS. But Obama, it seems to me, has demonstrated a limited ability to organize and delegate, that would not work well in a corporate environment. We're now seeing really bad results of the candidate's insistence that every aspect of the campaign route through his office.

I don't think he'll be a great President. But I think he'll be a competent one. And that is what we need, right now.

Thanks.

mp

Posted at September 16, 2008 6:20 PM in response to Key McCain Adviser Admits Palin Not Qualified To Run Major Company

I'm afraid I've never been an admirer of Powell, who built his entire career on the whitewash of My Lai (which he continues to maintain was not a massacre).

But anybody can rehabilitate himself. He's already admitted wrongdoing in the cover he provided to Bush for the invasion of Iraq.

I'll take his endorsement because it will have a positive impact in a lot of important "middle America" places.

But, I wouldn't invite him to dinner.

Thanks.

mp

Posted at September 16, 2008 10:14 AM in response to Election Central Morning Roundup

Gosh, does this constitute a "Doh!" moment?

Really, it seems to me that this comes down to Obama not wanting to delegate and take his own finger off the trigger. That is not a good omen for a Presidency.

I sure as heck hope we aren't too late to get this project completed.

Thanks.

mp

Posted at September 15, 2008 9:48 PM in response to Top Democrats Privately Urging Major Donors To Fund Outside Groups To Attack McCain

Got to admit, Obama really knows how to uncork the one-line zinger.

I'm anxious to see the debates.

Thanks.

mp

Posted at September 15, 2008 3:52 PM in response to Obama To McCain: "Senator -- What Economy Are You Talking About?"