If you haven't done so yet, check out Jeremy Blachman's parody of Howard Bashman's "20 Questions for an Appellate Judge." See Blachman here. See Bashman's real 20 Questions here. My favorites:
10. What is your view concerning whether the Ninth Circuit should be split into two or more circuits, and how do you respond to the reasons favoring a split that others have raised?
I fully support any opportunity my colleagues might have to move up in the pecking order. If splitting the ninth circuit, would allow some of those judges to be promoted to the eighth circuit, or even the seventh circuit, and open up a spot for me to be promoted to the ninth circuit, I am all in favor. I believe we've been too slow to promote those judges who everyone acknowledges are excellent to better and better circuits. My good friend on the Third Circuit should at least be on the Second Circuit, if not the First Circuit. I believe we should create the strongest bench we can, for when we go up against the Canadian judges in softball games.
....
13. How did you happen to become Judge Posner's close friend, what interests do you have in common with him, and how do you avoid letting the major disagreements the two of you have had over cases from becoming personal?
Judge Posner always pays for lunch. I wish he would work harder and write more books.
Wednesday, February 04, 2004
Tuesday, February 03, 2004
A Super Tuesday . . . for Some
So anyway, without Newzcrawler I'm in a bit of an information void, but I do know that Kerry did well today, and Edwards stayed alive. Yep, that's all Edwards did. Winning South Carolina was the bare minimum he could do to be a viable candidate, so let's not get too excited about him at this point.
Now it's obvious that Kerry/Edwards would be a strong ticket, because if Edwards could bring in a few southern states, that might be all that's needed in a close election. Of course, many political scientists and pollsters will tell you that the vice presidential choice means almost nothing in the end, but whatever small aid Edwards would bring could be useful.
However, Edwards said point-blank on Fox News tonight that he doesn't want to be Kerry's vice presidential nominee. That could be taken to mean "Well, I'd prefer not to be vice president, because I'd rather be president, if you hadn't noticed. But if push comes to shove, I don't have a senate seat to go back to, so why not?" But I don't think that's what he's saying. I think Edwards has different plans. I think he knows that being Kerry's vice president means that he must wait in the wings for a few years, doing nothing much, only to play a guessing game with Hillary when he's done. I could see Edwards thinking it isn't worth it, and it's better to go president-or-bust now, and do something else if he fails.
Dean's on his dying breath. I think it's bascially over. I watched him on Meet the Press on Sunday, and this was a desperate man. It was one hour of Dean telling you he could still win, but not giving any real reason why. He couldn't say with a straight face he was going to win anything today, but he did say things like "I'm going to win overall because I have a real message" or "I'm going to win by stealing delegates away with strong finishes everywhere" (I'm paraphrasing). So much for that. How many delegates did he pick up today, less than 5? Perhaps none? The best he can hope for is some bargaining power at the convention. The Dean experiment, as Dean-O-Phobe said, is dead. But the New York Times thinks he still has a "small window", so what do I know.
Wes Clark isn't fairing much better. He might even lose his own state (though it looks like he'll win Oklahoma by less than 1%). Then again, he peaked a while ago, and his peak wasn't very high. I guess you can only expect so much from a philanderling nit-wit with only superficial attractiveness (as Peggy Noonan sees him). But if Noonan's right, one can see why he won the Madonna and Michael Moore vote. Are they delegates? No? Well, I'm sure they're Super Delegates in their own mind.
If Dean's on his last breath, Lieberman already had a Costco parking lot paved over his grave site. Apparently my Arizona theory was wrong, because he didn't do too well there. This stands in opposition to his real focus, Delaware, where he only lost by 40%. But at least he can rightfully claim his "three-way-tie" in that regard.
Watching Lieberman's exit speech, it really hit home why his turn-out was not simply bad (being a lone voice on the other side of a rift in your party is never good news), but piss poor. He's just too nice, as many commentators noted. When Lieberman says "I stand for a strong national defense," he says it with an inflection that reminds me of Ned Flanders coaching little leaguers. I almost expect him to give a cute "grrrr" at the end, as if to say, "yeah, I'm a tough soccer-dad! Now let's all go for ice cream!"
Kucinich is still hoping for the cuban vote. Not cuban-americans, mind you. I'm thinking more like Castro.
And last, and least, is Al Sharpton. He's still looking for a delegate so he can trade him or her for influence. Tell you what Al, I'll give you a ham sandwich for your delegate if you get one. As Fred Barnes put it, "Al Sharpton is no Jesse Jackson." Which, coming from Fred Barnes, is like saying "Barry Manilow is no Liberace."
Speaking of Liberace, hope everyone had a super Tuesday, with more super tuesdays to come.
Now it's obvious that Kerry/Edwards would be a strong ticket, because if Edwards could bring in a few southern states, that might be all that's needed in a close election. Of course, many political scientists and pollsters will tell you that the vice presidential choice means almost nothing in the end, but whatever small aid Edwards would bring could be useful.
However, Edwards said point-blank on Fox News tonight that he doesn't want to be Kerry's vice presidential nominee. That could be taken to mean "Well, I'd prefer not to be vice president, because I'd rather be president, if you hadn't noticed. But if push comes to shove, I don't have a senate seat to go back to, so why not?" But I don't think that's what he's saying. I think Edwards has different plans. I think he knows that being Kerry's vice president means that he must wait in the wings for a few years, doing nothing much, only to play a guessing game with Hillary when he's done. I could see Edwards thinking it isn't worth it, and it's better to go president-or-bust now, and do something else if he fails.
Dean's on his dying breath. I think it's bascially over. I watched him on Meet the Press on Sunday, and this was a desperate man. It was one hour of Dean telling you he could still win, but not giving any real reason why. He couldn't say with a straight face he was going to win anything today, but he did say things like "I'm going to win overall because I have a real message" or "I'm going to win by stealing delegates away with strong finishes everywhere" (I'm paraphrasing). So much for that. How many delegates did he pick up today, less than 5? Perhaps none? The best he can hope for is some bargaining power at the convention. The Dean experiment, as Dean-O-Phobe said, is dead. But the New York Times thinks he still has a "small window", so what do I know.
Wes Clark isn't fairing much better. He might even lose his own state (though it looks like he'll win Oklahoma by less than 1%). Then again, he peaked a while ago, and his peak wasn't very high. I guess you can only expect so much from a philanderling nit-wit with only superficial attractiveness (as Peggy Noonan sees him). But if Noonan's right, one can see why he won the Madonna and Michael Moore vote. Are they delegates? No? Well, I'm sure they're Super Delegates in their own mind.
If Dean's on his last breath, Lieberman already had a Costco parking lot paved over his grave site. Apparently my Arizona theory was wrong, because he didn't do too well there. This stands in opposition to his real focus, Delaware, where he only lost by 40%. But at least he can rightfully claim his "three-way-tie" in that regard.
Watching Lieberman's exit speech, it really hit home why his turn-out was not simply bad (being a lone voice on the other side of a rift in your party is never good news), but piss poor. He's just too nice, as many commentators noted. When Lieberman says "I stand for a strong national defense," he says it with an inflection that reminds me of Ned Flanders coaching little leaguers. I almost expect him to give a cute "grrrr" at the end, as if to say, "yeah, I'm a tough soccer-dad! Now let's all go for ice cream!"
Kucinich is still hoping for the cuban vote. Not cuban-americans, mind you. I'm thinking more like Castro.
And last, and least, is Al Sharpton. He's still looking for a delegate so he can trade him or her for influence. Tell you what Al, I'll give you a ham sandwich for your delegate if you get one. As Fred Barnes put it, "Al Sharpton is no Jesse Jackson." Which, coming from Fred Barnes, is like saying "Barry Manilow is no Liberace."
Speaking of Liberace, hope everyone had a super Tuesday, with more super tuesdays to come.
As Ben said . . .
My hard drive is on the fritz. The Ben household graciously gave me a hot temp computer, however. Actually, "hot temp" probably isn't the best description - "experienced, reliable, middle aged mother of 3" is probably more accurate. Which is even better, really, since I do all my blogging in Q-Basic. But seriously, thanks to the Bens for coming though.
Sunday, February 01, 2004
Blogging the Super Bowl
Why watch the Super Bowl when you can watch someone blog the Super Bowl? I can think of a few reasons. (from Instapundit)
U of C Economist Wins Clark Medal
Professor Steven Levitt wins what many consider the top prize in economics. The Economist (via Paul Krugman) notes that "this award says more about the winner's excellence as an economist than does the better known, but rather less exclusive, Nobel prize. That honour, after all, is sprayed out every single year, often to more than one winner, and decades after the laureates have done their best work. Look to the Clark medal to see who is really at the top of the field, here and now."
Kind of sounds like that prize that teacher in Good Will Hunting won. It seemed really important in that movie, and since Paul Krugman thinks it's important, it must be. One can always count on Paul Krugman for an unbiased assessment, particularly of something he won.
Kind of sounds like that prize that teacher in Good Will Hunting won. It seemed really important in that movie, and since Paul Krugman thinks it's important, it must be. One can always count on Paul Krugman for an unbiased assessment, particularly of something he won.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)