New book: Firearms Regulation in the Bill of Rights

Now out. Book available through CreateSpace. Linked here.

https://www.createspace.com/6462047

Firearms Regulation In the Bill of Rights

List Price: $25.00 Add to Cart

About the author:
Margie Burns. PhD, English literature, Rice University. Freelance journalist writing on government, law, and politics. Washington, D.C., region. Many published articles in general-interest and scholarly publications but most writing time for three years has gone into this book, begun late 2012. National issues pursued in depth include Iraq War, election integrity, First Amendment issues, and gun violence.
Articles reprinted, archived, and anthologized. Cited in First Amendment Calendar (Freedom Forum, Washington, D.C.) Article on As You Like It incorporated into Gale Course Reader, Shakespeare (publisher, Gale, Cengage Learning). Article on Taming of the Shrew anthologized by Garland Press on TS. “Oedipus and Apollonius” awarded Fritz Schmidl Memorial Prize for Research in Applied Psychoanalysis by Seattle Psychoanalytic Society, later article published by Oxford University Press.
(Some articles and condensed profile accessible at www.academia.edu. Titles in World Shakespeare Bibliography, citations in Google Scholar, Google Books, MicroSoft Academic, Academic Search Complete (EBSCO), elsewhere.)

Firearms Regulation In the Bill of Rights:

Eighteenth-Century English Language and the U.S. Constitution

Authored by Margie Burns

Nonfiction book emphasizes the English language at the time the first ten amendments were composed, and compares the first ten amendments to the language of later amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
The English words in the Bill of Rights have been misconstrued in recent years, even in some federal courts. Firearms Regulation in the Bill of Rights argues that the lexicon of the Bill of Rights itself supports regulation of firearms–gun control and gun safety. Authors consulted by Supreme Court justices include Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, David Hume, and Dr. Samuel Johnson, revisited in this book to examine an issue that periodically reaches the high court. Hundreds of sources include English and American public documents, before 1789 and after; early American newspapers; and English dictionaries from the eighth century through the eighteenth.
No other book in the marketplace covers the same ground.

(Yes, I know; that’s what they all say. But the claim is accurate here.)

This book does not merely retrace recent arguments by attorneys specializing in the second amendment. Discussion touches on U.S. history, British history, and political philosophy, an interdisciplinary approach that looks at the eighteenth-century language of the Bill of Rights in context, and at the ways our understanding of the language has changed since the eighteenth century.
Publication Date:

Jan 16 2017
ISBN/EAN13:
153723885X / 9781537238852
Page Count:
640
Binding Type:
US Trade Paper
Trim Size:
6″ x 9″
Language:
English
Color:
Black and White
Related Categories:
History / United States / General

A “vanilla characterization”: Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, and Hillary Clinton

Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, Hillary Clinton. Your cash is good at the bar.

Emails recently released via wikileaks restore little hope about the Clinton team behind scenes. The excerpts below, verbatim and in-house, pertain to that vexed topic of Clinton’s paid speeches for Wall Street.

They’re pretty clear. Little editorializing required. As Halloween approaches, some naked self-exposure of cynical willingness to fool the public is highlighted in orange:

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Dan Schwerin <dschwerin@hillaryclinton.com> wrote: > Following up on the conversation this morning about needing more arrows in > our quiver on Wall Street, I wanted to float one idea. In October 2014, > HRC did a paid speech in NYC for Deutsche Bank. I wrote her a long riff > about economic fairness and how the financial industry has lost its way, > precisely for the purpose of having something we could show people if ever > asked what she was saying behind closed doors for two years to all those > fat cats. It’s definitely not as tough or pointed as we would write it > now, but it’s much more than most people would assume she was saying in > paid speeches. (Full transcript is attached and key riff is pasted below.) > Perhaps at some point there will be value in sharing this with a reporter > and getting a story written. Upside would be that when people say she’s too > close to Wall Street and has taken too much money from bankers, we can > point to evidence that she wasn’t afraid to speak truth to power. Downside > would be that we could then be pushed to release transcripts from all her > paid speeches, which would be less helpful (although probably not > disastrous). In the end, I’m not sure this is worth doing, but wanted to > flag it so you know it’s out there.

The suggestion did not meet with unmitigated moral contempt or a generous wrath. On the following Monday, Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon passed it along:

Reviving this thread because AP is working on a story similar to Pat Healy’s article in Sunday’s NYT about HRC’s “Wall Street image problem.” The reporter, Lisa Lerer, plans specifically to note that her paid speeches to banks were closed-press affairs, and transcripts are not available. She is asking if we wish to characterize her remarks in any way. I think we could come up with a vanilla characterization that challenges the idea that she sucked up to these folks in her appearances, but then use AP’s raising of this to our advantage to pitch someone to do an exclusive by providing at least the key excerpts from this Deutsche Bank speech. In doing so, we could have the reporting be sourced to a “transcript obtained by [news outlet]” so it is not confirmed as us selectively providing one transcript while refusing to share others.

There were demurrals. As Mandy Grunwald responded the same day,

I worry about going down this road. First, the remarks below make it sound like HRC DOESNT think the game is rigged — only that she recognizes that the public thinks so. They are angry. She isn’t. Second, once you start looking at speeches, you run smack into Maggie Haberman’s report for Politico on HRC’s Goldman Sachs speech, in which HRC isn’t quoted directly, but described as saying people shouldn’t be vilifying Wall Street.

In other words, the suggested riff might not obfuscate enough to be helpful. As Grunwald went on,

Maybe you think the Deutsche Bank speech takes the sting out of the Goldman report — but I am concerned that the passage below will exacerbate not improve the situation.

For nostalgic reasons, I like seeing the name Deutsche Bank come up. Remember the great moment in Casablanca when Rick (Humphrey Bogart) entertains an official from Deutsche Bank?

Clip on Youtube here

Playing it again

Playing it again

The dialogue names names:

53. I’m sorry sir, this is a private room.

 

54. Of all the nerve! Who do you think…? I know there’s gambling in there ! There’s no secret . You dare not keep me out of here! You

 

55. Yes? What’s the trouble? ABDUL This gentleman — GERMAN RICK Your cash is good at the bar. GERMAN What ! Do you know who I am? Yes? What’s the trouble? This gentleman ….

 

56. I’ve been in every gambling room between Honolulu and Berlin and if you think I’m going to be kept out of a saloon like this, you’re very much mistaken.

 

57. Hello Ugarte. Uh, excuse me, please. Hello, Rick.

 

58. What! Do you know who I am? Your cash is good at the bar

 

59. I do . You’re lucky the bar is open to you.

 

60. This is outrageous. I shall report it to the Angriff!

 

61. Huh. You know, Rick, watching you just now with the Deutsche Bank, one would think you’d been doing this all your life.

 

62. Well, what makes you think I haven’t.

WHAT YOU DIDN’T READ, ABOUT THE 2014 ELECTIONS

WHAT YOU DIDN’T READ, ABOUT THE 2014 ELECTIONS

Memo to Democrats: This is what you get, when the face of the Democratic Party is the Clintons.

Memo to Democrats: No passionate voter likes a lack of choice, a monopoly candidate.

Memo to Democrats: Passionate voters are not inspired by an election that looks preordained. Let alone by an election that looks bought. Let alone by an election that looks preordained, bought, timid, platitudinous, and uninteresting.

Wishes and hopes

Memo to Dems: Candidate Hillary Clinton lost the 2008 primaries decisively. She had more money and endorsements than popular appeal. She continued to downgrade other candidates, after the strategy ceased to wok. She and her husband were the boys-on-the-bus choice rather than the people’s choice. She and her husband were more the Republicans’ choice for a Democratic Party candidate than Democrats’ choice.

Memo: All of these factors persist today.

Memo to Democrats: A first in U.S. history, when Hillary Clinton fell behind during the primary process, she made open comments on the campaign trail that seemed to accommodate the possibility of assassinating a more popular candidate. She (and her team) tried to play the race card against a better and more effective candidate.

Memo to Dems: Playing to the David Gergens of the world works for Republican candidates; it does not work for Democratic candidates. The national political press has not effectively reported, let alone supported, movement on issues of national importance (recall the Washington Post’s campaign against health insurance reform), especially when reporting might benefit Democrats. It has aggressively reported the eccentricities and frailties of Tea Party types, while covering for establishment GOP candidates (recall the absolute silence this year about the young George P. Bush’s run-ins with the law, including the stalking incident/s re a former girlfriend).

In happier news: President Obama had a good press conference yesterday. As usual, he made important points with admirable concision. Among them,

  • “voters expect us to focus on their ambitions, and not on ours.”
  • two thirds of the electorate did not vote
  • “Voters went five for five” to increase the minimum wage. In other words, the minimum wage won in all five states where it came on the ballot (even when GOP anti-minimum-wage candidates won their senate races).
  • “We are more than simply a collection of red and blue states. We are the United States.” 

He also listed, concisely, a few items on the agenda for the current Congress, before its term ends: support for measures domestic and abroad against the Ebola virus; authorization to use military force against ISIS; and a budget that will cover the rest of the fiscal year.

Then you get the other side:

More GOP name-calling for a woman

Speaking of items not reported, or not reported with clarity, below are a few examples (besides the young George P. Bush’s stalking) of what newspaper readers did not see in the 2014 election cycle. Items are boldfaced.

A Democratic Party candidate is not written about as a “moderate,” in the national political press. That word “moderate” is reserved for Republicans, raising questions such as, ‘What is the “moderate” number of deaths from unsafe toys/unsafe workplaces?”

The GOP establishment prevented Tea Partyers and other unwelcome candidates from winning in 2014. Following several prominent examples from 2012–Richard Mourdock, Todd Akin, etc.–the party was aware of the dangers going into 2014, well aware of them. And the Republican Party establishment met the challenges at every turn except for the Virginia primary that ousted Eric Cantor and, possibly, except for the Iowa primary that elected Joni Ernst. David Brat was the only challenger/Tea Party-type who did not have to meet other challenger/Tea Partyer candidates in his GOP primary. (Cantor did not have to contend with another establishment figure/rival, either. But having the establishment field to himself wasn’t enough.)

So simple, so effective: In primary after primary, the establishment candidate was alone; the Tea Partyers were multiple. So the arithmetic of the field won, almost every time: a divided vote on the “insurgent” or Tea Party side gave the establishment candidate or incumbent a majority or at least a plurality of the electorate, almost every time. (The Iowa senate primary was the only exception, and a mixed bag; the Chamber of Commerce supported Ernst, as did the Washington, D.C.-based company that created her two attention-getting ads.)

Little to none of this scenario was reported in the national political press, even when the national political press covered a state or local election, and even when boys-on-the-bus coverage used the incumbent/establishment versus challenger/Tea Partyer model. Instead, the inevitable outcome of a Republican primary was inevitably reported as a victory for “moderate” GOPers over extremists/outsiders/clowns/rubes/Ebola-laden virus carriers, regardless of the margin of victory for the establishment figure, and regardless of the vote share taken by non-establishment candidates.

There is no guarantee, of course, that a one-against-one race will produce a win for the Tea Partyer. But the party took no chances. In every primary of any significance, the field was cleared for the ‘establishment’ type, and almost every time, the arithmetic of the field was decisive.

It was actually D.C.-based media consultant Todd Harris who came up with the hog and gunshot ads for Joni Ernst in Iowa. Ersatz machismo, Iowans. You voted for second-hand K Street knockoffs, thinking they were independence.

This nonsense is infuriating to anyone who actually knows anything about farming. My maternal grandparents were farmers, and they raised a couple of pigs each year–piglets in spring, sausages in fall. The hogs were humanely fed and treated, although no one made a big song and dance about it. They were not castrated. Castrating the animals is designed to produce an unnaturally large and capon-like hog, analogous to tying geese down and force-feeding them to produce fois gras. Ernst’s and Harris’s castrating metaphor is another indication of the ties that bind to agribusiness, not of robust independence. Ernst could use the username bogusfarmgrl. The Ernst-Harris ad made an effective call for campaign donations from agricultural interests, as the gunshot ad called successfully for donations from the NRA. The latter also, of course, called for assassinating a president. The established political pundits who let that one pass failed a significant test.

The Bushes are back. Not with a groundswell of enthusiasm. Under-qualified Bush administration alumni are still doing their usual, and some got elected to office. Others continue to work publicly or behind the scenes in government, media, and NGOs. The burrowers should have been fired in 2009.

Al Gore Should Have Built a Smaller House. MSNBC should have kept Keith Olbermann. Al Gore fired Olbermann at CurrentTV (after I published a brief criticism of Gore’s non-eco-friendly house construction) and then sold CurrentTV to Al Jazeera. MSNBC is not worth watching. No Olbermann; too little reporting; too much parroting the boys-on-the-bus groupthink.

Memo to Democrats: Being in office does not give you some magical, Tinkle Bell-fairy dust protection against losing office. Corollary: Having the endorsement of official Democrats does not necessarily win you the office.

What works, if anything will, is trying to do a good job in office. As Working Families points out, “Unless and until Democrats are seen as actually improving people’s lives, the path is open for Republicans to stoke fears about declining living standards and stoke white anxiety about a racially changing America.” Democrats who showcased their work on raising the minimum wage and passing paid sick days for workers, for example, won.

In this context, a few words on some more local races in Maryland are in order. Again, boldface for the non-reported or under-reported items.

Maryland was not a Republican sweep. The governorship went to the purportedly anti-tax white guy, but Dems Peter Franchot and Brian Frosch won state Comptroller and Attorney General respectively. None of the Maryland Democrats in the U.S. House were even threatened with a close race, except John K. Delaney in District 6, who won anyway; Delaney’s opponent did get more votes on Election Day but not enough to overcome Delaney’s large advantage in the early voting.

It did not help Dems, or electoral participation, in Maryland that late Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee’s death on October 21 meant several days of non-stop articles in the paper about the Washington In Crowd, a week before the 2014 elections. The orgy of self-back-patting over Post glory days, while understandable, does not appeal to any population.

In good news from Maryland, and Prince George’s County, a series of bond issues passed, as did other referenda.

The only Prince George’s County referendum that lost was one extending term limits for County Council and County Executive from two terms to three consecutive terms. Looks as though Rushern Baker’s running unopposed for County Executive (except for write-ins) was not overwhelmingly popular. Baker hasn’t done enough in office; too busy playing keep-away. Try to ‘explore’ the feeble county web site.

Rushern Baker, endorsed by the Washington Post, and running unopposed for reelection, got a total 184,663 votes for County Executive. The total was somewhat more than for the Clerk of the Circuit Court and the Register of Wills got, also running unopposed. But less than the highly qualified and effective Angela Alsobrooks got (185,770) for State’s Attorney from P.G., also unopposed.

State Senator Victor Ramirez got 14, 363 for reelection as state senator for District 47–the lowest vote total in the state, for a winning senator, opposed or unopposed. Several losing candidates for state senate also got more votes.

Back to the national scene:

If Mark Begich loses in Alaska, then three Democratic incumbent senators will have lost, in predictable states–Begich; Mark Pryor in Arkansas; and Kay Hagan in North Carolina. Of the three, Hagan and Begich did far better than Pryor. Pryor’s wipe-out in Arkansas should make the hack pundits quit drooling over Bill Clinton (or Hillary Clinton) as campaigners and vote-getters.

Stumping and stumped in Arkansas

Hillary Clinton did not run for Senate from Arkansas. No one mentions the fact. In all the palaver about the Clintons as pols, hasn’t anyone noticed that they did not leave Arkansas in good shape for Democrats? Their team had thirty years in Arkansas. They did as little for the 99 percent as they could get away with doing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Rick Perry is finished” line being pushed by anti-immigrant PAC

Coming soon from more than one rightwing group near you, the following message. Self-explanatory.

 

ALIPAC’s “Perry Is Finished” Press Release Goes Viral Across America !

Rick Perry Is Finished
http://www.alipac.us/article6612.html
For National Release
Friday, September 23

______________________________

ALIPAC’s ‘Perry Is Finished’ Release Goes Viral Across America!
http://www.alipac.us/article6618.html
Sunday, September 25

Topic: Americans for Legal Immigration PAC

Friends of ALIPAC,

We want each of you to know that ALIPAC’s press release titled “Rick Perry Is Finished” has gone completely viral on the web and in the main stream media.

Despite intense and protracted efforts to silence us and prevent news agencies from quoting us, we have succeeded once again.

The false and defamatory attacks by numerous multimillion dollar organizations that support amnesty and the illegal immigration invasion of America, such as ADL, SPLC, NAACP, LULAC, MALDEF, and La Raza, have failed to stop ALIPAC’s ability to remain a notable national organization.

It is clear to all that ALIPAC is a national leader in the fight against illegal immigration and against Amnesty, and that we are influencing which candidates will or will not win races for Congress, US Senate, and the Presidency.

Our national press release and the materials contained in it have been picked up by major wire services Reuters and Associated Press as well as Fox News. Our position that Rick Perry just destroyed his chances due to his support for in-state tuition benefits for illegal aliens appears in hundreds of newspapers across America today…

Our “Rick Perry Is Finished” national press release has been read over 17,000 time on our website while Google shows us the term
“Rick Perry Is Finished” has quickly risen from a few mentions to over 4,700 websites now carrying all or part of ALIPAC’s release.

As Americans opened their Sunday papers, our web traffic at www.ALIPAC.us set new historic records with over 26,000 pages of our site viewed between 9-10am ET alone!

If you were to try to put a price tag on how much this amount of exposure would cost you in advertising to the American public, the tab would be in the millions.

But we have accomplished this with a minuscule budget because we are trying our best to speak for the 81% of Americans of all races, political parties, and walks of life that have said NO in the polls and surveys regarding taxpayer benefits for illegal aliens.

Thanks to you, millions of Americans are hearing ALIPAC’s message this weekend.

Many of you have heard the news that Perry lost the Florida GOP straw poll and Herman Cain won. Fox News reports that voting delegates in Florida cite Perry’s unpopular comments about illegal immigration as their reason for not voting for him.

Rick Perry has destroyed his own chances at winning the GOP Presidential nomination, and our job has been to inform and educate the media and public on this issue.

We are accomplishing that in a grand fashion but we have much more work to do.

This coming week, we have to make sure that more Americans find out about Rick Perry’s support for illegal aliens to assure his support levels continue to fall.

Then, we will have the historic example of Rick Perry’s political implosion as a warning to all traitorous candidates and lawmakers that would stand on the side of the illegal immigrant invasion of American against the rising American defenders.

We have placed many of the major news articles from Fox News, Associated Press, Texas Tribune, Dallas Morning News, and Reuters UK on our homepage at www.ALIPAC.us for you to review.

Special thanks to all of our allies out there that reported, posted, forwarded, and relayed our timely and direct release!

Special welcome to the numerous new supporters that have joined ALIPAC’s email alerts in the last 48 hours in response to our national press coverage and popularly supported positions.

More great things to come!

William Gheen and The ALIPAC Team
www.alipac.us

Some of the many articles quoting ALIPAC since Friday

Perry’s Stance on Illegal Immigration Threatens His Front-Runner Status
http://www.alipac.us/article-6617-thread-1-0.html
FOX News Network, LLC
Sunday, September 25


It’s a Perry Pile-On, Some Critical of His Illegal Immigration Views
http://www.alipac.us/article-6616-thread-1-0.html
The Texas Tribune
Saturday, September 24

Conservatives slam Perry’s support of education benefits for illegals
http://www.alipac.us/article-6615-thread-1-0.html
Saturday, September 24

Day after debate, Perry feels fallout from stand on illegal immigration
http://www.alipac.us/article-6614-thread-1-0.html
Saturday, September 24

Romney pounces on U.S. rival Perry on immigration
http://www.alipac.us/article-6613-thread-1-0.html
Friday, September 23

_________________________________________________________________________

Paid for by Americans for Legal Immigration AMERICANS FOR LEGAL IMMIGRATION PAC
Post Office Box 30966, Raleigh, NC 27622-0966
Tel: (919) 787-6009 Toll Free: (866) 703-0864
FEC ID: C00405878

Earthquake in Cheverly, Maryland

Earthquake in Cheverly, Maryland

August 23–About ten minutes or a quarter to 2:00 p.m., my whole house shook. So did my neighbors’. This was a real earthquake. My house is brick; everything shook from basement to roof; heavy things fell off the mantel and a bookcase. I am sitting in the room I use for a home office–like most of the rest of the house–and behind me some books and papers are strewn on the floor that were more or less where they belonged, a short time ago. A first for me individually, and don’t let anyone tell you this is a small event. A four-story house (counting basement) does not shake lightly.

Little damage in my home–I’m about to go out to case the neighborhood.

If only the climate-change deniers would stop denying. These bouts of extreme drought, followed by serious monsoon-type flooding, are not much better for the earth’s crust than they are for farmers, or for ordinary people who would like to have their yards, flowers and trees flourish.

In simplest terms, our planet’s atmosphere is eroding. We need to think about how to slow down that process, and then how to reverse it. We need our atmosphere to protect us from being whipsawed by what are nowadays termed ‘weather events’.

No word yet on how the rest of the Washington, D.C., suburbs have fared.

 

more later

Update 2:13 p.m.:

This was bigger than I thought–my next-door neighbor felt the quake in her vehicle, in New Carrollton. She thought something was wrong with her car–got out to check to see whether a tire was flat, when her daughter told her, “Mom, the whole car is shaking.”

Walking around outside to view the neighborhood, no visible signs of damage, though my next-door neighbor had some breakage when objects fell. No trees seem to be down, fortunately, and no cracks in nearby streets or sidewalks so far. Plenty of sirens, though.

 

Update 5:50 p.m.:

For the sake of contributing a little to science, I tried to input my local (home) data for the U.S. Geologic [Survey] here. No luck: after filling out the form, when I tried to submit it, the server basically froze up. Either this was another communications snafu like our cell phones–can’t use those in a real emergency, America–or the usgs website was overloaded by too many people trying the same thing at once.

Would seem to be typical of an emergency . . .

I guess the all-destructo GOPers will be happy at that one. After doing everything they can do to harm the legitimate operations of government, to prevent responsible governance, and to defame anyone who sees the whole thing differently, they can point to ‘gummint failing.’

Apology from Texas, humor from the Yellow Dog Dems

Apology from Texas, humor from Yellow Dog Dems

If I do laugh at any mortal thing, ’tis only that I may not weep . . .

 

Rick Perry in state office

 

A little humor helps. View video here:

Dear America

 

From the Great State, or more specifically The Democratic Party of Texas (n.b. not the ‘Democrat Party.’ Yellow Dogs tend to know the difference between a noun and an adjective.), comes this invitation:

“Dear Friend,

Last Saturday while Rick Perry was busy spinning his hyped record for his Tea Party friends in South Carolina, we launched MeetRickPerry.com to shine a spotlight on the Governor’s real record.
We would like to thank the thousands of you who shared the info-site with your family, friends, and colleagues. With your help, MeetRickPerry.com made national news, was viewed on six continents, in 67 countries, and in all 50 states.
As we move forward we will be featuring new and enlightening videos, additional content like RickiLeaks, as well as a detailing of Perry’s state agency scandals.
You can help us today by sharing our newest video, in which we encourage the citizens of the United States to follow the advice of the last Texas Governor who became President: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice…..you can’t get fooled again.” And as Molly Ivins said, “please pay attention this time.””

Rick Perry explains his previous reluctance to run

 

Perry wants constitutional amendments re gay marriage, abortion

 

Using Perry to winnow the GOP field?

If GOP strategists plan to use Rick Perry to thin the Republican field, they risk further disasters

 

It’s too early to be writing about the White House race for 2012, but here goes anyway–

 

The GOP candidates line up in Iowa

The GOP field is shaping up, against all odds, to be interesting. Here’s the game:

Ron Paul

First, only one candidate, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.), stands out. Of all the possible Republican candidates announced and unannounced, Paul is the only one who combines genuine personal character, a genuinely conservative belief system, and the ability to connect with audiences because he says valid things—as far as they go—clearly. He does not equivocate; he does not backpedal on past positions; he does not characterize himself in metaphors. Michele Bachmann has called herself a “voice” probably dozens of times in interviews since winning the Iowa straw poll Saturday. Paul does not do that kind of thing; he tends to be given too little air time to waste any part of it in indirectness or vagueness. Paul also does not attack other candidates in personal terms, and he does not blame others for his actions—again unlike Bachmann, who as an attorney does not hesitate to blame her specialization in tax law on her husband. Paul is also consistent. For these and whatever other reasons, he is also a big money getter, in small donations, and has strong organization and widespread grass-roots support.

 

From those wonderful people who brought you the Iraq war

All the other GOP candidates, regardless of flavor, are essentially corporate mouthpieces. Differences in degree do not become a difference in kind. Huntsman and Romney may look the part more than do Bachmann and Palin, but the core fiscal hooey remains intact: whether the messenger is Gingrich or Giuliani, Perry or Palin, Santorum or Satan, the message is rich-get-richer. They don’t put it that way, of course. But it’s always there.

Undoubtedly Paul’s intense fiscal conservatism, or conservative libertarianism, would conduce to the same end. But with Paul, the inevitable benefit to the wealthy and to corporations from refusing to raise taxes is a by-product of policy. It is not an end in itself as it is for all the others. Opposition to the war in Iraq, opposition to the ‘war on terror,’ opposition to the ‘war on drugs’–he is not Wall Street controlled, though the anti-tax stand works that way. He represents a threat.

Second, all the other GOPers split the not-Ron-Paul vote. And all the others are weaker candidates individually, and there are a lot of them—Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani maybe, Jon Huntsman, maybe Sarah Palin, Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum. Even with Tim Pawlenty’s unsurprising winnowing out, there are so many Republican candidates that nothing prevents the entry of yet more latecomers into the race.

 

So (as I was musing in notes last week, while away on family matters) we should see a lot of rightist commentators and pollsters, and a lot of corporate-media headline writers, working overtime to winnow the not-Ron-Paul field. The goal will be to shut out Ron Paul, and these are people who understand the logic of arithmetic–except when it comes to the benefit of issuing U.S. Treasury bonds at a lower interest rate, to pay off bonds with a higher rate. (The analogy is to refinancing your mortgage, and it would be illuminating to know which members of Congress have refinanced their own houses, but that information is not publicly available. Residences of congress members are exempted from financial disclosure.) The interim project will be to clear a path for someone they consider plausible as GOP nominee. That would be Romney, for most, or Perry, they fondly believe. Little do they know.

And who will be doing the path-clearing?–anyone who has been touting Tim Pawlenty for months as a likely starter. See examples here and here and here, among others.

 

As to tactics, the immediate tactics are simple. One, ignore or downplay Ron Paul. Paul’s near-win was a virtual tie with Bachmann in the Iowa straw poll, but that fact would be difficult to glean from the political reporting:

“A victory by Paul would have been a blow to Bachmann, who brought considerable momentum to the vote and needed the victory to validate her standing as the frontrunner in the state. It also would have hurt the credibility and future of the straw poll, a number of Republicans here said.

[emphasis added]

Two, anoint a very few candidates as instant ‘top tier.’ Already done. As of this week the putative top tier comprises Bachmann, Perry, and Romney.

And third, bring out the conservative troops—in politics and in the media–to ridicule and/or to disparate the cannon fodder. Paradoxically, Bachmann straddles both the top-tier category and the cannon-fodder category.

Space precludes a round-up of entertaining examples of the third tactic at this time. More later.

Update Aug. 16:

Validating any sensible person’s summation, Rick Perry came out swinging–in a way to prevent anyone’s thinking he is ready for prime time. Here is the putative future president, on the topic of the Federal Reserve:

““If this guy prints more money between now and the election, I dunno what y’all would do to him in Iowa but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas. Printing more money to play politics at this particular time in American history is almost treasonous in my opinion.”

You can put lipstick on a hog . . .

If Perry is actually going to run for the White House, rather than just being the pool stick to open the table for some media-anointed figure with more credibility, he will have to learn that he is addressing the nation, not a bunch of  half-drunks stumbling into the political remarks after a rib feast sponsored by the local savings & loan.

Should be a lesson, meantime, to all the pundits eager to attribute gravitas to any candidate with a proven ability to fund-raise while simultaneously being white and male.