The President Is Going to Cut Down a Law or Two Tomorrow

"You know what would be the BEST, most constructive, reaction? For the House to pre-empt the president’s executive action by passing the comprehensive immigration reform that the Senate sent over to it." -Brad Warthen

Sure, I agree. We all like rational stuff. Even if the House doesn't like the current Senate bill, they can always amend it, or just pass their own. What are they waiting for?

Maybe they're waiting for the new Congress to be sworn in. Maybe they're waiting for Christmas. Either way, it doesn't matter why Congress is choosing not to act; that's entirely beside the point. If the President doesn't like the lack of immigration reform bills in the Congress, maybe his party should start winning some elections. Or maybe the President could have done something for the two years he had a super-majority in Congress.

But all of this talk about the President's action and the Congress' reaction also misses the point of this being bad precedent.

The President shouldn't do what he's about to do. There's no broad public support for it. It's against the specific will of the majority of the legislative branch. The legal basis is unsound. There's no national crisis at hand that cries out for drastic action. In fact, the President is actually creating a crisis with this defiant move. It's also not a permanent fix, either. It's theater. But it's theater that sets a horrible precedent of cutting down laws by Presidential order.

But you know...I don't put 100% of the blame on the President. I blame us. The entire Democratic party is thrilled at the idea of this executive action, and it is actively encouraging him to do this. A little less than half of the electorate is excusing the means because they like the end result. There's plenty of blame to go around. The President is going to announce that he's going to ignore some laws tomorrow, and it won't really register for much of the citizenry here in our young little republic.

At the end of the day, we have to have laws that mean things. If the law can just be altered (and non-enforcement is altering the law) then what is left? I know I use this clip all the time, but it's relevant once again.

You start cutting down a little bit of the law here, a little bit of the law there, and pretty soon, a cold wind is blowing, and the Devil will turn 'round on you. Where do you hide then?

Last Night's Election - The Devil's Own Day

Wave.

Nikki Haley cruised to a fairly easy victory last night, as Republicans swept pretty much every race there was, in both South Carolina and nationwide. Even the state of Maryland elected a Republican Governor. Maryland, y'all.

Anyway, we'll see how things go for the next two years. My only admonition to Republicans in the Senate is this: All glory is fleeting. Remember the hubris of the Democrats, who basically thought the were going to have a permanent majority?

Well guess what, y'all. No majority is ever permanent. Get things done, and you'll be rewarded. Act like knuckle-heads, and you'll be out on your ear next time. Being marginally better than the Democrats isn't something to get all that excited about. There's always another battle to be fought.

I'm reminded of the exchange between Grant and Sherman at Shiloh. After the first day of battle, the Confederates had taken the Federal position and forced a retreat of the Federals under Grant and Sherman. The Federals had been driven from the field and looked like they would be finished off the following morning.

When Sherman arrived at Grant's headquarters later that evening, he found the general–broken sword and all– chewing on a soggy cigar in the rain, which had begun soaking the battlefield.

'Well, Grant' Sherman said to his friend, 'We've had the devil's own day, haven't we?'

'Yes,' replied Grant, 'lick 'em tomorrow, though.'

The GOP could easily be licked next time.

Election Day: 2014 - You can't vote for me; I'm not on the ballot.

Well, today's the day. Although there aren't really any competitive races in South Carolina, it will be interesting to see what happens around the country. I'll certainly be interested to see how the dynamics of our national politics changes if the entire Congress becomes controlled by the GOP.

I guess the last time we had the Congress controlled by one party and the White House controlled by another was during George W. Bush's presidency. Man, doesn't that seem like a long time ago?

Voting was easy this morning. No delays, no broken machines. I had actually looked at a sample ballot last night, so I knew what to expect. (Yeah, that's kind of a dork move, isn't it?) And once again, I was the youngest person in my polling place again. I'm sure that will change eventually.

Also, there were lots of people running unopposed. What's up with that?

In any event, go vote if you are moderately informed about current events and the news.

Putin Knows How to Get People to the Polls

Every election here in the US, whether it's local, state, or national, I always hear the same thing. It's going to come down to voter turnout. So the politicians hire strategists like Karl Rove and David Axelrod to try and come up with a plan that gets their voters mobilized, energized, and out to actually vote.

Vladimir Putin has surpassed everyone here in the US in that regard.

With about half of the precincts reporting, 95.5% of the people of Crimea have voted to be join Russia. We here at the Permanent Press Decision Desk™ can now officially call this election for Russia.

Our sources on the ground in Crimea say that Putin really mobilized his base of ethnic Russians. Alsothe all important block of swing voters comprised of soccer moms and people who didn't want to be shot broke for Russia at the last moment.

Vladimir Putin's Campaign Staff

 In his post-election victory speech, Putin praised his uniformed staff for their efforts leading up to this crucial election.

"I thought about sending my staff door-to-door before the election to let people know our message, but I figured that I would just let all the voters know that we would be going door-to-door after the election if it didn't go our way. We saved a lot of time and energy with this strategy".

In an exit poll survey, 99% of the people who ended up voting for annexation to Russia cited "Not wanting to face the business end of an AK-47" as their main motivating factor.

In a related note, several voters praised the efficiency of the voting system, as compared to the Richland County Elections Board in Columbia, South Carolina. One voter in Crimiea said "Hey, at least we didn't have to stand in line for three hours to vote like those poor people in Richland County. Our ballots were actually pre-marked for us. We only  wait in long lines when we want to buy bread."

Over a Thousand Absentee Ballots Were Not Counted in Richland County

Government is just another name for things that we do together massive failure.

Remember the Richland County election debacle in the general election last year? It wasn't that long ago. It was the most recent election we just previously had. You know, last time.

So how did this election go? Oh, swimmingly, except for the fact that over a thousand absentee ballots weren't counted. But that's not the best part.

The best part is that the person most responsible for the 2012 fiasco, Lillian McBride, wasn't fired back then for being incompetent. She was reassigned. Guess where she was reassigned to for this election...

Wait for it....

She was in charge of counting absentee ballots. Excuse me for a moment.

This is insane, y'all. The person who screwed the pooch last time wasn't fired. She was simply transferred to an easier job. Then she managed to immediately screw the pooch on her first assignment. You would think that a normal person who makes a catastrophic mistake would be kind of on their toes the next time they get any assignment. Not Ms. McBride. Apparently, she cannot coordinate her department to complete the task of tallying an increasing sequence of positive integers.

It's not really that hard. 1, 2, 3.... Anyone seeing a pattern emerging? The numbers increase by one each time. All she has to do is count little pieces of paper. I know 6 year old children who can do this. However, Richland County government cannot seem to perform this basic task in elections.

Is this really the best we can do? How many chances should Ms. McBride be given? Where else can we transfer her? If she cannot count pieces of paper, what assignments can she handle?

The degree of sheer incompetence here is staggering.

Election Day News Roundup

Today is an election day here in Columbia. In my neighborhood/district, I get to choose between Todd Walter and Leona Plaugh. Both of them reflect the majority of my views, so that's not too big of a deal.

As for the mayoral race, I'm not really fired up about either candidate. However, when in doubt, vote for the person who you think will spend your money like it was their own.

Around Columbia and South Carolina, here are the other headlines I'm seeing:

1. Former Gamecock Kenny Miles was shot in what appears to be a robbery. Update: Apparently, it's not a robbery.

2. Some SC State Senators are working on a plan to "nullify" Obamacare. Look, I don't like the ACA anymore than anyone else, but let's knock it off with the "nullification" stuff. It's just silly.

3. On the same note, the ACA has even more fun waiting for us. Insurance cancellation for millions is just the start. The real fun will be when the doctor shortage hits. I feel really bad for the Canadians. Where are they going to go, now?

4. To end on a positive note, could Mike Davis be a 2014 Heisman hopeful? I think so.

SCOTUS Strikes Down Portion of the VRA

SCOTUS has just declared part of the VRA unconstitutional. Full text of the opinion is here (PDF). Here's the meat of the decision (in my humble opinion):

The Fifteenth Amendment commands that the right to vote shall not be denied or abridged on account of race or color, and it gives Congress the power to enforce that command. The Amendment is not designed to punish for the past; its purpose is to ensure a better future. See Rice v. Cayetano, 528 U. S. 495, 512 (2000) (“Consistent with the design of the Constitution, the [Fifteenth] Amendment is cast in fundamental terms, terms transcending the particular controversy which was the immediate impetus for its enactment.”). To serve that purpose, Congress—if it is to divide the States—must identify those jurisdictions to be singled out on a basis that makes sense in light of current conditions. It cannot rely simply on the past. We made that clear in Northwest Austin, and we make it clear again today.

Striking down an Act of Congress “is the gravest and most delicate duty that this Court is called on to perform.” Blodgett v. Holden, 275 U. S. 142, 148 (1927) (Holmes, J., concurring). We do not do so lightly. That is why, in 2009, we took care to avoid ruling on the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act when asked to do so, and instead resolved the case then before us on statutory grounds. But in issuing that decision, we expressed our broader concerns about the constitutionality of the Act. Congress could have updated the coverage formula at that time, but did not do so. Its failure to act leaves us today with no choice but to declare §4(b) unconstitutional. The formula in that section can no longer be used as a basis for subjecting jurisdictions to preclearance.

Just counting noses, Chief Justice Roberts, wrote this opinion, joined by Thomas, Alito, Scalia, and Kennedy. Justice Ginsburg wrote a dissent, which was joined by Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan. So Kennedy is the swing vote yet again. History doesn't always repeat itself, but I'm told that it rhymes.

I think this means that until Congress updates the coverage formula, the preclearance requirement is void. Accordingly, if Congress wants to have a functioning VRA, they're going to have to update their numbers. Don't hold your breath for that to happen.

On a practical level, if you are a state that would be subject to the preclearance requirement of the VRA (like South Carolina) now would be the time to pass laws about voting - you don't have to ask permission from the Federal government. For instance, SC could have waited a little bit on the Voter ID law, and we wouldn't have had to deal with the feds poking their nose into it.

SC Supreme Court Race for Chief Justice

Chief Justice Jean Toal will have some competition for the top judicial post in South Carolina. The State newspaper is reporting that Associate Justice Costa Pleicones will toss his hat in the ring and run against Justice Toal.

I don't really have a dog in the race, since I'm just a humble little lawyer around these parts. I had heard that the Chief Justice was considering not running again, so I guess you can't believe everything you hear.  It will be interesting to see how this plays out, though.

Mark Sanford: Straight From the Bottle

Mark Sanford has won the election for the South Carolina's First Congressional district, and is heading to the United States House of Representatives. I can sum up my thoughts with both a .gif and with words. First, my reaction to Mark Sanford being elected last night can best be summed up by Julia Ormond:

Yeah, straight from the bottle. No need to waste any taxpayer money on a glass, baby. Just open 'er up, and take a swig. The fact that the Charleston area sent Mark Sanford to the United States House of Representatives illustrates several things.

As an initial matter, Sanford should not have been the candidate. He won by a comfortable margin, but in the last few days before the election this race was starting to look like the GOP's failure to make an easy layup. This district is Red, Red, Red. The GOP could have run a Labrador Puppy, and as long as it had an "R" by it's name, the puppy would have been the favorite.

Second, and as a corollary, it shows that the people of this district would rather send and admitted adulterer to Congress than a Democrat. Think about that for a second. The people of South Carolina, who are always portrayed as socially conservative and "puritanical" basically took a look at a deeply flawed man who went AWOL on the job to have an affair...and they decided to go with him rather than with a Democratic candidate. Basically, Ms. Colbert-Busch's political views were more distasteful than Sanford's personal flaws.

In winning you learn no lessons. In losing, you learn. The GOP won, so they think everything is fine. But what conclusions should the Democratic party draw from this election?

There's an old rule that William F. Buckley put forward back in the day: Support the most conservative candidate who is electable. The Democrats would do well to heed this rule. Not every state is the same. Not every district in a single state is the same. If the Democrats really wanted to win this seat, they should have found the most liberal candidate who was electable. As the results show, Ms. Colbert-Busch was not electable. Her accepting large donations from labor unions was a self-inflicted wound that cost her lots of votes in a district that just obtained a new Boeing plant despite the efforts of unions.

She tried to put a conservative spin on every liberal position. She said she was proud to live in a right-to-work state, but she took money from labor unions, while Boeing donated to Sanford. You can talk all you want, but the money talks. At the end of the day, people knew that Colbert-Busch was hiding her true liberal views, and Sanford was just being himself. The voters chose to go with the unfaithful, lying guy who was honest about his political views, rather than go with someone who they distrusted on the issues.

Overall, the race doesn't have broad implications. South Carolina is a deeply conservative state. Yeah, we already knew that, thanks. Folks from SC have a history of sending flawed people to Congress.

I personally think that Sanford is too flaky for the job. Going AWOL while Governor is unacceptable and (in my opinion) unforgivable. The only silver lining is that he isn't seeking executive office. He won't be "in charge" of anything. I wouldn't put him in charge of organizing a bake sale.

People will certainly make fun of South Carolina being a "punchline" for sending such a scandal-ridden person back to public office. But don't think for a second that South Carolina is different that other places. Illinois sent Jesse Jackson, Jr. to Congress while he was being treated for bi-polar disorder and plagued with scandals. New York sent Charles Rangel back to Congress even after he was basically exposed as a long-time tax cheat and formally censured. Heck, Massachusetts kept sending Ted Kennedy back to the Senate, and he killed a girl. To date, I am not aware of anyone that Sanford has killed.

So before all y'all in other parts of the country get on your high horse to judge South Carolina, look in the mirror. He won't be the most scandalous guy to make it to Congress. (I know, that isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.)

US Diplomat Calls Obama Administration Liars

Remember Benghazi? Yeah, remember that the Obama Administration/The State Department told all of us  that "No one was told to stand down"? Remember this from Obama?

“I can tell you as I have said over the last couple of months since this happened, that the minute I found out this was going on, I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. Number two, we’re going to investigate exactly what happened to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice.”

Yeah, about that.

Hicks is expected to be the first ground-level eyewitness to speak publicly in the nearly eight months since the terrorist attacks that killed Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans. When Stevens went missing, Hicks became the Chief of Mission for the U.S. in Libya.

According to excerpts released Monday, Hicks told investigators that SOCAFRICA commander Lt. Col. Gibson and his team were on their way to board a C-130 from Tripoli for Benghazi prior to an attack on a second U.S. compound "when [Col. Gibson] got a phone call from SOCAFRICA which said, 'you can't go now, you don't have the authority to go now.' And so they missed the flight ... They were told not to board the flight, so they missed it."

So let's remember what we're dealing with on a basic level:

1. We have an premeditated attack on US people in Libya on 9/11/12.
2. There were warnings that this was going to happen.
3. The intelligence was changed when it was presented to the public to blame a guy who made a YouTube video, which created a spontaneous (and thereby unpredictable attack) so as to fend off criticism that mistakes were made.
4. The guy they arrested in connection with the cover story is still in jail.

Here's the thing. The Benghazi scandal isn't the botched intelligence or the failure to go rescue the guys for whatever reason. That's just run-of-the-mill incompetence. It happens. The real scandal is railroading a guy to jail for political gain in the run-up to an election. That's the real scandal. And it worked. Don't forget about how much Obama was running on the "I'm the guy who kept you safe" meme.

 

McBride Remains in Office - Crum Resigns

It's been over a month since the Richland County election fiasco, and the Richland County Elections Director, Lillian McBride, remains in office. Apparently, this has upset the Chairman of the Richland County Election Board, Elizabeth Crum to the extent that she has resigned.

Crum, an attorney, said that restoring voter trust in the combined Elections & Voter Registration Office would require a new director. She announced her views following a two-hour, closed-door session of the five-member board that oversees McBride’s office. The private discussion was to get legal advice and consider a personnel matter. Afterward, the board returned to public session, and Crum announced it [the Richland County Election Commission] had taken no action.

The Richland County Election Commission has decided to do absolutely nothing substantive after having over a month to think about things. This obviously didn't sit well with Chairman Crum, who resigned immediately following the meeting on Monday.

Here's what the Commission did suggest:

•  To push for a statewide early voting law to minimize long lines
•  To support a law that would allow counties of 100,000 people or more to open satellite locations
•  To ask the other 45 county election boards to lobby their delegations for the same laws.

Are you  kidding me? The Commission recommended "early voting" as a solution? Hey voters. We can't actually figure out how to get enough machines available to let all y'all vote on the same day, so if some of y'all could vote early, that would be great....m'kay? Thanks.

I don't really understand why we need early voting anyway. You can either vote absentee or can you vote on election day. What's the deal?

I also love the second suggestion. Hey, let's open more voting locations! Idiots. The locations that we currently have don't have enough voting machines! The problem isn't that we don't have enough places to go. We need more functional voting machines in the places we currently have.

The third suggestion baffles me. What right does Richland County have to demand that other counties do anything? As far as I can tell, the other counties actually have their ducks in a row and the voting is fine. This seems to me like the kid who can't get his homework done demanding that the prepared students come to the extra study-hall with him. If I were in charge of another County's election board, I'd tell Richland County to go pound sand.

ead more here: http://www.thestate.com/2012/12/17/2559906/no-final-report-until-january.html#storylink=cpy

So here's where we stand: The person who was actually responsible for the fiasco continues to serve, while the one Commissioner with enough guts to call for some accountability is out-voted, then resigns in disgust. Meanwhile, the Commission comes up with nonsensical ideas that won't solve the problem.

As long as corrupt and incompetent people are elected, this is what you're going to get.

Jim DeMint's Resignation

First of all, I don’t think Jim DeMint’s resignation from the Senate to go to the Heritage Foundation is some kind of pre-positioning for 2016. That’s not how you become President, and I think he knows that. If you think this is pre-positioning for a Presidential run, you need to stop doing drugs.

We all know that DeMint isn’t exactly a “team player”. He’s kind of the lone voice of really hard conservatism in the Senate, and he’s not really getting much done. Most of DeMint’s power was stop other things from getting done, and that’s got to be frustrating for him. Honestly, he hasn’t really been that effective at getting other hard-conservative/tea party folks elected, so it’s not like he’s been practically productive.

I think this is DeMint cashing in his chips when he can, as I’m sure the Heritage Foundation will probably pay him pretty well. Other than that, the main intrigue is how the seat goes. Governor Haley gets to nominate someone, and then they’ll have to have a special election in 2014 (I think). If that’s the case, then both seats in the US Senate from South Carolina will be up in 2014.

In any event, the Democrats will still control the Senate, and DeMint will still be a voice of hard-conservatism.

Ultimately, I kind of rate this as kind of a non-event. The only thing that is kind of a story here is someone walking away from a US Senate seat. He probably could have kept that seat as long as he wanted. You kind of have to respect that on a certain level.

Richland County Election Mess

WE'RE IN THE BEST OF HANDS. The person in charge apologizes, then blames other people, and still can't give a straight answer for why the problems occurred. Oh, and the person in charge can't be immediately fired because she doesn't actually have a boss. How convenient.

Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown.

2012 Electoral Map; My Prediction

I've looked at the polls and I've decided that I'm going to go with my gut on a few picks. First I think that that Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia go red. Florida is the state that Romney really needs, and he'll get it earlier in the night than most people think. North Carolina is red. 2008 was sooooo 2008. It's red again this year, along with Virginia.

New Hampshire goes red because Romney is in solid shape there. I wouldn't have expected this a month ago, but I'm cautiously optimistic for New Hampshire. Colorado goes red, because it's razor thin in the polling, and it's been moving Romney's way in the last month.

So, to count electoral votes at this point, I've got Romney 261, Obama 223. The remaining states are Iowa, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Since Romney needs 9, Iowa becomes irrelevant.

Romney wins one of the remaining three, or Obama wins all three, and it's game over. I know that lots of really optimistic GOP folks are saying Pennsylvania is going red this year, but I'm not buying. PA is blue. Just to go for the unexpected, I'm going to say that Obama gets Ohio and Romney pulls a surprise and takes the Badger state to go over the top.

Final Score: Romney 271; Obama 267.

Here's my map. Am I crazy? Or crazy like a fox?

Sunday Reading: WWII Posters and the Brooklyn Bridge

If you've seen my Twitter icon, it references this WWII propaganda poster that the British used. I decided to go with it while reading Churchill's epic memoirs of WWII. Seriously, it's a lot of reading, but it's good (if you like that sort of thing).

I've put my own little spin on it, but here's an interesting read on some of the other related posters and how the same ethos is applicable today.

On a related note, I've started an old book (new to me). It's David McCullough's "The Great Bridge". It's the story of the construction of the Brooklyn Bridge, which I thought was somewhat topical, given recent events. I'm still not through with Churchill's memoirs, but I'll double-fist it for awhile.

Post Debate Thoughts

Don't worry, unlike some celebrities, there are no curse words here. (I used all mine up last Saturday anyway.) The debates were pretty interesting when viewed in the context of each other. The final debate was most interesting as to what the candidates thought about the state of the race.

First a little recap. In the first debate, Romney came out hard, attacking, playing the prosecutor. At the same time, Obama thought he could just show up, recite his stump speech and win. Alas, it was not to be.

The first debate showed two things. One, Romney wasn't the evil guy that all the attack ads made him out to be. He actually had a plan for the future, and he could explain it. Two, Obama just didn't have the fire that he did four years ago. He was just "checking the box" of the debate, and his plan is to continue with "investing" in roads, bridges, and the same stuff he's been saying for four years. Romney ate his lunch, and everyone knew it. Well, almost everyone.

I think that Obama was playing a prevent defense too early. He knew he had a good lead in some important swing states, and he was simply going to show up, recite his stump speech, not make any major errors, and keep the election on it's current trajectory. As John Madden once said, "All a prevent defense does is prevent you from winning." That's exactly what happened. Romney scored touchdowns, and Obama wasn't even trying to play offense.

The second debate was what everyone thought the first debate was going to be. Both candidates came out of the gate hard, challenged each other, and at one point, I actually thought they were going to start hitting each other with the cordless microphones. Obama to his credit, responded well, showing that he still wanted the job. The energy debate centered on who was more in favor of drilling, which must have driven the environmentalists insane. In any event, basically a tie. However, the damage had been done in the first debate. The people who tuned in for the first debate had formed their impression. Relevant quote for this debate: "You never get a second chance to make a first impression."

The final debate was on foreign policy. Or at least it was supposed to be. At a few points in the debate, both candidates decided that they were just going to talk about domestic policy. Bob Sheiffer decided that he wasn't going to interrupt and get them back on the topic of foreign policy (or maybe he fell asleep) and the candidates talked about domestic policy for at least 10 minutes each in a 90 minute debate. Oh well, when the economy and domestic policy is as important as it is this election cycle, there aren't many votes to be had going into detail about foreign policy. Just kill the bad guys, which both candidates are in favor of.

Very differently than before, though, Romney came across as not the prosecutor, but the calm guy who was reasonable. He wasn't going to be the "Cowboy" President, unlike that last Republican in the White House. Romney agreed with Obama more in 90 minutes than he did in the entire campaign. Romney didn't attack Obama when given chances. On the contrary, Obama attacked Romney. All I can take away from this is that Obama thought he was behind (which he is) and Romney thought he was ahead (which he is). It was just the flip side of the first debate. The question is, does Romney's prevent defense work at this point, or does the Romney momentum fade too soon?

Ultimately: Most people voted for Obama last time. Why? Remember where we were four years ago? The outgoing Republican incumbent was toxic, and Obama was such a great story. It was a great combination that created a tidal wave of support. The landscape today couldn't be more different. The economy has been mired in the doldrums for four years, and the inspirational candidate from four years ago isn't here. This version of Obama is petty and condescending.

People desperately want the economy to get better, and they have a binary choice: Government continues to try and solve the problem, or government gets out of the way. We'll know in a few weeks. It's going to get more intense before then, so brace yourself - especially if you live in a swing state.

Facts Matter

Here's an e-mail exchange I had with a dear friend of mine today. He lives up North, but he can tie a bow tie.

Friend: Oh, Mitt,why are you sinking yourself with your stupid comments?

Me: It’s the facts – not the daily news cycles that determine elections.

Friend: HAHA, do you really believe that?

I thought about that. Do I really believe that? Am I being naive? There has been so much about "fact-checking" in this election. I really hadn't even heard of a "fact check" style of article until this election season. Now, fact-checkers are ubiquitous. After every major debate, speech, or campaign commercial, there are legions of fact checkers out there to tell us what is a fact and what is not. There are even fact-checkers for the fact checkers. But, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes, right?

So...do facts even matter? Is all this fact-checking an exercise in futility? Do I really believe that people will look at "Facts" when they vote this year? I guess the answer is: I hope so.

Here's what I think...

Baddourah Wins Columbia City Council Seat

Moe.

I'm actually a bit surprised that Moe Baddourah overcame all of the late endorsements for Coble. I think this is a sign that people are looking for some very pro-business ideas to come out of city council. Also, it's hard to overcome being a law student running for City Council. No tears for Coble though. He's got a great legal career in front of him, and I'd bet you a nickel this won't be the last time you see him run for elected office.

Now, if I can only convince him that Columbia isn't built for a gold-plated bus system.

Jenny Isgett and Robert Bolchoz Signs Vandalized

Ok, people...it's time for a little pow-wow.

The Columbia City Council elections are coming up soon, so the little yard signs are popping up like mushrooms after a spring rain. That's just part of life. Politicians have put up signs since the beginning of time. I'm not 100% sure about this, but my guess is that the Roman Senators had little signs chiseled out of marble.

My law office is on Devine Street, so apparently, it's prime real estate for this little election. Most of the folks running for City Council asked to put signs in my office's front yard, and (against our natural inclination to not get involved) we said "Sure...we're not supporting anyone in particular, but if you want to put a little yard sign up, that's fine with us."

So, someone came by and put a few signs up. No big deal, right? I mean, who really cares about the City Council election other than the group of hard-core politicos? When I asked people about the signs, they didn't know anything about the election, or that there was even an election at all.

However, I know that some people take this all very seriously, and that's fine. In any event, there's no need to get destructive. As I was looking out my office's front window this morning over some coffee, I noticed this:

and this....

By way of background, this isn't the first time that signs in front of our office have been knocked down. When it happened the first time, I just chalked it up to an isolated incident. This was the second time.

If you look closely at the Isgett sign, you can tell that it is held in by wooden stakes. Those stakes were driven about two feet into the grass. There's no way it came out other than by someone affirmatively going up to and and really pushing hard to tear it up. You can tell it took the grass and soil up. The Bolchoz sign was pulled up, and was moved about fifteen feet.

I really don't care who ends up on  City Council that much. It's not really that big of a deal. I have strong feeling about the penny sales tax, on general principle, but it's not worth pulling up signs. Nothing is. It's just a sign.

Look people: I remember that this kind of stuff happened when someone would run for student class president in fifth grade. But seriously, we're all adults now - grow up.

Tim Tebow and Tom Brady Register to Vote in Minnesota

ID? We don't need a Voter ID law. That's so stupid and racist. There's no way that voter fraud could actually exist.

Well...maybe there's a small chance it could exist. You'd have to get past all sorts of levels of scrutiny and checks. You'd have to be a diabolical mastermind...or maybe just fill out some forms.

[H/T Insty]