All four of the men running for Governor appeared in Richmond yesterday:

RICHMOND, Dec. 2 — While three of the four men vying to be Virginia’s next governor talked up their lengthy résumés in state government Tuesday, newcomer Terry McAuliffe pitched himself as a Richmond outsider who could change government.

Sen. R. Creigh Deeds and Del. Brian J. Moran, both Democrats, and Attorney General Robert F. McDonnell, a Republican, all have years of experience on Capitol Square. McAuliffe, a former Democratic National Committee chairman, has lived in McLean for two decades but has had little involvement in state government or politics.

“I think there is an opportunity for someone who has not been in Richmond who can come in with some new ideas,” McAuliffe said.

The four likely candidates shared the stage for the first time at a debate Tuesday, unofficially launching a yearlong campaign for the state’s top job by answering questions from journalists in front of a packed room in downtown Richmond.

The informal debate centered more on personality and records and less on issues. Most of the attention landed on McAuliffe, a nationally known political celebrity who calls Bill and Hillary Clinton close friends and appears on Sunday morning talk shows, but whose views on key state issues are virtually unknown

There was, however, some substance to come out of the forum in the form of two Democratic candidates who displayed an appalling level of economic ignorance:

Two of three Democrats likely to vie for governor next year on Tuesday declined to rule out increasing taxes if the state’s economic problems deepen.

The Democratic trio and Atty. Gen. Bob McDonnell, who is unopposed for the GOP gubernatorial nomination, made their first joint appearance during a conference of journalists that cover state government.

“Everything should be on the table,” said Del. Brian Moran, D-Alexandria. His position was echoed by state Sen. Creigh Deeds, D-Bath.

Terry McAuliffe, a former chairman of the Democratic National Committee who is eying a gubernatorial bid, disagreed. “You don’t raise taxes in a down economy,” he said.

McDonnell also rejected taxes, saying lawmakers should cut spending. “The worst thing you can do during a recession is try to tax yourself to prosperity,” he said.

McDonnell and McAuliffe are right, of course, but one wonders if the Democrats who will select their candidate for Governor realize just how wrong Deeds and Moran are.

H/T: D.J. McGuire

Similar Posts:

• Terry McAuliffe Moves Closer To Running For Governor
• Race For 2009 Begins Far Too Early
• Terry McAuliffe For Governor ?
• Fox News: Terry McAuliffe To Run For Virginia Governor
• Virginia Democrats Choose Primary For `09 Governors Race

Yet another poll shows that most Americans oppose the idea of giving billions of dollars to the auto companies:

WASHINGTON (CNN) — A national poll suggests that six in 10 Americans oppose using taxpayer money to help the ailing major U.S. auto companies.

Sixty-one percent of those questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey out Wednesday are dead set against the federal government providing billions of dollars in assistance the the auto makers, with 36 percent favoring such a bailout.

The poll, conducted Monday and Tuesday, also indicates that a majority of Americans, 53 percent, don’t think government assistance for the auto makers will help the U.S. economy.

“Only 15 percent say that they would be immediately affected if the auto companies went bankrupt,” CNN Polling Director Keating Holland said. “Seven in 10 say that a bailout would be unfair to American taxpayers.”

In early November, polls indicated that nearly half the public supported federal assistance to the big auto makers when this issue first came before Congress.

But evidence in surveys from other organizations suggests that the poor performance by executives from GM, Ford and Chrysler at congressional hearings, and the admission that they had taken private jets to get there, resulted in a steep drop in support for government assistance to automakers.

Judged on the merits alone, the bailout proposal is a bad idea. The Detroit Big Three have seemingly ensured it’s failure through their own stupid arrogance.

Similar Posts:

• Rasmussen: Most Americans Oppose An Auto Bailout
• The Detroit Money Pit
• Voters Remain Overwhelmingly Against Bailout Plan
• Next In Line For A Bailout ? The Auto Industry
• Bob Barr On The Freddie/Fannie Bailout

John Cole sums up pretty much how I feel about this nonsense at this point:

While Andy McCarthy and Pam Atlas will probably keep the faith, the rest of you out there should probably just come to grips with the facts- Obama is a citizen, Obama won the election, Obama is picking his cabinet, and Obama will be the next President. There is not going to be some sort of magical discovery that proves he is not a citizen and the lunatics were right all along.

He won. He is an American. Get over it.

Somehow, I doubt that they will, even though the substance of their arguments are without any more for the reasons I discussed here, here, here, and here.

Update: Matt Lews at Townhall has similar thoughts:

I am of the opinion that anyone advancing the notion that Obama is not a citizen, and thus not qualified to become president, is actually undermining the conservative cause.  Sadly, this ridiculous “conspiracy theory” will only serve to undermine the legitimate attacks on Obama, by casting us all in the role of zealots.

All indications are that Obama was born in the state of Hawaii.  His mother was clearly an American citizen.  In many regards, Obama has more of a claim to be eligible for the presidency than did Barry Goldwater (born in the “Arizona territory”), George Romney (born in Mexico), or John McCain (born in the Panama Canal Zone)…

There are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize Obama, but dwelling on this ridiculous notion will only serve to undermine them.

Unfortunately, rational arguments such as those Lewis advances will be lost on the largely irrational tin-foil hat crowd that is advancing this nonsense.

Similar Posts:

• Federal Judge Tosses Obama Citizenship Lawsuit
• New York Times Raises Questions About McCain’s Eligibility
• Lawsuit Filed Challenging McCain’s Eligibility For The White House
• Quote Of The Day
• The Obama Citizenship Lawsuits: Much Ado About Nothing

As I have noted earlier, I have come (quite) late to Facebook. But today I began to see some of the benefits.

It is, ahem, a date of some significance in my life - the 30th anniversary of my 29th birthday. And largely because of Facebook, it’s been memorable - I heard from friends all over the country.

Not sure I’m going to become an obsessive Facebook reader. But this was pretty great.

"I will open the doors of government and ask you to be involved in your own democracy again."  ~President-elect Barack Obama

Do you think the U.S. should have a single-payer health care system? What are your ideas for getting us out of this recession? Want to give the new administration your ideas on poverty, education, energy, Iraq, or anything else?

Click on VOTE NOW to support single payer health care. Once on the site you can post comments on that issue or go to other issues that you care deeply about.

We finally have a President who will listen. Are you talking?

This is just what Washington, DC needs on the morning after Inauguration Day, a bunch of drunk out-of-towners wandering around while everyone tries to get to work:

In the mood to celebrate President-elect Barack Obama’s inauguration at a D.C. bar? For four days in January, they’ll be open 24 hours a day.

Under emergency legislation approved by the D.C. Council yesterday, any District establishment with a liquor license, including restaurants and nightclubs, will be allowed to serve alcohol until 5 a.m. — three hours later than usual — and serve food round-the-clock from Jan. 17 until the morning after Obama’s swearing-in on Jan. 20.

The bill, an idea of the Restaurant Association of Metropolitan Washington, was introduced by council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1), who represents the nightlife-heavy neighborhoods of Adams Morgan and Mount Pleasant.

The council approved the bill, 9 to 4, with Graham voting against it after the measure, which originally excluded nightclubs at Mayor Adrian M. Fenty’s request, was revised on the dais to include them. Phil Mendelson (D-At Large), Carol Schwartz (R-At Large) and Muriel Bowser (D-Ward 4) also voted against the bill.

With large crowds expected to come to Washington for the inauguration, the city must be able to meet their entertainment demands, Graham had said while introducing the measure. But Mendelson, chairman of the council’s Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary, countered, warning of increased crime, violence and drunken driving.

“I know a lot of people are excited about the inauguration, and I share that excitement,” Mendelson said. “But there are very few people I know of out partying at 5 in the morning or 4 in the morning who aren’t getting drunk. I think there are going to be consequences to that from a public safety and public order point of view. It’s not a good policy to be supporting.”

Cheri Jacobs at The Hill isn’t pleased at all:

In what will undoubtedly go down in history as the stupidest and most dangerous move by the D.C. City Council, bars in the nation’s capital will extend “last call” from 2 a.m. to 5 a.m. during the Obama inauguration.

Why now? Why for this president-elect? Likely the dollar signs in the eyes of owners of local watering holes have pushed the lawmakers over the edge into this area of irresponsibility. The likelihood of alcohol-related injuries and deaths will skyrocket, arrests for public drunkenness and disorderliness will increase, and the potential for tragedy to mar Barack Obama’s celebration will be heightened.

History, meanwhile, suggests that mixing alcohol with Presidential Inaugurations isn’t necessarily a good idea:

Andrew Jackson ran for president in 1828 as a rough war hero and a man of the people. And when he first took office in 1829, the inauguration festivities were appropriately unruly.

Enormous crowds gathered at the Capitol building as Jackson, surrounded by supporters, walked to the ceremony. There was a fear of people being injured in the crush, and a ship’s cable was stretched across the Capitol steps to keep the crowd back.

As the ceremony concluded, the exuberant crowd did rush Jackson, and he had to be protected by marshals and rushed into the safety of the Capitol building.

Later that day a public reception was held at the Executive Mansion (now called the White House), and the celebration got raucous. Jackson supporters, fueled by pails of liquor, packed rooms on the first floor of the mansion. Furniture was broken, china was smashed. Men with muddy boots stood on damask furniture, hoping to get a glimpse of the new president.

Jackson himself managed to escape and flee back to his temporary quarters at a Washington hotel. And when the crowd got so large that it was feared the Executive Mansion might actually collapse, liquor was supplied out on the lawn. The crowds rushed outside, relieving some of the stress on the mansion’s groaning floorboards.

Exuberant crowds. Alcohol. I’m picturing cars flipped over and set on fire, how about you ?

Similar Posts:

• Inauguration Madness Update
• The D.C. Voting Rights Crybabies Are Back
• Because You Need To Be Drunk To Vote For John McCain
• Is Washington Ready For The Biggest Inauguration Day In History
• And So It Begins

Full background on California's Proposition 8 is here.

Sadly, this skit could just as easily be about Virginia. It's outrageous that I could meet a woman on the street, fly off to Vegas for a wedding tomorrow, and be showered with all the rights and privileges of marriage, yet to our fair commonwealth, Arlington County Board Member Jay Fisette and his partner, who've been together since I was in grade school, may as well be strangers.

Side note - have to point out that Jack Black's biblical riff is somewhat ripped off from one of the great West Wing scenes of all time.

Apparently Christa doesn’t appreciate my glam rock monster ballad series.  I’ll go back to posting about politics.

Beautiful stuff:

H/T: QandO

Similar Posts:

• Welcome Back
• Get Your Post-Graduate Degree Here
• The Sad Aftermath Of Obama’s Victory
• Another Reason To Celebrate The Collapse Of Communism
• Saturday Night In Washington

The Loudoun Board of Supervisors exercised fiscal prudence this week in declining a marketing partnership with the Washington Redskins. In a time of revenue weakness for the county, the Board declined to spend up to $250,000 to partner with the Redskins on a Redskins Hall of Fame in Loudoun.

Supervisors voted 5 to 4 against the motion, which called for $100,000 of transient occupancy tax funds to be spent on a marketing partnership between the county and the Washington Redskins. Under the arrangement, the county would have been branded the "Corporate Home of the Washington Redskins" and its logo would have been posted on the team's Web site.
...
If they had approved today's motion, the supervisors would have decided at a later date whether to spend an additional $150,000 on the second phase of the deal, which would have included the development of a Redskins Hall of Fame in Loudoun. - LoudounExtra

The Washington Redskins, in spite of being the NFL's second most-valuable franchise, and in spite of the team's owner being a billionaire, came looking for a handout of tax dollars from a County millions in the red. In return for this local corporate welfare for a multibillion dollar organization, the Redskins would give Loudoun...mention on their website.

Of course, Supervisor Waters was all in favor of spending scarce taxpayer dollars to subsidize a corporate initiative for a profitable corporation owned by a billionaire.

"We're trying to generate tourism and additional travel to the county," said Supervisor Lori Waters (R-Broad Run), who voted in favor of the funding. "We have the Redskins here that have millions of fans." - LoudounExtra

The presence of the Redskins' training camp in Loudoun already generates travel and tourism, and the Redskins benefit from that continuing, regardless of whether the County subsidizes their plans or not. And let us all be clear, this hall of fame for the Redskins is going to get built whether the County contributes money or not - the Redskins want it and they have the money to do it.

There is an argument that the money for this comes from the Transient Occupancy Tax, which is paid by hotel guests and must be spent on tourism. Thus, why not spend it on the Redskins? To this argument, I submit two responses. First, and foremost, the Redskins should not be getting our tax dollars - even if those taxes are paid by visitors to our County. The Redskins make millions on their own and do not need our marketing help. Second, there are many other worthy reasons to visit and tour Loudoun that may benefit from promotion that do not already have a multimillion dollar budget the way that the Redskins do. How about promoting the Loudoun Farm Tours, or the Little League Softball Championship? Are they not worthy of consideration? For these organizations a little bit of money may go a long way in terms of promoting visitors to come to Loudoun. Given the economic situation, our County may benefit from enticing people who are already coming here for events to bring their family and friends, organically growing our tourism based on existing events and destinations.

Great job by the Board of Supervisors in saying "no" to an unnecessary corporate handout in a time of fiscal austerity. That's governing by action, not just words.

After he endorsed Barack Obama in the middle of a heated primary battle, it was inevitable that Bill Richardson would get offered a cabinet position. There were some rumors that he might be offered Secretary of State if Hillary declined, but now Richardson has been named as Obama’s Commerce Secretary:

CHICAGO — President-elect Barack Obama named New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson as commerce secretary on Wednesday, filling a top economic post in troubled times and placing a second former campaign rival in his new Cabinet.

Talking optimistically despite the recession, Obama also said, “We have everything we need to renew our economy, we have the ingenuity and technology, the skill and commitment _ we just need to put it to work.”

The president-elect called Richardson a leading “economic diplomat for America. During his time in state government and Congress, and in two tours of duty in the Cabinet, Bill has seen from just about every angle what makes our economy work and what keeps it from working better.”

Obama seemed in a lighthearted mood as he made the announcement. Asked about Richardson’s recent decision to shave his beard, Obama joked that he was “deeply disappointed.” He said he guessed Richardson decided to jettison the facial hair after his wife found it scratchy.

Richardson’s endorsement back in March caused quite the stir in the Clinton campaign. Before it was made, Hillary tried to convince Richardson that there was no way Obama could win the General Election.
After it was made, the endorsement drew some fairly heated comments from both Bill Clinton and James Carville, who both compared Richardson to Judas with Carville accusing Richardson of violating a loyalty that I thought only existed in the Corleone family.

I’m guessing that Bill and Hillary won’t be sitting near each other at the Cabinet table.

Similar Posts:

• Obama Talks To Bill Richardson About Secretary Of State
• Bill Richardson Endorses Obama
• Carville Compares Bill Richardson To Judas
• Carville On Richardson: I Meant It, And I’d Say It Again
• Bill Richardson Responds To James Carville

For what it's worth, former DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe earned good reviews from the Beltway guys over at Politico for his performance in Richmond on Tuesday. McAuliffe appeared with the other gubernatorial hopefuls during AP Day at the Capitol.

"McAuliffe came prepared -- both to combat criticism and to exhibit his command of Virginia facts and figures," writes Josh Kraushaar. "He easily rattled off statistics about how many hours Virginians spend stuck in traffic each year, how many poultry farmers work in the state and how many people are unemployed in one of its most financially distressed citys, Martinsville."

Read the full post.

As with most things government-related, the bailout process now involves a handy form you can print out and fill out on your own:

H/T: Mises Economic Blog

Similar Posts:

• Putting “Big Oil” In Perspective
• I Have No Idea What This Means
• The Paulson-Bernake Bailout And Moral Hazard
• The $ 8 Trillion Dollar Bailout
• Obama’s Plan For Detroit: A Pre-Packaged Bankruptcy ?

Speech is fourth in a series on future challenges
Leadership needed to protect farms and grow agricultural economy

HOT SPRINGS – House Democratic Caucus Chairman Brian Moran, a candidate for Governor, outlined his approach to agricultural policy in a speech today at the Virginia Farm Bureau’s annual convention. Moran highlighted his commitment to local agricultural production, agriculture research, global marketing of Virginia farm products, and energy-generating crops.

The speech was the fourth in a series of remarks in which Moran has outlined his experience, values and vision for the difficult challenges facing Virginia’s future. He has previously outlined his approaches to fiscal responsibility, environmental leadership and public safety.

“Virginia has the chance to lead the way toward a new energy future,” Moran said. “Biofuel crops are the equivalent of being able to grow fuel – to create a renewable resource that drives the 21st century economy in the same way that tobacco and other crops drove our economy in centuries past.”

Moran noted that Virginia’s agriculture and forestry industry is the single largest industry in Virginia, employing one out of every 10 Virginia workers and creating $79 billion in annual economic activity. “This is a success story that more Virginians need to know,” he said.

“We ought to be looking at ways to increase our opportunities to sell agriculture at home as well, with a better emphasis on buying local,” Moran said. “We’ve spent so much time figuring out how to get Virginia produce to market on the other side of the country that sometimes we forget that it’s easier to sell it on the other side of the county.”

The theme of this year’s conference is “Safe, Fresh and Locally Grown.”

Download the complete text of his remarks (pdf).

There’s a special deal (round trip including all taxes and fees) on from Kansas City ($450) or Chicago ($350) to San Jose, Costa Rica. It needs to be done today, however, because we think it’s probably a mistake and will be taken off the market overnight. It doesn’t include the normal $300 in fuel surcharges that normally accompany that flight. Kansas City is the city my customer for whom I got the deal was flying out of, but I can certainly try other cities as well. Call me at 888-950-3273 (before 5 PM CST) or my cell at 620-899-1022 or email me at hans at goldrule dot net before 12 midnight CST if you’re interested.Similar Posts:

• VirtualSwitch.com
• San Pedro Sula, Honduras for $215
• Drug Dealers Start Charging Fuel Surcharge
• Funny Customer Comments and The Dentist’s Drill
• Northwest Airlines

And now, the latest installment in our inadvertent and poorly planned new series: May We See Your Nixon Button, Please? In which loyal Extreme Mortman readers send in their favorite Nixon buttons from their personal button collection and write about them, while plugging something of their own. So far we’ve featured Lee Annis’ “Nixon’s The One” button from Dick Tuck, Al Mendelsohn’s “They Can’t Lick Our Dick” button, and Ken Rudin’s “The I In Nixon Stands For Integrity.” Here’s today’s offering.

DC-based Scott Orr send this in:

My Nixon button, let me show it to you.

I’m from a mixed marriage. My wife is a pretty girl who would have been for Nixon if she had been old enough. I’m neither pretty, nor do I like Dick. This is her button and she has had it since she was a very little pretty girl. I don’t know anything of its provenance, but the message seems clear: If you don’t like Dick, you’re not a pretty girl.

The Wall Street Journal’s Even Newmark takes a look at General Motors’ plea for $ 18 billion of your money:

[T]he restructuring plan comes up short on the most fundamental question. Will this company actually make money? Just look at the details — or what details are lacking.

GM says it plans to focus on only four brands. So why does the number of models only drop from 48 to 40?

GM has 6,600 dealers, which it says it will cut to 4,700 by 2012. Honda has 1,300 dealers. Even Ford has only 4,100 — which it will cut further.

And nowhere in the document does GM lay out, year by year, its own projected market share. This is perhaps the most critical part of any business plan. The kind of thing you learn in the first day of business school.

Turn to Exhibit B-1 — and you find something interesting. It is only in an appendix entry — and not stated explicitly. GM appears to have changed its market share assumption for 2009 GM U.S. volume from 20.6% a year ago to 22.5% today.

In this environment, it seems strange that GM is actually increasing its market share assumptions. And car business is all about volumes.

That points to the real flaw in the GM restructuring plan. The U.S. car industry has been a credit junkie that now has to go cold turkey.

In 2007, GMAC financed about half of GM’s retail car sales, many to customers with weak credit. Today GMAC can’t finance to customers with credit scores under 700. In fact, today GMAC funds only 6% of GM’s retail car sales. No wonder GM sales have fallen off a cliff.

Will that change over the next year?

Ask yourself how long it will take housing to hit a bottom and you’ll understand why the GM restructuring plan ain’t gonna cut it.

Oh, it will work in Washington this week. But by next year, the U.S. taxpayer will be left holding the bag.

To which Robert Farago at The Truth About Cars adds:

Once again. I’ll flag the fact that GM’s for-public-consumption rescue plan makes direct and specific reference of its strategy’s dependence on a federal bailout for GMAC. That’s GM’s once-captive soon-to-be-a-bank finance arm that wrote paper on just one to two percent of GM’s November new vehicle sales. And who owns the majority of GMAC these days? The same peope who own Chrysler. If you want to talk about enabling, here be dragons.

I doubt anyone in Congress will listen, but the arguments against a bailout seem even more apparent than they were two weeks ago.

Similar Posts:

• The Auto Industry Bailout: Just Say No
• Next Year’s Headlines Today, Part XI
• Are Ford, GM, and Chrysler Fading Dinosaurs ?
• Please Note That This Blog Is Now A Bank Holding Company
• It’s Time To Tell General Motors To Just File Chapter 11 Already