THE LATEST CORN AND MINITER SHOW IS UP!

FOLLOWING THE Congressional money trail.

IN THE MAIL: Naftali Bendavid’s The Thumpin’: How Rahm Emanuel and the Democrats Learned to Be Ruthless and Ended the Republican Revolution. The reader reviews are certainly strong, but I don’t think it was Democratic ruthlessness, so much as Republican cluelessness, that ended the GOP majority.

SILENCE ON TORTURE: Silence is complicity, you know.

I’VE NOTED REPEATEDLY that gas prices don’t seem to be high enough to affect people’s behavior. Apparently they’d have to increase a lot more to do that:

In 1962 — a year writ large in the popular imagination as the quintessential year of muscle cars and cheap gasoline thanks to the movie American Graffiti — gasoline prices averaged 31 cents per gallon. When we factor changes in disposable income, today’s gas would have to cost $4.48 to be a comparable burden.

The public likewise thinks of 1972 as the last year of energy innocence prior to the rise of OPEC and the onset of shortage. Fuel prices in 1972 averaged 36 cents per gallon, a hefty $2.77 per gallon in today’s terms. While still high, this price is not all that different than the prices we were paying earlier in the year.

No wonder people are still driving fast and often.

WELL, THIS INSPIRES CONFIDENCE:

The Government Accountability Office, the federal government’s watchdog agency, Thursday released a report critical of the FBI’s internal network, asserting it lacks security controls adequate to thwart an insider attack. . . . Among its other findings, the GAO said the FBI did not adequately “identify and authenticate users to prevent unauthorized access.” The GAO report also criticized FBI network security in other regards, saying that there was a lack of encryption to protect sensitive data and patch management wasn’t being done in a timely manner.

Jeez.

ALI ETERAZ LOOKS AT U.S. Muslims and suicide bombings.

IN THE D.C. EXAMINER, A LOOK AT THE MEDIA WAR. Some interesting data. Read the whole thing.

ROGER SIMON (the other one) rains skepticism on the prospect of a Bloomberg Presidency:

I once worked for Bloomberg News, which is owned by Bloomberg, and had one off-the-record group dinner with him. He was funny, charming, bright and personable. But I think he might need a little bit more than that in order to become president.

Like a reason for people to vote for him. And a way of winning.

He’s too nannyish for me.

A REPORT ON THE BLOOMBERG GUN GIVEAWAY.

POLITICS IN GEORGIA: “Oh, and to be fair, it’s not just Rudy. Thompson’s possible legislative support in Georgia blows away what Romney and McCain have there, too.”

STILL SIMMERING IN CHINA: ” Residents of a riot-hit area of southern China warned Friday of renewed violence if authorities resume a brutal campaign to enforce family-planning rules. Tension remains high in the Guangxi region, nearly a week after thousands clashed with police over an official campaign that residents say included forced abortions, property destruction and crippling fines aimed at violators of the so-called ‘one-child policy.'”

WOULD RONALD REAGAN BE “PRO-AMNESTY” ON IMMIGRATION? “Reagan’s positive attitude towards immigration was not just an isolated issue position, but was integrally linked to his generally optimistic and open vision of America. I would add that it also drew on his understanding that America is not a zero-sum game between immigrants and natives – just as he also recognized that it is not a zero-sum game between the rich and the poor.”

Both understandings are correct. However, I think that much of today’s immigration anger is really about a feeling that voters have been betrayed by the political elites, rather than about immigrants themselves.

FIGHTING GLOBAL WARMING in Marin County.

FOR IT BEFORE THEY WERE AGAINST IT BEFORE THEY VOTED FOR IT: Jules Crittenden looks at last night’s war vote and finds widespread unhappiness on the antiwar side.

Meanwhile Don Surber notes that the war funding passed by a bigger margin than the war itself. But: “Clinton and Obama were among the 14 no votes. Clinton voted to send the troops in. Now she votes not to fund them. Presidential. NOT!”

THE BIG TROUBLE WITH IMMIGRATION: The shabby way that people who want to come here legally are treated. Here’s a post on that from a while back.

ANOTHER EMAIL ON ANBAR, from a Marine reservist I know who’s en route back to Iraq: “I’m typing this while sitting on the tarmac in Memphis, waiting for a flight to Camp Lejeune. Every NCO in my platoon is a veteran and most are here voluntarily. And we’re reservists.”

MORE NON-REFORM IN CONGRESS:

Powerful Democratic chairmen and subcommittee chairmen have relied on lobbyists to raise money during the first three months of this year, according to recent fundraising reports, which cast light on the strong opposition to lobbying reform legislation scheduled to reach the floor today.

Conservative Democrats in the Blue Dog Coalition have been particularly leery of legislation that would require lobbyists to reveal in public reports the total amount of contributions they raise or “bundle” for lawmakers. Many Democrats voiced concerns at a closed-door caucus meeting on the lobbying reform bill last week. . . . It appears many Democrats — and Republicans, for that matter — would prefer that the public not know how much fundraising help lobbyists provide.

There seems to be a lot they’d rather not have the public know.

ENVIRONMENTAL HYPOCRISY UPDATE: Okay, we’ve heard a lot about the greenhouse effect, etc., but I’m reading Wendy Williams and Robert Whitcomb’s Cape Wind: Money, Celebrity, Class, Politics, and the Battle for Our Energy Future on Nantucket Sound and I’m beginning to doubt the political class’s serious commitment to this cause. The book’s a treasure trove, but here’s a description of how what was supposed to be a wide-open democratic town meeting on the Nantucket Sound wind power project was taken over by the astroturf brigades of the project’s well-heeled opponents:

The evening’s piece de resistance: the presence of the Honorable William Delahunt , the white-haired U.S. congressman whose district included the Cape, Marthas’s Vineyard, and Nantucket, as well as towns and cities closer to Boston. . . . Delahunt hated the wind farm. Or, at least, he said he hated it. Delahunt was widely seen as SenatorEdward M. Kennedy’s man. What Ted Kennedy hated, Bill Delahunt hated. And Ted Kennedy loathed Cape Wind, with an unwavering ardor that curiously belied the environmental ideals he so often proclaimed from the floor of the U.S. Senate . . . .

Delahunt’s control of the podium was unusual. Every other speaker had to use a floor microphone and was limited to three minutes. To maintain discipline, a very large traffic light turned first a warning yellow and then a time’s-up red. Delahunt, however, assumed he was exempted from the burden laid upon the rest of the hearing’s participants. Blindsided by the Congressman’s performance, project supporters — and there were plenty on Martha’s Vineyard, despite the Alliance’s efforts — were miffed. How had this politico gained control of what they thought was to be a “public” — as in, for the public — hearing, and opportunity for thoughtful and informed people to add their insights to the discussion.

(In fact, [Delahunt’s staffer Mark] Forest had forced Army Corps officials to bow to Delahunt’s coup d’etat. Had the Corps refused, the congressman could have taken out his revenge when appropriation votes came up on Capitol Hill.)

And it gets worse from there. I’m finding the book quite interesting so far. And lest this passage give the impression that there were only Democrats acting hypocritically here, I should note that the alliance against the wind power project was bipartisan, with “Bush Pioneers” working happily alongside the Kennedys to block the project lest their oceanfront views be sullied by the sight of windmills five miles away. Here’s more:

Reporters had fun for a while that evening, but on reflection, some were saddened. The hearing was supposed to be an opportunity for public discourse and an expression of democracy at the local level. Instead, it had been hijacked and turned into a publicity stunt. While wrapping themselves in the mantle of democracy, the Nantucket Sound affluent were behaving as if they owned the government. . . .

When a democratic process could be sold like this to the highest bidder, and when a U.S. congressman was present to do the honors, what did this mean for the future of America? A few of those present that evening found the symbolism of the event frightening, given the dangerous realities of the new millennium. Energy prices were steadily rising. Regular people were having trouble paying their bills. Climate change seemed to be under way. Oil and gas were in short supply and developing nations were eager to have all that electricity could provide, from lightbulbs to computers.

Somehow, somehwere, sometime soon, these challenges were going to have to be addressed — by someone willing to take the lead. . . . “Nero’s fiddle,” muttered a journalist watching the show.

As I say, it’s interesting reading, and it certainly speaks poorly for the seriousness of the political class on these matters.

THE ANCHORESS: Impeach Bush! And she has some ideas on how to proceed.

SHOULDN’T THAT BE A “MATRONIZING” RESPONSE?

MARINES VOLUNTEER TO RETURN TO IRAQ:

Marine Cpl. Saul Mellado could be back in California, finishing the final months of his enlistment in a safe billet at Camp Pendleton.

Instead, the 23-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen from Mexico is patrolling these war-torn streets only recently wrested from insurgent control — and bracing for an expected counteroffensive.

Mellado, a machine-gunner, knows these streets: the adults who eye the Marines with suspicion and the children who beg for candy and water. He was first dispatched to Ramadi in late 2004, a deployment during which 15 Marines in his unit — the 2nd Battalion, 5th Regiment — died and more than 200 were wounded.

Under Marine Corps rules about “short-timers,” Mellado could have skipped this return to Ramadi six weeks ago. But like 200 other members of the battalion — a quarter of its number — he asked to have his enlistment extended. Unlike a reenlistment, the move earns the Marines no bonus money, no promotion and no promise of a job shift or posting to a favored duty station.

“For a lot of the guys, this is their first tour,” Mellado said as his Humvee moved slowly through the rubble-strewn streets. “If anything happened to them, and I could have helped them, I couldn’t stand that.”

Showing more dedication than some politicians I could name. Plus, there’s this:

The Two-Five, whose motto, “Retreat, Hell,” stems from the World War I battle at Belleau Wood, has drawn one of the tougher assignments in what remains the toughest city in sprawling Al Anbar province. Phone service is spotty, sewage runs in many streets, and any sign of local government is minimal.

But Marines say that residents, encouraged by tribal sheiks and imams, have turned against the extremists and, among other things, are pointing out the location of hidden roadside bombs.

“The last time, it was like the people didn’t want to do anything to help their neighborhoods,” Mellado said. “Now it’s a big change. I want to be here to help with that, to help my Marines.”

Bravo. Again, unlike some politicians I could name.

FORECASTING record air traffic delays this summer. I think I’ll drive.

MORE TOXIC FOOD FROM CHINA?

A frozen product labeled monkfish distributed in three states is being recalled after two Chicago area people became ill after eating it, the importer announced Thursday.

Hong Chang Corporation of Santa Fe Springs, Calif., said it is recalling the product labeled as monkfish because it may contain tetrodotoxin, a potent toxin.

While the frozen fish imported from China was labeled monkfish, the company said it is concerned that it may be pufferfish because this toxin is usually associated with certain types of pufferfish.

Eating foods containing tetrodotoxin can result in life-threatening illness or death and the toxin cannot be destroyed by cooking or freezing.

This is starting to look like a problem.

JOE KLEIN ASKS THE ANTIWAR LEFTY BLOGGERS: “I find it amusing that some doubt the military source who told me the good news in Anbar province but don’t question the sources who told me about the growing pessimism about the Shi’ites ever putting together a viable government…Why does good news about Iraq, however modest–and this was truly a modest, if intriguing, development–trouble you?”