Darkhouse for the nomination--Sen Amy Klobuchar of MN. Young, liberal, tough to filibuster a sitting Senator (well, it used to be that way...). University of Chicago JD, but a Yale Undergrad degree.

“Since 9/11, more than three dozen Federal air marshals have been charged with crimes, and hundreds more have been accused of misconduct. Cases range from drunken driving and domestic violence to aiding a human-trafficking ring and trying to smuggle explosives from Afghanistan.''

Actually, there have been many more arrests of Federal air marshals than that story reported, quite a few for felony offenses. In fact, more air marshals have been arrested than the number of people arrested by air marshals.

http://duncan.house.gov/2009/06/22062009.shtml

The Nightman Cometh wrote:

In fact, more air marshals have been arrested than the number of people arrested by air marshals.

http://duncan.house.gov/2009/06/22062009.shtml

this is a clever journalistic/rhetorical grabber that would probably apply to practically any criminal justice-related profession (is that even the right occupational category for air marshals? ahhh, eff it) you want to name.

But there's no denying it is one really effective device....

As far as I understand with federal law enforcement this is far from the norm. I know with US Marshalls they do pretty extensive background checks to prevent things like this, but as you said I am not sure if they are in the same branch as air marshalls.

jerseyhoya wrote:Newt Gingrich is an interesting fellow. He's a damn bright guy, prone to hyperbole, with remarkably inconsistent political instincts. He played a crucial role in the biggest Republican landslide since 1946, and did a decent job enacting stuff initially, but crippled himself and the GOP majority in losing the budgetary showdown with Clinton. Plus he proved himself to be a moral hypocrite in the whole Lewinsky bit. He's had lots of interesting ideas, is one of the most prominent reviewers of books on Amazon.com, likes to pretend he's going to run for president so people still take him seriously, and all sorts of other stuff. I guess you can think he's a douchebag if you want, but he's not Dick Cheney or anything in the "evil, conniving" sense. The man has little to no filter, and just thinks out loud. He's like a conservative version of Joe Biden.

Newt certainly isn't dumb, though he's also not nearly as smart as he thinks he is. (Admittedly, this might be impossible.) By virtue of the political victories he won during Clinton's first two-plus years, he still has respect, and the unfortunate void on the right in terms of Idea People makes him look really thoughtful by comparison. Seriously, there's Paul Ryan, and that's about it among electeds, plus Newt and Salaam and Douthat, sort of, in the punditariat. Frum arguably was in that bunch before being cast into the outer dark.

But what he really is--and jh nicely gets at this with the "likes to pretend he's running for president" line--is a marketer. This was true in his political career, and even more true in his pundit life. His buzzwords ain't what they used to be, though: he's trying to paint Obama as "secular" and "socialist," overlooking that neither has the zing it used to--"secular" because after the faith-based blather of the Bush years, the moderate middle is happy taking a breather from ostentatious religiosity, and "socialist" because any epithet loses meaning when it's overused. (Plus anyone who's remotely thoughtful and honest realizes that Obama has passed up one opportunity after another to expand government--no bank nationalization, no push for single payer, not even a government option. The auto bailout was the closest, and even that isn't so close.) The point, of course, is that he's selling a book with those words in the title.

Also, I'm not sure he's learned the lessons of his own past blundersvery well. "Remarkably inconsistent political instincts," indeed...

The Nightman Cometh wrote:As far as I understand with federal law enforcement this is far from the norm.

Yeah, but all of them have those foolproof FOP cards....

The title of Romney's book is No Apology.

I suppose it could be argued there's a sort of perverse genius in that.

drsmooth wrote:The title of Romney's book is No Apology.

I suppose it could be argued there's a sort of perverse genius in that.

It's sort of like getting pissed when Polanco boots a ball hit by Feliz.

Yes, there's bloat in NJ's schools

I understand the benefits of smaller class sizes, but there does appear to be a margin for error built in for some cuts over the past decade. Of course the teachers that will lose their jobs are the young sort who are still hungry and not making all that much money, and that part truly sucks.

TenuredVulture wrote:

drsmooth wrote:The title of Romney's book is No Apology.

I suppose it could be argued there's a sort of perverse genius in that.

It's sort of like getting pissed when Polanco boots a ball hit by Feliz.

the way I was thinking about it - and I have to say I'm about 80% ashamed I even bothered to think about it at all - is,

Romney, the Bob Foreheadest, if not the best, exponent of the Party of No, allowed his book to be titled No Apology, as if what he's written is an Apology for said P of N. Which I'm ready to bet, is in fact what it is, but damned if I'll so much as read the back jacket to find out.

jerseyhoya wrote:Yes, there's bloat in NJ's schools

I understand the benefits of smaller class sizes, but there does appear to be a margin for error built in for some cuts over the past decade. Of course the teachers that will lose their jobs are the young sort who are still hungry and not making all that much money, and that part truly sucks.

No doubt. But the question is whether the bloat is class room teachers, or administrators, or bells and whistles. For instance--as one poster here noted the possibility of cutting freshman sports--is that really a deep, painful cut? As I recall, my NJ high school had freshman teams in a handful of sports. Eliminating those programs (and presumably having those freshman play on JV teams) really only impacts a handful of students.

TenuredVulture wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Yes, there's bloat in NJ's schools

No doubt. But the question is whether the bloat is class room teachers, or administrators, or bells and whistles.

If a music program has been trimmed down to just bells and whistles, ain't much more they can cut (not to mention a level of annoyance equivalent to a Dante ring of hell).

Bakestar wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

Bakestar wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Stevens retiring

Nice, I'ma send in my resume. I'm qualified.

Actually, according to the Constitution, pretty much anyone with a pulse is qualified.

Sure but after the disaster when Bush initially nominated his pal What's-her-name with her Southern Methodist law degree, good luck seeing any President nominate anyone outside the Yale/Stanford/Harvard/Columbia orbit ever again.

I actually appreciate that Bush was willing to go outside that circle; his choice of person was just horrendous.

The law clerks do all the work anyway, so what?

Schumer was on one of the news shows this morning with Kyl. He said there was little chance there would be a filibuster of Obama's nominee due to the fact he would pick someone within the mainstream. He also said he was not happy the way the Roberts has taken the court.

So...who would a constitute "mainstream" or outside the "mainstream" candidate?. Would Alito at the time of his nomination have been considered a mainstream candidate?

Btw, some GOPers would like Obama to nominate a moderate which would actually make the court more conservative?

Steven's alleged liberalism is more a function of the court's current hard right stance than anything else.

Warszawa wrote:Btw, some GOPers would like Obama to nominate a moderate which would actually make the court more conservative?

Yes some Republicans would like Obama to nominate someone whose judicial philosophy is closer to theirs so that someone whose judicial philosophy that is closer to theirs is on the court. Crazy, huh.

Stevens kind of sucked and was all over the map on a lot of First Amendment issues.

Interesting early take on the 2012 Republican presidential field here, from Al Giordano. The Obama triumphalism is almost too much even for me, but I think he's nailed the basic dynamic of the primary campaign even if I'd dispute a bunch of the specific conclusions he draws (e.g. I'm not sure the anti-Mormon animus that arguably derailed Romney last time would be as strong now that he's familiar, that Mike Pence or Rick Perry have functioning brains, that Gingrich even has any personal interest in holding office again, etc).

The thing about "the smart people" sitting out a race they don't believe is winnable is that sometimes a Bill Clinton jumps in, wins the nomination, and gets to be president for eight years.

Adding: as an Obama supporter, Thune is the one name on here who'd really worry me.

TenuredVulture wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Yes, there's bloat in NJ's schools

I understand the benefits of smaller class sizes, but there does appear to be a margin for error built in for some cuts over the past decade. Of course the teachers that will lose their jobs are the young sort who are still hungry and not making all that much money, and that part truly sucks.

No doubt. But the question is whether the bloat is class room teachers, or administrators, or bells and whistles. For instance--as one poster here noted the possibility of cutting freshman sports--is that really a deep, painful cut? As I recall, my NJ high school had freshman teams in a handful of sports. Eliminating those programs (and presumably having those freshman play on JV teams) really only impacts a handful of students.

I'm also wondering about special ed -- I doubt that speech therapists, one-on-one aides, and OTs are considered teachers, yet the need for them is one the rise. This could account for some of the bloat. This is an interesting part of the problem -- I think that the phrase in federal law regarding special ed is "free, appropriate" education. But if these aides are not educators, should they be free? I know a lot of parents who really work the system to get as much services as they can, you always have to ask for more than you'll get. (As a disclaimer, VoxJr gets speech therapy and "remedial ed", and an aide at certain times, but we also opted to pay for private services outside the school as well.)

jerseyhoya wrote:

Warszawa wrote:Btw, some GOPers would like Obama to nominate a moderate which would actually make the court more conservative?

Yes some Republicans would like Obama to nominate someone whose judicial philosophy is closer to theirs so that someone whose judicial philosophy that is closer to theirs is on the court. Crazy, huh.

I bet they would like a lot of things, but they don't make statements about them like they have chance of actually happening do they?

There are a lot of reasons for Supreme Court speculation/suggestion even when it has no chance of happening. When Bush had his openings, I remember the Democrats suggested Sotomayor.