Richardson pay-for-play probe squashed?

Via Dan Riehl, it certainly looks like Bill Richardson (and cronies) will no longer have to worry about any pesky questions about his political contributions.

The decision not to pursue indictments was made by top Justice Department officials, according to a person familiar with the investigation, who asked not to be identified because federal officials had not disclosed results of the probe.

“It’s over. There’s nothing. It was killed in Washington,” the person told The Associated Press.

[monotone voice]
Completely unexpected.
Inconceivable.
Utterly shocking.
[/monotone voice]

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

I actually find this Rasmussen cash-for-appliances poll reassuring.

When you can’t get a majority of the population to agree that a government subsidy of their new kitchen upgrade is a good idea – when, in fact, you get just under half of the population saying that it’s a bad idea – well, perhaps we’re not quite as doomed as some might think.

Thirty-nine percent (39%) of Americans favor a “cash for clunkers”-like government program to give cash rebates to people who buy new, energy-efficient appliances, but 49% think it’s a bad idea, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

Twelve percent (12%) aren’t sure what they think of the $300-million plan that will provide cash rebates up to $200 to Americans who buy energy-efficient refrigerators, dishwashers, washing machines and the like. Unlike the just-concluded “cash for clunkers” plan to encourage purchase of newer, more energy-efficient cars, no trade-ins are required.

First off, it’s not a $300-million plan. It’s a “$300-million, plus whatever else we pump into the program when it runs dry, which would probably be… by lunchtime” plan.  Second, given the differences in this program with Cash-For-Clunkers (no need for trade-ins, more eligible participants, much easier to scam the government) the 49% against is astounding.  Given that it’s as close to being free money as you can get without just cutting people a check, I would have guessed it’d be 65/35 the other way.

Apparently, we can be taught.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

Meet Lou Huddleston (R Cand, NC-08).

NC-08: R+2 district, flipped to D after a lot of effort by the national Democratic party, including redistricting.  The former holder Robin Hayes barely won in ’06 and lost by quite a bit in ’08; since then Larry Kissell’s voted for the ‘stimulus‘, played duck-and-cover on the health care rationing bill and has cosponsored EFCA – even though North Carolina’s unemployment rate has nearly doubled in the last year.

As you might have gathered from the above links, the NC GOP is particularly interested in taking the seat back.  Hayes has declined to run again, which clears the field for new challengers; the first one to declare is Colonel Lou Huddleston, a retired Afghanistan veteran and North Carolina businessman.  He’s already picked up the support of potential candidate Linwood Faulk, but Huddleston is probably going to have at least one serious primary opponent.  He’s got a good background (local, career military, and businessman); his major potential problem was that he ran and lost a state race last year (I call it ‘potential’ because I don’t know what he learned from it).  Huddleston also seems to be already generating a bit of venom from North Carolina Democrats, if comments here are any indication.  I, of course, will not scruple to speculate as to why.

Huddleston’s site is still in placeholder mode, so if you’re interested check back on it later.  In the meantime, here’s the North Carolina GOP site (donations here).

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

As promised, Scalzi goes after Star Trek’s design failures.

For a given value of ‘little.’ A taste:

V’Ger
In Star Trek: The Motion Picture, a Voyager space probe gets sucked into a black hole and survives (GAAAAH), and is discovered by denizens of a machine planet who think the logical thing to do is to take a bus-size machine with the processing power of a couple of Speak and Spells and upgrade it to a spaceship the size of small moon, wrap that in an energy field the size of a solar system, and then send it merrily on its way. This is like you assisting a brain-damaged raccoon trapped on a suburban traffic island by giving him Ecuador.

(Via Fark Geek) They get better. No discussion of modified tachyon bursts, but the Star Trek holodeck gets its nod.

You know, I liked Foucault’s Pendulum.

This is not the first time that I’ve seen the book casually criticized, and while I’m not actually upset or anything I’m also not exactly sure what was supposed to be the problem with it. You sort of have to assume a certain quirkiness from translations and Foucault’s Pendulum is probably one of the better correctives to conspiracy thinking anyway. Watching one of the characters… well, no spoilers.

Moe Lane

PS: If you’re wondering why nobody ever made a movie out of it, it’s because after The Name of the Rose Eco didn’t want his books turned into films. Which is kind of odd, because that was actually a pretty good adaptation.

It’d be faster to figure out what Charlie Rangel reported *correctly.*

Taxes not paid, income not reported, assets not declared… but Madame Speaker doesn’t want to remove him as chair of Ways and Means.  What is it going to take?  The FBI buying Rangel a freezer?

Via Instapundit, who is probably as embarrassed for the country as I am right now.

Crossposted to RedState.

Henry Waxman doesn’t *care* what President Obama said.

He doesn’t think that he has to care.

And he wants to make sure that the pharmaceutical companies understand that, too. The House Energy Chair intends to retroactively remove what Waxman calls a ‘windfall’ involving Medicare D drug charges, and never mind what either the President or PhRMA thinks:

Drug makers contend they have already worked out a 10-year, $80 billion cost-savings deal with the White House and crucial Senate gatekeepers on the trillion-dollar health care overhaul. The industry says that trying to add Mr. Waxman’s provision could scuttle that agreement.

Putting aside the actual merits of the argument for a moment – I (and Hot Air) may have excellent reasons to assume that a Democrat posturing about ‘windfall profits’ is simply posturing, but it’s still an assumption – it’s instructive to see how little a powerful House Democrat fears the wrath of the White House on this issue.  Then again, this is what happens when you’re a President who hands off responsibility for a bill in the first place; the people who do the work naturally end up deciding that their opinions on its final form are more relevant than yours, and unless you have the ability to do something about it they’re going to show little reluctance in showing public defiance.  Given that the President just hit 50% on Gallup, and lacks any real experience in leading people who don’t want to be led, I’m not surprised that Waxman is doing this.

And this is why people say “If you want something done right, do it yourself.”  Cliche, yes, but cliches exist for a reason.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

Howard Dean: No tort reform for fear of trial lawyers.

You know, this admission may have justified the entire town hall thing, right there:

Here’s the quote:

“This is the answer from a doctor and a politician. Here’s why tort reform is not in the bill. When you go to pass a really enormous bill like that, the more stuff you put in it, the more enemies you make, right? And the reason that tort reform is not in the bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers in addition to everyone else they were taking on. And that is the plain and simple truth.”

Not that Dean’s being completely truthful: the various health care rationing bills share a distressing lack of taking anybody on. And he neglected to mention that the problem wasn’t so much ‘taking on’ the trial lawyers as it was ‘losing the money‘ from them. But this is still more truth than we’ve grown accustomed to from a Democratic politician: no doubt one reason that they packed Dean off to American Samoa right after the election.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

Sen. Tester (D, MT) ‘meh’ on public option.

Devastating, in its own way.

It apparently doesn’t excite his interest either way:

U.S. Sen. Jon Tester said that a so-called “public option” in the health care bill is optional for him – and said he is not yet committed to backing the plan being put together by U.S. Sen. Max Baucus.

Tester said Wednesday he could envision voting for a health care reform bill with or without the option that would let the uninsured buy into a Medicare type government program.

“I don’t need it either way,” Tester told The Associated Press between meetings with constituents. “I could either support it or not support it. It’s all in the design.”

Via @seanhackbarth. This is actually worse news for health care rationing proponents than if Tester was adamantly opposed to public/government option; it demonstrates that not only is he indifferent to what many progressive Democrats consider to be a make-or-break part of the bill… but Tester thinks that he can get away with saying so in public. Which he probably can, at that.

Honestly, the sooner that the other side simply admits that government option is off the table, the better; it’s keeping us from discussing the minimum level of tort reform and cross-state insurance availability needed in the final bill before Republicans will seriously consider voting for it…

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.