Last week, I expressed skepticism that Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Barack Obama (along with those of his son Patrick and niece Caroline) would actually matter in the one state where it had the most potential: Massachusetts. It's impossible to say what, exactly, caused Clinton's lead over Obama to fall from 37% two weeks before the primary to the 15% victory she scored yesterday.
When Ron Paul's newsletters were unveiled, respectable libertarians like the writers at Reason magazine and the Cato Institute almost immediately disassociated themselves from the fringe presidential candidate and his works. As Cato's David Boaz summed up his view at the time: Libertarians should make it clear that the people who wrote those things are not our comrades, not part of our movement, not part of the tradition of John Locke, Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, William Lloyd Garrison, Frederick Douglass, Ludwig von Mises, F. A. Hayek, Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, and Robert Nozick.
You know what's great about America? The fact that that "a person can come and even make a disruption, and you know what, that person is not going to be taken out and shot." That and fried squirrels. --James Kirchick
Former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton will speak at the Log Cabin Republican convention this year. --James Kirchick
Marty is pleased that the the New York Post has endorsed Barack Obama for president, a rather stunning turnaround given their largely pro-Hillary coverage since she became a senator. But if you read the endorsement, you'll see that it's more a riposte to Hillary than an endorsement of Obama.
If you are a critic of the Bush administration, chances are that, at some point over the past six months, Ron Paul has said something that appealed to you. Paul describes himself as a libertarian, but, since his presidential campaign took off earlier this year, the Republican congressman has attracted donations and plaudits from across the ideological spectrum.
Jason, conservatives attacking the complexions of our younger staff seems to be de rigeur these days. A few weeks ago, after my Ron Paul story broke, the kind folks down at the Paul-affiliated, Confederate-nostalgic, Ludwig von Mises Institute began referring to me as "the Pimply-Faced Youth," later abbreviated to "PFY" in subsequent postings. I can't speak for my peers, but I work hard to maintain a clear complexion, and even if I were "pimply-faced," it would have been difficult for anyone to tell under the layers of foundation the make-up girl at MSNBC applied. --James Kirchick
Now that it seems as if John McCain may actually win the Republican presidential nomination most of the Democrats who wouldn't in a million years vote for Hillary are heaving big sighs of relief, even pleasure. They could actually vote for McCain, some would do so while viewing him as the lesser of two evils, many more with contentment that he is a centered and honest person, which in this hokey age is a big thing. As some of you have detected, I am pleased to be an Obama supporter. He's who I'll vote for in the Masachusetts primary next Tuesday. And who'd I'd vote for in November.
Both Matthew Yglesias and The Nation's Ari Berman are appalled at two of the endorsements contained in our "TNR Primary;" those of liberal intellectual Paul Berman and law professor Alan Dershowitz, both of whom endorsed Hillary Clinton. To Berman, the mere fact that these two have endorsed Clinton is enough to render her campaign noxious; "Need I say more?" he asks.
I always thought that Bill Clinton really had mixed feelings about whether he wanted Hillary to be president. In fact, I wrote that I didn't think he did. I am now more convinced than ever that he doesn't want her in the White House, and he is doing his darndest to keep her out. He just might succeed.