Learning a Valuable Lesson

After an anti-tank rocket struck an Israeli school bus, Hamas is now claiming it didn't mean to hit a civilian target. They claim the road is often used by military vehicles (Israel points out the bus was bright yellow).

This reminds me of the brief period when Hamas was claiming that its rocket attacks during Cast Lead were also only hitting civilian targets accidentally. In response to Matt Yglesias' argument that this demonstrated at least a superficial belief that human rights norms were important -- a salutary step towards putting Hamas in dialogue with the broader human rights community -- I argued that this was better understood as an attempt to blur the "human rights" waters by accessing forms of discourse with proven legitimating force.

All forms of warfare cause civilian casualties. One of the critical distinctions Israel draws between itself and the terrorist groups it fights is that its civilian casualties are unintentional. So, Hamas thinks, why don't we just assert ours are unintentional too? Voila: moral parity!

The question isn't whether Hamas is serious in making this claim -- as Matt agreed last time around, their claims of accident are "transparent nonsense". I doubt even Hamas privately believes its rhetoric here (at best, they think they're just countering supposed Israeli disingenuous regarding their claims of non-intention). The problem is that bad-faith participation in human rights discourse is a proven successful tactic. The predecessor to Human Rights Watch was known as "Helsinki Watch", and its point wasn't to get the Soviet Union to sign human rights accords, but to try and create enforcement pressure on agreements already signed. If one looks at the body of human rights treaties floating around, nearly every country has signed them, because signing them is free credibility.

In any event, what I do see is Hamas taking another step forward in its abilities as a player in the global "lawfare" (in the broad sense) game. And that is most certainly not a good thing.

Apple of My Eye Roundup

In NYC for my cousin's wedding. Big weekend for her, and decently large one for me -- this is Jill's roll out to my dad's side of the family. Wish us luck!

* * *

I don't care whether they're actually happy or not, if I were the Tea Party, I would have declared victory on the budget battle.

Former top NOMer comes out in favor of full marriage equality.

The first Democrat officially jumps into the recall race, taking on highly endangered state Sen. Dan Kapanke (R-La Crosse).

I don't know whether anyone was thinking of reading Schools for Misrule based on David Bernstein's recommendation, but allow me to say: don't. It joins a Michael Moore volume as tied for the worst (and most nakedly hackish) non-fiction book I've ever read. And I'm someone who supports increased conservative representation in legal academia.

Can someone tell me what race-selective abortion even is? "Evidence shows that minorities are targeted for abortion" -- what, do they think African-American couples are getting pregnant, find out their baby will be Black, and are hoping for better luck next time? I find this utterly baffling.

Black student group condemns Israel-as-apartheid analogies. It's a group I haven't heard of -- it appears to be a grassroots organization centered on HBCUs, and has been strongly supported by AIPAC.

Prosser Retakes Lead, Waukesha County to the Rescue

After posting a tiny lead in the first count, Democrat JoAnne Kloppenburg has fallen behind incumbent David Prosser after 14,000 additional votes were found in conservative Waukesha County, netting him a gain of 7,000 (quite a lot, given that the margin between the two was hanging in the low triple digits).

Some folks have been having a lot of fun observing how the inevitable GOP cries of "fraud" have magically disappeared since Prosser retook the lead. Of course, hypocrisy tends to be a double-edged sword -- are Democrats who were formerly poo-pooing the fraud allegations now ready to storm the ramparts about the stolen election? To Daily Kos, responding to an announced state-level probe into the circumstances surrounding the newly discovered ballots:

[I]t's probably best not to get your hopes up about Kloppenburg potentially winning the campaign as a result of this probe. There are, as I noted earlier today, good reasons to believe that this was gross incompetence rather than fraud, even if the clerk and circumstances involved are extremely sketchy.

Hmm. That sounds ... amazingly mature. Imagine that. And I'm inclined to agree, incidentally -- rank incompetence strikes me as a far more likely explanation for these new votes than anything sinister.

In any event, since it looks extremely likely that Judge Prosser has retained his seat, I congratulate him on his hard-fought victory -- as well as to the Democratic and union organizers who managed to close a thirty point gap in the space of two months. This wasn't just Madison -- throughout the state of Wisconsin, there was strong and definitive movement in the blue direction that provides ample room to build upon as the recall races heat up.

Blog of Ratings: Women Don Draper Has Slept With

The Book of Ratings may be no more, but this blog carries on its spirit. Earlier, we did a series rating state mottoes. Today, we examine a more popular focus -- the women Don Draper of Mad Men has slept with. Tuck in, folks -- this will be a long one (even without including some of the more random obscure ones, like that flight attendant).

Midge

The first of Don's dames we're introduced to, even before his wife Betty, which is very appropriate. Midge represents the Beatnik world, and immediately provides a fun and whimsical counterpoise to Don's grim seriousness. She's in control of herself, and she's a carbon copy (in looks and attitude) of every Mary Louise Parker character ever (that's a major, major plus). Tragically, she makes her return to the show as a drug addict -- but the whole reason that has so much emotional punch is because we all love her so much and remember her happiness. Here's hoping she lands on her feet. B+.

Betty

Oh Betty. Chaotic evil personified, Betty Draper (now Francis) starts off as a very sympathetic character, given that Don treats her like a child and given, um, the topic of this list. But it soon becomes apparent that Betty basically is a child -- a malevolent, uncontrolled, petty, spiteful child (the actual child in the picture, Sally, on the other hand, is all manner of awesome). She doesn't know what she wants, but boy is she upset when she doesn't get it. I don't fault her for leaving Don -- who could? -- but I do find it baffling that she did so seemingly precisely as their relationship seemed to be improving dramatically. And poor Henry Francis -- you can tell he's only just realizing what he's gotten himself into. D.

Rachel Menken

Now we're talking. The Jew Power in me loves that the woman who easily the most all-around badass on the show -- yes, I'm including Joanie -- is a Jew. And not just in the "I ended up marrying someone named Katz" way, but an out-and-proud Jew who doesn't apologize for it. Rachel is smart, accomplished, in charge, smoking hot, and self-aware enough to cut Don loose when he's about to throw his entire life away. When Betty left Don, I was kind of hoping that Tilden Katz would get hit by a bus so they could get back together. Alas, no dice. A+.

Bobbie Barrett

If you took all of Don's evil qualities and added breast implants, you'd have Bobbie Barrett. Utterly amoral, her relationship with Don is basically paired sexual assaults mixed with self-destructive alcoholism. Yes, show, we get the symbolism of that. Anyway, Bobbie's relationship with Don has no redeeming qualities, though forcing her to stay with Peggy for awhile -- whose blinding light of earnest niceness manages to pierce even Bobbie's cynicism -- was fun to watch. But Bobbie herself has basically no redeeming qualities. The only things that prevents her from sinking below Betty are (a) she has a mind of her own and (b) we give at least grudging admiration to Don's negative qualities, so why not hers? D.

Joy

Okay, let's get one thing out the way: Joy is 21 in the same way that I'm 30. Alright, so Joy basically isn't a person so much as she is the incarnation of Don's sexual id -- unrestrained wealthy hedonism with no responsibilities or meaning. Joy is also perhaps the most prominent member of the club of women who basically demand Don sleep with them based on no more interaction than across-the-room eye contact. And her family probably smuggles drugs. This is precisely why Don was wise not ask questions, and eventually get the hell out of there. B-.

Ms. Farrell

There are many pluses to Ms. Farrell. Sally loves her, and she's a good teacher. She went to Bowdoin, which competes with Bates and Colby for the title "Carleton of Maine." And, oh yeah, she's basically a living saint. Which raises the question -- why does she fall for Don in the first place? It's established very early that she knows his game and knows it won't end well for her. And she actually manages to turn him down flat a few times. But then he gives her a full blast of Don-stare, and it's off with her dress. Ugh. I had such high hopes that you'd play a starring role in the (much smaller) "Blog of Ratings: Women Don Draper Hasn't Slept With" list. Alas. B.

Allison

It takes awhile, but Don finally dips into the secretarial pool. And I always liked Allison. She's competent, professional, understanding -- she's probably the best secretary qua secretary Don's ever had. So of course he treats her more cruelly than probably any of his other damsels, and she justifiably breaks one of his knick-knacks in fury. Serves him right. A-.

Dr. Faye Miller

Finally, another blond. Dr. Miller is certainly a step up from Betty. And I do like that her mob connections may see Don killed -- it's about time he actually suffered some consequences for his inability to form meaningful relationships. The main problem I have with Dr. Miller is that her introduction stymied a perfectly good opportunity to bring back that Austrian doctor who was so badass in Season 1. Also, I admit it's been awhile since I've seen Season 4, and my memory of the new doctor is a bit fuzzy. B+.

Megan

Megan's ... okay. She comes into the picture because of Allison's departure, and Allison is much cooler than Megan is. The best thing you can say about Megan is that Don's marriage proposal appears motivated by his belief that she'd make a good stepmom for his children, which is surprisingly noble of him (and fortunate, given that his original attraction to her was the standard commtiment-phobia thing against Dr. Faye). I don't have anything against Megan per se, it's just that when I make my list of "who should Don be married to, since Betty is a raging sociopath", she ranks pretty far down. B-.

Don Draper

Obviously, Don Draper is not a woman Don Draper has slept with. But it felt unfair to be grading all these women and yet let Don escape the critical gaze. For the main character of a show that prides itself on its verisimilitude, Don's ... kind of a parody, when you think about it. He's not just mysterious, he's got a back story that makes Harry Potter look plausible. He's not just sexy, women basically toss themselves into his bed approximately every 6 hours. He's smart, but he's benefited by being surrounded by idiots -- when Jill and I encounter a decent idea that's being promoted way above its candle power, one of us inevitably mumbles "It's called the Carousel." And that doesn't even go into his "mainstream" character flaws, like serial adultery. Still, he is dashingly handsome, and has some ability with words, I concede. B.

Twitter Debunks the "Israeli" Libyan Munitions

See here (keep clicking "load more" to read the whole story). Some munitions were found with an image of an umbrella (at first folks were saying a crescent) and a six-pointed star. The latter symbol had folks saying the weapons were Israeli-manufactured. Turns out, the umbrella is a parachute icon and the star is a symbol predating the existence of Israel indicating a flare round. The weapon itself was identified as an 81 mm illumination round, probably of Indian or British manufacture.

Alas, the story that Israel is supplying Qaddafi with weaponry has been making the rounds on al-Jazeera and PressTV.

Madison Versus the World

All ballots (minus absentees, I believe) have been tallied, and JoAnne Kloppenburg has pulled out an exceptionally tight, 200-vote-margin victory over incumbent David Prosser. The election was widely considered the first salvo in the recall fight sparked by Gov. Scott Walker's radical anti-union agenda, and Walker was eager to downplay what it all means for those races.

Gov. Scott Walker said this afternoon that the spring election results show there are "two very different worlds in this state."

"You've got a world driven by Madison, and a world driven by everybody else out across the majority of the rest of the state of Wisconsin," Walker said at a press conference in the Capitol.
[...]
Walker added that Justice Prosser's performance in many parts of the state bodes well for GOP senators who may face recall elections later this year.

"For those who believe it's a referendum, while it might have a statewide impact that we may lean one way or the other, it's largely driven by Madison, and to a lesser extent Milwaukee," the governor said. "But those Senate recall elections on both the Democrat and Republican side aren't being held in Madison, they aren't being held in Milwaukee."

The problem is that this doesn't actually tell the story of yesterday's contest at all. While Madison and (to a lesser extent) Milwaukee are key Democratic strongholds, it is not those two cities versus the rest of the state. Much the opposite: it's those two cities versus Milwaukee's suburbs, with the rest of the state being far more swingy than one might expect.

Look at this results map. Obviously, large chunks of Kloppenburg's margins came from Milwaukee and Madison (Dane County), though actually the bluest parts of the state are in the northwest corner. Meanwhile, the darkest red swaths are Ozaukee, Washington, and Waukesha counties -- the Milwaukee suburbs. Beyond that, the divide is not Madison versus the rest of the state, but east and west -- the eastern part of the state being more conservative, the western portions more liberal.

And while Walker's right that the recall elections aren't occurring in Madison, they're not occurring in Waukesha either. None of the five most vulnerable Republican state senators -- the five with re-elects under 50% -- are anywhere near Milwaukee. Dan Kapanke's district is in southwest Wisconsin, anchored in LaCrosse -- a pretty blue area. Self-inflicted wounds notwithstanding, Randy Hopper's geographically in good shape, with the help of the GOP stronghold of Fond du Lac. Luther Olson is right on the border of where red meets blue, with conservative Waushara and Waupaca counties alongside more liberal climes in Columbia and Sauk counties. Shawano, Outagamie, and Brown counties are all red, which is good news for Rob Cowles, but Sheila Harsdorf is like Olson in that her district straddles a red/blue divide (here, where Pierce and Dunn counties meet St. Croix and Polk, plus Burnett).

This isn't to say this is terrible terrain for the GOP (except for Kapanke, who may well be toast). But just as Democrats aren't operating out of their home base in Madison, Republicans aren't on their strongest Milwaukee metro turf either. If Walker thinks he can chalk this race up to Madison saving the liberal day, he's got another thing coming.

Hard-Earned Money

Bristol Palin, who received a $262,000 salary for her efforts to combat teen pregnancy, remarked "If I can prevent even one girl from getting pregnant, I will feel a sense of accomplishment." Jon Chait retorts "One prevented pregnancy at a cost of $262,000 would not be a terribly effective investment."

I'll go further -- if becoming a teen mother qualifies you to pull in $262,000, it's preventing the pregnancy that would be the tragedy.

Wisconsin Nightmares

I'm following the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, widely seen as a preview of the emerging Democratic recall threat. Unfortunately, I don't know the state well enough to offer much independent analysis -- I'm reliant on Swing State Project for that (and the AP for up to date results). One thing I do know is that the vote patterns seem to be tracking the 2004 Presidential election very closely. For those of you who don't remember, Kerry beat Bush in Wisconsin ... by .4%. Yeah, this is going to be a long night.

One thing that intrigues me about Wisconsin -- Minnesota is the same way -- is that the suburbs are, far and away, the most conservative parts of the state. Prosser is racking up massive margins in Waukesha County, outside Milwaukee. Why is that? In Maryland, Montgomery and PG County are huge Democratic strongholds, and the inner-ring NoVa suburbs are key blue regions in Virginia as well. Are we the weirdos, or is it a Midwest thing?

UPDATE: Dave Weigel has been doing some good 2004 vs. 2012 side-by-sides. Kloppenberg (D) appears to be barely outperforming Kerry in the counties measured. But all these counties are ones that Kerry ended up winning -- no word if Prosser is outperforming in more conservative regions.

UPDATE #2: SSP has also been observing the huge numbers coming in from Waukesha County and other Milwaukee suburbs. But it observes that something seems off about them -- the turnout is monstrous; not "we're really excited about this race" high, more "it's illegal not to vote" high. And while, hey, maybe that's what's up, another option is that the numbers are overstated (not because of fraud or anything, just the denser precincts have already reported, and the more sparsely populated ones are yet to come). If that's not the case -- well, we might just be screwed.

Yay Precedent

I read today that recall organizers can collect signatures outside the polling sites for today's Wisconsin Supreme Court election contest. Incumbent David Prosser is locked in a tooth and nail battle to keep his seat after tying himself to the highly unpopular Scott Walker administration (and after calling the chief justice of his own court a "bitch").

Wisconsin law prohibits "electioneering" outside polling places, but the decision was that this did not apply to political work for contests unrelated that day's election. And I read that, and I thought "here comes a controversy". Because while that's a perfectly plausible interpretation, the contrary one would be perfectly plausible too.

But then I read that this decision didn't come today, but rather four years ago, in a totally unrelated matter involving the recall of a Milwaukee alderman. It's just settled precedent that is being cross-applied to the current case. It's nice when precedent works that way -- defusing a potentially explosive controversy because the relevant rule had already been decided in a much more low-profile situation.

Bar None Roundup

There's a feeling of freedom in the air, but it will dissipate as soon as I start working on my bar application in earnest.

* * *

Israeli and Iranian relief workers join together in Japan. Unfortunately, as Harry's Place notes it is likely that one of the two countries will force out a denial that any cooperation occurred at all (remember this?).

I really like the cartoon at the bottom of this post.

Ahmadinejad predicts that the Arab revolutions will destroy Israel. Of course, he seems to say everything from the sun setting to the birds chirping will have that effect, so forgive my skepticism of his savvy geopolitical analysis.

Dahlia Lithwick describes Connick v. Thompson as "one of the meanest Supreme Court decisions ever."

More minimalism from the Roberts Court! (see my older post on the subject).

Goldstone Reassesses

The blogosphere is abuzz over Judge Richard Goldstone's reconsideration of his commission's report on Operation Cast Lead. Judge Goldstone, more or less, states that he's satisfied with the results of Israel's investigation into the accusations, that he no longer believes Israel can fairly be accused of targeting civilians as a matter of policy, and that he regrets that Israel did not cooperate with his commission's inquiry, as the evidence they have mustered would have substantially changed their conclusions. I had wondered what Judge Goldstone thought of Israel's ongoing investigations, and now we have our answers.

Jeffrey Goldberg calls this admission "as shocking as it is unexpected". I'm not sure I agree. I actually think it coheres pretty well to my read on Judge Goldstone as an arch-formalist. One of the things Judge Goldstone reemphasized in his reappraisal was that his investigation was not and was not meant to be "judicial" (in that it wasn't meant to offer definitive conclusions, only raise issues worthy of investigation). I observed that, technically true or not, Judge Goldstone was "the only person on the planet who hasn't taken the report as a definitive pronouncement of guilt and innocence." Ditto Judge Goldstone's clear disappointment that Hamas has not investigated the war crimes accusations against it, and the UNHRC's marked unwillingness to hold human rights violations against Israelis accountable. I remarked at the time that Judge Goldstone's surprise at these omissions is genuine if incredibly naive, and I think that's still accurate.

My line on Goldstone had always been that the problems in his report were structural, not the result of a malignant heart. It was Goldstone's determination to play a straight hand in a marked deck that was his undoing. Judge Goldstone was trying his level best, but there was no way to have a full and fair investigation -- no matter how diligent one is at crossing t's and dotting i's -- when the propagating party is the UNHRC and the investigation occurs within a context (the international legal community) that is shot through with bias and prejudice. There seems to be some belated realization by Judge Goldstone that this is true, but I fear it is for naught. Like his original report, his mea culpa is too legalistic to have much of an impact -- it is, shall we say, unlikely that the UN will accede to PM Netanyahu's demand that the original report be retracted in the wake of Judge Goldstone's recantation. We are, and always were, in the realm of politics, not law. Judge Goldstone tried as hard as he could to imagine that was not so, but there is no way to extract oneself in cases such as this. His colleagues in the system understood the game, and he got rolled.

I imagine some will question the reliability of Judge Goldstone's change of heart. We are, after all, dealing with the full weight and fury of the global Zionist monster -- Judge Goldstone could have simply finally cracked under the pressure. This strikes me as extremely unlikely. The Goldstone report had, frankly, fallen out of the news. It wasn't a story anymore, and the Jewish and pro-Israel community had moved on. This op-ed came out of the blue, and it is hard to imagine what leverage the Israel Lobby had over Judge Goldstone yesterday that outweighed the incredible fire he took in the immediate aftermath of the report's release. It's also difficult to imagine that Judge Goldstone's reputation or place in history will change all that much even with this op-ed. His legacy, for better or for worse, is tied to that report.

And even beyond what we think of Judge Goldstone, there is a larger sense in which this all doesn't matter. Nobody expects the folks who were Goldstone's greatest cheerleaders to reassess their evaluation of Israel's conduct. The people who excoriated may have an extra rhetorical arrow in their quiver, but they don't really need him either -- he's simply belatedly affirming the position they took all along. The world will spin on as normal. When the system is as badly broken as the UN's human rights apparatus is, it takes a far more herculean effort to see real change than what we see here.

Wisconsin Woman Charged with Bomb Threats

A Wisconsin woman who allegedly sent messages to GOP lawmakers threatening to bomb them and their families has been arrested.

Utterly unacceptable, thuggish behavior that deserves the full legal sanction available.

Iron Range

Ohio is about to pass a Wisconsin-like union-busting bill. And Democrats, who can force a referendum on the law before it goes into effect, are spitting for a fight.

The referendum will be held in November of 2011. And while some folks aren't thrilled about that (a few more days and the contest would be in November of 2012 -- alongside a likely more Democrat-friendly electorate aided by President Obama), the Daily Kos is stoked at the early race.

And while I agree with the particulars of their analysis (strike while the iron is hot, clear attention to this one issue, forces GOP presidential contenders to take a stand during the primaries), what I'm more hyped about is the enthusiasm. After a demoralizing 2010, the Democratic base is fired up. And that sort of enthusiasm, more than anything else, is symbolic of a political movement making a comeback.

Village Idiot

Michelle Bachmann posing next to a sign which reads: "Somewhere in Kenya, a village is missing its idiot."

Alas, somewhere in Anoka, Minnesota, they still have theirs.

Numbered Days

After Israeli police responded in force to violent settlers stoning officers sent to arrest a resident of Givat Ronen, Israeli MK Michael Ben Ari of the far-right National Union party compared the Israeli government to that of Muammar Gaddafi (a comparison I doubt either party appreciates):

Following the West Bank clashes Knesset Member Michael Ben Ari (National Union) said: "Internal Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch must remember he's not Gaddafi and that any regime that acts violently towards its citizens, beating, humiliating and punishing them collectively – his days are numbered."

Can we get over the illusion that Ben Ari is anything but an enemy of the state? It's the sort of statement that I almost wish Ben Ari would try to back up -- the folks Ben Ari represents are an existential threat to the long-term security of the state of Israel, and there needs to be (dare I say) a "price tag" put upon their thuggish, illiberal, and frankly seditious activities.

Meme Alert

"With notably rare exceptions (the Holocaust, for example), Europe has been very friendly to the Jews."

Alan Greenspan, defending the system of unrestrained capitalism:

Today’s competitive markets, whether we seek to recognise it or not, are driven by an international version of Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” that is unredeemably opaque. With notably rare exceptions (2008, for example), the global “invisible hand” has created relatively stable exchange rates, interest rates, prices, and wage rates.

Henry Farrell proclaims the birth of a new meme.

It’s best not to interpret this as an empirical claim, but a carefully-thought-out bid for Internet immortality. It has the sublime combination of supreme self-confidence and utter cluelessness of previously successful memes such as “I am aware of all Internet traditions” and the “argument that has never been made in such detail or with such care,” but with added Greenspanny goodness. I tried to think of useful variations on the way in to work this morning – “With notably rare exceptions, Russian Roulette is a fun, safe game for all the family to play,” and “With notably rare exceptions, (the Third Punic War for example), the Carthaginian war machine was extremely successful,” but none do proper justice to the magnificence of the original. But then, that’s why we have commenters. Have at it.

The commenters, indeed, come through (with varying degrees of success). Contribute your own!

I think, incidentally, that the essence of this meme lies in the existence of a catastrophic exception to the "rule" being forwarded, which is waved away as something "notably rare" and thus irrelevant in our overall assessment, when, obviously, it shouldn't be. The proximity we came in 2008 to a global financial meltdown is hardly something that can just be shrugged off as exceptional just because there where many more years where we weren't on the brink of economic anarchy. That's like complaining that using the Holocaust to indict German anti-Semitism ignores all those years Jews weren't being put in gas chambers.

How a Bill Becomes a Law

It's been awhile since I took high school civics, but I think I recall the basics: The House and the Senate both have to pass it, and then the President signs it. There are some wrinkles involving vetoes and conference negotiations and whatnot, but the basics aren't too difficult.

Unless, apparently, you're the GOP Majority Leader in the House. Then a bill becomes a law solely upon action by the House, regardless of whether the Senate and President like it or not:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said at a press conference that Republicans would consider the Government Shutdown Prevention Act on Friday. The bill would make H.R. 1 law if the Senate fails to pass a measure “before April 6” to fund the government for the rest of the fiscal year. H.R. 1, which passed the House but has gone nowhere in the Senate, would fund the government through the end of September and seeks to cut $61 billion in spending.

Despite GOP claims to the contrary, the Government Shutdown Prevention Act would not become law unless the Senate also approves it and the president signs it into law, neither of which is expected to occur.

In other basic checks-and-balances news, the Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General says that the state's new anti-union law is "absolutely" still in effect despite a state judge's restraining order blocking the law from going into effect (a temporary measure while the judge determines whether the passage of the law violated the state's open meetings requirement).

Liberation Transmissions

Herman Cain is telling conservative audiences exactly what they want to here, to wit, the ol' "Democrats are the true racists" game:

Cain then went on to say he thought liberals were upset with him "because I won't stay on the Democrat plantation like I'm supposed to."

"It may shock you but some black people can think for themselves," he added.

As Adam Serwer notes, the one audience whom this statement would go over like a stone is an audience of Black people. As Serwer observes:

Again, it's hard to imagine Cain talking like this to the average black audience, because the average black person doesn't really enjoy being compared to a slave. But it's the sort of thing white conservatives really eat up, which is why black conservatives often draw these kinds of comparisons.

Black people, I imagine, also don't like being told they mostly can't "think for themselves."

I have no doubt that Cain's conservatism is genuine. But if the idea behind promoting someone like Herman Cain is to show that the GOP is an inclusive place for Black people -- a place where their issues and concerns and beliefs will be taken seriously -- it's going to be an obvious failure. If the goal is to reassure the GOP's overwhelmingly White voting base that they're not racist, on the other hand, he's very useful.

Birth of a Monster

I'm really just thrilled that Donald Trump is (a) apparently serious about running for President under the GOP banner and (b) is going the full birther (and not just because he can't even manage to grandstand on it effectively). Trump is not a serious figure, but he has enough money to at least command attention in a GOP primary (and enough delusion to actually throw it away). Which means birtherism stays in the news as Republicans debate, and the Party can't dodge that it's a thing for them.

Anything that emphasizes to America that, hey, we're dealing with a Party that collectively has gone off the rails, is something good for not just Obama, but that entire Democratic Party in 2012.

UPDATE: Dave Weigel basically concurs.

Turnover

The law review board officially turned over today. As of 12 noon, I am officially an ex-Articles Editor. Unofficially, we still have some work to do. But it's a milestone all the same.

Congratulations to the incoming board, all of whom will do a fabulous job I'm sure. And congratulations to the outgoing folks from Volume 78 -- I think, all in all, we did a fine job we can be proud of.