You know, Ed Meese III, it is nice that you have come around, in some fashion, to the idea that we maybe shouldn't have the largest prison population in the world. Seriously, good for you.

But also, and more importantly: fuck you, Ed Meese.

It was actually Reagan's Attorney General, Mr. Ed Meese, who attempted to criminalize pornography and abortion, and who packed the federal judiciary with reactionary "tough-on-crime" assholes.

Ed Meese, once again as Attorney General, chaired the National Drug Policy Board. And during his tenure, federal spending on drug "enforcement" (arrests and seizures) increased by $700 million while drug prevention and education programs decreased. Ed Meese decided every worker in America should be drug tested all the time.

Oh, Bush-appointed former judge who is now concerned about overzealous prosecution, what is your complaint?

"A joint on a yacht, and the whole thing is forfeited," said Paul Cassell, a law professor at the University of Utah and a former federal judge appointed by President George W. Bush.

Funny! You are mad, as a conservative, that the government is seizing private property. Do you know who pioneered that approach to fighting drugs? Attorney General Ed Meese!

So, Ed Meese, we respectfully disagree with you, when you say that "liberal ideas of extending the power of the state" are to blame for an out-of-control criminal justice system. You are, after all, the Ed Meese who said once said this:

U.S News & World Report: You criticize the Miranda ruling, which gives suspects the right to have a lawyer present before police questioning. Shouldn't people, who may be innocent, have such protection?
Meese: Suspects who are innocent of a crime should. But the thing is, you don't have many suspects who are innocent of a crime. That's contradictory. If a person is innocent of a crime, then he is not a suspect.

But Ed Meese does not actually care about the massive and growing prison population. What he is mad about is that there are too many laws, in general.

"It's a violation of federal law to give a false weather report," Mr. Meese said. "People get put in jail for importing lobsters."

Maybe they do! Maybe there is a guy in jail, somewhere in America, for importing a lobster. But millions more get put in jail for smoking weed. And we think we should probably deal with that before we get to work fixing this "false weather report" zero tolerance policy that you are suddenly so concerned about.

Asshole.

How do I know this, you ask? Well, the answer to that question is perhaps best explained by a comment someone named Marvin Settle posted under Palin's note. He wrote:

Wow, and the public thought she wasn't educated enough to be President? That is some of the most well researched and thought out material I have ever read. Thanks Sarah.

Exactly! Thank you Marvin Settle. Thank you very much.

The note in question is supposed to be Palin's response to Obama's response to Palin's infamous "death panel" Facebook note. Here's a sampling of it:

Yesterday President Obama responded to my statement that Democratic health care proposals would lead to rationed care; that the sick, the elderly, and the disabled would suffer the most under such rationing; and that under such a system these "unproductive" members of society could face the prospect of government bureaucrats determining whether they deserve health care.

The President made light of these concerns. He said:

"Let me just be specific about some things that I've been hearing lately that we just need to dispose of here. The rumor that's been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for death panels that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we've decided that we don't, it's too expensive to let her live anymore....It turns out that I guess this arose out of a provision in one of the House bills that allowed Medicare to reimburse people for consultations about end-of-life care, setting up living wills, the availability of hospice, etc. So the intention of the members of Congress was to give people more information so that they could handle issues of end-of-life care when they're ready on their own terms. It wasn't forcing anybody to do anything." [1]

The provision that President Obama refers to is Section 1233 of HR 3200, entitled "Advance Care Planning Consultation." [2] With all due respect, it's misleading for the President to describe this section as an entirely voluntary provision that simply increases the information offered to Medicare recipients. The issue is the context in which that information is provided and the coercive effect these consultations will have in that context.

Section 1233 authorizes advanced care planning consultations for senior citizens on Medicare every five years, and more often "if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual ... or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility... or a hospice program." [3] During those consultations, practitioners must explain "the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice," and the government benefits available to pay for such services. [4]

Now, let's just stop there because it doesn't even really take a careful examination of the entire note to deduce that it simply could not have been written by Sarah Palin, which leads one to pretty much dismiss all of the points it attempts to make. In fact, a cursory glance is more than sufficient to come to that realization as the note is obviously meticulously researched and footnoted, appears to be entirely grammatically correct (It even contains semicolons!), presents rather cogent arguments in a reasoned attempt to persuade, and on the whole is written articulately. In short, whoever composed this particular note is everything that Sarah Palin is not: thoughtful, patient, dedicated, thorough, and rational, traits that any casual, non-delusional observer of Sarah Palin would never, ever associate with her.

Another key indicator in determining that Sarah Palin did not write this particular note are the host of Palin rhetorical hallmarks missing from it. Just ask yourself this question: Is it possible for Sarah Palin to compose anything clocking in at just under 1000 words that's completely devoid of references to God, the troops, the liberal media, Alaska, Ronald Reagan, her baby with Down Syndrome, or a hilariously painful attempt to channel her inner Jack London with some great poetic flourish? No! There is absolutely no consistency between this Facebook note and anything we've ever seen written or spoken by Sarah Palin.

Interestingly, there are a couple of other coherent notes on Palin's Facebook page posted after the "death panel" note that refer to her in the third person, as if they were written by an aide or a staffer. Here is one such note. Perhaps someone was enlisted to speak for her after the "death panel" debacle?

So who's writing Sarah's Facebook notes? Hell, your guess is as good as mine. Meg Stapleton perhaps? Bill Kristol? An intern? The person ghostwriting her forthcoming book? Who knows! But whoever it is, their being enlisted to perform these services is obviously part of a diabolical plan to rehabilitate Palin's image as a staggering dipshit. However, they really should have eased into it, because it's just way too obvious that Sarah Palin did not write the note that was posted to her Facebook page tonight. Period.

Picture is "Scary Ice Cream" by Mike Melva.

Come on, it was the '80s, everyone was a little wacky! Who didn't try to impress closeted lesbian Hollywood actresses by assassinating world leaders, back then?

Hinkley has not been crazy since 1985, according to doctors, and he is not even depressed anymore, even though he's been locked up in Arkham Asylum for almost 30 years. That is more time locked up than many murderders get, though most murderders do not shoot American Presidents.

And that is the problem here: Hinkley is not some regular formerly crazy attempted murderer. He shot Reagan! So every few years Hinkley asks to visit someone outside of his hospital and his doctors say ok and then the Justice Department makes a fuss and then a judge says to stuff it and let Hinkley go out for a while.

So yes Hinkley should be released, obviously, because he is not a danger to anyone, anymore, and civilized nations do not lock people up forever just because it is politically expedient to do so (except when they do, obviously), but what the hell does Roger Simon care about it? Does Roger Simon hate Ronald Reagan, and freedom? Who will he want freed next, Squeaky Fromme? Charlie Manson? Hitler?

[Photo: AP]

Update: This is the other Roger Simon. The non-crazy one.

The photographer Pete Souza says he's sure the goofy looking dude on the left with the camera around his neck and the blond hair is Putin (more recent pic here), while he was a KGB spy. The Russians deny it and are reportedly "furious" about the emergence of this picture for some reason, maybe because it proves that Vladimir Putin was once a big fan of John Ritter?
[Telegraph via VV]

Luckily our own Richard Blakeley was on hand to put together a collage. And there they all are, enjoying a sunny December pool party. Clockwise from left we have:

John Fitzgerald Kennedy

Ronald Wilson Reagan (with Nancy)

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (at Warm Springs perhaps?)

Gerald Rudolph Ford

William Jefferson Clinton (with some lady)

Barack Hussein Obama

Lyndon Baines Johnson

In December of 2000, right after it finally became clear that George W. Bush would be our next president and the world was therefore doomed, the New York Times reported that there was a surge of applications for jobs in his administration too. That surge was totally pathetic, though, in retrospect:

As of Tuesday night, before it was even certain that Mr. Bush would become president, his skeletal transition operation here had received 20,177 job applications. Most came through the operation's Web site, with a growing number arriving by mail and fax. All are being sorted by a staff of 16 personnel assistants.

In an even more amusing Washington Post story from early December of 1992, Al Kamen reported that the Clinton transition team was using computers to "scan" resumes!

Thus far, the transition office has received 10,200 resume's — one-tenth of the 100,000 applications it expects at a rate of 1,500 a day.

People really needed jobs back then, too.

And here is some wonderful advice that makes absolutely no sense from the Washington Post in December of 1980, explaining how to get a job with the incoming Reagan administration:

Waelde recently listed for seminar participants (most of whom had worked for the government for more than five years and held positions at GS-11 and above) what he calls the "three basic career constraints to advancement in the government:"

Professional constraints: "While it may be obvious, we often don't want to face the fact that it's not possible to get an endless series of promotions from the same position. As a secretary, or accountant or whatever, you can only go so high."

"The federal workforce is diamond-shaped. There are just a handful of GS-1 jobs, more and more GS-3, -4, -5, -7 positions, on up to Gs-11 — after which it tightens up again. So the competition gets tougher in the higher levels.

"You need to stop and think what additional skills you'll need to get the promotion you want. Check the position classification standards of the job you want and see what the typical duties are. Figure out how you can get that experience. It may mean going back to school, or it may mean asking for different responsibilities on your present job that will broaden your skills."

Organizational constraints: "Many people don't know that agencies often have staffing patterns allowing only a certain number of authorized positions at each grade level.

"So for you to be promoted, there must be a vacancy ahead of you. You could be the best in the world, but if everything's clogged up ahead of you, you may not be promoted. An agency change may be the only way to get out of that hole."

Personal constraints: "If you don't get along well with your supervisor, it's probably going to hurt your promotion possibilities."

But the single biggest pitfall to getting a federal job and advancing, says Waelde, "is poor SF 171 preparation. You've got to look at it as a work sample. They may get 200 applications for a GS-15 position, and only six or so will be referred to the selection office. You've got to make yourself stand out."

Among his advice for "top-notch 171 preparation":

Don't attach a resume. "It means the selection panel has to flip back and forth and makes a more cumbersome package."

Type it.

Make concrete and specific statements. "Don't say 'I identified and analyzed major problems in federal aid programs.' Give examples of problems encountered, your analysis technique and several of the aid programs."

Customize formats. "You're not going to be able to describe your experience in eight lines, so cut and paste, then Xerox, to add space — as long as it's neatly done. Paricularly for positions at GS-13 and above, you've got to tailor your 171 to the specific job."

Good advice for the million people who'll apply to work for President Obama. Work on that SF 171 application!

1. He wants to cut taxes BUT he also wants to raise them!
Barack Obama actually wants to cut taxes by an average of $900 a year for the average household, which is wayyyy more than John McCain. BUT, for the average household in the .01% of households, he wants to raise taxes by an average of $800,000 a year! This is radical socialism yes BUT we agree with former Treasury Secretary Bob Rubin who maintains that studies show it is not sufficient to "stifle innovation" especially with regards to how rich people do their taxes.

2. He thinks Ronald Reagan did some good things for the economy BUT he also thinks Bill Clinton did some good things for the economy.
Put another way, he is from Chicago BUT he is also from the Chicago School. As we all know, Barack Obama was a community organizer in Chicago. That job led him to think welfare reform was not a good idea, probably because he worked with people on welfare. But at the same time he also taught a constitutional law class at the very "Chicago School" that is the hotbed of all those people who think despite all evidence to the contrary that markets solve everything. By some form of "osmosis" Barack Obama is said to have absorbed the realization that markets do actually solve some things and now he wants to apply them to solving pollution or something.

3. He likes Bob Reich BUT he also likes Bob Rubin!
So did Bill Clinton, you say? True enough BUT! Treasury Secretary and Goldman Sachs moneylover Bob Rubin ultimately prevailed in the "Battle of the Bobs" with Labor Secretary Bob Reich over Bill Clinton's economic policy. BUT! It is not 1993 anymore! Fifteen years have passed! Bob Rubin got Bill to cut the budget deficit, which was good for interest rates, which was in turn good for rich people, and also deregulate the fuck out of everything, which was really good for rich people, but guess what he just told the Times? He said: “The distributional issues are obviously more serious now.” A few weeks ago Obama even tried to broker a little peace agreement with the Bobs over dinner!

He was sitting at a conference table, with Rubin two seats to his left and Reich across from him. “One of the points I raised,” Obama told me, “is if you just use you, Bob, and you, Bob, as caricatures, the truth is, both of you acknowledge the world is more complicated.”

4. Barack Obama's gut instincts regarding commonsense economic issues can seem bad BUT other times they seem remarkably good!
Early in the piece, Obama is described for taking his part-time professorship at the University of Chicago to "make extra money." I think we can all agree that you are not supposed to go into academia for the money! But later in the piece, Obama is described giving a speech to a bunch of economists about how laid-off factory workers should not have to all become nurses just because health care is the only sector creating new jobs in the economy because some of them probably would feel like that would be gay and what factory workers really want to do is "make stuff." Obama's suggestion was that we give factory workers jobs improving our roads and national infrastructure. Well, a few days after this speech, that huge bridge collapsed in Minnesota! You have to give the guy props for those political instincts. (And to that end: He changed his mind on welfare reform BUT he has yet to change his mind on ethanol subsidies. Sigh.)

5. Republican wonks say this fiscal policy will result in "European style social democracy" BUT the Obama campaign maintains they are simply following the model of the state where those Republican wonks live!
Yes, Virginia! (Heh.) As Chicago school resistance member Tom Frank has observed, Virginia is very very rich. (But as Tom Frank's fellow Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan has observed, you would not know how rich they are by their governor's Detroit-esque haircuts.) Virginia's thriving economy is one big love note to the economic boons to be reaped from big government spending, but the state didn't get that way by broadcasting its love for big government spending. Quite the opposite: they are all Republicans who support it when the government contracts out its functions in the name of "small government" so executives and lobbyists can reap a disproportionately large percentage of the ensuing economic output. And Virginia's per capita income is now 7% higher than the national average. (Not least because they have five of the country's richest counties.) Whatever, the point is: Obama will follow the economic lead of Virginia in the rest of the country, while trying to reduce the role of lobbyists, as long as Virginia's voters don't get in his way.

Barack Obama, A Free-Market Loving, Big-Spending, Fiscally Conservative Wealth Redistributionist