[October 6, 2000]

Mike's probably right, I am going to need my own blog soon. Self-styled internet guru Lawrence Lessig just argued to the D.C. Circuit that the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act is unconstitutional. I'd love to see the briefs, because this is an issue that's been rattling around my head for a while now. Copyright is a constitutional mechanism, so the question is: When does a copyright term go beyond "for limited times" and stop "promot[ing] the progress of science and useful arts"? Is 1,000 years constitutional? Will Mickey Mouse et al. get another extension passed in 2020? When does it end? I wonder if I can draft a law review article before Lessig hogs them all... W

Serbian protestors have burned their Parliament and captured the state-run media outlets, while the Russian government has recognized opposition leader Kostunica as the winner of last months' election. It looks like the reign of Milosevic is overW

[October 5, 2000]

I did not intend to watch the debate of the Vice Presidential candidates tonight, but I’m glad I did. Having seen both Dick Cheney and Joe Lieberman discuss the policy issues that face our nations, I’m now convinced that, whether Democrat or Republican, at least the bottom half of the ticket will have the character and intelligence to be worthy of the office he holds. Both men are well-informed, deliberate, well-meaning and basically decent public servants. Despite my stark differences in policy with both of them, some starker than others, I know the country will never have to worry about a Cheney or Lieberman scandal.

Both men showed themselves to be more worthy of the offices they seek than their putative superiors. This race should have been Cheney and Lieberman at the top of their respective tickets. Tom Brokaw even went where no self-respecting journalist should have gone when he “informed” the public that the Constitution doesn’t allow for the voters to switch the order of the tickets. I, however, have no such limitation, so let me say again: this race should be Cheney vs. Lieberman rather than their nuttier, less worthy leading acts.

Before this debate, I suspected that Lieberman would wipe up the floor with Cheney, who early in the campaign did not seem to be able to adequately defend his record, positions, and policy choices. For the first half of tonight’s debate, I was pleasantly surprised to find both candidates elevating the debate to matters of fundamental policy choices each would make. But as the night went on, I watched Cheney weaken as an advocate. I even laughed out loud at one of his points – I can’t remember which.

For the entire night, Cheney had the better platform to argue – smaller government, tax cuts for all rather than a select few, more freedom for individuals to craft their own lives. Not a perfect platform, but a better one than the program-in-every-pot promise of the New Deal Democrats. Despite this advantage, as the debate wore on Cheney proved more prone to argue his weaker points rather than his strong points. The most egregious example of this was when Bernard Shaw, the moderator, asked if each if they had observed any hypocrisy in the other since the joining the ticket. Cheney fell right into this trap, criticizing Lieberman for his stance on Hollywood. Lieberman had come off all night as a man of character and integrity, and Cheney lessened himself through the implausible attack. Cheney also missed the mark on the question about racial profiling – he could have spent much more time going into how a Bush-Cheney administration would benefit minorities rather than spin his wheels in an area where he had nothing to say.

Going into the third quarter, the game was tied. When the final whistle sounded, Lieberman was two field goals ahead, and Cheney had blown two opportunities to even the score. Both were excellent, worthy contenders, but Lieberman clearly gained more ground. If only the first string could perform as well for both sides. W

Unlike those on the stage, Harry Browne actually answers the debate questions, for you to watch in streaming video.  W

For what it's worth, I think Shawn is doing a great job hosting Perpetual Beta. Not everyone agreesW

The Institute for Justice fights to end eminent domain abuse:

The abuse of eminent domain—where government takes private property against the owner’s will—is a nationwide problem. But New York property owners face a particularly outrageous system not only fraught with abuse, but set up to prevent property owners from challenging such abuse under state procedures. On Wednesday, October 4, the Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Justice filed a federal lawsuit to change that.

Abusing the eminent domain power to transfer property from one set of private hands another is unquestionably wrong and serves as just one more example of how government power inevitably corrupts those who wield it. W

Okay, Mike, repeat after me: My wife is soooo cool for buying me a nifty Handspring Visor with a Springboard Expansion SlotW

[October 4, 2000]

The Libertarian Party asks about the word not heard:

But not once did Bush or Gore use the words 'liberty' or 'freedom' -- since those concepts are irrelevant to their plans to make the federal government bigger, more expensive, and more intrusive.

I think that ought to be the core of Bush's campaign - but he doesn't consult me anymore. W

The RNC tags Gore on the many lies he told during the debate last night. Some highlights:

It's getting so hard to keep track. Thank god for the web. W

Salon's David Horowitz on the debate:

Oh, and don't forget the baldfaced lying. My favorite whopper was when Gore said that Bush's education plan would let kids languish for three years in failing schools and then give their parents a pittance (because all of the tax cut, of course, was going to the rich). One thing this shows is what a wonk Gore is, because not one person in 10,000 would know enough about the details of the Bush plan to twist them so maliciously.

Who won the debate? Bush had to defeat the expectations that he was a lightweight. He did. He showed intelligence and comported himself with dignity. Al Gore had to show that he was not obnoxious, hectoring and the kid you hated most in the class. He didn't. Watch the gender gap close.

You can also read the opinions of Roger Ebert, Ben Stein, and Andrew Sullivan.  W

Heh. Monkeyfist asks the questions in this presidential debate. W

Pundits agree: declare a draw

"This is a draw, and anything that is a draw is good for Bush," said pollster John Zogby. "Gore went in prior to this debate with heft. Bush went into this debate with charm. And what emerged from this debate was a Gore with some charm and a Bush with some heft. That heft leveled the playing field."

I must have missed the part where Gore used charm. Both candidates can do better, and hopefully they will next time. W

So what happened to Al Gore, the invincible debater? He didn’t show up tonight. Instead he was replaced by Al the Arrogant, Al the Defensive, Al the Long-Winded, and Al of the Heavy Sigh. It almost seemed unfair to pit those four against only one of Governor Bush. But on the final scorecard, a focused, confident Bush held back the Al Team, essentially debating him to a draw. For Bush, widely held to be the underdog in this match-up, a tie was a decisive win.

From the very start, Gore got caught in stories of his own invention. He denied having criticized Bush’s qualifications for office, but moderator Jim Lehrer quoted a news article in which he had. When Bush spoke, Al hung his head like a scolded child, sighed breathily into his microphone, and even giggled once or twice. He insisted on having the last word every time, which he mostly wasted with rebuttals in the style of “Did not! Did too!”

Gore was clearly well-informed but seemed unable to make good use of this advantage. At times, it was a disadvantage. While Bush generally made his points short, sweet, and clear to the average swing voter, Gore at times droned endlessly about the inner workings of the Social Security Trust fund, interest payments, and Congressional Budget Office estimates. Gore had one line which he used to good effect several times about tax cuts for the wealthy, but he buried it so deeply in Economics 301 lectures that most folks had probably already tuned in to the new shows on the Fox network.

Bush, by contrast, pounded away at a few main themes, did so succinctly, and made his points. He struck right at the soft underbelly of Gore’s proposals when he decried the “explosion” of “big government” and pledged that he return power to the people to make their own decisions, about how to spend their money, how to educate their children, and how to obtain their healthcare. He flogged Gore on the failure of the administration to secure a prescription drug benefit for seniors, after campaigning on that promise in 1992 and 1996. He warned that the Gore plan to expand the government was the surest way to bust our booming economy.

Bush mostly avoided verbal stumbles, but when he did pause to search for a word he recovered quickly. He spoke of his conversations with new Mexican president Vincente Fox (which he pronounced correctly) and spoke competently on the current situation in Kosovo, even prompting Gore to observe that Bush’s “instincts were in the right place” on the matter.

In my subjective view, Bush tied almost every point of debate and even won a few. Gore seemed unable or unwilling to do much damage, a far cry from the master debater the public thinks him to be. I expect little movement in the polls from this debate – again, a victory for Bush. We’ll see if the next round is any different. W

[October 3, 2000]

Just a few short weeks ago, the Gore campaign strenuously objected to any debates that weren't carried by all the networks - in short, they wanted to eliminate viewer choice about whether to watch debates or Jessica Alba. But now that the debates are on, and Fox and NBC are essentially dropping out, where is Gore's lip service to full network coverage? Nowhere to be seen. It was, as we suspected all along, a cynical political gambit to get Bush to agree to the debates preferred by Gore.

To date in this campaign, Gore's debate victories have been due mostly to his uncanny ability to score the cheap shot - like his "racial profiling" attack on Bradley before a largely Africa-American audience. These tactics are simply part of Gore's overall plan to lie his way into the White House.

Tonight, for example, look for him to re-hash the same old lie that the country was in its deepest, darkest recession when Clinton-Gore took office. Not even the Washington Post can stomach that one. Bush can score big points by catching Gore in one or more of the many stories he will invent tonight, and exposing him before the whole country for what he is. Because most of America would rather have a President who trips over his tongue than speaks with a forked one.

All told, look for Bush to do better than everyone thinks he will. He's shown a tendency to rise to the big occasions, like his convention speech, and his team knows what to expect from the other side. Gore has huge expectations due to his reputation, and anything other than a total annihilation of his opponent will be seen as a failure for him. Don't expect it. W

If Mr. Arizona were Mr. Vermont, he might not still be a bachelorW

Matt helps spread a bit of wisdom:

Those who would trade their precious freedoms for a little bit of safety are deserving of neither freedom nor safety.
-- Ben Franklin

Ironically, Matt supports Nader, who is more of a cheerleader for Big Government than even Al Gore, and consequently is a much greater opponent of freedom. I recently read a piece about how Nader's platform actually favors large, entrenched corporations over small mom-and-pop shops. Only the large corporations have the resources - the lawyers, the lobbyists, and the war chests - that are absolutely essential to survival in a big-government regulatory atmosphere. I can't recall where I read that - do youW

Jay joins the Libertarian ranksW

When my time comes, I don't want a video camera to capture the intimate details of my child's birth. I love my family dearly, but my feeling is they call 'em privates for a reason. Still, it's a sad commentary on our litigious society that hospitals are starting to ban video cameras in the delivery room. People aren't going in there trying to set up a malpractice case; my guess is 99.9% of all parents would rather have a healthy happy baby than a multi-million dollar suit. I'm a big fan of docs, but they should have nothing to hide.  W

[October 2, 2000]

Recycled linkLink from Sean. I hope the Bush campaign sees this before tomorrow's debate, that Winifred Skinner collects cans because she refuses to accept prescription money from her well-to-do son. Gore's status as the biggest liar since Nixon would be a joke if it weren't so deadly serious. At least Nader believes what he says.  W

Gene Wojciechowski at ESPN.com:

Walker's team is 4-1, including two consecutive Big Ten road victories against ranked teams, which is only slightly harder to do than splitting the atom. . . Walker's attitude and his spread offense is transforming Northwestern into a bowl team.

Believe it, baby. Atom-splitting credits go to the physics majors on the offensive line, who created those black holes that sucked Damien Anderson downfield on a consistent basis. W

[October 1, 2000]

My Wildcats knocked off Michigan State 37-17 on Saturday, beating a ranked team for the second week in a row. This, my friends, is no fluke. The pollsters agree, putting NU into the top 25 for the first time since 1996. Also, you may note the new #1 at the top of the poll - my other team, the Seminoles, fresh off a 59-7 homicide with malice aforethought of victim Maryland.

Meanwhile, former Wildcat coach Gary Barnett is struggling with a 0 - 4 record at Colorado, and us Wildcats have shed not a tear for his troubles. Colorado's play against Kansas State was so bad in their 44-21 loss that the offensive coordinator actually had to go to the emergency room for his chest pains.

And what Saturday recap could be complete without a mention of the Gators' humiliation at hands of Mississippi State? On one third down play, the Gators were a full fifty-seven yards from making a first down. Let me say that again - it was third down and fifty-seven yards to go. I've been watching college football for over ten years now, and the only time I've ever seen a 3rd and 57 was on a map of ManhattanW

[archives]