Rahm Emanuel: 'Do What You Got Elected to Do' - WSJ.com

More on the new COS. Rahmbo looks to be just the sort of pragmatic streetfighter the POTUS will need to get things done. Emanuel's advice: "Do what you got elected to do." I.e., don't get led down the rabbit hole of orthodox liberal policies.

Barney Frank wants to slash Defense spending by 25%. Charles Rangel wants to bring back the draft. John Conyers, who has called for slavery reparations, is also sympathetic to Europeans who want to indict Bush administration officials for war crimes. And Henry Waxman is angling for steep energy taxes to combat global warming.

Most of this stuff is poison. Sure, defense spending is way too bloated. But it's the democratic third rail -- touch it, you die. Bringing back the draft? Ideologically, it's a great idea. But unless you want to leave office in 2012, don't even think about it. Indicting Bush for war crimes? Bloodlust is fun and all, but don't get stuck in this orgy of recriminations. You were elected to change things. We've got bigger fish to fry. The Waxman thing, though -- that's worth some consideration. Global warming is going to take bold, decisive leadership.

The point is this: Emanuel knows the dangers here. He knows what can be done, and what will be political suicide. Having seen the mistakes of the Clinton WH in the early 90s, he's in a great position to steer the Obama WH away from similar screwups.

Rahm Emanuel: 'Do What You Got Elected to Do' - WSJ.com

Obama Pick for Chief of Staff Criticized as Partisan Voice - WSJ.com

Mr. Emanuel, an Obama friend from Chicago's insular political world, brings to the post a hard-charging, sometimes profane voice that contrasts sharply with Mr. Obama's unflappable demeanor. He spent much of the Clinton administration inside the White House political office, shaping message and policy with a keen eye on its electoral impact.

I think this will prove to be a really good pick. Obama needs someone who is not afraid to get bloodied and draw a little blood. The 133m people who voted in this election ( ~ 67m for Obama ) are expecting big things. Obama has been right to tamp down expectations, but he's also got to make some quick progress when he gets there. Obama will also need to navigate an inflated Democratic majority in both chambers, as well as deal with GOP opposition on major policy priorities like health care reform and environmental protection. Emanuel's experience in the House leadership should prove rather valuable in that regard.

Some are saying that Emanuel is an ironic pick for a president-elect who ran on a message of post-partisanship. They have a point. But while Emanuel has a reputation for no-holds-barred politics, his boss does not. And Emanuel will be taking direction from Obama, not the other way around. The two will balance each other quite nicely. Emanuel will be perfect for the demands of this job: serving as muscle for his boss's agenda.

Plus, it doesn't hurt that this only strengthens the West Wing analogy: Rahm = Josh Lyman.

Obama Pick for Chief of Staff Criticized as Partisan Voice - WSJ.com

In Mayor’s Plan, the Plastic Bag Will Carry a Fee - NYTimes.com

This is the kind of low-hanging fruit that should be a no-brainer. If we don't do relatively easy things like this, how in the world can we expect to accomplish the really big tasks in the environmental realm? Good for Bloomberg for changing the incentives. Just like he did with the taxis.

In Mayor’s Plan, the Plastic Bag Will Carry a Fee - NYTimes

GOP Viewpoint: We Got The Thumping We Deserve : NPR

Interesting views. Will the GOP follow the Tory track?

GOP Viewpoint: We Got The Thumping We Deserve : NPR

Who’s the Question Mark? NYTimes.com

The rare Maureen Dowd column that I not only agree with but am also not annoyed by.

Who’s the Question Mark? NYTimes.com

Palin: Media Criticism of My Criticism = First Amendment Violation

The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog has picked up on the latest Palin Constitutional "interpretation." Palin asserts that: “If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations then I don’t know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media.”

There are more problems with this statement than warrant discussion in a non-academic context. Suffice it to say this:

The First Amendment is in no way implicated here. The First Amendment protects private citizens (which describes, and will continue after Nov. 4 to describe, Sarah Palin) from government suppression of speech. Note -- *government* suppression of speech. If Palin wants to temper her idiotic comments because the media pick up on them, she's entitled to do so, and from McCain's perspective, she's probably wise to do so. (In fact, one is reminded of the Twain quotation: Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.). But the media are not infringing on her First Amendment rights. That claim makes absolutely no sense. A statement like this is an appeal to the misinformed.

Palin said that when the media call her incessant comments about Ayers and Wright "going negative," they are chilling her speech. She made no comment about being libeled or slandered. She only whined that the "mainstream media" and "Washington elitism" have "attacked" her by referring to her statements as "going negative." Palin has an incredibly warped view of that the First Amendment is all about.

The First Amendment does not protect Palin -- a would-be government official -- from this sort of legitimate media statement. See, e.g., New York Times v. Sullivan. If she can't handle criticism of her public statements, how can she possibly have the strength of character to be VPOTUS? This isn't Alabama in the 60s. The media are supposed to perform a "watchdog" function and keep us informed of what our leaders and putitive leaders are doing and saying.

What the media are doing here is, quite simply, their job.

Palin: Media Criticism of My Criticism = First Amendment Violation

Official Google Blog: New steps to protect free expression and privacy around the world

This is probably a good step, but take it with a grain of salt: when Google entered China, it agreed to let the Chinese government control all sorts of user access. That, I submit, is not consistent with the company's motto: Don't be evil. That said, it's good that they're doing this.

Official Google Blog: New steps to protect free expression and privacy around the world