Paying No Mind

Surety
Democrats, some of whom are already pledging to mount strong challenges for state lawmakers’ seats in November, seemed less sure about the meaning of Mr. Walker’s victory. (NYT, 6/5/2012)


Really, Dems are again unsure what their loss means? As they were similarly unsure what their trouncing in 2010 meant. And the loss of Ted Kennedy's seat. We take great comfort in their uncertainty. It means that they have still not faced up to reality. After Obama's defeat in November we have no doubt they will remain in the dark. 


Perils and Dangers
“What it shows is the peril of corporate dollars in an election and the dangers of Citizens United,” said Dennis Van Roekel, president of the National Education Association, a school workers’ union, referring to the 2010 Supreme Court decision that barred the federal government from restricting political expenditures from corporations, unions and other groups. (NYT, 6/5/2012)


We will resist the urge to gloat that the unions got trounced. OK, enough of that. Our take on the Wisconsin result is that the grift was exposed and defeated. The unholy and criminal con wherein Democrat politicians traded salary and benefit largess to public sector unions for political contributions has been exposed and shut down. The country will be better for it.

Overwhelmed
In both San Diego and San Jose, voters appeared to overwhelmingly approve ballot initiatives designed to help balance ailing municipal budgets by cutting retirement benefits for city workers.


Around 70 percent of San Jose voters favored the pension reform measure, with almost 80 percent of precincts reporting. In San Diego, 67 percent had supported a similar pension reform measure, with more than 65 percent of precincts reporting. (NYT, 6/5/2012)


Everyday another story about cities and municipalities getting religion on the need to scale back the goodies for the public sector.


Odds and Evens
Former Democratic President Bill Clinton suggested Tuesday that Congress temporarily extend all the Bush-era tax cuts, undercutting President Barack Obama's position that the rates on upper-income Americans should rise at year's end.


It was the second example in recent days of Mr. Clinton taking a position at odds with that of Mr. Obama, underscoring that the former president, still one of the Democratic Party's most popular figures, also remains one of its most unpredictable.


Mr. Clinton's comments on tax policy, in an interview on CNBC, left the Obama re-election campaign "upset," and the campaign quickly asked Mr. Clinton to "correct'' his remarks, a person familiar with events said.


Later in the evening, a spokesman for Mr. Clinton issued a statement walking back the comments. It said that Mr. Clinton "doesn't believe the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans should be extended again." (WSJ, 6/5/2012)


So is Bill Clinton another Joe Biden, bumbling his way through campaign appearances with his foot in his mouth?  Of course not! 


Allow RedStateVT to explain. 


Remember first that Clinton holds a grudge a mile long against Obama for running for the Dem presidential nomination. In Clinton's mind, that was owed to him and Hillary. More than anything, Bill wants another turn in the Oval Office. (The power! The glamour! The interns!) With Hillary as president, Bill would be called a "senior adviser", but there is no doubt that he would see himself as co-president. Obama denied him his dream and Bill knows that time may be passing him by. Hence the off-the-record comments that Obama is a bumbling fool and the regular on-the-record "slips."