On the one hand, if you’re Chris Christie and you’ve lost Meghan McCain, that would augur problems down the road for your national political ambitions. On the other hand, if you’re Chris Christie and Meghan McCain won’t support you, it’s almost a conservative law that we constitutionalists must give him another look. The formulation is simple:  if Meghan McCain likes X, then Y is the correct choice; if Meghan McCain

Harry Reid corrected Sen Ted Cruz this morning, noting that what he’s engaged in is “not a filibuster.”  Immediately on Twitter, our socialist friend Tawny Fawn parroted that remark. And yet, as Charles Cooke points out at NRO: Is it a filibuster or not? Apparently this depends on who is speaking. In 2010, socialist senator Bernie Sanders performed precisely the same trick that Ted Cruz has over the past twenty-plus

Sign the petition.  We aren’t supposed to have a king and a court.  We’re supposed to own the government; instead, the government acts like our pimp, demanding we go out and earn to subsidize its velvet-lined Cadillac and fur cape. Your political affiliation shouldn’t make a damn bit a difference here.  “Progressives” who go on constantly about “fairness” — and yet who back a law that is fundamentally inequitable, at

The King and you: And yes, I fully expect that I’m on any number of potential “domestic terrorist” lists.  But fuck it.  Of course, if there’s a list for telling the truth and sticking to my intellectual guns (pardon the pun), I’m on that one, as well. I can live with that. (h/t Guido)

What’s the lesson here?  Well, to me, it’s that if Cruz, Lee, et al., really are engaging in a “gimmick” in order to milk the dullards in the grass roots of their money — and that in truth they really aren’t terribly hopeful about rallying the GOP establishment behind their cause, and the cause of we, the people — at least they’re doing more work to run their con then