Iowa Caucus Day: Certain select forces are quite excited and concerned about Iowa, but seriously, most aren't really too excited the whole thing. I suggest those too into it read Dave Barry's accounts to keep things in a bit of perspective. One reason the media is so excited is that this year it looks to be quite close, perhaps so close that we may not even know who really won. Howard Dean got in trouble for past statements that the caucus system was flawed because it is controlled by special interests. He also is worried about the closeness of the race. At any rate, like his other controversial statements, there is a lot of truth to that criticism. For a look at the positives and negatives of the system [one thing that stands out is that it violates the "secret ballot" idea that many think of as basic to our voting system] and an interesting comparison to proposed elections in Iraq see here. [more]

The Iowa caucuses will be important for those running (and it's too early to know the results as I write this), but we should never forget the ultimate goal -- the defeat of President Bush in November. The current de facto parliamentary system with Republicans in control is described in all its "glory" here. A change at the top will be an important step, so ultimately the decision for the Democratic voter is choosing who you feel would be the best person to challenge a Republican Congress while leading us in new directions.

---

More on the Pickering Nomination: Some conservatives and others are happy about the recess appointment of Judge Pickering in part because it is a small step toward ending the appointment logjam (and, of course, because of his politics). They apparently don't see the injustice of Republicans benefiting from a "let's play fair" approach, after years of doing the opposite. Likewise, even some conservative sorts are not crazy about this pick. One sarcastically suggested their motto should be: "Doesn't violate the letter of the ethics rules! Has the bare minimum of ethics to prevent professional responsibility professors from calling for his impeachment or resignation!" And, there's always the possibility that it gives the Dems another argument against the President.

The fact that there is a good chance he won't be confirmed once the recess appointment runs out (requiring him to retire, but with a full pension, suggesting why others without that option might not have taken this option) might just not be too upsetting to some of them, if they were honest about it. On the other hand, there is the interesting argument that a recess appointment threatens his independence or maybe even is unconstitutional [see 1/16; pretty interesting], since he is basically up for a "recall" vote a year hence. Historical experience has shown an allowance of such moves, but the argument is strong enough to suggest we should be careful. Judge Pickering is not really a close call.

Or not too much of a big deal, in the scheme of things, according to some (1/19). On the subject of judges, here's an amusing take on recent comments regarding Justice O'Connor. And federal judges' penchant to see themselves as immortals.