Links and Minifeatures 2008 05 15 Thursday

Volokh Conspiracy on why we here in California need to vote against Proposition 99.

The great danger posed by Proposition 99 is that nonexpert voters will understandably assume that it really does protect property owners, without realizing that it will actually undermine their rights by 1) offering no real protection and 2) blocking implementation of Proposition 98, a ballot proposal that really would give property owners protection against the kinds of takings authorized by the Supreme Court Kelo v. City of New London.

Red Cross: Up to 128,000 may have died in Myanmar

And a lot more people at risk:

The Red Cross estimated the number of people needing help after cyclone surged over the low-lying delta on May 3 at between 1.64 million and 2.51 million.

Meanwhile, the Thai Prime Minister is saying that the junta doesn't want help

But Thailand's prime minister said Wednesday that the junta believes it is in control of the relief operations, AP reported.

Samak Sundaravej, back from a visit to Yangon, said the military had guaranteed him that there were no disease outbreaks or starvation among the survivors.

China's earthquake victims 'eat bitterness'

Congratulations and a hearty well done to Patti from Soldier's Angels, who was chosen America's Favorite Mom, and is donating her prize money to Soldier's Angels.

Obama says Bush falsely accused him of appeasement

Barack Obama accused President Bush of "a false political attack" Thursday after Bush warned in Israel against appeasing terrorists - early salvos in a general election campaign that's already blazing even as the Democratic front-runner tries to sew up his party's nomination.

Supposedly, it's traditional for a president to eschew partisan politics on foreign soil, not that that stopped Clinton. Nor Nancy Pelosi, who's a member of the legislative branch, and not charged with foreign policy at all, as she embraced the Syrian Ba'athists and blasted George Bush. When it comes to partisanship, anything George Bush has done falls well short of these and other Democratic tricks. For all the disagreements I have with him, I have to admit that George Bush is fundamentally a decent man.

Did Bush accuse Obama, or some unnamed presidential candidate, or even Democrats in general? I'm not seeing it in the transcript. Here's the most relevant paragraph:

Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: "Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided." We have an obligation to call this what it is -- the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.

Looks directed at appeasers everywhere, if you ask me. It may have come to your attention. It's Obama volunteering the fact that the shoe fits, which has nothing to do with George Bush and everything to do with Obama. Obama wants to keep the nutroots and other BDS sufferers emotionally committed to him so they don't stop and think, therefore he slams George Bush every chance he gets. It's just that this time, he managed to insert both feet into his mouth.

Instupundit says all of this more pithily: "MEMO TO THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN: When somebody condemns appeasement, it doesn't help things to jump up and yell "Hey, he's talking about me!""

Volokh Conspiracy on the California Supreme Court tossing out the anti-gay marriage law.

I personally voted against that law. Unfortunately, my side of the question ended up with fewer votes. The law forbidding gay marriage is on the same level as the ones the Supreme Court used to toss it, and spoke to the specific issue. This is supposed to be carving a specific exception out of the general rules. Unfortunately for the people of California, the state Supreme Soviet Court has decided they just aren't important. I may not like this law in particular, but every time the courts overturn the will of the voters thus, it's a blow against democracy.

I'm going to vote against the state Constitutional Amendment proposed on this issue, assuming It makes it onto the ballot and that I'm not hit by a bus in the meantime. For that matter, I consider marriage a fundamentally religious concept that the state probably shouldn't be involved in at all. But I consider myself and the rest of us bound by the results of the ballot box, whether we like it or not. The process is critical, not just the results, and if we simply ignore things mandated by the voters, it's a lot closer than most people realize to having a popular President who refuses to step down after two terms. Or who hands power over to the party nominee, despite the fact that someone else won the election. Then they swear in 535 Congresscritters, all of the President's party. Get the picture?

More at Pajamas Media from the author of Gay Patriot.

Instapundit on Congressional energy policy: "Are these guys on the Saudi payroll, or what?"

Some unfortunately not-so-Common Sense