Mitch Daniels keeps saying no, but the speculation (and even encouragement) just won't stop. This is from Julian Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School:
Conservative pundits are in love with a candidate for 2012, and it is not Sarah Palin. If you ask many top Republicans their favorite pick for the presidential campaign, they will answer Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels.
Are those of us on the right lucky? We don't even have to decide how to oppose Eleana Kagan for the Supreme Court -- we have a Washington Post expert telling us what we're going to do:
I can't remember how many times it has been noted here or on the editorial page that once government starts something it's almost impossible to get it undone. It's always depressing to see one more example:
The Quinnipiac polls, conducted in three states across the past month, all find likely voters to have complex and contradictory views on these repeal lawsuits as well as health care reform itself.
When it comes to city services, what's the difference between an amenity and a necessity? Does the line move when times get tough? As the recession and state tax restructuring put more and more pressure on municipal governments, those are the kinds of questions we need to be asking: not just how to keep providing the same services, but whether those services still need to be delivered and, if they do, whether there are better ways to deliver them.
The Journal Gazette is annoyed with Gov. Mitch Daniels because he won't jump when Washington says jump. On tuesday, Health and Human Services sent a letter to state insurance commissioners and governors calling for them to chek on the data WellPoint used to justify big rate-increase requests. But:
According to a statement e-mailed to the Indianapolis Star by Daniels' spokeswoman, Jane Jankowski, Daniels will not respond to the letter.
An editorial in the Richmond newspaper takes note of some propaganda:
David Bottorff, executive director of the Association of Indiana Counties, says he does not believe Hoosiers fully understand the very difficult position in which local governments find themselves.
"God, what a hangover. That's what I get for getting so smashed in the middle of the day. What did I do while I was under the influence? Go ahead and tell me, I can take it. Oh my God, no, tell me you're kidding! I voted for WHO?"
A change in state law that allows bars, restaurants and stores to sell and serve alcohol on Election Day drew mixed reaction from people in northern Indiana's Mishawaka.
[. . .]
We can't let those dimwitted, know-nothing voters have referendums on tax issues. All they care about is their own pocketbooks. They'd never vote for anything that costs money. Well, maybe, maybe not:
Referendums seeking millions of dollars in additional funding passed easily Tuesday in numerous central Indiana school districts.
One of President Obama's short-list candidates to replace John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court is Diane Wood, who has sat on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago since 1995. Her record, it is said in the story, "reflects a mainstream liberal jurisprudence, tempered by a respect for precedent and a narrow focus on the facts at hand." If you're not clear on what "mainstream liberal jurisprudence means," this is what she says on that whole "living Constitution" issue:
I sort of hoped we'd have a small break of at least a few weeks to catch our breath and calm down before the fall election onslaught. But apparently there will be no rest:
