Guilty until proven innocent

Why is it that those on the left who believe that the police and the military are not held accountable (e.g. Ferguson, Treyvon Martin) constantly act is if they believe every other branch of the government acts with pristine purity in every aspect of their jobs? If that were not the case they would not constantly clamor for more government involvement (both in terms of money and regulation) in every aspect of government?

More money for education. More money for climate change research. More regulation for health care. The list  of bigger government requirements goes on and on.

The right has in the past been somewhat guilty of this as well, but in reverse. The military and police can do no wrong, but every other part of government is flawed and requires downsizing as a cure. But the right has made strides in this area - the military is still important, but it is equally important that they be efficient and not waste taxpayers' money. The police are important but they cannot be intrusive of personal liberty.

The right has evolved, the left has not. In fact they've regressed. When it comes to the police in particular, there's all too often a presumption of guilt until proven innocence, and even then, they often still presume guilt.

There's no simple solution to this as it involves perception and world-view type stuff. But it is something that needs to be addressed.

Is the nature of perception anathema to fiscal conservatism?

Wisconsin, where perception matters.

Today in the WSJ, there was an article talking about vindication for Wisconsin governor Scott Walker vis a vis the budget conflict he had had with teachers and their misguided students last year. The WSJ argues that the resulting recall election effort isn't going to work because Walker's budget has led to a decrease in property taxes that will cause voters to appreciate the Walker belt tightening effort in the state. Lower property taxes are indeed a rarity in Wisconsin.

“The public employee unions and other liberals are confident that Wisconsin voters will turn out Governor Scott Walker in a recall election later this year, but not so fast. That may turn out to be as wrong as some of their other predictions as Badger State taxpayers start to see tangible benefits from Mr. Walker's reforms—such as the first decline in statewide property taxes in a dozen years.

On Monday Mr. Walker's office released new data that show the property tax bill for the median home fell by 0.4% in 2011, as reported by Wisconsin's municipalities. Property taxes, which are the state's largest revenue source and mainly fund K-12 schools, have risen every year since 1998—by 43% overall. The state budget office estimates that the typical homeowner's bill would be some $700 higher without Mr. Walker's collective-bargaining overhaul and budget cuts.”

Big Picture: Perception of the GOP nominee

Then what?

Here's a strategic question I promised to talk about a few days back:  How is the GOP going to be perceived coming out of the nomination process?  It depends on a few factors; whether the current battle is hurting the eventual nominee, who the nominee is and even to a certain extent, what ends up happening to Ron Paul.

After the Republican party has it's nominee, that person will have to face president Obama.  The internal nomination process and the dragged out contest this year was actually a result of a design put in place by former chairman of the Republican National Committee, Michael Steele.  He put in place the proportional delegation assignments for states which has served to draw out the nomination process since the winner-take-all assignment, particularly in the early states, prevent a front-runner from winning too many delegates too quickly and sewing up a nomination before being vetted on a more national basis.  Of course the other factor is that the front runner hasn't really gotten the electorate to rally behind him.