« November 4, 2007 - November 10, 2007 | Main | November 18, 2007 - November 24, 2007 »
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Trusting Government With Torture
17 Nov 2007 08:10 pm
A reader writes:
Your discussion about torture is at once thought provoking and troubling. For this conservative it used to be a "slam dunk" for me. People like Khaled Sheik Mohammed got what they deserved and I couldn't care one wit. The "Jack Bauer" method of Intel was good enough for me.
But torture policy in the hands of a faceless government bureaucrats without accountability gives me real pause. Especially incompetent bureaucracies! (Has the CIA got anything right in the last 15 years?) Your post about the death of innocent people under our government authority questioning seems no better on the face of it than those poor souls disappearing in the subterranean haunts of Tehran.
Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus and many other civil liberties during the crises of the Civil War but his greatness was, I think, in the fact that he realized it was an "abnormal", reluctant and extraordinary condition to be righted when the emergency, i.e., the war was over. Cheney/Bush seem to think this is a perpetual state, a ceaseless war.
Continue reading "Trusting Government With Torture" »
Christmas Shopping On The Web
17 Nov 2007 06:43 pm
Yes, the holiday season is at our throats once again. But be of good cheer and follow these helpful tips to maximize savings online. My favorite nugget: "clean your cookies."
Why The GOP Is All But Begging For Clinton
17 Nov 2007 05:58 pm
A reader writes:
Sure, there are all the obvious reasons. But I think what it comes down to is this. The one thing the GOP can't abide is being knocked out of its comfort zone. And they know HRC doesn't have a prayer down South. With the possible exception of Romney (Mormonism), any of the main GOP guys will effortlessly sweep the South vs her. And FLA will probably come fairly easily too. That basically leaves OH as everywhere else will likely stay about the same as in 2004 (though McCain could put a state like MI or PENN into play).
Throw Obama into the mix and that dynamic changes. He'd present them w/ some curveballs down South they'd probably rather not deal with. And with Edwards, it'd be similar.
The View From Your Window
17 Nov 2007 05:00 pm
San Diego, California, 8 am.
Measuring Online Video
17 Nov 2007 04:40 pm
Harder than it might appear.
Clinton and Free Trade
17 Nov 2007 04:18 pm
The usual bullshit from one of the masters of the art.
The Denial Endures
17 Nov 2007 03:55 pm
Greenwald simply gapes at the fact that president Bush can give a speech with these words in it:
When the Founders drafted the Constitution, they had a clear understanding of tyranny. They also had a clear idea about how to prevent it from ever taking root in America. Their solution was to separate the government's powers into three co-equal branches: the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary. Each of these branches plays a vital role in our free society. Each serves as a check on the others. And to preserve our liberty, each must meet its responsibilities -- and resist the temptation to encroach on the powers the Constitution accords to others.
One has to ask: is the president an idiot or just shameless? I truly can't see a third option, except such clinical denial of reality that he should be removed from office for incapacity.
Obama A Natural Republican?
17 Nov 2007 02:41 pm
A reader writes:
I have always thought that Barack is a natural conservative and that he might do well in the Republican party, albeit the sparse Rockefeller wing. I think his conservative trait manifests itself in both his foreign and domestic policies as well as his personal style as a politician.
On foreign policy, I will describe Barack as a rational hawk in the mold of the elder Bush and Powell. The way he has handled his opposition to the Iraq war speaks to this. Even though he opposed the war from the start, he has been careful not to sound stupidly anti-war like the folks on the far left and has given the military and the commander-in-chief the benefit of the doubt by mostly funding the war. His position of appropriately escalating the conflict in Afghanistan is also consistent with this view.
On domestic policy, I think Barack struggles to fit into the big government wing of the Democratic party. His experience as a community organizer informs him about the limits of what government can do.
Continue reading "Obama A Natural Republican?" »
End Of Gay Culture Watch
17 Nov 2007 02:16 pm
A Dallas institution is closing its doors.
America's New Energy Source Update
17 Nov 2007 01:35 pm
I mentioned some promising new bio-energy research here. Kentucky Fried Movie was ahead of the game:
Fact-Checking Ron Paul
17 Nov 2007 01:16 pm
This Michael Dobbs column strikes me as a fair exposure of the fiscal consequences of abolishing the federal income tax. It's the kind of criticism Paul should welcome and respond to.
Clinton And Sleaze
17 Nov 2007 12:45 pm
Novak has some troubling inside scuttlebutt. There's no way to know if it's legit, bluff or just another attempt by Clinton to intimidate her way to the nomination. But if I were Hillary Clinton, I don't think I'd be eager to start a media war over the details of people's personal lives, if that's what this is about. When you are married to Bill Clinton, and when the world has decided to ignore, for now at least, the details of his personal life since he left office, best to leave the dirt alone, don't you think?
Pundits For Rudy
17 Nov 2007 12:32 pm
Ponnuru counts them:
The Giuliani bandwagon includes conservative commentator John Podhoretz, New York Post columnist Ryan Sager, American Spectator reporters Philip Klein and Jennifer Rubin, and the editors of the New York Sun. Several writers affiliated with NR or National Review Online are also on board. David Frum and David Pryce-Jones are formally affiliated with the Giuliani campaign. Richard Brookhiser has endorsed the former mayor’s run, as has Lisa Schiffren. Deroy Murdock regularly turns out supportive commentary.
Murdock is the columnist who argues that Americans should be proud - proud - of torturing prisoners. Just an appetizer for next year if Giuliani wins the nomination. it will be a campaign, I predict, whose central pillar will be deporting immigrants, waging war, and torturing prisoners. And it will have a powerful resonance for the Fox News base.
Why We Need The Laws Of War
17 Nov 2007 12:32 pm
Norm Geras makes what is increasingly a minority case among Americans:
The intentional targeting of civilians is a war crime, and not just the use of nuclear weapons against them. That is why terrorism is a criminal act. So is the carpet-bombing of population centres. I also agree that one shouldn't treat international law as if it were a system without blemishes, imperfections, problems - to be remedied and improved upon….
On the other hand, to dismiss the concept of crime from the conduct of war would amount, in effect, to allowing that war may be lawless - fought without moral restraints of any kind, only strategic ones. …Whatever the deficits of international law may be at present, the world would be a different, and a worse, place if there were no laws of war and no concept of war crimes.
Norm is responding to this.
Required Reading
17 Nov 2007 12:08 pm
These book covers cracked me up. "Let's Go To Iraq!" They're all supposed to be taken seriously, or were at some time or other. You can buy the book here. Hat tip: Paper Cuts.
A $222 Pack Of Cigarettes
17 Nov 2007 10:04 am
How to price a product and account for its health costs at the same time.
"Victory" In Iraq Update
17 Nov 2007 09:08 am
An unsettling nugget from this week's New Yorker:
"I asked Zaidan what sort of deal had led to the Sunni Awakening. 'It’s not a deal,' he said, bristling. 'People have come to realize that our fate is tied to the Americans’, and theirs to ours. If they are successful in Iraq, it will depend on Anbar. We always said this. Time was lost. America was lost, but now it’s woken up; it now holds a thread in its hand. For the first time, they’re doing something right.'
Zaidan said that Anbar’s Sunni tribes no longer had any need to exact blood vengeance on U.S. forces. 'We’ve already taken our revenge,' he said. 'We’re the ones who’ve made them crawl on their stomachs, and now we’re the ones to pick them up.' He added, 'Once Anbar is settled, we must take control of Baghdad, and we will.' There would have to be a lot more fighting before the capital was taken back from the Shiites, he said. 'The Anbaris will take charge of the purge. What the whole world failed to do in Anbar, we have done overnight. Baghdad will be a lot easier.'
Kevin Drum points to three pieces worth absorbing this weekend: from Tom Ricks, John Lee Anderson (above) and a post by Marc Lynch. Check this post out also - noted by Matt, by Brian Katulis. I have a feeling that this war is not "drawing to a successful close".
An Ikea Catalog Without The Furniture
17 Nov 2007 07:09 am
From the work of Jason Salavon, courtesy of Kottke, who adds:
You may remember Mr. Salavon from his composite photographs and videos of blowjobs, late night talk show hosts, and Playboy centerfolds.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Throbbing Fox News
16 Nov 2007 07:13 pm
A brief tour through the raciest right-wing programming out there:
Hat tip: Nerve.com.
Help Bangladesh
16 Nov 2007 06:54 pm
The West has a duty and an opportunity right now: we need to do all we can to give assistance to those Bangladeshis whose lives have been destroyed by the recent cyclone. It's at moments like these that we can push back against Islamists and help bolster support for and fondness of the US. Of course, we should help because it is just the right thing to do. But it is also strategically shrewd - a useful reminder that strength does not always means bombs and soldiers; it can also stem from clear moral standards and humanitarian care.
Why I Don't Go To The Movies Any More
16 Nov 2007 06:50 pm
We just got "Ratatouille" from Netflix. That's on the agenda for tonight chez Sully. Beats parsing Nixon in a pant-suit on CNN. Part of me is curious enough to want to go see "Redacted" in the theater, but Aaron has come to hate something he once loved: the grimy, sticky floors, the rip-off munchies, the idiot with the cell-phone, the non-stop chatterers, the poky, ill-ventilated multiplex rooms, and on and on. John Patterson sums up my feelings pretty well:
I didn't have to rob any banks to fund my massive TV and thundering sound system. It wouldn't kill me to save up for a customised DVD projector with a 12-ft canvas screen and perfect clarity; I have a quote on one for just over $2,000. This would transform my living room into a private screening salon just like any studio mogul's, except that my guests can smoke, drink, make out, pause the picture and yell at the screen. NetFlix enables me to programme my bills as perversely as I wish without even leaving the house. And since I'm the boss-feller, the DVD dictator, the moviehouse Mussolini, I can unilaterally ban popcorn, which to my nostrils has a far more offensive odour than fags or vomit, and immediately eject idiots who leave their cellphones on.
Honestly, with all that available, why should I ever hit the multiplex again?
He means cigarettes, by the way.
Jesus In The Ghetto
16 Nov 2007 06:08 pm
In stencil anyway. More here.
Downward Mobility For African Americans?
16 Nov 2007 05:13 pm
Some brutal data:
Overall, family incomes have risen for both blacks and whites over the past three decades. But in a society where the privileges of class and income most often perpetuate themselves from generation to generation, black Americans have had more difficulty than whites in transmitting those benefits to their children.
Forty-five percent of black children whose parents were solidly middle class in 1968 -- a stratum with a median income of $55,600 in inflation-adjusted dollars -- grew up to be among the lowest fifth of the nation's earners, with a median family income of $23,100. Only 16 percent of whites experienced similar downward mobility. At the same time, 48 percent of black children whose parents were in an economic bracket with a median family income of $41,700 sank into the lowest income group.
But Booker Rising blogger Shay has some methodology questions.
Those Anti-Mormon Calls
16 Nov 2007 04:54 pm
Weirder and weirder. They appear to be coming from a company based in ... Utah. And that company, according to Liz Mair, has at least two employees, including a senior VP, who have actually donated to Romney. Romney is blaming McCain-Feingold - and you can allow your own head to do a Linda Blair on that one. So a dirty trick? Or some self-inflicted self-hate crime? Well, we'll almost certainly find out soon ...
The Poor and Groceries
16 Nov 2007 04:41 pm
Dallas News wonders why there are so few grocery stores in poor neighborhoods. Econobloggers pounce: AWOL store executives? Lack of cars? More discussion here.
Paris Hilton: Numb and Number
16 Nov 2007 04:25 pm
Finally, a use for stupid spoiled you-know-whats:
Neuroscientists have found that a cardboard cutout of the ubiquitous Hilton Hotel heiress has a painkilling effect on mice. But don't expect clinical trials to begin anytime soon: Paris works only for males, and it may be only because she stresses them out.
Hat tip: Bookforum.
Obama and Clinton In Iowa
16 Nov 2007 04:10 pm
It seems as if it's becoming a two-person race.
The Red Cross At Gitmo
16 Nov 2007 04:04 pm
They were barred from even confidential access to some prisoners in Gitmo, we now find. This is the defense:
A spokesman, Lt. Col. Edward M. Bush III, said, "I am in no position to speculate about what happened in 2003 ... All I can tell you is what we do today. And the absolute policy now, today, is that the I.C.R.C. is granted access to everything."
Why were some prisoners withheld from Red Cross access - and in writing, a sign of the confidence some had that the Bush administration was very comfortable flouting international law? You know and I know. They were being tortured.
Face of The Day
16 Nov 2007 03:50 pm
A young boy plays with a bird coated in sludge by the Black Sea shore on November 15, 2007 near the Krasnodar Region in Russia. A severe storm broke a small Russian oil tanker in two off the Ukrainian port of Kerch on Sunday, spilling up to 2,000 tonnes of fuel oil in what a Russian official said was an 'environmental disaster'. By Igor Garin/Epsilon/Getty Images.
That Cyclone In Bangladesh
16 Nov 2007 03:37 pm
I can't believe I beat Drudge on this one. The Islamists are poised to move in for a p.r. coup in helping the victims. We need to counter swiftly. Latest death count? Up to 500. Over half a million in shelters. More Sidr updates and news here.
The Right vs Ron Paul
16 Nov 2007 03:23 pm
A remarkably weak column from Mona Charen. Bottom line:
No, Ron Paul is not my candidate. Not for president. He might make a dandy new leader for the Branch Davidians.
The anti-Semitic slur is repeated.
Covering Up The Arar Case
16 Nov 2007 03:16 pm
Scott has some new, and deeply disturbing details, about the torture of an innocent man, thanks to the Bush Justice Department:
[Inspector General for Homeland Security] investigators were astonished particularly by what transpired in the first ten days of Arar’s detention. Well-defined procedures were not followed. The State Department was consciously kept out of the loop. Steps were taken to circumvent Arar’s rights, and particularly to guard against the prospect that a lawyer for Arar would challenge his highly dubious treatment through a habeas corpus proceeding. Who was at fault in this process? A group of very senior figures, mostly in the U.S. Department of Justice.
Hence the attempt to quash the report.
If Starbucks Is Faltering ...
16 Nov 2007 02:59 pm
... is the broader economy next?
Dolchstoss Right Watch
16 Nov 2007 02:56 pm
"If America is forced to withdraw by the Democrats and civil war erupts, it will be Cambodia 2.0, and the American left will own a second genocide in a single generation," - Hugh Hewitt.
Aren't we being forced to withdraw next spring because we have reached the outer limit of what the current military can sustain? Is that the responsibility of the Democrats as well? Is Bush ever responsible for anything?
Republicans and Obama
16 Nov 2007 02:46 pm
An interesting nugget from Continetti:
Recently I've come across more than a few conservative Republicans who are open to voting for Obama should the Republicans nominate a polarizing figure like Giuliani. I asked one of them why they would vote for someone whose ideological leanings would result in policies with which conservatives disagree. "Well," this person said, "You've got to remember: the idelogical stuff never gets done."
Quote For The Day
16 Nov 2007 02:37 pm
"Political campaigns can be actually taken over by the 'public relations' experts, who tell the candidate not only how to use TV but what to say, what to stand for and what 'kind of person' to be. Political shows, like quiz shows, can be fixed--and sometimes are... Whether TV improves or worsens our political system, whether it serves the purpose of political education or deception, whether it gives us better or poorer candidates, more intelligent or more prejudiced campaigns-the answers to all this are up to you, the viewing public.
It is in your power to perceive deception, to shut off gimmickry, to reward honesty, to demand legislation where needed. Without your approval, no TV show is worthwhile and no politician can exist," - John F. Kennedy, TV Guide, 14 November, 1959.
(Photo: Ethan Miller/Getty.)
America's New Energy Resource?
16 Nov 2007 02:11 pm
Why Belgium Matters
16 Nov 2007 02:08 pm
No, seriously:
Belgium may indeed be held together only by "the king, the football team, and a few beers" as would-be prime minister Yves Leterme has said, but I'll take that over a country held together by race and religion any day. Bonne chance and veel geluk to those working to keep the place together.
I Love My Bike
16 Nov 2007 01:54 pm
But not this much. Seriously, leave the perv alone.
Santa's Hos
16 Nov 2007 01:42 pm
The p.c. police are coming.
Going Back To McCain
16 Nov 2007 01:20 pm
This story on John McCain's campaign is telling, it seems to me. It's also deeply depressing:
At a celebration Saturday of the 232nd birthday of the Marine Corps, in Bedford, N.H., as veterans from five wars over the last century looked on, Mr. McCain said that any candidate who joked about sleep deprivation, as Mr. Giuliani had done several days earlier, should talk to his fellow prisoner of war and supporter, Orson G. Swindle.
Mr. McCain described how Mr. Swindle was “chained to a stool for 10 days, then let off that stool for one day, and then chained to that stool again for 10 more days.” ...
But Milt Mattson, standing outside the cafe after Mr. McCain left, said he thought the United States needed to take any measure it deemed necessary. “This is a war for our life,” Mr. Mattson said. “These are people that chop heads off. I don’t care what we have to do to stop them.”
The reason McCain still matters, it seems to me, is that he is the sole Republican able to be respected for his position on the war - and deserves credit for being more confident about the surge's tactical potential than most others - while retaining the honor that marked America's war-making for two centuries. I truly fear the potential of dumb machismo warping the United States into being something it really isn't and mustn't allow itself to become. McCain's insistence on this core issue is both courageous in the current Republican climate and absolutely right. He is also capable of projecting strength while not pandering completely to fear.
Compare him with Giuliani.
Continue reading "Going Back To McCain" »
An Iowan Independent On The Vegas Debate
16 Nov 2007 01:14 pm
More sympathetic to Obama - especially on social security. CafeHayek gives Krugman the boot here. Obama won the Kos vote too, for what it's worth. But Kucinich was a close second. A Las Vegan blogger has this take:
Obama's strongest moment was when he unpacked the disingenuousness of Clinton's Social Security triangulation by noting that only 6 percent of households have income of more than $97,500, so raising the cap on earnings that are taxed for Social Security would not touch the middle class, but the upper class. In the spin room later, Nevada state Sen. Steven Horsford, an Obama guy, predicted that the Social Security issue could become a "centerpiece" of the campaign going forward. That's probably a tad optimistic. But Obama is clearly right.
I still think he had a mediocre night. His drivers' license answer was beyond stupid. But I guess it's a sign he actually thinks he can win.
Why Lowry Loves Obama
16 Nov 2007 12:51 pm
The creaming of Clinton:
Two high-profile Democrats, Obama and John Edwards, are validating a core part of the anti-Hillary case that Republicans have made for years -- that she's a slippery cynic who cares only about power.
Well: duh. She is. Dickerson worries:
Obama went too far here. He didn't have to compare Clinton to Giuliani and Romney.
Would it kill CNN to disclose that James Carville is a partisan Clinton supporter when talking about the presidential race?
Yeah it would.
Diamonds Or Pearls?
16 Nov 2007 12:48 pm
The question was planted ... by CNN.
The Brits Discuss America
16 Nov 2007 12:46 pm
One conservative Brit asks:
Have we reached the moment when the United States is downgraded as an economic, political, and military power by the rest of the world - permanently - reflecting its new status as a super-debtor with $3 trillion in external liabilities?
Another answers: naaah.
From Rudy To Ron
16 Nov 2007 12:38 pm
A conservative wavers.
The View From Your Window
16 Nov 2007 12:30 pm
Freiburg, Germany, 5.30 pm.
Bush and HIV-Positive Foreigners
16 Nov 2007 12:12 pm
As China prepares to lift its ban on visitors with HIV, the Bush administration actually tightens the rules for visa waivers for HIV-positive non-Americans, to make it even more onerous for them if they decide to risk it and visit the US:
On World AIDS Day last year, President Bush announced his intention to create a streamlined process for foreign travelers with HIV to enter the United States more easily. Currently the United States is one of only 13 countries in the world, including Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan, which ban travel for individuals who are HIV-positive. Now, almost a year later, DHS has proposed regulations which would make it even harder to get a short-term waiver.
I just don't understand this. The Bush administration has done a lot for foreigners with HIV, but continuing a Jesse Helms-initiated ban on even visits from foreigners with HIV is furthering the stigmatization of the HIV-positive population. Does Jenna Bush realize that the woman she wrote her book about is barred from even entering the US? Do we we really want to be more hostile to people with HIV than China?
Everything Up For Grabs
16 Nov 2007 12:03 pm
A reader recalls the following:
CBS News poll from Dec. 17, 2003, polling nationally:
Dean 23%
Clark 10%
Lieberman 10%
Gephardt 6%
Sharpton 5%
Kerry 4%
Edwards 2%
Moseley-Braun 1%
Heh.
A Conservative Against Torture
16 Nov 2007 11:46 am
A great post:
One of the key things that conservatives ought to remember (and which we notice all the time in liberal proposals) is that INTENTIONS DO NOT EQUAL OUTCOMES. The government is horribly incompetent at all sorts of things and we ought not abandon that insight when analyzing proposals of people who allege that they are our allies (the idea that Bush is a conservative ally is something I'd like to argue about on another day--but my short answer is that he isn't).
As with limitations on free speech, I don't trust the government to be able to fairly and nimbly navigate the rules that would be necessary to make certain that it only used a legal right to torture when it was the right choice. Sadly this is no longer a hypothetical question. In actual practice, we find that Bush's administration has tortured men who not only didn't know anything about what they were being tortured about, but weren't even affiliated with Al Qaeda.
Let me say that again. Bush's administration has tortured men who were factually innocent.
Not men who got off on technicalities. Factually Innocent.
We also have over a hundred deaths in US interrogation/custody. God knows how many of the murdered were innocent. You give government these tools - let alone one man with no oversight - and you are risking oblivion as a free society. This is a conservative position.
Graham On Maliki
16 Nov 2007 11:20 am
Lindsey Graham is surely right to worry that any security gains in the Iraqi regions mean little unless reciprocated by the Maliki government. Time is running out. But where is the alternative? James Joyner shrewdly notes:
The problem, however, is that Maliki gained power as a result of democratic processes that we helped institute. Wouldn’t this move give lie to the notion that the Iraqi government has sovereignty? ... Our leverage is incredibly limited given that it’s clear we are desperate to wash our hands of the Iraqi mess. That doesn’t exactly inspire a lot of confidence. Moreover, anyone who came to power through the strong backing of U.S. political leaders would thereby be at an incredible disadvantage domestically and in no position to lead the tough reconciliation process.
I thought this war was over?
Vets, Cops and Suicide
16 Nov 2007 11:11 am
A reader points out that the high suicide rate for Iraq vets is equaled by the suicide rate for cops. More caveats here.
"Bris" and "Brit"
16 Nov 2007 11:09 am
A reader sets me to rights:
The word "brit" literally means covenant. The full phrase in this context is "brit milah", the covenant of circumcision. So when it was written "at a Jerusalem brit", it means "at a Jerusalem circumcision."
And while I'm at it, Jules Crittenden is not David Frum's brother-in-law. He's David Frum's wife's cousin. With the neocons, the layers of family connections can get confusing.
"She's the Nominee"
16 Nov 2007 10:42 am
Isn't it remarkable how eager the Republicans are to declare the Democratic race over?
From Oy To Ow
16 Nov 2007 10:41 am
What goes around:
Rabbi Yosef Shalom Eliashiv, leader of the powerful Lithuanian religious movement, served as godfather at a Jerusalem brit [sic] Wednesday but suffered a deep cut to his hand, apparently when the mohel slipped.
The 97-year-old sage received stitches and was declared well. The baby was unharmed.
I'd love to meet that Jerusalem Brit, wouldn't you?
The Pro-Torture Right
16 Nov 2007 10:21 am
The use of torture is fast becoming a core principle of today's Republican party. My sense is that many in the base are uncomfortable with the defensiveness of the Bush people, and their use of euphemism in this respect. And so the NYT #1 Bestselling author is unabashed in his support of using Gestapo methods against terror suspects, seized without due process and tortured under presidential authority. Yes, of course he's endorsing Giuliani. Who else will do what the quisling, gutless liberals won't? Here is the Hannity-style argument:
"Congress really upset me with how they treated Attorney General Michael Mukasey and how the media pushed this question. Why aren't reporters forcing senators and Congress to answer the same questions about torture? What do you think we should have done? Given them a lawyer, three square meals a day and let planes get hijacked?"
Give them Geneva protections if they are caught on the battlefield, and interrogate them legally. Or if they are seized in the US, they remain covered by the Constitution. Is that so hard to grasp? Meanwhile, here are two more pro-torture pieces in the Washington Times: Murdock's open celebration of torture, and Mona Charen's astonishing two sentences:
Under the U.S. Constitution, treaties are the supreme law of the land. But that hardly settles the matter.
Indeed. When we live under a presidential protectorate, it really is up to one man to make a subjective judgment, isn't it? Even though no international body and no American precedents even question whether waterboarding is torture, the law is suddenly imprecise. It seems to me that the pro-torture right needs to make this explicit: legalize waterboarding explicitly, and withdraw from the Geneva Conventions, and the relevant UN Treaty. If resistance to America becoming a torturing nation is mere "moral preening" why not just get the Congress to do what the Republican base wants? It's far more honest than voting for Giuliani in the sure knowledge that he will torture any terror suspect he can get his hands on, while pretending that America is still the same country it was before 9/11.
Against Obama And Paul
16 Nov 2007 10:06 am
A reader writes:
You wrote:
"I don't think Clinton would resist [suspending civil liberties after another terror attack]. I think Giuliani would embrace it enthusiastically and be backed by Fox, whose creature he has been and will become. It's one reason I lean toward Paul and Obama. I think they are among the very few candidates who actually understand what civil liberty is."
You are close, but not there.
We are in Iraq because of linkage assumptions post 9-11 that, even if correct, are subject to repetition if there is sufficient catalyst.
Sufficient catalyst means, of course, another domestic terrorist attack. You fear Guiliani/Clinton because you fear the end of American liberty in the aftermath of a truly horrendous attack, and rightly so.
I fear Obama/Paul, not because they too would suspend liberties, but because their inherent lack of aggression, their disinclination to use force pre-emptively, is more likely to create a situation that permits the horrendous attack, which then ushers in the new leaders who 'will keep us safe.' We don’t need nice people who will do the ‘right thing’. We need a man like McCain who will fight hard, cleanly but hard, and who won't flinch. The best defense against an attack is to attack the terrorists everyday, to kill them and to make their lives so miserable and so difficult that they are perpetually on the defensive. Incrementalism, soft power, multilateralism, etc. will have the opposite of their intended effect when they are associated with a failure to prevent another attack.
I take the point, but I'm not sure that this definition of strength captures the subtler measures we need to take against an elusive enemy, while appealing to the populations that give them passive, and even active, support. If I felt Obama would lower our guard against Islamist terrorism, I wouldn't hesitate to back someone else. How we counter Islamist terror is the difficult question - and what I've learned from Iraq is that blanket warfare is not enough, and can even be counter-productive. The trouble is: so much of this war is conducted in the shadows and in secret and it becomes extremely difficult for average citizens or observers to be able to judge its efficacy.
About Last Night
16 Nov 2007 09:53 am
My impressions of the debate, written in the moments after, can be read here. Blitzer really pissed off Matt. Marc thinks Hillary may have had a "comeback". I wish she'd ever gone away. I'm on the Brian Lehrer show in a few minutes, and the Mike Gallagher show at 11.45 am, if you're near a radio.
Our Iraqi Friends
16 Nov 2007 09:44 am
Many Iraqis who have aided US occupiers and troops are now in extreme danger. Why will Bush not grant even 800 of the most urgent cases? Fred Kaplan wants to know. George Packer proposes a practical first step here.
Consumer Tips
16 Nov 2007 09:25 am
Don't order a custom-made cake from Walmart.
Evolving Evangelicals
16 Nov 2007 08:24 am
A reader writes:
It's a truism in many theological circles that religious belief flows in generational waves, as each rejects the premises of its parents. The first generation is fundamentalist. The second is liberal. The third is unchurched. The fourth is fundamentalist.
Oh, and if I were not already against Hillary, the accretion of The Egregious Sidney Blumenthal would seal the deal.
Fox News and CNN
16 Nov 2007 08:22 am
Their demographics still allegedly make CNN's ads more lucrative.
Blogs and the MSM
16 Nov 2007 07:19 am
A reader writes:
Yours is among several political blogs I read daily. A common trait among them is the interspersion of irreverence alongside the serious news — YouTube videos, pop culture contests, photos of the blogger's pets, etc.
As blogs become more legitimate as a news source, I was inclined to worry that the silly posts would diminish the impact of the news. But for some reason, on your blog (and others) the reader can distinguish the irreverent and the serious. Whereas increasingly, in the MSM, the silliness is the news.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
The Debate
15 Nov 2007 10:31 pm
I wish I had anything very trenchant to say about the debate I just sat through. It seemed to me that no one actually changed the dynamic of their own candidacies or the cogency of their own arguments. Clinton will have pleased her supporters, but I doubt she will have won over any waverers or doubters. Her more aggressive rebuttals led to a few moments of bossy screechiness, and her careful parsing of everything continued, diamonds and pearls included. By saying she wasn't playing the gender card, she played it. And so on. She grates on me more with every minute I have to listen to her. And that whole passive-aggressive crap about "throwing mud" and "Republican talking points" drove me once again up the wall. But she was better than her previous outing and the crowd was very supportive, in a rowdy dumb-liberal kind of way. She also managed to defuse her dreadful Kyl-Lieberman vote, which was quite a feat. We had one "laugh" - inappropriate, of course.
Obama was a solid B+, started strongly and then petered out. He blew the illegal drivers' license question and the polarization question. He really is uneven in these things. He didn't suck, but, at this point, he needs to keep the A grades coming to keep pressure on you-know-who. Alas, I think he just trod water. Edwards was impressive again - he can just sum up arguments, frame questions and target his opponents' weak spots like a, well, trial lawyer, I guess. But still I cannot think of him as a potential president. I liked the scrappiness of the start and found the usual high-minded reminders that we're all Democrats and deeply respect one another blah blah blah to be a letdown. But I guess I'm not a Democrat and I love watching them tear each other Clinton apart. It's quite clear to me, though, that Obama and Clinton loathe each other. When I hear people talk of a Clinton-Obama ticket, I want to know what they're smoking and get some.
There were a few fun moments. When Biden answered one question, "No", and then shut up, I began to worry about his health. When Dodd started tourettesing in Spanish, and when Kucinich insisted on impeaching Bush now, I perked up. Richardson had a bad surge answer. The Democrats had better think through the shifting sands of Iraq with a little more authority than they seemed to muster tonight.
I have to say, though, that I don't think I can make it through another one of these. Sit them down; stand them up; I don't think there's any way to make these less soporific any more. Maybe a Clinton-Obama two-some would be instructive. But it won't happen.
I guess I'm a little tired, but the Onion summed up my feelings about the campaign tonight. Tomorrow, of course, is another day.
The Democrats and the Oath Of Office
15 Nov 2007 09:03 pm
I've now heard Dodd and Clinton say that the president takes an oath to defend the Constitution and the territory and people of the United States. This is the president's oath of office:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
I would think that one basic requirement of assuming the presidency is to know the oath, wouldn't you? If forced to pick between defending the territory of the US and the Constitution of the US, your oath is to pick the Constitution.
Mark Penn's Memo
15 Nov 2007 07:35 pm
Ambers gives us the annotated version. She's a leader. Because most Democrats think she's a leader. Etc.
Obama In SF
15 Nov 2007 07:29 pm
A reader writes:
I went to hear Barack Obama speak tonight in San Francisco. The crowd was huge, the lines were long, and (reportedly) the Secret Service was slowing things down by searching everyone exhaustively at the door. It was painfully obvious that I probably wasn’t going to be admitted in time to hear the speech.
Then the police cleared the street next to the one I was waiting on, putting up “do not cross” tape. Childishly, I thought “I may not get in to hear the speech, but at least I’ll see the motorcade”. When the motorcade did come roaring down the street, it suddenly stopped.
Someone had told Senator Obama that huge lines of supporters had little or no hope of getting in to the main event. He left his motorcade, walked on foot down the street towards the crowd, and gave a ten minute impromptu speech for those waiting in line.
Continue reading "Obama In SF" »
The Evangelical Evolution
15 Nov 2007 06:50 pm
Christianism may be waning. Christianity cannot be trashed so easily. A reader writes:
I grew up in a typical evangelical household, and now attend Gordon College in Massachusetts, a non denominational evangelical college. As sort of a political news junkie, I read your blog regularly, and I frequently appreciate your analysis on the Christian Right, and their pull (albeit a but waning) on the political climate. Here at Gordon, I've met scores of students who grew up just like me, who were taught to exclude and condemn homosexuals, democrats, hippies, liberals, "secularists", etc. Gladly, I've found that most of my peers, while at school and as they grow in both spiritual and intellectual faculties, question the way they were brought up, the way they were taught to think. Many, like me, wonder why we were sold a "brand" of Christianity, complete with books, ideologies, and political parties.
Continue reading "The Evangelical Evolution" »
And They Die At Home As Well
15 Nov 2007 05:44 pm
Grim evidence that the toll of war is never restricted to the battlefield itself:
At least 6,256 US veterans took their lives in 2005, at an average of 17 a day, according to figures broadcast last night. Former servicemen are more than twice as likely than the rest of the population to commit suicide. Such statistics compare to the total of 3,863 American military deaths in Iraq since the invasion in 2003 - an average of 2.4 a day, according to the website ICasualties.org...
The suicide rate among Americans as a whole was 8.9 per 100,000, but the level among veterans was at least 18.7. That figure rose to a minimum of 22.9 among veterans aged 20 to 24 – almost four times the nonveteran average for people of the same age.
What "Victory" Now Means
15 Nov 2007 05:21 pm
Victor Davis Hanson, fresh from being decorated by George W. Bush, now defines victory in Iraq thus:
"stabilizing the country with a radical cessation of violence."
Just for the record.
It's Still 1968
15 Nov 2007 05:19 pm
Daniel Henninger pushes back against the argument of my Obama essay:
If it’s Hillary versus Rudy, McCain or even the placid Mitt Romney, we will be in those streets again. Besides, her candidacy comes with Jumpin’ Jack Flash himself, Bill Clinton. Would it be a good thing if the country’s politics said bye-bye baby to the children of 1968? Probably. But it won’t happen this time.
As Cartman would put it, why the fuck not? I'm as tired of it as Blue Crab Boulevard:
The saddest thing is that many of the idealists who formed their worldviews in the 1960s do not see that they have become more rigid in their outlook and even more authoritarian than the society they rebelled against in their youth... There is not a single hint that they see the irony in complaining vehemently over the reaction to an inappropriate display of anti-Bush sentiment by a bridge team while simultaneously screaming for the silencing of talk radio.
Steve Hayward suspects that
the Hillary nomination is inevitably going to open up another, but hopefully the last, chapter in the Hatfield-McCoy aspect of the baby boom saga.
But she can still be stopped! Tune in for Vegas debate bloggery later tonight.
Fox Business News
15 Nov 2007 04:51 pm
You know the propaganda is getting thick even for Fox when they lob Bush a question like this:
"You call yourself a supply-sider. Your speech today was all about tax cuts. But were even you surprised at how much revenue came in to the Treasury when you lowered those tax rates?"
The Musharraf Of South America
15 Nov 2007 04:43 pm
Hugo Chavez, natch, who is rather
a would-be Musharraf with large oil revenues—for now.
The Therapeutic Left-Liberalism Of Michael Gerson
15 Nov 2007 04:30 pm
Is there anything even faintly conservative about Michael Gerson? Has there ever been? Here is a man who feels guilty if the government isn't helping anyone who's hurting, a man who supports expanding entitlement programs as his boss did (hence this), a man drenched with white liberal guilt, a man who sees the logic of freedom as somehow heartless, a man who wants politics fused with religious entities to provide a meaning he thinks people cannot find for themselves. Thank God there are still some conservatives who can see through this:
[Gerson] wants to reinvent the entire idea of conservative politics and what it should stand for. Gerson wants to transform conservatism into a vehicle for emotional and spiritual uplift. He writes that a necessary component of presidential politics is a "vision of justice and hope that includes the whole country," and warmly refers to his favorite left wing coffee shop as spreading "the brush fires of suburban radicalism." He worries that the conservative movement’s "emphasis on spending restraint and limited government ... [is] hardly morally inspiring." Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, and William F. Buckley, just to name