Blue State Republican has some thoughts on Mike Huckabee's assumption of the Chair of the National Governor's Association and the bully pulpit it give him for the health care issue...
The leader of Hezbollah is claiming that Washington is pushing Lebanon into civil war with its demands. Does ANYONE really believe that crap?...In other news, pigs are reported circling all of the country's major airports...
In other news of a totally expected nature, the Huffington Post's traffic levels are flatter than my wallet. Many people, this blogger included, predicted that it would soon become nothing more than an afterthought, it's just surprising how quickly that has turned out to be the case (hat tip to the great Tim Blair)...
Saturday, June 04, 2005
2006: A Broad Overview
This is not a comprehensive post detailing the horse race in various states (PoliPundit, for one, always has some good insights on individual races). Instead, it is an early look at the big picture. We all know the conventional wisdom that midterms favor the party out of power, particularly out of the presidency. We also know that George W. Bush is polling extremely poorly. Iraq will not be settled by 2006; Social Security reform is all but dead. Unfairly or not, major media outlets and Democrats have succeeded in labelling the Republican party as 'extremist' and 'theocratic' in the wake of the Terry Schiavo affair.
In other words, it's a pretty gloomy picture. If the election were held today, my predicition would be a loss of at least two Senate seats, and substantially more in the House, though not enough to lose the majority. We've got some time left to make things better, or worse. Though many of my brethren on the right will scream bloody murder to hear it said, the judicial compromise was an important first step in rehabilitating our image. The nuclear option, at this stage, would be premature; it would also be the equivalent of handing our opponents a giant club to beat us about the head with.
Many have criticized this stance as 'weak', 'playing dead', 'a majority governing like a minority'. Perhaps they are right, but I don't think so. My goal is a strong Republican majority - in 2006...2008...2010...2012...and on and on and on. A strategy that focuses on the short-term is no strategy at all. Leave the tactics to the pollsters and the Democrats; let us choose our fights well and save our judicial firepower for the Supreme Court battle that will be coming very soon.
If the Republicans show restraint on Bolton, and the Appeals Court judges, the Democrats will be in a profound jam of their own making when the Supreme Court nomination comes up; they will have lost the PR war, and in modern politics, that's half the battle. If we use our option of last resort this soon, the PR victory will go the Left, and we will be in for a long, bloody Supreme Court fight, and a probable beating at the polls.
A word on the 'Religious Right' in relation to 2006; Republicans need to be cautious in their zeal and remember that a sizable part of the electorate is agnostic or atheist. Voters can sense phoniness in a leader who pretends to embrace religion every time an election comes around, and they LIKE a little religion in their politics. Too much religion, though, scares people away quite quickly. President Bush has done a marvelous job on this issue; saying the right things about Americans having the right to worship, and the right not to worship, as they choose. The Republican leadership has not had the same success, and has given fuel to those who want to flame the rhetorical fires with cries of 'theocracy on the march'.
At this stage, I see two major catalysts shaping the 2006 election. One is the Supreme Court nomination battle, which appears unlikely to wait until after the midterms, given the precarious health of the Chief Justice. The second is the Democratic attacks on Bush's handling of Iraq. The first will turn on public perception of the soundness of the nominee, and we must spare no effort winning that battle. The second, we have little control over; if the Democrats handle it skillfully, they may very well make substantial gains. However, if they go too far, too fast, the public will turn on them, as it always does on a party that defines itself in angry opposition. As 2006 approaches, I'll have occasional looks at some of the hotter horse races, and of course, events that could shape the election. Hope you'll be here with us, it promises to be fun...
In other words, it's a pretty gloomy picture. If the election were held today, my predicition would be a loss of at least two Senate seats, and substantially more in the House, though not enough to lose the majority. We've got some time left to make things better, or worse. Though many of my brethren on the right will scream bloody murder to hear it said, the judicial compromise was an important first step in rehabilitating our image. The nuclear option, at this stage, would be premature; it would also be the equivalent of handing our opponents a giant club to beat us about the head with.
Many have criticized this stance as 'weak', 'playing dead', 'a majority governing like a minority'. Perhaps they are right, but I don't think so. My goal is a strong Republican majority - in 2006...2008...2010...2012...and on and on and on. A strategy that focuses on the short-term is no strategy at all. Leave the tactics to the pollsters and the Democrats; let us choose our fights well and save our judicial firepower for the Supreme Court battle that will be coming very soon.
If the Republicans show restraint on Bolton, and the Appeals Court judges, the Democrats will be in a profound jam of their own making when the Supreme Court nomination comes up; they will have lost the PR war, and in modern politics, that's half the battle. If we use our option of last resort this soon, the PR victory will go the Left, and we will be in for a long, bloody Supreme Court fight, and a probable beating at the polls.
A word on the 'Religious Right' in relation to 2006; Republicans need to be cautious in their zeal and remember that a sizable part of the electorate is agnostic or atheist. Voters can sense phoniness in a leader who pretends to embrace religion every time an election comes around, and they LIKE a little religion in their politics. Too much religion, though, scares people away quite quickly. President Bush has done a marvelous job on this issue; saying the right things about Americans having the right to worship, and the right not to worship, as they choose. The Republican leadership has not had the same success, and has given fuel to those who want to flame the rhetorical fires with cries of 'theocracy on the march'.
At this stage, I see two major catalysts shaping the 2006 election. One is the Supreme Court nomination battle, which appears unlikely to wait until after the midterms, given the precarious health of the Chief Justice. The second is the Democratic attacks on Bush's handling of Iraq. The first will turn on public perception of the soundness of the nominee, and we must spare no effort winning that battle. The second, we have little control over; if the Democrats handle it skillfully, they may very well make substantial gains. However, if they go too far, too fast, the public will turn on them, as it always does on a party that defines itself in angry opposition. As 2006 approaches, I'll have occasional looks at some of the hotter horse races, and of course, events that could shape the election. Hope you'll be here with us, it promises to be fun...
Kerry To Lead Bush Impeachment Effort
Yep, that's what I said; and nope, this isn't one of my frequent Kerry parodies. Ryan James and PoliPundit have the scoop. But wait a minute: did Kerry really say that? The post of Ryan James doesn't mention impeachment; the PoliPundit one does, and I've seen the same headline elsewhere (and Rush Limbaugh is saying it, too) - nowhere, though, have I seen a direct quote from Kerry's mouth that he is going to build an impeachment case, but only that he plans to present the Downing Street Memo to the Congress.
If Kerry did say such a thing, it only confirms his status as a haughty buffoon; for once, though, I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt. If anyone can find a statement that QUOTES Kerry or one of his spokesmen calling for Bush's impeachment, please leave a relevant link in the comments. To be continued...
If Kerry did say such a thing, it only confirms his status as a haughty buffoon; for once, though, I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt. If anyone can find a statement that QUOTES Kerry or one of his spokesmen calling for Bush's impeachment, please leave a relevant link in the comments. To be continued...
Tolerance vs. Surrender: A Followup
A few followups related to my earlier Weekly Jackass, suggested to me by Andy and AJStrata in the comments. The French, facing no end of trouble with integrating their growing Islamic population into their school system, have been experimenting with various approaches. France's inspector-general of education conducted a study, and found, in so many words, that compromise was impossible:
Don Surber has some further thoughts on selective outrage that ties in nicely with some recent themes in these parts, and Scrappleface, as is often the case, uses humor to absolutely knock the ball of out the park. More great humor on the subject from the Therapist...
Best of all, though, is the great Victor Davis Hanson...
Interestingly enough, the investigators found that the schools most effective in dealing with the problem of Islamization were the ones that completely refused to tolerate it. Because of this finding, the Obin report recommends a policy of "no compromise with Islamist demands."Of course, no one expects Chirac's weakened government to follow anywhere near so hard a line.
Don Surber has some further thoughts on selective outrage that ties in nicely with some recent themes in these parts, and Scrappleface, as is often the case, uses humor to absolutely knock the ball of out the park. More great humor on the subject from the Therapist...
Best of all, though, is the great Victor Davis Hanson...
Perhaps I Was A Bit Hasty...
...in awarding my Weekly Jackass this time out. Certainly there were some strong contenders, including Ben Stein, who casually put the blood of millions of Cambodians on a whistleblower, not once, but twice; and then there was the late entry of Tom Harkin:
Harkin, appearing on liberal Randi Rhodes's national radio talk show, became animated as he said of Owen: "This is not a person to put on the bench for a lifetime appointment. This person is wacko! She's wacko!"On the same program, Harkin said Christian broadcasters are "sort of our home-grown Taliban." He added: "They have a direct line to God. And if you don't tune into their line, you're obviously on Satan's line."
Then again, there's no shortage of trophies, is there?...
A Very Special Weekly Jackass
With the global media focusing, for the most part, on the fact that a U.S. soldier kicked a Quran (Koran? Who knows, anymore?), it's easy to miss the fact that it was Muslim detainees who attempted to flush their own Quran/Koran. That's it for me...I've been chillin' lately, talking about overblown outrage, and generally sounding like a moderate.
What's missing here, though, is the outrage. We were assured, as ugly Americans, that the Muslim Holy Book was different...you had to wear eight pairs of gloves, a decontamination suit, and a tuxedo just to touch it, if I remember correctly. And when it looked like an infidel, an American infidel, no less - wait, check that- an American military infidel - had flushed one of these babies down the crapper, thanks to a poorly sourced story from good ol' Newsweek, there were riots. People were killed - it was a major atrocity! Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia were never as evil as the U.S.! Well, I guess it's true - the Muslim Holy Book REALLY IS different.
Except it isn't. Because if it were really true, all that politically correct, culturally understanding crap that got forced down our throats, why, surely the fact that a MUSLIM desecrated his own Holy Book would bring out thousands in the streets, demanding his head. How outrageous! A Muslim - trying to flush the Holy Book!...but there's silence. Oh, that's not true, either...no, there's plenty of noise - about somebody kicking a book.
At Al-Jazeera: Pentagon confirms Quran desecretion is the headline...NOT ONE DAMN WORD about detainees flushing it...
The NY Times: Might as well be the Al-Jazeera story...again, nothing at all about detainees and desecration..
Meanwhile, the lunatics at the Daily Kos have broken out the champagne, not because it was detainees and not troops doing the flushing, but again, because somebody kicked a book (anti-American Left? Naaaahhh....)...
So we have a group prize this week. The Jackass belongs to:
What's missing here, though, is the outrage. We were assured, as ugly Americans, that the Muslim Holy Book was different...you had to wear eight pairs of gloves, a decontamination suit, and a tuxedo just to touch it, if I remember correctly. And when it looked like an infidel, an American infidel, no less - wait, check that- an American military infidel - had flushed one of these babies down the crapper, thanks to a poorly sourced story from good ol' Newsweek, there were riots. People were killed - it was a major atrocity! Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia were never as evil as the U.S.! Well, I guess it's true - the Muslim Holy Book REALLY IS different.
Except it isn't. Because if it were really true, all that politically correct, culturally understanding crap that got forced down our throats, why, surely the fact that a MUSLIM desecrated his own Holy Book would bring out thousands in the streets, demanding his head. How outrageous! A Muslim - trying to flush the Holy Book!...but there's silence. Oh, that's not true, either...no, there's plenty of noise - about somebody kicking a book.
At Al-Jazeera: Pentagon confirms Quran desecretion is the headline...NOT ONE DAMN WORD about detainees flushing it...
The NY Times: Might as well be the Al-Jazeera story...again, nothing at all about detainees and desecration..
Meanwhile, the lunatics at the Daily Kos have broken out the champagne, not because it was detainees and not troops doing the flushing, but again, because somebody kicked a book (anti-American Left? Naaaahhh....)...
So we have a group prize this week. The Jackass belongs to:
- everyone who lectures U.S. troops on lack of respect for the Muslim faith while attacking the right of American Christians to have a political voice;
- every hyena at the Daily Kos that thinks that reports that reflect badly on our military are a cause for celebration;
- but mostly, every damn theocratic Islamic fanatic that's ever harmed a hair on the head of an innocent American, Iraqi, man, woman, or child, with your vile hypocrisy and evil butchery.
Friday, June 03, 2005
Not Walking Or Talking Like A (Lame) Duck
So says Janet Hook of the L.A. Times (hat tip to RealClearPolitics), who paints a portrait of a George Bush undeterred by sagging poll numbers, sniping from the media, and a foot-dragging Congress. Hook says Bush's tenacity (or call it stubbornness, if you prefer) will suit him well as he faces increasingly bleak prospects for some of his pet reforms. That's what I love about Bush - the very traits that infuriate his critics are what make him a most effective president. The biggest problem Bush faces, and Hook spells it out, as well, is a reluctant Congress that faces 2006 with trepidation...as well they should (more on that cryptic ending later in the weekend)...
Enough Politics For the Moment
Let's take a breather - Norman Geras, by way of our good friend bebere, is asking for a list of favorite actors/actresses, with an overall maximum of ten, and a maximum of seven of either sex. Without further ado, here are my own choices:
- Robert DeNiro - the king. Plagued lately by poor choices of roles, but his title is secure.
- Kevin Spacey - plagued even more than DeNiro by poor choices, but all is forgiven for the Usual Suspects.
- Cary Grant - Archibald Leach is still the suavest man who ever lived.
- Gene Hackman - Unforgettable in Unforgiven.
- Harrison Ford - the recent Star Wars trilogy makes you miss his Han Solo more than ever.
- Audrey Hepburn - absolutely stunning.
- Katherine Hepburn - the Philadelphia Story - enough said...
- Sharon Stone - do I really need to say anything?
- Jodie Foster - my all-time favorite FBI agent.
- Nicole Kidman - classy, beautiful, and smart enough to leave Tom Cruise.
Today's Must-Read: Alexander McClure on the 'Deal'
I am very impressed with this post by Alexander McClure at PoliPundit addressing the proper response to 'the deal'. Here's a taste:
Expressing outrage...would only re-enforce the perception that we had lost. Frist himself chose not to speak against the compromise or the seven Senators. Why, then, should the rest of the caucus not follow his lead - to cautiously support the deal's acceptance of three justices but to demand up-or- down votes on the rest? A minority faction! This isn't the first time in the history of the institution that a faction within a party has stymied the party's overall goals and objectives. The Whig Party was practically destroyed by the split between pro-compromise and anti-compromise Whigs after 1850.Spoken like a true Coalition member...
It's Put Up Or Shut Up Time
Coalition member AJStrata discusses an article in the Washington Post indicating that Bush is poised to send dozens of judicial nominees to the Senate. Those of us on both sides of the debate over the 'deal' will soon find out how the Democrats in the Senate plan to define 'extraordinary circumstances'. Although we're talking lower court nominees, it still seems plan that, if the Democrats plan to retain any credibility, they will have to move quickly on most, if not all, of these nominees. By definition, 'extraordinary' circumstances cannot become the norm. Any overuse of delaying tactics will signal, even to the supporters of the deal such as myself, that all bets are off; in such a circumstance, it's hard to see how the nuclear option won't be brought back to the table, with more support this time around. To be continued, to be sure...
Ben Stein Has Gone Insane...
...that's the only conclusion I can draw as he once again repeats the incredibly slanderous accusation that W. Mark Felt has the genocide in Cambodia on his hands for revealing the shenanigans of the Nixon White House.
Ben, get it straight...Nixon didn't just lie; he sabotaged the Paris Peace Talks by leaking word to the South Vietnamese negotiators that he was going to win in '68 and urging them not to sign any agreements, thus prolonging the Vietnam War; he treated the federal government as his own goon squad, ordering FBI wiretaps and IRS audits on his enemies with no compelling national security reason to do so; and his mere 'lying' was an obstruction of justice in that it impeded federal and congressional investigations.
Look, people went to prison over Watergate; we aren't talking about a small matter. Whatever Felt did, and however you feel about it, his transgressions pale in significance to the betrayal of the public trust perpetrated by Nixon. And this is a lifelong Republican talking...
UPDATE 12:45 p.m.: Those who think I'm exaggerating Nixon's behavior during the '68 campaign re: Vietnam should read The Trial of Henry Kissinger by the great Christopher Hitchens (see my short excerpt in the comments).
Ben, get it straight...Nixon didn't just lie; he sabotaged the Paris Peace Talks by leaking word to the South Vietnamese negotiators that he was going to win in '68 and urging them not to sign any agreements, thus prolonging the Vietnam War; he treated the federal government as his own goon squad, ordering FBI wiretaps and IRS audits on his enemies with no compelling national security reason to do so; and his mere 'lying' was an obstruction of justice in that it impeded federal and congressional investigations.
Look, people went to prison over Watergate; we aren't talking about a small matter. Whatever Felt did, and however you feel about it, his transgressions pale in significance to the betrayal of the public trust perpetrated by Nixon. And this is a lifelong Republican talking...
UPDATE 12:45 p.m.: Those who think I'm exaggerating Nixon's behavior during the '68 campaign re: Vietnam should read The Trial of Henry Kissinger by the great Christopher Hitchens (see my short excerpt in the comments).
Rather: I'm a Victim of My Own Shortcomings
Appearing on Larry King Live, Rather also continued to deny the infamous National Guard documents were forgeries:
In related news, John Kerry told Decision '08 that he, too, was a victim of his own shortcomings:The veteran newsman told King that he considered both men conservative, and therefore not totally unbiased, in the probe...
"The situation we had and still have is the last line of this hasn't been written. I've acknowledged that we didn't do it perfectly. I wish we had."
"Journalism is not a precise science," Rather added.
Although admitting the documents had weaknesses, he said that "the facts were supported by all kinds of things other than the documents."
Thornburgh and Boccardi, he noted, found the story wasn't the result of political or personal bias. They also weren't able to prove the documents were fraudulent.
"As you know, politics is not a precise science. Many people use my statements that I have signed the Form SF-180, or that I have promised to sign the form, or indeed that such a form exists, to imply that said form will or must or shall be signed by me, or by someone acting on said person's behalf, and furthermore, that the signing of said form should be subsequently followed by delivery of the required documentation to the appropriate repository, whereupon inquiries could be made in the proper manner. We can do better: I have a plan..."
Thursday, June 02, 2005
Quick Shots: Over To You, Tom Maguire
The Minuteman throws a few body blows at JFK II over his most recent whining...
John Hawkings of Right Wing News fame has a new site up called the Conservative Grapevine...
W. C. Varones brought to my attention this appallingly horrible piece by Ben Stein, where he basically accuses W. Mark Felt of genocide...astounding (and Ben, Nixon did a lot more than lie).
And we have Clint to thank for bringing this nice piece on our buddy Hillary to our attention...
John Hawkings of Right Wing News fame has a new site up called the Conservative Grapevine...
W. C. Varones brought to my attention this appallingly horrible piece by Ben Stein, where he basically accuses W. Mark Felt of genocide...astounding (and Ben, Nixon did a lot more than lie).
And we have Clint to thank for bringing this nice piece on our buddy Hillary to our attention...
Freedom of Speech: It's Not Just For Breakfast Anymore
I'm not a First Amendment scholar, but it seems to me that the FEC has no business in the blogosphere, unless a blog is exclusively allied with a presidential candidate (including financial backing or compensation other than ads). Not even that would be a concern if it weren't for McCain-Feingold, the law that dispels what good feeling I and many others have towards the honorable former POW. How in the world this odious law hasn't been struck down as unconstitutional is beyond me.
There is only one day left to submit public comments to the FEC regarding their forthcoming ruling over, among other things, the Internet and political speech. I have already submitted my comment; I urge you to do so, as well, before time runs out. Don't take for granted that blogs won't be touched, or you may be in for a nasty surprise. You can find out more from two excellent posts by Coalition members the Instapundit and Sophistpundit, both of whom find plenty to be concerned about.
Elsewhere, Coalition member John Podhoretz spotlights some long overdue recognition for the great Claudia Rosett...and speaking of long overdue recognition, join me in a round of applause for the esteemed Dr. Shackleford on the occasion of his very first Instalanche...
There is only one day left to submit public comments to the FEC regarding their forthcoming ruling over, among other things, the Internet and political speech. I have already submitted my comment; I urge you to do so, as well, before time runs out. Don't take for granted that blogs won't be touched, or you may be in for a nasty surprise. You can find out more from two excellent posts by Coalition members the Instapundit and Sophistpundit, both of whom find plenty to be concerned about.
Elsewhere, Coalition member John Podhoretz spotlights some long overdue recognition for the great Claudia Rosett...and speaking of long overdue recognition, join me in a round of applause for the esteemed Dr. Shackleford on the occasion of his very first Instalanche...
John Kerry: Democrats Can't Be Heard Over Right-Wing Noise Machine
Jeff Jacoby takes a shot at my favorite punching bag today with a story on how John Kerry is reviving the myth of 'the vast right-wing conspiracy', even if he doesn't have the courage to name it as such. Jacoby rightly pooh-poohs the notion that conservative think tanks and rich Republican donors have an untoward effect on the national discourse; in fact, as Jacoby points out, the accusation is far more accurate when leveled at the Democrats. See this excellent project by David Horowitz, Discover the Network (but take it with a grain of salt...I don't like paranoid conspiracy theories from either the right or left. It's an excellent informational tool, but it is less a proof of conspiracy than it is an affirmation that people tend to reinforce the ideas they already hold)...
The Latest Coalition Member: An Unnamed Senior Bush Aide
Yes, it appears our own Coalition of the Chillin' now has its version of Deep Throat, though I suspect this mystery will be far less famous than its predecessor. Guess with me who might have said the following:
One senior Bush aide, who declined to be named so he could speak freely, suggested the dismal numbers were directly related to the lengthy and arcane debate over the use of the filibuster in the Senate. "People don't want to follow this issue in such mind-numbing detail, so what you are seeing are the poll numbers that people feel Congress doesn't care about the issues they care about," he said. The aide also cautioned that the heated rhetoric about the so-called nuclear option and a possible shutdown of the Senate was alienating voters. "People will tune in and say: 'Did the Apocalypse happen?' Then they'll find out nothing has changed," the aide said. "The rhetoric doesn't match reality.""The rhetoric doesn't match reality." A truer, more succinct encapsulation of the Coalition credo I couldn't imagine. So who was the author? I'd be interested in your guesses - mine is Karl Rove...
Howard Fineman on Warner 2008
Howard Fineman throws the spotlight on Mark Warner's probable 2008 bid. As Fineman puts it, '...he's got youth, money, a base...and he's a Southern governor.' Good things all. The problem I have with Warner is the mirror image of McCain's; is he acceptable to the hard core, or at least acceptable enough to make it throuogh the primaries? Look for a candidate profile of Warner soon...
Triple Throat
For this morning's must-reads, I give you Bob Woodward's account of how Mark Felt became Deep Throat. Also, Peggy Noonan asks, 'Was Mark Felt a hero?'; Thomas Lifson sure doesn't think so...
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
Saying Hello to a Couple of New Blogs
Coalition member Beth is part of a new effort called the Cotillion, a group of lovely lady bloggers that looks quite promising...
Patrick Ruffini is just making me insanely jealous with this brilliant idea, the 2008 Presidential Wire...for this site, needless to say, it's an instant daily read...way to go, Patrick, I love it...
Finally, because I haven't found anyplace else to mention it today, AJ Strata brought his fisking of the WaPo's Harold Meyerson to my attention...Europe as a model for the U.S.? Not anymore...(of course, the Dutch followed France in rejecting the new EU Constitution - but that's a subject for another post)...
Patrick Ruffini is just making me insanely jealous with this brilliant idea, the 2008 Presidential Wire...for this site, needless to say, it's an instant daily read...way to go, Patrick, I love it...
Finally, because I haven't found anyplace else to mention it today, AJ Strata brought his fisking of the WaPo's Harold Meyerson to my attention...Europe as a model for the U.S.? Not anymore...(of course, the Dutch followed France in rejecting the new EU Constitution - but that's a subject for another post)...
A New Poll (I Think You'll Like This One)
Let's have a little fun here, with a hypothetical 2008 scenario...
Interestingly, the last poll, on your anticipated 2006 results, had just under 50% saying the Republicans gain in both houses. Well, this blog has a mostly conservative readership, so I guess that's to be expected - but 22% said the Democrats gain in both houses (of course, historically, that's probably the safest call - party out of the Presidency in the mid-term, blah, blah)...
I know many of you would choose the option to vote for McCain proudly...but you'll have to settle for holding your nose (it's not a scientific poll).
Interestingly, the last poll, on your anticipated 2006 results, had just under 50% saying the Republicans gain in both houses. Well, this blog has a mostly conservative readership, so I guess that's to be expected - but 22% said the Democrats gain in both houses (of course, historically, that's probably the safest call - party out of the Presidency in the mid-term, blah, blah)...
I know many of you would choose the option to vote for McCain proudly...but you'll have to settle for holding your nose (it's not a scientific poll).
Saving Outrage for the Outrageous
Lots of good stuff going on, and I don't hardly know where to begin, so best to plunge ahead, I guess...
Some very excellent bloggers (Jeff Goldstein at Protein Wisdom, The Apologist, Patterico, the Commissar) and one mediocre blogger have been going back and forth about, on the small level, the 'deal', and on the bigger level, 'partisanship' vs. 'moderation' and what constitutes a good Republican. The scare quotes are there for a reason, because I think more unites us than separates us.
A lot of the recent activity at this blog has been devoted to an idea, albeit perhaps a poorly articulated one. On a lark, I proposed a Coalition and got a big response, so I think a lot of other people share this idea. It's not a great idea, or a particularly original one, but here it is: a lot of time on a lot of blogs is spent working up a good sense of outrage. Outrage can be a good thing; it can also get a bit tiresome, in the manner of Chicken Little.
Many outrageous things are going on in this world, and some outrages are bigger than others. Here's what I find outrageous:
By saying that, I'm not saying the judicial fight is not important. If that's what outrages you, then by all means get outraged. The rhetoric that flowed, though...my God, folks, it was a procedural compromise in an elected body. Nothing got set in stone, no one died, and we have the ability to throw the bums out, if we so choose.
This may all sound a bit rich from a guy who has a 'Weekly Jackass'. Certainly, I throw out a little manure from time to time, too. I keep going back to the Daily Kos, though; a successful website it may be, but lord, is it tiresome! Infantile minds wishing for the death of Joe Lieberman because he's not a 'progressive', constant one-up-manship, higher and higher levels of bile and rhetorical excess. Jeff Goldstein took me to task a little in the comments for suggesting that originality and independence were necessary for the long-term health of the blogosphere. Well, who am I to say, and to say poorly, at that...but this is what I was getting at. In this blogger's opinion (and that's really all we are, for the most part - op-ed columnists for the world's biggest newspaper), I saw and am seeing some recent signs of Kossack-like behavior on the right, and I don't like it one bit.
And I reserve my right to say so, and yours to disagree...
Some very excellent bloggers (Jeff Goldstein at Protein Wisdom, The Apologist, Patterico, the Commissar) and one mediocre blogger have been going back and forth about, on the small level, the 'deal', and on the bigger level, 'partisanship' vs. 'moderation' and what constitutes a good Republican. The scare quotes are there for a reason, because I think more unites us than separates us.
A lot of the recent activity at this blog has been devoted to an idea, albeit perhaps a poorly articulated one. On a lark, I proposed a Coalition and got a big response, so I think a lot of other people share this idea. It's not a great idea, or a particularly original one, but here it is: a lot of time on a lot of blogs is spent working up a good sense of outrage. Outrage can be a good thing; it can also get a bit tiresome, in the manner of Chicken Little.
Many outrageous things are going on in this world, and some outrages are bigger than others. Here's what I find outrageous:
- Terrorists are killing our soldiers in Iraq.
- Kim Jong-Il is running a Stalinist, countrywide gulag, while Amnesty International gets headlines criticizing the U.S. for some (admittedly disgusting, but isolated) regrettable lapses.
- Darfur.
- The United Nations sex scandals and Oil-For-Food.
By saying that, I'm not saying the judicial fight is not important. If that's what outrages you, then by all means get outraged. The rhetoric that flowed, though...my God, folks, it was a procedural compromise in an elected body. Nothing got set in stone, no one died, and we have the ability to throw the bums out, if we so choose.
This may all sound a bit rich from a guy who has a 'Weekly Jackass'. Certainly, I throw out a little manure from time to time, too. I keep going back to the Daily Kos, though; a successful website it may be, but lord, is it tiresome! Infantile minds wishing for the death of Joe Lieberman because he's not a 'progressive', constant one-up-manship, higher and higher levels of bile and rhetorical excess. Jeff Goldstein took me to task a little in the comments for suggesting that originality and independence were necessary for the long-term health of the blogosphere. Well, who am I to say, and to say poorly, at that...but this is what I was getting at. In this blogger's opinion (and that's really all we are, for the most part - op-ed columnists for the world's biggest newspaper), I saw and am seeing some recent signs of Kossack-like behavior on the right, and I don't like it one bit.
And I reserve my right to say so, and yours to disagree...
A Must-Read for Coalition Members
The Politburo Diktat (a Coalition member) has a remarkably well done post entitled 'Questioning Patriotism' that I strongly urge you to read. The Commissar argues that by donning the guise of unflinching, partisan patriotism, with no room for dissent from the party line, that many bloggers are being quite unpatriotic, whether consciously or not. I prefer to stear clear of the 'patriotism' line, as I find it to be too inflammatory a term for reasonable argument (i.e., 'How dare you question my patriotism?', etc., etc.).
However, I do concur, and find it increasingly troublesome, that there is a whole lot of playing to the bleachers going on in the blogosphere (and I've done it, too, lest anyone accuse me of hypocrisy). I'm trying more and more to avoid it, though; that doesn't mean I'm a 'maverick' or 'contrarian'; I just happen to think that originality and a degree of independence are essential for the long-term health of the blogging community.
However, I do concur, and find it increasingly troublesome, that there is a whole lot of playing to the bleachers going on in the blogosphere (and I've done it, too, lest anyone accuse me of hypocrisy). I'm trying more and more to avoid it, though; that doesn't mean I'm a 'maverick' or 'contrarian'; I just happen to think that originality and a degree of independence are essential for the long-term health of the blogging community.
The Minuteman Makes the Case Against Krugman
One of my favorite bloggers, Tom Maguire, takes note of the now-public feud between former NY Times public editor Daniel Okrent and serial liar and full-time Bush hater Paul Krugman. It's a shame that the debate wasn't between Maguire and Krugman, because Tom's been on the beat for what seems like ages, and he always delivers the goods. The latest is no exception, including an amusing debate over the meaning of 'mathematically impossible' (apparently, for Krugman, that means 'highly unlikely')...highly recommended.
Papa Bush on Jeb: Maybe Someday
Jeb Bush's presidential possibilities are being talked up by one who should know (of course, he can be excused for a little bias): George H.W. Bush. Interestingly, though, the patriarch seems to feel that the time hasn't come for Jeb, yet...Jeb 2012, anyone? Of course, all depends on what happens in 2008...
Wictory Wednesday - Santorum Edition
PoliPundit has a Wictory Wednesday post up helping Rick Santorum; you can see the details here. Santorum has been vilified often, both justly (the Hitler comment - for which he DID apologize) and unjustly (his gay marriage comments taken WAY out of context). He's got an uphill battle, and he's gonna need all the support he can get, so if you're able and so inclined, help him out...
UPDATE 8:56 a.m.- Our good friend Fargus mentioned that he hoped I wouldn't post on this and asks my opinion of Santorum. I put the post up as a courtesy (after all, I've enrolled in the Wictory Wednesday group), but as you can probably tell, I'm not the biggest Santorum fan. I'm not endorsing him, that's why I say 'if you're so inclined'. If and when I do endorse someone, I'll try to make it explicit...
UPDATE 8:56 a.m.- Our good friend Fargus mentioned that he hoped I wouldn't post on this and asks my opinion of Santorum. I put the post up as a courtesy (after all, I've enrolled in the Wictory Wednesday group), but as you can probably tell, I'm not the biggest Santorum fan. I'm not endorsing him, that's why I say 'if you're so inclined'. If and when I do endorse someone, I'll try to make it explicit...
The Mixed Reaction Continues...
Not everyone shares my sentiments (imagine that!) about the value of W. Mark Felt's role as Deep Throat:
The NY Times has a nice (if too short) roundup of comments from some Watergate-era figures...
More reaction from contemporaries at the Washington Post...
Richard Cohen in the Washington Post (not often I'm on the same side as him!) says he's a hero, while Timothy Noah says everyone comes out a little stinky (including Woodward and Bernstein) (hat tip to RealClearPolitics)...
The Washington Post even has a special section set up for the story...
Here's the Vanity Fair article that started it all...
The NY Times has a nice (if too short) roundup of comments from some Watergate-era figures...
More reaction from contemporaries at the Washington Post...
Richard Cohen in the Washington Post (not often I'm on the same side as him!) says he's a hero, while Timothy Noah says everyone comes out a little stinky (including Woodward and Bernstein) (hat tip to RealClearPolitics)...
The Washington Post even has a special section set up for the story...
Here's the Vanity Fair article that started it all...
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
In Praise Of: W. Mark Felt
For political junkies, there can be few stories bigger than the unveiling of Deep Throat. Hundreds of thousands will re-read their dog-eared copies of All the President's Men, looking for the clues, the contradictions, the truth, and the fiction, and we will all anxiously await the inevitable Deep Throat book by Woodward and Bernstein, collectively or separately.
Before I delve too deeply into the arcana, though, I want to state unequivocably that Deep Throat is an American hero. His legacy is secure; though some will vilify him for various reasons (he only did it because he was selfish; he wanted the FBI director job and acted out of spite; and God knows what else), let it be said that he performed a great service for this country.
Richard Nixon was a great man, a man of accomplishment, intellectual heft, and fierce tenacity; he was also easily offended and carried a giant chip on his shoulder, two dangerous qualities for a man with such power. If one wonders where today's progressives get their deep paranoia, look no further than Richard Nixon; he lowered the bar in multiple ways. First, he lowered the bar for the presidents themselves - only after Nixon could Bill Clinton lie to a grand jury and excuse it by saying 'it was just about sex'. Nixon also lowered the bar for the public; how could one's faith in the institution of the presidency not be weakened when the occupant lies, cheats, breaks into offices, and obstructs justice? Doesn't it make it easier to believe that Bush would lie about Iraq, when Nixon lied - for what? To punish his enemies? To dig up dirt? To settle scores? Certainly not for the greater good of the country.
It is in this climate that the contribution of Felt must be considered. Although Watergate was one of our darkest hours, there is yet some daylight; after all, a President fell, an FBI man leaked, a reporter kept his source confidential despite enormous pressure to reveal his identity (and he told his editor, too), and through all of this, the Republic stood. No shots were fired; the government functioned, and Americans got by.
Would the world have been worse off if we had never had a Deep Throat? That is a question that cannot be answered. Some behavior is unacceptable at any level, though; when that behavior takes place in our highest office, it must be rooted out and punished...and Felt made that task immeasurably easier. For that, he deserves the thanks of a grateful nation.
UPDATE 8:57 p.m. central: Many thanks to the great Tim Blair for the link. I'm noticing a trend here that's a bit disturbing. A lot of people are minimizing the impact Deep Throat and the Washington Post had; that sounds a little disingenuous coming from us bloggers, who after all, did plenty of crowing after Rathergate and Easongate. Remember where that '-gate' suffix came from?...
However, for a quite persuasive viewpoint quite different from my own, look to Power Line and Edward Jay Epstein. Essential reading...
And many thanks to the lovely and talented La Shawn Barber for the link, as well...
UPDATE 2 10:58 p.m. central: The reaction from some Coalition members:
PoliBlog says 'it's a generational thing'...
Instapundit barely notices...
Prof Bainbridge is not convinced that we know who Deep Throat is even now...
Viking Pundit is dreading the inevitable 'Meet the Press' appearance ('...hell, I could win a Pulitzer too if I had a deputy director of the FBI feeding me critical information')...
Alexander McClure says it's time for some good ol'-fashioned Nixon-bashing from the MSM...
And State of Flux says, well, nothing about Felt, but has some nice words about the Coalition, so read it anyway, won't you?...
Before I delve too deeply into the arcana, though, I want to state unequivocably that Deep Throat is an American hero. His legacy is secure; though some will vilify him for various reasons (he only did it because he was selfish; he wanted the FBI director job and acted out of spite; and God knows what else), let it be said that he performed a great service for this country.
Richard Nixon was a great man, a man of accomplishment, intellectual heft, and fierce tenacity; he was also easily offended and carried a giant chip on his shoulder, two dangerous qualities for a man with such power. If one wonders where today's progressives get their deep paranoia, look no further than Richard Nixon; he lowered the bar in multiple ways. First, he lowered the bar for the presidents themselves - only after Nixon could Bill Clinton lie to a grand jury and excuse it by saying 'it was just about sex'. Nixon also lowered the bar for the public; how could one's faith in the institution of the presidency not be weakened when the occupant lies, cheats, breaks into offices, and obstructs justice? Doesn't it make it easier to believe that Bush would lie about Iraq, when Nixon lied - for what? To punish his enemies? To dig up dirt? To settle scores? Certainly not for the greater good of the country.
It is in this climate that the contribution of Felt must be considered. Although Watergate was one of our darkest hours, there is yet some daylight; after all, a President fell, an FBI man leaked, a reporter kept his source confidential despite enormous pressure to reveal his identity (and he told his editor, too), and through all of this, the Republic stood. No shots were fired; the government functioned, and Americans got by.
Would the world have been worse off if we had never had a Deep Throat? That is a question that cannot be answered. Some behavior is unacceptable at any level, though; when that behavior takes place in our highest office, it must be rooted out and punished...and Felt made that task immeasurably easier. For that, he deserves the thanks of a grateful nation.
UPDATE 8:57 p.m. central: Many thanks to the great Tim Blair for the link. I'm noticing a trend here that's a bit disturbing. A lot of people are minimizing the impact Deep Throat and the Washington Post had; that sounds a little disingenuous coming from us bloggers, who after all, did plenty of crowing after Rathergate and Easongate. Remember where that '-gate' suffix came from?...
However, for a quite persuasive viewpoint quite different from my own, look to Power Line and Edward Jay Epstein. Essential reading...
And many thanks to the lovely and talented La Shawn Barber for the link, as well...
UPDATE 2 10:58 p.m. central: The reaction from some Coalition members:
PoliBlog says 'it's a generational thing'...
Instapundit barely notices...
Prof Bainbridge is not convinced that we know who Deep Throat is even now...
Viking Pundit is dreading the inevitable 'Meet the Press' appearance ('...hell, I could win a Pulitzer too if I had a deputy director of the FBI feeding me critical information')...
Alexander McClure says it's time for some good ol'-fashioned Nixon-bashing from the MSM...
And State of Flux says, well, nothing about Felt, but has some nice words about the Coalition, so read it anyway, won't you?...
And We Have A Winner...
Bob Woodward has just confirmed that W. Mark Felt was, indeed, Deep Throat. And so ends the greatest political mystery of modern times. I have at least three books I have purchased over the years that just assured me that it was someone other than Felt. This one just felt right, though... from the moment I saw the initial story, I had a feeling this was the one; it just had the air of truth about it. Not that it was Felt, for he has been named before, but the circumstances around the announcement. Much more on this later, I'm sure...
Quick Shots: Don't Count Out Jeb...Yet
Coalition member John Podhoretz writes in the New York Post on the possibility of a Jeb Bush 2008 run, and finds it implausible, but intriguing; basically, if Jeb had a different last name, he'd waltz away with the nomination, says Podhoretz, who goes on to argue that a Hillary run might make the point moot, by pitting dynasty against dynasty...
Meanwhile, intensive research via Google reveals an Atlantic Monthly article from 1992 by James Mann that hints strongly at W. Mark Felt as Deep Throat...
Meanwhile, intensive research via Google reveals an Atlantic Monthly article from 1992 by James Mann that hints strongly at W. Mark Felt as Deep Throat...
Is W. Mark Felt 'Deep Throat'?
Vanity Fair claims he is, and, if the account is accurate, Bob Woodward is giving one of those non-denial confirmations he made famous (and Newsweek infamous). Felt, a former FBI man, has been fingered before, and has denied the allegation. More on this as events warrant...
UPDATE 1:11 p.m.: Three years ago, Timothy Noah was all over Felt as the prime suspect at Slate; don't miss the intriguing hints surrounding a lunch Woodward had with Felt in 1999....
UPDATE 1:11 p.m.: Three years ago, Timothy Noah was all over Felt as the prime suspect at Slate; don't miss the intriguing hints surrounding a lunch Woodward had with Felt in 1999....
Novak on the Bolton Delay: Blame Christopher Dodd
Robert Novak has a harsh critique of the filibuster deal, and even harsher words for the Senate, in this piece at RealClearPolitics. Mostly, he blames the collapse of the agreement to vote for cloture on the Bolton nomination on Christopher Dodd, who has been mixing it up for years with Bolton over the normalization of relations with Cuba (Dodd is for, Bolton against). Novak blasts the agreement reached last week, and mocks the 'good feelings' that resulted, but notice this bombshell:
Could the "nuclear option" (forcing consideration of judicial nominees by a majority vote) be used to confirm Bolton? It is not "off the table," as Reid claims. Frist intends to use it if Democrats filibuster additional judicial nominees. Not all seven Republicans in on the compromise would oppose him in that case."...Frist intends to use it if Democrats filibuster additional judicial nominees." If that is so, then what have the Republicans lost? We got to take the moral high ground, we got three nominees a guaranteed up and down vote, and apparently, according to the well-sourced Novak, we fully intend to go nuclear if the Dems attempt a filibuster of other judicial nominees. Sounds like a win-win to me, and only reinforces my conviction that the Republicans have taken the Democrats for a ride on this one...
Krauthammer Knocks One Out of the Park
Charles Krauthammer has a great opinion piece in the newest Time defending Americans of faith who wish to participate in the political process. Many of the themes I have touched on here are included, such as certainty vs. relativism and the ridiculous assertion that participation by religious Americans in the political process is forbidden. Some highlights:
The Op-Ed pages are filled with jeremiads about believers--principally evangelical Christians and traditional Catholics--bent on turning the U.S. into a theocracy. Now I am not much of a believer, but there is something deeply wrong--indeed, deeply un-American--about fearing people simply because they believe. It seems perfectly O.K. for secularists to impose their secular views on America, such as, say, legalized abortion or gay marriage. But when someone takes the contrary view, all of a sudden he is trying to impose his view on you. And if that contrary view happens to be rooted in Scripture or some kind of religious belief system, the very public advocacy of that view becomes a violation of the U.S. constitutional order.Highly recommended...
What nonsense. The campaign against certainty is merely the philosophical veneer for an attempt to politically marginalize and intellectually disenfranchise believers. Instead of arguing the merits of any issue, secularists are trying to win the argument by default on the grounds that the other side displays unhealthy certainty or, even worse, unseemly religiosity...
Nothing has more aroused and infuriated the sophisticates than the foreign policy of a religiously inclined President, based on the notion of a universal aspiration to freedom and of America's need and duty to advance it around the world. Such liberationism, confident and unapologetic, is portrayed as arrogant crusading, a deep violation of the tradition of American pluralism, ecumenism, modesty and skeptical restraint.
That widespread portrayal is invention masquerading as history. You want certainty? You want religiosity? How about a people who overthrow the political order of the ages, go to war and occasion thousands of deaths in the name of self-evident truths and unalienable rights endowed by the Creator? That was 1776. The universality, the sacredness and the divine origin of freedom are enshrined in our founding document. The Founders, believers all, signed it. Thomas Jefferson wrote it. And not even Jefferson, the most skeptical of the lot, had the slightest doubt about it.
McCain: Another View
The San Diego Union-Tribune, while making many of the same points I and countless others have (McCain has a tough run in the primaries, he's not a darling of the Religious Right), is decidedly more upbeat about his prospects than I am. Question, though - do McCain supporters really deserve the moniker 'McCainiacs'? Is anybody really that stoked about a McCain run? And does McCain deserve a Howard Dean leftover?...
The WSJ on McCain 2008 - When Pigs Fly
Brendan Miniter, in a piece that makes it clear he will not be joining the Coalition, assesses John McCain's White House strategy, and finds it lacking, to say the least. Miniter says McCain's 'maverick moderatism' makes him a power in the Senate, but kills his presidential aspirations (a conclusion that I endorse). Worth a look...
Monday, May 30, 2005
Gulf Coast Bandit on The Bolton Delay: Doing the Coalition Proud
Quick Shots: Purity in Politics (or the Lack Thereof)
Jay Tea at Wizbang has some thoughts that should be read by those (like a certain someone who keeps commenting here) who think politics is a matter of 'purity'...
The good Dr. Shackleford is all over the story of a former American hostage indicted for involvement in...a hostage plot!...
Trey Jackson has the video of President Bush's Memorial Day address (hat tip to Michelle Malkin, who has plenty of other great Memorial Day links, as well)...
The good Dr. Shackleford is all over the story of a former American hostage indicted for involvement in...a hostage plot!...
Trey Jackson has the video of President Bush's Memorial Day address (hat tip to Michelle Malkin, who has plenty of other great Memorial Day links, as well)...
Memorial Day Coalition News...
(At the risk of sounding like a broken record to my regulars, here's the Jacques Chirac Weekly Jackass piece, if you're looking for it - Blogger template is whacked out...and yes, I do plan on doing something about it, very soon!)...
Finally home after a fun weekend. Congrats to my niece and all the other recent graduates...
A timely and appropriate post from My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy...
AJ Strata is hopeful about some adult stem cell news...
Say Uncle has a DVD review that's off the beaten path...
TigerHawk has a long, excellent post on American power and democracy movements...
Tinkerty Tonk spills the beans about some really exciting celebrity encounters...really, really exciting...I'm talking excitement city here....
Blackjack has some excellent advice for those unsure about how to react to the French rejection of the EU Constitution - if it makes Jacques Chirac sad, it's good news...
That's it for now, but hey, why not check out another two or three Coalition blogs at random? Beats watching paint peel...
Finally home after a fun weekend. Congrats to my niece and all the other recent graduates...
A timely and appropriate post from My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy...
AJ Strata is hopeful about some adult stem cell news...
Say Uncle has a DVD review that's off the beaten path...
TigerHawk has a long, excellent post on American power and democracy movements...
Tinkerty Tonk spills the beans about some really exciting celebrity encounters...really, really exciting...I'm talking excitement city here....
Blackjack has some excellent advice for those unsure about how to react to the French rejection of the EU Constitution - if it makes Jacques Chirac sad, it's good news...
That's it for now, but hey, why not check out another two or three Coalition blogs at random? Beats watching paint peel...
Happy Memorial Day!...
(Please note: if you've landed here from the link to my Weekly Jackass piece on Jacques Chirac, please click here. My Blogger template has been on the fritz for about a week now. I also hope you will check out the Coalition of the Chillin')...
...and, of course, we all remember there's a reason why we're not at work today; thanks to all those who sacrifice so much for our nation. We couldn't begin to ever repay you...
Please welcome our newest Coalition member, Little Miss Atilla!...
Here's another shameless plug for Ryan James for keeping up with the Coalition blogroll. Pay him a visit, won't you?...
Jeers to Paul Krugman for his inability to take even one day off from criticizing the Bush administration...
Much more appropriate is this moving article at OpinionJournal based on a 'credo' written by a brave soldier of ours who unfortunately died in Iraq this past January. It's a poignant reminder both of why we fight, and of what an unspeakable tragedy war is. God bless all the brave soldiers and their families this Memorial Day...
...and, of course, we all remember there's a reason why we're not at work today; thanks to all those who sacrifice so much for our nation. We couldn't begin to ever repay you...
Please welcome our newest Coalition member, Little Miss Atilla!...
Here's another shameless plug for Ryan James for keeping up with the Coalition blogroll. Pay him a visit, won't you?...
Jeers to Paul Krugman for his inability to take even one day off from criticizing the Bush administration...
Much more appropriate is this moving article at OpinionJournal based on a 'credo' written by a brave soldier of ours who unfortunately died in Iraq this past January. It's a poignant reminder both of why we fight, and of what an unspeakable tragedy war is. God bless all the brave soldiers and their families this Memorial Day...
Sunday, May 29, 2005
Barone on Bush: A Book Club That Matters
(Please note: if you've landed here from the link to my Weekly Jackass piece on Jacques Chirac, please click here. My Blogger template has been on the fritz for about a week now. I also hope you will check out the Coalition of the Chillin' - and a big welcome to the newest Coalition member, MaxedOutMama)...
The always intriguing Michael Barone has a great column up at U. S. News about North Korea and its eventual fall. Barone begins by pointing out that last year, Bush was handing out the book The Case for Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror by Natan Sharanksy; then came the Second Inaugural and the Arab Spring in Lebanon. This year, the book that has captured Bush's fancy is The Aquariums of Pyongyang: Ten Years in the North Korean Gulag by Kang Chol-Hwan. This is a barometer of the seriousness with which Bush holds his hatred of the regime of Kim Jong-Il. Or, as Barone puts it, the choice of books 'suggests that he is more determined than ever to undermine a regime that is probably the world's worst violator of human rights'. Highly recommended...
The always intriguing Michael Barone has a great column up at U. S. News about North Korea and its eventual fall. Barone begins by pointing out that last year, Bush was handing out the book The Case for Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror by Natan Sharanksy; then came the Second Inaugural and the Arab Spring in Lebanon. This year, the book that has captured Bush's fancy is The Aquariums of Pyongyang: Ten Years in the North Korean Gulag by Kang Chol-Hwan. This is a barometer of the seriousness with which Bush holds his hatred of the regime of Kim Jong-Il. Or, as Barone puts it, the choice of books 'suggests that he is more determined than ever to undermine a regime that is probably the world's worst violator of human rights'. Highly recommended...
Weekly Jackass Number Twenty-Five: Jacques Chirac
With the vote on the EU Constitution taking place today in France, this is as good a time as any to award the Weekly Jackass to the French President. Jacques Chirac is hitting the airwaves urging French voters not to use the ratification vote as a referendum on his government, a statement that is remarkable in two ways. First, it is a frank admission by Chirac that his leadership is deeply unpopular, and second, I think the French voters are correct in using this vote as a referendum, for surely, it is the European style of governance that has led to the woes befalling the French nation.
Those woes include high unemployment, nearly nonexistent economic growth, and a strong anti-capitalist bias that hinders the inflow of foreign capital. France is a strong example that even in 'mild' doses, socialism is a failure. Chirac is not a tyrant, but he is surely a Eurocrat, and a potent symbol of the European Union as a whole. Dominated by Germany and France, and somewhat paralyzed by their rivalry, the EU is a bureaucratic Disneyland, a world of highly paid 'civil servants' and diplomats who smooze endlessly, accomplish little, and impede real progress at almost every turn. Quick, name the biggest accomplishment of the European Union. Okay, how about any accompishment at all?
As the great Arthur Chrenkoff noted recently, politics in France (and indeed, the greater part of Europe) seems divided between what most of us would consider the Left and the Far Left, i.e., the clueless versus the insane. It is telling that Chirac's government is considered 'center-right' by Europeans. I am reminded of the fit France and Germany recently threw over the tax policies of the newer, Eastern European EU entrants: they were offended by them because they were too low and were draining capital from the older EU nation-states. Any person with even a modicum of economic good sense would see that as a chance to revisit one's own high rates, but of course, the French and Germans preferred the other nations raise their rates, and just choke off their own economic growth to match the low EU-wide rate.
There are many other ways Chirac has proven himself worthy of the Jackass honorific. Chief among them was his no-holds-barred opposition to the removal of Saddam Hussein. The Bush administration, then and now, has come under fire for a rush to war under false pretenses, and for not pursuing a diplomatic solution robustly. The opponents of the war see vindication of Chirac's opposition; they are quite wrong to do so. We know now that no circumstances would have brought French support short of Saddam's tanks on the outskirts of Paris, and even then, we may be excused for having our doubts.
Chirac himself has not, so far as I know, been named as a personal recipient of Saddam's Oil-For-Food largesse, but certainly some of those close to him partook of the spoils. Even in the world of 'legitimate' dealings with Saddam's Iraq, France was doing quite well for herself. The circumstances of WMD stockpiles or the lack thereof, Saddam's continued involvement with Palestinian terrorists and others, the future of the Baathist tyranny, none of these things mattered: if the Bush administration had pursued diplomacy to the ends of the earth, we would not have brought Chirac around.
None of this even touches on the other Chirac legacy; I am referring to the vain, haughty, and oh-so-French propensity to oppose America simply because she is America. The Iraqi war debate, the EU referendum, the endless parade of anti-American rhetoric wrapped in French chauvinism; all are of a piece with Chirac's failure to see France for what it now is: a second-tier country with a proud past and an uncertain future that has been left dimmer by the failures of Jacques Chirac, our twenty-fifth Weekly Jackass.
UPDATE 5:44 p.m. central: As widely expected, Chirac was unable to deliver; French citizens voted 'Non!' to the EU constitution, and Chirac suffered a humiliating (and well-earned) defeat...
UPDATE 2 6:40 p.m. central: Thanks to the good folks at Power Line for the link; hope you all are enjoying your extended weekend...
Those woes include high unemployment, nearly nonexistent economic growth, and a strong anti-capitalist bias that hinders the inflow of foreign capital. France is a strong example that even in 'mild' doses, socialism is a failure. Chirac is not a tyrant, but he is surely a Eurocrat, and a potent symbol of the European Union as a whole. Dominated by Germany and France, and somewhat paralyzed by their rivalry, the EU is a bureaucratic Disneyland, a world of highly paid 'civil servants' and diplomats who smooze endlessly, accomplish little, and impede real progress at almost every turn. Quick, name the biggest accomplishment of the European Union. Okay, how about any accompishment at all?
As the great Arthur Chrenkoff noted recently, politics in France (and indeed, the greater part of Europe) seems divided between what most of us would consider the Left and the Far Left, i.e., the clueless versus the insane. It is telling that Chirac's government is considered 'center-right' by Europeans. I am reminded of the fit France and Germany recently threw over the tax policies of the newer, Eastern European EU entrants: they were offended by them because they were too low and were draining capital from the older EU nation-states. Any person with even a modicum of economic good sense would see that as a chance to revisit one's own high rates, but of course, the French and Germans preferred the other nations raise their rates, and just choke off their own economic growth to match the low EU-wide rate.
There are many other ways Chirac has proven himself worthy of the Jackass honorific. Chief among them was his no-holds-barred opposition to the removal of Saddam Hussein. The Bush administration, then and now, has come under fire for a rush to war under false pretenses, and for not pursuing a diplomatic solution robustly. The opponents of the war see vindication of Chirac's opposition; they are quite wrong to do so. We know now that no circumstances would have brought French support short of Saddam's tanks on the outskirts of Paris, and even then, we may be excused for having our doubts.
Chirac himself has not, so far as I know, been named as a personal recipient of Saddam's Oil-For-Food largesse, but certainly some of those close to him partook of the spoils. Even in the world of 'legitimate' dealings with Saddam's Iraq, France was doing quite well for herself. The circumstances of WMD stockpiles or the lack thereof, Saddam's continued involvement with Palestinian terrorists and others, the future of the Baathist tyranny, none of these things mattered: if the Bush administration had pursued diplomacy to the ends of the earth, we would not have brought Chirac around.
None of this even touches on the other Chirac legacy; I am referring to the vain, haughty, and oh-so-French propensity to oppose America simply because she is America. The Iraqi war debate, the EU referendum, the endless parade of anti-American rhetoric wrapped in French chauvinism; all are of a piece with Chirac's failure to see France for what it now is: a second-tier country with a proud past and an uncertain future that has been left dimmer by the failures of Jacques Chirac, our twenty-fifth Weekly Jackass.
UPDATE 5:44 p.m. central: As widely expected, Chirac was unable to deliver; French citizens voted 'Non!' to the EU constitution, and Chirac suffered a humiliating (and well-earned) defeat...
UPDATE 2 6:40 p.m. central: Thanks to the good folks at Power Line for the link; hope you all are enjoying your extended weekend...
Rich on Ground Zero: A Mixture of Gospel Truth and Blatant Falsehood
To say Frank Rich is a better writer than his nauseating counterpart Maureen Dowd is to damn with very faint praise, indeed. In fact, it may make Rich the more disgusting of the duo, as he wastes his talents by phoning in columns far too often. For once, his latest does not focus on cheap shots at religous conservatives. That's the good news. The bad news is that Rich instead turns to his second favorite obsession, those devious ol' Bushies.
Rich gets off to a strong start criticizing the interminable, and frankly infuriating, delays surrounding the rehabilitation of our sacred ground in lower Manhattan. Best of all is his reminded that more days have passed since the signoff on the final design of the Freedom Tower (of course, it wasn't a signoff at all, we know now) than were spent constructing the Empire State Building.
Frank quickly loses momentum, though, by not only veering off into a rant on Bush, but a false one at that. Frank, when Bush stood at Ground Zero with that bullhorn, he didn't say we would get the terrorists 'dead or alive'. That was at a Cabinet meeting with the press present. Instead, he said 'Can you hear me in the back?', then 'I can hear you...and the people who knocked down these people will hear all of us soon!' to great applause. How can anyone forget that, or any of the other events of those few days?
Worse is Frank's recital of the Left's canard that the Bush administration tried to tie Saddam Hussein's Iraq to 9/11 itself. Regardless of how many quotes liberals may find from lower-level officials, Bush himself made it abundantly clear on numerous occasions that no evidence tied Iraq to 9/11. What Bush did say (and he was quite correct), is that Saddam's Iraq did harbor terrorists, pay money to Palestinian suicide bombers, and look the other way when al Queda members needed a place to lick their wounds.
Rich and other prominent liberals have an astonishingly low level of patience with the War on Terror and the recovery of Iraq. These things take time, and lots of it, and Americans and our allies understand this. Sure, we're all frustrated that things are moving so slowly, but that doesn't translate into a desire to just leave and give up. Now, Ground Zero, that's another story entirely...and a shameful one, at that. Too bad Rich didn't stay on that subject - I might have found a column of his I could actually endorse.
Rich gets off to a strong start criticizing the interminable, and frankly infuriating, delays surrounding the rehabilitation of our sacred ground in lower Manhattan. Best of all is his reminded that more days have passed since the signoff on the final design of the Freedom Tower (of course, it wasn't a signoff at all, we know now) than were spent constructing the Empire State Building.
Frank quickly loses momentum, though, by not only veering off into a rant on Bush, but a false one at that. Frank, when Bush stood at Ground Zero with that bullhorn, he didn't say we would get the terrorists 'dead or alive'. That was at a Cabinet meeting with the press present. Instead, he said 'Can you hear me in the back?', then 'I can hear you...and the people who knocked down these people will hear all of us soon!' to great applause. How can anyone forget that, or any of the other events of those few days?
Worse is Frank's recital of the Left's canard that the Bush administration tried to tie Saddam Hussein's Iraq to 9/11 itself. Regardless of how many quotes liberals may find from lower-level officials, Bush himself made it abundantly clear on numerous occasions that no evidence tied Iraq to 9/11. What Bush did say (and he was quite correct), is that Saddam's Iraq did harbor terrorists, pay money to Palestinian suicide bombers, and look the other way when al Queda members needed a place to lick their wounds.
Rich and other prominent liberals have an astonishingly low level of patience with the War on Terror and the recovery of Iraq. These things take time, and lots of it, and Americans and our allies understand this. Sure, we're all frustrated that things are moving so slowly, but that doesn't translate into a desire to just leave and give up. Now, Ground Zero, that's another story entirely...and a shameful one, at that. Too bad Rich didn't stay on that subject - I might have found a column of his I could actually endorse.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)