I'm hanging out with the Club for Growth gang, following returns in the Rhode Island primary. Pat Toomey looks very unhappy -- which is to say, it's looking like Chafee is going to win.
The Spectacle Blog
Washington Monthly publishes essays by conservatives Jeffrey Hart, Christopher Buckley, Bruce Bartlett, William Niskanen, Bruce Fein and Richard Viguerie -- all arguing that Republicans should lose the midterm elections.
I challenge anybody to make the case for Republicans -- without mentioning Democrats.
The Globe and Mail reports:
U.S. filmmaker Oliver Stone, who surprised many with the patriotic flavour of his new film World Trade Center, hinted in Moscow yesterday that he is considering a more controversial follow-up investigating the "conspiracy" around 9/11.
"There is a great story in a movie, a conspiracy by a group of people in the American administration who have an agenda and who used 9/11 to further that agenda," he told journalists in
Link via Alarming News.
Actually, it isn't made by a conservative, but by a liberal over at The New Republic, Bradford Plumer:
The point is this: Any big-government program on the progressive wish list will likely prove even more difficult to pass than the 1986 tax reform or 1993 budget. Single-payer health care? Card check for unions? Reductions in carbon emissions? It won't get done without an orgy of earmarks to entice the inevitable skeptics in Congress. That won't be pretty, but if the price of, say, universal insurance is a bit of borderline corruption here and there, it's a tradeoff worth making. And, while it's also true that conservatives can use earmarks to pass their own massive spending programs--the prescription-drug benefit comes to mind--in the long run, institutional mechanisms that are biased toward activist government will favor liberals.
If the right ever needed an air-tight reason why to oppose pork, that's it. Let's hope Plumer's column gets read by every Congressional member of the GOP.
The AP reports:
BRISBANE/>, Australia/>/> The death of the "Crocodile Hunter" appears to have triggered a war on stingrays in Australia/>/>.
A fisheries department official says up to ten of the normally docile fish have been found dead and mutilated on Australia's eastern coast since Steve Irwin was killed by one last week. At least two had their tails lopped off.
Hamas has put on a good show for the world by agreeing to form a unity government with Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah in a bid to win back the international aid that was rightfully cut off when the terrorist group was elected.
According to the NY Times article, Hamas will implicitly accept working toward a two-state solution by recognizing all previous agreements between the Israelis and the Palestinians and will allow Abbas to negotiate on behalf of the Palestinians.
What this really means is that Hamas will use Abbas as its public face to make overtures of peace to the world so that it can rake in more money to fund its terrorism against Israeli civilians. And whenever you hear talk of Hamas implicitly accepting a two-state solution, you should always keep in mind this statement from Hamas leader and Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, made this January, just before the elections:
Bush said what needed to be said last night, but ultimately no speech is going to make much of a difference in public opinion, especially with regard to Iraq. A majority of Americans are set in their opinions on the war, and those who are swayable won't be swayed by words, but only an actual improvement in conditions in Iraq. I'm also having a harder and harder time taking Bush's tough talk seriously. Bush said, "The safety of America depends on the outcome of the battle in the streets of Baghdad." He said he believes that Iraq is the central battle in, "the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century, and the calling of our generation." If Bush truly believes these statements, then he's going to have to do more than stick with the same strategy that obviously hasn't been working too well. William Kristol and Rich Lowry have a piece in today's Washington Post, arguing for more troops to reinforce Baghdad. Perhaps more troops is the answer, perhaps it's too simple of a solution to a far more complicated situation.