- Jan 1–7 8–14 15–21 22–28 29–31
- Feb 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–28
- Mar 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–31
- Apr 1 2–8 9–15 16–22 23–29 30
- May 1–6 7–13 14–20 21–27 28–31
- Jun 1–3 4–10 11–17 18–24 25–30
- Jul 1 2–8 9–15 16–22 23–29 30–31
- Aug 1–5 6–12 13–19 20–26 27–31
- Sep 1–2 3–9 10–16 17–23 24–30
- Oct 1–7 8–14 15–21 22–28 29–31
- Nov 1–4 5–11 12–18 19–25 26–30
- Dec 1–2 3–9 10–16 17–23 24–30
Saturday, March 11, 2006
SloboDead
Posted by on 3.11.06 @ 6:21PM
The Butcher of Belgrade is assuming room temperature. I don't know if anyone cares to reopen the Balkans debates that divided the Right in the 90s, but for what it's worth, here's what I wrote in 2003, in the context of the prewar Iraq debate:
At the time, I was highly conflicted about American involvement in the Balkans (particularly in Kosovo); I was unsure that what the U.S. had to gain outweighed the risks those wars entailed, and somewhat disgusted by the Clinton administration's hypocrisy in ignoring humanitarian crises in, say, Rwanda. In hindsight, though, I have little doubt that stabilizing that region has been an almost unmitigated good: lives have, on balance (even with collateral damage and anti-Christian reprisals), been saved; the Muslim population we protected from ethnic cleansing has become relatively infertile for radicalism; policy makers have fewer strategic factors to worry about in a region at a critical geographic crossroads.James Poulos wrote last month on the continuing negotiations over Kosovo.
He's Their What?
Posted by on 3.11.06 @ 4:55PM
If history repeats itself first as tragedy, then as farce the Palestinians are only up to the tragedy stage. In context, the leaders of Hamas - the terrorists now elected to lead the Palestinian "government" - are only following in the shallow footsteps of Yassir Arafat, the KGB-trained terrorist kleptocrat by touring arab capitals seeking funds from the usual suspects. One report of the GWOT fundraiser in the Saudi governnment daily Arab News caught my eye. Think about this, taken from that report :
A five-member delegation of Hamas leaders arrived in the Kingdom yesterday. The delegation is headed by the group’s Politburo chief, Khaled Meshaal, and its members are expected to discuss with the Kingdom’s leadership the financial problems an incoming Palestinian government faces, Hamas official Ezzat El-Resheq said.The Hamas leaders are on a tour of Arab countries hoping to garner support from traditional allies. The Palestinian Administration under a Hamas leadership faces the possibility of losing Western financial support because the group does not recognize the state of
Israel.
Meshaal is their what? Politburo chief? Do they have a five-year plan for increasing the production of their terrorist farms? Will their leader take off his shoe and bang the table with it in his first UN speech? (Note to Fidel: better watch out, fella. This bunch of weasels will be competing with you for Hugo Chavez's largesse pretty soon. If I were in your shoes, er, boots I'd be offering to help the Israelis whack 'em soonest.) If it weren't sure to lead to bloodshed and tragedy, the Hamas "government" would be worthy of Gilbert and Sullivan.
Zogby's Bias Fuels Murtha's Madness
Posted by on 3.11.06 @ 3:08PM
A piece in yesterday's Philly Inquirer by Tim Kane exposes the absurd bias of the Zogby poll that propelled Murtha's statements last week on CBS Face the Nation. Murtha was ranting about how more than 70% of the US troops in Iraq wanted to come home. But as the Kane piece shows, the Zogby's work was the quintessential push poll: the questions were phrased to produce the answers Zogby wanted and they did. Nevermore shall a Zogby poll on any aspect of the war hold any credibility.
Friday, March 10, 2006
Rewriting the Torah, Again
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 5:43PM
Not so much on the politics beat, but, for those who may be interested, here's a story I wrote on a local orthodox Jewish community here in Boston who are trying to keep the last commandment of the torah by collectively writing their own.
New Labor Grievance
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 4:46PM
Umar Abdul-Jalil, the executive director of ministerial services -- i.e., the chief chaplain - to the New York City prison system has been suspended according to this NY Post story. His offense? He claimed Muslims were being tortured in Gitmo. Er, no. He claimed they were being tortured in NY jails. And he claimed that the, "greatest terrorists in the world occupy the White House."
We have received no reports on which union Mr. Abdul-Jalil belongs to, though that fact is crucial to the future of this case. If he is a member of the teachers' union, the city may be paralyzed by a general strike. If he is a member of the Teamsters or the Longshoremens', his grievance may be considered by the same arbitrators who adjudged that of Jimmy Hoffa.
The important lesson in this is to be found in the doctrinal consistency between this guy's claims and those coming out of current and former Gitmo inmates.
Last note from Sessions, for now
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 4:21PM
Finally, on a different subject, Sessions did note one encouraging development from what was a decidedly mixed-bag energy bill passed last year. Saying (accurately) that there hadn't been a single application for a new nuclear plant in years and years and years, Sessions reported that since the passage of the Energy bill, one of whose good provisions provided incentives for more nuke plants, a whopping 18 new requests for nuke plant permits have come in. That is great stuff: Nuclear energy is the cleanest around, with no automatic environmental problems, and new technology has made it safer by a huge degree than the already-safe nuke energy that was available 30 years ago. Even the snooty, self-proclaimed eco-friendly French have for decades produced the vast bulk of their own energy through nuke plants, and that's without the new, safer technology. So here's a toast to the nuclear power developers, may they forge ahead with their plans. Over time, their efforts will produce cleaner, less expensive energy for us all.
Wither Republicans
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 4:21PM
It's not a piece of legislation many conservatives have paid attention to, but perhaps now they should. We're talking about the telecom reform bill that Rep. Joe Barton is pushing through the House Energy Committee. According to staff sources, the main goal here, apparently is to give the telephone companies like AT&T the ability to offer cable TV-like services over their broadband lines. What should have every conservative nervous though, says an Energy staffer, is an issue that Barton, as well as Rep. Ed Markey, is pushing that would essentially impose a new layer of regulations on the Internet. "The language would eventually lead to the federal government having a say over what compaines might be able to do with their broadband networks, what services could be offered on the Internet, how people could charge or make money on the Internet," says a staffer we spoke to on Friday afternoon. "It would cede a lot more control over the Internet to the FCC. It's there in the bill, and people are missing it." The legislation is expected to be made public sometim in the next two weeks, according to committee staff. We all know what happens when the government decides to get their regulatory mitts on anything. First it's regulation, then it's taxes. Conservatives - and Democrats during the Clinton administration - have done a good job of keeping the Internet free of both regulation and taxes. Why Joe Barton is pushing this is beyond us, but Republican leadership better start paying attention, and conservatives should let Republicans know that after months of bloated spending, regulating the Internet just won't wash.
More Sessions
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 4:13PM
Despite Sessions (through Domenici) calling out the Dems on spending and taxes, he minced no words for his fellow Republicans who keep spending more money. Noting that President Bush had proposed savings of $75 billion (5-years) in the RATE OF GROWTH of entitlements (set to grow at 8% a year even as inflation runs only 3% (our quick table math -- I welcome readers to double-check this, because I haven't -- is that just a 6% avg hike for five years rather than 8%, which is surely not too draconian, would yield the $75 billion savings), Sessions lamented that the Senate Budget COmmittee plan approved yesterday called for not a red cent of entitlement savings. Sessions' comment on this development: "Some people think that if we have a middle-of-the-road, milquetoast budget that avoids controversy, we'll somehow avoid political harm, but I say it's just the opposite. We'll kill the enthusiasm of our supporters; we will likely not only NOT gain, but we'll lose potentially" because of letting down the fiscally conservative GOP base.
"We've got tohonor the voters who got us here," Sessions added.
Well, I say: Good for Sessions. Here's hoping the milquetoast Republicans get the message!!!
Sessions, finally
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 3:58PM
I meant to post this earlier today, but better late than never: I had a lengthy meeting yesterday with Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, a true conservative gentleman, and he had some very interesting things to say. First, he quoted New Mexico's Sen. Pete Domenici asking this (supposedly a word for word quote that Sessions jotted down): "If the Democratic proposals all were passd, how much would it add to discretionary spending and mandatory spending, and for tax increases?" Domenici's answer, according to Sessions: $16.3 billion in added discretionary spending, $125 billion in additional 'mandatory' (entitlement) spending over five years, and tax increases of $125 billion.
(Quin commenting now:) Wow. Tax and tax, spend and spend. The GOP in Congress has been just awful for many years on spending, but only if you don't consider the alternative. No wonder nobody trusts the Dems in Congress with the public fisc!
More on my next post........
Re: Sources Say
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 1:48PM
Before anyone points out that the AP moved news of Norton's resignation at 12:45, please note that the clock on this blog is about 16 minutes fast. You heard it here first, if only just...
Lou Dobbs as Howard Beale
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 12:58PM
Reading the Wall Street Journal's article on the media's role in fanning the ports fire and ran across this understated paragraph:
Then Mr. Dobbs got on the story. The CNN commentator, who has redefined his career by editorializing against outsourcing, illegal immigration and big business, aired his initial report in which he expressed incredulity that the deal was being allowed to go forward. That report was followed by 15 others in the following 17 of his shows.
I've caught Lou Dobbs' hysterical shtick a few times since he went off the deep end, and I'm usually embarrassed for him.
Maybe he should lose all pretense of seriousness and fully turn into Peter Finch's character, Howard Beale, in the 1976 film Network.
Sources say ...
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 12:57PM
An unimpeachable source is informing us that Gale Norton is looking to spend more quality time in the cleaner air and more pristine wilderness she helped enable. If she's the one jumping ship, all the best.
Too bad that Abramoff isn't available to throw his hat in the ring. Clearly Interior was a department he cared deeply about.
Resignation Coming?
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 12:48PM
Various people are hearing that we're going to have a resignation this afternoon in President Bush's Cabinet. We reported over the weekend that Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff had been considered the prime candidate to step aside. The other name to consider is Treasury Secretary Snow. He's been under a great deal of pressure lately to be more vocal. The Snow exit makes another rumor we've been hearing a bit more plausible, which is that current White House chief of staff Andy Card has been looking for "new challenges" at the same time that the President has been considering a new chief of staff. A Snow out, Card moving in to Treasury, would allow the President to put in place a war time consigliere type at chief of staff, to get a very wobbly White House staff in place.
The Economy Keeps on Rollin'
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 12:29PM
The U.S. economy added 243,000 jobs in February, and unemployment dipped to 4.8 percent.
Re: Ports Message-Sending
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 11:51AM
I should add, Dave, that you've got me convinced on the root irrationality question, and the first-order consequences are real. Fortunately we can move on without too many bruises. Big picture? The more fanged heads the mullahs grow, the closer the States and the Emirates grow.
Re: Ports Message-Sending
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 11:33AM
James, I agree that by no means should concerns about "message-sending" govern our decisions. But as with any decision making, it's part of the picture. The message is the secondary consequence. The rest of the Post editorial dealt with the primary decision making, but I found that section about the consequences particularly poignant.
Re: Ports Message-Sending
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 11:23AM
Dave -- I've got to take umbrage with the fear of "sending the wrong message" to the "Arab world." Choosing to do or to not do things based on what presumptive "message" is sent is a reactive, speculative, even irrational policy that I've criticized time and again. Here, I suspect that the UAE will continue to find and take advantage of business opportunities in the United States; that the host of preexisting reasons why the UAE has been a friend in the war on terror will not evaporate; and that the proposal to wipe out our foreign aid to Egypt, for example, if implemented, would be a far greater insult to Arabs than the sinking of the ports deal, which seems merely irritating to a handful of chief dealmakers running a single Arab company.
The Post on the Ports
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 11:01AM
The Post is rightly miffed by Congress killing the Dubai Ports World deal:
But our brave new Congress has achieved more than the irrational spiking of one business deal. It has also sent a clear message to the Arab world: No matter how far you move along the path of modernization and cooperation, Americans may be unable to distinguish you from al-Qaeda. Dubai welcomes hundreds of ship visits every year from the U.S. Navy and allied ships. It has worked with U.S. agents to stop terrorist financing and nuclear cooperation. But none of that mattered to the craven members of Congress -- neither to the Democrats who first sensed a delicious political opportunity nor to the Republicans who then fled in unseemly panic. As to long-term damage to the United States' security, economy and alliances? Not of concern to the great deliberative body.
Read it all. When it comes to Virginia politics, the Post ed board is off its rocker, handicapping the Democrats' performance. But when it comes to national security, the Post usually nails it, as it does today.
Hooray for the NFL
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 10:36AM
About a week ago in this space I came down hard on the NFL players and owners when they looked like they were gonna cut off their noses to spite their faces by failing to reach a new "labor" agreement. Well, in some senses I spoke too soon. The big-market owners did bend a bit on revenue sharing -- which is exactly what they should have done all along -- and both players and owners bent a bit on the distribution of revenues and salary cap issues, which allowed an agreement to be reached that will save the sport. It does seem, however, that the owners bent more than the players did, which I did NOT support... because I have little sympathy for people already making millions to play a game, but mostly because the extra cash for player salaries will end up coming from SOMEwhere, and that somewhere inevitably ends up being from the pockets of the fans. I always support the fans over both the players and the owners.
Anyway, better this deal than no deal -- and better by far. The game will continue on a mostly level playing field, without missing any games, for at least another six years. That's a very good thing, and I congratulate both sides on coming to agreement.
Allow me now, however, one final note. When I wrote my note last week, some readers responded that my praise of level playing fields was somehow anti-free-enterprise, or something like that. Well, I don't think ANYbody defines free-market principles more precisely and consistently than the editorialists at the Wall Street Journal, so I should note that the editorial in today's Weekend Journal section agrees with me 100%. The WSJ says that the NFL's agreement "isn't socialism... it's just good capitalist sense."
I rest my case.
Presenting the New Digital AmSpec
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 10:27AM
The American Spectator is proud to present to our readers and subscribers the new, upgraded Digital AmSpec. Digital subscribers can now view the full magazine in the best, most user-friendly and sleek format available to magazine readers today.
To use this new service, you will not need any additional software or plug-ins and nothing will be added to your computor. The only thing you will need is a digital subscription to the American Spectator -- a mere $19.95 a year. That's almost half the price of a print subscription and is easily purchased online.
So you read Spectator.org, but haven't subscribed? You're missing out: Ben Stein has a lengthy monthly column; Tom Bethell reports on the media's and science's political agenda; RET wields his rapier wit for his monthly column, the Continuing Crisis, and reviews the latest nonsense in print in Current Wisdom; and we present regular reports for our nation's wayward campuses in College Avenue. Regulars include John H. Fund, Jed Babbin, Jonathan Aitken, James Bowman, as well as contributions in recent issues from Grover Norquist, Paul Johnson, William Tucker, Shawn Macomber, and Tom Wolfe. In other words, you're missing the best writing TAS offers. And by subscribing, you help support our ongoing endeavors -- especially the website.
We're quite excited about the upgraded Digital AmSpec. You easily flip through the magazine almost as if you had it in hand. Features include:
-The ability to click over to an article straight from the cover, the table of contents, or from the navigation bar at the top of the screen.
-Upgraded search capabilities, as well as the ability to search the archives.
-You can easily send articles to a friend for free.
-Want to print out the magazine for the road? Download and print out the entire issue.
-If you're interested in a specific advertiser, or a book mentioned, they're linked directly from the magazine page.
-You can easily change the size of the magazine for easier viewing... or zoom out and see every page of the magazine.
If you subscribe, you'll be happy you did. And if you'd like the print magazine as well, buy a print subscription and the upgraded Digital AmSpec is part of the deal -- for only $39 a year. We're happy to present daily Spectator.org, but we're best known for our excellent monthly offerings and reporting in the print edition. Catch up on what you've been missing and support our work by subscribing today.
CCC
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 7:14AM
Blanton over at Redstate has the goods on one of the more shadowy groups that is an offshoot of the 527s Democrats set up. Legally identified as Campaign for a Cleaner Congress, the group is nothing more than one of the subsidiaries of American Family Voices, a 527 financed by labor unions before the 2004 election.
CCC works closely with the DNC on a number of issues (though that is supposedly illegal under McCain/Feingold campaign finance reform), has contracted with a number of former DNC opposition researchers to dig up dirt on Republicans, and then passes that material on to cooperative reporters.
No surprise then, that reporters treat the CCC as a nonpartisan source.
Why Won't Yale Answer?
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 6:00AM
Yale University won't respond to repeated requests for its response to the outcry over its admission of a former Taliban deputy minister, according to a reporter who has been trying to get the ivy league college's statement. Maybe you can. Dr. Richard Levin is Yale's president. His telephone number is 203-432-1345. And remember, no impolite words. Just calm questions.
Iran war warning, 2
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 2:12AM
Security council source reports that this news cycle is critical first round of discussions between five permanent members with regard the Iran confrontation. Britain and France are on course to ask for an IAEA report of noncompliance. China is silent. Russia asks for a report in 18 months.
Iran believes it can split the five with long term oil contracts and back room promises. The US is now the prince of multi-lateralism. Keeping Britain and France together, keeping Russia moving without a "no," keeping China silent, is far-fetched but possible.
There is no visible solution. Those who speak breezily of a diplomatic solution have not read the 1945 UN Charter. Chapter Seven, article 42, looms, a collective action of air, sea, land forces for demonstrations, blockades and interventions to be launched by a vote of the Security Council, with full compliance by five perms. The vote is binding. Getting to the vote will be a struggle, but the vote is the trigger. Jaw jaw leads to war war. Iron tongues followed by iron weapons.
Source says Iran welcomes the confrontation. Source says that Iran will watch the five perms talk, and if there is an indication of collectivity, Iran will act to provoke the US or Israel in order to split the five.
Iran is not a rational actor. It is a messianic state. It will shatter the Security Council with falsehoods and cash and intrigue.
When and if the Security Council breaks down, the US is left to defend itself. Iran knows this.
Iran is planning for the necessity of preempt with a surrogate attack on Israel, or with a staged incident over itsnational sovereignty (airspace, coastal waters) is a credible and effective scenario. Iran knows that the Bush Admin has low approval rate with the American public because of Iran's black hand in Iraq and because of plain clumsy over promising by the White House. Iran knows that a darting attack on a US target, or on a US ally, that is not answered in kind, will confirm Iran's ascendancy. Meantime, the oil weapon is the flame turned up on the frogs.
Consider this a war warning, 2. The UN is near to joining the League of Nations, ashes. We are in the final days of global trust. Iran is consistent and extremely confident. Repeat, it is not a rational actor. It cannot and will not climb down.
End of the Imperialist Horse
Posted by on 3.10.06 @ 12:58AM
Hugo Chavez continues to stand as the Vanguard of the Revolution in Venezuela and hero to twentysomething American boys in horn-rimmed glasses on college campuses everywhere.
Via Reuters:
Venezuela's Congress, dominated by allies of socialist President Hugo Chavez, has approved a revamp of the national coat of arms to ensure its white horse gallops left instead of right.
****
Last year Chavez dismissed the horse image saying "it's not even Venezuelan, it's an imperialist horse" after researching that it was originally designed by a British diplomat. But he cited historical reasons for the change.
"The horse now faces left with its head forward to the future, a white, free, untamed horse, as our nation is free as never before," lawmaker Cilia Flores said late on Tuesday after the law was passed.
Thursday, March 9, 2006
De-Nuke Israel?
Posted by on 3.9.06 @ 6:33PM
This is the talk of Britain's Jack Straw, who, one might fear, is grasping at himself:
If you want to see a nuclear-free Middle East, you've got to remove that threat from Iran, including the rhetorical threat to wipe Israel off the face of the map. Once you've done that, then we can get on to work in respect of Israel.
Is there real fruit filling in this pie-in-the-sky? Consider.
Re: Has Bush Lost Control?
Posted by on 3.9.06 @ 6:13PM
Ah, the joys of reading about American politics in the British press. The revised partisan status of "Frank Lautenberg, a Republican senator from the port state of New Jersey" must come as shocking news to the Republican party, the Democratic party, the state of New Jersey, and to Lautenberg himself.
Sen. Sessions reports....
Posted by on 3.9.06 @ 6:13PM
Forgive me, because the headline is just a teaser. I had a very interesting and lengthy discussion today with the very and sincerely honorable Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, and when I get my notes together in the morning I will report on that discussion on this blog. I just write this now as a reminder to myself, and a spur for all you readers to remind me to make my report if I haven't done so by mid-morning. -- Q
Bubble, toil and trouble
Posted by on 3.9.06 @ 5:37PM
I think my last post got fouled up, so I'll try again: Kudos to Andrew at Confirmthem for this post, which is a very on-target, and appropriately humorous, critique of a recent speech by the gentlemanly and erudite, but often wrongheaded, Justice Breyer.
Everybody Wins?
Posted by on 3.9.06 @ 5:17PM
In the deal that was widely rumored to be in the works, Dubai Ports World will divest the U.S. assets of Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co, the British company that currently manages the port operations.
Short term: Bush is harmed politically. Long term: This reaction will hang over the heads of those who rushed to the microphones.
Ha!
Posted by on 3.9.06 @ 4:37PM
We're already hearing rumors on Capitol Hill that one of the companies that will be interested in the Dubai Port properties once divestiture begins is ... Halliburton.
Makes sense. They are one of the few U.S. firms that could move in and handle the types of operations required.
But wouldn't that just be richest outcome? Democrats will just be spitting mad. And the MoveOn.org and Daily Kos types will be screaming that this whole thing was nothing more than a wiley Rovian plot to get Halliburton the deal.
Happy Birthday Lindy
Posted by on 3.9.06 @ 12:54PM
Quin: What wonderful news. I knew Mrs. Boggs very well back in the olden days when I was a lobbyist. I had long since lost track of her, and didn't even know she was still alive. She is a Southern Lady in the grand sense, and was a wonderful (and highly effective) political ally. Yes, she is and was too liberal for us on a lot of domestic issues, but a more staunch supporter of national security would be awfully hard to find.
The Ports Mob
Posted by on 3.9.06 @ 12:25PM
The Wall Street Journal offers a double shot of facts regarding foreign management of our ports today. First, we learn how extensive foreign management of our ports is. Heck, even China operates terminals in Los Angeles. But the editorial board succinctly sums up the Republican rush to join the Democratic reaction on the ports deal: "Over in the House, Republicans are preparing to block the Dubai port management investment as a sacrifice to Democratic criticism."
If not principled, at least Sen. Richard Shelby is honest about the opponents' motives:
"There's no way that we should or will, leave the national security issue to the Democrats," Senate Banking Committee Chairman Richard Shelby, R-Ala., told FOX News on Thursday. "We could pay a price in the fall [elections] and we cannot afford not to do this."
This is a classic mob. If folks want to discuss overall port security and do something about it, great. If they want to consider whether any foreign companies or if government-owned foreign companies should manage our ports, go for it. But the alarm over the Dubai deal, and only the Dubai deal, exhibits a total lack of consistency. The opposition is only because this is an Arab country.
Some are trying to justify the opposition after the fact. Barbara Lerner took that tack yesterday, arguing that the deal should be blocked because UAE's citizens overwhelmingly view the U.S. unfavorably -- they "hate us." By that logic, maybe we should also consider blocking French and German investment: a 2004 poll found that those countries only viewed the U.S. favorably to the tunes of 37 and 38 percent, respectively. The rest of her argument makes little sense, suggesting that since the UAE governments controls the newspapers, and they spread anti-American hatred, the government really hates us. If they really hated the U.S., I would imagine they wouldn't assist us in the war on terror. They're our allies when it counts. As for Lerner's conspiracy theory spinning about DPW overpaying for P&O, I think she may have skipped her homework about the bidding war over the British company.
Lerner's was the article that a reader pointed to yesterday as busting the "'managing ports' myth." Can't say that I see it. The more that I learn about this deal, the more that I'm baffled by the uproar. My best explanation is that it's election year politics. Those opposing the deal may be politically clever, but that doesn't make them right.
Hail to Lindy!!
Posted by on 3.9.06 @ 11:03AM
Okay, I'm blogging up a storm this morning, but I just read that the longtime former Dem. Rep. Lindy Boggs of Louisiana (also onetime Ambassador to the Vatican) is about to celebrate her 90th birthday in high style. Mrs. Boggs is of course far more liberal on lots of domestic/economic issues than I am, but let me take this moment to offer her a major solute and the heartiest of birthday wishes. She is one of the finest ladies I have ever met, and I know that I am far from alone, even among conservatives, in saying that. Unfailingly gracious, patriotic, and principled (she never yielded on her pro-life position, for instance, even as her party became ever-more stringently pro-choice), Mrs. Boggs' personal kindnesses are legendary. And while she is a very loyal Democrat, she was always willing to work across party lines, in genuine cooperative spirit and with her word always her bond, for the good of her country and her home state of Louisiana. She was even quite gracious to former Rep. Dave Treen (later governor of Louisiana) when he arrived in Congress in a neighboring district (after decennial redistricting) after Treen earlier ran three times against Mrs. Boggs' powerful husband Hale (later killed in a plane disappearance in Alaska), once (in 1968) coming within just a few hundred votes of unseating Hale Boggs.
I got to know her at least a little on a more personal level because she was dear friends with my grandparents (their son, my father, nevertheless worked hard for Treen against Hale, all the while saying what a wonderful guy Hale was in person), and served in their wedding and they in hers. So when I came to DC in the 1990s, every time I ran into her at receptions she would pull me aside and ask about my grandparents, my uncle, just about everybody in my family, whose careers and personal triumphs and tragedies she somehow kept track of long-distance.
I saw Mrs. Boggs just three months ago, at my great-uncle's funeral, and an happy to say she seemed to be doing wonderfully well, as vivacious as ever. I hope she has a wonderful birthday, and many happy returns!!!
Dems crazy on immigration
Posted by on 3.9.06 @ 10:39AM
Before I get into the meat of this comment, let me make clear where I'm coming from on immigration: My position is an amalgamation of the "welcome all you poor huddled masses" position of Jack Kemp, W Bush, and others, and the "throw the book at the illegals" position of so much of the conservative rank and file. Let's encourage LEGAL immigration all we can, because this is the land of opportunity and anybody who will abide by our laws and contribute to our country should be welcome. But if they won't even abide by our laws enough to go through the formal (and not terribly difficult) green card process, etc., then they aren't likely to abide by our other laws, either, so they have no place in our society.
So today I pick up the paper and see Hillary C, Richard Durbin and others criticize Republican proposals (including one by the generally pro-immigrant Arlen Specter) that would make illegal entry into the US a felony and allow criminal prosecution of illegal immigrants. The unbelievably stupid comment from Durbin: " I'm concerned that the chairman's [proposal] would take the unprecedented step of criminalizing people in America based solely on their immigration status."
Hell-O-O-O-O, Mr. Durbin: If somebody has intentionally broken our laws, that somebody is by definition a criminal. WE'RE not the ones "criminalizing" people, it's the illegals themselves who are making themselves into criminals. "Illegal" means "illegal." What part of the word "illegal" does Senator "Our-soldiers-are-as-bad-as-Hitler" not understand???
When Partisan Animals Attack
Posted by on 3.9.06 @ 9:15AM
Much time has been spent (rightly, in my opinion) mocking the new children's book, Why Mommy is a Democrat, about a single mom squirrel teaching her little baby squirrels liberal orthodoxy. Sample: "Democrats make sure children can go to school, just like Mommy does." (Reason's Nick Gillespie has a particularly funny attack on this.) In December 2002, I myself wrote about another stab at indoctrinating children via Russell is a Republican, the story of a conservative cat trying to deal with his liberal puppy friend, Benny: "Benny is usually looking for a handout. He has a tendency to whine and to moan and to sigh. Often he is anxious that he won't be cared for. He is a Democrat. Russell loves him anyway."
Not that anyone probably particularly cares where I come down on this, but I'm for indoctrination of children before indoctrination of animals, wild or domestic. Animals, after all, never grow up to be yawn-inspiring partisan hacks.
DNC Push Polls
Posted by on 3.9.06 @ 9:11AM
The DNC is financing a series of push polls around the country that have to be some of the most disingenuous we've heard or read. Perhaps best titled, "Democrats say ..." the phone polls take more than ten minutes to listen and respond to, and include more than 25 questions that focus on Democrats' purported (by the poll taker) desire to cut spending, improve government ethics, catch Bin Laden, win the war, fire Halliburton, clean up Congress, defend American ports and borders and still have enough time to pass real health-care reform.
What's clear from the poll is that the DNC is trying to figure out exactly what voters want to hear this time around. The questions continued to hit on Bin Laden's at large status, Halliburton's no-bid contracts, Iraq, the U.S. ports story, Halliburton's no-bid contracts, Bin Laden's at large status, Iraq, Iraq, and Halliburton getting more contracts in Iraq. Oh, and corrupt Republicans in Washington who give no-bid contracts to a certain company with ties to President Bush and Vice President Cheney.
In other words, the Democrats' still don't have a clue about what to say, don't have a position or any new ideas, and are falling back on the themes that lost them the election in 2004.
Iran War Warning
Posted by on 3.9.06 @ 1:35AM
Best signals source reports that Iran is over-confident, aggressive, ready for UN sanctions, U.S. aggression, any and all challenges to its authority as a messianic empire that is committed to armed struggle at the end of days.
In Iraq, Iran is in control of intelligence and security apparatus in the fledgling, incoherent, compromised Iraqi government. The Shia of Iraq have more weapons than the U.S. forces in Iraq, and Iran, in control of the Shia militants, can adjust to any U.S. plan.
In the nuke confrontation, Iran is indifferent to the UN sanctions because it already is a nuclear armed power and is eager to demonstrate its fierceness in confrontation or in a strike-counterstrike scenario. Iran's surrogates in Iraq, in Al Q, in Lebanon and Gaza and the West Bank are ready to attack Israel and the U.S. to harass and undermine confidence in the American security regimes of Iraq and Israel.
Ahmadinejad, the IRGC and the Council of Elders (mullahs) have prepared the Iran defenses not only to ride out a US/Israeli air strike but also to retaliate with a full range of weapons against the U.S. and against the Persian Gulf shipping lanes.
To this end, Iran declared operational this news cycle an Iran built mini-sub that can hide on the uneven bottom of the Gulf and threaten all U.S. tactics to keep the Straits open for supertankers. Iran has also launched new patrol boats in the Caspian Sea to threaten the strategic oil source of Azerbaijan, now under the U.S. umbrella.
Also, there is much noise on signals about a "big bang" sometime between March 21 and April 6: perhaps a strike on Israel, perhaps a strike similar to the Marine barracks of '83. In any case a strike that will humble the Bush Administration and intimidate the EU.
Iran regards the UN crisis meeting over the next weeks, pursuant to the referral from the IAEA to the Security Council, to be validation of its strategic position to challenge the Great Satan and its allies. Iran regards all condemnations from the UN as an endorsement of its decision to stand and resist. And Iran is assured that in any event, no matter how strong the words at the UN, Russia and China will not agree to sanctions. And even if there is a partial blockade by other means, the borders are porous and/or negligible.
Iran wants oil at $80 to $100 per barrel. At the same time it is hurting the dollar by selling oil at a discount on a bourse in Tehran that accepts Euros, not dollars, for oil. Iran is cocky, apocalyptic, resolute, cunning, disciplined, unafraid of martydom. It will not climb down from the fight. It will challenge the U.S. with words and deeds; it will not surrender.
Consider this a war warning. Not weeks, not months, no certain timetable, at a time of Iran's choosing.
Wednesday, March 8, 2006
Re: The Fairer Sex
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 7:45PM
More International Women's Day press -- this time at the Guardian, where Madeline Bunting scorns Britain's -- and the West's -- active contempt of the culture of life. Searing stuff:
What use is that sassy, independent, self-assertive, knowing-what-you-want-and-how-to-get-it type when you fast forward five years to the emotional labour of helping a child develop selfconfidence? Once there's a baby in the cot, you need steadiness, loyalty, endurance, patience, sensitivity and even self-denial - all the characteristics that you've spent the previous decade trashing as dull or, even worse, for losers. Forget trying to work out your own feelings - you'll be too busy trying to work out those of your children; ditto self-confidence and self-expression.
Motherhood hits most women like a car crash: they have absolutely no idea of what is coming. Nothing in our culture recognises, let alone encourages, the characteristics you will need once a bawling infant has been tenderly placed in your arms. So the debate about the baby gap is about far more than tweaking parental leave; it's about what a culture values and promotes. And it matters not just because of that falling birthrate, but because of how women stumble towards their own private insights into the importance of mothering - to which they cling in the face of not just zero endorsement from wider society but active contempt.
Save a Man, Kill a Candidacy
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 4:47PM
This is a little old but....
We've all been asked at one point or another, usually by the type of half-drunk guy who wears sandles in the winter and spends a lot of time toying with his gnarly hair, whether if given the chance we would kill a young Hitler before he came to power and wreaked havoc on the world. Now comes a modern twist on the philosophical query for the politician in the Age of Abramoff: Would you save your unpcoming state senate primary opponent if he was choking in a restaurant? The answer for one Democrat in Maryland a couple weeks ago was an emphatic yes.
State Sen. John Giannetti was waiting for his take-out order of Italian food at a Maryland restaurant on Monday when he saw a man choking. He rushed over, performed the Heimlich maneuver and dislodged a chunk of seafood -- saving the life of his political rival.
The choking man, Jim Rosapepe, is challenging Giannetti in the Democratic primary for the suburban Washington district.
*****
Rosapepe thanked his opponent for saving him.
"Obviously, it's an incredible coincidence, and a happy coincidence," said Rosapepe, a member of the University of Maryland system's Board of Regents.
And that is a sound of the wind suddenly being taken out of a campaign's sails. When the major difference between the candidates becomes which one was seafood consumer and which was seafood dislodger, it's time to pack it in and plan for 2008.
Hail to Stan Evans
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 3:25PM
Just a little while ago, I randomly ran into the great M. Stanton Evans while walking through Union Station, and I take this opportunity to pay homage to one of the great heroes of the conservative movement. Mr. Evans has trained so many conservative journalists, and written so powerfully on conservative themes, and helped give organizational support to so many conservative enterprises, that he forever belongs in our pantheon of heroes. On a personal note, Mr. Evans' writings in Human Events in late 1975 and through 1976 were one of two main factors (along with a little book called Sincerely, Ronald Reagan compiled by Helene Von Damm) that turned me into a committed Reaganite at the ripe old age of 12. I still have many of those old HE issues. Finally, let me put in a plug for a book Mr. Evans wrote about 12 years ago, The Theme Is Freedom, which I finally got around to reading just last year. It's the most elegant exploration and explanation I've ever seen of how and why this nation's religious heritage was not a hindrance to the development of our freedom-loving society (as the Left would have us believe), but instead a necessary predicate for the development of our uniquely free society. I urge all Spectator readers to find a copy of this book and read it!
RMC Strikes Again
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 3:03PM
Apparently Sen. Arlen Specter's letter denouncing the Republican Majority for Choice's tactics against his Pennsylvania colleague, Sen. Rick Santorum, has done little to dissuade the group from its strategy.
Jennifer Blei Stockman, the RMC national co-chair I interviewed for the article last week tying Specter to the RMC, has an op-ed in today's Philadelphia Inquirer on the South Dakota abortion ban. She couldn't help but localize the story and take a substantial swipe at Santorum:
More and more, mainstream Republicans are alienated by the direction of the party. Relentless attacks on abortion rights, stem-cell research, and the teaching of evolution only further show how religious fundamentalists call the shots and are playing bully boy with our party leaders.
Here in Pennsylvania, rank-and-file Republicans are withholding their support for the poster child of the religious right wing, Sen. Rick Santorum. Santorum finds himself down in some polls by nearly 15 points, and yet he continues to push a religious agenda out of step with most Americans. Through his own rhetoric in opposition to contraception and his comparison of abortion to slavery in his book It Takes a Family, he continues to discount the strong moderate majority in this state and across the country who disagree with his agenda.
Last election, school board members in the Dover Area School District who had voted to mandate the teaching of "intelligent design" found themselves suddenly out of a job - just as Santorum might this November. But Republicans giving the boot to extremists isn't just a Pennsylvania phenomenon, it's the beginning of a movement in the GOP by the moderate majority.
In his written statement last Friday, Sen. Specter implied his decision about whether or not to resign from RMC's advisory committee depended on their future action. I wonder if this is cause for resignation?
UPDATE: I checked if RMC has donated to Specter's campaigns. They have, though a measly amount: $5000 in the 2004 election cycle.The Dark Side of Browne
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 3:01PM
I've stayed quiet on Harry Browne, mostly on "don't speak ill of the dead" grounds. Besides, I said my piece on Browne's surrender-immediately foreign policy back in 2004 (see here and here). But I can't let all the eulogizing pass without mentioning something.
Browne violated Libertarian Party conflict-of-interest rules to secure the nomination in '96. (His campaign was also accused of mis-spending funds, though that's a murkier issue.) When Liberty magazine reported on this in 2001, the LP responded by refusing to grant press credentials to my fellow Liberty intern Jim Barnett at the 2002 convention (he ended up having to buy a party membership). This was pretty petty and stupid, especially since Liberty is, other than LP house-organs and activist's newsletters, pretty much the only magazine that has consistently bothered to take the Party seriously.
I certainly appreciated Browne's small-government advocacy, and I was heavily influenced by Why Government Doesn't Work. But I'm afraid that "honest" isn't the first word that comes to mind when I think of him.
Over the Top vs. Bush
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 3:01PM
Several thoughts about this Dana Milbank piece. First, it's at least a little absurd to identify Andrew Sullivan as a "conservative" blogger. He may lean conservative on some things, but he's more of an eclectic and sneering critic of everybody, right/center/left alike, than he is readily identifiable in any particular philosophical camp except his own camp of one. Second, while I agree with the gist of the criticisms of Bush's fiscal record and of some of his administration's other failings, it strikes me that both Sullivan AND Bartlett go way over the top; they paint Bush almost as if he's flat-out EVIL in all caps rather than as merely flawed. And really, doesn't Bartlett lose credibility when he says he would vote for Bill Clinton over W???? Methinks a little perspective, and a chill pill, is in order.
Santorum Writing Bill Dembski Foreword
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 2:52PM
Reports the AP. No matter what one thinks of ID, where does this fit in to Santorum's reelection strategy?
Bet on Kansas
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 2:44PM
Conservatives should be paying attention to the legislative session unfolding in Kansas, where state officials are considering passage of a bill that would allow the state to own and operate casinos in order to generate revenue to fund education budget shortfalls.
The bill, which has been floated before and failed, is a pet project of the governor, Democrat Kathleen Sebelius, and right now Republicans in the statehouse are telling associates that they support the legislation.
This is all the more mindboggling given that most Republicans in Kansas haven't seen much of the legislation's language. Given what Washington Republicans have just gone through with Indian casinos, Jack Abramoff, and lobbying, do they really think it's a good idea to get in bed with state-owned and operated gambling? And it if it isn't state-operated, just who is going to run these parlors of sin and temptation for them? Donald Trump?
Soros Bullish on Katrina Fallout
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 2:16PM
George Soros' Open Society Institute is preparing to dole out a goodly sum to ensure that all the positive, fawning coverage Hurricane Katrina's death and destruction has been receiving finally gets balanced out a bit with the hitherto unheard bad news:
The Katrina Media Fellowships, sponsored by The Open Society Institute (OSI), will support media makers working in print and radio journalism, photography, and documentary film and video to generate and improve media coverage of critical issues of poverty, racism, and government neglect in the Gulf Region that were laid bare by Hurricane Katrina. This one-time fellowship will be awarded to mid-career or veteran print or radio journalists, photographers, or documentary filmmakers with proven track records as serious media-makers. OSI will give special consideration to applicants who have been displaced from or are residents of the Gulf Region. OSI expects to award 12-15 fellowships. Fellowship recipients will be announced in mid-May 2006 and receive between $15,000-$35,000, to cover a stipend and project expenses.
Re: The Fairer Sex
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 1:48PM
Dave: either a socialist plot or plain human bad habit. Like the pagans of Rome we name our months for our gods.
Re: The Fairer Sex
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 1:23PM
So James, does that mean that the designation of March as National Women's History Month must have been a Socialist plot?
Or perhaps a presidential one: it's an opportunity for politicians to pander. In President Bush's case, he used yesterday's bully pulpit to tout the accomplishments of women in Iraq and Afghanistan. This was the right move: highlighting freedom where there was so little. But the rest just smacked of false hamming it up -- Look! I like women! I even have women friends and cabinet officers. I even married one! The Bill Clinton legacy continues...
The Fairer Sex
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 1:10PM
In accordance with Socialist Party tradition, today marks International Women's Day (official United Nations enthusiasm provided here). It's a fine occasion to consider the latest hip sexaholic feminist manifesto to hit bookshelves -- Sex and the Seasoned Woman: Pursuing the Passionate Life. Lakshmi Chaudry has hit back, from that other side of feminism you hear nothing about. I review in detail here.
Overload?
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 12:57PM
Well, almost. On today's Hugh Hewitt Show, there's almost too much to talk about. We'll get an Iraq update from Gen. Kimmett of CENTCOM, talk to Cong. Dan Lundgren (former California attorney general) about the expanding story of Meatheadgate (Rob Reiner's slush fund "First Five Commission"), Arizona Gov Napolitano sending national guard troops to the Mexican border, the Dubai port deal snafu, and a whole bunch more. Too bad we only have three hours. See ya on the radio.
Re: A Conservative Budget
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 12:04PM
The RSC budget's out. The quick synopsis: it's great, but it has the chance of a snowball in hell. It's here as a Word document. The highlights:
-It's boldly titled the "Contract for America Renewed." It apparently takes this title from its heavy reliance on a 1995 Contract for America budget, H.Con.Res. 67, which the House passed.
-Eliminate USAID, Millenium Challenge Accounts, and assistance to Egypt. That saves about $32-33 billion over five years.
-Eliminate the space shuttle and President Bush's Mars/Moon initiative. Good riddance to both. Savings: about $18 billion over five years.
-Eliminate Amtrak, the transportation bill earmarks, and the essential air service; privatize the FAA; and devolve federal highway aid. Savings: about $72 billion over five years.
-Eliminate Community Development Block Grants. $21 billion over five years.
-Under Education, Labor, and HHS, some conservative favorites are revivied: eliminate the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, NEA, and NEH, cut Education bureaucracy (remember when the GOP called for the elimination of the department? sigh...)
-Miscellaneous: it repeals Davis-Bacon, which mandates union-established prevailing wages for federal construction contracts, and opens ANWR.
House Republican leadership should have been on this since President Bush took office. It's unfortunate that it takes the earnest backbenchers to revive conservative principles in the budget on Capitol Hill.
A Conservative Budget
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 9:29AM
The House Republican Study Committee will release a balanced budget, in competition with the President's budget, this morning at 11 a.m. EST. We'll keep an eye out for it. Until then, read Mike Pence and Jeb Hensarling's case for it.
Console Thyself...
Posted by on 3.8.06 @ 8:13AM
...disaffected Republicans. Democrats are quibbling at the most basic level: control of voter lists. The Clintonista wing of the party is setting up their own operation in competition with Dean's DNC.
Tuesday, March 7, 2006
Forgery at the Impromptu Spelling Bee
Posted by on 3.7.06 @ 11:57PM
A Cyprus court jailed Pakistani national Fazal Ur Rehman for eight months for forgery after police spotted spelling mistakes on stamps on an Afghan passport he was carrying -- otherwise it was a near-perfect copy, the Cyprus Mail said Wednesday.
"Ministry" was spelled "Menistry" and the first "n" was missing from government, the newspaper said.
"The passport looked perfect and professionally made ... almost deemed original by forensics," a police officer told a magistrate in the Cypriot capital Nicosia.
Okay, okay. A Cyprus court? Pakistani national? Afghan passport? Huh? It sounds like it's probably a good thing this guy is such a bad speller...
Rational Exuberance
Posted by on 3.7.06 @ 6:52PM
After Knopf publishers paid out an estimated $8.5 million advance to former prez Bill C. for his so-called memoir, and Simon & Schuster gave away an easy $8 mil to wifey Hill for details of her life, former Fed Chair Alan Greenspan has just inked what Publishers Weekly is describing as "$8 million+ deal" to tell all. Being the only Fed Chair most of us can remember, he's bound to provide lots of hot currency.
And who's the lucky publisher this go 'round? None other than, Penguin, of formerly Penguin Putnam.
Does this news signal that Andrea Mitchell will soon retire also? And how come she didn't collect as much for her recent book?
Clarity From the Bench, Continued
Posted by on 3.7.06 @ 6:27PM
Here's some background on Leif Clark, the Billy Madison-citing bankruptcy judge.
Impeach Pro-Gay Marriage Judge?
Posted by on 3.7.06 @ 5:41PM
That's what some Maryland legislators have in mind this week. We just received an email over the transom from Delegate Don Dwyer's office reporting that he introduced an impeachment motion against the judge who overturned the state's gay marriage ban, Judge M. Brooke Murdock. Keep on eye on that situation as a key front in this nationwide battle.
Kept or Liberated?
Posted by on 3.7.06 @ 5:34PM
Women, that is. America's Future Foundation takes up the topic of "What does the Right want from its women" for its roundtable discussion Thursday night. Our friends there hope you D.C. working stiffs can make it.
Re: Bush's Unpopularity
Posted by on 3.7.06 @ 5:30PM
John, What's implied in that article, but left unsaid is the rehabilitation of these sometimes political stinkers into history's heroes. President Truman is consistently ranked by historians among the top ten and even top five presidents.
Bush's Unpopularity, In Perspective
Posted by on 3.7.06 @ 4:20PM
Bill Sammon at The Examiner takes a glass-half-full approach:
Although President Bush is suffering through the lowest job approval ratings of his presidency, most of his predecessors had ratings that were just as low or even lower.Eight of the 10 presidents who preceded Bush had ratings at least as low as 37 percent - the current president's nadir, as measured by Gallup. Some were dramatically lower.
Harry Truman once had a job approval rating of just 23 percent, the lowest ever recorded since Gallup began taking such polls in 1938. Ronald Reagan bottomed out at 35 percent.
"All presidents but two have been in the 30 percent range since Gallup began measuring in World War II," Gallup Editor in Chief Frank Newport told The Examiner. "The two that never got below 40 are JFK and Eisenhower."
Move the judges!
Posted by on 3.7.06 @ 4:17PM
Over at Confirmthem, Andrew makes a great post: It's time to start cracking the whip on the appeals court nominees again. Just because Alito and Roberts were confirmed is no reason to rest on our laurels. Let's get the ball rolling on this!
Today on the Hugh Hewitt Show
Posted by on 3.7.06 @ 1:06PM
Just what did Vice President Cheney have in mind when he said today that Iran would face "meaningful consequences" if it continued to defy the international community's attempts to block its nuclear weapons program? Tune in to the Hugh Hewitt Show today (6-9 EST on the Salem Radio Network). We'll be dissecting the Veep's words and much more, including the latest developments in Meatheadgate: the Rob Reiner ad scandal.
Bush Comes Around?
Posted by on 3.7.06 @ 10:27AM
After some thorough soul-searching, President Bush came to his senses about spending yesterday: "We can't be all things to all people when it comes to spending the taxpayers' money." Ok, so it's not fiscal conservatism at its roots, but it's apparent progress from No Child Left Behind and the prescription drug bill. Next step in therapy: "The government isn't the solution."
While the President is taking a solid step in pushing for the line item veto (I'm really not sure how a tailored version gets around the unconstitutionality of the first go 'round... something not one news report about yesterday's announcement explained), that is hardly an adequate explanation for his spending record. Legislative scapegoats won't do -- and since Bush hasn't vetoed a spending bill, chances are Congress won't take him seriously here.
UPDATE [10:30]: A helpful reader explains the constitutionality of the Bush proposal:
The Supremes called the line item veto unconstitutional because the 1996 law said that the President used the line item veto after Congress acted on a bill to cut items out of spending legislation. The Supreme Court decision said that violated Article I language that says the Congress passes legislation and then the president signs it or vetoes the whole thing. President Bush's version is constitutional because the President is given unfinished bills (not yet passed or acted upon by Congress) for the President to cut up with the LIV. He then sends it back for Congress to vote on with an up or down vote in both houses. He retains the right to veto the entire legislation when it comes back to him.
Clarity From the Bench
Posted by on 3.7.06 @ 9:53AM
Ann Althouse praised John Roberts yesterday regarding FAIR v. Rumsfeld, the Solomon Amendment case:
I want to express my deepest thanks to Chief Justice Roberts for gathering the Justices onto one clearly written opinion. There is no blather or hedging in the prose. He has obviously taken great pains to put every sentence in plain English. He deals with all the precedents, handling most of the cases in one or two crisp sentences. You may not appreciate how beautiful this thinking and writing is, but I do, and I think generations of law students will.One might similarly praise the plain English of Bankruptcy Judge Leif Clark, who recently shot down "for being incomprehensible" a "Motion to Discharge Response to Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Response Opposing Objection to Discharge." Clark added a footnote:
Or, in the words of the competition judge to Adam Sandler's title character in the movie, "Billy Madison," after Billy Madison had responded to a question with an answer that sounded superficially reasonable but lacked any substance,Clearly written, no hedging!Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I've ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response was there anything that could even be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.Deciphering motions like the one presented here wastes valuable chamber staff time, and invites this sort of footnote.
Getting Crazy With Iran - Like A Fox?
Posted by on 3.7.06 @ 9:08AM
Clever Hitchens, looking to make an end run around the thicket of Iran policy, suggests we go to the mullahs and kill them with kindness -- kindness aimed, that is, at their own pro-American people.
Creativity points, clearly, are in order -- but Tehran would grasp easily that a speech by Bush, or any US President, live and in person to the Persian masses means the jig is up, up, and away.
Query then whether we might bully them into doing it. Ponder the opportunity for letting gleam that other weapon of the Cold War...
"An iron veil has descended across a proud and ancient civilization. Mr. Ahmadinejad, tear down this veil!"
OBL hunt gone cold
Posted by on 3.7.06 @ 1:15AM
Signals source, when prodded, says that the report of imminent hot pursuit of OBL is now gone cold. Last weekend, POTUS in Pakistan asked Mushareff for assistance, and Mushareff turned away. This can be seen as the price of strategic alliance with India, and a good price. The bagging of the sickly and operationally insignificant OBL is not a central achievement. OBL is last century's villain. Now the enemy is most readily visible all the time. GPS for Tehran. GPS for the Wahhabbst princes of Araby. GPS for Palazzo al-Assad.
Monday, March 6, 2006
Re: Durbin, Wyden and Rockefeller
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 10:52PM
Quin: This is a pretty old story that may become new again soon. Over a year ago, I reported that these three were the subject of a criminal referral to the Justice Department. The unfortunate fact is that they're still in the Senate, and nothing has been done to bring them to account for the leak. It's also very likely that the NSA terrorist surveillance program was leaked by one of them or their staff. Stay tuned. This could get really interesting soon.
Nagin agin, on race case
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 6:00PM
Lord Almighty, my home city's pols keep embarrassing themselves. More evidence that Mayor Ray Nagin has gone to the dark side of demogoguery comes from yesterday's Houston Chronicle, here:
Nagin noted that 23 candidates entered the mayoral fray before the registration deadline last week.
"Very few of them look like us," he told the almost totally black crowd of about 200 persons who attended the meeting at the NAACP Family & Technology Center on Fannin.
This is, of course, "chocolate city" redux. And it's outrageous. Racial appeals have no good place in our politics, and certainly not in the politics of a suffering city that needs to pull together. And to think, Nagin originally was elected with majority white support and only a minority of black support. Anyway, shame on him. What a jack---.
Babbin on Durbin, Wyden, Rockefeller
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 5:46PM
Since Jed is so busy, I thought I would report what to me seemed the most interesting news he gave in his brief abut excellent ppearance (just a few minutes ago) on Fox News. HE says that Demo senators Durbin, Wyden and Rockefeller have been mentioned by name in a criminal referral in at least one of the leaks cases. Now I wasn't clear whether Jed was saying they are targets or "subjects" (or what) of the investigation, or even just witnesses, but it all sounded pretty significant. Granted, Jed may have reported that news on this blog before, but it was the first I had heard of it, and I do tend to pay attention. Anyway, I'm sure Jed will fill us all in once he finishes guest-hosting for Hewitt. But just wanted to give him him props for a very interesting appearance on Fox!
Busy, Busy, Busy
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 2:53PM
As the Bokononists would say, "busy, busy, busy." Before I hit the airwaves for Hugh at 6, look for me on The Big Story with John Gibson on Fox about 5:15. We're talking about the big leaks, and the investigations that may be producing significant developments this week.
Mike Rounds' Signing Statement
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 2:30PM
South Dakota's governor said in a statement today:
In the history of the world, the true test of a civilization is how well people treat the most vulnerable and most helpless in their society. The sponsors and supporters of this bill believe that abortion is wrong because unborn children are the most vulnerable and most helpless persons in our society. I agree with them.
Not much with which to disagree there.
Abortion Ban Signed
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 2:20PM
Pro-life legislation picked up speed this afternoon, as South Dakota Governor Mike Rounds signed into law the abortion ban passed last week.
Paglia Joins The Academic Counterrevolution
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 1:57PM
The Opinionator was fascinated enough with my supposedly oddball ideas about what we need by way of education in America to write:
Perhaps the most unusual conservative criticism of Bush comes from James G. Poulos at the American Spectator blog, who faults the president's plan to improve math and science education: "Our culture is not doomed but it is unraveling," he writes. "Building a professional army of scientists and mathematicians is precisely the wrong kind of educational emphasis required" to change that.
Now cometh Camille Paglia, joining Alan Dershowitz in dressing down the ivory tower generally and Harvard's Faculty of Arts and Sciences in particular. She's worth quoting at length. I could not have said it better myself:
"Will its members acknowledge their own insularity and excesses, or will they continue down the path of smug self-congratulation and vanity? Harvard's reputation for disinterested scholarship has been severely gored by the shadowy manipulations of the self-serving cabal who forced Mr. Summers's premature resignation. That so few of the ostensibly aggrieved faculty members deigned to speak on the record to The Crimson, the student newspaper, illustrates the cagey hypocrisy that permeates fashionable campus leftism, which worships diversity in all things except diversity of thought.
"If Harvard cannot correct itself in this crisis, it will signal that academe cannot be trusted to reform itself from within. There is a rising tide of off-campus discontent with the monolithic orthodoxies of humanities departments. David Horowitz, a 1960's radical turned conservative, has researched the lopsided party registration of humanities professors (who tend to be Democrats like me) and proposed an "academic bill of rights" to guarantee fairness and political balance in the classroom. The conservative radio host Sean Hannity regularly broadcasts students' justifiable complaints about biased teachers and urges students to take recording devices to class to gather evidence. [...]
"Over the last three decades of trendy poststructuralism and postmodernism, American humanities professors fell under the sway of a ruthless guild mentality. Corruption and cronyism became systemic, spread by the ostentatious conference circuit and the new humanities centers of the 1980's. Harvard did not begin that blight but became an extreme example of it. Amid the ruins of the Summers presidency, there is a tremendous opportunity for recovery and renewal of the humanities."
Paglia name-checking Hannity! In the New York Times! "Justifiable" indeed: this is another hideous portait of why our ignorance of the fatuous and disgraceful self-abasement of the humanities -- guardian and teacher discipline of our very culture -- in favor of an all-out push for technocrats to operate the World of Tomorrow is a grievous, unforgiveable error. How dare we seek "competetiveness" at the expense of civilization?
Re: Hugh Hewitt Show
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 1:52PM
Quin: We're on the air 6-9 pm EST on the Salem Radio Network. It's heard across the nation, but regrettably not in the DC area. But you can listen live on www.hughhewitt.com.
What time, etc?
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 1:40PM
Jed -- Since I'm back in DC after a nine year absence, please fill me in: What time is the Hewitt show, and what station number on the radio dial? Thanks!
Today on the Hugh Hewitt Show
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 1:25PM
Hugh is off this week and I'll be filling in starting today. Hope you can catch it. We're going to hit a lot of the breaking news ranging from the Supreme Court's 8-0 decision upholding the Solomon Amendment to the Oscars (yawn) to John Fund's take on God and Taliban at Yale. Maybe today, or later in the week, we'll be talking about what Rob (Meathead) Reiner is doing with the state of California's money? Izzit illegal and why isn't the Governator doing something about it? See ya on the radio.
Bill Thomas
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 1:13PM
Prowler: Thomas is an SOB of the first order, but he was more often than not OUR SOB, with the intellect to get things done (and with the repeated reminders from Thomas himself that he does possess said intellect and that therefore you should defer to him). One of the biggest opportunities we had last year for real SS reform was when Thomas said he wanted to EXPAND the proposal so that it covered all sorts of other retirement-related programs as well, so that it would be comprehensive reform that would have other "sweeteners" in it that could make it more politically salable. Frankly, Sununu-Ryan was better both substantively and politically, but Thomas' idea was better than having a brave but poorly planned White House effort that went solo. If Bush had worked WITH Thomas from the start, there might have been a chance to achieve something solid for personal accounts. Now, with Thomas retiring, the odds, quite sadly, look even worse.
Lobbying Reform
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 1:04PM
Some on the Hill are wondering if Thomas's announcement isn't going to lead to a set of exits by elected officials concerned about a possible two-year moratorium on lobbying their former colleagues.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is the big proponent of this 24-month lock down, and it's not clear how much support it has.
By the way, for those of you looking at the electoral map, Thomas's district is very much solid Republican, and our sources say that Thomas would not resign without a succession plan, of sorts.
Thomas Announcement
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 1:02PM
Sources on the House Ways and Means Committee are telling us that Rep. Bill Thomas, the committee's chairman, will be announcing his retirement from the House shortly.
Thomas has been a solid chairman, pushing hard for tax cuts, an advocate for spending cuts, and didn't always play ball with the White House the way it would have liked. Those are all good things.
If Thomas does go through with it -- and it's a big if given how he can get emotional about things -- it's a somewhat surprising move. Our sources tell us that he had just completed a reorganization of his senior staff on the committee, and had assured some of them, who had been mulling exits of their own, that he was staying put.
Oh yes, Jack's GOP
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 12:54PM
By the way, I should have added in my post on Nicklaus that he long has been quite publicly a GOPer, and he campaigned hard for Bush in Ohio in 2004.
Consulting the Iraq Experts
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 12:14PM
So this morning's Washington Post/ABC News poll finds that a strong majority belives civil war is imminent. Those polled? A majority of Americans. Methinks it might be a bit more instructive to poll Iraqis about whether or not their country will descend into civil war, not the American man on the street.
Jack for Senate
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 12:04PM
By the way, speaking of the great Jack Nicklaus (as I did a few posts ago when talking about Tiger Woods), I have a very, very serious suggestion: Florida Republicans should evict the hopeless underdog Katherine Harris from the Senate race (okay, I know, she won't actually step down, but in my plan she would be outgunned regardless) by drafting Nicklaus as their Senate nominee. The man is a solid, commonsense conservative Republican; he can largely self-fund; he's a terrific speaker and has infinite grace under press questioning; he's incorruptible; he has a history of charitable work that makes it impossible to lable him a "heartless conservative"; and he's a living, breathing hero, fergoshsakes. Truth be told, I think he would be a shoo-in in Ohio, whereas in Florida he would start out probably as a 50-50 chance (which is better than Harris, who has almost no chance, it seems) -- but Ohio has an incumbent semi-Republican already on the ballot in Mike DeWine. Florida needs Jack; the U.S. Senate needs Jack; and please don't anybody tell me that I "don't know Jack (s..)" about the subject, because I'm sure Nicklaus would have a better chance than Rep. Harris. Run, Jack, run!!!
Last Word to Wlady on Sayers
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 11:32AM
Okay, most of what I've seen of Sayers were highlight reels; when I was first really getting into the NFL at age 5 and 6, he already was on his way out the door because of his knee injuries. But your description of his grace is so lyrical that he MUST have been even more beautiful to watch than O.J.; to inspire such brilliantly written blog-writing, he MUST have been even more special than I remember. Thanks for the descriptions, Wlady.
Tiger, burning bright
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 11:28AM
It is to Tiger Woods' credit that he is always in position to win if other people choke, and that he himself never seems to choke to hand away titles to other people. He is indeed the most dominant athlete in his sport in my entire lifetime, Lance Armstrong included. But how I wish we could see him, a la my idol Jack Nicklaus, be forced to deal with excruciating defeats once in a while. Just once it would be nice to see somebody do to Tiger what Lee Trevino and especially Tom Watson (and several others, although they made no habit of it) did to Jack, which is to make birdies to snatch victories away when Jack seemed to have done everything necessary to win. Instead, the only people who have even held on in the face of Tiger in the lead or tied for the lead were the forgettable Bob May -- who lost, but didn't choke -- the perennial runner-up Chris DiMarco -- who choked early on Sunday, then came back, but was made to look better when Tiger bogeyed the final two holes of regulation -- and the enigmatic Thomas Bjorn, who just lucked out when Tiger mis-hit a ball into the water on 18 to hand Bjorn the victory. In short, once Tiger has the lead, everybody else folds. David Toms did it again Sunday, after going 71 holes without a 3-putt, only to horrible yank a putt and 3-putt 18 just when Tiger for the first time fell within one stroke of him. Late last year it was John Daly missing a two-footer. Earlier this year it was two guys gagging in a playoff. Somebody needs to be a man a snatch a win away from Tiger. Only then will we see Tiger have a chance to show the grace in heart-breaking defeat that Nicklaus showed, which is one of the things that made Nicklaus not just a great winner but a great SPORTSMAN. Tiger may have that same ability, that same grace. But until somebody has the guts to make him prove it, we'll never know.
Court Upholds Solomon Amendment
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 10:46AM
Law schools that accept federal funds lose case to boot military recruiters.
Great Work If You Can Get It
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 10:36AM
Pennsylvania's Supreme Court justices billed the state for more than $50,000 in assorted food, travel, and miscellaneous expenses -- for trips to conferences in Alaska, South Carolina, and Puerto Rico. And that's just for the first half of the fiscal year. Given their approval of the unconstitutional pay raise for themselves and the legislature last year, such spending would merit an audit. But no such luck, since Ed Rendell's the governor.
"Victory against Wal-Mart!"
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 9:06AM
That's NARAL's reaction to Wal-Mart's capitulation -- deciding voluntarily to stock the morning-after pill nationwide.
One Thousand vs. David Gregory
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 9:04AM
Some are calling -- via petition -- for the NBC White House correspondent's head.
Re: Curtains
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 2:38AM
Oh, yes, Wlady, I forgot about that -- it was the president of the Academy who went on about how much better movies are in theaters than on DVD. You'd think he, of all people, would have a decent home entertainment center, but I guess not...
Re: Vince Young, Gale Sayers
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 2:35AM
Quin: So far as I know, the University of Texas is synonymous with the state, a state that was once synonymous with primacy in football. Thanks to Vince Young, a native of the Republic of Texas, not only did he for all intents single-handedly and in the most brilliant fashion win the national championship for his Longhorns -- but in so doing he returned Texas football to heights not seen since its glory days under Coach Darrell K. Royal many decades ago. So how could the savior and liberator of Texas football possibly be allowed to end up serving the football interests of some other state?
Let's say he's drafted by the Saints. Surely he'd be more likely to build on his legend if he were based in San Antonio rather than in New Orleans, no?
But so long as we're speaking of glory days, I've always tended to regard Gale Sayers as beyond comparison. O.J. Simpson was superb, and despite almost spindly legs, amazingly tough and durable. At USC he carried the ball 35-40 times a game, it seemed, and always broke a long gain late in the game right after crawling back to the huddle from the previous play. He looked mighty stylish when he ran. So did USC's Marcus Allen a decade later, though he was never quite as strong and fast. Yet for my money, no one has ever matched Sayers for sheer artistic brilliance, a talent that combined speed, quickness, elusiveness, unpredictability, originality, creativity and fearlessness in way that made the world seem new. And as always when we see perfection, it couldn't last.
Curtains
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 1:06AM
John, apparently Hollywood also is afraid it's losing viewers. My wife tells me that earlier in the show someone made a distinct plea to viewers to watch their movies at the Multiplexes or Multisexes or whatever they're called these days instead of on DVD at home, where the popcorn is cheaper and less soggy. So far as I can tell the Academy split the difference, conferring the best-supporting actor awards to "cause" roles while saving the main acting prizes for two genuinely likable and appealing actors. For Reese Witherspoon to win over a major portrait of tranvestiture, in what for her was really a very slight role that allowed her to do little more than sing like an angel and go through a charming paces the rest of the way, is a huge Hollywood copout. So too is its choosing some nonsense named Crash -- does the 1996 movie of the same name (in which a couple get their kicks watching cars collide) get to share in this best movie prize? -- over the greatest male bonding film of the 21st century is an ultimate instance of chickening out. It won't do that Ang Lee was given a consolation prize for best director. The Academy pulled the same trick in 1998 when it gave Steven Spielberg the best director award without naming his Saving Private Ryan best picture.
And of course it also lacked the courage of its own convictions in failing to name Paradise Now best foreign film. Suicide bombers will have to wait for their real moment in the Hollywood sun.
But say what you will about the Oscar show. It ended at 11:30 p.m. eastern time, the earliest closing in living memory -- though probably too late to save Hollywood from itself.
Hollywood Hates Gay People!
Posted by on 3.6.06 @ 12:16AM
It's hard to believe that the Best Picture of the year was really Crash, a series of vignettes of wildly varying quality that, as Matt Welch points out, takes place in an LA that doesn't exist. There's a whiff of Brokeback Mountain backlash in the choice: I must admit that part of the reason I haven't seen Brokeback, thought to be the frontrunner, is that it seemed pitched as an eat-your-vegetables movie (see this if you're tolerant!). Maybe Academy members had the same reaction.
Other notable things about the ceremony: The word "Bush" was never mentioned. Jesus was thanked -- by "It's Hard Out Here For a Pimp" songsters Three Six Mafia. The Stephen Colbert-narrated "attack ads" were good for a laugh; so was Clooney's acceptance speech (being "proud to be out of touch" implies an indifference to selling tickets, which the star of Ocean's 12 plainly does not have). And the suicide bomber movie lost (Go Tsotsi!).
Sunday, March 5, 2006
Re: Chertoff (and Jon Stewart)
Posted by on 3.5.06 @ 9:44PM
Quin: Many thanks. I have no concreted prejudice against spec ops guys for that job (some of my best friends are...) But they are used to moving quick and light. Maybe D'OHS needs a heavy forces guy at the top and a spec ops type as deputy?
Meanwhile - watching the incredibly boring Oscars - I'm wondering if Jon Stewart is usually this bad. He's not dying up there, he's dead. Frozen with stage fright? I don't know, but isn't there someone in that crowd who could slip him a Prozac? Be merciful, people.
Yes to Jed, question to Wlady
Posted by on 3.5.06 @ 9:33PM
Jed -- Re your call for a senior command guy to head Homeland Security, that fits what I meant to say when I said this: somebody with actual manpower-organization experience, somebody who actually has dealt with big mobilizations in times of crisis. The next thought I had, when I started to bring in special ops, got interrupted by a fire alarm. To be clear, I agree with every word you wrote here:
Quin: If Chertoff gets the boot, which he should, there
should be a housecleaning. Removing him isn't enough. And his
replacement shouldn't be a spec ops guy. The whole idea is to get
someone who can plan things on a large scale or small, is used to
thinking in C3I terms -- command, communications and intelligence
-- and has real operational experience in senior command levels.
Time to separate the staff weenies and academics from the TACAMO
crew. Take charge and move out, people. Posted By: Jed
Babbin
Now, different subject, to Wlady: Why does Vince Young have to stay in Texas? As for Reggie Bush, I think he's incredibly explosive, but can he take a pounding? I think you are correct that he might not last, a la Sayers. Now, though, to really make people angry, I must say that I saw another runner who ran as beautifully as Sayers did. He was breathtaking to watch, and he seemed like a good man to boot, always giving credit to his linemen, saying all the right things, etc., and with an engaging manner that made him seem to be the most approachable of superstars. Unfortunately, he was last seen on a golf course searching for the real killer, after a glove didn't fit while riding the white Bronco, or something like that. What a shame that the Juice turned out so badly... and what a contrast with Gale Sayers, the only other runner with such amazing gracefulness, who actually does seem to be a good and decent human being.
Shunning Oscar
Posted by on 3.5.06 @ 7:53PM
I don't have too much punditry to add to the particulars of tonight's Oscars, but here's a column I wrote on the cult of Jon Stewart last year and another one on how silly it is to get worked up over the Academy Awards. I will say, however, the one Best Picture contender I saw, Crash, was just about the most ham-handed bit of pseudo-sociological foolishness I've ever seen; truly xenophobic in its paranoid vision of America as the ultimate racist society. Therefore, I believe Brokeback Mountain can and will be upset. Carry on.
Huge Anti-Terror Rally in Bahrain
Posted by on 3.5.06 @ 5:33PM
Gateway Pundit has a round-up. And Andrew Sullivan notes: "All this happened last Wednesday. Have you seen a mention of it in the MSM? Me neither."
Sadr Watch
Posted by on 3.5.06 @ 1:13PM
The AP reports on Moqtada al Sadr's latest moves in the pursuit of Iraqi nationalism:
"Extinguish the flames of the sectarian treachery," said the followers of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and members of the Sunni Endowment, a government agency responsible for Sunni mosques and shrines. "Every drop of blood shed is a waste."
Just so. Why would a package of lies benefit al Sadr more than this basic truth? His support has gone in the past to Shi'ite Prime Minister Ibrahim al Jaafari. But now the PM appears as an obstacle to unity, and al Sadr has shown a consistent willingness to compromise in order to maintain and consolidate political power. My suspicion remains that the power he desires is that independent of Iran. Add to that an intuition that al Sadr will let his support for al Jaafari slip -- and that his profile will continue to rise as a force for anti-sectarianism.
Oscar speak
Posted by on 3.5.06 @ 12:17PM
Words to watch for from an Oscar source re tonight's major acceptance speeches. Count who thanks his/her mom, who thanks his/her Dad, who thanks God Almighty. Since 1992, of the 42 major waward speeches (actor, actress, movie) only five actresses have thanked mom, one actor has thanked mom, none have thanked dad alone, only one has thanked God -- Mr. Gibson.
Also, words used only once in all the speeches include "Holocaust," "uxoriousness," "WMD."
Brownie's Rehab
Posted by on 3.5.06 @ 9:48AM
He sat down with Chris Wallace this morning on Fox News Sunday. I won't get into the he said/she said business of this. But does anyone else notice that Michael Brown's qualifications aren't even a matter of discussion anymore? Wallace is a tough interviewer, so he's not softballing Brown. The total disappearance of this matter shows how disingenuous that charge was: now that Brown's opposing the White House on the Katrina response, he's a respected expert.
Oscars Tonite
Posted by on 3.5.06 @ 9:26AM
Please don’t bother with Oscar predictions. At least those forecasting who wins meaningless honors such as “best actor.” The promoters are promising a night free of politics and the usual hyperliberal preaching. But these people can’t help themselves. They believe movies are a powerful political force that change people’s lives and Congressional votes. They are convinced of that importance and of the fact it can be maintained only by making films to please their fellow whacko liberal
I plan to watch most of it because we will have to make our own awards for:
WORST POLITICAL SPEECH BY AN AIRHEAD: There’s no contest in this category. George Clooney, if he gets to the microphone at all, will be the winner. Look for him to call George Bush a war criminal and demand we close Gitmo;
LAMEST POLITICAL JOKE: John Stewart will not be able to stop himself, and the evening’s most humorous moment will occur when Stewart makes some crack about Brokeback Republicans or Cheney’s hunting accident. For which he will receive a standing ovation;
MOST CLAIMS TO POLITICAL COURAGE: this is a hard one, because everyone, from Clooney to Brokeback to Capote’s new incarnation will be congratulating themselves for the enormous courage it took to make the only movies
CHEESIEST ACCEPTANCE SPEECH: The competition will be tough, but look for a new talent to distinguish itself. We will be watching for the phoniest shared congratulations and thanks from some hitherto hidden talent who – for all the syrupy thanks – really, sensitively, sincerely, with feeling, from the bottom of his heart means, “it’s all about me, and that’s why I’m up here holding the Oscar, not you.” In
- The Collapse of Jon Corzine
- Let's Return to the Gold Standard
- Current Wisdom
- Digital Subscription (Save 78%)
- Buy a single issue (Save 50%)
- Send Spectator as a gift
