- 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, May 6, 2006
Re: Kennedy Crashes and Other Golden Oldies
Posted by on 5.6.06 @ 3:08PM
Most of us seem to have been stunned into silence by the awful spectacle of another Kennedy having trouble self-medicating. And just as we wrangle that ghost of headlines past, Francis Fukuyama is back, with another re-reconsideration of The End of History. He's not too coy to tell us what it is he didn't tell us then. But, please -- enough of the known unknowns. Tell us something we don't know we don't know!
Kennedy's Binge Drinking Problem
Posted by on 5.6.06 @ 9:47AM
The Projo rode with Patrick Kennedy to the airport yesterday afternoon. They lead with this quote: "I've got to do total abstinence, period.... From now on, obviously, I'm a very public face with addiction and alcoholism written on my head." Kennedy acknowledged that he has a long-standing binge drinking issue, though he denied that he was drinking Wednesday night. But not to worry -- his unnamed girlfriend "validated" that claim .
Patrick Kennedy to Rehab
Posted by on 5.6.06 @ 3:04AM
WaPo:
"I am deeply concerned about my reaction to the medication and my lack of knowledge of the accident that evening," he said during a brief news conference at the Capitol. "But I do know enough that I know I need help."Wait, I thought it was a drug interaction. You just discontinue the meds when that happens. You go into rehab when you're taking more pills (or more of something else) than you should. Kennedy said before that he'd taken "'the prescribed amount' of Phenergan and Ambien."
I hope the good doctors at The Mayo Clinic can help Rep. Kennedy with his addiction to lying.
Friday, May 5, 2006
The Philippine Anthony Kennedy?
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 9:20PM
"A Philippine judge who claimed he could see into the future and admitted consulting imaginary mystic dwarfs has asked for his job back after being fired by the country's Supreme Court." Hey, some of our most distinguished jurists base their decisions on the mystical and imaginary.
(Hat tip: Jesse Walker.)
Re: Goss Out
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 4:16PM
Kudlow & Co cancelled my booking for today. Instead, I'll be on the Hugh Hewitt Show (Salem Radio Net) talking about the Goss resignation about 1805 EDT.
Hearing an Opportunity
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 4:09PM
Notwithstanding all the points I made in the two posts below, this new hearing for Kavanaugh may not be a terrible thing. First of all, word is so strong on the Hill that there is some sort of wink-and-nod agreement from the Democratic Seven NOT to filibuster Kavanaugh -- so strong that the first AP story actually said the pledge was specified in the letter written by the Demo Seven to Specter, before later stories dropped that incorrect claim -- that I'm assuming there must be something to it. One very solid source of mine in the Senate or Senate staff, very well placed, assured me flat-out that the deal for another hearing absolutely would not have been made if there weren't some VERY strong reason to believe, based on Member conversations, that a new hearing would make it easier for Kavanaugh to get confirmed rather than more difficult. Frankly, it sounds awfully fishy to me -- similar assurances sure seem to have been made and broken by the Dems in the past -- but the proof will be in the pudding. As much as we pundits think we know, we must admit to not being privy to all private Member conversations, and so we shouldn't leap TOO quickly to judgment.
Second, a new hearing for a good nominee and good witness like Kavanaugh, while a calculated risk, could well end up aiding our cause in the public eye. ANY time the witness is solid and keeps his wits while windbag senators browbeat him, the witness ends up looking better than the senators. See Oliver North, Clarence Thomas (who enjoyed STRONG poll support immediately after the hearings which only dissipated after another year of pummeling from the MSM while he had no other chances to defend himself), Bill Pryor, John Roberts, and Samuel Alito. I have faith in Brett Kavanaugh's ability to parry any cheap shots by Kennedy, Schumer, and Durbin -- AND, if offered the opportunity, to creating a "teaching moment" or two to explain again to the American public why a conservative ("textualist," "originalist," or "strict constructionist," which aren't exactly the same thing but all of which are basically conservative) jurisprudence is the proper one, and to explain how bad results (eminent domain abuse, anyone?) stem from liberal, make-it-up-as-they-go approaches to constitutional law. The more the liberal smear artists try to tear down an obviously qualified, intelligent, fair-minded and decent nominee, in a public forum where the nominee has the chance to defend himself, the conservative cause advances.
Third, the KEY test will be whether Kavanaugh still gets his committee vote next Thursday, just two days after the new hearing. If he does, the harm will be minimal. It will mean that there is still plenty of time to confirm him on the floor well before Memorial Day, AND to get several other appellate nominees confirmed as well.
IF, on the other hand, the Dems claim to be "disturbed" by the testimony and demand (and are granted) yet another week's layover before the committee vote on Kavanaugh, the possibility of getting him finally donfirmed by the full Senate before Memorial Day becomes far more distant. And since he is to be the first nominee considered on the floor, that would create a bottleneck for all the other pending nominees. Every time the process is pushed back, a judge is likely (on the back end) to get abandoned due to other supposed priorities on the Senate calendar (and the campaign calendar). Meanwhile, the Memorial Day deadline is especially crucial if the widespread rumors are true that Justice Stevens will step down at the end of this term. The experiences with Roberts and Alito show that the very minute that happens (if it does), ALL other appellate nominees will get sidetracked for the duration of the Supreme Court battle. What's worse, if the constitutional option that kills filibusters hasn't been used by the time a Supreme Court nomination comes forward, it will be less likely that Bush will nominate a real superstar (like, say, Edith Jones) because the Dems of course will threaten to filibuster any solid conservative who shows real flashes of brilliance.
All of which means that the decision to have another Kavanaugh hearing is dicey. But if Kavanaugh and Specter and other GOP senators (and the White House, for that matter) play it right and extract enough concessions from the "moderate" Dems in return, it could turn out okay in the end. I don't like the looks of the decision for a new hearing now, but I'm not ready to flat-out denounce it until and unless I see some of the bad scenarios above (rather than the good ones at the very start of this blog post) actually occur. We shall see.... and Specter and Frist and company will be judged on the results, and, if the results are good, will be justly praised in this quarter as well, where right now skepticism has a bit of the upper hand.
Insight of the Day
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 3:55PM
RE: Kennedy the younger's driving (and prescription drug? and drinking?) troubles, this from James Taranto's "Best of the Web" this afternoon:
Re: Goss Out
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 3:14PM
This is very bad news. Goss was on the road to reforming CIA. His resignation brings those reforms to a crashing halt. It threatens progress in cooperation of intelligence agencies. It leaves in charge the pre-Goss crowd, those who brought ius the WMD failure in Iraq, the Wilson/Plame nonsense, and the leaks of Mary McCarthy and the rest.
The Praetorians won. Castra Praetoria Langley rules, notwithstanding Negroponte or, for that matter, Bush.
Goss Out
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 2:10PM
There are other shoes that will drop in light of the resignation of CIA Director Porter Goss. We're hearing that Goss was growing increasingly uncomfortable with his role in light of the elevated role of chief intelligence official Amb. John Negroponte. Recent leaks and ongoing black eyes resulting from relevations of deputy misbehavior, and Goss was taking all kinds of flack internally from career staff there. That he took flack from careerists should be taken as a badge of honor.
The Specter of Kavanaugh
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 1:57PM
In explaining his decision to allow another hearing on the nomination of White House aide Brett Kavanaugh to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter had this to say: "I do not want to place the Senate in the position where we were a year ago this time when were having filibusters on the Democratic side and the Republican side was posing the constitutional, or nuclear option.I want to avoid that."
The sentiment is understandable, but on principle it is frustratingly counterproductive. The goal of Republicans ought not to be AVOIDING a fight, but WINNING the fight. The constitutional option is not to be feared. Indeed, it ought to be used, the sooner the better. There is a reason we have dubbed it the "constitutional option" -- because permanent filibusters used to kill judicial nominations are quite arguably unconstitutional by the letter of the law (there have been HUGE discussions of this over the past few years at Southern Appeal and Confirm Them and elsewhere; I'll let you, dear reader, do your own research and find the links), and certainly violate the absolutely clear spirit of it and of the Federalist Papers (several unambiguous Hamilton passages). There is a good reason why no permanent filibuster had ever been used to kill a judicial nomination before, and indeed why no judge with a majority of the whole Senate in favor had ever before been denied confirmation, in the first 214 years of the republic: because until the Schumerites came along, the very idea was unthinkable and indeed anathema.
Therefore, the goal should be, yes, to avoid a successful filibuster -- but to welcome rather than fear an attempted fillibuster that is killed with the constitutional option. Getting rid of, by rule, the permanent filibuster against judicial nominees would be a very good thing. It would restore the proper balance in the "advice and consent" equation. Otherwise, you have the bizarre ability of a minority of one half of one branch of government to hold hostage the power of a second branch of government to fill the offices in a third branch of government, whose operations are thus effectively held hostage as well to that minority of one half of one branch. On its face, the ability of such a semi-demi-hemi minority to hamstring two full branches (out of three) of a republican government is an abomination against republican principles.
The sooner we exercise the constitutional option, the sooner we ("we" meaning the American people through our elected senators) can restore the proper and appropriate and at least semi-efficient procedures meant to get judicial nominees either confirmed or rejected and thus to promote an efficient system of justice.
If the Kavanaugh nomination, sans a second hearing, would lead to an attempted filibuster that in turn were killed (the filibuster, not the nomination) by the constitutional option, it would open up the pipeline and let all the other nominees get the timely up-or-down votes that they deserve. This doesn't mean they all deserve confirmation just by virtue of being the President's choice, but it does mean they deserve to have their fate determined without endless delays and endlessly scurrilous attacks -- so they can move on with their lives either way. For Judge Terry Boyle to live in limbo for 15 years (!!!), wondering if his on-again, off-again promotion to a circuit court will ever be approved, is for him to be subjected to near-criminal abuse. Sometimes I think these high-and-mighty senators forget that it is real human lives that are being affected by these delays and smears -- not to mention, of course, that needed judgeships remain unfilled and their circuits backlogged, meaning ordinary citizens in those circuits have to wait too long for their day in court.
In sum, I don't fault Specter's intentions. But the end result of his overblown animus against the idea of the constitutional option is a host of despicable outcomes.
Next up on this topic: An analysis of the wisdom of the tactic of putting Kavanaugh through another hearing, APART from the question examined above about whether the constitutional option should be used.
Today on Kudlow & Co.
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 1:36PM
I'll be on with Larry on CNBC at about 1730 talking about the interview he's doing with the president immediately before. Should be a lot of fun. Hope you can catch it.
York Excuses Borking
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 12:29PM
I hate to disagree with NRO's Byron York, who does great reporting on judges, but chalk this up as a very friendly and respectful, uh, alternative view to York's column today, a column that effectively downplays the Democrats' success at blocking judicial nominees and the GOP's failures to get judges confirmed. York keeps trumpeting the supposed 87% success rate for GOP nominees, but misses the most important context: That seemingly acceptable success rate is built mostly on the basis of confirmations for district court judges, while the confirmation rate for the far more important (in terms of national policy) appeals court judges is far worse. Only 43 circuit court judges have been confirmed in more than five years of the Bush presidency. Two of those were holdover Clinton nominees (including the at least semi-controversial Roger Gregory) who Bush renominated as a gesture of goodwill -- a gesture that clearly has gone unrewarded. Kuhl, Estrada, Saad, and Pickering were harrassed into withdrawing. Myers, Haynes, and apparently Boyle are in limbo. Susan Nielson was confirmed after a sickeningly petty delay only when it became clear she was ill; she died shortly thereafter. In Alabama, magistrate judge William Steele was harrassed into being withdrawn from an appeals court nomination and then okayed for a district court judgeship instead. (The good news is that the slot was eventually filled by the wonderful Bill Pryor, but only after incredibly strenuous efforts on Pryor's behalf by the conservative movement.) (Also withdrawn was Fourth Circuit nominee Claude Allen, who now is troubled but whose record at the time showed no hint of any wrongdoing.) The Dems are threatening a filibuster of Wallace of Mississippi. And the delays have apparently enervated the White House, because ten slots remain without any nominees put forth by Bush at all, including five official "judicial emergencies," two of which have been vacant since the year 2000!!!! In all, as somebody pointed out just a few weeks ago, the Republican Senate under a Republican president has confirmed fewer appeals court nominees than the Republican Senate did under Democrat Bill Clinton.
This is not a record for the GOP to brag about -- but it is a record that should please the smearmeisters of the Democratic Party like Kennedy and Schumer and Leahy.
House Leaders Standing Up
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 11:51AM
In the one bright spot of the week on Capitol Hill, House Republicans, particularly Leader Boehner and Speaker Hastert, are calling the Senate's pork-laden emergency appropriations bill dead on arrival.
Strangely, some senators like Montana's Conrad Burns who call for "fiscal responsibility" still voted for the bill. It's not a contradiction if you can speak out both sides of your mouth, I suppose.
Take a Pill
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 9:13AM
It's clear from the Capitol Hill Police reports, as well as what the officers are telling their colleagues and reporters, that there wasn't just Ambien involved in this mess. This story has the whiff of former President Clinton's infamous "I tripped over a rock down at Greg Norman's compound, nothing more, nothing less" excuse.
Kennedy's story line is that he was "returning to the House for a vote," an excuse he has used before in similar incidents with Capitol Hill Police. Now, there have been whispers about Kennedy's seeming inability to stay awake during House sessions and hearings, something you'd expect from his doddering, bloated father, not the young bloated son. And given the way some of these sessions go, who'd blame a fellow for popping a pill and taking a snooze? But still.
The scandal in this is not that Kennedy was driving impaired. Apparently that is a God-given right and recreational activity for the Kennedy clan. The angle in this story is that Capitol Hill officials once again waved off police to make the problem go away in a manner similar to the McKinney affair. Any other citizen would be in cuffs, heading for testing and an early morning in the drunk tank. Kennedy got a ride home.
Here's hoping there wasn't a female officer in that car that brought him home. Given Patches' reputation with the ladies and his condition, it might have been a messy scene.
The Ambien Story
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 7:30AM
I find it hard to believe nearly 24 hours after the incident.
Had Kennedy staggered home, gone to bed, immediately turned himself over to cops for further inspection in the morning, and issued this excuse, fine. But the late night statement reeks of a scramble to concoct a story.
Re: Kennedy
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 7:14AM
I've been wondering about a way to publish this experience, and this appears the perfect spot.
Dialysis patients notoriously have trouble sleeping, so for a while I was trying various sleeping pills. (I have since given up on all of them.) I had Ambien for a while, the weakest dose. In my particular form of insomnia, I'd go to sleep between 10 and 11 and wake up -- wide awake -- an hour later. Usually I'd kill time going out to an all-night donut shop, listening to John Batchelor in my car, smoking a cigar, till I could relax and go to sleep again.
And I had become very familiar with how fast sleeping pills worked -- I thought.
So there I am one night about 1:30, having switched over by that time to the Beeb, and I've eaten my donut and drunk about a quarter of my coffee and lit my cigar. I pull out my Ambien bottle, take one, figure to start for home in 10 minutes.
But in ten minutes, just like a switch had been thrown, my vision doubles. I was seeing literally two of everything.
Thinks I, "I better get home."
And next thing I know I'm looking over the nose of my car at the flowerbeds in back of the donut shop, wondering where I am. Vision still doubled, but now add complete disorientation. And this donut shop -- first thing I realize -- is where the cops from three adjacent towns come for mid-graveyard pick-me-up.
I managed to drive home, a hairy experience indeed, and luckily over roads I know well and which are absolutely deserted.
Let me put paid once for all to the comedians' idea that you can close one eye when you have double vision. If you close one eye, the Ambien gets you and you close the other eye and fall asleep. Instantly.
Never again. Ambien is a drunk pill, and there are millions of people taking it and doing what I did.
Partying Like a Kennedy
Posted by on 5.5.06 @ 12:53AM
Rep. Kennedy says he was disoriented by prescription drugs, specifically the sleep medication Ambien and the anti-nausea medication Phenergran (which can cause drowsiness). Getting in front of the wheel after taking a sleeping pill, of course, is just as dangerous as driving drunk, and just as illegal. The special treatment that Kennedy got really is outrageous: Anyone else almost certainly would have had to spend the night in lockup.
There is a small possibility that Kennedy didn't know what he was doing: Ambien causes somnambulism in a tiny percentage of users (fewer than one in a thousand, according to the prescribing information, though some litigious busybodies have started claiming that that estimate is too low.) (UPDATE: They're mocking the Ambien story over at Wonkette: "Was his excuse written by the producers of Dateline NBC?")
Another wrinkle: Patrick Kennedy has been quite open about being diagnosed bipolar. Could the prescription drugs he wasn't taking possibly be as important as those he was?
Thursday, May 4, 2006
Re: Kennedy Coverage
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 11:51PM
Ladies and gentlemen: we are being much too understanding and lenient - dare I say liberal? - in commenting on the coverage of this latest Kennedyism. For starters, let us be grateful that no one drowned in this car wreck.
Second, let us take Rep. Kennedy at his word. He denies imbibing any alcohol before the incident. But the pharmaceutical cornucopia that may be available to him -- to smoke, snort or drop - is limited only by his imagination. Forget the breathalyzer. Let's get a real chemical workup.
Kennedy Coverage
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 8:32PM
The Post has it slated for page A5 tomorrow. Pretty weak. I guarantee that if he were the elected son of a conservative political scion, it would be above the fold, page one.
McKennedy
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 6:54PM
Well, Rep. Cynthia McKinney has to be just ecstatic over this turn of events. We wouldn't be surprised if she was one pouring the shots of Glenlivet Patches might have been ingesting.
What's priceless is that at nearly 3 am, Kennedy claimed he needed to get back to the House for a vote. No doubt on his important tax cut amendments.
This is not the first time Kennedy has had run-ins with Capitol Hill police. What's interesting is they continue to effort coverups for the boy who couldn't drive straight.
Yet Another Kennedy Wreck
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 5:55PM
What is it with officials covering up for Kennedys involved in car accidents? I mean, is it even possible for a Kennedy to be made to call for account for highly questionable behavior (to put it far more nicely than it deserves to be put)? Drudge is on the story, broken by Roll Call. Anybody who wants a refresher course in police cover-ups for Kennedys should read Leo Damore's "Senatorial PRivilege," the definitive book on a certain sad incident in Massachusetts in 1969.....
Democrat Economics
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 1:36PM
Out for a walk in the charmless Rosslyn area of Arlington, home of Spectator World Headquarters, I ran into Harris Miller, ex-lobbyist and Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate from Virginia.
He was holding a photo op at a gas station -- where gas is going for $3.11. Since I pass this gas station a few times a week, I know it's the most expensive place around. In fact, the real estate is at such a premium that it's located below a Methodist Church. (It's down from $3.19 yesterday, which was the most expensive in Arlington.)
So, Mr. Miller, why the photo op at the most expensive place around? "Oh, it's convenient." I told him there are cheaper places right up the road, and that looking for cheaper places is how the market works. He countered by saying he'd filled up for $3.25 this morning. Where? Chain Bridge Road and GW Parkway in McLean. That, too, is one of the most expensive stations around, located at an important crossroads. Elsewhere in McLean, I said, there is gas for less than $3.
Talking for a while, I learned that Miller's part of the Bill O'Reilly crowd. He has no problem with oil companies making their normal profit share, but claimed that they're raising prices -- and profits -- at a rate outstripping the growth in crude oil prices.
Miller's solutions aren't helpful. He advocates more ethanol, though he denies that it costs more to produce than gasoline, even as taxpayers subsidize it to the tune of 50 cents per gallon. He wouldn't consider lowering federal gas taxes.
And he's driving an SUV, albeit a Mercury Mariner hybrid. At 33/29 mpg, that's impressive, but no better than my conventional Nissan Sentra. If Miller really wanted to reduce prices, he'd reduce demand and spring for a hybrid sedan that actually makes the hybrid price worthwhile. And he'd stop patronizing stations in high-rent, high-traffic areas. As long as he fills up his SUV at these places, he's only exacerbating the problem.
UPDATE (7:20 p.m.): Amy Ridenour has all the facts on profit margins that I didn't. Apparently there is a negligible difference between the oil companies' profit margins this year and the margins last year at this time.
Nothing Like Good, Ol' Fashioned Excommunication
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 1:10PM
The Vatican excommunicated four bishops recently ordained by the Chinese "Church." Really, it's an underutilized tool.
But the background is even more interesting: the Vatican's upset with China because they had agreed in low-key discussions that China would only recognize Vatican-authorized bishops. That understanding would have been a key step toward reestablishing diplomatic relations.
And China broke the agreement within days. I know the Vatican must walk a narrow line here between tough love and gaining access to minister to its flock. But that's what happen when you rely on the word of despots.
That's Probably Unnecessary
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 11:22AM
A draft Hillary effort? I can understand the necessity of the "draft Condi" cause (though not why it's a good idea). But rest assured, drafters, it's on her radar.
Ethics Yawn
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 10:27AM
Why did the House of Representatives even bother to pass the sham "ethics reforms" that they passed yesterday? The bill is a joke, and it virtually screams out: "Hey, don't you know who we are? We're Congressmen, and by virtue of our exalted position we deserve to be feted with free meals and golf games! You got a problem with that, buddy? Well, kiss my grits. Only the hoi polloi worry about ethics. We in Congress are above all that."
Aside from the paltry details of the bill, what's so discouraging is that this bill again shows the House leaders to not be men of their words. The key sentence fragment from the front-page WashPost news story sums it all nicely: "Neither [House nor Senate] version [of the bill] is as tough on lobbyists and lawmakers as Republican leaders promised in January...."
The arrogance and lack of seriousness of this Congress is astonishing.
If You Thought Gene Robinson Caused a Flap
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 10:00AM
Just wait until California Episcopalians elect another gay bishop. They're voting this weekend, and three of the seven candidates are gay. The national church would have to accept or reject them over the summer. Conservatives in the church have been largely appeased that the Gene Robinson incident was an aberration (wishful thinking, I know). But a new gay bishop would be the last straw for most orthodox congregations.
Revel in Revel
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 9:56AM
I am jealous of editor-in-chief R. Emmett Tyrrell for his having known the great French thinker/writer Jean-Francois Revel personally. Tyrrell's tribute to the now-late Monsieur Revel on today's web site is a must read. Brilliant, perceptive stuff (as usual), and written with a charming fondness.
Revel's 1983 book How Democracies Perish has long sat on my bookshelf within easy reach. It must be admitted that he was too pessimistic about the ultimate triumph of republican nations in the face of the Communist threat. The first line of his book was a necessary warning, but fortunately incorrect as a prediction: "Democracy may, after all, turn out to have been a historical accident, a brief parenthesis that is closing before our eyes." But while our civilization was not and is not doomed, Revel's diagnosis of its weaknesses was right on target. Hence the brilliantly concise and perspicacious opening line of the book's second chapter: "Democratic civilization is the first in history to blame itself because another power is working to destroy it."
Revel was writing about the Communist enemy, but he could just as easily be warning against the wrong Western response to Islamic terrorists: "It is less natural and more novel that a stricken civilization [ours--QH] should... regale its friends and foes with reasons why defending itself would be immoral and, in any event, superfluous, useless, even dangerous." And: "Self criticism is, of course, one of the vital springs of democratic civilization and one of the reasons for its superiority over other systems. But constant self-condemnation, often with little or no foundation, is a source of weakness and inferiority in dealing with an imperial power that has dispensed with such scruples."
And so wisely on. Again, Revel was warning against Communism, and indeed one reason the West defeated Soviet Communism was because leaders like Reagan and Thatcher and Pope John Paul II heeded Revel's warnings and followed his prescriptions for standing against the menace of the Evil Empire. It would be unjust to blithely remove Revel's warnings from that anti-Communist context by minimizing the mortal threat he opposed and trying to shoehorn his words too freely into today's war against the Islamo-terrorists.
Nevertheless, the lessons of the one fight are valuable for today's fight as well. And so is Revel's call for a heroic response. To end How Democracies Perish, Revel (in the book's very last line) aptly quotes Achim d'Arnim thusly: "The history of the world begins anew with every man, and ends with him."
Twas a good thing indeed that Jean-Francois Revel entered our history, and helped explain it to us.
They'd Be Funny...
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 9:53AM
...if they weren't so darned expensive. Howie Kurtz wonders: "Has Congress become something of a joke?"
Sad, but true: I cringe whenever they return from a recess.
Beinart's Delusional Universe
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 8:55AM
It's a commonplace for WaPo columnists to oppose sensible national security measures but when they base their conclusions on utter falsehoods -- as Peter Beinart does today -- we have to answer.
Relying on studies by the Nixon Center and Syracuse University, Beinart argues it's absurd to talk about sealing the Mexican border because, "Not one terrorist has entered the United States from Mexico." In that he's wilfully ignorant of the facts. As I wrote a month ago, there's plenty of evidence that terrorists are coming across the Mexican border. My source? Not a think tank, but FBI Director Robert Muller who testified about an Hizballah cell that was caught.
Those such as Beinart who want to keep the borders open are committing willful falsehoods in proclaiming concern for national security. Let's talk plainly: any "immigration reform" bill that doesn't create border walls - on the north and south - visible with the naked eye from low earth orbit isn't worth a bucket of warm spit. And it shouldn't pass.
Re: Moussaoui Lives
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 8:38AM
Whatever one thinks of the sentence, can we agree that it is disturbing to see the jury list the following as mitigating factors in its decision not to sentence the defendant to death?
-- Nine jurors found that the defendant's unstable early childhood and dysfunctional family resulted in his being placed in orphanages and having a home life without structure and emotional and financial support, eventually resulting in his leaving home due to his hostile relationship with his mother.
-- Nine jurors found the defendant's father had a violent temper and physically and emotionally abused his family.
-- Three jurors found that the defendant was subject to racism as a youngster because of his Moroccan background, which affected him deeply.
Imagine what sad stories Mohammed Atta would have come up with about himself, if he were in the dock.
Long Live The Electoral College
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 7:49AM
In other news, the flag has dropped and the rush is on for would-be Dem presidential contenders to denounce the Electoral College as not "appropriate" to our "modern era" -- and not coincidentally as the only reason why George W. Bush was elected in 2000. But try as Evan Bayh might, federalism is still a good idea, and the College is vital in its (usually) quiet function. Just ask Joe Biden...
Re: Moussaoui Lives
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 7:40AM
Jed, I'm fairly confident Moussaoui will be kept under wraps. Then again, I was sure Vicente Fox would sign that drug bill, too...
Stealing from Consumer, Giving to Bureaucrats
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 7:11AM
That's the best one can say about the price gouging nonsense the House passed last night. The bill would authorize the Federal Trade Commission to define price gouging -- in other words, passing the buck from lawmakers to unelected bureaucrats.
Further, in a market of choice between competitors, how would price gouging exist? I've heard commercials by local news stations with hot reports about how "customers paid $5.75 a gallon before they knew better." That sounds like uninformed customers not making a responsible market decision. The price of a good is what people will pay for it. That "gouging" station will gouge for a short period of time before his customers dry up, and he has to lower the price to bring them back. Accordingly, if costs (like, say, crude oil) go up for all retailers, they'll all increase prices at the same time.
Collusion is one thing. Theoretically, it would enable oil companies, distributors, or retailers to fix prices. But without collusion, price gouging is a fiction. The Bill O'Reilly/black helicopter crowd won one last night.
Re: Moussaui Lives
Posted by on 5.4.06 @ 4:54AM
If I were to overhear someone plotting a murder which later took place exactly as plotted, I would not be legally culpable in any way for not reporting said plot to legal authorities -- so long as I am not a police officer or a lawyer. Moussaui was haled into civilian court on charges that could be called "trumped-up."
No mistake, he belongs behind bars. But he should have been an enemy combatant from the get-go.
Wednesday, May 3, 2006
Re: Moussaoui Lives
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 9:12PM
Jed, James: There are lots of implications to this verdict that defy easy analysis. Does giving Moussaoui life show that we're better than our enemies, or weaker than our enemies? Do enemies in the War on Terror belong in the civilian court system? How would Moussaoui have faired before, say, a military tribunal?
These are hard and interesting questions, worth chewing over. The question of whether Moussaoui will ever be let out of solitary to become a prison preacher, however, is pretty easy: No, not a chance. No advocate for Moussaoui's rights would even try to get him moved into a general population, where he'd be murdered in a wink. Instead, he'll spend the rest of his life here:
Since opening in 1994, Florence ADMAX has become the new, state-of-the-art Alcatraz for the most violent and escape-prone prisoners.Terry Nichols, Eric Rudolph, and the '93 World Trade Center bombers are also at ADMAX.There are 399 inmates in the prison, which has a capacity of 490 and is run by a staff of 298, said Krista Rear, Florence ADMAX spokeswoman.
Despite the roster, most prisoners lead lonely lives.
Most are confined to 7-by-12-foot cells for 23 hours a day. In their one-hour recreation period they remain isolated in chains.
"Inmates at the ADMAX right now do not have any physical contact with each other whatsoever," Rear said.
Their cells are their lives. Each inmate has a cement stool, desk, bed and television stand. They get educational and religious programming on a 12-inch TV. They eat alone in their cells, their meals slipped to them on a tray through a slot in the door.
Hearing Hearings Rumors
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 7:36PM
I usually hate to publish something that is just a rumor, but when I hear the same rumor from two different good sources -- although, in this case, both of THEM said their own sources were only of the rumor variety, so it may just be the same folks talking to the same folks without solid sourcing -- and when the rumor is important and timely, it's worth airing just for the warning value.
ANYway, I'm hearing that Sen. Specter may be coming close to caving in (and going against what top staff last week had indicated was his own firm decision) by letting the Dems put court nominee Brett Kavanaugh through yet another hearing. On the one hand: Fine. Brett will handle himself well and make the Dems look, again, like jerks. But this is still a very bad development, because it means a delay of AT LEAST one week, almost certainly two weeks, and perhaps even three weeks, before Kavanaugh finally gets out of committee -- meaning it becomes that much more difficult to get him a floor vote before Memorial Day, much less get other nominees the floor votes they deserve.
So let's hope these rumors are not true. Far as I can tell, there is no good reason for this capitulation to Dems who merely want a show trial to try to rough Kavanaugh up some more while running out the clock on as many nominees as they can. Please, Mr. Chairman, don't give in!
Re: Moussaoui Lives
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 6:24PM
James: Do you harbor any doubt that the ACLU and some court will combine, in the next few years, to release him from solitary? I sure don't.
Harris Matters
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 5:59PM
We're hearing that Republican Florida House Speaker Allen Bense (R) is quietly talking to state and national GOP fundraisers about challenging Rep. Katherine Harris for the Republican Senate nomination. The filing deadline is May 12. Harris has been under intense pressure to back out of the race in light was a series of gaffes, whiffs of ethical impropriety and staff defections. A candidate should knows she's cooked when her own campaign advisers go public with information that her opponents would normally leak. Timing here, obviously, is critical. Sen. Bill Nelson, who at one time was considered to be a beatable candidate has raised upwards of $10 million, and his seat is now considered safe. All of this comes at a time when national Republican leaders are getting an earful about the dire condition of the party leading into the 2006 election cycle. Day-after reviews of polling numbers in Ohio raise a number of red flags about party enthusiasm and the ability of some candidates to get out the vote.
Moussaoui Lives
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 5:13PM
...and I can live with that. Although terrorism walks a purposefully narrow line between crime and war, Moussaoui's role in the death and destruction of 9/11 is not quite close enough to qualify as murder and not far enough from the event to remove him from enemyhood. Everyone would be content for a really blood-soaked man like Bin Laden to simply disappear, hounded out of existence. If that sort of life sentence for the Prince of Terror satisfies the soul, surely this formal one for a third-rate maniac and evil lummox satisfies too.
Of course, Jed, if they let him out of solitary, that would be the can't-gettingest of no satisfactions.
Imam Moussaoui
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 5:11PM
The verdict in the Moussaoui death penalty trial is in, and surprisingly the jury has returned with a life sentence recommendation. No one - not the feds for sure - will have the stomach to keep Moussaoui in solitary for life. So he will soon be preaching jihad behind bars, and doing more damage in prison than he ever did outside. This is the worst possible result.
Condolences to Tiger
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 3:41PM
If anybody saw the tearful tribute Tiger Woods paid to his father after winning the 2005 Masters, they will understand the sadness of this news -- and appreciate the wondrous blessing of a good father-son bond. May Earl Woods rest in peace, and may Tiger be in our prayers.
World Press Freedom Day
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 12:43PM
Press Freedom Day is being celebrated in the Islamic world, according to this report from the Saudi government "Arab News." The Organization of Islamic Conference has endorsed press freedom with one little catch. Here's the money quote:
The OIC has always underscored the importance of ensuring freedoms for all, chief among which is the freedom of expression. The organization has demanded that journalists performing their professional duties be protected.
However, the pan-Islamic organization said that with freedom comes responsibility. "The publication of the blasphemous caricatures of the Prophet (peace be upon him) last September and its ramifications, have provided each and everyone with the absolute evidence of the consequences of non-abidance by these regulations," the statement said.
"Therefore, the organization demands that an international legislation or a code of conduct be issued affirming the need to prevent dissemination of hatred, premeditated defamation and incitement of denigration," it added.
Freedom of the press, then, is ok so long as it complies with Islamic censorship. Orwell had a names for this: "newspeak" and "doublethink."
NBA Gangsta
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 12:38PM
Should an NBA player who settled with the victim in a sexual assault case several years ago be bragging how he likes to play rough on the court? After last night's elbow-fest loss to Phoenix, which saw both him and the fellow defending him ejected from the game, here's what Kobe Bryant had to say: "That's how I grew up playing basketball in Philadelphia. I love playing that style. It excites me more than anything."
O.J. Simpson never had it so good.
Charlie Wilson's War
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 11:23AM
Democrat Charlie Wilson won his primary race in Ohio’s 6th Congressional district as a write-in candidate on the backs of more than $1 million in Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee funds and more then $1.5 million in AFL-CIO money being poured into the district.
Wilson himself spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to get out enough votes to win. By AFL-CIO estimates, labor loaned
This election cycle is going to be fun to watch. Especially if you’re in a business that makes money off of campaigns.
Clueless DeWine
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 10:26AM
Whatever happened to the principled, conservative, smart Mike DeWine who first was elected senator from Ohio? As I noted in today's web column, DeWine (who has been a disappointment on many levels) failed last year to give assurances that the judicial nomination of brilliant White House aide Brett Kavanaugh would be filibuster-proof by "Gang of 14" standards. Now, the Sulla Institute reports that at a campaign party last night in Ohio, DeWine appeared utterly clueless even about who Kavanaugh is, even though the Senate leadership has very publicly announced that Kavanaugh's will be the next nomination pushed to a floor vote. But wait, it gets a little worse: Sulla's "Lucius Cornelius" reported to me via e-mail that even after DeWine "nodded his head" when reminded that Kavanaugh was a judicial nominee, it appeared that "he probably still could not place the name."
Maybe this utter cluelessness could also
explain his office's susceptibility to embarrassing staff
problems of the sort memorialized by the (in)famous sex
chronicler known as Washingtonienne. And it might help explain why
he is in a fairly tough fight for re-election this
year.
Rosen on Roe
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 10:12AM
In this interview in The Atlantic Online, center-left law professor Jeffrey Rosen gets into a fascinating discussion about Roe v. Wade and its effect on American politics for the past 33 years. Rosen's thesis that the Supreme Court should somehow function as "the most democratic branch" of government is sheer nonsense, but Rosen at least maintains some intellectual consistency within that rather untenable argument, and meanwhile his other insights are acutely perceptive. Oh, and by the way, Rosen, who considers himself pro-choice, has always said that Roe was wrongly, or at least poorly, decided.
Louisianans For Life
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 9:38AM
Pepper Bryars, a former colleague at the Mobile Register, has a pro-life blog that he updates almost daily. Today's topic is legislation from my home state of Louisiana; Pepper makes some excellent points. Give it a read!
Re: Guilt, Culture, Death of the West &c.
Posted by on 5.3.06 @ 9:09AM
Want a brilliantly done capstone to yesterday's conversation on guilt and western culture -- and a cornucopia of sorrowful facts to boot? Commentary runs George Wiegel's piece on "Europe's Two Culture Wars." Wiegel takes the ball from my March scrum on the fathered civilization and runs for a TD.
Tuesday, May 2, 2006
Lone Coburn
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 10:35PM
Speaking of senators good and bad, it's a shame that Tom Coburn is the lone crusader on earmarks in the Senate. (John McCain is his "Sancho Panza" -- sidekick suits him well.)
The Party of Specter
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 5:48PM
It should come as no surprise that Sen. Arlen Specter is supporting the liberal Republican leadership in the Pennsylvania statehouse against their conservative primary opponents. Again, we ask, what hath the GOP wrought in supporting Snarlin' Arlen in 2004?
Those legislators are the ones who voted themselves and the Pennsylvania judiciary an unconstitutional pay raise last year, detailed here.
Re: White guilt
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 4:43PM
Shelby Steele left out something important -- the source of even worse white guilt in Europe. Imagine what it must have been like to see one of your fellow countries, a renowned source of sophistication and artistic achievement, the country of Goethe and Beethoven and Schiller, succumb to the tribal barbarities of Nazism -- and then do its best to conquer the world under that savage banner.
No surprise that Europe as a whole reacted against the Nazi plague by turning its back on nationalism, tradition, religion, and Western philosophy. Today, in Germany, some 35-40 percent of Germans believe George Bush plotted and executed the attacks of 9/11. Those who purport to believe in nothing will believe anything.
The End of McCain?
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 3:35PM
Conservatives have had many reasons over the years to differ with Sen. John McCain: his opposition to tax cuts, campaign finance reform, and his tendency to act like a Democrat on anything not related to defense or earmarks. Bottom line: most conservatives with memories don't trust the man.
But now all voters have a chance to rally against the man. D.C. Examiner goes after the Senator today for his arrogance.
Apparently his intemperate side cropped up last week, and he had this to say about free speech versus "reform": "I would rather have a clean government than one where, quote, First Amendment rights are being respected, that has become corrupt. If I had my choice, I'd rather have the clean government."
That, my friends, is why John McCain shouldn't be president, in principle. And why he may not make it, practically. This quote will come back to haunt him.
RedState links to the video (go to the middle), notes he first said it on Imus's show last Friday, and wonders whether he meant his oath to protect and defend the Constitution.
Re Race Case AND White Guilt
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 1:43PM
I think y'all's discussions on guilt, etc., actually fit right in with my post earlier today on Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. How else to explain its continued existence, and the vow from Bush and Specter and company to renew it, except with reference to misplaced guilt?
Re: White guilt and the rest
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 1:31PM
Lawrence, Paul, I cheer to see this conversation joined. It's perhaps the most important of all. The boomers, like we subsequent generations, seem unfairly fated to die. But there's a solution for that, too.
Philip Rieff, whose tocsin I shall keep sounding, refers us to
Donner Professor of Science at MIT, and founder of that school's
Artificial Intelligence Laboratories, Marvin Minsky:
"Should we robotize ourselves and stop dying? I
think the answer is clear for the long run because in a few billion
years the sun will eventually burn out and everything we've done
will go to waste. [...] Is it possible, with artificial
intelligence, to conquer death? [...] Then eventually there'd be no
room for more new people, and that would raise more
problems."
Minsky gave us that little wonder of scientific fantasizing back in 1985, a year that science itself has since left deep in the dust. Fukuyama too predicted "our posthuman future," but science, like always, lends only a helping hand. Posthumanity is, in fact, just a culture away.
The cultural room for more new people, as well as for the aged people we already have, is already shrinking. We the young, we the us, demand resources, time, and energy for the pursuit of our selves. This town ain't big enough for the three of us.
Beyond euthanasia we have cold storage for the old. Beyond abortion we have the decision simply not to conceive. The better to accumulate "me time;" the better for the tyranny of MyLife.
Re: White guilt and the rest
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 12:12PM
James, Paul, I think about this subject a lot, and I keep coming back to the fact that, from about 1850 onwards, there have been titans in the world of ideas devoted to destroying at least some part of Western Civilization: Marx, Dewey, Freud, et al.
My take on one aspect of the question, "The Baby Boomers are Going to Die," from Enter State Right in 1999, here.
Hall of Shame for Appropriators
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 11:30AM
Today's Washington Post has a big feature on how GOP Appropriations Committee folks in the House are fighting tooth and nail against saner voices in the party, against reforms of ethics and of earmarks. One would at least expect the appropriators to offer a principled, or at least principled-sounding, defense of their position. But no. Idaho's Mike Simpson makes up (partly) in candor what he and all his ilk so obviously lack in philosophical principle: Rep. Simpson told the Post that "we are getting more authoritative.... We are standing up for our turf."
Bingo! That's what this all is about, pure and simple: a nasty, petty turf war. Nothing noble, nothing public-service-oriented, nothing even remotely suggesting principle. Just turf. Power for power's sake.
I write this as somebody who for two years was on the payroll of the Appropriations Committee. But I never drank the kool-aid. The appropriators who are more interested in preserving their own turn than in serving the public interest aren't worth former VP John Nance Garner's proverbial bucket of warm, uh, spit. A pox on all their turf, and on their reputations.
Broke Entitlements
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 11:17AM
So now comes the new report that Medicare will go broke in 2018, two years earlier than projected just last year and 12 years earlier than had been projected in 2001. Social Security's day of reckoning, meanwhile, has been moved up from 2041 to 2040. All of this was announced yesterday by the trustees of the entitlement systems, who are required to issue annual reports on the programs' fiscal health.
Well, as Gomer Pyle used to say, "Surprise, Surprise, SURPRISE!!!" -- except that this bad news should come as no surprise to anyone. This twin looming disaster has been in the workds for years, and Congress keeps punting on the issues. To President Bush' credit, he had the guts to try to address the Social Security problem, but a combination of sheer gutlessness by his Republican (supposed) allies in Congress and of his administration's own hamhanded legislative tactics, policy choices, and communications, all combined to destroy the initiative that the president so bravely proposed.
Meanwhile, the Bush/Kennedy prescription drug plan, which is the single worst piece of federal legislation actually signed into law in my adult lifetime, makes matters worse, if only indirectly. It is true that the huge costs of that program are borne by the government's general fund, not by the (paper) trust fund of Medicare. But by adding so substantially to the government's general debt, the prescription drug idiocy makes the fiscal choices that much harder by providing even less leeway in the future for creative bail-outs/reforms of the trust fund by the general fund. The truth is that, in the end, all the money to pay for all these programs comes from the same source, the US taxpayer, and no matter how cleverly the gov't tries to disguise things by use of paper trust funds, the end result of it all is the same: One way or another, the more debt created by all government programs combined, the more debt is borned by taxpayers...which means, in the long run, higher taxes or higher interest rates or both.
Even worse, by removing the "carrot" of prescription drugs from the legislative arena, Bush/Kennedy makes it that much harder to reform the overall Medicare program -- because there no longer is the "goodie" of a new drug offering to make other reforms more politically palatable.
Back in 1995, when the GOP Congress first began talking seriously about addressing Medicare, the looming bankruptcy was still a quarter-century away. Now it is just 12 years away. Chalk up another failure of nerve, will, and seriousness to the ignoble, pathetic, embarrassing record of Congress since 1998.
Race Case
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 10:38AM
On NRO today, Edward Blum of AEI has an incredibly important column about the sheer perfidy of President Bush and top Repubs in both houses of Congress introducing legislation to renew Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. I've written on this many times. Whereas most of the Voting Rights Act is permanent, as it should be, Section 5 originally was only supposed to last for five years. That was about 40 years ago. What Section 5 does is require the time-consuming process of "preclearance" from the Justice Department for ANY change in election procedures in several suspect (read: Southern) states. Blum explains why this is, philosophically, a horrible provision. What he doesn't make clear is that, in practical terms, Section 5 is even worse than it looks on paper. DoJ has to weigh in on election changes as small as moving a polling place from, say, a school's gym to the same school's cafeteria. Examples are numerous of local election officials running into problems even holding elections on time while waiting for DoJ officials to get around to preclearing such changes. Thurbert E. Baker, the black, Democratic attorney general of Georgia, has argued vociferously AGAINST Section 5, because it's a bureaucratic nightmare and because, in the name of blocking discrimination against blacks (which is what the other sections of the Voting Rights Act already do, and do well, as well they should), it instead discriminates against entire states by assuming they are guilty of nefarious shenanigans until proven innocent. Of course, white Republicans attorneys general, such as Bill Pryor of Alabama (now, thank goodness, a federal appeals judge) have made the same points many times.
This is serious stuff. Yet Bush and Specter and company, pandering to ...well, to whomever the heck they think they are trying to impress...are pushing pell-mell for the renewal of this ill-advised, unethical, and even perhaps unconstitutional, measure to be renewed. Congress should defeat their efforts -- and if not, somebody should take them to court and argue, using the (what passes for) logic of Sandra Day O'Connor (who famously wrote in Grutter v Bollinger that that which is constitutional at one point may not be constitutional many years later), that Section 5, being no longer a reasonable remedy for past discrimination, is a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Not to mention an abomination.
To the End of the Line
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 10:23AM
Illegal immigrants shouldn't have a head start over those already in line for legal entry into the U.S., as Jay Homnick argues this morning.
NPR had an excellent commentary along those lines today, by an Indian doctor who has gone through the work visa, the green card, and has patiently waited for years for citizenship. What a shame that law abiding immigrants may wait longer because of those who have circumvented the existing, albeit poor, system.
Re: Feeling Guilty?
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 10:20AM
Paul, you're dead right. One glaring index of how the West's loss of faith goes far deeper than race guilt is how far the West has gone to eliminate personal guilt as a peril of right feeling. In the absence of compelling spiritual doctrine, neurotics of identity turned to psychotherapy to destroy guilt. But guiltmaking acts continued to pile up, and psychoanalysis is an inefficient replacement for religion when neurotic feelings must be picked off one at a time.
Thus have we developed our cults of selfhood. The "Me" Generation is a passe prelude; one "me" is not enough, expecting too much and too little of us. Ours is now the "My" Generation, where all of our products are customized and we are customized right along with them. This unholy marriage of psychotherapy and capitalism has just been consummated with a feature in The New York Times.
I have a long meditation on this epochal and ugly phenom here.
K Street Meets Boston
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 10:06AM
Shawn Macomber's review of Matthew Continetti's The K Street Gang is up at the Washington Times today.
Feeling Guilty?
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 9:32AM
Over the weekend while discussing the illegal immigration situation with a friend, I was asked why I thought our government seemed so paralyzed and fearful of taking action to protect itself from the invading hordes. “Guilt,” I said. “Guilt over what?” he asked. I tried to explain, but Shelby Steele does so much better here. For years he has made essentially the same if compelling point, that whites’ racial guilt over the sins of the past has robbed them of moral authority to act. This guilt, he believes, has ramifications everywhere from how wars are fought in I’d quibble with Steele, though, on how closely he conflates Western guilt with racial guilt, as well as on his chain of causation. While racial guilt is probably the most important subset of Western guilt, the West feels guilty about more than just its racial past. And where Steele traces the origins of white guilt to the end of World War II, there was a terrible war before that one that left Western self-confidence in tatters. In his book The First World War, John Keegan asked why the West chose to march towards self-destruction in 1914, and did not venture an answer. Steele’s analysis of the impact of white guilt is valuable as always, but the origins of the West’s loss of faith seem to be older, deeper, and more mysterious than the question of race.
Campaign Cleanup
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 9:20AM
Things are heating up for the fall. We've got a bog primary election in Ohio, where Secretary of State Ken Blackwell is attempting to win the Republican nominagtion for Governor.
But this morning the real news is going to be out of Nebraska, where we hear that Sen. John McCain this morning will endorse Rep. Tom Osborne in his primary challenge of sitting Republican Gov. Dave Heineman.
Osborne, better known in his previous career as head coach of the University of Nebraska football program, is putting up a fight for this one. Why is this interesting?
Well, first Chuck Hagel has already endorsed Heineman, throwing a bit of a twist into what was thought to be a close relationship between McCain and Hagel.
And second, we're seeing political decision being made here less to do with Osboune and Heineman and more to do with the ambitions and egos of McCain and Hagel. Both men want to run for President. And some of Nebraska's media markets are shared with Iowa, where the first caucuses will beheld. This gives both men some political coverage in both states.
The Heroism of Brad Kasal
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 8:32AM
You may remember Marine 1st Sgt. Brad Kasal from the May 2005 TAS article entitled, "Forty Minutes in Fallujah." Kasal, who with a few of his men charged into a house in Fallujah to rescue other Marines who were pinned down, gun-fought the insurgents for almost an hour and received several wounds while saving the lives of those other Marines.
I'd speculated that Kasal's bravery wouldn't go unnoticed, and it hasn't. According to this LA Times Report, Brad Kasal has been promoted to Sergeant Major and awarded the Navy Cross, which is the next-highest award to the Medal of Honor in recognition of valor in combat.
Kasal has been assigned to recruitment duty in his native Iowa. He'll be an inspiration to all the young folks who come into his office, and in all the schools he'll visit. Congratulations, Sergeant Major. You're an inspiration to us all.
A Day Without Whom?
Posted by on 5.2.06 @ 7:52AM
James, the morning papers are bearing out your point about the lack of impact of the illegal immigrant "economic boycott." (Ol' Howard Beale, I mean, Lou Dobbs noted how only the Washington Post is calling the protesters illegal immigrants as opposed to just immigrants.)
But when the New York Times writes of letdown in the second paragraph, you know it was a flop. "The demonstrations did not bring the nation to a halt as planned by some organizers...." The papers and wires show photos of downtown L.A. -- how impressive is it to fill Wilshire Blvd. with illegal immigrants on any given day? It makes for an easy front page shot, but what I want to know is: did they play in the streets of Peoria?
Monday, May 1, 2006
A Modest (Immigration) Proposal
Posted by on 5.1.06 @ 6:44PM
Mexico is in favor of immigration. Mexico has made drug possession legal, at least in small amounts. So it should follow that all American drug addicts would be given a one-way ticket to Mexico city. Open borders are open in both directions.
Re: Poor, Uneducated, and Easily Led
Posted by on 5.1.06 @ 5:35PM
Yet were, say, I to deploy that ignominious phrase, amongst reflections on the Spanish-inflected hoohah wafting through the window of my flat, I would be doomed -- not just doomed but a doomed racist. Fortunately I won't say any such thing. The Wash Post itself reports that illegal immigrants seem rather more difficult to lead than some had predicted. The mixed baggery of the Great School & Business Walkout suggests that at least some of the poor would prefer to work and some of the uneducated to learn. How about that for an American tradition?
Poor, Uneducated, and Easily Led
Posted by on 5.1.06 @ 5:05PM
With regard to Dave's post immediately below, the single worst -- nay, not just bad, but flat-out offensive -- line of Ryan Lizza's in his hit piece on George Allen, the one that Dave Holman so brilliantly skewered, was this: "Whuppin' his siblings might have been a natural prelude to Confederate sympathies and noose-collecting if Allen had grown up in, say, a shack in Alabama."
This astonishing bit of cultural condescension (not to mention slander against poor people from an entire state and, by implication, an entire region of the country) has more than just a small whiff of the infamous Washington Post story by Michael Weisskopf in 1993 in which he wrote that followers of the Christian Right are "largely poor, uneducated and easy to command."
The very next day, the Post ran a correction, "There is no factual basis for that statement," and Post writer Howard Kurtz on Feb. 6 quoted then-Post managing editor saying, "We really screwed up."
The question is, will the New Republic, usually a respectable journal, have the same decency the Post did and apologize for Mr. Lizza's slur?
Finally, any chance I get to point out just how culturally clueless so many members of the liberal East Coast media are, I always refer to the major newsmagazine (I temporarily have forgotten whether it was Time or Newsweek) which, in the early-to-mid 1990s, had a subhead that read thusly: "The surprising unsecularity of the American public" -- which of course would not have been a surprise to anybody who isn't in an elitist bubble, and which of course goes out of its way to make "secularity" the norm and then, worse, creates the dicordant word "unsecularity" rather than the simple, straightforward, words available, such as "faith" or "faithfulness" or even the New Age-sounding "spirituality."
The point is that, as in those other examples of liberal snobbishness and total lack of awareness of the broader American culture in which they live, the Lizza line combines all the worst elements of culturally biased journalism and, more simply, of the obnoxious, nose-in-the-air superciliousness that makes liberals so unattractive that voters keep defeating them at the polls.
'Hyperbole'?
Posted by on 5.1.06 @ 4:32PM
At the New Republic blog, Jason Zengerle razzes me "for painstakingly establishing that, contra the first sentence of Ryan's article, Allen is not the only person in Virginia who wears cowboy boots..." He says I should look up "hyperbole."
That might have explained Lizza failing to see my boots, just feet away in a small group, until he emailed, "I didn't see any cowboy boots at Shad Planking except Allen's."
UPDATE: Amy Ridenour
is not surprised.
Anybody home?
Posted by on 5.1.06 @ 3:27PM
Awfully quiet in here this morning. We're not...no, we wouldn't do that. Besides, we already write the stuff ordinary Americans can't be bothered to write.
Newspaper Geeks United
Posted by on 5.1.06 @ 3:11PM
The Wall Street Journal website is free for the next ten days.
"Socialist Bunk"
Posted by on 5.1.06 @ 11:00AM
That's what Sen. John Cornyn's spokesman calls Bill Frist's $100 gas rebate plan. The comments go downhill from there: another Republican Senate staffer said that constituents are asking, "Do you think we are prostitutes?"
Wow. It's a rare day on Capitol Hill when common sense just might prevail.
Overheard @ The Prom
Posted by on 5.1.06 @ 9:31AM
Joe Wilson and his wife, She Who Must Not Be Named, were two of the most visible attendees at the White House Correspondents Dinner on Saturday.
In the aftermath, after President Bush stole the show with a bravura performance that outclassed just about everything else that night, Wilson was quoted as telling various reporters that some Republicans blamed him for President Bush's low approval ratings.
Whatever Wilson was being served by ABC News at its pre-dinner party, we'd like a big pot of it, whatever it was, because Wilson must be seeing lots of pretty colors and living in a fantasy world. No Republican with a mind is even thinking of Wilson at this stage of the game. He's a has-been, a washed up, retired, mediocre foreign service officer, who talked a good game of "having contacts" in Africa to his wife, and then failed her when she got him an important gig that should have been assigned to more qualified people.
The President's problems reside solely at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and up on Capitol Hill, where messaging and legislative discipline need to be put on the priority list.
New Republic's Charges on Allen Fall Flat
Posted by on 5.1.06 @ 8:02AM
One would imagine that the folks at the New Republic were hoping for a bigger splash to Ryan Lizza's story. They leaked it in advance of web publication, and published the web story ahead of posting the full magazine -- in which it's the cover story.
Just two days later, Sen. George Allen was scheduled to take a "civil rights pilgrimage" through Southwest Virginia with civil rights leader Rep. John L. Lewis. Perfect timing to pin it on Allen, no?
In the Washington Post's coverage of the trip, the paper shrugs (if papers can shrug). The old news about the Confederate battle flag and noose make the ninth paragraph, and the TNR story makes the tenth.
Read more on the Lizza story here.
Sunday, April 30, 2006
Funny Catholics in L.A.
Posted by on 4.30.06 @ 7:09PM
If you have any doubts that something's truly amiss in the Los Angeles archdiocese -- or even American Catholicism -- watch this video. And don't stop just because it hurts.
UPDATE: Ack! If you thought, where is the cardinal? Cardinal Mahony's presiding.
Re: Mexican Congress On Crack
Posted by on 4.30.06 @ 10:39AM
Tabin: you fight the good fight, my friend, but this law is a chaos factory. "Several doses" of heroin for a first-time user is a fine ticket for a round trip ride on the midnight train, more than enough to teach a man how to ride a horse -- all the way to town. His eventual addiction will outpace, outlast, and finally outsmart even the Mexican government.
The law will, by then, have succeeded only in delaying the smack-fueled crossing of its redrawn line in the sand. Which, I suppose, has its appeal when one's too busy trying to keep cops from going crooked to keep kids from getting bent.
But let's get serious. The two-pound rule on peyote is good for all occasions, if I'm not mistaken, not just spiritual ones; and even a paltry four-line or two-hit concession creates demand by increasing and sanctifying availability. Now you can argue that Mexico has bigger problems on its hands than a country full of potheads. True enough -- so do we. But higher-order drugs like cocaine and speed make you remember -- if you've done the LA club circuit, for example -- why it's so tiring and difficult to be around hard drug users, even recreational ones. Daily life is ruined by the attitudes these drugs create. Productivity suffers. People spaz out. And that's leaving out acid and ecstasy. Two hits of either, even twice a week, can turn a regular human being into a space alien for months at a time.
I suggest I am not alone in proposing that Mexico went too far by treating profoundly dangerous drugs -- from a sheer health and functionality perspective -- on the same level as pot. It is neither the task nor the prerogative of the state to demote the general welfare.
You're on, John. Let's make it a bottle of Wild Turkey.
Re: Mexican Congress On Crack
Posted by on 4.30.06 @ 3:34AM
James: I'll bet you an evening's serving of your drug of choice (wine, right?) that this bill will have almost no effect on addiction and drug-related death in Mexico. The bill legalizes possession of 5 grams of marijuana, two MDMA pills, a half a gram of cocaine, 25mg of heroin, and 1 kilogram of peyote. With the exception of the peyote, which I suspect gets special treatment because of its role in Native American religious ritual, these are tiny amounts: four joints, two hits of ecstasy, four lines of coke. Twenty-five milligrams of heroin is several doses for a first time user, but wouldn't do much for an addict: According to a study by the Swiss government, after 6 months of regular use (the point at which tolerance generally levels off into a stable dose), the mean daily dose of heroin is 491.7mg.
And remember, this is Mexico we're talking about: Standard operating procedure when caught for small drug possession is to bribe the cops and go on your way. Surely a modest bit of drug legalization is preferable to that sort of endemic corruption.
- Republic, Regained
- Common Prayer, Uncommon Beauty
- Barney Shuffles Off
- Digital Subscription (Save 78%)
- Buy a single issue (Save 50%)
- Send Spectator as a gift
