HELP
Archive
E-mail Comments
Send to a Friend
<% printurl = Request.ServerVariables("URL")%>Print Version
Saturday, January 15, 2005

RE: PICTURES FROM TITAN [John Derbyshire]
This first picture looks like Long Island. Though with the temperature up there at about 300 below zero, I imagine the Titanian equivalent of the Long Island Railroad is having some service delays.

Posted at 06:10 PM

STILL GIVING ORDERS [Andrew Stuttaford]

Via Haaretz

“German politicians have called for a Europe-wide ban on Nazi insignia after Britain's Prince Harry caused outrage by wearing a swastika armband and Nazi regalia at a fancy dress party… Markus Soeder, general secretary of Germany's Christian Socialist Union opposition conservative party told the paper: "In a Europe grounded in peace and freedom there should be no place for Nazi symbols. They should be banned throughout Europe, as they are with good reason in Germany." Soeder also urged the German government to push for a more balanced history program in British schools.”

No word yet on whether those German politicians, who seem to have a thing or two to learn about free speech, would support a Europe-wide ban on Communist insignia.

I wonder why not.


Posted at 03:36 PM

A GOOD WOMAN [Andrew Stuttaford]
A wonderful story from, yes, the New York Times

Posted at 03:10 PM

SUPERFLUOUS? [Andrew Stuttaford]

Here’s a little moment of delight courtesy of the invaluable, if slightly obsessive, EU Referendum blog, a daily must-read for anyone interested in the goings on in the den of thieves:

“Seen on BBC’s Newsnight programme yesterday, a report on the UN "Oil for Food" scandal. In what was supposed to be a critical piece, we heard Peter Marshall, the Beebie reporter state, with not a hint of a blush:

“The Asian tsunami has provided a perfect example of the need for an efective UN under an activist Secretary General. This time Kofi Annan was quick off the mark and America's independent efforts soon looked superfluous.”

As a reminder, the BBC is funded by a television ‘license’. That’s an annual tax on any Briton so bold as to want to own a TV, whether or not he watches the BBC. Don’t pay it, and you go to jail.

Free country? Not really.


Posted at 03:02 PM

FOX [Rich Lowry]
FYI--I'm scheduled to be on around 4:20 pm.

Posted at 02:52 PM

DON'T FORGET [KJL]
to RSVP to our Friday bar night in D.C. next week--helps with logistics planning. Details here.

Posted at 02:42 PM

ALSO FROM THE FRIDAY COURT REPORTS [KJL ]
The inauguration was declared safe for God: Michael Newdow lost his suit (but extended his fifteen minutes).

Posted at 02:38 PM

VIRGINIA IS FOR LOVERS… [KJL ]
…married or unmarried. Yesterday, the state supreme court there struck down an anti-fornication law that was still on the books.

Posted at 02:35 PM

HARRY - BEYOND SATIRE [Andrew Stuttaford]

Kathryn, in fact the BBC’s report on Harry’s wardrobe malfunction went out of its way to note that the wicked princeling had a drink and a cigarette in his hand.

Oh the horror.


Posted at 02:21 PM

THEY WANT YOUR SPERM [KJL]
If you're an Australian parliamentarian, that is. An IVF clinic down under has formally requested a contribution from 25 pols, hoping they'll get other Aussie men at work.

Posted at 02:11 PM

ALSO RE GENEVA [Cliff May]
A footnote to Andy and Rich’s points: This is why it makes no sense whatsoever when Sen. Joe Biden as well as so many folks in the MSM repeat that the reason we should treat terrorists as POWs because in that way we ensure that our troops, if captured, will be treated according to these standards. No, emphatically not.

First, our troops and even our civilians are not being accorded Geneva protections or even a minimum of civilized treatment by the terrorists (think Nick Berg, Margaret Hussein, Daniel Pearl). Second, if you say to the terrorists, “Don’t worry, no matter what you do, no matter how barbaric, it doesn’t matter – you’ll always get kid gloves-Geneva treatment from our side,” you eliminate any leverage you might otherwise have had.

I don’t expect Human Rights Watch to understand or care. I do think Sen. Biden ought to.

Posted at 02:07 PM

MEMO TO MICHAEL MOORE FANS [KJL]
You might get more than you bargained for reaction-wise if you get the wrong kind of blue bracelet.

Posted at 01:57 PM

FOX CAIRS [KJL]
Fox has agreed to run Council on American-Islamic Relations-produced public-service announcements to make up for 24's "sins" of intolerance.

Posted at 01:53 PM

MAYBE IT’S OK IF THESE IRAQIS DON’T VOTE? [Cliff May]
An extremist Sunni group believed to have ties to Al Qaeda took responsibility on Friday for killing an aide to Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the aide's son and four guards with a car bomb on Wednesday evening.”

(And don’t forget: the war in Iraq has nothing to do with al Qaeda, nothing to do with terrorism. If we hadn’t invaded Iraq, these folks would be staying at home, re-finishing their basements and whipping up new recipes – like for aerosol anthrax.)

Posted at 01:47 PM

HARRY'S TROUBLES [KJL]
If you have a minute to kill: "In fact, he only wore the armband to distract attention from the fact that he was holding a cigarette, so in one sense it worked perfectly..."

Posted at 01:40 PM

TIME FOR ABBAS TO FISH OR CUT BAIT [Cliff May]
A senior Israeli official says that one of the Palestinian Authority’s prinicpal security forces “was to the best of our knowledge involved” in the most recent terrorist attack at the Karni border crossing between Israel and Gaza. The Israelis add that newly elected P.A. president Mahmoud Abbas “knows who carried out the attack” and must take action before there can be negotations with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

If Abbas were a moderate, he would take action. But he’s not a moderate. Maybe, however, he’s a pragmatist? My Scripps Howard column on this topic is here.

Posted at 01:40 PM

TITAN [Andrew Stuttaford]

John D, I’m with you. Those pictures are simply wonderful. Amazing. And yes, John M, Sirens of Titan is a wonderful book. The whole point of human civilization was to advertise the need of a spare part for an alien spacecraft. Now that’s what I call intelligent design…

Vonnegut has spouted plenty of nonsense since then, but everything can be forgiven the author of one of the soundest short stories ever written – Harrison Bergeron. Here’s an extract:

“The music began. It was normal at first- cheap, silly, false. But Harrison snatched two musicians from their chairs, waved them like batons as he sang the music as he wanted it played. He slammed them back into their chairs. The music began again and was much improved. Harrison and his Empress merely listened to the music for a while-listened gravely, as though synchronizing their heartbeats with it. They shifted their weights to their toes. Harrison placed his big hands on the girl’s tiny waist, letting her sense the weightlessness that would soon be hers. And then, in an explosion of joy and grace, into the air they sprang! Not only were the laws of the land abandoned, but the law of gravity and the laws of motion as well. They reeled, whirled, swiveled, flounced, capered, gamboled, and spun. They leaped like deer on the moon. The studio ceiling was thirty feet high, but each leap brought the dancers nearer to it. It became their obvious intention to kiss the ceiling. They kissed it. And then, neutralizing gravity with love and pure will, they remained suspended in air inches below the ceiling, and they kissed each other for a long, long time.

“It was then that Diana Moon Glampers, the Handicapper General, came into the studio with a double-barreled ten-gauge shotgun. She fired twice, and the Emperor and the Empress were dead before they hit the floor."

If you haven’t already, read the whole thing. Now.


Posted at 01:30 PM

RE: YOUR POST ON MEDIA MATTERS & GENEVA [Andy McCarthy]
You are entirely correct, but there is an even more basic reason that the 4th Geneva Convention on the protection of civilians does not apply to al Qaeda. It is found near the very beginning of the 4th Convention itself. The third paragraph of Article 2 reads as follows (italics are mine):

"Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof."

In cases where a non-party to Geneva, such as al Qaeda, participates in an armed conflict, this paragraph means two things things:

First, the states who are high contracting parties must adhere to the convention's terms insofar as their dealings with each other go. (E.g., if the U.S. and China faced off in a war in which, say, the Tamil Tigers were also participating, the U.S. and China would still have to accord Geneva protections to each other even though the Tigers would not be eligible for such treatment in the same war.)

Second, and more important for present purposes, let's assume for argument's sake that a non-contracting party such as al Qaeda could be considered a "Power" even though it is not a nation-state. Al Qaeda would still not be eligible for 4th Geneva Convention treatment unless it both accepted and applied the provisions of the 4th Geneva Convention.

To the contrary, al Qaeda's modus operandi is to violate the laws of war -- specifically to target civilian populations for mass attacks, as well as endangering civilian populations by hiding among them. As it neither accepts nor applies the 4th Geneva Convention, it is ineligible by the very terms of that convention.

This is perhaps the most salient point of the whole argument. The thrust of Geneva is to encourage civilized behavior. The object here is not simply to prevail on a technical legal point. Our point is not just that Geneva doesn't apply to al Qaeda simply as a strict legal matter, although that is surely so. We are also arguing that applying Geneva to al Qaeda would reward and encourage the very behavior it was Geneva's principal purpose to prevent.

Posted at 01:27 PM

INTEGER SEQUENCES [John Derbyshire]
Remember those IQ tests (or whatever name they are camouflaged under nowadays) in which you are asked to prode the next member of a sequence of numbers? (What is the next number in this sequence: 1, 11, 21, 1211, 111221, 312211,...?)

Well, back in the early 1970s, Neil Sloane published a Handbook of Integer Sequences, intended as a start on listing ALL possible integer sequences of any interest at all. This project gre and grew -- I have a 1995 book titled The Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences, which was another milestone.

This is now all on the internet, of course, and you can look up your favorite sequence here. If you liked Prime Obsession, check out these: A100060, A102522, A102523, A102524. (Click the "Sequence Number" radio button & put the sequence number in the text box.)

(Thanks to Gary Adamson for noticing these entries.)

Posted at 01:24 PM

LIBERAL=LIBERATED [Tim Graham]
Visiting Mom and Dad at Christmas, I saw their letter from a dear liberal cousin of mine lamenting that the re-election of Bush is a sign of the astounding low "educational level" of voters. (Hmm, why didn't I get a card this year?) Journalists have that mindset too. See Hugh Downs declaring the media are liberal because they are "liberated," better informed and "more in touch."

Posted at 01:20 PM

TITANIAN FICTION [John Derbyshire]
J.J.: Arthur C. Clarke wrote a novel set partly on Titan -- a favored tourist destination in whichever future year the thing took place. Some v. good and plausible descriptions of Titanian geo- (or Titanio-) morphology. The whole thing was tied up with the Bicentennial somewhow -- I guess it came out in 1976, and the future year was 2776 or something. I wish I had a better memory for books.

Sir Arthur, by the way, is just fine out there in Sri Lanka, where he's been living for the past 40 yrs or so.

(He is of course a Derb fan )

Posted at 01:19 PM

ZETAGRID [John Hillen]
At the end of last year, the Zetagrid project achieved its goal of verifying the Riemann Hypothesis for the first trillion zeros of the zeta function.

This is a landmark in computational number theory.

Posted at 01:17 PM

GRANER COURT-MARTIAL [John Hillen]
Most MSM papers and the European press are making much of Specialist Charles Graner’s court-martial and sentencing yesterday – saying it serves to highlight the debate over the morality of the U.S. intervention.

Quite the opposite. If there is a morality play on the question of the injustices of Iraq, it should turn on the difference between a self-correcting system that has brought dozens of soldiers and Marines to courts-martial proceedings (the great majority for non-capital crimes) and the lack of any such system on the other side. And lest someone suggest this is light justice, these are heavy sentences being handed down. The six year military jail terms handed out to several National Guardsman for pilfering un-tended equipment springs to mind – a ‘crime’ that would have put the con-men and scavenging crew of ‘Operation Petticoat’ away for life.

CNN and others like the fashion of scoreboards these days. One is reminded of the running ‘Days Since the 9/11 Commission Issued Its Report’ vs. ‘Number of 9/11 Recommendations the Administration Has Enacted’ tally – which mindlessly presupposed the infallibility of the commission’s recommendations and mendacity of those not implementing them right away.

I suggest a brought-to-justice-by-their-own-system scoreboard for Iraq. We can even equate the horrific capital crimes (including beheading of aid workers, etc) of the terrorists in Iraq with the lesser offenses of Americans and Coalition forces. By my count it is:

US and Coalition: 3 dozen or more

Salafist and Baathist Insurgents: 0

That’s the lesson to be drawn from Graner’s well-deserved court-martial.

Posted at 01:14 PM

RE: SOSEC REFORM [John Derbyshire]
The ring of truth

Posted at 01:11 PM

MOON MAN [John J. Miller]
I'm not quite sure what I'd think of it today -- and something tells me there's a good chance I'd seriously dislike it -- but in high school I thought The Sirens of Titan by Kurt Vonnegut was a wonderful book.

Posted at 05:52 AM

Friday, January 14, 2005

MOVE OVER LANCE ARMSTRONG [KJL]
Now blue-staters--all over the world--can wear blue bracelets to show they hate Bush.

It's going to be a bitter four years for those who can't moveon.

Posted at 08:39 PM

PHRASES I'M TIRED OF HEARING #895 [John Derbyshire]
"What's up with THAT?"

Posted at 07:47 PM

PICTURES FROM TITAN [John Derbyshire]
The Huygens probe has successfully landed on Titan, Saturn's major moon. First pictures have come in. This is tremendously exciting.

Posted at 07:40 PM

MEDIA MATTERS AND GENEVA [Rich Lowry ]
There is a confused item on Media Matters accusing conservatives, including me, of distorting the Geneva Conventions.

It argues that, even if Al Qaeda members aren't entitled to protections as POWs under Geneva III, they are protected under Geneva IV. But Geneva IV is about protections for civilians. Its title is “Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War.” Nothing in its text or negotiating history suggests it is meant to apply to unlawful combantants. That is why Protocal 1, which we rejected, was proposed in the 1970s as an addition to create protections for such combatants. Under Geneva IV there is a provision for holding civilians as security detainees, but only very briefly. If Media Matters is suggesting that unlawful combatants are entitled to this status it would mean that they are preversly entitled to better treatment than POWs--POWs can be held for the duration of the war, security detainees have to be turned around very quickly.

Media Matters also argues that al Qaeda should be protected under “common Article 3” that is in both Geneva III and Geneva IV. But that article applies to “armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties.” Al Qaeda is a transnational organization, so conflicts involving it are inherently international and this provision doesn't apply either.

Conservatives are on solid ground here. Its the left that can't stand the idea that terrorist thugs don't deserve gold-plated treatment under international law.

Posted at 05:06 PM

CRYING ON INAUGURATION DAY? [KJL]
Our friend Andrew Breitbart--Matt Drudge's partner in crime at the Drudge Report--co-authored a book on Hollywood life and values last year. It's a colorful look at the heart of blue America. Since Golden Globes are this weekend, prominent Dems have recently demonstrated they follow Michael Moore's marching orders, and Oscar talk is everywhere, I checked in with him to chat about Hollywood Commie love and the like. He's a funny guy, and it comes through in the interview. I think you'll enjoy. It is here if you haven't read it yet.

Posted at 04:21 PM

MORE GRANER [Rich Lowry ]
More e-mail:

"Mr Lowry,

I was in Iraq the same time Chuck Graner and little Lyndie England were. I was the logistics officer for an MP Battalion that thankfully was not attached to the 800th MP Brigade which had responsibility for Abu Ghraib. Our line companies used to drop prisoners off at Abu Ghraib and told us on more than one occasion that things were all F'd up at that place. The abuses there had nothing to do with Don Rumsfeld, nothing to do with Alberto Gonzales or anyone else that high on the food chain. It was piss poor leadership in the 800th Brigade pure and simple. From the unbelieveably incompetent Brigadier General Judith Karpinski down to the section sergeants at the prison, no leadership was exercised.... As for getting orders from MI that’s also a load. MI doesn't give guidance to Spec 4's. It all boils down to the leadership of Graner's unit all the way to the Brigade level being non existent. All the MP's in theatre during that time knew the 800th was a joke. I am thankful I dont have to sport the 800th patch on my right shoulder."

Posted at 04:12 PM

RE: KOS, LAUCK, ETC. [KJL ]
Bloggers should definitely disclose such things (to the point of overemphasis even)—be obvious about your biases and readers can take it from there. I imagine there'll always be a campaign staffer who blogs in his spare time, etc.—just make sure everyone knows that. Even if it was just a part-time gig. Keeps everyone honest.

Posted at 04:03 PM

FULL DISCLOSURE [Kathryn Jean Lopez ]
Jon Lauck had a South Dakota blog, writing on South Dakota politics--the Thune and Daschle campaigns specifically--during the election. He wrote a few pieces for NRO on the Thune-Daschle race. He also received consultant fees from the Thune campaign, something NRO was not aware of when accepting and commissioning articles from him (I just learned it myself in the last few days).

Lauck addressed the issue on his site in December.

He says that because it had been reported in South Dakota media that he was a Thune consultant as soon as he became one, he never thought to stamp his site with a disclosure--and never thought to call it out to me when discussing potential pieces.

I apologize to readers: Had I known he had gotten any Thune money (I probably should have asked; I will now), the pieces would not have run on NRO.

Posted at 04:00 PM

GALILEO FOOTNOTES [Jonah Goldberg]

From a reader:

Subject: Thanks for the Article on Galileo

Dear Jonah,

Some footnotes to add to your understanding of
Galileo:

1. He rejected Kepler's mathematics showing that
planets move in egg-shaped orbits. With
Copernicus, he affirmed uniform motion in
perfect circles, which entailed more cycles
and epicycles than were used in the Ptolemaic
system.

2. The Pope's favorite argument was put in
the mouth of old Simplicio (aka Shapth to
his friends). This was not a friendly act.

3. The condemnation was primarily about Galileo's
teaching about the Scriptures. If he had only
left the Bible out of the book, he probably
could have escaped ecclesiastical notice.

4. Galileo had no new observational evidence
to prove that the heliocentric model was correct.
He asserted on his personal authority that it
was a fact. Scientists love to praise doubt
except when it is turned against their edicts.
Completely persuasive observations were not
made until the late 18th and early 19th
centuries--but by then, Newton's use of
Galileo's laws of motion and Kepler's laws
of planetary motion, coupled with Newton's
own theory of gravity, had utterly eradicated
the geocentric model. Anti-Catholics routinely
ignore Galileo's scientific errors and focus
solely on the (real and lamentable) errors of
the tribunal that condemned him.


Posted at 03:49 PM

KIDS, STRIP THIS FROM YOUR CAREER GOALS [KJL ]
Eight-graders get an exotic-dancing Career Day presentation.

Posted at 03:43 PM

CHARLES GRANER [Rich Lowry ]
Remember how that OLC memo was supposed to have led inexorably to the abuses of the likes of Charles Graner at Abu Ghraib? Well, presumably some evidence of that would have been introduced by his defense at his trail. But this is how the Times reports it today:
His lawyers have argued that Specialist Graner, a 36-year-old former prison guard from Pennsylvania, was following orders to "soften up" detainees before interrogations. But on cross-examination, witnesses called by the defense on Wednesday and Thursday almost all ended up reinforcing the prosecution's case that Specialist Graner had abused detainees for sport.
There are new damning e-mails according to the Times:
In addition to testimony in the case, including three detainees who gave videotaped depositions, the jury of 10 combat veterans will consider about 10 e-mail messages, retrieved from a cache that Specialist Graner sent from his Army account around November 2003.

The court said it would not publicly release that e-mail, given to the jury by the prosecution on Tuesday, but a person close to the defense provided copies to The New York Times. They include new photographs from Abu Ghraib, sent to Specialist Graner's friends and family, including his young children, with chatty messages to explain them.

"The guys give me hell for not getting any pictures while I was fighting this guy," said one message, titled "just another dull night at work," with a photograph attached of a bound and naked detainee howling with pain, his legs bleeding. To an e-mail message about a Take Your Children to Work Day event, he replied, "how about send a bastard to hell day?" attaching a photograph of a detainee's head bloodied beyond recognition.

With a photograph of him stitching a wound on a detainee's eye, he wrote: "Things may have gotten a bit bad when we were asking him a couple of questions. O well." A similar photograph is titled "cool stuff." It was attached to an e-mail reading, "Like I said, sometimes you get to do really cool stuff over here," ending it "xoxoxoxo to all."

Sending the same photograph to another friend, Specialist Graner wrote, "Try doing this at home, and they'll lock you up if you don't have some type of license," adding, "Not only was I the healer, I was the hurter. O well life goes on."
Of course, don't look for these e-mails to be splashed all over the news because they reinforce the idea that Graner--not Al Gonzales--was responsible for his acts of abuse.

If I remember correctly, in the initial flush of hysteria over Abu Ghraib Anne Appelbaum and Andrew Sullivan advanced the theory that Graner must have been acting on orders because he didn't look guilty in the photos. I guess they would argue that these e-mails prove even more clearly that Graner was acting on orders since he doesn't demonstrate any guilt whatsoever in them. Of course, what they show is that Graner is a remorseless monster.

There were a few witnesses for Graner's defense. One was named Megan Ambuhl, who was also having sex with Graner (who, of course, fathered a child by Lyndie England). She said interrogators told them to point at male detainees in the shower. The Times continues:
Questioned by the prosecution, Ms. Ambuhl acknowledged that she had been sexually involved with Specialist Graner for a month before the investigation began, and did not wish to see him convicted. She acknowledged, too, that military intelligence, or M.I., was not present for the photographs that show hooded and naked detainees forced to masturbate, form a pyramid or simulate oral sex.

"M.I. did not direct this, did they?" the lead prosecutor, Maj. Michael Holley asked. "No, sir," she replied.
Sgt. Kenneth Davis also testified in Graner's defense that military intelligence officers were involved in the abuse. That appears to be true, but there is a problem with the idea that they were ordering Graner to do what he did as part of an interrogation strategy. The Times again:
But under questioning from the prosecution, Sergeant Davis acknowledged that the military intelligence soldiers ranked below Specialist Graner - he was a corporal at the time - and that the detainees were not interrogated.
(UPDATE: This post initially was screwy. Fixed now.)

Posted at 03:03 PM

V-DAY [John J. Miller]
In an unusual but propitious coincidence, both the Wall Street Journal (subscribers only here)and the Washington Post have editorials today criticizing three senators -- Chafee, Dodd, and Nelson of Florida -- for visiting Venezuela and disregarding the Chavez regime's latest totalitarian power grab. I hoped they're blasted in the hometown papers as well.

Posted at 02:16 PM

FAMILY CIRCUS [KJL]
In light of a federal court letting stand a Florida law banning gay adoption stand this week, Maggie Gallagher looks at state adoption laws and notes that only two states have a codified preference for married couples as adoptive parents. She reports from an upcoming study out of her think tank that finds that, in fact, discrimination worries may rank higher than an mom and a dad in terms of placement considerations:
States are twice as likely to "forbid 'discrimination' based on marital status than to make any legal effort to place vulnerable children in homes with a married mother and father."

Posted at 01:59 PM

ALSO WORTH READING [Ramesh Ponnuru]
Nick Eberstadt's latest grim assessment of Russian demographic trends.

Posted at 01:54 PM

WHEN FAMILY-FRIENDLY POLICIES AREN'T [Ramesh Ponnuru]
Neil Gilbert argues in the Public Interest that policies that attempt to make work more "family friendly"--really, to make families work-friendly--may not work because. . . well, read the essay.

Posted at 01:45 PM

A PASSION FOR UNFAIRNESS? [Stanley Kurtz]
Here’s an amazing story about a college that is stopping students from showing Mel Gibson’s Passion of the Christ on campus. Supposedly, the college banned the film because it is R rated. Yet the same school permitted a live performance called “F***ing for Jesus that describes simulated sex with “the risen Christ.”

Posted at 01:32 PM

JACK [Jonah Goldberg]
Do you have any idea how painful and expensive it is to have a flabber de-gasted?

Posted at 01:29 PM

YES! [Jonah Goldberg]

Gore in '08! I love it!

When the time comes I really hope someone shows those clips of him all sweaty and vein-y screaming at the top of his lungs with spit flying as he denounced Bush. Deaniacs may love that stuff, but it reminds most Americans of a crazy dude on subway platform shrieking while unaware that the cops are circling him with plastic handcuffs in hand.


Posted at 01:26 PM

RE: MAD AS HELL [John Derbyshire]
A reader: "A Briton would fill out the survey, grumbling all the while to his grumbling contemporaries. An American would throw it in the trash, reserving his time for moneymaking, or invention, or honest leisure."

This reader is absolutely correct. I have not been living up to my new citizenship obligations.

Into the trash it has gone!

Posted at 01:23 PM

UKRAINE [KJL]
to join the EU?

Posted at 01:23 PM

GORE '08 [Rich Lowry ]
We're hearing that Al Gore is very serious about running next time.

Posted at 01:20 PM

SPIT-TAKE WARNINGS [Jonah Goldberg]

This is like the 30th email I've gotten along these lines (scroll down to the Tron post to see what caused the reax). Basically, I don't like warning readers when there's something G-rated and shocking. It reduces the spice from life. Anyway, from a reader:

Dude! You've got to give some kind of warning when you put up a link like that. I had just taken a sip of coffee and almost sprayed my computer monitor when the link came up.

Next time, put something like "Spit take warning! Do not drink liquids of any kind while clicking this link."


Posted at 01:15 PM

MY FLABBERS ARE GASTED! [Jack Fowler]
Not a pretty sight, but that’s beside the point: the big news is that in the last five days, we’ve had another NINE CABINS RESERVED for the National Review 2005 British Isles Cruise! I kid you not: since this Monday we have received nine new bookings. That gives us some 120 cabins sold. But that means only 30 cabins remain available, and that we could very well be SOLD OUT by St. Valentine’s Day. I can see it now, lots and lots of lollygaggers left standing on the dock, crying as they miss the cruise of a lifetime because they took their sweet time signing up. Be one of the happy ones watching all the boo-hooing from the Promenade Deck of the beautiful Crystal Symphony (elbow to elbow with Bill Buckley, Paul Johnson, Peggy Noonan, Larry Kudlow, Robert Bork, David Pryce-Jones, Kate O’Beirne, Rich Lowry, Jay Nordlinger, and John O’Sullivan) as it pulls away for 11 phenomenal nights (July 10 – 21) of conservative revelry. Sign up right now at www.nrcruise.com.

Posted at 01:07 PM

HOLLAND [Stanley Kurtz]
Geert Wilders, the Dutch politician who wants to put a hold on immigration, is in the United States. Here’s an interesting report from The New York Sun on Wilders’ response to questions at a forum in New York.

Posted at 01:04 PM

BUSH REGRETS... [ Jonah Goldberg ]

... saying "Bring 'em on" and that he wanted "Osama dead or alive." To be honest neither of these statements ever bothered me, though I can see the case for regretting both, particularly the Osama thing. Personally, I don't mind if the world thinks we turn into a bunch of crazy cowboys when you attack us the way we were attacked on 9/11.

I doubt this bit of humility will not do one bit of good to change Bush's image among his detractors here, or abroad.


Posted at 01:01 PM

RE: SOSEC REFORM [John Derbyshire]
E-mail exchange:

Reader (quoting me): "'The current system is simple, straightforward, and needs about 8 bureaucrats to run it.' Are you kidding, or did I mis-read this? The budget for the 2005 SSA 'administrative costs' was $8.875 Billion. If 8 bureaucrats are splitting that pie, I'm in the wrong line of work."

Derb: "Wait'll you see the 'reformed' budget!"

Posted at 12:41 PM

EXCOMMUNICATING CONDI [ Jonah Goldberg]

There's a great post at the Volokh Conspiracy about the tendency of liberal academics to celebrate inquisitions and excommunications. This is of particular interest for a bunch of reasons, including my need to research the topic more for my book. If anybody has first hand experiences on the subject I'd love to hear from you. Or if you've read anything good on the subject (left or right) I'd love to know about it. But please don't send it to my normal address. Send email on this subject to JonahResearch@aol.com. It may be a little while before I respond.

Anyway, just to get people thinking on the subject, it's long been my opinion that for all of the left's glorification of Galileo as a victim of a religious inquisition, the real masters of the art are professional academics themselves. After all, while the Church may deserve its share of criticism for what happened to Galileo, his scientific colleagues have gotten-off scot-free. See my column on Bjorn Lomberg's treatment for more of what I mean.


Posted at 12:32 PM

JOANN DAVIDSON [KJL]
Ken Mehlman’s tapped a pro-choice woman from Ohio—big GOP activist type (as they tend to be)--who worked on the ground in that important state, to be RNC co-chair. Some conservatives are ticked. I’m inclined to let it go, to be honest. We’re not the Democrats, who have had a tendency to ostracize anyone who differs (thinking Casey). That said, of course, if we were talking chair, I’d be on a crusade, but we’re not, and there’s some room, as long as everyone knows where the party stands. (Also: If this were some State Department employee who oversees an international health-care type program who turned out to be an abortion activist, I’d be on the march, too, but this seems like a moment to hold fire.)

And, frankly, at this moment in time (see Rehnquist story in the NYPost--scroll down), my main concern “personnel” wise is who we get on the Court. And I think the White House is going to do the right thing there. It's, simply, key.

Posted at 12:11 PM

PRINCE HAL (3) [Andrew Stuttaford]
Here's a rather entertaining detail about that now notorious fancy dress party via the London Times:

"Last week the two young Princes and their friend Guy Pelly, 22, set off for Nailsworth, a few miles from Highgrove to choose fancy-dress outfits...Mr Pelly decided to dress as the Queen and chose a powder-blue dress, grey wig, long white gloves and a crown."

Classic.


Posted at 11:42 AM

STATE GUN RIGHTS - AWESOME [Jonah Goldberg]

A reader informs me that the Pennsylvania state constitution says "The Right of Citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be questioned."

I love that. Presumably there's a specific history to that language and how it should be interpreted. But I just love that a layman's reading suggests that it's unconstitutional to question the right to bear arms. It certainly sounds like this is an imposition on free speech.

I mean, if I'm sitting at a I-Hop in Philly and I say "You know Tom, I think we should revisit the whole 'right to bear arms' thing..." can a cop draw down on me and tell me to lie down on the floor and put my hands behind my back?

Crazy....


Posted at 11:34 AM

GETTING CLOSER [KJL ]
There is still a little room at the Feb. 24 dinner/fundraiser at Bill Buckley’s house. As Rich points out, being there, with him (as well as a substantial showing from NR's top editors), is really a unique opportunity you'll enjoy (he's a busy man!). Everything you need to know is there. And thanks again for considering it--we value your support.

Posted at 11:11 AM

LOOKING FOR A THURSDAY NRO EVENT? [KJL ]
Be sure and stop by David Frum’s open house on Thursday (he'll be book signing, among other things). Details here (scroll down).

Posted at 11:08 AM

COLORING D.C. RED [KJL ]
Some of you e-mailed me last week bummed that you didn’t have the cash to spare for our intimate night with the Buckleys & co. in February, but would love to meet up with NR types.

You can.

If you’re in DC next Friday, come by Fado’s Irish Pub in Chinatown and hang and drink with the NRO gang for our inaugural celebration. That’s where we’ll be hanging out from 5-8.

RSVP to thecorner@nationalreview.com to help us get a headcount for the good folks at the bar. Thanks much and see you there.

Posted at 10:58 AM

RE: SOSEC REFORM [John Derbyshire]
Several e-mails like this: "Mr. Ponnuru and Mr. Derbyshire---An insight regarding your recent Corner postings... As an investment advisor, I have a line of business that provides professional portfolio management to participants in 401k plans for a fee. Needless to say, I have an up close and personal view of how individuals handle portfolio management. The evidence is clear that Americans are woefully unprepared to make appropriate investment decisions. There are mountains of studies that show individuals do a very poor job of managing their own investments. We shouldn't be surprised however, since this country does nothing at the primary school or college level to educate our citizens about personal finance or prudent investment principals. I am a huge Bush fan, but I have to agree with Derb that this reform will be a very costly disaster. It would be far better (and cheaper) to lower benefits and raise the retirement age while clearly explaining to people that if they want a more comfortable retirement become responsible savers NOW."

Posted at 10:55 AM

RE: CHICOMS ETC [John Derbyshire]
Several annoying readers: "Where is Raiwan? I can't find it in my gazeteer."

As a result of a Home Improvement malfunction yesterday, I have a large Band-Aid on one of my key typing fingers. I am operating at half speed and with an error rate several times normal.

And it's a sin to mock the afflicted. So there.

Posted at 10:52 AM

RE: SOSEC REFORM [John Derbyshire]
---"John is worried about having too much choice, or too little. Relax: You won't have to participate in the accounts at all if you don't want to."

Oh, that's all right then. Like when HR says: "Of course, you don't have to participate in the firm's Managed Health Care plan at all if you don't want to..." (Subtext: "If you don't want to pay the govt-approved price, you are free to pay the sucker price.")

Or like when the State highway authority says to the homeowner: "Of course, you don't have to sell your house to us at this suggested price of $29.95 at all if you don't want to. We can just route the new expressway right round your property..."

---"(It is possible that you will face some benefit cuts either way.)"

You don't say!

---"For those who do choose to participate, portfolio management need not be especially daunting: Millions of people have been able to make the same sorts of choices with their 401(k)s."

I personally find it very daunting, and I have a degree in math. I have no clue what most of those numbers on my statements mean, and have long since resigned myself to the assumption that they will all dwindle to zero in some future financial panic, crisis, or swindle. (The name "Enron" mean anything?) What assurance do I have that they won't? One, I mean, that I can *understand*?

I want my Social Security check.

Posted at 10:49 AM

FAIR POINT ON GUNS - A RETRACTION [Jonah Goldberg]
Sorry, I guess I should have waited for my coffee. I don't offer retractions much. But, I think I was wrong to say "fair point" about the guy's email saying states can ban guns. I think you can make an intellectually serious argument from that perspective, but that perspective really isn't my own. And normally when I say "fair point" or some such about an email it means I'm more or less endorsing its content. I do think gun ownership is a right recognized by the constitution and extended to the states by the 14th amendment. However, as everyone around here knows, I'm very, very sympathetic to the idea that states should have vastly more power to do what they want on a whole range of public policies.

Posted at 10:21 AM

DEFENDING KOS [Jonah Goldberg]

Froma reader:

Jonah,

I have no love for Kos [...] but you're "not sure about the Rathergate magnitude of this whole thing?" Hey, if Dan Rather began every broadcast by disclosing that he supported John Kerry and hated the Bush family, there wouldn't be a Rathergate. Kos had a prominent disclaimer about this on his site for the entire time he was taking consultant checks from Dean.

Beyond that, that Hynes article treads perilously close to libel. He lists a few examples of crazy Kos quotes and wonders if Kos wrote them on the Dean payroll. But that Fallujah quote is from April, and the "Kerry's team should be shot" quote is from last month. This isn't just after the Kos-Dean agreement expired - it's after Dean pulled out of the prez race!

I understand the benefits of bashing Kos, but I think we can all wait until he says something new and stupid to do so. I'm uncomfortable with bloggers and Hynes basically making up or ignoring facts to allege some kind of wrongdoing.


Posted at 10:14 AM

CRIME, COVER-UP, TWIST [KJL]
Charles Krauthammer weighs in on Rathergate this morning, here.

A taste--a few good questions:
Did Mapes and Rather devote a fraction of the resources they gave this story to a real scandal, such as the oil-for-food scandal at the United Nations, or contrary partisan political charges, such as those brought by the Swift boat vets against John Kerry? On the United Nations, no interest. On Kerry, what CBS did do was ad hominem investigative stories on the Swift boat veterans themselves, rather than an examination of the charges. Do you perceive a direction to these inclinations?

Posted at 10:02 AM

INTEL [KJL]
I just got this e-mail (characterizations within do not necessarily reflect the view of NRO or NRO's editor):
What real geeks are doing right now

Is watching NASA-TV on the web while at work - waiting for the Huygens probe data to come back from Saturn.

Think about it...the mission is actually over. The probe has gone silent. But, since Saturn is so far away, the data is all enroute at this time....but we won't get it for another couple of hours.
HHHHMMMM. Jonah told me earlier he's be disappearing this morning. Aha.

Posted at 09:57 AM

CHICOMS TAKE OVER YONKERS SCHOOL [John Derbyshire]
A correspondent in Yonkers (where, as all Ella Fitzgerald fans know, true love conquers) offers disturbing evidence that the ChiComs have begun infiltrating our school districts.

"My daughter's elementary school (she's in kindergarten) is celebrating Chinese-American month. As part of that, the classroom across the hall is now displaying China's flag (specifically, the flag of the PRC, introduced in 1949). They've had the kids create these for display. I suppose at Cuban-American heritage month, perhaps they'll let people create little portraits of Che."

My correspondent attaches a picture of the ChiCom flag display so lovingly produced by American tots.

Apparently this is all in aid of something called "Chinese-American Heritage Month." (Known to some of us as "January.")

Here is just one of the many questions that arise. Given the infinite concern that school authorities show towards kids' sensibilities in matters of bacjground, parentage, and so on, what effect will this have on Chinese kids whose parents come from Raiwan? Or whose parents have fled persecution by the Communists?

Just for once, I want to see a "sensitivity" lawsuit launched. Let's get the ACLU on this. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Posted at 09:44 AM

DERB'S PERSONAL ACCOUNT WORRIES [Ramesh Ponnuru]
John is worried about having too much choice, or too little. Relax: You won't have to participate in the accounts at all if you don't want to. (It is possible that you will face some benefit cuts either way.) For those who do choose to participate, portfolio management need not be especially daunting: Millions of people have been able to make the same sorts of choices with their 401(k)s. Whether we trust Bush seems irrelevant. There is going to be a bill for Congress to vote up or down on. If you're a Bushophobe, you could say that perhaps the Iraq war authorization bill would have deserved passage under another president--but this one can't be trusted to execute responsibly the powers the bill gives him. But that argument doesn't seem to apply to SocSec reform, Medicare, or NCLB. The major reasons for not doing any of these things would be contained in the bills themselves, which are either good or bad ideas regardless of who would be charged with implementing them.

Posted at 09:31 AM

RE: CURTAIN CALL? [Tim Graham]
Since some similarities have emerged between the CNN "Tailwind" fiasco and the CBS "Dan Rather's Just a Sock Puppet" fiasco, it's important to remember that Peter Arnett, who avoided the first round of firings at CNN while he insisted he was only a script reader, was eventually let go about a year later. Could CBS have a plan to put Dan out to pasture by the end of the year?

Posted at 09:12 AM

BACKGROUNDER [ Jonah Goldberg]
If you coming late to the Kos thing, the Wall Street Journal explains.

Posted at 08:58 AM

THE TEDDY BEAR SCANDALS [KJL]
A friend e-mails: "I once got a bear for valentine's day that was in a prison outfit and said 'prisoner of your heart.' do you think this might offend the incarcerated?"

Actually, the Vermont Teddy Bear Company has a "horny devil" and a Playmate Bear, so I see this story getting bigger before it fades away. Where's the Vermont governor on hellfire and teddy bears? And where's the Department of Justice on the "Gangster of Love" bear?

Clearly, the Vermont Teddy Bear Company is a menace.

Posted at 08:52 AM

THE DEAN ANGLE [ Jonah Goldberg ]
Patrick Hynes weighs in. I'm not sure I agree with his suggestion that other Democrats didn't know about Kos taking money, or about the Rathergate magnitude of this whole thing, but it's worth a gander.

Posted at 08:46 AM

FAIR POINT RE GUNS [Jonah Goldberg]

From a reader re last night's post about guns:

Jonah -

In the case of guns, there is still a natural way of reconciling (limited) Constitutional protection with the possibility that empirical evidence might show that, crudely put, "guns are bad for you." The Federal government can't outlaw gun ownership, but states can. Would that this split and flexible system were still maintained for at least the more extravagant examples of free expression.


Posted at 08:43 AM

DAILY KOS: ONE LAST POINT [ Jonah Goldberg]

I should point out that Daily Kos does not fully believe in full disclosure. Or at least Daily Kos doesn't practice it. He's honest about this point, but he writes in "disclosure post":

But for the record, I will not discuss my role within the Dean campaign, other than to say it's technical, not message or strategy. I will also not discuss any of my other clients, including their identities (I have non-disclose agreements to which I must adhere).

Some of you may be upset, but there's nothing I can do about it. I have to make my living, and if I can do so helping Democrats win elections, I can't imagine anything more exciting and fulfilling. [Italics mine]

So yes he disclosed about Dean but not about some unknowable number of other Democrats. I'm not a big Kos reader, but the statement that "helping Democrats win elections" is the most exciting and fulfilling thing he can imagine seems to underscore Kos' status as a partisan Democrat Bulletin Board. Again, he's honest about all this, but his position is he's free to take money from Democrats (presumably many of them elected Democrats) without telling us who they are and that his highest priority is electing Democrats. We also now know that it is accepted practice among at least some prominent Democratic strategists to throw "technical" contracts in the hope of extracting favorable coverage. This is not exactly a recipe for shining intellectual independence now is it?


Posted at 08:40 AM

SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM [John Derbyshire]
There are some interesting points being made over at Steve Sailer's blog. Steve himself, a Bushophobe conservative, makes this rather unsettling one: "How much evidence is there that Bush's actions generally turn out more responsible than his rhetoric? Iraq? Immigration? Medicare drug benefits? Tax cuts during war time? No Child Left Behind?" Well, personally, I bought (and still buy) Iraq; but he's got me on the others. What if Bush Sosec reform is like NCLB? Or GWB's immigration ""reform."" (Yes, that's double scare quotes. I thought something extra-strength was needed.)

I'll confess I am a Sosec reform skeptic, on the grounds that:

(a) It will make my life even more complicated, at an age when I'd be looking to simplify it. More of my life, of the national life, will be in the hands of lawyers and accountants, for a net loss of self-reliance. As someone says on Steve's site, only one person in a thousand is smart enough to do portfolio management even half competenetly. Sosec reform is a nuclear strike against the left side of the Bell Curve, and the middle too.

(b) Govt will end up being involved MORE in my affairs, not less. The current system is simple, straightforward, and needs about 8 bureaucrats to run it. With the political necessities of privatized Sosec (i.e. you can't let people invest any fool way they please), there will be govt bureaucrats crawling all over the mutual-fund business -- yeah, yeah, but even more than there already are. It will end with some crisis and a complete govt takeover of the securities markets -- "To protect your investments..."

I grew up under the old-style Beveridge- (trans: New Deal-) type socialism. Free orange juice, free health care, free college education, a check once a month when you hit retirement. Sure, sure, I know all the counter-arguments -- I've been hearing them (and making them!) all my life. I'm starting to think, though, that we are being marched off towards a newer, more oppressive, more liberty-denying kind of socialism; and the banners we are marching under read: PRIVATIZATION! LIBERATION! PERSONAL CHOICE!.....

Posted at 08:14 AM

JUST PLAIN CRAZY [KJL ]
The Vermont Teddy Bear Company gets grief about their Valentine’s Day “Crazy for You” bear because it’s supposedly offensive to the mentally ill: “The bear, wrapped in a white straitjacket with a red heart on the front, comes with commitment papers and is meant to convey out-of-control love, the company says.” The Vermont governor, for the record, has taken a firm stand against the bear.

Nuts.

Posted at 07:54 AM

NO JOKE [KJL ]
From Slate:
Here's an idea: As soon as William Safire shuffles off to the Old Columnists' Home, put Barry smack dab in the middle of the Times editorial page. Barry confessed a few years ago that he's a raving libertarian—just the kind of dyspeptic crank who would take pleasure in thumbing Washington in the eye. Give him 14 inches twice a week and let him write whatever he wants. Why settle for another graying libertarian when you can have a libertarian who makes booger jokes?

Posted at 07:38 AM

A NIGHT AT WFB’S [Rich Lowry ]
It's a conservative experience you can't afford to pass up--drinks and dinner with William F. Buckley at his legendary Manhattan apartment. If Fenway is New England's living room (see how hard I'm trying to reach out?), WFB's place is conservatism's living room. Believe me, it's not something you will soon forget and you will be able to dine out it for a long time, in addition to having a delightful time in a grand style with your favorite NR/NRO writers. Please join us. Details are here.

Posted at 07:17 AM

SELLING YOUR SOUL [KJL ]
John Podhoretz took his column a little to far today when he offered to support George Pataki for president, but only with Armstrong Williams kinda incentive. George Pataki. Surely there is no amount… Although, I’m looking at my bankbook now…ok, just don’t settle, that one’s a hard sell.

Posted at 06:43 AM

CRUEL WORLD [KJL ]
AP:
BATAPOLA, Sri Lanka -- Police have arrested a 63-year-old Sri Lankan man on charges of trying to sell his two young granddaughters after their home was destroyed and their mother killed by the Asian tsunami -- a case that highlights the vulnerability of children in the wake of the disaster.

Posted at 06:41 AM

THIS CAN’T HURT TO HAVE IN HIS PORTFOLIO; ELECTIBILITY CREDS [KJL ]
Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, possible 0’8 presidential contender, gave his state of the state address yesterday. Here’s the Boston Globe editorializing on it: “A small-government reformer who came into office pledging to bring cold-eyed management to the public sector, Romney last night sounded at times like a New Deal Democrat in a business suit.”


Posted at 06:24 AM

NOT LOOKING GOOD [KJL ]
A NYPost writer spots Chief Justice Rehnquist.

Posted at 06:21 AM

WIZ KIDS [KJL ]
There will always be the kid who computer companies will have to hate (while secretly wanting to hire):
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. -- Nicholas M. Ciarelli was not even old enough to shave when he started getting under Apple Computer Inc.'s skin.

As a 13-year-old middle-schooler, the New Woodstock, N.Y., native built a Web site in 1998 and began publishing insider news and rumors about Apple, using the alias Nick dePlume.

Three years later, ThinkSecret.com was first to report that the company would debut a G4 version of the PowerBook laptop series. The product launched soon thereafter, along with ThinkSecret's reputation among Apple's legendarily zealous fans, generating millions of page views per month.

But after a series of letters warning the Web site to stop publishing proprietary information, Apple decided enough was enough. When Ciarelli scored yet another scoop in late December, by predicting the arrival of a new software package and a sub-$500 computer rolled out at this week's MacWorld Conference and Expo in San Francisco, the computer maker filed a lawsuit accusing him of illegally misappropriating trade secrets…

Posted at 06:18 AM

POTENTIAL COWARDLY CURTAIN CALL [KJL ]
From NYTimes:
As much as he would like to recover from the blows his reputation has suffered recently, Dan Rather may not have a chance to work very long on the program that he expected would be his next professional address.

The future of CBS's "60 Minutes Wednesday" - the program that broadcast Mr. Rather's report, now discredited, about President Bush's National Guard record - is in doubt, both the top CBS executive and the program's new executive producer acknowledged yesterday.

Leslie Moonves, the chairman of CBS and co-president of the network's parent company, Viacom, said in a telephone interview that Mr. Rather was expected to continue his career at CBS on the Wednesday edition of "60 Minutes" after he steps down as the network's primary anchor in March. But Mr. Moonves added the phrase, "provided the show continues."

The program is guaranteed to be on the air through May, when the current television season ends, Mr. Moonves said, but "they are not exactly tearing it up in the ratings over there."..
Sorry, Dan, we don’t have a show for your hard-hitting journalism… But we’ve got a few fun game shows on during the day...enjoy ‘em.

Posted at 06:09 AM

Thursday, January 13, 2005

PENTAGON "SEX BOMB" [KJL]
Of course this was from the Clinton years:
THE Pentagon considered developing a host of non-lethal chemical weapons that would disrupt discipline and morale among enemy troops, newly declassified documents reveal.

Most bizarre among the plans was one for the development of an "aphrodisiac" chemical weapon that would make enemy soldiers sexually irresistible to each other. Provoking widespread homosexual behaviour among troops would cause a "distasteful but completely non-lethal" blow to morale, the proposal says.
Sounds like something that started out as a joke around a table...no one had any better ideas and, weeks later there's some kind of R&D; plan.

Posted at 10:16 PM

LOTT, WILSON, BENJAMIN & GUNS [ Jonah Goldberg]

I don't write about John Lott or guns much because I'm no expert on either and I don't much like the email that results from such discussions. But the Volokh conspiracy has a very interesting post from John Lott about the lastest development in the "More Guns, Less Crime" debate -- a report from the National Academy of Sciences. I don't take sides in the technical arguments in this debate because they are way, way too technical for me. But as a matter of philosophy I tend to agree with Lott (strange cat though he may be). And I find many of his anecdotal points fairly persuasive. What's particularly interesting to me is the item in Lott's post about James Q. Wilson's dissent from the NAS study. Why? Well because I think Wilson is among the most impressive, decent and honest scholars of the twentieth century. That doesn't mean I automatically think he's right here, but it makes me lean that way.


I would, however, quibble with this statement from an earlier post by Stuart Benjamin about the Lott controversies. He says: " I don't have any particular precommitments regarding guns (and I shot many a gun while hunting as a youth), so I am guided by the empirical evidence. If more guns produces net benefits to society, then let's have more guns; if it doesn't, then let's not."

Of course Benjamin's free to have any position he wants. But it seems to me that if you are going to let the "empirical evidence" decide whether we should have more or less guns, you've already expressed a precommitment on the constitutional status of guns, i.e. you don't think they have any. In other words, someone who believes we have a constitutional right to bear arms would argue that even if the data showed they caused net losses for society that wouldn't automatically mean the state has the authority to reduce the number of legally held guns in this country. Gun ownership can be "bad" for society and still be constitutionally protected from the whims of policymakers. Just as all sorts of speech is indisputably bad for society but we wouldn't -- or at least don't -- apply a cost-benefit analysis to it.


Posted at 08:18 PM

RE: MAD AS HELL [John Derbyshire]
No-o-o-o: "Like you need time to do what else? If your answer is that you need time to think through your superficial analysis of intelligent design, then you have all my sympathy and I suggest you consider the following..."

Posted at 07:11 PM

THE MOST PETTY THING EVER [ Jonah Goldberg]
If CBS really did this, it gives new meaning to lameness. According to Little Green Footballs CBS has modified the PDF of its report so you can't cut-and-paste. Maybe there's some other explanation, but if someone actually told a web-lackey "make it harder for the blogs to make fun of us" then, well, then that's just sad.

Posted at 06:55 PM

PASSIONATE GRASSROOTS [KJL]
Folks are still petitioning the Oscar gods re: The Passion of the Christ.

Posted at 06:44 PM

OSAMA OBAMA [John Derbyshire]
Cliff: I assume that wedding will take place in Alabama?

Posted at 06:40 PM

NRO PREVIEW [KJL]
I'm just getting out of Victor Davis Hanson's piece for tomorrow--it is another "just what the doctor ordered" kinda piece. I almost always find when I'm beginning to get down--about Iraq, etc. (the election--the election was a big one)--he delivers to buck me back up. Just plan a little Hanson time, is all I'm saying. I think you already have that built into your Fridays though...

Posted at 06:37 PM

WOULD THEY HATE OBL IF HE WERE A LESBIAN? [Cliff May]
If Osama bin Laden married Barack Obama he’d be Osama Obama.

Posted at 06:25 PM

MAD AS HELL [John Derbyshire]
Some weeks ago I received in the mail a form from the Census Bureau, titled "The American Community Survey." I'm supposed to fill it out, under threat of some dire penalty. I threw it away the first time, but they sent me another one with A BIG FAT WARNING.

This thing is ***TWENTY-FOUR PAGES LONG*** with HUNDREDS of boxes. Samples: What time did my wife leave home to go to work last week? Does either of my children have any of a long list of medical conditions? In the past 12 months, what was the cost of water for this house? Et cetera, et cetera, et damn stinking bloody cetera.

Who the hell do these fool bureaucrats think they are, stealing my time like this? What the hell business is it of federal bureaucrats what time my wife leaves for work? Or what conditions my children might have?

I have no idea about some of these answers, e.g. cost of water. I'd have to go through my files and add up all my water bills. I'm putting down numbers at random. The hell with these nuisances. I think I'll lie on all those impertinent questions about what race we are. If challenged I'll say I read in the New York Times that there is no such thing as race.

I love my country, but just at this moment, I hate my filthy lousy stinking government.

Posted at 06:15 PM

LINCOLN’S LAST WORDS [Cliff May]
To John Wilkes Booth: “Is it because I’m a lesbian?”

(Sorry, I just couldn’t resist tying those two threads together.)

Posted at 05:54 PM

TRON [ Jonah Goldberg]
They're making a sequel . I bet you anything this guy is psyched..

Posted at 05:45 PM

WILLIAMS [Jonah Goldberg]
A reader points out in response to the reader who called me a fathead that Williams did in fact disclose the payment on his TV show once or twice. He just never disclosed it elsewhere.

Posted at 05:36 PM

DAILY KOS -- CLARIFICATION [Jonah Goldberg]

Yes, yes, Kos disclosed his relationship -- once, as I understand it. I did say that LGF and Instapundit had the details, which included that point. Of course, Daily Kos readers are typically defensive on such matters. For example, here's one email:

Hey Fathead, In case you weren't aware, Kos was not paid using your tax dollars (unlike A. Williams) and he disclosed his position as soon as he was hired (again, unlike A. Williams). Try again.

Fathead here: I agree that what Kos did isn't nearly as bad as what Armstrong Williams did and I never intended to imply otherwise. I've criticized Williams pretty relentlessly (in the Corner, my syndicated column, on CNN and even The New York Times), so I'm kind of at a loss as to why anyone would think I'm defending Williams by pointing out that Kos took money from Dean. But Kos has been more than eager to question the integrity of the entire conservative media based upon the Williams affair. I think his less than saintly practices are cause for some fun finger-pointing. Forgive me if I relish the fact that this news will come as a surprise to many people, including his own readers and that taking money from a campaign which is trying to buy good coverage is unseemly. Indeed, if I were Kos I would denounce Dean for his undemocratic approach to politics in which he tried to buy-off journalists. But yeah, the "on the take headline" was probably more misleading than what was warranted.

Evil cackle still warranted, as far as I'm concerned.


Posted at 04:58 PM

RE: GAYBRAHAM LINCOLN [Jonah Goldberg]
One point lots of readers have made is that none of Lincoln's political enemies ever accused him of being homosexual. If that's true, I think it's a good point as far as it goes. It doesn't necessarily mean Lincoln's sexuality wasn't unusual, it simply means that if it was, it was kept very, very well-hidden. But I think it's fair to believe that if any of Lincoln's opponents thought for a moment that there was any truth to the charge, they would have used it.

Posted at 04:44 PM

DAILY KOS ON THE TAKE [ Jonah Goldberg ]

Daily Kos was paid by the Dean campaign, in part to buy good coverage. Little Green Footballs and Instapundit have all the details and associated links.

[Insert self-righteously annoying evil-mocking cackle here].


Posted at 04:19 PM

THANKS, SEN. KENNEDY [John Derbyshire]
Now I've got that darn song stuck in my head. You know the one: "Osama, Obama, come on pretty momma...

Posted at 03:22 PM

BROWNBACK 4 PRESIDENT? [KJL]
A Kansas paper speculates. [Sorry! It's a Missouri paper.]

Posted at 03:15 PM

FROG ALERT [KJL]
John Kerry is meeting with Chirac tomorrow.

Posted at 03:09 PM

BERNIE GOLDBERG ISN'T NUTS, TAKE 78,986 [KJL]
"The unremitting liberal orientation finally became too much for me. I still check in, but less and less frequently. I increasingly drift to NBC News and Fox and MSNBC." That's from Van Gordon Sauter, who was president of CBS News in the early 1980s, talking about the CBS Evening News. He's got a piece in the LATimes today.

Posted at 03:06 PM

YOU MIGHT WANT TO WORK ON THAT ONE, SENATOR KENNEDY [KJL]
AP:
Kennedy also mangled the name of the Democrats' new star, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, calling him "Osama bin … Osama … Obama."

Posted at 03:01 PM

ISN'T IT SOMEWHAT SHOCKING [KJL]
that the Roanoke Times doesn't cover rodeos? (That link is actually a story about Ali G--maybe;and now I can't get the image of Ralph Nader's interview out of my mind.)

Posted at 02:35 PM

THE CHINESE CENTURY [John Derbyshire]
We had some exchanges on the Corner a few days ago about whether or not this is likely to be the Chinese century. This followed a silly article by clapped-out old bore -- oops, sorry! highly respected elder statesman of journalism -- Sir William Rees-Mogg.

I pooh-poohed the whole idea. Martin Vander Weyer does likewise in the current (so far as airmail subscribers are concerned -- Jan. 8) issue of The Spectator (You may need to be a subscriber to read it.)

Posted at 02:23 PM

PRINCE HAL (2) [Andrew Stuttaford]
The EU foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, has now felt the need to join in the criticism of Price Harry's ill-judged choice of fancy dress. It was, he intoned, "not appropriate". It's a fair comment. Nevertheless it's worth remembering that this is, of course, the same Mr. Solana who had these words to say on the death of Yasser Arafat:

"I have learned of President Arafat's passing with great sadness. I wish to express my sincere sympathy to his family and to the Palestinian people. With the passing of Yasser Arafat the Palestinian people has lost its historic leader. More than any other, his life stands for the tragic and turbulent history of the Middle East. A period of grief starts for all Palestinians...


Posted at 02:08 PM

THE SALVADOR OPTION [Jonah Goldberg]

From a friend of mine. Point number one is particularly apt/annoying because I thought I had made that point explicitly but must have cut it while moving stuff around:

Jonah,

Couple things you could have mentioned a little more in the otherwise great piece.

1. Whatever we did in El Salvador and Nicaragua worked. This isn't evidence of its moral probity since ends don't justify means (if, indeed, we did anything wrong, which I'm not convinced of--the whole School of the Americas thing always seemed very unconvincing), but in the world of Realpolitik, we've got two reasonably friendly democracitas down there.

2. We are, in fact, sitting on the Kurds. There's no reason we couldn't let the peshmergas go in and root out all sorts of Sunni malefactors in Mosul, a Kurdish city that Saddam peopled with his Sunni cronies, particularly in the wake of the mess-tent bombing. Now, would there be some ugly incidents where the Kurdish guerillas took out some Sunni types perhaps not directly connected with the guerilla war? Yep.

And that's why we're not letting them, despite the fact that they know the city and the situation far more intimately than we ever will. Which seems like the exact OPPOSITE of what we're being accused of...


Posted at 01:59 PM

L.A. PATRIOTS [KJL]
A family gives--their sons, and a morale boost.

Posted at 01:45 PM

MSM=MORE LIBERAL THAN EVER? [Stanley Kurtz]
When the Rather affair broke, I suggested in “From Biased to Partisan” that the controlling business dynamic of the media would make network news more liberal, not less. Media bias has become self-reinforcing. As the public turns to alternative and more conservative outlets, the mainstream media’s audience grows more liberal. That puts on pressure for more bias, not less. Now Peggy Noonan has also predicted more, and more open, media bias, not less. Meanwhile, Jack Shafer at Slate proves the point, by admitting the media’s liberal bias–and bragging that it’s a good thing. I think the Business Week cover story on The New York Times points in the same direction. The Times has gained readers by expanding its audience to include the national liberal elite. But as Business Week reports, the Times has also lost a tremendous number of readers in New York City–many of them, I believe, to more conservative local papers. That means the readership of the Times is now much more liberal than it used to be. That puts even more pressure on NYT to keep its news coverage tilting left. In time, the paper may even proudly tout its liberal slant. The more fully media bias is exposed, the more readers desert MSM, and the more liberal the remaining MSM audience becomes. This is why CBS has not done more to admit its political leanings, or to show regret for its treatment of the bloggers. Those kind of admissions would imply a determination to change. But CBS doesn’t want to change–and can’t change–if it’s going to hold on to its own increasingly liberal audience.

Posted at 01:38 PM

GAY-BRAHAM LINCOLN [Jonah Goldberg]

I have to say I've been surprised by my own reaction to the Lincoln-was-gay thesis: I don't care very much. I haven't read the book, but I take Rick and others at their word that the evidence certainly passes a certain threshhold to make Lincoln's behavior curious and the assertion that Lincoln had bi- or homo-sexual tendencies not intellectually outrageous. But having read Victor Davis Hanson's piece about Alexander the Great's homosexual exploits and Oliver Stone's treatment of same, I'm not sure you can make very much hay out of any of this one way or the other.

The core assumption is that if it were proved Lincoln's gay it would overturn .... something. But I'm just not sure what it would overturn. I know that there are people out there who think homosexuality is of itself evil and that homosexuals are evil. But that's not exactly where the debate is. The debate is that homosexuality is different than heterosexuality in significant ways and how that difference should be accomodated in society. So it's a bit of stolen base to say "If Lincoln was gay, that proves gays aren't evil" or that it "proves gays can be great citizens and leaders." It may or may not prove that, but such proof wouldn't change the argument about whether or not marriage can mean the joining of a man and a man.

If Lincoln did gay stuff in private, he did not do it in public. He got married, had kids and never for a moment advocated that society or government should create social space for homosexuals. Indeed, if one were so inclined, one could take the available evidence and say "See! Lincoln's gayness proves that if homosexuals just stay in the closet, they can achieve great things!"

Again, I just haven't followed this that much but I just can't see how proving Lincoln was gay changes our understanding about how to organize society any more than declaring Alexander the Great was gay illuminates our understanding of today or of the past. In the current debates about homosexuality, "homosexual" is a legal-political designation that would have seemed completely bizarre to Lincoln and his contemporaries.


Posted at 01:38 PM

DISHONORABLE CBS [Stanley Kurtz]
Deep down, this Dan Rather business is about honor. The reason CBS hasn’t laid the problem to rest is because they’ve failed to satisfy the honor of their critics. The bloggers were dissed by Dan and by CBS. What they really need is a show of remorse for the insult they’ve received. The bloggers told the truth about those bogus documents, yet their carefully marshaled facts and arguments were contemptuously waved aside by Rather. On top of that, the bloggers received the insult of the pajama remark. When something like that happens, you can’t resolve the problem without an apology–even if couched in indirect language. The analogy to the Rather affair at this point is the case of the Dixie Chicks. Willie Nelson supported Dennis Kucinich, but conservative country music fans could care less about that. The Dixie Chicks think people punished them for their politics. But what really upset folks wasn’t that the Chicks were against Bush or the war, it was that the Chicks said they were ashamed to be from the same state as the President–and said this to a foreign audience. That dishonored the President, the country, the state of Texas, and the South. That is why country music fans turned against the Chicks. By the same token, Dan and CBS need to satisfy the honor of their critics, which despite this detailed report, they have patently failed to do. Yesterday on NPR, Daniel Schor excused Rather’s original defense of the bogus memo as a well-intentioned desire to stick by his people. That misses the point. In defending his own team, Rather acted in a dismissive and insulting way to critics who had truth on their side. Despite his loyalty to his own, Rather would never have acted that way if he’d honestly scrutinized the evidence the bloggers offered. But Rather refused to give the critics fair consideration, and he made it clear that he was ignoring the bloggers because they were not worth taking seriously. Now Rather and CBS need to show remorse for their arrogance. It’s because they refuse to do this that they have not laid the matter to rest.

Posted at 01:26 PM

GOODBYE, TIMES [Stanley Kurtz]
The latest issue of Business Week features a very interesting cover story on The New York Times. The biggest news is that the Times is in a financial downturn. There are a variety of factors at play, but the move away from MSM and toward Internet-based news sources is clearly playing a role. That shift is not entirely driven by ideological issues, but disaffection with the paper’s liberal bias is helping to push erstwhile subscribers toward alternative outlets on the Web. There are other sources of trouble. The Times is now geared toward a national readership among the scattered and largely liberal educated elite. That means the paper lacks the critical mass in any one location–even New York City–to allow for targeted local advertising. The Times gained a lot of subscribers when it went national, but it also lost a huge number of subscribers in New York City. Net readership is still up, but the hit in NYC was a big one, and clearly cut into ad revenues. Business Week doesn’t say so, but the rise of more conservative local New York City papers like The New York Sun and The New York Post has probably hurt the Times a lot. These papers may be less expensive, but it seems likely that the NYT’s politics has also pushed some subscribers over to more conservative local challengers. So liberal bias may figure into the NYT’s financial troubles even more than Business Week says. The big decision facing the Times is whether to start charging subscription fees for Internet access. That would mean a huge exodus of readers, and a large drop in Internet ad revenues. Yet higher subscription income could more than make up for lost ad revenue.

Even given what the Times has become under Pinch Sulzberger, it pains me to say that I wish the paper ill. The Times offers detailed and high quality reporting–especially on developments outside the U.S.–that no other paper can match. But I do wish The New York Times ill. As I see it, NYT has discredited itself in lasting fashion. Jayson Blair is the least of it. I read the paper with far more suspicion now than I did even a few years ago, and I read it with far more suspicion then than a few years before that. I hope the Times decides to insist on paid subscriptions from online readers. That may give a temporary boost to the paper’s bottom line, but it will vastly contract readership. In the long run, lost readership will damage the paper’s prestige, limit its cultural reach, and probably cut into profitability. It’s gratifying to see the Times forced to choose between long term health and influence and short-term profits. As I say, it’s a shame to want to see misfortune befall a paper that still upholds an unmatched standard of quality in certain kinds of news coverage. Yet The New York Times has discredited itself. This paper has destroyed our ability to trust it, even when it does what it does best. For that, The New York Times deserves to suffer.

Posted at 01:23 PM

"US 'ERODES' [KJL]
global human rights "

Posted at 01:20 PM

NEXT YEAR'S SENATE RACES [Ramesh Ponnuru]
Brendan Miniter of the Wall Street Journal writes, "[Debbie] Stabenow, though no pushover, holds one of three Democratic seats that Republicans have identified as ripe to pick off (the others are Washington's Maria Cantwell and the seat of New Jersey's Jon Corzine, who is expected to run for governor)." I think Miniter may be leaving something out.

Posted at 01:16 PM

BLOGGER BEGS FOR A LINK [KJL]
A Corner parody--clearly by someone who doesn't read close enough, or he'd have worked that Marmite substance in with the oatmeal (though not on).

Posted at 01:13 PM

THE DERB COLLECTION [John Derbyshire]
There is now a Derb Collection (T-shirts and stuff) at FoundersOfAmerica. Not that they mean to indicate that I am one of the Founders. Though of course I would have been, if I'd been around. Probably.

Hamilton: Then, gentlemen, are we to have a monarchy, or a republic?
Derb: Why not an ochlocracy, a stratocracy, or a pantisocracy? Have we really looked into the pros and cons of autarchy, duarchy, triarchy, and oligarchy? Then there's hierocracy, gerontocracy, technocracy, cathedocracy, meritocracy, gynecocracy...

(Sound of musket shot...)

Posted at 01:08 PM

RE: BIG SPUD [John Derbyshire]
Mark: (Can you hear me all right over the gnashing of my teeth?) Just put in the usual word for me, would you? You know, same as before: brilliant geostrategist... incisive analyst... personable and persuasive... really, really good on the zeta function...

And give my regards to Linda if you see her.

Posted at 01:05 PM

ATTN: MANHATTAN READERS [Mark Krikorian ]
I’m also scheduled to address the New York Young Republican Club tonight, at 7:30. It’s at the Union League Club, which is a classy place, so wear a coat and tie.

Posted at 01:00 PM

GOOD ADVICE [Mark Krikorian]
Republican House members are telling the president that pushing his amnesty/guestworker plan will sink his other reform initiatives. In an earlier interview with the Washington Times, the president pointed to his success in passing the tax cut to explain his confidence that Congress would support his immigration proposal. Completely aside from the merits of the plan, there is simply no political comparison between the two: all Republicans favor tax cuts, at least in theory, whereas most Republicans oppose the president on immigration, creating the possibility of a serious political split in the party, as David Frum warns in the cover story of the current NRODT. And it gets worse: since there isn’t a single Democrat -- not one -- who would vote for the president’s immigration plan as he outlined it last year, the White House (if it’s serious about actually pushing an immigration bill) will end up reversing course and adopting the Democrat/McCain approach of giving green cards to the illegal aliens. Given the president’s repeated opposition to amnesty, which he defines as giving green cards to illegals, this would blow up in his face just like his father’s tax increase after the “read my lips” promise.

Posted at 12:59 PM

RE: O’REILLY [Mark Krikorian ]
John: Well, I’m scheduled to be on tonight to talk about the military on the border. Is it because I’m a lesb… -- oh, never mind.

Posted at 12:56 PM

SCOTUS WATCH [KJL]
Even ESPN gets its digs in at Clarence Thomas. Tis the we-might-need-a-new-chief-justice-soon season.

Posted at 12:52 PM

MICHAEL MOORE'S JESUS FILM? [Tim Graham]
"[Michael] Moore...says that his film, too, resonates with Christ’s message. The Passion of the Christ emphasized Christ’s final hours and, for the most part, left out scenes of his ministry. ‘But my film dovetails with the rest of Jesus’ life,’ Moore told Time last week. ‘It connects to his message about questioning those in authority, of being a man of peace, of loving your neighbor.’" — Time's Richard Lacayo in the magazine’s December 27/January 3 year-end double issue, juxtaposing the left-wing Moore with actor/director Mel Gibson as runners-up for Time’s "Person of the Year" award.

Posted at 12:47 PM

MORE DEFENDING WAL-MART [KJL]
An effort to open one in Queens is a hot political issue here. Ryan Sager defends Wal-Mart here.

Posted at 12:39 PM

DIRTY HARRY [KJL]
I'm ignoring Clint Eastwood's warning to Michael Moore right now and focusing on the breaking news:
Michael Moore and I actually have a lot in common - we both appreciate living in a country where there's free expression," Eastwood told the star-dotted crowd attending the National Board of Review awards dinner
There is free expression for movie folks? Anyone tell the likes of Tim Robbins? Is it because John Ashcroft's tenure's about up as AG?

Posted at 12:32 PM

RE: UNMARRIED WITH BABY [KJL]
I'm withya, JG. Reminds me of a piece from a few months ago a bit: Soap operas don't do abortion--six in six decades. Obviously there are no conservative cultural wins there, it's just they're avoiding a hotwire. Much easier to focus on vampire affairs'n'things.

Posted at 12:18 PM

DEATH SQUADS & DANCE POLES [Jonah Goldberg]

Two important corrections from readers:

Your piece today in NRO brought back memories of the left going ballistic over our Central American policy. However, when you speak of "death squads," the NPR writers manual referred to them as "right wing death squads" or more accurately "rightwingdeathsquads." If your are going to talk about them use the full handle.

And...

Jonah --

I cannot figure out why you think "Tramp" is a strip club.... But I assure you it is not. And the pole is a pole for dancing, not stripping. Seriously.

Note I fixed spelling of "pole" in the headline.


Posted at 11:49 AM

MURPHY BROWN & RACHEL GREEN [Jonah Goldberg]

I happened to catch a few seconds of a Friends re-run last night. It was the one where Rachel finds out she's pregnant, something we've discussed before in re abortion.

What's really interesting to me is how double-edged allegedly conservative victories are. The argument over Murphy Brown was how it sent a bad message to encourage single-motherhood as glamorous. Today, single motherhood on TV may be less glamorous but it is far more ubiquitous. Anyway, the point is that characters like Rachel decide not to have abortions, which is something of a nominal conservative victory. Right? But they also conclude that being a single mom is eminently "doable." This, it seems to me, is a conservative defeat.

Admittedly they are sort of apples and oranges so it's hard to say which is worse for society. Obviously if you believe abortion is akin to murder then the societal harm of these messages should take a back seat to the importance of choosing life. But sending the message that having a baby on your own is like picking up a new hobby is not good news for society either. This really seems like a no-win situation to me.


Posted at 11:40 AM

OVERHEARD IN A PARK SLOPE COFFEE SHOP (NYC) THIS MORNING [KJL]
"I'm so mad at Oscar de la Renta for even thinking of designing her dress!"

Posted at 11:32 AM

NEXT UP: HILLARY, GOING FOR THE REDS [KJL ]
Ted Kennedy did it yesterday. Hillary’s doing it next week, it looks like--talking "values." This from a column earlier this month in the Boston Globe:
…Rev. Eugene Rivers, who once had enough sizzle to command his own Newsweek cover (June 1998). A cofounder of the Ten Point Coalition, a group of ministers credited with addressing Boston's gang problem in the 1990s, Rivers is now working with the Bush administration on faith-based initiatives aimed at ending urban street violence. He also says he got a call from the White House on New Year's Eve, seeking his input for the speech George W. Bush will give at his second inaugural.

Rivers is also behind an invitation to Senator Hillary Clinton to speak in Boston on the eve of the presidential inauguration. She is scheduled to appear at the Fairmont Copley Plaza on Jan. 19 to address the importance of faith in addressing social problems in an event that will benefit the Ella J. Baker House and the National TenPoint Leadership Foundation.

Posted at 11:32 AM

HOW DID I MISS THIS STORY? [ Jonah Goldberg]

Playboy Playmate gets into a karate-cat fight with another woman at a strip club. She used the stripper pole to get leverage for a round-house kick! CNN is supposedly re-vamping its news philosophy to cover more "riveting story-telling." This seems like the place to start.


Posted at 11:29 AM

MEET THE BUCKLEYS (AND MORE) [KJL]
Seats are going at the Feb 24 fundraising dinner/cocktails at WFB's house with a crew of some of your NR favorites. Act now--Here's what to do.

Besides the chance to support NR/NRO, it's the unique opportunity to have dinner and drinks with WFB and many of the top editors here, among other regulars. I--we--look forward to seeing you there.

Posted at 11:08 AM

PRELUDE TO A RADICAL KISS? [KJL ]
Last night, at a dinner, Senator Clinton took aim at the Bush administration on abortion and contraception. She told a women’s group that "reproductive health care and family planning service is a basic right,” and made reference to U.N. Beijing Women’s conference of ten years ago, which Hillary Clinton, then First Lady, played no small role in. There’s a follow-up event to that at the U.N. this year. If Hillary really wants to run in ’08 and is savvy, she might find away to disappear during it, making the papers write about her moderation (not that they ever noticed the radicalism of the confab ten years ago) while the U.S. abortion lobby goes nutty that Bush people are there. But last night, relatively mild for though it was, makes me wonder about her plan. Any NARAL events on the senator’s schedule?

Posted at 11:00 AM

I'LL TESTIFY TO IT [KJL]
Whenever Jonah is late on a deadline, he uses his l-word issue as an excuse.
K-Lo: Wasn't I supposed to get your G-File three days ago?
Jonah: Maybe.
K-Lo: Where is it? We've got a daily magazine to put out, you know. Every seen it--www.nationalreview.com?
Jonah: You're mean to me because I am a lesbian. You'll be hearing from my lawyer. [Jonah proceeds to post his excuse in Klingon to The Corner.]

Posted at 10:44 AM

SHOW ME THE MONEY [Michael Graham]
Writing in the Wall Street Journal this morning, Glenn Yago and Don McCarthy point out that one key Western value is already on the rise in the Middle East: Capitalism.

“The end of Saddam's regime sent a major, unconfused market signal after the West's years of disinterest in the Middle East as a Levantine backwater. Subsequently, every major capital market index in the Middle East has risen.

Regionally, stock markets rose over 30% in 2004 and represent a market capitalization of $470 billion…The main Egyptian equity index has increased 165%, while that of Saudi Arabia has gone up by 158%...Israel's leading index has risen by 32%, the benchmark index of Kuwait's exchange by 73%, Jordan's by almost 60%, and that of the United Arab Emirates by 110%.”

They also note that, for years the Mideast has attracted less than 1% of foreign direct investment, but since Saddam’s fall they project a jump in FDI of 76% to more than $11 billion.

Just ask Michael Novak: Where capitalism goes, democracy will assuredly follow.

Posted at 10:37 AM

IN SEARCH OF LATIN PHRASES... [Jonah Goldberg]

From a reader:

Just because you might be right about a bigger congress doesn’t mean you’re not an idiot.

Why is GayPatriot using the fact that you agree with him as evidence that he is not crazy. I’m sure William F. Buckley has a Latin phrase for “evidence of something, but not of that.”

Thanks, loved your column.


Posted at 10:37 AM

BECAUSE I'M A LESBIAN... [Jonah Goldberg]

A reader makes a good point. I would like to think this is the correct and accurate interpretation:

Jonah - I am shocked you don't consider Serena's line a subtle mocking of the identiy politics on the left: We know nothing about Serena's sexual preferences, and we have to assume that Fred Thompson also knows nothing (considering she shocked look on his face). Yet when Serena was fired for being a lousy DA, her first response was to assume it had something to do with her membership in an Opressed Minority Group.

Posted at 10:31 AM

BIG SPUD [John Derbyshire]
Kathryn: Just noticed your yesterday post, the one implying that I am some kind of cheerleader for Bill O'Reilly. Not so, and I don't know why you would think so. (Though I suppose this probably has something to do with it.) It is true that I'm addicted to "The O'Reilly Factor," but being an addict isn't the same thing as being a cheerleader. I'm mildly addicted to several things (power tools, fruit cake, the imbedding of favored objects in lucite, analytic number theory, writing columns) but I am aware that not all of them are good for me.

I do like Bill's show, though, even when his logic goes extraterrestrial. As recently when he was arguing (if I got it right) that it's fine for homosexuals to foster kids, but not to adopt them. Old split-the-difference Bill. That's OK, though. I'll excuse some things.

The only thing I REALLY dislike about "The O'Reilly Factor" is that I am never on it. Bill? Bill? Hello?

Posted at 10:05 AM

MY NEW STRATEGY FOR NEGOTIATING EVERYING [Jonah Goldberg]

Me: Rich, I need a raise.

Rich: Jonah, you can't have one.

Me: Is this because I'm a lesbian?

Flash to new scene.

Wife: It's your turn to change the baby's diaper.
Me: I don't want to.
Wife: So?
Me: Are you taking this tone because I'm a lesbian?


And so on.


Posted at 09:52 AM

IS IT BECAUSE I'M A LESBIAN? CONT'D [ Jonah Goldberg]

The Gay Patriot has more.


Posted at 09:49 AM

"THE EL SALVADOR OPTION" [ Jonah Goldberg]

People often ask me, "Sir, could you eat off your own plate?" But that's not important right now.

They also sometimes ask me what I think about El Salvadoran death squads and the use of similar tactics in Iraq. The answer to that question can be found in today's G-File.


Posted at 09:43 AM

THE WHOLE WORLD WAS SO JIVE [KJL]
"Y.M.C.A." is American Indian history.

Posted at 09:01 AM

JACOBY JOINS THE BANDWAGON [Jonah Goldberg]

Our friend Jeff Jacoby has seen the light and signed on to the idea which launched my career and got George Will to call me an idiot. That is, the need to expand Congress.


Posted at 08:46 AM

WHAT SHE DID FOR LOVE [KJL ]
Gabriele Helms, a Canadian college professor, died of cancer on New Year’s Eve, after giving premature birth to her daughter:
In Canada is it routine for pregnant women diagnosed with cancer to abort, but Helms’ friends said that being a mother was her first priority….“She was in excruciating pain but she was still elated about her pregnancy. I saw her during her stay in the hospital and she was always putting her hand on her stomach because she could feel the baby by that time. In (Gabi’s) obituary, it says she chose her daughter over herself. She did that because she wanted the child so much.

Posted at 08:35 AM

"IS IT BECAUSE I'M A LESBIAN?" [Jonah Goldberg]

Last night the blonde DA (Elizabeth Röhm) on "Law & Order" was canned for being "too passionate." From what I could tell there had been little indication this had been in the cards. But what was completely out of left field was her response to Fred Thompson when he let her go. "Is it because I'm a lesbian?"

Now, this isn't mere bitterness that they didn't develop this story line years ago. But this was a complete non sequitur (unless I missed the famous lesbian date episode). She might as well have said, "Is this because I'm am the warrior queen of the planet Glaxnor?" Or, "Is this because I ate the last bread crust when we were in that Cambodian tiger cage?"

I like the lack of character development generally, but can we get a little foreshadowing next time?


Posted at 08:32 AM

ROGER SIMON ON THE CBS REPORT [KJL]
He hopes Dick Thornburgh's on the take.

Posted at 08:14 AM

WHEN YOU HAVE A MUDDLED MESSAGE, YOU GET THIS [KJL]
The search for WMDs in Iraq is over. Which was announced last night on a local NYC ABC news broadcast as: “The reason for the invasion of Iraq came up empty.”

Posted at 08:11 AM

MOVE OVER HOLLYWOOD [KJL ]
From a NYTimes story on the First Lady’s Oscar de la Renta gown for next week: “For designers inaugural commissions are well worth it. For prestige they know no equal, not even a dress for the Oscars.”

Posted at 08:05 AM

YOU’RE WELCOME [KJL ]
AP:
BANDA ACEH, Indonesia - Indonesia announced that U.S. and other foreign troops providing tsunami disaster relief must leave the country by the end of March and ordered aid workers Wednesday to declare their travel plans or face expulsion from devastated Aceh province on Sumatra island.

Posted at 07:52 AM

DOES SHE EVEN KNOW THE POWER SHE HAS? [KJL]
Btw, a note to Carrie Fisher (see Dowd col): There are probably a gazillion Corner-reading males who would be satsified with the role of consort to Princess Leia.

Posted at 07:49 AM

THE DEVOLUTION OF MEN [KJL ]
MoDo has got some Thelma and Louise rant going today: “So was the feminist movement some sort of cruel hoax? The more women achieve, the less desirable they are? Women want to be in a relationship with guys they can seriously talk to - unfortunately, a lot of those guys want to be in relationships with women they don't have to talk to.”

As usual: If you haven't read it though, you might just want to spare yourself.

By the way, Maureen: If you think the secretaries with male bosses in the NYTimes office are talking about you every time you walk by today, you're right, they are.

Posted at 07:46 AM

LITERALLY [KJL ]
I feel self-conscious about the word since Steve Hayes’s "casual".

Posted at 07:38 AM

DON’T DRINK THE WATER [KJL ]
People have been saying that on the Hill for years. Now they mean it literally.

Posted at 07:37 AM

WAL-MART [KJL]
defends itself.

Posted at 07:35 AM

AND NOW I'M FOUND? [KJL]
Gotta love the strategic vision: The image of Ted Kennedy as the future of the Democratic party.

Posted at 07:20 AM

REMEMBER WHEN... [KJL]
It wasn't that long ago that Tim Roemer was a wise man of the 9/11 Commission, rather than a villified pro-life Dem.

Posted at 07:05 AM

THE KERRY CAMPAIGN THAT WAS [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
Summed up by [Joan Vennochi] : “When it comes to controversial issues, duck. Stand for everything and nothing. Whenever possible, avoid direct answers on issues like war and abortion.”

Sounds like it to me.

She goes on to state the obvious: That the Dem party is a little lost at the moment. She warns particularly against the possibilty of Tim Roemer as DNC head.

Posted at 07:02 AM

PRINCE HAL [Andrew Stuttaford]
Oh dear. Prince Harry's dumb, dumb choice of fancy dress is causing a fuss over in the UK. Would there, I wonder, have been an equivalent row if he had dressed up in full Soviet regalia? And if not, why not?

Posted at 06:59 AM

GET OUT OF TOWN, TINA BROWN [Tim Graham]
In today's WashPost, columnist Tina Brown bites on the Dan Rather spin that he was just an empty suit on the Bush-TexANG fiasco, and ends by claiming "The old Canadian press baron Lord Northcliffe's definition of news is still the only one that counts: 'News is what somebody somewhere wants to suppress; all the rest is advertising.'"

What a bad slogan -- it doesn't seem to care whether the news is true or not, which is the whole problem with Rather. It could be his slogan. But it's odd coming out of Tina, whose snake-oil advertising for the sexiness and loving marriage of Bill and Hillary Clinton was too ridiculous for words. Stroll down memory lane here.

Posted at 06:59 AM

BYE-BYE, WHFS [Tim Graham]
Lots of Washington-area alternative-rock fans are dismayed over the last 24 hours at the sudden demise of the legendary station WHFS (never a ratings legend, just a legend) to make room for "El Zol," a Spanish-language FM station. While the "HFStival" had become a big concert date in the last ten years, since the rise of grunge the station had become more and more indistinguishable from DC-101, which used to be the Led Zeppelin-Aerosmith station to HFS's Clash-Talking Heads-REM sound. Still, the whole switcheroo, complete with lectures about how Spanish-language stations are a "growth market" and serve an "underserved" audience, can make you want to send money to Tom Tancredo. (Speak English, this is America, Jack!) The washingtonpost.com "wake" for HFS is here.

Posted at 06:58 AM

FILM FLASH! [Rick Brookhiser]
Attention, NYC Cornerites: the uncut Italian version of Luciano Visconti's The Leopard, based on the novel by Giuseppe di Lampedusa, is showing at the Film Forum until Jan. 20. Beyond cynical, it is knowing. Beyond sad, it is tragic. Beyond beautiful, it is both of the above. Run, do not walk.

Posted at 12:08 AM

Wednesday, January 12, 2005

A NEW EXPERIENCE [Rick Brookhiser]
I just returned from my first ever Burns dinner--the Scottish celebration of Robert Burns (or, as they say, Rabbie Buns). This was courtesy of Scottish Power in NYC. We had an address to the haggis, a speech to the lassies, a parting rendition of Auld Lang Syne, pipers to pipe us in and out. Wonderful stuff (and I do not have a drop of Scottish blood, the MacBrookhisers not being a recognized clan).

Posted at 11:28 PM

I LOVE [KJL]
Richard Brookhiser using "IMHO." Too cool.

Posted at 11:08 PM

FDR'S PRAYER [Rick Brookhiser]
I hear a distinct echo of the Book of Common Prayer in FDR's pre-D-Day message. IMHO, our current lingo is more demotic, more American--and worse.

Posted at 09:13 PM

MORE GOD IN THE WHITE HOUSE [Jim Robbins]
Every single president has invoked God upon taking office (scroll down this page).

Posted at 05:12 PM

LOST IN TRANSLATION [John Derbyshire]
I hope nothing has been, actually. Prime Obsession is now available in a Japanese translation. I just thought you'd want to know that.

Posted at 05:05 PM

HOLLAND'S TROUBLES CONT. [ Jonah Goldberg]
The Somali woman who co-produced Theo Van Gogh's documentary was the target of an assasination plot.

Posted at 04:30 PM

RE: KID ROCK [KJL]
An e-mail (asterisks--you're shocked, I know--are mine)
K-Lo:

Oh f***ing great. Now it's headlines at Drudge.

Can we *please* stop re-inforcing the fuddy-duddy no fun no rock and roll out of touch with the mainstream Republican image?

Who's gonna play? Lawrence Welk is dead...

The GOP can't hire anyone associated with RockNRoll to play because at some point in their life they may have said F***k. S**t, I think WFB used in a column recently.

This sucks a**.
ME: Some readers actually are ticked--i.e. want him to play.

Sounds to me like the whole thing was handled badly, if he was invited (still not clear that he was), because a censored/disinvited impression does make us look like a stereotype of conservatives. Kid Rock should not be invited to an official inaugural party/one hosted by the Bush twins. Anyone knows that. Just play Pimp of the Nation:
Pimp of the nation, I could be it
As a matter of a fact, I foresee it
But only pimpin hoes with the big tush--
While you be left pimpin Barbara Bush.
Now, if the Recording Industry Association wants to have a Kid Rock party in DC like they did in NYC during the Republican convention, go for it (it was, not shockingly, popular--right-wingers aren't a stereotype). But he can’t be at anything official, and that was obvious before anyone complained (which is why I am inclined to believe they couldn not have possibly invited him--or so I hope). I don't think that is no-fun. That's reasonable in this case.

Posted at 04:19 PM

DUMB HEADLINE [ Jonah Goldberg]

There's a lot to chew on in this article about George Soros' and his lefty billionaire buddies' plan to spend more money on liberal causes. But can we start with the unbeliveable no-nothingness of the headline?

Soros group raises stakes in battle with US neo-cons

Nowhere in the article does the word neocon come up. Instead it lists the American Enterprise Institute and the Heritage Foundation. I could see the point of calling AEI neoconservative (as misleading as that might be) but when you include the Heritage Foundation you basically mean "conservatives in Washington" or "conservative think tanks." I mean what's not "neoconservative" among establishment Washington if AEI and Heritage are collectively the "neo-cons"? Cato, the foreign policy lobe of the American Conservative and...and...uh...that's about it.


Posted at 04:14 PM

SO MUCH FOR SATIRE...IT'S REALITY [Tim Graham]
"One envisages the news editor just minutes before Dan Rather is to go on the air reviewing the lead story for the CBS Evening News: `Perfect! Not one word is accurate. Not one statistic is true or informative. We'll go with it! This is news! The illusions of our time remain intact!'"

-- R. Emmett Tyrrell in his 1992 book The Conservative Crack-Up.

Posted at 04:08 PM

MADONNA SAVES RUSSIA! [KJL]
We had heard that might happen, during the Cold War, but who knew?

Posted at 03:56 PM

THIS HAS GOT TO BE A JOKE (IT'S NOT) [KJL]
UNITED NATIONS--"The Three Amigos" -- as the cartoon condoms named Shaft, Stretch and Dick are called -- are pictured in a variety of settings from a spaceship to a soccer field to a casino. Twenty different spots are available in each of the 41 languages varying from 20 to 60 seconds in length. Some spots are blatantly sexual, others more restrained.

The punch line in the spaceship spot says: "No condom, No blastoff. Stop the spread of AIDS." The soccer spot says: "You just can't score without a condom." And the spot focusing on a roulette wheel in a casino says: "Not all gamblers realize the odds stacked against them. Don't gamble with your life. Use a condom. Stop the spread of AIDS."

Posted at 03:50 PM

I'M AFRAID THERE'S SOMETHING TO THIS [Rich Lowry ]
E-mail:

"You want to know why Peralta's story hasn't received the same coverage that Lynch's did? Look no further than the Pentagon:

Here's Peralta

Here's Lynch

Remember that it was the Pentagon that pushed the Lynch story in the first place, and that is why it received so much coverage. But they've completely given Peralta short shrift. Not a single press release.

So don't blame the media. Blame the Pentagon."

Posted at 03:47 PM

WE ATE [KJL]
the dinosaurs.

Update: Call it another man bites dinosaur story.

Posted at 03:43 PM

GOD & THE PRESIDENT [Jim Robbins]
Another former President weighs in on the issue of divine guidance:
It is most cheering and encouraging for me to know that in the efforts which I have made and am making for the restoration of a righteous peace to our country, I am upheld and sustained by the good wishes and prayers of God's people. No one is more deeply than myself aware that without His favor our highest wisdom is but as foolishness and that our most strenuous efforts would avail nothing in the shadow of His displeasure. I am conscious of no desire for my country's welfare, that is not in consonance with His will, and of no plan upon which we may not ask His blessing. It seems to me that if there be one subject upon which all good men may unitedly agree, it is imploring the gracious favor of the God of Nations upon the struggles our people are making for the preservation of their precious birthright of civil and religious liberty.

Very truly Your friend A. LINCOLN.

Posted at 03:40 PM

KNOCK KNOCK. ANYONE HOME? [KJL]
Armstrong Williams is on the White House Fellowships Commission. Shouldn't he have resigned the day the USA Today story came out? Common sense thing--he should have made the move, or he should have been asked to.

Posted at 03:37 PM

KERRY '08? [KJL]
From The Hill:
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) is vetting the leading candidates to be the next Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairman, and asking them to remain neutral in the presidential selection process in 2008. It is the latest indication that Kerry is putting down markers to run again for the party’s presidential nomination in 2008.
I don't believe it, by the way. He's not running. But teasing will keep people interested.

Posted at 03:32 PM

RE: REACTIONARY CORNER [John Derbyshire]
Good grief!

"I hated mine [i.e. keyless power drill chuck] too when I first got it. At first I used two channel locks to tighten it sufficiently. Then I figured out that if I held the outer chuck and drove the drill slowly clockwise, not too fast or it will burn your hand, it would tighten the bit for sufficient for any use. The first time I tried it I burned my hand because I went too fast. Once I figured it out, I think the keyless chuck is better."

This reminds me of that WFB column (this is going back 30 yrs or so) about his first encounter with snap-on ski bindings. He said something like: "It's as if you just discovered an obscure little box on the tax form which, if you check it, causes your tax liability to be halved."

Posted at 03:29 PM

GOOD LORD! [Jack Fowler]
Imagine how the W-phobes would react if they were around in 1944 when FDR issued this prayer on the eve of D-Day:
My fellow Americans: Last night, when I spoke with you about the fall of Rome, I knew at that moment that troops of the United States and our allies were crossing the Channel in another and greater operation. It has come to pass with success thus far.
And so, in this poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer:
Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our Nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.
Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith.
They will need Thy blessings. Their road will be long and hard. For the enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces. Success may not come with rushing speed, but we shall return again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph.
They will be sore tried, by night and by day, without rest-until the victory is won. The darkness will be rent by noise and flame. Men's souls will be shaken with the violences of war.
For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end conquest. They fight to liberate. They fight to let justice arise, and tolerance and good will among all Thy people. They yearn but for the end of battle, for their return to the haven of home.
Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them, Thy heroic servants, into Thy kingdom.
And for us at home -- fathers, mothers, children, wives, sisters, and brothers of brave men overseas -- whose thoughts and prayers are ever with them--help us, Almighty God, to rededicate ourselves in renewed faith in Thee in this hour of great sacrifice.
Many people have urged that I call the Nation into a single day of special prayer. But because the road is long and the desire is great, I ask that our people devote themselves in a continuance of prayer. As we rise to each new day, and again when each day is spent, let words of prayer be on our lips, invoking Thy help to our efforts.
Give us strength, too -- strength in our daily tasks, to redouble the contributions we make in the physical and the material support of our armed forces.
And let our hearts be stout, to wait out the long travail, to bear sorrows that may come, to impart our courage unto our sons wheresoever they may be.
And, O Lord, give us Faith. Give us Faith in Thee; Faith in our sons; Faith in each other; Faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.
With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogancies. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister Nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.
Thy will be done, Almighty God.
Amen.

Posted at 03:26 PM

WONDER OF THE WORLD [KJL]
Here's a comparison of the groundbreaking guidelines. Hope you didn't lay out the cash for Oprah's trainer's new book. Oh, and on the money: Can we have a weigh in though? How much do the guidelines and pyramid building cost? Just curious.

Posted at 03:16 PM

WERE THE OLD GUIDELINES “EXERCISE LESS, EAT MORE’? [Cliff May]
CNN is showing:
“NOW IN THE NEWS

New Dietary Guidelines: Exercise More, Consume fewer calories.”

Glad they finally told me!

Posted at 03:12 PM

THE GIPPER ON GOD IN THE WHITE HOUSE [Jonah Goldberg]

A reader sent me this quote:

“Without God, there is no virtue, because there's no prompting of the conscience. Without God, we're mired in the material, that flat world that tells us only what the senses perceive. Without God, there is a coarsening of the society. And without God, democracy will not and cannot long endure. If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under. If I could just make a personal statement of my own -- in these 3 1/2 years I have understood and known better than ever before the words of Lincoln, when he said that he would be the greatest fool on this footstool called Earth if he ever thought that for one moment he could perform the duties of that office without help from One who is stronger than all.”

Ronald Reagan (from an address to the University of South Carolina, Columbia, September 20, 1983)


Posted at 02:42 PM

RE OVERREACT [Cliff May]
Didn’t Reagan once say that he didn’t see how anyone who isn’t an actor could be president?

Did that suggest that no lawyers need apply? Wait a minute, come to think of it, that’s not a … oh, never mind.

Posted at 02:30 PM

MOTHER OF THE YEAR [Rod Dreher]
In New York City, two outer borough toughs have been charged with a hate crime for beating up a teenage Satanist. This conclusion to the Times' account is too bizarre to make up: "My allegiance is to Satan and I hate Christianity, Judaism and Islam, but I don't hurt anyone," Mr. Romano said. "I take out my anger in mosh pits and S-and-M clubs. I think it's ironic that the Christians got violent with the Satanist." His mother, Debbie Romano, 48, said, "I'm a Christian, but he went the other way; I don't understand his beliefs, but he doesn't hurt nobody."

Posted at 02:30 PM

AN ATLANTA CLUB GETS GRIEF [KJL]
over same-sex benefits.

Posted at 02:16 PM

OVERREACT MUCH? [Jonah Goldberg]

Andrew Sullivan writes: :


ATHEISTS NEED NOT APPLY: What was Bush thinking with this statement: "President Bush said yesterday that he doesn't 'see how you can be president without a relationship with the Lord,' but that he is always mindful to protect the right of others to worship or not worship." So, out of his beneficence, he won't trample on others' religious freedom. But the White House? That's for Christians only. No Jews? Or atheists? Notice also the evangelical notion of a personal "relationship" with the Lord. That also indicates suspicion of those Christians with different approaches to the divine. I must say this is a new level of religio-political fusion in this administration. To restrict the presidency to a particular religious faith is anathema to this country's traditions and to the task of toleration. The president surely needs to retract the statement.

Me: Without dwelling on this, a few quick points. First of all, how new is this, really? Do we really think that Jimmy Carter, never mind George Washington, never said that having a relationship with the Lord was helpful to being president? This is how I read Bush's remarks. Second, How different is this from the spirit of all of Bush's previous statements (including in two national campaigns) in which he made it clear that he draws sustenance and strength from his relationship with God. I am flummoxed as to why Andrew should be surprised that Bush said it again. Third, the fear that Bush is suspicious of non-evangelical Christians or non-Christians rings a bit hollow considering that yesterday he nominated a Jew to run homeland security and before that he nominated a Catholic (and longtime loyalist) to be his Attorney General. Given his latest hires, how exactly does this new level of "religio-political fusion in this administration" translate itself into policy?

Well, Sullivan says the new policy is that the White House is for "Christians only." Unfortunately -- or rather, fortunately -- George W. Bush isn't in any position to apply a religious test to any president. Bush has absolutely zero authority to "restrict the presidency to a particular religious faith." He doesn't hire his replacement, Andrew, we do.


Update: Woops. I'm told that Gonzales attends an Episcopal Church. I don't think this does terrible violence to my point though.


Posted at 02:13 PM

RE: BEHIND THE MUSIC [KJL ]
Stanley was talking about song lyrics earlier, which reminded me: Some readers are giving me a hard time for a throwaway line yesterday about Kid Rock at the Inaugural. I’m a little of two minds about this: Basically, I’m all for the president looking cool, and know Hilary Duff doesn’t quite cut it, but when looking cool means having a guy who sings “F*** U BLIND” (among others) headlining an inaugural celebration hosted by the First Daughters, I’m definitely inclined to settle for a mild pop princess. (Though, yes, kudos to Kid Rock for USO touring.)

P.S. Looks like he's not performing next week.

Posted at 02:08 PM

24 [KJL]
CAIR's not keen on (more here).

Posted at 01:57 PM

RE: THE END OF THE ANDROID SEX STRING [Jonah Goldberg]
Okay, I'll stop. But please remember to use your paper-towel safety mitts as you leave the holodeck.

Posted at 01:52 PM

FOX [Rich Lowry ]
FYI--I'm scheduled to be on around 2:30 pm.

Posted at 01:48 PM

DID I PICK A DRUNK ROBOT FOR THE HYPOTHETICAL? [KJL]
Turns out R2-D2 happens to be in the news:
Star Wars star protests innocence over drunk driving Star Wars R2-D2 actor Kenny Baker is challenging charges of drunk driving--claiming his asthma prevented him from agreeing to the breath test to determine the alcohol in his body. The 70-year-old vertically challenged actor, who played the robot in the 1977 movie, is relying on blood tests to clear him of reckless driving after he was stopped by police as he drove his Maroon Mercedes in Lancashire, England, on 17 December. Baker ended up being locked up for two hours until a doctor had carried out a blood test - after his asthma prevented him from blowing into the test bag. He says, "The police said they'd had reports from other motorists that I was veering all over the road. "I had gone for a drink after the show (Speed dating), but only had one glass of wine. I am certain the tests will come back clear."

Posted at 01:45 PM

A CLARIFICATION: AND THIS REALLY HAS TO END NOW [KJL]
K-Lo, it may seem like quibbling but it's actually key to the Church's teaching on sexual morality: The conjugal act has to be OPEN to life, not "directed toward" life. Having to be directed toward procreation would imply that it's wrong to enjoy the marital embrace during infertile periods or during pregnancy or after menopause or once it was discovered that one of the spouses is infertile. Yet the Church freely allows all these things.
In truth, when the conjugal embrace is what it is meant to be, it is directed toward the beloved. It is a gift of love to him or her. Children are its primary fruit, but not its only fruit, and not its direct aim. We do not use our spouses for procreation.
This is so over now.

Posted at 01:40 PM

POST HOC ERGO MORAL [Jonah Goldberg]

From a reader:

I'm not sure that I agree with Hemingway's definition of morality (what feels good afterwards), but I think that it holds some water in this scenario. There's a good reason that I'd feel like a schmuck telling my wife that I'd just spent an hour in the holodeck.

Of course it's moot because I don't have a wife.

Damn, I need a holodeck.


Posted at 01:29 PM

YOU'LL NEVER THINK OF R2-D2 THE SAME AGAIN [KJL]
So I was actually joking about the catechism thing. I wasn't going to give this another moment's thought, but, uh, well, readers are actually e-mailing me about Jonah's question (outside of please to take him up on his prohibition plea), so, against my better judgement, I continue and hopefully end this thread:
Sex with anything or anybody besides one's marriage partner divides one's marriage objectively. Is extra-marital sex directed toward the marriage's procreation? No. Is extra-marital sex directed toward making one's marriage more closely resemble the infinite, perfect, reciprocal love of the Trinity? No. End of question. The android/hologram variable isn't significant. What extra-marital sex does to the married person is.

Posted at 12:59 PM

UNDER-DISCUSSED [Jonah Goldberg]
One ironic bit about the Chertoff nomination is that it comes so close to the Gonzales nomination. People forget now -- and refused to admit then -- that John Ashcroft's Justice Department wasn't too keen on the military tribunals stuff. Ashcroft, of course, got blamed for the policies even though they were crafted by Gonzales and the Defense Department. It was Chertoff who wanted to prosecute high-ranking terrorists in Federal court. I think he was probably wrong on the merits, but he gets a free-pass from me because everyone I've ever talked to about this says his policy preference stemmed in no small part because Chertoff's just a fighter and he didn't want to take a pass at getting his whack at the bad guys. He believed he could punish the terrorists on his turf. He might have been right. But even if he's wrong, you have to admire the fighting spirit.

Posted at 12:38 PM

HATE SPEECH [Cliff May]
Tomorrow, Thursday, in Washington, the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and the Committee on the Present Danger are holding a symposium: “Propaganda & Terrorism: Policy Options for the War of Ideas.”

Among the panelists are NRO contributor Andy McCarthy.

It’s by invitation only but we have a little room left, so if there are any regular Cornerites who would like to attend, they are cordially welcomed.

More information on the forum and on how to RSVP is here.

Posted at 12:30 PM

REACTIONARY CORNER [John Derbyshire]
Things I totally HATE about the early 21st century, series #8,192: Keyless chucks (i.e. on power drills). Whose fool idea was this? The bloody things don't work. Can I get my money back?

Posted at 12:24 PM

STORIES OF HEROISM PAST [Rich Lowry ]
People have been e-mailing me various heroic stories that Sgt. Peralta reminds them of. Here is one that is truly incredible. E-mail:

"Rich,

First, thank you for recognizing the sacrifices and heroism of our brave soldiers, Marines, and airmen fighting over there so we don't have to fight the battle here. Second, your description of SGT Peralta's heroic action reminded me of the similar actions of a young man from my home town during fighting in Vietnam. PFC Ronald Coker gave his life in a similar manner and placed the lives of his fellow Marines above his own and made the ultimate sacrifice. It is indeed a shame that more of these stories are not being reported by the MSM and more people are not aware of these heroic deeds."

*COKER, RONALD L. Rank and organization: Private First Class, U.S. Marine Corps, Company M, 3d Battalion, 3d Marine Division (Rein), FMF. Place and date: Quang Tri Province, Republic of Vietnam, 24 March 1969. Entered service at: Denver, Colo. Born: 9 August 1947, Alliance, Nebr. Citation: For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while serving as a rifleman with Company M in action against enemy forces. While serving as point man for the 2d Platoon, Pfc. Coker was leading his patrol when he encountered 5 enemy soldiers on a narrow jungle trail. Pfc. Coker's squad aggressively pursued them to a cave. As the squad neared the cave, it came under intense hostile fire, seriously wounding 1 marine and forcing the others to take cover. Observing the wounded man lying exposed to continuous enemy fire, Pfc. Coker disregarded his safety and moved across the fire-swept terrain toward his companion. Although wounded by enemy small-arms fire, he continued to crawl across the hazardous area and skillfully threw a hand grenade into the enemy positions, suppressing the hostile fire sufficiently to enable him to reach the wounded man. As he began to drag his injured comrade toward safety, a grenade landed on the wounded marine. Unhesitatingly, Pfc. Coker grasped it with both hands and turned away from his wounded companion, but before he could dispose of the grenade it exploded. Severely wounded, but undaunted, he refused to abandon his comrade. As he moved toward friendly lines, 2 more enemy grenades exploded near him, inflicting still further injuries. Concerned only for the safety of his comrade, Pfc. Coker, with supreme effort continued to crawl and pull the wounded marine with him. His heroic deeds inspired his fellow marines to such aggressive action that the enemy fire was suppressed sufficiently to enable others to reach him and carry him to a relatively safe area where he succumbed to his extensive wounds. Pfc. Coker's indomitable courage, inspiring initiative and selfless devotion to duty upheld the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and of the U.S. Naval Service. He gallantly gave his life for his country.

Posted at 12:24 PM

IT'S LIKE I'M BEGGING FOR A CORNER-BAN [Jonah Goldberg]

From a reader:

Jonah, Your Socratic-like question about sex in a holodeck brings up other questions. 1. Will they teach holographic sex-ed in school? 2. When someone asks "how many people have you slept with" will you have to do the "finger quotes" and say, "what do you mean by 'people' "? 3. Will the programmers of the holographic women be women themselves, thereby requiring us to cuddle with our hologram afterwards? and lastly... 4. Will people giggle every time someone innocently asks you to "turn on your hologram"

Posted at 12:15 PM

JUST A REMINDER [KJL]
Norman Mineta is still transportation secretary.

Posted at 12:15 PM

PLEASE SIGN THIS WOUNDED WARRIOR'S GUESTBOOK [Rich Lowry ]
An e-mail:

"Could you make a post in the corner with this link. It is a link to the guest book for a soldier that my girlfriend was good friends with in college in DC and he just got back from the middle east. He lost his eye and is going to have a difficult road to recovery. The photo of him really hit home when I saw it. I know the corner gets lot readers, and it might make him feel better to see the support in his guest book."

UPDATE: the link has been fixed

Posted at 12:12 PM

RE: NORMAN'S PIECE [KJL]
Are you finding though, that you read more print-out worthy pieces on-screen because you'll never actually read them otherwise? Basically, it's now or never, the piles of must-reads on dead tree are already too high.

Which is why you should subscribe to NR Digital: Get all of NR, without the additional paper.

Posted at 12:09 PM

SWINGING WITH ANDROIDS [KJL]
I better go Rome-ing to my Catechism on that one.

Posted at 12:06 PM

RE: DO FAKE BOOBS GO TO HEAVEN? [Jonah Goldberg]

Now that's my kind of theological imponderable!

It also -- in the most unbelievably opportunistic and tangential way -- raises the burning moral quandry I've mentioned before around here: "Is sex with an android (or on the holodeck) adultery?"

I seem to recall the consensus answer had a lot to do with lusting in your heart. That's all fine and I get it. But isn't faith about deeds not just thoughts or words?


Posted at 11:54 AM

THE WAR ON THE WAR ON TERROR [ Jonah Goldberg]
Norman Podhoretz takes a post-election survey of the situation. Long piece, I haven't finished yet. Looks print-out-worthy.

Posted at 11:49 AM

RE: LEFT BEHIND [KJL]
Jonah, you must see the Left Behind movies. Growing Pains meets the Rapture. Kirk Cameron & the Marboro man at the Wailing Wall.

What Rod memorably wrote about the first one:
Do fake boobs go to heaven too? I ask because if the feature film Left Behind has it right, and all the true believers in Jesus Christ will be beamed to paradise in advance of the Antichrist's rule, and the clothes off each Christian's back will fall right where he or she stood before God's eye twinkled — well, what, then, is going to happen to breast implants? Artificial knees and hips? Does Pastor Jay Bakker, the pierced progeny of Jim and Tammy Faye, get to take his golden liploop to that dee-luxe apartment in the sky?

Sorry to be impious, brethren and sistren, but Left Behind made me do it. The movie, which opened in theaters this past weekend after selling nearly 3 million copies on videocassette, is bad beyond all telling. It's like The Day of the Jackal as conceived by Ned Flanders, and produced by the film and video department of a rural Bible college...
I don't recommend it to most people, but for Jonah it seems like a requirement. You can't be an expert in bad cultural moments without it.

Posted at 11:35 AM

"IT'S HARD TO KNOW NOW WHO, IF ANYONE, IN THE 'MEDIA' HAS ANY CREDIBILITY." [KJL]
Howard Fineman has a brutally honest webpiece up on the way it is re: Rathergate and the MSM:
A political party is dying before our eyes—and I don't mean the Democrats. I'm talking about the "mainstream media," which is being destroyed by the opposition (or worse, the casual disdain) of George Bush's Republican Party; by competition from other news outlets (led by the internet and Fox's canny Roger Ailes); and by its own fraying journalistic standards. At the height of its power, the AMMP (the American Mainstream Media Party) helped validate the civil rights movement, end a war and oust a power-mad president. But all that is ancient history. ..

In this situation, the last thing the AMMP needed was to aim wildly at the president—and not only miss, but be seen as having a political motivation in attacking in the first place. Were Dan Rather and Mary Mapes after the truth or victory when they broadcast their egregiously sloppy story about Bush's National Guard Service? The moment it made air it began to fall apart, and eventually was shredded by factions within the AMMP itself, conservative national outlets and by the new opposition party that is emerging: The Blogger Nation. It's hard to know now who, if anyone, in the "media" has any credibility.

Posted at 11:32 AM

DERB'S PARACHUTE IS A BACKPACK! [Jonah Goldberg]
Now he's dissing the "Left Behind" books (none of which I've read). Prepare yourself for even more email Derb.

Posted at 11:28 AM

STATLER & WALDORF ARRESTED [ KJL ]
For telling lawyer jokes.

Posted at 10:50 AM

UN CADEAU FOR JONAH AND J.J. [Rod Dreher]
I thought of Jonah and John when a friend forwarded me this passage from the 1979 novel "Shibumi," by the novelist Trevanian. It's a conversation between Le Cagot, a Basque, and Hel, an Englishman:
Le Cagot patted the hostess's bottom and sent her after their food. "I don't think we have made a great friend there, Niko. And he is a man to be feared." Le Cagot laughed, "After all, his father was French and very active in the resistance."

Hel smiled. "Have you ever met one who was not?"

"True. It is astonishing that the Germans managed to hold France with so few divisions, considering that everyone who wasn't draining German resources by the clever maneuver of surrendering en masse and making the Nazis feed them was vigorously and bravely engaged in the Resistance. Is there a village without its Place de la Resistance? But one has to be fair; one has to understand the Gallic notion of resistance. Any hotelier who overcharged a German was in the Resistance. Each whore who gave a German soldier the clap was a freedom fighter. All those who obeyed while viciously withholding their cheerful morning 'bonjours' were heroes of liberty!"

Hel laughed. "You're being a little hard on the French."

"It is history that is hard on them. I mean real history, not the verite a la cinquieme Republique that they teach in their schools. The truth be known, I admire the French more than any other foreigners. In the centuries they have lived beside the Basque, they have absorbed certain virtues- understanding, philosophic insight, a sense of humor- and these have made them the best of the 'others'. But even I am forced to admit that they are a ridiculous people, just as one must confess that the British are bungling, the Italians incompetent, the American neurotic, the Germans romantically savage, the Arabs vicious, the Russians barbaric, and the Dutch make cheese. Take the particular manifestation of French ridiculousness that makes them attempt to combine their myopic devotion to money with the pursuit of phantom 'gloire'. The same people who dilute their burgundy for modest profit willingly spend millions of francs on the atomic contamination of the Pacific Ocean in the hope that they will be thought to be the technological equals of the Americans. They see themselves as the feisty David against the grasping Goliath. Sadly for their image abroad, the rest of the world views their actions as the ludicrous egotism of the amorous ant climbing a cow's leg and assuring her that he will be gentle."

Posted at 10:43 AM

INTELLIGENT DESIGN [John Derbyshire]
Darn it, some last points. This is the ABSOLUTELY FINAL clean-up on the matter.

(1) ID is not just lousy science, but lousy religion. I dislike it at least as much for religious as for scientific reasons. I dislike it, in fact, for the same reasons, or at least the same KINDS of reasons, that I dislike the "Left Behind" books & movies, and unbelievers telling me that natural disasters like the recent tsunami "prove" the non-existence of God.

All that kind of thinking trivializes God. It belongs to the category of thinking that A.N. Whitehead called "misplaced concreteness." It shows a dismal poverty of imagination -- reducing the divine to science fiction (or in the case of the "Left Behind" books, to a combination of sci-fi and spy thriller). The ID-ers' God is a sort of scientist himself, sticking his finger in to make things work when natural laws -- His laws! -- can't do the job. Well, if that's your God, I wish you joy of him. My God is much vaster and stranger than that. Are we the children of God, or the children of Wrath? I think about that a lot; but I am certain, at any rate, that we are not the children of some celestial lab technician.

(2) Some readers have chid me for referring to ID as "flapdoodle." This was, they say, ill-mannered of me. Heaven forbid I should be thought ill-mannered! Me! I therefore beg you to strike out the word "flapdoodle" and replace it with one of the following, according to taste: balderdash, baloney, blather, bunkum, bushwa, claptrap, gobbledygook, hocus-pocus, hogwash, hokum, hooey, humbug, mumbo-jumbo, piffle, rigmarole, tripe, twaddle.

(3) Some other readers (and perhaps some of the same readers -- my eyes are starting to glaze over) have chid me for refusing to explain my religious beliefs in response to a polite inquiry. This chiding often came tagged with contemptuous references to my previous remarks in this area, remarks I have made about the feebleness of my faith, my aversion to theology, my attachment to the merely (! -- there's an essay right there, if not a Ph.D. thesis) esthetic aspects of worship -- hymns and so on -- and my general lack of deep piety, or, to be frank, of much interest in religious topics. Let me tell you, you have not savored the full meaning of the phrase "holier than thou" until you have passed some religious comment on a well-attended blog.

Well, on this one I think my chiders have a point. I shall make amends. I shall write something about my beliefs; and if I don't post it on NRO (which, it seems to me, is not really the right place), I shall link to it from The Corner. I don't know when I'll get round to it -- I have never tried anything like that before, and have no real idea how to go about it -- but it's on my list. In the meantime, this will have to suffice.

Posted at 10:39 AM

AUSTIN BAY IS NOW BLOGGING [Rod Dreher]
I was down in the state capital the other day for the start of the legislative session, and ran into my friend Austin Bay, the columnist and military strategist who has a following among conservatives on the web. Austin has just launched his own blog, which should be on every smart right-winger's daily blog roll.

Posted at 10:36 AM

PRESIDENT BUSH ON WOMEN IN THE MILITARY [KJL]
Wash Times: "There's no change of policy as far as I'm concerned. No women in combat. Having said that, let me explain, we've got to make sure we define combat properly: We've got women flying choppers and women flying fighters, which I'm perfectly content with."

I hope someone is emphasizing the "No woman in combat" to Pentagon bureaucrats.

Posted at 10:33 AM

BEHIND THE MUSIC [Stanley Kurtz]
David Adesnik over at Oxblog had some thoughtful things to say about Mary Eberstadt’s discussion of music lyrics. As I’ve already said in my own piece on Home Alone America, Eberstadt’s book is well worth a read.

Posted at 10:13 AM

"REDUCE '60 MINUTES' TO MORE MANAGEABLE 15-20 MINUTES." [KJL]
Letterman's Rathergate top ten.

Posted at 10:10 AM

CONTROVERSY AT COLUMBIA [Stanley Kurtz]
A bitter dispute has been roiling the waters at Columbia University for four months now. Although the Columbia conflict has stirred up a lot of local interest, there’s been little national attention. That’s too bad, because the Columbia controversy has just called forth an extremely important statement on academic freedom and intellectual diversity--a statement with implications that go well beyond the Columbia dispute. The commotion at Columbia began when students produced a film alleging classroom intimidation of pro-Israel students by the overwhelmingly pro-Palestinian faculty of Columbia’s Department of Middle East and Asian Languages and Cultures. The film left many of Columbia’s alumni and donors outraged at the one-sided bias and intimidation now typical at this once great university. Various faculty at Columbia have responded to the film, and to alumni threats to withhold donations, by warning of a “McCarthyite witch hunt” that endangers academic freedom. For a full review of the controversy, see this story from New York Magazine, “Columbia’s Own Middle East War.” (On the whole, the article is balanced, but it includes a totally distorted account of HR 3077, the bill that would reform federal subsidies to Middle East Studies.) For a powerful account of faculty bias at Columbia, see “Hate 101" by Douglas Feiden of the New York Daily News. But what strikes me as the big story in this dispute is a statement on academic freedom and intellectual diversity just released by FIRE (the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education). The FIRE letter is offered as a rebuttal to a statement by the NYCLU, the New York branch of the ACLU. The NYCLU letter takes the professors’ side, claiming that student criticism and donor anger threaten academic freedom. The FIRE statement offers a powerful rebuttal to NYCLU’s claim.

The truly important thing about FIRE’s statement on the conflict at Columbia University is that it successfully shows how to draw the delicate line between concerns about a professor’s academic freedom, on the one hand, and the rights of students and alumni to protest faculty bias and indoctrination, on the other. The FIRE letter also advances a key argument about a university’s right to define its own mission and purpose, and to construct a faculty that advances that mission. This entails an obligation to “truth in advertising” by a university. If an institution claims to believe in the marketplace of ideas, then it has to deliver. Of course, if an institution openly admits to a desire to uphold a particular ideology, that’s alright too–so long as it honestly reveals this purpose to donors and potential students. Again and again, we are confronted with conflicts between student complaints about professorial bias, and faculty claims of “McCarthyite” threats to their freedom. The FIRE statement provides a road map for doing justice to both sides of this conflict. FIRE is nothing if not a civil rights organization. In fact, FIRE is often allied with the ACLU. It took this open clash between the NYCLU and FIRE to draw out critically important principles that can guide those of us who want to respect professorial freedom, while also doing something about the terrible academic bias that is killing the marketplace of ideas on campus. After all, the very purpose of academic freedom is to foster the marketplace of ideas. Something has got to be wrong when protecting academic freedom means killing the marketplace of ideas. On this difficult issue, FIRE lights the way.

Posted at 10:04 AM

ALMOST ENOUGH TO MAKE YOU A MARXIST [Jonah Goldberg]

A breakdown of the Pitt-Aniston assets.

(Please: Hyper-literal Randians, note that A:I said "almost" and B: I'm joking)


Posted at 10:00 AM

RATHER BIASED [Stanley Kurtz]
Alright, so CBS won’t admit to its blindingly obvious political bias. That’s not surprising. But here’s a challenge. Since the mainstream media won’t fess up to its political bias--even in a case this egregious--how would we actually know if, or when, the media stopped being biased? After all, the media can’t openly claim credit for getting rid of a bias they haven’t acknowledged to begin with. So we need to create a measure that will tell us when unacknowledged media bias actually goes away. To solve this problem, I’ve devised a simple test that will indicate with objective certainty the moment when the media’s liberal bias finally disappears. Notice that Tuesday’s Washington Post featured an analysis of the Rather report co-written by Howard Kurtz and Dana Milbank. Milbank used to write for The New Republic, a liberal political magazine. It’s common for mainstream outlets to hire reporters from liberal magazines (but not from conservative magazines, of course). And the Rather report will either be discussed (or meaningfully ignored) this Sunday on ABC’s This Week, hosted by President Clinton’s former chief political advisor, George Stephanopoulos. So when in the future we find that 60 Minutes has put out a bogus report threatening the chances of a Democratic presidential nominee at the height of an election, and when that story is analyzed in The Washington Post in an article co-written by Howard Kurtz and Ramesh Ponnuru. And when the story is either discussed (or meaningfully ignored) on ABC’s This Week, hosted by Karl Rove, then we will know that the mainstream media no longer has a liberal bias.

Posted at 09:57 AM

OH FAT TONY.... [Jonah Goldberg]
Sorry, but I just need to point out to Simpsons fans that Chertoff put "Fat Tony" Salerno behind bars. One wonders: Did he make Fat Tony give back the pretzel money?

Posted at 09:54 AM

FROGS [John Derbyshire]
J.J.: One moment of glory for the "Frog" epithet (i.e. in reference our Gallic friends) occurred in a movie titled The Adventures of Barry McKenzie.

For those who never made the acquaintance of the immortal Bazza, he was an early creation of Australian comic genius Barry Humphries, who is closely related to the stage megastar Dame Edna Everage. "The Adventures" first ran as a comic strip in the London scandal sheet Private Eye in the midlle 1960s. Bazza is an Australian country boy living in London. He is clueless about pretty much everything, but especially about sex -- one of the running jokes of the strip was Bazza's utter inability to make any sexual connection, mainly because he just misses the point of every potential encounter. He is also completely in the dark about Political Correctness, which was just then beginning to rear its hideous head. Bazza's customary greeting to any colored person was: "G'Day there, Woggy boy..."

Well, in the movie Bazza goes to Heathrow Airport to catch a plane. There is a shot with some parked planes in the background. One of them has the Air France logo on its tail, supplemented by the words FROG AIR.

Posted at 09:48 AM

IF YOU DON'T GOT TO THE WFB PARTY [Jonah Goldberg]

You may miss him saying such things as:

"Could someone tell Mr. Goldberg the hors d'oeuvres are for everyone?"

"Ms. Lopez, please get off the computer. This is a party."

"The eschaton cannot be immanentizing at this moment, Mr. Goldberg has vomited in the punch bowl."


Posted at 09:45 AM

RE: BREAKING UP, FALLING DOWN [KJL]
John, I think you assume too much. Why would the AP think the breakup of a marriage is a bad thing?

Posted at 09:41 AM

BREAKING UP, FALLING DOWN [John J. Miller]
K Lo: This will be my first and last comment on Brad and Jen. Does the AP mean to suggest that the fall of the Berlin Wall was a bad thing?

Posted at 09:31 AM

YOU@THE BUCKLEYS [KJL]
Update: 50-some folks have signed up for the Feb 24 fundraiser shin-dig. That means the RSVP list will close sooner rather than later. To join Rich, Jonah, Kate, Jay, Ramesh, Rick, Derb, Stuttaford, K-Lo & more, get your seat asap, while there's still a chance (as in the next few hours).

And thanks again.

Posted at 09:17 AM

MOST OVERLY DRAMATIC "LEDE" OF THE DAY [KJL]
This is my last Brad-Jen post.

From the AP: "In the world of celebrities and those who love them, the Jennifer Aniston-Brad Pitt breakup was like the fall of the Berlin Wall."

Posted at 09:14 AM

COUNT US! [Mark Krikorian]
The Bureau of Labor Statistics has announced plans to drop the question about gender from one of its surveys, and the "Institute for Women's Policy Research" doesn't like it one bit. This is a small foretaste of what would happen if we tried to remove the race and ethnicity questions from government forms. And contrary to the comments from the women's research group in this story, the issue is not the quality of the data, but respect and attention -- being counted separately underlines the distinct and special status of the groups in question, and if women -- or Hispanics, or Asians, or etc.-- were just Americans like everyone else, what need is there for an Institute for Women's Policy Research?

Posted at 09:02 AM

THUMBS UP . . . [Mark Krikorian]
. .. for Chertoff, from a colleague in a position to know.

Posted at 08:58 AM

OUR BABIES [John J. Miller]
More details on why it's ridiculous to say infant mortality rates in Cuba are better than those in the United States:
The primary reason Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate than the United States is that the United States is a world leader in an odd category -- the percentage of infants who die on their birthday. In any given year in the United States anywhere from 30-40 percent of infants die before they are even a day old.

Why? Because the United States also easily has the most intensive system of emergency intervention to keep low birth weight and premature infants alive in the world. The United States is, for example, one of only a handful countries that keeps detailed statistics on early fetal mortality -- the survival rate of infants who are born as early as the 20th week of gestation.
For more, read this whole article by Brian Carnell.

Posted at 08:49 AM

FRENCH FROGS [John J. Miller]
My NRO article today -- on why we call the French "frogs" -- owes a lot to The Corner. Many moons ago, Peter Robinson and I had an exchange here about the joys and how-tos of catching frogs with your kids. When we bumped into each other months later, Peter asked me how it was going with the frogs -- and I assumed he was talking about my book on the French. We proceeded to have an awkward conversation until we realized he was talking about amphibians and I was talking about Gaullists. Anyway, if you've ever wondered how the French got their nickname, read this.

Posted at 08:40 AM

TINY BIAS BUBBLES [Tim Graham]
One small, nitpicking mental note on the Rather front: we couldn't help but notice that old CBS hands like Diane Sawyer on ABC and Terence Smith on PBS didn't happen to mention during their service on the Rather story that they had a bit of a career connection to Black Rock.

In an unrelated nitpick, notice how the networks are hosting fundraisers for tsunami relief through UNICEF? Does this make them even less likely to scrutinize UNICEF to see if the relief job gets done effectively?

Posted at 08:40 AM

BOB NOVAK [KJL]
slaps the House leadership for ousting good-guy but not-always-team-player Chris Smith from the vets committee.

If only a little of that disciplining rubbed off on the Senate GOP (say, back in November...)

Posted at 08:33 AM

RE: WHITMAN [KJL]
John: Sure it'll be a dud? She'll be all over TV I-Day/I-Week. Makes her seem relevant, at least. Obviously a loss would have worked out better for book sales, but winning doesn't kill her media moments.
And she does have a long-term legacy in the White House.

Posted at 08:27 AM

CHE KRISTOFF [John J. Miller]
K Lo: Maybe Kristoff was wearing a Che shirt. I suppose the real question is whether he would let his own wife deliver a child in Havana.

Posted at 08:20 AM

NPR'S WISHFUL THINKING [Tim Graham]
A source in Milwaukee notes that NPR's Melissa Block had this question on Bush's plan to reform Social Security on last night's All Things Considered: "Do you think there is some middle ground here, or is this going to be similar to what happened with Hillary Clinton and health-care reform: overreaching and a plan that just falls flat on its face?" E. J. Dionne responded: "You've just described the Democratic dream."

Posted at 08:14 AM

35 YEARS AGO TODAY [KJL ]
All in the Family went on the air.

Archie glossary here.

Posted at 08:10 AM

A NIGHT AT THE BUCKLEYS [KJL]
The suits tell me seats are increasingly limited for the Feb. 24 fundraiser--cocktails and dinner at Bill Buckley's Manhattan crib. Act now, and I'll see you there (as will Jonah, Rich, Kate, Ramesh & more).

And thank you for your support for this thing we do.

Posted at 07:55 AM

COVERT LIVING [KJL ]
This piece, from Tuesday, on secrecy, seemed more suited for a women’s glossy than the “paper of record.” With possible cover lines: YOUR HUSBAND IS KEEPING A SECRET FROM YOU.
'TIL SECRETS DO US PART
DOES HE MOONLIGHT AS SEXGOD901?
YOU’LL NEVER REALLY KNOW YOUR MAN
You get the idea.

Posted at 07:48 AM

TEMPTING [KJL ]
I haven't gotten into the IPod thing yet. But with the announcement of the Ipod Shuffle, I feel an inevitability in the air (though I might just save up for the real-deal version).
There’s an Insta discussion about it here.
As a non-computer geek, I don't quite get the BYODKM Mac mini idea. By the time you bring your own display, keyboard and mouse, the cost-efficiency seems in question, no? (But I am a very just-have-it-all-in-the-box kinda consumer on these things.)

Posted at 07:38 AM

WHAT’S WRONG WITH 3 (PLUS) HOUR LUNCHES? [KJL ]
Spain rethinks its daily routine.

Posted at 07:31 AM

FRIED BERGER [KJL]
Former Clintonite Bruce Lindsey testified before a grand jury yesterday in Socksgate.

Posted at 07:27 AM

ADVANTAGE: CLOONEY [KJL]
Bill O'Reilly gets bullied by George Clooney and caves. Derb can't be happy.

Posted at 07:24 AM

RE: DR. CASTRO [KJL]
John, I pictured Kristoff wearing a Che shirt while he wrote that.

Posted at 06:52 AM

THERE'S THAT HASTE ARGUMENT AGAIN [KJL]
The lessons the LA Times takes from Rathergate:
The Internet and cable TV news have created a 24-hour news cycle that presses hard against news shows with a fixed daily time, like network news, as well as daily newspapers. The fear that an exclusive story will last only a few hours is often fed by sources, who threaten to take the story elsewhere.

But more insidious, and less clearly visible, is what happens when reporters turn into stars and the stars become powerful executives while still retaining the fiction that they are reporters. Like Dan Rather.
There's something deeper, of course, they are blind to (willfully or not), because they're too close to it.

Posted at 06:46 AM

WHITMAN'S LOSS [John J. Miller]
By the way, isn't it obvious that the entire commercial rationale for Whitman's book was the possibility of Bush losing re-election? If Bush had in fact lost, can you imagine how the media would lionize her for saying the GOP is too right-wing and religious? Her book could have been a best-seller. Now it will become a dud.

Posted at 06:43 AM

"THE RIGHT TO COMPLAIN" [John J. Miller]
Why is Christine Todd Whitman so whiny? Russ Smith addresses the matter in his NY Sun review of her new book: "The author spends a great deal of her book recalling her affluent childhood, citing her parents, both of whom were active in the New Jersey's Republican party, as the catalyst for her career choices. A generation ago, Mrs. Whitman writes, politics was more genteel, without the polarization of today, and the GOP didn't impose strict 'litmus tests' on its candidates. She quotes her father as saying long ago, 'If you don't participate [in elections], you lose your right to complain.' The former governor then adds, in a schoolgirl tone, 'When you're a child that makes quite an impression - the last thing you want to do is lose your right to complain.'"

Posted at 06:40 AM

GERMAINE GREER ESCAPES "FASCIST PRISON" [KJL]
Sorry we'll miss this:
The Australian writer and academic left British show "Celebrity Big Brother" after five days of being locked in a house with an underwear model, a teenage musician, a drug-loving dancer and an ex-wife of Sylvester Stallone.

Posted at 06:27 AM

SPEAKING OF BRAD AND JEN: AND THE FUTURE OF NETWORK NEWS [KJL]
This was Katie Couric on Monday:
You know, Larry, I usually tease you about kind of the inordinate attention some of these stories get, but everybody I know, they were very upset this weekend about this particular breakup, because it sort of made you feel like, 'Gosh, can any marriage last?' And here they seemed really suited to each other. They were, you know, so attractive. They both seemed like very nice people. And I actually called our newsdesk on Saturday and said: 'I know that we have this tsunami going on, and--and all these people, but is it true that they broke up? I mean, so I think a lot of people are really interested particularly in them as a couple. Why do you think that's true?
Courage.

Posted at 06:21 AM

WE INTERRUPT THE BRAD AND JEN WATCH [KJL]
to bring you a revisit with Gary Condit. All just filling the time before the Michael Jackson trial.

Posted at 06:17 AM

"DID SADDAM HUSSEIN LOOT A FUND TO COMPENSATE VICTIMS OF THE 1990 INVASION?" [KJL]
Claudia Rosett finds another Oil-for-Food abuse trail in the Volcker report.

Posted at 06:17 AM

THIS COULD BE THE END OF JOE WILSON’S 15 MINUTES [Kathryn Jean Lopez ]
The Plame drop was not a crime? Victoria Toensing & Bruce Sanford write:
It's time for a timeout on a misguided and mechanical investigation in which there is serious doubt that a crime was even committed. Federal courts have stated that a reporter should not be subpoenaed when the testimony sought is remote from criminal conduct or when there is no compelling "government interest," i.e., no crime. As two people who drafted and negotiated the scope of the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, we can tell you: The Novak column and the surrounding facts do not support evidence of criminal conduct.

Posted at 06:05 AM

PHU FIGHTERS [John J. Miller]
Mark Molesky -- co-author with me of Our Oldest Enemy: A History of America's Disastrous Relationship with France -- reviews a new book about the French disaster at Dien Bien Phu in Vietnam half a century ago, in today's Wall Street Journal (subscribers only). Two interesting factoids: Dien Bien Phu translates as "big frontier administrative center" and half the Foreign Legion troops at the battle were German, including lots of "Wehrmacht veterans recruited from prisoner-of-war camps after World War II."

Posted at 05:50 AM

DR. CASTRO [John J. Miller]
Nick Kristoff of the NYT touts Cuba's health-care paradise in his column today--he says that infant-mortality rates are lower there than they are in the United States, and says what a shame it is that a great country like America can't post better numbers. He even suggests the problem is that we spend too much money on warplanes. What he doesn't explain is that, 1) the United States handles high-risk pregnancies very well (i.e., American doctors and nurses save preemies that wouldn't have a prayer in Havana), and 2) American women are delaying childbirth into their 30s and 40s and thereby putting themselves in the position of having larger numbers of high-risk pregnancies -- a state of affairs that may or may not be regrettable, but which certainly is more the result of personal decisions rather than the quality of American health care (except to the extent that our medical system is good enough to make such choices possible).

Posted at 05:39 AM

Tuesday, January 11, 2005

THE ELECTION IS OVER! [KJL]
Ohio challenge dropped.

Posted at 07:51 PM

CONSERVATIVE THINK TANKS [Ramesh Ponnuru]
Their days may be numbered--but the number could be pretty large.

Posted at 06:40 PM

FADING RATHER OUTRAGE [Tim Graham]
After a long look at today's morning shows, I think it's safe to say "Rathergate" is going to fade very quickly in the major media. It seems obvious they've concluded that what's bad for CBS is bad for all of them. NBC's Andrea Mitchell sounded very glum on Imus this morning, even when surprisingly agreeing with the Wall Street Journal take on the Dick & Lou report: lots of how, not much why. For a summary of the morning avoidance techniques beyond my previous post on ABC hyping breast milk Internet sales, see here.

One colleague today suggested that after 30 years, conservatives are just going to have to get more creative than the "gate" suffix on scandals large, small, and superficial. I can agree, but we also know that even when "gate" doesn't stick (Iran-Contra-gate?), attempts to avoid it can be equally lame. Some tried "Iranamok" and "Iragua." It's not a surprise we fall back on the old shorthand.

Posted at 05:49 PM

RATHER'S COMMENTS [KJL]
Up on Drudge: "Lest anyone have any doubt, I have read the report, I take it seriously, and I shall keep its lessons well in mind."

They'd be infuriating if they weren't pathetic.

Posted at 05:22 PM

DELONG AND SHORT OF IT [John Hood]
Ramesh: you are being, if anything, too charitable to Brad DeLong on the point of the nature of the IOUs in Social Security. He is right to point out that, on some level, any financial security is an IOU. It represents a claim on future income. Thus it represents, inevitably, an asset for the payee and a liability for the payer. If the payee and the payer are the same person, it represents precisely nothing. The fact that the federal government always pays its debts, and thus federal bonds are a popular security, is entirely irrelevant. A private person with excellent credit who everyday filled a box with IOUs for a Christmas-present fund would, when December rolls around, be no better off that if he hadn’t bothered to do so.

This is the one argument against Social Security accounts that really makes me cringe. It’s embarrassing — particularly for the DeLongs and Krugmans of the world and those who mindlessly peddle their nonsense.

Posted at 05:18 PM

DELAY ELECTIONS? [Cliff May]
For reasons I don’t quite understand the Left has adopted the view that elections in Iraq should be delayed until the “security situation” improves. On Fox earlier today, Ralph Peters pointed out to Ellen Ratner that to allow terrorists to set the schedule for democracy not only would be a mistake – it also, obviously, would provide an incentive for more suicide bombings, to keep the “security situation” from improving, to prevent elections from occurring.

And what would be the ramifications were we to establish the precedent that elections will be delayed whenever someone threatens violence against voters? Is it not possible that violent minorities in other countries – even these United States – might decide they’d rather an election not go forward? And might they not then threaten those who go to the polls? Would the Left say, in such an instance, that we too should delay elections until such time as the “security situation” could be improved?

Posted at 05:08 PM

RE: INTELLIGENT DESIGN [John Derbyshire]
"Dear Mr. Derbyshire---I read the stuff in the corner on NRO about intelligent design and you not buying it and why. You say you believe in God somewhere in there like Einstein did and whatnot. I'm sure I'm not the first to ask, just thought I'd add my voice to the chorus, but could you please tell us since we value what you say and have been doing so for years now, Why you believe in God or what you mean by saying you believe in God, or if you have already done so, direct us to where you have done it."

It is no-one's business but my own (and His) why I believe in God, so no, I will not tell you.

And if there is any implication here (if there is not, I apologize for the implication that there might be such an implication) that if I believe in God, I darn well ought to believe in Intelligent Design Theory, well, fiddlesticks. Millions of people believe in God who not only do not believe in ID, but have never heard of it, and would not be interested in it if they *did* hear of it. There are also some articulate and well-read men of the cloth whose opinion of ID theory is as low as mine, though not necessarily for the same reasons. Here is one such.

Posted at 04:58 PM

HILLARY 2008 [KJL]
Fundraising time! Byron reports.

Posted at 04:17 PM

RE: INTELLIGENT DESIGN [John Derbyshire]
Don't EVEN get yourself involved in this, Jonah. It's worse than the bloody Middle East.

Working scientists are engaged in doing a certain thing, and they have a certain attitude to what they are doing. ID-ers are not doing that thing, and they don't have that attitude. They are doing a different thing, with a different attitude. That is the nub of the matter.

And that's my last word on the topic. If any reader feels cheated, look, the internet is thick with ID and anti-ID sites of every shade of opinion and degree of passion. Go browse. Have a blast.

Posted at 04:17 PM

THE REFLEX [KJL]
Note, by the way, the big pop-culture tent here on NRO. DD's new CD was panned when it came out. Spanglish today is hit a second time on NRO (previously here) despite my very different view on the matter.

In all seriousness, Roger Simon’s Oscar series is a fun one. Read the first here, the second here, and the today’s here.

Posted at 04:10 PM

THE CORNER WORKS IN MYSTERIOUS WAYS [KJL]
The Bathroom doors remind me to pass along this e-mail that came in this morning:
Thanks for the heads up on the Duran Duran appearance on Las Vegas. I bought the CD the next day, and it was like a tall drink of water. The CD is great and sounds like their old stuff. I have lurked around the Corner since its inception, and have been reading blogs since 2000. I have never written in, and it cracks me up that a Duran Duran post brought me into the fray. I love the Corner, it's "like, Totally Awesome, Dude!"
You really never know what’ll rope people in here (I mean, even I find the DD references occassionally annoying).

Posted at 04:03 PM

JONAH’S REALLY WRITING ABOUT MEN’S ROOMS, ISN’T HE? [KJL ]
I guess it’s better than Jonah writing about women’s bathrooms.

Posted at 03:59 PM

SGT. PERALTA [Rich Lowry]
This email makes good points about why we don’t hear more of these stories of heroism:

“Rich –
Thanks for your story on Sergeant Peralta heroism. As you mention at the end of the article, media stories of heroism have been almost non-existent throughout this War. Given the vicious fighting that has been going on, I have to believe there are a lot of these kinds’ of stories that have to be told. Part of the reason is I think is the lack of willingness of our military men and women to acknowledge their own heroism because they believe their comrades are just as heroic as they are. In addition, while there is likely some media bias in not wanting to go out and get these stories, many of the media who are not imbedded with units cannot travel safely to get these stories.

I am not sure how to fix it, but I think it is really important that these stories be told not only because these men and women deserve to be recognized for their sacrifices, but also as we hear the stories about the inevitable mistakes and tragedies that come with war, we need to know what works well.”

Posted at 03:53 PM

CHERTOFF [Rich Lowry ]
Let me join the general praise--a terrific choice...

Posted at 03:16 PM

SGT. PERALTA IS JUST THE BEGINNING [Rich Lowry ]
An e-mail in response to my column today:
“Mr. Lowry,

Thanks for writing about Sgt Peralta. I don't know if you remember that I upbraided you via email some time ago for whining about the dearth of stories on our heroes. I said, in effect, its your job as a journalist--so do something about it. I'm not going to let up on you, though. Here is a list of men you might also consider honoring with a column:
Army:
MSG Anthony S. Pryor
MSG Jefferson Davis
SFC Daniel Petithory
CWO Donald Tabron
MSG Patrick M. Quinn
SSG Jason D. Brown
SSG Jeffrey Adamec
CPL Jeremiah C. Olsen
PVT Dwayne Turner
1SG Kevin Remington
SFC Charles Good
PFC Christopher Fernandez
Air Force:
TSgt John A. Chapman
SrA Jason Cunningham
TSgt Keary Miller
SSgt Thomas Case
USMC:
LCpl Armand E. McCormick
Cpl Robert P. Kerman
Lt Brian Chontosh
Cpl Timothy Tardiff

These men (with the exception of Lt Chonosh, who was awarded the Navy Cross) all were awarded the Silver Star, some posthumously. Most were also awarded the Purple Heart, as well. The Silver Star is the third highest award for valor (the Army Distinguished Service Cross, Navy Cross, & Air Force Cross is the second highest).”

Posted at 03:13 PM

LINCOLN'S GAYNESS [ Jonah Goldberg ]

All of the debate about whether "the Illinois rail-splitter's" weird behavior suggests he was gay reminds me of one of my favorite scenes from the Simpsons.

In "A Fish Called Selma" Noted film actor Troy McLure (You may remember him from such films as "The Greatest Story Every Hula-ed" and "They Came to Burgle Carnegie Hall") is in trouble. His career's off track and his agent tells Troy that he's got to get married, even if it's a sham, to save his career.

Troy wants to marry Selma, but he's got a dark, dark secret. Anyway, the relevant line:


Selma: Are you gay?

Troy: Gay? I wish! If I were gay they'd be no problem! No, what I have is a romantic abnormality, one so unbelievable that it must be hidden from the public at all cost. You see...
Selma: Stop!

Anyway, every time someone asks me if Lincoln was gay, I can't help but respond: "Gay!? I Wish!"

Which doesn't necessarily mean I buy that he was.


Posted at 03:05 PM

HILLARY'S WHITEWATER GRUDGES [KJL]
Hillary was also the lone vote against Viet Dinh as an assistant attorney general. He worked on Whitewater and impeachment.

Posted at 02:29 PM

MOUSSAOUI [Andy McCarthy]
Back in April, I addressed at some length the Fourth Circuit's decision reviving the prosecution of Zacarias Moussaoui for complicity in the 9/11 plot. (See). The Appeals court ruled, contrary to Virginia federal district judge Leonie Brinkema, that Moussaoui would not be denied a fair trial by the government's denial to him of access to captured al Qaeda prisoners (like Khalid Sheik Mohammed) as long as the Justice Department prepared an adequate substitution -- a written summary that would allow the defendant to place before the jury any interrogation statements these terrorists had made that might be helpful to his case.

At the time, both sides appeared cautiously optimistic that they'd be able to work out a substitution. But as we noted at the time,"both sides will have reason to consider an appeal to the Supreme Court. Even if there is no immediate appeal, it is a lot easier [for a court] to order parties to work out a substitute than it is actually to work out a substitute. Additional long delay is certainly conceivable."

Yesterday, nine months later, Moussaoui -- unhappy with the government's proposals -- appealed to the Supreme Court. (see.) Even assuming a decision in favor of the government by the end of the current term (i.e., by late June), it is hard to imagine Moussaoui's trial beginning before 2006. (If they tried to start in the fall, one assumes Moussaoui would vigorously object to a trial that began anytime close to September 11, which annually causes a spate of publicity about the attacks.)

Posted at 02:23 PM

THE SAFETY MITT [Jonah Goldberg]

One reader asks:

I am a big supporter of the paper towel safety mitt. But I am often in a dilemma as to how to dispose of such mitt. If in a more crowded restaraunt or public place, "accidentally leaving" the mitt on the handle is my common practice. But what about those not-as-public places? I am a lawyer, so when I visit my client, I don't want to be littering the back of their door with paper towels. Nor do I want to walk into my meeting with a wadded up - and germ-filled - paper towel. What to do?

And another comes to the rescue, sort of:

The "germ doctor" (Philip Tierno) writes in his book ("The Secret Life of Germs"), "when you leave a public restroom, use the hand or paper towel to open the door then throw away the towel in the garbage can near the door. If there is no garbage can near the door, throw the towel on the floor--there soon will be one."

Posted at 02:19 PM

RE: CHERTOFF [Barbara Comstock]
Judge Chertoff is an absolutely inspired choice for this critically important position of Homeland Security Secretary. He brings a wealth of experience and understanding in fighting on the war on terrorism and has deservedly earned bipartisan praise from federal, state and local officials for being a great manager, known problem solver. (I fondly recall being in the Senate when he was confirmed and Senator Lautenberg (D-NJ) came over to thank him and praise him.)

Posted at 02:08 PM

A HERO TO THE GREAT WASHED [Jonah Goldberg]

From a reader (who stacks his words vertically for extra effect):

I

Cannot

Believe

You

Wrote

This

Jonah!

My admiration for your courage, already high, just went way up. I think
you should ask Derb why in the H-E-Double-Hockey-Sticks the Brits have
separate hot and cold faucets in their public restrooms. What do they
expect, a guy to plug up the drain, fill the basin, and have a little
splash-up where everyone else's geebers have gone before? Then, to top it
off, they have the mixer faucets in the bathtubs: the one place where you
don't effing *need* it.


Posted at 02:06 PM

KISS AND MAKE-UP [KJL]
Cuba restores diplomatic relations with the EU.

Posted at 02:03 PM

WHY!? [Jonah Goldberg]

Why do so many public bathrooms have doors that open into the bathroom so that dudes (and dudette's, I suppose) who wash their hands are still forced to touch the handle dripping with the cooties of dudes who don't wash their hands? Why, why, why?

Old observation, I know. But all the more annoying because it's a sign of the enduring travesty that is this state of affairs.

And yes, I do use the paper towel safety mitt method to open the door whenever possible.


Posted at 01:43 PM

THIS FLAG IS YOUR FLAG, IT SURE AIN'T MY FLAG... [Michael Graham]
That was the clear message from listeners and emailers defending the state of Virginia's policy that school children can't be forced to stand while their classmates say the Pledge of Allegiance. There's a non-partisan issue about whether or not forcing kids to stand during the Pledge means you're forcing them to make a political statement (answer: No.), but I was amazed by the many Bush-haters who argued that making a kid pledge to the flag meant he was being forced to support President Bush.

One caller--who also mentioned he believes Dan Rather, so he's obviously a kook-- said that "No child should be forced to pledge allegiance to that man," GWBush. Wow. I didn't know that it was the Pledge of Allegiance to the Bush. I didn't know that it was the Flag of the Republican States of America, either.

I happen to believe that you can be a patriot and proudly fly the American flag in opposition to Bush policies. If I found myself at an anti-Iraq War rally, I would expect to see plenty of American flags, all of them flying (with the possible exception of Sen. Kerry's) right-side up.

But if the American Left wants to hand the Stars and Stripes over to the Republican Party, we'll take it! If you want to be the anti-American Flag party, go right ahead. Stop pledging our American flag and choose another, perhaps the flag of the U.N., or maybe the old Iraqi flag. After all, you wish we'd left Saddam in power.

I don't know how you translate this into a winning political strategy, but hey--I'm a Republican. We're the dumb, religious, southern, inbred party. You're the smart, anti-religion, anti-Christmas, anti-military and now anti- American flag party.

Sounds like a winning platform to me. How much longer until 2008?

Posted at 01:31 PM

DEAN [KJL]
runs for DNC chair.

I'll save the "Please Elect This Man" pleas.

Posted at 01:19 PM

HILLARY, WHITEWATER & CHERTOFF [KJL]
Here's what she told Larry King on June 10, 2003, during her book tour:
KING: In the Senate yesterday, Assistant Attorney General Michael Chertoff came up to be a federal court appeals judge. The vote was 88-1. You were the one.

CLINTON: Right.

KING: Why?

CLINTON: Well during that time when he was on the staff of the committee in the Senate, a number of the young people who worked in the White House were, I thought, very badly treated by the Senate staff investigating Whitewater. And a number of those young people were put under tremendous pressure, legal bills that they had to run up. And I just didn't think it was handled appropriately or professionally.

KING: So you didn't think him worthy of a judgeship then?

CLINTON: Based on my firsthand knowledge of what went on during that period. But, you know, that's over. That vote is gone and part of history.

KING: Could have skipped the vote, couldn't you?

CLINTON: You know, there were several of these young people who asked me to express the only way I could the very difficult feelings that they had in the way that they were treated by that staff.

KING: So you were making a statement?

CLINTON: Yes. I mean, you know, it was a single vote. But it stood for a lot of what I think was wrong during that period.

Posted at 01:13 PM

DIES WITH EYES ON THE PRIZE [KJL]
Sounds like he was ready, even if it still comes a bit like a thief.

Posted at 12:55 PM

INTELLIGENT DESIGN [Jonah Goldberg]
Derb - I knew you were doomed to assault from the intelligent design folks the second you brought it up. It's one of those topics that really animates folks. For the record, I enjoyed Michael Behe's Darwin's Black Box, but I'm generally agnostic about the whole intelligent design thing. By agnostic I mean I certainly don't preclude the possibility that science will find evidence of God's existence in a way that will persuade some of the science-minded. But basically, I find ID interesting for its case against Darwin rather than its case for God. I believe in evolution, but I find the various critiques of evolutionary theory to be interesting and enlightening.

Posted at 12:52 PM

INTELLIGENT DESIGN [Jonah Goldberg]
Derb - I knew you were doomed to assault from the intelligent design folks the second you brought it up. It's one of those topics that really animates folks. For the record, I enjoyed Michael Behe's Darwin's Black Box, but I'm generally agnostic about the whole intelligent design thing. By agnostic I mean I certainly don't preclude the possibility that science will find evidence of God's existence in a way that will persuade some of the science-minded. But basically, I find ID interesting for its case against Darwin rather than its case for God. I believe in evolution, but I find the various critiques of evolutionary theory to be interesting and enlightening.

Posted at 12:52 PM

RE: CHERTOFF & HILLARY [Shannen Coffin]
K-Lo, a reader reminds me that Hillary's vote against Judge Chertoff was the only vote against him. It was 88-1. A few Senators (Kerry among them) did not vote, but Hillary was the lone voice of dissent. I'm sure it her vote was a matter of principle and had nothing to do with Chertoff's role in the Whitewater investigation

Posted at 12:38 PM

MOVIE MISTAKES 2004 [KJL ]
Here goes your lunchhour? Today’s timewaster.

Posted at 12:27 PM

CHERTOFF & HILL [KJL]
Not surprisingly, my junior senator consistently votes against Chertoff when his name is up for confirmation.

Posted at 12:24 PM

"SELF-HATING DEMOCRATS" [KJL]
Here's a Village Voice cartoonist's view of the state of the Democratic party.

Posted at 12:20 PM

INTELLIGENT DESIGN [John Derbyshire]
Strewth, the ID people are out in force today.

Some points:

(1) If scientist X passes a remark about the universe sure being a mysterious place, he has not thereby placed himself in the ID camp. ID is a specific set of arguments about specific scientific topics. Of those arguments I have seen, none struck me as very convincing.

(2) None of the ID people I have encountered (in person or books) is an open-minded inquirer trying to uncover facts about the world. Every one I know of is a Christian looking to justify his faith. This naturally inclines me to think that they are grinding axes, not conducting dispassionate science. This is, in my opinion, not only a path to bad science, but also a path to bad theology. ID is, in my opinion, a species of Science Envy -- like Deconstructionism or Marxism. Science has been brilliantly successful in the present age at explaining things, making things, and improving our health and comfort. People whose natural attraction is to non-scientific disciplines -- literaty criticism, history, theology -- want some of the action.

(3) I do not feel myself to be under any moral obligation to set out detailed arguments against this or that ID-er here on The Corner. Such arguments can be found all over the web, for those who want them. I have better things to do than repeat here what can be easily found.

(4) The "coincidence" point (i.e. "How come physical constants are just precisely what they need to be in order for us to exist?") is very fascinating to any thoughtful person. I have never seen an answer that struck me as very satifactory; but the non-ID answers -- e.g. the Anthropic Principle in its various forms (Google it) -- are at least as satisfactory as the ID ones ("Because God made things that way.")

Posted at 12:15 PM

CHERTOFF & WHITEWATER [KJL]
Talk of his partisan past is the conversation right now on CNN.

Posted at 12:07 PM

CONSERVATIVES AND JUDICIAL POWER [Ramesh Ponnuru]

William Stuntz argues that conservatives "have the wrong judicial philosophy" and that they tend to have too grand a view of the proper scope of judicial power. I think these are (or can be) defensible claims, as are some of Stuntz's subclaims. He argues, for example, that conservatives ignore the extent to which the judicial enforcement of federalism amounts to an assumption of power by the federal judiciary. I would add that it is hard to see the "federalist revolution" as anything but an assumption of power by the federal judiciary when that revolution does not extend to protecting states and localities from the federal judiciary itself.

But I suspect that the flaws in Stuntz's essay will keep many conservatives from appreciating what may be worthwhile in it. He repeats hoary old arguments against originalism. Conservatives generally reject those arguments, and know why they do. Thoughtful originalists do not believe that judging amounts to a guessing game about what James Madison would believe about the issues of today or even the principles that underlie those issues--that's Stuntz's caricature of the philosophy.

His argument that federalism requires no protection from the Supreme Court, meanwhile, is a version of the old claim that the political process protects federalism just fine. His evidence that it does: State and local governments have been growing faster than the federal government for years. This will be cold comfort for conservatives who do not understand federalism in terms of the interests of state governments.

Stuntz then takes a realist turn, arguing that judges will always impose their preferred policies and the thing to do is to get them to impose the right ones. The right policies, he suggests, are those that defer to the voters and elected governments: "There are many ways a society could decide whether or not gays can marry, doctors can perform third-trimester abortions, universities can admit blacks and Latinos because of their ethnicity, or cops can frisk suspects based on a hunch. Judges writing jargon-filled opinions is rarely the best decisionmaking process. Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, the two conservative heroes on the current Court, are no more likely to get the right answers than I am."

But hold on. On three of those four questions, the "answer" Scalia and Thomas are inclined to give is precisely that voters and their representatives should decide the issue. Nobody has credibly argued that either justice would outlaw abortion, block states from recognizing same-sex marriage, or overturn state laws that restrict police procedure. These justices are already largely where Stuntz says they should be. And they got there by adhering to the originalism that Stuntz rejects.

The essay's a mess.


Posted at 11:59 AM

CUTE, RP [KJL]
On a serious note of dissent: One minor point re: Jonah saying he'll likely sail through the Senate. Dems will give him some grief, dontcha think, considering he's former Whitewater committee counsel?

Posted at 11:56 AM

CHERTOFF [Ramesh Ponnuru]

What a lousy pick for homeland security chief.

Actually, I think he's pretty good. I just thought there ought to be some dissent here.


Posted at 11:15 AM

CHERTOFF [KJL]
A first step to the Supreme Court? One blogger suggests a Supreme deal would explain giving up a life tenure. (The White House convincing you you are the perfect man for the DHS job is another, though.)

Posted at 11:07 AM

BRAD DELONG [Ramesh Ponnuru]

I don't read his blog very much because he's so gratuitously nasty and so obviously convinced of his own brilliance--and while he does seem to be a genuinely intelligent person, there's just not enough good stuff there to outweigh the mindless snottiness. I know this style of writing has won him some fans, but I think it has also detracted from his reputation among people who would otherwise be inclined to listen to him.

Anyway, DeLong says that my latest article is "idiocy" and that I have a "strange economic mind." He makes three claims to back up this charge. First, he claims that I deny that higher growth will solve Social Security's fiscal problem whereas, in truth, higher growth has pushed back the exhaustion date for the program's trust fund. My point was, however, precisely that higher growth cannot solve the problem even if the day of reckoning can be pushed back. DeLong can't really be arguing that Stelzer was right to ignore the way that higher growth increases Social Security benefits? I also don't think that the trust fund exhaustion date is the day of reckoning, which gets us to point two: DeLong ridicules me for saying that the Social Security trust fund contains only IOUs, when stocks are IOUs too. There's a lot that could be said on this point, but I think the key point here is that the IOUs in question are promises from the government, to the government. Let's assume that maintaining the trust funds over the years has been a good policy: that it has kept the government from going deeper into debt and thus made it easier for the government to confront the looming problems with Social Security. It is still true that the government has to raise taxes, cut spending, or borrow money as soon as Social Security's benefits start to exceed its revenues. The date that happens is when there's a problem, not the date the trust fund is exhausted. Third, I say, responding to Stelzer's claim that personal accounts would be too regulated to give people any real control over their money, that people would probably have real investment choices. DeLong objects to this comment because with real choices comes the possibility of large losses for some people.

This third point is where DeLong's commentary really goes off the rails. Note that he isn't claiming that Stelzer is right or that I am wrong. On his account, I am an idiot simply because, in the course of answering one specific objection to personal accounts, I have not answered all possible objections to personal accounts. I think I will find a way to live with DeLong's disdain.


Posted at 11:00 AM

CHERTOFF [Jonah Goldberg]
This is great news. Chertoff is a grown-up. He's hawkish on the war on terror and he should sail through the Senate. Unless someone wants to explain why he has the necessary temperment and skills to be a federal judge but not Directorof DHS. Good for the White House getting it right the second time around.

Posted at 10:33 AM

BASHING CHERTOFF [KJL]
CNN (Jeanne Meserve) just quoted a annonymous homeland-security expert as calling the Chertoff nomination as "a desperation pick" from the White House.

Posted at 10:11 AM

MORE RE CHERTOFF [Shannen Coffin]
Every now and then the White House will pull a rabbit out of its hat and come up with absolute magic. Most of the country doesn't know Mike Chertoff. And I have to admit that, given his current job, I never would have thought about him for DHS Secretary. But he is an absolutely incredible choice. Currently a federal appeals court judge, Mike has a background as a hard nosed prosecutor and former head of the Criminal Division at the U.S. Department of Justice. He is tough, absolutely brilliant and fair. More importantly, he's got great experience in the current war on terror. And he understands what it takes. With the able assistance of people like Alice Fisher, then his deputy at DoJ, Mike was on the front lines of coordinating the government's investigation into the attacks of September 11th. An exquisite choice by the President. He will be terrific.

Posted at 10:07 AM

RE: CHERTOFF [Andy McCarthy]
Mike Chertoff, currently a U.S. Court of Appeals judge on the Third Circuit, and formerly the Chief of the Criminal Division at DOJ, the U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey and a top organized crime prosecutor in the Southern District of New York, is an absolutely superb choice for this post. He is smart, he has a creative linear mind, and he is up to the management challenge -- which is the biggest challenge facing this sprawling agency. Best of all, in contrast to former NYC police commissioner Bernie Kerik and some of the other state law enforcement people whose names have been floated, he knows the federal system inside and out -- including the sharp elbows of its competing agencies. Once he takes the reins, you are never again like to read another story about how other agencies like the FBI are running bureaucratic rings around, and seizing turf from, DHS.

Posted at 10:07 AM

RE: CHERTOFF [KJL]
CNN just reported a "homeland security expert" as being "flabbergasted" by the choice. But the legal and terrorism-watcher types I've asked in the last few minutes are much more enthused. More along the lines of this IM reax from one: "OH MY G*D THAT IS SO AWESOME! Too bad he has to give up life tenure though."

Stay tuned for more...

Posted at 10:04 AM

BLACK THURSDAY [KJL ]
Or you can lock your doors, get into the fetus position, and make people suffer on Jan. 20. That’s one loser plan: “the Detroit Democrat and a handful of other anti-Bush groups across the country are urging others of like mind to withhold their cash and labor on Inauguration Day--from all businesses.”

Posted at 09:55 AM

"DON'T GIVE IN TO SUPERMARKET TABLOID PRESSURE..." [Rick Brookhiser]
...or you'll have an alien baby.

Posted at 09:52 AM

INAUGURAL [KJL ]
Roll your eyes if I am being too starry-eyed about Republican government and some of its associated smells and bells, but in response to all those who want the inaugural balls and things cancelled because of a) the tsunamis b) the war c) Kerry lost: Though it has been done, I'm not sure it is all for the winner to cancel. The inaugural celebration is about more than who won and who lost (though, yes, I’d be increasingly bitter if Bush lost as Jan 20 approached), it’s about the peaceful transfer of power/representative government here. It’s about celebrating the system even more than the win. The show should go on (though I could do without the Kid Rock part), and we should all appreciate that, John Conyers & co.’s claims to the contrary, the whole process generally keeps working. (And we may get 8 years of Bill Clinton now and again, but we move on.)

Posted at 09:49 AM

FOR GOING GREEN, [KJL]
MacGyver is getting shot down by readers.

24--"Spare me your sixth-grade Michael Moore logic"--seems to be the show of choice for Corner fans these days.

Posted at 09:49 AM

DHS [KJL]
Various reporting it is Michael Chertoff.

(Did anyone make sure Larry Klayman's not around first?)

Posted at 09:36 AM

I KID YOU NOT [Tim Graham]
ABC's "Good Morning America" discussed almost everything in the world (including -- get this -- the sale of breast milk on the Internet) before even mentioning the CBS-hoax report at Minute 15. They had a businesslike 2-minute report by Brian Ross, and then on to the next subject.

Posted at 09:33 AM

THE MAN CAN MAKE ANY MESS WORK: MY CANDIDATE FOR NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE DIRECTOR [KJL ]
MacGyver Season 1 is on DVD Jan 25.

Posted at 09:30 AM

THE PRESIDENT WILL ANNOUCE HIS NOMINEE FOR SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY AT 10:00 AM (EST) IN THE ROOSEVELT ROOM OF THE WHITE HOUSE [KJL]

Posted at 09:23 AM

PEACE IS FLOWING... [KJL]
From the Jerusalem Post:
As the Palestinian Central Election Committee was holding a press conference in Ramallah on Monday to announce the final results of the election for the chairmanship of the Palestinian Authority, hundreds of students attended a rally organized by Hamas at Bir Zeit University, where they called for more suicide attacks against Israel.

Posted at 09:23 AM

INTELLIGENT DESIGN [John Derbyshire]
Just some points on Intelligent Design:

Lots of scientists believe in God. Einstein seems to have, for instance. So do I; and so do a great menay other people who think that ID theory is pure flapdoodle. It is possible to believe in God and not believe in ID; it is possible (as I pointed out in a previous post) to believe in ID but not God.

ID theory posits that certain features of the natural world CAN ONLY be explained by the active intervention of a designing intelligence. Since the entire history of science displays innumerable instances of hitherto inexplicable phenomena yielding to natural explanations (and, in fact, innumerable instances of "intelligent design" notions to explain natural phenomena being scrapped when more obvious natural explanations were worked out), the whole ID outlook has very little appeal to well-informed scientists. A scientist who knows his history sees the region of understanfing as a gradually enlarging circle of light in a general darkness. If someone comes along and tells him: "This particular region of darkness HERE will never be illuminated by methods like yours," then he is naturally skeptical. "How can you possibly know that?" he will say, very reasonably.

Examples readers have been sending me -- the origin of the universe, nature of consciousness, the convenient "scaling" of physical constants, and so on, in which big-name scientists occasionally sound off in an ID-ish sort of way -- are neither here nor there. They are not the main point of ID as promoted by folk like Behe. They are just coffee-break opinionating on large topics about which we know nothing. When the scientist comes off break and goes back to his lab, telescope, or (usually nowadays) computer, he never gives them a moment's thought. He is too busy working -- trying to find natural explanations for natural phenomena.

By contrast with these meta-topics about which we know nothing -- the questions about which may not even have meaning -- we know a great deal about the actual mechanisms of natural selection, gene function, inheritance, matter-energy systems, and the early history of the universe; but there are many things we do not fully understand, and the ID-ers wish to plug those gaps by invoking the intervention of a higher intelligence. Working scientists in these fields are much, much more likely to say: "Well, let's wait and see what a couple more generations of scientific inquiry turn up before we leap to conclusions like that."

Posted at 09:19 AM

"HIDING BEHIND THE SKIRTS OF ANONYMOUS OR FICTIONAL CONSERVATIVES IS COWARDLY AND INSULTING." [KJL ]
Thanks, Jonah. I just realized you narrowed Armstrong Williams “others do it” cloud to female and Irish/Scottish male right-wing commentators yesterday.

Posted at 09:15 AM

IT'S A JOB, NOT A REVIVAL MEETING [KJL]
Speaking of zeal: I was struck by the very last page when the report. "it would compound the mistakes made if the lasting impact of this Report resulted in any lessening of CBS News' investigative zeal." But wasn't it "fervent faith" in what they wanted to believe was true that was a key part of the problem, as the report tells us earlier in the conclusion section? Digging deeper into the "faith" and roots of the zeal in the newsroom might have produced a more complete report.

And--I haven’t read the whole report and probably won't--but what's with the independents trying to excuse Rather with that comment at the end, seemingly passing the buck to Mapes?

Rather should not be let off the hook.

Posted at 09:08 AM

DON’T COUNT ON THAT 18-YEAR COUNTDOWN WORKING OUT [KJL]
Kids may “boomerang”:
"There is no longer an assumption by parents that there is a clear-cut departure age," says Galinsky, whose 35-year-old son, a professor, lives with her.

Posted at 09:04 AM

OH... [Jonah Goldberg]
Lest we forget in the Armstrong Williams hubub, the actual No Child Left Behind Act just isn't a very good piece of legislation.

Posted at 08:52 AM

JEN & BRAD CORNER [KJL ]
ABCnews.com’s The Note yesterday fantasized about Jennifer Aniston dating Chris Heinz.

It’s nice to think that’s a White House soap that will never be.

Posted at 08:44 AM

FEB 24 [KJL]
There's still time to make a date with WFB & co. Details here.

Posted at 08:36 AM

SANDY BERGER [KJL]
His top-secret stuffing case is before a grand jury.

Posted at 08:33 AM

"DON'T GIVE INTO TABLOID PRESSURE" [KJL]
The Today Show (I know you're oh-so-glad to get these oh-so-important morning-show tidbits) just had on an expert talking about couples and the decision to have children--how to go about it, how to know if it's a bad idea, etc. Included in her advice: don't give into pressure from family, friends...and, of course, tabloids. That last one's always a problem for me, how about you?

Posted at 08:29 AM

BRITS TO BE RELEASED [KJL]
from Gitmo

Posted at 08:19 AM

I'LL HAVE COFFEE TODAY, THANKS [KJL]
"Man stabs neighbor to death over cup of tea remark"

Posted at 08:13 AM

"HASTE" [Jonah Goldberg]

I'm gonna write a column on Rather, Williams and the media today. But in my haste , I just can't stop myself from offering a few points.

First, the CBS report was supposed to do many things, two of them were: 1) Authenticate/explain the origin of those documents and, 2) address the issue that the Memo story was politically motivated. The report punts on both. They can tell us that the blogs were politically motivated from a conservative perspective, but on the biases that caused this entire scandal, we get silence.

But the more annoying thing is this constant talking point about "haste." Last night I watched Dick Thornburgh say that "haste" is the "enemy" or "villain" in this story over and over. In this context "haste" is a weasel word. It leaves aside the question of motive entirely. It also obscures the 12 day outrageous stonewall as a footnote. Dan Rather went back to the well countless times in those days to reaffirm this was a solid story, that his source was "unimpeachable" (when he knew it was not) and to accuse all of his accusers of bad faith and partisan motives. None of that was the result of haste. Hubris, maybe, but haste no.

Why not cite "sloppiness," "carelessness," "well-meaning zeal" or any of the other value-neutral adjectives?

The report is useful, but it is not sufficient -- even if it will have to suffice.


Posted at 07:14 AM

DID CLINTON DESTROY THE DEMOCRATS? [KJL ]
New Donkey has his doubts.

Posted at 05:46 AM

SUPREMES TURN DOWN [KJL ]
Traficant Appeal.

Wow—I had completely forgotten about him. A nice feeling.

Posted at 05:43 AM

FIGHTING OVER THE INTERNET [KJL ]
Interesting piece in The New Yorker:
The younger officers have another advantage over their superiors: they grew up with the Internet, and have created for themselves, in their spare time, a means of sharing with one another, online, information that the Army does not control. The “slackers” in the junior-officer corps are turning out to be just what the Army needs in the chaos of Iraq. Instead of looking up to the Army for instructions, they are teaching themselves how to fight the war. The Army, to its credit, stays out of their way….

Posted at 05:38 AM

ANCHORMEN ARE SO OVER [KJL]
says Roger Simon. He also says Brit Hume doesn't count as one, making me completely comfortable with the diagnosis.

Posted at 12:11 AM

CURIOUS HE’D TAKE THE NIGHT OFF MONDAY [KJL]
Dan Rather Flashback: "If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I'd like to break that story… Any time I'm wrong, I want to be right out front and say, 'Folks, this is what went wrong and how it went wrong.' "

Posted at 12:08 AM

Monday, January 10, 2005

GAY ADOPTION BAN STANDS [KJL ]
In Florida.

Posted at 11:35 PM

DID ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS TAKE CASH FROM ALLAWI? [KJL]
That's not an actual serious question, but Iraq's Allawi has been paying journalists in advance for positive election coverage, according to the Financial Times.

Posted at 11:33 PM

PRELUDE TO THE END? [KJL]
From the NYTimes on the CBS story:
But the production staff member said the staff at CBS did not feel powerful enough to bring about change. "We have no juice," the staff member said. "We're a dying business, and this didn't help us. Some people feel like CBS News could be out of business in five years."

Posted at 11:13 PM

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE FUTURE? [KJL]
This was in Sunday's LA Times from Joshua Muravchik:
Violence will keep many Iraqis from the polls. Fatah's presidential candidate, Mahmoud Abbas, will not face any serious challengers. Syrian occupiers will keep a majority of Lebanon's legislators in their pocket. Saudi municipal councils will remain half-appointed, and women may not be allowed to participate in voting to fill the other half. But the skeptics are too cavalier. The sudden plethora of elections signifies a gathering momentum for the idea of popular sovereignty and a corresponding delegitimization of the various rationalizations for authoritarianism — heredity, national unity, divine will and the like.

The hoariest excuse for Arab dictatorship has been the need for an iron fist as long as the Arab nation is under challenge. We can't risk reform while Israel occupies Palestinian land, they have said, an excuse that has carried weight despite its illogic. But even the most passionate Arab nationalist will see its hollowness if the Palestinians themselves, although not yet a state, are conducting politics by democratic methods.

And won't it be humiliating if the Iraqis under occupation select their own government while other Arabs, untouched by foreign domination, aren't permitted to do so?

Sure, the elections result from pressures, foreign and domestic. But the people bringing the pressure aren't going to be satisfied with empty rituals. 2005 will be the year of Arab voting and perhaps, as well, of the birth pangs of Arab democracy.

Posted at 11:09 PM

THIS IS WHAT YOU COME HERE FOR [KJL]
FYI: Brad Pitt and John Ashcroft were both raised in Springfield, Missouri.

Posted at 10:48 PM

MOUSSAOUI [KJL]
is with the Supremes.

Posted at 06:27 PM

99-PERCENT BALONEY [Tim Graham]
Just before I went on MSNBC around 2:45, they showed a clip of Moonves saying "99 percent of the people, and 99 percent of the stories we have are accurate, true, straight down the middle." NO. This and the panel on p. 28 are mistaken to assume that this fiasco is one small deviation from a record of meticulous political balance and utter lack of calculation! This is the must-see --rebut this, Dick and Lou! They shouldn't be pretending to be judges of the entire oeuvre of CBS News content....they only look like lackeys for insisting on CBS's everyday excellence.

Posted at 05:59 PM

UKRAINE WINNER OFFICIAL [KJL]
Yushchenko with 51.99%

Posted at 04:54 PM

BONE IN LEG [John Derbyshire]
What do I mean by declaring I have a bone in my leg? Put the following text into the Google search box: nannyisms site:nationalreview.com

Posted at 04:43 PM

AMBER & WHITTAKER [KJL]
Telling witnesses apart.

Posted at 04:40 PM

RATHER WON'T BE REPORTING ON THE REPORT TONIGHT [KJL]
Drudge says he's got the night off.

Posted at 04:35 PM

DERB AWOL [John Derbyshire]
Derb can't blog right now. Got a bone in my leg.

Posted at 04:15 PM

NOT EVERYTHING IS ABOUT POLITICS, YOU KNOW [KJL ]
Many people are emailing me the link to this website, claiming that Jen was more red than Kerry-supporting Brad. But Jen talked bad about Bush to Rolling Stone , so I'm skeptical. (Besides, Brad's the red stater.)

Leave them alone, maybe they work it out--and restore our faith in true love again.

What's that you say? CBS report? Elections in Iraq? I think this is pretty big...but I'm done for now.

Posted at 04:12 PM

RE: ON THE TAKE [KJL]
Jonah's right--this will keep coming up. The White House says this was an isolated incident. I have no reason to not believe that, except, you do wonder why Williams?

And I resent having to waste time on this, for the record. Like Jonah, I'm not keen on this navel-gazing stuff. But this was wrong. And it casts a cloud, so the air needs to be cleared. Williams needs to be honest about what happened, and not play games.

(No comments, please, on the irony of the Brad and Jen watcher talking about "wasting time.")

Posted at 04:01 PM

FULL DISCLOSURE [Jonah Goldberg]
That really is the issue. If Williams had simply admitted that he was taking the money when he wrote about it and advocated for it, he wouldn't be in this trouble. Of course, he would have jettisoned his credibility had he admitted it. Imagine if he wrote, "the White House has given me a quarter of a million dollars to say this, but let's talk about the merits of the No Child Left Behind...." The fact that he didn't write such disclaimers should be a sign that he realized how bad it would appear. And if it appears bad it's a good hint that it might also be bad.

Posted at 03:50 PM

DOES THE NEW REPUBLIC [Ramesh Ponnuru]
have some sort of quota on adulatory notices about Eliot Spitzer? Does it have to run one every 5 issues? Do they take breaks from the adulation when they're actually running articles by Eliot Spitzer? Check out page 8 of the January 17 issue for an especially emetic installment.

Posted at 03:47 PM

EVERYBODY DOES IT...BUT I'M NOT SAYING WHO DOES IT [Jonah Goldberg]

Armstrong Williams is making things worse -- for conservatives and himself. If there are other conservative commentator types who do this sort of thing, I want to know who. It seems to me there are three possibilities: A) He's lying (or just really wrong), B) He's thinking of other activist-"ideaprenures" like David Keene and Grover Norquist who take lots of money as lobbyists C) He's telling the truth. If he's talking about the lobbyist types he should say so -- because it will clear the air and surprise nobody -- and if he's telling the truth, he should spill the beans completely.

Hiding behind the skirts of anonymous or fictional conservatives is cowardly and insulting. I resent having my credibility and integrity called into question no matter how remotely -- and, heck, I'm not even that school-marmish on journalistic ethics.


Posted at 03:39 PM

AN AMAZING WEEKEND [Jack Fowler]
Since my last posting (Thursday, Jan 6) on the NR 2005 British Isles Cruise we’ve received 9 new cabin reservations! To describe the speed and volume of bookings as anything but “staggering” would be a lie. I couldn’t be happier. And if you’re a dilly-dallying wanna-cruiser, you won’t be sadder when you find yourself shut out of this once in a lifetime experience. Throw tantrums, grind your teeth, pluck your hairs: there will be nothing – NOTHING – anyone will be able to do to get you on board once NR’s quickly dwindling allotment is gone. Make certain you’re not one of those unfortunate ones (and there will be MANY of them). Go right now to www.nrcruise.com and book your cabin, while there’s still one to book!

Posted at 03:36 PM

CORN'S QUESTION [Ramesh Ponnuru]
is totally legitimate, and deserves an answer: Who else was on payroll? And Corn's framing of the question, while cute, is also reasonable: By vaguely saying that other conservative commentators are for sale, Williams is impugning a lot of people. He should name names if he knows anything solid.

Posted at 03:33 PM

FLYING BLIND [KJL]
A number of e-mailer mentioned this over the weekend, and, it came up and our editorial meeting this morning (all the most important news covered, naturally): News stories keep claiming Brad and Jen were set up on a "blind date" in 1998. The whole blind aspect seems implausible, considering.

Posted at 03:29 PM

ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS [Ramesh Ponnuru]
How pathetic is his spin? Dan Flynn counts the ways. (Via redstate.org)

Posted at 03:19 PM

"THERE ARE OTHERS." [KJL]
Armstrong Williams tells David Corn he's not alone.

Corn writes:
And then Williams violated a PR rule: he got off-point. "This happens all the time," he told me. "There are others." Really? I said. Other conservative commentators accept money from the Bush administration? I asked Williams for names. "I'm not going to defend myself that way," he said. The issue right now, he explained, was his own mistake. Well, I said, what if I call you up in a few weeks, after this blows over, and then ask you? No, he said.

Does Williams really know something about other rightwing pundits? Or was he only trying to minimize his own screw-up with a momentary embrace of a trumped-up everybody-does-it defense? I could not tell. But if the IG at the Department of Education or any other official questions Williams, I suggest he or she ask what Williams meant by this comment. And if Williams is really sorry for this act of "bad judgment" and for besmirching the profession of rightwing punditry, shouldn't he do what he can to guarantee that those who watch pundits on the cable news networks and read political columnists receive conservative views that are independent and untainted by payoffs from the Bush administration or other political outfits?

Armstrong, please, help us all protect the independence of the conservative commentariat. If you are not alone, tell us who else has yielded to bad judgment.
I remain insulted no one has offered me money to promote a flawed federal program to Americans with Spanish surnames. Or to women. Or anyone.

Posted at 03:00 PM

THE BLOGOSPHERE AND THE WASHINGTON STATE RACE [KJL]
Since Barbara Boxer and the CBS aren't railing against irregularities in the Washington governor's race, bloggers are. John Fund has a good piece today on the state of the challenge and the watchdogs.

Posted at 02:58 PM

THE COOLEST POSITION IN ALL OF SPORTS [Rich Lowry ]
Forgive me one last football posting (I know there are more important things going on): there is nothing quite like the quarterback. No other sport has a position that is so glamorous, has so much influence, and is so like a field general. A pitcher is important, but is just not the same. A goalie? Too passive. A center, in basketball, hockey, or soccer (I'm assuming they have one in soccer)? Just a first among equals. Quarterback is king...

Posted at 02:55 PM

AL MICHAELS... [Rich Lowry]
...Is the best all-around broadcaster of the last 30 years, no?

Posted at 02:52 PM

THE JOY OF UNAFFILIATED FANDOM [Rich Lowry ]
Everyone wants their team to win, but I have to say there is something very nice watching games to which you have no existential commitment one way or the other. No stomach aches, no temper tantrums, no superstitious rituals, no hatred of life. In the midst of the Yankee-Red Sox series-- fantastic by any standard--I remember telling a friend, “I'm sick of baseball.” Watching this weekend's playoff games made me realize how nice it is to enjoy the drama of high-pressure sports...from a safe emotional distance.

Posted at 02:49 PM

OF COURSE [KJL]
I have a higher tolerance for Korbel than for reading the CBS report...the headache comes much faster when Dan Rather's involved.

Posted at 02:41 PM

HOW MUCH KORBEL CAN YOU DRINK [KJL]
without getting a spliting headache? Find out next week: it's the official inaugural drink.

Posted at 02:35 PM

ZEAL TO BEAT WHAT? [Tim Graham]
If CBS can be blamed for mere competitive zeal, what was "60 Minutes Wednesday" up against in the ratings battle on September 8, 2004?

ABC: a special, "Are You Ready? NFL 2004"
NBC: the dud drama "Hawaii"
Fox: "That '70s Show"/"Quintuplets"
UPN: "Amish in the City"
WB: "Smallville"

The better battle might have been against ABC a little later. At 10 Eastern that night, ABC ran a "Peter Jennings Reporting" special that sounded like it should have run in the Clinton years, exposing "high-profile health advocates who have turned their backs on anti-smoking campaigns, and the failure of the states to sustain the fight against smoking." (I only mention the Clinton era because Clinton fought tobacco much harder in public than terrorism.) That would have been liberal bias vs. liberal bias.

Posted at 01:36 PM

OBL & CIA [Jim Robbins]
The former #3 man in the CIA thinks OBL should remain at liberty. Now we know why we haven't caught him yet. Between this guy and Michael Scheuer it's pretty easy to see why the CIA has fumbled the ball. Director Goss can't clean the place out fast enough.

Posted at 01:00 PM

CBS DESPISES BUSH [Tim Graham]
No political motivation at CBS? This is like denying you can breath oxygen on Earth. It's wrong for Thornburgh and Boccardi, or anyone else, to minimize the obvious liberal agenda behind what Dan Rather and others were trying to do to George Bush's electoral chances last September. In a race in which John Kerry was touting his military service in Vietnam as making him a superior commander-in-chief to Bush, CBS's zeal on this Bush-bashing story with a Bush-hating source cannot be dismissed as merely a search for a ratings boost, as if the President were Michael Jackson or Scott Peterson.

Posted at 12:56 PM

THEY KNOW THE BLOGOSPHERE BETTER THAN THEY KNOW THEMSELVES [KJL]
The investigators at CBS can't acknowledge CBS bias but assume that watchdogging bloggers had a "conservative agenda." See p153. Jim, did you get interviewed? Did any bloggers--the ones mentioned in the report, for instance? Just wondering.

Posted at 12:46 PM

PARTY ON [KJL]
You have drinks, dinner, conversation with Rich, Jonah, Ramesh, Rick, Kate, K-Lo, and more...and Bill Buckley...at his home. The cost goes toward supporting NR/NRO, and to only begin to celebrate NR's 50th...we'd be honored to have you be a part of the night and, of course, grateful. It won't disappoint. Seats are very limited, so act now.

Posted at 12:43 PM

RICHERT REDUX [Ramesh Ponnuru]

Scott Richert defends the claim that abortion levels are rising under this president. He claims that this conclusion follows from data "that almost all national pro-life groups accept." I don't buy his argument at all.

He's mixing and matching two sets of numbers: some from the Centers for Disease Control and some from the Alan Guttmacher Institute, which is more authoritative on this subject. AGI reports 1.53 million abortions for 1992 and 1.31 million for 2000. So there was a decline in abortion during Clinton's presidency--a generally accepted fact. So far, Richert and I basically see the same picture.

AGI hasn't published new numbers for the Bush presidency. Richert uses a lower estimate for 2000--an estimate he came up with himself using the CDC's incomplete data. Then, for the post-2000 years, Richert goes back to using AGI numbers. He may not realize he is doing this. He says he is using numbers that pro-life groups accept. Perhaps he is getting his numbers from the National Right to Life Committee--certainly a major pro-life group. The NRLC has attempted to estimate how many abortions have taken place in the United States since Roe v. Wade. That required it to make estimates for 2001 through 2004. What to do in the absence of data for those years? The NRLC decided that a rough estimate that would work for their purposes was to just take the AGI estimate for 2000 forward--assuming that the number of abortions had neither decreased nor increased.

If you compared the NRLC number for 2003 to the AGI number on which it was based, you would find that abortion hasn't increased. It's stayed the same. (Which, of course, wouldn't tell you anything interesting.) If you used CDB numbers throughout, you'd have abortion declining from 1.36 million in 1992 to 857,000 for 2000 and then 853,000 in 2001.

We don't have any numbers showing that abortion has continued to decline in the Bush years--and maybe it hasn't, what with RU-486 coming on the market in September 2000--but we don't have any data showing that it's increased either. And national pro-life groups, notably the NRLC, certainly do not accept the contention that abortion levels are rising.


Posted at 12:29 PM

RE: MS. FRINGE [KJL ]
Of course, as things like last Thursday’s Boxer rebellion make clear, Mad Max & co. are more mainstream in the Democratic party than not.

Posted at 12:25 PM

MS FRINGE [KJL ]
Just in case you wondered: In the winter issue of Ms., the flagship feminist magazine declares about Maxine Waters: For us, Waters is far more than dedicated; she is a hero.

Posted at 12:20 PM

ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS [KJL ]
has got to be grateful for Dan Rather today.

Posted at 12:19 PM

THE ANTI-CHE [KJL ]
A reader suggests, in one of those e-mails one doesn’t know how to respond to: “How about a picture of Jonah with a yarmulka striking a Che like beret pose?”

Posted at 12:19 PM

MORE CHE: WHAT TO WEAR! [KJL ]
Following up on the ongoing Che Chic conversation (see Friday Corner rant):
If you are ever up to watching TLC's What Not to Wear look for an episode with a girl named Delia. At one point during taping she had a Che t-shirt on but it had the international sign for no over his face, i.e. the circle with the slash diagonally across the middle. When she turned around the shirt read, "Cuba Libre Hoy".

Posted at 12:14 PM

TIME WASTER: SOMETHING LIKE, SAY [KJL]
This or this.

Posted at 12:11 PM

IT’S A DIFFERENT WORLD THAN WHERE YOU COME FROM [KJL ]
A line on the cover of this month’s Redbook: “ANNOYING TIME WASTERS AND HOW TO BEAT THEM.”

Demonstrates no appreciation for the finer things.

(Again, I’m now encouraging the things in The Corner that I used to scold others [Jonah] for. Progress?)

Posted at 12:06 PM

WANT TO KNOW JUST HOW UNREASONABLE I AM? [KJL]
We were outraged when Bob Scheiffer wound up moderating the debates during the election, post Rathergate. I lost respect for Scheiffer for not resigning. How could you be a legit newsman type at an organization pretending so badly. (They all pretend, as I've recently gone off on (see CJR thang), but they're shameless and terrible at it.)

Posted at 12:01 PM

CBS KNEW [KJL]
They tried to trip us up, releasing the report during an NR editorial meeting. But Jim and Jonah had the eyes on 52nd Street.

Posted at 11:57 AM

I AM UNREASONABLE [KJL]
but CBS gets no cred back until Rather is gone completely and admits culpability--or CBS fires him citing that as a reason. But, like I said, I'm unreasonable.

Posted at 11:52 AM

SEBASTIAN MALLABY [Ramesh Ponnuru]
breaks down the costs of the tort system in an illuminating way.

Posted at 11:42 AM

POLITICAL AGENDA [Jonah Goldberg]

From the section of the report on the suggestion that the Memogate story was attributable to any political agenda:

The Panel is aware that some have ascribed political motivations to 60 Minutes Wednesday’s decision to air the September 8 Segment just two months before the presidential election, while others further found political bias in the program itself. The Panel reviewed this issue and found certain actions that could support such charges. However, the Panel cannot conclude that a political agenda at 60 Minutes Wednesday drove either the timing of the airing of the Segment or its content.

Given that the Panel does not believe that political motivations drove the September 8 Segment, questions likely will be raised as to why these massive breakdowns occurred on this story at an organization like CBS News with its heritage and stated commitment to the highest standards of journalism. The Panel heard from many that the Rather/Mapes team was a formidable force at 60 Minutes Wednesday. Great trust was placed in Mapes, a highly respected producer who had just produced a widely acclaimed segment on the Abu Ghraib prison abuses, and vast deference was given to Rather, the “face” of CBS News. These factors, along with the “crash” of the production, contributed greatly to the failures of the September 8 Segment and the
Aftermath.

Translation: Because we cannot do a conclusive Vulcan mind-meld with Dan Rather and Ms. Mapes to prove they were motivated in part by partisan lust and anti-Bush fervor we must conclude that they were not.


Posted at 11:08 AM

CBS REPORT [Jonah Goldberg]
Jim Geraghty's all over it.

Posted at 11:02 AM

FOUR FIRED AT CBS [Jonah Goldberg]

From MSNBC:


CBS News has fired four employees, including three executives, for their roles in the broadcast of a disputed story about President Bush’s service in the National Guard, the network reported Monday.

advertisement
The action followed an independent investigation, by former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh and former Associated Press President Louis Boccardi, that found network failed to follow basic journalistic principles in preparing the piece.

The investigators reported that a “myopic zeal” to break the story about Bush’s National Guard service was a key factor in explaining why CBS News had produced a story that was neither fair nor accurate and did not meet the organization’s internal standards.

The 224-page report not directly fault the correspondent on the story, CBS News anchor Dan Rather, who is stepping down in March.

The story, which aired on Sept. 8, relied on four documents allegedly written by one of Bush's Texas Air National Guard commanders in the early 1970s. Questions about the authenticity of the documents were raised almost immediately.

You can dowload the full CBS report there as well.


Posted at 10:56 AM

FEB 24 AT WFB'S [KJL]
We're taking more sign-ups for the party and dinner in support of NR/NRO at Bill Buckley's house in NYC. Details here. And thanks in advance. Hope to see you there.

Posted at 10:01 AM

THE CW HAS GELLED [ Jonah Goldberg ]

The other day I heard Evan Thomas explain that John Kerry's problem was that he was too high-minded. EJ Dionne is constantly complaining that the trouble with Democrats is that they aren't willing to stoop to the level of the Republicans. Now there's this USA Today piece:

WASHINGTON — Imagine a Democratic presidential candidate and his allies assailing the character of the Republican nominee in ads and speeches every day for eight months.

Having trouble? That's because Democrats generally don't have the stomach or the discipline to do it. Often they don't even effectively fight back when under attack themselves.

But with George W. Bush's second inauguration next week, Democrats are pondering their choices in a Feb. 12 election for party chairman and rethinking what might be called their character problem.

Democrats "as a group are uneasy" about attacking and defending on character, says Harold Ickes, a former Clinton aide who heads the Media Fund, a political ad organization. "But they damn well better get the stomach," he adds, because "we've seen way too many of our candidates taken down on issues of character."

There's more.

Isn't it possible, just the eensy-weensiest bit possible that there's just the tiniest bit of substance to the charges Republicans level against Democrats? Also for consideration: When Democrats attack on "character" they sound obnoxious, cyncial and insincere and that's not because they aren't "good" at it.


Posted at 09:34 AM

THE PRIDE OF THE SISTERHOOD [KJL ]
From the wire story I just linked to:
Despite conservatives' success in the election, feminists found some encouragement notably an increased turnout by low-income women in many areas, and the overwhelming re-election in populous California of Sen. Barbara Boxer, an outspoken women's rights advocate.

Posted at 09:08 AM

AMERICA NEEDS FEMINISTS LIKE A FISH NEEDS A BICYCLE [KJL ]
Liberals feminists are singing the blues since the red states have spoken.

Posted at 09:05 AM

RE: SPICY WINTER RISOTTO [KJL]
Dinner at Ramesh's!

Posted at 08:56 AM

GOOD MORNING! [KJL]
If you're just joining us--there was some Cornering Sat and Sunday--on Hollywood, Lincoln, natural disasters, Iraq, Mideast, Brad & Jen, and uh, men sharing beds (doesn't the tyrannical/puritanical K-Lo regime ban such conversations?)...and more. Just keep scrolling down...

Posted at 08:50 AM

ANOTHER TAKE ON COMMIE KITSCH [Roger Clegg]
A reader replies:
Hello Mr. Clegg:

In a recent corner post you complain about kids in Che shirts, hammer & sickle shirts, etc. With young kids (20-ish) this is merely the age old wish of a young person to offend the old. However, I'm a musician & part of my stage gear is a 25+ year old black leather jacket with dozens of pins I've collected over the years. I have Red Army pins, Soviet Rocket Forces insignia, etc.

They're like scalps.

Best Wishes,

Kent

Fort Wayne, Indiana

Posted at 08:45 AM

HOW TO MAKE A SPICY WINTER RISOTTO [Ramesh Ponnuru]
Julie Gunlock tells you how it's done.

Posted at 08:35 AM

RE: ASHCROFT'S DITTY [KJL]
An e-mail:
I'm sure you didn't mean to use "roll" for "role," but it does raise an interesting "Baba Wawa"-type question: If John Ashcroft could be a roll, what kind of roll would he be? By caricature, maybe "whole-wheat," "sourdough" or even "kaiser," but I think that he would prefer to be a hearty "potato" roll.


I'll never make that typo again, for sure...

Posted at 08:32 AM

BABIES AND SOCIAL SECURITY [Ramesh Ponnuru]

An email from a smart friend who follows the Social Security debate:

"Don’t know if you saw the Phil Longman piece in today’s [Washington] Post, but it hits some of the same points as that Mueller article [which I discuss here--RP] and might be worth commenting on in the Corner. Longman’s got some points – part of Social Security’s shortfall is due to falling birth rates – but he exaggerates their role and his solution is a bit off. He says that 'it's the decline in the American birthrate since the postwar "baby boom" years that most threatens the benefits of future retirees.' Partly, but the real killer is increased longevity (Mueller makes this mistake as well). Every worker eventually becomes a retiree, so there’s a bit of a wash there. But if life expectancy at 65 goes from 10 years to 20 years, that’s almost a pure loss to the system.

"The average birth rate since the baby boom has been about 2.1 children per woman, while from 1940-1964 it averaged 3.1. Even if we went from 2.1 to 3.1 kids/woman, you’d only erase 1.1 percentage points of the 1.9 percent 75-year deficit, which itself exaggerates the impact because it doesn’t count the extra people born before 2075 who need to be paid benefits afterwards. (This is one of many good reasons to use the perpetuity forecasts, since this truncation affects measures of a bunch of different factors).

"Longman’s policy idea ['have one child, and the payroll tax you pay (and that your employer nominally pays) drops by one-third. A second child would be worth a two-thirds reduction in payroll taxes. Have three or more children and you wouldn't have any payroll taxes again until your youngest child turned 18.'] has even more problems. Since the average person already has two kids, we’d be cutting payroll taxes by two-thirds on most of them. Even if it’s just til the kids turn 19, it would cut revenue by about one-third without any real payoff. You’d really have to rejigger things to get it right, plus you’d have lawsuits from infertile people protesting the tax increase.

"Personally, I wouldn’t have any beef if the spousal benefit were traded for a child’s benefit like a tax cut, since it’s a more effective way to raise fertility, but I wouldn’t look to this to rescue us.

"Longman’s also wrong that it was Social Security that caused the decline in fertility. Before stocks and mutual funds were widely available, there weren’t many ways for people to save for retirement. Having and investing in kids was a way to transfer assets over time. But once financial capital became readily available, people would invest in stocks or bonds rather than kids. Now, SS probably reduced the amount that people save (as Feldstein argues), but if there weren’t SS there would be more money in stocks/bonds, not necessarily more kids.

"Anyway, just a few thoughts."


Posted at 08:18 AM

CONIFF ON THE A-PARTY [KJL ]
She’s livid about "softening" talk: “If the Dems give up on abortion, how are we to tell them apart from the Republicans? Because they're nice?” You’ll want to read it.

Posted at 07:55 AM

CHANGE, COMING TO THE ABORTION-PROTECTION PARTY? [ KJL ]
Pro-life Tim Roemer has joined the race for DNC chair.

Posted at 07:53 AM

SEAN PENN ON W.—BECAUSE I KNOW YOU CARE [KJL ]
Now starring in The Assassination of Richard Nixon; From the Boston Globe:
There's an interesting parallel between Bush and Richard Nixon. While Nixon was clearly a superior statesman and in many ways a more intelligent politician, what they share is a kind of boldness in how they emote their insecurities. What we're finding with George Bush -- part of what's familiar to people and that adds to his likability for many -- is that there's a commonality of deep insecurity and his handling it with a kind of bravado. What they both did is handle things with a similar certainty -- certainty being the "disease of kings."

Posted at 07:50 AM

REALITY TV KEEPS GETTING WORSE [KJL ]
A sperm competition? Really. So far, no takers to put it on the air, but, there is always Fox.

Posted at 07:49 AM

TO THE CHAIR [KJL ]
A Connecticut Death-Row inmate volunteers to die.

Posted at 07:32 AM

IRAQIS CANDIDATES [KJL ]
Hit the airwaves.

Posted at 07:29 AM

MOVE OVER KID ROCK, “LET THE EAGLE SOAR” [KJL ]
I missed this last week: Outgoing AG John Ashcroft will play a roll in the inauguration: a song he wrote will be sung.

Posted at 07:12 AM

DON RUMSELD TO KILL NUNS [Michael Graham]
That might as well be the headline on this Newsweek story, which breathlessly reports the scandalous decision by the US military to (prepare to be shocked) start killing people!

The “people” are terrorist leaders and insurgent cell members in Iraq and Syria. The plan is fairly straightforward: Teams of Iraqis led by U.S. Special Forces will find Bathist hold-outs like Saddam’s half-brother—currently believed to be hiding in Syria—and capture or kill them.
In the hands of Newsweek writers Michael Hirsh and John Barry, it sounds like the return of the SS. They call these U.S. military-led units “paramilitary,” which is confusing, and suggest the approach is similar to that used by “death squads” in El Salvador in the 1980s. Newsweek even throws in Iran-Contra for good measure.

The only thing Newsweek seems to be missing is journalism. Look for “Bush Enlists Bigfoot In Terror Fight” on Newsweek’s cover next week.

Posted at 07:09 AM

CNN SCRAPS "HEAD-BUTTING" [Tim Graham]
Something tells me new CNN boss Jonathan Klein is not going to be the competitive genius Fox News has reason to fear. While no one can argue the current "Crossfire" formula was a monster hit -- a show that was once unique is now overshadowed by all its copies -- Klein seems to be suggesting his fight against feisty Fox is going to be made by dropping the "head-butting" shows, making CNN a pure "news" channel. But I'd say Klein is trying to impress the liberal media elite, not the general public. He's trying to suggest CNN is marching closer in concept to a 24-hour Jim Lehrer NewsHour channel, which would have to make Fox want to hold a secret three-hour meeting with the sole agenda item of laughing themselves silly. In reality, CNN is then not an "objective" news channel, but a traditional liberal pretending-we're-objective news channel.

Wouldn't you think that one way to go at the Fox lead would be to try to poach the natural Fox audience and offer a better balance, with more conservative voices? Instead, CNN is taking "Crossfire" and "The Capital Gang" off the air, two rare places where conservatives would feel a reason to see their favorites mix it up on CNN. By the same token, this was in a sense what went wrong with "Crossfire." Conservatives neither felt Tucker Carlson was exactly Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity, and then couldn't for one minute watch Bill Clinton's harshest paid liars hold up the other end of the table.

Even if you're a lefty and you think CNN or MSNBC reaching out for conservatives is a terrible goal, CNN can no longer pretend that when news breaks out, the cable-news junkies will think "CNN" as the first destination. It's a competitive world out there now. Liberals often think people like Fox for their "head-butting" (Hannity, O'Reilly) and don't see Fox as a place to get hard news. That would be wrong. It's precisely because many viewers have seen the "news" filtered by Aaron Brown (or the likes of Keith Olbermann on MSNBC) that they feel Fox News is more fair and balanced (while, yes, liberals, less likely to trash the country they love).

Posted at 07:07 AM

GUYS SHARING BEDS [John Derbyshire]
A reader: "Mr. Derbyshire---Even more recently: Roberto Benini shares a bed with his male friend in 'Life is Beautiful.' I just thought it was a European thing."

I cannot resist recycling a Fleet Street story from the waning days of the hapless John Major's administration in Britain. The government had launched a "moral values" campaign, promoting old-fashioned virtues, family life, and so on. This campaign was given the name "Back to Basics." The campaign suffered something of a setback when it was learned that the (male) government minister responsible for promoting "Back to Basics" had shared a bed with another (male) government functionary on an official trip to France. Once this became known, the minister concerned issued an indignant denial of any impropriety, insisting that he and his colleague had shared a bed simply to save taxpayer funds, French hotels being outrageously expensive. Nothing untoward at all had occurred, he firmly insisted. One of the London tabloids ran this denial under the heading: BACK TO BACK TO BASICS.

Posted at 07:00 AM

CROSSFIRE NOSTALGIA [Tim Graham]
While Vaughn Ververs is right to have nostalgia for the good old days (or at least just plain old days) when “Crossfire” was a rare chance to conservatives and liberals battle it out on television – indeed, my college roommates would quickly discover that for me, it was appointment television – the nostalgia can travel a bit far. In fact, even then, I felt the show’s first liberal host, Tom Braden, was regularly unimpressive, a dream opponent. That’s judging what he said, not even noting the fact he looked about 40 years older than Pat Buchanan back then. Here’s two tiny tidbits out of the MRC dustbin.

Pat Buchanan: "What I want to know about you is why you are not as concerned about the freedom of Nicaraguans as you were about the freedom of Frenchmen?"
Tom Braden: "Because our civilization depended on winning World War II, and this [Nicaragua] is a tin-horn, chicken-shack country."
-- Crossfire, May 2, 1988.
Robert Novak: "Ask the dead people in Beijing about the menace of communism: right through the head. That's the menace."
Tom Braden: "That's not communism, that's fascism and it's a dictatorship, and that's all it is."
-- Crossfire, June 5, 1989.
As for the show being remembered as more civil then, Braden also uncorked lines like this one in 1988: “Most conservatives are stupid.”

Posted at 06:55 AM

RE: ATHEISTS FOR INTELLIGENT DESIGN [John Derbyshire]
Jonah: As I understand Intelligent Design theory, it rests on the idea that there are phenomena, especially in biological evolution, that can only be explained by the intercession of a directing intelligence. Behe's "irreducible complexity," for instance, says: "You can't get from HERE to HERE (in the evolution of an organism) by any conceivable natural process, because the intermediate steps make no functional sense."

Whatever the merits of this kind of argument, it does not necessarily imply **supernatural** intervention. We might, for example, be sharing the universe with creatures who are as far advanced from our biological state as we are from the amoeba. Nothing that we know about the universe makes this impossible, or even unlikely. (Earth formed about 4.6 bn years ago, and amoeba-equivalents around 1bn years ago. A planet that formed a billion years earlier than ours -- this is not improbable, in a universe 13 bn years old -- and on which biology proceeded at the same pace, would fit the bill.) If these super-creatures were diddling about with our evolution for their own unfathomable purposes, that would be Intelligent Design; but it would be entirely within the scope of the natural world. Of course, that would leave hanging the question of how THEY got evolved... but properly scientific investigation of that point would have to wait until we had access to their biology.

It is therefore possible that some un-religious scientist might become convinced, on scientific evidence, of the existence of Intelligent Design, while remaining perfectly open minded about any of the truths of religion.

When that scientist shows up, I shall beging to take Intelligent Design seriously.

Posted at 06:49 AM

ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS [KJL ]
Re: his apology: What do vouchers have to do with No Child Left Behind? Not much, most school choice was mixed in Congress. So he kinda lost me.

Posted at 06:26 AM

"PROBABLE CAUSE" [KJL]
The Tacoma News Tribune says Rossi has good reasons to challenge the gubernatorial election results.

Posted at 05:38 AM

GOOD-NEWS ROUND-UP [KJL]
from Afghanistan, here.

Posted at 05:35 AM

ON ANOTHER CHANNEL SUNDAY NIGHT... [KJL]
A reader reports:
you apparently missed a great line on Fox's premiere of "24." William Devane, playing the Secretary of Defense, was discussing policy with his son, who was planning some sort of lefty protest at Andrews AFB. The son gave his father the usual lefty "It's all America's fault" speech, and William Devane's character responded by telling his son to "Spare me the 6th grade Michael Moore logic." I nearly fell out of my chair!

Posted at 05:31 AM

PAJAMAHADEEN [KJL]
get some respect: "most creative" word of the year, according to the American Dialect Society. Nice job, Jim Geraghty.

Posted at 12:12 AM

Sunday, January 09, 2005

THE PRIVATE PASSION OF MEL GIBSON [KJL]
An Australian piece on the Gibsons' giving.

Posted at 11:39 PM

STRAIGHT TALK [KJL]
Abbas doesn't pretend: "I present this victory to the soul of Yasser Arafat and present it to our people, to our martyrs and to 11,000 prisoners."

Posted at 11:08 PM

I'M A LITTLE SHOCKED [KJL ]
Gibson got a standing ovation (it may be the "people's choice awards," but it is still Hollywood).

He said: “When you circumvent the system, I depended on you, and you were there….God bless you all.”

Posted at 11:01 PM

MEL WINS [KJL ]
Passion takes home the Favorite Movie Drama, last one of the night.

Posted at 10:55 PM

OK, NEVERMIND...MOORE BUCKS UP HIS PEOPLE [KJL ]
The place just went nuts for Moore. Upon accepting the award for best movie: “I don’t want you to give up. This country is still all of ours…I’ll take this as an invitation to make more Fahrenheit 9/11s.” (Oh joy.)

Posted at 10:43 PM

ATHEISTS FOR INTELLIGENT DESIGN [Jonah Goldberg]
Derb - Isn't that a little bit of an oxymoron? I guess you qualify that by referring to a "committed religious believer." Still I do kind of like the idea of a scientist who is convinced he's come upon proof that the cosmos was designed by a higher power and yet at the same time steadfastly believes there is no God. There must be some good ironic quote about the "triumph of hope" to be used in such a context but I'm too exhausted to think what it might be.

Posted at 10:40 PM

PRESIDENT BARTLET [KJL ]
Martin Sheen’s line was relatively even sober: “It’s nice to see democracy is alive and well, at least here, at the People’s Choice Awards”

Posted at 10:37 PM

AN HOUR AND A HALF INTO THE PEOPLE’S CHOICE AWARDS [KJL ]
Cliff, I'm watching, waiting for a Moore-Gibson showdown. (Actually, there won't be one: They are in different categories.) It has had its moments: Ellen DeGeneres was funny, always tends to be. Adam Sandler cracked me up, as always (and had some words for our troops—good stuff). But, man, other than that…I almost want the pontificating. I think I was disappointed when Sheryl Crow thanked Cat Stevens for writing “The First Cut Is the Deepest” and made no associated political point. (Eric McCormack from Will and Grace did do a “We’re Here, We’re Queer.”…but, zzz.)

So, yes, next time I complain about Hollywood politics and how we don’t care what Sean Penn thinks about the Iraq war, etc., you can call me a hypocrite.

Of course, Martin Sheen is coming up. And Michael Moore. And Mel Gibson. So it'll get interesting.

Posted at 10:31 PM

RE: BROOKHISER ON TRIPP ON LINCOLN [John Derbyshire]
Rick: I take your point about Lincoln's weirdness; and the explaining of it, or at least the "placing" of it on the spectrum of known human sexual types, is certainly a legitimate historical exercise. The notion that incoln was "gay" in the modern, self-conscious sense seems to me preposterous, though; and the adducing as evidence for it, that he shared a bed with other men, is preposterosity on stilts. However, this is not really fair comment, since I know Tripp's book only from your review, and Lincoln not half as well as I ought.

Generally speaking, though, I would take this business of "outing" historical characters more seriously -- I actually just mean "seriously" -- if it were ever done by someone not a homosexualist ideologue; just as I would take the "intelligent design" stuff more seriously if it were argued by someone not a committed religious believer. As it is, these cannot but come across as exercises in axe-grinding.

Posted at 10:24 PM

HOLLYWOOD [Cliff May]
So it’s Sunday evening, and I figure I’ll turn on the TV and relax for a little while, but I sure don’t want to watch the so-called “People’s Choice” awards, where I expect they will claim that the “people” have chosen Michael Moore.

No, I turn on “Boston Legal” where the plot is about an immigrant from Sudan who has become vastly wealthy here in the United States but he is upset over the genocide in Darfur and so he wants to sue – the U.S. government. (I kid you not.)

The attorney tells him he is unlikely to prevail and, what’s more, the butchery in Darfur has been widely reported in the U.S. but, she adds, it’s clear that, “The American people don’t care.” (I kid you not.)

I’m turning off the TV now. I’m going back to work.

Posted at 10:15 PM

BUT DON’T FORGET: THE UN HAS MORAL AUTHORITY [Cliff May]
UN peacekeepers working in the Congo sexually abused girls as young as 13.

Posted at 08:57 PM

POSTHUMOUS OUTING [Rick Brookhiser]
John, I ran into this with Alexander Hamilton. People fasten on quite passionate language in letters he wrote in his early twenties to Col. John Laurens, Lafayette, and other young officers on Washington's staff, or close to Washington. Far more intense than anything Lincoln ever wrote anyone, they speak of "love," "my heart," etc., etc.

I concluded that Hamilton was not gay, passingly gay, or passingly bisexual, because of the times, and the rest of his life. His letters--and the letters of other officers to him, and to each other--breathed the 18th century cult of sensibility, propogated by Sterne (and mocked by Jane Austen). It was cool to show how deeply you felt your feelings--hence the over the top rhetoric.

Hamilton showed himself to be a dedicated lover of women. He married at 23, and had eight children with his wife, whom he adored and who adored him. He also had a crush on her elder sister (whether or not they had an affair is a great crux of Hamilton biography). By his own public admission, he had an affair with Maria Reynolds, a blackmailer.

The mass of Lincoln's life seems very different. The Weekly Standard has a piece by Philip Nobile, accusing C.A. Tripp (author of the book I reviewed) of plagiarizing him, and of bending evidence. The question of plagiarism I leave to the courts. Bending of evidence will be obvious to anyone who reads Tripp's book. But the wierdness in Lincoln remains.

Posted at 08:55 PM

MONDAY LOOKS LIKE IT WILL BE A LONG DAY [KJL]
for Kofi Annan--see Judith Miller's piece here if you haven't. And, typically, the U.N. CYA spin has begun in earnest already.

Posted at 06:13 PM

ABBAS [KJL]
wins.

Posted at 06:04 PM

RE: BROOKHISER ON TRIPP ON LINCOLN [John Derbyshire]
Some points on the matter of men sharing beds.

(1) From a reader: "Dear Derb---Pursuant to NRO's staff recommendations on 'must read' classics, I delved into Moby Dick because that was on everyone's list. There, Ishmael and the harponeer, Queequeg, share a bed prior to sailing. Quite a long dissertation on the subject."

(2) A reader in England recalls that the 1970s TV comedy duo Morecambe and Wise shared a bed in several sketches. There was a story that one of the producers questioned this, wondering if perhaps viewers would think that perhaps there was a homosexual "subtext." The consensus among the players and production personnel, however, was: "Nah...."

(3) I have vague recollections of two sailors (!) on shore leave sharing a bed in a 1940s British movie, but I can't remember which one. Anyone recall this, or similar instances in movies?

Posted at 06:01 PM

MORE AMERICAN INNOCENCE [Rick Brookhiser]
John, Sidney Hook famously asked, "What do homosexuals do?" I was not given a date when told this anecdote, but my impression was that it happened in the mid 20th century.

Posted at 05:58 PM

BROOKHISER OF TRIPP ON LINCOLN [John Derbyshire]
Rick:

That is a nice, measured review. I think you have been too kind to Tripp, though. The "recruiting" of historical figures to the homosexualist cause has been with us at least since my schooldays, when a homosexual schoolmaster spent an extraordinary amount of time trying to persuade us that various historical -- esp. Lord Kitchener -- had been homosexual. (On my reading of the evidence, it seems much more likely that Kitchener was simply asexual.) More recently, Louis Crompton, another homosexual propagandist, has published a book on this theme, which I reviewed a few months ago for the Claremont Review.

On the topic of men sharing beds: I don't know how things went over here, but in England this was commonplace until very recently. I can remember sharing beds with other guys when a student in the mid-1960s. It was a matter of convenience; nobody thought there was anything peculiar or salacious about it.

Further back people were even more blithe. Especially, perhaps, in the USA: "America in those days was a curiously innocent country. Numbers of men asked me to explain what it was that Oscar Wilde had done." ---Bertrand Russell's Autobiography, vol. 1, p.209. He is speaking of the late 1890s.

Posted at 02:24 PM

PA TV BLAMES JEWS AND AMERICANS FOR TSUNAMI [Cliff May]
“[T]he Jews are a cancer that spreads inside the body of the Islamic and Arab nation.... They invest in the East Asian countries, which were destroyed [by the Tsunami] because of the Jewish and American corruption and destruction."

Palestinian Media Watch has more.

Posted at 01:58 PM

IRAQI WOMEN LOOK FORWARD TO THE FUTURE [KJL ]
Interesting poll from a non-“neocon” source (!):
The first survey of Iraqi women since the outbreak of the war was released today by Women for Women International, one of the few non-governmental organizations remaining in Baghdad. The groundbreaking survey paints a vivid and even surprising portrait of Iraqi women in transition and dispels the prevailing notion that women believe tradition, customs or religion should limit their participation in the formation of a new Iraqi government….
The most unexpected result of the survey is that despite increasing violence, particularly violence against women, 90.6% of Iraqi women reported that they are hopeful about their future…

Posted at 01:39 PM

MR. LINCOLN [Rick Brookhiser]
My review of the new Lincoln was gay book appears in the New York Times Book Review this weekend.

Posted at 12:40 PM

CHE RE-RE-EDUCATION [KJL]
A reader has the right idea. Could start a trend...

Posted at 12:34 PM

READING BEYOND THE FIRST PARAGRAPH [KJL]
An opportunity for peace in the Mideast? Think again. Andy McCarthy points this out, from a piece in the Guardian on the Palestinian elections today:
"Yehiya Musa, the Hamas leader in the southern Gaza town of Khan Yunis, said: 'The struggle with Israel is in stages. Each one is different. If Abu Mazen comes to us with proposals about how to deal with this stage, we will look at them very seriously.'"

Posted at 10:59 AM

BUT WAS HE WEARING A CHE SHIRT? [KJL]
An Italian sports star appears to give a fascist salute. Happens to play for Mussolini's favorite team.

Posted at 10:53 AM

A JET… TILL THEY CART YOU AWAY [KJL]
Players picking a fight at a sports game is so last year.

Posted at 10:33 AM

SMELLS LIKE A HATE CRIME... [KJL]
...Or a desperate host. From a reader:
Did you see Keith Olberman [Friday] night on MSNBC? After savaging Fox News throughout most of his "newscast" he took a "talking Ann Coulter" doll and literally bashed it, smashing it repeatedly across the edge of his dest with a look of pure hatred on his desk, until it was in pieces.

After the break he held up the naked legs and buttocks of the doll and said, "This is all that's left of Ann Coulter." Then he threw it at the camera.

Posted at 10:26 AM





Looking
for a story?
Click here