Image
Demagoguery
"Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth."

Franklin D. Roosevelt


Regular Reads
Eschaton
Tapped
Daily Kos
The Liquid List
Matthew Yglesias
Talking Points Memo
Slacktivist
James Wolcott
Michael Berube
Political Animal
How Appealing
MaxSpeak, You Listen!
Tbogg
TalkLeft
Rittenhouse Review
Neal Pollack
Suckful
Cursor
John Moltz
Southern Appeal
Nathan Newman
The Poor Man
NRO's "The Corner"
Pandagon
Wonkette
Legal Fiction
Sugar, Mr. Poon?
Carpetbagger Report
Balkinization
Happy Furry Puppy Story Time w/ Norbizness
This Is Not Over


Contact Us
Eugene Oregon
Noam Alaska
Helena Montana
Frederick Maryland
Zoe Kentucky
Arnold P. California


Mutual Admiration Society
DCCC's The Stakeholder
Abolish the Death Penalty
Busy Busy Busy
Uggabugga
New American Empire
Staunch Moderate
A La Gauche
The Moderate Voice
The Sneaky Rabbit
Bluegrassroots
Political Strategy
Cutting to the Chase
Acrentropy
The Blue Bus
American Monkey
Restless Mania
Your Right Hand Thief
Naked Furniture
Dimmy Karras
The Department of Louise
Torvus Futurus
HellaFaded
Live From the Nuke Free Zone
Proof Through the Night
No More Apples
Slapnose
PoliGeek
Irrational Bush Hatred
The Slugging Southpaw
I Voted for George
Nosey Online
Donna's Place
Schadenfreude
Resource.full
wordsimageslife
The Bully Pulpit
Lying Socialist Weasels
TJ Griffin
To The Barricades
Omni-Curious
Eat Your Vegetables
Stoutdem
Suddenly Routine
The Story So Far
Skimble
Marstonalia
The Lefty Directory
ZipSix
ReachM High Cowboy Network
John Hoke's Personal Asylum
Riba Rambles
The Bone
Fables of the Reconstruction
The Modulator
Planet Swank
Scoobie Davis Online
Single-Minded
World Phamous
The Good Life
Something's Got To Break
Upside-down Hippopotamus
Damfacrats 2004
The Fulcrum
BeatBushBlog
archy
Yankee From Mississippi
It's A Crock!
Red Wheelbarrow
Apropos of Nothing
Political Parrhesia
The Mahablog
Mousemusings
Restlessgeist
Galois
Muise in Gradland
American Leftist
Political Blog Directory
Boiled Meat
John Costello
Skydiver Salad
The Game & How We Played It
Soupie's BBQ and Daycare
Odd Hours
Nebraska Liberal
The American Street
Approximately Perfect


If you have linked to us and don't see your name, please send us an e-mail and we'll add you.


Recommendations
















Archives:


-- HOME --



This page is powered by Blogger. Why isn't yours?
Thursday, June 10, 2004


The Public Grades Reagan's Presidency

Two years ago, conservative pundit Pat Buchanan called Ronald Reagan "one of the greatest presidents ever." In the wake of his death, those on the Right are pouring it on. Ann Coulter recently declared, "America's greatest president has gone home." Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey emphatically writes, "We have no doubt that history will remember him as the greatest modern American President." But ordinary Americans? Their review can best be summed up as "Pretty good? Sure ... The Greatest? No way."

Question #7 on this new CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll asked the public:
How do you think Ronald Reagan will go down in history -- as an outstanding president, above average, average, below average, or poor?

Outstanding ........ 15
Above Average ...... 43
Average ............ 31
Below Average ....... 6
Poor ................ 4
No Opinion .......... 1

(Poll was conducted on June 6.)


posted by Frederick Maryland at 6:31 PM




In Honor of Reagan's Passing ...

There will be little to no blogging on Friday as the entire city of Washington seems to be shutting down - including our places of employment.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 5:08 PM




The Intelligence Failure No One Talks About

America’s intelligence failures, argues Jeffrey Sachs, "extend far beyond the CIA and the countries where America is at war or chasing terrorists." In this recent column, Sachs, director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, writes:
In the world's poorest regions, from the Andes to Central Asia, the U.S. government seems to operate almost blindly, facing challenges that it simply does not understand and therefore can't resolve.

This isn't a problem that started in this Bush administration, though the combination of ignorance and arrogance in President George W. Bush's foreign policy has proved especially lethal.

Since the early 1980s, American development programs have been gutted, to the point that there is little institutional understanding about societies seething because of mass unemployment, rapid population growth, (and) pervasive disease ...
"Since the early 1980s" ... otherwise known as the Reagan years. (Much too easy to resist.) Sachs continues:
This is too bad, because the low-income world (roughly, those who live and die on less than $2 per day) constitutes half of humanity -- and most of the places where American troops have fought and died in recent decades.

When I went to key Bush administration officials in 2001 to urge stepping up the battle against the AIDS pandemic, my counterparts were lawyers, holdovers from the cold war and political operatives. What was lacking was professional expertise ... [USAID’s] budget and expertise had been so sapped by 2001 that there were few independent thinkers left, and even fewer who knew the details of the AIDS catastrophe in Africa.

... When it has been urgent in recent years to confront challenges arising from African poverty, Andean political instability or environmental catastrophes in Asia, there has been almost nobody to speak with in senior U.S. government positions.

... The undoing of U.S. foreign policy is captured in the budget numbers. Long gone are the Marshall Plan times, when America dedicated several percent of its gross domestic product to European reconstruction. The United States will spend about $450 billion this year on the military but only $15 billion on official development assistance.

The 30-to-1 ratio is mirrored by a similar imbalance in American thinking. America's military expertise is undoubted. America's ability to understand what exists before and after wars in low-income countries is nearly nonexistent.

... [USAID] requires a professional, nonpoliticized leadership and staff; a new mandate to study a world economy of startling inequalities; increased financial resources to help fragile and impoverished countries before they fall into chaos; and a rank as a cabinet-level department ... The United States must have leaders who recognize that the problems of the poor aren't trifles to leave to do-gooders, but are vital strategic issues.


posted by Frederick Maryland at 4:07 PM




Hell Hath No Fury Like a Corner Scorned

There's a funny exchange going on at the blog for the Libertarian magazine, Reason. Reason's Jesse Walker comments (both effectively and humorously) on the hubbub surrounding Reagan's funeral:

Deathfest: Day 4

You can count me among those who find the Week-Long Death Festival more appropriate for the expiration of a North Korean dictator than an American president. But as long as we're all still talking about Reagan, can I pipe up and say I never was one of those people who found his speeches "inspiring"? If the best thing Reagan ever did was to pardon Merle Haggard, the worst was to saddle us with Peggy Noonan.

Walker's post was picked up by the Jonah Goldberg at NRO's The Corner and, since then, a bunch of Corner groupies have attacked Walker with witticisms about "turds," etc.

Jesse, having briefly felt the wrath of some of John Derbyshire's acolytes (some of whom offered "your momma" jokes in response to one of my posts) I feel your pain.

posted by Noam Alaska at 3:22 PM




Sudan's Neglected Nightmare

The The Globe and Mail has a great article on Darfur which explains the situation on the ground as well as the events that created it

The annual rains will come this week, or next -- fierce storms that will instantly rob the refugees of whatever shelter they have cobbled together, and make the roads impassable for aid trucks for as much as four months. With the advent of the rains, the farmers will have missed the planting season -- they can put no crops in the ground now, and so they will have nothing to harvest, and nothing to eat in the coming year. So even were there peace in Darfur tomorrow, they could not go home for almost a year; they must stay in the camps where the UN doles out grain and soybeans.

I found the article via 100 Days of Rwanda which seeks to, in some small way, make us conscious of the 100 days in 1994 during which hundreds of thousands of people died.

Today is day 65.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 2:22 PM




King of Pork Hails Reagan's Anti-Gov't Philosophy

At yesterday's Capitol Rotunda funeral ceremonies for former President Reagan, the mood of solemnity was pretty well shattered by both the sloppy history and hypocritical nature of Senator Ted Stevens' remarks. In his eulogy, Stevens stated:
When Ronald Reagan was sworn in as our 40th President, this nation was gripped by a powerful malaise -- inflation and unemployment were soaring, and the Soviet Union was winning the Cold War.
The latter assertion is rather far-fetched. Although the Reagan campaign preyed on voters' fears that America was falling behind in the arms race, not even Reagan himself seemed to believe it. At one point, in the early 1980s, Reagan himself was asked if he would willingly trade the U.S. nuclear arsenal for the Soviet nuclear arsenal; his answer was "no."

Most ridiculous of all was Stevens, the maestro of pork-barrel spending, hailing Reagan with these words:
[Reagan] reminded us that "government is not the solution." The solution lies in each of us.
Interesting words coming from Stevens who is very fond of government when it lets him play Santa Claus. Since 2001, the Alaska senator has twice received Citizens Against Government Waste's "Porker of the Month" award.

Alaska is one of 7 states without a state income tax. And the state has no reason to create one so long as it can count on Stevens (as chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee) to make taxpayers from other states subsidize rather dubious projects in his state such as these:
$1.25 million for Aleutian Pribilof church repairs
$2.5 million for a pilot training simulator at the Univ. of Alaska
$750,000 for the Ketchikan Wood Technology Center
$400,000 for a parking lot and pedestrian safety access in the town of Talkeetna (population: 300).
If they ever produced a video of Senator Stevens' political career, it would be easy to name: "Stevens Gone Wild!"

posted by Frederick Maryland at 2:14 PM




Riding Reagan's Coattails?

A lot of Republicans seem to believe that Reagan's death will give Bush a bump in the polls. So far, they couldn't be more wrong. In the first 4 days after Reagan's death-- during the height of the media's nonstop eulogizing-- the average American voter appears to be unaffected.
Kerry led Bush 51 percent to 44 percent, according to the poll, which was posted on the Times Web site Wednesday evening. With independent candidate Ralph Nader included, Kerry received 48 percent, Bush 42 percent and Nader 4 percent.

The poll surveyed 1,230 registered voters nationwide from Saturday to Tuesday.
...
Though the poll showed that voters may favor Kerry, it also showed that they lack knowledge about him and are less sure about his stance on issues.


Addendum:There are also these new numbers to consider:

Question: "If the November 2004 general election for Congress were being held today, which party would you like to see win in your congressional district: the Democratic Party or the Republican Party?"

Democrat 54%
Republican 35%
Independent 1%
Neither 3%
Unsure 7%

The Los Angeles Times poll. June 5-8, 2004. N=1,230 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3 (total sample)



posted by Zoe Kentucky at 11:03 AM




Huh?

From the The New York Times

An emotional President Bush met Wednesday for the first time with the newly designated interim president of Iraq, Sheik Ghazi Ajil al-Yawar, telling him, "I never thought I'd be sitting next to an Iraqi president of a free country a year and a half ago."

From a year and a half ago, during Bush's January 2003 State of the Union Address

And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country -- your enemy is ruling your country. (Applause.) And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation.

Either Bush didn't think his push for war was going to work or he is trying to pretend that he hadn't been planning on attacking Iraq since they day he took office.

Or maybe he is just an idiot.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 10:44 AM




Sudan

This isn't good news

Not a single Sudanese child refugee under the age of five will be alive in six months unless there is immediate and dramatic international intervention, a senior United Nations official warned yesterday.

This is depressing

The pro-government Janjaweed Arab militia has been accused of using systematic rape, as well as killing and destroying the villages of black Africans, in the conflict in Sudan's western Darfur region.

And this is appalling

Sudanese Vice President Ali Osman Taha blamed Western governments for the conflict in Sudan's Darfur region that the United Nations has described as the world's worst humanitarian crisis.

He told a gathering of Egyptian and Sudanese intellectuals and politicians in Cairo that the conflict in western Darfur was "fabricated" by the international community, and in particular, by the West.

And just beyond Sudan's southern border, the Lord's Resistance Army is still killing people

Rebels of the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) launched a fourth raid within a month on a camp for internally displaced persons (IDPs) in northern Uganda on Tuesday, killing at least 19 people and burning over 200 huts, the Ugandan army and witnesses said.

So far this month, the LRA has killed nearly 100 people, and last night they killed 25 more

The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) rebels last night struck Apok camp in Oyam North and killed 25 people. The LC-V of Apac, Ben Chwa visited the scene of the attack in Otwal-sub county, 30 miles northwest of Apac town. He told The Monitor yesterday that he had counted 25 dead bodies.

"We counted 19 bodies of which six were children. Six other bodies were found on the way," he said. The Gombolola Internal Security Officer, Tony Okello, said the rebels who were dressed in army fatigue, duped the wananchi in the camp, before staging the attack.


posted by Eugene Oregon at 10:08 AM




I Couldn't Have Said it Better Myself

Ann Coulter's pathological need to say the exact opposite of anything "liberals" are saying leads her to do strange things. For example, since "liberals" seem to be praising Reagan upon his death, she feels compelled to remind us that he was, in fact, a total right-wing asshole

This wasn't sunny old grandpa carrying candy around in his pocket for children. After watching Walter Cronkite's coverage of the Vietnam War in December 1972, Reagan told President Richard Nixon, "under World War II circumstances, the network [CBS] would have been charged with treason."

Reagan quoted "Mr. Democrat himself," Al Smith, for the proposition that the Democratic Party was no longer the party of Jefferson, Jackson and Cleveland, but was now the party of Marx, Lenin and Stalin. (And that was 30 years before they tried to push Hillarycare on us.)

Reagan was a bulldog, completely, implacably right-wing on every issue. He was the right-wing Energizer Bunny. He never quit and he kept beating liberals. He cut taxes 25 percent across the board his first year in office; he walked away from Gorbachev at Reykjavik; he fired all those air-traffic controllers - and wouldn't let them come back even when they wanted to; he gave speeches about 'welfare queens' and polluting trees; he nominated Antonin Scalia and Robert Bork to the Supreme Court; and he enraged grim liberals when he warmed up his radio mike by saying, 'My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.'

You are totally right. Thanks for scoring on your own goal, Ann.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 9:21 AM


Wednesday, June 09, 2004


See Ralph Run...For the Buchanan Right

Ralph Nader sits down and makes his pitch in an interview with Pat Buchanan himself. I'm sure it will infuriate many Dems to read it, so if you're one of those I recommend sitting it out and sparing your blood pressure.

I actually found it kind of interesting. Will I be frustrated if he draws a lot of votes? Of course. Rather egomaniacal? Yup. But I will give him this: he means what he says and he says what he means. So I offer this up without much comment other than that. To see what I mean, check out Nader's closing pitch to the audience of The American Conservative.
If you add all of those up, you should have a conservative rebellion against the giant corporation in the White House masquerading as a human being named George W. Bush. Just as progressives have been abandoned by the corporate Democrats and told, "You got nowhere to go other than to stay home or vote for the Democrats," this is the fate of the authentic conservatives in the Republican Party.

I noticed this a long time ago, Pat. I once said to Bill Bennett, "Would you agree that corporatism is on a collision course with conservative values?" and he said yes.

The impact of giant corporations, commercialism, direct marketing to kids, sidestepping parents, selling them junk food, selling them violence, selling them sex and addictions, selling them the suspension of their socialization process -- years ago conservatives spoke out on that, but it was never transformed into a political position. It was always an ethical, religious value position. It is time to take it into the political arena.

PB: Well, it's a pleasure. Thank you very much for coming over, Ralph.

RN: Thank you very much.


posted by Helena Montana at 5:03 PM




What's Your Favorite?

The National Review wants your favorite Reagan quotes, jokes or stories.

My personal favorite is "We did not--repeat, did not--trade weapons or anything else for hostages, nor will we."

But "Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do" is pretty good also.

You can send your favorites to them at thecorner@nationalreview.com

posted by Eugene Oregon at 2:57 PM




"You Can't Have a Foreign Policy Based on Lies"

Oh yeah? Watch us.

Folks at the UN don't particularly like, or trust, Bush

President Bush has worked well with friends and poorly with allies, it could be said. But this June, from the shores of Normandy to Sea Island, Georgia, Mr. Bush is making concessions in an effort to bring the old friends, of Old Europe, back to the side of U.S. foreign policy.

Publicly, it's working. The U.N. Security Council unanimously passed a resolution supporting the handover of sovereignty to the interim Iraqi government on Tuesday, as world leaders met in Georgia at the G-8 summit of leading industrialized nations.

But in the corridors of the United Nations, people are skeptical, if not downright displeased, with current U.S. efforts to revive relations.

The Carpetbagger has more.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 2:18 PM




All's Well in Rwanda

Pasteur Bizimungu, the man who became president after the Rwandan Patriotic Front stopped the genocide and took control of the country in 1994 has been sentenced to 15 years in prison

Rwandan court sentenced former president Pasteur Bizimungu yesterday to 15 years in prison for creating a militia, embezzling state funds and inciting ethnic violence in a country still scarred by the 1994 genocide.

He drew the sentence for threatening national security with the creation of a militia group, embezzling at least $100,000 meant for orphans created by the genocide and inciting ethnic violence.

Amnesty International says it was an unjust trial meant to quash any and all political opposition

The sentencing of former Rwandese president Pasteur Bizimungu and seven co-defendants is further proof of the government's willingness to subvert the Rwandese criminal justice system in an attempt to eliminate all potential political opposition.

The trial and judgment of these men combined with other recent events demonstrate the government's readiness to deny the civil and political rights of individuals and civil society organizations that dare to criticize the RPF-controlled government.

[edit]

"The trial procedures and outcome undermine the Rwandan government's claim that it is fostering an open society and that the judiciary is capable of operating independently from government interests," the organization said.

Given the Rwandan government's penchant for labeling anything they don't like "divisionist" and shutting it down on national security grounds, Bizimungu's case has all the trappings of a show trial.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 12:56 PM




Shut Them Down

I read this AP story and that was my first reaction.
NEW ORLEANS - A purported anti-abortion activist was accused in a lawsuit Monday of running a sham abortion clinic that dupes women into waiting too long to have abortions.

The federal complaint, filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights on behalf of five plaintiffs, accuses William A. Graham of running the Causeway Center for Women as a way to prevent abortions.
But it gets worse as you read the details.
One plaintiff, Priscilla Cabrera, contacted Graham in late December seeking an abortion. She said he used an alias and offered to help arrange an appointment with a doctor who performed $125 abortions.

Graham told her if an abortion were "performed too early, it could be harmful to her health," according to the lawsuit.

Graham allegedly said he would schedule an appointment for Jan. 10 but did not call Cabrera back for weeks, though she called repeatedly.

When the two finally spoke, he suggested a later abortion would be better for her health and said he could arrange abortions up to the 30th week of pregnancy, according to court documents.
Now, clearly this bad, bad man thinks this is defensible. That all abortion is murder no matter what so this blatant fraud is acceptable. Not only is he jeopardizing the health of these women, but he's actually creating more late-term abortions. Most people don't have his black/white view of abortion, but do become increasingly conflicted as a pregnancy goes on. So he's also tricking them into a moral conundrum. That's pretty darn evil in my book. Not to mention the selective obedience to the Ten Commandments.

posted by Helena Montana at 12:46 PM




Blah, Blah, Blah

Human rights: blah blah blah. International law: blah blah blah. Torture: blah blah blah.

From Human Rights Watch

The torture and mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison was the predictable result of the Bush administration's decision to circumvent international law, Human Rights Watch said in a new report released today.

The 38-page report, “The Road to Abu Ghraib,” examines how the Bush administration adopted a deliberate policy of permitting illegal interrogation techniques – and then spent two years covering up or ignoring reports of torture and other abuse by U.S. troops.

“The horrors of Abu Ghraib were not simply the acts of individual soldiers,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “Abu Ghraib resulted from decisions made by the Bush administration to cast the rules aside.”

When is HRW going to learn that we are America and we can do whatever we want?

posted by Eugene Oregon at 12:08 PM




Just for the Record

This Washington Post piece finally manages to admit that all

[T]he lavish praise obscures that much of Reagan's record through eight years in office was highly controversial and intensified social and political divisions.

Anyway, it then goes on to state

The administration in 1984 secretly sold arms to Iran -- which the United States considered a supporter of terrorism -- to raise cash for Nicaraguan contra rebels, despite a congressional ban on support for the Latin American insurgency. An independent investigation concluded that the arms sales to Iran operations "were carried out with the knowledge of, among others, President Ronald Reagan [and] Vice President George Bush," and that "large volumes of highly relevant, contemporaneously created documents were systematically and willfully withheld from investigators by several Reagan Administration officials."

It is a common misconception that the "Iran" and the "Contra" parts of the Iran/contra scandal were closely intertwined. They were in fact two entirely separate endeavors that just happened to intersect because Oliver North was in charge of both of them.

The "Contra" part involved administration officials raising money from private citizens and foreign leaders to fund the rebels after Congress had explicitly prohibited them from "train[ing], arm[ing], or support[ing] persons not members of the regular army for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Nicaragua."

The "Iran" part had to do with selling weapons to Iran in exchange for assistance in freeing Americans held hostage by Islamic militants in Lebanon.

After selling the weapons to Iran at inflated prices and having nowhere to put the profits, North and Richard Secord thought it would be "a neat idea" to start funneling it to the Contras. And they did.

So Iran/contra was not just one massively illegal endeavor - it was actually two massively illegal endeavors connected by a third equally illegal money laundering scheme.

For which one person went to prison.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 11:18 AM




Darfur

Back in February, I stumbled across an op-ed in the Washington Post entitled "Unnoticed Genocide." It was the first I had heard of the situation and I've been paying close attention to it ever since. I've written about it several times and today I did a search to see just how many articles on Darfur have appeared in major US newspapers so far this year

January: 102 articles
February: 153 articles
March: 180 articles
April: 348 articles
May: 574 articles

The worse the situation became, the more press coverage it began to receive.

And now we are seeing articles like this

Sudanese children dying of hunger

Hundreds of children have started to starve to death in Sudan's war-torn western province of Darfur.

So we'll probably be seeing all sorts of coverage now.

It would have been nice if this could have gotten some coverage before children started starving to death.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 10:59 AM


Tuesday, June 08, 2004


Who's Recovering in this Recovery?

Conservatives have seized on recent government employment data to validate the Bush administration's tax-cut policies.

This conservative blogger declares that America is "on a steamrolling track to recovery." A few weeks ago, Vice President Cheney told a Texas audience that "the results of the President's (economic) policies are clear," citing recent data on job-creation and boasting that "the economy has grown at ... the fastest pace since Ronald Reagan's first term in the White House and the fastest of any major industrialized nation in the world." But what has that growth yielded?

Last year, in this Wall Street Journal article, tax-cut cheerleader Pete DuPont also hailed the god of growth. He wrote that tax-cut policies spur growth and "growth is what creates more jobs, higher incomes, and better goods at lower prices." But what about those "higher incomes" that DuPont predicted?

The best answer came a few months ago from this report by the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University. The Center acknowledged that the U.S. economy "has performed quite well in recent months from an overall output growth perspective," but its report also noted which segment of the economy is recovering more than others:
... corporate profits (before tax and after inventory and capital consumption adjustments) in the U.S. accounted for nearly 41% of the change in national income between the first quarter of 2002 and the fourth quarter of 2003, exceeding the share of national income growth accruing to workers in the form of labor compensation. ... What is most astonishing about these income developments is that the absolute increase in corporate profits over this 21-month period exceeded the entire increase in the compensation of all of the nation’s employees ($325 billion versus $310 billion).

... Corporate profits and proprietors’ income together were responsible for 52% of the growth in national income over this 21-month period. At no other time in post-World War II history did corporate profits and proprietors’ income combined ever come close to capturing such a large share of the growth in national income during the first two years of recovery from a national recession.

... The 40.5% share of national income growth obtained by corporate profits wasmore than twice as high as that obtained by corporate profits in any other recovery period. The previous high was 19% during the two years of recovery from the 1960-61 economic recession.
In other words, in this economic recovery, some people are recovering much better than others.

posted by Frederick Maryland at 4:58 PM




What Color Is the Sky in Your World?

Ann Coulter has long been a stranger to reality, but one of her recent columns, posted last week on Human Events’ website, indicates that the distance that separates Coulter and reality continues to grow. Coulter’s column opens with this declaration:
"The invasion of Iraq has gone fabulously well, exceeding everyone's expectations -- certainly exceeding the doomsday scenarios of liberals."
"Fabulously well"? The 'F' words that seem more relevant are 'Fallujah' or 'floundering.' But before she tries to convince Democrats or the general public of this laughable proposition, Coulter should work on Republicans and her conservative ilk. They've had a lot to say about the Iraq war:
"This has been a rough couple of months for the president, particularly on the issues of Iraq ..."
U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), May 20, 2004

"Members of the president's party are really worried about the (Iraq) war ... As his Democratic counterpart on Foreign Relations, Sen. Joseph Biden, delivered partisan slashes (on NBC's 'Meet the Press'), (Indiana Senator Richard) Lugar offered no criticism. When Biden commanded Bush to ‘take charge,’ moderator Tim Russert asked whether that was good and necessary advice. ‘Yes it is,’ said Lugar. ‘It's very necessary.’ ... Other senior senators share Lugar's concern. Sen. John Warner, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, is reported by colleagues to be unhappy (though it is unlikely he ever would go public)."
Syndicated columnist Robert Novak, Oct. 20, 2003

"President Bush should live up to his recent pledges to restrain spending, by ... taking a strong stance that the new Iraq can and should pay for its own reconstruction."
U.S. Rep. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) and Stephen Moore, a conservative economist, Sept. 2003 editorial in the National Review.

"President Bush is facing increasing dissent among leading conservative politicians and pundits in the face of mounting U.S. casualties in Iraq. ... Republican Party ranks are beginning to break and the White House is worried. Longtime GOP critics on Iraq are growing progressively more vocal in their condemnation."
CBSNews.com, April 7, 2004

"I'm not buying this 'Iraqis are on the American side' right now."
FOX News commentator Bill O’Reilly, quote is from the April 6, 2004 edition of "The O’Reilly Factor."

"The US is putting relatively little effort into a long-range plan, but we are putting a great deal of effort into trying to stop terrorists. The cost-benefit ratio is against us! Our cost is billions against the terrorists' costs of millions."
Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Oct. 16, 2003 memorandum

"Should (the) June 30 handover date to the Iraqis be extended? You can bet your life on it ... because creating this false deadline in time for a presidential election is no way to win a war."
MSNBC-TV host and former U.S. Rep. Joe Scarborough, quoted by CBSNews.com, April 7, 2004

"There’s a deep sense of apprehension about the conflict in Iraq from almost everybody."
U.S. Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (R-Md.), May 20, 2004

"If the White House wants to be portrayed as spending tax dollars in Iraq as cost-effectively as they spend [money] anywhere else, they're going to have to explain this (budget)."
Brian Reidl, budget analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation, quoted in The Washington Post, Sept. 26, 2003

"U.S. forces in Iraq are insufficient."
Syndicated columnist George Will, quoted by CBSNews.com, April 7, 2004



posted by Frederick Maryland at 3:23 PM




The Beauty of Isolationism

Jerry Fowler, staff director at the US Holocaust Museum's Committee on Conscience, traveled to Chad and wrote an op-ed about the horrors of Darfur in the Washington Post over the weekend.

Yesterday, he was on-line taking questions. Among them was this one

The United States should stay out of this. There is no threat to the U.S., and I think we've all had enough of the U.S. imposing its imperialist vision of the world on everyone. If the U.N. wants to do something, that's fine. But Americans like you need to stop thinking that the rest of the world should abide by your rules. Let the Sudanese come to their own solution.

Yes, we need to stop thinking that the rest of the world has to abide by the rules that governments cannot slaughter thousands of their own citizens.

Sudan has it all under control.

Curse that US imperialism!

posted by Eugene Oregon at 3:08 PM




Arithmetically Challenged

I came across this article on Nader the other day and was reminded of just why I think he is such an ass

Nader also questioned why Democrats still complain about his 2000 presidential candidacy when millions more Democrats voted for George W. Bush in 2000 than voted for Nader.

"I don't understand how deeply, arithmetically challenged these people are," Nader said. Democrats contend that former Vice President Al Gore would have won the 2000 election had Nader not been a candidate.

I don't understand why Nader refuses to admit that he more than likely cost Gore the election.

His assertion that millions more Democrats voted for Bush than for him is totally irrelevant. If Nader had not been in the race, those Democrats would still have voted for Bush. But the key fact remains that had Nader not been in the race, a large percentage of people who voted for him would have voted for Gore. The fact that a large number of Democrats voted for Bush is in no way relevant to his own presidential campaign - those people would have voted for Bush either way, they weren't doing so because Nader was in the race.

And if you look at the election returns you find two states, New Hampshire and Florida, where the number of Nader voters was larger than Bush's margin of victory.

In Florida, Gore lost by 537 votes and Nader received more than 97,000.

In New Hampshire, Gore lost by 7282 votes and Nader received more than 22,000.

In either case, had Gore received the support of just 33% of Nader's voters, he would have won both of those states and be sitting in the White House (assuming that the rest of Nader's voters wouldn't have voted for Bush, which I think is a relatively safe assumption.)

In the other 48 states, Nader had no significant impact on the voting - Gore won or lost those on his own. And he would have won or lost them regardless of Nader's candidacy. But in two states, Gore lost because Nader received enough votes to throw them to Bush. And if Gore had won either of those states, he would be president.

The only person who is "arithmetically challenged" here is Nader.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 2:12 PM




Tell Matthew Limon It's Not Defamatory

I had meant to post something about this story a week or so ago, when this court decision was handed down.
A federal judge has ruled that stating that someone is homosexual does not libel or slander them, particularly in light of new court decisions granting gays more rights.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Nancy Gertner came as she threw out a lawsuit by a former boyfriend of pop singer Madonna, who claimed he was libeled because his name appeared in a photo caption in a book about Madonna -- under a picture of Madonna walking with a gay man.
"In 2004, a statement implying that an individual is a homosexual is hardly capable of a defamatory meaning," Gertner said Friday in a ruling.
I have mixed feelings about this ruling. On the one hand, being called "gay" shouldn't be viewed as defamatory; on the other hand, many (if not most) straight people would consider themselves humiliated or dissed if someone thought they were gay.

Issues of identity aside, the actions that society uses to define sexual orientation can still have unjust and dire consequences for gay people, as this legal case demonstrates:
Matthew Limon, who has already served more than four years of his prison term, was convicted under a Kansas law that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) says is discriminatory. Since Limon, who was eighteen at the time, engaged in oral sex with a fourteen year-old boy, he was given a punishment 13 times longer than if he had performed the same act with a teen of the opposite sex, says the ACLU.

... Limon was charged and convicted of criminal sodomy, which in Kansas includes acts of oral sex, for performing consensual fellatio on a fellow resident at a school for developmentally disabled youth in Miami County, Kansas. At the time of the incident, Limon had just turned eighteen and the boy he had sex with was nearly fifteen.

... All else being equal, had Limon been convicted for performing oral sex on a female, he would have received a maximum sentence of fifteen months. However, since [Kansas'] Romeo and Juliet law does not apply to teenagers convicted of having sex with someone of the same sex, Limon was convicted under Kansas' criminal sodomy law, which provides for much harsher sentences and labels offenders as child molesters. Thus Limon was sentenced to seventeen years in jail plus five years of post-release supervision, and he must register as a sex offender upon release.
Two years ago, the Kansas Supreme Court denied Limon's appeal, but there is good news. In the wake of the Lawrence v. Texas decision, the state's high court has been instructed by the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider Limon's case.

The epithet of "gay" may or may not be defamatory in the eyes of a federal judge, but that's small consolation to Limon, whose future is resting on the hopes that Kansas's highest court will rule favorably on his case.

posted by Frederick Maryland at 12:39 PM




Bigmouth Strikes Again

However much one dislikes the policies of the Bush administration, or even Bush the man, a recent crack by pop star Morrissey is beyond the pale: 'Bush should have died, not Reagan.'

I suppose it is part of a performer's job to ignite controversy, but if Morrissey really cares about the political movement trying to oust Bush in November, he should keep such hateful commentary to himself. It reflects badly on the rest of us, providing ammunition to those on the right, and in the media, who are eager to dismiss liberals as Bush haters.

posted by Noam Alaska at 11:16 AM




Second-Class Christians?

In denouncing hate crimes legislation, the right-wing Center for Reclaiming America made an interesting observation: both of the Senate sponsors of the bill are--gasp!--Mormons [note: emphasis added]:
Less than one month after Canada passed a law potentially criminalizing biblical texts that denounce homosexuality, two U.S. Senators have announced plans to introduce a controversial "hate crimes" bill, which could be construed to criminalize various biblical verses.

Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Gordon Smith (R-OR) — both Mormons — plan to introduce the legislation in the upcoming week.

The proposed legislation comes as a result of emboldened leadership within the homosexual community. After the legalization of same-sex 'marriage' in Massachusetts, homosexual advocates are now attempting to achieve special rights and status within America — at the expense of Christians.

The implication here is that Hatch and Smith being Mormons--i.e. not real Christians--wouldn't be concerned about the rights of true believers. This is a pretty amazing assertion to make given that Hatch is normally embraced by Christian conservatives and regularly appears at Christian Coalition meetings. Back in 1999 when he ran for president against Bush, Bush famously indicated that Jesus was his favorite political philosopher. While Hatch cited Lincoln and Reagan, he also said, "But I bear witness to Christ, too. I really know him to be the savior of the world. And that means more to me than almost anything else I know."

Interestingly, while I was writing this post, Center for Reclaiming America revised its statement, pulling out references to Mormons generally and Hatch specifically (you can see the original Mormon-bashing text courtesy of Google cache). The new sentence reads: "Senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Gordon Smith (R-OR)have introduced this as an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act, making it more difficult for politicians to oppose." Why bother demonizing Mormons when that all-purpose villain Ted Kennedy is available?

posted by Noam Alaska at 10:46 AM


Monday, June 07, 2004


Watching Darfur Die

Condoleezza Rice says it's a "brewing disaster" and that people are watching

Sudan's government bears much of the blame for the "brewing disaster" in its western region of Darfur and should act to resolve the crisis, U.S. national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said on Monday

[edit]

"Darfur is a brewing disaster for which the Sudanese government bears a lot of responsibility, and people will look to them to act responsibly to defuse that crisis," she said.

Again I say, rhetorically pressuring the government of Sudan isn't going to save the lives of the estimated 1 million people threatened by militias, starvation and disease.

Exhibit A: Sudan has responded by issuing this press release

For the past two decades, the American media has been guilty of criticizing, bashing, and reporting the situation in Sudan with an unbelievably biased perspective against the Government of Sudan. Sudan has been ravaged by civil war for many of these years, but on June 5, 2004 the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army signed the framework for a peace deal that will be applied in less than two months. The end of the "worst" and "the most tragic" ongoing civil war is finally in sight. This has been a source of joy and a cause for celebration in Sudan and among the Sudanese people throughout the world, but has been met with a deafening silence from the American media; a media which prefers to focus on human tragedy rather than human triumph.

None of the major U.S. newspapers printed a word of encouragement about the critical achievement wrought by the Government of Sudan and the SPLM/A. Instead, the New York Times, and the Washington Post are waging a smear campaign against the Government of Sudan over the conflict in Darfur. The coverage of the situation in Darfur has failed, so far, to condemn the perpetrators: the rebels, who initially attacked innocent civilians and urban centers, motivated by the erroneous assumption that peace between the north and south would come at the expense of other regions.

The American media has become a champion for these armed elements in Darfur by justifying armed struggle against innocents as a fight against marginalization. This blatant disregard for truth should not be tolerated by the international community and developed world. Allowing the American media to perpetrate these fallacies against countries like Sudan contributes to the chaos and ethnic strife that is prevalent in Darfur and other parts of Africa.

While the media has concentrated its efforts on reporting the "tragedy" in Darfur, the Government of Sudan has been busy guaranteeing unfettered access to humanitarian aid in Darfur, and approving the African Union mechanism for monitoring the ceasefire. Although it took two weeks to get the consent of rebel groups, the Government is the party that has been blamed for the delay when the media finally took notice. Other incidents that have escaped the attention of the media include one that took place two days ago, where the rebels took 16 aid workers hostage, and disrupted humanitarian aid initiatives in the process. Three weeks ago, the rebels burned to the ground five villages near Nyala City, and displaced 12,000 civilians in a single night, this also drew no attention.

What has drawn media attention, illustrated by today's editorial in the Washington Post, is the anticipated death of 300,000 people in Darfur. Not surprisingly, the article fails to mention that these deaths will occur because the response of the international community to food and medicine shortages never exceeded 20 percent of the actual needs. Additionally, the editorial does not address the fact that the Government of Sudan has loudly proclaimed it's willingness to join forces with the U.S. government and the international community, in instituting a feasible plan that will save lives and enable the people in Darfur to return to their villages. It is regrettable that the media has chosen to target the government of a poor nation like Sudan, and to overlook the true perpetrators who thrive on creating conflicts and placing blame on others.

Doesn't look like our "we're watching you" is having much of an impact.

But we are watching, and according to the International Crisis Group's Andrew Stroehlein, we'll soon be able to watch hundreds of thousands of people die from the comfort of our own homes

When people are starving en masse, television is there to capture their fly-covered faces as they expire. The world is appalled by the repeated images of the dying and is stirred to action: People open up their purses to charity appeals, and politicians feel strong public pressure to address the famine and its root causes at the highest level.

But mass starvation doesn't just appear out of nowhere in an instant, so where are the TV cameras just before the emaciated bodies start piling up?

Didn't Bush once vow "Not On My Watch!"?

There sure seem to be lots of people watching.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 8:15 PM




Finally
The Army's top supply commander said Monday that all American troops in Iraq are now equipped with bullet-resistant vests, after a shortage that led many soldiers to pay for costly body armor themselves.
Take that, John Kerry! You tried to stop him, but President Bush has valiantly delivered safety equipment to our troops; what's more, it's been only a little more than a year since the end of major combat operations.

posted by Arnold P. California at 8:09 PM




What Are the Judge Wars About, Anyway?

For an entertaining and more than occasionally enraging account of what's been going on for the past quarter-century or so in the federal judiciary, you should pick up the new book by Professor Herman Schwarz, Right-Wing Justice. Schwartz accurately describes himself as a (liberal) partisan in the struggle over judicial nominations, and ex-Clinton White House Counsel Lloyd Cutler calls the book "a colorful, informative and highly entertaining brief in support of his case."

So don't expect anything like a dispassionate analysis here, let alone a sympathetic account of Republicans' grievances over episodes like the defeat of Robert Bork. But if you want to know why people like me gnash our teeth every time Orrin Hatch kvetches about nominees' right to an up-or-down vote, this book will give you chapter and verse of the sordid history.

posted by Arnold P. California at 8:09 PM




Innumeracy in Sports (Warning: Pet Peeve Rant)

Anyone who's read my posts on sumo and cricket will have realized that I'm a bit of a sports nut. Writing about American sports would be normal enough, but I have to go for these weird foreign games as well.

So it shouldn't come as a surprise that I've been following the Stanley Cup finals closely (that's ice hockey, for those benighted souls who don't know icing from butt-ending). The telecast of Game 5 of the best-of-seven series exemplified one of the annoyances of viewing sports on American television: the proliferation of useless statistics.

Now, I'm a big fan of statistical analysis--I've got a copy of every published edition of the annual Bill James Baseball Abstract. But for every Bill James who does something intelligent with numbers in sports, there are a dozen idiots at the networks who deluge us with garbage like "Jones is batting .333 against lefthanders with runners in scoring position after the 7th inning," when Jones has been in that situation exactly three times all year.

Anyway, Tampa Bay and Calgary were tied at two games apiece going into Game 5. In the intro, both the adept play-by-play man Gary Thorne and the excellent ESPN/ABC anchor John Saunders highlighted the fact that in the 18 previous NHL finals that were tied 2-2, the team that had won Game 5 had gone on to win the cup 14 times. This fact was repeated ad nauseam in graphics and orally throughout the contest--all four hours of it (the game went into overtime).

So your average sports fan is supposed to be thinking: 14 of 18? Wow. This game is even more important than I thought.

Except for this: if a team has a 50-50 chance of winning each game, then you'd expect the winner of Game 5 to win the cup 75% of the time. The loser has to win two in a row, and it's a simple probability problem to multiply .5 by .5 and arrive at .25 as the chance that it will do that (putting aside things like home-ice advantage, "momentum," the possibility that the team facing elimination in Game 6 will play harder than the team that can afford to lose, etc.). So, if the Game 5 winner can be expected to win the series 75% of the time, how many times out of 18 would that be? 13 or 14 (13 1/2 to be precise). And the breathlessly and endlessly repeated fact that's supposed to bowl us over is that they've come through 14 times--exactly what one would expect a priori. So, yeah, winning Game 5 is important, but we knew that already. Getting excited about the 14-out-of-18 history was silly.

In the next game, there was a less egregious example. Calgary finished with the 12th-best record in the league, and the announcers pointed out that if Calgary wins the series, they will be the first team to do so after finishing the regular season that far down in the rankings. That's an interesting fact, I suppose, but less striking than it was made to sound. For more than half of the time that the NHL has been awarding the Stanley Cup, there were only six teams in the league, so obviously no one could finish as low as 12th (though the New York Rangers often seemed to be trying). Then the league expanded rapidly, and for many years there were 21 teams, of which the "top" 16 made the playoffs. This made the regular season a joke, as the playoff included between five and seven teams that had lost more games than they had won during the season, often a whole lot more. Only in the 90s did the league expand to its current 30 teams. Obviously, finishing with the 12th-best record out of 30 is a lot better than finishing 12th out of 21. Calgary had 94 points this year, which I think is a .573 record; plenty of champions in hockey (and other pro sports) have done worse.

Anyway, Game 7 is about to begin. I'm looking forward to watching it on tape when I get home. Calgary won Game 5 in overtime, and Tampa Bay came back to even the series in double overtime in Game 6, in front of a deafening crowd of red-clad and slightly insane Canadians. I'll try to ignore the useless graphics and focus on the excellent competition.

posted by Arnold P. California at 7:41 PM




The Best Job Listing Ever

I just thought this was hilarious

Writers: Abandon your dreams. And come work for us. Dream of writing the great American novel? Or the next hot Hollywood screenplay? We can help you forget those pesky aspirations. Come work in advertising instead. Sure, it may not be rewarding or...what's the word?...fulfilling. But if you can pour the same passion and flair into a direct mail piece, a sales brochure or an interactive promotion, you may be the morally bankrupt 'artiste' for us. Candidates should preferably have two years writing experience, marketing or otherwise, and a penchant for smart, inspired prose. Basically, the kind of people whose spirits we especially enjoy crushing.

So you still want to be a soulless capitalist drone? That is, a soulless capitalist drone with a health plan? Send a resume, cover letter, salary requirements and a few of your best writing samples to resumes@arn.com or to Helen Searles. Via Arnold Worldwide, 1600 International Drive, Suite 300, McLean VA, 22102. No calls please. EOE


posted by Eugene Oregon at 4:46 PM




Because We Say So

From the Wall Street Journal

The Convention Against Torture was proposed in 1984 by the United Nations General Assembly and was ratified by the U.S. in 1994. It states that "no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture," and that orders from superiors "may not be invoked as a justification of torture."

The WSJ goes on to expose a report written by Bush administration lawyers who contend that the president isn't bound by laws prohibiting torture and that government agents who might torture prisoners at his direction couldn't be prosecuted by the Justice Department.

I've posted the entire article here.

Read it.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 4:30 PM




Convention Shenanigans in Texas

As a Texas expatriate, I always find the need to keep up on the local political wackos. The State Board of Education usually keeps me busy, what with their censoring of information about breast cancer and the like.

But since it's political convention time, I thought I'd see what the state Christian Coalition was up to. They are busy organizing their members to offer up reactionary resolutions for the state platform, of course. But since they are at least nominally nonpartisan, they must give information on the Democrats as well as the Republicans. You'd think that would be easy enough, right?

Wrong.

They offer links to the rules documents for both parties, only the one for the Texas Democrats is a broken link. I managed to find the correct one with a simple google search. Now that's just plain tacky.


Dear Texas Christian Coalition,

Here's the correct link: http://www.txdemocrats.org/files/Rules2004.pdf


Best regards,

Helena

P.S. Your momma would be ashamed.

posted by Helena Montana at 3:42 PM




Darfur

Complain and you shall receive. That brings the total number of remarks Kerry has made regarding Darfur up to two.

Also, the Washington Post has a good editorial on Darfur in today's paper.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 3:05 PM




Comparing Reagan to Bush

This article by former Clinton speechwriter David Kusnet was written months ago, but it is quite relevant today as the media, Republican faithful, policy wonks, and many others compare the Reagan presidency with the current occupants of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue:
The case for C-student presidents serves Reagan better than Bush. While Reagan may not have known how his own administration worked, he did understand how America works.

Growing up poor, he'd been a radio announcer, movie actor, union leader, TV host, and corporate spokesman before being elected California governor. He knew how poor people aspire to affluence, how to present himself to audiences, how to close a sale with financial backers, how to drive a hard bargain with studio executives, how to answer tough questions from factory workers, how to build mass movements and how to change the subject from inconvenient facts to big ideas.

But by the time he became president, Reagan was telling stories about "welfare queens," although his father had received public aid, and wondering why the media worried about laid-off workers in "South Succotash," although he knew what it was like to get a pink slip at Christmas time. Why did Reagan forget so much of what he'd learned growing up in poverty and coming of age as a labor liberal?

... But Reagan remained "a closet tolerant," in the words of the journalist Rick Hertzberg, a former speechwriter for Jimmy Carter. As governor, he signed a liberal abortion-rights law and later opposed a referendum to prevent gays and lesbians from teaching in California's public schools.

Bush, however, has lived and learned much less. While his admirers present Bush as a man of wisdom and resolve, one wonders where these characteristics came from since he lacks both learning and life experience. He drifted until the age of 40, then capitalized on his connections to acquire a baseball team, a governorship, the presidency and an air of unearned certitude. He admits that his great obstacle was his own irresponsible behavior as a younger man -— hardly the equivalent of Lincoln's poverty, Roosevelt's polio, or Kennedy's PT-109.

... Bush's lack of life experience translates into economic policies that are even worse than Reagan's.


posted by Frederick Maryland at 3:04 PM




As Suspected

A few months ago, a report was leaked to the French media blaming current Rwandan president Paul Kagame for shooting down former president Juvenile Habyarimana's plane in April 1994, an event that served as the catalyst for the genocide that savaged the country for the next 100 days.

But now witnesses are offering testimony that seems to support the long-held theory that Hutu Power extremists within the government and military shot down Habyarimana's plane themselves in order to destroy the Arusha Peace Accords and unleash their planned genocide

A prosecution witness testifying in the trial of four senior former Rwandan army officials being heard at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda concluded his testimony on Thursday by stating that the former Rwandan head of state, Juvenile Habyarimana, had for a long time prevented the genocide by urging people not to kill Tutsis.

The witness code-named LAI to protect his identity, said 'the genocide could have taken place a long time back but for a long time President Habyarimana had urged the public not to fall into the snares of the enemy.' He added that, 'Habyarimana had called on people not to kill Tutsis and to leave in peace'

LAI continued that 'after the President was killed the massacres took place because nobody could stop them,' referring to the army and Interahamwe militia. The witness had worked closely with the militia and had testified about them.

It doesn't really matter who shot down the plane as the genocide was well-planned and orchestrated and not some spontaneous outpouring of rage, but it would be nice to finally lay this question to rest.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 3:00 PM




Great Leader

I am not going to bother debating Republicans as they seek to canonize Ronald Reagan because doing so would be pointless.

But if you want an accurate picture of the man and his administration, I'd recommend that you read "President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime" by Lou Cannon, who also wrote this long obituary in the Washington Post. I came away from that book with an appreciation for Reagan's optimism and political savvy but aware that, beyond that optimism and savvy, he had very little understanding of what was happening within his own administration. Oh, and I also learned that Reagan's travels often had to be scheduled so as not to conflict with the recommendations of Nancy Reagan's psychic.

And if you want to see what happened because Reagan had no understanding of or control over his own administration, you ought to read Theodore Draper's "A Very Thin Line: The Iran Contra Affairs." How Reagan managed not get impeached over this is very hard to understand.

In short, it has been said that George W. Bush is, in many ways, the heir to Reagan's revolution. And when you read about Reagan, you can see how true that statement really is because the current administration is essentially a clone of the Reagan's, only without the humor or optimism.

posted by Eugene Oregon at 2:36 PM




Other People Have Said Interesting Things

...about the Reagan legacy. Which is good, because I don't have to. If you are so inclined you might want to take a gander at:

What Chris Mooney has to say about Reagan's scientific legacy.

What Peter Manseau has to say about the end-times undertone to “Morning in America.”

Tim Noah's ballsy piece in Slate arguing that Reagan made the GOP a totally irresponsible party. (He put that up on Saturday, people. That takes some guts.)

posted by Helena Montana at 2:16 PM




Robertson the Revisionist

The Right Reverend of Politics, televangelist Pat Robertson, released this statement related to news that Ronald Reagan had died. The line that most annoyed me had nothing to do with religion or faith. It was this one:
The tremendous financial blessing that this nation enjoyed for many years was put into place by his tax and fiscal policies back in the early 1980s.
Is a "tremendous financial blessing" Robertson's interpretation of the budget deficit that tripled under Reagan? As The New Republic's Jonathan Chair noted:
It is widely known, for instance, that federal spending grew substantially during Reagan's presidency, but conservatives explain this away as an unavoidable by-product of Democratic control of Congress, conveniently forgetting that Reagan's proposed budgets increased spending as well.
Or perhaps Robertson was referring to Reagan's tax cut, which was indeed a financial "blessing" to society's upper crust. As writer David Kusnet recently observed:
In an interview with The Washington Post's William Greider early in the administration, Budget Director David Stockman said Reagan's economic theories were really "a Trojan horse to bring down the top rate." He explained, "It's kind of hard to sell 'trickle-down,' so the supply-side formula was the only way to get a tax policy that was really trickle-down."


posted by Frederick Maryland at 1:58 PM




Class Act vs. No Class

In a classy (and, no doubt, politically wise) move, John Kerry has suspended his campaign schedule for the week in Reagan's honor.

Apparently, however, this is a unilateral cease fire. This morning, the Republican National Committee, in business-as-usual mode, sent out a press release attacking Kerry. Only later did they admit that it was a mistake to issue such attacks on a national day of mourning. Paraphrasing Fat Albert, the RNC is like summer vacation--no class.

Meanwhile, wingers have been circulating quotations from the '80s by Kerry in which he criticized Reagan. (The National Review's Rich Lowry has done so again and again and again on the Corner today. Not to be outdone, Newsmax warns that Kerry may face trouble in November because he "worked hard at undermining the 40th president's anti-communist initiatives.")

I don't personally have a problem with politics continuing in the wake of Reagan's death. Reagan was, after all, a politician. What could be more appropriate? However, this line of attack is rich coming from folks who accuse Kerry of politicizing everything under the sun.

posted by Noam Alaska at 1:53 PM




Lifeboats of Intolerance

When the Southern Baptist Convention meets June 15-16 in Indianapolis, the conservative denomination's delegates may formally debate a disturbing resolution. Education Week reports:
Sitting in a wing chair inside his modest brick house —- an American flag fluttering out front —- T.C. Pinckney explains why he is petitioning the Southern Baptist Convention to urge Christian parents to remove their children from public schools.

"In the Bible," he says, "God assigns the responsibility for the education of the children to the parents, not the government." Thus, he says through his white beard and mustache, parents should, ideally, home-school their children.

... (Pinckney) is asking the largest Protestant denomination in the United States to allow its representatives to vote next month on a resolution calling on Christian parents to abandon the public schools. Even if his request is denied, some Southern Baptists and other evangelical Christians say the fact that such an action is being proposed is a sign of many Christians' growing unhappiness with public education.

... Mr. Pinckney views his resolution as fitting in with the broader "fundamentalist resurgence" in the Southern Baptist convention that began in 1979. The proposed resolution refers to public schools as "government schools" and calls them "anti-Christian" and "Godless." It criticizes them for "teaching that the homosexual lifestyle is acceptable."

... But it’s unlikely that the resolution will make it out of the resolutions committee, according to Ed Gamble, the executive director of the Southern Baptist Association of Christian Schools. He added, though, that he doesn’t consider the authors of the resolution "totally off the wall." He simply doesn’t view the resolution as practical.

Southern Baptist churches run about 650 schools, Mr. Gamble said, and couldn’t cope with droves of parents seeking to enroll their children in those schools. "It’s a lot like asking people to jump off the ship when there are no lifeboats ready," he said.
If I were a parent, I'd probably choose to go down with the ship than jump into the Southern Baptist Convention's "lifeboats."

posted by Frederick Maryland at 11:58 AM




Marriage by Abduction

The Washington Post has a horrifying story about a young woman from Ethiopia who was abducted by 4 men and raped for two days before she managed to escape. One of the men was arrested, released on bail and immediately abducted her again, holding and raping her for another 15 days before she finally escaped.

The most horrifying aspect of this is that not only is the judicial system not working, but tribal tradition views marriage by abduction as a common and acceptable practice

[A] man and his friends kidnap a woman or girl he has been watching, rapes her and then pressures her to sign a marriage contract.

Woineshet's father recalled that he felt caught between the draw of the modern world in the capital and the traditions of the village. He said he was offered bribes of cows and cash by local elders to keep quiet. He also endured pressure from some members of his family, who thought that Woineshet should marry her abductor. Ethiopian law absolves abductors of their crime if they marry their victims.

Other family members said they also wanted Woineshet to get married because she was no longer a virgin and therefore, they believed, would never find a husband.


posted by Eugene Oregon at 9:39 AM


Sunday, June 06, 2004


The Canonization Begins


"The evil that men do lives after them;
The good is oft interred with their bones ..."


"Julius Caesar" by William Shakespeare
Act III, Scene II



To any American watching television this weekend, Marc Antony's speech in the wake of Caesar's death must seem even more hopelessly dated that it otherwise is. After all, the mainstream media in the U.S. has been exceedingly kind to presidents and other notables who have died through the years.

Indeed, the past 24 hours have made it rather clear that whatever was "good" about Ronald Reagan will surely not be buried; it will be the subject of lavish praise and lump-in-the-throat reflections for days to come from a host of TV commentators and their honored guests.

I think my breaking point came this morning when I was listening to National Public Radio. A former White House correspondent recalled once traveling aboard Air Force One, high above the state of Tennessee, when President Reagan summoned him and other reporters to a window. Reagan pointed down toward some of the 130 varieties of trees that cover the 800 square miles of the Great Smokey Mountains National Park. Echoing a statement he'd made years earlier, Reagan told the reporters that those trees were the cause of America's air pollution problem -- only this time Reagan was grinning, betraying his sarcasm.

The ex-correspondent's story produced a long giggle from NPR's host. What did she find so amusing? Reagan's ability to trivialize the issue of environment protection? Yuck. On the one hand, this story indicates that Reagan eventually realized how ridiculous his original claim had been. But, on the other hand, he never acknowledged this fact to the broader public. Reagan's original statement (never retracted from the public domain) and many others helped to marginalize environmental quality as an issue, thereby slowing efforts to clean up toxic waste sites and penalize corporate polluters.

As the formal process of Reagan's canonization officially begins and the media sings his praises as it covers the various post-mortem events, I would be content to see at least some of Reagan's faults, quirks, and shortcomings acknowledged.

Reagan is being hailed for having raised the stakes of the Cold War and helping to accelerate the demise of the Soviet Union. Fair enough. But let's also recall the Reagan who ended his radio address one week by saying -- with a "live" mike broadcasting every word -- that he had "just signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes." Can you imagine the U.S. reaction if Brezhnev or Gorbachev had chosen similar words as a joke?

Reagan is rightly remembered for his ability to communicate with ordinary people in ways that built trust and enhanced his image. But consider, as the New York Times reminds us, the blemishes that these communication skills helped to obscure:
If the federal deficit almost tripled in his presidency, if 241 marines he sent to Beirut were killed in a terrorist bombing, if he seemed to equate Nazi storm troopers with the victims of the Holocaust, he was always able to rekindle public support. He became known early on as the Teflon president.
I could offer many other examples (e.g., trying to classify ketchup as a vegetable as a back-door means to cut the federal school lunch program). But I think you get the point.

If people want to reflect on Reagan and his legacy, I recommend this website.

posted by Frederick Maryland at 5:57 PM




Mon Dieu! Gay Marriage in France

Who says France never follows America's lead?*
A gay couple said "oui" for the first time in France, days after the prime minister warned that the homosexual union would be legally "null and void."

Stephane Chapin, dressed in a white suit and dabbing tears of joy from his eyes, and Bertrand Charpentier, in deep gray pinstripes, embraced, kissed and smiled broadly Saturday after the brief civil ceremony in the Begles town hall in southwestern France, near Bordeaux.

... Begles Mayor Noel Mamere defiantly wore the blue, white and red ribbons -- France's national colors -- that are conferred on mayors as representatives of the state and used during all official functions. In France, mayors perform civil marriages, which are required by law.

"I regret nothing," he said later. Mamere, choked with emotion, said his decision to marry the two men despite a multitude of warnings (by state officials) was a gesture in the name of tolerance.

"This is not a media operation," Mamere said, adding that he performed the marriage as a gesture toward all those who suffer discrimination "for their skin color, their religion, their social status and also their sexual orientation."
France's justice minister has asked a court to declare the same-sex marriage null and void. Interior Minister Dominique de Villepin -- once a thorn in the side of Rumsfeld and company -- also attacked Mamere's action. I was blown away by this de Villepin quote that was carried by the Sunday New York Times:
"It is not a question of entering the heart of the debate. But I intend to have the law and the authority of the state respected."
In other words, why should foes of same-sex marriage enter "the heart of the debate" over this issue when they can simply hide behind empty soundbites about obedience to law and respect for "social traditions"?

* - Just for the record: yes, I'm aware that France has been more progressive (in terms of national laws) than the U.S. has been on the overarching issues of gay rights.

posted by Frederick Maryland at 5:36 PM



Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com