Thursday, April 29, 2004
Interesting news from Iraq: Mystery group wage war on Sadr's militia
This hothead seems to be wearing out his welcome in Najaf. The best thing to do is probably to let this trend take its course without doing anything to anger the Shiites.
This hothead seems to be wearing out his welcome in Najaf. The best thing to do is probably to let this trend take its course without doing anything to anger the Shiites.
An important UPI report on Islamist violence in Thailand raises the disturbing possibility that this is becoming Al Qaeda's 'second front'. Perhaps second front is too strong a term for what has happened there so far, but there does seem real likelihood of a renewed Islamist insurgency there and Thailand being added to bin Laden's monotonous list.
Thaksin has wanted to play down violence so far, for fear of hurting tourist revenue. This is understandable, but must be accompanied by serious efforts to forestall a Bali-style attack. Then, euphemisms will be useless.
Thaksin has wanted to play down violence so far, for fear of hurting tourist revenue. This is understandable, but must be accompanied by serious efforts to forestall a Bali-style attack. Then, euphemisms will be useless.
Wednesday, April 28, 2004
Tom Friedman reports that the Japanese economy is showing strong signs of recovery. This is wonderful news. If only they could do something about their population growth rate, that would be a big comfort to the economies of the world. Japan is a status quo power and we need it to be stable, happy and prosperous.
All this Vietnam stuff is going to make for a truly shitty campaign. I think the blame is on the Bush people for starting it and I can't blame the Kerry people for responding in kind, but we are looking at a campaign in the gutter, folks, premised on who did what in Vietnam or just after Vietnam. I just don't think national Democratic candidates do as well playing dirty as Republicans do. I can't say why, it's just a strong feeling that I have. One could certainly argue, for example that the truly successful dirty candidates were those who ran against non incumbents: Poppy Bush and Dubya. Against an incumbent, though, this sort of stuff looks small. Again, this isn't Kerry's fault, but he can't let this campaign get defined for him as a mudslinging match. That's a sure-as-hell ticket back to Boston.
An interesting report from Najaf indicates the possibility that Sadr may be wearing out his welcome with local Shiites.
Tuesday, April 27, 2004
The unlikely pair of John McCain and Madeline Albright have written an important editorial on Burma. Clear on the need to act against the regime there, the piece is more careful and perhaps vague on one step needed to achieve real pressure on Rangoon - getting Thailand to change its attitude
In A Need to Act on Burma, they do single out Bangkok as a country in particular which needs to reconsider where Burma is headed. This may be a tall order.
Thailand's government is strongly pro-Burma, but has wisely contributed forces to Iraq. Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is a fairly wily guy - and he will no doubt make the case for engagement with Burma. Thailand remains a very solid ally in the region (more than, say, Indonesia or Malaysia where the suicide belt may become a fashion statement). Getting them to budge on their new buddy, particularly when Burma has cooperated with them in stabilizing their long border, will be tough.
In A Need to Act on Burma, they do single out Bangkok as a country in particular which needs to reconsider where Burma is headed. This may be a tall order.
Thailand's government is strongly pro-Burma, but has wisely contributed forces to Iraq. Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is a fairly wily guy - and he will no doubt make the case for engagement with Burma. Thailand remains a very solid ally in the region (more than, say, Indonesia or Malaysia where the suicide belt may become a fashion statement). Getting them to budge on their new buddy, particularly when Burma has cooperated with them in stabilizing their long border, will be tough.
What is happening in Syria? There are reports of a lethal gunfight in Damascus between government security forces and what they deem terrorists. Syria being Syria, these could be Kurds seeking rights, road-tripping Hezbollah members who made a wrong turn, or genuine Al Qaeda jihadists. The news out of Syria is remarkably devoid of detail, but hopefully more will trickle out. For all the apparent placidity that the absence of news from Syria seems to convey, it is a country as complex and diverse as Iraq (with a minority population ruling over a majority). Actually the similarities with pre-2003 Iraq are pretty striking. Let's hope we get more news out of there soon.
A Note to Kerrry on How to Win Florida
Especially the Cuban population. You don't have even to appease the hardliners.
Especially the Cuban population. You don't have even to appease the hardliners.
Friday, April 23, 2004
IHT: Sharon says Arafat may be targeted
I'm about the last person to proclaim the value of Yasser Arafat's life right now. I think he's been a truly abysmal leader and a truly abysmal human being. Frankly, the Palestinians could have done better by selecting a donkey to lead them. BUT - and you knew this was coming - giving this jackass the martyrdom he claims to crave would be a bad call.
At this point, Israel has put the Arab world on notice that it is not to be fucked with and will not honor the trivial distinction between political terrorist leaders and military terrorist leaders. That is a good step toward maintaining the credibility of its deterrent. Whatever happens, no one will think that it will leave Hamas alone after a Gaza pullout should the group continue to plot attacks.
What does killing Arafat achieve? It will trigger more outrage, though the effect will be much the same as increasing the heat on a pot already bubbling over. But I don't really see any military benefit. Arafat certainly deserves to die before any Palestinian state emerges, but I think nature can probably take care of that if left to its own devices. The cons to this are more certain than the pros - I do think the backlash outside of the Arab world would be formidable. Israel really doesn't need that when time is on its side.
I'm about the last person to proclaim the value of Yasser Arafat's life right now. I think he's been a truly abysmal leader and a truly abysmal human being. Frankly, the Palestinians could have done better by selecting a donkey to lead them. BUT - and you knew this was coming - giving this jackass the martyrdom he claims to crave would be a bad call.
At this point, Israel has put the Arab world on notice that it is not to be fucked with and will not honor the trivial distinction between political terrorist leaders and military terrorist leaders. That is a good step toward maintaining the credibility of its deterrent. Whatever happens, no one will think that it will leave Hamas alone after a Gaza pullout should the group continue to plot attacks.
What does killing Arafat achieve? It will trigger more outrage, though the effect will be much the same as increasing the heat on a pot already bubbling over. But I don't really see any military benefit. Arafat certainly deserves to die before any Palestinian state emerges, but I think nature can probably take care of that if left to its own devices. The cons to this are more certain than the pros - I do think the backlash outside of the Arab world would be formidable. Israel really doesn't need that when time is on its side.
Much the same is true in Iowa, though here Kerry leads 47-46, with a slobbering 3% preferring Saint Ralph.
American Research Group has Bush and Kerry virtually tied in Florida: 46-45 with a brain-dead 4% expressing a preference for Nader.
Sunday, April 18, 2004
How soon do you need them out, Señor Bin Laden?
Spain's New Government Orders Iraq Withdrawal
Really disgraceful. Forget June 30, Zapatero is stepping up the deadline. It will be a while before anyone takes Spain seriously again.
Spain's New Government Orders Iraq Withdrawal
Really disgraceful. Forget June 30, Zapatero is stepping up the deadline. It will be a while before anyone takes Spain seriously again.
Saturday, April 17, 2004
Is it East Versus West? . . .
Inspiration struck me today at the gym. Elsewhere, I'd been baffled by the suggestion that a Tupac Shakur song really dealt with the question of terrorism. I realized today that the real song for our era has nothing to do with Tupac, but is instead Survivor's classic anthem "The Burning Heart." Yes, the song was written for the soundtrack of Rocky IV and yes it's about the Cold War, but ask yourself, does that make it less salient today? Below are the lyrics with interpretive comments:
Two worlds collide - rival nations, (A Huntingtonian view of the situation)
It's a primitive clash - venting years of frustrations, (Grievances dating back a few centuries or so)
Bravely we hope against all hope - there is so much at stake. (fairly self explanatory)
Seems our freedom's up against the ropes. (Just what is good about the Patriot Act)
Does the crowd understand?
Is a East versus West, or man against man, (A clash of civilizations or Bush and bin Laden going mano a mano)
Can any nation stand - alone? (Clearly international coordination is desired)
In the burning heart - just about to burst, (We now look into the soul of Condoleeza Rice)
There's a quest for answers, an unquenchable thirst, (What should she tell Dubya)
In the darkest night - rising like a spire, (Or perhaps a minaret)
In the burning heart - the unmistakable fire. (Ironic juxtaposition)
In the warriors code - there's no surrender, (Donald Rumsfeld doesn't take no for an answer)
Though his body says stop - his spirit cries - never! (70+ and still kicking ass)
Deep in our soul a quiet ember, (Still he has a heart)
Knows it's you against you, it’s the (and a sense of personal irony)
Paradox that drives us on -
It's a battle of wills, in the heat of attack, (Meeting with Colin Powell every day)
It's the passion that kills - (Mel Gibson is responsible for this ultimately)
The victory is yours alone. (Truly a zero sum match)
Strike from your minds any images of Rocky Balboa and Apollo Creed and especially Ivan Drago. This is a song for our time.
Inspiration struck me today at the gym. Elsewhere, I'd been baffled by the suggestion that a Tupac Shakur song really dealt with the question of terrorism. I realized today that the real song for our era has nothing to do with Tupac, but is instead Survivor's classic anthem "The Burning Heart." Yes, the song was written for the soundtrack of Rocky IV and yes it's about the Cold War, but ask yourself, does that make it less salient today? Below are the lyrics with interpretive comments:
Two worlds collide - rival nations, (A Huntingtonian view of the situation)
It's a primitive clash - venting years of frustrations, (Grievances dating back a few centuries or so)
Bravely we hope against all hope - there is so much at stake. (fairly self explanatory)
Seems our freedom's up against the ropes. (Just what is good about the Patriot Act)
Does the crowd understand?
Is a East versus West, or man against man, (A clash of civilizations or Bush and bin Laden going mano a mano)
Can any nation stand - alone? (Clearly international coordination is desired)
In the burning heart - just about to burst, (We now look into the soul of Condoleeza Rice)
There's a quest for answers, an unquenchable thirst, (What should she tell Dubya)
In the darkest night - rising like a spire, (Or perhaps a minaret)
In the burning heart - the unmistakable fire. (Ironic juxtaposition)
In the warriors code - there's no surrender, (Donald Rumsfeld doesn't take no for an answer)
Though his body says stop - his spirit cries - never! (70+ and still kicking ass)
Deep in our soul a quiet ember, (Still he has a heart)
Knows it's you against you, it’s the (and a sense of personal irony)
Paradox that drives us on -
It's a battle of wills, in the heat of attack, (Meeting with Colin Powell every day)
It's the passion that kills - (Mel Gibson is responsible for this ultimately)
The victory is yours alone. (Truly a zero sum match)
Strike from your minds any images of Rocky Balboa and Apollo Creed and especially Ivan Drago. This is a song for our time.
Another one bites the dust. This one, regrettably, bears no outward resemblance to anyone from a Tolkien movie.
Watch to see if the European press tries to cast Rantisi as a martyr like they did Yassin. One sickening slide show at the BBC paid more attention to Yassin's "charitable work" than his efforts to derail the Oslo process by blowing up Israelis.
Watch to see if the European press tries to cast Rantisi as a martyr like they did Yassin. One sickening slide show at the BBC paid more attention to Yassin's "charitable work" than his efforts to derail the Oslo process by blowing up Israelis.
A fellow blogger blasts the Israeli Disengagement Plan as "lopsided" and "biased." I think he's missing the real point of the exercise, and I don't think he's being particularly realistic. Allow me to explain.
The notion that the disconnectedness of Gaza and the West Bank makes a Palestinian state nonviable just seems bizarre to me. What is Israel supposed to do to remedy this, cede a land corridor between the two? By the same rule of thumb it would then be strategically unviable - the only safe route between the two halves would involve going around the African continent. Ehud Barak had the right idea when he proposed an elevated highway between the West Bank and Gaza. Strictly speaking, territorial contiguity is not a prerequisite for state viability. Too many states to count have non-contiguous territories. Let's get used to this aspect of the map as it is, particularly in the absence of sound territorial remedies (my colleague names none anyway).
This is being implemented not to immediately bring about a Palestinian state, but as a step on that road. And as a step, it is significant. Political control over the vast majority of the Palestinian population will fall to Palestinians. That alone makes this a big deal. That Israel controls border points is driven by its contention that it lacks a Palestinian negotiating partner, which is ultimately true. Until then, it will want to have some ability to prevent the mass importation of weapons (something that its alleged "partner" has attempted on numerous occasions). Expecting control of ports to be unilaterally passed to the PA at this point is to confuse an intermediate step with a final step.
Hoping for the emergence of a robust Palestinian state at this point in time is remarkably unrealistic. The territorial circumstances on the ground preclude the emergence of a state capable of threatening Israel's security. No one should expect Israel to act in such a way as to create a nemesis-state. And no one should think that Washington would be wise to push Israel into doing otherwise. Many of the states existing today came into existence through a slow assumption of sovereignty. This was particularly true among states in the Balkans, and the British Commonwealth but also - and most relevantly - in the case of Ireland, which began as the Irish Free State, still owing allegiance to the British monarchy, and militarily at the mercy of Britain. Ireland assumed the status of a full republic after a few decades.
The Irish were able to do this because they had an established and stable state structure. Palestinian sovereignty can only come if a Palestinian leadership emerges that is willing to assume the full commitments that a sovereign state must live by. Arafat has notably failed to do that, and no one in their right mind would now consider him a potential negotiating partner. To the fluttering of many hearts, a steady procession of Palestinian moderates has emerged, but each has been largely emasculated by Arafat. A non-emasculated Palestinian prime ministership is a vital and necessary prerequisite to a non-emasculated Palestinian state; to insist otherwise is to dangerously put the cart in front of the horse and invite another war in a few years.
Finally, it really is time that someone punctured the pieties of Palestinian nationalism, just as it was good to have the notion of perpetual Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank and Gaza punctured. The US does well to reject the "right of return" as the pipe dream that it is. That Palestinian leaders have been fostering this fantasy for decades speaks to their irresponsibility, not to its viability. To the extent that it was responsible for the Oslo breakdown, it's time to acknowledge its clear infeasibility. Israel is not going away and the Palestinians would do well to recognize the fact.
The same may be said about Jerusalem. Barak was willing to contemplate rather remarkable arrangements for sharing the city, but Arafat spat in his face. Granting Arafat Barak's concessions now rewards him for nothing, nor is there a Palestinian state able to act responsibly in administering Jerusalem, nor is the issue ready for negotiation. This is, once again, an intermediate step taken in the absence of a viable (there's that word again) Palestinian negotiating partner. This cannot be a final step and expecting it to live up to that requirement fundamentally underestimates the governmental vacuum on the Palestinian side, and the legitimate security requirements of Israel.
The notion that the disconnectedness of Gaza and the West Bank makes a Palestinian state nonviable just seems bizarre to me. What is Israel supposed to do to remedy this, cede a land corridor between the two? By the same rule of thumb it would then be strategically unviable - the only safe route between the two halves would involve going around the African continent. Ehud Barak had the right idea when he proposed an elevated highway between the West Bank and Gaza. Strictly speaking, territorial contiguity is not a prerequisite for state viability. Too many states to count have non-contiguous territories. Let's get used to this aspect of the map as it is, particularly in the absence of sound territorial remedies (my colleague names none anyway).
This is being implemented not to immediately bring about a Palestinian state, but as a step on that road. And as a step, it is significant. Political control over the vast majority of the Palestinian population will fall to Palestinians. That alone makes this a big deal. That Israel controls border points is driven by its contention that it lacks a Palestinian negotiating partner, which is ultimately true. Until then, it will want to have some ability to prevent the mass importation of weapons (something that its alleged "partner" has attempted on numerous occasions). Expecting control of ports to be unilaterally passed to the PA at this point is to confuse an intermediate step with a final step.
Hoping for the emergence of a robust Palestinian state at this point in time is remarkably unrealistic. The territorial circumstances on the ground preclude the emergence of a state capable of threatening Israel's security. No one should expect Israel to act in such a way as to create a nemesis-state. And no one should think that Washington would be wise to push Israel into doing otherwise. Many of the states existing today came into existence through a slow assumption of sovereignty. This was particularly true among states in the Balkans, and the British Commonwealth but also - and most relevantly - in the case of Ireland, which began as the Irish Free State, still owing allegiance to the British monarchy, and militarily at the mercy of Britain. Ireland assumed the status of a full republic after a few decades.
The Irish were able to do this because they had an established and stable state structure. Palestinian sovereignty can only come if a Palestinian leadership emerges that is willing to assume the full commitments that a sovereign state must live by. Arafat has notably failed to do that, and no one in their right mind would now consider him a potential negotiating partner. To the fluttering of many hearts, a steady procession of Palestinian moderates has emerged, but each has been largely emasculated by Arafat. A non-emasculated Palestinian prime ministership is a vital and necessary prerequisite to a non-emasculated Palestinian state; to insist otherwise is to dangerously put the cart in front of the horse and invite another war in a few years.
Finally, it really is time that someone punctured the pieties of Palestinian nationalism, just as it was good to have the notion of perpetual Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank and Gaza punctured. The US does well to reject the "right of return" as the pipe dream that it is. That Palestinian leaders have been fostering this fantasy for decades speaks to their irresponsibility, not to its viability. To the extent that it was responsible for the Oslo breakdown, it's time to acknowledge its clear infeasibility. Israel is not going away and the Palestinians would do well to recognize the fact.
The same may be said about Jerusalem. Barak was willing to contemplate rather remarkable arrangements for sharing the city, but Arafat spat in his face. Granting Arafat Barak's concessions now rewards him for nothing, nor is there a Palestinian state able to act responsibly in administering Jerusalem, nor is the issue ready for negotiation. This is, once again, an intermediate step taken in the absence of a viable (there's that word again) Palestinian negotiating partner. This cannot be a final step and expecting it to live up to that requirement fundamentally underestimates the governmental vacuum on the Palestinian side, and the legitimate security requirements of Israel.
Friday, April 16, 2004
Amnesty International lists some of the people a real documentarian might have interviewed were they truly examining the state of affairs in Cuba:
Anyone thinking of watching Stone's film should read the whole page, and the other documents that Amnesty has compiled about Cuba.
- Bernardo Arevalo Padron: Since 28 November 1997 Bernardo Arevalo Padron has been serving a six-year sentence for showing 'disrespect' towards President Fidel Castro and Vice-President Carlos Lage. When interviewed by a Miami radio station, he called them ''liars'' and accused them of failing to keep the commitments they had made to democracy at an earlier Ibero-American Summit.
In April 1998 he was reportedly beaten by two guards at Ariza High Security Prison after they accused him of distributing anti-government propaganda. As a result of the injuries to his head, he has reportedly suffered from memory problems. He is also said to be suffering from lumbago and high blood pressure as a result of which doctors have recommended that he should not do physical work. Despite this, his failure to do such work was the reason reportedly given by the authorities to deny his conditional release. Bernardo Arevalo Padron is the founder and director of the independent press agency known as Prensa Linea Sur, Linea Sur Press.
- Vladimiro Roca Antonez:(32) In a document entitled 'La Patria es de Todos', 'The Country is for Everyone', Vladimiro Roca, Rene Gomez, Felix Bonne and Marta Beatriz Roque criticized the position taken by the fifth congress of the Communist Party, called on people to abstain in the elections and requested foreign investors not to invest in the island. The four were arrested on 17 July 1997 and convicted of 'other acts against state security' relating to a charge of 'sedition' for which they were sentenced to prison terms ranging from six months for Marta Beatriz Roque to five years for Vladimiro Roca. Vladimiro Roca was finally released from prison on 5 May 2002; the other three had been freed in May 2000. He had reportedly been denied conditional release and held in isolation in a punishment cell for much of his time in prison. According to statements made by his wife, Magaly de Armas, Vladimiro Roca's state of health was poor because, as well as arterial hypertension, he was suffering from a chronic lung illness.
Vladimiro Roca is the son of Blas Roca, one of the founders of the Partido Comunista Cubano, Cuban Communist Party.
- Julia Cecilia Delgado:(27) released on 19 October 2001 after serving ten months of a one-year sentence for 'disrespect' reportedly imposed because she had tried to participate in a peaceful march calling for human rights in Cuba. When she left prison, Julia Cecilia Delgado described the conditions in Manto Negro Prison as ''subhuman in all senses. The water given to the prisoners is contaminated with sewage water. The majority of the prisoners are suffering from dermatitis, diarrhoea and vaginal infections.'
Anyone thinking of watching Stone's film should read the whole page, and the other documents that Amnesty has compiled about Cuba.
Ann Louise Bardach recently interviewed Oliver Stone about his new movie about Castro and Cuba. She did her job a bit too well, and it seems clear that Stone doesn't know shit about Cuba or Castro - other than what he wants to believe. I'd recommend reading the whole thing right now. Otherwise, here are some choice segments below:
Also . . .
There were so many women . . . critics have inferred misogyny of Stone, particularly based on Any Given Sunday where the women are either whores, drunks, or vicious manipulators. Finally,
It's rich that Stone can derive personal amusement from the workings of a rigged justice system. It's more appalling though that his sympathy is for Castro, rather than the people he is jailing. Some might be troubled his blanket statement, "It's a Latin thing" ("this is just how they are folks! another martini for the lady"). And his fixation on the notion that Bush is planning to invade Cuba is bizarre.
Ah well, at the end of the day, Stone can go back to his LA estate and ruminate about White House conspiracies and his charismatic buddy Fidel. All the unpleasant details he skirted around during his filming holiday in Cuba can be pushed to the side, or masked by his trademark conspiracy theories. And that is what really matters.
ALB: Now, when you were talking to the prisoners who tried to hijack a plane, one told you he was a fisherman, and you said, 'Why then didn't you take a boat?' Why did you ask that?
OS: Well, it seemed to me that if they were familiar with boats, it seemed to be the best way.
ALB: Did you know that in Cuba there are virtually no boats? The boats that are used for fishermen are tightly controlled. One of the more surreal aspects of Cuba, being the largest island in the Caribbean, is that there are no visible boats.
OS: I see.
Also . . .
ALB: Did you ask him about his relationship with Juanita in Miami?
OS: God, I don't remember. There were so many women.
ALB: Juanita is his sister.
OS: Juanita's his sister?
There were so many women . . . critics have inferred misogyny of Stone, particularly based on Any Given Sunday where the women are either whores, drunks, or vicious manipulators. Finally,
ALB: Did it strike you as interesting that at one point in the scene with the prisoners, Castro turned to the prisoners' defense lawyers, who just happened to be there, and he says, "I urge you to do your best to reduce the sentences"?
OS: I love that. I thought that was hilarious. Those guys just popped up.
ALB: Is there a show-trial element here?
OS: Yeah. I thought that was funny, I did—the prosecutor and Fidel admonishing them, to make sure they worked hard. There was that paternalism. I mean "father knows best," as opposed to totalitarianism. It's paternalism, that's what I meant. It's a Latin thing.
It's rich that Stone can derive personal amusement from the workings of a rigged justice system. It's more appalling though that his sympathy is for Castro, rather than the people he is jailing. Some might be troubled his blanket statement, "It's a Latin thing" ("this is just how they are folks! another martini for the lady"). And his fixation on the notion that Bush is planning to invade Cuba is bizarre.
Ah well, at the end of the day, Stone can go back to his LA estate and ruminate about White House conspiracies and his charismatic buddy Fidel. All the unpleasant details he skirted around during his filming holiday in Cuba can be pushed to the side, or masked by his trademark conspiracy theories. And that is what really matters.
Thursday, April 15, 2004
Bin Laden has offered to negotiate with Europe to cease attacks there. In a sense, it's a mark of how impressed he was by his success in Spain. But I'd say that this will likely have positive consequences.
There are those in Europe who would call for negotiating with Al Qaeda - notably Mo Mowlam, Britain's former Northern Ireland Secretary. Romano Prodi seems defeatist as well. But the reaction that bin Laden got was far from positive - even from Prodi. Even Europeans skeptical of America can see that there can be no negotiations with mass murderers, and even Europeans who might want to purchase some relief from the new horror would find something debasing in saying that they do indeed want to negotiate. This is one of the few things that has put Italy, France, Germany and Britain on the same page, and that is heartening.
And we have Andrew Sullivan's nice and simple response:
MEMO TO OSAMA: Re: the "truce." Go fuck yourself.
I couldn't agree more. Bush or Kerry should say this to him sometime, I swear.
There are those in Europe who would call for negotiating with Al Qaeda - notably Mo Mowlam, Britain's former Northern Ireland Secretary. Romano Prodi seems defeatist as well. But the reaction that bin Laden got was far from positive - even from Prodi. Even Europeans skeptical of America can see that there can be no negotiations with mass murderers, and even Europeans who might want to purchase some relief from the new horror would find something debasing in saying that they do indeed want to negotiate. This is one of the few things that has put Italy, France, Germany and Britain on the same page, and that is heartening.
And we have Andrew Sullivan's nice and simple response:
MEMO TO OSAMA: Re: the "truce." Go fuck yourself.
I couldn't agree more. Bush or Kerry should say this to him sometime, I swear.
Sunday, April 11, 2004
From the new issue of The Atlantic comes The Front-Runner's Fall, a priceless insider account of the rise and fall of Howard Dean.
The ever-sensible William Raspberry has justified reservations about the launch of liberal talk radio in his Stop Embracing the Negative :
I agree with him. The excitement I've felt from liberal friends about this is more the "Now we're going to stick it to them the same way they've stuck it to us" variety than "Now we have a new outlet for educating the public." Depending on how the format of this whole thing shakes out, either could be true.
If this just ultimately becomes a means for liberals to rain hate and half-truths on conservatives, I don't see much value to it. The Limbaugh method is beneath us. We gain nothing by muddying ourselves, other than the validation of Republican claims that liberals really are smug elitists. As Harry Truman was wont to say, "Never wrestle with a pig. You get dirty and the pig loves it."
- Now, Franken is a funny enough guy, I suppose, as an entertainer. But to the extent he sees his role as countering right-wing misrepresentations with left-wing misrepresentations, my response is: Who needs him?
The answer to lies and partisan innuendo is not more lies but truth -- truth at least to the best ability of journalists to uncover it.
I agree with him. The excitement I've felt from liberal friends about this is more the "Now we're going to stick it to them the same way they've stuck it to us" variety than "Now we have a new outlet for educating the public." Depending on how the format of this whole thing shakes out, either could be true.
If this just ultimately becomes a means for liberals to rain hate and half-truths on conservatives, I don't see much value to it. The Limbaugh method is beneath us. We gain nothing by muddying ourselves, other than the validation of Republican claims that liberals really are smug elitists. As Harry Truman was wont to say, "Never wrestle with a pig. You get dirty and the pig loves it."
Howard Dean's op-ed piece, For Ralph Nader, but Not for President, is a lot softer than I'd like it, but definitely a mark in his favor. Dean is ideally positioned to guard Kerry's left flank and it looks like he is taking the job seriously. Hats off to him. Saint Ralph doesn't stand a chance.
Monday, April 05, 2004
I'm appalled to have Nader and RNC ads rotating above this blog. Here, let me try to fix this: John Kerry. John Kerry. John Kerry. John Kerry. John Kerry. John Kerry. John Kerry. John Kerry. John Kerry. John Kerry. John Kerry. John Kerry. John Kerry.
Iraqi Judge Issues Arrest Warrant for Sadr
This seems the best approach to take. If Sadr is implicated in sectarian violence, this is a great way to discredit him and peel away his base of support, giving other Shiite clerics more credibility in calling for unity and restraint.
This seems the best approach to take. If Sadr is implicated in sectarian violence, this is a great way to discredit him and peel away his base of support, giving other Shiite clerics more credibility in calling for unity and restraint.
Sunday, April 04, 2004
Jim Hoagland's Distemper in Europe leads one to an interesting conclusion - there have been no European winners on either side of the Iraq debate. Tony Blair is under siege. Aznar was just defeated - though his handling of the Madrid bombing was very significant and his party was leading prior to that. But on the other side of the aisle, Schroeder has been steadily battered in Germany and Chirac was hammered by the Socialists in France.
Iraq was an interregnum in normal patterns of European politics. Chirac's big victory in 2002 had something to do with the splintering of the left and less to do with any innate appeal - he's generally seen as old and corrupt. Schroeder just barely eked out a victory that same year.
With the recent hammering that Chirac has taken in the polls, he's reshuffled his cabinet. Dominique de Villepin, the moronic dilettante with a Napoleon fetish, is moving out of the foreign ministry and his successor will hopefully be more pragmatic. Tres interessante is the shifting of the popular Nicholas Sarkozy to the finance ministry. Sarkozy is the most popular politician in Chirac's party and his tough law and order stance and position on Islamic headwear has endeared him to French voters, but not to Chirac. Putting him at Finance may cut him off from his prior successes and leave him in a position to take blame from any economic downturns.
Which would be a shame because my hunch is that Sarkozy is the best leader France has to offer right now. Though he's gone with the party line, I think we have yet to see where he really stands on the trans-Atlantic partnership, but his prior success in combating hate crimes was the one positive mark on France's otherwise blemished record.
As Hoagland reminds us, the lines between the different European coalitions have been smudged over time. Continued political disruptions in Europe offer the hope that a new Western consensus can be formed.
Iraq was an interregnum in normal patterns of European politics. Chirac's big victory in 2002 had something to do with the splintering of the left and less to do with any innate appeal - he's generally seen as old and corrupt. Schroeder just barely eked out a victory that same year.
With the recent hammering that Chirac has taken in the polls, he's reshuffled his cabinet. Dominique de Villepin, the moronic dilettante with a Napoleon fetish, is moving out of the foreign ministry and his successor will hopefully be more pragmatic. Tres interessante is the shifting of the popular Nicholas Sarkozy to the finance ministry. Sarkozy is the most popular politician in Chirac's party and his tough law and order stance and position on Islamic headwear has endeared him to French voters, but not to Chirac. Putting him at Finance may cut him off from his prior successes and leave him in a position to take blame from any economic downturns.
Which would be a shame because my hunch is that Sarkozy is the best leader France has to offer right now. Though he's gone with the party line, I think we have yet to see where he really stands on the trans-Atlantic partnership, but his prior success in combating hate crimes was the one positive mark on France's otherwise blemished record.
As Hoagland reminds us, the lines between the different European coalitions have been smudged over time. Continued political disruptions in Europe offer the hope that a new Western consensus can be formed.
The latest from Baghdad offers the troubling news that Shiite radicalism has now targeted the coalition. Sadr has really been stoking the fires with his rhetoric lately - praising 9/11 was a signature moment - and it looks as though he's been seeking it.
There's really no other way than to meet this with the requisite force while appealing to moderate Shiites to stay the course. Sadr doesn't speak for all Shiites or even a majority of them - his street rep has often been that of an immature hothead. So long as the coalition can outflank him with more established and pragmatic Shiite voices, it can come out on top. But knuckling to him will be deadly. This is a dangerous moment but the only thing to do is keep one's head and hold on.
There's really no other way than to meet this with the requisite force while appealing to moderate Shiites to stay the course. Sadr doesn't speak for all Shiites or even a majority of them - his street rep has often been that of an immature hothead. So long as the coalition can outflank him with more established and pragmatic Shiite voices, it can come out on top. But knuckling to him will be deadly. This is a dangerous moment but the only thing to do is keep one's head and hold on.
Saturday, April 03, 2004
Blast in Spain kills officer, 3 terrorism suspects
But wait. I thought Spain was off the terror list. They must have done something to make the terrorists want to blow themselves up at the risk of taking myriad other lives (surely it would have been easier to just shoot themselves). This is what Spain must expect for trying to enforce the law in its own territory.
But wait. I thought Spain was off the terror list. They must have done something to make the terrorists want to blow themselves up at the risk of taking myriad other lives (surely it would have been easier to just shoot themselves). This is what Spain must expect for trying to enforce the law in its own territory.
Friday, April 02, 2004
Recently overheard at a Democratic dinner:
You know you're in the doghouse when Jimmy Carter is punking you.
President Carter: [speaking to an audience]: I have a friend named Ralph Nader. He was trusted enough by my family to have been permitted in Plains, Georgia to umpire a softball game where I pitched on one side and my brother pitched on the other side. That's a lot of confidence. When I was president he gave me a lot of advice. And tonight I want to return the favor by giving him some advice.
[Audience applauds]
President Carter: Ralph, go back to umpiring softball games or examining the rear end of automobiles, and don't risk costing the Democrats the White House this year as you did four years ago.
[Audience applauds louder]
You know you're in the doghouse when Jimmy Carter is punking you.
