 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
||||||
|
RE: PICTURES FROM TITAN [John Derbyshire] This first picture looks like Long Island. Though with the temperature up there at about 300 below zero, I imagine the Titanian equivalent of the Long Island Railroad is having some service delays. Posted at 06:10 PM STILL GIVING ORDERS [Andrew Stuttaford] Via Haaretz “German politicians have called for a Europe-wide ban on Nazi insignia after Britain's Prince Harry caused outrage by wearing a swastika armband and Nazi regalia at a fancy dress party… Markus Soeder, general secretary of Germany's Christian Socialist Union opposition conservative party told the paper: "In a Europe grounded in peace and freedom there should be no place for Nazi symbols. They should be banned throughout Europe, as they are with good reason in Germany." Soeder also urged the German government to push for a more balanced history program in British schools.” No word yet on whether those German politicians, who seem to have a thing or two to learn about free speech, would support a Europe-wide ban on Communist insignia. I wonder why not. Posted at 03:36 PM A GOOD WOMAN [Andrew Stuttaford] A wonderful story from, yes, the New York Times Posted at 03:10 PM SUPERFLUOUS? [Andrew Stuttaford] Here’s a little moment of delight courtesy of the invaluable, if slightly obsessive, EU Referendum blog, a daily must-read for anyone interested in the goings on in the den of thieves: “Seen on BBC’s Newsnight programme yesterday, a report on the UN "Oil for Food" scandal. In what was supposed to be a critical piece, we heard Peter Marshall, the Beebie reporter state, with not a hint of a blush: “The Asian tsunami has provided a perfect example of the need for an efective UN under an activist Secretary General. This time Kofi Annan was quick off the mark and America's independent efforts soon looked superfluous.”
As a reminder, the BBC is funded by a television ‘license’. That’s an annual tax on any Briton so bold as to want to own a TV, whether or not he watches the BBC. Don’t pay it, and you go to jail. Free country? Not really. Posted at 03:02 PM FOX [Rich Lowry] FYI--I'm scheduled to be on around 4:20 pm. Posted at 02:52 PM DON'T FORGET [KJL] to RSVP to our Friday bar night in D.C. next week--helps with logistics planning. Details here. Posted at 02:42 PM ALSO FROM THE FRIDAY COURT REPORTS [KJL ] The inauguration was declared safe for God: Michael Newdow lost his suit (but extended his fifteen minutes). Posted at 02:38 PM VIRGINIA IS FOR LOVERS… [KJL ] …married or unmarried. Yesterday, the state supreme court there struck down an anti-fornication law that was still on the books. Posted at 02:35 PM HARRY - BEYOND SATIRE [Andrew Stuttaford] Kathryn, in fact the BBC’s report on Harry’s wardrobe malfunction went out of its way to note that the wicked princeling had a drink and a cigarette in his hand. Oh the horror. Posted at 02:21 PM THEY WANT YOUR SPERM [KJL] If you're an Australian parliamentarian, that is. An IVF clinic down under has formally requested a contribution from 25 pols, hoping they'll get other Aussie men at work. Posted at 02:11 PM ALSO RE GENEVA [Cliff May] A footnote to Andy and Rich’s points: This is why it makes no sense whatsoever when Sen. Joe Biden as well as so many folks in the MSM repeat that the reason we should treat terrorists as POWs because in that way we ensure that our troops, if captured, will be treated according to these standards. No, emphatically not. First, our troops and even our civilians are not being accorded Geneva protections or even a minimum of civilized treatment by the terrorists (think Nick Berg, Margaret Hussein, Daniel Pearl). Second, if you say to the terrorists, “Don’t worry, no matter what you do, no matter how barbaric, it doesn’t matter – you’ll always get kid gloves-Geneva treatment from our side,” you eliminate any leverage you might otherwise have had. I don’t expect Human Rights Watch to understand or care. I do think Sen. Biden ought to. Posted at 02:07 PM MEMO TO MICHAEL MOORE FANS [KJL] You might get more than you bargained for reaction-wise if you get the wrong kind of blue bracelet. Posted at 01:57 PM FOX CAIRS [KJL] Fox has agreed to run Council on American-Islamic Relations-produced public-service announcements to make up for 24's "sins" of intolerance. Posted at 01:53 PM MAYBE IT’S OK IF THESE IRAQIS DON’T VOTE? [Cliff May] “An extremist Sunni group believed to have ties to Al Qaeda took responsibility on Friday for killing an aide to Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the aide's son and four guards with a car bomb on Wednesday evening.” (And don’t forget: the war in Iraq has nothing to do with al Qaeda, nothing to do with terrorism. If we hadn’t invaded Iraq, these folks would be staying at home, re-finishing their basements and whipping up new recipes – like for aerosol anthrax.) Posted at 01:47 PM HARRY'S TROUBLES [KJL] If you have a minute to kill: "In fact, he only wore the armband to distract attention from the fact that he was holding a cigarette, so in one sense it worked perfectly..." Posted at 01:40 PM TIME FOR ABBAS TO FISH OR CUT BAIT [Cliff May] A senior Israeli official says that one of the Palestinian Authority’s prinicpal security forces “was to the best of our knowledge involved” in the most recent terrorist attack at the Karni border crossing between Israel and Gaza. The Israelis add that newly elected P.A. president Mahmoud Abbas “knows who carried out the attack” and must take action before there can be negotations with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. If Abbas were a moderate, he would take action. But he’s not a moderate. Maybe, however, he’s a pragmatist? My Scripps Howard column on this topic is here. Posted at 01:40 PM TITAN [Andrew Stuttaford] John D, I’m with you. Those pictures are simply wonderful. Amazing. And yes, John M, Sirens of Titan is a wonderful book. The whole point of human civilization was to advertise the need of a spare part for an alien spacecraft. Now that’s what I call intelligent design… Vonnegut has spouted plenty of nonsense since then, but everything can be forgiven the author of one of the soundest short stories ever written – Harrison Bergeron. Here’s an extract: “The music began. It was normal at first- cheap, silly, false. But Harrison snatched two musicians from their chairs, waved them like batons as he sang the music as he wanted it played. He slammed them back into their chairs. The music began again and was much improved. Harrison and his Empress merely listened to the music for a while-listened gravely, as though synchronizing their heartbeats with it. They shifted their weights to their toes. Harrison placed his big hands on the girl’s tiny waist, letting her sense the weightlessness that would soon be hers. And then, in an explosion of joy and grace, into the air they sprang! Not only were the laws of the land abandoned, but the law of gravity and the laws of motion as well. They reeled, whirled, swiveled, flounced, capered, gamboled, and spun. They leaped like deer on the moon. The studio ceiling was thirty feet high, but each leap brought the dancers nearer to it. It became their obvious intention to kiss the ceiling. They kissed it. And then, neutralizing gravity with love and pure will, they remained suspended in air inches below the ceiling, and they kissed each other for a long, long time. “It was then that Diana Moon Glampers, the Handicapper General, came into the studio with a double-barreled ten-gauge shotgun. She fired twice, and the Emperor and the Empress were dead before they hit the floor." If you haven’t already, read the whole thing. Now. Posted at 01:30 PM RE: YOUR POST ON MEDIA MATTERS & GENEVA [Andy McCarthy] You are entirely correct, but there is an even more basic reason that the 4th Geneva Convention on the protection of civilians does not apply to al Qaeda. It is found near the very beginning of the 4th Convention itself. The third paragraph of Article 2 reads as follows (italics are mine): "Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof." In cases where a non-party to Geneva, such as al Qaeda, participates in an armed conflict, this paragraph means two things things: First, the states who are high contracting parties must adhere to the convention's terms insofar as their dealings with each other go. (E.g., if the U.S. and China faced off in a war in which, say, the Tamil Tigers were also participating, the U.S. and China would still have to accord Geneva protections to each other even though the Tigers would not be eligible for such treatment in the same war.) Second, and more important for present purposes, let's assume for argument's sake that a non-contracting party such as al Qaeda could be considered a "Power" even though it is not a nation-state. Al Qaeda would still not be eligible for 4th Geneva Convention treatment unless it both accepted and applied the provisions of the 4th Geneva Convention. To the contrary, al Qaeda's modus operandi is to violate the laws of war -- specifically to target civilian populations for mass attacks, as well as endangering civilian populations by hiding among them. As it neither accepts nor applies the 4th Geneva Convention, it is ineligible by the very terms of that convention. This is perhaps the most salient point of the whole argument. The thrust of Geneva is to encourage civilized behavior. The object here is not simply to prevail on a technical legal point. Our point is not just that Geneva doesn't apply to al Qaeda simply as a strict legal matter, although that is surely so. We are also arguing that applying Geneva to al Qaeda would reward and encourage the very behavior it was Geneva's principal purpose to prevent. Posted at 01:27 PM INTEGER SEQUENCES [John Derbyshire] Remember those IQ tests (or whatever name they are camouflaged under nowadays) in which you are asked to prode the next member of a sequence of numbers? (What is the next number in this sequence: 1, 11, 21, 1211, 111221, 312211,...?) Well, back in the early 1970s, Neil Sloane published a Handbook of Integer Sequences, intended as a start on listing ALL possible integer sequences of any interest at all. This project gre and grew -- I have a 1995 book titled The Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences, which was another milestone. This is now all on the internet, of course, and you can look up your favorite sequence here. If you liked Prime Obsession, check out these: A100060, A102522, A102523, A102524. (Click the "Sequence Number" radio button & put the sequence number in the text box.) (Thanks to Gary Adamson for noticing these entries.) Posted at 01:24 PM LIBERAL=LIBERATED [Tim Graham] Visiting Mom and Dad at Christmas, I saw their letter from a dear liberal cousin of mine lamenting that the re-election of Bush is a sign of the astounding low "educational level" of voters. (Hmm, why didn't I get a card this year?) Journalists have that mindset too. See Hugh Downs declaring the media are liberal because they are "liberated," better informed and "more in touch." Posted at 01:20 PM TITANIAN FICTION [John Derbyshire] J.J.: Arthur C. Clarke wrote a novel set partly on Titan -- a favored tourist destination in whichever future year the thing took place. Some v. good and plausible descriptions of Titanian geo- (or Titanio-) morphology. The whole thing was tied up with the Bicentennial somewhow -- I guess it came out in 1976, and the future year was 2776 or something. I wish I had a better memory for books. Sir Arthur, by the way, is just fine out there in Sri Lanka, where he's been living for the past 40 yrs or so. (He is of course a Derb fan ) Posted at 01:19 PM ZETAGRID [John Hillen] At the end of last year, the Zetagrid project achieved its goal of verifying the Riemann Hypothesis for the first trillion zeros of the zeta function. This is a landmark in computational number theory. Posted at 01:17 PM GRANER COURT-MARTIAL [John Hillen] Most MSM papers and the European press are making much of Specialist Charles Graner’s court-martial and sentencing yesterday – saying it serves to highlight the debate over the morality of the U.S. intervention. Quite the opposite. If there is a morality play on the question of the injustices of Iraq, it should turn on the difference between a self-correcting system that has brought dozens of soldiers and Marines to courts-martial proceedings (the great majority for non-capital crimes) and the lack of any such system on the other side. And lest someone suggest this is light justice, these are heavy sentences being handed down. The six year military jail terms handed out to several National Guardsman for pilfering un-tended equipment springs to mind – a ‘crime’ that would have put the con-men and scavenging crew of ‘Operation Petticoat’ away for life. CNN and others like the fashion of scoreboards these days. One is reminded of the running ‘Days Since the 9/11 Commission Issued Its Report’ vs. ‘Number of 9/11 Recommendations the Administration Has Enacted’ tally – which mindlessly presupposed the infallibility of the commission’s recommendations and mendacity of those not implementing them right away. I suggest a brought-to-justice-by-their-own-system scoreboard for Iraq. We can even equate the horrific capital crimes (including beheading of aid workers, etc) of the terrorists in Iraq with the lesser offenses of Americans and Coalition forces. By my count it is: US and Coalition: 3 dozen or more Salafist and Baathist Insurgents: 0 That’s the lesson to be drawn from Graner’s well-deserved court-martial. Posted at 01:14 PM RE: SOSEC REFORM [John Derbyshire] The ring of truth Posted at 01:11 PM MOON MAN [John J. Miller] I'm not quite sure what I'd think of it today -- and something tells me there's a good chance I'd seriously dislike it -- but in high school I thought The Sirens of Titan by Kurt Vonnegut was a wonderful book. Posted at 05:52 AM Friday, January 14, 2005 MOVE OVER LANCE ARMSTRONG [KJL] Now blue-staters--all over the world--can wear blue bracelets to show they hate Bush. It's going to be a bitter four years for those who can't moveon. Posted at 08:39 PM PHRASES I'M TIRED OF HEARING #895 [John Derbyshire] "What's up with THAT?" Posted at 07:47 PM PICTURES FROM TITAN [John Derbyshire] The Huygens probe has successfully landed on Titan, Saturn's major moon. First pictures have come in. This is tremendously exciting. Posted at 07:40 PM MEDIA MATTERS AND GENEVA [Rich Lowry ] There is a confused item on Media Matters accusing conservatives, including me, of distorting the Geneva Conventions. It argues that, even if Al Qaeda members aren't entitled to protections as POWs under Geneva III, they are protected under Geneva IV. But Geneva IV is about protections for civilians. Its title is “Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War.” Nothing in its text or negotiating history suggests it is meant to apply to unlawful combantants. That is why Protocal 1, which we rejected, was proposed in the 1970s as an addition to create protections for such combatants. Under Geneva IV there is a provision for holding civilians as security detainees, but only very briefly. If Media Matters is suggesting that unlawful combatants are entitled to this status it would mean that they are preversly entitled to better treatment than POWs--POWs can be held for the duration of the war, security detainees have to be turned around very quickly. Media Matters also argues that al Qaeda should be protected under “common Article 3” that is in both Geneva III and Geneva IV. But that article applies to “armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties.” Al Qaeda is a transnational organization, so conflicts involving it are inherently international and this provision doesn't apply either. Conservatives are on solid ground here. Its the left that can't stand the idea that terrorist thugs don't deserve gold-plated treatment under international law. Posted at 05:06 PM CRYING ON INAUGURATION DAY? [KJL] Our friend Andrew Breitbart--Matt Drudge's partner in crime at the Drudge Report--co-authored a book on Hollywood life and values last year. It's a colorful look at the heart of blue America. Since Golden Globes are this weekend, prominent Dems have recently demonstrated they follow Michael Moore's marching orders, and Oscar talk is everywhere, I checked in with him to chat about Hollywood Commie love and the like. He's a funny guy, and it comes through in the interview. I think you'll enjoy. It is here if you haven't read it yet. Posted at 04:21 PM MORE GRANER [Rich Lowry ] More e-mail: "Mr Lowry, I was in Iraq the same time Chuck Graner and little Lyndie England were. I was the logistics officer for an MP Battalion that thankfully was not attached to the 800th MP Brigade which had responsibility for Abu Ghraib. Our line companies used to drop prisoners off at Abu Ghraib and told us on more than one occasion that things were all F'd up at that place. The abuses there had nothing to do with Don Rumsfeld, nothing to do with Alberto Gonzales or anyone else that high on the food chain. It was piss poor leadership in the 800th Brigade pure and simple. From the unbelieveably incompetent Brigadier General Judith Karpinski down to the section sergeants at the prison, no leadership was exercised.... As for getting orders from MI that’s also a load. MI doesn't give guidance to Spec 4's. It all boils down to the leadership of Graner's unit all the way to the Brigade level being non existent. All the MP's in theatre during that time knew the 800th was a joke. I am thankful I dont have to sport the 800th patch on my right shoulder." Posted at 04:12 PM RE: KOS, LAUCK, ETC. [KJL ] Bloggers should definitely disclose such things (to the point of overemphasis even)—be obvious about your biases and readers can take it from there. I imagine there'll always be a campaign staffer who blogs in his spare time, etc.—just make sure everyone knows that. Even if it was just a part-time gig. Keeps everyone honest. Posted at 04:03 PM FULL DISCLOSURE [Kathryn Jean Lopez ] Jon Lauck had a South Dakota blog, writing on South Dakota politics--the Thune and Daschle campaigns specifically--during the election. He wrote a few pieces for NRO on the Thune-Daschle race. He also received consultant fees from the Thune campaign, something NRO was not aware of when accepting and commissioning articles from him (I just learned it myself in the last few days). Lauck addressed the issue on his site in December. He says that because it had been reported in South Dakota media that he was a Thune consultant as soon as he became one, he never thought to stamp his site with a disclosure--and never thought to call it out to me when discussing potential pieces. I apologize to readers: Had I known he had gotten any Thune money (I probably should have asked; I will now), the pieces would not have run on NRO. Posted at 04:00 PM GALILEO FOOTNOTES [Jonah Goldberg] From a reader: Subject: Thanks for the Article on Galileo Posted at 03:49 PM KIDS, STRIP THIS FROM YOUR CAREER GOALS [KJL ] Eight-graders get an exotic-dancing Career Day presentation. Posted at 03:43 PM CHARLES GRANER [Rich Lowry ] Remember how that OLC memo was supposed to have led inexorably to the abuses of the likes of Charles Graner at Abu Ghraib? Well, presumably some evidence of that would have been introduced by his defense at his trail. But this is how the Times reports it today: His lawyers have argued that Specialist Graner, a 36-year-old former prison guard from Pennsylvania, was following orders to "soften up" detainees before interrogations. But on cross-examination, witnesses called by the defense on Wednesday and Thursday almost all ended up reinforcing the prosecution's case that Specialist Graner had abused detainees for sport.There are new damning e-mails according to the Times: In addition to testimony in the case, including three detainees who gave videotaped depositions, the jury of 10 combat veterans will consider about 10 e-mail messages, retrieved from a cache that Specialist Graner sent from his Army account around November 2003.Of course, don't look for these e-mails to be splashed all over the news because they reinforce the idea that Graner--not Al Gonzales--was responsible for his acts of abuse. If I remember correctly, in the initial flush of hysteria over Abu Ghraib Anne Appelbaum and Andrew Sullivan advanced the theory that Graner must have been acting on orders because he didn't look guilty in the photos. I guess they would argue that these e-mails prove even more clearly that Graner was acting on orders since he doesn't demonstrate any guilt whatsoever in them. Of course, what they show is that Graner is a remorseless monster. There were a few witnesses for Graner's defense. One was named Megan Ambuhl, who was also having sex with Graner (who, of course, fathered a child by Lyndie England). She said interrogators told them to point at male detainees in the shower. The Times continues: Questioned by the prosecution, Ms. Ambuhl acknowledged that she had been sexually involved with Specialist Graner for a month before the investigation began, and did not wish to see him convicted. She acknowledged, too, that military intelligence, or M.I., was not present for the photographs that show hooded and naked detainees forced to masturbate, form a pyramid or simulate oral sex.Sgt. Kenneth Davis also testified in Graner's defense that military intelligence officers were involved in the abuse. That appears to be true, but there is a problem with the idea that they were ordering Graner to do what he did as part of an interrogation strategy. The Times again: But under questioning from the prosecution, Sergeant Davis acknowledged that the military intelligence soldiers ranked below Specialist Graner - he was a corporal at the time - and that the detainees were not interrogated.(UPDATE: This post initially was screwy. Fixed now.) Posted at 03:03 PM V-DAY [John J. Miller] In an unusual but propitious coincidence, both the Wall Street Journal (subscribers only here)and the Washington Post have editorials today criticizing three senators -- Chafee, Dodd, and Nelson of Florida -- for visiting Venezuela and disregarding the Chavez regime's latest totalitarian power grab. I hoped they're blasted in the hometown papers as well. Posted at 02:16 PM FAMILY CIRCUS [KJL] In light of a federal court letting stand a Florida law banning gay adoption stand this week, Maggie Gallagher looks at state adoption laws and notes that only two states have a codified preference for married couples as adoptive parents. She reports from an upcoming study out of her think tank that finds that, in fact, discrimination worries may rank higher than an mom and a dad in terms of placement considerations: States are twice as likely to "forbid 'discrimination' based on marital status than to make any legal effort to place vulnerable children in homes with a married mother and father." Posted at 01:59 PM ALSO WORTH READING [Ramesh Ponnuru] Nick Eberstadt's latest grim assessment of Russian demographic trends. Posted at 01:54 PM WHEN FAMILY-FRIENDLY POLICIES AREN'T [Ramesh Ponnuru] Neil Gilbert argues in the Public Interest that policies that attempt to make work more "family friendly"--really, to make families work-friendly--may not work because. . . well, read the essay. Posted at 01:45 PM A PASSION FOR UNFAIRNESS? [Stanley Kurtz] Here’s an amazing story about a college that is stopping students from showing Mel Gibson’s Passion of the Christ on campus. Supposedly, the college banned the film because it is R rated. Yet the same school permitted a live performance called “F***ing for Jesus that describes simulated sex with “the risen Christ.” Posted at 01:32 PM JACK [Jonah Goldberg] Do you have any idea how painful and expensive it is to have a flabber de-gasted? Posted at 01:29 PM YES! [Jonah Goldberg] Gore in '08! I love it! When the time comes I really hope someone shows those clips of him all sweaty and vein-y screaming at the top of his lungs with spit flying as he denounced Bush. Deaniacs may love that stuff, but it reminds most Americans of a crazy dude on subway platform shrieking while unaware that the cops are circling him with plastic handcuffs in hand. Posted at 01:26 PM RE: MAD AS HELL [John Derbyshire] A reader: "A Briton would fill out the survey, grumbling all the while to his grumbling contemporaries. An American would throw it in the trash, reserving his time for moneymaking, or invention, or honest leisure." This reader is absolutely correct. I have not been living up to my new citizenship obligations. Into the trash it has gone! Posted at 01:23 PM UKRAINE [KJL] to join the EU? Posted at 01:23 PM GORE '08 [Rich Lowry ] We're hearing that Al Gore is very serious about running next time. Posted at 01:20 PM SPIT-TAKE WARNINGS [Jonah Goldberg] This is like the 30th email I've gotten along these lines (scroll down to the Tron post to see what caused the reax). Basically, I don't like warning readers when there's something G-rated and shocking. It reduces the spice from life. Anyway, from a reader: Dude! You've got to give some kind of warning when you put up a link like that. I had just taken a sip of coffee and almost sprayed my computer monitor when the link came up. Posted at 01:15 PM MY FLABBERS ARE GASTED! [Jack Fowler] Not a pretty sight, but that’s beside the point: the big news is that in the last five days, we’ve had another NINE CABINS RESERVED for the National Review 2005 British Isles Cruise! I kid you not: since this Monday we have received nine new bookings. That gives us some 120 cabins sold. But that means only 30 cabins remain available, and that we could very well be SOLD OUT by St. Valentine’s Day. I can see it now, lots and lots of lollygaggers left standing on the dock, crying as they miss the cruise of a lifetime because they took their sweet time signing up. Be one of the happy ones watching all the boo-hooing from the Promenade Deck of the beautiful Crystal Symphony (elbow to elbow with Bill Buckley, Paul Johnson, Peggy Noonan, Larry Kudlow, Robert Bork, David Pryce-Jones, Kate O’Beirne, Rich Lowry, Jay Nordlinger, and John O’Sullivan) as it pulls away for 11 phenomenal nights (July 10 – 21) of conservative revelry. Sign up right now at www.nrcruise.com. Posted at 01:07 PM HOLLAND [Stanley Kurtz] Geert Wilders, the Dutch politician who wants to put a hold on immigration, is in the United States. Here’s an interesting report from The New York Sun on Wilders’ response to questions at a forum in New York. Posted at 01:04 PM BUSH REGRETS... [ Jonah Goldberg ] ... saying "Bring 'em on" and that he wanted "Osama dead or alive." To be honest neither of these statements ever bothered me, though I can see the case for regretting both, particularly the Osama thing. Personally, I don't mind if the world thinks we turn into a bunch of crazy cowboys when you attack us the way we were attacked on 9/11. I doubt this bit of humility will not do one bit of good to change Bush's image among his detractors here, or abroad. Posted at 01:01 PM RE: SOSEC REFORM [John Derbyshire] E-mail exchange: Reader (quoting me): "'The current system is simple, straightforward, and needs about 8 bureaucrats to run it.' Are you kidding, or did I mis-read this? The budget for the 2005 SSA 'administrative costs' was $8.875 Billion. If 8 bureaucrats are splitting that pie, I'm in the wrong line of work." Derb: "Wait'll you see the 'reformed' budget!" Posted at 12:41 PM EXCOMMUNICATING CONDI [ Jonah Goldberg] There's a great post at the Volokh Conspiracy about the tendency of liberal academics to celebrate inquisitions and excommunications. This is of particular interest for a bunch of reasons, including my need to research the topic more for my book. If anybody has first hand experiences on the subject I'd love to hear from you. Or if you've read anything good on the subject (left or right) I'd love to know about it. But please don't send it to my normal address. Send email on this subject to JonahResearch@aol.com. It may be a little while before I respond. Anyway, just to get people thinking on the subject, it's long been my opinion that for all of the left's glorification of Galileo as a victim of a religious inquisition, the real masters of the art are professional academics themselves. After all, while the Church may deserve its share of criticism for what happened to Galileo, his scientific colleagues have gotten-off scot-free. See my column on Bjorn Lomberg's treatment for more of what I mean. Posted at 12:32 PM JOANN DAVIDSON [KJL] Ken Mehlman’s tapped a pro-choice woman from Ohio—big GOP activist type (as they tend to be)--who worked on the ground in that important state, to be RNC co-chair. Some conservatives are ticked. I’m inclined to let it go, to be honest. We’re not the Democrats, who have had a tendency to ostracize anyone who differs (thinking Casey). That said, of course, if we were talking chair, I’d be on a crusade, but we’re not, and there’s some room, as long as everyone knows where the party stands. (Also: If this were some State Department employee who oversees an international health-care type program who turned out to be an abortion activist, I’d be on the march, too, but this seems like a moment to hold fire.) And, frankly, at this moment in time (see Rehnquist story in the NYPost--scroll down), my main concern “personnel” wise is who we get on the Court. And I think the White House is going to do the right thing there. It's, simply, key. Posted at 12:11 PM PRINCE HAL (3) [Andrew Stuttaford] Here's a rather entertaining detail about that now notorious fancy dress party via the London Times: "Last week the two young Princes and their friend Guy Pelly, 22, set off for Nailsworth, a few miles from Highgrove to choose fancy-dress outfits...Mr Pelly decided to dress as the Queen and chose a powder-blue dress, grey wig, long white gloves and a crown." Classic. Posted at 11:42 AM STATE GUN RIGHTS - AWESOME [Jonah Goldberg] A reader informs me that the Pennsylvania state constitution says "The Right of Citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be questioned." I love that. Presumably there's a specific history to that language and how it should be interpreted. But I just love that a layman's reading suggests that it's unconstitutional to question the right to bear arms. It certainly sounds like this is an imposition on free speech. I mean, if I'm sitting at a I-Hop in Philly and I say "You know Tom, I think we should revisit the whole 'right to bear arms' thing..." can a cop draw down on me and tell me to lie down on the floor and put my hands behind my back? Crazy.... Posted at 11:34 AM GETTING CLOSER [KJL ] There is still a little room at the Feb. 24 dinner/fundraiser at Bill Buckley’s house. As Rich points out, being there, with him (as well as a substantial showing from NR's top editors), is really a unique opportunity you'll enjoy (he's a busy man!). Everything you need to know is there. And thanks again for considering it--we value your support. Posted at 11:11 AM LOOKING FOR A THURSDAY NRO EVENT? [KJL ] Be sure and stop by David Frum’s open house on Thursday (he'll be book signing, among other things). Details here (scroll down). Posted at 11:08 AM COLORING D.C. RED [KJL ] Some of you e-mailed me last week bummed that you didn’t have the cash to spare for our intimate night with the Buckleys & co. in February, but would love to meet up with NR types. You can. If you’re in DC next Friday, come by Fado’s Irish Pub in Chinatown and hang and drink with the NRO gang for our inaugural celebration. That’s where we’ll be hanging out from 5-8. RSVP to thecorner@nationalreview.com to help us get a headcount for the good folks at the bar. Thanks much and see you there. Posted at 10:58 AM RE: SOSEC REFORM [John Derbyshire] Several e-mails like this: "Mr. Ponnuru and Mr. Derbyshire---An insight regarding your recent Corner postings... As an investment advisor, I have a line of business that provides professional portfolio management to participants in 401k plans for a fee. Needless to say, I have an up close and personal view of how individuals handle portfolio management. The evidence is clear that Americans are woefully unprepared to make appropriate investment decisions. There are mountains of studies that show individuals do a very poor job of managing their own investments. We shouldn't be surprised however, since this country does nothing at the primary school or college level to educate our citizens about personal finance or prudent investment principals. I am a huge Bush fan, but I have to agree with Derb that this reform will be a very costly disaster. It would be far better (and cheaper) to lower benefits and raise the retirement age while clearly explaining to people that if they want a more comfortable retirement become responsible savers NOW." Posted at 10:55 AM RE: CHICOMS ETC [John Derbyshire] Several annoying readers: "Where is Raiwan? I can't find it in my gazeteer." As a result of a Home Improvement malfunction yesterday, I have a large Band-Aid on one of my key typing fingers. I am operating at half speed and with an error rate several times normal. And it's a sin to mock the afflicted. So there. Posted at 10:52 AM RE: SOSEC REFORM [John Derbyshire] ---"John is worried about having too much choice, or too little. Relax: You won't have to participate in the accounts at all if you don't want to." Oh, that's all right then. Like when HR says: "Of course, you don't have to participate in the firm's Managed Health Care plan at all if you don't want to..." (Subtext: "If you don't want to pay the govt-approved price, you are free to pay the sucker price.") Or like when the State highway authority says to the homeowner: "Of course, you don't have to sell your house to us at this suggested price of $29.95 at all if you don't want to. We can just route the new expressway right round your property..." ---"(It is possible that you will face some benefit cuts either way.)" You don't say! ---"For those who do choose to participate, portfolio management need not be especially daunting: Millions of people have been able to make the same sorts of choices with their 401(k)s." I personally find it very daunting, and I have a degree in math. I have no clue what most of those numbers on my statements mean, and have long since resigned myself to the assumption that they will all dwindle to zero in some future financial panic, crisis, or swindle. (The name "Enron" mean anything?) What assurance do I have that they won't? One, I mean, that I can *understand*? I want my Social Security check. Posted at 10:49 AM FAIR POINT ON GUNS - A RETRACTION [Jonah Goldberg] Sorry, I guess I should have waited for my coffee. I don't offer retractions much. But, I think I was wrong to say "fair point" about the guy's email saying states can ban guns. I think you can make an intellectually serious argument from that perspective, but that perspective really isn't my own. And normally when I say "fair point" or some such about an email it means I'm more or less endorsing its content. I do think gun ownership is a right recognized by the constitution and extended to the states by the 14th amendment. However, as everyone around here knows, I'm very, very sympathetic to the idea that states should have vastly more power to do what they want on a whole range of public policies. Posted at 10:21 AM DEFENDING KOS [Jonah Goldberg] Froma reader: Jonah, Posted at 10:14 AM CRIME, COVER-UP, TWIST [KJL] Charles Krauthammer weighs in on Rathergate this morning, here. A taste--a few good questions: Did Mapes and Rather devote a fraction of the resources they gave this story to a real scandal, such as the oil-for-food scandal at the United Nations, or contrary partisan political charges, such as those brought by the Swift boat vets against John Kerry? On the United Nations, no interest. On Kerry, what CBS did do was ad hominem investigative stories on the Swift boat veterans themselves, rather than an examination of the charges. Do you perceive a direction to these inclinations? Posted at 10:02 AM INTEL [KJL] I just got this e-mail (characterizations within do not necessarily reflect the view of NRO or NRO's editor): What real geeks are doing right nowHHHHMMMM. Jonah told me earlier he's be disappearing this morning. Aha. Posted at 09:57 AM CHICOMS TAKE OVER YONKERS SCHOOL [John Derbyshire] A correspondent in Yonkers (where, as all Ella Fitzgerald fans know, true love conquers) offers disturbing evidence that the ChiComs have begun infiltrating our school districts. "My daughter's elementary school (she's in kindergarten) is celebrating Chinese-American month. As part of that, the classroom across the hall is now displaying China's flag (specifically, the flag of the PRC, introduced in 1949). They've had the kids create these for display. I suppose at Cuban-American heritage month, perhaps they'll let people create little portraits of Che." My correspondent attaches a picture of the ChiCom flag display so lovingly produced by American tots. Apparently this is all in aid of something called "Chinese-American Heritage Month." (Known to some of us as "January.") Here is just one of the many questions that arise. Given the infinite concern that school authorities show towards kids' sensibilities in matters of bacjground, parentage, and so on, what effect will this have on Chinese kids whose parents come from Raiwan? Or whose parents have fled persecution by the Communists? Just for once, I want to see a "sensitivity" lawsuit launched. Let's get the ACLU on this. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Posted at 09:44 AM DERB'S PERSONAL ACCOUNT WORRIES [Ramesh Ponnuru] John is worried about having too much choice, or too little. Relax: You won't have to participate in the accounts at all if you don't want to. (It is possible that you will face some benefit cuts either way.) For those who do choose to participate, portfolio management need not be especially daunting: Millions of people have been able to make the same sorts of choices with their 401(k)s. Whether we trust Bush seems irrelevant. There is going to be a bill for Congress to vote up or down on. If you're a Bushophobe, you could say that perhaps the Iraq war authorization bill would have deserved passage under another president--but this one can't be trusted to execute responsibly the powers the bill gives him. But that argument doesn't seem to apply to SocSec reform, Medicare, or NCLB. The major reasons for not doing any of these things would be contained in the bills themselves, which are either good or bad ideas regardless of who would be charged with implementing them. Posted at 09:31 AM RE: CURTAIN CALL? [Tim Graham] Since some similarities have emerged between the CNN "Tailwind" fiasco and the CBS "Dan Rather's Just a Sock Puppet" fiasco, it's important to remember that Peter Arnett, who avoided the first round of firings at CNN while he insisted he was only a script reader, was eventually let go about a year later. Could CBS have a plan to put Dan out to pasture by the end of the year? Posted at 09:12 AM BACKGROUNDER [ Jonah Goldberg] If you coming late to the Kos thing, the Wall Street Journal explains. Posted at 08:58 AM THE TEDDY BEAR SCANDALS [KJL] A friend e-mails: "I once got a bear for valentine's day that was in a prison outfit and said 'prisoner of your heart.' do you think this might offend the incarcerated?" Actually, the Vermont Teddy Bear Company has a "horny devil" and a Playmate Bear, so I see this story getting bigger before it fades away. Where's the Vermont governor on hellfire and teddy bears? And where's the Department of Justice on the "Gangster of Love" bear? Clearly, the Vermont Teddy Bear Company is a menace. Posted at 08:52 AM THE DEAN ANGLE [ Jonah Goldberg ] Patrick Hynes weighs in. I'm not sure I agree with his suggestion that other Democrats didn't know about Kos taking money, or about the Rathergate magnitude of this whole thing, but it's worth a gander. Posted at 08:46 AM FAIR POINT RE GUNS [Jonah Goldberg] From a reader re last night's post about guns: Jonah - Posted at 08:43 AM DAILY KOS: ONE LAST POINT [ Jonah Goldberg] I should point out that Daily Kos does not fully believe in full disclosure. Or at least Daily Kos doesn't practice it. He's honest about this point, but he writes in "disclosure post": But for the record, I will not discuss my role within the Dean campaign, other than to say it's technical, not message or strategy. I will also not discuss any of my other clients, including their identities (I have non-disclose agreements to which I must adhere). So yes he disclosed about Dean but not about some unknowable number of other Democrats. I'm not a big Kos reader, but the statement that "helping Democrats win elections" is the most exciting and fulfilling thing he can imagine seems to underscore Kos' status as a partisan Democrat Bulletin Board. Again, he's honest about all this, but his position is he's free to take money from Democrats (presumably many of them elected Democrats) without telling us who they are and that his highest priority is electing Democrats. We also now know that it is accepted practice among at least some prominent Democratic strategists to throw "technical" contracts in the hope of extracting favorable coverage. This is not exactly a recipe for shining intellectual independence now is it? Posted at 08:40 AM SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM [John Derbyshire] There are some interesting points being made over at Steve Sailer's blog. Steve himself, a Bushophobe conservative, makes this rather unsettling one: "How much evidence is there that Bush's actions generally turn out more responsible than his rhetoric? Iraq? Immigration? Medicare drug benefits? Tax cuts during war time? No Child Left Behind?" Well, personally, I bought (and still buy) Iraq; but he's got me on the others. What if Bush Sosec reform is like NCLB? Or GWB's immigration ""reform."" (Yes, that's double scare quotes. I thought something extra-strength was needed.) I'll confess I am a Sosec reform skeptic, on the grounds that: (a) It will make my life even more complicated, at an age when I'd be looking to simplify it. More of my life, of the national life, will be in the hands of lawyers and accountants, for a net loss of self-reliance. As someone says on Steve's site, only one person in a thousand is smart enough to do portfolio management even half competenetly. Sosec reform is a nuclear strike against the left side of the Bell Curve, and the middle too. (b) Govt will end up being involved MORE in my affairs, not less. The current system is simple, straightforward, and needs about 8 bureaucrats to run it. With the political necessities of privatized Sosec (i.e. you can't let people invest any fool way they please), there will be govt bureaucrats crawling all over the mutual-fund business -- yeah, yeah, but even more than there already are. It will end with some crisis and a complete govt takeover of the securities markets -- "To protect your investments..." I grew up under the old-style Beveridge- (trans: New Deal-) type socialism. Free orange juice, free health care, free college education, a check once a month when you hit retirement. Sure, sure, I know all the counter-arguments -- I've been hearing them (and making them!) all my life. I'm starting to think, though, that we are being marched off towards a newer, more oppressive, more liberty-denying kind of socialism; and the banners we are marching under read: PRIVATIZATION! LIBERATION! PERSONAL CHOICE!..... Posted at 08:14 AM JUST PLAIN CRAZY [KJL ] The Vermont Teddy Bear Company gets grief about their Valentine’s Day “Crazy for You” bear because it’s supposedly offensive to the mentally ill: “The bear, wrapped in a white straitjacket with a red heart on the front, comes with commitment papers and is meant to convey out-of-control love, the company says.” The Vermont governor, for the record, has taken a firm stand against the bear. Nuts. Posted at 07:54 AM NO JOKE [KJL ] From Slate: Here's an idea: As soon as William Safire shuffles off to the Old Columnists' Home, put Barry smack dab in the middle of the Times editorial page. Barry confessed a few years ago that he's a raving libertarian—just the kind of dyspeptic crank who would take pleasure in thumbing Washington in the eye. Give him 14 inches twice a week and let him write whatever he wants. Why settle for another graying libertarian when you can have a libertarian who makes booger jokes? Posted at 07:38 AM A NIGHT AT WFB’S [Rich Lowry ] It's a conservative experience you can't afford to pass up--drinks and dinner with William F. Buckley at his legendary Manhattan apartment. If Fenway is New England's living room (see how hard I'm trying to reach out?), WFB's place is conservatism's living room. Believe me, it's not something you will soon forget and you will be able to dine out it for a long time, in addition to having a delightful time in a grand style with your favorite NR/NRO writers. Please join us. Details are here. Posted at 07:17 AM SELLING YOUR SOUL [KJL ] John Podhoretz took his column a little to far today when he offered to support George Pataki for president, but only with Armstrong Williams kinda incentive. George Pataki. Surely there is no amount… Although, I’m looking at my bankbook now…ok, just don’t settle, that one’s a hard sell. Posted at 06:43 AM CRUEL WORLD [KJL ] AP: BATAPOLA, Sri Lanka -- Police have arrested a 63-year-old Sri Lankan man on charges of trying to sell his two young granddaughters after their home was destroyed and their mother killed by the Asian tsunami -- a case that highlights the vulnerability of children in the wake of the disaster. Posted at 06:41 AM THIS CAN’T HURT TO HAVE IN HIS PORTFOLIO; ELECTIBILITY CREDS [KJL ] Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, possible 0’8 presidential contender, gave his state of the state address yesterday. Here’s the Boston Globe editorializing on it: “A small-government reformer who came into office pledging to bring cold-eyed management to the public sector, Romney last night sounded at times like a New Deal Democrat in a business suit.” Posted at 06:24 AM NOT LOOKING GOOD [KJL ] A NYPost writer spots Chief Justice Rehnquist. Posted at 06:21 AM WIZ KIDS [KJL ] There will always be the kid who computer companies will have to hate (while secretly wanting to hire): CAMBRIDGE, Mass. -- Nicholas M. Ciarelli was not even old enough to shave when he started getting under Apple Computer Inc.'s skin. Posted at 06:18 AM POTENTIAL COWARDLY CURTAIN CALL [KJL ] From NYTimes: As much as he would like to recover from the blows his reputation has suffered recently, Dan Rather may not have a chance to work very long on the program that he expected would be his next professional address.Sorry, Dan, we don’t have a show for your hard-hitting journalism… But we’ve got a few fun game shows on during the day...enjoy ‘em. Posted at 06:09 AM Thursday, January 13, 2005 PENTAGON "SEX BOMB" [KJL] Of course this was from the Clinton years: THE Pentagon considered developing a host of non-lethal chemical weapons that would disrupt discipline and morale among enemy troops, newly declassified documents reveal.Sounds like something that started out as a joke around a table...no one had any better ideas and, weeks later there's some kind of R&D plan. Posted at 10:16 PM LOTT, WILSON, BENJAMIN & GUNS [ Jonah Goldberg] I don't write about John Lott or guns much because I'm no expert on either and I don't much like the email that results from such discussions. But the Volokh conspiracy has a very interesting post from John Lott about the lastest development in the "More Guns, Less Crime" debate -- a report from the National Academy of Sciences. I don't take sides in the technical arguments in this debate because they are way, way too technical for me. But as a matter of philosophy I tend to agree with Lott (strange cat though he may be). And I find many of his anecdotal points fairly persuasive. What's particularly interesting to me is the item in Lott's post about James Q. Wilson's dissent from the NAS study. Why? Well because I think Wilson is among the most impressive, decent and honest scholars of the twentieth century. That doesn't mean I automatically think he's right here, but it makes me lean that way.
Of course Benjamin's free to have any position he wants. But it seems to me that if you are going to let the "empirical evidence" decide whether we should have more or less guns, you've already expressed a precommitment on the constitutional status of guns, i.e. you don't think they have any. In other words, someone who believes we have a constitutional right to bear arms would argue that even if the data showed they caused net losses for society that wouldn't automatically mean the state has the authority to reduce the number of legally held guns in this country. Gun ownership can be "bad" for society and still be constitutionally protected from the whims of policymakers. Just as all sorts of speech is indisputably bad for society but we wouldn't -- or at least don't -- apply a cost-benefit analysis to it. Posted at 08:18 PM RE: MAD AS HELL [John Derbyshire] No-o-o-o: "Like you need time to do what else? If your answer is that you need time to think through your superficial analysis of intelligent design, then you have all my sympathy and I suggest you consider the following..." Posted at 07:11 PM THE MOST PETTY THING EVER [ Jonah Goldberg] If CBS really did this, it gives new meaning to lameness. According to Little Green Footballs CBS has modified the PDF of its report so you can't cut-and-paste. Maybe there's some other explanation, but if someone actually told a web-lackey "make it harder for the blogs to make fun of us" then, well, then that's just sad. Posted at 06:55 PM PASSIONATE GRASSROOTS [KJL] Folks are still petitioning the Oscar gods re: The Passion of the Christ. Posted at 06:44 PM OSAMA OBAMA [John Derbyshire] Cliff: I assume that wedding will take place in Alabama? Posted at 06:40 PM NRO PREVIEW [KJL] I'm just getting out of Victor Davis Hanson's piece for tomorrow--it is another "just what the doctor ordered" kinda piece. I almost always find when I'm beginning to get down--about Iraq, etc. (the election--the election was a big one)--he delivers to buck me back up. Just plan a little Hanson time, is all I'm saying. I think you already have that built into your Fridays though... Posted at 06:37 PM WOULD THEY HATE OBL IF HE WERE A LESBIAN? [Cliff May] If Osama bin Laden married Barack Obama he’d be Osama Obama. Posted at 06:25 PM MAD AS HELL [John Derbyshire] Some weeks ago I received in the mail a form from the Census Bureau, titled "The American Community Survey." I'm supposed to fill it out, under threat of some dire penalty. I threw it away the first time, but they sent me another one with A BIG FAT WARNING. This thing is ***TWENTY-FOUR PAGES LONG*** with HUNDREDS of boxes. Samples: What time did my wife leave home to go to work last week? Does either of my children have any of a long list of medical conditions? In the past 12 months, what was the cost of water for this house? Et cetera, et cetera, et damn stinking bloody cetera. Who the hell do these fool bureaucrats think they are, stealing my time like this? What the hell business is it of federal bureaucrats what time my wife leaves for work? Or what conditions my children might have? I have no idea about some of these answers, e.g. cost of water. I'd have to go through my files and add up all my water bills. I'm putting down numbers at random. The hell with these nuisances. I think I'll lie on all those impertinent questions about what race we are. If challenged I'll say I read in the New York Times that there is no such thing as race. I love my country, but just at this moment, I hate my filthy lousy stinking government. Posted at 06:15 PM LINCOLN’S LAST WORDS [Cliff May] To John Wilkes Booth: “Is it because I’m a lesbian?” (Sorry, I just couldn’t resist tying those two threads together.) Posted at 05:54 PM TRON [ Jonah Goldberg] They're making a sequel . I bet you anything this guy is psyched.. Posted at 05:45 PM WILLIAMS [Jonah Goldberg] A reader points out in response to the reader who called me a fathead that Williams did in fact disclose the payment on his TV show once or twice. He just never disclosed it elsewhere. Posted at 05:36 PM DAILY KOS -- CLARIFICATION [Jonah Goldberg] Yes, yes, Kos disclosed his relationship -- once, as I understand it. I did say that LGF and Instapundit had the details, which included that point. Of course, Daily Kos readers are typically defensive on such matters. For example, here's one email: Hey Fathead, In case you weren't aware, Kos was not paid using your tax dollars (unlike A. Williams) and he disclosed his position as soon as he was hired (again, unlike A. Williams). Try again. Fathead here: I agree that what Kos did isn't nearly as bad as what Armstrong Williams did and I never intended to imply otherwise. I've criticized Williams pretty relentlessly (in the Corner, my syndicated column, on CNN and even The New York Times), so I'm kind of at a loss as to why anyone would think I'm defending Williams by pointing out that Kos took money from Dean. But Kos has been more than eager to question the integrity of the entire conservative media based upon the Williams affair. I think his less than saintly practices are cause for some fun finger-pointing. Forgive me if I relish the fact that this news will come as a surprise to many people, including his own readers and that taking money from a campaign which is trying to buy good coverage is unseemly. Indeed, if I were Kos I would denounce Dean for his undemocratic approach to politics in which he tried to buy-off journalists. But yeah, the "on the take headline" was probably more misleading than what was warranted. Evil cackle still warranted, as far as I'm concerned. Posted at 04:58 PM RE: GAYBRAHAM LINCOLN [Jonah Goldberg] One point lots of readers have made is that none of Lincoln's political enemies ever accused him of being homosexual. If that's true, I think it's a good point as far as it goes. It doesn't necessarily mean Lincoln's sexuality wasn't unusual, it simply means that if it was, it was kept very, very well-hidden. But I think it's fair to believe that if any of Lincoln's opponents thought for a moment that there was any truth to the charge, they would have used it. Posted at 04:44 PM DAILY KOS ON THE TAKE [ Jonah Goldberg ] Daily Kos was paid by the Dean campaign, in part to buy good coverage. Little Green Footballs and Instapundit have all the details and associated links. [Insert self-righteously annoying evil-mocking cackle here]. Posted at 04:19 PM THANKS, SEN. KENNEDY [John Derbyshire] Now I've got that darn song stuck in my head. You know the one: "Osama, Obama, come on pretty momma... Posted at 03:22 PM BROWNBACK 4 PRESIDENT? [KJL] A Kansas paper speculates. [Sorry! It's a Missouri paper.] Posted at 03:15 PM FROG ALERT [KJL] John Kerry is meeting with Chirac tomorrow. Posted at 03:09 PM BERNIE GOLDBERG ISN'T NUTS, TAKE 78,986 [KJL] "The unremitting liberal orientation finally became too much for me. I still check in, but less and less frequently. I increasingly drift to NBC News and Fox and MSNBC." That's from Van Gordon Sauter, who was president of CBS News in the early 1980s, talking about the CBS Evening News. He's got a piece in the LATimes today. Posted at 03:06 PM YOU MIGHT WANT TO WORK ON THAT ONE, SENATOR KENNEDY [KJL] AP: Kennedy also mangled the name of the Democrats' new star, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, calling him "Osama bin … Osama … Obama." Posted at 03:01 PM ISN'T IT SOMEWHAT SHOCKING [KJL] that the Roanoke Times doesn't cover rodeos? (That link is actually a story about Ali G--maybe;and now I can't get the image of Ralph Nader's interview out of my mind.) Posted at 02:35 PM THE CHINESE CENTURY [John Derbyshire] We had some exchanges on the Corner a few days ago about whether or not this is likely to be the Chinese century. This followed a silly article by clapped-out old bore -- oops, sorry! highly respected elder statesman of journalism -- Sir William Rees-Mogg. I pooh-poohed the whole idea. Martin Vander Weyer does likewise in the current (so far as airmail subscribers are concerned -- Jan. 8) issue of The Spectator (You may need to be a subscriber to read it.) Posted at 02:23 PM PRINCE HAL (2) [Andrew Stuttaford] The EU foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, has now felt the need to join in the criticism of Price Harry's ill-judged choice of fancy dress. It was, he intoned, "not appropriate". It's a fair comment. Nevertheless it's worth remembering that this is, of course, the same Mr. Solana who had these words to say on the death of Yasser Arafat: "I have learned of President Arafat's passing with great sadness. I wish to express my sincere sympathy to his family and to the Palestinian people. With the passing of Yasser Arafat the Palestinian people has lost its historic leader. More than any other, his life stands for the tragic and turbulent history of the Middle East. A period of grief starts for all Palestinians... Posted at 02:08 PM THE SALVADOR OPTION [Jonah Goldberg] From a friend of mine. Point number one is particularly apt/annoying because I thought I had made that point explicitly but must have cut it while moving stuff around: Jonah, Posted at 01:59 PM L.A. PATRIOTS [KJL] A family gives--their sons, and a morale boost. Posted at 01:45 PM MSM=MORE LIBERAL THAN EVER? [Stanley Kurtz] When the Rather affair broke, I suggested in “From Biased to Partisan” that the controlling business dynamic of the media would make network news more liberal, not less. Media bias has become self-reinforcing. As the public turns to alternative and more conservative outlets, the mainstream media’s audience grows more liberal. That puts on pressure for more bias, not less. Now Peggy Noonan has also predicted more, and more open, media bias, not less. Meanwhile, Jack Shafer at Slate proves the point, by admitting the media’s liberal bias–and bragging that it’s a good thing. I think the Business Week cover story on The New York Times points in the same direction. The Times has gained readers by expanding its audience to include the national liberal elite. But as Business Week reports, the Times has also lost a tremendous number of readers in New York City–many of them, I believe, to more conservative local papers. That means the readership of the Times is now much more liberal than it used to be. That puts even more pressure on NYT to keep its news coverage tilting left. In time, the paper may even proudly tout its liberal slant. The more fully media bias is exposed, the more readers desert MSM, and the more liberal the remaining MSM audience becomes. This is why CBS has not done more to admit its political leanings, or to show regret for its treatment of the bloggers. Those kind of admissions would imply a determination to change. But CBS doesn’t want to change–and can’t change–if it’s going to hold on to its own increasingly liberal audience. Posted at 01:38 PM GAY-BRAHAM LINCOLN [Jonah Goldberg] I have to say I've been surprised by my own reaction to the Lincoln-was-gay thesis: I don't care very much. I haven't read the book, but I take Rick and others at their word that the evidence certainly passes a certain threshhold to make Lincoln's behavior curious and the assertion that Lincoln had bi- or homo-sexual tendencies not intellectually outrageous. But having read Victor Davis Hanson's piece about Alexander the Great's homosexual exploits and Oliver Stone's treatment of same, I'm not sure you can make very much hay out of any of this one way or the other. The core assumption is that if it were proved Lincoln's gay it would overturn .... something. But I'm just not sure what it would overturn. I know that there are people out there who think homosexuality is of itself evil and that homosexuals are evil. But that's not exactly where the debate is. The debate is that homosexuality is different than heterosexuality in significant ways and how that difference should be accomodated in society. So it's a bit of stolen base to say "If Lincoln was gay, that proves gays aren't evil" or that it "proves gays can be great citizens and leaders." It may or may not prove that, but such proof wouldn't change the argument about whether or not marriage can mean the joining of a man and a man. If Lincoln did gay stuff in private, he did not do it in public. He got married, had kids and never for a moment advocated that society or government should create social space for homosexuals. Indeed, if one were so inclined, one could take the available evidence and say "See! Lincoln's gayness proves that if homosexuals just stay in the closet, they can achieve great things!" Again, I just haven't followed this that much but I just can't see how proving Lincoln was gay changes our understanding about how to organize society any more than declaring Alexander the Great was gay illuminates our understanding of today or of the past. In the current debates about homosexuality, "homosexual" is a legal-political designation that would have seemed completely bizarre to Lincoln and his contemporaries. Posted at 01:38 PM DISHONORABLE CBS [Stanley Kurtz] Deep down, this Dan Rather business is about honor. The reason CBS hasn’t laid the problem to rest is because they’ve failed to satisfy the honor of their critics. The bloggers were dissed by Dan and by CBS. What they really need is a show of remorse for the insult they’ve received. The bloggers told the truth about those bogus documents, yet their carefully marshaled facts and arguments were contemptuously waved aside by Rather. On top of that, the bloggers received the insult of the pajama remark. When something like that happens, you can’t resolve the problem without an apology–even if couched in indirect language. The analogy to the Rather affair at this point is the case of the Dixie Chicks. Willie Nelson supported Dennis Kucinich, but conservative country music fans could care less about that. The Dixie Chicks think people punished them for their politics. But what really upset folks wasn’t that the Chicks were against Bush or the war, it was that the Chicks said they were ashamed to be from the same state as the President–and said this to a foreign audience. That dishonored the President, the country, the state of Texas, and the South. That is why country music fans turned against the Chicks. By the same token, Dan and CBS need to satisfy the honor of their critics, which despite this detailed report, they have patently failed to do. Yesterday on NPR, Daniel Schor excused Rather’s original defense of the bogus memo as a well-intentioned desire to stick by his people. That misses the point. In defending his own team, Rather acted in a dismissive and insulting way to critics who had truth on their side. Despite his loyalty to his own, Rather would never have acted that way if he’d honestly scrutinized the evidence the bloggers offered. But Rather refused to give the critics fair consideration, and he made it clear that he was ignoring the bloggers because they were not worth taking seriously. Now Rather and CBS need to show remorse for their arrogance. It’s because they refuse to do this that they have not laid the matter to rest. Posted at 01:26 PM GOODBYE, TIMES [Stanley Kurtz] The latest issue of Business Week features a very interesting cover story on The New York Times. The biggest news is that the Times is in a financial downturn. There are a variety of factors at play, but the move away from MSM and toward Internet-based news sources is clearly playing a role. That shift is not entirely driven by ideological issues, but disaffection with the paper’s liberal bias is helping to push erstwhile subscribers toward alternative outlets on the Web. There are other sources of trouble. The Times is now geared toward a national readership among the scattered and largely liberal educated elite. That means the paper lacks the critical mass in any one location–even New York City–to allow for targeted local advertising. The Times gained a lot of subscribers when it went national, but it also lost a huge number of subscribers in New York City. Net readership is still up, but the hit in NYC was a big one, and clearly cut into ad revenues. Business Week doesn’t say so, but the rise of more conservative local New York City papers like The New York Sun and The New York Post has probably hurt the Times a lot. These papers may be less expensive, but it seems likely that the NYT’s politics has also pushed some subscribers over to more conservative local challengers. So liberal bias may figure into the NYT’s financial troubles even more than Business Week says. The big decision facing the Times is whether to start charging subscription fees for Internet access. That would mean a huge exodus of readers, and a large drop in Internet ad revenues. Yet higher subscription income could more than make up for lost ad revenue. Even given what the Times has become under Pinch Sulzberger, it pains me to say that I wish the paper ill. The Times offers detailed and high quality reporting–especially on developments outside the U.S.–that no other paper can match. But I do wish The New York Times ill. As I see it, NYT has discredited itself in lasting fashion. Jayson Blair is the least of it. I read the paper with far more suspicion now than I did even a few years ago, and I read it with far more suspicion then than a few years before that. I hope the Times decides to insist on paid subscriptions from online readers. That may give a temporary boost to the paper’s bottom line, but it will vastly contract readership. In the long run, lost readership will damage the paper’s prestige, limit its cultural reach, and probably cut into profitability. It’s gratifying to see the Times forced to choose between long term health and influence and short-term profits. As I say, it’s a shame to want to see misfortune befall a paper that still upholds an unmatched standard of quality in certain kinds of news coverage. Yet The New York Times has discredited itself. This paper has destroyed our ability to trust it, even when it does what it does best. For that, The New York Times deserves to suffer. Posted at 01:23 PM "US 'ERODES' [KJL] | |||||
<% printurl = Request.ServerVariables("URL")%>