 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
KRISPY KREMES: FOOD OF THE GODS: [Rod Dreher] Ah, Andrew, you had to bring Krispy Kremes into this, didn't you? They are probably the perfect food. One of the happiest feelings in the world is the warm glow on your palm as you're carrying a box of fresh Krispy Kremes in a box out of the store. I grew up on them, and was pretty much a tub for all my childhood. Alas, I don't dare eat even one nowadays, for the same reason a reformed drunk doesn't so much as sip booze. Man, they're tasty! All us Southerners living in NYC had to smile when Krispy Kreme came to Manhattan, seeing all the Yankees line up down the block for sugar-glazed fried dough (which is like calling Montrachet "fermented grape juice"). Posted 9:50 PM | [Link] WACKO JACKO CRACKO: [Rod Dreher] Michael "Norma Desmond" Jackson cannot deal with the fact that he's a pathetic, washed-up freak who hasn't made a record anyone wants to listen to in years, and has trashed his own career with his paranoia and quasi-pederastic whimsy. So he further makes a laughingstock of himself by joining forces with Al Sharpton and declaring that his ruination is part of a corporate racist conspiracy. Posted 9:45 PM | [Link] LIBERALWORLD: [Ramesh Ponnuru] The New York Times's op-ed page today is perfect, a zone of 100 percent liberal thought. There are two liberal Yale law professors hoping to replace the FEC with a new, super-duper FEC; an aging '60s radical urging action against sweatshops; some general-purpose tactical advice for the Left; and the inimitable Frank Rich--because who would want to imitate him?--calling on President Bush to unleash the regulators. Oh wait, there is one Republican voice on the page: Rich quotes "the Republican political analyst Kevin Phillips." Equal time! Posted 6:43 PM | [Link] THE ICC STRIKES BACK [Andrew Stuttaford] A reader writes to point out this new and disturbing demonstration of the powers of the international criminal 'court'. Thanks to the coldfury blog for highlighting these sinister developments. Posted 6:15 PM | [Link] OUT OF THE ZONE [Andrew Stuttaford] Rod, from the sound of it, this protein story could be, well, food for thought. I shall, ahem, digest the article over tonight's steak (washed down, of course, with a cardio-protective glass of red wine). Now, is there any chance of a rehabilitation for my Krispy Kreme diet? I tried this for a while - and, yes, it met two of your tests: I was never hungry and I felt great. The losing 30-pound thing didn't really work out though... Posted 6:04 PM | [Link] OSAMA IN HELL: [Rod Dreher] Here's something to offend the sensitivity police: an Orthodox Church in Romania now has a fresco depicting Osama Bin Laden in hell. Apparently the news hasn't reached Romania that Islam is a religion of peace. Posted 5:49 PM | [Link] A BIG FAT LIE?: [Rod Dreher] Remember the shocking "Dan Quayle Was Right" article in The Atlantic Monthly a few years ago (shocking, because it amounted to the establishment embracing heresy)? Here's the nutrition-journalism equivalent, from The New York Times Magazine. It reports that nutrition researchers are increasingly having to face the fact that diet doctors Robert Atkins, Dr. Barry Sears ("The Zone") and the SugarBusters doctors are right. That is, weight gain is controlled by insulin levels in the blood, not the amount of fat one eats. High-protein, low-carbohydrate diets are the best way to lose weight effectively. The low-fat, high-carb gospel the nutritional establishment has been preaching for over 20 years may well be responsible for the obesity epidemic. This makes complete sense to me. I've been following a high-protein, low-carb diet since January -- a modified form of The Zone, which eschews the high-fat food Atkins recommends -- and have lost 30 pounds. I've never felt better, and I'm never hungry. It really works. Posted 5:44 PM | [Link] JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS [Andrew Stuttaford] The New York Times is reporting that FBI officials are still "puzzled" over why Egyptian-born Hesham Hadayet attacked the El Al ticket counter at LAX on July 4th. In a piece of better news, however, the Feds have announced that they may be closer to understanding why exactly it was that John Wilkes Booth shot Lincoln. They now suspect that it may have been "something to do with" the fall of the Confederacy. Posted 11:21 AM | [Link]
ANALYZE THIS [Ramesh Ponnuru] Accompanying Schmitt’s scoop is a “news analysis” by Patrick E. Tyler, “The Warpath: Pressures Build on Iraq.” One sentence of it jumped out at me (a reaction Kate had too): “The obstacles, risks and costs to such a strategy remain largely unaddressed by the Bush administration, and its planning for any eventual war is tightly wrapped in secrecy.” Umm, if the planning is so “tightly wrapped,” then isn’t it possible that the administration has in fact addressed the “obstacles, risks and costs” in secret? Isn’t it probable? Are we really to believe that the administration wouldn’t think of “obstacles, risks and costs” without prompting from New York Times news analysts? Posted 10:44 PM | [Link] “U.S. PLAN FOR IRAQ IS SAID TO INCLUDE ATTACK ON 3 SIDES” [Ramesh Ponnuru] That’s the lead story in the New York Times Friday. Reporter Eric Schmitt uncovered an “American military planning document” from two months ago. The document gives us more reason to think 1) that the Bush administration is serious about regime change in Iraq; 2) that it has been moving away from the idea that we can bring about satisfactory regime change without a significant presence on the ground; and 3) that it entertains no illusions, whatever its public rhetoric, about the reliability of our “allies” in the House of Saud. Posted 10:43 PM | [Link] I was a little surprised to read in The Hotline the other day that John Thune, the Republican candidate for Senate in South Dakota, “opposes a plan to invest Social Security benefits in the stock market.” The Hotline was accurately quoting from an article by Melanie Brandert in the Argus Leader, but Thune spokeswoman Christine Iverson tells me Brandert distorted her words. Iverson says she told Brandert that Thune opposes plans that would have the government invest Social Security funds. He’s not opposed to letting individuals do the investing. . . . That’s not the only instance of shoddy reporting in Brandert’s article. She refers to a study by private-account opponents Peter Diamond of MIT and Peter Orszag of Brookings. That study has generated serious criticisms, but she quotes none of the critics. Posted 10:41 PM | [Link] GORE'S SPRAWL [Andrew Stuttaford] A Corner posting a few days ago on Al Gore's purchase of a house in the wealthy Nashville suburb of Belle Meade leads one reader to point out that the former Vice President was meant to be against suburban sprawl. Now, to be fair, Belle Meade was developed a long time ago, but if Mr. Gore really wants to confine the American people to densely-populated city centers shouldn't he set a better example? Posted 6:03 PM | [Link] ENVIRONMENTALISM AND THE RIGHT [Andrew Stuttaford] To revert to an earlier discussion here on the Corner, blogger John Tabin highlights this piece by Nathan Lewis (and yes, I know that this sentence is turning into a classic example of blogprose) on the environment. I'm not sure that I agree with all that Lewis has to say, but it's worth a read. Posted 5:45 PM | [Link] THE WEAKEST LINK [Andrew Stuttaford] A reader highlights this story out of Denmark. Something for bloggers to watch out for? Posted 5:31 PM | [Link] AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM: [Rod Dreher] America is out of step with the Western world, and that's fine with Mark Steyn. This column reminded me of something a French friend who works in Silicon Valley told me last week. He said he was sick and tired of French whining and cowardice in the face of international terrorism. Zut alors, I'd say the guy is well on his way to becoming a patriotic Yank. Posted 1:02 PM | [Link] UP WITH RICK: [Rod Dreher] Wasn't Rick Brookhiser's PBS program on George Washington wonderful? Man, Rick, you did us proud. It was a wee bit chilling to see Rick on top of a bank building in my neighborhood, surveying what was once a colonial battlefield, and to spy the Twin Towers in the background. Ghosts. Anyway, now that an NR writer is responsible for such an auspicious achievement on PBS, why stop there? I submit that PBS should send Jonah and a camera crew to France for a month, for a program called, "In Search of the Heroic Frenchman." It'd be as fruitless as waiting for Godot, but think of all the mean fun our boy'd have at France's expense. Posted 12:58 PM | [Link] SADDAM’S STEPSON & POSSIBLE GULF WAR P.O.W. [Kathryn Jean Lopez] FOX had a call-in segment on what to do with Saddam Hussein’s stepson. One caller suggested telling Saddam that his stepson will be set free, but not before we get from Iraq Navy pilot Scott Speicher or his remains and definitive information on what happened to him. I can’t see State signing onto that, but I’m game. (Read Cmdr. Bob Stumpf’s comprehensive piece on the Speicher case here.) Posted 11:36 AM | [Link] NOT STANDING GUARD [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Rod, the National Guard hasn't been on airport duty since May. The new Transportation Security Administration took them off the assignment, transferring the detail to local police departments until the TSA's new fed airport cops exist. Smaller airports don't even have to have an official police presence for now. Posted 10:38 AM | [Link] NOT REASSURING [Andrew Stuttaford] In an article today on the new international criminal 'court' Financial Times journalist Philip Stephens repeats a familiar reassurance as to why the US has no need to fear politically-motivated prosecutions of its citizens. "The court's statutes, framed precisely to meet US concerns about political prosecutions, offer explicit guarantees that jurisdiction lies first with national governments." Indeed they do, but what the many who use this argument do not choose to explain is that if those national governments do not pursue their citizens in a manner satisfactory to the international court, the ICC is then free to prosecute. Posted 10:29 AM | [Link] CORRECTION [Andrew Stuttaford] In a correction to his earlier statement, California Governor Gray Davis has now praised July 4th "as the day on which we honor what America stands for - liberte, egalite, fraternite." Posted 10:07 AM | [Link] HARD CELL: [John J. Miller] Not even your cell phone is safe from evil telemarketers. Posted 10:06 AM | [Link] MINETA REACTS? [Andrew Stuttaford] Stung by criticism of the security at LAX in the aftermath of the shooting by Hesham Mohamed Hadayet, Norman Mineta is rumored to be ready to act. Expect further screenings of grannies, toddlers, disabled veterans... Posted 9:52 AM | [Link] 9/10 [Andrew Stuttaford] Rod, yes, the FBI's reluctance to brand the LAX shooting as "terrorism" is quite remarkable - and very 9/10. Posted 9:42 AM | [Link] WHERE WAS THE GUARD? [Rod Dreher] An NRO reader writes: "I thought the National Guard were supposed to be policing the airports. If it hadn't been for the private El Al guard, who presumably carried a *loaded* weapon, I wonder how many people would have died waiting for the National Guard to fill out requisition forms for bullets. This needs to be questioned: Were there National Guard troops at LAX at the time, and did they carry *loaded* weapons? If not, why not?" Posted 9:28 AM | [Link] RED HEIFER FILE: [Rod Dreher] Despite a bone-dry summer, Jerusalem's Wailing Wall is "weeping," and some Jewish mystics are seeing this as the fulfillment of a prophecy saying the remnants of Herod's temple would shed water prior to the coming of the Messiah. Others say it's probably just a leaky hose somewhere in the Temple Mount complex. Posted 8:55 AM | [Link] ARE WE TURNING FRENCH?: [Rod Dreher] Authorities are hesitant to label the LAX attack "terrorism." Let's see: the murderer was an Egyptian-born Muslim who turned up at the counter of the Israeli national airline, heavily armed, and starts shooting. Excuse me, but why is this not terrorism? I wonder if the eight children left behind by one of the Islamofascist shooter's victims have any trouble discerning whether or not this is terrorism. By this standard, all the anti-Semitic violence of late in France, which has been carried out by Arab Muslims, is not terrorism either, but random criminal acts. Come to think of it, isn't that what the French authorities have been saying? Posted 8:52 AM | [Link] HEY! THAT REALLY IS MY DAD! [Jonah Goldberg] Cool. Posted 8:44 AM | [Link] DUMB DEFINITIONS [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Sidney Goldberg (a.k.a. the father of Cosmo’s master) has a great piece in theWall Street Journal on some "amateurish and witless" dictionary definitions.(Casto: "Cuban revolutionary leader, prime minister and president.") Posted 8:26 AM | [Link] "LIBERTY, SECURITY, DIVERSITY [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Man, that's what we fought the revoulation for: Homeland Security. Which is why, rightfully, Norman Mineta should have been fired yesterday. Posted 8:21 AM | [Link]
SECURITY AND DIVERSITY? [John J. Miller] An exceptionally weird comment from California's Gray Davis, in the wake of the LAX shooting: "That it happened on the day on which we honor what America stands for — liberty, security and diversity — makes this particularly more tragic." Posted 10:09 PM | [Link] NO HARD FEELINGS[Andrew Stuttaford] Happy Independence Day, America! Posted 5:47 PM | [Link] HOW PATRIOTIC? [John J. Miller] Karlyn Bowman of the American Enterprise Institute has compiled a comprehensive survey of polls on Americans' attitudes toward their country. Posted 3:00 PM | [Link] WHAT’S SO GREAT ABOUT AMERICA [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Here’s a short review of Dinesh D’Souza’s book (by KJL). And, don’t forget to read his piece on NRO. And, of course, buy the book. Okay, happy (and safe) 4th (there are Martha Stewart flag tarts to be made)! Posted 7:14 AM | [Link] RIGHT BOOKS [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Conservatives continue to take a piece of the bestseller pie. (Ann Coulter makes the top of the list this week. Dinesh D’Souza also in the top 20.) Posted 7:11 AM | [Link] THE INDISPENSIBLE FIGHT SONG [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Michael Knox Beran told the story of the Battle Hymn of the Republic last fall on NRO. Posted 6:49 AM | [Link] REDISCOVERING GEORGE [Kathryn Jean Lopez] George Will's column today is about the "indispensible George Washington and our indispensible Richard Brookhiser's documentary on him, Rediscovering George Washington. (Did I mention it airs TONIGHT after the DC fireworks on PBS?) Posted 6:45 AM | [Link] BEEF AGAINST CHRISTIANITY [Kathryn Jean Lopez] It’s been awhile since we talked about Peter Singer. He clearly wants to remedy that. Posted 6:36 AM | [Link] THIS FOURTH OF JULY [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Saddam Hussein's stepson is in custody....in the U.S. Mohammad Nour Al-Din Saffi was arrested last night in Florida for being in the U.S. to take a course at a Florida flight school without a student visa. He is a citizen of New Zealand and expected to be deported there. Posted 6:00 AM | [Link] NOT MADE IN USA: [John J. Miller] This is sort of sad: American apparel manufacturers can't keep up with the imported competition when it comes to the sale of American flags. Posted 4:46 AM | [Link]
SPEAKING OF CHER [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Joe Bob Briggs has reviewed her "farewell" concert over at UPI. Posted 5:16 PM | [Link] SOUNDS LIKE A BAD CHER MOVIE [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Defendant sentenced to six years in prison for having an affair with a juror. Posted 5:14 PM | [Link] PALESTINE: A DIFFERENT VIEW [Andrew Stuttaford] Here's an intriguing piece from today's Daily Telegraph. Posted 4:26 PM | [Link] FYI [Rich Lowry] The guy who runs that site with the Foxfield video thanks Corner readers for all the traffic today…Thanks for all the Maryland e-mails, but I’m not going to return to it…Walking back to the office, I just saw a guy on a motorcycle with an huge American flag on the back. What a wonderful thing. I think motorcycling must be one of the activities with the strongest correlation with patriotism (I mean, except maybe running in a park with your dog after squirrels)….REMEMBER to watch Rick Brookhiser’s George Washington documentary tomorrow! Happy 4TH! Posted 4:20 PM | [Link] THE PLEDGE IS CHILD'S PLAY COMPARED TO THIS [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Daniel Pipes writes about a program that really actually does promote a religion (of course, it's Islam, so somehow that makes it ok). Posted 3:31 PM | [Link] A FEMINIST FOURTH [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Need something to do on July 4th? The Women’s Sports Foundation has some suggestions: #2 Complain to your congressman—sorry person--about not enough male wrestlers losing their teams this year. #4 How about suing your school? That’s feminism today for you! Posted 3:17 PM | [Link] THE KEY TO THE PROBLEM? [Andrew Stuttaford] Here's a thought-provoking piece by Thomas Friedman in the New York Times on a new report on the Arab world. This report concludes that many of the problems there (and, in Friedman's view, bin Ladenism) can be blamed on "a shortage of [the] freedom to speak, innovate and affect political life, a shortage of women's rights and a shortage of quality education". That seems right, and what it describes sounds a lot like 'Saudi' Arabia. Now, why is it again that the US continues to support the House of Saud? Posted 3:13 PM | [Link] BY GEORGE! [Kathryn Jean Lopez] The website for Rediscovering George Washington, the documentary hosted by our own Richard Brookhiser (a brilliant storyteller) is a remarkable Washington Wonderland. Go here and see it for yourself. Teachers, especially, will have a field day. The documentary airs after the fireworks tomorrow night (July 4) on PBS. Posted 3:10 PM | [Link] WHO WOULD TAKE DATING ADVICE FROM AMY FISHER? [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Posted 3:09 PM | [Link] MEDICAL MIS-TRIAL [NRO Staff] Famed trial lawyers David Boies and Dick Scruggs have announced plans to sue six of the nation's largest HMOs on racketeering charges. While navigating HMOs can prove a mild annoyance for Americans without Boies and Scruggs' large pockets, it's worth remembering that managed-care plans are the result of excessive government regulation, not the lack thereof. Until the person paying for health care and the person receiving it are the same, health costs and regulation will continue to rise--and until Congress and the president get serious about tort reform, litigators like Boies and Scruggs will continue to shape public policy through anti-democratic means. Posted 2:56 PM | [Link] FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TRACKS [Kathryn Jean Lopez] A lawyer in London is suing his credit-card company for erroneously rejecting his card at a posh boutique where he was purchasing a dress for his wife. He says he was publy "humilated" because the declining of the card branded him as one whose financial standing is "unsound." Some of us get use to the humiliation.... Posted 2:52 PM | [Link] BEWARE, GRANDMA, OF YOUR KNEE REPLACEMENT [Kathryn Jean Lopez] It might be the cause of your being strip-searched at the airport. Posted 2:44 PM | [Link] JUSTICE SERVED [Kathryn Jean Lopez] The National Education Association has be fined for misappropriating dues. Posted 2:32 PM | [Link] NO GORE-LIEBERMAN 2004 [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Posted 2:19 PM | [Link] NOT SUGAR & SPICE [Kathryn Jean Lopez] The Powerpuff Girls Movie is clever, Steve Sailer says. He also says it is for boys, not girls. Posted 2:06 PM | [Link] EPA OUT TO LUNCH [Jonathan Adler] Bill O'Reilly and I did not see eye-to-eye on much last night, but there's one point on which we agreed: The Bush administration has done a terrible job explaining -- let alone defending -- its environmental policies. This problem is most acute at the Environmental Protection Agency. Exhibit A: The EPA's been getting hammered in the press the last few days (see, e.g., here). So, yesterday afternoon I called over to the EPA's press office to get their response. I was told they had no prepared response to the stories, and that someone would have to get back to me. I explained why and told them I needed the information within two hours. I finally received a call around 8pm, which is when The O'Reilly Factor airs (and about two hours after the show is taped). Posted 1:52 PM | [Link] THE REAL PARTIAL-BIRTH FIGHT [Jonathan Adler] The state of Ohio has a ban on partial-birth abortion that may pass muster with the Supreme Court. (Read: The law may satisfy Justice O'Connor.) A challenge to the law is on appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, and the Bush Administration has intervened in defense of the statute. Posted 1:51 PM | [Link] NO, ANDREW [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Try bizarre and disturbing. Posted 1:24 PM | [Link] MARMITE [Andrew Stuttaford] Here's a useful and exciting update. Posted 1:11 PM | [Link] DEAR OLD UVA: [Rich Lowry] Whenever young men get together to drink lots of alcohol, bizarre, silly and/or disgusting rituals take root. Let’s hope this is not a new one developing at the UVA drunkfest “Foxfield,” ostensibly a horserace but really an excuse to dress in outlandishly preppy clothes and drink all day long. Not for the faint of heart… FOR THOSE…: [Rich Lowry] …keeping score from an e-mail I posted the other day about state and city names that might violate the Establishment Clause, here’s a clarifying e-mail: “I don't think there is a religious connection for the name "Maryland." It is named after Queen Henrietta Maria, wife of the English King Charles I.(source: World Almanac).” Posted 11:34 AM | [Link] MYCHAL, JUDGED [Rod Dreher] Here's an essay that's been making the conservative Catholic rounds, asserting that the hero priest of 9/11, Fire Department of New York chaplain Mychal Judge, was not a homosexual. The author, Dennis Lynch, says he and others who knew Fr. Judge for some time never had the slightest hint that he was gay. That may be true, but that proves nothing. In fact, a number of people close to Judge, including former FDNY Commissioner Thomas von Essen, have said Fr. Judge came out to them (it seems beyond doubt that Fr. Judge affiliated himself with the dissenting gay Catholic group Dignity). Others close to him - like his brother Franciscan Brian Jordan - say they never knew about his private life. One friend of the late priest's said Judge was careful not to out himself to friends and congregants he figured might be upset by this knowledge. Fr. Judge's homosexuality does not take away from the fact that he did a world of good for the men and women of New York, and that he died heroically. Nor does his good work posthumously baptize his dissent from Church teaching, or prove the Church wrong, as some gay activists would have it. All can agree he was a flawed but good-hearted man who was loving, and was loved, and who died on a mission of mercy. Beyond that, I say it's up to God. Posted 11:33 AM | [Link] SOUTH OF THE BORDER JUSTICE: [Rod Dreher] From the looks of things, Mexicans know how to handle child molesters. Posted 11:27 AM | [Link] FUHRER FURORE [Andrew Stuttaford] An enjoyably stupid controversy has just erupted over in EU-land. There's a new advertising campaign against the possible introduction of the Euro in Britain. One spot includes a well-known comedian dressed up as Hitler, parodying the Nazi salute and shouting "Ein Volk! Ein Reich! Ein Euro!". In good taste? Absolutely not. EU bureaucrats, naturally, are claiming to be outraged. Reuters reports an EU spokesman as saying that "the use of Hitler in this campaign is...appalling...and beneath contempt". It's a complaint that would have had more force were it not for what the spokesman went on to say: "The European Union, and now the European currency, have made a major contribution to peace, democracy and political stability ...as a tool and a weapon against all the Adolf Hitlers." In other words, the spokesman was using Hitler in the campaign for the Euro. Posted 11:01 AM | [Link] KELLER: [Ramesh Ponnuru] Fr. Rutler makes excellent points, but let's not forget that Bill Keller's column sounded pro-life notes that may not heretofore have appeared on the Times op-ed page. Not the least of the column's services is to remind people of the pressures that women face to get abortions even if they are not themselves inclined that way--pressures that the rhetoric of "choice" obscures. Posted 10:55 AM | [Link] IN THE CASE OF STANLEY HAUERWAS: [Ramesh Ponnuru] Just because Time calls him “America’s best theologian” doesn’t mean he’s not a smart guy. An interview Hauerwas did for the National Catholic Reporter has stirred up controversy in the blogosphere in the last month, with Hauerwas’s brand of Christian pacifism—often presented in provocative terms—coming in for stinging criticism. In an essay (not yet online) in the June/July issue of First Things, Stephen H. Webb includes, en passant, the best take I’ve seen so far: “Perhaps the key to the reception of [Hauerwas’s] work is his anti-Americanism. Hauerwas has given rise to a whole generation of theologians who make quick work of consumerism, patriotism, nationalism, and popular culture. . . . [H]is critique of all things American is what makes Hauerwas look more at home with liberals than conservatives. By continuously thumping on that theme, he is able to gain a larger academic audience than would ever listen to a more traditionally evangelical theologian. Indeed, without his constant critique of everything American, he would be in danger of looking like just another evangelical theologian. “Hauerwas thus pushes the intellectual elite to take traditional theological claims seriously while at the same time assuring them that many of their left-leaning cultural and political assumptions will remain untroubled. Can you really enter theology from the right and exit at the left? That trick seems less plausible in the light of September 11. . . . During this time of crisis, his barbed rhetoric seems less helpful. Now it does not seem so wise to work so hard to isolate Christianity from America—and the West. Modernity, after all, is the bastard child of Christianity, and Christians still have some parental responsibilities.” Posted 10:51 AM | [Link] PROPAGANDA TV [Kathryn Jean Lopez] “Voice of Muslims,” an English-language satellite channel, based in London, will start broadcasting soon in the U.S., Europe, and Canada. "The station will monitor the misconceptions and distortions broadcast by enemy stations" against Arabs and Muslims and try to refute them, Prince Mansour, a Saudi businessman involved in the project, told the Arab News. The prince says that “the non-profit station will be the voice of Arabs and Muslims in the West. It will rely on sponsorships and advertisements for Arab and Islamic products.” Posted 10:21 AM | [Link] GETTING KELLER [Kathryn Jean Lopez] A few weeks back Bill Keller wrote a rabid piece in the Times on the Catholic Church and the scandals. Fr. George Rutler, always a wise and clever Catholic priest and writer, has a terrific piece today about Keller’s most recent Times column, which sheds some light on Keller's venom. Posted 10:09 AM | [Link] MY LAST WORD (FOR NOW): [Ramesh Ponnuru] I'm getting the impression that there are limits to how much time people want to spend following my debate with Jonathan. I'll just say that the disagreement between us does not, in the end, concern federalism but rather the separation of powers. Like a lot of conservatives and libertarians, Jonathan is a judicial supremacist in matters of constitutional interpretation, even in cases when the constitutional provisions in question fairly scream that they are not meant to empower the federal judiciary. I’m not one. I also think his view of Chief Justice Marshall, while it is the overwhelmingly dominant view, is completely wrong--a point explained patiently by Robert Lowry Clinton in Marbury v. Madison and Judicial Review and by Matthew J. Franck in Against the Imperial Judiciary. Posted 9:33 AM | [Link] WORTHWHILE FRENCH-BASHING HELP [Jonah Goldberg] July 4 may be tomorrow, but Bastille Day is coming. Which means my annual French-bashing column is coming up. These columns get harder and harder because there are only so many ways you can say the same thing. Still, it's what the people want. But if anyone out there has seen -- or sees -- anything particularly good for this years B-Day column (get it?), please send it along (put FRENCH BASHING, or some such in the header). Meanwhile, you might enjoy this Get Fuzzy comic. Posted 8:54 AM | [Link] NRO ADVISORY [Kathryn Jean Lopez] We're experiencing a few technical difficulties (punishment for seeking to "take a half day"). Bear with us. Lots new to read will be up shortly. Posted 7:57 AM | [Link] FOX STILL IN THE LEAD [Jonah Goldberg] Changes at CNN -- including the hiring and under-utilization of yours truly -- has failed to dethrone Fox News. Clearly, it's time for the CNN suits to reconsider my proposal for "Me, Cosmo & the Couch," a whole new kind of TV show. Posted 7:53 AM | [Link] NO G-FILE TODAY [Jonah Goldberg] Alas, I cannot file a column today because NRO is taking a half day (though the Corner will keep going 24/7). And, my day is filled with prior commitments including, sadly, a funeral for a friend who passed away unexpectedly last week. Also, I will be on KSFO in San Fran at 8:00 AM California time. If you'd like to read today's syndicated column on Al Gore, you could always click here. Posted 7:40 AM | [Link] DON'T LISTEN TO THE COWARDS [Kathryn Jean Lopez] The cowards would be the State Dept. and their vague, semeingly all-encompassing travel warnings. Ralph Peters calls State "easily the lamest institution in the federal government" and says enjoy your summer, whatever they say. Posted 4:54 AM | [Link] THANKSGIVING DAY [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Peggy Noonan's 4th list of things--people, institutions--to be thankful for. Posted 4:50 AM | [Link] HELL, NO, WE DON'T WANT HIM TO GO [Kathryn Jean Lopez] The Saudis tell the U.S. to butt out of Palestinian affairs. Posted 4:37 AM | [Link] TRACTATUS PONNURUIENSIS ET ADLERIUM: [Rod Dreher] Uhh ... hey Jonah, all this legal philosophizing in The Corner has done froze my brain. Tell a Cosmo story, make a "Simpsons" reference, insult the French, pull my finger, something, anything. We're getting too respectable around this here frat house. K-Lo hasn't chastised us in ages, which is a sure sign of decline. Posted 12:03 AM | [Link]
ON STATE ACTION [Jonathan Adler] Ramesh's mention of state action reminds me of a point I should have mentioned earlier. The Fourteenth Amendment focuses on state action -- something clear from the amendment's text as well as its history -- whereas a federal partial birth ban focuses on private actions by abortion providers. Properly understood, section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment gives Congress the power to criminalize disparate enforcement of state laws, or to expressly invalidate state laws that themselves violate equal protection, but not to directly regulate private conduct. Thus, even if one were to adopt a more expansive view of the Fourteenth Amendment, the proposed federal partial birth abortion ban would still fail to pass constitutional muster. Posted 8:30 PM | [Link] A CAVEAT [Jonathan Adler] The often-overlooked privileges and immunitires clause in section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment might throw a wrinkle into the above analysis. Under this clause, "no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States." Citizens, in turn, are defined as "all persons born or naturalized in the United States." A state law explicitly allowing the murder of citizens below a certain age might well violate this clause. Were that the case, Congress could enact prophylactic legislation to protect against such violations. This still would not help Ramesh's case as, by its own terms, the clause does not apply to the unborn. Posted 8:30 PM | [Link] ON MURDER, INFANTICIDE AND PERSONHOOD [Jonathan Adler] A federal law prohibiting murder committed by puncturing the skull of the victim and sucking out his brains would be unconstitutional. Sure, Congress could ban such actions on army bases, in post offices, and on federal property, but it could not make such acts illegal across the board. Congress lacks a federal police power of the sort that would be needed to enact such legislation. Section 5 doesn't help because such a law would not ensure the "equal protection" of people under state law. In the case at hand, Ramesh suggests the equal protection violation comes from the fact that state homicide laws only protect those who have been born, but I disagree. Age, unlike race (and perhaps sex), is not a suspect class. The equal protection clause does not mandate that states treat all people equally. Rather, it requires that like people be treated equivalently in like situations. Therefore, a state law permitting infanticide is not clearly distinguishable on this score from a state law explicitly allowing companies to adopt mandatory retirement laws for people above a certain age. As for the issue of who defines personhood, states routinely define the point at which life begins and ends for all sorts of purposes -- including when hospitals may pull the plug. That states may adopt the wrong standard in one context or another does not create an equal protection violation. But, Ramesh will respond, what about infanticide? That's a tricky question, but I'm inclined to believe that were a state to be barbaric enough to legalize infanticide Congress would still lack the authority to remedy it. (But see below.) Posted 8:29 PM | [Link] RAMESH AND MY DISAGREEMENT [Jonathan Adler] As things stand, Ramesh and I have a fundamental disagreement about the scope of federal power under the Fourteenth Amendment. I believe that the Fourteenth Amendment imposes obligations on the states, and then grants Congress a limited power to "enforce" -- but not define -- those obligations. That Congress is limited to the enactment of "appropriate" legislation to enforce the amendment reinforces the fact that the Amendment did not grant the legislature an unbridled power to define equal protection violations in need of a federal response. While Congress has an obligation to consider the constitutionality of legislation before it is enacted, it is ultimately the obligation of the Supreme Court to, in Chief Justice Marshall's famous words, to say what the law is. Ramesh is correct that the Supreme Court took the first step toward federalizing the abortion debate -- and it was wrong to do so -- but this does not justify having Congress respond with an unconstitutional act of its own. One wrong turn does not merit another. Posted 8:28 PM | [Link] STANDARDS AT THE NEW YORK TIMES [John Derbyshire] Thanks to the several readers who pointed out the article on the Riemann Hypothesis in today's New York Times I was alarmed to see that they spelt John Fry's name as "Frye." In my recent NRO piece (and in my book!) I have spelt it "Fry." Surely the New York Times can't be wrong? Yep, looks like they're wrong. Posted 5:59 PM | [Link] OVER-DOING THE INVITE [James S. Robbins] Tokyo Kyodo News Service reports that an all expenses paid press junket to cover the 57th anniversary of the A-bomb attack on Hiroshima has "attracted virtually no interest from the domestic media." It featured a three-week "Hiroshima seminar" program. A Hiroshima city spokesman said, "It's a pity that our program was not considered to be of news value." I think they should revisit the length of the program--I mean, three weeks? Posted 5:52 PM | [Link] SECOND THOUGHTS? [James S. Robbins] Arafat's WAFA Press Service now says: "The statement which was attributed to the Fatah Movement and the Al-Asifah Forces and which threatens to strike the U.S. and Israeli interests is baseless. The movement has absolutely nothing to do with this statement." Too good to be true I guess. Posted 5:50 PM | [Link] WELCOME TO THE PARTY PAL [James S. Robbins] Thanks for the Fatah link, Kathryn. Arafat's Al-Aqsa Martyrs brigades are declaring global war on the United States. We saw what happened when we ignored Osama bin Laden's 1996 Declaration of War. I don't think this president will make the same mistake. Palestinian terror groups have taken great pains to separate themselves from direct and open anti-U.S. action (note Hezbollah's recent fervent denials of links to al Qaeda). They understand the consequences. Al-Aqsa must want more martyrs. If Arafat crosses this line, I'd say it's game over. Posted 5:24 PM | [Link] BYE, BYE BEN [Kathryn Jean Lopez] After 15 terms in Congress, liberal Republican Ben Gilman (my congressmen) has just announced his retirement. A victim of resdistricting, he's spent the last few weeks flirting with changing parties so he would be able to run against Republican Sue Kelly who is now in the new district, but the polling suggested it wasn't worth the effort. Among other things, he has a ZERO rating with the Right to Life Committtee...so eyes are dry here. Posted 5:16 PM | [Link] ONE MORE POINT, AND A QUESTION: [Ramesh Ponnuru] Adler says that the Constitution reserves the regulation of abortion to the states. As a matter of ideal legal regimes, I’d prefer one in which states banned abortions, and I think this would be perfectly constitutional. But let’s not forget who federalized this issue in the first place. It wasn’t pro-lifers. I think Jonathan would agree with me on this. About one issue, though, I’m not sure what his view is: If a state legalized infanticide for newborns within the three months after birth, would the Congress have any power to counter it? Posted 5:16 PM | [Link] A LEGITIMATE INFERENCE: [Ramesh Ponnuru] Adler argues that it’s illegitimate to infer, from Congress’s power to “enforce” equal protection, any authority for it to define what equal protection of all persons means. Well, somebody has to define it. Should that be up to the Supreme Court—an institution nowhere mentioned in the amendment, unlike Congress, and an institution whose own misconduct was responsible in no small part for the bloody war that occasioned the amendment? The inference that Congress is to have the responsibility is a lot easier to defend than Adler’s apparent conviction that the amendment was meant only to protect blacks, even though it wasn’t worded that way. Posted 5:15 PM | [Link] ADLER, STILL WRONG: [Ramesh Ponnuru] In his latest post on abortion and federalism, Prof. Adler argues that just as Congress can’t bar age discrimination based on the Fourteenth Amendment, it can’t ban abortion on that basis. The situations aren’t parallel because of the element of state action. There is no equivalent, in the age-discrimination case, to the homicide law. The parallel would work only if a state had a law saying it was a crime to fire anyone but making an exception for firing elderly people. Second, Adler writes that a ban on partial-birth abortion doesn’t amount to equal protection anyway—it would still be possible to kill fetuses using other methods. If that proves anything, it’s that Congress has a responsibility to ban those other methods too. But since it would be illegal to puncture the good professor’s skull and suck his brains out, it’s within Congress’s rights to make it illegal to do that to other members of our species. The fact that Congress has declined to ban abortion generally does not mean it would be beyond its authority to do so—or that piecemeal measures are beyond it now. Posted 5:14 PM | [Link] PAGE ONE 9/11: [Rod Dreher] The Poynter Institute, a journalism think tank, has published a collection of newspaper front pages from extra editions published on September 11, and regular print runs of the September 12 edition. Most of them come from the United States, but there are a few front pages from other countries. A portion of the book's proceeds goes to 9/11 charity. Click here to look at the online gallery Poynter has established, displaying these unforgettable images. It's interesting to compare and contrast the way different papers played the story. Posted 4:15 PM | [Link] AN IMPORTANT BLOW FOR ASSIMILATION: [Rich Lowry] Yankees tell El Duque to speak English By Howard Bryant The Record (Bergen County,N.J.) NEW YORK · Apparently, the New York Yankees have decided that five seasons is long enough for Orlando Hernandez to learn English. Posted 3:47 PM | [Link] ADLER…: [Rich Lowry] …is going to take a break from fighting with Ramesh to appear on O’Reilly tonight to talk about the environment. Posted 3:36 PM | [Link] FATAH CALLS FOR ATTACKS ON AMERICANS [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Posted 3:15 PM | [Link] HE'S BACK!: [Rod Dreher] One of my favorite political columns, Chris Caldwell's "Hill of Beans," has resumed in New York Press. In this week's installment, Chris observes that there's something weird and bubble-like about the Administration's high polling numbers, and that voters could easily turn on Bush, as they did his father. He cites a recent Harris poll showing both Powell and Rumsfeld with huge approval ratings. Writes Chris, "To have the two personalities most associated with the war effort polling like movie stars would appear to be good news for Bush–but what it actually shows is how absurd, arbitrary and shallow the administration’s popularity is. Powell and Rumsfeld stand for diametrically opposite strategies conducting America’s most important political endeavor–Powell for appeasing a coalition of Arab states, Rumsfeld for establishing priorities at the risk of losing Arab support. A single respondent can’t like them both. This is like a poll showing that 90 percent of Americans eat dinner at 5 o’clock, while another 85 percent eat dinner at 7 o’clock. In short, it’s evidence that, as in 1991, Americans are answering every polling question as if they were being asked, 'Do you want to win the war or to lose it?'" Posted 3:14 PM | [Link] AND SOME GET MY BACK [Jonah Goldberg] For example: To take your Corner post too seriously, I have a reply to your oh so educated Princeton review geek. Posted 2:31 PM | [Link] TAKING THE GF TOO SERIOUSLY CONT'D [Jonah Goldberg] Some readers think I am being too hard on my critic. For example: Regarding your Corner comment about the SAT criticism, frankly the guy is right and you're wrong. And, I found none of his criticism to be heavy-handed, which means that your "lighten up" comment is not appropriate. Because your comment was sarcastic, this makes you the arrogant player in this scenario. Posted 2:27 PM | [Link] AN INTERESTING TWIST: [Rod Dreher] Ex-VOA guy Stephen Schwartz, a bitter and learned opponent of Wahhabism, is a relatively recent convert to Sufi Islam. You can read his conversion story here. He has taken the name "Suleyman Ahmad Stephen Schwartz." Posted 1:37 PM | [Link] WHERE RAMESH IS RIGHT [Jonathan Adler] When the Supreme Court strikes down unconstitutional legislation, as it has in its federalism decisions, it isn't judicial activism. Striking down legislation because five justices don't like it or think they know better is. Posted 1:01 PM | [Link] WHY RAMESH IS WRONG [Jonathan Adler] Ramesh believes section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment gives Congress the power to "give meaning to" the amendment's substantive protections, but that's not what the text says. Section 5 gives Congress the power to "enforce" the equal protection guarantee, not to define it. This distinction is a meaningful one -- and one the Framers understood. Elsewhere the Constitution explicitly gives Congress the power to define certain offenses (see, e.g., Article I, section 8, granting Congress the power to "define and punish . . . offenses against the Law of Nations"). Congress can no more use its Fourteenth Amendment power to protect fetuses than it can to bar age discrimination against the elderly. In addition, even if Congress could enact legislation to ensure that fetuses receive "equal protection," a partial-birth ban would not be "appropriate" legislation under the amendment. The legislation would not advance, let alone guarantee, equal protection. All such a bill would do is ban one particularly heinous procedure. It would not ensure that fetuses, or even late-term fetuses, receive the same protection as the rest of us. Thus even if Congress had the greater power to bar all late-term abortions on equal protection grounds -- a claim which I contest -- this would not include the lesser power to selectively prohibit specific abortion methods irrespective of the age of the fetus on which they were performed. Abortion, like so much else Congress tries to regulate, is simply a matter our constitutional system reserves to the states. Posted 1:00 PM | [Link] PAKISTANI TRIBAL "JUSTICE" [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Posted 12:59 PM | [Link] RON RADOSH ON VOA'S FIRING OF STEPHEN SCHWARTZ [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Posted 12:44 PM | [Link] TAPPED TRIPS [Jonathan Adler] Many conservatives are inconsistent, if not hypocritical, when it comes to federalism -- a point I've made time and again. But Tapped is wrong to claim hypocrisy when Ashcroft overrules prosecutors' sentencing recommendations. This isn't anti-federalism; Ashcroft is overruling the federal prosecutors in cases prosecuted under federal law. If Tapped wants to criticize the Justice Department, then it should question whether federal prosecutors should have brought these cases in the first place. That, and not the sentencing recommendation, is the real federalism issue. As a senator, Ashcroft criticized the Clinton administration for failing to seek the death penalty in enough federal cases. Now he's doing something about it. Ashcroft may be wrong on the merits in some of these cases, but he's not being hypocritical here. Posted 11:41 AM | [Link] CALIFORNIA KYOTO [Jonathan Adler] As expected, the California legislature passed curbs on automobile emissions of greenhouse gases. This is only the beginning of the fight, however, as automakers will likely challenge the law in court. They have a strong argument that federal law preempts the standards because of their impact on automotive fuel efficiency. For those interested in preemption, this will be a fight to watch. Posted 11:39 AM | [Link] TAKING THE G-FILE TOO SERIOUSLY [Jonah Goldberg] I just received this criticism of yesterday's G-File: I've worked for both ETS and Princeton Review. I agree about the dumbing down of the SAT being awful, but a piece mocking those who want to get rid of the SAT shouldn't contain an error about SAT questions. It makes you look like the stupid one. I think you mean "water is to cools" to be the right answer but in fact, the right answer is "none of the above" (though, if memory serves, I don't think "none of the above" is ever an option in the analogy section). The two words in the analogy question and the two words in the correct answer have to be definable in terms of one another. "Fire" and "burn" are probably okay so long as 'burn' is taken to mean "consumed by flames" rather than a sensation of burning. The definition would then be something like "Fire burns oxygen" or "Fire burns combustable material" or something like that. But water doesn't cool oxygen, nor does water cool combustible material, not is there any definitional link between 'water' and 'cools'; the water that I make cofee with doesn't cool anything. So 'water' 'cool' isn't an acceptable answer to this question and, in fact, couldn't be an acceptable answer to any such question. Maybe you don't think this is important, but it's a bit wierd to read a piece defending the SAT analogies as indicative of something (as I say, I agree about this) by an author who hasn't a clue about how SAT analogies work. My only response: "Lighten up Francis." Posted 11:01 AM | [Link] NOT TO BE IMMATURE.... [Jonah Goldberg] but, after reading Ramesh's posts, I must say that if the Corner were a school playground, I'd be rushing to the crowd yelling "FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!" Posted 10:57 AM | [Link] WHY ADLER’S WRONG, II: [Ramesh Ponnuru] Adler imagines that those of us who believe that a state’s failure to ban abortion is a violation of constitutional rights “cannot. . . seriously critique the Supreme Court for unbridled activism,” presumably because we would want the Supreme Court to impose a ban on abortion. The first odd thing about this argument is that almost everyone who complains about "activism" presupposes a constitutional baseline from which the activism departs. If, for example, the Constitution really demands that the Court impose the federalism limits that Adler seeks, the Court's doing so is not activism. (If it doesn't, it should be.) And if it is true that a sound reading of the Constitution demands that the Court itself prohibit abortion, that's not activism either. But those of us who consider a federal ban on partial-birth abortion constitutional are committed to no such proposition in any case. Our point is that it is up to Congress, not the Court, to enforce the Fourteenth amendment. If the states fail to ban abortion, that’s not necessarily a reason for the Court to step in and make them. We're not judicial supremacists. Posted 10:32 AM | [Link] WHY ADLER’S WRONG: [Ramesh Ponnuru] Our favorite professor of environmental law concludes that a federal ban on partial-birth abortion would be unconstitutional. He’s wrong. The Fourteenth Amendment gives Congress the power to enforce the guarantee that states provide all persons with the equal protection of the laws—including the homicide laws. Adler makes two arguments. First, he claims that the amendment was intended to protect blacks, not fetuses. But no defensible form of originalism treats unenacted “intentions” as law. The law as enacted covers all persons, not (only) all black persons; nor is it by its terms directed solely at denials of the protection of law based on race. Should fetuses count as “persons”? The same generation that passed the amendment moved to tighten anti-abortion laws precisely on the basis that they were persons. That’s one piece of evidence that the understanding of the word at the time of enactment included fetuses. The plain meaning of the relevant terms is that all persons are to be protected—and if Congress, which is supposed to “enforce” the amendment (and in this context, I’d argue that “enforce” is functionally equivalent to “give meaning to”), concludes that fetuses are persons (as it should), it may act on that understanding. Posted 10:26 AM | [Link] NO MORE MONTY PYTHON! [Jonah Goldberg] Yes, yes, I knew there was a Monty Python reference to be made yesterday about witch-burning. But I was tired and lazy. But that doesn't mean 8 trillion of you should feel free to send me the whole witch scencefrom Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Posted 9:26 AM | [Link] MS CLOUD, REVEALED [Jonah Goldberg] The caricature of a lefty professor I linked to last night, has a bio page on the web. Posted 9:08 AM | [Link] HOW CONVEEEEEENIENT: [Rod Dreher] Remember that Saudi princess set to go on trial in Florida for allegedly pushing her Indonesian maid down the stairs? Looks like the dame's gonna walk. It seems that the maid, who was the prosecution's chief witness, went back to Jakarta for her mother's funeral, and the U.S. State Department refused to give her a visa to come back to testify. And the Florida prosecutors weren't especially interested in pressing them to. How do you say, "The fix is in" in Arabic? Posted 8:53 AM | [Link] BOWMAN ON HONOR [Stanley Kurtz] James Bowman, American editor of London’s Times Literary Supplement, recently delivered an exciting and deeply thoughtful lecture entitled, “Whatever Happened to Honor?” for the American Enterprise Institute’s Bradley Lecture Series. Bowman is trying to resuscitate a reformed tradition of honor in the West. A sense of honor once stood alongside (but in tension with) law and religion as a central support of our morality. Nowadays, the notion of honor embarrasses us, when we think of it at all. Yet Bowman succeeds in showing that honor hasn’t really disappeared. However forgotten or denied, honor remains something that we cannot--and do not--do without. Bowman’s reflections on honor and the war on terror make for an exciting conclusion to the piece. Bowman understands that how the traditional Middle Eastern concept of honor (and our inability to understand it) stands behind this war. Implicitly, Bowman’s piece is about the contrast between American individualism and societies built around “honor groups,” like those in the Middle East. (A theme that complement’s my own recent take on the Fukuyama-Huntington debate in my essay for Policy Review, “The Future of History.”) And instead of simply extolling Western individualism at the expense of non-Western cultures, Bowman remains critical of non-Western modes while also highlighting the need for Western societies to leaven their individualism with a reformed and modernized version of traditional honor concepts. (Another respect in which Bowman’s approach complement’s my own in “The Future of History.”) That said, I take a somewhat different view than Bowman of Islamic society, and I’m a bit more skeptical than Bowman about the uses of national honor as a guide to foreign policy. These quibbles aside, though, Bowman’s lecture is well worth a look. It’s a long, but easy, exciting, and very thoughtful read. Posted 8:47 AM | [Link] SPAIN & SAUDIS [Kathryn Jean Lopez] The Saudi kingdom planning for when we dump them? Posted 8:37 AM | [Link] AMERICANS IN SAUDI ARABIA [Andrew Stuttaford] Kathryn, that's an interesting story from the "Kingdom." Will the Saudis try their usual trick and claim that the explosive device was somehow linked to turf struggles among the makers of bootleg liquor? It becomes ever more evident that the House of Saud is a house of cards, and it becomes ever more obvious that the Bush administration's embrace of these vicious despots is as pointless as it is inane. Best advice to Westerners living in Saudi Arabia: Leave now. Posted 8:34 AM | [Link] SAUDI SATIRE [Kathryn Jean Lopez] "Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat stunned the world yesterday by demanding that the United States hold democratic elections for a new [US President] Chief Executive before it attempts to continue in its role as broker between Israel and Palestine." From the Arab News, the official Saudi English-language daily, reprints a satire piece from the Green Party candidate for Texas governor. Posted 8:25 AM | [Link] THE NORMAN MINETA PROBLEM [Andrew Stuttaford] Kathryn, I didn't think that Mineta could shock me any more, but then I read the story that you have just posted. Why should we pay any attention to anything the administration has to say about domestic security so long as this man remains in the government? Posted 8:19 AM | [Link] AN AMERICAN IN RIYADH...AND THE EXPLOSIVES HE FOUND ON HIS CAR [Kathryn Jean Lopez] From the Arab News: "According to a US Embassy statement issued on Sunday, Saudi authorities are investigating the discovery of an explosive device on the personal vehicle of an American citizen employed at the King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center in Riyadh. On Saturday morning, the American and his spouse discovered an unfamiliar and suspicious object attached underneath the vehicle because the object was dragging on the road as they set off to work. They reported it to the Saudi police who secured the device and removed it. Further examination by the police determined that it was an explosive device." Posted 8:17 AM | [Link] AMERICAN EARNESTNESS [Andrew Stuttaford] New American Derbyshire is trying too hard. A man who has just spent $115 on a ninety-year old edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica shouldn't be dissing English know-how. Posted 7:41 AM | [Link] KALININGRAD [John Derbyshire] Check out the June 27th issue of The Economist. Trouble brewing in Kaliningrad. But you read it first on NRO. Posted 7:39 AM | [Link] GOOD JOB, NORM [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Looks like Norman Mineta rejected a plan to have retired NYPD cops pitch in with security help at NY airports in favor of keeping non-citizen security screeners in San Francisco. Posted 7:37 AM | [Link] DID YOU KNOW SATURDAY WAS "BARBARA LEE DAY? [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Posted 7:28 AM | [Link] CNN NOT POPULAR IN ISRAEL [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Seen: "CNN Lies" stickers. Posted 4:50 AM | [Link] POSTPONING WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE 10 MONTHS AGO [Kathryn Jean Lopez] The Dept. of Homeland Security becomes a problem. Posted 4:28 AM | [Link]
STATE LEGISLATURES AT WORK [Kathryn Jean Lopez] Posted 10:54 PM | [Link] IF YOU CAN BELIEVE IT . . . [Jonathan Adler] Eugene Volokh has already posted a thoughtful critique of today's bad decision. Posted 10:39 PM | [Link] CANADIAN CULTURE [John Derbyshire] Jonah: Almost the first thing I ever heard about Canada was the old saw that: "The Canadians could have had English government, American know-how, and French culture. Instead they got French government, English know-how and American culture." Posted 10:36 PM | [Link] ON THE OTHER HAND: [Rod Dreher] Anne Wilson is no fan of radical Islam, but she finds more than I did to like about the Senate proposal to bring Islamic high school students into America to study. She makes some points worth considering. Posted 10:27 PM | [Link] CIVILIZATION COMES TO SAN FRANCISCO: [Rod Dreher] Let joy be unconfined. Today, the burghers of San Francisco banned public urination and defecation. Too many bums were, er, dropping their friends off on the curb, and the city finally had enough. "Don't poop on the stoop" -- it's now the law in Frisco, baby. For added convenience, the Board of Supervisors decided to post the locations of public toilets on the city's website, so the homeless can point and click their mouses right over when they need assistance. Posted 9:46 PM | [Link] RED-GREEN [Andrew Stuttaford] Jonathan, another reason that the right has such a problem with environmentalists is an entirely justified suspicion of their motives. Are the Greens really interested in protecting our planet or are they pursuing an agenda that is, in fact and intention, nothing more than (appropriately enough, I suppose) recycled socialism? You say that too many on the right believe that supporting environmental protection means an unnecessarily intrusive expansion in the power of government. Well, it needn't necessarily be so, but it usually is - and for many environmentalists that's just the point. Posted 6:29 PM | [Link] PEOPLE WORSHIP CONT'D [Jonah Goldberg] Now, Professor Cloud's anti-American screed provides the perfect opportunity to make a point about God and religion. Sophisticates say that asserting God's existence constitutes the endorsement of religion. But the question of God's existence can be and often is completely separate from the efficacy of any religion. You can believe in God and not be religious. And, you can be an atheist and devise a religion centered on trees, ducks, or the half-eaten tuna sandwich in your fridge.There are those who make liberty the central tenant of their religion. Communists made a religion out of the worship of the masses and the dialectic which guided their destiny. Others worship mammon. Ms. Cloud (I assume she's a she) seems as swept up in religious fervor as any zealot. She just worships at the altar of tiresome lefty silliness. Posted 6:05 PM | [Link] PEOPLE WORSHIP [Jonah Goldberg] The following comes from a forum in the Daily Texan, the newspaper of the University of Texas. It was written by Dana Cloud an associate professor of communications studies. You can find it here (scroll to the bottom): Pledge for the workers Posted 5:44 PM | [Link] PROVISIONAL STATES [Andrew Stuttaford] Jonah, the history of Anglo-Irish relations is not, to put it mildly, the happiest of stories, but it does provide one example as to how a 'provisional' state can lead to full independence - for at least part of a disputed territory. When the Southern counties of Ireland won their independence from Britain in 1922, they did so as the 'I | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<% printurl = Request.ServerVariables("URL")%>