Archive

  • TO FIRE, OR...

    TO FIRE, OR NOT TO FIRE? It looks , rather surprisingly, like John McCain , Lindsey Graham , and John Warner are readying to take substantive stands against the Bush administration�s attempt to torture by another name. The nut of the disagreement is over Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment." The Bushies, through some complicated legal footwork, are trying to invalidate that prohibition. McCain, Graham, and Warner appear unwilling to allow it, and are crafting their own compromise that actually follows the Geneva Convention. Right now, we basically have two tiers of interrogation: The Army, which fully abides by the Geneva Conventions, and the CIA, which tortures. That may make sense, save for the total lack of evidence that the CIA�s program is either more effective or a useful compliment to the traditional methods of interrogation. Lt. General John Kimmons , the Army's deputy chief of...
  • The Deficit You Didn't Read About

    The deficit hit another record in July. It's now running at an $820 billion annual rate, more than 6 percent of GDP. Of course, I'm talking about the trade deficit, not the budget deficit. All the bad outcomes of large budget deficits are also true of large trade deficits, yet the media barely notice a trade deficit that is now more than 3 times as large as the budget deficit. (Even if we add in the money borrowed from Social Security the trade deficit would still be almost twice as large as the budget deficit.) Like the budget deficit, in the short-run the trade deficit allows higher living standards. We can consume imported goods that we are not paying for, just as the government can spend money that is not paid for with tax revenue. In the long-run we cannot do this, we accumulate foreign debt on which we will have to pay interest. While the media never tires about talking about long-run problems from the budget deficit, they manage to largely to ignore the much larger trade...
  • WHY EMANUEL HATES...

    WHY EMANUEL HATES DEAN. In a funny bit of intra-Democratic news from this week, the burgeoning rapprochement between Rahm Emanuel and Howard Dean included an agreement on how much the DNC would spend in 2006, and almost contained a "good behavior" clause in which the DNC would donate more money if Emanuel stopped bashing them to the press. It's a testament to Emanuel's loathing of Dean that the DNC even considered such a play, but it's more understandable in the context of this article reporting what the two national party committees will spend on 2006: The DNC will contribute $12 million to Democratic efforts, the RNC will give $60 million. This, by the way, is why I remain somewhat bearish on the Democrat's chances in 2006. While the national mood may favor the left, the GOP still enjoys a massive advantage in funding, voter technologies, microtargeting databases, and GOTV efforts. Add in dropping gas prices and the power of the bully pulpit (which Bush has used to great effect over...
  • WYNN WINNING.

    WYNN WINNING. A while back our boss Bob Kuttner (assisted by wunderkind intern Asheesh Siddique ) put some real thought and effort into actually discerning who were the most indefensibly sell-outish Democrats in the House. Among the "faithless fifteen" they came up with was Maryland's Al Wynn , who's of course garnered blogospheric attention more recently for his anti-net neutrality shenanigans and faced an extremely serious primary challenge yesterday from Donna Edwards . Though it may still be too close to call, it now appears that Wynn will be able to pull out a victory against Edwards. But this is the kind of primary challenge -- a strike against bad behavior engaged by incumbents who don't need to be engaging in bad behavior -- that's healthy and fruitful even if it doesn't succeed. Check out Midterm Madness today for more coverage of yesterday's primaries. --Sam Rosenfeld
  • IT'S NOT A...

    IT'S NOT A CRUSADE; IT'S AN AWAKENING. The Washington Post 's Peter Baker today reports some mind-blowing remarks made by President George W. Bush on the subject of America the Good versus the collective Great Satan known as the Islamo-fascists: President Bush said yesterday that he senses a "Third Awakening" of religious devotion in the United States that has coincided with the nation's struggle with international terrorists, a war that he depicted as "a confrontation between good and evil." (Look here for an authoritative explanation of America's "Great Awakenings.") The president's remarks were made to a " handful of journalists ," described by Baker as conservative, in an on-the-record meeting Bush convened in the Oval Office. (Alas, despite my religious fervor for fighting evil-doers, I was not invited.) Baker notes that after weathering criticism in the days following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, for defining the U.S. response as a "crusade," the president has...
  • TALKIN' BOUT MY...

    TALKIN' BOUT MY GENERATION. Talking about the strange perceptual gap wherein the middle class feels insecure even while it wields relative affluence, Scott Winship writes : it's the I'm OK-They're Not Syndrome at work. In The Optimism Gap, journalist David Whitman described a phenomenon common to a number of areas of public opinion. People will often perceive society to be in trouble or declining on some indicator while at the same time perceiving themselves to be doing quite well. So the educational system is a mess, but my kids' school is just fine. Politicians are corrupt, except for mine. Family values are a thing of the past, except in my family where they thrive. In other words, Americans accurately perceive their own situation, but misperceive the economy at large. And we, as political pundits, watchers, and observers latch onto their judgments about the country as a whole, not about their personal situations. To some degree, that's correct. Or at least, was. But I'd argue that...
  • WAR SUPPORTERS' LAST THROES.

    WAR SUPPORTERS' LAST THROES. Everyone's getting their digs in on Rich Lowry and Bill Kristol �s "More troops to Iraq!" column in The Washington Post , as, indeed, they should. But I think today's chutzpah award has to go to TNR 's Lawrence Kaplan, who has a new article hectoring pro-withdrawal commentators for feeling insufficiently bad about the sectarian bloodletting that will likely accelerate in the absence of the current buffer provided by U.S. forces. "The moral cost of abandoning a country we have turned inside-out seems not to have made the slightest impression on opinion-makers," he writes. This is not actually true -- plenty of advocates for withdrawal have wrestled soberly and in earnest with the likely consequences for Iraqis of an American withdrawal. ( Matt 's dispatch in the September print issue argues explicitly that dynamics have reached a point in the Iraqi civil war such that neither withdrawal nor some other drastic American policy change, including the secure-...
  • A DIFFERENT LOOK AT 9-11.

    A DIFFERENT LOOK AT 9-11. The leading lights of conservative thought labor through the day to produce enough big fish to fill enough small barrels. A woman casts herself wistfully as the Mrs. Miniver of World War III (or IV.) The editor of Commentary wallows in existential dread and can't keep it from between his toes. A suburban dad is baffled as to why he -- and his local Best Buy -- are not living their lives in a garrison state, and is even more confused about whether or not that's a good thing. The second generation of the Pipes family looks around for another threat to which he can attach the family helium bottle. And the World's Second-Most Annoying Canadian -- David Frum 's retired the Champion's Cup, alas -- once again wins a round of the JEOPARDY home game against two opponents made entirely of straw. Of course, it's the liberals who are bereft of ideas. Gaze in awe. --Charles P. Pierce
  • GOREWATCH. Pat...

    GOREWATCH. Pat Buchanan , no stranger to insurgent candidacies, is arguing that Al Gore is well-placed to defeat Hillary Clinton and take the Democratic nomination. Most of his points are, I think, perceptive and convincing, but his final grafs falter. "Hillary," Buchanan writes, "has the option of waiting much longer to decide when and whether to get in. Gore must decide soon after November." I think it's quite the opposite. As I argued in my profile of Gore, the longer he stays out, the stronger his chances of winning become. Were he to enter early, the initial shock would wear off and the psychodrama of Gore versus Clinton would emerge, harming and marginalizing both candidates. More likely is the scenario wherein Gore enters late in 2007, becoming the exciting deus-ex-machina candidate of the race. If Hillary is dominant but not thrilling, or absent but not replaced, Gore could enter as the bigfoot the Democratic base (and media) was waiting for, grabbing headlines, attention, and...
  • CHOOSING FRANK LUNTZ...

    CHOOSING FRANK LUNTZ OVER DARFUR. If the political dynamic surrounding Darfur remains static, the region has about three weeks before African Union forces are replaced by the Sudanese military and its genocidal proxies. Meanwhile, Kofi Annan is struggling to sound the alarm on the sheer urgency of the crisis. Yesterday, he appeared in person before the Council and, in an attempt to raise the individual Council members to action, gave a rather stirring speech . In unusually blunt language, Annan called on �additional voices� (read: key member states like China, Russia, and the United States) to do their utmost to press Sudan to consent to a U.N. peacekeeping operation for Darfur. But rather than stick around to give the American response, sources tell me that Ambassador Bolton skipped out of the briefing immediately following Annan�s speech. And though other permanent representatives, such as Emyr Jones Parry of the United Kingdom, stayed, Bolton dispatched only a mid-level �minister...

Pages