Archive

  • GEORGE WILL IS SHRILL.

    GEORGE WILL IS SHRILL. George Will does the unthinkable and not only attacks George W. Bush 's approach to national security, but even offers praise for John Kerry , arguing that Kerry was right to say "that although the war on terror will be 'occasionally military,' it is 'primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation that requires cooperation around the world'" while his critics are engaged in a "farrago of caricature and non sequitur mak[ing] the administration seem eager to repel all but the delusional." --Matthew Yglesias
  • JUST POSTED ON TAP ONLINE: STAKES ON A PLANE.

    JUST POSTED ON TAP ONLINE: STAKES ON A PLANE. Matt makes the case against the new airport security measures. --The Editors
  • JUST POSTED ON TAP ONLINE: WHAT'S IN A NAME?

    JUST POSTED ON TAP ONLINE: WHAT'S IN A NAME? Mike makes the case against the Washington Redskins' name. --The Editors
  • MORE CHICKEN COUNTING.

    MORE CHICKEN COUNTING. Following up on Matt 's post , I do think the emerging line holding that Ned Lamont 's victory demonstrates that the Dems can ride an anti-war platform to victory in '06 and '08 is totally premature. For one thing, Lamont (obviously) won a primary, not a general election. The fact that the anti-war platform commands a small majority in the Democratic primary doesn't mean it will in the general election. Lamont could still lose the general election -- indeed, he's behind in the polls. He also could win it with less than an outright majority (with more Connecticut voters opting for one of the pro-war candidates.) Moreover, I've never heard the phrase "As Connecticut goes, so goes the nation," for a reason. Perhaps "as Connecticut goes, so goes Massachusettes" would be more apt. Even if Lamont gets well ahead in the polls in a month or two that doesn't necessarily prove that what plays in Connecticut will play in all the states and districts that the Dems need to...
  • Bad European Growth Numbers in the NYT

    Newspapers should try to report economic data in ways that are clear to their readers. That should not be a debatable point. The NYT badly failed in this task in an article on European economic growth. The headline told readers that "Economy Grows Nearly 1% in Europe." Before anyone bemoans poor European growth, it is important to realize that the 1.0 percent is a quarterly growth rate. In other words, Europe's economy grew by close to 1.0 percent in the second quarter of the year. This translates into close to a 4.0 percent annual rate. In the United States, growth is always reported as an annual rate. There is absolutely no excuse for a reporter (or an editor) not taking the 2 seconds needed to convert a quarterly rate into an annual rate. This is about as simple as it gets; the Times should not be reporting economic data in ways that might unnecessarily mislead readers. --Dean Baker
  • Is Europe Hiding Its Productivity?

    The Wall Street Journal has an interesting piece today on how France Telecom is trying to set up its workers in their own business as a way of getting around restrictions on layoffs. The story itself is interesting -- it�s an innovative initiative that would seem to produce win/win outcomes. But the discussion also raises another serious question about excess labor in France and other countries with restrictive laws on layoffs. The article implies that much of France Telecom�s 120,000 workforce has been made unnecessary due to the rapid changes in technology over the last 15 years. In the United States, the old-line telephone companies have all had massive layoffs. In France, and most other European countries, employment protection laws prevent such large-scale dismissals so companies must retain workers even if they don�t need their labor. This could be one of the factors explaining the difference between European and U.S. productivity growth over the last decade. (Prior to 1996,...
  • JUST POSTED ON TAP ONLINE: A HAWK FOR ALL SEASONS.

    JUST POSTED ON TAP ONLINE: A HAWK FOR ALL SEASONS. Is Joe Lieberman actually strong, or at least serious, on defense issues? Spencer Ackerman says no. The senator adheres to no coherent or systematic foreign policy doctrine beyond a blanket, consistent hawkery on every security issue of the day. Ackerman examines Lieberman's record since the Persian Gulf War, concluding that "the most surprising thing about Lieberman's defense record is the difficulty of defining Liebermanism. On the central question of why a nation should or shouldn't go to war, Lieberman's answer is simply, 'yes!'" Read the whole thing . --The Editors
  • WHAT DO THE...

    WHAT DO THE POPULISTS WANT? It seems to me that Noam Scheiber 's column on Ned Lamont 's populism suffers from a couple undefined premises. What, for instance, does the populism of Ned Lamont and the netroots actually seek? Scheiber indicates that it's a more fundamental critique of capitalism and corporations than the New Democrat wing of the party would tolerate. I'd like to see the evidence. It's been my impression that the more strident a class warrrior's rhetoric, the more banal his set of solutions. Lamont, for instance, isn't advocating massive increases in marginal tax rates, but universal health care. He doesn't want to break up Wal-Mart through an antitrust suit, he wants them to pay better wages and let their workers unionize. It's populism-lite, asking merely that the corporations be a bit more kind and gentle, or at least allow the government to do the kind and gentle things the corporations seem unwilling to pay for. The first stirrings of class revolution this is not...
  • GOREWATCH. Al...

    GOREWATCH . Al Gore 's companion book to An Inconvenient Truth is resting comfortably atop the New York Times Bestseller List, which reports 20,000 copies flying off the shelves each week. The book itself is a very slick production -- mostly pretty pictures and eye-catching graphs, about as colorful and as quick a read as anything on the subject of climate change can possibly be -- but I have a hard time believing that customers are buying a coffee table tome on global warming rather than a little piece of Gore-mania. And, while a bestseller does not make a presidential campaign, it's got to be one more siren song tempting the ambitions of the former contender... --Ezra Klein
  • CHICKENS COUNTED PRE-HATCHING.

    CHICKENS COUNTED PRE-HATCHING. As best as I can make out, the mandate of John Nichols ' blog for The Nation is to be preternaturally optimistic about the prospects for left-wing activism, but I think his post arguing that Nedraline could put Russ Feingold in the White House is missing a whole bunch of steps. Realistically, Hillary Clinton is no Joe Lieberman in terms of political profile, even though I agree that their views on Iraq are less different at the end of the day than Clinton would like us to think. But that brings us to the larger point, Lieberman lost by a pretty narrow margin at the end of the day -- had he not decided to run around acting like Dick Cheney 's sock puppet he would have won easily. What's more, the dynamics of the Connecticut primary were very different from a presidential one. Had Lieberman agreed to respect the outcome of the primary, the general election would have been a blowout win for whoever won the Democratic nomination. That took the dread "...

Pages