February 17, 2007

J.D. JOHANNES SAID IT BEST: "Support the troops. Let them win."

UPDATE: By contrast, Charles Schumer promises another Vietnam.

To some people, Vietnam wasn't a defeat, but a victory. To them, the right side won. And lost. Naturally, they're happy to repeat the experience.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Mickey Kaus thinks the Senate stalemate is "win-win."

MORE: Further thoughts on Iraq and Vietnam:

Okay, let's compare Iraq to Vietnam, in the terms Balko has chosen. Over 58,000 American troops died in 12 years in Vietnam. 3000 have died in Iraq in 3 years. At that rate, Balko will be waiting 57 more years for our troop dead toll to reach 60,000. By the very measure Balko invokes, it would appear that our leadership in Iraq has been far better than it ever was in Vietnam. Of course, by his measure our leadership in WWII must have been truly abysmal, since we lost over 400,000 troops in four years.

Iraq is not Vietnam and Vietnam was not WWII. We've had our share of competent and incompetent leadership during all three conflicts, and I won't argue that the lower death toll in Iraq indicates better leadership, but rather that measuring our leaders' competence and the worthiness of a war by means of relative death tolls is silly, you might even say "shameless", considering that the death toll has nothing to do with whether it is right to be fighting. The measure of a war should not be whether our leaders are competent, or how many people die, but rather, whether our goals are just and good and achieveable, and whether there is any viable alternative to war that will achieve the same ends.

So why do people who are opposed to the war in Iraq compare it to Vietnam? I suspect that the InstaPundit is right: "To some people, Vietnam wasn't a defeat, but a victory. To them, the right side won. And lost. Naturally, they're happy to repeat the experience."

And read the bit about the war as a "consensus identity narrative," too.

AN ANTI-WAHABBI TRANSLATION of the Koran.

MEGAN MCARDLE: "One of the areas of foreign policy in which I do not think that George Bush has made anything appreciably worse is North Korea. Of course, this is because it doesn't actually get much worse than Crazed Dictator Worshipped As God By Millions of Starving Citizens, Who Has a Nuclear Weapons Programme. So it's not as if this actually redounds to Mr Bush's credit. What puzzles me, actually, is the many people I know who purport to believe that Mr Bush has somehow egregiously fouled things up, here. . . . It seems glaringly obvious to me that unless we invade North Korea or Iran, these countries will continue their quest to stockpile a little doomsday."

COPYRIGHT PROBLEMS for the MPAA.

GREGORY BENFORD ON WHAT TO DO ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING:

Benford has a proposal that possesses the advantages of being both one of the simplest planet-cooling technologies so far suggested and being initially testable in a local context. He suggests suspension of tiny, harmless particles (sized at one-third of a micron) at about 80,000 feet up in the stratosphere. These particles could be composed of diatomaceous earth. "That's silicon dioxide, which is chemically inert, cheap as earth, and readily crushable to the size we want," Benford says. This could initially be tested, he says, over the Arctic, where warming is already considerable and where few human beings live. Arctic atmospheric circulation patterns would mostly confine the deployed particles around the North Pole. An initial experiment could occur north of 70 degrees latitude, over the Arctic Sea and outside national boundaries. "The fact that such an experiment is reversible is just as important as the fact that it's regional," says Benford.

Is Benford's proposal realistic? According to Ken Caldeira, a leading climate scientist at Stanford University and the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology, "It appears as if any small particle would do the trick in the necessary quantities. I've done a number of computer simulations of what the climate response would be of reflecting sunlight, and all of them indicate that it would work quite well." He adds, "I wouldn't look to these geoengineering schemes as part of normal policy response, but if bad things start to happen quickly, then people will demand something be done quickly."

Read the whole thing.

UPDATE: A suggestion that this solution is too good to try. What if it worked?

PATRICK FITZGERALD, indicted. By Victoria Toensing.

BAGHDAD TODAY: A report from Mohammed Fadhil: "The progress made so far invites hope and optimism, but it’s still too early to celebrate."

UPDATE: This sounds good: "Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki told President Bush on Friday that the increased effort to provide security in Baghdad had gone exceedingly well so far, Mr. Maliki’s office said in a statement. . . . Maj. Gen. Joseph F. Fil Jr., commander of the First Cavalry Division in Baghdad, told reporters on Friday that there had been a substantial reduction in violence in the past 48 hours, which he attributed both to the increased troop presence and the decision by Sunni and Shiite militants to keep a low profile." Stay tuned. This sounds promising. Unfortunately, too many members of the U.S. political classes have now put themselves in a situation where success is politically more dangerous than failure.

ILYA SOMIN OFFERS THOUGHTS ON prison rape and what to do about it.

SURRENDER RESOLUTION FAILS. It's nice to see the Senate Republicans show a little backbone.

Meanwhile, I note that N.Z. Bear's VictoryCaucus.com has been growing by leaps and bounds. Just look at this traffic, as of first thing this morning:

UPDATES: Thoughts on what it means, from Austin Bay.

THINGS BEGIN TO fall apart in Venezuela.

COMMENTS ON THE NEW DEMOCRATIC SENATE AND THE WAR, from Bill Frist.

FOR CAMILLE PAGLIA, "peak experiences" seem to come easily. Plus, this advice: "When people come up and try to hand you underwear, it shows good instincts not to accept it."

BYRON YORK LOOKS AT "The Thing That Cannot Be Spoken at the Libby trial." Because if it were, the whole thing would collapse.

THE WASHINGTON POST SLAMS MURTHA:

Mr. Murtha has a different idea. He would stop the surge by crudely hamstringing the ability of military commanders to deploy troops. In an interview carried Thursday by the Web site MoveCongress.org, Mr. Murtha said he would attach language to a war funding bill that would prohibit the redeployment of units that have been at home for less than a year, stop the extension of tours beyond 12 months, and prohibit units from shipping out if they do not train with all of their equipment. His aim, he made clear, is not to improve readiness but to "stop the surge." So why not straightforwardly strip the money out of the appropriations bill -- an action Congress is clearly empowered to take -- rather than try to micromanage the Army in a way that may be unconstitutional? Because, Mr. Murtha said, it will deflect accusations that he is trying to do what he is trying to do. "What we are saying will be very hard to find fault with," he said.

Mr. Murtha's cynicism is matched by an alarming ignorance about conditions in Iraq. He continues to insist that Iraq "would be more stable with us out of there," in spite of the consensus of U.S. intelligence agencies that early withdrawal would produce "massive civilian casualties." He says he wants to force the administration to "bulldoze" the Abu Ghraib prison, even though it was emptied of prisoners and turned over to the Iraqi government last year. He wants to "get our troops out of the Green Zone" because "they are living in Saddam Hussein's palace"; could he be unaware that the zone's primary occupants are the Iraqi government and the U.S. Embassy?

Murtha is the face of today's Democratic Party on the war. This is bad for the country, and likely to prove unwise politically.

UPDATE: Related item on the "armor shortage" claims here.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Blasting an idiotic Republican.

MORE: Further thoughts on armor from J.D. Johannes: "As one who has been in a lot of humvees and has been lens-to-detonator with IEDs, I have a mixed feeling about the armor debates." Read the whole thing.

WHY THE PELOSI DEMOCRATS scare China. "Will there be a United States-China trade war? Protectionism is a major concern on Wall Street right now. In a recent analysis, Morgan Stanley chief economist Stephen Roach compared U.S. trade friction with China today vs. that with Japan in the 1980s–and found today's circumstances far more worrying."

DAN GERSTEIN: "If the liberal blogs want to understand why so few people outside their narrow echo chamber take them seriously, and what it will take to gain the broader credibility they crave, they should look no further than their handling of the recent flap over John Edwards’ foul-mouthed blogger hires."

(Via Danny Glover).

UNDERREPORTED NEWS from France.

ALAN BOYLE on how to fight a killer asteroid.

PERSONALLY, I think that this will gain votes for Hillary.

February 16, 2007

WHAT HAPPENED IN IRAQ, while Congress was voting. From The Mudville Gazette.

JOHN SCALZI'S NOVELETTE The Sagan Diary gets a strong review from Professor Bainbridge: "Along with a Dunhill cigar and a glass or three of port, it made a great after-dinner treat." He notes that it "differs radically" from Scalzi's other books. I'm reading Scalzi's next book, The Last Colony, now. It's a sequel to Old Man's War and Ghost Brigades, so it's not such a departure. It's good though. It'll be out later this spring.

ENDING THE "CULTURE OF CORRUPTION:" Check out the Sunlight Foundation's Open House Project.

WATCHING MICHELLE MALKIN SUB for Bill O'Reilly, I noticed that her guest , Democratic consultant Julie Roginsky, appeared to have gotten her Media Matters talking points confused. When responding to a question about the Edwards blogger fiasco, she quickly parried with a blurted remark about McCain "having an anti-semitic blogger."

Hmm. I've never heard anyone call Patrick Hynes an anti-semite, and it's an absurd charge based on my knowledge of him. So I googled "Patrick Hynes anti-semite" and found this Media Matters press release calling Bill Donohue an anti-semite, while attacking Patrick Hynes on other grounds. Roginsky probably just confused the two. Call it talking-points crosstalk?

UPDATE: Video here.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Clay Waters of TimesWatch emails:

Last Saturday on Fox she also accused Hynes of "inflammatory, racist statements" and cited the NYT as her source in a discussion of Marcotte. I tackled the false charges in the Times story here (insulting Rep. Henry Waxman's big nose is apparently anti-Semitic, and it wasn't even Hynes, it was his commenters that the Times called anti-Semitic). If you want, you can try and discern any actual anti-Semitism in the comments in question (which would have nothing to do with Hynes' "anti-Semitism" anyway).

What reporter John Broder of NY Times said on Feb. 9: "[Hynes] then came under fire for declaring that the United States was a 'Christian nation' in a book and television appearances that predated his work for Mr. McCain. Last November, while employed by Mr. McCain's campaign, Mr. Hynes posted on his personal blog a picture of Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California, and invited readers to submit nicknames, some of which were anti-Semitic."

That seems pretty weak. More here.

MORE: Don Surber thinks Fox should give Malkin a show.

A PACK not a herd.

HEH: “I would like to remind Prime Minister Prodi about Mussolini and the way Mussolini was dealt with.”

COMMENT FAKERY: Pretty lame.

UPDATE: Indeed: "Yet another of those situations where, had it been a conservative blogger, the netroots would have spent days up in arms."

ANOTHER UPDATE: Of course, in this, as in so many things, Jane Hamsher is a pioneer.

GUN CONTROL IN BRITAIN: An assessment, from The Telegraph:

We have, post-Dunblane, what are said to be the toughest gun control laws in the world. They have actually proved strikingly ineffectual. Gun crime has doubled since they were introduced.

This was predicted at the time, of course. But crime-control was only the excuse. (Via Dave Hardy).

MORE INSURGENCY IN IRAN:

Police and insurgents clashed after a bombing in southeastern Iran late Friday near the site where an explosion killed 11 members of the elite Revolutionary Guards this week, Iranian news agencies reported. . . .

A Sunni Muslim militant group called Jundallah, or God's Brigade, which has been blamed for past attacks on Iranian troops, has claimed responsibility for the Wednesday bombing.

Iran has accused the United States of backing militants to destabilize the country. Tensions between Tehran and Washington are growing over allegations of Iranian involvement in attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq, and over Iran's nuclear activities.

Hmm. Maybe I spoke too soon in criticizing the Bush Administration for doing nothing about Iran. On the other hand, this sort of thing has been simmering in Iran for a while, and Iranian claims of American involvement are hardly conclusive evidence. In fact, they're hardly evidence at all.

RUDY GIULIANI: "It's okay, they aren't real." Heh.

A D.A.R.E. VIDEO on what to do in case of a school shooting. Actually sounds sensible.

COOPERATE WITH A FEDERAL GUN INVESTIGATION, get badmouthed by the Brady Campaign:

You have to worry about doing business with the wrong customers. And a Washington lobbying group could post your name on its Web site, naming you as an arms dealer who caters to criminals.

Which is what happened last month when the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence released a report, "Shady Dealings: Illegal Gun Trafficking from Licensed Gun Dealers." Tanner's store was featured as one of the scurrilous.

What the Brady Center didn't know is that the sale had been a sting, arranged in cooperation with the local office of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. . . .

A black eye for good behavior.

Oops.

A local newspaper ran the news from the Brady report on the front page.

"The phones started ringing off the hook," Tanner says. Some customers were outraged and threatened never to do business with the place again. Others called to say they couldn't believe it was true.

To their credit, Brady apologized. (Via Snowflakes in Hell).

GOOD THING IT'S NON-BINDING: Resolution in favor of defeat passes in the House. "This was expected: but the good news is, the 40-60 Republican defectors that the Democrats had been predicting failed to materialize. Only seventeen Republicans voted for the resolution --- and two Democrats broke ranks to vote against it. "

I'm disappointed that my own Rep. John J. Duncan voted for it. At least he's consistent, as he also voted against the Iraq war. Nonetheless, I think this vote was a mistake on his part.

UPDATE: Joe Lieberman has some thoughts.

ANOTHER UPDATE: John Hinderaker comments: "The press will no doubt try to spin this as a 'bipartisan' resolution, but the truth is that the Democrats didn't get anything like the number of Republican supporters they were hoping for just a few days ago. I think the public will recognize that the real meaning of the resolution is that the Democrats, as a party, have committed themselves to a policy of failure and surrender. Time will tell whether that commitment will turn out to be a wise one."

MORE: "Support the troops. Let them win."

STILL MORE: Capt. Ed points out that those supporting this dumb resolution aren't traitors:

Unfortunately, the House just sent a huge signal to the terrorists that waiting us out is a winning strategy, one they will not have to endure for very long. I don't believe that the politicians who voted for this resolution are traitors or Quislings, and in fact I strenuously reject that characterization. I think they're idiots and fools, though, and idiots and fools can be almost as dangerous.

Glad he cleared that up.

AN INSIDE LOOK at postwar planning.

FREEZER CASH: Not a security risk!

Eight months after stripping Rep. William J. Jefferson of his seat on the Ways and Means Committee, Speaker Nancy Pelosi plans to award the lawmaker with a spot on the Homeland Security panel. . . .

Jefferson, the subject of an ongoing federal bribery probe, surprised fellow lawmakers and political observers Dec. 9 when he won election to a ninth term in a close runoff race.

“He’s been in limbo for a long time,” the leadership aide said. “He’s a member of Congress representing his constituents and is working on issues of concern to his district and the country.”

Jefferson has been embroiled in a nearly two-year-old federal investigation focusing on whether the 59-year-old lawmaker accepted bribes when he attempted to help set up some telecommunications deals in Africa for a Kentucky-based company called iGate Inc. Court documents indicate that the FBI has accumulated a significant amount of evidence in the case, including video of Jefferson allegedly accepting a $100,000 cash bribe from an FBI informant.

The case became fodder for late-night talk show comedians after investigators raided his home and found $90,000 in cash tucked away in a freezer.

But he's not a security risk! (Via Dave Weigel, who writes: "These Democrats are making it really really hard for me to shill for them.")

BLOGS AS A disaster relief tool.

CHARGES OF MCCARTHYISM, at Duke.

SAM BROWNBACK HAS MISSED MORE VOTES THAN ANY SENATOR except for Tim Johnson, who has a much better excuse.

JOHN PODHORETZ:

The words "I support the troops" are now solely for those who oppose what the troops are doing.

It's positively Orwellian. But true.

UPDATE: "Bring the troops home" -- from 1983?

HERE'S A LIST of people liveblogging the New York Law School symposium on writing about the law.

UPDATE: Photo- and video-blogging here. It includes the rock-star-like Randy Barnett.

A FOLLOWUP ON THE PELOSI C-SPAN STORY that I mentioned yesterday.

ELEVEN EMORY PROFESSORS ASK: "What's Jimmy Carter afraid of?"

ALABAMA'S SEX TOY BAN UPHELD: I think that this decision is wrong, and that such legislation is beyond the legitimate police powers of state governments, as explained here. We even talk about dildos.

And there's always Amazon!

DEMOCRATS IN A PICKLE OVER THE WAR:

Democrats face a host of risks as they move toward more substantive steps to tie President Bush's hands with funding restrictions on the Iraq war.

Leaders are wary of allowing the more intense anti-war activists define the party's image.

As they should be. Unfortunately, it's a bit late for that. (Via John Hinderaker, who comments: "In all of the convoluted political calculations detailed by the AP, there is not a single word, by any Democrat of any stripe, about what is best for the troops, for the Iraqi people, or for the security of the United States.").

IN THE MAIL: P.J. O'Rourke's On the Wealth of Nations.

UPDATE: Reader Kevin Fleming emails: "I grabbed this one and read it as soon as I saw it in the bookstore. It’s well-written, smart, funny, learned, witty, acerbic, and a good explanation of tough material. I wish they’d make this a textbook for high school students. Hell, it ought to be required reading for Congress. Annually."

A CONTRARIAN VIEW: Has George W. Bush regained his political footing?

Alternate view: It's a dead-cat bounce! But it's really hard to say. Clinton's presidency looked dead several times, and he rebounded with an assist from his enemies' overreaching and obvious over-the-top hatred. Plus, in 1995, a terrorist attack. Let's hope that history doesn't repeat itself that way.

UPDATE: Don Surber comments.

MICHELLE MALKIN, profiled in the Washington Post. I predict an unfavorable response from Kosland. On the other hand, there's this quote: "There is a feeling that every time we go to bat for the Bush administration, they pull the rug out from under us." I think a lot of Bush supporters feel this way.

Allah wasn't crazy about the piece.

UPDATE: Oops, the dreaded co-blogger confusion: It was See-Dubya, not Allah.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Ed Morrissey: "Kurtz' article does her on-line persona justice. It's not really his job to go beyond that, but he gives readers a glimpse of what makes Michelle special for those of us fortunate to know her."

(Morrissey link was wrong earlier. Fixed now. Sorry!)

NEWS ON THE "SURGE," from The Mudville Gazette. It seems clear that this really is about a change in tactics more than additional U.S. troops, which I think is a good thing.

TENNESSEE'S DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE STONEWALLS on a Freedom of Information request. "You're not worthy!"

Full story here.

MICKEY KAUS finds a positive indicator for Scooter Libby.

GLOBAL WARMING UPDATE: Burning fossil fuels with helicopters and Cadillacs in Massachusetts. Of course, with the weather they're having now, a pro-global-warming stance might be smart politics!

February 15, 2007

JULES CRITTENDEN ROUNDS UP good news and bad news from Iraq and elsewhere.

ARKIN FALLOUT: A resignation at NBC.

WHY PEOPLE WHO ARE WORRIED ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING should support the Iraq war.

SOME THOUGHTS on wealth and culture.

SHRUGGING OFF CORRUPTION in Chicago.

GOING AFTER "WHITE FLAG REPUBLICANS," at VictoryCaucus.com.

NOMINATIONS FOR THE MILBLOGGIES are in full swing.

MEXICAN DRUG DEALERS take to YouTube.

UPDATE: On the other hand, here's a school-shooting prevented, with help from a YouTube view. (Via AGoyandhisBlog).

STRATEGYPAGE ON BAGHDAD:

Most people believe al Qaeda in Iraq is finished. After boasting last Fall that they would establish a safe zone in western Iraq, and failing to do anything close to that, the Islamic terrorists lost whatever credibility they had left. Most of the terrorist bombings these days are the work of Iraqi Sunni Arab organizations, who still believe that if you make the Iraqi Shia Arabs mad enough, they will get so nasty that neighboring Sunni Arab nations will feel compelled to invade. This plan has split the Sunni Arab nationalists, mainly because the invasion shows no sign of happening, and the brighter terrorists point out that the Saudi army is unlikely to win against the Americans. In a trend that began two years ago, Sunni Arab factions are continuing to battle each other. U.S. troops stand aside when they encounter "Red-on-Red" fighting, then deal with the winner.

Meanwhile, the Iraqi Shia Arab militias, especially the Sadr forces (the Mahdi Army), have lost whatever unity and discipline they once had. Factionalism has taken over as several of Sadr's lieutenants compete for popularity and territory by driving Sunni Arabs out of Baghdad neighborhoods. Most of Iraq's Sunni Arabs have been chased from their homes since 2003, and that process has accelerated in the last year. The Iraqi Sunni Arabs are quite wealthy compared to Iraqi Shia, and the Shia gangs have been fighting each other over the loot, and the power. Gang war, literally, because many of the militiamen moonlight as gangsters (or vice versa).

While the number of terror bombings has been declining in the past year, the crime rate has not, and most people in central Iraq are looking forward to the "Battle for Baghdad." Brigades of troops are arriving from the Kurdish north and Shia south, and more American troops can be seen on the streets. There are more raids in Baghdad. But all the average Iraqi wants is safer streets, fewer kidnappings and a little peace and quiet. Realizing that that kind of paradise is not likely to be found in the Middle East, Baghdad has been suffering a major brain drain in the past year, with the most educated fleeing for foreign countries. Europe and North America are preferred destinations, but any place with a lower crime rate will do.

Read the whole thing. Plus, a look at Ramadi.

MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE PUT MILTON FRIEDMAN ON THE NEW DOLLAR COIN: "The contribution of world-renowned 18th century philosopher and economist, Adam Smith, is to be acknowledged on a new-design £20 banknote the Bank of England is to introduce into circulation next Spring."

ENDING racial discrimination in a journalism program. Eugene Volokh has more.

A LOOK AT VENEZUELA'S ECONOMY, from Lynn Kiesling.

NANCY PELOSI PIRATING C-SPAN?

I'm pretty sure this is bogus. At least, the floor coverage is called public domain by C-SPAN itself. And even if this charge is somehow true, as I doubt, this is awfully small potatoes. If this is the most the RSC can find to complain about, then Pelosi must be doing a pretty good job.

UPDATE: Follow the top link for an update. The complaint was bogus; the RSC has withdrawn it and says they were given a bum steer by someone at C-SPAN.

A REVIEW OF BRIAN DOHERTY'S RADICALS FOR CAPITALISM, from John Fund. He likes it a lot: "Mr. Doherty has rescued libertarianism from its own obscurity, eloquently capturing the appeal of the 'pure idea,' its origins in great minds and the feistiness of its many current champions."

HOWARD KURTZ:

The press seems downright excited at the prospect of the first female president.

The idea of the first black president has journalists all but giddy.

But the first Mormon president? Whoa! That's a different matter.

The skeptical tone toward Mitt Romney's announcement has been impossible to miss. And the major reason is his religion.

Hmm. Is this because most members of the press don't hang around with Mormons much? Maybe it's a diversity problem.

JUST SPOKE to the local chapter of the PRSA (the Public Relations Society of America) and asked how many monitor Technorati, etc., to keep an eye on blog discussion regarding their clients. Nearly half of the people there raised their hands.

The Glenn and Helen Show: Five for Fighting's John Ondrasik on War, Peace and Music

John Ondrasik is Five for Fighting. Unless you've been living in a cave in Waziristan, you've heard his songs like 100 Years, Superman, and The Riddle. But the title cut to his latest album, Two Lights, turns out to come from a lunch with none other than blogosphere fave Victor Davis Hanson. (There are some streamable samples at the link, too.) We talk to Ondrasik about politics in the music business, what drives his songwriting, what aspiring musicians should do to make it, and more -- including his new, about-to-launch web-video-based viral charity enterprise, What Kind of World Do You Want? (Hear his music on iTunes here.)

You can listen directly -- no downloads needed -- by going here and clicking on the gray Flash player. You can download the file directly by clicking right here. You can get a lo-fi version suitable for download by going here and selecting lo-fi. And, of course, you can get a free subscription via iTunes -- and you should! As always, of course, my lovely and talented cohost is taking comments and suggestions.

Music is by Five for Fighting. This podcast is sponsored by Volvo USA. Buy a Volvo, and tell 'em we sent you!

ANN ALTHOUSE: "I haven't had the time or inclination to follow the detailed blog coverage of the Libby trial, but I really would like to read some detailed coverage of the dynamic between the professional journalists and the bloggers who get to have so much more fun and show their emotions."

HEH.

CATHY YOUNG ON PANDAGATE and the cult of victimhood.

WELL, YES: "With mandatory curbs on U.S. global-warming emissions looking increasingly likely in the next several years, industries are starting to argue over who will pay for the cleanup. One thing is clear: Whatever the cost, it will get passed along to consumers."

SURGE UPDATE: B1 over Baghdad.

A WARNING TO DEMOCRATS from former Gore advisor Lawrence Haas:

Leading Democrats, none more so than their presidential candidates, are disavowing their previous votes or statements for the war and competing for anti-Bush purity. They are demanding that Bush end the war in Iraq before the next (presumably Democratic) president takes office in 2009. Momentum is building to block funding later this year.

But, in playing to their anti-war political base, congressional Democrats are pushing party orthodoxy on foreign policy further to the left. After a two-year campaign, any successful Democratic candidate for president may wind up with little leeway to project U.S. power abroad.

Unfortunately, the world will not likely cooperate with a hemmed-in president. Just as Soviet expansionism in the late 1970s reminded America that the Cold War was still on, so may the aftermath of Iraq remind Americans of the larger struggle at hand. Just as our withdrawal from Vietnam emboldened the Soviets, a withdrawal from Iraq may do likewise for today’s enemies.

Read the whole thing.

UPDATE: Porphyrogenitus looks on the bright side:

As for the current crop of "anti-war candidates", while it's kind of cynical to say their campaign rhetoric will mean nothing when we're faced with the need to "project force abroad", it's also reassuring to realize that the current Democratic candidates are, well, lying, even if they are getting credit for being "the candid truth tellers". (Ok, Dennis Kucinich exempted: He's sincere).

Just take Al Gore (please) - today he sounds as rabid anti-War Left as the rest of them, but during his actual career, he employed people like, well, Lawrence Haas. Right now the Dems are just saying what the "Netroots" demand to hear. Is this behavior corrosively destructive to our civic discourse? Yes. But it doesn't have as many real foreign policy implications as people who are taking them at their word believe.

At least I hope that's true. To the extent to which they're sincere, instead of cynically playing to the "netroots" base, we're in trouble.

It's amazing how often I hear politicians talk and hope that they don't mean what they say. And certainly with regard to extraordinary rendition, Al Gore has changed his tune since he was in office.

TED STEVENS: Ban Wikipedia! Wikipedia problems notwithstanding, this is dumb. I can only conclude that somewhere in Alaska, someone is developing a federally-funded Wikipedia competitor. I'll call it "the Wiki to nowhere!"

Okay, Stevens' dumb proposal goes way beyond Wikipedia, but I couldn't resist that shot.

A FREUDIAN APPROACH to climate change.

I'VE BEEN SAYING FOR A WHILE that local news-blogging, and videoblogging, will be big. Now Bill Hobbs offers another example of why that is.

JAN CRAWFORD GREENBURG on judicial insecurity:

There’s no question “judicial security” is a serious and urgent concern. But I’m skeptical about how mere criticism of judges and their rulings somehow undermines independence, and I suggest it’s somewhat disingenuous to even mention the two concepts in the same phrase or sentence. The murder of the Chicago federal judge’s mother and husband by a disturbed man who’d been before her in a medical malpractice case is horrific and chilling. But that tragedy argues for greater security for judges, not less speech from those criticizing their opinions in controversial cases. Verbal attacks on federal judges -- by congressmen or commentators or bloggers or dissenting colleagues -- is something entirely different than murderous attacks by disturbed litigants.

Judges write opinions. Judges get criticized. Judges continue writing opinions, some for the rest of their lives (i.e., life tenure). It’s called democracy. I find it quite astonishing that criticism could be considered a threat to judicial independence and has been the topic of recent speeches and conferences and, now, it seemed, congressional hearings.

For life tenure, nice benefits, and largely unchecked power, it seems that having to accept some criticism should be a fair tradeoff. But read the whole thing.

PRESIDENT RUSH LIMBAUGH, and Vice President Ann Coulter.

UPDATE: Ouch.

February 14, 2007

RUDY GIULIANI ON non-binding resolutions.

JOHN MELLENCAMP as Barack Obama's VP?

DONALD SENSING: "What happens when a six-year-old girl sings a song written by her mother for her son who is serving in Iraq? It get’s posted on Youtube and gets more than 1.7 million downloads, that’s what."

ODD GOINGS-ON at Brandeis.

BUT THEY SUPPORT THE TROOPS!

AUSTIN BAY on the great American failure: "The hard truth is, America has never been good at coordinating diplomatic, information, military and economic efforts."

NANCY PELOSI has a new blog. With video.

IRANIAN ATOMIC SCIENTIST KILLED, without much of a global stink.

Related thoughts here.

UPDATE: I've produced "Insta-Twistitude?" It's a gift.

More here.

ANOTHER UPDATE: More thoughts here.

A HUNG JURY in the Libby trial? It would be a fitting conclusion.

IN THE NEW DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS, a move to renew the assault weapons ban, which as Les Jones notes is spurring some recriminations among gun-rights supporters who were unhappy with the GOP last fall.

BOINGBOING: Valentine's Day is for infidels!

WELL, IT WAS OBVIOUS, BUT it's surprising to see the open admission:

Chairman Murtha will describe his strategy for not only limiting the deployment of troops to Iraq but undermining other aspects of the president’s foreign and national security policy.

"Undermining" may not be a felicitous word, but it's certainly accurate.

UPDATE: Via ABC News, some of the troops' views:

MAUREEN DOWD ATTACKS OBAMA: More evidence that the Obama honeymoon is over.

A VALENTINE'S DAY LOOK AT the cost of love.

THE BLOG PRIMARY: A look at political advertising in the blogosphere. It's in the WSJ, but it's a free link

WHAT'S GOING ON WITH NORTH KOREA: Richard Fernandez interviews an expert.

LOTS OF INTERESTING STUFF at The Victory Caucus.

PUNISHING WINNERS: A war on Toyota?

MAKING IT AS A MODERN MALE.

RAY NAGIN held in contempt. And this time, it's by a court.

CHARGING FRONTLINE with misrepresentation.

HEH:

In Congress, they are debating a meaningless resolution.
Down the street, they are trying a guy for lying about a leak.
A House subcommittee had to cancel a hearing on global warming because of snow.
Just another day in Washington.
Happy Valentine's Day.

It's almost a Haiku.

UPDATE: And another heh.

HAROLD FORD, JR. LANDS ON HIS FEET: "Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. today announced that Harold E. Ford, Jr., former congressman, Ninth District of Tennessee, will join the company as vice chairman and senior policy advisor, effective March 5." I kind of figured that he would.

DAVE HARDY'S SECOND AMENDMENT DOCUMENTARY gets a favorable review at Hot Air, which also shows the trailer.

IN THE MAIL: John Scalzi's new book, The Last Colony, the sequel to Old Man's War and Ghost Brigades. Started reading it last night, and so far, so good!

TWO (ALLEGED) RAPES IN DURHAM: Two different standards.

Thanks to the numerous readers who emailed to remind me to add the "alleged." It's a reminder I shouldn't have needed.

WE'LL CALL IT "SURRENDER WITHOUT RESPONSIBILITY!" No, wait -- get me rewrite!

Top House Democrats, working in concert with anti-war groups, have decided against using congressional power to force a quick end to U.S. involvement in Iraq, and instead will pursue a slow-bleed strategy designed to gradually limit the administration's options.

Led by Rep. John P. Murtha, D-Pa., and supported by several well-funded anti-war groups, the coalition's goal is to limit or sharply reduce the number of U.S. troops available for the Iraq conflict, rather than to openly cut off funding for the war itself.

How brave of them.

UPDATE: A simple question: "What will the left fight for?"

I believe the answer is "power."

CLAYTON CRAMER'S NEW BOOK, Armed America, gets a rather nice review in the Washington Times. Excerpt:

The only problem with "Armed America" is its framing as a refutation to Mr. Bellesiles. Nevertheless, what makes Mr. Cramer's work important is not that it debunks Mr. Bellesiles yet again, but that it explores the entire process Mr. Bellesiles ignored.

The introduction extensively documents Mr. Bellesiles' fraud, and in the final chapters Mr. Cramer distractingly bolds references to documents that Mr. Bellesiles misused. But through most of the book, Mr. Cramer mercifully stays away from the now-waning controversy.

All considered, "Armed America" proves a must-read. The author sets aside his beliefs to explore history, conceding evidence against his thesis, noting when the available records are unclear and admitting that guns have done bad as well as good things for America. He dedicates an entire chapter to post-Revolution gun violence. As a result the book is readable, believable and fair.

Sounds like this will get excerpted on the paperback edition!

MICHAEL SILENCE IDENTIFIES A DUMB BIG-GOVERNMENT INITIATIVE from Tennessee Republicans:

Knoxville state Rep. Stacey Campfield, who allegedly supports less government, wants "certificates for aborted fetuses," and some records would be public.

The party is hellbent on going down in flames. Are Republicans happy that the phrase attached to the GOP, "less government," is now the political joke of the nation?

Dumb idea. But Democratic fundraisers will love it! Makes me glad I voted for Bredesen . . . .

A BOMBING in Iran.

IS YOUTUBE LOSING ITS SHEEN? "Some observers hoped when the subpoenas came to light that Google’s history of resisting US government subpoenas would lead to non-cooperation in this case. The moral high ground is clearly far smaller in this case, though." Yes, this isn't about national security, it's about power for the entertainment industry. No moral high ground in resisting that.

FOLLOWING UP ON VIRGINIA POSTREL, some thoughts on beauty at The Speculist.

AT POPULAR MECHANICS, the best of green design.

JULES CRITTENDEN: A botched apology. The Obama honeymoon seems to be over . . . .

February 13, 2007

WORRIES THAT A BIRD FLU OUTBREAK could choke the Internet.

STEPHEN SPRUIELL on Libby trial contradictions.

MICHAEL TOTTEN interviews Walid Jumblatt.

THE "GORE EFFECT" HAS STRUCK AGAIN: "HOUSE HEARING ON 'WARMING OF THE PLANET' CANCELED AFTER SNOW/ICE STORM." And I'm not even sure Al was scheduled to be there. How does he do it?

"AND THEN THERE WERE NONE:" The Edwards blogger fiasco draws to a close.

AL SADR FLEES TO TEHRAN. Captain Ed is happy: "This couldn't have come at a better time. Congress has tied itself in knots trying to opine on what a disaster the surge will be, and before they can vote on a resolution scolding George Bush for wasting resources, he's already chased one of the worst actors out of Baghdad. Nancy Pelosi will be holding a debate to disapprove of a strategy that has already demonstrated success."

Gateway Pundit has more, and Iraq will be closing its borders with Syria and Iran, which it seems to me it should have done a long time ago.

PRISON RAPE UPDATE: Barry Deutsch at Alas! A Blog has posted a roundup of commentary from blogs both left and right. This seems to be an issue on which there's a lot of cross-blogosphere agreement.

BRIAN DOHERTY'S Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement is now out. Helen and I both read the advance copy and liked it.

RUDY GIULIANI on global warming.

A WASTE IS A TERRIBLE THING TO MIND. Or, in other words: "Nowadays, every politician will be defeated by exactly one word. Kerry got 'stuck.' Biden had 'clean.' Obama gets 'wasted.'"

UPDATE: One reader jokes that for Hilary, the word is "Bill." But he's actually more popular now than he was when he was President. The clue to Hillary's word, if it exists, is probably to be found in this post by Arianna Huffington: "Team Hillary's attempt to out-weasel John Kerry's legendary 'I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it' continues in earnest."

THOMPSON ON FITZGERALD:

Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson today criticized Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald's handling of the C-I-A leak investigation. The Republican former lawmaker said the prosecutor had to have known from the start that it was not a crime to disclose Valerie Plame's identity as an agent. . . .

Thompson's objections are the same ones Democratic politicians made in the 1990s about independent counsel Kenneth Starr, who spent six years investigating President Clinton and first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Sometimes when history repeats itself, it's farce both times.

A PODCASTING AD BOOM? Bring it on!

LETTING D.C. VOTE IN CONGRESS is almost certainly unconstitutional, according to a report from the Congressional Research Service. Report available here. This seems obvious to me. (Via Volokh).

MIND OVER MORALITY: Thoughts on law and psychology from Steven Erickson, reviewing Minds on Trial. (Via who else?)

THE NEW RUSSIA: Not a police state, but a secret-police state?

SURGING IN BAGHDAD, with photos.

DANIEL DREZNER ON THE NORTH KOREAN NUKE DEAL, and the failure of diplomacy where Iran is concerned. But is Iran heading for economic and political collapse? I certainly hope so.

THE GOVERNMENT AND DANGEROUS PRODUCTS: Walter Olson asks: Is government the problem? "The government, our alleged protector, has done much at all levels to promote products later assailed as needlessly unsafe, from tobacco to lead paint, from cheap handguns to Agent Orange. Often the state is at least as aware of the risks as the businesses that distribute the product, and in at least as good a position to control or prevent them. But-shaped and propelled by the incentives provided by our litigation system-our process of organized blame hardly ever puts the government in the dock."

N.Z. BEAR LAUNCHES THE VICTORY CAUCUS. Jim DeMint is guestblogging.

A WINDFALL PROFITS TAX on Google? (Via Taxprof).

POLICE TRANSITION TEAMS IN FALLUJAH: Bill Ardolino posts a report, with photos.

IN THE MAIL: Atul Gawande's Better: A Surgeon's Notes on Performance. Looks quite interesting, and I'm a Gawande fan.

MORE ENVIRONMENTALIST SUPPORT for nuclear power.

HOWARD KURTZ: "That pffft you hear is the sound of the air going out of the Scooter Libby trial."

UPDATE: Imus on Russert and Plame: "I think he knew." Plus this: "Frank Rich knows little about this trial but he is a useful barometer for the conventional wisdom of the Bush-bashing left. And he opined that the Plame outing was an accident and an over-reaction, not any sort of a plan to specifically expose her."

SO THE LATEST POPULAR SCIENCE RECOMMENDS the Breville Ikon blender for lump-free smoothies:

Inside the world's most powerful consumer blender, a long, wide blade funnels food toward the center, where two sharper blades ensure even pulpage.

"Even pulpage." That's the goal! But when I tried to order one, the closest thing I could find was this. Sleek and capable, it appears, but is it powerful enough?

UPDATE: Reader Jim Pereira sends this link to what seems to be the right one.

ARE THE MEDIA TURNING ON OBAMA already?

KEEP THESE GUYS AWAY FROM MY RX-8: An RX-7 limo conversion.

BIZZYBLOG: "What happens if a deficit falls and almost no one reports it?"

A MODEST CIVIL RIGHTS VICTORY in the Georgia legislature. Will Gov. Sonny Perdue stand in its way?

IRAN IN IRAQ: Smoking guns.

This has been obvious for a long time anyway, and I don't understand why the Bush Administration has been so slow to respond. Nor do I think that high-profile diplomacy, or an invasion, is an appropriate response. We should be responding quietly, killing radical mullahs and Iranian atomic scientists, supporting the simmering insurgencies within Iran, putting the mullahs' expat business interests out of business, etc. Basically, stepping on the Iranians' toes hard enough to make them reconsider their not-so-covert war against us in Iraq. And we should have been doing this since the summer 2003. But as far as I can tell, we've done nothing along these lines.

UPDATE: More thoughts from Hugh Hewitt.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Haig Hovaness emails (most personal insults deleted):

What is wrong with you? How can you not grasp that what you are advocating is a mirror-image of the savagery of those who attacked us on 9/11? You don't seem to know what civilization means. Civilization is not a big TV and lots of disposable income, nor is it a tenured position and a fast Internet connection. Civilization is founded on ethical conduct. The barbaric conduct you are advocating is despicable, and, if carried out, will reap a whirlwind of disastrous consequences for America.

Actually, I was trying to suggest something well short of massive air strikes, invasion, or giving them the full Atrios treatment. Nor do I think that targeting actual wrongdoers is the same as the 9/11 attacks. But if civilization will not allow itself to respond to the barbarians who are making war on it -- complete with a nuclear weapons program that violates the "international law" usually invoked with such vigor where U.S. actions are concerned, and the fomentation of widespread murder throughout the region -- then civilization will not persist, and barbarism will flourish. Mr. Hovaness will be happy to know, however, that the Bush Administration seems to share his views, as it has done essentially nothing in response to Iranian depredations for nearly four years. I suspect that we will come to regret that limp response, but I hope that Mr. Hovaness is right, and sweet reason will prevail throughout the region despite U.S. inaction.

I note, however, the complete absence of moral outrage aimed at the Iranian mullahocracy.

ANOTHER UPDATE: More thoughts on "soft war" against Iran: "There are many ways to bring Iran to account for their war-making inside of Iraq, and perhaps the most effective options may not require direct military involvement."

MORE: Reader Terrye Huygentober thinks I'm unfair to Bush: "Just because you do not know what the Bush administration is doing in regards to the Iranians, does not mean they are doing nothing. A few days ago the NYT accused Bush of bullying Iran and so far the Democrats do not seem inclined to even consider evidence of Iranian involvement in Iran. Things are not as black and white as you imply. However, I do agree that there are ways of dealing with Iran that do not include outright invasion." I wish I believed that there was a cunning plan in operation.

Meanwhile, outrage on behalf of Iran is analyzed here. And some of those who are outraged say it's terrible to attack "religious figures and scientists." But wait -- wasn't the left calling American bomb builders "mass murderers?" And the mullahs hardly deserve immunity for their actions because those actions are cloaked in religion. Certainly few on the left would extend such immunity to Christian religious figures who acted in the same fashion. But to be clear, I think it's perfectly fine to kill people who are working on atomic bombs for countries -- like Iran -- that have already said that they want to use those bombs against America and its allies, and I think that those who feel otherwise are idiots, and in absolutely no position to strike moral poses. We may wind up doing so via airstrikes, but it would be better to do it in a more selective manner.

MORE: A reader points out that my suggestion is actually milder than this Democratic policy document on Iran from 2006, which provides:

Carrots are not enough:

* Iran should be concerned that it has no realistic possibility of making its enrichment and reprocessing facilities operational.

* Accordingly, Iran should understand the existential threat of a military response under some conditions.

"Existential threat" means regime change, basically, and war. What I describe is well short of war -- a better-targeted version of Clinton's cruise-missile strikes against suspected WMD factories and terrorist leaders, which nobody complained about much, plus some squeezing intended to get the existing regime to change its policy. But the Democrats of 2006 are apparently too warlike for some people in the spring of 2007.

STILL MORE: Don Surber rounds up the options and doesn't like my suggestion above: "Supporting insurgents is a long-established weapon in the U.S. diplomatic arsenal, but Frank Church killed assassinations. I always had the creepy feeling that JFK’s death was bad karma." Instead, he makes a different recommendation:

Cutting a deal with Iran makes sense. Iran does need electricity and could use a nuke power plant or five. Hey, we could use the nuke-building business, right? Put some of that Iran oil money in US pockets. And why the hell do we still embargo Iranian oil?

We could agree to buy oil at $40 a barrel and to set up a half-dozen nuke plants in exchange for Iran playing nice and helping to rebuild Iraq. That might piss off the House of Saud, but so what? Those are the bozos who gave us Osama bin Laden.

Well, that's thinking out of the box. If I thought we could trust them to keep the deal, I might be for it. But I don't. Do you?

MORE STILL: Looking at Memeorandum, I notice that many of the lefty websites are unhappy with this post, though their outrage seems a bit forced, and somewhat disconnected from the actual substance of the post. I just wish they could get as exercised about people who want to kill Americans in wholesale lots as they do about my blogging. That wish seems unlikely to be fulfilled, though. But then, they're not the only ones whose thinking on this subject seems rather confused.

And Major John Tammes emails:

Sir,

I agree with your stance on the Iranians. I am a bit startled that people could be so shocked (shocked!) that those that have publicly declared their intentions to kill or covert us all would actually have violence used against them!

I suppose its still OK to them if it is an Iranian IED or sniper rifle being used against one of my fellow soldiers, however...

Yeah, it seems to be.

Jeff Goldstein comments: "I don’t happen to agree with Reynolds on this. But that doesn’t mean I find the suggestion irrational or repugnant -- just, from a contemporary political standpoint, unworkable." But read the whole thing, as he has some choice -- and accurate -- things to say about Glenn Greenwald's analysis and Greenwald's -- typical -- misrepresentation of my positions. And this comment seems about right: "The problem is that any solution we propose will be the wrong solution to the progressives. Whatever war we support will be the wrong one. “No, we should have liberated Zimbabwe...” (or Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia) will often come from the same people who complained about the international legality of our resumption of hostilities with Iraq, either without seeing the contradiction or ignoring it in their quest for further arguments. Then they’ll suggest the miraculous special forces should do the job, until someone actually proposes the covert solution, at which point the moral objections rear their ugly heads. Sanctions are good, until someone puts starving children on TV, then they’re bad." It's wrong to do anything. Except apologize for existing.

Rick Moran reluctantly concludes that assassinating mullahs and atomic bomb builders is too hard.

HOW MANY LAW PROFESSORS MAKE $330K? Not enough. Well, I'd like to see that number increased by one, anyway. . . .

DANIEL DREZNER on diplomacy in the Middle East.

VIRGINIA POSTREL: "It shouldn't be any more offensive to say some people are more beautiful than others than to say that some people are taller, or smarter, or more agile than others. The genetic lottery isn't fair, and the truly beautiful are genetic freaks."

MICKEY KAUS: Yglesias 1, Hillary 0: It's harder to fool bloggers than Iowans: "Is Hillary Clinton's campaign really trying to pretend, through vigorous Webbery, that she didn't support the war? That's what Matt Yglesias claims.** If true, that's a bit different than simply stubbornly refusing to apologize for your support; it's trying to deny that you have anything to refuse to apologize for! And it's kind of pathetic."

JOHN TIERNEY HAS THOUGHTS on Richard Branson's climate prize. And in a discussion of what global warming theorists really say, he talks about the gulf stream.

February 12, 2007

A "GLOBAL COLDENING" prediction.

I'M VOTING FOR HOWARD:

Who would you prefer for President in 2008?
	Hillary Clinton
	John Edwards
	Rudy Giuliani
	John Howard
	John McCain
	Barack Obama
	Mitt Romney
pollcode.com free polls

Okay, not really. But . . . .

A DEAL WITH NORTH KOREA? But will they keep their word?

HAPPINESS IS A WARM GUN: No, really.

VACLAV KLAUS ON GLOBAL WARMING.

(Had my Vaclavs mixed up earlier. Fixed now.)

WELCOME TO THE SAUSAGE FACTORY: A look inside the Washington Post's Feith blunder.

UPDATE: More here.