Archive for 2005

THE NEW YORK TIMES’ PUBLIC EDITOR is unhappy with Paul Krugman and Gail Collins:

An Op-Ed columnist for The New York Times who makes an error “is expected to promptly correct it in the column.” That’s the established policy of Gail Collins, editor of the editorial page. Her written policy encourages “a uniform approach, with the correction made at the bottom of the piece.”

Two weeks have passed since my previous post spelled out the errors made by columnist Paul Krugman in writing about news media recounts of the 2000 Florida vote for president. Mr. Krugman still hasn’t been required to comply with the policy by publishing a formal correction. Ms. Collins hasn’t offered any explanation.

Read the whole thing.

THIS PASSAGE FROM BUSH’S SPEECH worries me a bit:

Yet the system at every level of government, was not well coordinated and was overwhelmed in the first few days. It is now clear that a challenge on this scale requires greater federal authority and a broader role for the armed forces — the institution of our government most capable of massive logistical operations on a moment’s notice.

He’s talking about logistics here, but it’s not clear that’s all he’s talking about. I’d certainly oppose a repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act. And those interested in getting the military more involved in law enforcement should read this cautionary tale from an earlier disaster.

UPDATE: Donald Sensing has similar concerns, which he outlines in a long and thoughtful post.

NEWSDAY’S LOU DOLINAR writes on what went right with Katrina response.

SINGULARITY WATCH: “If nanotechnology maintains its current pace of development, it will give birth to a computer that has the information processing capacity equivalent to every human brain combined by 2060.”

DAVE KOPEL shares my concerns regarding Roberts’ views on the commerce clause.

FUNDING KATRINA RELIEF: Bush seems to be shoveling out the cash, which has led some people to suggest cutbacks elsewhere — though curiously the press mostly seems to mention Iraq. Here’s an InstaPundit poll on the question that explores some other alternatives. Express yourselves!


Where should we cut spending to finance Katrina relief?
Farm subsidies
Federal support for public broadcasting
The DARE program
Congressional travel and staff allowances
All of the above

MEDIENKRITIK reports on the German elections.

STEM CELL UPDATE: The Lancet reports:

French researchers have used embryonic stem cells from mice to repair heart damage in sheep. Claudine Ménard and colleagues report that embryonic stem cells from mice could be successfully transplanted into larger mammals to regenerate damaged heart cells. This strengthens the possibility that embryonic stem cells could one day be used to repair heart cells in humans.

Let’s hope.

LAURA BUSH told Popular Mechanics today that she supports rebuilding New Orleans, though PM readers oppose it by a rather hefty margin, according to their online poll. It’s unscientific, of course, but this real poll isn’t very supportive. Are there any scientific polls that suggest widespread support for rebuilding?

Ian Schwartz, meanwhile, has video of Bush’s speech, here’s a CNN transcript, and Lorie Byrd notes that ABC was unprepared for the reaction of evacuees. More on that here (and here, and here) — but he’s no relation.

Matt Welch liked Bush’s speech, which is surely news, though I would have preferred the Welch-edited version myself. Michelle Malkin didn’t like it as much as Matt did.

UPDATE: Ian Schwartz has the priceless ABC interview video online now. Don’t miss it.

ANOTHER UPDATE: More video, and a transcript, here. Don’t miss it — though in fairness I don’t think that Dean Reynolds’ (no relation) tone is as anti-Bush as some people in the ABC discussion forums thought. There’s no question, though, that the interviewees shot down the standard Big Media line on Katrina relief.

Matt Duffy, meanwhile, compares ABC’s live coverage with NPR’s edited product.

I EXPRESS MY SKEPTICISM regarding the New York Times’ new TimesSelect program.

On the other hand, if I’m wrong, and people really are willing to pay through the nose to read blathering opinions on the Internet, well . . . I might be okay with that, too!

PEOPLE HAVE BEEN LOOKING FOR THE DAMNING ROBERTS QUOTE, and I’ve found it:

SCHUMER: OK. Let me ask you, then, this hypothetical: And that is that it came to our attention, Congress’, through a relatively and inexpensive, simple process, individuals were now able to clone certain species of animals, maybe an arroyo toad. Didn’t pass over state lines; you could somehow do it without doing any of that. Under the commerce clause, can Congress pass a law banning even noncommercial cloning?

ROBERTS: I appreciate it’s a hypothetical, and you will as well, so I don’t mean to be giving bindings opinions. But it would seem to me that Congress can make a determination that this is an activity, if allowed to be pursued, that is going to have effects on interstate commerce. Obviously if you were successful in cloning an animal, that’s not going to be simply a local phenomenon. That’s going to be something people are going to…

SCHUMER: We can leave it at that. That’s a good answer, as far as I am concerned.

Under this analysis, everything is subject to regulation under the commerce power. That it’s a good answer as far as Schumer is concerned doesn’t surprise me, but that it’s the answer of a Bush nominee to the Supreme Court is damning, if not terribly surprising — for the Bush Administration. Fair-weather Federalism, indeed. More here.

What’s more, it seems that he’s answered my question number five in the affirmative.

UPDATE: Reader Martin Albright asks if this means that I disagree with Wickard v. Filburn. Possibly — but Wickard stands for the proposition that instances of economic activity that impacts a scheme of pervasive economic regulation can be aggregated to find an impact on interstate commerce sufficient to justify Congressional regulation. Roberts seems to be saying that anything can be aggregated to find an impact on interstate commerce, and that Congress can even nip it in the bud by outlawing it in advance to ensure that there never will be such an impact. This seems rather extreme to me, perhaps even going beyond Raich.

In fact, it seems as if Roberts is endorsing the Schumer view of the commerce power that Jonathan Adler was deriding just the other day over at NRO’s “Bench Memos” site. Perhaps Roberts misspoke, but he’s not really the misspeaking type, is he?

MORE: Hugh Hewitt says not to worry, but I am uncomforted.

MORE STILL: I remain uncomforted by this discussion.

ERIK JAFFE: “I am struck, watching the hearings, at the complete disconnect between the criticisms of many of those opposing Judge Roberts and a cogent view of the role of the courts. It seems that many of the criticisms are policy based — x or y rulings would lead to bad RESULTS — and make no reference whatsoever regarding whether such results are in fact the correct interpretation of the law (or the Constitution). . . . It is particularly ironic to hear the demands of Senators (most notably Specter) that they not be treated like children when they seem so intent on acting like children. ”

IT SMELLS BAD, BUT HERE ARE FEWER DEAD PEOPLE THAN WE EXPECTED: That’s the gist of this post-Katrina report:

Floodwaters recede from the city’s hard-hit east side, revealing neighborhoods covered in slimy, putrid muck and dotted with ruined cars and collapsed houses.

_ The body count in Louisiana climbs to 474, and it’s expected to rise further as state and federal officials go about the tedious task of collecting bodies and identifying them through DNA tests. The total death toll in five states reaches 710.

_ Mayor Ray C. Nagin says the tourist-friendly French Quarter and central business district may reopen as early as Monday after the Environmental Protection Agency said the foul-smelling air in the city was not overly polluted.

_ Nagin expects about 180,000 people to return to the city within a week or two, when power and sewer systems are restored.

Overall, it seems that things aren’t as bad as we feared, and the recovery is proceeding faster than we thought.

A WHILE BACK, I mentioned the idiocy of FEMA requiring firefighters to take sexual harassment training before being sent to New Orleans. Now John Derbyshire has what appears to be the curriculum for FEMA volunteer training. Whatever you think of this in the abstract, it seems awfully dumb to be putting people through this stuff when there’s an actual, ongoing disaster.

UPDATE: Reader Don Fleming emails: “Is there a firefighter who has been on the job longer than a month anywhere in this country who hasn’t already had the diversity training?” Seems unlikely to me.

Derbyshire’s curriculum is satire. Sadly, I had to read it twice to be sure.

ANOTHER UPDATE: A reader who requests anonymity says that it’s not that much of a satire:

Sadly John Derbyshire isn’t far wrong. It’s called “Cultural Awareness” and is required before you can deploy. Anyone that wants to deploy in any FEMA team has to take required training BEFORE becoming “deployable”. USAR, DMAT, DMORT, VMAT, it doesn’t matter. Cultural awareness is only one module. Sadly, most of the training is a waste of time. For example, doctors have to take basic classes in first aid.

Some of the training is helpful, such as how to set up equipment, but it makes more sense to do this in field training exercises than in on line sessions.

If you chose to mention this, please don’t attribute it to me.

I think that we could skip the sexual harassment stuff when there’s an actual disaster underway.

THE TAMPA TRIBUNE is running a new “Voices From the Front” section, where they get views from serving soldiers. I think it’s a great idea. Installments can be found here and here.

Read ’em both, because they have a different take on things than the usual media talking-heads. Congratulations to the Tampa Tribune for adding some diversity to its coverage.