KAY HYMOWITZ WONDERS WHY LIBERTARIANS are happy:

And yet, judging by their output in recent years, libertarians are in a fine mood–and not because they are in denial. However distant the country may be from their laissez-faire ideal, free-market principles now drive the American economy to a degree unimaginable a generation ago. Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who as a young economist sat at the knee of the libertarian guru Ayn Rand, presided in the 1990s over one of the most prosperous stretches in American history, with the support, no less, of a Democratic president. When the avowedly libertarian economist Milton Friedman died last November, he was lauded just about everywhere, and even given respectful treatment in places like the New York Review of Books.

Well, just look around — do you see anything that’s likely to revive faith in Big Government? I think, though, that Hymowitz misses something about libertarians’ cultural ideals: We can be conservative in our own lifestyles and childrearing (and many of the people she names are) without believing that it’s the government’s business to make everyone live that way. We can even think that traditional childrearing and marriage are generally a good thing without insisting on social mores that punish those who live differently. I don’t think that’s a “cultural contradiction” at all. It’s just a belief in letting people make up their own minds.

BILL ARDOLINO POSTS MORE PHOTOS FROM FALLUJAH: I like this caption: “Iraqi Policemen pose for a picture at the Nazaal Precinct. During my last visit, they hid from my camera to protect their families from being attacked. Now, with greater numbers and rising confidence, they ask me to take pictures.”

SOME USEFUL ADVICE ON THE WAR, for both Democrats and Republicans.

FALL SHAKEUP IN RUSSIA: Lots of news and analysis on Putin’s purge.

ARE AMERICANS LOSING TOUCH WITH HANDS-ON SKILLS? That’s the topic of my latest Popular Mechanics column. They’ve also got a list of 25 skills you should have.

BYE, BYE ABE: A look at politics in Japan.

BOB OWENS: “At this point in the Scott Beauchamp/The New Republic scandal, only two questions really matter.”

NOT VERY JUDICIOUS: “Immigrant: Judge told me to go home.”

HIGHER EDUCATION IN AMERICA: I’m Okay, You’re Not Okay.

OKAY, THIS IS JUST WEIRD: Hiring and firing Erwin Chemerinsky in one week? Because it turns out he’s too liberal? First of all, who doesn’t know about Erwin’s politics? Certainly anybody who managed to hire him without knowing his political leanings would have to have been grossly negligent in their evaluation. Second, he’s a nice, fair guy regardless of his politics — which aren’t that liberal by law school standards — and which just shouldn’t matter anyway. Perhaps there’s more to this story than we’re hearing, though I’m not sure what it could be, but it makes absolutely no sense as reported. Anyway, I have to agree with Brian Leiter that this is going to make it very hard for them to recruit anyone of comparable stature for the position now.

ROD DREHER REPORTS on a terror trial that’s not getting much coverage.

FRANK J. explains the war on terror.

IN THE MAIL: Joe Haldeman’s new book, The Accidental Time Machine. I actually started it last night, and so far it’s good.

ANN ALTHOUSE: Is Fred a fizzle? He’s had a lot of time to put together a well-oiled machine, and from what I can see he hasn’t done so. Since putting together an effective team is a major part of being a successful President, I think that’s a bad sign. My own take is that Thompson makes a good ticket-balancer for Giuliani, and that his campaign is good enough to get him there, but probably not good enough to get him to the White House. I forget who it was I saw recently who noted that Thompson has always been a supporting actor, but that fits, too.

HUNTING AL QAEDA: A new dispatch from Michael Yon.

THE NEW REPUBLIC: Pelosi’s failure: “In a press conference after a meeting with George W. Bush today, Democratic leaders talked tough about the Iraq war. But one aggressive reporter, who didn’t identify himself, asked Nancy Pelosi a quite pointed question: Given that it now appears likely that US troop levels will be roughly unchanged since she took power in January, hasn’t the Democratic Congress ‘been a failure’? Pelosi was understandably taken aback. But she didn’t have much to counter with.” I’m glad she’s failed, but the netroots may feel differently. It’s not like they’ve done much to live up to their other promises, either . . . .

ELBARADEI IS GETTING TOUCHY: A record of public failure will do that. But when the European Union thinks you need to show more backbone, well, you probably do . . . .

FALLUJAH FROM THE OTHER SIDE:

INDC: But what motivated al Qaeda to do that though? Why would they start killing those innocent people?

Leo: I think the major goal was chaos … to make big chaos. And everyone knows [that the radical mujahadeen] were pushed [into Iraq] from beyond the borders: Iran particularly, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait. Nobody wants Iraq to stabilize, to be a good country and a democratic country, because democracy will affect them, and they are dictatorships. There is a prince in Kuwait, there is a King in Arabia, there is what everyone calls a republic, but it’s not a republic, it’s a kingdom in Jordan. And Iran, Iran wants to take over the whole area, if possible. So they see an opportunity to take over Iraq, and they take it. That’s what everyone thinks, just like what I’ve said.

INDC: One thing I’m curious about is, what do the Fallujans think of the Marines as fighters? Do they respect them, hate them, fear them? I know that your culture is very proud and tough. You fight. What do they think of the Marines?

Leo: You know, al Qaeda and other mujahadeen say that the Americans are not tough, they are just cartoon soldiers, just like characters in cartoon films, but most of the people see the fact that they are tough people. And they are so patient. And they can fight outside of their country overseas, and I don’t think al Qaeda or someone else can fight like Marines, overseas and so distant from home.

Read the whole thing.

CANADIAN PRIME MINISTER STEPHEN HARPER gets it wrong. But I think that Jules Crittenden is too hard on him. The overall speech wasn’t that bad.

LAUNDRY LIBERTARIANISM. Count me in.

RADLEY BALKO REPORTS ON bizarre events in Manassas Park.

RECOMMENDED TO ME BY AMAZON: A book on How People Blogging Are Changing the World And How You Can Join Them. I just might give it a try!

NOT ANTIWAR, just on the other side: “Disturbed anti-war protester can’t find soldier, kills civilian with axe instead.”

UPDATE: Brendan Loy thinks I’m wrong to use the “other side” comparison. But I’d absolutely do his pro-life sniper post counterexample, too. So maybe I’m just mean to deranged ideological killers.

TANGLED HSU STRINGS. Nice pun. But they bring back that damn -gate suffix: “HsuGate is a flashback to the scandals of Clinton’s husband — John Huang and the Buddhist temple; Johnny Chung transferring cash for a Red Chinese military officer, including $50,000 delivered directly to the then-first lady’s chief of staff; Charlie Trie, who was cozy with a front firm for the Chinese military.” Suffix or not, they’re right about that.

NORMAN HSU OUT, Sandy Berger in? “Why do I find the report that Hillary Clinton is using Sandy Berger as one of her key foreign policy advisors so unnerving? Because it shows both poor judgment and a lack of regard for Berger’s legal and ethical breaches. I also find it quite surprising. Hillary Clinton has impressed me as a Senator and as a candidate. Whatever her other faults, she is intelligent, savvy, disciplined, and determined; by far the most impressive candidate in the Democratic field. All this makes her apparent inclusion of Berger in her foreign policy ‘triumvirate’ all the more difficult to fathom.”

Maybe she owed him a favor. On the other hand, the loss of Hsu seems to have driven Hillary to truly desperate measures.