Archive for 2015

VANITY FAIR SUCKS UP TO CHELSEA CLINTON:

Two and a half years ago she put her name alongside those of her parents at their foundation, which has raised some $2 billion since its inception and is now called the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation.

This was no vanity move. Those who work with her at the foundation attest to her almost daunting intelligence, her diligence, and her genuine dedication to the job. . . .

Except among members of right-wing media, the idea of making Chelsea Clinton uncomfortable feels wrong. Our national instinct is to protect and revere her—to treat her more like royal progeny than an adult who has taken on a position of global consequence. The coddling is not simply because she’s the daughter of two political superstars who are loved and feared and protected by their own omertà—although that’s certainly part of it. It’s also because we witnessed the public humiliation she went through as a teenager by virtue of being President Clinton’s daughter, and because, in spite of all that, she appears to have emerged as a decent, serious young woman. The resilience was moving. As Anne Hubert, a friend from Stanford and now a Viacom executive, puts it, “People are rooting for Chelsea. They want her to be doing well.”

Ew. Best take: “This reads like propaganda about the love all Soviet people feel for Konstantin Chernenko.”

Even Glenn Greenwald is nauseated.

Plus: “Yikes. What’s missing is the skeptical, hard-edged tone last seen in the Vogue profile of the Assads.”

SAN FRANCISCO LAMP POST, CORRODED BY URINE, NEARLY KILLS MOTORIST: “For all their talk about environmentalism, sustainability and stewardship, why are liberal cities so filthy?”

ON HIROSHIMA DAY, “Thank God for the Atom Bomb.” Those were my grandfather’s sentiments, after he fought across Europe only to be put on a ship for the Pacific, to probably die invading Japan. But I suspect Paul Fussell expresses them more eloquently than he could have. This was originally published in 1981, though this is a somewhat revised edition.

WELL, GOOD: Navy: No charges against officer for weapons violations in Chattanooga attack. “Lt. Cmdr. Tim White, the Navy officer who fired a sidearm in defense during the attack on Navy Operational Support Center in Chattanooga, Tenn., will not face charges, an official familiar with the investigation told Stars and Stripes on Wednesday. White was reported to be one of two servicemembers carrying sidearms at the time of the attack, which could have led to charges. The Department of Defense prohibits all military personnel other than security forces from carrying arms while on base unless they are in a combat zone.”

Now change the stupid policy.

BECAUSE “DEATH TO AMERICA” IS JUST HYPERBOLE: Iranian-born Sohrab Amari writes in Commentary about “The 36-year project to whitewash Iran.”

The metamorphosis of Iran, in elite American opinion, from terrorist state into U.S. partner is a long-brewing triumph for a certain set of ideas about the Islamic Republic and its relation to the nation it has called the “Great Satan” since its birth. Over time, the argument has been advanced by journalists, academics, Washington lobbies, and government officials. Its basic purpose has always been to sell the Iranian regime as moderate, amenable to reason, even decent and democratic, relative to its neighbors. The various arms of this campaign didn’t always work in concert. It wasn’t always a conscious effort. Frequently, it was advanced by well-intentioned but credulous journalists. The rebranding campaign was not a dark conspiracy; it was, for the most part, carried out openly. Nor, finally, did it always progress smoothly, but rather in fits and starts, with numerous setbacks along the way.

Nevertheless, Iran’s American apologists have now scored an unprecedented coup: making the U.S. friendly toward a regime whose motto is “Death to America.” . . .

But hey, I’m sure the whole “death to America” and “Great Satan” thing is just hyperbole. They’re really just a bunch of peace loving moderates who want to live in peace and embrace western values of democracy and equality, right?

Besides, as Obama said today, “The choice we face is ultimately between diplomacy or some form of war. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not three months from now, but soon.”  So in Obama’s worldview, the choice is between: (1) near-term, conventional war with Iran; or (2) kicking the can down the road (until after Obama leaves office), and accepting the possibility of Iranian nuclear aggression against Israel or the U.S.

The fact that President Obama cannot even envision a middle ground between these two extremes–such as the possibility that continued or enhanced sanctions could leverage greater limitations on Iran’s nuclear program or even create pressure for meaningful, democratic regime change–is what strikes me as most disturbing. A president who sees major foreign policy issues in such stark “you’re either with me, or you’re a war monger” terms is a dangerous, divisive leader.

In President Obama’s narcissistic quest to achieve a legacy of “diplomacy” with America’s enemies abroad, he is remarkably incapable of evincing any diplomacy at all domestically, with fellow Americans who dare to criticize him.

A RIFLE BEHIND EVERY BLADE OF GRASS: Slate: What Would Have Happened if Germany Had Invaded the U.S. During World War II? “In addition, everybody had guns. One commonality among the nations conquered by Germany is that private firearms ownership was heavily restricted or simply banned. With no such restrictions here and given the fact that modern combined arms tactics were still in their infancy, it’s difficult to see how the Germans would have avoided taking heavy casualties. The Germans would have faced an armed force at least 10 times the size of their invasion force, who were also motivated to ensure that they (the Germans) would lose.” Entirely true, but interesting to read that in Slate.

On a related note, I thought Newt Gingrich & William Forstchen’s 1945, which involved a less ambitious German effort, was moderately amusing, especially as most of the action took place within a dozen miles of my house.

QUOTE OF THE DAY:

“It is one thing to have free immigration to jobs. It is another thing to have free immigration to welfare. And you cannot have both. If you have a welfare state, if you have a state in which every resident is promised a certain minimal level of income, or a minimum level of subsistence, regardless of whether he works or not, produces it or not. Then it really is an impossible thing.”

Milton Friedman.

BOOZE IN SPAAAAAAACE! “This month, Suntory will be loading up the Kounotori 5 transfer vehicle — due to launch from Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency’s Tanegashima Space Center on August 16 — with five kinds of whisky (along with 40% ethanol) to mature for a few years on the International Space Station.”

Probably best to start stockpiling reserves in earth orbit, given how Obama’s “negotiations” with Iran are going…

THE CARS OF 1960 EXPLAIN WHY YOUR GRANDPARENTS DRIVE DIFFERENTLY: OK, I get why they were underpowered. But take a look at the dull-as-dishwater 1960 Ford Falcon atop this new Popular Mechanics post. What explains Detroit’s awful styling lacuna in the early 1960s – the era of Rat Pack swank and JFK’s optimistic New Frontier – coming after the gorgeous giant tailfins of the late ’50s and before the exuberant muscle cars of the late ‘60s?