THE KIRSTEIN AFFAIR IS COVERED OVER AT HISTORY NEWS NETWORK.

There’s also a piece by Joyce Appleby on the Bush Administration’s “radical bellicosity.” The reader who sent the link says that it’s “ripe for a Fisking,” and a quick perusal suggests that he’s right. Unfortunately, I’m headed for a faculty meeting and don’t have time right now. (“I have a Fisking for that, but it is too long to include in the margin. . .”) So I’ll leave this as an exercise for the reader — though I can’t help noting that people who think the Administration’s policy has been radically bellicose have little appreciation of what a response based on actual radical bellicosity would look like. Contrast, say, what Curtis LeMay would have done, with the Bush Administration’s approach to get some idea of what I’m talking about.

UPDATE: Hmm. There seems to be some pretty good Fisking going on in the comments section at the bottom of Appleby’s piece. Here are a couple of my favorite excerpts:

I find it odd that Prof. Appleby, who I am sure thinks of herself as progressive, would use John Randolph of Roanoke to support her position.

—

I wish you were right. I would very much prefer a world in which America could simply turn inward and “set an example.” But choosing this option in the face of attacks already completed against us is choosing to submit to the will of our self-declared opponent.

Is Bush acting in a “radically bellicose” manner? Given our true capacity for mayhem, I’d say that he has acted with great restraint.

There’s more.

UPDATE: Geitner Simmons has discovered an Appleby / Bellesiles connection. Well, it’s not really so surprising.