THE CARNIVAL OF THE CAPITALISTS IS UP: And since I’ve been pretty lame about listing carnivals lately, be sure to visit BlogCarnival.com for more. And note the carnival highlights in the right sidebar, just above the blogroll.

TOMORROW IS the 10th anniversary of Flight 800.

IS NEWT GINGRICH CRITICIZING BUSH, or is he criticizing the left? Maybe both?

RICHARD EPSTEIN criticizes Presidential signing statements. While I think there’s some place for them — and, shockingly, as Epstein notes, they predate the Bush Administration — I think that reinterpreting laws via signing statements is wrong. Presidents should veto bills they object to, rather than signing them and trying to avoid their impact through signing statements.

Here’s an excerpt, which seems right to me:

President Bush dishonors traditions in his aggressive use of signing statements as one way among many to circumvent the congressional and judicial checks built into the Constitution.

My objection to signing statements does not apply just to the president. It includes efforts by members of Congress to skew statutory interpretation through the adroit use of legislative history. The risk in both situations is that the president or members of Congress essentially fudge the record to distort the meaning of laws.

Individual members of Congress don’t speak for an entire branch of government. The president, however, by virtue of his distinctive constitutional position, necessarily speaks for the branch that lies under his direct control. His message is often all too clear.

One way to counter the risk is to give these statements no more weight before a court or administrative agency than the same statement made by some third party in a law review article or editorial. Assuming that courts would do so, many people might wonder why signing statements are any big deal, if courts are free to disregard them.

He explains why. (Via Jonathan Adler, who rounds up some other comments).

A “MEGAMARCH” IN MEXICO demanding a recount.

AGAINST THE WAR, BUT FOR THE TROOPS: The Mudville Gazette reports that it can be done.

VARIFRANK HAS THOUGHTS ON AIRLINE PASSENGER ANGER:

It’s not engine failure or bad aircaft designs that kill passengers and flight crews on aircraft but “Gotta-get-there-itis”. This easily preventable disease is still the biggest killer of flight crews and passengers in the world, and it’s the passengers and the pressures they put on flight crews to “get there” that serve as one of the root causes to this horrible disease. . . .

I’d much rather be inconvenienced by a delay, than dead from a bad decision. For me what matters is safety above all. The emphasis for scheduling is up to me. If I’m flying on a tight schedule and the schedule doesnt work, its ok, most of the schedule is out of my control. If its within my control to change my schedule by flying with fewer stopovers or with bigger layover windows, or heaven forbid – early, I do it. If I dont have those options, well I take the chance that a simple delay could blow the whole trip. It does happen, but its not the worst thing in the world. This is the worst thing in the world. I missed this flight because I was stuck in a meeting that went long. One of my coworkers managed to catch it. He was interested in getting home for his kids first Halloween.

He didn’t make it.

Airlines can be infuriating, especially when the delays aren’t safety-related, or when they give you the runaround. But Frank’s got a good point.

DISCOVERY is scheduled to land tomorrow morning.

AT CHICAGOBOYZ: The double standards of the impotent. Complete with Robin Williams reference.

GETTING BETTER MILEAGE: A systematic approach.

HERE’S THE LATEST ROUNDUP on events in Lebanon, from Pajamas Media.

UPDATE: Some useful thoughts from The Belmont Club.

WON’T THIS JUST ENCOURAGE STUPID PEOPLE TO VOTE? A lottery for voters.

Wait ’til you get to the religious justification, though. I’m pretty sure it’s theologically unsound . . . .

STRATEGYPAGE:

While the death of Chechen terrorist leader Shamil Basayev on July 10th has received considerable attention, it’s also worth noting that perhaps as many as a dozen other people were killed with him. So far, no one in Russia has said anything officially about these people. There are, however, rumors that some of them were key players in the Chechen rebel movement. If that is so, their deaths, coupled with those of Basayev and of Abdul-Khalim Sadulayev, the rebel “president,” less than a month ago, may have fatally weakened the rebel movement. Basayev was also the leader of the “Islamic” faction of the Chechen rebel movement.

I hope this is right. The Chechens have gotten a raw deal from history, but Basayev deserved to die, and so did his movement.

FLIRTING WITH QUEEN NOOR: Understandable, if not wise.

DANG: I’m at the Mellow Mushroom finishing up a book review, and I nearly went to the Preservation Pub instead. Good thing I didn’t, though if I had I could have done some cool photojournalism like Randy Neal.

“COURAGE:” Plus, a defense of Dan Rather!

ERIC SCHEIE: “I’m still trying to figure out exactly who is supposed to be persuaded, and of what.”

UPDATE: This post explores a related phenomenon.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Heh. “A new form of McCarthyism” indeed. The really dumb form . . . .

I promise, however, not to tar all of Media Matters with its employee Oliver Willis’s endorsement of torture and rejection of the judicial process:

So there’s a story that two Al Qaeda members may have died under torture in Afghanistan. Alex says “the use of torture like this simply cannot stand”. I am honestly trying to see this as a bad thing, but its hard. These guys were members of the Al Qaeda network. They weren’t Joe Afghan Civilian who was the suspect of a crime, they were members of a terrorist network whose sole purpose on this planet is to kill as many of us as they can.

I hear the arguments for morality, and protests that because we’re Americans we just can’t do this – and while I think the logic may be sound, we spent too many days watching the powdered remains of people being removed from the WTC, incinerated bodies from the Pentagon, corpses from The Cole and the embassies in Kenya or the nightclub in Bali for me to give two seconds of thought into the fact that the last minutes of life for an Al Qaeda soldier may have been unpleasant.

Some believe that because I’m a liberal that my argument against war in Iraq and that our focus should be on Al Qaeda is just so much partisan bickering. But that’s not true. The world will be a better place when every member of the Al Qaeda network is dead. Not arrested and tried under some B.S. court, but dead.

After all, that was way back in 2003! (Oliver later “clarified” this, but his archives seem to have lost the torture posts, and the link in the Wayback Machine version is taking me to Amazon for some reason; maybe you’ll have better luck. But hey, I’m providing more context and fairness than some people . . . .)

YET ANOTHER LEBANON NEWS ROUNDUP, at Pajamas Media.

UPDATE: Austin Bay says Lebanon is one big human shield. Smash looks at possible evacuation plans in Beirut. And Aziz Poonawalla says that Israel and the Lebanese government should work together.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Norm Geras has an interesting roundup. Plus, Power Line has an email report from Joel Mowbray.

MORE: Opfor thinks that Israel is prepping the battlespace for a larger invasion.

JEEZ, the Middle East post is too depressing to finish the night with. So here’s a picture I took Friday at the Downtown Grill and Brewery.

A MIDDLE EAST PEACE PLAN THAT JUST MIGHT WORK:

Can we put the Romans in charge of that region again? Granted, they didn’t do much for the region, aside from roads, aqueducts, keeping the peace, and sanitation, but at least they united the factions against their common enemy: The Judean People’s Front.

I suppose some might see joking about such things as bad taste, but although Kevin Drum is getting hammered for it, I actually understand why he might want to throw up his hands on this subject. It’s not that I don’t care — I do — and it’s not that I don’t hope that things will work out well. I do. But beyond hoping (and “hope” is probably the operative word) that we’ll see a decisive end to Syrian/Iranian mischief-making in the region, I don’t have a lot to contribute.

But here’s a hopeful sign, anyway:

I can see pigs flying. The conference of Arab foreign ministers in Cairo are not, as usual, arguing over Israel, they’re discussing the legitimacy of Hezbollah. Saudi Arabia is leading the camp of ministers criticizing Hezbollah.

And I might as well hope, because it’s all I can do. One hopes, also, that those with more influence on the region are using it constructively.

UPDATE: A not-so-hopeful sign, in the form of a post from Michael Totten’s co-blogger, now a refugee heading to, yes, Syria.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Dan Riehl says I’m wrong to be depressed. On the other hand, this guy (who I haven’t read before) says I’m wrong to be hopeful. At least they agree that I’m wrong — I’m a uniter, not a divider . . . .

YET ANOTHER UPDATE: Egyptian blogger Sandmonkey sends this post to cheer me up. Thanks!

IT’S WEIRD: My earlier mentions of John Edwards (whose blog-boomlet continues!) have generated two types of email: “You bastard — of course as a lawyer you’d support an Evil Trial Lawyer,” and “You bastard — of course as a Rethuglican stooge you’d push another southern white boy.”

Yeah. I mean, I think I’d be okay about a ticket with Edwards and Warner on it, but how likely is it that two southerners from adjoining states could win the presidency for the Democrats? By even raising that point I’m some sort of Rovian stooge. And, worse, a lawyer!

[Well, aren’t you a lawyer? — Ed. I’m just on the side of justice!]

UPDATE: Several people email along these lines: “I suppose that someone has pointed this out to you already. But in 1992, two Dems from adjoining Southern states did win the presidency.”

Er, yes. I even voted for them, the first time.

GREG BURCH has thoughts on Marx and Muhammad.

A MODEST DIPLOMATIC SUCCESS: The U.N. has condemned North Korea. Austin Bay has further thoughts.

MICKEY KAUS:

I admit I doubted reading Lebanese and Israeli bloggers would be a very useful way to learn about the latest Mideast fighting. I mean, anyone with a modem can just spout off! But N.Z. Bear’s Topics Page turns out to be a highly efficient and engaging way to get the flavor and texture of the conflict. (Example: The advice of Big Pharoah’s dad.)

Yes, and between it and the Pajamas Media coverage, I get to take it easy and leave the heavy lifting to others. Which is a good thing, at the moment.

THE HISTORY CARNIVAL is up!