"This was the voice of moderation until 13 Sept, 2025"
by publius I just watched Juno and heartily recommend it to one and all. Ross Douthat has also seen it, and waxes abortionistic: And while Juno may not be moved by thoughts of her embryo’s “hallowed rights,” exactly, she certainly seems to be moved by the unremitting grossness of the abortion clinic . . . … Read more
by publius I’m far … far … from an expert on Pakistan. But, color me skeptical of the initial attempts to blame the Taliban or (according to Pakistan) al Qaeda-affiliated militants. It may all be proven true, but it sure smells like military elements played a role too. Admittedly, I’m conjecturing, but hear me out. … Read more
by publius Bhutto assassinated. More to come.
by publius On the one hand, I’d like to read the book because I don’t want to miss out on all the fun. (In all seriousness, I think books like these are juvenile, and call out for ridicule. Indeed, humiliation is probably the most effective way to prevent embarrassments like this from being written in … Read more
by G’Kar I hate to ask for money, but I am willing to make an exception for particularly good causes. And I think that Pretty Bird Woman House, a women’s shelter on the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, qualifies. Some fine example of humanity burned down the shelter, and they need some $70,000 to buy a … Read more
by publius
I’ve been torn on whether – and how – to respond to Bruce Bartlett’s op-ed, which previews his book on racism and the Democratic Party. Some of his sentences are so blatantly disingenuous that it’s clear he’s fishing for outrage. (See, e.g., “[I]f a single mention of states’ rights 27 years ago is sufficient to damn the Republican Party for racism ever afterwards . . .”). What’s maddening is that he – Coulter-esquely – wants me to be outraged so that he can sell more books.
Maybe I’m playing the fool, but his argument requires a response because it’s outrageous and deeply, callously offensive. Smiling at those words, eh Brucey? It’s actually offensive on two levels – one obvious way and one way that is less obvious but more insidious.
First, to the extent that Bartlett is attempting to make a logical argument (personally, I don’t think logic is the goal) Yglesias pretty much rips the argument to shreds here and here. As Bartlett surely knows, the American political parties – while keeping the same labels – have shifted dramatically over the past 200 years. As every seventh-grade American history student knows, the white supremacist coalition (largely but by no means exclusively Southern) voted Democratic until the civil rights era when it moved to the GOP with helpful nudges from Goldwater, Nixon and Reagan.
It would be great of course if Bartlett were sincerely concerned about America’s historical racial legacy. But he’s not. That’s not the point of his book. The point is to win modern political points for the GOP and smear the Democrats. If he can get the question aired, he largely wins. (Chris Matthews: Tonight’s panel will discuss if the Democrats are racist. Joining us are …”
The first level of outrage here is that he’s smearing the modern Democratic Party for the actions of the same racist white supremacists that the party institutionally repudiated in the civil rights era (at great political cost). During this same time period, Bartlett’s own party – whose rank-and-file are largely non-racist – institutionally adopted this grotesque bloc of Bull Connor voters. Since then, at the institutional level, the GOP has intentionally fanned racial flames through opposition and/or indifference to civil rights legislation, through inflammatory code words, and through turning a blind eye to institutional actions by the GOP in southern states (e.g., Georgia Confederate flag controversy).
Admittedly, the Democratic Party is guilty of taking the black vote for granted. And they are also guilty of not pushing as hard as they could for fear of white backlash. But that said, they’ve been the only ones who have even been trying for the past 40 years. The Democrats are the ones fighting for the programs and laws that disproportionately help poor and urban African-Americans. The Democrats are the ones fighting against race-based voter disenfranchisement efforts (e.g., “voter ID”). The Democrats the ones fighting against judges who are hostile to civil rights achievements.
The parties’ record on race over the past 40 years illustrates all too clearly just how dishonest Bartlett is being. That’s bad, but it’s not the worst part. The more outrageous part of Bartlett’s argument is not the dishonesty, but the callous indifference to historical discrimination. He treats the whole thing like a chess pawn in a silly DC talk show game.
by G’Kar
Does the intent of those who create a law effect the constitutionality of that law? As always, below the fold to minimize the disruption of the front page.
by publius Ho Ho Ho. If you’re dying to send any of us a Christmas present (preferably an iPhone), just shoot us an email and we’ll send you an address. Merry Christmas everyone.
by publius More on this to come post-Christmas, but Bruce Bartlett’s op-ed (and book) is the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen. Looks like Yglesias has it covered, but this argument is just stunningly disingenuous. Textbook “School of Rove” — dishonestly accuse your political opponent of one’s own serious flaws. Ugh, to sit back and benefit … Read more
by G’Kar
A few thoughts on an interesting piece in the Washington Post, below the fold for those who prefer to skip on past.
If you are still getting problems with the spam filter, let me know. I’ve been trying to work with Typepad about it, and they assure me that it is doing better. Otherwise, open Christmastime thread.
by G’Kar
Inspired by some recent reading, both here and elsewhere, I wanted to address some matters military. Since this post is somewhat meandering and since I’m just a guest here, I’ll put the post below the fold so readers can skip past to the more important stuff.
by publius Looking back at Year One of Reid/Pelosi, I realize that my view of the Democratic leadership has been schizophrenic. On some days, I prefer a Kossian pitchfork. On other days, I sympathize with the formidable challenges of dealing with vulnerable members and legislative minorities with veto power. In this sense, I embody the … Read more
by hilzoy The Army’s unwillingness to accept openly gay soldiers has always struck me as not just bigoted, but incredibly dumb. Placing heterosexism ahead of national security looks even dumber than ever at a time when the Army is having a lot of trouble recruiting and retaining people. But it’s not just gays the Army … Read more
by hilzoy We hear a lot about how the war in Iraq is “breaking the Army.” But while I have used that metaphor, I’ve never been comfortable with it. It’s not as though one day we will hear a loud snap and find the Army broken in two. We will not get up one morning, … Read more
by publius If Mickey Kaus wants to use Slate — a professional, well-regarded political “magazine” — to parrot the National Enquirer’s “story” on John Edwards, shouldn’t Slate fire him if this story turns out to be wrong? I mean, if a reporter from Kaus’s hated NYT ran with something like this, he or she would … Read more
by publius Posts like this reinforce my growing view that Edwards is in a much stronger position in Iowa than the polls show. Specifically, Edwards benefits from the 15% threshold in a couple of ways: (1) he’s the most popular “second” choice; (2) his rural organization makes it less likely that he’ll come in under … Read more
by publius I’m still catching up on the news, but I have a few quick thoughts on the rise of Huckabee (and the fascinating conservative backlash – see Steve Benen for a roundup). First, regardless of what you think of Huckabee’s over-the-top religiosity, it’s shrewd politics. The knock against Huckabee has been that he lacks … Read more
by publius I’m almost finished grading finals, so posting should be more regular soon. But in the meantime, political junkies might enjoy this Hardball debate among the three big-shot Democratic campaign managers — Axelrod (Obama), Penn (Clinton), and Trippi (Edwards). (Via Politico). A few notes here — first, Mark Penn really shouldn’t be on TV. … Read more
by hilzoy Megan McArdle thinks that liberal bloggers need to acknowledge the good news coming out of Iraq: “Lately, however, the anti-war side is beginning to sound a lot like the boosters they were so angry at. This is the particular example that caught my eye, but there is an increasingly rich body of blog … Read more
by hilzoy From the NYT, h/t Gary: “Steadily lengthening delays in the resolution of Social Security disability claims have left hundreds of thousands of people in a kind of purgatory, now waiting as long as three years for a decision. Two-thirds of those who appeal an initial rejection eventually win their cases. But in the … Read more
by publius Hillary Clinton apparently joined the Politico staff this week, writing a longish (for the Politico) piece attacking Obama as – wait for it – too liberal. This devastating, devastating piece is based on a single questionnaire provided to a random voter group in Illinois in 1996 (the famous “Independent Voters of Illinois — … Read more
by hilzoy Hi, and sorry for my absence. It has been an interesting fall, and about — two weeks ago? — I just let blogging slip away, what with one thing and another. It’s nothing drastic, just a lot of things piling up on top of one another, and my not realizing how long it … Read more
by publius YODA No more training do you require. Already know you that which you need. LUKE Then I am a Jedi. YODA Ohhh. Not yet. One thing remains: Vader. You must confront Vader. Then, only then, a Jedi will you be. The Dems’ latest unwillingness to fight on Iraq funding is hardly surprising. In … Read more
by Charles
[Upate at the end.]
There are clearer signs that Iraq is becoming less violent, perhaps sustainably so. Civilian casualties are one measure for gauging the success or failure of a counterinsurgency operation, and they have dropped for the third consecutive month.
(Hat tip to Engram for the graphs.) The three-month moving average shows a similar trend.
The source for the above is the Iraq Coalition Casualty Count, which takes its data from independent media reports. Al Qaeda will still get away with spectacular suicide bombings, but the above doesn’t look like statistical noise to me. It’s a noticeable trend, and it doesn’t take the willing suspension of disbelief to see it. For one thing, al Qaeda is losing its gambit. Here’s what Strategypage says:
Al Qaeda appears to be moving its main effort to Afghanistan, after operations in Iraq, North Africa, Somalia and Europe (not to mention North America) have all largely failed. But continued Taliban activity in Pakistan and Afghanistan has provided al Qaeda with one area where they might be able to have a little success. But that will require a change in methods. In the rest of the world, al Qaeda has caused itself lots of problems by using terror tactics against Moslems (who refused to support the terrorists). This approach worked, for a while, but eventually the Moslem victims had enough and turned on al Qaeda. There have already been some clashes in Pakistan, between angry tribesmen, and al Qaeda groups that tried to use force to get what they wanted. To many of the Pushtun tribes along the Pakistani-Afghan frontier, the al Qaeda gunmen are seen as haughty foreigners, who look down on Pushtuns, and are quick to use force on anyone who gets in their way.
To take advantage of this, U.S. forces are talking to Afghan tribes about opposing al Qaeda, and letting the Americans help them do it. The news of what al Qaeda did in Iraq gets around, as does the eventual angry reaction of Iraqis. The U.S. is offering the potentially anti-al Qaeda tribes weapons, equipment and other aid. This might work, as the Afghan tribes are amenable to gifts, especially from someone they have shared interests with.
When 40 senior al Qaeda members are killed or captured in one month, it’s time to leave. Al Qaeda has irretrievably lost, in my opinion. For another, Muqtada al Sadr have made threatening noises, but he and his Mahdi militias are still on the sidelines. The violence on the Shiite side has lessened considerably, and Sunni insurgent groups are working with the coalition (for the most part). Looking ahead, it’s easy to foresee increased tensions between Sunni tribes as well as intraparty squabbles between Shiite groups (as well as lots of other squabbles), but for the last several months, there are few signs of a civil war, intractable or otherwise. In concert with fewer civilian casualties, U.S. troop casualties are also lower despite relatively high troop numbers and despite continuing kinetic operations and despite the fact that more soldiers are on the streets instead of parked in forward operating bases.
More below the fold…
by publius Steve Dunleavy, New York Post, 9/21/99 (no link): IT WON’T be hard to find Bill Clinton in New York today – just follow the traffic jams that his visits always produce. But don’t look for his conscience. For the past 14 years, you wouldn’t have been able to find it with AWAC radar … Read more
by publius In other signs of the apocalypse, watch as I quote Byron York on Huckabee and the NIE: After Kuhn explained the NIE’s findings to Huckabee, Huckabee seemed confused about what it meant. Beyond doing nothing to resolve doubts about his foreign policy qualifications, the exchange underscores the fact that Huckabee doesn’t really have … Read more
by publius Robert Kagan: Regardless of what one thinks about the National Intelligence Estimate’s conclusion that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003 — and there is much to question in the report — its practical effects are indisputable. The Bush administration cannot take military action against Iran during its remaining time in office … Read more
by publius There’s obviously a lot to say about what one hopes is the timely end of Cheney’s war with Iran. And when I get more time, I’ll say it. But first, a quick word on the great John Bolton. Given that the Post’s Peter Baker can’t seem to write a foreign affairs article without … Read more
by publius Just a heads up – it’s Pledge Week over at Gary Farber’s place. Pledge early and often.
by publius Today’s NYT contained a welcome article on how the GOP has transformed the filibuster into its primary legislative strategy. On balance, I think the filibuster is a bad idea (though I would keep it for lifetime judicial nominations). But that said, the filibuster is getting a bum rap these days in progressive circles. … Read more
by publius Karl Rove, Super Genius: Speaking on PBS’s “Charlie Rose” talk show last week, Rove said Congress pushed to have the vote before the election. “The administration was opposed to voting on it in the fall of 2002,” Rove said. Asked why, he said: “Because we didn’t think it belonged within the confines of … Read more
by publius It seems the Artist Formerly Known as YearlyKos will be in Austin next summer. Although “the man” apparently won’t let me have my own panel, consider this a save the date for an event “the man” doesn’t want you to see. An even more prestigious panel – currently consisting of myself and Eric … Read more