February 29, 2008
REFORMATION IS ANGLOCIZATION:
Ex-Islamists start moderate thinkthank (Owen Bowcott and Riazat Butt, March 1 2008, The Guardian)
The Quilliam Foundation believes Muslims should shake off the "cultural baggage of the Indian subcontinent" and the "political burdens of the Arab world".Its director is Maajid Nawaz, 30, who was adopted as a prisoner of conscience by Amnesty International after being jailed in Egypt for membership of Hizb ut-Tahrir. Since returning to London he has written pamphlets criticising the party.
His deputy is Ed Husain, 32, the author of The Islamist, which details his youth in east London moving through radical groups including Hizb ut-Tahrir.
The policy institute, to be launched next month, is named after Shaikh William Henry Abdullah Quilliam, an English solicitor and convert, who founded the UK's first mosque in Liverpool at the end of the 19th century. [...]
Its aim was to "revive a western Islam" by removing certain "obstacles". "We consider these to be scriptural literalism, extremism, Islamism, and foreign ideological influences and interferences with western Muslim communities.
"Western Muslims should be free from the cultural baggage of the Indian subcontinent, or the political burdens of the Arab world. We were born and raised in a milieu that is different from the Muslim east. Our future and progeny belong here."
AND HELL HATH NO FURY...:
High Democratic Turnout Sends a Mixed Signal for November (Kent Garber, February 28, 2008, US News)
[F]or starters, primary turnout rates (in terms of ballots cast) historically tend to be higher for Democrats than Republicans. From 1972 to 2004, there were only two primary elections in which Republicans had a higher cumulative turnout: 1996 (when Bill Clinton, as the incumbent, essentially made Democratic primaries that year irrelevant) and 2000 (when Al Gore, as the sitting vice president, made quick work of Bill Bradley and clinched the nomination early in the campaign). Much of this trend reflects the fact that Democrats, for the past 36 years, have been "out of the White House" more often than in it and therefore have greater incentive to vote in primaries, as well as the rather sizable advantage—17 million more people are registered Democrats than Republicans, as of 2004—they hold in overall voter registration. In fact, even in 1980, when Jimmy Carter, the Democratic incumbent, was on the ballot, the number of votes cast in Democratic primaries exceeded the Republican total by 6 million, or nearly 50 percent.Second, record turnouts during primaries often fail to yield general election victories in November. Two notable examples would be 1988 and 2000. In 1988, the Democratic Party, bolstered by eight years of a Republican in office, set an all-time primary high of 23 million votes (compared with 14 million in 2000 and 16.2 million in 2004), before losing again to another Republican (George H. W. Bush). The Republicans experienced a similar—if less consequential—problem in 2000. That year, the party had its highest primary turnout in history: More than 17 million votes were cast, breaking the previous record by more than 3 million votes. In November, however, Bush lost the popular vote to Al Gore by more than 500,000 votes.
GLOBALIZATION IS AMERICANIZATION:
Not so exceptional: French industry is taking on more Anglo-Saxon characteristics (The Economist, 2/28/08)
Some French firms now want to curtail production at home and switch to cheaper manufacturing abroad. Michelin (profits up 35%) and ArcelorMittal (up 30%) both plan to close French factories to improve their international competitive positions. Lakshmi Mittal, boss of ArcelorMittal, has refused government aid to keep a factory in the Moselle region open: he wants to close a plant that is no longer economic, aid or no aid. Similarly, Michelin, a global brand as well as a French star, is consolidating the smallest of its 32 factories in Western Europe (16 of them in France) for economies of scale. But it plans to expand production in Mexico, Brazil, India and China by 60% in the next few years. [...]As le Meccano industriel has gone out of fashion, activist investors, led by firms such as Wendel (a listed, family-controlled investment firm) and AXA, an insurance group, have been championing a more Anglo-Saxon style of French capitalism. Both are involved in a simmering row at Saint-Gobain, a building-materials firm. Wendel has taken an 18% stake, thinks the firm's assets could be sweated harder, and is demanding seats on the board.
But Jean-Louis Beffa, the veteran chairman of Saint-Gobain, wants to cancel the double-voting rights of long-term shareholders to stop Wendel taking control. Saint-Gobain's employee shareholders support him because they fear tougher management. For the first time, French managers are under pressure from stable shareholders who want them to improve returns—not just shelter from hostile bids.
Might have been helpful if it hadn't taken them two centuries to figure it out....
BLACK V. BROWN:
Hope and fear: Democratic economic policy sounds worryingly populist (The Economist, 2/28/08)
FOR a man who has placed “hope” at the centre of his campaign, Barack Obama can sound pretty darned depressing. As the battle for the Democratic nomination reaches a climax in Texas and Ohio, the front-runner's speeches have begun to paint a world in which laid-off parents compete with their children for minimum-wage jobs while corporate fat-cats mis-sell dodgy mortgages and ship jobs off to Mexico.
John McCain needs to cast this as Mr. Obama being hostile to Mexico in particular posthaste.
"An Al-Qaeda fugitive from Egypt"?:
'US missiles' kill 13 in S Waziristan (The Nation pk, 2/29/08)
At least 13 militants, including some foreigners, were killed and 11 others were critically injured as three missiles, allegedly fired by the US forces, hit a house in Kaloshah area of Wana District in South Waziristan Agency on Thursday, eyewitnesses said.Immediately after the attack, the militants encircled the area and local people were barred from entering the site.
However, the locals informed that three missiles fired from an unknown direction hit the house of Malik Khel Wazir at Shero Village, Kaloshah Azam Warsak area at midnight, killing at least 12 people, mostly foreigners, and injuring 11 others critically.
Several rooms of the house were completely destroyed in the attacks.
Exact identity and strength of the foreigners killed in the incident has not yet been determined, but the locals informed that they were either from Arab countries or Central Asia. An Al-Qaeda fugitive from Egypt is also reported to be among them.
YOU CAN PRY OUT THEIR GOLD FILLINGS TO HELP DEFRAY HEALTH CARE COSTS....:
No Obama Care for Terri Schiavo (George Neumayr, 2/29/2008, American Spectator)
IT IS NOW A cliche that the GOP blew it by defending Schiavo so loudly. The truth is that moment represented one of the few honorable acts of a dishonorable GOP Congress, and if the Republicans had any sense they would revisit these fundamental moral issues, which provide the starkest dividing line between liberalism and conservatism.Why let Obama occupy the moral high ground? For all his pious progressive prattle, for all the windy talk about human rights, he leads a party whose platform rests on the gravest human rights abuses imaginable.
The Democrats support killing unborn children at the beginning of life, the elderly at the end of it, and not so long from now the disabled in between. (If you doubt the latter, look at the now-routine eugenics aimed at the disabled unborn, the logic of which applies to the living disabled.) Whatever national health care plan the Democrats eventually enact will incorporate and accelerate this grim harvest.
In every liberal scheme of human improvement, no matter how mellifluous the rhetorical bells and whistles that accompany it, the final solution is death. What Obama means by "progress" is more like regress into a pagan past. Instead of abandoning babies on hilltops and the doddering to snow drifts, Obama Care will let Ivy League doctors get the job done.
Obama in effect casts himself as a moralist, appealing to the better angels of our nature. But in reality all the old Democratic demons hover above him, counseling despair, not hope. "Yes, we can," he says to starry-eyed affluent voters. No, we can't, he says to the voiceless weak who need hope the most.
RHETORIC BECOMES REALITY:
Cuba signs 2 human rights treaties (James C. McKinley Jr., February 29, 2008, IHT)
Just days after Raúl Castro took office as this country's new president, Cuba's Communist government has signed two important international human rights treaties that Fidel Castro had long opposed, another sign the new administration might set a new course. [...]Elizardo Sánchez, head of the Cuban Commission on Human Rights and National Reconciliation, said the signing was "positive news because the signing of these pacts is an old demand from inside Cuba and from the international community."
"I hope Cuba honors the letter and spirit of the law of these pacts, but I am not sure it will," Sánchez told The Associated Press.
FROM "I FEEL YOUR PAIN" TO "FEEL MY PAIN":
Michelle’s Struggle: Mrs. Obama empathizes in hard-hit Ohio. (Byron York, 2/29/08, National Review)
As she has many times in the past, Mrs. Obama complains about the lasting burden of student loans dating from her days at Princeton and Harvard Law School. She talks about people who end up taking years and years, until middle age, to pay off their debts. “The salaries don’t keep up with the cost of paying off the debt, so you’re in your 40s, still paying off your debt at a time when you have to save for your kids,” she says.“Barack and I were in that position,” she continues. “The only reason we’re not in that position is that Barack wrote two best-selling books… It was like Jack and his magic beans. But up until a few years ago, we were struggling to figure out how we would save for our kids.” A former attorney with the white-shoe Chicago firm of Sidley & Austin, Obama explains that she and her husband made the choice to give up lucrative jobs in favor of community service. “We left corporate America, which is a lot of what we’re asking young people to do,” she tells the women. “Don’t go into corporate America. You know, become teachers. Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a nurse. Those are the careers that we need, and we’re encouraging our young people to do that. But if you make that choice, as we did, to move out of the money-making industry into the helping industry, then your salaries respond.” Faced with that reality, she adds, “many of our bright stars are going into corporate law or hedge-fund management.”
What she doesn’t mention is that the helping industry has treated her pretty well. In 2006, the Chicago Tribune reported that Mrs. Obama’s compensation at the University of Chicago Hospital, where she is a vice president for community affairs, jumped from $121,910 in 2004, just before her husband was elected to the Senate, to $316,962 in 2005, just after he took office. And that does not count the money Mrs. Obama receives from serving on corporate boards. She would have been O.K. even without Jack’s magic beans.
So her struggle appears to be somewhat different from the struggles of the women sitting at the table. In addition to its below-average median household income, Muskingum County’s unemployment rate has risen in recent years. And it is not filled with Harvard-educated lawyers. According to census data, just 12.2 percent of adults in the county have a bachelor’s degree or higher — well below the Ohio and national average. About 20 percent don’t even have a high school degree. They won’t face the wrenching choice of whether to go into hedge fund management or the helping industry.
She may be Karl Rove's greatest invention.
ETCH-A-SKETCHY:
Clinton: Rival Obama Is a 'Blank Screen' (CYNTHIA McFADDEN and KINGA JANIK, Feb. 29, 2008, ABC News)
"I think the best description, actually, is in Barack's own book, the last book he wrote, 'Audacity of Hope,' where he said that he's a blank screen. And people of widely differing views project what they want to believe onto him. And then he went on to say, 'I am bound to disappoint some, if not all of them.'"
IF HE LOOKED LIKE MITT HE'D BE NEXT IN LINE:
Hoosier Fixer: Indiana governor Mitch Daniels has brought a corporate mentality to the job of streamlining state bureaucracies. (Christy Hall Robinson, February 29, 2008, The American)
Government is “the last monopoly,” he said, and it “lacks accountability.” The only way to make it effective is to “implant” a system of accountability to measure and count results as businesses do, because “what gets measured gets done.” For example, Daniels said, a visit to the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles—the kind of trip most Americans dread—now has an average wait time of eight minutes and ten seconds, down from over 40 minutes. Customer satisfaction has surged to 97 percent. The fact that Daniels refers to patrons of the bureau as “customers” speaks volumes about his corporate mentality.During his tenure, Indiana has reduced the number of state employees by 10 percent. This reduction, even with the institution of a pay-for-performance system that provides much larger rewards for good workers, has allowed Daniels to operate with a state payroll that is lower than it was four years ago. Daniels’s emphasis is on “managing for results,” and he is not necessarily against government doing the job. But if the private sector is more capable of administering a project effectively, reducing costs, and operating “at the speed of business, not the speed of government,” he supports privatization. That is why IBM has replaced the state bureaucracy in administering welfare programs—which has saved Indiana roughly $1 billion. Daniels also brought $4 billion to the state by privatizing Indiana’s toll road, and he deregulated the telecommunications industry.
Daniels joked that he achieved success through what might appear to be a “very mysterious process,” but the practical reforms he implemented to control annual expenditures and streamline government operations are rooted in basic business principles. When Daniels became governor in January 2005, the state’s deficit was $600 million. Within one year of his inauguration, Indiana had a $300 million surplus. Cutting employees and expenditures was not the only contributing factor. Under Daniels, Indiana has improved its business tax climate, attracted a surge of foreign investment (particularly from Japan), and brought its unemployment rate to the lowest level in six years.
One big project Daniels hopes to finish this year is property tax reform. He plans to offer Indianans immediate relief on property taxes by using the revenue from an increased sales tax along with part of the state’s $300 million budget surplus, and he hopes to put a permanent cap on property taxes starting next year.
He'd bring John McCain the sort of comprehensive Third Way vision his campaign currently lacks, but it's hard to see a modern political pairing of two little bald white guys.
THE UNIVERSALISTS:
Teaching The Federalist in South Korea: Reflecting on the principles of limited constitutional government (Peter Berkowitz, 2/29/08, National Review)
So what did these students think of The Federalist? In Hamilton’s assertion in Federalist l — that, were Americans to fail to establish free and democratic government by ratifying the new Constitution, it would “deserve to be considered as the general misfortune of mankind” — they found an expression of American exceptionalism. Some saw arrogance in the fact that, even from the beginning, Americans attributed universal significance to their political challenges. But all were also open to appreciating a certain modesty in Hamilton’s assertion that the moral and political principles that applied to Americans applied with equal force to all human beings.In Madison’s caution in Federalist 10 that “enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm,” they found easy application to their center-left president and his center-right challenger (who was elected in a landslide on December 19). But they were pleased to ponder Madison’s insistence that, in all cases, liberal democracies should be built to withstand the folly of unenlightened statesmen.
In Madison’s examination of the separation of powers in Federalist 51, they saw grounds for preferring the South Korean system of appointing judges — wherein the chief justice confers with the president on nominees before they are sent to the legislature for confirmation — because it assigned a role to all three branches, while the American system provides no role for the judicial branch in filling its own bench. But they had no trouble appreciating that Madison’s larger lesson goes not to a particular constitutional scheme for judicial appointments but to the need to achieve a delicate balance in the blending of separated powers.
Like American college students, my Korean college students, whose democracy is barely two decades old, have never known anything but freedom and equality under law. Also like their American counterparts, they were intrigued by The Federalist’s harsh assessment of the diseases to which liberal democracies are prone, and its calm explanation of the institutional remedies for preserving liberty. This compelling mix enabled them to make sense both of their low opinion of their own politicians and their genuine excitement over a democratic future.
HARD FOR OUR COUNTRY TO UNDERSTAND NATIONS:
The clash of peoples (Jerry Z. Muller, February 29, 2008, IHT)
Projecting their own experience onto the rest of the world, Americans generally belittle the role of ethnic nationalism in politics. They also find ethno-nationalism discomfiting both intellectually and morally. Social scientists go to great lengths to demonstrate that it is a product not of nature but of culture, and ethicists scorn value systems based on narrow group identities rather than cosmopolitanism.But none of this will make ethno-nationalism go away. Immigrants to the United States usually arrive with a willingness to fit into their new country and reshape their identities accordingly. But for those who remain behind in lands where their ancestors have lived for generations, if not centuries, political identities often take ethnic form, producing competing communal claims to political power. The creation of a peaceful regional order of nation-states has usually been the product of a violent process of ethnic separation. In areas where that separation has not yet occurred, politics is apt to remain ugly.
While the Left would like to imagine that it is our "Imperialism" that causes violence in the world, it is actually our unwillingness (or inability) to make others more like us that results is the cause.
IS SHE BUCKING FOR THE GOP VP SLOT?:
Clinton ad cites 'dangerous world' (Johanna Neuman and Mark Z. Barabak, 2/29/08, Los Angeles Times)
Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign unleashed a new television ad today designed to show that unlike her opponent, Barack Obama, she has the experience to "lead in a dangerous world."In the ad, a phone rings in the background as children sleep. An announcer says, "It's 3 a.m. and your children are safe and asleep. But there's a phone in the White House and it's ringing. Something's happening in the world. Your vote will decide who answers that call, whether it's someone who already knows the world's leaders, knows the military, someone tested and ready to lead in a dangerous world."
John McCain.
WAS DAN AKROYD REALLY A CONEHEAD?:
Did 'SNL' Go Beyond the Pale With Fauxbama?: Lorne Michaels Defends Casting Of Non-Black Man in Sketch (Paul Farhi, 2/29/08, Washington Post)
Is Fred Armisen, who is not African American, "black enough" to embody Obama on "Saturday Night Live"?Debate over that question has been pinging around the Internet since Armisen, a veteran cast member, donned darker makeup to portray the Democratic candidate for the first time Saturday. Armisen played Obama opposite Amy Poehler's Hillary Clinton in a sketch satirizing the supposedly cushy treatment his candidacy has received from the media.
"SNL" impresario Lorne Michaels said yesterday by phone that he thought the sketch played so well that the show intends to air another Obama/Clinton debate spoof tomorrow night, with Armisen and Poehler reprising their characters.
Kind of awkward for Obama supporters to be insisting on a quota hire to play Fauxbama, isn't it?
TALK ABOUT DOG BITES MAN...
McCain is Right About Barack H....Obama (Michael Reagan, February 29, 2008, FrontPageMagazine.com)
During his introductory remarks to the audience [Bill] Cunningham repeatedly referred to Sen. Barack Obama as a “hack” and as Barrack Hussein Obama with the emphasis on Hussein, Obama’s middle name -- a tactic used by critics who insist that Obama is really a Muslim.McCain, who was not in the hall when Cunningham spoke, reacted angrily, telling reporters, “I take responsibility and I repudiate what he said. A person came out here before I arrived and made some disparaging remarks about Senators Obama and Clinton and I regret that. In my entire campaign I have treated Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton with respect. I will continue to do that throughout this campaign."
For his part, Cunningham acted like a spoiled child being punished by his parents, threatening to vote for ultra-liberal Hillary Clinton in response to McCain’s scolding.
...a radio personality acting like a spoiled child...
THE GOOD T.B.:
Rays of hope: Overhaul of talent, attitude has team thinking big (Scott Miller, Feb. 28, 2008, CBSSports.com)
Yes, just like George Jefferson himself, these Rays, finally, seem to be movin' on up.Of course, posting the first winning season in franchise history would be evidence.
But if you talk to one particular veteran talent evaluator, who just happens to have specialized in pitching ninth innings during most of his career, he'll tell you that this well could be a -- gulp -- playoff team in the very near future.
Even if the Rays still reside on the same block as resident bullies Boston and New York.
"The talent level is here," says veteran closer Troy Percival, "I got abused when I signed with Detroit (before the 2005 season) because they had lost 120 games (119, actually, in '03). But I went through that roster before I signed, and that team was really talented. Two years later, they were in the World Series.
"I did the same thing here. What I liked was that there were young, talented starting pitchers here. And young, talented players."
Percival signed with the Rays this winter after his longtime friend, manager Joe Maddon, placed a few recruiting calls. Maddon's basic message: This place was a mess last year, but that has been fixed. And there's some outstanding talent.
"The pitchers I'm seeing around here this spring," Percival says. "When I went to Detroit, I was seeing (Joel) Zumaya and (Justin) Verlander and two or three other kids who threw 95, 96. I came here and I'm seeing the same thing.
"Price, the ball is just jumping out of his hand. Jeff Niemann ... we have those arms here."
None from the group of Price, McGee, Davis and Niemann (ranked 99th on Baseball American's Top 100 prospects) project to crack Tampa Bay's opening day rotation. Right now, that's reserved for Scott Kazmir (currently shelved for two weeks after a strained left elbow sent shudders through Rays camp this week), Garza, James Shields (184 strikeouts against only 36 walks while posting a 3.85 ERA in 215 innings pitched last year) and, at this point, Andy Sonnanstine and Edwin Jackson.
Upton, just 23, smashed 24 homers, collected 82 RBI and compiled a .386 on-base percentage last year. Left fielder Carl Crawford, a veritable old man on this team at 26, is a two-time All-Star.
The Rays fielded the second-youngest club in the majors last season at 26.7 years, and though they finished with baseball's worst record (66-96), what playing all those kids did was allow, as Friedman says, the club to "decide who we were going with for the long haul."
Dukes and his criminal record? Young and his penchant for not running out ground balls? No longer around to drive management crazy, or to tempt other kids to go half-speed.
"There was a sense of entitlement last year," Maddon says. "There was a scholarship program. We don't have that anymore. The attitude has just been tremendous."
Instead of young punks thinking they're owed something, there are veterans like Percival and outfielder Cliff Floyd who are looking to give back some of what veterans offered them when they were young. And that peer group influence has been especially dramatic here in Rays-ville.
Example: Coach George Hendrick gathered the outfielders for a session the other day, then asked Floyd if he'd like to add something.
"He absolutely nailed it," Maddon says. "He was talking not only about defense and positioning, but about communicating with each other. He eloquently explained it. I had been a big fan of his, but I really became one at that moment.
"When a peer brings the message, a student will not find any allies if he has complaints about that message."
ALONG THE AXIS:
Nasir Abas, terrorist defector, aids Indonesian police (Seth Mydans, February 29, 2008, IHT)
Once a high-ranking commander in the region's deadliest terrorist group, Abas, 38, has been born again as an antiterror evangelist. Working with the police, he visits his former comrades in jail in an effort to persuade them to cooperate and to mend their ways.He appears at public forums and he has published a book called "Exposing Jemaah Islamiyah," the terrorist group he once belonged to, which is linked to Al Qaeda and has been behind most of the major attacks in the region in recent years.
His conversion is a boon to the police, who have taken what Indonesia's counterterrorism chief, Asyaad Mbai, calls a "soft, humane approach" to detainees, treating them as wayward brothers rather than as criminals. They are given special privileges in prison and in some cases their families receive financial support.
"It has the dual function of tainting some who accept and also winning members to a cooperative stance, so the police get more intelligence than before," said Sidney Jones, a senior adviser to the International Crisis Group and an expert on terrorism.
As part of this approach, Abas said he tries to persuade detainees that their view of holy war is misguided, that the police are not evil and that cooperating with them is not a sin.
"I explain to them that it is wrong killing people with bombs," Abas said. "This is not jihad in Islam. You are killing unarmed civilians. It is a shameful thing."
Even the Realists are finally figuring out what W has been up to with India, but it'll still be years before they figure out the centrality of Indonesia to the Axis of Good.
DITCH THE PARTY AND GET THE PARTY STARTED:
The Cuban Economy: After the Smoke Clears : For most Cubans, life remains a slog. But here's the surprise: There's plenty of potential for growth in everything from oil exploration to upscale tourism (Geri Smith, 2/29/08, Business Week)
Farther offshore, in a triangular section of the Gulf of Mexico that belongs to Cuba, things look even better. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that as much as 9.3 billion barrels of oil may lie in the 6,000-foot-deep waters. A half-dozen foreign outfits, including the state oil companies of China, Norway, and Venezuela, have snapped up exploration rights and are conducting seismic studies. Several expect to drill exploratory wells next year. Cuba has encouraged investment by offering standard international production-sharing deals, giving foreigners a percentage of output. "We have tried to make the contracts as fair and flexible as possible because we are interested in finding oil quickly," says Tenreyro-Pérez. Within a decade, he says, Cuba could be a net exporter of oil.Major offshore discoveries would have important geopolitical ramifications: Cuba could reduce its dependence on the charity of the mercurial Venezuelan President, Hugo Chávez, who now sends 92,000 barrels a day of oil to the island at heavily subsidized prices. And it would provide the Cuban government with funds needed to improve living standards, which could buy it more years in power. "Even if Cuba simply becomes self-sufficient, that would be a very big change," says Jorge I. Dominguez, a Latin American studies professor at Harvard University. "And Cuba as an exporter of energy would make things even more interesting."
It's far from certain, though, that Cuba will ever get there. As long as the U.S. embargo remains, Havana would have nowhere to send the crude for processing, since nearby refineries are either operating at capacity or are U.S.-owned. And if Cuba's economy keeps growing as fast as it has, consumption will surely climb, too.
Tourism is similarly promising—and faces similar problems. Cuba has long attracted plenty of tourists, but not Americans, who are barred from visiting the island without special permission. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Raúl persuaded a reluctant Fidel that they should open the borders to foreign visitors so the country could earn needed hard currency. Cuba began pitching its white sands and turquoise waters to armies of budget vacationers from Canada and Europe. It went from receiving just 340,000 tourists in 1990 to more than 2 million by 1994 and 2.3 million in 2005. Today, package-tour visitors burn themselves to a crisp on the beaches of Varadero and Cayo Coco, while the more adventurous dodge 1950s Buicks and Chevys in the streets of Old Havana looking for the Floridita and other bars where Ernest Hemingway used to toss back daiquiris.
Now, Cuba wants to go upscale. Officials aim to attract richer tourists by constructing dozens of new four- and five-star resorts and restoring some 50 historic buildings as boutique hotels. [...]
Another potential moneymaker: tapping Cuba's huge corps of doctors to offer foreigners a tummy tuck or help in kicking a drug habit. Cosmetic surgery and other procedures in Cuba can cost less than half what they do in the U.S. Last year, 6,000 foreigners visited Cuban hospitals and clinics for treatment, bringing in a total of $22 million, and Argentine soccer star Diego Maradona has checked in twice to overcome a cocaine addiction. "By charging [foreigners] for these services, we help defray the cost of our universal health system," says Gelacio Aday, director of international services for Cubanacan, the health tourism agency.
American business, meanwhile, is eager to join the party.
THE OBLIGATIONS OF MONARCHY (via John Beckwith):
Prince Harry goes to war: British officials confirm he's in Afghanistan after media leak (JILL LAWLESS, 2/28/08, AP)
Prince Harry has been serving on the frontline in Afghanistan with the British Army, calling in airstrikes on Taliban positions and going out on foot patrols, the British ministry of defence announced yesterday.Officials said the prince, a lieutenant in the Blues and Royals regiment, was still deployed in the country.
"His conduct on operations in Afghanistan has been exemplary," the head of the army, Gen. Richard Dannatt, said. "He has been fully involved in operations and has run the same risks as everyone else in his battle group."
Harry, who is third in line to the throne, has been in the southern Helmand province since December.
Such service is not necessary for an ordinary citizen, but is for a prince.
FRANCO'S POINT IS JUAN CARLOS, NOT FRANCOISM:
Putin’s Anointed Heir Shows Hints of Less Icy Style (C. J. CHIVERS, 2/29/08, NY Times)
Now, Mr. Medvedev, the presidential successor personally selected by Mr. Putin, is creating his own public identity according to a choreographed script. And here, in a mix of Soviet and Russian symbols, the man rising to Kremlin power avoided the stern themes that have often accompanied Mr. Putin’s appearances.He wanted to talk about living conditions, for soldiers and civilians alike. “Let’s talk about the problems that exist,” he said to the soldiers beside him before a bank of television cameras. “Let’s have a normal conversation. Please.” [...]
As he has become the country’s second most-watched man, he has implicitly presented himself as both a Putin loyalist and a president-in-waiting who will wield power in a manner more gentle than the world has seen under Mr. Putin’s brand of rule.
Whether this is a pose is an open question. Mr. Medvedev, in commentary outside of official Russian circles, has been cast as a puppet, a president who will labor according to Mr. Putin’s command.
But he has made unanticipated moves. In a speech on Feb. 15, he said liberty was necessary for the state to have legitimacy among its citizens. And he has laid out domestic policy goals in what seems like a communiqué to Russia’s expanding consumer class.
Mr. Medvedev has also struck a campy pose — hamming it up with Deep Purple, the British heavy metal band whose music was popular in Soviet times — that suggested a dormitory-life playfulness that is decidedly not Putinesque.
His words and behavior have raised unexpected but pervasive questions. Does Mr. Medvedev mean what he seems to say? Can he ease the grip on Russian political life that has been a central characteristic of Mr. Putin’s rule?
And if he does, will he clash with Mr. Putin, his principal source of power?
Like the surge, classic fascism is meant to be an interlude, not permanent. For cultural reasons Russia is likely to remain more authoritarian than we, and, as a dying nation, it probably requires less freedom than if it had a potential future. But it can certainly enjoy greater liberty as it fades.
GETTING HIS ANGRY ON:
McCain steps up criticism of Obama (Julie Bosman and Elisabeth Bumiller, February 29, 2008, IHT)
"On the issue of my differences with Senator Obama on Iraq, I want to make it very clear: This is not about decisions that were made in the past," McCain said. "This is about decisions that a president will have to make about the future in Iraq. And a decision to unilaterally withdraw from Iraq will lead to chaos."McCain, the likely Republican nominee for president, was reacting to Obama's response to a hypothetical question in a debate in Cleveland on Tuesday night, when Obama said that although he intended to withdraw American forces as quickly as possible, he reserved the right to send troops back if Al Qaeda were forming a base in Iraq.
"Al Qaeda is there now," McCain said in Houston, with a tone of belittlement in his voice. "So to state that somehow if Al Qaeda were there that he would consider going back militarily is really a remarkable comment, and I don't think displays an understanding of the size of the threat and what's at stake in Iraq."
We can argue about whether it's a good or a bad thing, but it pretty undeniably seems to be te case that Maverick dislikes even the usual political back and forth with colleagues he respects, but revels in going after those he holds in contempt. Thus, the gentlemanly tenor of his contest with his main GOP rival, Mike Huckabee, as opposed to the cold-bloodedness with which he dispatched the poseur, Mitt Romney. Because of this dynamic, he'd be fairly unlikely to really pummel Ms Clinton, who he likes, but appears eager to get it on with Senator Obama. The free ride Mr. Obama has received from the press and his fellow Democrats will serve him ill in this regard, as he's utterly unprepared to deal with criticism.
MAKING YOURSELF MONSTROUS...:
Israeli minister warns of Palestinian 'holocaust' (guardian.co.uk, February 29 2008)
An Israeli minister today warned of increasingly bitter conflict in the Gaza Strip, saying the Palestinians could bring on themselves what he called a "holocaust"."The more Qassam [rocket] fire intensifies and the rockets reach a longer range, they will bring upon themselves a bigger shoah because we will use all our might to defend ourselves," Matan Vilnai, Israel's deputy defence minister, told army radio.
Shoah is the Hebrew word normally reserved to refer to the Jewish Holocaust. It is rarely used in Israel outside discussions of the Nazi extermination of Jews during the second world war, and many Israelis are loath to countenance its use to describe other events.
The minister's statement came after two days of tit-for-tat missile raids between Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip and the Israeli army. At least 32 Palestinians and one Israeli have been killed since the surge in violence on Wednesday.
...is an awfully high price to pay to deny people self-determination. Israel has really squandered the opportunity that the election of Hamas afforded.
February 28, 2008
OUT OF THE MOUTHS...:
Staying to Help in Iraq: We have finally reached a point where humanitarian assistance, from us and others, can have an impact. (Angelina Jolie, February 28, 2008, Washington Post)
The Iraqi families I've met on my trips to the region are proud and resilient. They don't want anything from us other than the chance to return to their homes -- or, where those homes have been bombed to the ground or occupied by squatters, to build new ones and get back to their lives. One thing is certain: It will be quite a while before Iraq is ready to absorb more than 4 million refugees and displaced people. But it is not too early to start working on solutions. And last week, there were signs of progress.In Baghdad, I spoke with Army Gen. David Petraeus about UNHCR's need for security information and protection for its staff as they re-enter Iraq, and I am pleased that he has offered that support. General Petraeus also told me he would support new efforts to address the humanitarian crisis "to the maximum extent possible" -- which leaves me hopeful that more progress can be made. [...]
My visit left me even more deeply convinced that we not only have a moral obligation to help displaced Iraqi families, but also a serious, long-term, national security interest in ending this crisis.
Today's humanitarian crisis in Iraq -- and the potential consequences for our national security -- are great. Can the United States afford to gamble that 4 million or more poor and displaced people, in the heart of Middle East, won't explode in violent desperation, sending the whole region into further disorder?
What we cannot afford, in my view, is to squander the progress that has been made. In fact, we should step up our financial and material assistance. UNHCR has appealed for $261 million this year to provide for refugees and internally displaced persons. That is not a small amount of money -- but it is less than the U.S. spends each day to fight the war in Iraq. I would like to call on each of the presidential candidates and congressional leaders to announce a comprehensive refugee plan with a specific timeline and budget as part of their Iraq strategy.
As for the question of whether the surge is working, I can only state what I witnessed: U.N. staff and those of non-governmental organizations seem to feel they have the right set of circumstances to attempt to scale up their programs. And when I asked the troops if they wanted to go home as soon as possible, they said that they miss home but feel invested in Iraq. They have lost many friends and want to be a part of the humanitarian progress they now feel is possible.
It seems to me that now is the moment to address the humanitarian side of this situation. Without the right support, we could miss an opportunity to do some of the good we always stated we intended to do.
GREEN BROWN SHOW:
Nader chooses Matt Gonzalez as his running mate (AP, 2/28/08)
Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader selected Matt Gonzalez, a former member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, to be his running mate.Nader, who launched his fourth White House bid last weekend, made the announcement Thursday at a news conference. The Texas-born Gonzalez ran for mayor of San Francisco as a Green Party candidate in 2003 but lost to Democrat Gavin Newsom after a surprisingly close runoff election. Gonzalez, a lawyer, has been largely inactive in city politics since then.
IT'S GOOD TO BE THE KING:
Bush roasts, toasts champions (Bryan Bender, February 27, 2008, Boston Globe)
The World Series Champs, decked out in their Sunday best and accompanied by manager Terry Francona and rest of the coaching staff, were led out of the White House residence to the rhythms of a military band and as slugger David Ortiz carried the World Series trophy.But the star of the show quickly became Bush, the former owner of the Texas Rangers and fan-in-chief who was clearly enjoying the opportunity to mingle with ballplayers after more substantive meetings earlier in the day with the prime minister of the Czech Republic and a special envoy from the Organization of the Islamic Conference:
Singling out ace hurler Daisuke Matzuzaka, Bush made reference to the large group of Japanese reporters who were on hand, joking, "His press corps is bigger than mine." He then noted another similarity he said he shares with "Dice K": "We both have trouble answering questions in English." [...]
But he couldn't help but note the absence of Manny Ramirez, who also did not attend the first Red Sox visit to the Bush White House after the 2004 World Series.
"I'm sorry [Ortiz'] running mate, Manny Ramirez, isn't here. I guess his grandmother died again," Bush quipped, drawing laughter form he crowd but quickly adding, "Just kidding. Tell Manny I didn't mean it."
"And how about Jonathan Papelbon? The guy pitches almost as well as he dances. And I appreciate the dress code. Thanks for wearing pants."
It can hardly be a coincidence that the three successful presidents of the past fifty years--Reagan, Clinton, and W--so obviously enjoyed the job the most.
ALL OFFENSE:
Poll: McCain looking good in FL (Domenico Montanaro, 2/28/08, First Read)
McCain leads both Obama and Clinton in potential general-election match ups with either candidate in the all-important swing state of Florida, according to a Mason-Dixon poll out today.McCain leads Obama 47%-37% and Clinton 49%-40%. The Arizona senator leads the Democrats across the board. About 80% of Republicans are behind McCain. Only 66% of Democrats are behind Obama and 72% are backing Clinton in one-one-one match-ups with McCain. Currently, 17% of Democrats indicate that in a match up with Obama, they'd support McCain; 16% say so in a match up with Clinton.
With the exception of Ohio, John McCain will not have to defend a single state that W carried. On the other hand, with his appeal to Latinos, Rust Belt Catholics, and Jews he can force the Democratic nominee to spend the Fall just trying to defend the states they have to carry to avoid a landslide and loss of Congress.
TO THE SUCKER ALL MEN ARE CON MEN:
Dems face 'sucker punch' on taxes (David Rogers, Feb 28, 2008, Politico)
A year ago, healthy revenue projections allowed the new majority to sail past the question of whether Congress would extend all or only part of President Bush’s tax cuts, due to expire after 2010. Today’s budget landscape is much more difficult, and the tighter margins give Republicans more leverage to demand that Democrats spell out what tax cuts they would keep — and which would be lost.“That is the sucker punch they want. They want that fight,” says Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), watching from the relative safety of the House. And given Senate rules allowing dozens of targeted budget amendments, it could be open season for Republicans, who are eager to draw a sharper line between their likely nominee, Arizona Sen. John McCain, and the two leading Democrats, Sens. Barack Obama of Illinois and Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.
Mr. Emanuel unwittingly echoes Friend Perlstein's comment yesterday about conservatives being con men. At the point where you think the other side is cheating just because you have to defend your ideology, you've lost the argument.
THE BANALITY OF HOPE:
Obama: A Harsh Ideologue Hidden by a Feel-Good Image (Rick Santorum, February 28, 2008, Philadelphia Inquirer)
John McCain's campaign and conservative pundits have listed the numerous times in Obama's short Senate career where he sided with the extremes in his party against broadly supported compromises on issues such as immigration, ethics reform, terrorist surveillance and war funding. Fighting on the fringe with a handful of liberals is one thing, but consider his position on an issue that passed both houses of Congress unanimously in 2002.That bill was the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. During the partial-birth abortion debate, Congress heard testimony about babies that had survived attempted late-term abortions. Nurses testified that these preterm living, breathing babies were being thrown into medical waste bins to die or being "terminated" outside the womb. With the baby now completely separated from the mother, it was impossible to argue that the health or life of the mother was in jeopardy by giving her baby appropriate medical treatment.
The act simply prohibited the killing of a baby born alive. To address the concerns of pro-choice lawmakers, the bill included language that said nothing "shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand or contract any legal status or legal right" of the baby. In other words, the bill wasn't intruding on Roe v. Wade.
Who would oppose a bill that said you couldn't kill a baby who was born? Not Kennedy, Boxer or Hillary Rodham Clinton. Not even the hard-core National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). Obama, however, is another story. The year after the Born Alive Infants Protection Act became federal law in 2002, identical language was considered in a committee of the Illinois Senate. It was defeated with the committee's chairman, Obama, leading the opposition.
Let's be clear about what Obama did, once in 2003 and twice before that. He effectively voted for infanticide. He voted to allow doctors to deny medically appropriate treatment or, worse yet, actively kill a completely delivered living baby. Infanticide - I wonder if he'll add this to the list of changes in his next victory speech and if the crowd will roar: "Yes, we can."
How could someone possibly justify such a vote? In March 2001, Obama was the sole speaker in opposition to the bill on the floor of the Illinois Senate. He said: "We're saying they are persons entitled to the kinds of protections provided to a child, a 9-month child delivered to term. I mean, it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal-protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child." So according to Obama, "they," babies who survive abortions or any other preterm newborns, should be permitted to be killed because giving legal protection to preterm newborns would have the effect of banning all abortions.
Of course, he supports adulticide too, as in his regret at not having helped kill Teri Schiavo.
CITIES WERE A MISTAKE:
It takes a neighborhood to cut crime (Tim Harford, February 27, 2008, Sac Bee)
Could economics say anything about what makes our neighborhoods defend us or abandon us? I discovered that it could. Economists can now tell us why neighborhoods go through dramatic transitions from dangerous to safe or rich to poor; they have established a clear link between urban architecture and crime; they can even shed some light on whether local crime is contagious. And they can tell us what difference law enforcement really makes when the streets are peopled by those who try to kill for no reason.Cities frequently fall into a sharply defined patchwork of thriving areas and struggling ones, often divided along racial lines. It is easy to see this as the result of bitter prejudice. But the Nobel Prize-winning economist Thomas Schelling proved decades ago that the motivations that lead to segregation may be less entrenched than you might suppose.
In the days before computer simulations, Schelling demonstrated his theory with a game played with randomly distributed pennies and nickels on a checkerboard. He invented a simple rule for how the coins moved: A nickel could be happy as long as it was touching two or more other nickels. But if it touched only one other nickel, it would hop elsewhere, leaving its former neighbor isolated. One coin after another would move in a chain reaction. Schelling's game seemed to make possible a mixed checkerboard, but the result was always segregation.
The lesson? Even if everyone were comfortable living in a mixed neighborhood, extreme segregation -- by race, class or income -- could still emerge from people's mild preferences not to be outnumbered.
Countless individually rational decisions can snowball into a socially regrettable outcome.
Schelling's successors are exploring ways in which societies can "flip" from bad situations to good ones. City streets can be unsettlingly empty or reassuringly thronged with passers-by. The safer and livelier the streets feel, the safer and livelier they become.
This virtuous circle means a small catalyst can transform a neighborhood from struggling to thriving.
Architecture matters, too, something we feel intuitively but find hard to prove or quantify. Think of high-rise apartments. Do they make a city safer by packing more people into an area and giving the streets a greater bustle? Or are cities safer if most buildings are low-rise, so people feel a connection to the street? Two new-wave economists, Edward Glaeser of Harvard and Bruce Sacerdote of Dartmouth, matched crime figures with data on building height and discovered that the residents of high-rise apartments are much more likely to be crime victims, specifically street crime. The effect remains similar after statistically adjusting for poverty, demographics and public housing: It's the height of the building itself that matters.
These insights apply to numerous issues, not least why urban intellectuals advocate the politics of atomization and dependency on the state--since it just reflects the lives they lead.
POTENTIALLY MAKING IT EDIBLE:
Cauliflower Popcorn (Marlene Parrish, 2/28/08, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)
* 1 large head of cauliflower
* 3 tablespoons extra-virgin olive oil
* 1 cup shredded sharp white cheddar cheesePreheat oven to 400 degrees. Cut cauliflower in half. Remove core with small knife and discard. Break into florets, about 3/4-inch pieces. Place in bowl. Toss with olive oil and sprinkle with salt and pepper. Place on a rimmed baking sheet and roast for 35 to 40 minutes until soft and golden brown.
Use pot holders to shake pan gently several times so cauliflower doesn't stick.
Transfer cauliflower to platter. Add salt and pepper and sprinkle with cheese. Serve hot or at room temperature.
NOTE THE PARENTHETICAL:
29 Taliban killed in clashes, bombing in southern Afghanistan (Associated Press, February 28, 2008)
Insurgents ambushed the drug eradication force Wednesday in Marja district of Helmand province, killing one police officer and wounding two, said Gen. Mohammad Hussein Andiwal, the provincial police chief.Police launched an attack afterward, killing 25 Taliban fighters, including a senior regional militant commander, the Interior Ministry said in a statement. [...]
Separately, four militants died and another was wounded Thursday when the roadside bomb they were planting on a road in Helmand exploded prematurely, Andiwal said. Militants regularly target Afghan and foreign troops with roadside bombs, though many civilians are killed by the blasts.
Last year was the deadliest in Afghanistan since the 2001 U.S.-led invasion. More than 6,500 people -- mostly militants -- were killed in insurgency-related violence, according to an Associated Press count.
THE BAD NEIGHBOR POLICY:
Democrats Rile Canada, Mexico: Vows To Renegotiate Nafta Met With Stiff Resistance (JOSH GERSTEIN, February 28, 2008, NY Sun)
Canada and Mexico are rebuking the top Democratic presidential candidates, senators Clinton and Obama, for vowing to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement and threatening to pull out of the pact altogether if America's neighbors refuse."Nafta has been a win-win-win for Mexico, the United States and Canada, proving that a rising tide can lift all boats," the Mexican ambassador to America, Arturo Sarukhan, said in a written statement. "Mexico does not support reopening Nafta. It would be like throwing a monkey wrench into the engine of North American competitiveness."
On the bright side, they aren't serious about changing the deal. It's just racial.
THE COMPANY YOU KEEP:
Obama Rebuffs Challenges on His Israel Stance (Jonathan Weisman, 2/28/08, Washington Post)
In the Democratic presidential primaries, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) has run well ahead of Obama among Jewish voters in states with large Jewish populations, taking 67 percent of the Jewish vote in Nevada, 63 percent in New Jersey, 65 percent in New York and 60 percent in Maryland. Obama narrowly won the Jewish vote in Arizona, California and Massachusetts, and captured 61 percent in Connecticut."The campaign's going to have to make a strong effort against these rumors," Cohen said.
Alan Solomont, a Boston financier who is Obama's Northeastern finance chairman, said he has been fielding almost daily calls from Jewish friends, asking about Obama's position on Israel and on other policy issues important to them.
Another issue for Obama besides Farrakhan and White has been his campaign's association with Zbigniew Brzezinski and Robert Malley, two prominent foreign policy experts whom some Jews regard as anti-Israel.
Obama took on those issues in Cleveland when he told Jewish leaders that Brzezinski, a national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter, is not a key adviser but merely someone he had lunch with and exchanged e-mails with "maybe three times." Malley, a State Department official in the Clinton White House involved in failed efforts to complete a comprehensive Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement, "is one of hundreds of people who have sent advice to the campaign," Rep. Robert Wexler (D-Fla.), an Obama supporter, wrote in the Jerusalem Post yesterday.
The persistence of the changes against Obama has left his supporters pointing fingers, both at the GOP and at the Clinton campaign. Wexler pointed to a Newsweek article this week that said Clinton senior adviser Ann Lewis had called Brzezinski Obama's "chief foreign policy adviser" during a conference call in January with leaders of major Jewish organizations.
Sounds like a sinister plot.
AND THE LUCIOUS IRONY IS THAT...:
The dark side of Obamamania (Robert Sibley, February 28, 2008, The Ottawa Citizen)
When the post-election realities become evident to the electorate, as they always do, there is inevitably a harsh and bitter reaction from those who are disappointed that the man or woman they voted for didn't live up to their hopes. The consequence of this disappointment is, of course, greater cynicism toward politics and politicians.Politics is not something from which we should be saved, any more than life is an illness in need of a cure. As [late political philosopher Michael Oakeshott] put it, politics is not "an encounter of dreams," a "jump to glory," or the means for making people better.
This attitude probably has few adherents nowadays. Many assume the function of government is to serve our wants and desires. Some even think it's the government's obligation to improve our lives, make us healthy.
Oakeshott thought people should behave like adults, take responsibility for their behaviour, and accept the consequences of their actions. Such a disposition places a restraint on attempts to use politics for grand social engineering schemes. Oakeshott certainly wouldn't have thought much of a political program based on slogans as mindless and banal as "change we can believe in."
...their irrational emotional disorder is brought on by their very Rationalism
THERE'S NOTHING FUNNY ABOUT PEACE, LOVE AND UNDERSTANDING:
ONE NATION, UNDER VANDEN HEUVEL: Mugger kinda likes the little liberal weekly. What’s up with that? (Russ Smith, 2/28/08, NY Press)
Perhaps I’ve been snoozing, but when did The Nation morph into such a pleasantly quaint magazine? It’s not that the weekly, founded in 1865, has been left behind by the melding of print and web. Just as The National Review made itself relevant again several years ago by establishing a vigorous online presence, its left-wing counterpart is also energetic on that front. And in contrast to the fading New Republic, The Nation’s paid circulation has swelled during the Bush years. As a longtime subscriber, I scare myself upon retrieving the slim weekly from the mail slot on whatever day it arrives. I place it, along with The Weekly Standard and The New Yorker on top of a must-read (or, more accurately, must-look-at) pile. [...]One aspect of The Nation’s content I appreciate is that there’s no pretense of humor, satire or celebrity worship.
The humorlessness of a Leftwing rag can hardly be news anymore, but this makes a nice bookend with an older piece from when folks were just realizing that all humor is conservative, Bubble Wrap:
The Nation vs. The Weekly Standard (John Powers, 8/30/02, LA Weekly)
[O]ver the last two decades, the joy has gone out of the left -- it now feels hedged in by shibboleths and defeatism -- while the right has been having a gas, be it Lee Atwater grooving to the blues, Rush Limbaugh chortling about Feminazis or grimly gleeful Ann Coulter serving up bile as if it were chocolate mousse, even dubbing Katie Couric "the affable Eva Braun of morning television." (Get your political allegiances straight, babe. Katie's the Madame Mao of morning television. You're Eva Braun.)These same high spirits course through The Standard, whose editor William Kristol constantly shows up on TV grinning like a catfish. His magazine features catchy covers, a reader-friendly layout, breezy headlines (a hit piece on Lula was called "Brazil's Nut") and a core of enjoyable writers, notably David Brooks, Christopher Caldwell (whose article on Islam in France is one of the best things I've read this year) and David Tell, probably the country's most compelling editorialist. Although driven by a devout ideological agenda -- it's for unfettered free trade and war on Iraq -- Kristol and executive editor Fred Barnes know how to mix things up, running a parody page (often mirthless, to be sure), funny articles by the likes of P.J. O'Rourke (who reminds us that reactionaries make better humorists than liberals) and sharp, short items designed to keep readers amused on that long march to Baghdad. Snappy and pointed, it's designed to compete in a world that has many magazines.
YOUR DARWINIST SLIP IS SHOWING:
Abortions earmarked by race: An investigation of Planned Parenthood’s money (Lila Rose, Winter 2008, UCLA Advocate)
Over the summer, The Advocate investigated the financial dealings of Planned Parenthood and made some shocking discoveries about the clinic-owning "nonprofit." We obtained the information by having an actor call clinics across the country and pose as a donor. The actor who called, The Advocate’s advisor, communicated to them a very racist agenda—the one that Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood’s founder, had envisioned. He then asked to donate money specifically for the abortions of African-American babies in order to "lower the number of blacks in America."Despite his bigoted requests, no Planned Parenthood employee (or director of development, in one case) declined the tainted money. Some even asked to speak with other employees to get permission. In the first day of calling seven clinics, not a single Planned Parenthood representative expressed outrage or concern at the racism behind donations specifically "to reduce the number of blacks." In fact, some even went as far as agreeing with the anti-black agenda.
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA (DiscovertheNetworks.org)
SpokesmanReview.com reports that the Planned Parenthood Federation of America is marred by "the presence of an ugly strain of racism." An actor posing as a racist donor called several Planned Parenthood centers and asked that his donation be earmarked specifically to fund the abortions of African-American babies in order to lower the number of black people. Every branch agreed to process these donations, and none expressed concern about the racist intentions of the donors. Following is a transcript of a portion of the actor's call to Planned Parenthood (PP) of Idaho:Donor: I want to specify that abortion to help a minority group, would that be possible?
PP Rep: Absolutely.
Donor: Like the black community for example?
PP Rep: Certainly.
Donor: The abortion—I can give money specifically for a black baby, that would be the purpose?
PP Rep: Absolutely. If you wanted to designate that your gift be used to help an African-American woman in need, then we would certainly make sure that the gift was earmarked for that purpose.
Donor: Great, because I really faced trouble with affirmative action, and I don't want my kids to be disadvantaged against black kids. I just had a baby; I want to put it in his name.
PP Rep: Yes, absolutely.
Donor: And we don't, you know we just think, the less black kids out there the better.
PP Rep: (Laughs) Understandable, understandable.
Back in the pre-Falwell/Reagan/John Paul '70s, people used to at least be more honest about supporting abortion as a means of controlling the poor generally and minorities in particular.
AS THE EUROPEANS HAVE DISCOVERED...:
China considers ending one-child policy (Tania Branigan, 2/28/08, guardian.co.uk)
China could scrap its one-child policy, a senior family planning official said today, acknowledging concerns about its effects in creating an ageing society and gender gap. [...]Although the population has yet to peak – it is expected to rise from 1.3 billion now to 1.5 billion in 2033 - the birth rate has dropped below the replacement rate of 2.1. [...]
Zhao also acknowledged the problems posed by the longstanding cultural preference for boys and warned that in future the use of ultrasound to predict the sex of a child – and terminate female fetuses – could become "a big issue" for China.
It already has 118 male births for every 100 female; way above the global "normal" ratio of between 103 and 107 boys for every 100 girls.
...it's easy to dehumanize your society, hard to reverse the process.
MORE WFB:
A Remarkable Man: In memory of William F. Buckley Jr. (Joseph Lieberman, 2/27/08, National Review)
Buckley's life is an extraordinary one. Upon leaving Yale, he became well known for a book he wrote — God and Man at Yale — about what he saw as the hostile environment there toward people of faith. He started National Review in the mid-1950s. I remember reading once that he had said in the founding issue that the publication would derive from the original ideas of the moral order. Bill Buckley was a person who studied history, studied literature, and learned from it. He was also infused with a deep and profound commitment to his Roman Catholic faith. I believe that was the origin of the moral order which he gave expression to in his writing for National Review, and in speaking out and conducting himself as a provocative, loving American.He believed that ideas mattered, and they do. National Review, in some sense, gave birth to the modern American conservative movement. It wasn't necessarily a Republican movement; his conservatism was a matter of ideals and ideas and philosophy. He rejected extremism. To his everlasting credit, he took on the John Birch Society when it wasn't popular to do so.
Buckley's conservative ideology was not always favorable to Republican candidates. I recall reading National Review’s endorsement of General Dwight D. Eisenhower for President. While everyone else was echoing the slogan "We Like Ike," Buckley's editorial said "We Prefer Ike.” He was more thrilled, of course, by the candidacy of Senator Barry Goldwater, and then most of all by the candidacy of President Ronald Reagan.
At one point in the mid-60s, Buckley ran for Mayor of New York, as kind of a joyous, thought-provoking, elegant, eloquent exercise in being involved in the marketplace of public ideas. Perhaps the most famous, if not the most substantive, thing he said in that campaign was when they asked him what he would do if he was elected. Bill Buckley famously said, "Demand a recount."
Guru of the Right was guided by a rebel's sensibility (John B. Judis | February 29, 2008, The Australian)
WILLIAM F. Buckley Jr, will, of course, be remembered as the man who was most singly responsible for the modern conservative movement. Before 1955, when Buckley founded National Review, there were disparate strands of an American Right, from free-market anti-New Dealers to traditionalists and anti-Semitic crackpots.Through National Review, Buckley constructed a new conservatism by knitting together the traditional and free-market strands of the Right with the militant anti-communism of former communists and Trotskyists such as Whittaker Chambers and James Burnham, and by casting out of the new mix the various anti-Semites and kooks. Barry Goldwater was around, too, but Goldwater's politics - set forth in a book ghosted by National Review editor L. Brent Bozell Jr, Buckley's brother-in-law - were inconceivable before National Review. Buckley provided the synthesis.
Buckley didn't necessarily provide the theory. He was a brilliant impresario and editor and later became an exceptional columnist and television personality. He yearned to write what he called a "big book" on the model of Russell Kirk's The Conservative Mind - it was to be called The Revolt Against the Masses - but he gave up in the early 1960s and settled for the fast lane of punditry, hosting Firing Line on TV, and later novel-writing. A conservative by political reputation and a traditionalist in his faith, he was nonetheless at home, and reached the peak of his success, during the frenetic '60s. He was most comfortable in the role of a rebel. And, as Dwight Macdonald wrote in a review of Buckley's first book, God and Man at Yale, he had much of the temperament and sensibility but none (or very little) of the political outlook of the left-wing rebel.
-William F. Buckley Jr., one private memory (Andrew Malcolm, 2/28/08, LA Times: Top of the Ticket)
And then his eyes lit up and he smiled. He wanted to share a recent story about "a dear friend." That dear friend, again surprisingly, was Hubert H. Humphrey, the former pharmacist, Minneapolis mayor, Minnesota senator and vice president whose liberal politics were about as far from Buckley's as Tokyo from Connecticut.Buckley was famous for skewering liberals lke Humphrey during the 1,504 episodes of his TV show, recalling on-air to one famous New York Democrat how many times he'd been on "Firing Line." And then, adding, "Tell me, Mark, have you learned anything?"
Humphrey was called "the Happy Warrior" for his endless enthusiasms and energies to fix things. He had returned to the Senate after being crushed by Richard Nixon and Humphrey's own badly-fractured Democratic Party in the antiwar violence, assassinations and political violence of 1968.
As Buckley talked that evening, the world silently knew that Humphrey was dying from cancer, slowly and surely. But the Minnesotan wouldn't let on.
Buckley had been on a recent flight from New York to Britain, he said. The in-flight movie projector had broken so he was reading, legs crossed, Santa Claus spectacles perched on his nose. When, abruptly, a noisy ruckus erupted behind and above him.
Buckley wheeled and there, coat off, sleeves rolled up, he saw Hubert H. Humphrey mounting a ladder and inserting himself into the broken projector situation and the aircraft's ceiling, muttering constantly to himself while he tried to fix the balky machine, without success as it turned out. "That's Hubert," Buckley thought with affection.
A flight attendant approached. She said the captain was a fan and was inviting Buckley into the cockpit to watch the landing in the London night. Buckley recalled being awed by the scene approaching ahead, the horizon aglow from the ancient city, the modern airport closer with all the lights, some flashing, many colored as the giant plane slowly descended through the darkness toward the earth.
Suddenly, the cockpit door flew open. "Bill!" shouted the senator. "What are you doing in here? Why wasn't I invited? What's going on? Oh, my goodness! Bill, will you look at that sight? Isn't that beautiful? Oh, my. Look!"
And, Buckley recounted, instead of the outside scenery, he ended up that night in the dark cockpit watching instead his dying friend in admiration, still excited, still himself, exulting at the world's beauty as he came down slowly for a landing at the end of a long trip.
Then, Buckley looked at me and took a sip of his drink. "I hope at the end," he said, "I come in for my last landing the same way."
I think he did.
MORE:
William F. Buckley Jr., RIP (Ben Johnson, 2/28/08, FrontPageMagazine.com)
Aloise Buckley Heath once reminisced that, when her brother set out to establish National Review in the mid-1950s, “Our most deeply buried fear was that Gerald L.K. Smith was the only other conservative in America.” Fifty years later, William F. Buckley Jr.’s “weekly journal of opinion” (now bi-weekly) reaches more than 150,000 subscribers, including the president of the United States, and is recognized as the intellectual fountainhead of modern conservatism.This sea-change can largely be attributed to the work of its founder. More than anyone else, William F. Buckley Jr. came to embody conservatism itself. He made the term “conservative” respectable, realigned the Republican Party (permanently, one hopes) to the Right, and set in motion a movement that saw two of its members elected president of the United States.
-Remembering William F. Buckley Jr.: The Economic Man (NY Sun, February 28, 2008)
-Remembering William F. Buckley Jr.: A Stupendous American (R. EMMETT TYRRELL JR., February 28, 2008, NY Sun)
-William F. Buckley: RIP., Enfant Terrible (Ann Coulter, 2/28/08, Real Clear Politics)
-William F. Buckley, Amiable Combatant (David von Drehle, Feb. 27,
2008, TIME)
-William F. Buckley: Mandarin of Right-Wing TV (RICHARD CORLISS, 2/27/08, TIME)
-OBIT: William F. Buckley Jr. is dead at 82 (Douglas Martin, February 28, 2008, IHT)
-William F. Buckley, Jr. Remembered (David Horowitz, 2/28/08, FrontPageMagazine.com)
-Conservatism's Heart and Soul (Alfred S. Regnery, 2/28/2008, American Spectator)
To say that Bill Buckley caused a sensation, when he first emerged on the scene with the publication of God and Man at Yale in the spring of 1951, would be an understatement. Just 25 and a recent Yale graduate, he was well known on campus, having been the editor of the Yale Daily News where his editorials were debated, reviled, and praised. But, as wrote John Chamberlain in his preface to the book, nearly everybody on campus thought young Buckley was fighting a losing fight. He was, they thought, on the side of the past.Yale was in the throes of celebrating its 250th anniversary, and was braced for a rousing good time and expecting praise from every quarter. But the celebration would soon be upstaged by Buckley's first book, which reported that, contrary to what it was telling its donors and trustees, Yale was not a Christian institution but instead promoting socialism and collectivism. It noted that academic freedom was a hoax as far as anything other than leftists was concerned, and suggested that the alumni should begin to direct the course of education at Yale instead of the administration and faculty.
Within weeks after the book appeared, Buckley was a national phenomenon, and the publisher was having a hard time keeping the book in stock.
-SPEECH: Man of Manifold Marvels: WFB and his mighty pen (Norman Podhoretz, 2/28/08, National Review)
-"The Sacred Elixir of Life": Bill’s large life (Michael Knox Beran, 2/28/08, National Review)
-INTERVIEW: W Buckley: Listening to Mr. Right: William Buckley's advice for Christian activists. (Michael Cromartie interview with William Buckley, 10/02/1995, Christianity Today)
-INTERVIEW: Buckley on Belief: A 1997 Books & Culture interview with William F. Buckley, Jr. (Interview by Michael Cromartie, November / December 1997, Christianity Today)
IF ONLY HE WERE LESS BRIGHT...:
Is the Terror Threat Overrated? (David Ignatius, 2/28/08, Real Clear Politics)
The heart of [Marc] Sageman's message is that we have been scaring ourselves into overexaggerating the terrorism threat -- and then by our unwise actions in Iraq making the problem worse. He attacks head-on the central thesis of the Bush administration, echoed increasingly by Republican presidential candidate John McCain, that, as McCain's Web site puts it, the United States is facing "a dangerous, relentless enemy in the War against Islamic Extremists" spawned by al-Qaeda.The numbers say otherwise, Sageman insists. The first wave of al-Qaeda leaders, who joined Osama bin Laden in the 1980s, is now down to a few dozen people on the run in the tribal areas of northwest Pakistan. The second wave of terrorists, who trained in al-Qaeda's camps in Afghanistan during the 1990s, has also been devastated, with about 100 hiding out on the Pakistani frontier. These people are genuinely dangerous, says Sageman, and they must be captured or killed. But they do not pose an existential threat to America, much less a "clash of civilizations."
...he might put two and two together and recognize that the WoT has been a perfect pretext for bringing the End of History to the Islamic world.
BECAUSE THE ARAB WORD FOR "SAFE HAVEN"...:
Missile Kills 13 in Pakistan (Reuters, 2/28/08)
A missile struck a house in a Pakistani region known as being a safe haven for al Qaeda early on Thursday, killing 13 suspected militants including foreigners, intelligence officials and residents said. [...]A security official said he believed the missile was fired by U.S. forces who are operating in neighbouring Afghanistan, and the house belonged to a Pashtun tribesman, Sher Mohammad Malikkheil, known as Sheroo, who is believed to have links with militants.
...is the American word for "target rich environment."
WHAT THE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS PROMISES...:
Louisiana governor pierces business as usual (Adam Nossiter, February 28, 2008, NY Times)
Downstairs, legislators gnashed their teeth, while upstairs at the Capitol here this week, the new governor claimed victory against the old customs down below.Six weeks into the term of Governor Bobby Jindal, an extensive package of ethics bills was approved here this week, signaling a shift in the political culture of a state proud of its brazen style. Jindal, the earnest son of Indian immigrants, quickly declared open season on the cozy fusion of interests and social habits that have prevailed among lobbyists, state legislators and state agencies here for decades. Mostly, he got what he wanted.
Jindal, an outsider to that rollicking if sometimes unsavory banquet, a Republican with a missionary's zeal to smite Louisiana's wickedness at one of its presumed sources, called on the Legislature to reform itself and its high-living ways.
Grudgingly, pushed by public opinion and business pressure, it went along.
...a Republican governor delivers.
ALONG THE AXIS:
Bush and Czech Leader Close to Deal on Radar (SHERYL GAY STOLBERG, 2/28/08, NY Times)
President Bush and the Czech leader said Wednesday that they were close to an agreement on a plan for the United States to install an early warning radar system in the Czech Republic, a key component of a missile defense system that has drawn stiff opposition from Russia.“There are only three words remaining to resolve,” said the Czech prime minister, Mirek Topolanek, speaking through an interpreter, after meeting with Mr. Bush in the Oval Office.
February 27, 2008
STAKES AND STRATEGY:
Lessons on the Long War: Understanding the stakes and strategy in Iraq. (Pete Hegseth, 2/27/08, National Review)
While traveling to Baghdad, I had plenty of downtime to re-read large portions of House to House, Staff Sergeant David Bellavia’s memoir of urban combat in Fallujah, and the U.S. Army/Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual authored by General David Petraeus and (new Vets for Freedom board member) Lieutenant Colonel John Nagl. The two books highlight fundamental aspects of the Iraq war today — and are must-reads for anyone who wants to understand the enemy we face and the strategy we’re currently employing against them, with great success.Congressional Medal of Honor nominee David Bellavia’s first-person account of deadly hand-to-hand combat in Iraq paints a realistic and detailed picture of the enemy he faced in Fallujah — what he called “an insurgent global all-star team” that included “Chechen snipers, Filipino machine gunners, Pakistani mortar men, and Saudi suicide bombers.” The insurgents were not ordinary Iraqis fighting for their freedom against an invading power — but international Islamic militants supported by al-Qaeda. “They seek not only to destroy us here in Iraq, but to destroy American power and influence everywhere. They revile our culture and want it swept clear, replaced with Sharia law.” If only certain U.S. Senators truly understood the global nature of our vicious enemy in Iraq.
The second book outlines the military doctrine behind our counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq — and is a testament to military adaptation and leadership. In the military theater, Petraeus’s manual calls for “securing and controlling the local populace,” but also for “providing essential services” and “supporting government reforms and reconstruction projects” — all of which requires “a high ratio of security forces to the protected population” (i.e., enough troops). Meanwhile, on the home front, the manual warns that “protracted counterinsurgency operations are hard to sustain. The effort requires a firm political will and substantial patience by the government, its people, and the countries providing support.” In light of today’s Senate fights, these words are painfully prescient.
The extent to which our military and government can internalize and implement the lessons these books provide will determine whether or not we succeed in Iraq and in the broader war on terror.
The motley nature of the insurgency and its inability to appeal to the broader population is actually the most important lesson.
BLACK POWER SYMBOL:
It's OK to vote for Obama because he's black (Gary Kamiya, Feb. 26, 2008, Salon)
[I]f Obama weren't black, he would not be the Democratic front-runner.I believe that most of Obama's supporters are voting for him for the same reason. Like me, they're drawn to his idealism, his youthful energy, his progressive politics. But it's his blackness that seals the deal.
And that's OK. In fact, it's wonderful. [...]
It's true that voting for Obama is in some ways a symbolic gesture, one that won't instantly solve America's race problems. But it will help. Symbolism is powerful.
The problem with arguing that it is okay to vote for Senator Obama just because he's black and your vote is symbolic way of siding with black empowerment is that you then have no rational basis for arguing that it is wrong to vote against him because he's black and because your chosen symbol is your own race. That's not a big deal in much of America, where blacks and whites aren't generally locked in a power struggle. But it matters very much in a number or urban areas and certain regions of the country where blacks are contesting political power with other ethnic cohorts--Latinos, Jews, Asians, etc.
Indeed, the open appeal to racial identity and the tensions especially with Latinos and Zionists combined with John McCain's Christian/post-racial politics (as it manifests itself on immigration and Israel in particular) creates a set of peculiar voting dynamics for the Fall. As the New Republic [presumably] unwittingly reported today, white nationalists feel right at home with Mr. Obama's identity politics. In fact, the most racist are not unlikely to vote against John McCain because they recognize him as a friend to Jews and Hispanics.
Such is the malignancy of the sort of racialism that Mr. Kamiya here celebrates.
THE BELTWAY HAS NEVER EVEN MET THE BASE:
Televangelist Supports McCain (Laura Meckler, 2/27/08, Wall Street Journal: Washington Wire)
Sen. John McCain took a step toward making peace with the evangelical community as he picked up the endorsement of televangelist John Hagee, a leading Christian supporter of Israel and pastor of the 18,000-member Cornerstone Church.Hagee praised McCain’s positions on abortion, Israel, the war in Iraq and immigration. “John McCain will be a strong, courageous and effective leader from the first day he steps into the Oval Office,” he said. “I am very honored today to lend my vigorous, enthusiastic and personal support to an American hero.”
Hagee, a fundamentalist Christian, preaches a health-and-wealth belief: if congregants’ faith is strong enough, God will reward them. He has devoted a great deal of energy to raise money and awareness for Israel. He is a leading figure in the “Christian-Zionist” movement, a political philosophy rooted in biblical prophecies and a belief that Israel’s struggles signal a prelude to Armageddon.
THE BASTARDS GAVE US WHAT WE PRETENDED TO WANT!:
In shift, G.O.P. welcomes Iraq debate: Republican senators see the issue as a plus for the presidential campaign. (Gail Russell Chaddock, 2/28/08, The Christian Science Monitor)
In a surprise move, Republicans stunned the Democratic leadership by voting to debate a bill that requires the Pentagon to begin the "safe redeployment of US troops" within 120 days. [...]Democratic leaders had planned to use this week's floor time to debate high-profile legislation on relief for Americans facing home foreclosures. "It is obvious to me what the game plan is: They want us to slow the Senate down from getting things done," Senator Reid said, after the 70-to-24 vote to take up the Iraq bill.
The only thing they said they'd do if they were elected was bring the troops home. Here's their chance to get the thing done.
MAVERICK HAS HIS MEASURE:
Democrats duel, then McCain pounces (Brian Knowlton, Patrick Healy and Jeff Zeleny, February 27, 2008, NY Times)
[I]n the debate, Obama - who like Clinton has promised to withdraw U.S. troops quickly from Iraq - was asked whether as president he would reserve the right to send American troops back into Iraq to quell a civil war or uprising.Obama said that "if Al Qaeda is forming a base in Iraq, then we will have to act in a way that secures the American homeland and our interests abroad." [...]
"When you examine that statement, it's pretty remarkable," McCain told a crowd in Tyler, Texas. "I have some news. Al Qaeda is in Iraq. It's called 'Al Qaeda in Iraq,' " McCain said, The Associated Press reported.
MARTY PERETZ RELEASES THE HOUNDS:
Race Man: How Barack Obama played the race card and blamed Hillary Clinton (Sean Wilentz, February 27, 2008, New Republic)
After several weeks of swooning, news reports are finally being filed about the gap between Senator Barack Obama's promises of a pure, soul-cleansing "new" politics and the calculated, deeply dishonest conduct of his actually-existing campaign. [...]Misleading propaganda is hardly new in American politics --although the adoption of techniques reminiscent of past Republican and special-interest hit jobs, right down to a retread of the fictional couple, seems strangely at odds with a campaign that proclaims it will redeem the country from precisely these sorts of divisive and manipulative tactics. As insidious as these tactics are, though, the Obama campaign's most effective gambits have been far more egregious and dangerous than the hypocritical deployment of deceptive and disingenuous attack ads. To a large degree, the campaign's strategists turned the primary and caucus race to their advantage when they deliberately, falsely, and successfully portrayed Clinton and her campaign as unscrupulous race-baiters--a campaign-within-the-campaign in which the worked-up flap over the Somali costume photograph is but the latest episode. While promoting Obama as a "post-racial" figure, his campaign has purposefully polluted the contest with a new strain of what historically has been the most toxic poison in American politics.
More than any other maneuver, this one has brought Clinton into disrepute with important portions of the Democratic Party. A review of what actually happened shows that the charges that the Clintons played the "race card" were not simply false; they were deliberately manufactured by the Obama camp and trumpeted by a credulous and/or compliant press corps in order to strip away her once formidable majority among black voters and to outrage affluent, college-educated white liberals as well as college students. The Clinton campaign, in fact, has not racialized the campaign, and never had any reason to do so. Rather the Obama campaign and its supporters, well-prepared to play the "race-baiter card" before the primaries began, launched it with a vengeance when Obama ran into dire straits after his losses in New Hampshire and Nevada--and thereby created a campaign myth that has turned into an incontrovertible truth among political pundits, reporters, and various Obama supporters. This development is the latest sad commentary on the malign power of the press, hyping its own favorites and tearing down those it dislikes, to create pseudo-scandals of the sort that hounded Al Gore during the 2000 campaign. It is also a commentary on how race can make American politics go haywire. Above all, it is a commentary on the cutthroat, fraudulent politics that lie at the foundation of Obama's supposedly uplifting campaign.
The New Republic will endorse Maverick this Fall.
"MY FRIEND, THE CON MAN":
Model behaviour: William F Buckley, who died today at 82, genuinely respected his ideological adversaries - in stark contrast to today's demonisation of political opponents (Rick Perlstein, February 27, 2008, The Guardian)
William F Buckley was my friend.I'm hard on conservatives. I get harder on them just about every day. I call them "con men". I do so without apology. And I cannot deny that Buckley, the founder of National Review and leader of the conservative movement, said and did many things over the course of his career that were disgusting as well. I've written about some of them. But this is not the time to go into all that.
My friend just passed away at the age of 82. He was a good and decent man. He knew exactly what my politics were about - he knew I was an implacable ideological adversary - yet he offered his friendship to me nonetheless. He did the honour of respecting his ideological adversaries without covering up the adversarial nature of the relationship in false bonhomie. A remarkable quality, all too rare in an era of the false fetishism of "post-partisanship" and Broderism and go-along-to-get-along. He was friends with those he fought. He fought with friends. These are the highest civic ideals to which an American patriot can aspire. [...]
Nice people, friends, can disagree about the most fundamental questions about the organisation of society. And there's nothing wrong with that. We must not fantasize about destroying our political adversaries, nor fantasize about magically converting them. We must honour that some humans are conservative and some humans are liberal, and that it will always be thus.
And some, simply are mensches. Last year Bill called me to ask if I would blurb his next book, about Goldwater. I chose not to. But damn: I bit my nails a little. I wanted him to blurb my book! Now he'd certainly take out his revenge by refusing. That's the way you're supposed to behave in the literary game.
He didn't. Instead, when a reporter came calling to ask him about Rick Perlstein, he said something remarkably sweet for the record - for all I know, one of his last public utterances. Then, after sending him the galleys of my next book, I heard back from him post-haste: another self-reproach. He would love to endorse it, but could not. He was too frail. This in an email obviously drafted by himself. Letters were missing, words garbled.
Buckleyism to the end: friendship and adversarialism coinciding. All of us who write about politics, may that be our role model.
MORE:
-VIDEO: Buckley on Buckley (The Open Mind, 1996)
-ETEXT: Odyssey Of A Friend Whittaker Chamber S Letters To William F. Buckley Jr 1954-1961 (1956)
-ESSAY: Buckley: The Right's Practical Intellectual (E. J. Dionne Jr., October 11, 2005, Washington Post)
-TRIBUTE:The Unbought Grace of Life: Remembering William F. Buckley, Jr. (Myron Magnet, 27 February 2008, City Journal)
-TRIBUTE: How William F. Buckley Changed America (Dinesh D'Souza, Feb 27th 2008, AOL News)
-OBIT: William F. Buckley, Jr., R.I.P. (The Editors, 2/27/08, National Review)
-TRIBUTE: William F. Buckley Jr., RIP (Roger Kimball, 2/27/08, Roger's Rules)
This morning, I got the very sad news that my friend William F. Buckley Jr died earlier today. He was 82. I cannot say that the news was entirely unexpected—Bill had been seriously ill for months—but it was nevertheless shocking. I am one of a host of Bill’s friends who contributed a few words about him to NRO. I’d like also to share the some portions of the review I wrote of his “literary autobiography,” Miles Gone By, partly because it allows me to speak about him in the present tense:...
WELL, HE DIED WITH HIS BOOTS ON....:
William F. Buckley Jr. Is Dead at 82 (DOUGLAS MARTIN, 2/27/08, NY Times)
William F. Buckley Jr., who marshaled polysyllabic exuberance, famously arched eyebrows and a refined, perspicacious mind to elevate conservatism to the center of American political discourse, died Wednesday at his home in Stamford, Conn.Mr Buckley, 82, suffered from diabetes and emphysema, his son Christopher said, although the exact cause of death was not immediately known. He was found at his desk in the study of his home, his son said. “He might have been working on a column,” Mr. Buckley said.
Given how much he wrote, that seems fitting.
Mr. Buckley is the common thread that runs throughout the entire history of the modern conservative movement, from having Albert Jay Nock as a family friend to employing Whittaker Chambers, Willmoore Kendall, Frank S. Meyer, James Burnham, Jeffrey Hart, etc. in the early days of National Review, to inventing Barry Goldwater to promoting Ronald Reagan and so on and so forth. He was in many ways the most influential political figure of the 2nd half of the 20th century.
You can hardly go wrong picking up any of his work, but two in particular that we'd recommend are: The Unmaking of a Mayor, which ranks right up there with Richard Ben Cramer's What it Takes as a look at American politics in action; and Stained Glass, the best of the Blackford Oakes thrillers.
Hopefully it wasn't being mentioned in the same breath as a mere blogger that killed him...
Here's his fine summation in the famous Panama Canal Treaty debate with Ronald Reagan:
MORE:
-Q&A on William F. Buckley (The New York Times, 2/27/08)
Sam Tanenhaus, the editor of The Times Book Review and Week in Review, is writing a biography of William F. Buckley Jr., who died Wednesday. Mr. Buckley was for decades the intellectual standard bearer for American conservatism, and he was also one of the 20th century’s truest men of letters: a magazine editor, newspaper columnist, novelist and essayist — the author of 45 books.Sam is taking reader questions about Mr. Buckley. What do you want to know? Ask your questions in the comments field below, and we’ll get to as many as we can.
-VIDEO: William F. Buckley (C-APAN: American Writers)
-ARCHIVES: William F. Buckley Jr. Archive on National Review Online
-ARCHIVES: Featured Author: William F. Buckley Jr. (With News and Reviews From the Archives of The New York Times)
-ARCHIVES: William F. Buckley (NY Times)
-REVIEW ESSAY: The Right
