quasi-pundit,
barstool philosopher,
backseat driver
but never a Monday morning quarterback
email:
adrag1 at msn.com [until the QP server gets fixed]
willv at comcast.net

QuasiPundit Sections

QuasiPundit Home

Punditwatch
Will Vehrs' twice-weekly review of the pundits

From Left Field
Essays from QuasiPundit Tony Adragna

Dispatches From Afar Commentary, analysis, and entertainment from QuasiPundit contributors

Blog Watch II
Your guide to who is saying what, where

QuasiPundit's Above The Fold
Today's top stories from four major newspapers - without commentary

Blogs of Note

The Newspaper Rack

QuasiPundit Forum"The Refuge"
Reader Feedback & Discussion

Favourites

Virginia Pundit Watch Will Vehrs' Weekly Column at Bacon's Rebellion

DC Metro Blog Map

UVA Center for Politics and Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball Predictions 2002

TAPPED

Spinsanity - Countering rhetoric with reason

InstaPundit.Com

On the Third Hand
A blog by a proud member of the Bellicose Women's Brigade

Marstonalia

Newsrack Blog

Samizdata.net

Mark A. Kilmer's Political Annotation

A Nickles Worth of Free Advice

Where HipHop and Libertarianism meet

Note To Self
"Crash"'s way kewl blog

The Rallying Point

Cursor.org

Mind Over What Matters

MaxSpeak Weblog

AintNoBadDude

Off the Kuff

What She Really Thinks

Unqualified Offerings

Talking Points Memo

Kausfiles

Matt Welch

KEN LAYNE

the talking dog

Cornfield Commentary

Cooped Up

The Rittenhouse Review

The Lefty Directory

Sneaking Suspicions

Derek Crane

Common Sense and Wonder

Jim Miller on Politics

Croooow Blog: Rantings and ravings on the news of the day.

Ipse Dixit

The Road to Surfdom

Jason Rylander

Daimnation!

Smythe's World

Weblog Central

l8r

COINTELPRO Tool

War Liberal

Andrew Sullivan

The Volokh Conspiracy

Counterspin Central

perfunctory.org
perfunctory links(We think it's "the Mother of links pages for news and pundit junkies" - eds)








Independent Gay Forum


Town Hall: Conservative News and Information - The Conservative Movement Starts Here

Who's He Think He's Foolin'

Tony Adragna

OK, Putin didn't really give me anything to chew on (Barbara asked all the "right questions", but the answers were all predictable). Somebody's gonna try to make something out of the fact that Mr. Putin "warned us about terrorism." Well, what Mr. Putin was doing in the past was defending the Russian campaign in Chechnya. What Mr. Putin is doing now is piggybacking on Sep 11, and hoping that his support for our campaign in Afghanistan will translate into willful blindness in re Chechnya. I'm not offering a judgement on Russia's actions in Chechnya, but I'm also not believing that the Russia's concern in Chechnya is all about terrorism.

Mr. Putin's comments about missile defense were also no surprise to me. The pro-MD crowd wants to believe that we're moving closer to agreement on the allegedly defunct ABM Treaty - not so! I said some months ago that Mr. Putin is a "yes man" - that is, he initially says yes, but ends up saying no. That's in contrast to the Sov's who always said nyet, but came arount to da after extended negotiations. Mr. Putin argues that there's room within the ABM Treaty for development of some form of MD - he oughta know, the Russians have a system (sorta). But, here's the problem - the Russians see the ABM Treaty as a "framework" and our proposal as "frameless". We're not going to negotiate our way outa the ABM Treaty, and I think that unilateral withdrawal (allowed under the treaty) is a bad idea. Anyway, the people who predicted, after the first Bush-Putin meeting, that the two would soon be on the same page were naifs.


Best line - Putin qoutes Churchill ( that's who he attributed it to, I haven't been able to confirm): he used the line about politicians looking toward the coming elections, but statesmen looking at coming generations. There's alot of "Churchillianess" going around lately, and I don't mind (WSC is my heero).
posted by Anonymous at 11:14 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"

It Wouldna Made A Dif...

Tony Adragna

We missed what? You mean - Giulianni's gotta go? They were having an election in New York? ...

I love the print pundit review!!!

I really didn't want ot talk about the "campaign finance" thingy because my solution isn't very popular, and wouldn't work anyway. Public financing only gets one's foot in the door, and would only work if you made it impossible for a candidate to self-finance. We might be able to limit how the parties/candidates raise and spend contributions, but I don't see any way to prevent candidates from spending money out of their own pockets (not any constitutional way, that is - of course, the same argument is made in re contribution limits i.e. Mr. Justice Scalia would still like to revisit that Nixon decision - what a goombah! NOT!).

I've been described as a goombah - by somebody who didn't know what it means (some young political science major who just graduated from one of those schools). He tried to use it pejoratively in response to a piece of wisdom that I was attempting to impart(someting along the line of Ensigns not being able to find their own asses with both hands, a flashlight, and a roadmap - that's why we have Chiefs and Petty Officers - translate that into a normal office culture and you get the gist). Me and the bartender just looked at each other and laughed, while the snooty little elitist snob stormed out (too bad, he was kewt). See, I mighta dropped out of college, but I got more out of my liberal arts education (and reading books) than most of my contemporaries who went to Hastings Law, or Stanford Med (well, they got more money, but I've lived a fuller life). Education's wasted on people who go to school! We can do a more indepth treatment of education - it's on the agenda for our next ed. conf. I was gonna start off by saying "you don't want to ask me about education, I'm the guy who dropped out", but I think that I've beaten up on McC enough over that bit of self-efacement.

I usually agree with Broder, but I still think that the decision to not hit the campaign trail had less to do with "party politics" than "national unity" and "focus". I'm glad somebody asked the question about Gilmore - I was wondering what kind of flak he was going to get. My second favorite pundit, Mark Sheilds, got me a little peeved today, though (the column isn't online). He wants to reinstate the draft in order to make sure that this whole spirit of "national unity" gets translated into "mutual sacrifice". I think national service is great, but I don't want anybody in service who doesn't really wanna be there - ya know...

Well, I'm gonna watch Baba's interview with Putin tonight... I might have something to say after...
posted by Anonymous at 9:42 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"

The first "print pundit" edition of Punditwatch is here
posted by Will Vehrs at 2:24 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"

While Quasipundit Slept ....

Will Vehrs

Tony, we here at Quasipundit were all over the VA and NJ races. missing totally the prodigious vote-buying of Michael Bloomberg in New York City. I'm not sure what his victory means, other than being another example of a disturbing (to me) trend: rich people having a leg up on running for office, and no cries for campaign finance reform directed against their excesses.

The best and worst of politics is on display today. The best has victors basking in the glow of their victory, with optimism abounding. The worst has backbiting political hacks assigning blame and demanding that "heads roll." I prefer the former activity and I wish my governer-elect, Mark Warner, the best as he assembles a transition team to help him lead Virginia during uncertain times.

You have an interesting background, Tony, and I'm glad you shared it. An old boss of mine was fond of saying, "It's never too late to make the right decision." I would never bestow a raspberry citizenship award on you for your past shunning of the electoral process; we all find ourselves and our "calling" on our own, unique schedule.

I didn't read the Philadelphia schools story, but I did see the headline and thought that education might be a good topic for one of those on-going dialogs we've talked about. I get as maudlin about classrooms as I do about voting. When I hear all the hand-wringing about the need for more spending on schools, I acknowledge the importance of money, but I know that a good teacher is as good in a sparkling high tech classroom as in a one room cabin heated by a wood stove. What happens within the four classroom walls trumps everything else. Let's talk more about this.

My Jihad Against Sabato Ends....

Will Vehrs

The Washington Post's on-line section today featured two savvy political observers. Professor Robert D. Holsworth of Virginia Commonwealth University is the Avis to Larry Sabato's Hertz Virginia political talking head franchise. David Broder, of course is the dean of Washington political reporters. This half of the Quasipundit empire saw their appearances as a chance to needle Sabato for his unkind remark yesterday. Cleverly disguised as "Manassas, VA," Quasipundit had this exchange with Holsworth:

Manassas, VA: Professor Holsworth, on Monday Professor Sabato charged that President Bush didn't campaign for Mark Earley because he'd rather work out in the gym or throw out the first ball at the World Series. What's your take on the risk/reward calculation the White House had to make?
Robert D. Holsworth: I love Larry's answer. Bush may be a bit like his dad and see campaigning a necessary evil, not something that he really likes to do. In terms of the risk-reward calaculation, it was probably pretty simple: why stop in New Jersey on your way to Yankee Sadium or cross the river at lunctime, to expend your political capital on two candidates who were going to lose, because then the gremlins in the press might read the results as a referendum on you. In addition, it might damage the above the fray image as a unifier that the public is so supportive of today. On the other hand, I think that President Bush could have defended his decision to campaign relatively easily. What better signal could you of conveying the President's message that America should return to "business as usual" than having the President in the middle of a political campaign.

I hate it when this happens! My similar question to Broder was not selected, but this question on the issue was asked by a Quasipundit mole:

Washington, D.C.: David,
Since the Republicans lost two big races yesterday and the White House stayed out of them for the most part, there are some angry Republicans out there. Do you think the White House strategy was calculated to maximize Bush's influence in the 2002 elections which will matter much more?
David S. Broder: I think the White House strategy was calculated to insulate Bush from personal association with two likely defeats. They saw it coming, and decided to step aside. I fully expect to see Bush heavily engaged in the 2002 races, where he has a great deal at stake in control of the House and Senate and of key state houses.

Based on Holsworth and Broder, I'll acknowledge that Sabato just gave a flippant answer instead of a long-winded discussion of the President's options. The jihad is over.

BTW, Tony, Broder sees the airline security issue clearly:

Bethesda, Md.: It seems to have been decided by/in the press that only federal government employees can adequately provide airport security, and that to think otherwise means you're acting in a partisan manner or are beholden to the lobbyists. This is obviously not the case; it's a matter of hiring good employees, training them well, and making the job attractive (pay, benefits, opportunity for advancement, etc). The government isn't uniquely capable of providing any of those. Why doesn't the press report that it's an issue that intelligent people can differ on?
David S. Broder: I agree completely with your statement. It is a legitimate debate. The key to this problem is recruitment, training and opportunity for advancement. Providing that is more important than the question of who signs the paycheck. It's also important that the decision be made soon, because the current situation is not working.



posted by Will Vehrs at 7:28 AM | permalink | "The Refuge"

I'm Psycho... I mean Psychic...

Tony Adragna

It was a purely inuitive guess about you punching a card... at least you're not still using those old lever machines like we are here in Prince Georges County. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the importance of voting - you've shamed me into an admission - '00 was the first time I voted.

I know - go ahead and renominate me for that "special citizenship award". See, in my radical-lefty days (I was in seminary while Liberation Theology was en vogue amongst radicals) I had refused to register with Selective Services. I couldn't get any fed aide, and was afraid to register to vote because "they would come get me". Well, I ended up dropping out after three semesters, and (irony of ironies) volunteered for the U.S. Navy in Jan '85. I still had a problem voting - being the person that I am, I just couldn't square myself with voting for my own commander-in-chief. I left the service in '88, and thought about voting, but didn't like the choices (same answer for '92 and '96). I decided that '00 was time to "get off the pot" - I don't really care for Gore, but I knew that I didn't want another Bush in office (I've revised and extended since Sep 11 - I don't even want to think about how Gore would've handled that address to congress).

Which brings me to Sabato's remarks on Bush. You know what line really turned me off? It was that bit about being "AWOL" - them's serious charges, you know what I mean. It's absurd to claim that the president is "AWOL" from "party politics" at a time when he needs to be the symbol of "national unity" (there I go again). Of course, I've been suggesting from the beginning of this presidency that he oughta be less partisan - but I'd rather have party politics instead of what it took to get a semblance of national unity (well, at least there's unity outside the Beltway - I'm a betting man, but I'm not putting any money on when Congress is gonna get it together). Wait a minute - I'm agreeing with Fred Barnes! Where're Eleanor and Jack when I need them?

And how about Mortawn? I don't read Roll Cal as often as I did when I was working on Capitol Hill, but something prompted me to see what Kondrake's up to. He's endorsing the Snowe/Murray "tax holiday" scheme (similar plan in the House offered by Lindsey Graham). We've agreed that there isn't a whole lot that can be done to fix the economy right now (with Joe Britt's concurrence) - I guess some people won't take no for an answer so long as there's something that hasn't been tried. My only question - where's the money gonna come from?

And it's time for my story pick of the day - it's about money, fixing things, and the futility of the wrong approach. Pennsylvania wants to privatize (sorta) Philladelphia schools. I think that every child in America should have a chance to get a private school education - that's not what we're talking about here. Schools need money , and more efficient management, but what they need even more are better teachers. There's absolutely no reason why students can't succeed in public schools - they simply need to be taught. Frank McCourt tells the story about getting his students excited about literature and writing after being told that he was fighting a hopeless battle. The only hopeless battle in public schools is trying to get rid of inept teachers - fix everything else about public schools and you've gone nowhere until you've fixed that problem. My solution to the education problem: bust the union (in a weird coincidence, I was reading this story in the office when a call came in from the Council for Advancement and Support of Education, where I spent the day doing more "admin work").

I think that's 'nuff for tonight!

p.s. I did say that I would get back to you 'bout "oilmen" - I hafta admit that I have nothing against oilmen. Richmond, CA depends on Chevron. Check out the "Rosie the Riveter" site, too (Kaiser is a BIG name in my hometown neck of the woods - I grew up in El Sobrante, which is an unincorporated part of Richmond, tucked away in a little valley behind the Berkeley Hills).

p.p.s. least suprising GOP loss - Mayor James S. Grimes lost his bid for reelection in the City of Frederick, Md- this loss really isn't worth noting in anybody's little black book - nothing extraordinary 'bout what happened there.
posted by Anonymous at 8:29 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"

My Raspberry Goes to Larry Sabato

Will Vehrs

Tony, just like the night shift at every plant I've ever worked, you've left a lot of loose ends for the day shift ....

I'm glad your assignment turned out okay. Why do I think you might just might meet E. J. Dionne on one of your breaks, strike up a conversation, and end up doing regression analysis on tax policy for Brookings? I won't be able to cover both shifts here at Quasipundit, you know .... I'm also pleased that you were able to get information on the Diamondbacks from another source and that at one time you were a Bay area sports fan. How do you survive, living where you do, without being a Redskins (or, as Greg Easterbrook calls them, the "Chesapeake Watershed Region Indigenous Persons) fan?

Bin Laden over Unocal? Hey, oilmen aren't that bad! I used to be one.

You got hacked off at William Raspberry yesterday; I was seeing red over a comment in the Washington Post by Larry Sabato. Sabato is a professor at the University of Virginia, an author, and a widely quoted talking head. He also moderates political debates in Virginia (don't get me started on his last Warner-Earley effort). Professor Sabato does a lot of good work, including what he was doing yesterday: taking questions from the citizenry on-line at the Post site. The comment that got me going was in response to a question about whether President Bush should have come to Virginia to campaign for Mark Earley.

Quote of the Day
If President Bush had made the time to come down for Earley, or even to tape a commercial, then Earley would have been significantly advantaged. As it is, Bush was too busy attending the World Series and maintaining his exercise regimen of 1 to 2 hours per day. Larry Sabato

The Post making it "quote of the day" added insult to injury. First off, the exercise regimen thing is a cheap shot. Second, New Yorkers seemed to appreciate the President attending the Series, going to a place that before 9-11 gave him about 30% of the vote. Secondly, I don't think Sabato knows just how fragile Bush's support is right now. I don't think it makes sense for him to risk that support during a war to campagin for a candidate who is behind, running against a candidate who has gone out of his way to support Bush's conduct of the war. Sabato is one of the biggest critics of partisanship, but here he's as much as asking for partisanship--maybe so he could criticize it. There, I've got that off my chest. I'm off to vote.

One last thing--why is it that a capitalist pig, Lincoln-driving housemate won't pick up the check?

Loose ends...

Tony Adragna

... More like frayed endsWill. I finished at CLIR with rave reviews, so I won't be meeting Dionne soon. Don't know where I'm off to today.

It was my turn to cook, and I didn't feel like it - so I paid. BTW, his name is William. The other housemate is conservative as well (I'm surrounded, but I hold my own, thank you very much).

I'll get back with my thoughts on Sabato, and oilmen in the PM... Don't forget to punch all the way through...

Not a Hanging Chad in Sight

Will Vehrs

Tony, how did you know we were still using punch cards for voting here in Southside Virginia?

I walked with my daughter to her school, Swift Creek Elementary, the polling place for my area. For some reason, election day is usually a school holiday. Only a Democrats for Mark Warner person was working outside, greeting voters. The poll workers, unfailingly cheerful as always, checked me in quickly. I was the 95th "P-Z" voter, an indicator that turnout had been fairly brisk up to that point. All of my agonizing over my vote was long past, so I punched my card quickly. I pulled it out--all my punches were "clean." I checked the candidate number on the ballot versus the number punched on my card. Everything checked out--I had not voted for Pat Buchanan by mistake ... I turned my ballot in and got my "I Voted" sticker. When I got to the office, I saw a lot of those stickers on my colleagues.

I get maudlin when I think about voting. I cannot remember an election I've missed since 1972, even if it was just for some Soil Conservation District board. I've voted absentee while stationed in Germany, and I've voted in NY, PA, and NJ, in addition to the majority of my votes that have been cast in Virginia. I tried to explain to my daughter today that soldiers had died in war to ensure that I could freely punch that card. I'm not sure she fully undestood--she's only six. Someday she will.

Tell William and the other conservative housemate that I feel their pain. You hold your own all too well when you are presented with our "truth."

Make It A Raspberry Torte for Sabato

Will Vehrs

Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post quotes conservative warhorse Fred Barnes at length today and--surprise, surprise--it fits in with my critique of Larry Sabato's gratuitous slam on Bush. Barnes writes:

A top priority for Bush is to keep the nation, and particularly Democrats and Republicans in Congress, behind the war effort. To achieve that, Bush has accepted limitations on his political role. He’s declined to campaign this year for GOP candidates. He’s no longer the public champion of a Republican agenda. Even on war-related issues, he rarely promotes his own proposals or those of congressional Republicans. He doesn’t criticize Democrats.

Since the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Bush has become Mr. Bipartisan. This is all but required of a war president. The attacks caused Bush’s approval rating to reach 90 percent, but it’s his performance post-September 11 that’s kept it there. He’s forged a congenial working relationship with Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle and House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt. They’ve had only one sharp disagreement (when Daschle said he wouldn’t bring up more judicial nominations this year). On the conduct of the war, there’s been no serious Democratic dissent. The result is Bush has the luxury of speaking for a united America on the war.

But he’s sacrificed the luxury of speaking as the leader of the GOP. In fact, he’s leaned so far toward the middle he’s occasionally tilted in favor of Democrats. He made concessions to Democrats on an economic stimulus package without insisting on Republican-backed elements. This upset conservatives in Congress, who felt abandoned.

According to Sabato, Bush didn't campaign for Earley because he'd rather pump iron or appear at the World Series. According to Barnes, who probably would want Bush to campaign for Republicans for selfish Republican reasons, Bush didn't because he's now a war president in a unique bi-partisan situation. I'm with Barnes here. Is it such a bad thing to have conservatives in Congress (who have no where else to go) mad at you while keeping moderates and Democrats muted? I think the war effort is worth making Mark Earley and Bret Schundler run on their merits.





posted by Will Vehrs at 7:58 AM | permalink | "The Refuge"

This Is Really Hurtin'

Tony Adragna

I hate not beng able to check in during the day, but I'm gonna hafta be QuasiPundit PMing it for awhile.

Remember the Afghan story from our earlier exchange? Well, I got around to reading Raspberry's column on the Metro ride home - I'd like to send him a raspberry. It really irks me when columnists pose queries the answers to which are in stories published on the same day in the same publication. But, that doesn't bother me as much as the fact that his questions are inane (what's the point of asking a moot question?).

I think that failure to publicly link (believe me, everybody who shoulda known knew) the Taliban with support for bin Laden is summed up in this whole question of "recognition". It's more diplomatic bumbling a la April Gillaspie's pre-Gulf War nod at the "Beast of Baghdad". Of course, who knew that it was going to end up costing 5000+ lives right here at home. Albright even concedes the point that I've been harping on - Americans just never really paid attention to the threat that these thugs pose.

The bit about Unocal in the story is more telling than it appears at face value. Why would the the Taliban harbor bin Laden at roughly $20MM per year, when they could be getting $100MM per year from Unocal if they cleaned up their act? Seems obvious to me - they like bin laden a whole lot more than they want to admit (true love trumps money, even if your partner is ugly - doesn't it?).

Let's see - you got an election to go to tomorrow. Another good opinion piece on why the GOP oughta lose The Old Dominion. Read that along with the editorial about choices for Northern Virginia. It looks like some people are thinking that taxes aren't that bad after all.

Just a quick note on constitutional issues: I was listening to NPR while the capitalist-pig Lincoln driving Republican (my housemate William) was driving me to dinner (which I had to pay for out of my depleted coffer), and I heard a discussion about "restricting rights". One of the panelists (I don't know who, I was trying to tune out the voice-over-identification so's I could hear what he was saying) said that post-Sep 11, people are more accepting of restrictions on rights. I'll agree, people are more accepting, so long as it's somebody else's rights that are being restricted. If all rights exercises come with a cost to the individual (which I certainly have never disputed), then all restrictions must come with a cost to society - wouldn't you agree?

Townsend is a good Maryland name, and Kennedy gets recognition just about everywhere - it's kinda like somebody named Alioto Brown running in California. But politics is all in the counties over here; Schaefer was mayor of Baltimore, Glendening was Prince Georges County Exec, and I think Duncan has a good shot at Gov next time around (if he decides to run). I'll go out on a limb and predict that WP won't endorse Kennedy Townsend because she won't run.

You never responded - who are these D-Back folk? (I know who they are, now). I haven't been a sports fan since Al Davis took the Raiders down south - only to bring them back. I still catch a 49rs game when I feel like it, and I watch the As play very rarely. It's odd, I grew up in the S.F. area, the home of three great ball clubs, and I loved it - not anymore.

My assignment today was OK. I told the agency that my "dream job" is research/law library work (which the "crazy Morrocan" trained me very well at, thank you very much). So, they sent me to the Council on Library and Information Resources (next door to Brookings - I behaved myself on my cig breaks). I did "admin work" (which is temp lingo for "stuffing envelopes") all day. The one break was when they asked me to check some citations in a paper that somebody was preparing (only found three problems - easily corrected). One of the citations was a page cite in Nicholson Baker's book. Remember the Slate dialog between Baker and Fallows: one wharehouses old newspapers, the other can't figure out how to retrieve old copy from outdated storage media - can't help either one.

Back at ya tomorrow!

Update: ooops, I said "three great ball clubs". Who did I leave out? The S.F. Giants! Sorry! I never was a Giants fan, what with Billy Martin's As being what they were while I was growing. Speaking of coaches, that's another reason I don't follow the Raiders anymore - they got rid of John Madden (I don't care what anybody says, Madden is da Man)
posted by Anonymous at 9:43 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"

Prescient Pundits Call It for D'Backs

Will Vehrs

Tony, some people watch the Sunday pundit shows for the politics. I watch them for the sports tips! Yesterday morning, on ABC's This Week, Sam Donaldson asked for World Series predictions. Linda Douglas, heretofore never known as heir to the mantle of Grantland Rice, opined that this Series would be decided in the bottom of the ninth inning. George Will, seizing on this opening, noted that a decision in the bottom of the ninth would mean victory for his favorites, the Diamondbacks. Forget politics, get these two a show on ESPN!

Not A Sports Fan

Tony Adragna

Who are these Diamondbacks I'm hearing so much about?

Speaking of pundits, the traffic on Punditwatch is taking off - kewl!

Just read a good Afghan background story in the WP. Two notes - the WP is critical of a failure to designate Afghanistan as a state sponsor of terrorism, but fails to hit on the point that Afghanistan is really a terrorist supported state; and, in line with InstaPundits "Bellicose women" theme, Madeline Albright was the first US official to call the Taliban what it is.

Well, I'm sitting in an office waiting for an assignment - wish me luck...

"Speech must be free, but cannot be without cost"

Will Vehrs

Tony, while you're waiting--and good luck!--see if a Wall Street Journal is laying around. Greg Easterbrook has a great op-ed piece on free speech. Easterbrook edits Beliefnet.com and writes the snarky Tuesday Morning Quarterback for Slate(sorry, can't get away from sports!). A lot of folks who have been criticized for their remarks about 9/11 are falsely claiming abridgement of their right to free speech. Easterbrook demolishes their "hypersensitivity." Here's a good summary from his piece:

It is censorship if books are seized and burned; it is not censorship if books are tossed in the trash because their authors mock the liberty that made the books possible.

The Right To Not Listen

Tony Adragna

I just read Easterbrook's piece, it's featured on OpinionJournal.com today. In fairness, there are some people who do argue a need for censorship - to them I say "just change the channel"(or, don't buy that book, visit that website, etc). I have to agree, though, that what's been happenning recently isn't censorship.

Off on assignment...

Not a Pretty Story

Will Vehrs

Tony, hope you've lucked into a good assignment right off the bat. I know how "dicey" some of them can be on the first day. Maybe some day we can discuss the politics and culture of offices and workplaces. There's a potentially long dialog ....

I read the article about Afghanistan that you cited. It's an ugly story of bureaucratic and policy drift, mismanagment, and mistakes. It's not hard to sympathize with Madeline Albright's explanation for why things happened the way they did. At least she's talking, unlike Warren Christopher, who refused to be interviewed. I recall that years ago some wag, commenting on an international problem, said simply, "None of this would have happened if Warren Christopher were still alive."

I was never a big fan of Albright, thinking her much better as an academic than our top diplomat. But she had some good moments even while hamstrung by serving in an administration that until the end concentrated on domestic issues. Why she was never able to link the Taliban's treatment of women and their terrorist support in order to effect both issues probably haunts her.


posted by Will Vehrs at 7:23 AM | permalink | "The Refuge"

Better Late Than Never for MacEachin

Will Vehrs

Tony, last week the Washington Post endorsed Democrats Mark Warner and Tim Kaine for Virginia Governor and Lieutenant Governor, respectively. Today, two days before the election, they finally endorse Democrat Donald MacEachin for Attorney General. It's one of the most tepid endorsements you'll ever see. I suspect the Post editorial board had a lot of trouble with this one and that's why it came so late. The Republican, Jerry Kilgore, is very qualified and hails from Southwest Virginia, an underrepresented part of the state. The Post editorial page's reflexive Democratic tilt came through for MacEachin, but I think Kilgore will win on Tuesday.

Wouldn't you like to be a fly on the wall at a major newspaper editorial board meeting? Let me go out on a limb and predict that the WP will endorse Kathleen Kennedy Townsend for Governor of Maryland, ha ha ....

No Record, No Experience...

Tony Adragna

You said "tepid", but it's more like "lame". Admit that he's not "the perfect candidate for this job", but give him a chance anyway. What they should've said is that since he represents an opportunity for change, that makes him "the perfect candidate" because there's so much change needed.

Is that a BIG race in Virginia? (I've seen some few Kilgore ads in the last few days, but no MacEachin ads)

Kathleen Kennedy Townsend for Governor of Maryland? Hey, ya never know! I kinda hope Doug Duncan (Montgomery County Executive) runs ...

Steppingstone to the Statehouse

Will Vehrs

Tony, the Attorney General job in Virginia has become the best launch pad for governor in recent years. J. Marshall Coleman, Mary Sue Terry, Jim Gilmore, and now Mark Earley all were Attorneys General. Is it a BIG race in Virginia? No, but it's all the GOP has going, so that's why I'm flogging it! It's basically an administrative job--it's not "top cop," although you'd think so, to see the ads.

Don't you think Kennedy Townsend's name and fund raising network will scare off potential challengers in Maryland?



posted by Will Vehrs at 9:49 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"

Sunday With Snakes

Will Vehrs

No, Tony, not the political kind. People were telling me that I wasn't getting out enough, so I took my daughter to the "Reptile Expo." I have now gotten out quite enough, thank you very much. Imagine a rug bazaar, only with snakes and salamanders.

Maybe this was all the preparation I needed to post the first "Punditwatch."

Snakes v. Snakes

Tony Adragna

Let's see, you went to a running event yesterday, and a reptile expo today - I ran around the basement snaking out the mainline yesterday. Guess you had a more interesting weekend, and had time to watch the pundits. Great job on Punditwatch - I like very much.

I tuned out George's interview with Gen. Franks - I had the same reaction as your initial. But, thinking about it, that pairing made sense: the interview wasn't about military strategy, it was about fighting the homefront PR war. I glad you picked up on Zakaria's comment - I read his "The Politics of Rage: Why Do They Hate Us?" back on Oct 14, and agreed without reservation. I don't need to comment further on Dionne's class warfare nonsense. I think you covered all the bases...


posted by Will Vehrs at 3:57 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"

A Note on "Security"

Tony Adragna

Just watched the Kerry/De Lay face off on "Meet the Press" - I was expecting De Lay to defend the House GOP approach on efficiency, or cost, etc. What I got out of their dialogue is that the main reason for the House GOP approach is that it's what Mr. Bush wants. Is De Lay deferring to the president? In fairness, I think the House bill is what the House GOP wants for their own reasons, but De Lay's insistance that whatever they do must be in line with Mr. Bush's vision of how to go about security doesn't strike me as a good rationale - Mr. Bush isn't a "security expert" (is he?). We'll Mr. De Lay gave his reason for delay - no compromise.

I was happy to hear that Gov. Ridge is in opposition to attempts at giving him a budget and more power.
posted by Anonymous at 11:55 AM | permalink | "The Refuge"

McGreevy, Warner Hold Wide Leads Before Tuesday Voting

Will Vehrs

Tony, things look grim for GOP candidates for governor in New Jersey and Virginia. The Trenton Times reports today that a Farleigh Dickinson poll shows Democrat James McGreevey leading Republican Bret Schundler 53% to 35%, with 12% undecided. New Jersey Democrats also have a good chance of taking control of the legislature. In Virginia, a Richmond Times-Dispatch/NBC-12 poll shows Democrat Mark Warner leading Republican Mark Earley 46% to to 33%. A large 16% are undecided and 2% favor the marijuana legalization candidate, Libertarian William Redpath. If there's a silver lining for Virginia Republicans, they are expected to widen their control of the legislature and Warner appears to have weak coattails for the Lieutenant Governor and Attorney General races.

Neither Mark Earley nor Bret Schundler got the President Bush campaign stop they desperately needed. The politico who did rush to Earley's rescue has caused controversy. Mayor Rudy Guliani made a tv spot praising the former Virginia Attorney General and two ironies were raised. On last night's Capital Gang, an otherwise forgettable guest, reporter Warren Fiske of the Norfolk Virginian-Pilot, noted how Guliani had gotten into a dust-up with Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore over New York trash. When Virginians were irate over the amount of New York trash coming into Virginia landfills, Guliani retorted that they should be happy to take it because of the cultural attractions New York offered. The other irony, to me, anyway, is the spectacle of brickbats being thrown at an out of state endorsement. I wonder what the reaction would be if Senator John McCain had made a spot for Earley?

Still Too Early For "Told You So"

Tony Adragna

I read the Times-Dispatch story that you refer to - it's an interesting read. I like the way that Warner subsumed a trditional Republican "local control" theme into a "pro-tax" agenda - he gets to talk about taxes without actually talking about taxes. Of course, I think Northenr Virginians don't see any other solution to their transportation problems except building more roadways (I'm a public transit person myself).

A preview of possible 'O2 issues - the comments at the end of this story:

"What Gilmore has done to the finances of this state is atrocious," said Russell MacInnis, a retired Montgomery County businessman who rallied in Christiansburg.

Carroll Montgomery, a retired mail carrier at the Fort Chiswell event, said he supports Warner because "he is a businessman and the state is one of the biggest businesses we have. What they did to the budget was a fiasco."

OK, still too early..
.
I think McCain would have deferred - after all, he's the guy who lost his bid for an executive office.

posted by Will Vehrs at 9:27 AM | permalink | "The Refuge"

The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner

Will Vehrs

I took a ride out into the Hanover County, Virginia countryside this afternoon for the Central Region Cross Country Meet. I was a runner in high school and fell in love with the sport--it is the most pure and simple of athletic pursuits. Anyone willing to work can find a place on their high school team--it doesn't take a lot of talent to be respectable.

This meet was like every cross country event I've ever attended--specatators milling around, earnest coaches nervously pacing as they clutched their clipboards, and no toilet paper in the Porta-Potties. The Pole Green Park course, replacing a course near the University of Richmond that had been used for years, featured open fields, woods, and twisting turns around old barns and athletic field fences. The girls' race was a runaway victory for Tiffany Cross of Atlee High School. Her form and concentration were exactly the same at mile one as at the finish of the 5K course. The boys' race featured a recalled start, the first I can remember. If any runner falls in the first 100 yards, all runners are called back. Unperturbed by starting again, pre-race favorite Alex Tatu of Thomas Dale won fairly easily. The top four teams and top 15 individuals advance to the state meet at Great Meadows, VA next Saturday. Last year the state meet was won by Alan Webb, the runner who broke Jim Ryun's 37 year old prep mile record.

"The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner" crept into the lexicon after Alan Sillitoe's novella and the movie starring Tom Courtenay and Michael Redgrave. As I watched the string of runners navigate the course, I thought about that concept of loneliness. Though they were surrounded by teammates and opponents, each runner waged an individual battle against his or her own concept of physical and mental limitations. Out on the dusty trail today, each runner experienced that splendid loneliness and I knew exactly how it felt.

Anyone interested in high school cross country should check out Milestat.com and Dyestat.com.

posted by Will Vehrs at 9:39 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"

The Police In PG County Are Brutal

Tony Adragna

OK Will, I finally got around to reading the paper. I've been following the PG county "police brutality" storyline for awhile, and there was more news today. There's something odd about reading the findings as supporting a claim of bias: white officers treat black suspects tougher than black officers treat black suspects, but ther'e no suggestion that white officers treat white suspects differrently than black suspects. Sounds to me like white officers are just tougher on criminals in general. Maybe there's something in the data that would support a charge of racial bias (there've definitely been some individual incidents), but if that data exists, nobody's talking about it.

Rogue Cops, Rogue Criminals

Will Vehrs

Tony, I'm no social scientist, but why do I think the results of this study may have been preordained? This passage struck me:

Researchers scored contacts between officers and suspects based on a "force factor" scale, which measured the amount of police coercion – from strong verbal commands through deadly force – relative to the suspect's resistance. Altercations were analyzed based upon how they escalated, including who became aggressive first. Pepper spray was most frequently used to subdue suspects. In four cases, police used deadly force.

A "scoring" system for past contacts sounds mighty subjective. Of course, the Miami-Dade police were studied at the same time and come out just fine. Wonder if their minority communities agree?

I think there are some rogue cops. There are cops who occasionally make tragic misjudgements in pressure situations. It appears that Prince Georges County has too many of both. But there are still a lot more "rogue" criminals than rogue cops.


posted by Anonymous at 5:17 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"

Battling the Enemy and the Afghan Winter

Will Vehrs

Tony, I am moved this morning by the story of the helicopter crash and rescue somewhere in the Afghan mountains. I can only imagine the thoughts running through the minds of the crew when they knew their chopper was going down because of the wintry weather and how, like all trained soldiers, they must have put aside their fears and relied on their training and their fellow mission personnel to fashion a rescue. As they lifted off, the air strike to destroy their abandoned helicopter was probably called in. I'm sure the troops took great satisfaction in knowing that strike would deny the enemy a propoganda victory.

Armchair generals here are calling for more troops and more engagement just as the cruel Afghan winter settles over the land. Maybe they're right. Maybe multiplying the number of incidents like this one and taking the inevitable casualties on the chance that they'll find Bin Laden is worth it, as opposed to a narrower, more precise, and less risky course with a similar probability of finding him in some god-forsaken cave.

Armchair Generals Be Damned

Tony Adragna

Change that to "easychair generals" - I can think of all kinds of ways to win this war, but I'm not the one what's gotta do 'em. I think that's what McCain was saying in the referrence I made the other day, but it the excuse he gave was lame. Which brings me to how the public percieves incidents like this. Actually, I'm not concerned, so long as the general & admirals are still in charge. When McCain's plane got shot down, his father, Admiral McCain, carried on with his mission. That's what we need to do: keep on keepin' on.

Recliners and Cross Burnings

Will Vehrs

There must be some strategic advantage to directing military assets from a recliner--maybe it's that powerful lever on the side, controlling the blood flow. I am inclined--not reclined--to let the military plan play out into early summer before I begin to second-guess. Developing a military plan, executing it, and making adjustments as new information becomes available and experience is gained takes time.

The Virginia Supreme Court has ruled that a Virginia law banning cross burnings is unconstitutional. I agree with the majority in this 4-3 decision, but it's not a pleasant place to be. The First Amendment is not for the squeamish. The state says it will appeal.

Update: Read Cal Ulmann's comment--his point is well-taken. When speech is a physical action, such as nude dancing or, in this case, cross burning, it frequently runs afoul of objective laws, like trespassing or disturbing the peace. There's a link to Cal's blog, Where HipHop and Libertarianism Meet to the left--above Slate.

Let'sBurn Some Armchairs Instead

Tony Adragna

I know all about directing warfare from easychairs - for me it's about wanting to be there. Let me play "Airmchair General" for a minute. I think we need to engage in both tactics: put a few columns of M1A1s on the Mazer-e-Sharif salient, or headed toward Kabul, and see how quickly the Taliban goes away. Going after bin Laden is a different problem, and I think that method we're currently using is the only practical method. You mentioned the infamous "Afghan weather", but I think that this issue is on par with the "Afghan invincibility" mythology - both issues worthy of consideration, but neither one a deal breaker.

I like Cal's site. His comment is about what prosecutors do, but I'm not so sure that they always get it right. For instance, do you prosecute a flag burner for the disturbance that ensues in protest of the flag burning? It seems to me that the "disturbances" are often used as an excuse to prosecute somebody for an exercise that "the majority" finds offensive. Of course, the cited case is problematic - there was clearly trespass, and intimidation, but how do you go from there to "hate crime" (which is what the cross buring law is all about, after all). I think that all you can do with "hate crime" type statutes is use them to militate stronger punishment of underlying offenses, only if you can establish a nexis, but laws banning "cross burning", or "flag desecration", or even "fag bashing", per se, just don't stand up to muster. I think the Virgina court was right.





posted by Will Vehrs at 9:19 AM | permalink | "The Refuge"

Updated 11:00 PM

"Secure Transportation for America Act of 2001"
and other matters

Tony Adragna

Hey Will, I wasn't done with airline security - I was starting to work on something when I had to run (that all-you-can-eat crab legs from last night has me laid-up). By now you've heard that the House approved their version. Not to worry - yet - let's see what comes out of conferrence. I think that private companies could do the job, but it's going to require the airlines to pay what real security is worth, and that means increased fares.

Kinsley getting on my nerve! Remember "news speak"? I don't think that's what happen - I think that anchors are just getting lazy, reading the teleprompter texts and not bothering to fill in the blanks. I hope I'm right because as fast as things happen in our modern world it's kinda hard to figure out if their talking about something that is/was/going to be. That's why I always watch the Newshour at both 6 PM and 7 PM - if I missed the point of the story the first time, then I pick it up the second time around. I'm really tired of all the "quick hits" on the network news. It's the Newshour and the McLaughlin Group all the way for me (unless Mr. Germond is on some other Sunday show).

Bad times bringing out the best - isn't that what happened to Mr. Bush? I'm quite pleased with Mr. Bush right now, but not so happy with Robert Wright. He's been a natterring nabob of negativity since even before the bombing started (I think we both agree?)

BTW: thanks for accepting the invitation - it was getting difficult trying to be keeping this going by myself.

More on Secure Transportation and Pundits

Will Vehrs

Tony, as wedded as I am to my ASSC (Air Security Screeners Corps) idea, I think private contractors, under strict federal oversight, can work. It just can't operate like it did before--the contractors who provide this service have to have higher standards and better management of the human factors that make the jobs so difficult. The contractors will have to be paid more and they will have to pay their employees more. Ultimately, the public will be footing the bill and there will be hell to pay if the public faces rude or incompetent screeners. You rightly point out the all-important factor of how much scrutiny each traveller will face. Imagine rude and incompetent at the highest level of scrutiny!

So you are a Germond fan? Remember how I once wrote that he was my "Pundit Fantasy Camp" counselor choice? I confess to being a news and pundit "junkie." Here's my weekend "must see" tv: NBC Nightly News, The News Hour (once), Capital Gang, Meet the Press, and This Week. I used to be a big fan of Slate's "Pundit Central" by Michael Brus. Did you know that Brus has left Slate and is now working in social services in Seattle? He'll be missed. I'd like to start a pundit review column here--what do you think? I work cheap, just like the boss ....

Reading Robert Wright is fine as long as one also turns to the Fray and reads the powerful rebuttals by the likes of Will Allen and Publius.

Why I Like Germond

Tony Adragna

See what's happenning, Will? Get two rational people together, with no axes to grind, and we get a lot of agreement! I remember writing something awhile back about me and my Capitol Hill drinking buddies being able to solve all of the world's problems - we kinda figured that the folks six blocks up Penn Ave shoulda sat down with us for cocktails sometime... oh well...

Yes! Very much a Germond fan! A Tip O'Neill (God love him) fan, too! Something about "gin blossoms" (WSC was a bit of a drinker, too). Tell the truth, I don't trust people who stay away from drink.

You want to tackle reviewing pundits? Sounds a good idea to me - it would even be nice if they would reciprocate. Maybe we could even find some criticism of Germond that we agree upon ( I think we already sufficiently covered Kinsley, which wasn't a difficult task, and required few words).

One of your friends suggested that we go www - it's very close to happenning!

Kinsley and the Great Pundit Review

Will Vehrs

Tony, you're the first person in a long time to suggest that I might be rational, but I may have to drink more to stay in your good graces. Thanks for giving me the pundit review go-ahead. Now what do I do? Stay tuned.

This WP article might be the Kinsley explanation we're seeking. He's too busy with his fledgling Seattle tour business to be the deeply serious East Coast type pundit we used to know and love.

Going www is great, but I'm more excited about the comment we got from Joseph Britt. Britt is one of the most consistently insightful and entertaining reads on the Slate Fray, a true gentleman and scholar.

R.O.F.L.M.A.O.

Tony Adragna

That WP article explains alot. I used to be more like Kinsley - til I moved out here twelve years ago. People out here are very different - you probably haven't tried to pick somebody up at a bar lately, but that infamous D.C. opening line, "So, what do you do for a living?", sums up the difference. S.F. after work is "partytime", D.C. after work is "networking" (except the neighborhood joints that I like). It might have something to do with that miasmal swamp that D.C. was built on.

I read Joseph's comment, too - high praise ('cept, I think we're doing better than most Slate dialoguers - definitely better than the Kinsley/Buckley [Mike/Bill] dialogue). Here's a good example of the kinds of things that Joseph has to say - I didn't bother to respond, he said it all.

note: the acronym mean "rolling on the floor laughing my ass off"..

posted by Anonymous at 5:16 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"

How Best To "Stimulate"

Tony Adragna

Listening to Sen. Corzine speaking on the stimulus package, I slowly came to the conclusion that I don't agree with any of the alternatives being considered for short term stimulus. Traditionally, short term stimulus has been achieved through monetary policy, but rate cuts haven't been working. So, we've started looking at everything from capital gains rate reduction, to a sales tax holiday. The problem is that I don't see any of these things having any impact on spending, and even if they do, it'll come too late to be considered "short term". Tax rebates haven't worked - estimates are that only about 20 cents per dollar have been spent of the recent rebates. Along those same lines, rate reductions are being used to improve bottom lines, pay debt, everything but new spending.

I think the answer is government expenditure. The argument against is that government spending is inefficient, and doesn't increase real output. If we're just talking about spending on entitlement programs, then I would agree.. But, government investment in real projects, instead of programs, does have a positive effect on labor, productivity, and business. This would require some deficit spending, though, and I was happy to hear Sen. Corzine call on his colleagues to revisit the tax cuts passed earlier this year.

I have a cure for the market, too: psycho-analysis.

Memo To: Tony

From: Will

Tony, Here you are, talking economics. Yesterday it was security and Ramadan. Meanwhile, Michael Kinsley's latest column is tackling the critical issue you've been ignoring: the disappearance of verbs on television news. I said a while back that I thought Kinsley was being frivolous during these difficult times. To give him his due, though, he is as puckish as anyone writing today. I'm thankful you are serious.

I have my doubts that government tinkering ever does all that much for the economy, but there is a compulsion to do something and by gosh the President and Congress are going to deliver. I have to agree with you that government spending, related to the war effort and restoring faith, is the best and perhaps only prescription for these tough economic times.

I'll tell you my hope: that the NY Yankees are a metaphor for the United States. When it looks darkest, the most heroic things happen.


posted by Anonymous at 12:44 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"

Updated 10:20 PM

Being a GS-Something Won't Make the Job Any Less Boring

From: Will Vehrs

Tony,

As I write, Congress is still debating the Airline Security Act, or whatever it's called (Infinite Security?). You might expect that I'd be in favor of the Republican alternative. Actually, I think the best alternative might be something in between the Republican Federal standards, private contractors approach and the Democrat's Federal employee approach.

Let's be honest and admit that an airline screening job is boring, whether you're a GS-something or a minimum wage private employee. I think boredom is one of the biggest problems in the industry and a reason why the turnover is so high. It's also why wages are low. Almost any employable person can do the job. The Democratic plan, with a government pay scale, would attract more and better candidates, but the best and the brightest will likely get bored first. They'll have a huge bureaucratic personnel structure to support them, a structure that allows them sick leave, family leave, grievances, mandated non-job training, job protection, etc. etc. The Republican alternative will impose tough Federal standards on private contractors, with all the familiar abuses of defense contractors a likely outcome.

I'd like to see either some tests of each system on a small scale or a grander vision. By grander vision, I'm thinking of a para-military organization--an airport equivalent of the Coast Guard, perhaps. In such an organization there would be an esprit de corps that could help overcome the sheer monotony of the jobs. There could be physical requirements, although I would think some jobs, like x-ray screeners, could be open to physically challenged individuals. There would be frequent rotations, among stations at airports and perhaps even between airports. Security training would be rigorous. Young people might move from the "Security Corps" to police jobs in cities and localities. Pay would be relatively low, as in the military, but the benefits, including educational reimbursement, would be a major inducement. Poor performers could be easily discharged and a steady stream of ex-military personnel could staff the supervisory jobs.

What do you think, Tony? Try something bold, try something half-ass, or just turn the whole mess over to a government that has no experience in this line of work?

From: Tony Adragna

Will
I've been leaning toward "federalization", only because private firms haven't been able to get their act together - even with all the post-Sep 11 scrutiny. What prevents me from wholeheartedly supporting the Senate plan is, as you point out, the old "merit protection" nonsense, which is worse than the "union" nonsense. OK, that's two "liberal" stands that I've trashed, and I still feel no need to prove my liberal bona fides (I'd rather be sine cera instead). I like the "corps" concept - actually, it's the best idea I've heard.

Of course, that would be the best way to organize airport security, but I still have a problem with the fundamental question: what level of scrutiny of passengers will give us actual security? Until we decide that a higher level of scrutinity needs to be applied uniformly to all passengers, the risk isn't reduced.

Oh, the House is calling it the "Secure Transportation for America Act of 2001" - it's an interesting read.



posted by Will Vehrs at 8:15 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"

Updated 5:36 PM

Linus Is Foolish, But
What About Ashcroft?

From: Will Vehrs

Tony,

Richard Cohen’s column in this morning’s WP is pretty much how I feel about everyone who’s criticizing government response to terrorist threats and anthrax. I don’t discount what you said about the CDC not following epidemiological protocols, but the earliest case—Florida—had not shown any USPS connection. I think the government was guilty, at worst, of not imagining worst-case scenarios.

Everyone says it was so logical to test postal workers early on. Well, by that logic, and some examples we’ve seen now, everyone who got mail in areas where anthrax has been confirmed should be tested. Nobody’s saying that—the implications are too frightening: shutting down the mail.

--Will

PS Thanks for running my stream of conscious ramblings, written in-between handing out Halloween candy at the front door. Turn-out was below previous years, but not by a lot.

From: Tony Adragna

Will,
It's amazing - I'm not seeing a whole lot of disagreement on the WaPo's opinion page lately. Put Cohen's piece together with what Hoagland and Kelly wrote yesterday, and you get where I'm coming from.

Worst case scenarios - yeah, I take your point. But, that's kinda what the folks at CDC and Fort Detrick are supposed to do. Granted, the Florida case was a hard place to start, since they had the variable of possible "crop duster" usage that they were concerned about, with that airfield being so close by.

re your p.s.: I don't know what I'm gonna do with all the candy we have left. The doorbell only rang three times, and nobody showed up after 7 pm. That's compared to about 15 hits for each of the previous Holloweens that we've been in this neighborhood (Hyattsville, between Rt 1 and Peace Cross). It doesn't help that some local jurisdictions decided to cancel Halloween this year (I felt like Linus sitting in the pumpkin patch).

Tony

p.s. I ususally try not to get upset at the natterring nabobs, but I couldn't let Dionne's column from yesterday go unremarked upon. I think my criticism of the response to anthrax is fair, but Dionne is making some kinda "class" issue out of it - along the lines of "the elite" not being concerned about "po' folk". The "Big Bugout" may have had something to do with congress thinking itself too "precious", but I think the failure to survey postal facilities once the mail was identified as a delivery route was just plain ol' error.

From: Will Vehrs

Tony,

The Wed and Th WP opinion pages are part of a response to Kristol, Krauthammer, and McCain’s shots from Monday and Tuesday. There is some difference of opinion, but it comes in waves of one side or the other.

Al Hunt tackles the subject of our “Dialogue” in his WSJ column today. We stand up pretty well compared to his analysis.


--Will

PS I never used to use PS much …

From: Tony Adragna

Hey Will,
I rarely read Kristol (only when somebody quotes him, then I take the time), been trying to stay away from Krauthammer (his thinking scares me - and you know why), and I always take McCain with a grain of salt (did you hear him the other night - he deferred to the general because - paraphrase: I don't know nothin' 'bout fighting war, I was the guy who got shot down).

My Dow Jones Interactive account is kaput, and I couldn't find the Hunt column in Lexis-Nexis, but I'll take your word - if we're doing OK compared to the pros, that's good enough for me.

Tony

p.s. I hate p.s.ing - I prefer a lot of "parentheticals"


posted by Anonymous at 5:39 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"

"Ramadan gives an
opportunity for reconciliation"

That's what Nicholas Thompson says, but there are several problems with his argument.

He begins with an anecdote about himself being kidnapped in Morocco during Ramadan, being requested to smuggle and sell drugs (probably some good marijuana - my Moroccan friend tell me that theirs is the best) into the US, and having sixty dollars stolen. All this story proves is that there are thugs in Morocco who don't "strictly" observe Ramadan, but then there are many ordinary decent Muslim folk in Morocco who don't strictly observe many of the tenets of Islam. Most of my Moroccan friends partake of alcoholic beverages regularly, don't observe the discipline of daily prayer, and never go to mosque. When I jokingly implied that they've picked up western habits since being in the US, they reply that we westerners don't know how to really party. "Besides" they say, "we're more like the Sicilians than we are like the Saudis." That statement says a whole lot.

Even taking his own anecdote, and the history of Islam at war during Ramadan, into consideration, Thomspon goes on to argue:

Ramadan gives an opportunity for reconciliation, and when the holy month begins with the new moon, the United States should offer some sort of plausible resolution. It should temporarily lay down its arms, make a concerted effort to help refugees, and perhaps even publicly present hard evidence of Bin Laden’s guilt. If the Bush administration wants to make one more concerted try at peace, this is the moment for it.

Such an effort will be fruitless if Mullah Omar really does intend to fight to the last man. But even if the Taliban don’t surprise the United States by turning over Bin Laden—the way my Moroccan kidnapper surprised me with his offer of a rug—at least the United States will make some progress at retaining moderate Muslim support. And that’s probably the best outcome from Ramadan we can hope for.

The argument only makes sense if: a) there's a reasonable chance that the gesture might produce a resolution, or b) it would curtail the opposition of moderate Muslims against the US. We've plenty of evidence as to the Taliban's unwillingness to cooperate with a peaceful resolution, and the war has only hardened their resolve to be uncooperative. Lacking their cooperation, we would need to resume the campaign, but it's not moderates that we would need, or even should, be concerned about - it's the extremists who would use the lull in our campaign to their benefit that we need to worry about.

posted by Anonymous at 2:38 PM | permalink | "The Refuge"