Year: 2003

So far, we have Bill Frist distancing himself, Tom Delay getting cold feet, Bob Barr dissenting, Lyn Nofziger opposed, a Weekly Standard piece calling it hopeless, Jim Sensenbrenner queasy, and every single Democratic candidate in opposition. Aren’t Constitutional Amendments supposed to gain overwhelming national support before they succeed?

EMAIL OF THE DAY: “The more I read about the Massachusetts ruling, the more I become convinced that it is unlikely to be undone by the state legislature. And what a beautiful thing that is. I’m beginning to feel what it’s like to be a complete human being in the eyes of the law for the first time since since I was twelve or thirteen years old. I didn’t realize how much the deprivation of basic rights affected me psychologically, affected my whole view of the world, until the prospect of having those rights was in sight.” – more feedback on the Letters Page.

It goes off the deep end toward the conclusion, but this has its moments. (I should add, I think Friedman has been good this past year, even when I’ve disagreed with him).

KRUGMAN’S DECLINE: Lying in Ponds blog – a champion of Paul Krugman’s columns on the California energy crisis – updates its statistical analysis of the NYT columnist’s writing. From relative sanity in 2000, every single column Krugamn now writes is partisan to an almost absurd degree. He has come undone.

BOORTZ ON GOODRIDGE: Another conservative keeps his cool.

“About two years ago my nephew traveled to Syria with a group from the German university where he studies. Since he looks German, speaks German, and was with a German organization, he ‘passed’ for German on the trip. He also speaks good Arabic, and talked to many Syrians. He was shocked by the number Syrians from all walks of life, who told him quite openly that the Germany and Hitler had the right idea when it came to the Jews. It was about the first thing out of their mouth when they discovered that he was visiting from Germany.” Figures. Yet Europe looks the other way.

I’m not the only one concerned.

… favors equality for gays. David Brooks.

The Telegraph gets it.

I don’t use that term lightly. Take a look at what the Syrian government allows to be broadcast in Lebanon and elsewhere on Hezbollah’s satellite television channel. Look at the stills. This is what our enemy is doing to the minds of Arab viewers in the Middle East – filling them with Nazi hatred toward the Jews. I didn’t think I could be shocked by these monsters. But I am.

Finally, the big papers take on the Feith memo. Pincus must have hated doing the story and manages to find a way to cover it without actually covering it. Jehl does it a little better. The fact that this memo has been covered at all seems to me a function in part of web pressure. The blogs and Slate helped a lot.

“I’m not saying that this bill won’t generate some energy. It will certainly fuel the coffers of big oil and gas corporations. It will propel the wealthy special interests. And it will boost the deficit into the stratosphere. Indeed, this legislation can be fairly called the Leave no Lobbyist Behind Act of 2003.
There are also four proposals known as ‘green bonds’ for construction of commercial buildings that will cost taxpayers $227 million to finance approximately $2 billion in private bonds. One of my favorite green bond proposals is a $150 million riverfront area in Shreveport, Louisiana. This river walk has about 50 stores, a movie theater and a bowling alley. One of the new tenants in this Louisiana Riverwalk is a Hooters restaurant. Yes my friends. Here we have an energy bill subsidizing both hooters and polluters.” – Senator John McCain, on the monstrosity otherwise known as the Energy Bill. How any principled, small-government, free-market Republican could vote for this vast waste of public money is beyond me. But we’re beginning to realize that GOP has nothing to do with small government or fiscal sobriety. It’s a vehicle for massive debt and catering to the worst forms of corporate welfare. Thank God for McCain. Bush should veto this bill, until it is de-porked. He won’t, of course. He has yet to veto a single big-spending bill. He doesn’t seem to give a damn about what is happening to the fiscal health of this country. If Dean is at all smart, he will make this a center-piece of his election strategy, and tempt fiscal conservatives like me to support him.

ON THE OTHER HAND: Dean makes it impossible for believers in the free market to support him by backing a return to the failed regulatory policies of the past. So we have to pick between a budget-busting, free-spending, entitlement-expanding Republican and a Democrat opposed to many critical aspects of a free and dynamic economy. We’re stuck between a reckless liberal and a regulatory liberal. It’s the 1970s all over again – and too depressing for words.

ON THE OTHER OTHER HAND: Perhaps Dean will woo yours truly and other hawks with a Sister Souljah moment against the anti-war left. After he wins the nomination, of course. Noam Scheiber elaborates.

Finally, some sanity on the subject.