ABC News gets a big scoop on the U.N. oil-for-food corruption scandal. I wish I could say I’m shocked. In fact, I’m shocked that more hasn’t come out yet. Saddam had a lot of people on the take in the West and the U.N. But this story is about more than a simple U.N. scandal. What it shows is what the alternatives to war against Saddam actually were: a slowly disintegrating regime, becoming ever-more Islamist in tone as it tried to cling to power; sanctions that were in effect starving kids, destroying Iraqi civil society and enriching corrupt U.N. officials and Saddam’s family; and the potential of those sanctions being lifted at some point, leading to a resurgence of WMD development. We were so right to intervene. The alternatives were far, far worse.
POTTERY BARN VERSUS POWELL: They don’t like the analogy. And it’s not even true.
BLAIR’S GAMBLE: It’s a fascinating moment in British politics. The big constitutional question of the last few decades – Britain’s relationship with Europe – will be put to a referendum some point in the future. Tony Blair has finally decided that the new, proposed EU Constitution – which would, in my view, mark the essential end of the European nation-state as we have understood it – will be put up for a vote. Previously, Blair had balked, fearful that he could receive a stinging rejection from the voters. But now he’s for it – although it may not happen until after the next election. There are broader ramifications. Nine EU countries are set to vote on the new constitution. If a sigle one votes against, it will be dead. If Britain votes against, it will be as dead as the infamous parrot. It sounds suicidal for Blair, but it may not be. He gets to change the subject from Iraq, he gets to take the initiative in arguing against what he believes are euro-skeptic “myths”, and he also sets himself up for an obvious post-election retirement if he loses the vote, handing the poisoned chalice of power to his ally and rival Gordon Brown, some time late next year. Worth watching.
VIRTUALLY NORMAL: A neighborhood birthday party for a one-year old. With a small difference.
POLL-PORING: Some interesting nuggets in the latest Gallup poll. Bush’s highest area of opposition comes in healthcare (understandable, given that it’s a natural Democratic issue) and the deficit. The president’s handling of our national finances is disapproved of by 60 percent of the sample. I think it has now become true that the Republicans are no longer identified by the public as the party of fiscal responsibility. It’s no longer part of the brand, as it were. We expect Republicans to rack up debt for future generations, to make only piddling attempts to reform entitlements, and to be indistinguishable from Democrats on pork. Bush has now cemented this in the public mind. But the most revealing question to me was the following: “43. Overall do you think Bush has done more to (unite the country), or has done more to (divide the country)?” 50 percent said he unites the country; 48 percent said he divides it. Quod erat demonstrandum.
NOT REAL EVANGELICALS: That poll that showed a majority of evangelicals oppose a constitutional amendment to ban civil marriage for gays has come under fire – from evangelicals.
ENVIROCONS: There are more of them than I gave them credit for. Check out the Economist’s and Bjorn Lomborg’s “Copenhagen Consensus” website for practical non-lefty proposals to make cost-effective changes that can tangibly improve the environment and people’s lives. It has a far broader area of concern than the environment but it is an encouraging pragmatic sign. There’s the Property and Environment Research Center, whose motto is “Improving Environmental Quality Through Markets.” There’s also material here and here. This is also a good moment to plug Matthew Scully’s beautifully argued and gut-wrenching book, “Dominion,” on the enormous harm we are doing to the animals we own and control. And here’s a profile of a Bush administration official who doesn’t quite fit the stereotype.
The Dish 