Month: June 2004

“I’m so conservative that I approve of San Francisco City Hall marriages, adoption by same-sex couples, and New Hampshire’s recently ordained Episcopal bishop. Gays want to get married, have children, and go to church. Next they’ll be advocating school vouchers, boycotting HBO, and voting Republican. I suppose I should be arguing with my fellow right-wingers about that, and drugs, and many other things. But I won’t be. Arguing, in the sense of attempting to convince others, has gone out of fashion with conservatives. The formats of their radio and television programs allow for little measured debate, and to the extent that evidence is marshaled to support conservative ideas, the tone is less trial of Socrates than Johnnie Cochran summation to the O.J. jury.” – P.J. O’Rourke, in the Atlantic.

QUOTE OF THE DAY II: “Deborah Solomon: You recently created a stir when you defended the interrogation techniques at Abu Ghraib.

Trent Lott: Most of the people in Mississippi came up to me and said: ‘Thank Goodness. America comes first.’ Interrogation is not a Sunday-school class. You don’t get information that will save American lives by withholding pancakes.

DS: But unleashing killer dogs on naked Iraqis is not the same as withholding pancakes.

TL: I was amazed that people reacted like that. Did the dogs bite them? Did the dogs assault them? How are you going to get people to give information that will lead to the saving of lives?” – From the New York Times Magazine.

THE PEACE PROCESS: I have to say I haven’t been so amused in a very long time. At a United Nations ceremony, one of the doves of peace, released by the Sri Lankan public security minister, “was dead before takeoff and ‘dropped like a brick.'” They’re launching an inquiry. Oil for Food program? Billions in kickbacks. Bosnia? Genocide enabled. Dead dove? Priceless.

KRAMER VERSUS SULLIVAN: Larry Kramer calls Reagan Hitler. I respond. In the Advocate. One reason why I was so surprised by Jonah Goldberg’s assertion last week that I was playing to the gay audience with my non-endorsement of Bush is that I have spent much of my career alienating the gay establishment by arguing against some of their shibboleths. I have opposed hate crime laws; I have had reservations about employment non-discrimination laws; I favored the right of the Boy Scouts to practise discrimination (even while I deplored the discrimination itself); I have challenged AIDS orthodoxy: I have battled victimology in the gay world; I endorsed Dole over Clinton in 1996 and Bush over Gore in 2000; I have praised the drug companies’ successes in HIV treatment. Very few members of a minority have been as controversial as I have in the gay world. It just happens that I believe that the Constitution is not the place to decide social policy and that civil marriage is a civil right for all Americans, not just the straight ones. I say that to all audiences. Always.

BLOGGING THE CONVENTIONS? It’s happening. For my part, I think bloggers could make more of a statement by not going to these elaborate infomercials. All they are are schmooze-fests for journalists, pundits and political types and then many layers of corrupting parties for donors. The only political importance is as television shows, and you can better understand that by, er, watching television. New York might be fun – as long as you hang outside with all the left-wing freaks, as opposed to inside with all the right-wing freaks. Am I rationalizing staying in beautiful Ptown? Er, no. Never. Wouldn’t dream of it. Of course not. Are you kidding?

Here’s a list of the occupations of the gay applicants for civil marriage licenses in Massachusetts in the first week:

Acceptance tester, Accounting manager, accounts payable manager, activist, activity director, advertising, administrative assistant, administrator, airline employee, anesthetist, antiques dealer, appraiser, area manager, architect, artisan, artist, arts administrator, assembler, assembly technician, astrologer, at-home mom, athletic coach, athletic trainer, attorney, audiovisual coordinator.

Baker, bank branch manager, bank executive, banquet manager, bartender, billing coordinator, boat builder, book dealer, bookstore manager, buyer.

Cabinet maker, camp director, cantor, career counselor, carpenter, case manager, caterer, cell phone specialist, certified nurse assistant, certified nurse midwife, certified public accountant, chef, chaplain, chief financial officer, chief operating officer, chemist, chemistry professor, child nutrition program specialist, child psychologist, childbirth educator, choreographer, civil engineer, claim analyst, clergy, clerk, clinical chemistry supervisor, clinical coordinator, clinical director, clinical social worker, clinician, college administrator, college professor, community center director, company president, compliance officer, computer analyst, computer consultant, computer programmer, computer specialist, computer systems manager, consultant, contractor, controller, cook, corporate benefits manager, correction officer, cosmetologist, countertop installer, courier, craftmaker, creative arts therapist, creative director, crisis clinician, custodian, customer service.

Data architect, database administrator, designer, desktop publisher, development associate, diagnostic radiological technician, dialysis technician, dietician, director, director of athletics, director of employment, director of membership, director of recreation, director of religious education, director of technology, domestic engineer, draftsman.

Economist, editor, educator, electrical engineer, electrician, electronic technician, emergency room technician, engineer, English professor, entrepreneur, environmental scientist, Episcopal priest, equipment installer, estimator, event planner, executive, executive assistant, executive director, expeditor.

Facilitator, faculty dean, farmer, field service engineer, filmmaker, financial adviser, financial analyst, financial manager, financial representative, firefighter, fitness director, fitness specialist, flight attendant, floral designer, florist, food service manager, forestry technician, fund accountant, fund-raiser, furniture sales.

Gallery owner, gardener, general manager, gifts coordinator, geographic information systems analyst, Girl Scout executive, glazier, goldsmith, golf course superintendent, graphic artist, groomer, group leader, guidance counselor.

Hardware store, hairdresser, hair designer, hair stylist, health and conservation agent, health and safety manager, health care administrator, health care ethicist, health inspector, higher education administrator, historian, history teacher, holistic health counselor, home daycare, homemaker, hospice nurse, hospital administrator, hotel manager, house cleaner, house painter, housewife, human resources, human services director.

Information security consultant, information technology specialist, inspector, insurance adjuster, insurance broker, Internal Revenue Service, inventory control, investment banker.

Jeweler, journalist, judge.

Krispy Kreme manager.

Land surveyor, land use planner, landlord, landscape architect, landscaper, laundry owner, law professor, legal assistant, librarian, library media specialist, library page, literary agent, loan analyst, loan originator, locksmith, logistics manager.

Machine operator, manager, marine biologist, marine service, market research, marketing, massage therapist, medical administrator, media designer, medical technician, mental health counselor, mental health executive, midwife, minister, mortgage banker, muscular therapist, music teacher, musician.

Nanny, newspaper production, network administrator, night receiver, nurse, nurse’s aide, nurse practitioner, nursing home administrator.

Occupational therapist, office clerk, office manager, ophthalmologist, optician, optometric technician, optometrist, orthopedic surgeon.

Packer, painter, paper hanger, paralegal, paramedic, park ranger, parole officer, pastor, pastry chef, PC technician, pediatric rehabilitation aide, percussionist, personal care attendant, pet business owner, pharmaceutical manager, phlebotomist, photographer, physical therapist, physician, physician assistant, picture framer, pilot, pipefitter, pizza maker, planner, plant manager, plumber, point of sale coordinator, police lieutenant, police officer, policy analyst, pool manager, postal worker, preschool teacher, principal, private detective, process consultant, produce manager, product designer, production coordinator, project manager, program manager, property manager, psychologist, psychotherapist, public access coordinator, public health director, public relations, publicist, publishing production manager.

Quality control inspector, quality control supervisor, quality coordinator.

Rabbi, radiologist, real estate broker, real estate director, real estate manager, Realtor, recycling coordinator, registrar, religious educator, registered nurse, reproductive biologist, research analyst, researcher, residential supervisor, respiratory therapist, restaurant manager, restaurateur owner, retail management, retired, risk manager.

Sales person, sales manager, sales rep, school administrator, school counselor, school nurse, school psychologist, scientist, security guard, self-employed, senior research specialist, server, service adviser, service manager, shipper/receiver, shipwright, shopkeeper, short order cook, small business owner, social insurance specialist, social worker, software engineer, software quality engineer, soil scientist, special education advocate, special education teacher, specialty food buyer, speech pathologist, stand-up comic, state trooper, store manager, student, superintendent of schools, supervisor, systems analyst.

Tailor, teacher, tech consultant, technical support engineer, technical writer, technician, telecommunications manager, temp, tennis instructor, tester, therapist, title examiner, training consultant, training manager, translator, transportation engineer, travel agent, travel consultant, triage coordinator, truck driver.

Unemployed, union officer, utility cleaner.

Veterinarian, veterinary technician, victim services advocate, video producer, violin maker, virologist, visual artist, vocational rehab counselor.

Waiter, warehouseman, web developer, web marketing manager, website administrator, welder, writer.

Yoga teacher, youth advocate, youth worker.

Here’s a challenge. Think of any straight person you know who does a job like this. Now imagine telling him or her that he or she has no right to marry, that his or her spouse is a room mate and his or her children can be taken away by relatives or the state at any time. That’s what gay people live with every day. They are treated as sub-human and beneath full citizenship. That must end.

“… Sontag’s elitism has an exclusionary malevolence that goes well beyond the notion of a priestly caste of artists and thinkers. As early as 1964, she attributed the cinema’s relative security from hordes of interpreters in part to ‘the happy accident that films for such a long time were just movies; in other words, that they were understood to be part of mass, as opposed to high, culture, and were left alone by most people with minds.’ That use of ‘people with minds’ as a synonym for literary intellectuals has always ruffled me, since the unavoidable corollary is that people who aren’t literary intellectuals don’t have minds. And that’s offensive… Sontag is noticeably reticent on the subject of her own family, and the few spots where she does refer to it give off a whiff of contempt… but then, Sontag has always had a low opinion of her fellow citizens, predicated on the embarrassing robustness of American bad taste. For her, vulgarity is a mortal sin rather than a venial one. ‘Today’s America,’ she scowled in 1966, ‘with Ronald Reagan the new daddy of California and John Wayne chawing spareribs in the White House,’ (as a Southerner, I resent that), ‘is pretty much the same Yahooland that Mencken was describing.’ Then she got really high-handed: ‘After America was won, it was filled up by new generations of the poor and built up according to the tawdry fantasy of the good life that culturally deprived, uprooted people might have had at the beginning of the industrial era. And the country looks it.’ That’s some fairly supercilious class bias to be issuing from the granddaughter of immigrant Jews, not to mention from a radical (at that point) leftist.” – Craig Seligman, from his new book, “Sontag & Kael: Opposites Attract Me,” thanks to a diligent reader.

It’s going global – not in the sense that child abuse is prevalent across the world in the Catholic Church (we knew that already), but in the sense that the Vatican and other parts of the Church hierarchy can use their international status to move criminal priests from one country to another to avoid prosecution or discovery:

INSKEEP: When priest sex abuse becomes an international issue, when people are being moved from country to country, whose job is it to police it?

Mr. EGERTON: It’s a really great question. International flight is the ultimate challenge for law enforcement. And it often becomes unclear whose job it is. Police, we have found, though, in many cases, haven’t availed themselves of all that they could to pursue these folks.

INSKEEP: Yo! u mean haven’t taken advantage of extradition treaties and that sort o f thing?

Mr. EGERTON: Right. In some cases, they’ve failed to pursue extradition. In other cases where extradition treaties aren’t present, they haven’t made other inquiries to see if something else can be arranged. In some cases, they haven’t even gotten to the point of doing anything but filing a warrant in their home country and just filing it away and walking off.

INSKEEP: Were there American priests who were shipped overseas?

Mr. EGERTON: Absolutely. Frequently, what we’ve seen are priests who worked for a long time in America but remained citizens of another country. They came here and, when trouble arose, there was an easy escape hatch, and that was to go back to their native lands.

INSKEEP: You’ve already told us of one case where someone outside the United States got in trouble and was shipped to the United States for a while.

Mr. EGERTON: That’s right. It…

INSKEEP: Did that happen more than once?

Mr. EGE! RTON: Oh, yes, absolutely. Yeah, we found some folks who are still here, still here.

I’ve long believed that this scandal goes right to the heart of the current hierarchy in Rome. Good for the Dallas Morning News for pursuing this. (Hat tip: Glenn.)

EMAIL OF THE DAY: “People out there are learning the exact wrong lesson from the shortfalls of intelligence about Iraq. The failure of our intelligence organizations to correctly assess the status of Saddam’s WMD programs is actually a powerful argument IN FAVOR of preemptive – or even preventive – national security doctrine.
Sure, it’s fair to hold the CIA accountable for this “intelligence failure,” and I don’t argue that the intel community could have done better. But think about it this way: The question of Iraqi WMD was one of the most critical national security issues for the United States for over a decade, and the US, our allies, and the UN directed vast intelligence collection and analysis resources against it. Regardless of what particular mistakes were made, the degree to which the CIA came up short reveals a larger truth: This type of intelligence problem is fundamentally impossible to solve with the precision necessary to support a security policy based on traditional “imminent threat” criteria. Whether Saddam’s WMD capabilties were overestimated or underestimated is a peripheral issue. What is essential is that we didn’t – and probably couldn’t – know for sure what those capabilities were.
Contrary to the assertions of many who opposed war in Iraq, this epistemological limitation does not argue for the abandonment of a preemptive doctrine. In fact, it argues for yet greater urgency in the preventive (yes, preventive) elimination of regimes that have the potential to use WMD or supply them to other actors. The definitive intelligence issue for this doctrine is not what specific weapons programs, terrorist links, or ill intentions a certain state might possess, but rather the nature of that state. That is a question that is readily answerable and is therefore a more valid guide to ethical decision-making on issues of war and peace.
Just war doctrine has long rejected this line of reasoning, as it could provide pretexts for endless wars of agression. But times have changed. The civilized world can no longer safely permit governments like Saddam’s to exist. The precise status of WMD programs (especially bio and chem) in countries like Iraq, Iran, and North Korea are practically insurmountable intelligence problems. The solution lies not in trying to improve the intelligence, but in getting rid of the problems.” More feedback on the Letters Page.

Words, of course, fail. But it is important to look at our enemy squarely. Will the networks show these images? They absolutely should.

… gets whacked by the dittoheads for actually thinking.

Given what we now know about Abu Ghraib, given the murders and rapes of several inmates in U.S. custody, given the fact that the U.S. now allows for “disappearing” prisoners in order to hide them from the Red Cross, is it not incumbent on the administration to release all memos detailing what this administration regards as permissible “coercive interrogation techniques?” (By the way, isn’t that term in and of itself chilling? Its plain meaning is the use of violence or the threat of violence against inmates. When a government resorts to this kind of euphemism, you know something fishy is going on.) We really do need to see two in particular:

[T]he documents include a memo from Mr. Rumsfeld to Gen. James T. Hill, the senior officer of the Southern Command, dated April 2003 and titled, “Coercive interrogation techniques that can be used with approval of the Defense Secretary.” Another memo dated Jan. 4, 2004, written by the top legal adviser to Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the senior American commander in Iraq, and sent to military intelligence and police personnel at the Abu Ghraib prison, is titled, “New plan to restrict Red Cross access to Abu Ghraib.”

In the first, we can find out what kinds of torture or abuse Rumsfeld has deemed legit. In the second, we can find out how the policy of restricting Red Cross access might have contributed to the horror of Abu Ghraib. If the administration wants to say it has never condoned torture, and that Abu Ghraib was the work of a handful of rogues, these memos could prove their case. So why won’t they release them? Hmmm.

This one, caught by Mickey, is a beaut. It’s CBS’ John Roberts on the 9/11 Commission:

It is one of President Bush’s last surviving justifications for war in Iraq, and today, it took a devastating hit when the 9-11 Commission declared there was no collaborative relationship between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. … Those repeated associations left the majority of Americans believing Saddam was involved in 9/11, but the commission today put the nail in that connection, or for that matter, any other al-Qaida acts of terror against America, declaring, ‘There is no credible evidence that Iraq and al-Qaida cooperated on attacks against the United States.’ The report is yet another blow to the president’s credibility as he struggles to find the exit door in Iraq and opens him up to new criticism on the wisdom of taking on Saddam with al-Qaida’s leadership still at large.

Astonishingly biased, even by CBS standards.

Talk about a water-tight defense of the Bush administration’s handling of post-war Iraq! Here’s Rich Lowry, rightly pointing out the need to be patient in bringing a turn-around in Iraq, but finding a way to excuse mistakes and failures by the Bushies:

Patience, of course, is now in short supply. By the exquisite standards of today’s media and the critics of the Iraq War, the men who rebuilt Japan and Germany were incompetents. They had to muddle their way to success through policy failures and bureaucratic infighting. Incompetence can achieve the same success in Iraq, if it’s given the chance.

One wonders under what circumstances, if this is the standard, could one criticize the Bush administration? Lowry’s convenient answer: Never! Look, I want the Iraq war to succeed with every bone in my body. But I don’t think it helps the war effort never to criticize the conduct of it. One reason democracies do well in war is that they can indeed air criticism and achieve correction more quickly than rigid dictatorships. But some on the right are now busy saying that any criticism is tantamount to treason, that torture can be justified, that disasters (such as Abu Ghraib) should be kept from the public (Jonah Goldberg’s position), that a vote for Kerry is a vote for Osama, and so on. Such reflexive, brain-dead defensiveness is not a key to success. It’s a recipe for failure.

The war continues.