Month: October 2007

McCain’s Home Run

It was an almost perfect line for the culture war he is still, alas, a part of. And it’s a sign of some desperation. He wants to malign the Democrats as Woodstock hippies – still working after three decades! – while touting the torture "enhanced interrogation" he endured as a Viet Cong captive as an emblem of his patriotism. But notice how a politician still gets traction in our culture: not by addressing actual policies or even engaging current cultural arguments. He gets it by electro-charging up the ancient cultural divide that has prevailed since Vietnam and that still drives the boomers and those drawn into their orbit (i.e. the rest of us). This culture war is something we need to move beyond if we are to tackle the threats from abroad and make concrete, pragmatic reforms at home. And yet it’s still indispensable in provoking the kind of emotional response that campaigns need to gain oxygen. Remember the Swift Boat attack? This is what Obama is up against. He’s a post-boomer politician in a boomer-dominated discourse, where Woodstock and Vietnam are still the needle-changing motivators. Still. How many more election cycles do we have to go through before we get past this?

Ron Paul On Marriage

Conservative sanity, compared with fundamentalist panic:

Well, if you believe in federalism, it’s better that we allow these things to be left to the state. My personal belief is that marriage is a religious ceremony. And it should be dealt with religiously. The state really shouldn’t be involved. The state, both federal and state-wise, got involved mostly for health reasons 100 years or so ago.

But this should be a religious matter. All voluntary associations, whether they’re economic or social, should be protected by the law. But to amend the Constitution is totally unnecessary to define something that’s already in the dictionary.

We do know what marriage is about. We don’t need a new definition or argue over a definition and have an amendment to the Constitution. To me, it just seems so unnecessary to do that. It’s very simply that the states should be out of that business, and the states — I mean, the states should be able to handle this. The federal government should be out of it.

Giuliani’s position – that there should be a federal amendment not if DOMA falls but if more states decide to adopt marriage equality – is befuddling. If you allow one state to try the reform, why is there a numerical limit on how many you’re going to allow? Does it matter if a state decides to do it by legislative action rather than by the courts? And what if it’s a combination, as in Massachusetts, where the legislature and governor have now upheld the reform initially dictated by the court? Is federalism okay until a critical mass of states moves in one direction? Or is Rudy making this up as he goes along?

Bombing Iran

Niall Ferguson looks at the likelihood of an attack any time soon:

The U.S. has 11 active aircraft carriers. Of these, the Kitty Hawk is in port in Japan. The Nimitz and Reagan are in San Diego. The Washington is in Norfolk, Va. The Lincoln and Stennis are in Washington state. And the Eisenhower, Vinson, Roosevelt and Truman are undergoing various sorts of refitting and maintenance checks in the vicinity of "WestLant" (Navy-speak for the western Atlantic). Only one — the Enterprise — is in the Persian Gulf.

At present, then, talk of World War III seems to be mere saber-rattling, not serious strategy. U.S. aircraft carriers can move fast, it’s true. The Lincoln’s top speed is in excess of 30 knots (30 nautical miles per hour). And it, along with the Truman, Eisenhower and Nimitz, are said to be "surge ready." But take a look at the map. It’s a very long way from San Diego to the Strait of Hormuz. Even from Norfolk, it takes 17.5 days for an aircraft carrier group to reach Bahrain. If you were Ahmadinejad, how worried would you be?

You can fact-check his Scottish ass here.

Romney On Healthcare

Finally, he cops to his own Hillary-style reform in Massachusetts. I’m with Ambers:

Even his rivals have to admit: when he admits he’s proud of his health care record in Massachusetts, when he’s not afraid to explain what he did, when he wields his accomplishment as a sword… he’s very compelling. Say what you will about the guy: he expended political capital, he worked hard, and he did something meaningful to reform the health care system in his state. Very few candidates on either side can say that.

Including Clinton.