Month: January 2009

Fallows, who knows how to fly a plane, helps you see that this was indeed a remarkable feat. And he makes nervous flyers like myself a little spooked about … birds:

Coastal airports are often near water; most airports are surrounded by a lot of grass; the combination means that flocks of birds often assemble where they can do themselves and the airplanes real harm. At an airport in Maryland I once aborted a takeoff in a small propeller plane — the only time I’ve had to do so — because, out of nowhere, dozens of Canada geese suddenly appeared in front of me. It’s all too common, when approaching airports near water, to have to concentrate on flocks of seagulls (or crows, even away from water) in hopes that they will, by the very last instant, get out of the way and allow you to land.

And ditching in water? This is something that very few amateur or professional pilots have ever practiced for real.

Nate Silver looks at other presidents and crunches the numbers:

Although there is some correlation between the final Gallup numbers and the historians’ views of each president, it is not very strong — in fact, it is not at all statistically significant. The most obvious discrepancy is that of Harry S. Truman, who was extremely unpopular at the time he left office in a cloud of foreign entanglements and minor domestic scandals. Truman, however, is regarded very favorably by historians. The next-most striking disconnect is that of Gerald Ford, who was actually fairly popular for most of his presidency — perhaps Americans were happy to have any alternative to Richard Nixon after Watergate — but is not very well regarded by history. Ronald Reagan and Lyndon Johnson have also worn a little better historically as compared with perceptions about them at the end of their terms.

We cannot know what we will think in a decade’s time. But what we can say is what we see now. For the record, and fuly acknowledging that I once supported him, I think Bush is at this point in time, the worst president in American history, with Buchanan a close second. With each passing day, the evidence of the astonishing damage he did accumulates. I feel ashamed I ever hoped for the best, and only marginally comforted by the fact that I realized my error before a lot of others.

(Photo: Paul J Richards/Getty.)

Ruffini starts the revisionism:

On taxes, Bush did everything right. Being a shrewd politician, he tackled the easy part first, but never followed up on the hard part (spending). Lest we be too hard on the man in this case, he is not exactly unlike most politicians in that way, and most of the responsibility for the spending atrocities rests with Congress. Were it not for the war, this would have been an era of tax cuts and fiscal responsibility — and certainly so in comparison to Obama.

The fiscal negligence began long before 9/11 and was made infinitely worse by the Medicare expansion and social security failure.

Daniel Levy speculates:

If a ceasefire is becoming imminent, then it is fair to assume that while the dynamics of the conflict (Israeli recoil from fully re-occupying Gaza), and the diplomatic effort have played a role, the key element to timing here is the approaching Obama presidency.

Increasingly, I think this entire operation is about Obama. The Israelis are showing that they know the incoming president is a grown-up and will likely force them to come to some difficult but vital decisions about their future. So they’re increasing their leverage as best they can – largely by launching an operation that is both legitimately designed to weaken Hamas as much as possible and illegitimately designed to punish Palestinian civilians for voting for the wrong leaders. Levy continues:

First of all, the various actors–and one imagines Israel in particular–will not want to piss on Obama’s parade this Tuesday.  More substantively, there is an expectation that the new president would have felt compelled to immediately intervene in this situation.  While there is an assumption that the Obama administration will remain strongly supportive of Israel, one can also anticipate a more thoughtful articulation of what serves American interests in the Middle East, how the close Israel-America relationship should be managed, and the taking of corresponding efforts to immediately de-escalate this spiraling crisis.  It might be pushing the envelope to call Obama the peacemaker here, but it’s hard to deny that his impending entrance to the world stage has an effect.

If this conflict does now end (as one desperately hopes it will), then it will of course be the Obama administration that is left to deal with the fall out.  The memo of understanding, due to be signed by Israel and the US tomorrow, is one part of that.  It seems to be a smart move by Condoleezza Rice to give this to the Israeli Foreign Minister in order to get her fully on board for ending the war.  If it is indeed mostly political theater, an election campaign photo-op for Livni, then so be it.  But if it amounts to more, then this might well be one final poison chalice that the Bushies are bequeathing to 44.  If America is to play an active military role in the Sinai, then expect complications and a scenario with all the makings of nurturing over time another insurgency with possible blowback, and even with consequences for the shaky and unpopular regime of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

By repealing DADT.

The Frums celebrate Obama’s Inaugural.

A reader writes:

I don’t think you can be "a Tory" because it just doesn’t exist in the American tradition. Since it is American political culture, which, you’re principally engaged in I think defining yourself with a foreign meme diminishes your potential impact. Also just because the Tories are adopting more moderate social positions in England, up in Canada they’re not the socially progressive responsible conservatives that the Tories in England have become and that you identify with.

Further! Don’t give up on the word conservative. It’s true that it has been perverted by Christianists and the militarists on the radical wing of the Republican party but that’s why it’s so important that you don’t give up on it. Re-define them not yourself! Words are important and Conservative is NOT a dirty word. If someone as dedicated to pushing back against the germanization of the english language (enhanced interrogation techniques + homeland security being not coincidentally the most high-profile examples) and as high profile as yourself gives up then we’re lost.

Chris Hayes guesses at the GOP’s plan:

Here’s my sense of their long-term strategy. This isn’t based on anything other than observation and chatting around the Capitol. I think they’ll let the stimulus pass and, indeed will be quite fine with it being very big. Much bigger than it is now: a trillion dollars or more. Because once the stimulus passes, Republicans are going to say: OK. We’re done. Meaning: no more money. They’ll point to the $700 billion for the TARP, plus the $1 trillion for the stimulus, and they’ll say: we’ve spent all the money there is to be spent. There’s no money for healthcare. There’s no money for anything, really except the Pentagon. They’ll run against deficits, waste and bailout nation.

Rick Warren speaks of his mentors in trying to take over the world for Jesus. He also decries the notion of moderation in religion or politics. Those who believe that Warren is interested in truth rather than power need to get to know his writing and speaking and record more thoroughly.

Really, really safe sex: But the genius part is the blooper reel:

One more after the jump: