Month: January 2009

Some spending delusions:

The tendency to attribute outright magical powers to government spending has gotten slightly out of control.  It’s appropriate to ask the same question that should have been asked of Republicans in 1980:  if all this is so marvelous, why don’t we just do it indefinitely–slash tax rates to zero, borrow and spend forever?

The answer is that there are declining returns to all of this.  At some point, the Laffer Curve maximizes, and any further cuts cost the government money. Similarly, the trillionth stimulus dollar probably isn’t nearly as effective as the first.

My own impression is that Obama’s econ peeps are well aware of this. We may well be surprised by their fiscal conservatism. In fact, I think we may be. There are many aspects of this administration that are shaping up to be more authentically conservative than the Bush administration. That’s one reason Paul Krugman remains so pissed off. And one reason Obama may succeed.

The Israelis shell the UN headquarters in Gaza. In yet another brilliant move to win over global opinion and dispel any notion that this invasion has been morally suspect, they also destroy large amounts of food and humanitarian supplies. Meanwhile, the only entity capable of running any kind of viable Palestinian state – Fatah – is being murdered by Hamas in Gaza and undermined on the West Bank by Israel’s Gaza campaign. So the result of this campaign might well be the permanent collapse of any hope for a viable Palestinian state, deeper alienation of Israel’s own Arab population, propaganda gains for Jihadism across the world, and a crippling legacy for the new administration to try to tackle.

Just a day’s work for neoconservatism.

Ted Haggard relaunches himself. You can figure it all out.

Fresh Pics features the photographic art of Jean-Yves Lemoigne. God knows how he pulls these off, but my heterosexual male and lesbian readers might like the pixelated ladies. Here’s my favorite metaphor for Obama as he arrives in Washington:

Pew has a new report. Money quote:

By nearly three-to-one (55% to 20%), Republicans approve of the military action Israel has taken in the Gaza Strip. Independents, by a smaller margin (44% to 29%), also approve of Israel’s actions. However, a plurality of Democrats (45%) disapproves of Israel’s military campaign, while just 29% express a positive opinion…

Those who are younger than 30 are less likely to sympathize with Israel than are older Americans. By 42% to 17%, more young people say they sympathize more with Israel than the Palestinians. Roughly half or more of those in older age groups sympathize more with Israel, while only about one-in-ten or fewer sympathize more with the Palestinians.

White evangelicals are the strongest non-Jewish supporters of Israel.

I wouldn’t be surprised, I have to say.

Thanks so much for the votes. Best Blog is a real honor – and, heading into the ninth year of daily blogging, a mark of survival in a way. But the great advantage of the poll is to be reminded how many great blogs there are out there that you haven’t yet heard of. Here’s the winner of the Best Blog Design: Our World 2.0, for example. Neil Gaiman won the best lit blog. I’d never heard of the Strobist photo blog before now. If you don’t know of Ars Technica, and are interested in technology updates, you should check it out. In the Best New Blog department, I found Shafeen Charania. I’d never heard of him and can’t really place him easily in the political universe – but was drawn in immediately. This, I thought to myself, is the spirit of the blogosphere I remember from its earliest days (and I was there). Props to those we already know and appreciate: Nate Silver and Andy Towle are longtime Dish faves (and from Andy, I found this tennis-porn blog). And then we have the quintessential blogger photograph – jammies and all:

Another reader:

The value of this map, at least for me, would be the same even without the names attached.  This map has finally cracked the story I’d been able to tell myself about Prop 8. It wasn’t my community that was the problem, the story went, it was all the money coming in from out of state, especially Utah.  Well, the map speaks for itself.  Scan down the San Francisco peninsula, between San Francisco and San Jose.  I live in the middle of that swath of red dots, in what is conventionally assumed to be one of the most liberal parts of the country.  I’ve probably waited in line with some of the people in those red dots at the grocery store or post office, passed them on the street, or seen them at the library.  There were no Yes on 8 signs in yards or stickers on cars during the campaign around here, and they would probably have been quickly ripped out had anyone tried to put them up.  Well, the Yes on 8 folks aren’t invisible to me anymore.  I can’t keep telling myself that my community isn’t part of the problem with such clear evidence staring me in the face.

And so you have a clearer idea of the work we have to do: persuading, arguing, telling our stories.

Jeffrey Rosen reviews a new show:

…it’s not exactly surprising–even though it’s surely unintentional–that ABC’s new primetime show, "Homeland Security USA," confirms the false promise of DHS. Billed as "the new hit series about the heroes who keep us safe at home," the show, which airs [Tuesdays], promises that "no job is more important–or more dangerous" than the one performed by the men and women of the Department of Homeland Security. But the first episode last week turned out to be a glorified version of "COPS" at the border, and every segment inadvertently reminded us why DHS officers spend so little time protecting the homeland against violent threats: Investigations that begin by looking for terrorists come up short, so officers have no alternative but to snag people for non-violent crimes.

Rickrolling jumps the shark.