In which the Dish gets pwned:
Perhaps Liberman’s real anxiety is that Super-Freakonomics overshils and misses the sweet spot. But most of the people who see his post wouldn’t have clicked through to it if Andrew Sullivan hadn’t pushed our hot buttons with a rather misleading post title: “The Liberal Beck and Limbaugh.”
I'm busted.
This piece of bearische camp may help you wake up this Tuesday morning. Or not:
Well, I'm not an expert in these matters but this is straight out of a movie:
During one meeting, Nozette indicated he could be paid in cash up to $10,000. "Cash is fine&[I know] how to handle cash…you buy consumables&cash is good for anything&you can eat it, drink it or screw it."
On Sept. 10, 2009, FBI agents left a letter — in the post office box Nozette had been told about — for him to answer questions about U.S. satellite information. A week later, Nozette returned the letter to the post office box with answers to the questions, and passport pictures for an Israeli passport the scientist had requested and an encrypted computer thumb drive.
Ambers has a fascinating discussion of what Nozette might have had that was useful for the Israelis. Bottom line:
"Nozette would be in a good position to know how easily it is for U.S. technologies to pierce the veil of Israel's secret nuke program."
Hmmm.
PPP warns that its new poll will show gains for the anti-marriage equality forces in Maine. It's automated, which may explain why it's different than two recent polls. People can tell recordings their real feelings. It's hard to know what to make of the polls, except that this is a close race and that the anti-gay forces have relentlessly focused on schools and kids. Any device they can find to provoke fear of gay people around children is electoral gold. You can blame California. Or you can get an email like this one in the Dish in-tray tonight:
The fact that you "see no reason why kids should not learn at some point that homosexuality is a part of the world and history, whatever people's views are on the question" is an unsurprising and totally irrelevant fact to me. You see, I am charged with raising my children and I can assure you that I am wholly unconcerned with your views on the matter. Should I be?
Stay away from my kids.
They use this tactic because it works. Stay classy, Maggie.
Today on the Dish our coverage was especially scattered. Greenwald and Reason reacted to news of the administration's move towards decriminalizing medical marijuana, just as public support hit an all-time high. Greenwald also tackled the latest in the Binyam Mohamed case. (David Rohde, by contrast, was treated well by his Taliban captors.) We also found a translation of Mousavi's first recorded interview since the election and linked to some footage of Palin's heretic hunter in action. Brauchli lied.
In blog commentary, Reihan amended his Rove praise defense, McWhorter slammed the black Family Guy, Frum sized up the right punditry, and Stephen Dubner defended himself. The Dish got more DADT insight from servicemembers here and here. Another reader passed along footage of a 32-year-old Andrew talking to Brian Lamb.
In home news, the inimitable James Bennet was just named Editor of the Year by Ad Age. Andrew shared his thoughts here. Fallows here. Subscribe here.
— C.B.
Here is the memo. Greenwald's take:
Criminalizing cancer and AIDS patients for using a substance that is (a) prescribed by their doctors and (b) legal under the laws of their state has always been abominable. The Obama administration deserves major credit not only for ceasing this practice, but for memorializing it formally in writing. Just as is true for Jim Webb's brave crusade to radically revise the nation's criminal justice and drug laws, there is little political gain — and some political risk — in adopting a policy that can be depicted as "soft on drugs" or even "pro-marijuana." It's a change that has concrete benefits for many people who are sick and for those who provide them with treatments that benefit them. So credit where it's due to the Obama DOJ, for fulfilling a long-standing commitment on this issue.
Video above from 2008 via Nick Gillespie who describes the memo as "the most compassionate and sensible policy to come out of Washington in a very long time." Jacob Sullum isn't so sure. Earlier Dish coverage here.
Renard Sexton runs the numbers on electoral fraud:
Using our conservative affected-vote estimates, the situation remains fairly damning for Hamid Karzai. Assuming that the results are equal to or less favorable than our estimates, it seems likely that a runoff will ensue. With just four percent of cushion, it would take a miracle for him to walk away with a majority after this, where 20 percent of the vote is fraudulent, much from his tally. Dr. Abdullah Abdullah is in the strongest position he has been in thus far, and could conceivably win a run-off held in strict conditions.
Of course, strict conditions we do not have in Afghanistan, where winter is rapidly approaching. If another round of voting is ordered, it could be difficult or impossible to complete before the freeze brings movement around the country, outside of major cities, to a halt. Perhaps a coalition government or tribally negotiated solution is in store?
Further thoughts on the situation by J Alexander Thierat of Foreign Policy.
Tim Mak watches anti-climate change flick Not Evil, Just Wrong so you don't have to:
[T]he choice of “Not Evil, Just Wrong” as the title is puzzling, because the primary purpose of the film is to convince the viewer that environmentalists are, in fact, evil.
A Beagle and owner Nanette Prideaux, pose during the 'Meet The Breeds' show at the Jacob Javits Convention Center October 17, 2009 in New York City. By Afton Almaraz/Getty.
A reader writes:
Several months ago I read Paranoid Style in conjunction with All the King's Men. I now worry about Peronism in this country…the offspring of Palin and Dobbs.
Another:
This part of the quoted passage from The Paranoid Style gave me my own memory flash:
The two-party system as it has developed … hangs on the common recognition of loyal opposition: each side accepts the ultimate good intentions of the other. The opponent's judgment may be held to be consistently execrable, but the legitimacy of his intent is not … his Americanism is not questioned.
It was this: Bush Sr. protesting that he wasn't questioning Dukakis' patriotism, just his judgment.
He had to protest thus because he had built his campaign on questioning Dukakis' patriotism. As Bush Sr. now waxes solemn about incivility, we should remember that he kicked off the modern era or what we now call Rovian tactics — and that, when asked about the swiftboat attacks on Kerry, he stuck the shiv in a bit deper, saying, to paraphrase, there must be something to these allegations or these people wouldn't be making them.
The Dish 