Category: Old Dish

The definitive job on the New York Review of Books. Fred Siegel in the New York Observer documents its long history of getting everything wrong, its loathing of capitalism, its solipsism and marginality, its pomposity and tedium, its condescension to the American public, its cliquish insularity … and more. Thanks to Mickey Kaus for pointing me toward it.

THANKS, WSJ: A stern editorial today from the Journal deploring some African countries’ recent turn toward scapegoating homosexuals in the AIDS epidemic. It’s encouraging in many ways, not least because it’s rare to hear the Journal, or indeed any other conservative outlet, defend homosexuals from the threat of violence or intimidation or discrimination. This is a shame. Even if some conservatives may disagree on marriage rights or military service, there really should be a consensus that no-one should be targeted for violence or hatred because their orientation. This needn’t mean hate crime laws (although it surely means that if you support hate crime laws for other groups, there is no rational reason to deny them to gays.) It simply means a public affirmation of homosexual dignity and humanity. Don’t you think that conservatives who want to deny civil rights to homosexuals would seem less mean-spirited if they occasionally took a moment to regret anti-gay violence or anti-gay bigotry? I guess I shouldn’t be handing out this p.r. advice to people I disagree with, but heck, take it. And good for the Journal for leading the way.

A truly gut-wrenching and important piece in Salon.com by Joan Walsh. It’s about the war against successful for-profit schools in the inner-cities. Many of these schools, funded by the Edison Project, have been making real progress in raising test scores, improving teaching and helping minority kids. You’d think public school boards would be ecstatic. Instead, one of the best Edison schools in San Francisco faces being shut down because it is not p.c. enough, even though it is doing great work with minority children. Similarly, New York City Schools Chancellor Harold Levy’s attempt to hand over a few schools in New York City to Edison looks doomed, because of visceral hostility to anything smacking of profit. It’s a classic case of leftist ideology prevailing over the interests of children. Ballsy of Salon to run with this. And timely too.

So an emissary of Marc Rich is apprehended flying into London carrying close to $2 million in ready cash. Am I the only one wondering what that cash was for and for whom it was intended? Could Pardonscam get a second wind?

The case against Britain’s barbaric policy of killing the herds in order to save them from foot-and-mouth disease. Check out my new TRB, “The Killing Fields,” posted opposite.

I’m a little perplexed by the hysterical reaction of the foreign, especially European, press to Bush’s decision to ignore the quixotic Kyoto agreement. No other industrialized country has yet ratified it. The Senate has already voted 95 – 0 not even to consider ratifying it. Bush’s statement is simply the recognition of the bleeding obvious. Of course, in diplomacy, you’re not supposed to tell the truth, at least not bluntly. But it’s refreshing when someone does. Bush’s first moves abroad – telling the North Koreans and Palestinians where to get off, insisting on missile defense, dropping Kyoto – all remind me of very early Thatcher. Her predecessors had all played the internationalist game, hob-nobbing at summits, talking grandly about the future of the planet, issuing communiqués no-one intended to abide by, and so on. Thatcher walked into her first European summit, asked for a rebate for Britain from the E.U., demanding “our money back,” and wouldn’t budge till she got her way. Her international peers were appalled at her vulgarity. But Thatcher thought that foreign policy was about pursuing your national interest. So, it appears, does Bush. They’re both right – and deeply refreshing.

The National Research Council, a branch of the National Academy of Sciences, has issued a report pointing out that we have almost no reliable statistics on whether the ‘war against drugs’ is actually working. The report also points out one extraordinary fact: the $30 billion spent in 1999 by federal, state and local governments in the drug war was twice the U.S. cost of the Gulf war of 1991. The number of people arrested in 1998 for drug offenses was triple the number in 1980 and the number of people in jail in 1998 for drug offences was a staggering 12 times greater than 1980. But at least we know we got Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait.

Had a minor epiphany watching the smooth young Southern forelocks of North Carolina trial lawyer Senator John Edwards on Hardball today. He looks uncannily like Tony Blair! He even has the concerned sincerity down right, as well as the moderate liberalism and awkward smile. Uh-oh.

Paul Gigot has an excellent column today, as usual, on Lincoln Chafee, the persnickety Rhode Island Republican who could single-handedly kill Bush’s budget in the Senate. Gigot tries to corner him into why he wouldn’t vote for the current package – due for consideration by the Senate next week – and gets nothing but incoherent cantankerousness. John McCain is another danger, of course. But an all-or-nothing approach is not the best way to proceed right now. People often over-estimate the damage to a president of being upstaged by Congress. They key is to co-opt and adjust, as Clinton showed. In that respect, I’m amazed by Dick Cheney’s alleged comment to Republican Senators this week that losing the budget resolution would mean “handing the keys” to the Senate to Tom Daschle. A slightly more modest tax cut wouldn’t be the end of the world. Neither is McCain-Feingold as long as Bush manages to co-opt it when it hits his desk. The president is always relevant – and in these nineteenth century days, is often going to be reactive to the dominant Congress. So sit back and enjoy. As long as Bush doesn’t become completely reactive, it’s a structure suited to Bush’s passive-aggressive character.

Impressive press conference from W today. Articulate, crisp, and generally persuasive. But why did it take him so long to explain the links between his decisions on carbon dioxide, arsenic and Kyoto? The art of communication is explaining what you’re doing before and during the process. Bush should not have waited till now to put all this together, allowing his critics to paint him as a mere tool of energy interests or a polluting conservative. I fear one aspect of Bush’s business-style approach to government, and one he shares with his father, is that he tends to act first, explain later. That may work in business. But it’s a lousy communications strategy in politics.

When Safire is hot, he’s smokin’. Today’s column is a beaut, revealing that Anti-Defamation League head Abraham Foxman not only accepted $250,000 from March Rich on behalf of the ADL but actually hatched the idea of Denise Rich being used as an interlocutor for her ex-husband’s pardon. It took Foxman several weeks after the first Rich revelations to cough up this amazing fact, more grist for “The Jews Made Me Do It” defense of the pardons. Safire lets his old buddy off lightly, in my opinion. Foxman should quit over this, surely.