"The discussion is how to put the Democrats in a box without attacking the president," – a Republican aide to the AP.
The discussion is not, it seems, how to deal with immigration. I’m not saying the Democrats are any better. I am saying that Congress seems much more concerned with partisan advantage than with actually grappling with serious issues. And they wonder why their ratings are so low. It’s just as well they’ve rigged the system so they’re re-elected at a 98 percent rate, isn’t it?
I should air another dissent, because there have been so many:
Today has been a very tough day. I feared the worst when I found out about the US soldiers taken by terrorists. I’ve been sick all day thinking about what they must have gone through.
I’m sorry, but reading your description of what the US did to Abu Zubayda did not make me sick. I could only hope that our soldiers were treated so humanely. Of course, I know they were treated much worse, and were eventually killed.
I think that reasonable people see the difference between us and the terrorists. Those who don’t would never give us any slack anyways.
Your attempt to use this very sad day to prove some esoteric moral perspective makes me even sicker than I already was.
I feel sick too. All I can say is I just do not believe opposing the torture of prisoners is an "esoteric" moral position. I think it’s the most basic moral position there is. And it requires reiterating precisely when all our emotions are programmed to violate it. As another reader writes:
I don’t think it’s quite right to say that we musn’t lose our moral compass to save civilization. Our moral compass is the linchpin of our civilization.
Another comments:
See, Andrew, you’ve hit upon what, for conservatives, is the unreconcilable paradox of this war: Is whatever America might do in this war permissible and ultimately moral simply because this is America? It is – if your moral legitimacy cannot be questioned, because it is not derived from your actions but from who you are, what you have historically been.
It reminds me of the fundamentalist mindset: because we are on the side of good, and our enemy is evil, we can do no wrong. The ends always justify the means. And for this president, the ends are everything.
I’ve seen this one before but it’s still amazing. Up there with Michel Gondry. It seems to me that advertizing isn’t recognized enough as an art form. Just because it’s selling something doesn’t mean it cannot also be an aesthetic experience at the same time – and, sometimes, a great one.
My Times (of London) column, which was subject to a computer glitch, can now be read in full here. It’s on signs that Condi Rice may be beginning to make headway against the Cheney-Rumsfeld axis.
That’s one way to describe my email in-tray the last day or so. Greg Djerejian explains.
The Scottish historian, Niall Ferguson, changes his mind and decides independence is the best route for Scotland’s future. It might indeed help sever the country’s unhealthy dependency on its Southern neighbor, end some of its chippiness, and force it to make some market-oriented reforms. Or maybe they’ll continue to commit economic suicide with their suffocating and over-bearing government. Adam Smith has been a stranger in his own land for some time now, alas.
Eric Umansky raises some doubts about Ron Suskind’s book. The comments are worth reading as well. I should get it from Amazon today. Suskind has worked for the Wall Street Journal, has a Pulitzer, and has good sources in the intelligence industry. I’ve no doubt some of his sources are fighting back against Cheney and the president. That doesn’t mean they’re not real; and that what they’re saying isn’t true. It certainly fits the pattern we have come to understand. And I say that as someone who once – stupidly and prematurely – lionized this president in the wake of 9/11.
Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 3 pm.
"I’m a big fan of getting around the privileged class. So, you know, we do have a Huey Long today. He’s called Hugo Chavez. When the levees broke in New Orleans we had a president who sent in rescue teams and desalinization plants. It was Chavez, but our State Department sent back the planes. In the book I report on Chavez’s assassination ‚Äî I just thought I’d do it in advance. You know, I reported on two stolen elections (2000 and 2004). Now I’m reporting on 2008 being stolen. I figure if I do it in advance I might be able to affect things," – Greg Palast on his forthcoming book.
"My fellow progressives, when you scorn everybody who does not agree with everything you say, a process inimical to human nature ensues. When you shout people down and call them names, they tend to get defensive and either shut down or shout back at you. When an ultra-progressive (of which I bear some traits) tells a moderate liberal "you are full of shit, f*** you," that’s not the best way to get buy-in on any of your ideas.
Not the best way to engage your fellow citizens. For if you go down this absolutist path, you lose the opportunity to engage, and change, the minds of those whose critical mass we really need to change things about what is wrong with our nation and the world," – Russell Shaw, HuffPuff.
The Dish 