The Dish

A reader writes:

How is Mark Levin’s post on Chester Finn’s article a "sign of health"?  He simply links to Finn’s article and labels it "a prescription for disaster." In other words, it simply amounts to trying to cast out another conservative because he has dared to challenge the far-right fringe that now dominates debate in conservative circles.

Finn’s article was a sign of health and sanity, providing reassurance that "intelligent conservative" is not an oxymoron. Levin’s post is a sober reminder that dysfunctionality and radical (non-conservative) ideology are still core components of today’s so-called conservatism.

A sane, smart argument against raising it – from Greg Mankiw.

Some readers have asked if I favor its abolition. I sure do. That’s probably why I’m a blogger and not a politician.

Jefferson City, Missouri, 10.30 this morning.

A reader writes:

I just wanted to drop a note to thank you for linking to the video for Smalltown Boy. It was, and still is one of my favorite songs, and to this day, I have it, as well as a Jimmy Sommerville version of "I Never Can Say Good-Bye" on a CD in my car, (along with other songs by Bronski Beat, The Communards, UB40 et all).

Being from a small town and being gay in the ’80’s was never easy. I was a teenager in a small town in the 70’s, and it was even harder. I endured black eyes, broken bones, ostracism, and generally being the town "fairy".

Needless to say,  on the day I turned 18, I was gone. By the time this video came out, I had already met the love of my life (this past Sept was our 26th anniversary), but even now, some of the scars surface. I had forgotten how gut wrenching some parts of that vid is.

Can I just say this to my straight readers: when you think of gay people, and the "gay agenda," please think of this guy as well, will you? He went through all that, found a husband and committed to him for 26 years – and the Republicans now tell him that his committed relationship is a a threat to the family and to civilization. In my view, someone who endured that and committed to a relationship for almost three decades should at least be given the same civil rights as Pamela Anderson and Kid Rock. Anything else adds insult to injury.

David Kuo writes an open letter to two leaders of the Christianist right.

A reader writes:

I’m no shrink but it seems to me that W will stick to his guns in Iraq for one simple reason: When things finally change upon his retirement (and, as you know better than I, it’s going to get rough for a while when it does) he can say "if they’d just continued my policy everything would have been OK. They changed it, and now you’ve got a disaster. I told you so."

I’ll rant, and state the obvious. He’s a cosseted son-of-the-establishment who failed all the way up to presidency. Just as in everything that’s come before in his life his Dad and his Dads’ buds are going to bail him out. Problem this time is that he’s president. He has the wherewithal – and an enabler in substitute father-figure Cheney – to put them off. It’s only two years. It’ll be a disaster of Iraq, and for us, but he’ll go into his dotage thinking he’s a success.

And that’s all he cares about. He already said it’s going to be someone else’s problem.

If this is an accurate assessment of the president’s motives, he really is a danger to the republic and a disgrace to his office. But I suspect that he has already also rationalized it in his head as the statesmanlike option. He’s blind even to his own pride.

(Photo from yesterday in Kirkuk by Marwan Ibrahim for AFP/Getty.)

That’s now Charles Krauthammer’s timeline for the Maliki government to prove it is more than just a front for al-Sadr. But he gives the Hadley stay-the-course strategy some short-term cover:

We should … make a last effort to change the composition of the government and assemble a new one composed of those ‚Äî Kurds, moderate Sunnis, secular Shiites, and some of the religious Shiites ‚Äî who might be capable of reaching a grand political settlement.

But he also concedes that the political culture in Iraq makes this a pipe-dream. What he doesn’t concede is that the Bush administration’s management of the war and its acquiescence to anarchy made the chance for a grand compromise in Iraq all but impossible. It’s hard to do a deal with people who have been busily murdering your in-laws for three years with impunity. But then Charles pivots and seems to favor an even swifter withdrawal than many Democrats:

The U.S. should be giving Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki a clear ultimatum: If he does not come up with a political solution in two months or cede power to a new coalition that will, the U.S. will abandon the Green Zone, retire to its bases, move much of its personnel to Kurdistan where we are welcome and safe, and let the civil war take its course. Let the current Green Zone–protected Iraqi politicians who take their cue from Moqtada al-Sadr face the insurgency alone. That might concentrate their minds on either making a generous offer to the Sunnis or stepping aside for a new coalition that would.

Or they might just say: fine. See ya later. And then what do we do? I’m afraid Charles is relieving himself into a gale-force wind. Maliki has had many months to prove himself. And waiting some more merely adds to the chaos and actually weakens our leverage. But, hey, two months is not too bad. Maybe there is a realist-idealist compromise out there. Give Maliki two months, then withdraw to Kurdistan. Wait and see if anyone emerges from the slaughter who can deliver order. But don’t be surprised if it’s someone we really don’t like.

"Basically I see the provision of basic civil rights and domestic partnership benefits [as] a campaign against [then-House Speaker] Tom Finneran. I see Tom Finneran and the Democratic leadership as having opposed the application of domestic partnership benefits to gay and lesbian couples and I will support and endorse efforts to provide those domestic partnership benefits to gay and lesbian couples," – Mitt Romney, in a Bay Windows interview published Oct. 24, 2002.

The poor theocons. They don’t have anyone bigoted enough to support in 2008.

I’m not big on p.r. stunts like World AIDS Day. I remember my old friend Patrick once saying he would die of red ribbons before he died of AIDS. But he died of AIDS. He was 31. In many parts of the world today, 31 is an achievement for people with HIV. Please give to HIV/AIDS charities, support research, defuse stigma (remove the federal travel ban on HIV-positive foreigners!), and work for better diagnosis and treatment. I’d say that Africa is indeed a valid priority. But many African-Americans in American cities are no better off than some people with HIV in Africa. Charity begins at home. And stigma sometimes has to be conquered before charity is even possible.

But know this also if you are caught in this web: HIV need not be the end of your life. This is my 13th year of living with it. And I’ve never felt as alive. If you have this virus, face it, own it, beat it. It can be done. And there is great spiritual blessing to be found in such fear and pain if you pray hard enough.