The Dish

An amateur sings (somewhat prematurely): "Don’t It Make My Red State Blue."

The latest from Dr Dobson.

Clarkston, Missouri, 4.15 pm.

"You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man’s age-old dream – the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order – or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path," – Ronald Reagan, stumping for Barry Goldwater in 1964.

Vive la resistance.

Together again. Hitchens and I on Rumsfeld on CNN yesterday. I repeat: Iraq is now a foreign policy Katrina. If you liked the way they handled Katrina, you’ll like the way they have handled Iraq. I repeat again: This is no longer an election. It’s an intervention.

Maybe this story isn’t over. I’ve been thoroughly persuaded by John Derbyshire and Christopher Hitchens that John Kerry’s words were indeed a botched joke. The clincher for me was the actual prepared text, which I confess I hadn’t seen till I watched the Daily Show (where I tend to get the news these days) last night. The actual text was that if you didn’t work hard, "you end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush."

Now, I may be typical of many people’s real-time response to this piece of "news." When I first heard the remarks, I cringed and was appalled. When I saw the context, I could see what Kerry might have meant, but also saw the need for him to apologize for the way his spoken remarks could have plausibly been misinterpreted. I stand by that. But now I also see the prepared remarks in black and white, I have a third wave of sentiment. I agree with Jay Nordlinger here:

When you see Kerry’s prepared text ‚Äî I guess you would have to accept it as authentic ‚Äî you can see precisely what Kerry meant: Bush is stupid, he has always been a slacker, that left him unprepared to lead in Iraq, blah, blah, blah.

So the debate over what Kerry actually meant is now over.

Now what do I next remember? I remember that the president vehemently went after Kerry, as did McCain. Now, when a president decides to do such a thing, his staff have examined the upsides and downsides every which way. They are paid to know any possible backfire for the remarks. And Rove is very smart. So this much I now know: knowing full well that he was deeply distorting Kerry’s meaning, the president used the quote full-bore to impugn Kerry’s commitment to the troops – and to help turn the base against the Democrats.

I know it’s politics. I’m not naive. But it’s also revealing about someone’s character that he could authorize and exploit such a thing. Most fair-minded people will have to concede that, in retrospect, this was a very, very, very low blow. It hadn’t sunk in for me till last night how low. In retrospect, this incident says much more about Bush than about Kerry. I’ll bet I’m not the only one mulling that over this morning.

Gay couples have helped strengthen the institution. Money quote:

Seventeen years after recognizing same-sex relationships in Scandinavia there are higher marriage rates for heterosexuals, lower divorce rates, lower rates for out-of-wedlock births, lower STD rates, more stable and durable gay relationships, more monogamy among gay couples, and so far no slippery slope to polygamy, incestuous marriages, or "man-on-dog" unions.

Who would have thought that encouraging marriage for everyone would do all that? Ahem.

"I call Donald Rumsfeld the best Defense Secretary the U.S. has ever had," – Michael Novak, NRO.

If you agree with him, vote Republican.

A very strong contender, I’d say: Bonnie Tyler’s "Total Eclipse of the Heart." Classic cheesy ’80s ballad that goes on for ever, completely incomprehensible video featuring Foley-esque English schoolboys pouting in a row with day-glo green eyes. Enjoy.

Click here to see the other entries…

I’m beginning to get the first emails from people who have actually read "The Conservative Soul." Here’s one person’s response:

"I am a 19 year-old East Mediterranean history student studying at Birmingham University in the UK.

The last book I read before yours was ‘The God Delusion’ by Richard Dawkins. In it, Dawkins lumps all religious people together – fundementalists, conservatives and liberals. This was a view I wholeheartedly shared. As far as I was concerned, religion was all utter nonsense from beginning to end.

Your book, whilst not converting me, has opened my eyes. Your reasonable, practical and undogmatic faith seems to me a far more accurate reflection of the faith most people hold. I may not agree with you that God exists, but your nuanced reasoning and humanistic approach to your faith has done much to open my eyes with regards the plurality of opinion within the religious world. And I do agree with you that the fight back against all types of fundementalist religion will come principally from liberal and secular religious people like yourself, not militant atheists like Dawkins. All Dawkins wil succeed in doing, it seems to me, is throw more petrol onto the fire."

The book is in some central respects an attempt to describe a non-fundamentalist Christianity for our fundamentalist times. Far from being an attack on faith, it’s a defense of it – against the arguments of Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. Check out some other actual reader reviews at Amazon here.