The Dish

I’d say this Jonah column is a home run. If Kevin Drum still needs to be persuaded that Jihadist terrorism is a real and contunuing threat to the U.S., then he is essentially unpersuadable. I would have thought that 9/11 alone was enough. Alas, not. A nuke in a major city maybe? If that’s what it will take to get the Democrats to take the threat seriously, you can’t blame the American people for deciding not to wait.

EMAIL OF THE DAY: “You wrote that David Brudnoy’s ‘final and heartiest laugh’ was that his HIV didn’t kill him. I don’t mean to ruin this lovely thought, but as you know, people with HIV often don’t die as a result of primary HIV infection. They often do, however, die of some illness to which they become vulnerable by virtue of chronic immunosuppression. Brudnoy died of Merkel cell carcinoma, a rare form of cancer that occurs between five and thirty times more frequently among HIV-infected individuals than in the general population (see Engels, EA, et al. (2002), “Merkel cell carcinoma and HIV infection,” Lancet 359:497-8). So I’m afraid it’s not unlikely that HIV did kill him. May he rest in peace.” Go ahead. Ruin my little piece of denial. More feedback on the Letters Page.

“Who really cares what Hollywood thinks? All these hacks come out there. Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It’s not a secret, OK? And I’m not afraid to say it. That’s why they hate this movie. It’s about Jesus Christ, and it’s about truth. It’s about the messiah. Hollywood likes anal sex. They like to see the public square without nativity scenes. I like families. I like children. They like abortions. I believe in traditional values and restraint. They believe in libertinism. We have nothing in common.” – Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, Scarborough Country, December 8.

Here’s some great news from the real success story of the war on terror: Afghanistan. Money quote:

The US-led military in Afghanistan said on Wednesday that it had been contacted by Taliban members willing to lay down their weapons following an arms-for-amnesty offer by the US envoy to the country. US military commanders operating in south and southeastern Afghanistan have been contacted by Taliban members declaring their desire to ‘join the peaceful political process,’ the US-led military spokesman, Major Mark McCann, told a news briefing in Kabul.

I sometimes wonder how big Bush’s margin of victory would have been if he had never invaded Iraq. Which, of course, redounds to Bush’s favor. Iraq turned out to be a big risk for him politically. He deserves credit for taking it on. But that doesn’t mean he should evade criticism for screwing so much of it up.

Moves are afoot to provide civil unions for gay couples in this historically Catholic country. I’d favor full marriage rights myself, for all the usual reasons. Not least of which: divorce in Ireland is an extremely tough process. Meanwhile, here’s a good story on the Canadian decision. Canada’s parliament will have the last word early next year, with a free vote on the matter. David Frum argues that this is not democratic. A free vote in the national parliament? And the Supreme Court essentially deferring to an existing government decision? Undemocratic? Let’s just say it’s a lot more democratic than, say. Brown vs Board of Education.

The issue of unprotected troops seems finally to have caught the administration’s attention. John Kerry didn’t manage to get them to notice. But a reporter-goaded soldier did. Part of Rumsfeld’s response was :

Rumsfeld said the problem was “essentially a matter of physics,” with production of armored Humvees taking time to catch up to demand.

Hmm. Here’s a story about the sole company assigned to make protective plates for the army. Money quote:

Armor Holdings Inc., the sole supplier of protective plates for the Humvee military vehicles used in Iraq, said it could increase output by as much as 22 percent per month with no investment and is awaiting an order from the Army.

So is it physics? Or is it the army bureaucracy?

David Brudnoy was and is a class act. He was a Tory libertarian, a loyal Republican, ornery in a gentlemanly way, and a brilliant, emollient radio personality. I was on his show a few times, broadcast from his cozy, Victorian-style Back Bay apartment, with friendly and unfriendly callers all treated in the same courteous but unsparing manner. His own openness about his struggle with HIV was a real boon to others, like me, who dealt with this alone to begin with. He also proved that it isn’t simply possible to be a conservative and to favor gay dignity, but that it is quintessentially conservative to do so. Homosexuality is like the weather: an unalterable part of the human condition, as noble and as tawdry as every other facet of human life and experience. Conservatives should seek to understand it, and to bring it within the boundaries of civilized life. David was an emblem of that civilization: a prince of a conversationalist, a charmer and a friend. His final and heartiest laugh? That HIV didn’t kill him. God bless him.

Here’s an interesting point from a reader:

At a most simplistic level much of the opposition to steroid use is based on the ingestion of artificial ‘substances’ that boost performance without there being a relationship to the amount of work or level of talent that an individual athlete has. This has the perceived effect of decoupling the characteristics of the individual from that individual’s performance. This line of arguing says that performance should be based on intrinsic rather than extrinsic factors. Well, how do you classify this one? Nike puts athletes in a house with reduced oxygen levels so that the body builds up its oxygen use/carrying capacity as a response. This allows them to ‘live’ in a house at a virtual high altitude and train at low altitude. In this case, the athlete’s performance is being boosted by a substance that is extrinsic to their individual characteristics (and in fact is ‘ingested’ in manner analogous to steroids) yet this approach is praised rather than pilloried. Is the ingestion of chemicals (yes CO2 is a chemical, albeit an abundant one) to boost performance desirable or not? You can’t have it both ways so to be consistent the anti-steroid crowd should be calling for the expulsion of most of the US long distance running team.

I tend to agree. The distinctions between what is intrinsic to performance and what is extrinsic are somewhat arbitrary. Take even nutrition. If someone who had poor childhood nutrition competes against someone who had a healthy upbringing, isn’t the contest unfair in the same way as a contest affected by unlilateral use of steroids? No, not exactly the same. But not completely different either.

EMAIL OF THE DAY: “I’m a ‘decriminalize pot’ libertarian but I don’t get the defense of Bonds and Giambi. Sure, if they stood up there like men and said we take steroids and we think they should be legal- I would respect them. But they lied repeatedly, giving the impression that they were significantly more talented than the clean players. If you want to see modern players obliterating old records just give them METAL BATS! The only reason they’re using steroids is because it’s the best way to cheat while acting like your just like everyone else.
I’m shocked by the lack of outrage (outside of sports columnists). I wish they could be banned from the league. Pete Rose betting on other teams is nothing compared to what these guys did. And remember how we treated the East German and Chinese Olympic athletes like they were Frankenstein monsters born from the evils of communism? Marion Jones is getting the benefit of the doubt because she doesn’t look like a freak of nature.
Sports’ modern era is tainted. The only reason our culture won’t admit it is because everyone’s life is so wrapped up in the accomplishments of these juiced-up overpaid athletes driven by the richest of the rich. If you take these stats and titles away from many Americans, their lives are meaningless.
I know this sounds like a ‘Democracy Now’ rant but if you’re going to appreciate the benefits of our free-market you have to condemn its failures.” More feedback on the Letters Page.

The bad news is that Omar and Ali, the intrepid Iraqi bloggers, couldn’t make our coffee date this afternoon. The good news is that they blew me off for the president of the United States. I think Wolfowitz got them into the Oval Office. Yay.

AND ISRAEL: I forgot to mention that Israel also just recognized gay couples for legal benefits and protections. I wonder if David Frum is pissed off. I’ll be responding to this erroneous post soon. Soon, it will become, I think, a defining characteristic of modern, democratic states that they acknowledge equal rights for gay citizens. Except, alas, in America?

QUOTE OF THE DAY: “If I were a soldier overseas wanting to defend my country, I’d want to ask the secretary of defense the same question, and that is, are we getting the best we can get us? And they deserve the best.” – president Bush, saying the right thing, today.

A libertarian take. And, yes, the health hazards are grossly exaggerated.

ATTACKING THE RED CROSS: TNR gets it right this week in an editorial bemoaning the righ’s knee-jerk critique of the International Committee of the Red Cross. ICRC’s crime? Reporting on prisoner abuse under U.S. command. It’s worth stating the obvious: the abuse is a much bigger problem than the ICRC. Have conservatives lost their moral bearings? Money quote:

It is the height of hypocrisy for Rumsfeld to malign the ICRC. His Pentagon has spent nearly three years insisting that the ICRC’s presence at Guantánamo Bay obviates any need for further human rights monitoring. In November 2002, when asked about disturbing photographs that had been leaked to the press showing hooded and restrained enemy combatants en route to the prison, then-Defense Department spokeswoman Torie Clarke said, “People also know, but should be reminded, we have the International Red Cross … to ensure that the treatment of the detainees is absolutely appropriate.” And, when three British inmates at Guantánamo charged after their release that they were abused, Navy Secretary Gordon England told CNN in August that the charges couldn’t be true because “the International Committee of the Red Cross is here regularly. … I can’t imagine that someone would not have reported this to the icrc.” On Monday, The Washington Times editorialized that the ICRC’s report should be ignored “without more concrete and substantiated evidence.” But, by making the ICRC the only monitor with access to Guantánamo, Rumsfeld has ensured that there can’t be any.

And that’s the point, isn’t it?

NOW, NEW ZEALAND: After Canada and Britain, another part of the Anglosphere grants relationship rights to gay couples. In parliament. On a free vote. No judicial “tyranny.”

It could be worse.