The Dish

“The faith fetish, the belief in belief, is an insult not only to the mind, but also to the soul. For there are many varieties of faith, and the “faith” of the Republicans, which does not grasp the old distinction between fideism and faith, represents only one of those varieties. Not all religion in America is as superstitious and chiliastic and emotional and dogmatic and political as this. And not all religion in America is as Christian as this. When the spokesmen for Bush’s holy base call for the restoration of religion to a central position in public life–for the repeal of the grand tradition of mutually beneficial separation that began with Roger Williams’s heroic alienation from the theocracy of Massachusetts–they are usually calling for the restoration of their religion.” – Leon Wieseltier, the New Republic.-

It’s a tonic of an essay (subscription required). I won’t add anything except to say that social and cultural liberals should never concede the issue of faith to the religious right. My belief in the equality of homosexuals, for example, is directly connected to my faith. My own experience has led me to the truth that gay people are as human as straight people, that their loves are as worthy and their relationships as sacred. People ask me how I can be openly gay and Catholic. The answer is simply: I am openly gay because I am Catholic, because my faith teaches me not to be afraid of the truth, and requires me to speak up against injustice and cruelty. My opponents are simply wrong, clinging to theological certainties that collapse upon close scrutiny, and appealing to fear where Christ always appealed to love. In my view, they will eventually be seen as the forces of immorality, rather than the apostles of moral truth. And that is why this struggle is so deep and so intractable. Because it is not a struggle of faith against unbelief, but of faith against faith, just as every civil rights movement always has been.

It’s pointless to reiterate this, since the administration will never listen, but the evidence is still overwhelming that we do not have sufficient military manpower – American or Iraqi – to keep order in Iraq. Order is the essential prerequisite for elections. But order is absent – in some places terrifyingly so. Falluja has been temporarily quieted. But who will keep the peace once the troops have left? Especialy when those troops are now badly needed for outbreaks of violence and chaos in Samarra and Mosul and Ramadi, places where many insurgents have found a new home. Money quote from the Post:

The most immediate concern for the interim government is manpower. Iraq has no more than eight battalions of the newly trained troops, whose main job is to occupy cities after U.S. forces defeat insurgents. Duty in Samarra and Fallujah, which have about a half million people between them, already was stretching that force thin. Adding duty in Mosul “means you’re operating right out on the edge of what forces you have — Iraqi forces,” the U.S. official said.
American forces may be stretched thin as well. A battalion deployed outside Fallujah raced back to its Mosul base when insurgents struck, attacking in groups as large as 50 at a time, numbers not previously seen in the city, said Lt. Col. Paul Hastings of Task Force Olympia, the brigade that in February replaced a much larger unit, the 101st Airborne Division.

The notion that Falluja would be one-stop shopping for insurgents was obviously, sadly, over-optimistic. So do we have enough troops to quell an insurgency that seems, even now, to be gaining strength elsewhere? And does the Bush administration have the capacity to admit past mistakes in order to prevent future ones?

QUOTE FOR THE DAY: “Clinton went back and executed that retarded guy. That said, ‘I share your values.'” – a “senior Kerry adviser,” explaining his frustrations about Kerry’s inability to connect with everyday Americans.

So the mullahs agree temporarily to Europe’s latest attempt to bribe them into abandoning their nuclear programs. The decision largely cuts the U.S. out of further meaningful pressure on Iran, unless the president wants to isolate the U.S. from Europe in the first weeks since his election. He surely won’t. (I wonder how extensively this was discussed with Tony Blair. The president seemed to endorse the European initiative last Friday.) Put that together with renewed European enthusiasm for movement on the post-Arafat Israel-Palestinian question, and you can see why I wondered before the election what difference a Bush victory would actually mean for the war on terror. Actually, the Washington Post does see an impact from Bush’s re-election:

European diplomats said Bush’s reelection helped the negotiations by limiting Iran’s options. Had Democrat John F. Kerry won, Iran might have tried to play for time or probe what policy shifts a new administration was considering, they said.

So Bush indirectly prompted the Iranians to ally themselves more thoroughly with the European powers. I doubt, with Iraq’s insurgency still raging, the president has much of a choice but to acquiesce for the time being.

EMAIL OF THE DAY: “It’s never easy to be a liberal in Alabama. The Democratic Party here is in tatters, and it’s certainly a tough adjustment from my previous life in San Francisco. And yet, the most difficult thing for me is having to listen to the endless procession of whiney, pouting urban liberals, who have filled the Internet this week with this idea that the South is filled with nothing but hillbilly, cousin-loving yahoos.
I can tell you one reason John Kerry lost the South. He and the Democrats have written it off the past two presidential elections. Al Gore would be President today if he had won his own damn state, and he could have done that if he had spent a bit more time talking to his constituents than sipping cappuccino with yet another group of Wisconsin voters.
Yes, Bush would have won Alabama no matter what the Kerry/Edwards camp did this year. But the Democrats entire national campaign in Alabama consisted of one four-hour trip from Edwards. He literally got stepped off a plane, had a quick dinner, grabbed $500,000 in checks and hit the road. Screw the Alabama Democratic Party and anyone else in the state.
Why would anyone in Alabama give a damn about the Democratic Party? Despite the fact that Kerry won 11 counties statewide, and despite the fact that the current Republican governor is a prime target to be beaten in 2006, Democrats just walked away from the state.
It took the conservatives 20 years to build a strong national base, and they did it one precinct at a time. From what I’ve seen this week, we liberals don’t have the stomach for it. When we hit a tough patch, we whine and walk away from the battle. I’m just disgusted by my fellow liberals.” More feedback on the Letters Page.

Just read a little of this piece from the Guardian about Falluja. Notice how the direct quotes from soldiers are rendered colloquially to add to the notion that these guys are morons or parodies of British-left views of Americans. Money quote:

In the huge, muddy field which serves as a forward base, Major-General Richard Natonski prepared his troops for the battle ahead. ‘We’re goin’ in to raise the Eye-raqi flag above Falluja – to give it back to the Fallujans,’ he shouted, the eyes of the entire 1st Marine Division on him. … ‘Only two songs send a shiver up my spine,’ said one marine, his face scored with the pockmarks and confidence of youth. ‘The marine hymn, and that song by Toby Keith after 9/11 which says “we’re gonna kick you up the ass – that’s the American way”.’

The writer, deploying every cliche known to man, is Channel 4 News’s International Editor. Is it possible to get broadcast news in Britain which doesn’t have an egregiously anti-Western slant?

NOW, BURGERS: Nanny-staters in Britain now want to ban television advertizing for fast food before 9 pm. Here’s a classic piece of Orwellian nonsense from the Blair government’s Health Scretary: “What people want in today’s world is as much support and assistance from the Government as possible to help them make the healthy choices that will give them a better quality of life.” We can’t even eat any more without government help?

NPR ROLLS IN IT: Take a look at some of these NPR salaries. Nothing compared to many broadcasters on television and talk radio. But it sure isn’t just a public service any more.

The Stranger elaborates. Here’s a visual that brings it home.

CHENEY UNPACKED: You know you wanted to see the pic.

Why the reform makes political and economic sense for conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic.

“The most tragic was the failure in the early days after the invasion to fulfill the ‘first duty’ of an occupying power: providing basic security. Much has been made of the looting that occurred immediately after the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime, but [Noah] Feldman notes the essential point: by allowing the looting to proceed, American forces sent a clear message ‘that the United States was not in charge, and that no one else was, either.’ Iraqis had to seek security for themselves in what was for a time a state of anarchy, and it was hardly surprising that they turned to their own kind for protection. Feldman says that it was not ‘ancient’ ethnic and religious differences that empowered armed militias, but the human instinct for survival. ‘Had there been half a million U.S. troops on the ground,’ he insists, ‘it is highly likely that there would have been little looting, no comparable sense of insecurity and therefore a reduced need for denominational identities to become as dominant as they quickly did.'” – Robert Kagan, reviewing Noah Feldman’s “What We Owe Iraq,” in the New York Times book review. Kagan, one of the more cogent and persuasive neoconservatives, now calls Rumsfeld’s short-changing the Iraq war and occupation a “monumental error.” I’m a fan of Rumsfeld. But any semblance of accountability must surely mean that he not be re-appointed as secretary of defense. His monumental strategic errors in Iraq and his monumental moral error at Abu Ghraib must surely count for something. Or will they?

He’s the most powerful figure in the conservative movement, and has enormous leverage over social policy in the Bush administration. Who is he? Mike Crowley explains.

A depressed Kerry-supporter? Here’s one option that some of you might want to consider, from Craigslist:

Go ahead and gloat by putting me over your knee and reminding me that George Bush is King! I’ll take it like a man. Any conservative women out there want to spank a handsome, polite, fit and clean liberal and make some cash? Make a sore loser out of me!

This is how Margaret Thatcher used to win elections.

“Certain distressed liberals and progressives are talking about fleeing to Canada or, better yet, seceding from the Union. We can’t literally secede and, let’s admit it, we don’t really want to live in Canada. It’s too cold up there and in our heart-of-hearts, we hate hockey. We can secede emotionally, however, by turning our backs on the heartland. We can focus on our issues, our urban issues, and promote our shared urban values. The Republicans have the federal government–for now. But we’ve got Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Diego, New York City (Bloomberg is a Republican in name only), and every college town in the country. We’re everywhere any sane person wants to be. Let them have the shitholes, the Oklahomas, Wyomings, and Alabamas. We’ll take Manhattan.” – Dan Savage, celebrating the urban archipelago, in the Stranger.