The Dish

It’s rare you want to cheer at something a State Department spokesman says. But I did reading this:

QUESTION: Did you hear that Castro fell?

MR. BOUCHER: We heard that Castro fell. There are, I think, various reports that he broke a leg, an arm, a foot, and other things, and I’d guess you’d have to check with the Cubans to find out what’s broken about Mr. Castro. We, obviously, have expressed our views about what’s broken in Cuba.

QUESTION: Do you wish him a speedy recovery?

MR. BOUCHER: No.

Yes, I know, it’s usually unfair to enjoy the physical misfortunes of others. But given his long legacy of tyranny and murder, I’m prepared to make an exception for Castro.

Hitch is sticking with his new-found ally. Here’s why. Kudos to the Nation for publishing it.

A REPUBLICAN FOR EXECUTING GAYS: It was only a matter of time before one of them did. A state Senate candidate in Hawaii says he’d favor a law that called for the death penalty for gays.

Poring over the polls this morning, I’m struck by one big thing: Zogby is showing a real Bush surge in the battleground states. It’s dizzying following all the polls – and the races are still so close in so many states, I’m not sure what to make of snapshots like these. But Bush might be heartened. Zogby tends not to over-state his support, unlike Gallup. And he’s headed for a clear victory if these polls pan out.

The image of executed Iraqi soldiers – murdered Nazi-style – is one of the most distressing of this distressing war yet. Arthur Chrenkoff says it’s not the whole reality in Iraq.

The health problems of William Rehnquist pose an interesting question: which party’s base is more worried by the potential Supreme Court picks of the other side? I’d give it to Kerry’s base by a small margin. The news is breaking his way.

THE DRAFT SHENANIGANS: Josh Claybourne rightly bashes MTV’s campaign of scaring the bejeezus out of younger voters. Isn’t Kerry the candidate aiming to increase troop levels by 40,000?

BUSH, KERRY AND LIFE: Steve Chapman, perhaps the best libertarian columnist in the country (someone give him Safire’s job), joins the crew of new Kerry-backers. Here’s one point he makes that I think should be more salient for Catholics:

“The other big issue for ‘seamless garment’ pro-lifers like me, who reject the taking of human life except in self-defense, is the death penalty. There, Bush is proudly in favor of killing people to show that killing people is wrong.”

The Church hierarchy, of course, distinguishes between abortion and the death penalty. Abortion is always wrong. The death penalty is almost always wrong. The “almost” is very small – Rome has come extremely close to saying it is wrong in all cases, and certainly believes it should be restricted to a tiny number of cases where the alternative could be disastrous. Now compare that to Bush’s own record. He has signed more death warrants than almost any man in the country. As Texas governor, he showed absolutely no qualms about giving the nod to hundreds of deaths; in fact, he bragged about it. In one case, he even joked about it. He is far closer to the evil of the death penalty than Kerry is to the evil of abortion. And he has shown in his statements on the issue far more glibness than Kerry has ever revealed in the case of abortion. I should say: I think Kerry’s support for partial birth abortion and his extreme backing of everything the pro-choice movement wants is troubling. But Bush doesn’t get a free pass here. And I’d have more respect for pro-life, pro-Bush Catholics if they averred at least some discomfort with Bush’s ease with this particular culture of death.

This blog has been on the case of vanished and missing explosives and infrastructure from Iraq weapons sites for some time. It was worrying enough when materials disappeared during or just before the invasion. But the fact that large amounts of potentially deadly materials have been looted under the eyes of the American occupation is Exhibit A in the case for this administration’s incompetence. And, yes, “criminal negligence” is not hyperbole. In terrorist-ridden Iraq, the possibility of serious weaponry falling into the hands of the enemy and being deployed against American troops and conceivably American citizens is unforgivable. The whole point of the invasion was to prevent this kind of transfer from taking place. Yet, thanks to this administration, it may have precipitated it. Sure, we have enough troops. Sure.

THE CLINTON FACTOR: Bill Clinton is an immensely talented campaigner, as even his detractors concede. Al Gore was too proud or too close to utilize him on the campaign trail four years ago. And he will always be a divisive figure. But his heart by-pass operation surely makes his current campaign swing less complicated. Everyone wishes him well, apart from a few malicious nutcases. He will be greeted as a rock star and now with a certain degree of compassion from the Democratic base. He can appeal to black voters in a way the stiff Kerry cannot. If he’s deployed effectively this coming week, he could be the October Surprise of the Democrats.

My take on the differences between George W. Bush and John F. Kerry.

VOTING AGAINST BUSH: Here’s a sentence I could have written:

“Yes, Kerry is liberal. But what’s to fear from a liberal president? That he would run big deficits? That he would increase federal spending? That he would expand the power of the federal government over individuals’ lives? Nothing Kerry could do could top what President Bush has already done in those realms.”

That’s the Des Moines Register, endorsing Kerry. Then there’s Bob Barr, hardline fiscal conservative, finding it impossible to pull the Republican lever this time around.

LEFT OR RIGHT? In the Bush-Kerry battle, it’s not so simple any more. My take in Time.

The pro-war, increasingly centrist Washington Post endorses Kerry.

QUOTE OF THE DAY I: “I supported the war on the basis of what I believed to be the case and I am not moving away from that now. I do think that many people around this country would be very wary indeed of taking this government’s word on another occasion if a further military adventure seemed likely, given the history of what has happened on this occasion. That is very worrying,” – former British prime minister, and George H.W. Bush’s close ally in the first Gulf War, John Major, on the current occupation in Iraq. Agree with him or not, I think it’s empirically true that the United States will not be able to rely on even Britain in any coming military intervention. Any future pre-emptive wars under the current president will have to be unilateral, if they can occur at all. And that’s why the stark contrast now being drawn by some about the future differences between Bush and Kerry are, in my view, over-drawn. Bush has ensured that we are ham-strung in any future engagements: no troops left, no allies remaining. And people are worried about Kerry.

QUOTE OF THE DAY II: “People will often be misled into thinking someone is brighter if he says something complicated they can’t understand,” – professor Linda Gottfredson, an I.Q. expert at the Unioversity of Delaware, on why people might be surprised to find that Bush may have a higher I.Q. than Kerry.

EMAIL OF THE DAY: “Forgive me for correcting a minor misstatement you made on the Matthews Show this morning. I recall that you said that we do not have close re-elections for President in this country. Not since 1888, we don’t, but in 1888, the incumbent Cleveland was defeated for re-election by Harrison. Out of 11,000,000 popular votes, Cleveland won by a mere 104,000 (but he lost in the Electoral College, 168-233). The next one, in 1892, a re-match, was almost close. Cleveland defeated the incumbent Harrison by 350,000 votes out of 12,000,000 (and won in the Electoral College, 277-145-22, the latter being a Populist candidate).” The movie- perfect scenario this time around, of course, is for Bush to win the popular vote but to lose in the electoral college. History is ironic, of course. But rarely that ironic.

James Dobson, one of the most influential people in the Republican party, a man hard-wired to Karl Rove’s Blackberry, now says that allowing gays to marry will lead to global destruction:

Dobson warned those attending the Friday afternoon rally at Oklahoma Christian University that the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman must be protected. He cited examples of countries such as Norway that have allowed same-sex couples to marry as proof that fewer men and women get married. Dobson said 80 percent of children are born out of wedlock in Norway. “Homosexuals are not monogamous. They want to destroy the institution of marriage,” Dobson said. “It will destroy marriage. It will destroy the Earth.”

Someone please alert FEMA.

Strange things going on in Boston. Loads of people streaming past us on sidewalks wearing caps with “B” emblazoned on them. And small items of clothing as logos. Is there some sort of sporting event going on?

CORRECTION OF THE DAY: “In the Oct. 17 Sunday Source, the “Gatherings” story described a Republican barbecue held to watch a presidential debate. The item reported “the possibly unprecedented occurrence of a young woman in a cowboy hat pretending to make out with a poster of Dick Cheney.” The item should have explained that the woman was asked to pose with the vice president’s picture by the photographer working for The Washington Post. The woman also did not pretend to “make out” with the picture; at the photographer’s suggestion, she pretended to blow a kiss at it. The item should have explained that the party was hosted in response to a request from The Post, which discussed the decorations and recipes with the host and agreed to reimburse the cost of recipe ingredients.” – from the Washington Post.