The Dish

I guess lots of people will chuckle at the news that one William Stowell is now suing the hospital that circumcized him as a new-born. He claims that he enjoys less sexual pleasure as a result. Actually, I think he has half a point, so to speak. I don’t think he should sue. And I don’t think the issue is sexual pleasure. (A lot of men seem to experience enough sexual pleasure to be finished in five minutes. With foreskin, they could be done in five seconds. Straight women and gay men have a good reason to worry about this.) It’s much simpler. In the absence of a pressing medical problem, it seems to me unconscionable to mutilate infants before they are able to give their consent. When they do this to baby girls, it’s called Female Genital Mutilation, and rightly abhorred. Slicing off your foreskin is nowhere near as damaging as removing the clitoris, of course, but it’s still damage. And damage should only be inflicted, it seems to me, with a person’s consent. I doubt if any grown man with an unmutilated penis would agree to the unnecessary pain and disfigurement unless he really had no better option. So why should we be doing this to children? The situation is even grimmer when you consider that all medical procedures have an error rate. The awful story recounted by John Colapinto about a boy brought up as a girl began with a botched circumcision resulting in the complete destruction of the baby’s genitals. Mercifully, the American Academy of Pediatrics just altered their guidelines to doctors and hospitals against routine circumcision of new-borns, after several generations of medically-enforced child abuse. How about amending it still further to recommend no mutilation unless there is a pressing medical need?

Bill O’Reilly points out something I’d over-looked. Karin Stanford, Jesse’s lover, was given moving expenses after she’d quit her job. She gave two days’ notice and upped and left – prompting Jackson’s Citizenship Education Fund to offer to pay her to move to L.A. As O’Reilly puts it, with his inimitable style, “I’m sure millions of Americans have gotten moving expenses after quitting their jobs – I just can’t think of any right at this moment.”

A reader provides new evidence of our multi-cultural present and future. Driving to work this morning through one of Philly’s historically Italian neighborhoods, he saw a sign in the window: “It’s a boy – Grandchild #15 – Isaac Brendan Panzia!” I think the pot just melted.

FIRST TIPPING POINT BONUS: Flush with a little cash, we’ve rejigged the site a little. From now on the default site will be the lite site. We’ve scrapped the intro page. You can still access the heavy site from the lite site, via a button near the Tipping Point. We found that 80 percent of you were using the lite site, so we decided to give you what you want. More improvements to come.

I’m not an advocate of polls about tax cuts. People have been indoctrinated for so long into thinking that they have no right to keep their own money that they feel guilty admitting it. Nonetheless, today’s New York Times poll has one interesting nugget. In an admirably rare piece of a fair questioning, the poll gave a summary of both the president’s and the Democrats’ budget plans, and asked which was preferable. It said Bush’s would devote a third of the surplus to tax cuts, a third to debt reduction and a third to spending; it then said that the Democrats would use half for debt reduction, and divide the rest between tax cuts and new spending. 57 percent backed Bush’s priorities; while only 49 percent backed the Democrats. That seems significant to me. Why the small majority for Bush? The most persuasive reason given is that 56 percent are afraid of what Congress would do with the money if it were left in Washington. If I were Bush, this is the main theme I would strike. I’d say that the Congress can’t help itself. What did Reagan compare Congress to? A baby: a huge appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other. Why doesn’t W use that line again? The public knows it’s true; all they need is a president who can remind them.

INK, INK, INK: Some flattering pieces about this site you might be interested in. Inside.com reviews the Amazon honor system. Apparently, we’re doing a lot better than others, which, to my mind, is just a sign of how great you guys are. Cruising past $6,000 by the way, which is $6,000 more than Inside.com has yet to make in profit. THANKS AGAIN. The American Spectator Online also just called us “perhaps the single most famous personalized Website in American journalism.” Thanks, Wlady. Logrolling extra: the new Spectator is refreshing and slick as well. And I’ll forgive the Cosmos Club for insisting I wear my Puff Daddy overcoat in the bar next time. Fun having a drink with Bob Tyrell there the other evening. Tyrell has a smile on his face these days that announces VINDICATION everywhere he goes. And he deserves every inch of it.

IS TIM NOAH DUMBER THAN DUBYA?: A new low for Noah in Slate, which is saying something. He waxes on and on and on about how president Bush is stupid – a far worse accusation among Noah’s coterie than, say, adulterer or perjurer. The evidence for W’s dumbness is his obvious lack of knowledge about things Bill Clinton could recite at will at 4 am in the morning, while on the phone to some criminal donor with Monica under the desk. But is that dumb? Or, rather, does that make W “functionally dumber,” to use Noah’s phrase, than Clinton? Intelligence is a multi-faceted thing. There is, for example, a pretty old distinction between theoretical and practical wisdom. (Re-read your Aristotle, Tim.) No-one has ever claimed that W is an intellectual. But he’s clearly canny, shrewd, good with people, efficient and a good manager. These are good qualities and they surely count as functional intelligence – especially in someone supposed to run the government. It also remains indisputable that W pummeled Gore in the three debates last year – in large part because he wasn’t as smart as Gore but a hell of a lot wiser and nicer and more intelligible. I have nothing against eggheads, I should add. I am one, after all. But I am a terrible manager of people, useless at organizing much, bad at schmoozing, good at pissing people off, and not always good at judging character. I’m proud of my work editing The New Republic, but, man, could I have benefited from some of the basic managerial techniques W seems to have mastered. Or to put it another way: I’m probably smarter in some respects than W, but he’s way smarter than me – and most hacks for that matter – in the area he’s working in. And that includes Noah, who is Exhibit A in why most people find clever-dick journalists to be even less appealing than tongue-tied politicians.

I had no idea that the Justice Department actually has funds to help schools combat bullying. Among their recent bequests was a cool $123,000 to, er, Santana High School, site of the recent shooting incident. Just goes to show how effective our government usually is at tackling social problems. Actually, given a couple of incidents I went through at high school, maybe I should apply for reparations.

Trust me. This is sticking. Now the Los Angeles Times has done a thorough story. My favorite quotes from it? Robert Woodsen, black activist: “[Jackson] uses the black community to threaten corporations, but then who benefits? It’s not the black community. It’s a handful of black businessmen around Jesse Jackson. And what it’s really doing is diluting the rich legacy of the civil rights movement. That legacy is now for sale.” T.J. Rodgers, president and CEO of Cypress Semiconductors: “It’s a shakedown. The basic shakedown mechanism is, he declares racism based on dubious statistics. Then he gives you a chance to repent – and the basic way is to give Jesse money. The threat is you’ll be labeled a racist if you don’t. That scares business leaders.” Maybe now it’s Jackson who’s a little scared.

DUDE, WHERE’S MY DRUG POLICY?: Fascinating story in today’s New York Times on new research into the possible medical uses of LSD, peyote, and even Ketamine, the party drug known as “Special K.” Some anecdotal evidence suggests that moderate use of these drugs might be helpful in curing addictions, personality disorders, depression, and schizophrenia. More evidence of the collapsing barrier we have put between so-called ‘recreational’ drugs and ‘medicinal’ pharmaceuticals – see my TRB posted in the Politics Section of the Greatest Hits. Too bad Joseph Califano hasn’t noticed.

No less an authority than E.J. Dionne has now conceded that George W. Bush is not a moron. No word yet on what George W. Bush thinks of E.J. Dionne.

JUST SAY NO: Just when you thought the drug war couldn’t get any worse, along comes Joseph Califano in today’s Washington Post homing in on “addiction” as the problem – including addiction to alcohol and nicotine. Our drug policy should not be scaled back, Califano urges, but expanded to hammer even further the alcohol and tobacco companies, force miscreants into government re-education camps to stop using drugs, make drunkenness punishable by law, and on and on. “Prevention, education and media campaigns should target alcohol and tobacco as aggressively as illegal drugs,” Califano avers. “Congressional restrictions that confine the White House drug policy director to illegal drugs should be lifted.” Next up will be class action lawsuits against liquor companies. Help! They’ve taken away our joints and our pills. Now they want our beer and our cigarettes. Califano won’t be happy till we’re all sitting upright in school like miniature Johnny Ashcrofts, indoctrinated against pleasure by our government – and all for our own good. The piece has the usual canards, including the typical hooey about this being “about our kids.” Remember: the drug warriors are just using kids for practice. What they really want is your Makers Mark. I guess we should be grateful to Califano for admitting it.

WAIT, THERE’S MORE: In the item below (“AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND, ER, SNEAKERS”), I wrote about the riot-looting-demo in favor of racial discrimination in college applications. The demo was full of high school kids, who were actually bussed there and organized by their San Francisco public high schools! Can you imagine public high school teachers bussing their kids to a rally against race preferences? Check this out in last Friday’s San Francisco Chronicle. Apparently some San Francisco teachers decided against the demo because it would be hard to keep tabs on the kids, and other procedural worries. No-one seems to have batted an eye-lid at the use of public high schools for left-wing propaganda – against a ballot inititiative that passed by a hefty margin. The kids who had to stay home were treated to “teach-ins” on the merits of racial preferences. Not as fun as looting sneaker stores, I bet. Maybe this will all backfire, and San Fran is quietly rearing a generation of future libertarians. We can only hope. Small thought: maybe as a compromise Janet Reno should have sent Elian Gonzalez to school in San Francisco rather than back to Cuba. He would hardly have noticed a difference.

Why the former could defuse the latter. For why, check out “Pied Beauty” opposite. Oh, and thanks for all your donations. Bit by bit, they’re adding up: $5,167 as of today. THANKS.

Priceless story I somehow missed last Thursday about a rally at Berkeley in defense of racial preferences in higher education. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, “about 2,000 young people, many of them high school students, converged on Berkeley for a noontime rally in support of a return to affirmative action programs. After some of the speeches began at the gate to the UC Berkeley campus, a group of students ran into and started looting an Athlete’s Foot shoe store on Telegraph.” It seems the students want affirmative action, women’s rights, aid for East Timor, and a pair of those really cool new sneakers. Reminds me of the equally priceless Onion headline in their compilation of spoof newspaper covers, “Our Dumb Century.” For the L.A. riots in 1992, the Onion’s headline was: “L.A. RIOTERS DEMAND JUSTICE, TAPE DECKS.” The text, in part, read: “Calling for an end to racial prejudice and oppression, an estimated 15,000 people marched on Al’s Electronics Emporium on the corner of Slauson Avenue and Avalon Boulevard at noon Wednesday. The historic march climaxed in a stirring “I Have A TV” speech by Compton resident Melvin Haskins, who told the crowd that he envisions the day when “white men and black men, Jews and gentiles have 27 inch RCA ProScan televisions with Dolby sound.” Oh and a pair of Nikes to make a mother proud.

There are lots of ways to write about the high-school murderer, Charles “Andy” Williams, but did Time.com have to make him their “Person Of The Week?”

TAKING THE PITH: Laughed out loud over my pancakes this morning over the following new anecdote to be included in the updated Bartlett’s Book of Anecdotes. The New York Times got permission to reprint a few choice ones. Check them out if you’re dealing with Monday issues. Here’s my fave: “Andrew Lloyd Weber was searching for someone to write the lyrics for his latest production, and paid a visit to Alan Jay Lerner, who had written the lyrics for “My Fair Lady.” Lloyd Weber expressed disappointment that he had not been able to find a steady collaborator. “I don’t know why,” he said, “but some people dislike me as soon as they meet me.” Lerner replied, “Perhaps it saves time.”” Now I think I understand Michael Wolff.

JACKSON WATCH I: Fascinating piece in today’s Chicago Sun-Times by Mary Mitchell in response to her expose of Jackson’s shakedown operation, aka Operation-PUSH. Of 150 emails Mitchell received, only six backed Jackson. Many, many African-Americans seems to have had enough. “He has become the very thing he despises: taking and not giving. Operation PUSH should have been investigated a long time ago. I am an Afro-American, and I am ashamed at what I see,” wrote one emailer. “Yes, some of us (black folks) don’t like it when the cover is taken off,” wrote another. “Well, I say if you cannot run with the big dogs, stay on the porch. Rev. Jackson brought this on himself.” Or this one: “I have been called a house nigger and sellout because I am an achiever who cares less about my skin color and more about my ability to succeed. I have been aware of Jackson’s double dealing and race baiting for years, and I’m glad the Teflon is starting to wear off.” I’ve had a few emails accusing me of being a racist for going after Jackson, as if I haven’t criticized white pols as well. In fact, I think it’s a form of insidious racism not to criticize this kind of betrayal of the civil rights movement. Too many white liberals look the other way out of misplaced, if well-meaning, condescension. Good for the Chicago media for keeping the heat on. But don’t hold your breath for the New York Times.

JACKSON WATCH II: Weird moment, my sources tell me, on This Week with Cokie and Sam this morning. For some reason, Cokie Roberts asked attorney-general John Ashcroft if the Justice Department is mounting some kind of criminal investigation into Jesse Jackson’s race racket. Ashcroft didn’t confirm or deny. Hmmmm. I wish I could give you a link to the transcript, but none is posted yet on the next-to-useless “This Week” website. Watch this space.

POT, KETTLE DEPT: Interviewed on the religious webite, Beliefnet, Jerry Falwell opined that Muslim groups should be barred from President Bush’s faith-based charity initiative. Why? “I think the Moslem faith teaches hate,” Falwell said. “I think there’s clear evidence that the Islam religion, wherever it has majority control – and I can name a dozen countries – doesn’t even allow people of other faiths to express themselves or evangelize or to exist in their presence…. I think that when persons are clearly bigoted towards other persons in the human family, they should be disqualified from funds. For that reason, Islam should be out the door before they knock.” That’s quite a statement, but not nearly as fascinating as Falwell’s subsequent spin. “I am not anti-Moslem,” he sputtered. “I know and work with many American and foreign Moslems who love all peoples. In my interview with Beliefnet.org, I was simply saying that the Bush administration should bar all bigots and racists from participating in their faith-based program.” Put those two quotes together and Falwell is lying somewhere. He’s also completely incoherent on the general principle. In general, he’s in favor of the program, but he wants the government to pick and choose which religions are permitted on the question of whether they are “bigoted” or not. This is probably, ahem, not a path Falwell should go down. One man’s bigotry is another man’s Book of Revelation. Are homosexuals part of the “human family”? If so, why does Falwell support public funds for the Boy Scouts? The paradox of the faith-based programs is that, in today’s multicultural America, the Feds will have to be completely neutral about the actual religion they are funding. Sorry, Jerry, but that means your favorite president is actually set on accelerating government’s role in undermining any talk of a Christian nation. And all to appease the Christian right. Go figure.