Palin’s Base

Frum points to the polls:

I was interviewed on PBS last week about Palin’s book release. I said that Palin had an especially serious problem with women voters. This is just fact, again recorded in every survey…And yet this attested statistical fact is shrugged off with comments like, “when I saw her campaign in N.H., I was surrounded by moms with strollers”

[…]Sarah’s constituency is a relatively small cohort of conservative men. I offended a lot of these people last week by suggesting that there was some sexual dynamic at work in the enthusiasm for the politician whom Rush Limbaugh used to describe as “Governor Babe.” So let’s put it this way: Whatever impulse it is that so excites Palin supporters, it is not shared by their wives.

A Million Little Fabrications

Another person featured in "Going Rogue" presents his side of the story. Money quote:

Why should anyone care about any of that? The reason they should care is that if Lynn Vincent aka Sarah Palin got as many of the facts, asserted and implied, about me in Going Rogue as wrong as she did, what does that say about the validity of the many other, much more important, “facts” in Sarah’s book?

Were any of the facts in this book checked? And who was the fact-checker at HarperCollins?

Quote For The Day III

“His frequent speeches before large crowds all across the country are full of obtuse circular arguments about good and evil, and in interviews and small gatherings, like ones he has held for academics and journalists when he visits the United Nations in New York, he answers questions with questions, ending with a joyous smile that reads as a distinct putdown. His logic is seldom convincing, but then he cares little about what elites and experts think of him. He knows that the poor masses like his folksy style. Though he may seem comical, to many in Iran he comes across as daring and confident. They like his audacity, and especially the way he stands up to the elites, belittling their education, their wealth and their blue blood,” – Vali Nasr, on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Fundamentalist politics – whether Christianist or Islamist – often assumes the same basic structure. What must be resisted is logic, argument or follow-up questions.

Palin Vs. Huckabee

Douthat considers both 2012 contenders in his column today. Ross hopes that someone who shares Huckabee's and Palin's "charisma" can lead "an intellectually vigorous conservatism." Isaac Chotiner counters:

Douthat's argument is tautological. Sure, it would be nice for the GOP if Palin and Huckabee were interested in policy. But if they were interested in policy, then they would not be so appealing to the GOP base. In other words, the problem is that a large part of the right has no interest in a policy wonk, and sneers at intellectuals and elites and the types of people Douthat would like to see running the party. A candidate who was interested in learning the ins and outs of the welfare state and health care policy is unlikely to ever achieve Palin/Huckabee levels of popularity with the grassroots. 

Some numbers have started to trickle out of Iowa that show Huckabee ahead.

No Joke

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
Jason Jones: Behind the Veil – Persians of Interest
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Political Humor Health Care Crisis

Maziar Bahari tells the story of his time in Iran's infamous Evin prison. They interrogators didn't understand The Daily Show:

Only a few weeks earlier, hundreds of foreign reporters had been allowed into the country in the run-up to the election. Among them was Jason Jones, a “correspondent” for Stewart’s satirical news program. Jason interviewed me in a Tehran coffee shop, pretending to be a thick-skulled American. He dressed like some character out of a B movie about mercenaries in the Middle East—with a checkered Palestinian kaffiyeh around his neck and dark sunglasses. The “interview” was very short. Jason asked me why Iran was evil. I answered that Iran was not evil. I added that, as a matter of fact, Iran and America shared many enemies and interests in common. But the interrogators weren’t interested in what I was saying. They were fixated on [the recording of] Jason.

“Why is this American dressed like a spy, Mr. Bahari?” asked the new man.

“He is pretending to be a spy. It’s part of a comedy show,” I answered.

“Tell the truth!” Mr. Rosewater shouted. “What is so funny about sitting in a coffee shop with a kaffiyeh and sunglasses?”

“It’s just a joke. Nothing serious. It’s stupid.” I was getting worried. “I hope you are not suggesting that he is a real spy.”

“Can you tell us why an American journalist pretending to be a spy has chosen you to interview?” asked the man with the creases. “We know from your contacts and background that you told them who to interview for their program.” The other Iranians interviewed in Jason’s report—a former vice president and a former foreign minister—had been arrested a week before me as part of the IRGC’s sweeping crackdown. “It’s just comedy,” I said, feeling weak.

(Hat tip: Silverstein)

Who Voted in 2008?

Ambinder passes along some new data:

It's taken about a year, but thanks to new Census numbers and to Project Vote, we now have the most accurate picture of who voted, who didn't vote, and how the voting patterns compare to previous elections.  The highlights: 64% of the 204 million voting-age Americans voted, up about 6 million in number and 4 percentage points from 2004.  Historically underrepresented groups made gains in this election.  Non-whites made up more than 90% of the increase in the total number of voters.  The authors conclude that had non-whites voted at the same percentage as whites, more than 5 million more votes would have been cast in 2008.  The study, by Douglas Hess and Jody Herman, finds that had voters under 30 voted at the same rates as their counterparts over 30, more than 7 million additional ballots would have been cast.

No wonder Republicans worry about a Democratic demographic storm. 

Talking To The Men

DiA counsels:

Most of the developing countries where fertility rates have fallen sharply in the last 20 years are places like Bangladesh, Indonesia and Brazil, which have had relative political stability and solid economic growth. Because there are so many such countries, there's reason to be optimistic on the global population front. But in countries that aren't seeing political stability or sustainable economic growth, and where women are illiterate and repressed—countries like Afghanistan, or Yemen—fertility is running disastrously high. In countries like that, opposition from religious and community leaders—ie, men—can easily torpedo any public-health effort. So common sense dictates that, in addition to providing counseling and access to birth control for women, advocates must also reach out to religious authorities.

We Can’t Criticize Operation Cast Lead Because Of Iran?

Frum combines two talking points:

There is only one last non-military stop on this train: President Obama’s initiative to organize so-called “crippling” sanctions against Iran.

These sanctions would penalize the firms that sell, carry and finance the half-million tons of gasoline that Iran must import every month. (Incredibly, this huge oil exporter and aspiring nuclear power refines only about half the gas it needs.) Such firms are vulnerable to international pressure: Two of the three Swiss firms that provide the bulk of Iran’s gasoline have substantial investments in Canada, for example. If Canada joins the sanctions regime, Canada can bring great pressure to bear on these suppliers — and thus upon Iran.

To sustain sanctions over any length of time, however, will require international co-operation, especially from Russia, China and India. Will that co-operation be forthcoming? So far, the record is not promising. But if those countries understand that the final destination of the Iranian effort is an Israeli military strike on Iran, maybe they will rethink. For that reason, the whole world has an interest in enhancing the credibility of Israeli action. For that reason, the campaign to penalize and demonize Israel for its actions in Lebanon and Gaza is an affront to world peace. Only an effective Israel can believably threaten the strike that will incentivize Iran’s trading partners to join the U.S. economic campaign.

So we have gone from denying outright any moral problems associated with the Gaza attack to arguing that, regardless of what actually happened, the whole world should back Israel because of the danger of Iran and the fact that Israel's threatened military strike is the only real lever we have.

Well: let's see how China might view this. They might ask: why should we care if Iran goes nuclear? Or rather: do we care enough that we are prepared to initiate a global terror war with utterly unforeseen consequences rather than tolerate a nuclear – or a latent nuclear – Iran? I think the Chinese would understandably say: nope. Ditto the Russians. They're happy to watch America squirm because of Israel's insistence on either crippling sanctions or war (with no concessions, of course, with respect to the Palestinians).

Would China and Russia move in quickly to fill the gap created by US-European sanctions? You betcha.

Would the Arab and Muslim world blame Russia and China if Israel, with US cover, then attacked Iran? Surely not. The war between Islam and the West after a US-Israel attack on Iran would become as intense as that between Islam and Israel. Russia and China could sit back and watch the American empire be destroyed by a global terror war that simultaneously sends the US economy – and possibly the American constitution – into the toilet. China would suffer collateral economic damage from global depression, but that's a small price to pay to watch the US hegemon go down the drain of religious global conflict.

And let's see how the Iranian people, including the Green Movement, would see this: they oppose sanctions and they oppose military strikes. If the US were to back Israel in crippling sanctions, they'd be accused of being in league with a Zionist plot to starve their fellow citizens. If the US were to tolerate a military attack by Israel, the Green opposition would perforce back the coup regime against a foreign military attack. And every single Muslim and Arab suspicion that Israel controls US foreign policy would be given a propaganda victory.

Tehran's coup regime is wicked but not stupid. They know that on the nuclear issue, they have the winning hand. And if Israel insists on making the US go to the brink over this issue – then the US will lose. Israel may gain a temporary pause before it too faces its end-game. But it's the US that would truly lose.