I'm traveling the rest of the week (Literary Translators convention in Las Vegas) and then in pre-election panic, so until I get motivated again, read these guys:
My fab five:
http://jameswolcott.com/
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/
http://www.andrewsullivan.com/
http://www.theillustrateddailyscribble.com/
Click on the title. I guess this is what all the undecided voters have been waiting for.
But there's another endorsement I think is worth reading, too, especially for my Republican friends: here.
New York Times: The Bush administration is holding talks with its European allies on a possible package of economic incentives for Iran, including access to imported nuclear fuel, in return for suspension of uranium enrichment activities that are suspected to be part of a nuclear arms program, European and American diplomats said Monday. [Saw the link on Andrew Sullivan's page]
But the GOP is now the Big Government party. And its deficit-mongering will mean higher taxes in the not-so-distant future. You have to believe that the terror gap between Kerry and Bush is simply massive to acquiesce in Bush's domestic policies: fiscal insanity, social intolerance, and creeping theocracy. Bush has moved the GOP toward being the political wing of fundamentalist evangelicalism. If you're not born-again, you increasingly do not belong there. In four more years, heaven knows what he will have accomplished. But, then, many of you think the difference in foreign policy is so great nothing else matters. That's the calculation. You have to weigh the damage Bush is doing domestically with the damage Kerry might do internationaly."
I have to say I'm harder on Bush and not as hard on Kerry, but Sullivan has really identified the basic choice to be made. Not to mention if Shrub were to nominate a few Supremes during a second term....
In debate #1, Bush was Curious George (see the link below for the curious chimp face).
In debate #2, Bush was Furious George (click me).
There are only two rhymes left for debate #3 -- injurious and spurious. I'm betting on spurious.
Marshal Wittmann is a former McCain staffer, former high-up in the Christian Coalition, and a self-styled "Bull Moose Republican," in the tradition of Teddy Roosevelt.
In a thoughtful editorial, he endorses Kerry:
"Moose on the Loose"
One of the best punch lines:
"Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have waged an unprecedentedly cynical and divisive campaign. The campaign has proven that there are no guard rails when it comes to a scorched-earth effort to hold on to power. However, Democrats can seize the opportunity to reach out to disaffected moderate Republicans and independents to build a new political coalition of national unity. That is both the hope and the cause of this unreconstructed Bull Moose. "
Click the title. The writer is a Civil Affairs specialist - the same subject I taught during my brief military career. His goal is to defeat an insurgency by understanding what makes them fight, then dealing with the causes rather than just trying to kill them all a few at a time.
He adds, "So long as there is support for the guerilla, for every one you kill two more rise up to take his place. More importantly, when your tools for killing him are precision guided munitions, raids and other acts that create casualties among the innocent populace, you raise the support for the guerillas and undermine the support for yourself. (A 500-pound precision bomb has a casualty-producing radius of 400 meters minimum; do the math.)"
Study is here.
Key Quote:
"Since current odds hold that the Bush memos are faked, the question of their authenticity turns to whether CBS should have known they were inauthentic – if, in fact, they are. In fact, there seems to be nothing in the memos that indicates they are faked. All evidence points toward a mechanical production process and away from a digital process.
"Furthermore, the mechanical process seems to be consistent with typewriters used in the military at the time in question.
"If I had been one of the experts advising CBS, I would have advised them that there is nothing physical in the memos implying they are not authentic. All indicators imply they are authentic. I would have told them that from my point of view, the memos are worthy of presenting to the public."
