Miscellanea: Payola Scandal Edition

You might think from reading this blog that I think the Bush administration can do no wrong - well, I'm partisan, but not blindly so. The Armstrong Williams affair is pathetic, and will give our 'progressive' friends a legitimate reason to do so some obnoxious gloating. Michelle Malkin has the details...

And it doesn't stop there. Scrappleface has the world exclusive on the explosive tie between Bush and Michael Moore...

In other conspiracy-oriented news, if you think you smell a hidden agenda in the Bush administration Social Security reform scheme, you're right. Patrick Ruffini lets the cat out of the bag...

Speaking of hacks on the payroll, you may not realize that many of our finest left-wing bloggers are paid to spin things the Democratic way. Now, I'm not suggesting there's anything unethical about that...in fact, I'd like to take this opportunity to sell my opinions to the highest bidder. Do I hear $10? $5? A stale doughnut? [...the sound of crickets chirping fills the room. A single tumbleweed rolls across the lonely, desolate landscape...]. Enjoy your weekend, the freelance, unpaid blogger says with a heavy sigh...

UPDATE 01/10/05 1:09 pm central: At least one reader of this blog thinks I took the Scrappleface Bush/Michael Moore story seriously. I didn't; my reference was a joke (or a rather lame attempt at one)...

Cautious Optimism for a Troubled Land

An election is being held with monumental consequences for U.S. foreign policy...and it's not the one on January 30th, as important as that may be. The Palestinians are preparing to elect a new leader, and in all likelihood, the winner will be Mahmoud Abbas. While Iraq is the focal point of our current policy, and rightly so, given the continuing deaths to brave Iraqis and coalition forces, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has served as the launching pad for much of the Radical Muslim hatred of the West. A peaceful resolution there would rob the biggest terrorist organizations of one of their most potent rallying cries.

I don't intend to go into the root causes of the conflict here, and I'm not particularly concerned with who was right and who was wrong in the past. Nations, like people, have to focus on the here and now to be successful, civilized members of the world community. Have some Palestinians been wronged by Israelis? You bet your life...and, of course, vice versa. The point is how to move forward from here. If I governed my life the way the Middle East is governed, I would still be nursing enormous grudges against every woman I ever dated (uhhmmm, bad example, that - in fact, my love life is very much like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, now that I think of it).

What are the prospects, then? The optimist and the pessimist can both find nourishment in Abbas's public statements. What a breath of fresh air to hear a Palestinian leader condemning violence, even if only from a PR standpoint, and speaking of a revival of Road Map negotiations. How disappointing, then, to hear the same leader speak of the Zionist enemy, the heroism of the militants, and the non-negotiability of the 'Right of Return' (both sides agree that this would completely destroy Israal as it currently exists; the only disagreement is over the desirability of that event).

Ultimately, the prospects for near-time peace in this most unpeaceful environment may hinge on this question: who is the imposter? Is Mahmoud Abbas a visionary who is forced to indulge the 'Arab street' to secure his election? Or is he yet another cynical politician willing to give lip service to the democratic impulses of the West in his rhetoric, while working to ensure the flames of the conflict are fanned behind the scenes? I don't dare hope for the former, yet can't reconcile myself to the latter. As always, time will provide the answer.

Miscellanea - No Need to Be In a Hurry, CBS Edition

Whoops! TKS says no Rathergate report after all; maybe when the pompous blowhard gets back from covering the tsunami...

Elsewhere on the tsunami front, don't dare miss the 12 stupidest quotes collected by Arthur Chrenkoff...

JRR Tolkein: Liberal or Conservative? Professor Bainbridge shares his thoughts...

Sadly, vastly overrated Hollywood hunk Brad Pitt and Weekly Jackass contender Jennifer Aniston are calling it quits. Try to enjoy your weekend anyway, folks, hard as it may be...

In Praise Of Frank Sinatra

Nobody knows this but my beagle and I, but I have a secret. I can sing. I can sing really, really well. The catch is, I can only sing well to a Frank Sinatra record. Sinatra has that effect on you - his phrasing is not only impeccably tasteful, it is also instructive. By the time you have listened to a Frank Sinatra album the fifth time through, you've learned how to put just the right inflection here, and drop a half-octave here, and - you get the idea.

Frank Sinatra still has one up on me, and you, and everyone else - he didn't have to listen to a record of himself to know how to sing a song like Frank Sinatra, and for a time, if it was on a Sinatra album, you knew damn well it was a great song receiving its definitive treatment.

In private, Sinatra was often a jerk. That's unfortunate, but it doesn't diminish his accomplishments in the studio and on stage. If your image of Sinatra is an old man belting out 'My Way' at the top of his lungs, pick up a copy of Sinatra at the Sands from 1966, or better yet, listen to the subtlety of the singing and the melodies on the incomparable 1954 album In the Wee Small Hours. Fifty-one years later, it remains the quintessential heartbreak album. I can think of no other work in any medium that better captures the despair and longing of the lonely. If you're looking for upbeat, you can't go wrong with 1955's Songs for Swinging Lovers.

Sinatra was doing concept albums before most artists even considered the long-playing record a different medium from singles. The 'concept', at least in what most would consider the 'classic Sinatra' era of the mid-50s and early-60s, was a sustained mood rather than the telling of a narrative. When it worked, most spectacularly with the Nelson Riddle Orchestra, it was timeless.

I like my Grateful Dead, my U2, my Rolling Stones, that's a fact; at his peak, though, Sinatra inhabited a song in a way that Bono, Jerry, and Mick can only look at in envy. I've been going to Las Vegas almost yearly since the late '70s; how I wish I had taken the time to go see Ol' Blue Eyes just once. I'm certain that even an old, diminished Sinatra was still the best show in town.

Miscellanea - One Entry Only Edition

I don't have time right now for a full-blown Miscellanea, but here's something I just couldn't resist - a dead-on fisking of Paul Krugman by Vodkapundit. See you later this afternoon or evening (it's Friday...yay!)...

Miscellanea - Hi, I'm Richard Gere, and I'm Getting Hammered On Behalf of the Entire World Edition

Richard Gere is racking up insults faster than you can say 'Dan Rather is a Pompous Blowhard'. Our Weekly Jackass Number Five is knocked down several pegs by Moxie, who links this list of 9 Additional Things Richard Gere Would Like to Say on Behalf on the Entire World at Protein Wisdom (now I know how the standup comedians felt during the O.J. trial - you could ride this wave for weeks - thanks, Rich!) ...

Carpe Bonum is a relatively new site, like mine, but you wouldn't know it from the quality of the posts. I suggest you check it out for, among other things, the extensive coverage of the Social Security reform issue. I have a feeling we'll be looking at this site quite a bit in the days to come...

John Behan remains the Internet's first elected blogger - by a day....

My beagle's favorite movie auteur has company (hat tip to Professor Bainbridge)...

Miscellanea - Get Ready for the Whitewash Edition

Jim Geraghty at the Kerry Spot (pardon me, TKS - about time, Jim!) says the Rather report could be coming out tomorrow. Odds of the report calling Dan Rather a pompous blowhard are exceedingly long (hat tip to Patterico's Pontifications)...

Congratulations to Tim Blair on his new job. He is going to be the Assistant Editor (News) at Australia's Bulletin. Celebrate by reading some of his excellent posts...

Debbie Schlussel on Terrorism's American Gigolo and our Weekly Jackass Number Five...

Not content to let Richard Gere get all of the Jackass attention, Mike Whitney at the Smirking Chimp (guess who that's referring to...) has a doozy of a post. Some highlights:

Every facet of the war in Iraq has been painstakingly dissected like a murder victim at an autopsy. Every facet, except one. The only topic that continues to remain off-limits is race, and the racist theology that drove the country to war...

How different is Bush's Global Democratic Revolution [from slavery and the genocide of the Native Americans]; the melodious sounding euphemism for racial warfare and subjugation? Don't deny it; the evidence is everywhere. The third world has entered Bush's crosshairs and racist ideology is fueling the hysteria...

How many Christians are there in Guantanamo Bay? How many Jews? How many white Christians are there in Abu Ghraib, or in any other of Rumsfeld's numerous gulags stretched out across the planet? Find one for me...just one; and I'll consider an argument to the contrary.

...The plundering of nations and the subsequent destruction of their culture is embraced under the sobriquet of "humanitarian intervention"; a general disclaimer for the racist subjugation of third world countries. History is really nothing more than a faithful chronicle of racist wars. The illusion of "western culture" is only perpetuated by concealing the enormous material wealth that was stolen from vulnerable, people of color. Our "civilization" is grounded on plunder...

If anyone knows where I can get a hard copy of Mike's post, I'm just about out of toilet paper...let's see, at the risk of being placed in one of Rumsfeld's numerous gulags stretched across the planet, Mike has delivered this plea for a good grade from Chomsky...uh, Mr. Whitney? One question, if I may..how many Christians were there among the 9/11 hijackers? How many Jews?...Mr. Whitney?...Sorry, I didn't catch your reply...

Miscellanea - Failing Upwards Edition

A movement is afoot to extend Terry McAullife's reign as DNC chairman - and why not? He's done such a bang-up job so far...

Harry Reid of Nevada continues to mock Clarence Thomas's mental prowess while demonstrating his lack of same (but it's okay, he's a Democrat!) (hat tip to Confessions of a Political Junkie)...

Wretchard of Belmont Club has a typically thoughtful post on the torture debate...

Hindrocket at Power Line shares my affection for Oliver Stone (speaking of failing upwards - anyone have any figures on how much money the studios have lost on this clown in the last 10 years?)...

Weekly Jackass Number Five - Richard Gere

When you think of a spokesman for the human race, who do you think of? Do you think there can even be such a person? Don't strain your brain too much thinking about it, because the position is already taken. Here's a quote care of little green footballs (hat tip to David Limbaugh):

A pro-peace group is hoping that a potent mix of Hollywood glamour and religion will motivate Palestinians to vote in next week�s presidential elections � and their star attraction is actor Richard Gere. ...Gere, together with an Islamic cleric and a Greek Orthodox Church official, recorded a public service announcement calling on the Palestinians to vote in the Jan. 9 election to replace Yasser Arafat.

�Hi, I�m Richard Gere and I�m speaking for the entire world. We�re with you during this election time. It�s really important: Get out and vote,� Gere said, according to a transcript of the announcement obtained by The Associated Press.

I don't ridicule the sentiment: the Palestinian elections are extremely important, but the audacity! 'I'm Richard Gere and I'm speaking for the entire world"! In fairness, maybe Gere didn't write the line. His Weekly Jackass status is secure nonetheless. Let's take a look at the many faces of our honoree:

1. Gere the Moral Relativist - Q: Although you are cautious in speaking about the dharma, you are a passionate spokesman on the issue of freedom for Tibet. A: I've gone through a lot of different phases with that. The anger that I might have felt twenty years ago is quite different now. We're all in the same boat here, all of us-Hitler, the Chinese, you, me, what we did in Central America. (from an interview with Gere regarding his Buddhism)
2. and
3. Gere the apologist for Saddam Hussein and the spokesman for all Americans (he sure speaks for a lot of people, this guy) - "I keep asking myself where all this personal enmity between George Bush and Saddam Hussein comes from. It's like the story of Captain Ahab and the great white whale from Moby Dick...America has never paid any attention to other people, so it's absurd for Bush to say that it's all in the best interests of the Iraqi people. If the United States marches into Iraq without the backing of the United Nations, that will be done entirely without the backing of the American people." (at the 53rd Berlin Film Festival)
4. Gere the elitist Hollywood big shot - [Gere]has absolutely no sense of humour (a fact which someone who worked with him closely a few years back attests to) and doesn't seem to understand the bartering nature of the process - or simply feels it's beneath him. Never mind the fact that he has just made a film which needs an audience. If he dislikes a question, and you can be sure he will, he won't even try to take it somewhere else: the natural response of most intelligent people when asked a question they don't want to answer. Why should he? Hey, he's the star! (Harriet Lane gets a dose of the famous Gere charm while attempting to interview him as he publicizes the film 'Chicago')
5. Gere the touchy-feely activist who caused a nation of television viewers to hurriedly search for their remote controls in their couch cushions: "I wonder if something miraculous and really kind of movie-like could happen here, where we could send some kind of love and truth and kind of sanity to Deng Xiaopeng in Beijing, that he would take his troops and take the Chinese away from Tibet and allow these people to live as free, independent people again." (at the 1993 Oscar telecast)

Clearly, Gere is somewhat of a renaissance Jackass with a variety of annoying personas. For his wisdom, yes; for his political acumen, certainly; for oh so many reasons, we salute you, Richard Gere: Weekly Jackass Number Five is yours to cherish forever. May a really kind of movie-like thing happen where you receive some kind of love and truth and kind of sanity...

Miscellanea - The Focus Moves to Virginia Edition

Commonwealth Conservative, who bills himself as the world's first elected blogger (and I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary) reminds us all that Virginia and New Jersey have governor's races in 2005, then proceeds to provide an excellent, detailed preview...

From across the pond comes Conservative Commentary with an entertaining look at the Books of 2004 in two parts (bonus: he reads Chomsky and Krugman so you don't have to)...

Two excellent posts on Social Security reform and a July 2004 CBO study from the always insightful JustOneMinute and Victor of the Dead Parrots Society...

Great news, folks! The great Ken Mehlman, newly elected head of the Republican National Committee has just informed me via e-mail that the inauguration is coming to me(!!!!) and, of course, I'm inviting all of you, so if you guys want to form a committee, I'll bring the ice and a nice dessert, and you can...what's that, Ken? An inauguration party, but not the actual inauguration? Damn, I thought it was too good to be true...check back later tonight or early tomorrow (depending on how lazy I am) for the latest installment of Weekly Jackass. I know, the anticipation is brutal...

Can an Empowered Woman Want to Be Beautiful?

Luddites and other opponents of the blogosphere often point to the availability of vast quantities of misinformation and garbage as representing a 'danger' to informed discourse. I find the opposite to be the case - so much good stuff is out there than even the most dedicated blogger can only hope to scratch the surface. A perfect example of a post I might have missed, but I'm glad I didn't, is Ann Althouse's post on femininity vs. feminism, in response to a simply horrendously argued piece in Slate (a website that is now drowning in mediocrity, with the exception of Mickey Kaus and Christopher Hitchens, thanks to its almost total leftward slant these days).

In the Slate piece, Laura Kipnis asks "Can you be a fat female and also an object of desire?" You, of course, know the answer, but to Kipnis, the answer is apparently no (of course, one could just as easily ask the same question of a fat man, but Kipnis can't seem to see a man as anything but exploitive). Kipnis's piece is crawling with tired, cliched arguments not worthy of a college freshman, in which the world is made of people who can't control their fate because of their race, class, and gender. A prime example is her definition, first, of femininity, and then of feminism:

Femininity is a system that tries to secure advantages for women, primarily by enhancing their sexual attractiveness to men. It also shores up masculinity through displays of feminine helplessness or deference. But femininity depends on a sense of female inadequacy to perpetuate itself.

Feminism, on the other hand, is dedicated to abolishing the myth of female inadequacy. It strives to smash beauty norms, it demands female equality in all spheres, it rejects sexual market value as the measure of female worth.

Truly laughable is this assertion:

...for all feminism's social achievements, what it never managed to accomplish was the eradication of the heterosexual beauty culture, meaning the time-consuming and expensive potions and procedures...the beauty culture is a heterosexual institution, and to the extent that women participate in its rituals, they, too, are propping up a heterosexual society and its norms.�

I sure hope this heterosexuality doesn't get out of hand - before you know it, people might be growing up in traditional families...the horror!

I'll step aside and let Althouse take over:

Note that Kipnis can't just say feminism failed to extinguish the human love of beauty. It's not beauty, it's a beauty culture that is the problem, and a heterosexual one at that. There's some sort of crushing patriarchy imposing something on women, something unnatural, involving "expensive potions and procedures." The assumption � actually quite incredible � is that empowered women would not care how things looked.

Don't homosexuals love beauty too? If you fix your hair and put on makeup and choose your clothes with some care, are you participating in a ritual? Is the heterosexuality that most of us feel a "society" that needs "propping up"?

Althouse has it right. It's the human love of beauty that Kipnis has a problem with. It's an admirable thing to look beyond the surface and discover the inner beauty that resides in us all; it's disingenuous to deny that we all love that surface beauty, too; but it's the height of folly to suggest it's all a problem with heterosexual culture...

UPDATE 8:13 pm central: bebere has some excellent thoughts on the post and the subject from a self-described 'former radical feminist' and now just all-around great person...

Miscellanea - Another Unwelcome Return Edition

This has not been my day - first, O.J., then the return of horrible traffic now that school's back in session, and to cap it off, Paul Krugman appears to be back for good. He promises to continue attacking Bush's Social Security privitization plan in future columns. Oh, joy, I can't wait...

JustOneMinute is not about to let this latest Krugman screed pass by unnoticed...

Hindrocket at Power Line sees the continuing influence of Michael Moore in the Mainstream Media criticism of Bush's 'slow' response to the tsunami...

In another amazing display of stamina, Arthur Chrenkoff rounds up the latest tsunami news with a thoroughness that should shame the rest of us. Chrenkoff's blog is undoubtably one of the best around...I highly recommend you bookmark it...

Miscellanea - A Most Unwelcome Guest Edition

O.J. Simpson plans to rear his ugly head at the Orange Bowl tonight. How would you like to be the poor soul that pays God knows how much money to see the national championship and winds up next to the world's most famous athlete / murderer?...

If the Iraqi insurgents are 'freedom fighters', does the same apply to the Ku Klux Klan post-Civil War? deacon at Power Line shares his thoughts...

The Diplomad reports that the UN is hard pressed to find takers for its 'coordination' efforts on tsunami relief. More and more, it would appear that Annan and his backers plan to use this disaster to begin a PR effort to save his hide (hat tip to Arthur Chrenkoff)...

JustOneMinute skillfully parries Jared Diamond's worries about American collapse (didn't we already go through this with Paul Kennedy and 'The Rise and Fall of Great Powers'?)...

Oil-For-Food, Part Ten: The Mission - Save Kofi and Rescue the UN

An extraordinary story by Warren Hoge appeared in today's New York Times. Since the Times pulls their articles down rather quickly, I will need to quote at length and comment afterwards:

The meeting of veteran foreign policy experts in a Manhattan apartment one recent Sunday was held in strict secrecy. The guest of honor arrived without his usual retinue of aides.

The mission, in the words of one participant, was clear: "to save Kofi and rescue the U.N."

At the gathering, Secretary General Kofi Annan listened quietly to three and a half hours of bluntly worded counsel from a group united in its personal regard for him and support for the United Nations. The group's concern was that lapses in his leadership during the past two years had eclipsed the accomplishments of his first four-year term in office and were threatening to undermine the two years remaining in his final term.

...Their larger argument, according to participants, addressed two broad needs. First, they said, Mr. Annan had to repair relations with Washington, where the Bush administration and many in Congress thought he and the United Nations had worked against President Bush's re-election. Second, he had to restore his relationship with his own bureaucracy, where many workers said privately that his office protected high-level officials accused of misconduct.

In the week after the session, Mr. Annan sought and obtained a meeting with Condoleezza Rice, the nominee for secretary of state. United Nations officials said afterward that it was an encouraging meeting.

The apartment gathering on Dec. 5 came at the end of a year that Mr. Annan has described as the organization's "annus horribilis." The United Nations faced charges of corruption in the oil-for-food program in Iraq, evidence that blue-helmeted peacekeepers in Congo had run prostitution rings and raped women and teenage girls, and formal motions of no confidence in the organization's senior management from staff unions.

..."The intention was to keep it confidential," [former UN ambassador Richard] Holbrooke said. "No one wanted to give the impression of a group of outsiders, all of them Americans, dictating what to do to a secretary general."

He described the group as people "who care deeply about the U.N. and believe that the U.N. cannot succeed if it is in open dispute and constant friction with its founding nation, its host nation and its largest contributor nation."

"The U.N., without the U.S. behind it, is a failed institution," he said.

...One of the members of the group had prepared for the session by finding out if the Bush administration was siding with those in Congress who were calling for Mr. Annan's resignation or whether it would support his resolve to stay in office until the end of his term in December 2006.

The official, a onetime senior government figure in Washington with close ties to the Bush administration, said he concluded that "they were not going to draw the sword against Kofi."

"Everyone I talked to, including the White House, said that if Kofi was going to go, it was going to be by the hand of the Volcker report, not by the hand of the Bush administration," the official said.

Much can be deduced from this article with a patient reading. First, Kofi Annan is clearly in serious trouble. If you are familiar with the history of Watergate, this sounds very much like the meetings Nixon began to hold with Republican leaders in Congress as the situation grew grimmer. Second, the meeting was not just about Annan, but about the credibility of the United Nations as a whole. Mr. Holbrooke's comment about the UN being a failed institution without American support is remarkable in light of his highly visible support of the Kerry campaign and its UN love-fest atmosphere. Essentially, and almost certainly against his will, he is confirming the charges the UN critics have laid at its feet. However, there is more, and it points to Annan's survival.

The article confirms the buzz that the Bush administration has made the decision to let the Volcker investigation drive events. This is not good news. As I and others have discussed at length, Annan has stacked the deck; the report will be delivered to him to take such action as it deems necessary. In any event, Volcker has previewed the results of his investigation with recent comments such as these:

�Without question, (there were) problems in the oil-for-food area,� Volcker said. �But when you look at those 10 billion-dollar figures, or 20 billion figures, most of those numbers are so-called smuggling, much of which was known and taken note of by the security council, but not stopped.�

Volcker refused to speculate on why the council did not stop the smuggling, but indicated the issue would probably be addressed in his reports. An initial report was expected in January and a final report in the summer, he said.

If the Volcker report comes out along these lines, Congress must step up and keep the heat on, or we will be faced with yet more calls for 'reform' of the UN that ultimately lead nowhere.

It would be interesting to know the back story: who leaked the meeting? What did they hope to accomplish? (I can only speculate that the idea was to show how seriously Kofi is taking the accusations and how committed he is to improving relations with the U.S.) To what extent did the Bush admistration encourage the meeting or the leak? How much cover will the tsunami relief efforts provide the UN? At this point, there are more questions than answers, but I'm increasingly unhappy with the direction the scandal investigations are taking. To be continued...

Believe It, Desmond

Former Noble Peace Prize winner Desmond Tutu engages in a little Bush-bashing in Newsweek. Among the highlights (I fisk in italics):

What impact do you expect the Jan. 30 elections to have there [in Iraq]?
Any normal human being ought to be feeling considerable outrage and deep, deep, deep hurt for so-called ordinary [Iraqi] people. We hardly ever hear about what the casualties have been on that side. How I wish that politicians could have the courage and the humility to admit that they have made mistakes. President Bush and Prime Minister [Tony] Blair and whoever supported the invasion ought at least to have the decency to say [they] went into this war because [they] were given the wrong reasons for going to war.

Any normal human being would feel considerable outrage that the Iraqi insurgents are murdering people by the score. Any normal human being would feel considerable outrage over the mass graves we have uncovered. Any normal human being would feel considerable outrage over the beheading of hostages. And any normal person would celebrate the freedom the Iraqi people will exercise by going to the polls.

You said George Bush should admit that he made a mistake. Were you surprised at his re-election?
[Laughs] I still can't believe that it really could have happened. Just look at the facts on the table: He�d gone into a war having misled people�whether deliberately or not�about why he went to war. You would think that would have knocked him out [of the race.] It didn�t. Look at the number of American soldiers who have died since he claimed that the war had ended. And yet it seems this doesn't make most Americans worry too much.

Believe it, Desmond. Americans are VERY worried about the number of dead soldiers; yet once again, we are forced to carry a heavy burden for the sake of the future.

Talking about religion, much has been said about the role it played in the White House race. What do you say to those who believe that Bush was chosen by God?
[Laughs] I keep having to remind people that religion in and of itself is morally neutral. Religion is like a knife. When you use a knife for cutting up bread to prepare sandwiches, a knife is good. If you use the same knife to stick into somebody�s guts, a knife is bad. Religion in and of itself is not good or bad�it is what it makes you do� Frequently, fundamentalists will say this person is the anointed of God if the particular person is supporting their own positions on for instance, homosexuality, or abortion. [I] feel so deeply saddened [about it]. Do you really believe that the Jesus who was depicted in the Scriptures as being on the side of those who were vilified, those who were marginalized, that this Jesus would actually be supporting groups that clobber a group that is already persecuted? That�s a Christ I would not worship. I'm glad that I believe very fervently that Jesus would not be on the side of gay bashers.

Desmond here equates George Bush with gay bashers, despite his stated support of civil unions, said position also being John Kerry's. Does Tutu equate John Kerry with gay-bashers? Does Tutu think Jesus would take the side of those who behead humanitarian aid workers and spread the filthy video across the globe? That's a Christ I would not worship.

So have the attacks of September 11 and the so-called war on terror given America and its allies another focal point?
Yes. There's no question at all. It appears as if we need enemies for our self identification.

This is a particularly infuriating argument one frequently hears from the left. Tutu and his ilk would have us believe that we conjured up the enemy of organized terrorism in order to suppress civil rights and usher in a new Reich. How soon we forget the people who jumped from 100 stories in the air to certain death rather than die in flames, people whose only crime was showing up for work.

Tutu was a great spokesman against South Africa's reprehensible apartheid regime. How sad to see that he has now become just another 'progressive'.

Miscellanea: A Plethora of Punditry Edition

Did Bush grab the bull by the horns, or what? I LOVE the idea of appointing his father and Clinton to lead the private fundraising effort for tsunami relief. Reaching out to Clinton was both smart and politically astute - let's face it, the man has a lot of standing with most of the world; and not being afraid to appoint his father - ahhh, life is sweet. What a great president we have!...

If you don't know, Arthur Chrenkoff rounds up the good news from Iraq for the Wall Street Journal on a regular basis. The latest edition is chock-full of great stories you probably aren't hearing from the Mainstream Media...

Speaking of good news from Iraq, Power Line has a post on the latest poll of Iraqis re: elections. These people want freedom, folks...

Bill Gates and Bono (yes, Bill Gates and Bono) want to make 2005 a good year for the poor of the world (I have a modest proposal of my own along those lines) (tip of the hat to RealClearPolitics)...

Candidate Profile Seven - Condoleezza Rice

A correspondent asked me recently why she couldn't find Condoleezza Rice listed as a potential 2008 candidate anywhere. My answer: I consider her such a strong choice I was saving her. Since you asked, however...

My fantasy matchup in 2008 would be Dr. Rice versus Senator Hillary Clinton, two very formidable women with two very different worldviews. The mere thought is enough to make me weak with anticipation. Is it a possibility? Stranger things have happened...

Dr. Condoleezza Rice - official biography

Rice 2008 - Unofficial campaign site

Resume - former Professor of Political Science, Stanford University; former Provost, Stanford University; fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences; frequent member of boards of directors for major corporations; former Senior Director of Soviet and East European Affairs in the National Security Council; former Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs; current National Security Advisor; Secretary of State-designee; pianist of considerable talent; named by Forbes magazine in August 2004 as the world's most powerful woman

Do you get the feeling after looking at that resume that you've wasted your life? Very impressive indeed...Rice is in many ways a dream candidate. She would present a very interesting problem for 'progressives': how to mount a coherent attack against a candidate who is an African-American woman. 'Uncle Tom' attacks will not win elections any more than Anybody But Bush did. Rice is no affirmative action hire, though; she is a woman of vast intelligence and great accomplishment who has been perhaps George W. Bush's closest confidant. That very fact, of course, would be used against her in any possible presidential bid.

Are there any other drawbacks to a Rice candidacy? She would face opposition from some voices in the black community. Witness this broadside from The Black Commentator, entitled 'Condoleezza Rice - The Devil's Handmaiden':

Condoleezza Rice is the purest expression of the race traitor. No polite description is possible.

Ahh, the gentle persuasion of the Radical Left. What was Rice's sin? She dared to work for an administration that felt maybe the time had come to end race-based preferences in college admissions.

As mentioned above, many would also feel Rice has been TOO close to Bush and his policies; whether that will be a liability depends in large part on what happens to Iraq between now and 2008. If democracy takes root and we have pulled a substantial number of troops out, Rice should be covered on that front.

Obviously, I am a big fan of this woman, but I'm not blind to the obstacles. The Republican field may be loaded with quality candidates: possibilities include McCain, Rudy G, another Bush boy by the name of Jeb, the largely unknown (on a national level) but appealing Mark Sanford, and many, many others. Inevitably, some fools would object to a woman, or an African-American, president. The bigotry of a few should not be allowed to dictate the Republican Party we want in the future, though. Nominating Condoleezza Rice makes sense on many levels; she could be the Hillary slayer, yes, but so much more. If Dr. Rice throws her hat in the ring, a LOT of those potential candidates mentioned earlier are going to be very, very nervous - and for good reason.

CURRENT ODDS: 10-1

UPDATE 03/19/05 10:49 am central: Condi has been hurt (a little) by recent developments - see here.

CURRENT ODDS: 14-1

UPDATE 06/15/05 8:35 pm central: The Condi buzz has died down some...

CURRENT ODDS: 15-1

UPDATE 07/24/2005 10:56 p.m.:

CURRENT ODDS: 13-1: see here...

Oil-For-Food, Part Nine - What Kofi Still Doesn't Get

The Left has a group of talking points related to almost every issue - they are spread through the Democratic Party, 'progressive' websites like Talking Points Memo (aptly named, that) and The Daily Kos, and intellectual giants like Jim Hightower and Molly Ivins. Sure, the Republicans have their talking point channels as well, but this post is not about talking points per se, but rather what the official 'Democratic' response to Oil-For-Food has been.

As I have previously noted, the 'progressive' point to be made about OilyGate is that it was largely a success - after all, the Iraqi people were fed, the sanctions were kept in place, and Saddam was disarmed, right? (How exactly the disarming of Saddam and the sanctions fit in is always left a little vague - I suppose the argument is the humanitarian aid allowed political cover for nations opposed to sanctions to vote in their favor regardless, although the real motive for keeping the sanctions in place indefinitely should be apparent to all but the most willfully ignorant by now).

Today, on ABC's This Week with George Stephanapoulos, Secretary General Kofi Annan trotted out the talking points almost verbatim:

Stephanopoulos: This comes at the end of what you called a horrible year for the United Nations, the shadow of the oil-for-food scandal. Given that, how do you convince the world this time that you can handle an effort on this scale with confidence, with credibility, and without corruption?
Annan: I think the oil-for-food issue was a unique issue. It was a unique scheme. Yes, there may have been some corruption. There may have been some mismanagement. But the program achieved its results. It was effective against� The sanctions were effective. Iraq was disarmed. Iraq is well-fed. We will make sure that they get their basic necessities with regards to health and others. And, in fact, the distribution system was so effective that today we use the distribution cards as the basis for voter registration for the elections. So, yes, there were, there has been some wrongdoing, which is being looked into, but we should not forget that it achieved its results.

What's wrong this argument, anyway? Is it not true that Oil-For-Food did real good for the Iraqi people? The point that Annan and his supporters are (in my view, deliberately) failing to address is 'bang for the buck'. Of course, when you spend tens of billions of dollars on some problem, things will improve, even if a huge portion of that was siphoned off into the pockets of fat cats and diplomats. If $100,000 is pledged to help me reduce my credit card debt (to use a slightly exaggerated example), and if only $18,000 makes its way to me, I'm still $18,000 better off than I was. But what of the people (or nations) who paid that money? Will they be satisfied knowing that $82,000 of the $100,000 they provided expressly to help me never found its way to the intended beneficiary?

The UN puts the Total Oil Revenue from Oil-For-Food at $65 billion. Of the $21 billion in Iraqi humitarian aid siphoned off, 'only' $17 billion was stolen during the years of the program. If my math is wrong, someone please correct me, but that's a little over 26% of the total oil revenue to Saddam's cronies. That doesn't include, of course, the administrative overhead, which can amount to 30 or 40% even in legitimate charities, and I suspect must be higher in the UN. Let's assume the UN did a good job on the adminstration, though (against all evidence to the contrary). That $17 - $21 billion dollars could have bought some state-of-the-art medical equipment in abundance, provided computers for Iraqi classrooms, improved sanitation conditions, you fill in the blank. It's a lot of cash down the drain, Kofi - THAT'S the point. Sure the program helped, but so much more should have been done.

In light of the above discussion, the initial criticism of the US tsunami relief efforts begins to make more sense. Why does it matter who controls what, when there are people dying? Let Kofi speak again:

Stephanopoulos: ...could this crisis, as horrible as it is, become an opportunity for the U.N. to prove to the world what it can do?

Annan: It could be, and I would hope so. I would hope so. We want to help the people in need. We want to do it as effectively as possible. We have only one U.N. It's not perfect, but we have to be efficient and effective. And we are going to try to do that.

I'm sure Kofi Annan and George Stephanopoulos did not mean to suggest they wish to score political points off this catastrophe. Had they bothered to examine the meaning of their words more carefully, they surely would have realized the cynicism on display. However, one can't help but wonder how much comfort an Indonesian fisherman who has lost three family members will take in knowing he is doing his part to rehabilitate the image of the UN.

Miscellanea - Who You Calling Stingy Edition?

Everyone (myself included) has an opinion on the relative 'stinginess' of the United States when it comes to humanitarian aid - but Daniel Drezner has both the expertise and the figures (hat tip to Virginia Postrel)...

This post by The Big Trunk at Power Line suggests that maybe some of my optimism re: the Middle East is wishful thinking (I remain hopeful, though)...

RightWingDuck has some New Year's resolutions for various celebrities that you're sure to find amusing (note: while reading this post, I realized I had been spelling former Weekly Jackass Barbra Streisand's name as Barbara - oops! Who's the jackass now? Surprisingly, Streisand has yet to issue a 'truth alert' on this matter)...

The always amusing ScrappleFace on John Kerry's failure to uphold the Democratic tradition of landslide losses...

It's 2005, and the UN Still Must Go - A Modest Proposal

The Diplomad is a blog by career foreign service officers, not just a snarky site by a know-it-all like me, so I take what they say pretty seriously. The same UN that criticized the US for its stinginess is doing just short of nothing to help the tsunami victims. I quote:

The UN is taking credit for things that hard-working, street savvy USAID folks have done. It was USAID working with their amazing network of local contacts who scrounged up trucks, drivers, and fuel; organized the convoy and sent it off to deliver critical supplies. A UN �air-freight handling centre� in Aceh? Bull! It's the Aussies and the Yanks who are running the air ops into Aceh. We have people working and sleeping on the tarmac in Aceh, surrounded by bugs, mud, stench and death, who every day bring in the US and Aussie C-130s and the US choppers; unload, load, send them off. We have no fancy aid workers' retreat -- notice the priorities of the UN? People are dying and what's the first thing the UN wants to do? Set up "a camp for relief workers" one that would be "fully self-contained, with kitchen, food, lodging, everything." The UN is a sham.

I couldn't agree more (hat tip to Arthur Chrenkoff, back from vacation and in fighting trim...).

Meanwhile, reports Power Line, the USS Abraham Lincoln is offshore with a group of military personnel who are fired up and ready to do whatever they can.

It appears increasingly likely that Paul Volcker's investigation will not provide enough impetus to remove Annan from the job, so it's up to the US Congress to keep the heat on, and the bloggers, because we know the MSM is largely going to let Oil-For-Food die if at all possible. Stories like the one above, however, show that more than just a little $21 billion fraud is involved: as I and others have said many times, the UN is failing in its most basic tasks, repeatedly. It doesn't function well for relief work, peacekeeping, or diplomacy. It cannot administer funds with any degree of accountability. It cannot prevent genocide. It cannot enforce its own decrees. What in God's name is the point of all that money? How many billions in overhead go to paying all those diplomatic salaries? What is the cost of the upkeep of the United Nations building?

Here's a proposal...pull the funds the United States is providing to the UN (all the funds mentioned above, not just direct operational cash), and split it into thirds: one-third to fighting AIDS in Africa, one-third to debt relief for the poorest nations, and one-third into a general humanitarian fund to handle things like this recent disaster. Does anyone doubt this would benefit the world more than the status quo?