July 2005 Archives
|
 |
Wow. Sen. Bill Frist got a spine transplant. Man. This modern medicine is pretty powerful stuff, huh? Particularly when it's served up with a dose of political ambiton and fear.
The Senate Majority Leader has - finally! - woken up and realized that his job is to lead the United States Senate, not to take orders or dictation from the White House. As such, he's decided to follow the (increasingly powerful) moderate wing of his party and work to pass a bill that would allow federal funding for some kinds of embryonic stem cell research. Why? 'cause that what the legislative branch of the party he's supposed to lead wants to do.
But Frist always wants to have it both ways. The kicker comes near the end of this New York Times story.
In his speech, Mr. Frist seemed to adopt that line of reasoning, harking back to a set of principles he articulated in July 2001, before the president made his announcement, in which he proposed restricting the number of stem cell lines without a specific cutoff date. At the time, he said the government should pay for research only on those embryos "that would otherwise be discarded" and today he similarly supported studying only those "destined, with 100 percent certainty, to be destroyed."Continue reading "News Flash: Senate Majority Leader Grows Backbone"Moreover, he said, "Such funding should be provided only within a comprehensive system of federal oversight."…
[The legislation currently proposed] "lacks a strong ethical and scientific oversight mechanism," does not prohibit financial incentives between fertility clinics and patients, and does not specify whether the patients or the clinic staff have a say over whether embryos are discarded. He also says the bill "would constrain the ability of policy makers to make adjustments in the future."
Fri 10:26 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Hillary Clinton. I may not make it through to 2008 if Sen. Hillary Clinton appoints herself titular Democratic Party nominee. And she clearly has.
See, I'm going to have to vote for her. I'm a Democrat. And I'm going to have to support her candidacy. 'Cause I happen to share her gender and, yeah, I'd like to see this country elect a woman president and, honestly, she can probably win. As my conservative friends say: No one ever made any money betting against Bill and Hillary Clinton. No one. Except, my conservative friend reminds me, Roger Clinton.
But those are the only reasons to support her and, honestly, they're not good enough.
'cause after the former First Lady gets into the West Wing on an official-like basis, I'm going to have – we are going -- to have to listen to all her Clinton-esque BS – that's redundant, isn't it? - about how she's really a Liberal or a Centrists or a believer in the meaning of politics or whatever baloney she and the husband cook up to satisfy all their funders and supporters. The Clintons are Corporate Democrats. They run their campaigns like they'd run – if they gone into business, not politics – a big huge corporation. In an age of Big Media and Big Corporate Planning, that was a great strategy. But it's out of touch – way out of touch – with where the party should be going in the future.
So after Hillary gets elected, we're going to watch her ignore the development of a sound foreign policy for this country – just like her husband did – and we're going to have to squirm and protest as she tries to figure out how to be a "free market" Democrat while placating the unions and ignoring the impact of globalization on U.S. foreign and domestic policies. And I'll have to listen to her twaddle about making abortion "rare" – you know, conservative Republicans have kind of taken care of that if you're young, poor and happen to live in the 'wrong' state – and birth control more available. Or listen to more crap about how a video game – one of a well-know and well-established series built for young adult men whose tastes dominates the video game business – should be banned, amended or have its sales restricted. Only someone as out of touch as the grandma who bought the thing for her 14-year-old could worry that Grand Theft Auto was for a child. You see what I'm saying?
Continue reading "Grand Theft Autopilot"Thu 11:22 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
I've been laughing a little bit about all the talk on the political TV shows and among Big Media reporters about how Judge John Roberts' nomination to the Supreme Court is the first of the "Internet age."
A lot of folks are complaining about how full their email in-boxes are. And the other are wringing their hands about bloggers. And everyone's talking about how quickly information can move in this new age.
You'd think Martians were really coming. My God! There are no insiders anymore! They all know what we know! And they know it when we know it. Sometimes they know more than us. The horror! The horror!
Anyway, I wrote an eWeek column about all this and you can read it here.
Enjoy. And watch out for alien space ships, okay?
Thu 11:02 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
It's our birthday week. So we're giving YOU presents.
Our most recent addition, Ms. Deborah Klosky who is based in Southern California, debuts today. And if you're coming to BlogHer – and who isn't? – this weekend, you can meet her and chat her up, too.
Deb – who has many years of reporting experience here and in Western Europe – is going to write about domestic policy. Really domestic. As in household.
Her job is to add some sense – and a lot of humor – to a field of writing that's woefully under-represented in our media culture: The stay-at-home Mom. The ones who don't have household help and really enjoy spending time with their children.
So check out today's post about China and that special place in some homes that Deb has dubbed the "Toy Cave."
Mr. Christopher Brauchli has also weighed in – and he'll do almost every Thursday – with a few thoughts on China and the U.S.
And Trevino: Well, he shellacked me earlier this week. And he did it well, too. Have a look.
Thu 11:00 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Guess what?
This site is two years old today. This very day.
Here's the first post:
Here's the most recent, by Mr. Trevino.
In a few days, we'll be adding another writer, the talented Ms. Deborah Klosky who will be joining us just in time for the sold-out and BlogHer confab this Saturday in Santa Clara. And I hope you're also reading Christopher Brauchli, who appears here on Thursdays.
But as they say on late-night, TV ads, there's more! Much more.
In a few weeks, we're going to get the website equivalent of a facelift and a tummy tuck (a new name, a new logo, some widgets, gizmos and bells to make it easier to find us and to find new writers) and after that, we should be ready to greet the world again.
So thank you. And keep reading!
Tue 08:43 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Well, I'm right about one thing, these days. Josh and I are never going to agree. Says the conservative in his latest post: "Chris, I take it, rejects the clash of civilizations thesis; I do not."
Yup. I'd say that the nub of the thing. I am leery – as I think we all should be – of calling the continuing conflict against random bombings a clash of civilizations. I think such terminology sets one type of civilization – one set of social or cultural mores – above another and I am not sure in this connected, always-on digital age that we can afford to draw such harsh lines. Why harsh? Well, in such clashes one side there is often is an air of virtuous determination that I find dangerous. On both sides. In calling something "evil" you are, by definition, assigning an equally exaggerated sense of virtue to those who opposed it. But this is perhaps the deepest divide between my and Josh's thinking.
I look at the bombings – from New York to London, from Bali to Sharm el Sheick – as part of a inchoate religious war launched by a violent group of Muslims who see their faith as the only one that is true. And I think, as it always has been, that's an excuse; an excuse to be a bomb-loving jerk who takes a sick and horrid pleasure in inflicting pain. The folks who bomb our planes and trains here in the West think of us as evil, that's certainly true. But I think in making that same charge back to them – as actors and believers in their faith – we are affirming their point of view. To treat the "war" on terror as a police action is, for me, then the proper course because it both diminishes the threat by stripping it of its rhetorical virtue while at the same time, taking it and treating it very seriously. (And oh, if you want a look at how that can be done effectively, have a look at the profile of Ray Kelly's NYPD in this week's New Yorker).
The bombings are not a new way of seeking vengence. They are the statements of the outraged, the disenfranchised, the scared the denied, the confused. Like the poor, they are always with us: Ask an English cop about the IRA, a Spaniard about ETA, the Germans about Baader-Meinhoff, the NYPD about the Weather Underground.
Continue reading "Right and Wrong: Talking Back to Trevino"Mon 11:15 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Some of you – you know who you are – would prefer to ignore the "right" hand side of things here at Politics From Left to Right.
For you folks, we've added the talented and smart Mr. Christopher Brauchli, a classic American Liberal who works and lives in Boulder, Colo. Chris' columns can be found here - he usually posts on Thursdays - so I hope you'll look forward to his work.
But back to Josh. He has filed a fine – if just a touch long – defense of his accusing the Spanish of cowardice in his otherwise very fine post on the London bombings earlier this month.
He uses a lot of longer words. And I disagree with him very strongly. I said as much back in March. You can read that here and, from a friend of the site, here.
Josh and I may never agree. The issue here for U.S. citizens isn't really whether the Spain have -- as conservatives and supporters of the Iraqi War insist -- caved into pressure from terrorist. The issue is -- and it one that has not been adequately answered on the Left -- what to do about it.
Clearly, the Right believes in the power of condemnation and ridicule. The Left believes in hand-wringing.
Continue reading "Biting Back"Thu 02:53 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
This week's eWeek column is about Colin Powell and Kleiner Perkins Caufield and Byers.
KP, already an institution in Silicon Valley, has been making some very interesting moves lately as it positions itself not just as a venture capital firm but as West Coast Institution as important as Bechtel Corp. or Walt Disney Inc. By hiring Powell it is saying that it – and by extension the firms it backs, the people those firms employ, the ideas and culture this firm both embodies and represents – want to count in the conversation about U.S. foreign and domestic policy.
It is no different from the way long-time Washington and New York establishments like the Carlyle Group, Solomon Brother or Goldman Sachs hire. And it represents a turning point for the firm, if not for Silicon Valley.
Think I'm exaggerating? Well, take a look at the tech guests that regularly show up on The Charlie Rose Show. Almost all of them – the most recent one was Eric Schmidt – can trace a path to KP. Schmidt, for instance, runs Google, a company funded and backed by KP. And, of course, he was at Sun for years. Another KP investment.
Continue reading "Ya Gotta Have Friends"Thu 11:45 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Everybody else on the Leftie side of the house has chimed in on The New York Times magazine piece on "framing" and George Lakoff and, well, I'm sorry but I can't leave this alone.
A bunch of Democrats are quoted in this capable story by Matt Bai as thanking "framing" – which seems to be a new, fancy way to describe the ability to put issues in language that some how is super resonating with voters – for their recent victories. What victories? Say you, sensible reader.
Well, the defeat of the Republican move to remove the filibuster from the Senate and the stuttering defeat – it's done, no one's said anything yet – of President Bush's plans to reform Social Security.
The Democrats say have these victories because they are "framing" Republicans as office-holders who abuse their power.
Yeah. Right. I think it's more like Republicans really are abusing their power (Terri Schiavo, anyone?) and – for once – Democrats are taking note of that fact, loudly and publicly. I mean, look, the reason the press went along with the White House scenario about Iraq – and the lies that accompanied it – is because there was no real, substantive criticism of that war coming from the Democrats in the U.S. Congress. Howard Dean was the anti-war candidate, not John Kerry.
Continue reading "Frame This"Mon 02:06 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Well Doc Searls has called me on being pessimistic and Ed Cone has said I'm cynical and the New York Times says Bob Novak was Karl Rove's source and Mickey Kaus wonders if Novak's source was New York Times reporter Judith Miller. And Matt Cooper, well, he's telling all and some of that involves Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff Lewis Libby.
Deep breath. Can you say "circle jerk"?
So, as I always do when I worry that my disgust – no, that's not too strong a word -- for politicians shenanigans and the reporters who let them get away with it reaches a new high, I have turned to Jon Stewart, a man who gets away with pointed social commentary by repeatedly – and inaccurately – insisting that he is not serious.
Stewart has not let me down. Wednesday, in doing his take on the White House Press Corps' merciless hounding of Bush Spokesman Scott McClelland, Stewart noted that the usual group had been "replaced by real reporters." As if.
He then went on to have this exchange on Thursday with Newsweek's Michael Isikoff.
"Aren't we already in somewhat of a bad shape," Stewart asked "if the principle reporters are standing on – in terms of confidentiality - is not a powerless person whistle-blowing to blow the cover on a thing but rather protecting people who are going on double secret probation to basically just go 'That guy's wife made him go.' That, to me, seems like, 'Wow, We're already in a difficult position.'Continue reading "The Troubles We've Seen""I understand the reporters' privilege or whatever it is, to stand on principle. But has the press corps been reduced to the point where now all they have to stand on is 'I don't want to loose my access to the White House completely even if all they're spreading is gossip and innuendo?'
"I can answer that question,'' Isikoff dead-panned. "I'd like to do it off the record."
Mon 01:28 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Have you noticed that this site is a Karl-Rove-free zone?
Why? The raging summer controversy over Rove's role in identifying Valerie Plame Wilson as a CIA agent is of great and massive interest to many, many people I know and respect as journalists. It is of no interest whatsoever to anyone living outside the Washington, D.C. beltway or off the island of Manhattan. It is a high-stakes game of inside baseball gone public. And it is boring.
It is boring because it is predictable. Even I have been having trouble getting interested in this mess. It's that much of an inside game. Of course, Rove was the source. And of course he denied it. And of course the White House is embarrassed. But this whole mess is just another good example of why most folks think that the national press and politicians deserve each other. They see the Rove controversy as a family spat that will be settled in time for everyone to make nice at the family Christmas party. A pox on both their houses, is the thinking.
They're right. The Affair Rove is a perfect example of how Big Media and politicians in elected office – regardless of party – feed off each other. No one individual is at fault here. It's a corrupt system nurtured in part by systemic weaknesses in the media business, weaknesses that can be disguised by reciting supposedly absolute rules about sources, or information or how we do our jobs. The only absolute in this business is that there are no absolutes.
Here's an example of what that's true: In spinning Time writer Matt Cooper, Karl Rove was doing this job, he was dissing a critic of the administration going to a rival publication – Time magazine – to throw a little dirt on the New York Times editorial board. Cooper had to have born this in mind when he sent a memo to his editors saying that Rove had spoken to him on "double secret" background. That's ridiculous -- Cooper was putting Rove's name in the memo for anyone to see and read. But Cooper, too, was doing his job: Telling his boss what the White House thought of former Ambassador Joe Wilson's New York Times op ed piece and "warning" them about that editorial. Was Rove being sleazy? Yes. How about Cooper? Well, he was showing off, that's pretty clear. But both men were doing their jobs, playing their roles; that of powerful insiders, armed with information unavailable to the outside world. To some extent, they're still at it.
Continue reading "Fantasy Island"Thu 11:07 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Man that was fast. Gov. Terminator really is moving quickly to becoming Gov. Terminal.
This million dollar deal – the Sac Bee says $5 million, the LATimes $8 million – with magazines that endorse and push dietary supplements is a whole lot easier for folks to understand than anything involving White House leaks, the CIA or inside baseball.
The Gov. got paid by the folks who make the stuff -- the good supplements (yeah, right) and the bad ones, too -- that made baseball player blow up like bugs and hit big fat home runs. Got it.
If Schwarzenegger were more popular this wouldn't be as much of an issue. But he's not. And the perception that underscored his election – that he was too rich, too powerful, too much of a movie star to be bought – just took a big hit.
Thu 11:02 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
This week's eWeek column offers more on the Internet tax controversy. As I said last week, I got a lot of nasty mail. And I made a boneheaded mistake in writing about the issue the first time.
So I've set the record straight and talked a little more about the political realities at play. It's going to be an interesting and long fight. A presidential advisory commission on tax "simplification" won't finish its work until September. That means that any work on the issue will start in an election year. In 2006, a third of the Senate and all of the House face re-election. That muddies the waters a bit more.
Thu 11:01 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Let's talk about California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. In some respects, the problems Gov. Terminator is having are the same problems that President George Bush is having: A recalcitrant legislature happily taking advantage of his extreme position on some important issues.
The two executive office-holders like to think of themselves as tough, decisive leaders. And, certainly, the Bush administration is doing a great deal to reassert the authority of the president and the office; that's really what's at stake in the arguments, legal and otherwise, over records and meeting agendas the White House doesn't want to share with Congress. They don't often use the phrase "executive privilege" but that's what they're asserting.
Schwarzenegger is trying something similar. He is trying to reassert the authority the governor has over state policy. That's what shrinking commissions and advisory boards is all about; those boards are a kind of patronage system for the Democratically dominated state legislature. Creating a weaker legislature is the main reason the governor would like to see redistricting enacted: it is an attempt – perhaps the only one the state may have – to wrest power away from the state employees' unions who, almost automatically, endorse Democrats.
With the "war" on terror and the fear that 9/11 has inspired – not to mention the fear of fear that seems to pervade American politics these days -- President Bush is having much better luck asserting his authority and that of his office. I'm going to leave it to presidential scholars to decide the merits of what he's doing. There is, however, no getting around the perception that the insular nature of this particular administration has left us with a series of unbalanced policies – not to mention the memos that support them. Some of is this starting to come home to roost in the U.S. Senate where the administration's hand-picked Majority Leader has shown himself not up for the job. That's creating a rare opportunity for the president's political rivals and his foes, the Democrats.
Gov. Schwarzenegger may be trying to imitate Bush's tough can-do approach to confronting and solving problems. It is, after all, an extension of his "Hasta La Vista, baby" Terminator image. Tough guy Arnold swept into Sacramento to clean house.
But, particularly during this past year, it seems that Gov. Terminator has turned into Gov. Terminal. He's hitting dead end after dead end. And he's called a special election for the fall that, if things keeps going the way they have been for the past few months, may well be the end of his political career.
Continue reading "Terminator to Terminal"Mon 12:48 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Kevin Drum, Mr. Political Animal, wonders if he should attend Blogher, the woman-run conference on blogging scheduled for the end of this month. He's a little worried. Given the history here, I can't say I blame him.
This gives me a wonderful chance to state the obvious about this conference: IT IS NOT FOR WOMEN ONLY. Not only are men welcome -- a statement that it seems absurd to have to make - but some are planning to attend. So you will have company, Kevin.
This gives me the chance to make another observation: If you are a man who like code and software and things that plug in, and is perhaps having trouble finding a girl who likes Java (and knows it's not just a coffee) and undersands your inner Geek, this might be the PERFECT place for you to spend a summer afternoon.
The ratio at most tech conferences is hugely biased toward men. That will assuredly not be the case here.
Anyway, here's what I left as a comment over at Drum's site. Chime in down there. Let's see if we can't move the man.
Kevin, this is such a no-brainer, I'm ashamed of you.Blogher has a terrible name, I agree (and I'm on the advisory board) but it's a fabulous chance to hang around with a bunch of smart, tech-savvy women who are going to be spending a lot of time talking about blogging and writing on-line and, well, Kevin, some of them even have cats.
And I think you'll be very surprised to see that this is NOT a convention about "why it's unfair that men run the world." Nor is it a "sisterhood-only" event. It's for EVERYONE.
If I were you, I'd fly up Friday, take a cab from the SJ Airport to the Westin, crash the BlogerHer speakers' dinner (you can come as my date, big guy), kick back and have a good time, realizing that the on-line movement pioneered by guys like you has thrived, spread and is now opening up to a whole new generation of writers who should be encouraged, welcomed and praised.
What's NOT to like about this Kevin? Huh? What?
Registration for the conference -- which is close to being sold out -- ends on July 25. So hurry, boys, hurry.
UPDATE: Mr. Drum - who said his mother told him to come - will, in fact, be joining us at BlogHer. Dan Gilmor won't but says he wishes he could. Uber nerd Craig Newmark has also give BlogHer his endorsment. And the Pope of the Internet Instapundit Glenn Reynolds has sent us thousands of views. Thanks, guys.
Sat 11:05 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
I am not exactly sure what President Bush hopes to accomplish with his decision to hire actor and former Sen. Fred Thompson as an escort for whomever he decides to nominate to the Supreme Court.
Thompson has had one of the more interesting public careers out there. First he's a Watergate lawyer. Then he's a Tennessee lawyer. Then he's an actor. Then he's a Senator. Now he an actor again. And, it seems, charged with wowing Senators and, one suspects, the press with his "star" power.
If this works, the U.S. Senate is filled with more fools than I thought. And I didn't set the barrier very high, believe me.
There are two things that could be going on here. Recruiting Thompson is an indication that Bush is seriously thinking of nominating Gonzalez who – if his confirmation hearings for the Attorney General's job were any guide – is not ready for primetime grilling. The guy's too much of a lawyer. That's fine when people think your job is to fight terrorism – and where the measure is entirely based on how well you do domestically -- but when you're going to be a Supreme Court justice the stakes are different. He plays dodge ball: Feint to the left, feint to the right, stand up, say nothing, fight, fight fight.
Straight-talking twangy Fred from the TV, now he can be trusted. And, well, he's got more juice that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. It'll come in handy.
The other possibility is even more insulting: Thompson's TV show, Law & Order does really well among women, particularly career women of a certain age: Yours and mine. These women are the folks likely to be the most interested in the next Supreme Court nominee in part because whoever gets the nod will be replacing Justice Sandra Day O'Conner, the first woman nominated for the job. Not to mention all the Roe v. Wade stuff out there.
Fri 12:01 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
This week's eWeek column is about the possibility – the liklihood, I think – that the era of tax-free shopping on the Internet is coming to an end.
And I have to say, I have not gotten this much nasty mail in a long, long time.
The arguments were pretty straightforward: How can Congress do this? Well, Congress regulates interstate commerce. That's in the Constitution. Besides, in previous years, they've exempted on-line commerce from state tax. The exemption clear the way for the imposition.
The other argument is a bit more of a stretch: on-line taxes will encourage people to buy foreign goods directly. Theoretically this is possible. But, well, between customs duties, shipping costs and language barriers, it's unlikely you're going to see a whole lot of folks ordering stuff from other countries.
The deal is here isn't much different from the deal with Grokster or the Federal Elections Commission attempt to steer its way through campaign finance on the 'net. The Internet isn't a novelty anymore. It's a way to conduct business. And everyday the entities that it's allowed to prosper and grow – this site is a good example – are slipping into mainstream use.
Fri 11:55 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Josh Trevino is still in the U.K. and he's still writing.
Here's his latest post. Another winner.
Let me emphasize again how talented this guy is: Writing is hard. Writing under pressure is harder. Doing it well: That's talent.
UPDATE: Andrew Sullivan has a round up of Brit reaction. It's interesting to contrast his and his countrymen's reactions. The English, long accustom to the IRA and its threats aren't exactly taking the bombings in stride. Who would? But they're not flinching either.
The tone and tenor as Sullivan is serving it up is remarkably different. It is more like the attitude that Californians have about earthquakes: Yes, they happen (we had a little shake very early this morning, if I'm not mistaken). But being prepared – now you know why the Scots police have such lovely riot gear – is a large part of dealing with the problem. Security in Europe is serious business. That is not the case in this country.
Europeans have lived with terrorism pretty steadily since the end of World War II. The IRA in London. The Basques in Spain. The Red Brigade in Italy. The Germans had Baader-Meinhof. They recognize – and Americans don't appreciate this as fully as they should – that the terror never ends. But fear – fear can be put in its place.
Thu 07:56 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
I'm not so sure this was a riot. For me, a riot should involve tear gas and fire. Which we may still see if – as I suspect he will – President Bush turns aside British Prime Minister Tony Blair's entreaties to reduce Africa's debt.
No, I'd say yesterday's Edinburgh street-scuffle was your average Euro-student protest summertime run-in with the cops. But Josh Trevino, in search of a Wifi connection stumbled right into it. Actually, Josh was looking for a Starbucks but as any San Franciscan can tell you – we may be the only city in America that has breathing self-proclaimed anarchists still roaming the streets – anarchists love to trash Starbucks and Mickie Dee's. It's their hobby.
In any event, Josh's posts from Scotland – as always – are well worth your time. To quote Emma Goldman: "If I can't dance, I don't want to be part of your revolution."
And check out the picture of the horses in riot gear. This is now my screensaver, I love this photo so much. The Boy Scouts got nothing on the Scottish police.
Here's another great photo to warm my old news hounds heart: Riot cops at the ready with the nonplussed Scot in the background.
Tue 03:28 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Judge Janice Rogers Brown may have one of the shortest Appellate Court tenures on record. Barely confirmed to a seat on the D.C. Circuit by the U.S. Senate last month as part of the filibuster deal, Brown's name is showing up with some regularity on the list of potential Supreme Court nominees.
It's a good bet she'll get the nod. Brown is conservative and she's an African American. That doesn't make it hard for Liberals to object to her legal opinions but it makes it hard for Democrats in the U.S. Senate to vote against her. Brown's nomination would also take pressure off the Bush administration – losing its edge with women voters – to keep at least two women on the court.
The public signs are good for Brown, too. Her name was floated last week by Jay Sekulow, head of the conservative American Center For Law and Justice in Atlanta. Even he admitted that Justice Sandra Day O'Conner's resignation from the court has uh, kind of surprised everyone and that, with "reality setting in" woman judges would advance up the list of nominees. Brown's name showed up front and center in the Wall Street Journal's early rundown. When you consider that it's a woman lawyer making the list, it's looking safer and safer for Brown.
Continue reading "Supreme Bank Shots"Mon 11:37 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
The president's on vacation so maybe that’s it. But is there some reason no one in the Bush administration has said "boo" about the approaching G8 Summit?
British Prime Minster Tony Blair can't shut up. If it's not African debt relief – the focus of the conference, courtesy of Bono and Bob Geldof – he's talking about helping the Chinese and Indians better manage auto emissions. Yes, he's hosting and yes, it's an extension of "Cool Britannia" and yeah, this one's for the history books. But there's something else going on here. The Brits are winning the political PR war and, to some extent, they're doing it by imitating the tried and true U.S. approach to solving problems. First, they've racheted up the high-minded rhetoric.
All the Bush folks want to talk about is the "last throes" of the Iraqi resistance, a clear piece of wishing aloud as you're liable to see in public these days. They'll fill your ears with talk about the administration's AIDs relief efforts, too. But that's about it. They're saving their energy for the war on terror; a semi-permanent state of world affairs that's not going to be changed anytime soon and which most Europeans – particularly the English and the Irish who haven't forgotten the IRA – see as a regrettable fact of modern life.
Continue reading "What's He's Looking For"Mon 10:12 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Those of you with Geek tendencies may have noticed two things – not unrelated – about this site in the past few days. One, I haven't written much and two, there's another writer's name appearing on the RSS feed for Politics From Left to Right.
As I said, not unrelated. I've made several references in the past few months to the work we're doing here behind the "magic curtain." Well, it's time to raise it a bit.
Please welcome Josh Trevino to Politics From Left to Right. Josh knows how to make an entrance: he is one of a handful of writers or bloggers going to Edinburgh, Scotland on today to cover Live8 at the G8, the International Media Extravaganza of the Summer. Our pals at Technorati hooked us up. So we thank Mr. Sifry and Mr. Hirshberg.
Josh started his on-line career as the pro-Iraqi war blogger Tacitus and was one of the co-founders of Redstate.org. He thinks Ronald Reagan is one of our greatest presidents. He conservative, anti-abortion and thought Congress did the right thing in the Terri Schiavo case. In short, there's almost nothing about which Josh and I agree politically.
But here's what matters: He writes honestly and well; he is smart and sincere. His coverage of the events in Scotland – he started yesterday with a good, solid post about the purpose of these sort of mega-events -- is both smart, original and dead-on. Josh has traveled extensively in Africa as part of his work in public health so he doesn't just know the issues, he's seen them first hand. Oh, and did I mention that he's not much on movie stars?
Josh will be filing through the week and I can't wait.
Sun 12:42 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
