Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Crystal ball failure
took aim Wednesday at lavish salaries and bonuses for corporate executives, standing on Wall Street to issue a sharp warning for corporate boards to "step up to their responsibilities" and tie compensation packages to performance.... The president acknowledged people's continuing nervousness about their financial picture, despite a string of similar reports that provide some reason for optimism. He said some workers are being left behind in the booming economy and the disparity between the rich and the poor is growing.
"The fact is that income inequality is real. It has been rising for more than 25 years," the president said. "The earnings gap is now twice as wide as it was in 1980," Bush said, adding that more education and training can lift peoples' salaries.
Monday, January 29, 2007
Comity, Comity, Uber Alles
Sunday, January 28, 2007
Chicks aren't serious
[The Democrats are] Their choice of Webb proved it. Yes, they have the first woman Speaker in American history. But they gave the response to a navy man from the South. They know what they’re doing. Which is more than can currently be said for the White House.
Friday, January 26, 2007
Shocking GOP stonewalling tidbit
This is an astonishing bit of information.
Who would have thought that it would have taken constant pressure to get Pat Roberts to roll over for the administration?
You'd've thought that "a polite suggestion," or "a knowing glance," or "promises of fresh baked goods" would have sufficed.
Right up there with old sitcoms as a bottomless source of inspiration for Hollywood...
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Sometimes it's easier to feign outrage than to defend your children against personal attacks
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
death by caricatures
The “professional GOP web toiler” quoted in the post has the better of the argument versus Sen. Webb on the "majority" point. The poll showed a small level of support for the way the war is being fought, but it was non-scientific, and didn't show majority opposition.
The interesting part of the discussion comes in Sen. Webb's discussion of opposition to the Vietnam War. Webb wrote:
The majority of the American people never truly bought the antiwar movement’s logic. While it is correct to say many wearied of an ineffective national strategy as the war dragged on, they never stopped supporting the actual goals for which the United States and South Vietnam fought... [In Sept. 1972,] By a margin of 74 percent to 11 percent, those polled also agreed that “it is important that South Vietnam not fall into the control of the communists.”This cannot be a surprise. Of course we would rather that South Vietnam not fall to communists-- they were our allies, and communism was bad. We'd all rather win than lose in Iraq, too. But you don't get to just check a box and win. The relevant issues are, (1) is our presence making things better for most Vietnamese/Iraqis, and, (2) is the cost that we are paying proportionate to the benefit to our national interests and the security situation in Iraq.
One common path to misguided opinions is to ground your own views in opposition to a straw man version of what you perceive your political opponents to believe. Another is to learn one lesson from one moment in history, and perceive every single moment thereafter as a reenactment of that precise moment.
The fact that some people opposed the Iraq War or the Vietnam War for unsound reasons (ie, anything the US does is always wrong, or Bush is just as bad as Saddam, or the Magic 8-Ball said so) does not mean that the best arguments against the war should not be engaged. Who cares what the noisy, or fantasized, or caricatured antiwar activists have to say? They have roughly zero public impact in this country.
All that administration apologists want to talk about now is the downside of failure. Woulda been worth considering five years ago.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Why does it matter?
Why doesn't this fall into the "bitch set me up" category of external circumstances that, while unfortunate, do not amount to a valid legal defense?
Is the theory that all of the government witnesses the prosecution is going to call who are going to say that Libby knew of Plame's status long before he told the FBI he did are all lying to protect Rove? That's quite a theory.
UPDATE: Here's another theory.