Archive for June, 2002

June 30, 2002

VACATION: I may post a few items later tonight, but then I’m outta here. I’m scuba diving this week, and — unless there’s a U.S. invasion or a major terrorist attack sufficient to encourage me to find an Internet cafe on a tropical island — I have no plans to post or check email before next weekend. If you send me email, it’ll probably become part of a huge heap that won’t be read when I return, so you probably shouldn’t bother unless it’s something really important. In fact, you definitely shouldn’t bother unless it’s something really important.

I thought about getting someone to serve as a Special Guest Blogger while I was gone or something, but I thought that would make InstaPundit seem too much like, you know, a job. Have a great week, celebrate the Fourth of July (er, and Canada Day for you hosers up North) appropriately, and I’ll see you next weekend. In the meantime, check out the fine bloggers to the left — and my TechCentralStation column should be up on Wednesday as usual.

UPDATE: Oh, and don’t miss the new NZ Bear site and reset your bookmarks accordingly. Yet another Sekimori effort to beautify the Blogosphere.

June 30, 2002

THE GUY who runs the Eleven Day Empire website (focusing on media criticism) has a pretty cool CafePress shop featuring Project Echelon merchandise (Motto: “We’re listening.”).

June 30, 2002

CYNTHIA MCKINNEY HAS MADE A BELIEVER OUT OF THE INDEPUNDIT!

June 30, 2002

FLIT SAYS that the U.S. Air Force is trying to whitewash the actions of Major Harry Schmidt, who accidentally bombed allied forces, killing several Canadian soldiers. I haven’t followed this as closely as Bruce, but the story that he makes out is pretty damning. I hope that some American media will look into this. Finding out what happened, and ensuring that people are held accountable, isn’t bad for the war. It’s good for the war. Bureaucratic ass-covering is bad for the war, and there seems to be plenty of it.

June 30, 2002

MORE ON BRAZIL: Nelson Ascher (who’s Brazilian, even though he’s in Paris at the moment) writes:

As a Brazilian it may be somewhat suspect for me to say this, but it is time for the Americans to think harder about Brazil. Among all Latin American countries it is the one where nostalgia for the old world is weaker, and it is doubtlessly difficult to miss Portugal’s grandeur. While most Spanish Americans feel envy for and kind of admire Spain, we made of Portugal the target of our jokes, and they, the Portuguese, resent it deeply. If Brazil ever had a role model, after having been an operetta monarchy in the 19th century, it has been the USA, and up to some time ago the country’s official name was Estados Unidos do Brasil/ United States of Brazil. Now it is called the Federative Republic of Brazil, though it is still far from being a true fedeation in American terms. The overwhelming majority of Brazil’s population feel pretty close to the US, be it in its way of life, its aspirations or thoughts. There is, it is true, an intellectual elite that remains closer to Europe, but Americans have to take into consideration that for many years the Europeans have been doing their best to invite them over to their continent, publish their works, cover them with prizes etc. That is a job the US has not been doing well or at all, and consequently it has been losing points on the propaganda front. The battle for the hearts and souls of the Arabs and the Muslims in general is lost, and it is a waste of time to dwell on it. But I see no reason for the US to lose Latin America to the EU.

A lot of Americans seem to feel the same way.

June 30, 2002

PUNDITWATCH IS BACK! Woohoo!

June 30, 2002

THE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR REPORTS that Jordan has foiled an Al Qaeda embassy-attack plot:

US diplomats in Amman were unavailable for comment. But informed sources said four of the men were understood to be planning attacks on the American and Israeli Embassies, and on leisure centers believed to be frequented by Americans recuperating during military exercises in the kingdom. A second six-man cell, says Duwaik, was supposedly planning to hit unnamed Israeli targets across the Jordanian border in the West Bank. He says the men are accused of belonging to a hitherto unknown group known as Al Ashara, or “The 10,” and are now being held in Al-Juwaydah Prison, south of Amman.

And there’s even more good news:

Jordanian officials say popular anger at perceived US support for Israel’s onslaught against the Palestinians and America’s active role in isolating Iraq has turned to helpless resignation.

The Den Beste Plan appears to be working.

UPDATE: And check this out: the EU President endorses Arafat’s ouster.

June 30, 2002

MINE’S 187.5.

June 30, 2002

GRAY DAVIS UPDATE: Matthew Hoy offers a cautionary tale about the corruption generated by “emergency” powers that may have relevance beyond California.

June 30, 2002

THIS IS AN AMUSING STORY about a legal battle over ownership of a moon rock. But what’s upsetting is that they’re still so valuable. By now, it once seemed, they’d be about as valuable as pieces of the Berlin Wall: sentimentally important, but not rare.

June 30, 2002

ANDREA HARRIS WEIGHS IN on Stanley Hauerwas, in her usual circumspect way. Play nice, Andrea!

For some more, er, respectful responses, go here and here and here and follow the links.

June 30, 2002

WORLD CUP INSIGHT: Reader Jonathan Singer writes:

As the World Cup draws to a close, so does the latest round of pundits hectoring Americans to care more about soccer and insisting that we are missing all sorts of crucial information about the world by ignoring the sport. In that spirit, I’d like to share the insight the tournament gave me today.

As I was heading to work in Boston (having gotten up early to watch the game and cheer on Brazil), I got stuck in a traffic jam caused by dozens of Brazilians waving flags and Ronaldo jerseys, honking and cheering. Without exception, all the Americans were honking and cheering along with them. It occurred to me that everyone I’d spoken to who knew about the game was rooting for Brazil. It’s pretty clear who we consider to be “us”.

Admittedly, Brazil is one of the hemisphere’s more likable and attractive countries. But it seems to me the EU would be a little concerned to know how much more our attention is focused south (and west) instead of east. It’s a new millennium, and there’s nobody Belgium can indict that will change that.

Yeah, I was rooting for Brazil, too, but I hadn’t really thought about it that way. I think he’s right.

June 30, 2002

DO YOU THINK GARY COLEMAN KNOWS that they’re using his name for a gruesome antiabortion site?

June 30, 2002

YET ANOTHER FIRE started by a government employee who’s supposed to be stopping them. This is getting ridiculous. I think an investigation is in order.

As The Talking Dog puts it: “Throw this in with the arrest in Colorado, and you begin to think that the West would be perfectly safe from these massive fires if it weren’t for these damned firefighters!”

June 30, 2002

HERE, QUEER AND ARMED: Deroy Murdock reports on the Pink Pistols: apparently, they’re in the Gay Pride Parade!

June 30, 2002

DR. MICHAEL S. BROWN SAYS the Violence Policy Center is suffering a major decline.

UPDATE: Susanna Cornett says their numbers are dishonest.

June 30, 2002

AL QAEDA MAY BE DOWN, but this report says that other Islamic terror groups are still turning up in America.

June 30, 2002

JIM BENNETT has some observations on current business scandals:

One of the principal critiques of alternative theories of the state is that by trying to do many things for which it is not suited, government inevitably neglects the basic tasks for which it is suited.

Indeed, it is worth noting that Enron, WorldCom, and a number of the other firms most noted for massive fraud operated in highly regulated market areas. Regulation, as opposed to enforcement of laws against fraud and misrepresentation, increases the hazard of fraud and misrepresentation, by raising the stakes for political manipulation. Increased disclosure requirements, beyond a reasonable level, actually aid fraud by hiding the significant data in a sea of irrelevant information.

The entrepreneurial market economy is a remarkably self-correcting system, provided that the system is protected against simple fraud. The problem has not been the concept of the watchman state, but the distraction of the watchman.

June 30, 2002

LOTS OF VENEZUELA NEWS, MOST OF IT DEPRESSING, AT EL SUR. It should be a regular stop if you’re interested in South American news.

June 30, 2002

CHRISTIAN BLOGGER DAVID ROSS has a long post on Stanley Hauerwas’s antiwar sentiments. And scroll up and follow links for an ongoing discussion he’s having with Telford Work. For that matter, go to Telford Work’s page and scroll down for lots of interesting stuff.

Why am I paying so much attention to this? It’s not as if theology is my usual schtick — in fact, I tend to avoid it as my father’s bailiwick. But the previous antiwar movement came out of this kind of Christianity — and much of America’s antiwar left, even the anti-Christian part, is still motivated by these memes even if it doesn’t understand the source. I think it’s important to challenge and discuss these ideas early on; I’m happy that those more qualified, and interested, than I am are now deep in discussion.

June 30, 2002

RECORD COMPANIES FOUND GUILTY OF ILLEGAL PRICE-FIXING! Who’d have thought that these companies, who have been so morally rigorous with regard to copying, would engage in illegal activities for their own profit at the same time? Er, besides everyone, that is.

June 30, 2002

VERY INTERESTING STORY on Afghan prisoner interrogations, via Gary Farber.

June 30, 2002

FRANCE’S AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED STATES is taking a pounding in the Washington Post’s Letters to the Editor column today. He’s been alienating people a lot lately. I thought it was Americans who were supposed to be alienating everyone with their insensitivity.

June 30, 2002

OKAY, THIS IS PRETTY LAME even by Maureen Dowd’s recent standards.

June 30, 2002

I LIKE THIS BIT from the New York Times story on Bush’s colonoscopy:

In Mr. Bush’s case, Dr. Tubb performed a neurological examination, including testing his knowledge of the day and time. In such an examination, doctors also typically ask patients who is the president of the United States, but White House physicians leave that one out.

And I don’t want to go all Katie Couric on you, but if you’ve been putting this off, you should go ahead and get it done. It’s not just diagnostic: it’s preventive, as removing the polyps prevents cancer. Having seen more than one person close to me die of cancer, I promise you — having somebody look up your butt is a small price to pay for avoiding it.

June 30, 2002

NOW I UNDERSTAND: It was all Ken Layne’s fault. I should have known.

June 30, 2002

STANLEY FISH, PRO AND CON: Ben Domenech has the scoop.

June 30, 2002

MORE ON THE AL QAEDA-HAS-SHOT-ITS-WAD THEORY, FROM REID STOTT. I hope he’s right, but I don’t think we should let our guard down.

June 30, 2002

EUROHYPOCRISY: Andrew Stuttaford makes a point that some bloggers have made:

EU leaders are indignant at George Bush’s suggestion that he would rather not work with a Palestine run by Arafat. This is, they claim, interfering in the Palestinians’ right to choose their own leadership. Well, it’s an argument, I suppose, but it’s rather difficult to reconcile with the EU response to Austria’s elections two years ago. These elections (which were, incidentally, infinitely more democratic than anything ever seen in the Palestinian Authority) led to the formation of a government that many EU politicians found unacceptably right-wing.

The EU’s response?

Sanctions.

Yeah, but Haider’s worse than Arafat — because he’s critical of the EU. Arafat, on the other hand, loves the EU. And why shouldn’t he? They’re his chief financial backer.

June 30, 2002

RICHARD BROOKHISER has these observations on the war:

Osama bin Laden has imagination and charisma, if you find dream interpretation and Koranic midrash charismatic. But isn’t it likely that he and his network have profited from the help of a government—and not the dirt-poor kakistocrats of Khartoum and Kabul? Who is the obvious candidate, in terms of both resources and grudges? Our intelligence agents have dismissed the report that hijacker Mohammed Atta met with an Iraqi agent in Prague, but the Czechs have not backed down from it. At home, we are looking for a rogue American scientist as the source of last fall’s anthrax letters. But then came the story that one of the 9/11 hijackers checked into a hospital emergency room with lesions that the attending physician now says were consistent with exposure to anthrax. If that is true, where then did Osama bin Laden get his stash? If Saddam Hussein had been living a monk’s life, he would still be a danger, because he’s manufacturing nukes and germs to incinerate and poison Israelis and whoever else displeases him. But his vows of peace may already have been broken.

Most Americans will celebrate the Fourth of July weekend as they always have—by relaxing, partying and watching fireworks. But this year, we should reflect that not celebrating is our right; that, in many parts of the world, putting on a bathing suit or even drinking beer is forbidden; that, if we hear a sermon over the weekend, it will be a sermon of our choosing; and that when we see the fireworks, they stand for all the explosions from Long Island to Hawaii to, yes, Germany, Japan and Afghanistan, when Americans fought for their rights and their indulgences, and exacted terrible vengeance on our enemies.

Indeed. Say, it occurs to me: Everyone is saying that America might be attacked on July 4 because of that date’s importance. Has it occurred to anyone that we might launch an attack of our own then for the same reason?

June 30, 2002

RUSSIA IS DROPPING ITS SUPPORT FOR AN IRANIAN NUCLEAR REACTOR: This is partly because of U.S. pressure, but I have to think that the Russians, upon consideration, are less enthused about the notion of a nuclear-capable Iran than they might once have been.

June 30, 2002

THE BUTCHER OF BAHRAIN: God knows what people would be saying if this guy were an American. But he’s not, so it’s okay.

June 30, 2002

EUROWEENIE ANTISEMITISM ALERT: Survey says. . . one in three Europeans is antisemitic!

A new form of anti-Semitism has taken hold in Europe, fuelled by anti-Israeli sentiment, according to a survey which shows almost one in three Europeans now harbours some anti-Jewish feelings.

Attitudes towards Jews vary across the five countries surveyed with Belgians, Germans and the French “most likely to hold a prejudiced view of Jews”. Denmark and the UK are said to be the least prejudiced. But attitudes in the UK show a worryingly high level of anti-Semitic sentiment. . . .

One in five Britons believes Jews have too much power in the business world. More than 10 per cent of those surveyed in the UK believed Jews are “more willing to use shady practices to get what they want”.

One in 10 believes “Jews don’t care what happens to anyone but their own kind” while one in three considers “Jews are more loyal to Israel than to this country”.

Fiona Macaulay of the Board of Deputies of British Jews said: “These findings are shocking. If one was to substitute the word Jew for black there would be outrage.”

And remember: the UK is where there’s the least antisemitism. I shudder to think how the French are answering. I think, though, that this analysis has cause and effect backward: I don’t think that antisemitism is fueled by anti-Israeli sentiment.

UPDATE: A reader sends this link to a poll on antisemitism in America. You’ll note, however, that it’s much stronger among recent immigrants.

June 29, 2002

WELL, THE POWER’S BACK ON, and I’ve got a nearly finished draft of my TCS column. But I think I’m going to bed. Good night.

June 29, 2002

TEEN SEX VERSUS ADULT SEX: One man’s distinction.

June 29, 2002

COMPUTING BY CANDLELIGHT: No, really. The power went out shortly after we got home from the “Hey, Arnold!” movie. I’m on the laptop — still with a highspeed connection, since the router and DSL modem are connected to an uninterruptible power supply that’s good enough to run them for hours. But I’ve got a candle burning for room illumination — it’s like Abe Lincoln in the 21st century, sort of. Here at InstaPundit Secret Headquarters we don’t let no stinkin’ thunderstorms get in the way of bloggin’!

The “Hey, Arnold!” movie was pretty darn bad. The Nickelodeon show is okay, and my standards for kiddie cartoon flicks are low — I was even able to enjoy “Return to Neverland,” which most people panned. But I have some standards. It was a rehash of an ancient plot: developer wants to bulldoze neighborhood for mall, kids have to stop him. The developer, in a slap that Virginia Postrel should take personally, keeps telling people not to be afraid of change, and constantly repeats “change is good!” right to the very end. The heroes all want to keep things just the way they’ve always been.

But forget the lame plot. The animation sucked; the drawings all looked faintly blurry all the time. It wasn’t even up to Hanna-Barbera standards. And it wasn’t bad projection — the previews were sharp, and so were the titles. It was just crap.

My daughter enjoyed it, though, and when we got home we finished The Prisoner of Azkaban (on our third time through the series) by flashlight before she went to sleep.

UPDATE: Brian Carnell says the movie sucked like a bilge pump. Yeah, I was actually being kind. He’s right: Nickelodeon should be ashamed. At least it was short.

June 29, 2002

INSTAPUNDIT has earned me a little money since its inception. But it’s a huge success compared to Salon. Just think how long I could keep going if I were down to my last $1.5 million in cash.

June 29, 2002

FOR THOSE WHO WONDER how I spend my time, for the last three hours or so I’ve been working on my next TechCentralStation column (space aliens are involved; I’m using the wireless laptop in the playroom, where I have a big comfy chair that’s ideal for this purpose) while my daughter plays Barbies. There was a brief interruption in Barbiedom while she played “Trouble” with her mom when she got back from the office, but the goings on in Barbiedom are apparently very absorbing though I’m a bit hazy on what exactly they are. Of course, I used to be just as absorbed playing with the green plastic soldiers that cost a buck for a whole bag — though that absorption was generally a lot louder and more destructive.

Every once in a while I flip screens and post one of these. In a little while I’ll fire up the grill (a spicy-teriyaki tuna for us, chicken for my daughter). Tonight, we may see the new “Hey, Arnold!” movie if it’s not too crowded.

I’m not sure why anyone should care about this, but somebody emailed me that it was a topic of conversation at the Blogosphere panel yesterday. So, since I couldn’t answer in person, here you are.

June 29, 2002

A READER SENDS THIS WORLDCOM-RELATED OBSERVATION:

I worked for many years at a big five firm, I have sympathies both ways when it comes to these accounting messes, but with the WorldCom situation, I think the press is missing a few points.

First, the accounting delusions did not cause the company to collapse and 17,000 people to lose their jobs. No, a very bad business model that said if you keeping on growing by acquiring lousy companies, you can become one great big good company, failed (this is simply a variation of the old, we sell everything at a loss but make up for it in volume). All the bad accounting did was extend the time before these people HAD to be laid off. In other words, they were not screwed because they worked for a crooked CFO; they were screwed because they worked for a stupid company.

Second, the CFO was, almost for sure, not trying to defraud people in the sense of achieving any personal gain. Without any personal knowledge of this company, I can almost bet you, what he was thinking, was that if I just buy the company some time, things will correct themselves–and nobody will ever notice how I bridged this problem.

I think that’s probably right.

June 29, 2002

READER JAY ALLMAN sends this link to an interesting David Warren column on Christian pacifism.

Warren says that the notion that Christ was antiwar is unfounded.

June 29, 2002

HERE’S ANOTHER REPORT from yesterday’s Blogosphere panel.

June 29, 2002

JIM HENLEY offers some interesting speculation on the anthrax investigation, and a possible Rhodesian connection. It does hang together nicely, but it’s still speculation. There’s enough information, though, that someone with investigative resources ought to be able to decide if it has some basis.

June 29, 2002

I LIKE GINGER STAMPLEY’S site policy statement. It’s pretty much the way I feel.

June 29, 2002

STANLEY HAUERWAS UPDATE: Christian blogger Christopher Johnson says Hauerwas is wrong.

June 29, 2002

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A WAR AND A “WAR ON” — “WARS END”.

June 29, 2002

OKAY, THIS IS SO STUPID that it’s probably required by law in Georgia.

June 29, 2002

I THINK I MAY APPLY MOBY’S APPROACH to hate email. Chortle.

June 29, 2002

DAVE WINER says the nothing-for-any-actual consumers Microsoft settlement was about giving power to Hollywood and the federal government at the expense of users.

What worries me is that I think he’s right.

And here’s a story about how Hollywood wants permission to hack and destroy networks it thinks are infringing its copyrights. This is absolutely disgraceful.

UPDATE: Jeez, and read this. It’s enough to turn you into a Microsoft basher.

June 29, 2002

ERIC ALTERMAN ASSIMILATION WATCH: Ken Layne agrees with his assessment of the antiwar left.

June 29, 2002

JOE KATZMAN ties together Sufi wisdom, Muslim/Jewish tennis doubles, and Noam Chomsky.

June 29, 2002

CORNEL WEST UPDATE: Orrin Judd has an interesting contrast.

June 29, 2002

I HOPE THAT THIS STORY IS TRUE:

U.S. intelligence sources in Washington are saying that the job of taking out the suicide bombing infrastructure of the extremist Hamas group will be done by Egyptians.

Under the guise of helping the Palestinian Authority with their reforms so called Egyptian experts will begin to appear in the West Bank and Gaza. Only they’ll be intelligence operatives, and soon designated suicide bombers and their support teams will begin to disappear. The United States has extracted a promise from Egypt not to station forces permanently in the Palestinian enclave. “(The Egyptians) are absolutely ferocious” one U.S. intelligence officer says admiringly.

(Via Fred Pruitt).

June 29, 2002

MORE ON HAUERWAS: Okay, it’s not generating email the way the men in college post did, or the SUV and interracial marriage posts did, but it’s generated a fair amount. Some samples:

Reader Angie Schultz is a bit hard on Telford Work:

I was prepared to respect Work’s attitude, but no longer. In that link you posted:

> Firing off a missile or two to “send a message” was a common enough

> response from the Clinton Administration. It projected the image (and

> the reality) of a country dismissive of its foes, arrogant about its

> power, and complacent about its future. It enraged and encouraged

> America’s enemies.

No, indeed, it projected the image of a country insecure in its power, hesitant to march overseas and deliver its enemies the ass-kicking they so richly deserved. (And I’ll point out that, though I wasn’t paying much attention, I thought at the time that firing a couple cruise missiles was either too little or too much.)

It did encourage our enemies, but only because it made them think us weak.

> At my school’s memorial service, even before we knew who had

> perpetrated the act, we instinctively repented of our triumphalism,

> arrogance, and complacency

That’s right, we are automatically to blame, no matter what happened, no matter who our enemies are or what their ultimate goals. Osama et al want to set up the Caliphate, for Chrissake, where no doubt Christians would be put to the sword, as in Saudi Arabia (Osama thinks the Saudis are a bunch of pansies), and Work and his oh-so-pious ilk are sorry we are not more accomodating of them.

He also says he hopes Christians would fight non-violently. Forgiving the oxymoron, most of Americans consider themselves Christian, however lightly or fervently they hold the religion. Guess this would mean actually defending the country would fall to Jews and atheist, plus whatever small percentage of other non-pacifist religions remain in the country. Unless of course by “Christian” Work means (as so many Christians do) “my brand of Christianity which is the only legitimate one”. Those other “Christians” (who aren’t really, you know) can go do the hard and bloody work. He sounds like a damned Eurominister.

By the time he’s reminding us that we need to be humbled for relying on our own power, rather than God’s, I’m done. Experience and history show that people and nations who rely solely on God’s intervention, rather than developing their own powers, are doomed.

Feh.

In case you haven’t gathered, I’m an atheist, and I’m really pissed

off.

Well, I think Work is thoughtful and serious. Hauerwas. . . well, I’m not so sure. I think he’s gotten caught up in the act.

Reader Chris Moseley writes:

I’m a Christian and I also agree with you about Hauerwas’ prayer.

I once heard Hauerwas give a paper at Duke. What one needs to realize about him is that he sees himself as a gadfly (in the Socratic sense) for the church. His schtick is to make outrageous statements that get attention; if challenged by coherent criticism, he retreats or deflects the challenge, but the purpose has been served. What I’ve read of his work appears not to be scholarship but the maintenance of a carefully crafted pose.

I recall that at the talk I attended, Hauerwas likened middle-class white Christians (the sort who might listen to ‘Jars of Clay’, say) to Nazis. This was part of the schtick, but it may also reflect genuine hatred on his part.

However, what he may hate and fear above all else is to be ignored. From what I’ve read of his writing, he has reason to fear this.

I don’t think that Hauerwas hates middle-class America. But by all appearances he doesn’t respect it, or its beliefs, as much as he respects those who do hate America. The Nazi analogy is also in this article: “Americans are, for the most part, good, decent and hardworking people, Hauerwas says, but ‘so were the people that supported the Nazis.’”

Reader James Dixon says I’m wrong:

Prof. Reynolds:

> The 9/11 attacks, in other words, seem to have been exactly what

> Hauerwas was praying for.

Uhm, no. I’ll quote:

“Sober us with the knowledge that you will judge this nation, you will humble this nation, you will destroy this nation for our pride.”

I would argue that the 9/11 attacks had, if anything, exactly the opposite effect.

Perhaps it wasn’t America’s pride that God chose to humble. That doesn’t change what Hauerwas was praying for.

In addition, while Hauerwas did ask for specific outcomes in his prayer, he left the matter of how best to achieve those outcomes entirely in God’s hands (note the “if it be your will”). I doubt that even Hauerwas would consider the deaths of thousands of innocents to be a method God would choose.

I don’t know. Read the prayer. How else do you “humble” a great nation? Historically, it has usually involved fire and blood. As for the “if it be your will,” that’s the usual weasel-phrase people add after asking God to do their will.

Glenn, Hauerwas is arguing from a theological perspective. As much as I like your blog, you are not qualified to debate him on those terms, anymore than he is to debate you on Constitutional law. While I am not a trained theologian either, I can confidently state that his positions are in fact based on accepted Christian doctrine. The positions themselves are extreme, in that they would not be those reached by most reasoning Christians, but few Christians would argue the doctrine from which they are derived.

Yeah, but so what? Personally, I think that Constitutional discourse should be comprehensible to everyone. I feel the same about theological discourse. I agree that Hauerwas argues from a Christian tradition (one that I don’t share) but I don’t feel that gives his opinions on secular questions, like the war, any additional authority. At any rate, Hauerwas is someone who has chosen to take his positions beyond the seminary walls. That makes him fair game — and to his credit, I don’t think he would try to maintain that only those with union cards may debate him. I repeat: I think I’m doing him credit by taking his ideas seriously, rather than simply ignoring them.

I personally do not agree with him, as I consider the Afghan conflict to be a “just war”.

As to why he is taking these positions, he is reminding Christians that they are Christians first and Americans second. For a Christian, the commandments of Christ take precedence over all else, even the survival of the United States. He is simply pointing this out to them. You can argue all you want that this is unwise, but this is a matter of faith, not wisdom, so whether it is wise or not is beside the point to believing Christians (and his arguments are aimed squarely at believing Christians, anyone else they reach is a side benefit).

Anyway, I doubt I’ve cleared the matter up any, but I thought I should try. Thank you for taking the time to share your views with us. Oh, and if you would rather be addressed as Dr. Reynolds, please let me know. I personally consider Professor to be the more respectful title.

I’m happy with all non-profane titles of address. Law professors don’t use “doctor,” though, even though the degree is a doctorate, for reasons based in history (at one time the law degree wasn’t a doctorate) and professional rivalry (the whole medical doctors versus lawyers thing).

It’s fine for Hauerwas to tell Christians that they’re Christians first and Americans second — so long as he’s willing understand that by doing so he puts himself, and Christians who agree with him, in the position of being dismissed as people who, well, put America’s interests second to their own religious beliefs. Kind of like Pat Robertson.

Brent Hardaway writes:

I enjoy your site and I’m an evangelical Christian who thought that your prayer in response to Hauerwas was most appropriate and on target. It is not any “cautionary note”. I spent seven years in a Mennonite denomination where a strong minority of the members are pacifists. I’m sad to say that the modern manifestation of Christian pacifism has nothing to do with it’s more noble past. I think that it makes most of them very bitter that America has the power to secure itself by the use of military force, because it’s much more difficult to go around saying “violence begets violence” when in fact violence can neutralize the enemy. Their words seem to imply that they would like America to be defeated in a war. Well, at least as long as their personal safety would remain intact.

Yes. There’s rather a lot of arrogance in this position. It’s wrong to say “The United States will destroy a nation that threatens its beliefs.” But it’s okay to say, “The United States should be destroyed as a nation because defending it threatens my beliefs.” The former, we’re told, is nationalistic arrogance — the latter, presumably, is piety of some sort.

Screw it. You want to be a martry for Christianity, fine. Get a load of Bibles and take them to Saudi Arabia. But don’t fool yourself that the rest of us share your beliefs, or desire your fate. My own belief is well captured by a passage from the Tennessee Constitution: “the doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.”

There’s an interesting email exchange over at Kieran Lyons’ site that’s worth reading, too.

June 29, 2002

OKAY, I’VE FOUND MY NEW HEROES: Amir Hadad and Aisamul Haq Quresh, an Israeli Jew and Pakistani Muslim who are partnered at Wimbledon.

Pakistan’s government is not happy. They should get a clue.

June 28, 2002

BY ITS FRUIT THE TREE IS KNOWN:

A teenager who pleaded guilty to murder described his contempt for school and for America in essays that reveal a transformation from popular student to cold-blooded killer of two Dartmouth College professors. . . .

In another school essay, Tulloch said he believed America treated Europeans and Japanese poorly during World War II and entered the war only when its interests were challenged.

“The Japanese? Well, we had to kill or be killed, right? And the Jews? Well, heck, they’re all the way across the ocean, what do we owe them. And so, since it is a known fact that American lives are worth more than any other, we stayed out of the war. We bombed Japan, ruined countless future generations and still didn’t give a damn,” Tulloch wrote in May 1999, when he was a junior.

Well, he’s a historical illiterate, but he’s got the attitude down.

June 28, 2002

TELFORD WORK doesn’t like the sarcastic prayer I wrote in response to a prayer of Stanley Hauerwas’s.

I’d like to agree with Work, who is a very thoughtful guy, that Hauerwas was just trying to deflate hubris. I’m all for that — as I said in a post after the Afghanistan victory (quoting Han Solo) “Great shooting! Don’t get cocky.” Pride does go before a fall.

But I just don’t read Hauerwas that way. His prayer isn’t a cautionary note. Rather it’s a demand for God to visit judgment on an America that Hauerwas thinks is too big for its britches. Now you can construct a coherent theological argument for such a position, which people will be persuaded by or not. But I think it’s lousy. (And I note that Hauerwas seems almost boastful as he describes the extent of the American power that he decries. Pride comes in many forms.)

I think Hauerwas’s prayer should be Exhibit One for the Rev. Donald Sensing’s piece contrasting a previous era’s pacifists’ patriotism and willingness to sacrifice for their country in nonviolent ways with today’s pacifists, who seem more anxious to sit astride their high horses. Can you imagine one of these pacifists praying “make those we bomb instruments of your judgment”? I can’t. And I think that it’s entirely fair to call such a prayer un-American. That’s what it’s author intends it to be, and that’s what it is. (Indeed, I think that Hauerwas would take pride in having his work described this way). And calling it that isn’t being dismissive. It’s taking it very seriously on its own terms.

If Hauerwas’s theology is sound, then it is also fair to associate Christian theology in general with such attitudes. If it’s not, then perhaps Christian theologians should spend a bit more time criticizing him. Personally, I think his prayer stinks. Read this account of the “judgment” Hauerwas prayed for and see if you agree.

UPDATE: Bryan Preston writes:

Just wanted to say that I’m with you on this. I’m a Christian, and frankly I’m appalled at the pacifist wing of my faith and its conduct since 9-11. They’re on very shaky theological ground, as the “just war” doctrine has been an integral part of mainstream Christianity at least since Augustine. Further, by praying for judgement on America, they’re cheering on murderous, brutal people who would, as their first act if they won, ban Christianity–that’s what they tend to do in the countries they rule now. They’re taking a cowardly, immoral stand in my view.

You’re right to expose Hauerwas, and your counter prayer was just (and funny too). I said so on my blog, and a majority of Christians agree with you.

Well, thanks. I just wonder: If Brazil was the world’s “hyperpower,” would Hauerwas be calling down God’s judgment on Brazil? The answer, I think, is “only if Hauerwas were from Brazil.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader James Christiansen suggests that I am ignorant of theology. He also says that Stanley Hauerwas is in fact criticized by a lot of theologians, and sends this exchange from First Things as an example.

Well, I’m probably ignorant of theology, at least compared to some — but not of theologians, having grown up around them (much of my childhood was spent around the Harvard Divinity School). I’ll save my views on theology, theologians, and of theology as a discipline, for another time, but yes: I know that Hauerwas is controversial, and often criticized within the discipline, and occasionally in nonprofessional semipublic fora like First Things. I think, however, that the times call for something more than that.

June 28, 2002

AND SMALLER FLEAS TO BITE ‘EM: Okay, this is getting silly.

June 28, 2002

STEPHEN GREEN HAS responded to TAPPED’s challenge.

June 28, 2002

I’M LISTENING TO NPR at the moment, which is running a very negative story on Robert Mueller’s decision to speak to the American Muslim Council.

UPDATE: Howard Feinberg has background on the American Muslim Council.

June 28, 2002

HERE’S A REPORT on the Blogosphere panel that I missed. I like the term “airplane trouble,” which suggests that it was my personal Lear that was misbehaving. But, uh, you guys are going to have to hit the tipjar a lot harder before that comes true.

It sucked not being able to make it.

UPDATE: ARNOLD KLING has a report too. It was not, however, “lack of an honorarium” that kept me away — except that I had an $800 plane ticket (NOT paid for by the panel sponsors) that would have been wasted if I hadn’t made it in time, as seemed extremely likely.

Though I suppose the “you need an honorarium to get Glenn to speak” meme is one I should try to encourage. Make that “you need a really big honorarium. . . .” In the meantime, picking up the tab on the plane ticket would help, I guess. But, really, the thought that I would probably be stuck in Charlotte while the panel went on without me anyway was the deal-killer. I guess I could have tried flying up the night before — but that didn’t work for Lileks, or for the woman standing behind me in line, who had been stuck overnight.

UPDATE: Here’s another report, and a pretty good one.

And here’s another one, with pictures.

June 28, 2002

STEVEN DEN BESTE ANSWERS Donald Sensing’s statement that all the pacifists Sensing has met are cowards. Of course, it may just be that they’re not making pacifists like they used to. Den Beste also looks at the latest Israeli incursions into the West Bank and asks: “Where’s the outrage?” The answer, I think, is that the Palestinians have pretty much used up their moral capital. Which I think suggests that Bush’s rope-a-dope was successful. The Palestinian problem isn’t standing in the way of war anymore.

UPDATE: Sensing replies with an extended riff on why they’re not making pacifists like they used to. Excerpt:

American religious pacifism has a rich history going back to the early days of the republic, but its adherents also sought ways to serve their country in times of war. They did not shirk from sharing the risk of preserving freedom even though they refused to take up arms in their own hands.

They don’t make pacifists like they used to. On the whole, American “pacifist” ranks have been filled with white men and women of privileged backgrounds whose primary motivation seems mostly anti-American. Hence, they refuse to share the risks of preserving America, even in non-combat roles, perhaps because they don’t see America as something worth preserving.

June 28, 2002

JOSH MARSHALL LOOKS AT CHRIS WHITTLE’S — AND EDISON’S — FINANCES and doesn’t like what he sees. Whittle, of course, is a Knoxvillian. He built a big publishing empire here (he once owned Esquire, among a bunch of other magazines, the Channel One TV network, and a bunch of cheesy efforts to advertise in places like doctors’ offices). Whittle’s grandiose Colonial-style headquarters building (known as “Historic Whittlesburg” around these parts) is now a magnificent Federal Courthouse whose over-appointed chambers — it was bought by the Feds when Whittle went belly-up, at firesale prices complete with real oriental rugs, pink marble fireplaces, crystal chandeliers, etc. — are the envy of federal judges everywhere.

Unfortunately, Whittle seems to be better at buying things and borrowing money than at running things and making money. I’d like to see Edison succeed, but I’ve always doubted its financial soundness. Even expensive private schools depend on a surprisingly large amount of volunteer labor and financial donation that it’s not at all clear a for-profit school can attract. Marshall’s got an axe to grind, of course, “and plenty of fury to turn the wheel.” But I think he’s right to be doubtful about Edison’s future.

The good news is that a bunch of the people who came to Knoxville to work for Whittle stayed after it went belly up. Many of them started their own smaller ventures, or became freelance writers, thus enriching the area substantially.

June 28, 2002

MOIRA REDMOND has posted her farewell message to Slate. For better or worse, InstaPundit owes, well, pretty much everything to The Fray. Moira will be missed.

June 28, 2002

ERIC ALTERMAN DESERVES A SOUND FISKING FOR THIS ABSURD STATEMENT:

As for CCR, well, who the hell was their drummer? I never saw them, but were they any better than Fogerty solo? I can’t imagine it. The man is magic-except for that one crappy album with the voodoo stuff on the cover.

The drummer was Doug “Cosmo” Clifford, for whom the album Cosmo’s Factory is named. He’s a hell of a drummer, who has recently done good work with Southern Pacific. The bass player, Stu Cook, is also superb as almost any random CCR track will prove (but listen to “Pagan Baby” or “Born to Move” if you doubt me). Clifford and Cook could lay down a line you could hang your wash on. And John’s brother Tom Fogerty ranks among the world’s top rhythm guitarists, and did some good solo work, too before his health went.

I’m as big a John Fogerty fan as anybody alive, and his solo stuff is excellent (especially by comparison with, say, Mick Jagger’s solo stuff — ugh). I saw his first reappearance in public at Mud Island in 1986, and have seen him several times since. He’s great. But the whole was more than the sum of the parts with Creedence Clearwater Revival.

UPDATE: Reader H. Koenig writes: “Those two (Clifford and Cook) have a band called “Creedence Clearwater Revisted” which has been recently advertised as playing at at least one Indian Casino here in the Pacific Northwest.”

Anybody heard ‘em play?

ANOTHER UPDATE: And, of course, the answer is “yes!” Multiple yeses, in fact. Reader Brian Jones (no, not that Brian Jones: he’s dead) writes:

I not only saw them play, I got to introduce them, at the 30th anniversary of Woodstock…not that mess up at Griffis AFB, but at Yasgur’s Farm with several of the other original performers.

While I can’t vouch for how this half-CCR performs on other nights — I’ve seen too many cringeworthy oldies shows — the two original members were delighted to be back on that stage, and it showed in their performances and rubbed off on the other band members.

Still, the previous year’s show was better.

Meanwhile reader Bruce Kratofil writes:

I just happened to hear CCR version 2.0 last week (June 20). We were staying on Hilton Head, and they gave a concert at the tennis stadium a short walk from our rental – effectively a free concert, since you could walk right outside the tennis court and both listen and watch.

They went out and hired a John Fogerty sound-alike lead singer (whose name escapes me) and they also added a rhythm guitarist from the Cars. On the instrumental parts, such as the end of “Grapevine”, you really couldn’t tell the difference. On the vocals, the trick was not to pay too close attention to them, and it sounded close enough.

I never heard the original ones except via vinyl — and now CD.

Me neither, though my mom played their records so many times they wore out when I was a kid. Which is parenting at its finest.

June 28, 2002

I’M A BIG FAN OF MELISSA SECKORA’S and now she’s profiled as a “rising star” by UPI. I’m not surprised to read that she’s blessed with “brains, beauty, talent and drive” but I was a bit surprised to find out that she’s 26. Somehow her writing gives the impression of a grizzled journalism pro. Guess I’ll have to leave out the “grizzled” part now.

June 28, 2002

WELL, THAT SUCKS: I won’t be at the Blogosphere panel after all. I got up at 4:30 a.m., drove to the airport for my 7:30 nonstop flight, was told at 6:45 that it was cancelled. The next flight would have gotten me to D.C. just in time to waltz in at noon — if everything went perfectly, which the agent told me was unlikely given “equipment and crew issues” at Charlotte. So rather than risk spending my day at Charlotte and still missing the panel, which seemed far and away the most likely outcome, I aborted.

To be fair, he was nice and helpful in trying to find alternate routes, didn’t give me any overoptimistic bullshit, and cheerfully refunded my ticket without any guff. And — in yet another reason to love Knoxville — the parking lot attendant didn’t even charge me when she heard why my stay was so brief. So I had a better experience than Lileks, but with the same ultimate outcome.

I’m going to take the opportunity to spend some quality time with my wife. Back later. In the meantime, check out this challenge to the Blogosphere from TAPPED.

UPDATE: Laurence Simon of Amish Technical Support has taken up the challenge.

June 28, 2002

OKAY, HERE’S A QUICKIE: Howard Owens says we shouldn’t be ashamed of the Crusades: they were a defensive war against Arab aggression.

And the Blogosphere panel has already produced a Lileks piece. Also, a good column today from Charles Krauthammer and a rather mixed column from Salman Rushdie — I don’t think that the war is going badly, as he seems to, but he’s certainly right about the Muslim world’s muteness on terrorism. Oh, and the irony: this story came with a huge honkin’ popup ad.

And lastly, check out the picture of Dick Gephardt accompanying this article in the New York Times. He looks like they caught him in the middle of a downhill ski run. Nobody was trying very hard to make him look good when they decided to run that one.

Have a good day. I’ll be back later.

June 27, 2002

I’M GOING TO BED EARLY, since I have to get up at the crack of dawn to fly to DC for the Blogosphere panel. Probably no more posts until tomorrow night, unless I find myself with time to kill somewhere where there’s an internet connection.

June 27, 2002

THE SPAM MAP shows the interrelationship of many spam emailers in graphic form. But where’s Mrs. Mobutu Sese Seko?

June 27, 2002

PHILIP SHROPSHIRE makes the all-too-seldom-heard left-wing argument for colonizing Mars. I admire this piece, and agree with most of it. It’s a welcome break from the rather large crowd of people on the left who haven’t approved of anything new since the invention of the wet blanket.

June 27, 2002

ERIC RAYMOND ANNOUNCES HIS FIRST Blogchild.

June 27, 2002

AMERICAN AGENTS, disguised as roving mullahs are wandering through Pakistan. The beauty of this is that if their cover works, the mission is successful. If their cover’s blown, it means that genuine roving mullahs (who don’t like us, for the most part, and who are a plague on that part of the world) will find themselves distrusted and, hopefully, roughly interrogated.

June 27, 2002

FISKING MOLLY IVINS: Yeah, okay, it’s easy — but this guy’s new, and he does it well.

June 27, 2002

JOHN ENTWISTLE is dead, apparently of a heart attack. Bummer.

UPDATE: Ed Driscoll has some thoughts. I saw The Who at RFK stadium in 1989, from 9th row seats. They were awesome. I always liked Entwistle because he was so businesslike, and so incredibly good. That’s a combination I admire — common in bass players, not so common elsewhere in rock and roll.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Brink Lindsey shares some memories of drunken revels and jam sessions with Entwistle.

June 27, 2002

ECONOMIC SCHADENFREUDE ISN’T LIMITED TO THE NATION: Charles Austin reflects on how journalists love bad economic news.

No chance any of those guys will take any blame for hyping the boom the way they’re hyping the bust, is there? They were pumping companies as hard as Arthur Andersen, but we won’t hear about that now.

June 27, 2002

INSTAPOWER? Yep. A bunch of pictures have been added to the PopShot Magazine interview with the Capitalist Chicks. How do I know it was InstaPower? Because they told me so.

June 27, 2002

READER HARRY HELMS offers this slant on the voucher decision:

Wonder if all the cultural conservatives applauding today’s Supreme Court decision on vouchers realize this means their tax dollars can now be used to support students attending Islamic madrasas? And what will be the reaction of those same conservatives when they learn about vouchers being used by parents who want to give their children an education in an “Islamic-based environment”?

Stay tuned. This decision is going to have a LOT of interesting ramifications.

Well, but at least they’ll have to say the Pledge of Allegiance. . . .

UPDATE: Here’s an old Jonathan Rauch article from Reason on unforeseen consequences of vouchers. I think that these fears have resonance only to the extent that voucher schools get no oversight, which I see as unlikely.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Eugene Volokh has blogged a reply to Helms.

June 27, 2002

PSYCHOTIC DEATH CULT UPDATE. Sorry, no other caption does justice to this.

(Via Charles Johnson).

June 27, 2002

THE BLOVIATOR (who teaches public health law in real life, I think) says that the Homeland Security bill would be a public health disaster.

UPDATE: I was right. Ross Silverman writes: “You are correct. I teach health law and policy, and have a particular interest in public health law.”

June 27, 2002

THE PLEDGE RULING has been stayed pending action by the full Ninth Circuit.

June 27, 2002

MICHAEL BARONE has noticed a Dick Gephardt speech on the war that deserves more attention.

June 27, 2002

A READER sends this picture with the phrase “Hooray for our side!” and suggests that it’s why the West will defeat Islamist fundamentalists.

Well, it certainly helps explain why our side has more appeal.

UPDATE: I think we killed this server. At least, the link’s gone bad, and the parent site is returning cryptic error messages. Oops. Maybe it’ll be back up tomorrow.

June 27, 2002

IS PRESIDENT BUSH MAKING HIMSELF A DICTATOR? Krugman, Dowd & Moore say yes. Spinsanity says no. And it says that Krugman, Dowd, and Moore need to drop their manipulative paranoia and get a grip. Yep.

June 27, 2002

JANE GALT EXPLAINS WORLDCOM. I like the way she frames the initial question.

June 27, 2002

HEY! Didn’t Dave Winer have this idea first?

June 27, 2002

RAPID RESPONSE: Reason has an article on the vouchers decision, by Mike Lynch. It also has a piece by Charles Paul Freund, pointing out that the Pledge started out as a piece of Socialist propaganda. Interesting reading.

June 27, 2002

CHRISTIAN PACIFISM UPDATE: Reader Ramesh Ponnuru sends this prayer from Stanley Hauerwas’s book Prayers Plainly Spoken:

Title: Save Us from Our American Power

Hauerwas puts in an editor’s note: “I wrote this prayer after the United States sent missiles into Iraq because Iraq had allegedly tried to kill George Bush when he visited Kuwait. President Clinton showed he ‘meant business’ by bombing them.”

Here’s the prayer: “Graceful Lord, we find ourselves living in the most powerful country in the world. The pride and self-righteousness such power breeds are beyond compare. No power exists that can humble us. We are tyrants of all we survey. We decide to bomb these people, send rockets against those people, kill those we call terrorists–all because we can. We are the most powerful people in the world. It is hard not to be caught up in such power. It is intoxicating. Save us from it. Sober us with the knowledge that you will judge this nation, you will humble this nation, you will destroy this nation for our pride. Send us a reminder that you are God, that you alone have the right of vengeance, and if it be your will, make those we bomb instruments of your judgment. At the very least, save us from the ‘normality of killing.’ Amen.”

The 9/11 attacks, in other words, seem to have been exactly what Hauerwas was praying for. I hope he’s happy. Here’s my prayer in response:

Dear God, at the very least, save us from the inanity and excessive self-regard of those who choose to say they are Thy servants and mouthpieces, but who only seem interested in humbling others’ pride, and whose positions always seem to mirror those of Mother Jones. Except that even Mother Jones is showing some sign of a backbone these days. Perhaps I should say The Nation — which seems to see nothing more offensive than American “boastfulness.” In Thy mercy and power, please grant these smug Pharisees in their well-paid sinecures a clue. Amen.

UPDATE: A reader named Dave (his email address gives no clue as to his name, and his signature gives only his first — this is often why I call people “a reader” in these posts, the other reason being that they request confidentiality) sends this thought:

I think the problem is that someone prayed Voltaire’s prayer, and He’s still answering it.

Dave

“I have only made but one prayer in my life: `O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.’ And it was granted.”

– Voltaire

That’s been the prayer of warbloggers everywhere, and boy, oh boy, has it been granted.

June 27, 2002

JAY NORDLINGER has some thoughts on antisemitism and Holocaust denial at SFSU and the University of Michigan (scroll down). He offers a lot of interesting information (some of which was new to me) both about the extent to which hardcore antisemitism (and anti-Americanism, which is becoming antisemitism’s frequent companion) has spread on college campuses — and some heartening examples of how students are pushing back.

June 27, 2002

SPEAKING OF CHOOSING POORLY: I think that these guys have a case. But boy are they idiots.

June 27, 2002

THE PALESTINIANS ARE CHOOSING. . . POORLY: Check out these insults directed at Condi Rice. Brian Emmett is unimpressed.

June 27, 2002

ISNTAPUNDIT is royally p.o.’ed at the various other InstaPundit-knockoff sites that have sprung up lately. He figures he had that market cornered, tells the other guys where to get off.

June 27, 2002

OKAY, when I implied that nobody reads paper magazines, I was kidding. In fact, I found this article by Seth Godin in Fast Company while I was waiting to get my hair cut. It rules. Also, elsewhere I saw Esther Dyson making the point that high-speed wireless will make computer use more social — instead of being tied to a machine you can take the machine where people are, making computing a group activity more like watching TV together. That’s how it is in my house now that the wireless network is working.

June 27, 2002

CHICKS, BUCKS AND ROCK’N'ROLL: PopShot Magazine has an interview with the Capitalist Chicks. It’s on their website — I don’t usually get the actual mag, but I assume it’s there, too. Cool photo on the cover of the webzine; is it the cover photo on the actual, hardcopy version? I don’t know.

But who reads magazines on paper anymore anyway?

UPDATE: The cover pic rotates, so I’ve added it here. I don’t think they’ll mind.

ANOTHER UPDATE: They didn’t mind. In fact, they sent this one for your further enjoyment. I had it on the site for a minute, but it’s a bit too big for the main page.

June 27, 2002

THE CLEVELAND SCHOOL VOUCHER PROGRAM WAS JUST UPHELD BY THE SUPREME COURT — which adds an interesting angle to the Pledge of Allegiance case. Perhaps Patrick Ruffini will update his post on the political impact of the Pledge decision to take that into account.

HERE’S A LINK to a page where you can view the decision in PDF form. Warning: it’s 995K.

UPDATE: Here’s another link that seems a lot faster. And Eugene Volokh has links to the Court’s other important decisions today.

June 27, 2002

IT’S A COULTER-A-THON: Henry Hanks says that TAPPED’s fact-checking comes up short.

June 27, 2002

BLOGOSPHERE PANEL UPDATE: Mickey Kaus has bowed out due to scheduling problems, but Josh Marshall and John Hiler will be there, which is something new since my previous mention. It’s the National Press Club, tomorrow at noon. Here’s a link to the press release.

UPDATE: Hey, I thought Jonah Goldberg was invited. Come anyway, Jonah!

June 27, 2002

TROUBLING DEVELOPMENTS IN COLOMBIA: Here’s a short report from the Miami Herald and a much more detailed analysis from El Sur. Essentially, the FARC terrorists are trying to take over the country, starting with mayors and municipal officials.

June 27, 2002

CAN WE TRUST THE HOMELAND SECURITY BUREAUCRACY AS MUCH AS WE NEED TO? I have my doubts, as this FoxNews column makes clear.

June 27, 2002

N.Z. BEAR SAYS Stephen Green is wrong about the pledge. Me, I agree with the Bear on the Pledge: adding “under God” was just a cave to a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, actually — but I just don’t care about this issue much. I agree with Stephen that it’s a bit of a distraction when we’re at war.

June 27, 2002

MICKEY KAUS SAYS THAT TOM DASCHLE IS BLUFFING.