I stopped living the “road warrior” life in 2000. In my time as a road warrior, I have witnessed passengers in the midst of a psychotic episode being subdued by the crew as the person tried to open the door in flight. I’ve missed other flights that have crashed, killing other co-workers, but nothing has effected me like the story of United 93. To me, it is not an abstract story of other peoples suffering. It is the sense of guilt that comes from the surviving of it all that eats at my soul.
United Flight 93 claimed the lives of several of my company’s employees. They were people just like me, who were doing business one day and returning home the next, doing by air what most people do with the crosstown bus. But for a small change in my career decisions and personal desires during the preceding 12 months before 9/11/01; one of the September 11th flights might very well have been a flight that, I too, would have been on and most certainly would have died like all the others. I cannot look at any pictures from that day without thinking, “it could’ve been me on that plane”. Its very unsettling to see your potential death scene replayed over and over.
I once missed a flight that a co-worker had managed to catch, on which he was later killed. Yes, that event bothers me too, but September 11th is something else altogether. . . .
I do not know yet if I can go into a theater this weekend and watch a movie like United 93, but I do know that whether I choose at this point to see the movie or not, I will be buying a ticket to ensure that the legacy of that story is given the respect that it deserves by popular culture.
Read the whole thing. The audience reviews sound a similar note -- see especially Mark Whittington's review.
posted at 07:34 PM by Glenn Reynolds
CIRCUMCISION FOR AIDS PREVENTION? I remember seeing studies on this over a decade ago; apparently it's panning out.
posted at 03:11 PM by Glenn Reynolds
THE LIMITS OF TECHNOLOGY: In light of my video appearance at the Harvard blog conference yesterday, some people are asking if I think that videoconferencing will replace in-the-flesh presentations at academic conferences. In a word, no.
I very much appreciate the conference organizers letting me do it that way, because I just couldn't make the trip. But for me -- and, I suspect, for the people at the other end -- it was a distinct second-best. The fun of conferences is meeting people and schmoozing, and I missed out on that. And my delivery was probably off: I like to get direct feedback by watching the audience, and though there was a two-way camera hookup, the camera was facing the stage, meaning that I got to see a somewhat unnerving image of me as a Big Giant Head (delayed by about a second due to two-way Internet latency) instead of the audience. It was nice that I could do it that way, and it was an interesting experience, but it was no substitute for being there.
MICKEY KAUS, in the course of offering anecdotal evidence that high gas prices are changing behavior in L.A., channels Sen. Hayakawa: "But, speaking selfishly, if I had a choice of a) paying $4 a gallon and getting where I want to go in as little time as it took 20 years ago and b) paying $1.50 a gallon but spending twice as much time to get there, it would be a no-brainer. $4 is a bargain! Will a secret base of support for higher gas prices emerge in the suburban upper middle class of previously frustrated drivers?"
The F.B.I. has notified three nonprofit organizations created by Representative Alan B. Mollohan and financed primarily through special federal appropriations he steered their way that they should expect subpoenas soon for financial and other records. . . .
The nonprofits at issue are the Vandalia Heritage Foundation, the Institute for Scientific Research and the Canaan Valley Institute. The F.B.I.'s notification to them has occurred over the last two days and signals that the bureau is looking deeper into the 500-page complaint, which among other things suggests ties between the special appropriations, or earmarks, and Mr. Mollohan's personal real estate investments.
This sort of thing wouldn't happen if appropriators like Mollohan didn't enjoy so much untrammeled authority over government funds.
I still think there's a future in plogging, though.
posted at 03:26 PM by Glenn Reynolds
UH OH: "I have also contemplated the future of blogging and have concluded that single-author sites are the wave of the past."
posted at 03:22 PM by Glenn Reynolds
I'LL BE TALKING (BY VIDEO) at the Harvard Blog conference in a few minutes. My topic is libel and bloggers, and I just ran across this piece by Ed Cone entitled How Not to Fight a Web War that goes nicely with my theme. Excerpt:
A New York ad agency, Warren Kremer Paino Advertising, has filed a seven-figure lawsuit against a Maine blogger.
Here's a version of events by the blogger, Lance Dutson of the Maine Web Report; here's the lawsuit; here's media-critic Jeff Jarvis' take; and here's how the Boston Globe reported it.
Even if the complaint has merit -- and from my superficial understanding of the case, at least parts of it are questionable -- is this a smart strategy for any company to take when confronted with a hostile blogger?
A relatively unknown gadfly was irritating the agency and its client, the Maine Office of Tourism. Now Dutson is a cause celebre in the blogosphere, and his allegations about the agency and the tourism department are headed for very wide distribution.
Already, the first Google page in a search for "Warren Kremer Paino Advertising " shows entries from the Maine Web Report, but not the agency's own homepage -- and I'd guess that Google front page is going to get uglier for WKP in the weeks ahead.
The agency and its client look like bullies for trying to outspend and outlawyer an independent writer.
You'd think an advertising agency would be brighter than that. The Media Bloggers Association has much more on the subject. I suspect that a lot of bloggers will be looking closely at WKPA, and the Maine tourism office, in coming days and weeks, and perhaps we'll learn a lot more about what's going on.
UPDATE: Comments on my appearance as a Big Giant Head can be found here. They had me on a huge screen behind the panel, reminding me of the Big Giant Head character from Third Rock. Or, if you prefer, that 1984 Macintosh commercial.
Yahoo appears to have kowtowed to the Chinese government yet again and passed details of a fourth dissident writer's email account to the security forces, brightening the spotlight thrown on the dubious compromises that western businesses are making to operate within the world's second largest internet market.
Doing business in China has always involved a heavy dose of realpolitik - a senior mobile phone industry executive, desperate to get into the world's fastest growing mobile market, once described operating in China to me as akin to walking into a room and taking down his trousers. But what makes Yahoo's flagrant co-operation and the recent self-censorship carried out by search engine rival Google so shocking to web users, is that the internet has been sold to the world as a tool for free speech not for maintaining or even strengthening the political status quo.
And it's certainly caused me to think less of both organizations, and the people behind them.
posted at 01:05 PM by Glenn Reynolds
YES, THERE'S A DOS ATTACK that's screwing up a lot of HostingMatters blogs, including this one. At the moment I can post, and see the blog, but I've been posting at my backup site too. It's been quite a while since this has happened, but you might want to bookmark that location. Yes, it's linked above under "backup," but that won't help you if this site is down.
posted at 12:46 PM by Glenn Reynolds
TOM MAGUIRE: "I'm not worried that reporters currently spend too much time with Google and Nexis."
THIRD PARTY UPDATE: Mickey Kaus notes some interesting poll data from Rasmussen. "The border-centric third-party candidacy actually takes more votes from the Democratic side than the Republican side!. But it draws heavily from both parties, and as heavily from 'moderates' as from 'conservatives.'"
I'VE ALWAYS BEEN A JAMES WEBB FAN, but this combat boots campaign gimmick seems reminiscent of "John Kerry, reporting for duty." Yeah, you can get away with more in the way of gimmickry in a state race, but I expect that this one won't last.
posted at 07:34 AM by Glenn Reynolds
JAMES PINKERTON looks at United 93 and asks: "what's the world going to be like when two things are ubiquitous: high technology and high-intensity religion?"
posted at 07:26 AM by Glenn Reynolds
OKAY, WHEN I SAID that higher gas prices weren't changing people's driving habits, I may have spoken too soon. . . .
posted at 07:21 AM by Glenn Reynolds
April 27, 2006
ALAS, FAMILY ISSUES kept me from joining other bloggers in dining at the Harvard Faculty Club and hanging out at the Zephyr Lounge. I'm delivering my paper tomorrow via video hookup, which will be different.
DRUDGE / KOS UPDATE: I was a bit skeptical about the Drudge numbers on Kos's book, and it turns out I was right to be. A publishing insider sends me some info that makes Drudge look kind of bad. Click "read more" for it. The gist is that Kos isn't doing all that badly -- and that Drudge isn't in any position to point fingers.
UPDATE: On the other hand, Radio Equalizer claims that Drudge understated Air America's problems.
Observation: First his [Drudge's] numbers are old. Next, the average nonfiction book sells around 5000 units in its lifetime. Not even two months old yet, Kos’s book clearly is on the way for better than average. Drudge says the book is stalled, yet it’s selling around 700 copies a week right now. That won’t hit the NYT list, but it doesn’t suck, and it’s not stalled. If Kos keeps the energy up on the book it could sell more than 30,000 at the end of a year—and that’s just hardback. I’d be surprised if it happens. 15,000-to-18,000 is more like it. But that’s very respectable. Drudge should know better than to report a decently selling book as stalled. As it stands, he’s misreporting the situation.
So there you have it. What's exciting to me is discovering that my last book, which was well-reviewed but no barn-burner saleswise, nonetheless outsold Drudge.
As record oil prices turn attention to the need for renewable fuels, momentum is building in Congress to buck Senator Edward M. Kennedy's bid to block the proposed Cape Cod wind energy project, potentially reviving efforts to construct the sprawling windmill farm in Nantucket Sound. . . .
''Are we going to be for developing alternative energy or not?" said Representative Charles Bass, a New Hampshire Republican who helped persuade House leaders to table the bill until at least mid-May. ''The longer you delay it, the longer there is for people to examine the issue, and to determine what's going on here."
The efforts to move the wind farm forward occur amid growing attention to Kennedy's role in the secret, behind-the-scenes maneuvering to stop it. Republican Ted Stevens of Alaska, the senator who inserted the wind-farm provision into the Coast Guard bill, has acknowledged discussing the matter privately with the Massachusetts Democrat.
Environmental groups have launched an aggressive advertising and lobbying campaign to persuade Democrats to abandon Kennedy and back a promising source of renewable energy. If the wind farm becomes a reality, advocates say, it could provide three-fourths of the Cape and Islands' energy needs and could set an example for the nation.
The maneuver to stop the wind farm ''is clearly a backroom deal, and they're going to get called publicly on it," said John Passacantando, executive director of Greenpeace USA. ''The Democrats are going to kill the first big offshore wind farm in the United States because of their relationship with Ted Kennedy."
It won't be the first to be killed because of a relationship with Ted Kennedy.
UPDATE: Matt Stoller emails that the folks at MyDD have been mad at Kennedy for a while: "Here's a leading member of the party that claims to be pro-environment trying to shut down an environmentally responsible project because it would take away from his scenic views. It's classic NIMBYism. John Stossel couldn't make up a better narrative if he tried." I think that's right.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Aleta Jackson sends this email:
There are over 8,000 graceful, slender bright white windmills just west of my house, in the Tehachapi hills. They are quite nice to look at; some would even say lovely. They ATTRACT TOURISTS. People come from all over the world to take photos. They spend money at the hotels and restaurants, then leave. Foreign film makers come here to use the wind farms as backdrops for weird movies or music videos. They rent stuff, take photos, spend money at the hotels and restaurants, then leave.
The point is, wind farms are an attraction, and can be an attractive attraction. All it takes is the proper attitude.
She sends this photo, too, from her office window. Nice view!
SWEET JESUS, I HATE BILL O'REILLY: Okay, I don't usually feel that way. In fact, I seldom think of O'Reilly at all. But I caught a bit of him and Chuck Schumer doing double-team demagoguery on gas prices last night and, well, the sentiment did cross my mind. Can somebody please send him a copy of this book, ASAP?
UPDATE: Evan Coyne Maloney is unhappy with Republican demagoguery on gas prices. Yeah, we expect it from Schumer, but . . .
Here's the kind of response that's getting from former GOP supporters: "Okay, real conservatives, Republicans, and libertarians, stay home. Just...stay home in 2006. Or - what the hell - vote for a Democrat. We have to wake up the Stupid Party, before it completely merges itself into the Republicrat Statist Party."
I think that a GOP disaster is now officially looming.
posted at 08:44 AM by Glenn Reynolds
TOM MAGUIRE has lots of new stuff. Just keep scrolling.
Amid the many scandals at the United Nations, a new mystery now looms. What happened to the world organization’s unique and valuable postal archive — in effect, the U.N.’s own stamp collection, one of the crown jewels of its past and a popular point of contact with the global public? . . .
The postal archive sale may be yet another instance of what Paul Volcker’s investigation into the Oil-for-Food scandal described as “systemic problems in United Nations' administration,” involving lack of accountability, oversight, or even basic clarity in the organization’s activities. Despite the historic importance of the postal archive, senior U.N. officials contacted by FOX News professed to know nothing about it — including some in departments specifically charged with approving or blocking the dispersion of U.N. historical material.
We talk to him about the Singularity -- and how it may come from the superhuman "ensemble behavior" of ordinary humans with powerful computers linked via the Internet rather than through the development of superhuman artificial intelligence -- about signposts indicating how we're doing, about humanity's prospects for utopia or extinction, and related minor issues. We also discussed writing science fiction (the secret, he says, is "brain parasitism," taking advantage of readers' smarts), whether college is becoming obsolete, mind uploading, and the joys (or lack thereof) of virtual-reality sex, a question that perplexes Helen.
You can listen directly (no iPod needed) by clicking right here, or you can get it via iTunes. (We'd like it if you'd actually subscribe on iTunes, as that's what pushes us up the charts there). There's also an archive of previous podcasts here, and you can get this -- and other -- podcasts in a low-fi dialup version here.
Hope you liked it! Music is "Indistinguishable from Magic" and "Robosexual" by Mobius Dick.
UPDATE: Vinge emails: "Wow! Such fast 'time to press' is a nice commentary on our times all by itself."
posted at 09:02 PM by Glenn Reynolds
PORKBUSTERS UPDATE: Here's an interesting report:
Senators Frist, McConnell, and Sessions just finished assembling over 34 Senate signatures on a letter backing the veto threat the President laid out yesterday on the groaning Senate supplemental. This plan—have the President say he will veto a fat bill, and have the Senate leadership deliver fiscal conservatives to that cause—should serve as a rallying point for those who have been horrified at the spending spree underway in Congress, for which the House, Senate, and White House all share responsibility. It’s time to rally to the fiscal conservative flag, and the sooner our friends in the conservative community know that there is a majority in the Senate worth listening too when it comes to spending matters, the sooner people can realize what the stakes really are in November.
I think that this should be a bipartisan issue -- but it's certainly true that Republicans have the most at stake in getting this under control at the moment, since they're in charge.
I tend to think of stories like this as mostly insider stuff. But I remember reading in Liberty magazine, back when Clinton appointed Mike McCurry as Press Secretary, that it was going to turn around Clinton's fortunes with the press. And it kind of did. So who knows?
UPDATE: Reader Doug Hart emails that we need a Dan-Rather-in-Pajamas photoshop contest.
posted at 01:24 PM by Glenn Reynolds
I'M NOT SURE, but I think we may be reaching more people with our podcasts than Air America is reaching with its broadcasts. And our cost per listener is definitely lower!
UPDATE: Yes, my book is selling a lot better than Drudge says that Kos's book is selling. But I don't know whether to put any credence in those numbers or not. I haven't read all of Crashing the Gate, but I thought what I read was pretty good, and given his audience and exposure I'd be surprised if the Drudge numbers were right.
L. SPRAGUE DE CAMP: "After forty, it's just patch, patch, patch." Michael Silence is living that phrase.
posted at 10:08 AM by Glenn Reynolds
WRITING IN FORBES, NICK SCHULZ notes something I've been wondering about -- if high gas prices are hurting consumers as much as news accounts say, how come consumers aren't changing their behavior?
But what's more interesting about these stories is what they don't tell you. For example, the Associated Press reports that "surveys indicate drivers won't be easing off on their mileage, using even more gas than a year ago." Now why is that? If prices are rising, one would expect consumers would use less.
The answer might be in some of the long-term trends that the short-term media lens is too cramped to see. Energy prices may be rising, but energy itself is much less important to consumers and to the overall economy than it once was.
According to the Bureau of Economic Affairs ( see chart here), American consumer spending on energy as a fraction of total personal consumption has declined considerably since 1980. Whereas 25 years ago, one in every ten consumer dollars was spent on energy, today it's one in every 16. In other words, what it takes to heat and cool our homes and drive to and from our jobs and vacation destinations is relatively less costly than it was then.
This goes a long way toward explaining why even when gas prices rise this summer--higher than they were throughout the 1990s--people will still be driving more; it's much more of a value than it was a generation ago.
Heck, as I've mentioned before, people don't even seem to be slowing down on the Interstate. Go less than 85 in the left lane and you'll find some soccer mom in a Honda Odyssey flashing her lights behind you.
PUSHING FOR TRANSPARENCY: Check out the new Sunlight Foundation website. Plus the Congresspedia. And here's a story from the Washington Post. These people are lefties, which has engendered some suspicion (see the WP story), but I think that this stuff transcends partisanship.
Let's hope this amounts to something. There's much more background here, including this observation:
Keeping spending down below the President's initial request level is important, but how that money is spent matters, too. The President should therefore threaten to veto a bill that contains any extraneous spending items--that is, anything that is not truly emergency spending. Funding for the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq qualifies and is fair game for a supplemental bill. Hurricane-related funding that addresses immediate, on-the-ground needs qualifies, too. But not pork projects. Whatever its merit, the "Railroad to Nowhere," for example, is just not an emergency need. Little, if any, of the junk that the Senate has thrown into the supplemental and is still considering adding makes the cut, either.
If it's not an emergency need, it shouldn't be in the supplemental. That's a simple rule, and one that the President should enforce.
Yes. It would be political gold for the White House (which, God knows, needs it!) and it might win over some of those many disgruntled Republican voters who are otherwise likely to stay home in November.
We're as curious as anyone to see how Ms. McCarthy's case unfolds. But this would appear to be only the latest example of the unseemly symbiosis between elements of the press corps and a cabal of partisan bureaucrats at the CIA and elsewhere in the "intelligence community" who have been trying to undermine the Bush Presidency. . . .
The deepest damage from these leak frenzies may yet be to the press itself, both in credibility and its ability to do its job. It was the press that unleashed anti-leak search missions aimed at the White House that have seen Judith Miller jailed and may find Ms. Priest and Mr. Risen facing subpoenas. And it was the press that promoted the probe under the rarely used Espionage Act of "neocon" Defense Department employee Lawrence Franklin, only to find that the same law may now be used against its own "whistleblower" sources. Just recently has the press begun to notice that the use of the same Espionage Act to prosecute two pro-Israel lobbyists for repeating classified information isn't much different from prosecuting someone for what the press does every day--except for a far larger audience.
We've been clear all along that we don't like leak prosecutions, especially when they involve harassing reporters who are just trying to do their job. But then that's part of the reason we didn't join Joe Wilson and the New York Times in demanding Karl Rove's head over the Plame disclosure. As for some of our media colleagues, when they stop being honest chroniclers of events and start getting into bed with bureaucrats looking to take down elected political leaders, they shouldn't be surprised if those leaders treat them like the partisans they have become.
Journalists are reviled by many for alleged negativism and over-focus on bad news in Iraq. Or perhaps the problem is: Their employers are just trying to do it on the cheap. Ironically, the same media that criticizes the U.S. for sending too few troops to stabilize Iraq send too few reporters to cover much more than the dramatic bombings around Baghdad.
“I hope we keep out of the post-Vietnam thing that the press lost the war,” Joe Galloway, soon to retire military editor for Knight Ridder, recently told me in an interview. But discrepancies in what’s reported, or an imbalance, are daily highlighted by military bloggers in Iraq and conservative commentators here at home.
As one who has been an embedded reporter in Iraq, I would answer in the affirmative. . . . I can name all the other reporters I met last Summer–because there were so few of them. I actually met more radio talk show hosts than major media reporters.
UPDATE: Mr. Bingley asks: "Is it me, or has Popular Mechanics quietly become the most respected news service in the country? My goodness, they do great in-depth research and present the facts on a variety of issues." It's a novel approach, but hey -- maybe it'll catch on!
Hamid Hayat, the 23-year-old Lodi man on trial for terrorist-related activities in Sacramento federal court, was found guilty Tuesday, just hours after a mistrial was declared in the related trial of his father, who was accused of lying to the FBI to cover up for his son.
Hayat was found guilty of providing material support to terrorists by allegedly attending an al-Qaida camp while visiting Pakistan in 2003 and three counts of lying about it. He faces up to 39 years in prison if convicted of all charges against him.
With gasoline prices close to $3 a gallon, President Bush this morning gave a disingenuous speech to an alternative fuels association about what he was going to do to stem the rising tide. There were a few flashes of candor and insight, but, on the whole, it was a sad example of political capitulation by a former Texas oilman who certainly knows better.
I heard part of Bush's speech in the car, and the part I heard didn't impress me much. Ethanol's okay, though he talked mostly about ethanol from corn and I don't see much future in that -- corn's expensive to grow, and depletes the soil. Ethanol from waste biomass, which he finally got around to mentioning just as I got out of the car, is better but not as easy.
Of course, there's lots of loose thinking on energy and gas prices, as Ron Bailey recently noted:
With some headlines blaring about "record oil prices," a bit of perspective is in order. It is true that in nominal dollars, the price of crude oil has never been higher. However, in inflation-adjusted terms, the picture looks somewhat different. It turns out that the price for a barrel of oil peaked at about $98 in December 1979.
Still oil prices have tripled in the past four years, but the economy nevertheless chugs along. . . . the price of oil would need to double from today's $70 per barrel to have the same impact on the U.S. and world economy that prices had during the 1970s oil crisis.
As he notes, that could happen, as we haven't had enough investment in additional capacity, but news reports and political sloganizing about "record high" gas prices are mostly evidence of sensationalism and innumeracy. Apparently, however, the public isn't so dumb:
Consumers shrugged off higher gasoline prices in April and sent a widely watched barometer of consumer confidence to its highest level in almost four years, a private research group said Tuesday.
I'VE WONDERED why the Bush Administration hasn't been more exercised about gas prices, but now I understand -- it's all been a devious Rovian plot to sucker the Democrats into supporting tax cuts. I should've seen that one coming!
posted at 01:05 PM by Glenn Reynolds
AN ARMY OF MICHELLE MALKINS? I wrote her about Hot Air, and she replied:
The newscast is filmed in my basement with a Sony HVR-A1U Digital HDV Handycam and edited with Avid Xpress DV and Adobe After Effects. There's a green screen behind me. Bryan does all the wizardry. We're having fun and it is truly amazing how all this fairly inexpensive software and hardware is revolutionizing broadcast media. We're living the Army of Davids dream. (Can't count how many times someone has written and said "when are you going to have your own TV show?" Now, I don't need to wait!)
IN THE MAIL: Carrie Lukas' new book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Women, Sex and Feminism. I handed it off to the Insta-Wife, who was lukewarm: "I think this is just an 'in the mail' mention," was her response. The reader reviews, however, seem to indicate stronger sentiments, pro and con.
Sen. Arlen Specter obtained a $200,000 grant last year for a Philadelphia foundation represented by the son of one of Specter's top aides,the latest example of how the Pennsylvania Republican has helped clients of lobbyists related to members of his staff.
Bill Reynolds, Specter's chief of staff, said an investigation found two lobbyists who sought financial favors and who were related to staff members. Specter has changed his office rules to ban lobbying by staffers' relatives.
"The better practice is what we have now. We're living and learning," Specter said in an interview.
So are the rest of us. One lesson is that when members of Congress "help" people get grants, it's a lure for people who want them to use whatever influence they can. And no, the Reynolds here is no relation.
Rep. Alan B. Mollohan, the West Virginia Democrat whose real-estate holdings and financial disclosures have drawn federal scrutiny, last year bought a 300-acre farm with the head of a small defense contractor that had won a $2.1 million contract from funds that the congressman added to a 2005 spending bill.
The joint purchase of the farm, which sits on the Cheat River in West Virginia, is the most direct tie yet disclosed between Rep. Mollohan and a beneficiary of the federal spending he has steered toward his home state. It raises new questions about possible conflicts of interest by Rep. Mollohan and his use of such spending. House ethics guidelines warn lawmakers to avoid business deals with those who benefit from their official acts. . . . Over the past five years, Rep. Mollohan steered more than $200 million to a network of nonprofit groups in West Virginia, including more than $20 million in the latest fiscal year, often through narrow spending provisions known as earmarks. The Wall Street Journal reported in an April 7 story that executives of these groups and companies had contributed regularly to Rep. Mollohan's campaigns and to his family foundation. They included at least two people who were partners with the lawmaker in various real-estate investments.
I agree with Ed that the "Cheat River" part is priceless.
SOME THOUGHTS ON DEMOCRACY AND ECONOMIC DETERMINISM, from Chester.
posted at 10:40 AM by Glenn Reynolds
STRATEGYPAGE says that while the media are focusing on retired generals, they're missing the real story on the troops:
But the troops also exchanged information on tactics and techniques, as well as anything else they knew that could help keep them alive in combat. This alarmed the Department of Defense, which put some restrictions on active duty bloggers. The troops did not fight back, as, once reminded, they understood that, in public forums, anyone could read what they were saying, including the enemy. So a lot of this information continued to be exchanged email and private message boards. The military got into the act by establishing official message boards, for military personnel only, where useful information could be discussed and exchanged. All this rapid information sharing has had an enormous impact on the effectiveness of the troops, something that has largely gone unnoticed by the mass media.
This hierarchy-flattening effect is something that Tom Ricks got in his novel, though his portrayal was mostly negative, but it's not getting that much media attention in general. It's easier to interview retired generals, I guess.
This year, the PKK has been very active just across the border in Turkey and Iran, attacking police and army units. The Turks and Iranians are fighting back. There are already over 2,000 Turkish troops inside Iraq. This sort of presence has been tolerated for years, as long as the Turks were just looking for PKK camps in remote areas. But the Turks have over 50,000 troops on the border, and appear ready to expand their operations in northern Iraq. Meanwhile, to the east. Iranian troops are moving to the border, and Iranian artillery is being fired into Iraq, at areas believed occupied by the PKK.
The Kurdish government in northern Iraq basically tells the PKK, "you're on your own." But if the Turks and Iranians do serious damage to the PKK (by finding and destroying many of the PKK camps, which are often disguised as civilian villages), many of the PKK fighters will just flee to Kurdish government controlled areas and blend into the civilian population (the PKK gunmen don't wear uniforms). This would tempt the Turks to just keep going. The Turkish army has been fighting, and defeating, Kurdish irregulars for centuries. No big deal. Many Turks believe that northern Iraq really belongs to Turkey (it was taken away from defeated Turkey after World War I, so that Turkey would not have access to the newly discovered oil in the area.) Iraq does not want to give up the north, but they cannot defeat Turkish troops. Only the U.S. can. For the moment, the Americans are telling the Turks to stick to hunting PKK, and forget about lost provinces. For the moment, anyway.
More on this at California Yankee. Given the Turks' lack of support regarding our efforts in Iraq, I don't see why we should be particularly supportive of their efforts. An Iranian invasion, meanwhile, would just be playing into Bush's hands.
Saying surfing the web is equivalent to reading a newspaper or talking on the phone, an administrative law judge has suggested that only a reprimand is appropriate as punishment for a city worker accused of failing to heed warnings to stay off the Internet.
Administrative Law Judge John Spooner reached his decision in the case of Toquir Choudhri, a 14-year veteran of the Department of Education who had been accused of ignoring supervisors who told him to stop browsing the Internet at work.
Frankly, we'd be better off if bureaucrats spent more time reading blogs, and less doing their jobs. . . .
InstaPundit -- bringing on the revolution, one wasted hour at a time!
posted at 06:17 PM by Glenn Reynolds
THREE MILLION DOWNLOADS for The Glenn and Helen Show since we started counting 13 episodes ago. If only we were getting 99 cents per download . . . .
And Stephen Spruiell says that media outfits are using a misleading frame to make it look as if the McCarthy story is connected to the Plame story. Hey, maybe she's the Plame leaker! I mean, they'd know, right . . . ?
Christopher Hitchens said on the Hugh Hewitt show recently that he "dislikes" the Republican party but has "contempt" for the Democrats. I appreciate the distinction, though I'm not sure I could muster even that level of genial tolerance. . . .
But what happened to the other guys? "The Republican party," says Arlen Specter, "is now principally moderate, if not liberal" — and he means it as a compliment. "I'll just say this about the so-called porkbusters," chips in Trent Lott. "I'm getting damn tired of hearing from them. They have been nothing but trouble since Katrina."
Well, to be honest, I'm a good half-decade past getting damn tired of hearing from Trent Lott. But the difference is that, as a member of the pork-funding sector of the economy, I pay for him; he doesn't pay for me.
HOWARD KURTZ has more on the Hiltzik affair. So does Jeff Jarvis, who writes: "I would not fire Hiltzik. He screwed up and made an ass of himself. That is punishment enough." There's some interesting discussion in the comments.
It was only last month that the Senate staged a breast-beating debate about the need to control the rampant pork-spending abuse of earmarks — boondoggle appropriations tucked into vital legislation with little public scrutiny. Senator Trent Lott, Republican of Mississippi, orated on the side of the angels in calling for reform. Well, the angels have lost another player. As the Senate returns from recess it will confront the year's prize porker blithely trotted out by Senator Lott — a $700 million earmark to relocate a Gulf Coast rail line, which was just rebuilt, post-Katrina, at a cost of $250 million. . . .
Even worse, Senator Lott and his fellow Mississippi Republican, Thad Cochran, are attaching this frivolous add-on to a bill that is supposed to be used to pay for emergencies — specifically the war in Iraq and hurricane reconstruction.
Senator Lott angrily resents any description of his pet project as a right of way to the slot machines. He insists the rail line needs higher ground and his constituents better protection. But it seems clear the twin traumas of Iraq and Katrina are being used as cover. Economic development is a fine goal for the Gulf Coast, but it deserves careful consideration, not a devious rush to the pork barrel.
UPDATE: People who think that this kind of thing won't matter to the GOP should read this post.
posted at 10:17 AM by Glenn Reynolds
MICHELLE MALKIN has a new web video venture called Hot Air. The current episode is about China, Internet censorship, and the complicity of U.S. companies.
posted at 08:29 AM by Glenn Reynolds
IF YOU WERE OFF having a life or something over the weekend, you missed our podcast interviews with Jim Dunnigan, Austin Bay, and the just-back-from-Iraq Michael Totten.
Up to 20,000 people turned out Saturday for a parade to welcome home the National Guard's 278th Regimental Combat Team, providing a big-city atmosphere powered by small-town values. The rains that had been pelting the region ceased and the clouds gave way to bright sunshine for the two-hour Celebrate Freedom Parade 2006 through downtown Knoxville.
"What a great sight this is on the street today," said Gov. Phil Bredesen as he reviewed the 2,500 members of the 278th standing in parade formation wearing their camouflage uniforms. As governor, Bredesen is commander of the Tennessee National Guard.
Bredesen said the men and women of the 278th who were deployed to Iraq for a year represent "what is the very best of our state and the very best of our nation."
Nice to see something positive like this going on.
CATHY SEIPP ON BLUE CROSS: "To decide after a therapy has proved beneficial that it's merely 'investigational' and therefore should not be covered — that, actually, seems the definition of bad faith. . . . What I didn't realize at the time was that I'd turn out to be my insurance company's worst nightmare — the cancer patient who keeps responding to extremely expensive treatments. I only hope that Blue Cross doesn't turn out to be mine."
DARFUR UPDATE: The trouble has spread to Chad, and StrategyPage has the latest:
While Sudan insists it did not support the Chad rebels, people who have traveled through the border area contradict this. The U.S. also says Sudan is involved (without revealing its sources, which probably include satellite surveillance and agents on the ground.) Sudan apparently believes that, if the faction it backed got control of Chad, the Darfur rebels would have one less place to hide out in. But some of the Darfur rebels belong to tribes that have branches in both Sudan and Chad. That said, Sudan's brutal policy in Darfur doesn't make sense either, but there it is. The Sudanese leadership are ruthless, and don't much care how much mess and misery they create.
Indeed. Meanwhile, Osama bin Laden -- who was already mad about the end to genocide in East Timor -- is now declaring war against the world over efforts to end the genocide in Darfur. I agree that this is, if genuine, an agitprop error. But it's hard to stay in touch with the currents of popular opinion when you live in a cave.
UPDATE: TigerHawk notes something that this dog isn't barking about: "Apart from the list's comic aspects, it is fascinating for its omissions. Why didn't bin Laden talk about Iraq? Less than 2 1/2 years ago, al Qaeda broke the news to the Taliban that it was diverting resources to Iraq so as to humiliate the American 'Crusaders.'"
I guess that didn't work out so well.
ANOTHER UPDATE: In TigerHawk's comments, Kai Carver says that Osama did talk about Iraq. I guess it just wasn't seen as newsworthy. Hmm.
THE WASHINGTON POSTASKS: "Who are the overlooked autocrats we should be paying attention to but aren't?" It's not a bad list, though Robert Mugabe should probably be on it. I guess he gets more attention than the folks listed, but he still doesn't get nearly enough.
I don't know about that -- it sounds like a bit of an exaggeration -- but it's nice to hear. There's no question that PorkBusters has gotten a fair amount of attention, and that politicians are at least embarrassed about pork.
PorkBusters has certainly irritated Trent Lott, which is some evidence of success, and there's a report that earmarks are down 37% presumably as the result of public pressure.
That's not bad for a project only a few months old, run by a couple of bloggers without a budget with help from other folks in the blogosphere. But it's going to take more than this to make a real difference. Changing the psychology is the first step, and that's happened. And, perhaps, we've even started to change behavior. But we need a lot more of that, and I suspect that structural changes will be needed, too.
There is no mention by the Post -- none -- that Mary McCarthy is a big Kerry campaign and Democratic Party contributor.
How can the WPost justify reporting one friend's mere impression that McCarthy is not biased and that it is very difficult even for those who know her well to understand why she would leak sensitive information, and yet not report the objective fact that -- after a meteoric professional rise in intelligence circles during a Democratic administration -- McCarthy, while a government official on a government salary, gave at least $7700 of her own money in a single year to Democratic political campaigns?
Given the Post's delicate posture in this case -- having been the recipient of at least one highly sensitive leak on a subject about which it chose to publish a story damaging to national security -- you would think they might perceive a special obligation to play it down the middle here. But apparently not.
This morning's story is said to have had no fewer than eight contributors -- it was written by R. Jeffrey Smith and Dafna Linzer, and lists as contributors Walter Pincus, Al Kamen, Howard Kurtz and Dan Morse, and research editor Lucy Shackelford and researcher Magda Jean-Louis.
Since campaign contribution information is available on-line -- you don't even need to draft star reporters and research editors to dig it out -- is it too much to suppose that at least one of these eight folks might have mentioned, at least in passing, that this purported non-ideologue of a leaker was giving lots of money to the effort to unseat the present administration?
I'm pretty sure that similar evidence tying a leaker to the GOP under similar circumstances would get a lot of play.