Monday, September 29, 2003

I'm going on vacation

I'll be back next Monday -- see you then.

The blogosphere gets results!

Both Deborah Orin and John Leo are pointing out that blogs are affecting the media's consistently negative spin on the news from Iraq.

Also, Max Boot's USA Today editorial is very persuasive in its affirmation of progress in Iraq.
Your tax dollars at work

I had a sickening ride to work this morning listening to NPR. First the "anchor" said that members of Congress were in Iraq this weekend to tour "Iraq's crumbling infrastructure." That is a blatantly false and misleading statement, as Iraq's infrastructure was largely undamaged by the war and is now already in better shape, in many cases, than before the war.

Then I had to listen (yes, I recognize that I had the power to change the station) to a long story bewailing the plight of the Palestinians who live near the new security fence and whose lives will be disrupted. I wonder how many in-depth stories NPR has done on the families of those killed by Hamas terror -- I certainly haven't heard any.

With so many news outlets available these days, why can't the Republican Congress get the gumption to get rid of this boondoggle? Why does the government tax me to spout liberal nonsense? (Yes, I realize that this is a stupid question and that those in Britain have it worse.)
Bustamante in 3rd place?

I think that Kenneth Khachigian is right that it could happen. All the trends are pointing in that direction. For McClintock to beat Bustamante would be a huge achievement, and it would be a serious blow to Democrats in California.

Sunday, September 28, 2003

Dean attacks Clark

I enjoy the contest for the Democratic presidential nomination because I really don't have a stake in it. Whoever the Democrats nominate will not be favored to beat President Bush, so I can enjoy the fighting without all the worrying and whining that goes with knowing that it's hurting your party.

Today, Howard Dean said that the Wesley Clark candidacy represents a "desperate" attempt by party insiders to defeat his candidacy by using "a general who was a Republican until 25 days ago." For what it's worth, Dean is obviously right. His attack on Wesley Clark, however, only raises Clark's profile -- an obvious misstep for Dean. He should let Edwards, Lieberman, Kerry and Gephardt attack Clark -- they would do Dean's dirty work for him if he would only be patient.

Howard Dean may be having some difficulty remembering that he is now the frontrunner for the nomination instead of an underdog. Dean's problem is going to be convincing the Democratic base that he'll be able to expand his appeal if he gets the nomination. He won't be able to do that if voters perceive him as simply an angry man who likes to attack others.

So why did Dean do it? My own gut feeling is that it was simply too good a zinger to pass up -- it felt good. Here's what he said:

"I think that Wes Clark is, first of all, a good guy," Dean told CBS's "Face the Nation." But Dean added, "I think what you see in the Wes Clark candidacy is a somewhat of a desperation by inside-the-Beltway politicians."

"You've got a lot of establishment politicians now surrounding a general who was a Republican until 25 days ago," said Dean. ...

Dean noted that Clark voted for Republicans Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon for president. "I think that's going to be hard to swallow for a lot of Democrats," Dean said.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?