LFTC - Letter From The Capitol

Index 11/30/05

Apology: Due to date mix-up there was no vacation post on Nov. 28.  What I intended for Nov. 28 went up on 29.  What I intended for 29 will now go up in a future VP.  5 posts today: (1) Iran: The Nuclear Smoking Gun--9/11, 3/11 & N/11; (2) Pit-Bull Court Sacks Pit-Bull Ad--The Home Front; (3) Iraq: The Case Bush & Cheney Should Make--Us v. Them; (4) My Poem for Wilson/Plame: The "Pin-the-Jail-On Twist--The Home Front; (5) Torture: Sometimes Surely--9/11, 3/11 & N/11.

Iran: The Nuclear Smoking Gun

A Wall Street Journal Nov. 28 editorial argues that the oil-for-food experience should teach us not to trust Russia's offer to verify that Iran is not enriching uranium for nuclear bombs, but only enriching minimally to create commercial reactor fuel.  More to the point, as WSJ also reports, is what the International Atomic Energy Agency reported last week: Iran has detailed blueprints that show Iran can "cast and machine enriched natural and depleted uranium into hemispheric forms."  Nuclear architecture?  Yes, for making a bomb.  No commercial usage requires hemispherical uranium fuel.  43, are you paying attention?
WSJ: Do Not Trust Russia To Audit Iran Nuclear Fuel

Pit-Bull Courts Sacks Pit-Bull Ad

The Florida Supreme Court has ruled that two Fort Lauderdale lawyers who advertised their personal-injury law firm as a pit-bull firm "demeaned" the legal profession.  The Court ordered both lawyers to attend an advertising workshop, and also decreed that they be publicly reprimanded.  Judge Barbara Pariente warned that if this practice were not stopped, next would come lawyers advertising themselves as "sharks, wolves, crocodiles and piranhas."  Miami-Herald Columnist Fred Grimm thinks pit bulls were demeaned by the ad, and sees risk as well to sharks, wolves, crocodiles and piranhas.  I report; you decide.
Miami Herald: Court Rules Pit-Bull Ad Demeans Lawyers
Fred Grimm: Doggone Ruling

Iraq: the Case Bush & Cheney Should Make

With all the attacks on 43, here is a neat piece from scholar James Q. Wilson, making the case on Iraq.  NRO's Mike Ledeen goes one step further, and says we are in a regional war that must entail, for victory to be ours, taking down Syria and Iran.
Wilson: The Speech Bush or Cheney Should Give on Iraq
Ledeen: Winning the War Makes the Case

My Poem for Wilson/Plame: The "Pin-The-Jail-On Twist"

The New York Post reported while I was away that Valerie Plame is retiring from the CIA, having stayed an extra year to qualify for her 20-year service pension.  Seems that the imbroglio her husband started compromised her work.  Her husband could have kept his criticism private--confining it to Beltway outlets, and her cover would have been preserved.  In that she had recommended him for the Niger/uranium mission, he--and she--had to know that going public created a huge risk her cover would be blown.  Clearly, they had other priorities that trumped protecting her CIA cover.

There is not much more I can say about the Plame/Wilson mess, having written numerous articles on it for LFTC, so instead for holiday cheer here is a little twist on an old one, in hope of brightening your day.  Background:  In 1962 the San Francisco (baseball) Giants had players named Orlando Cepeda (1B), Chuck Hiller (2B), Stu Miller (P) & Tom Haller (C).  After a bungled infield play, a wag wrote this gem, entitled The Miller, Hiller, Haller, Hallelujah Twist:

Cepeda runs to field the ball, so does Hiller, so does Miller
Miller hollers Hiller
Hiller hollers Miller
Haller hollers Hiller points to Miller with his fist
And that's the Miller, Hiller, Haller hallelujah twist

Herewith a modern version for the Beltway, where for two-plus years the aim of the Wilson/Plame farce has been, in a manner of speaking, to try to pin the jail on one or more (indicted) donkeys:

The Wilson, Miller, Woodward "Pin-The-Jail-On Twist"
Wilson sings to the grand jury, so does Woodward, so does Miller
Miller hollers "Scooter!"
"Plame's cover-shooter!"
Wilson hollers "White House!" yells at Woodward that he's pissed 
That's the Wilson, Woodward, Miller "Pin-The-Jail-On Twist!"
NY Post: Plame to Retire

Torture: Sometimes Surely

Charles Krauthammer makes an eloquent case why high-level al-Qai'da detainees should, under certain circumstances, be tortured; he notes specifically how "waterboarding" 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Muhammad yielded information that saved lives.  I would add to it the following: Let the debate be decided by asking America's soccer moms--not known as rabid hawks--two questions.  Q-1: "Are you willing to see your children taken hostage at schools--as was done in 2004 in Beslan, Russia, where more than 300 children were killed by terrorists--because we failed to torture a senior terrorist leader who had prior knowledge of the attack?"  Q-2: "Same as Q-1, except that the attack we do not learn about is a WMD strike on an American city that kills hundreds of thousands?"

Let the issue be so joined and let the debate then proceed.
Krauthammer: The Truth About Torture

2008: A Ladies WWF Election Special?

VACATION POST 4 of 5.  Dick Morris's book on 2008, Condi v. Hillary, does not qualify as a true literary classic, but is a classic for chutzpah and contains enough nuggets of plausible political analysis to merit a look.  Morris asserts that the only Republican who can beat Hillary for the Presidency in 2008 is Condolezza Rice.  Half of his premise seems beyond cavil: Barring catastrophe, Hillary Rodham Clinton will be the standard-bearer for the Democratic Party come 2008.  Her assets are without equal in her party: (1) 100 percent name recognition; (2) burning ambition linked to martial discipline; (3) unmatched access to massive funds; (4) a sufficient resume--law partner and major-state Senator, lit up by her status as former First Lady and aided by her rock-star ex-President husband; (5) a core cadre of 24/7 dedicated supporters who combine great skill with immense political savvy; and (6) mainstream media fawning decorated with an iconic aura given her by Hollywood and Madison Avenue.  No other Democrat can come close to this.  Yes, she has liabilities, leftover from the Clinton years, but by 2008 these will be ancient history, save in the hearts and minds of those long-opposed to her under any circumstances.

Who among current probable Republicans can match this?  Forget about Chuck Hagel, MSM darling but unable to win the GOP nod, adn Bill Frist, even if he avoids legal troubles over his stock sale.  Senator and ex-Governor George Allen of Virginia and Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts are both attractive figures, with Allen's record as Virginia Governor (1994 - 1998) impreesive--crime reduction, welfare and education reform and economic growth.  Which brings us to the two front-runners among probable aspirants: John McCain and Rudy Giuliani.  McCain has been elevated by MSM to near-iconic status via his deserting Republicans on key issues (campaign finance reform and global warming) and, above all, his genuine war-hero status.  But in 2008 McCain will be 72, one year younger than was Ronald Reagan when he ran for re-election in 1984, when in his first debate with Walter Mondale he took his closing drive down the San Bernadino Freeway.  And Reagan did not spend 5-plus years at the Hanoi Hilton.  In the event, McCain's dissing Republicans will cost him any reasonable shot at the 2008 GOP nomination.

Which leaves Rudy Giuliani among declared candidates, and Condi Rice among those who say they will neither run nor accept nomination. Morris believes that Rudy has two fatal liabilities that will cost him any chance of winning the 2008 GOP nomination: (1) his social liberalism--abortion, gay rights, gun control & pro-immigration; (2) the extreme antipathy that black voters, a group Republicans ardently court, feel towards him.

Morris then turns to Condi.  His case rests on three pillars: (1) Condi's own iconic status; (2) Condi's superior appeal to three key voter groups--white women, blacks and Hispanics; (3) the ability of those who would draft Condi to use the Internet as did Howard Dean's supporters in 2004.  Morris believes, based upon conversations with several top black political figures, that Condi can win 40 to 60 percent of black votes.  He sees Condi doing fairly well with Hispanics, and very well with white women.  Morris doubts that any other Republican who might win the nomination can reach these groups nearly as well.

Here are his numbers.  Start with the strongest Democratic groups: minorities.  In 2004 Bush carried 9 percent of black voters, up from 7 percent in 2000; blacks were 10 percent of voters in 2000 and 12 percent in 2004.  Bush beat Kerry by 9 points among Hispanics, having lost them 62-35 to Al Gore in 2000; Hispanics were 6 percent of the 200 vote and 8 percent in 2004.  But Morris believes that the key group, which in 2008 will decide the election, are white women.  In 2004 Bush won white women 55-44, versus 49-48 over Gore in 2000; white women were 51 percent of 2000 voters and 54 percent of 2004 voters.  Women are now 54 percent of the total voting electorate.

In 2008 Morris sees Hispanics casting 10 percent of the vote, and Hillary winning them 65-35.  Hillary will win over 90 percent of the black vote, and every one point increase in black turnout is one million more Democratic votes.  Which leaves white women.  Before the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade in 1973, constitutionalizing abortion rights, women and men voted much the same.  Not after.  Twice the "gender gap" favored Democrats by more than ten points--Clinton by 16 in 1996 and Gore by 11 in 2000.  Bush beat Kerry 51-48 in 2004.  But there is a sharp difference in the vote patterns of single and married white women.  Single white women vote liberal; married white women vote conservative.  In 2004 Bush won married white women by 8 points but lost single white women 64-36.  Single women have a lower turnout, 50 percent in 2004 versus an overall 60 percent turnout.

So, Morris adds up as follows.  Bush by Kerry by 3 million votes (62M to 59M) in 2004.  Against any male GOP candidate, he sees Hillary adding 7.2 million votes: 1 million blacks, 2.7 million Hispanics and 3.5 million white women.  Morris believes that Condi can hold her own with black and white women voters, and thus prevail.  The two key issues that women focus on are abortion and education, on which Rice, pro-choice and super-educated, is strong.

Beyond the numbers, Morris a vast distance between Hillary and Condi: Hillary's ascent has been derivative, piggybacking on the rise of a powerful man, without which she would be practicing law somewhere.  Condi, by contrast, climbed largely on her own, coming from a family with a deep tradition of self-help and commitment to excellence.  At age 8, Condi saw the White House (1962), and said that someday she would make it there.  Yes, some element of affirmative action may have played a role, but Morris says, rightly, that Condi was the fast track anyway.

Morris devotes a chapter to metrics on how the Internet aided Howard Dean's insurgent run.  But with only one such campaign on record his metrics are soft.  The chapter reads well.  On drafting, Morris notes that it was not until January 1952 that Eisenhower agreed to accept a draft.  For Condi supporters, some states require that a candidate affirmatively declare to be listed on the ballot, but many do not.

So, is he right?  His chief flaw is underestimating the appeal of Rudy.  Women want to be made safe; Rudy's security resume, with his crime reduction and post-9/11 Churchillian performance, tops all other candidates.  He is not Mr. Warmth, but if security concerns are high on voters' minds Rudy will run well; if not Allen--who is Mr. Warmth--might be front and center.  As for a Condi draft, Rice does a "Sherman" ("If nominated I will not run; if elected I will not serve"); she prefers NFL Commissioner.  Morris sees a draft gathering steam, but this assumes that no Republican winner emerges in the early primaries.  There is another Rice route: Cheney's health prevents his finishing his term, and 43 prevails upon Condi to step in.  She will not refuse 43.  If that happens, she will be the candidate in 2008.  But if not, bet on Rudy or a dark horse--other than co-favorite John McCain.  Stay tuned.

Alice Finally Goes to the Moon (In Heaven She Rests)

VACATION POST 3 of 5 (4 & 5 Mon. & Tues. next week).  Audrey Meadows, Alice on The Honeymooners, died in 1996, 5 days shy of what would have been her 70th birthday.  Before leaving us she left a delicious memoir for us to savor: Love, Alice (Crown Publishers 1994).  The book says little about Audrey's non-show life.  (I will be presumptuous and use the familiar form of address, based upon a TV-viewer kinship with a golden show, neither wanting to refer to her as "Meadows" nor by her "Alice" fictitious name.)  Born in 1926 the child of missionaries, her first language was Chinese.  It is a good thing she left that out of her Brooklyn housewife character.

The book abounds with amusing lines, such as this from legendary bartender and restaurant owner Toots Shor, whose watering hole ruled Manhattan's east-40s for several decades, with regulars including show biz luminaries like Gleason and sports stars like DiMaggio.  One couple told Shor of their steaks: "We have much better steaks than this in Omaha."  To which Shor replied: "So what?  When you're through eating, you're still in Omaha!"

Audrey gave up a set role in a touring Phil Silvers production to take her chances with the show.  The rest, as they say, is history.  Gleason emerges as a pleasure to work with, not the tyrannical boss the media frequently made of him, fair to everyone, low-key and completely professional.  Except that The Great One loathed rehearsals, so that his cast (including that week's guest stars) would rehearse without him.  When the performance came on Saturday night, he would force last-minute line of joke changes.  Yet he stuck to the script.  The players learned to anticipate his stage moves during rehearsal.  Off stage his appetite for food drink was justly legendary.  Audrey recounts one evening when to wash down acres of scotch Gleason orders four lobsters, six orders each of clams casino and French fries, a chocolate cake, and a salad.

Along the way, she tosses us amusing tales, plus one touching tale.  Fans of the show, in that simpler time, were so upset that Alice Kramden's kitchen apron, curtains, etc. were so shabby that they sent in thousands of replacements, which were duly donated to charities.  Gleason liked to play a special gag for folks coming to hotel rooms.  He would place two naked beauties as lamp stands, each wearing a lampshade over her head.  'Twould liven up many an abode.

And there are tales of star turns as well.  Elvis does an appearance, one of his first on TV, and resists Gleason's importuning to do a re-take, displeasing The Great One.  It took Colonel Tom Parker to bribe Elvis with the promise of a candy bar to get him to do the take.  Afterward, Gleason was so annoyed that he passed up and offer from Parker to buy 50 percent of Elvis, for $25,000.  Marilyn Monroe emerges as classy as she was gorgeous, and at one point has a splinter removed from her prize tush in the ladies room.  Cary Grant tries to wangle a spot on the show as a guest, asking Audrey, but how does an impossible debonair Englishman meet up with a Brooklyn bus driver?

Audrey was smart enough to negotiate a lifetime residuals contract--the only cast member to have done so.  WPIX ran episodes--the 39 classics from 1955-56, for 25 consecutive years; in 1992, on the air again, it outdrew Johnny Carson and Arsenio Hall.  Audrey did other TV work, but marriage took precedence in the 1960s.  Notable were two one-time gigs: (a) she once burned $1 million in old bills at the Chicago Federal Reserve bank--throwing shredded greenbacks into a furnace; (b) after being interviewed by Edward R. Murrow for Person To Person, she once substituted for him as interviewer.  The obvious intelligence and common sense revealed in her memoir suggests she was successful in that venture.

Alice, we miss you.  We are stuck in a generational time warp with a pack of grotesquely self-absorbed entertainers, the vast majority with but a pale fraction of your talent.  They are loud, vulgar, ludicrously overpaid for producing mostly trash; you were gracious, classy, and ridiculously underpaid for producing a gem for the ages--before a live audience, no retakes.  Come back--not just via DVD, but for real.  We could send Eminem and 2 Live Crew "to the moon" where they belong, along with smart-ass pseudo-comics like Bill Maher, and savor instead a Ralph + Alice + Ed + Trixie retake.
Audrey Meadows Official Website
Audrey Meadows Mini-Bio

Broadway Joe's Lifelong Party

VACATION POST 2 of 5.  I had the good fortune to attend two Super Bowl games, each with seats between the 45- and 50-yard lines.  One benefit of attending the University of Miami from September 1965 to June 1969 was that Super Bowls II & III were played at the Orange Bowl.  Friends of my father got tickets for me.  I went with a college chum to see the Green Bay Packers whip the Oakland Raiders, 33-14 in II, and in III I joined a friend of my father's to see Broadway Joe Namath lead the New York Jets to the biggest Super Bowl upset in history, 16-7 over the 18-point favorite Baltimore Colts.  The gracious gentleman who took me to III was a publicity agent named Alan Meltzer, who was the model for the Norman Paperman protagonist in Herman Wouk's best-seller, Don't Stop The Carnival.

Sportswriter Mark Kriegel's bio, Namath (Penguin Books 2004), paints a vivid portrait of the highs (Super Bowl win, big bucks, fame and thousands of gorgeous female conquests) and lows (chronic pain from football injuries--not just knees-from college and early pro days, battles with alcohol and depression) that this mill worker's son from a Pennsylvania mining town (Beaver Falls) experienced.  Namath's capacity to play after a night consuming a bottle of vodka or scotch leads one to conclude that if his knees were as sturdy as his liver, he would run like a deer.  Most poignant: He finally marries in 1984, a lady who does not want to be Mrs. Joe Namath, but has career (acting) ambitions of her own; after more than a decade she runs off with an LA (from where else?) plastic surgeon, leaving Joe with two kids, who a few years later ask him if they can live with mom.  Joe, Mr. Mom from the start, consents.  The good news: he sees the kids now.  But the few years separation from his kids sent him into depression.

The Story of Joe is a tale the classical Greeks would easily recognize.  Achilles knew that if he went to Troy he would win eternal glory but die young, despite his being invulnerable save for his heel.  He went, to die in glory rather than live in shame for reneging on his pledge to King Menelaus to come to his aid should Helen be taken.  Namath, conqueror of countless Helens, chose battlefield glory too, giving not his life per se, but what we in today's debased coinage call "life quality."  Yet it is not just his knees that trouble Namath; he has severe osteo-arthritis in his spine and hands--he cannot even make a fist today.  Namath's courage is awesome: He endures late hits and worse from monster linemen who shove his face into mud, nearly suffocating him, and break parts of his face.  Namath says nary a word, and keeps on playing.  His relationship with teammates is awkward: The rules differ for him but his box-office draw helps pay their salaries.

The author does a great job showing how the AFL was saved.  Namath was the catalyst, but David (Sonny) Werblin, second at MCA to Hollywood legend Lew Wasserman, was the showbiz genius who raised TV money to save the AFL by enabling it to sign top players.  Parity was a few years away: no TV dough, no great draft picks, no league.   It was that simple.  Werblin, BTW, got back the $427,000 he paid Namath (spread over several years) by selling 2,500 additional season tickets within weeks of signing Broadway Joe.

Of the many portraits Kriegel paints, those of Namath's family--blue-collar, Hungarian, old school--and of Paul (Bear) Bryant, whose practices sound like Stalag 17, are the most vivid.  Bryant went for Namath knowing he would have to change his offense.  Surprisingly, Namath turns out to have been great at both basketball and baseball in his high-school days.  Namath has his humorous side, too.  Upon his pro contract signing a smart-ass sportswriter asked if he, Namath, had studied underwater basket-weaving at the University of Alabama.  Namath shot back that he had found that subject too hard, and instead had majored in journalism.

Chronic pain and crippled movements in tandem with a sex life Hugh Hefner would envy, plus money and fame: How many males think this a good trade?

The Last Great Sea Battle

VACATION POST 1 of 5.  With smart bombs and terrorist human bombs, naval warfare seem mostly an anachronism.  It has been 23 years since the last sinking of a major warship.  In June 1982 the British nuclear attack sub HMS Conqueror sank the Argentine heavy cruiser General Belgrano, when the ship entered the exclusion zone established by the Royal Navy; Argentina claimed the destroyer HMS Sheffield as a victim, via an air-launched French (naturally) Exocet missile.  There were several air skirmishes, with Prince Andrew one of the carrier-based UK pilots.  Perhaps the best memorial nuggets from that conflict over possession of island with more sheep than people was the tart comeback of British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher when asked what if the UK's effort failed. Maggie missed nary a beat, quoting Queen Victoria of sainted memory: "The possibility of failure does not exist!"

Recently England marked the bicentennial of its most famous naval battle, Trafalgar, the climax of several months of maneuvering, in which hero-for-the-ages Admiral Horatio Nelson gave his life, but defeated the French off the Spanish coast and relegated Napoleon to adventures on land.  World War I saw one great, anti-climactic battle, in May 1916 off Jutland; it was said of British Admiral Sir John Jellicoe and his Grand Fleet that he was the only man in England who could lose the war in a single afternoon.  Thus his risk-averse conduct of the main engagement despite superior firepower--preserve the British Fleet, the Sceptred Isle's lifeline,  at all costs.  British losses were greater, but the Kaiser's High Seas Fleet was bottled up for the rest of the war.

American naval history is marked--at least, for earlier generations of students, by several pithy quotes, rather than grand battles: "I have just begun to fight!"  "Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!"  "We have met the enemy and they are ours!"  "You may fire when ready, Gridley!"  (Answers at the end of this article.)  The most famous US naval battles were the 1862 Monitor-Merrimac ironclad draw, and the smashing destruction of four Japanese carriers in June 1942 off Midway Island.  Both engagements were relatively brief, nothing like Trafalgar.  But there is a Trafalgar-style balletof battles in American naval history.  It was the last grand naval battle in world history, with a sacrificial charge as heroic as any in military annals; it was named after a place few Americans, even of my generation, know about: The Battle of Leyte Gulf, Oct.23 - 26, 1944.  That is the title of a magnificent book by Naval War College historian and professor of strategy and policy, Thomas J. Cutler (Bluejacket Books 2001).  The story, in a nutshell:

To set the stage, in 1942, 6 months almost to the day after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, the US Navy won a smashing victory at Midway Island, sinking four Japanese carriers.  But thousands of miles away, 1942 saw the humiliating defeat of American and Filipino forces at Bataan and Corregidor, with tens of thousands marched off the confinement (so harsh that 1/3 of prisoners died in Japanese camps, more than ten times the fatality rate in Nazi prison camps).  The Commander of the Philippine garrison, General Douglas MacArthur, was ordered by FDR to evacuate; MacArthur was such a prestigious figure that FDR feared the General's capture might be calamitous for Allied morale in the Pacific War.  Famously, MacArthur vowed upon departing Corregidor: "I shall return."

After Midway, America began a twin-pronged "island-hopping" campaign across the Pacific, headed for the Japanese homeland.  The better-known prong was in the open Pacific, starting with the Solomon islands at Guadalcanal; the second prong, led by MacArthur, now based in Australia, sent American and Australian troops into the vast New Guinea jungles.  (New Guinea is an island second only to Australia in size; its length would stretch from America's east coast to the foothills of the Rockies.)

By 1944 the Allies had made great progress, approaching the Marianas Islands, from whose perch US B-29 bombers could launch the massive air assault against the Japanese homeland.  In June 1944 Admiral Raymond Spruance smashed a Japanese carrier force in the famed "Marianas Turkey Shoot," but chose not to chase the remaining ships, lest he leave forces on land unprotected.  His decision split senior US leaders, and would have fateful consequences for the upcoming battle at Leyte.

The Allies faced a strategic choice: drive in a straighter line towards the Japanese homeland to possibly accelerate termination of the air, via Formosa (Taiwan today) and China, or detour off of a straight line and liberate the Philippines.  Proponents of the first course, including the formidable Admiral Ernest King, US Fleet Commander, made purely military arguments to Admiral Chester Nimitz, Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific, and FDR.  MacArthur's case was more political: He argued that bypassing the Philippines and thus leaving tens of thousands of Americans and loyal Filipinos dying in hideous prison conditions was immoral, and would alienate public opinion at home and in the Philippines.  MacArthur's view prevailed.

The Japanese High Command knew after the Marianas debacle that time was running short.  A successful American landing in the Philippines would spell certain doom.  They decided to send their entire remaining fleet in a desperate attempt to stave off defeat.  Admiral Takeo Kurita was told to spare nothing.  The Japanese faced vastly superior forces, especially as to aircraft carriers, but inflicting a morale-deflating defeat was within the realm of possibility.  They resolved to try to use a strategy of complex maneuver and deception to defeat the Americans (and Australians).  The Japanese had few surviving flat-tops, plus several battleships, featuring the two largest dreadnoughts ever built, the super-battleships Yamato and Musashi, displacing 72,800 tons fully loaded.  These behemoths sported nine 18.1-inch guns, which could fire their 3,200 pound projectiles up to 27 miles; the three main-gun turrets, at nearly 2,800 tons, each weighed more than a destroyer.  A few feet shorter than the US Iowa-class ships (America's largest, with nine 16-inch guns firing 2,700-pound shells up to 25 miles), the Japanese monsters were much wider, that being necessary to absorb the recoil of their largest-ever naval batteries. US ships were limited by the need to pass through the Panama Canal, 110 feet wide; thus the Iowa class ships were 108"6' wide.  Yamato and Musashi were 135 feet wide.  But these super-dreadnoughts were ideal for a World War I battle, when no planes darkened the skies.

Leyte Gulf was mainly fought in 4 battles, each with its own signature: (1) Sibuyan Sea, Oct. 24; (2) Surigao Strait, Oct. 24-25; (3) Cape Engano, Oct. 24; (4) Samar, Oct. 25.  (On Oct. 23 , as prelude, two US submarines sank several Japanese ships on the way to the battle area.)  Sibuyan Sea saw US air power sink the Musashi and several other ships in Admiral Kurita's main fleet.  This proved once again that air power trumped battleships, as earlier wartime sinkings had shown (Bismarck, Prince of Wales and Repulse in 1941).  But Yamato would have its chance, soon.

Before that day, however, Surigao Strait saw the last "crossing the T" in naval history, with US battleships--some repaired after damage suffered at Pearl Harbor, sinking two Japanese battleships (older ones) in a night engagement; the "T" is crossed when ships line up broadside against approaching ships in single file, allowing the broadside ships to concentrate all their firepower against ships limited to forward guns.

The most critical battles were those at Engano and Samar.  The Japanese sent their four remaining aircraft carriers, with few airplanes, as decoys to the north of the main Philippine island, Luzon, waiting off a Cape whose Spanish name means "trick," "deceit" or "fraud."  The trick worked, Admiral William F. ("Bull") Halsey, mindful of Spruance's decision not to pursue at Marianas, sent his entire carrier and battleship force north.  They did indeed inflict great damage upon engaging the fleet.  But they left the other strait, San Bernadino, that led to Samar, where a beachhead had been established a few days earlier (when MacArthur fulfilled his pledge to return, wading ashore under fire).  Into this opening Admiral Kurita's fleet, less damaged than Halsey imagined, went sailing.

Kurita's fleet emerged in late morning Oct. 25 off Samar.  Between his surviving battleships, including mega-ship Yamato, were 16 escort carriers and several destroyers and destroyer-escorts, all lightly-armed.  Escort carriers were small flat-tops that carried, as did destroyer escorts, small planes used for reconnaissance and anti-submarine warfare.  Regular destroyers had only guns, the largest being 5-inchers.  Against them were several battleships besides Yamato, plus cruisers also vastly more powerful.  Admiral Raymond Sprague ordered his destroyers and destroyer-escorts to charge the Japanese capital ships, trying desperately to buy time.  Admiral Halsey had by then realized he had been snookered; Halsey had ordered the nearest carrier group to steam towards Samar; the carrier force was headed by none other than Senator John McCain's grandfather, John Sr.  But it would not get to Samar in time to affect the battle.

Four small ships, USS Samuel B. Roberts, USS Johnston, USS Hoel and USS Heerman, armed with small guns and torpedoes, charged the Japanese ships, sending up smoke screen to assist their advance.  It was a real-life replay of a charge that, in an astounding calendar coincidence, had taken place exactly 90 years earlier to the day: the charge of British cavalry against Russian artillery at Sevastopol, immortalized by Alfred, Lord Tennyson in his Charge of the Light Brigade.  Except that the first charge was a blunder, made in vain; not so the second, an inspired masterstroke that saved the day.  And so into the Valley of Death rode 1944's valiant 600--about the same number of sailors.  Three ships were sunk; USS Heerman survived, badly damaged.  The Yamato was forced to break off the attack to evade torpedoes.  Admiral Kurita, seeing US planes approaching on the horizon, elected to depart, rather than sacrifice his fleet as he had been ordered to do; his reasons for doing so are unclear to this day.

Admiral Kurita saved the remnants of his fleet, to no avail.  No significant naval battle took place thereafter.  On April 6, 1945, the Japanese High command sent Yamato on a lone-ship suicide mission, the kind first used in the war by airplanes at Leyte Gulf, on Oct. 25, against US ships.  This kamikaze attack, time by ship instead of plane, would be launched against the American fleet supporting the landing at Okinawa, last and bloodiest of the island campaigns.  (Kamikaze means "Divine Wind," and refers to two storms, in 1274 and 1281, that spared Japan conquest by the Mongols, whose fleets were sunk by typhoons.)  Yamato never got close enough to engage ships; she was sunk by 400 carrier planes on April 7, 1945.

Yamato met an ignominious end, virtually helpless under air assault.  Not so the sailors who in small ships of Samar, on October 25, 1944 charged the biggest guns ever mounted at sea, galloping, as it were, into "the Valley of Death."  They well fit the poet Stephen Spender's words:

Born of the sun they traveled a short while towards the sun,
And left the vivid air signed with their honor.

Quiz Answers: (a) John Paul Jones, Revolutionary War-1779; (b) David Farragut, Civil War--1863; (c) Oliver Hazard Perry, War of 1812--in 1813; (d) Commodore Dewey, Manila Bay, May 1898, Spanish-American War.
Map: Battle of Leyte Gulf
Stephen Spender: "I Think continually of Those Who Were Truly Great
Lord Tennyson: "Charge of the Light Brigade"

White Flight Takes a Twist

Bonus Vacation Post for Saturday Nov. 19.  The Weekend Wall Street Journal has a stunning front-pager today on "The New White Flight" that is simply too good to pass up.  It reports that Silicon Valley whites are fleeing certain schools.  Poor academic credentials?  Poor services?  Poor classmates?  Crime in the schools?  Fear of black and Hispanic rappers?  Nope.  Why, then?  Too many....Asians.  (Vacation Posts will also appear Nov. 21, 22, 23, 28 & 29.)

Whites are fleeing certain California schools in Cupertino.  (However, California is not alone as to Asian/white shifts.  At Tenafly High in New Jersey the principal expects the Asian share of the student body to jump from 27 percent today to 36 percent in 2010.)  Once known for its fruit orchards, Cupertino is celebrated as the home of Apple, among other tech firms.  The Asian share of Cupertino's population has jumped from 24 to 41 percent since 1998.  Middle-class white parents want their children to get away from Asian students, whose academic focus they perceive as too strong and too narrow--math and science, rather than liberal arts, sports and extracurricular activities.  In the past decade whites declined from 50 to 25 percent of the student body at Lynbrook.  At Monta Vista whites, in a town where they are 50 percent of the population, have declined from 45 to less than 33 percent at the school; a B-student would rank in the bottom 1/3 of the class.

The Monta Vista PTA president recently told a young white couple that they should not move to Cupertino. Her reason?  She told the reporter: "This may not sound good, but their child may be the only Caucasian kid in the class."  She adds: "White kids are thought of as the dumb kids."  One of her own kids left the school for a pet store because the academic work was too tough.  Teachers also presume Asians students are smarter than white classmates.  Asians agree.  Said one Asian graduate of Monta Vista: "Many of my Asian friends were convinced that if you were Asian, you had to confirm you were smart.  If you were white you had to prove it."

Some Asians resent the stereotypes, but others find a measure of truth in them.  Said one interviewee: "We emphasize academics so much and protect our kids, I feel there's something lacking in our education."  On the plus side, the schools report no racial tensions, let alone, violence.  However, California is not alone as to Asian/white shifts.

What then to make of this?  On one level it is sad to see folks fleeing higher standards of academic achievement.  Yet if your child cannot make the grade, it is better to go to a school at the appropriate academic level.  Trading math for liberal arts is a legitimate educational choice for many students.  Better still, at least we are not seeing cries for affirmative action or assaults on "racist" standards that discriminate against white students, with a concomitant call for a lowering of "unfair" standards.  (Black students placed by affirmative action in schools above their academic level have very poor graduation rates, and would be better off in schools from which they could in fact graduate.)

Which brings to mind Verse 41 of legendary Chinese sage Lao-Tse's (b. 604 BC) classic Tao Te Ching.  (Digression: The title is rendered in the Wade-Giles system of Chinese-English transliteration used in the US when I read the work as a student at the University of Miami 40 years ago; in modern Pinyin--phonetic--transliteration it is rendered as Dao De Jing.  I never quite got over Mao Tse-Tung becoming Mao Zedong; the latter may be truer to pronunciation, but it strikes me as far less elegant.  In the event, there was nothing elegant about tyrant Mao.)

Back to Lao-Tse and the verse I wish to quote from.   The title of his classic translates alternatively as "The Way of Life" or "The Way of Virtue" (the latter meaning civic rather than sexual). Verse 41's first stanza (for the full verse see link below) reads per one translation (the one I read at Miami was slightly different, but identical in meaning):

When a superior man hears of the Tao,
he immediately begins to embody it.
When an average man hears of the Tao,
he half believes it, half doubts it.
When a foolish man hears of the Tao,
he laughs out loud.
If he didn't laugh,
it wouldn't be the Tao.

"The New White Flight"
Lao-Tse
Verse 41,Tao Te Ching
Chinese Transliteration

Index 11/18/05

9 posts: (1) France: A Normal Night--Weenie Watch; (2) Hiring: Ruth Leads the Way--The Home Front; (3) Iraq: Clinton (Bill) Caves--Weenie Watch; (4) 9-11 Panel's 3rd Report Card--9/11, 3/11 & N/11; (5) Islam: Free Speech, But Not Blasphemy!--Us v. Them; (6) Ship Ahoy!  A Sonic Boombox Defense--Cyber-Serendip; (7) "Fire AEGIS When Ready, Gridley!"--The Home Front; (8) Woodward Gets Wilsoned--The Home Front; (9) Vicente Takes Hugo On--Weenie Watch.  N.B., Today is the last Full Post until Nov. 30.  Nov. 21, 22, 23, 28 & 29 will feature one Vacation Post each.

France: A "Normal" Night

Stratfor (subscription only) reports that over the night of Nov. 16-17 another 98 cars were torched in France, a level police described as a return to "normal."; the peak night during the rioting was Nov. 6, when 1,400 cars were set aflame.

"FRANCE NOT IN TIME"
(to the Styne-Comden-Green tune "Just in Time")

Not in time
France woke up not in time
To Muslim violent crime
Both night and day

Youths are mad
No jobs French can be had
A crummy "banlieue" pad
It's no fair way

Running 'round
Chirac made little sound
While parties fought for higher ground
It's the French way

This time it's cars they scorch
Soon Notre Dame they'll torch
When they own Paris porch
And mosques hold sway!

Copyright John C. Wohlstetter 2005

Hiring: Ruth Leads the Way

Ed Whelan, chief of the Ethics & Public Policy Center and leading light of NRO's Supreme Court blog, Bench Memo, informs us about Ruth Bader Ginsburg, she the High Priestess of Affirmative Action.  As an appeals judge on the D.C. Circuit RBG did not hesitate to hold a company liable for racial discrimination--even absent evidence of any intent to discriminate.  Question: How many minority clerks did the civil rights judicial lioness hire during her more than one decade sitting on the D.C. Circuit, with more than 50 positions she filled in that span? Answer:  ZERO--in black-majority Washington, DC.
Whalen: Alito v. Ginsburg

Iraq: Clinton (Bill) Caves

Today a Wall Street Journal editorial chronicles the prior actions and statements of ex-Prez (and putative unofficial World-Prez) Bill, re Iraq, Saddam, WMD and terror pre-emption.  Makes for a great read after Slick reversed field when speaking to students this week in Dubai.
WSJ: A Clinton Reprise

9-11 Panel's 3rd Report Card

The 9-11 panel has made itself at times a public nuisance by periodically issuing statements re this and that, especially as to their bureaucratic reorganization not being followed to the hilt in every jot and tittle.  The panel was formally dissolved August 21, 2004.  Since then all ten members have formed a 501(c)(3) organization, the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, designed to educate the public over a one-year period.  On November 14 the PDP issued its third "report card," covering foreign policy, public diplomacy and nonproliferation.

The card runs about 14 pages, and is worth a look. Grades are given for 13 categories, with a range of scores: "good progress" on 2 categories; "some progress" on 4; "minimal progress" on 3; "insufficient progress" on 2; "unfulfilled" on 2.  Check the report link below for the details.

Two key findings merit discussion here.  First, PDP offers valuable metrics as to nonproliferation (grade: "insufficient"): Under the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Initiative, to date, after 14 years, the following dismantling of Soviet assets has been accomplished: 40% of ICBMs, 51% of warheads, 64% of strategic bombers and 58% of missile silos. Also: for 75% of nuclear-related buildings in the former USSR the Russian Federation has completed "rapid upgrades" and for 54% it has finished "comprehensive upgrades."  The RF has finished 26-29% comprehensive upgrades of nuclear material, 46-49% if rapid upgrades are added.  True, the pace in the US is twice that of the RF, primarily due to access disputes inside the RF.  The PDP recommends acceleration.  Fair enough.  N.B., The grade applies as well to the Clinton and late 41 years, and the lack of greater progress may be mainly the fault of Russian recalcitrance.

Second, as to international broadcasting (grade: "some"):  The US budget for broadcasts to Arab and Muslim countries has tripled since FY02, from $45 million then to $152 million for FY06.  Total US-sponsored broadcast hours have nearly quadrupled since 2001, from 13,000 to 50,000 hours (presumably an annual figure).  An August 2005 AC Nielsen survey showed 35 million audience for radio and TV broadcasts we sponsor.  Radio Sawa, the radio effort launched in 2002, is that top radio outlet in those regions.  Alhurra, the TV outlet, sports an average 25% share for the audience in 11 Arab-countries each week, versus 80% for al-Jazeera and 65% for al-Arabiya.  Customer satisfaction levels are 77% for Alhurra and 73% for Radio Sawa.  Not the Garden of Paradise, but not chopped hummus either.
9/11 Public Discourse Project Homepage
9/11 PDP Part III: Foreign Policy, Public Diplomacy, and Nonproliferation

Islam: Free Speech, But Not Blasphemy!

Writing in today's Washington Times, columnist Diana West contrasts two recent episodes that between them illustrate the clash, if not of civilizations than at least of cultures--that Islamism has set off.  In Afghanistan the supposedly liberal Karzai government has jailed the editor of "Women's Rights,"a new Afghan magazine, for daring to publicly criticize Islam's practices of giving 100 lashes to adulteresses and making it a crime to leave Islam.  Islamic shar'ia, it seems, trumps liberal ideals of political freedom.

Meanwhile, in Lutheran Denmark, a newspaper editor started a contest for a depiction of Muhammad after a children's book publisher declined to include same in a new educational text, for fear of retribution from Muslims angry at perceived violation of Islam's stricture against depiction of the Prophet.  Unable to censor publication of the entries that appeared in the paper, instead Muslims rioted for two night in Arhus, second largest Danish city.  The editor's picture is now an on al-Qai'da website listing potential targets.  Death threats and other forms of intimidation have been added to the mix.

The Danish episode echoes what happened in 1976 when Hollywood, having made a major feature film about Muhammad's life (see link below) starring Anthony Quinn and Irene Pappas, pulled the film in the face of vigorous protests by Muslims.  (The film, all 182 minutes of it, is now apparently available on DVD--see link below.)  The Danish editor, courageously, stands firm.  But governments--including, alas, 43's--have been silent, with media organizations alone protesting the Karzai government's action.  Yo, 43, isn't this the very war we are supposed to be fighting?
West: International Caricatures
"Muhammad: Messenger of God" (1976) - Not Released
Al-Rsialah (The Message)

Ship Ahoy!: A Sonic Boombox Defense

The German weekly Der Spiegel reports on what amounts to a sonic cannon, called a Long Range Acoustic Device, used for non-lethal defense at ranges up to 300 meters.  It is 20-kilograms, satellite tv-dish size (the linked article includes a photo), developed by American Technology Corporation, a San Diego firm.  The cruise ship Seaborn Spirit used it on November 5 off the coast of Somalia to ward off pirates armed with machine guns and rockets, by firing an intense acoustic beam that generates 150-decibels of painful noise, more than a rock band or jet engine.  To date, some 300 have been sold, mostly to the US military, which uses them to clear houses and keep drivers approaching checkpoints at bay.  Two cruise ships (Seaborn Spirit and Queen Mary) have the $30,000 weapons, as do two police departments (New York and Boston).  The device was developed upon request of the US military after the successful October 2000 attack upon the USS Cole in Aden Harbor.

What next, a gangsta rap cannon?  Then again, the pirates probably like such aural trash.
Der Spiegel: Sonic Cannon Wards Off Pirates

"Fire Aegis When Ready, Gridley!"

Yesterday the AEGIS missile cruiser USS Lake Erie fired an SM-3 missile that collided with a missile warhead, at 100 miles altitude and 375 miles distance.  This was the first such test to intercept a warhead separated from its booster stage; earlier tests had used a Scud with a dummy warhead.  It was the sixth successful test in seven tries since 2002, according to the Missile Defense Agency.

Today's descendant of Commodore Dewey, who gave the famous command "You may fire when ready, Gridley!" at Manila Bay in 1898 to commence the Pacific part of the Spanish-American War, will soon be able to say: "Fire AEGIS when ready, Gridley!"
AEGIS Test Succeeds Again

Woodward Gets Wilsoned

Wesley Pruden's hugely witty column recaps, in light of Joe Wilson's call for the Post to investigate Mr. Investigative Stud himself, Bob Woodward, the musical comedy that has become the Plame Game.  Indeed, Pruden reports that a musical spoof is now being written.  There is already plenty of material, and the latest twist, from the man Pruden has nicknamed "Mortuary Bob" (after the death-bed confession Woodward alleges a dying William Casey gave him), will likely not be the last.
Pruden: Mortuary Bob Exposes Another Cover-Up

Vicente Takes Hugo Head-On

In her Friday column on Latin American affairs, the Wall Street Journal's Mary Anastasia O'Grady informs us that leaders in key Latin American countries are getting fed up with Venezuela's Castro + oil commie, Hugo Chavez, and his cross-border meddling in other countries.  Mexico's Vicente Fox,useless weenie to 43 re immigration, seems to have stepped up to the plate in recalling his ambassador and kicking out Chavez's envoy this week, in response to Chavez's over-the-top verbal assault against Mexico.  Venezuelans are getting fed up too, with Chavez's domestic repression and commie economics.  It's high time.  Stay tuned.
O'Grady: Why Fox's Outrage

Index 11/17/05

6 posts: (1) The Libby Case: Woodwardgate--The Home Front; (2) Jordan Poll: Sunni Turning Point?--Us v. Them; (3) UN: Once Again, Down Is Up--Turtle Bay Tortoise; (4) New Orleans: Will Race Delay 2006 Mayoral Race?--Katrina Etc.; (5) Foggy Bottom Fogs Up Israel--Weenie Watch; (6) Iraq: Are Sunnis or Jihadists the Problem?--Us v. Them.

The Libby Case: Woodwardgate

Yesterday we found out that superstar Watergate hero Bob Woodward withheld from the Washington Post--and from investigators--that he spoke with two White House officials about Spy Gal Val.  His reason?  Explaining his actions, Woodward said that "Job No. 1" in his profession is protecting sources.  Cooperating with a duly appointed special counsel, is not a top priority.  He added: "I hunkered down. I'm in the habit of keeping secrets. I didn't want anything out there that was going to get me subpoenaed."

So, the town's biggest star reporter sat on his duff for more than two years, before finally, after the first indictment was handed down, going before the grand jury--a new one convened by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, not the one that indicted I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby.

Woodward apologized for his actions, which surely impeded the investigation.  But dig the evolution of his public position, as detailed by Slate editor-at-large Jack Shafer, at the link below.  The central question in Plamegate, now Woodwardgate may become, per Senator Howard Baker's famous 1973 Watergate formulation re President Nixon: "What did Bob Woodward know, and when did he know it?"  Add in, from whom did he know it?

Fitzgerald, for his part, did not give Scooter Libby a chance merely apologize for his.  And no one has even asked Joe Wilson or Spy Gal Val to apologize for their lies and concealment.  Lawyers David Rivkin and Lee Casey present in today's Washington Times the Justice Department guidelines, per the US Attorneys Manual:

"[B]oth as a matter of fundamental fairness and in the interest of the efficient administration of justice, no prosecution should be initiated against any person unless the government believes that the person probably will be found guilty by an unbiased trier of fact."

They argue that Fitzgerald, having relied on Libby being the origin of the Plame CIA leak, must, with Woodward's disclosure of prior knowledge obtained from a former government official, review the indictment; further, if reasonable doubt arises as to Libby's alleged state of mind--intentionally making false statements--the prosecutor must dismiss the indictment.  Also, perjury is, per the law, not simply lying under oath, but doing so as to a material fact--legalese for important information.  How important are Libby's machinations if (a) he did not try to spin Woodward and (b) Woodward had other sources, including outside the Administration, as to Spy Gal Val's identity?

Here is a statement from one of Scooter Libby's lawyers:

"Woodward's disclosures are a bombshell to Mr. Fitzgerald's case. First, the disclosure shows that Mr. Fitzgerald's statement at his press conference of October 28, 2005 that Mr. Libby was the first government official to tell a reporter about Mr. Wilson's wife was totally inaccurate. Second, Woodward's disclosure that he talked to Mr. Libby on June 23 and June 27, 2003 and that Mr. Libby did not mention WIlson's wife undermines Mr. Fitzgerald's key theme that Mr. Libby was involved in a scheme to discredit Wilson by telling reporters about Wilson's wife's employment at the CIA. Hopefully as more information is obtained from reporters like Bob Woodward, the real facts will come out."

Stay tuned.
Breitbart: Woodward Withheld Plane Conversations
Shafer: What Did Woodward Know....
Rivkin & Casey: Dismiss Libby Indictment

Jordan Poll: Sunni Turning Point?

Eli Lake reports in today's NY Sun that the November 9 Amman bombings may prove a turning point, by shifting Sunni attitudes decisively against al-Qai'da.  Consider these Jordan poll results since the bombing.  Asked their attitude about al-Qai'da, Jordanians (essentially, all Sunni) responded; 78.2% "very negative"; 12.8% "somewhat negative"; 5.4% "somewhat or very positive."  Asked whether al-Qai'da is compatible with Islam, Jordanians responded 86.4% "no" and 7.4% ""no to a certain extent."

If November 9 does prove an historic turning point, it will join another November 9, that of annus mirabilis 1989, in history.  It was 16 years earlier that the Berlin Wall was dismantled.  If Abu Musab al-Zarqawi dismantles the Sunni wall of indifference to terror at best and support for for terror at worst it will be quite an achievement.  The revolution may yet, like a Sunni Saturn, devour its own children.
Lake: Turning Point in Amman

UN: Once Again, Down Is Up

Today's NY Sun reports that after a 60-day review intended to bring down renovation costs the UN has raised its cost estimate from $1.2 billion to $1.9 billion.  Perhaps we might ask the UN to study how it might increase the cost for the project?  Probably not.  At the UN, simply because down turns into "up" does not mean that "up" can turn into "down."  Unless, that is, we make Donald Trump the next Secretary-General.

(with apologies to Diana Ross)

Upside down
Kofi turns we
Inside out
A runaround
Downside up
A spending spree
Outside in
A fix you're in

Instinctively you take from we
The dough that we need
To pay for UN ways remaking
Respectfully we say to thee
We know that you're faking
This time we won't suffer a taking

Copyright John C. Wohlstetter 2005

NY Sun: UN Renovation Cost Estimate Soars

New Orleans: Will Race Delay 2006 Mayoral Race?

Absent Katrina, New Orleans would surely hold its scheduled city elections as planned, in February 4, 2006.  Mayor Ray Nagin is up for re-election.  But there are calls for postponing the election, with 80 percent of the 462,000 pre-Katrina population still outside the city, and nearly300 of the city's 442 polling places destroyed or damaged by Katrina.  The argument for postponement is put starkly by a Louisiana Democratic state legislator:

"The minority became the majority, and the majority became the minority.  That changed the whole outlook of the political scene.  If you have an election right now, it is going to be some of the people voting on behalf of all the people."

Most of the 60,000 to 100,000 residents who have returned are middle-class whites, to a city that was two-thirds black pre-Katrina.  Absentee balloting would be needed on an unprecedented scale, yet it is not clear if voters who might cast ballots intend to return.  While the State has the initial decision, the Justice Department must also approve, per the 1965 Voting Rights Act supervisory provisions.

Tellingly, the NY Times article cites "racial fairness" as a consideration in whether to hold the election as scheduled.  There is, of course, an alternative to creating a new racial entitlement ("Once a city goes black, it stays black"): How about holding the election as scheduled, and if after that residents return in greater numbers they get to vote in the next city election?
NY Times: New Orleans 2006 Vote Unclear

Foggy Bottom Fogs Up Israel

David Brooks writes in today's NY Times that Israeli society has undergone a profound transformation in psychology, from that of making peace with the Palestinians to that of separation and disengagement from a society Israelis perceive as terminally dysfunctional.  Brooks says that while this change is understandable it is not sustainable, for two reasons: (1) Palestinians remain dependent upon Israel; and (2) neither America nor Israeli Arabs will accept disengagement.

The first argument is false, because Arab petrodollars can substitute for access to Israel in creating jobs for Palestinians.  The second, as evidenced by Condi Rice's twisting Israeli arms to force through a Gaza/Israel access deal, is probably correct.  Foggy Bottom seems unable to comprehend two things: (1) pushing for Palestinian "need" for access to Israel ignores the cause for lack of access, i.e., the stupefyingly barbarous Palestinian suicide bombing campaign; (2) ignoring the cause effectively absolves Palestinians for responsibility in starting a terror campaign, and thus sends the wrong signal to the wrong people.  Instead we should have told the Palestinians that they created their own access problem, and that until they defeat terror factions and end terror once and for all access would not be granted.

Behind all this is the unseemly spectacle of Arab governments raking in petrodollars at triple the true market price, unwilling to spend even a small fraction of that wealth in rebuilding Palestinian society; with $400+ trillion annual oil revenues, a one percent contribution would inject $4 billion investment in the areas.  So much for Arab solicitude for the plight of Palestinians.  The truth, which Foggy Bottom still does not comprehend, is that the Arabs still hope that the Palestinians somehow succeed in destabilizing Israel.
Brooks: What Palestinians?

Iraq: Are Sunnis or Insurgents the Problem?

Military historian Frederick W. Kagan published in the 10/31 Weekly Standard a must-read article (long, at 8 printed pages) on the situation in Iraq.  He argues that the coalition made a number of fundamental errors, most importantly, three: (1) failing to see that the Sunni would not readily accept a diminished role under democratic rule as preferable to a larger role in a repressive society; (2) perceiving the insurgency as primarily driven by an influx of foreign jihadists; and (3) believing that reducing American troop presence is the overriding necessity to gain support from the local populace.

Kagan argues that the insurgency is predominantly Sunni, and  has been reduced from a would-be guerrilla war to a pure terrorist action.  But in order to pacify the Sunni more US troops will be needed: a few tens of thousands to create a presence in Sunni urban enclaves.  Sending in largely Shi'a Iraqis has only one advantage--their fluency in Arabic, enabling easy conversing with locals.  But the Sunni, writes Kagan, hate the Iraqi Shi'a more than they dislike Americans.  Further, US troops are still far more effective than the Iraqis, and are needed to stabilize matters.

The article is superb and bears reading in depth.  I will add that now is the time, if we have not already done so, to give the Sunni a choice: war without oil or peace with oil (Iraq's oil is located primarily in Shi'a and Kurdish areas).  Imposing a vast economic cost on belligerence may bring them around.  When carrots fail, one is left with the stick.
Kagan: Blueprint for Victory

Index 11/16/05

8 posts: (1) A REAL Intel Issue: Did a Senator Tip Saddam?--The Home Front; (2) France Faces History--Weenie Watch; (3) France: Any Solutions?--Weenie Watch; (4) Jordan Steps Up, and The Man That Got Away--Us v. Them; (5) Homeland Insecurity: Throwing Bureaucrats at the Problem--The Home Front; (6) Education: Katrina Blows Away "The Education Blob"--Katrina Etc.; (7) Southern "Hemispherics": Aiding Our Enemies--Us v. Them; (8) A Trio on Alito--The Home Front.  N.B.,  The Katrina/Rita/Wilma category has been renamed Katrina Etc. for streamlining.

A REAL Intel Issue: Did a Senator Tip Saddam?

Senator Jay Rockefeller, an honorable, gracious and decent fellow, said with commendable candor on Sunday TV this past weekend that in a January 2002 trip he made to Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Syria he told leaders that in his view Bush had already decided to go to war with Iraq and would inevitably do so.  This may not be, as Captain's Quarters blogger Ed Morrissey says in a Weekly Standard piece today, a violation of the 1917 Logan Act, which prohibits private diplomacy.  In the event, Logan Act prosecution of prominent folks seems never to fly, else Jimmy Carter might be in jail for numerous unsolicited ventures; in 1991 Carter went around lobbying governments to stay out of the war coalition Bush 41 was building for Iraq.  In 1983 Jesse Jackson went to Syria to free a captured black flier who had been shot down on a mission that was in retaliation for the October 24, 1983 Marine barracks bombing in Lebanon.  Carter failed, and Jesse succeeded, with both results acceptable to the Administrations then sitting.

But what can one make of the 2002 Rockefeller visit?  Tipping three governments--two hostile to us and one a fair-weather friend at best--as to 43's likely course of action surely sent information to Saddam via one or more of those conduits.  Worse, Rockefeller is the Vice-Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; what was he thinking?  (Select Committees have Vice-Chairs; the more numerous Standing Committees have ranking Minority members.)

Which gave Saddam time--14 months, no less-- to plan to hide his WMD; thousands of trucks transited from Iraq to Syria in the run-up.  So far, the media are largely ignoring the story.  That the Iraq WMD fiasco may have been facilitated by such advance notice seems not to interest them. Did other present or former officials give similar tips?   No interest.  I wonder why.  No, I don't.  I know.  We know.  Because chasing this story hurts not 43, but the Democrats.  A tip story might best explain why we found no WMD.
Morrissey: Logan Act Violation?
Logan Act of 1917

France Faces History

Lebanese sage Fouad Ajami gives a history lesson: how a fly-whisk in the face of a 19th century envoy changed French-Africa relations, led to France annexing Algeria, and now to the quasi-intifada outside Paris.
Ajami: France Faces History

France: Any Solutions?

Former Lady Thatcher aide John O'Sullivan writes in today's NY Post on the France Muslim riots.  He identifies many factors and suggests that France, with its own long civilizational tradition, can still pull this one out.  For reasons posted in the past few days on LFTC I am not sanguine, and O'Sullivan realizes the difficulties.  His idea is that instead of pitching a broad European identity alternative to Euro-Muslim identity, a French nationalist model can successfully appeal if the larger society opens up and offers opportunity to France's Muslim citizens.  Read his as always well-put take.
O'Sullivan: France's Task

Jordan Steps Up, and The Man That Got Away

William Buckley writes in today's NY Sun that the Jordan bombings validate 43's view that the war we are engaged in is not just against al-Qaida and the insurgents in Iraq, but against the genus terror.  Today's Washington Post carries a pair of columns, one on Jordan by David Ignatius and one on suicide bombing, by Anne Applebaum.  Applebaum's column shows that popular theories (poverty, craziness, rootlessness) do not explain the ghastly phenomenon of suicide bombing, and that only action within the Muslim community that deprives the practice of its "sick form of honor and pride" can stop it.  Thomas Friedman echoes Applebaum in today's NY Times, noting that by targeting Sunni civilians the Sunni jihadists have declared an intra-sect civil war.  Friedman goes on to say that the Sunni are silent when non-Sunni are targeted, and warns them by quoting an old poem:

"The Sunni world would do well to reread the famous poem by the Rev. Martin Niemöller, a German pastor imprisoned in World War II: 'First they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me.'"

Lebanese scholar Fouad Ajami writes in today's Opinion Journal that Jordan was hit by "blowback" for its own support of terror elsewhere.  A population seething with hatred of us (and Israel), convinced that its societal failings are the fault of others must, Ajami writes, face history and choose.  Read the piece as much for its poetic prose as for its analytical acuity.

Ignatius details how Jordan's King Abdullah, in the wake of the bombings in Amman, is stepping up domestic reform.  More important, Jordan's crack security services are now increasing their assistance to our forces in fighting the insurgents in Iraq.  Now, The Man That Got Away--no, not the Arlen/Gershwin tune.  Ignatius reveals a tidbit that amazes: Acting on tips from the Jordanians, US forces had arch-terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in physical custody TWICE; each time they let him go because they did not know who he was!  The LA Times has an excellent article today on how Zarqawi has eluded capture: Simply, put, he has far better intelligence than do we, and he kills anyone who helps us.

Will anyone in the Senate take on THIS intel failure, instead of harping on disclosure of the identity of a desk-jockey CIA employee?  Do not hold your breath.
Buckley: Wild Hits Against Jordan
Applebaum: The Puzzle of the Suicide Bomber
Ajami: Blowback
Ignatius: Jordan Steps Up
Friedman: Sunni Intra-Sect Civil War

Homeland Insecurity: Throwing Bureaucrats at the Problem

9/11 Commission member John F. Lehman, Reagan-era Navy Secretary and a top national security talent, lambastes 43 for setting up a huge bureaucracy under the newly-created Director of National Intelligence, the post recommended by the 9/11 panel.  Lehman is right, except that what did he and his fellow panelists think would happen?  Throwing bureaucracy at problems will not work, and the 9/11 panel's recommendations facilitated creation of a new bureaucracy.  Worse, as Lehman points out, instead of bringing in new blood a lot of tired old hands were promoted.  This, too, was predictable.  Homeland security remains an accident looking for a place to happen.  Worth a read.
Lehman: 43 Builds Bloated Bureaucracy

Education: Katrina Blows Away "The Education Blob"

Today's Wall Street Journal reports that in the wake of Katrina, with private and parochial schools opening far faster than are New Orleans public schools, Louisiana--spurred by even its go-slow Democratic Governor, herself a former school teacher--are liberalizing charter school programs and showing receptivity even to vouchers.  With New Orleans' completely corrupt and hopeless public school system unable to even open, school choice is the only available educational alternative.  Seems that to reform what Reagan-era Education Secretary William Bennett called "the education blob" takes a Category 4 hurricane.  Which suggests that to get education reform in California we need another San Francisco Quake, and for Iowa we need tornadoes.  There must be a better way, such as politicians voting to expand school choice without waiting for natural disasters to wipe out the entire public school infrastructure.
Wall Street Journal: Katrina Aftermath Boosts School Choice

Southern "Hemispherics": Aiding Our Enemies

Former Clinton guru Dick Morris has a solid column in today's NY Post that warns how our protectionism, plus cocaine  and oil dependency work to aid our enemies, such as Castro and Chavez.  We will lose Latin America unless we can change.  A good read.
Morris: Our Latin American Policy Perversity

A Trio on Alito

George Will has a superb piece in the current Newsweek showing how Alito applied the law in three specific cases--exactly as a first-rate jurist should.  Worth a look.
Will: Three Samples of Sam Alito

Index 11/15/05

6 posts: (1) McCain on Iraq Intel--The Home Front; (2) Post-Riot France: Chirac Does Jimmy Earl--Weenie Watch; (3) Jordan: Palestinians Pained?--Us v. Them; (4) McCain Bill: Should We Commit Suicide Over Torture?--The Home Front; (5) The Most Imperial Kennedy: Anthony--The Home Front; (6) UN Tortoise: US Needs a Hare--Turtle Bay Tortoise.

McCain on Iraq Intel

In his 11/14 Blog, politics maven Michael Barone addresses the Iraq WMD intel failure, and gives us the answer that John McCain gave CBS Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer on his 11/13 show.  McCain, often critical of 43, calls the accusation that Bush lied re Iraq WMD a lie itself.  Herewith McCain's superb verbatim answer to Schieffer's imbecilic question, "Do you believe it is unpatriotic to criticize the Administration's Iraq policy?" (has anyone seriously asserted this?):

"No, I think it's a very legitimate aspect of American life to criticize and to disagree and to debate. But I want to say I think it's a lie to say that the president lied to the American people. I sat on the Robb-Silberman commission. I saw many, many analysts that came before that committee. I asked every one of them–I said, `Did–were you ever pressured politically or any other way to change your analysis of the situation as you saw [it]?' Every one of them said no. Now was there a colossal intelligence failure? Of course, there was. Is there still a lot that needs to be done to improve that? Are we winning the war on terror? I think it depends on your parameters. But to assert that the president intentionally lied to the American people is just wrong."  (Boldface in Barone's text.)
Barone: McCain on Iraq Intel

Post-Riot France: Chirac Does Jimmy Earl

The Washington Times reports that French president Jacques Chirac has diagnosed France as suffering from a "malaise"--and that discrimination must be fought and hiring diversity promoted.  One wonders if Chirac knows that malaise was the word applied to Jimmy Carter's July 15, 1979 national address, upon announcing a shake-up of energy policy.  Carter never actually said the "m" word, but rather used "crisis of confidence" to describe a moral and spiritual crisis he saw in America; anticipating Clinton, Carter also said that he would "feel your pain."  The cure for that pain turned out to be Ronald Reagan.

As for his proposed remedies, Chirac is as clueless as was Jimmy.  Half-baked concession coupled with "understand their frustrations" is a recipe for serial episodes of mass rioting.  Chirac would do well to study the difference between David Dinkins and Rudy Giuliani in their respective approaches to dealing with urban crime.  Doing so will not resolve the deeper issues of what France will do with the ten percent of its population that is now Muslim (70 percent of whom hail from North Africa).  But it can create a framework of basic civil order from within which other problems might possibly be addressed.  Is there a French Rudy?  Or Reagan?

Gerard Alexander, an associate professor of politics at the University of Virginia, informs us in the current Weekly Standard that crime rates have skyrocketed in Europe over the past quarter-century.  While murder rates are still well below US levels, many Western European countries have higher rates of assault, robbery and burglary.  Famously pacific Norway has a higher auto theft rate, and several Scandinavian countries have higher general theft rates.  As for France, one reason that the Muslim discontent was ignored for so long by authorities is that 80 cars per night were being torched in France--even before the riots.

Enter Charles Krauthammer with his column in Time.  Noting that the Euro-Muslim birthrate is triple that of Christians, and that the most common first name in Belgian maternity wards is...Muhammad, Krauthammer says:

"On the one side are the protester-arsonists, many if not most of them Muslim, whom the Interior Minister called racaille (rabble)--young, restless, violent, vibrant, angry, jobless, envious and fecund. And on the other side is an aged and exhausted civilization, the hollowed-out core of European Christendom, static, aging, contented, coddled, passive and literally without faith. Who would you think will win in the end?"

And:

"The only possible way out for France is to undertake the kind of self-reformation that America did in the 1960s, when it finally began welcoming African Americans into mainstream society and spent two generations pursuing that goal. But the prospects for success in France are far fewer, because even if France changed, woke up and welcomed those it had once invited, it is very late. The grandparents who first came would have eagerly accepted the invitation. But their young have grown up in an alienated monoculture that has contempt for the godless decadence of French secularism with its empty churches, sexual license and existential ennui. France doesn't want them. They don't want the France they are throwing rocks at. But they are not leaving. And they are growing."

Culture maven Mark Steyn goes further, noting the angry reaction in Jordan last week to the bombings, compared with the passive "in sorrow" reaction of the Spanish after 3/11/04's pre-election bombing, which turned them not against the Moroccan terrorist perps but against Jose Maria Aznar and Bush.  Worse than passivity is, in Steyn's view, a structural weakness: a bi-cultural society is far less likely to be stable than one with more than two ethnic groups, because polarization is more likely to occur with twin warring camps:

"Whether or not one believes in 'celebrating diversity', that's a lot of diversity to celebrate. But the Continent isn't multicultural so much as bicultural. There are ageing native populations, and young Muslim populations, and that's it: 'two solitudes', as they say in my beloved Quebec. If there's three, four or more cultures, you can all hold hands and sing We are the World. But if there's just two - you and the other - that's generally more fractious. Bicultural societies are among the least stable in the world, especially once it's no longer quite clear who is the majority and who is the minority - a situation that much of Europe is fast approaching, as you can see by visiting any French, Austrian, Belgian or Dutch maternity ward."

Steyn continues: "In a democratic age, you cannot buck demography."  He adds:

"I love the way those naysayers predicting doom and gloom in Baghdad scoff that Iraq's a totally artificial entity and that, without some Saddamite strongman, Kurds, Sunnis and Shias can't co-exist in the same state. Oh, really? If Iraq's an entirely artificial entity, what do you call a state split between gay drugged-up red-light whatever's-your-bag Dutchmen and anti-gay anti-whoring anti-everything-you-dig Muslims? If Kurdistan doesn't belong in Iraq, does Pornostan belong in the Islamic Republic of Holland?"

Steyn breezily concludes that France is not worried about Iran becoming the second Muslim nuclear state, because the third will be...France.  And a generation or two after that the national symbol, you can be sure, will no longer be Marianne.
Washington Times: Chirac Sees "Malaise"
Carter 7/15/1979 Speech
Alexander: Europe's Crime Rates Climb Past US
Krauthammer: France Will Lose
Steyn: Islamic Reform Better Bet Than European Reform

Jordan: Palestinians Pained?

Islam scholar Daniel Pipes writes in today's NY Sun that Palestinians, who celebrated with joy when a late-October suicide attack was carried out inside Israel, were not so cheery after a Palestinian wedding was ripped apart in last week's Amman bombings.  Pipes speculates that getting "a dose of their own medicine" might awaken Palestinians to the unacceptability of suicide bombing as a tactic.  Wish it were so, but do not bet on it.  Pipes quotes none other than Hillary-pal Queen Noor as saying that Palestinians "made a significant tactical error here, because they have attacked innocent civilians, primarily Muslims."  Tactical error?  Civilians, primarily Muslims?  This from the daughter of Lebanese-American Najeeb Halaby (himself only half-Arab, as his mother was a Texan), former Pan Am CEO and head of the Federal Aviation Administration under JFK.

But here is a Palestinian voice, writing in the Lebanese Daily Star:

"The insane missionaries of death are now knocking at our doors. Governments should act immediately to uproot them from our societies. Serious action should include preparing plans to cripple these people and their freedom of movement, to impede their receiving shelter, to draw plans to cut them off from their financial sources and to deny them the capabilities to recruit people."

Talk-show host Dennis Prager has hopes, quoting Jordanian reaction to the bombings--from a neighbor of Zarqawi's: "By killing Jordanians here in Jordan, civilian Jordanians going to a wedding, they did something that not even a Jew would do."

Not much of a straw, but even a wsipy one looks good compared to before 9/11.
Pipes: Palestinians Unhappy Re Jordan Bombings
Najeeb Halaby
Prager: Muslim Agony
After Amman, Pity What Islam Has Lost

MCCain Bill: Should We Commit Suicide Over Torture?

Former prosecutor Andrew McCarthy writes in today's NRO that the McCain bill on prisoner treatment is two parts redundant and one part suicidal.  It is redundant in restating what the US is already committed to: refraining from torture--defined under international convention as the intentional infliction of severe pain--and general standards of humane treatment.  ("Severe" excludes moderate and mild pain--detention is not supposed to be the Ritz.)  But then McCain would go much further: He would protect detainees with Geneva-type norms that prohibit any resort to force, intimidation or coercion.  McCarthy notes that restraint as to many low-level detainees might be reasonable, but that vital intelligence will be lost if top leaders aren't aggressively interrogated.  McCarthy points out the absurdity that McCain and others supporting the bill would not quarrel with targeting terror leaders for assassination, yet balk at subjecting them to harsh confinement.  McCarthy concludes:

"We should be asking this question of each and every member of Congress who claims to support the McCain Amendment: If we had credible information regarding an ongoing al Qaeda plot to detonate a nuclear weapon in the continental United States, and we had just taken into custody an al Qaeda militant who was in a position to know where and when the attack was to occur but who was refusing to cooperate, are you saying we would need to let thousands of Americans die rather than harm a hair on the terrorist's head in an effort to extract the information that might save them?

"If the answer to that question is 'no,' you have no business voting for the McCain Amendment. If the answer is 'yes,' you have no business serving in a government whose first obligation is the security of the governed."

Rich Lowry tells us on NRO that when al-Qai'da 9/11 planner Abu Zubaideh was captured in Pakistan, he had been shot in the groin.  Painkillers were selectively administered, and the terrorists coughed up the names of other top leaders.  Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, top 9/11 planner, was subjected to "waterboarding."  Makes sense.

Senator McCain seems not to have heard of Justice Robert H. Jackson's famous dictum, oft-quoted in LFTC, about judges, either infusing their judgments with a little practical wisdom, or else they will  convert the Constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact.  Neither can we afford to allow international legal norms to tie our hands, with our lives at stake.
McCarthy: McCain Bill Partly Suicidal
Lowry: Harsh Methods Sometimes Needed

The Most Imperial Kennedy: Anthony

And you thought that the Kennedy Dynasty had imperial ambition.  Constitutional scholar Bruce Fein writes in today's Washington Times on a June 3, 2005 interview given to the Academy of Achievement by Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, that shows his judicial philosophy to be that of quintessential Platonic Guardianship.  Says the Justice:

"You know all of us have an instinctive judgment that we make. ... And judges do the same thing ... [A]fter you make a judgment, you must then formulate a reason for your judgment into a verbal phrase, into a verbal formula. And then you have to see if that makes sense, if its [sic] logical, if it's fair, if it accords with the law, if it accords with the Constitution, if it accords with your own sense of ethics and morality. And if at any point along this process you think you're wrong, you have to go back and do it all over again."

Fein aptly points out that Kennedy thus substitutes his personal predilection for that of applying laws as written.  He then cites an even worse passage: "The Framers wanted you to shape the destiny of the country. They did not want to frame it for you."

The Framers, if Alexander Hamilton's writing in Federalist 78 is to be credited, wanted a Judiciary that was "the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it would be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them."  It would, he wrote, possess "neither FORCE nor WILL but merely judgment."  (Emphasis in original.)  Hamilton thought the Judiciary the weakest of the three branches.  The man whose commercial republic ideal most closely resembles America today did not live in a time when judges ordered taxes to fund education spending, nor when judges saw private conscience (theirs) as the lodestar for judicial review.

Alito, hurry up and get thyself to North Capitol Street.
Fine: Justice Kennedy's Ambition
Hamilton: Federalist 78

UN Tortoise: US Needs a Hare

US envoy John R. Bolton told a Washington Times luncheon yesterday that unless there is "a revolution of reform" at the UN the US may look elsewhere to find multinational solutions.  Said Bolton: "The UN is one of many competitors in a marketplace of global problem-solving."  But it suffers from "a culture of inaction."  Noting that the US pays 22 percent of the UN's budget but has only one of 191 General Assembly votes, Bolton said: "We have one-half of one percent of the total [votes], meaning we pay 44 times more than our voting power.  My priority is to give the United States the influence it should have.  Everybody pursues their national interests.  The only one who gets blamed for it is the United States."

Bolton is, of course, completely right.  Somehow the US--at least, large numbers of its leaders--have absorbed the infantile notion that the UN is  a Parliament of Man--well, post-feminism--of Persons.  Ergo such folks believe we should pursue idealistic global interests rather than our parochial national concerns.  In ignoring this the Europeans have no qualms, with their tradition of power politics.  This is one area where France has much to teach us.
Bolton: US Wants a Hare

Index 11/14/05

7 posts: (1) War and Intel Memory Holes: Time To Bypass MSM Filter--Weenie Watch; (2) Japan: Rising Sun of Friendship--Us v. Them; (3) Gangsta Goes Global--Weenie Watch; (4) Niger Documents: French Fakes--Weenie Watch; (5) Jordan Bombings Backfire--Us v. Them; (6) National Health Insurance: A Market Solution--The Home Front; (7) CIA "Cover" Uncovered--The Home Front.

War and Intel Memory Holes: Time To Bypass MSM Filter

President Bush gave a speech on Veterans Day recapitulating the War on Terror, much in accord with his recent fine address at National Defense University.   It merits a read, free of the media filter.  As well, in today's Opinion Journal, Norman Podhoretz presents a lucid recap of Iraq intel; he establishes beyond reasonable cavil that intel failures were honest mistakes.  I was away last week, so I did not monitor how MSM covered 43's speech.  I would be surprised if they did so in a competent fashion.  My own experience upon attending Presidential addresses is that rarely do they receive accurate coverage in MSM.  MSM either takes passages out of context or harps on quips, thus giving the public the impression that the speech lacked substance.  When I wish to know what a President has said, I now go to the White House website and download the speech.  This is the only way to reliably learn what was said.  Sad but true.

Which raises a question: What, if anything, should be done about it?  First, the President should--holidays excepted--speak in prime time when desiring to reach the public directly.  Second, he should appoint a third Republican to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and the agency should adopt a new rule for broadcasters: As part of their obligation to serve "the public interest, convenience and necessity," broadcasters must do two things: (1) upon Presidential request, they must give air-time; (2) upon request of the opposition party, they must give the opposition equal air-time.

Currently, broadcasters have discretion as to whether to carry a Presidential address, and they can decline to do so if they judge the president's speech "political."  Well, all Presidential speeches are political; the President is a practicing politician.  Allowing a few network executives to decide for themselves whether to carry presidential remarks is giving vast power to people who themselves are highly politicized.  Now consider certain objections that will be raised.

First, what is to stop a president from abusing the privilege--getting in the public's face nightly?  Answer: the public reaction is likely to be highly adverse, and in the event a message given incessantly falls on deaf ears.  Second, is this a revival of the FCC's "Fairness Doctrine," junked during the Reagan years?  Answer: No, because that doctrine involved refereeing private media commentary for lack of balance; the diversity of media today enables all points of view to receive air-time.  Third, what about the First Amendment rights of the broadcasters?  Answer: Broadcasters are licensees of public spectrum, and have a "public interest" statutory obligation encompassed within their charter.  Now, the Supreme Court might disagree, and strike down a rule such as the one I propose.  But then the President is no worse off than now.  It is worth a try.  The Court did, after all, uphold the constitutionality of the Fairness Doctrine.

Oh, one last idea: White House press conferences should be junked.  The White House reporters rarely even try to inform viewers with their questions.  They try instead to embarrass Presidents they dislike with smart-aleck, loaded questions.  No one learns from this MSM grandstanding.  Adopting an English custom of answering questions before the legislature would be better, in that critics could be called on distortions--as could the President and his own party.  Reporters are rarely called on theirs.  Presidents should be made to confront critics, but in a serious forum, not via the frivolous inanity of press conferences with self-absorbed media wiseacres.
President Bush's Veteran's Day Speech
Norman Podhoretz Reviews Iraq Intel

Japan: Rising Sun of Friendship

The Heritage Foundation's Peter Brookes writes in today's NY Post about a huge, unheralded Bush diplomatic success: a deepening friendship with Japan that stands in stark contrast to 41's trade-bashing and Clinton's China suck-up.  A nice list of Japan's contributions is given here.
Brookes: Japan's Our New Best Friend

Gansta Goes Global

David Brooks writes in the 11/10 NY Times that the styles of American counter-culture trump American culture in terms of global hegemonic influence.  Rioters in France are emulating gangsta rap's poisonous underclass macho.  With little upward mobility, Europe cannot do much about it.  Ugh.
Brooks: Gangsta Beats McDonald's

Niger Documents: French Fakes

NRO's Mike Ledeen explained in the 11/7 NRO why the French were the ultimate source for the Italian forgery re the infamous Niger/Iraq uranium deal.  Amusing, as Mike often is, and informative, as he always is.
Ledeen: Chirac's Stink Bomb

Jordan Bombings Backfire

NRO's James Robbins writes convincingly on how the terror bombings in Amman last week were a sign of desperation on the part of terrorists who are losing.  A solid read.  Ditto the NY Sun piece today reporting on how imams in Amman denounced at Friday sermons the Amman bombings.
Robbins: Jordan Backfires
NY Sun: Amman Imams Assail Zarqawi