Internal Monologue

Would someone please help this administration get its story on "stability" straight?

OK, via billmon , we get this article from the LA Times : The Bush administration is scrambling to assemble a plan to help rebuild Lebanon, hoping that by competing with Hezbollah for the public's favor it can undo the damage the war has inflicted on its image and goals for the Middle East. Administration officials fear that unless they move quickly to demonstrate U.S. commitment, the Lebanese will turn more fully to the militant group, which has begun rolling out an ambitious reconstruction program that Washington believes is bankrolled by Iran. OK: kudos to the administration for figuring out where the real battlefronts are. But given the fact that the damage was caused by Israel, with the explicit support of the United States, I think the opportunity to win hearts and minds is going to be limited. If you want to get credit for building things, it helps if you weren't backing the military that blew them up. But still, I rather hear this administration making noise about out

This is one of those things that I already knew, but still galls me to no end whenever I am reminded of it. From the NYT (HT: Hullabaloo ): In surveys conducted in 2005, people in the United States and 32 European countries were asked whether to respond “true,” “false” or “not sure” to this statement: “Human beings, as we know them, developed from earlier species of animals.” The same question was posed to Japanese adults in 2001. The United States had the second-highest percentage of adults who said the statement was false and the second-lowest percentage who said the statement was true, researchers reported in the current issue of Science . The Science link has the following brief statement: The acceptance of evolution is lower in the United States than in Japan or Europe, largely because of widespread fundamentalism and the politicization of science in the United States. This is such an embarrassment. During the 50's, when the Russians were ahead in the space race, this countr

Sullivan links to this NYT article about British converts to Islam. The following passage reminds him of a certain person: Mentioning reports in the news media that Mr. Waheed was a heavy drinker and drug user before turning to Islam, Ms. Franks added: “I think there’s a tendency for some people, when they stop using some kind of addictive substance, to be left with a big hole in their lives. To do something extreme is the easiest way to go, because it fills that big hole.” It reminds me of him , too. It's so sad when the puritanical reaction to human weakness (or even human desire for pleasure) turns a human into someone who is both completely certain and completely willing to use violence. That is a horrible combination when it occurs in our enemies. It is even worse when it happens in our leaders. When is the establishment (media, political) going to treat Bush with the disdain and contempt he so richly deserves?

My rocketry expert, Maniak, weighs in: I'm not ready to buy the reports of an imminent North Korean nuclear test yet. The pattern of where the reports and denials are coming from don't give it a lot of credibility at this point. It all seems to stem from an ABC report from a "senior defense official" saying that there is suspicious vehicle activity that looks like a nuclear test preparation. That seems rather flimsy, if that's all that it is. North Korea knows where our satellites are, and they often like to put on shows for them. They've done much more elaborate shows in the past, such as digging deep shafts, and then filling them back in. That's the sort of evidence you'd expect before a nuclear test, but the last time they did that, there was no follow through. I would guess that it's probably some kind of bluff this time. With the comparitive state of their nuclear and rocketry technology, they would raise the threat level m

Glen Greenwald makes the case , in light of today's court ruling on the NSA's warrentless wiretapping (they said it's illegal): Thus, judicial decisions are starting to emerge which come close to branding the conduct of Bush officials as criminal. FISA is a criminal law. The administration has been violating that law on purpose, with no good excuse. Government officials who violate the criminal law deserve to be -- and are required to be -- held accountable just like any other citizens who violate the law. That is a basic, and critically important, principle in our system of government. These are not abstract legalistic questions being decided. They amount to rulings that our highest government officials have been systematically breaking the law -- criminal laws -- in numerous ways. And no country which lives under the rule of law can allow that to happen with impunity.

Ok, not quite. They are just not backing their own guy, Schlesinger. The Politicker via Crooks and Liars : This morning, a source at the National Republican Senatorial Committee confirmed in a phone interview that the party will not help Schlesinger or any other potential Republican candidate in Connecticut, and it now favors a Lieberman victory in November. UPDATE : An NRSC spokesman just called to make clear the distinction between actively and openly supporting Lieberman, which they're not doing, and merely opting not to support a Republican in Connecticut. "The NRSC is not supporting Lieberman," said Brian Nick, a spokesman for the NRSC. "He is a Democrat who votes 90 percent of the time with the Democrats. The race isn't competitive at this point -- our resources will be used elsewhere." Yet more confirmation that Lieberman is more cozy with Republicans than with Democrats. Let us rid the Senate of him. How long until Harry Reid, Chuch Schumer, H