From the desk of Jane Galt:

Welcome to the family

My cousin's gorgeous new son, Griffin Arthur Kelleher, now has his very own blog. Cutest baby ever? We report, you decide.

From the desk of Jane Galt:

Thought for the day

I posted this in the comments to another post, but I liked it so much that I thought I'd post it on the main page as well.

Thought for the day: Being a libertarian means that you never have to say you're sorry -- since you never, ever get anyone elected.

From the desk of Jane Galt:

Breaking news

Looks like the first Enron prosecution to make it to trial may have just blown up courtesy of Andrew Fastow. Could it be a little well-timed revenge for the court's nixing his wife's plea agreement? Or were the prosecutors trying to pull a fast one? Enquiring minds want to know!

From the desk of Jane Galt:

Toodle-oo, Tenet

So George Tenet has resigned "for personal reasons". Of course, no one ever gets fired any more; they just resign for personal reasons, usually to "spend more time with my family".

Or, as one colleague put it, "to spend more time with my family complaining about getting fired."

From the desk of Jane Galt:

What to think about the Chalabi scandal?

I mean, other than that the Bush administration associated itself with someone who wasn't exactly helping the cause in Iraq? Because we knew that before the Iran brou-ha-ha.

Something's been bothering me about the Iran story, though. Richard Perle puts his finger on it in this article in the New York Times:

"The whole thing hinges on the idea that the Baghdad station chief of the MOIS commits one of the most amazing trade craft errors I've ever heard of," Mr. Perle said, referring to Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security. He said it defied belief that a seasoned intelligence operative would disclose a conversation with Mr. Chalabi using the same communications channel that he had just been warned was compromised.

"You have to believe that the station chief blew a gift from the gods because of rank incompetence," Mr. Perle said. "I don't believe it, and I don't think any other serious intelligence professional would either."

Now, of course, Mr Perle is in full ass-covering mode, since his reputation will take a terrible shellacking from this Chalabi disaster. Still, he has a point. For the station chief to have told his superiors that their secure channel was possibly compromised -- over the compromised channel -- would be, to put it mildly, one of the most amazingly boneheaded acts ever conceived.

Not that government employees haven't historically been some of the prime sources of stunningly original, amazingly boneheaded moves. Still, it makes me wonder. Because if I were Iranian intelligence, and I wanted to

a) Check out my suspicions that the Americans were reading my traffic

b) Get rid of Ahmed Chalabi

. . . it strikes me that sending a transmission along the lines of the one we intercepted would be a smashing way to accomplish both goals.

In which case, I think that makes us the idiots.

From the desk of Jane Galt:

Fun fact of the day

Guess who lags the US in curbing toxic emissions? No, really, you'll never guess. It's Canada. Crazy, huh?

From the desk of Jane Galt:

Why I haven't been blogging or responding to my email

Well, first I went on vacation, to visit my grandparents in the far reaches of Red America, where internet connections are rarer than hen's teeth or members of the Democratic party.

Then I got the flu.

Now, thanks to the magic of Dayquil, and its dark sister, Nyquil, I'm getting better. But I have a whole lot of work to catch up on.

I'm not too busy, however, to take notice of Howell Raines' piece in the Guardian. His self-trumped rage against the White Male Power Structure seems to have morphed into rage against the Non-Howell-Raines Power structure. His piece dispenses political advice to John Kerry with the same visionary political instincts that led him to run 43 pieces in the New York Times on the protests against the Augusta National Country Club for its refusal to admit women--more than one piece per protester. Uncle Howell's wise counsel:

1) When, after telling Tim Russert on Meet the Press that he had never called Vietnam soldiers war criminals, Tim Russert confronted him with a 1972 clip of himself calling vietnam soldiers war criminals, John Kerry should not have "crawfished"

He should have said: "Tim, what you see in that video clip is a young man fresh from the battlefield and incandescent with the horror he saw. I mourned deeply for my comrades who were killed and maimed. I felt moral conflict, as many of our soldiers and sailors did, about the civilian casualties all around us. I felt angry that our national leaders had put us into a war without an exit strategy or a way of defining victory.

"Those are the feelings aroused in me today when I see our young men and women dying in Iraq. I am older and I hope wiser and as the nominee of my party I have an obligation to use less colourful language. But my desire for a government that is both strong and wise in the use of that strength - that calls upon its young for necessary sacrifice, but does not gamble needlessly with their lives - is as deep today as it was then. I have seen the face of battle when it was my duty. That will make me a president who understands the cost of conflict, the need for judgment that balances our military power, the need for honesty with the American people about what we know and don't know about where and when to go after terrorists ..." And so on and so on.

This is very good advice, if John Kerry had had six months and the assistance of Howell Raines to compose his response. But since John Kerry was right there, and had to answer right then, in the haze of shock immediately following his being whacked upside the head with his own fib, this is not very useful.

2) Kerry should tell voters that he's a Clinton-style, New Democrat type, and then when he gets into office, he should raise the hell out of taxes, especially on the rich, so that he can redistribute all their money down the income ladder. Which is a great plan, because voters and the Republicans who control the House and the Senate never notice things like that.

3) Kerry should dodge questions whenever possible by answering the question he'd like to answer, rather than the one he's asked.

This is brilliant stuff--the kind of keen political thinking that makes legends. I mean, Americans, especially the kind who aren't already smart enough to be Kerry-voting liberals--they're so dumb they don't even subscribe to the New York Times. It stands to reason that they won't catch on when Kerry's asked "What do you think about the Partial Birth Abortion ruling?" and he answers, as Uncle Howell suggests, "Here's my plan for getting us out of Iraq and defeating terrorism," and "Here's my plan for making sure you're not sick and poor in your old age." . . . and pulls the same stunt "over and over again, no matter what question is asked of him." Also, they believe that "getting us out of Iraq and defeating terrorism" and "making sure you're not sick and poor in your old age" are sufficiently easy to accomplish that John Kerry can swing the job singlehandedly.

But then, I suppose that everything's easy, as long as you're not blinded by Republican avarice and racism.

From the desk of Mindles H. Dreck:

Ouch! That's gotta hurt.

"My posterior's been fact-checked and I won't be able to sit down for a week"

click picture

From the desk of Jane Galt:

Obesity suits march on: a dieter is suing Atkins for giving him arteriosclerosis.

From the desk of Jane Galt:

Still on track

The economy grew at 4.4% last quarter, faster than originally estimated.

This is great news for us; the recovery is still going strong, and jobs, which have been slower to recover than even the 1990's "jobless recovery", seem finally to be coming back. Now if we don't get a nasty shock from a popped housing bubble, we'll be in very good shape.

Of course, it's not great news for all Americans. There has to be some consternation in Kerrystan right now . . .

From the desk of Mindles H. Dreck:

Failure to subsidize my speech

Heard on DeadAir America last night:

David L. Robb, the author of this book said, that the Pentagon's policy of assisting with movies (lending equipment, etc.) on the condition of substantial editorial control is 'clearly unconstitutional' - a violation of first amendment rights. Garofalo and Seder suggested it was grounds for a movie-viewer class action! Think of all the war movies we didn't get to see!*

While the Pentagon's editorial policies seem silly, I can't imagine forcing them to assist ALL films. This is transforming a negative right (freedom from interference with free speech) into a positive right. Do we have a right to assistance from the Pentagon with our film actively trashing the Pentagon?

I'm interested to know legal bloggers' (calling Professor Volokh?) opinion on Robb's claim. It seems relevant to the issue what (or how) the Pentagon charges for its assistance, but that was not clear from the discussion.

UPDATE: There are a few interesting objections in the comments. First of all, several commenters think "substantial editorial control" is not accurate. Perhaps. Taken at face value, what Robb describes constitutes editorial control in my book. For instance, changing the Top Gun love interest to a civilian, not allowing sailors to swear and re-writing scenes to avoid depiction of a war crime. Again, I think The Defense Department's position is defensible, but that is 'substantial editorial control' in my book. 'Silly'? Well, the first two examples above seem pretty silly to me. Silly isn't illegal or unconstitutional, it's just what bureaucracies do so well.

In other news, Garofalo and Seder compared various members of the administration to Nazis, etc. They remain interesting, like the Osbournes are interesting, but unfunny. I do keep listening, for reasons difficult to explain. I guess I get a kick out of hyper-partisan rhetoric. As anti-Howard Stern listeners famously told a pollster - 'to see what he'll do next'.

*What are the damages?

From the desk of Mindles H. Dreck:

It's either demand or supply....

Omar has some very normal looking pictures from Baghdad and observes that the market for construction materials is tight.

From the desk of Mindles H. Dreck:

Spooky Cicadas

I'm listening to this year's bumper crop of Magicada. They sound like B-Movie UFO's, enough to jar the addled brain.

The males’ love songs have been likened (to human ears) to buzz saws, small jet planes, and to a “high winding trill.” The quote is from a song, Day of the Locusts, that Bob Dylan wrote in 1970 after attending Princeton’s Commencement to receive an honorary degree and when he was serenaded by the song of the Magicicada. [Note: cicadas are not locusts!]

From the desk of Mindles H. Dreck:

Sigh. the anthropologist wears blinders

That's an interesting question: should a public intellectual have the right to be a right-winger? Actually, I don't even know how to respond to that. By definition, one thinks of public intellectuals as critics of power.

One more small knife in the back of open-mindedness in academia. I'm sure right-leaning faculty everywhere are waiting for his permission. Here's some context, which doesn't improve the discussion:

Part of Margaret Mead would be some kind of a model in terms of critiquing sexual repression or something like that, but the later Margaret Mead, where she's mucking around with stopping the AAA from opposing anthropologists from working with the CIA, that's a shame. That's a dark moment in terms of her stature failing as a public intellectual where she could have taken a public intellectual stance and said "No, anthropologists shouldn't work with the U.S. military," and do that unambiguously. That's an interesting question: should a public intellectual have the right to be a right-winger? Actually, I don't even know how to respond to that. By definition, one thinks of public intellectuals as critics of power.

UPDATE: Ok, this was bugging me, so I took a run. In the midst of doing so it came to me that this is the equivalent of bureaucratic ass-covering. This is similar to the company guy who opposes everything in the name of fiscal prudence but takes credit for every success and owns his predictions only with hindsight. Now I don't have to keep thinking this is just evil.

You see, if you have 'moral duty' to criticize power, it doesn't matter if you are proven wrong on the facts. Even if you're wrong, you're right! Neat. When you are 'public intellectual' you don't have to think at all, and you'll always be 'right'.

I'm right, you're wrong, go to Hell.

SECOND UPDATE: Look - a pubic intellectual.

From the desk of Mindles H. Dreck:

Code ?

There is a huge police presence around the downtown trains and ferries today. I took this photograph at about 7:30 this morning in front of Ground Zero. The line of police cars on the left extended two blocks.

I asked several officers what was going on and they said it is a 'routine drill'. The security officers in my building (former police) say there are specific threats against the subways today.