Maybe what we need, we Americans, is a large-scale public debate on whether or not we're going to rebuild New Orleans. If we decide yes, then there will be a mandate.
That might be the only explanation for the strange (to me) absence of some crucial questions in the punditry over the Iraq Study Group Report this week.
You're running the only major program to try to assist homeowners in returning and rebuilding, you're now sixteen months after the flood, and you concede a 25 percent error rate. And that's not news?
The US Army Corps of Engineers has started edging, tentatively, mendaciously, towards a big concession to its New Orleans-area critics.
Meet Carne Ross, who revealed this past Friday that Britain's leaders never bought the Saddam-WMD and Saddam-al Qaeda stories.
Regan kept on the subject of the drive against successful women, until I finally pointed out that nobody seems to be gunning for Oprah. "Not yet," she replied.
Maybe helping people rebuild their homes is a surer way to win hearts and minds than buying their army more ammo?
You don't necessarily expect a group of public-spirited scientists to have the best PR smarts in the world.
So the United States had to be saved from the trauma of watching Nixon and his men lie under oath. But Iraq, a cobbled-together creation, is perfectly capable of absorbing this trial.
New Orleans figures into the announcement as a "see what I mean?" support for Edwards' revived "two Americas" slogan. But the people being bedeviled by problems in New Orleans belie that neat dichotomy.
Despite all his faults, Woodward still owns the Watergate story. He proved it again with a blockbuster piece about the long, mutual, and secretive personal friendship between Ford and Nixon.
Hard numbers, of permits for electricity to be turned on, of demolition and rebuilding permits, issued by the city. The T-P has a fine analysis of th...
