I have a little girl who's about to turn eight. One of the most fun things about having a little girl who's about to turn eight is listening to the excuses she comes up with to do stuff she knows she's not allowed to do, but pretends she didn't know. Sometimes she'll stay up late reading when she knows she's supposed to be asleep, but when she gets caught, she'll say she thought it was the night we change the time and it's really two hours earlier. Sometimes when she tries to sneak sweets in between meals she'll claim that she thought the rule applied only to dark chocolates, not white chocolate, even though it's her favorite. I find these amusing, though I hide it, because, you know, nobody gets killed; nobody gets maimed; nobody wastes hundreds of billions of dollars; no new terrorists are created and recruited; no Constitutional protections are eviscerated, and Cheney's cronies at Halliburton do not get rich off of them. I only wish one could say the same about George W. Bush's war.
Take a look at this report, and please let's end the nonsense that they really believed their own propaganda and therefore were not "lying." If they were not lying, that's even worse, because it means they can't tell the difference, and we are being led by people with no more profound commitment to reality than, say, a not-quite-eight-year-old who wants to sneak some sweets. I'm not kidding. All of this stuff insults our intelligence. How many times must we read facts like these before we wake up to the painful truth of the near-complete irresponsibility not only of our government but of the political class that act as his apologist?
* For example, consider biological weapons, a key concern before the war. The CIA said Saddam had an "active" program for "R&D, production and weaponization" for biological agents such as anthrax. Intelligence sources say Sabri indicated Saddam had no significant, active biological weapons program. Sabri was right. After the war, it became clear that there was no program.
* Another key issue was the nuclear question: How far away was Saddam from having a bomb? The CIA said if Saddam obtained enriched uranium, he could build a nuclear bomb in "several months to a year." Sabri said Saddam desperately wanted a bomb, but would need much more time than that. Sabri was more accurate.
Next crash, Iran: Anyway, we all know that the Bush administration managed to set the mainstream media agenda for the invasion of Iraq in 2003. But given its increasing weakness and a President in near polling freefall, how is it still managing to do so on Iran in 2006? Why are our newspapers still proving so incapable of connecting the global dots in the face of an administration that never stops doing so? These are the questions Tom Engelhardt explores in his latest dispatch, "Iran and the Irrationality Factor."
What's more fun (and safer) than hanging with Dick Cheney? How about two hours in New Jersey traffic, on purpose?
I read somewhere, Tapped, I think, that John Derbyshire of National Review wrote something quite similar to what's below. It would really do the world an um, world of good, if media critics, left and right, would learn something about newspapers, like, um, the fact, that advertisements, opinion columns, editorials, and news stories are different things. I don't think Nick Kristof cares about the ads in his paper, and I don't think he should and I don't think the Times should care if he cares and if people believed that stupid, evil advertisement for the Sudan, yesterday, well, you can't publish a newspaper for stupid people. Anyway, look here.
Ironically, The Times published a powerful editorial yesterday condemning Sudanese government-financed Arab militias that slaughter black Africans by the hundreds of thousands. "Nick Kristof has waged an almost single-handed campaign against the atrocities," Levine added. "If I was Nick Kristof, I would say this is a slap in the face."
My man Paul McLeary gets a little tough on Mr. Friedman, though not the famous one, here.
This is so funny, it hurts.
American Prospect Section:
* Draft Gore for president. Not a bad piece, and you know I agree, but it misses the element of personal transformation that comes from Gore's identification with his father's loss of his senate seat for his refusal to support the Vietnam War. The Gore/Dean stuff is compelling however, and fleshes out an explanation about which I had mused, but never articulated. Anyway, read it.
* But also read this brilliant piece by Harold Meyerson on how to save the middle class economy, something this administration seeks to destroy and the Democrats appear afraid to protect.
* You'll have to pay to read Todd Gitlin on Chris Matthews, and James Galbraith on Jeffrey Sachs and Jeff Faux.
Heroes on tour: Go see Tom Tomorrow. Buy this. Ask him about the bearded librul's beard...