This Week in Magazines -- If Palin Read The Economist, Domino's Crack Cocaine

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin now asserts that she reads The Economist, at least to Fox News Channel. Such claims about The Economist are akin to claiming you saw Babe Ruth "call his shot" by pointing to center field at Wrigley Field during the 1932 World Series, then hitting a home run. Or swearing you read Thomas Pynchon's "Gravity's Rainbow" in college.

Well, doggone it, if she does peruse the Oct. 4 issue of the terrific, London-based newsweekly, she'll find a 20-page report on the presidential election. The right-leaning publication, which has experienced impressive growth in the U.S. even as it's jacked up its price well beyond that of its competitors, is characteristically smart and critical, with its formal endorsement (which could swing five to six votes) set for the Nov. 1 issue.

It chides Barack Obama for "the thinnest resume of any nominee in living memory" and derides John McCain for lack of eloquence, volcanic temper, a potential "warmonger" tendency and shaky grasp of economics and finance. But it finds the latter politically brave and willing to upset those within his own ranks. It argues that "for all Mr. Obama's rhetoric about reaching across the partisan divide, he has never stood up to his party to accomplish anything substantial."

Still, don't assume they'll endorse McCain. This bastion of the free market does fret that McCain's tax plan would widen the rich-poor gap and, like Obama, is very short on details on reducing the gargantuan federal deficit via spending cuts. It discerns a foreign policy "schizophrenia" within the McCain ranks between the swaggering neocons and the more careful realists. When it comes to what it concedes is the "scandal" of our health-care system, it seems partial to Obama's almost-universal-coverage plan rather than McCain's cost-centered plan with its problematic ditching of the current tax advantages enjoyed by employer-provided insurance.

As for "America's decidedly mediocre schools," it correctly underscores that Obama has far more beef in his plan, especially regarding the neglected topic of early childhood education, though this section is rife with misunderstandings about the No Child Left Behind law (underperforming schools don't face actual financial sanctions, as this asserts, while lauding McCain for suggesting letting parents choose tutors for their kids is mistaken since the law already allows just that). On crime, it contends that McCain's maverick reputation is misplaced and constitutes thoroughly Republican orthodoxy (long prison sentences, bashing "overreaching" judges, pro-guns, etc.). As Obama proved in the Illinois legislature, with substantial work reforming death-penalty laws, he does step back and look at the entire system, seeing it as screwed up, while also weighing in against broken families in Cosby-like fashion.

Ultimately, this report pokes both candidates for selling themselves as antidotes to our divisive culture wars but personifying those wars during the campaign. Yet it suspects that the mess in our markets will rule on Election Day and "the winner is likely to be the man who shows he best understands and can help the anxious average American." Gosh, golly, maybe these guys endorse the Democrat this time!

Now, if you want some other reading:

--Lucky me! The New Yorker profiles Arianna Huffington ("The Oracle") in its Oct. 13 issue. Lauren Collins crafts a solicitous if not fully satisfying opus on a woman of nerve, energy, eclectic intellect and renowned networking aplomb. If there is a thesis, it surfaces late: "Huffington's decisions in life, contradictory as many of them have been, seem to have in common the conviction that the worst imaginable fact would be to have people not pay attention to her at all." But readers don't get much insight into how she's actually pulled off this impressively successful website and gained a distinctly new status amid the bloody competition of the Internet. Is it merely a mix of colorful journalism and the serendipity of finding a growing core of politically-active folks during a feverish presidential campaign? What about the future and how it might evolve? Finally, one might have made a potentially fascinating comparison, even if one which would have unavoidably come quite close to home, between Huffington and former controversial New Yorker editor Tina Brown, mentioned briefly here as a Huffington friend. They each operate on as many levels as a pricy wedding cake, as friends and foes would acknowledge, and swing for the fences in a world of mostly singles hitters.

--Salmon follows canned tuna and shrimp as the most popular seafood in the U.S., with 600 million pounds consumed annually, including five million of the primo lot, chinook. The October Smithsonian inspects the various theories purporting to explain the rapid disappearance of the Chinook, which, like aspiring presidential candidates, tend to stay at sea for about three years before heading home (to the Sacramento River for the salmon, to Des Moines for the pols). Reporter Abigail Tucker is especially good eviscerating the romantic notion of the salmon's indomitable determination as she details not just its man-made foes but also how natural-resource managers are starting to load huge numbers of juvenile chinook from hatcheries, drive them 200 miles, and dump them into San Pablo Bay, just above San Francisco Bay, to bypass the Sacramento River and related perils. It's one of many compromises to try to save the species even as the nation's craving for salmon grows.

---A minimally-conflicted Newsweek cover essay likens Sarah Palin to Chauncey Gardiner of "Being There" and Marge from "Fargo," along the way wondering if, well, that's an elitist take on her as it reviews historic arguments regarding the "capacity of the common man to serve in government." If you're Palin'd out, Jeneen Interland reports that there may actually be more to know about the sinking of the Titantic 97 years ago, namely that bonafide negligence (the builders knowing it's frailty) was at play, not just incompetence in construction. Meanwhile, Time has historian Niall Ferguson on why this is not the Great Depression redux and, for techies, astute Josh Quittner praising as "the ideal laptop" the new HP EliteBook 2530p, assuming you can swallow the price tag (about $2,500 with its fancy "solid-state" drive.

--Foodies, or lonely guy and gal microwave addicts who secretly clamor to know something about cooking, will find a feast in the November-December issue of Cook's Illustrated, one of the greatest publications in the history of Western civilization. Forget about CNN's "NO BIAS, NO BULL" claim. The real deal is here, where one finds a 30-minute, Chinese-inspired method for cooking a great, crispy roast chicken on a skillet; how to avoid having roasted sweet potatoes turn out mushy; ways to do nifty sautéed string beans without parboiling or shocking them; and the inside skinny on producing bona fide Hungarian goulash without a truckload of vegetables. Finally, its unsurpassed testing of equipment concludes that the best slicing knives are the Forschner Fibrox 12-inch Granton Edge Slicing Knife Model 47645 ($49.95); the Wusthoff Gourmet 12-inch Roast Beef Slicer Hollow Edge Model 4515 ($99.95); and the Messermeister 12-inch Park Plaza Extra Wide Kullenschiff Slicer Model 8096-12 ($49.95).

--The October Domino, which is crack cocaine for yuppie female shoppers, takes an absolutely gratuitous shot at all of us (referred to as "your parents") who did indeed rely on shag rugs once upon a time, especially in the 1970s, as it heralds the return of wall-to-wall carpet (which they could have asserted was used by "your grandparents"). It offers a bunch of reasonably priced alternatives, all of which do just what my immigrant parents desired, namely disguising unappealing floors and muffling sound. It's back to the future. Meanwhile, I loved my white shag rugs!!!

--Historical precision is not a hallmark of public-policy debates, so it's nice to see the brief exchange of letters in the Oct. 9 New York Review of Books involving former Barack Obama foreign policy aide Samantha ("Hillary is a monster") Power and United Nations official David Harland. It involves Power's Aug. 14 essay, in the same publication, on U.S. national security in which she asserted that the U.S.-led military intervention in Kosovo and Bosnia "largely ended ethnic cleansing in both regions." As Harland diplomatically demurs, it's not that simple, and for a period the impact was to accelerate and consolidate ethnic cleansing. Indeed, Slobodan Milosevic responded with greater ethnic cleansing, while the Albanians reacted by cleansing more than 100,000 Serbs. Power concedes she was a bit loose with her language and should have written that those interventions "largely ended the ethnic cleansing that Serb forces had been carrying out in both regions."

Comments

[Svendem]

I've read the Economist on occasion for years. But it's only been this week I've ever heard that there's supposed to be some air of pretension about it.

Seems to be a sad comment on the state of American intellectualism if that's the case. Sure, it's a few notches above Time/Newsweek in terms of intelligence. But it's not exactly the New England Journal of Medicine or anything.

[exit116]

The Economist is centrist, it leans right on economic issues and left on social issues. It supports gay marriage, legalization of drugs and prostitution, abolition of the death penalty, gun control, and immigration. It endorsed Clinton in '92, Kerry in '04, and Ken Livingstone for mayor of London. It even published an obituary for God in 1999. The current issue on newstands has a study that said 70% of economists in academia think Obama would handle the economy better which hints at who they will endorse. To say they "lean right" is a little skewed.

[indc]

She did not know what the Economist was until after the Couric interview... betcha if it ain't on a hockey stick she doesn't dogone read it.

[ConservativeEd]

Sarah is sooooo Cute,
and Smart to boot!

[tablogloid]

I am seriously thinking about putting my shag rug rake on ebay today.

[richardwb]

Don't go out like that, man.
It's not worth it.

Best Wishes,
World Peace.

[werbenjagermanjensen]

No, no, George W. Bush is Chance the Gardener, and Marge Gunderson would never babble and obfuscate like Sarah Palin; she's a direct, honest woman who's just trying to do her best for her community.

[rmreddicks]

Seems unlikely she could even begin to read "Gravity's Rainbow". The "Economist" she probably took a look at in the dentist's office while waiting for some teeth whitening treatment. Or truth whitening treatment while sitting in the office of McCain's veep choice handlers.

Whether she could have understood anything that was in it? As likely as her being able to read any of Pynchon's better books.

-Slothrop

[mr5roses]

The Economist reporting is often good, the editorial section usually bad (to terrible when it comes to political endorsements). Like the old WSJ, when editorial failed to draw conclusions from its own reporting.

[lovethesinner]

James, I just want you to know that when I'm fast forwarding through the seemingly endless and mind numbing corporate propaganda on MSNBC, I always rewind if I see your ironic and smiling face. You make me laugh, think, and validate my purchasing a Tivo. I disagree about the shag carpets, but, I think its my allergies. Do you have pets?

Obama-Biden '08

[Twainiac]

So.... when is anyone going to point out that Palin's husband has been or is an actual card carrying member of a domestic, militant, virulently anti-US organization that preaches violent overthrow of the the USA? Furthermore, Palin herself has given the welcoming address at their meetings on more than one occasion and told them to 'keep up the good work.' This is complete BS!! Is anyone from the Obama campaign going to say something about this?
A case could be made that by the standards of the Bush administration, if the Palin's were Muslim, they'd be in Guantanamo or on a 100 watch lists and NOT running for VP.

[WeAreTheBorg]

We didn't think that she could sound out words as long as "Economist." We thought she was limitet to words of two syllables.

We are the Borg.

[dill]

Okay, agreed that Palin has NEVER read "The Economist". Now to the important part of your post--the shag carpeting. You loved your white shags, we loved our three inch long grass green shag which was perfect for toddlers learning to walk. They would fall, hit that rug and bounce right back up, no harm done. Funny the important things we forget and the trivial things we remember.

[JanP]

And you know that she hasn't read it how?

If I read the Economist do I qualify to be president?

Does Obama read the Economist?

[KodeBloo]

Why aren't people in the media asking Palin about the subjects and information she's allegedly gleaned from perusing The Economist? MSMedia is asleep at the switch and now lower than lawyers in terms of respect and honor.

[tablogloid]

Maybe because she recited those publication titles on Fox after her Couric interview. I am sure this was planned since we all know who Fox supports. She is no "Fargo" woman cop character. Sarah is a sound byte emoting robotic meat puppet.

[JanP]

We also know who CBS and Couric support, don;t we?

[CompetenceMatters]

Don't you think they are all dying to ask her questions? But she's too heavily guarded, they can't get close enough.

If I could ask her only one thing, I'd be really torn between:
1) Do you believe everything you say?
AND
2) Do you understand everything you say?

I'd probably go with 1) since I kind of know the answer to 2).

[DianeTreehugger]

The grammar in Economist is proper, the sentences are complete, and the thoughts expressed were written by people with critical reasoning skills. THe only way Palin reads it if is someone is translating it into Palin's scary brand of "simpleton-speak" for her.

[inwhatrespectcharlie]

Reads the Economist but can't talk about the Bush Doctrine? I don't think so...

[jkirkish]

The Economist endorsed John Kerry in 2004. They are not as "right leaning" as you think. Mark my words, they will endorse Barack Obama this year.

[PerryWhite]

When Gov. Palin asked Charlie Gibson for more specificity on his Bush Doctrine question, perhaps she had this article from The Economist in mind:

http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10873479