Lieberman - Lamont Debate And The WaPo

I'm (obviously to anyone who reads here with any frequency) not a real big fan of the way media covers a lot of stories these days. This Washington Post story about the Lieberman/Lamont debate is about the closest to the neutral ideal I have seen in a long, long time. It does not start with loaded sentences, it seems pretty fairly balanced and it describes the problem in Connecticut very well.

Lieberman headed into the night with vastly diminished party support after a nearly four-decade political career that included a turn as his party's 2000 vice presidential nominee. Earlier this week, he signaled that he will run as an independent this fall if he loses the Aug. 8 primary — a possibility, according to recent polls. Lieberman's agreeing to debate Lamont on television was interpreted by some political analysts here as evidence that he is worried about the primary.

Connecticut, with its large pool of Democrats and independents, has become a focal point for the opposition to the war in Iraq. Just as Republicans are feeling heat throughout the country for supporting an increasingly unpopular war, Lieberman and moderate Republicans from the Northeast are finding that backing the president's Iraq policy can cost them substantial support within their traditional base.

Three House members from Connecticut — Nancy L. Johnson, Christopher Shays and Rob Simmons — are considered among the most endangered GOP incumbents on the ballot in November.

Lieberman, 64, a three-term senator who once was praised by party leaders for his independent thought and civility of spirit, has become a lightning rod for Democratic animosity because of his unflinching support for the war and his rebuke last month of Senate Democrats' calls for either setting a deadline for withdrawing troops or reducing troop levels beginning later this year.

Lamont has relentlessly hammered Lieberman as a rubber stamp for the president's war policies. One well-circulated image of the Lamont campaign, featured on buttons and in a television ad, shows Bush embracing Lieberman after the 2005 State of the Union address and appearing to kiss him on the cheek.

Lieberman used his opening remarks in Thursday's hour-long debate to complain that Lamont "seems to be running against me based on my stand on one issue, Iraq, and he is distorting who I am and what I have done."

"Let me tell you some things that may surprise at least Ned but shouldn't," he added. "I know George Bush. I've worked against George Bush. I've even run against George Bush, but I'm not George Bush."

Lamont disputed Lieberman's charges that he has equivocated on the war and avoided taking tough stands, at one point snapping, "You're the only person in Connecticut who's confused by my position on the war."

At the end of it all, my reading is that Lieberman beat heck out of Lamont.

Ouch

One presumes Charles Krauthammer fully intended to leave a mark.

He did.

The unfixable part of the Hamdan ruling, however, is the court's reading of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. The Geneva Conventions, which were designed to protect civilian populations and those combatants who respect them, were never intended to apply to unlawful combatants, terrorists of the al-Qaeda kind. The court tortures the reading of Common Article 3 to confer upon Hamdan — and by extension the man for whom he rode shotgun, bin Laden — the kind of elaborate legal protections that one expects from "civilized peoples."

The Geneva conventions were simply not written to cover the kind of situation that terrorism presents. They need to be rewritten, and that needs to happen soon.

Possibly The Stupidest Move Ever

It appears that the North Korean Government, led by their miniature whack job, may have been planning the absolutely dumbest piece of brinkmanship in history.

They may have tried to launch their Taepodong-2 long-range missile toward Hawaii.

If the missile had not failed in the first minute, South Korea might just have been a brand new island. And you know what? The vast majority of the people in the world would have said, "So?".

Dumbass move, Kim.

UPDATE: Heh. Kim Jong (mentally) Il.

Trails

Liveblogging Lieberman - Lamont Debate

Allahpundit did a live blog of the debate (I was tied up, sorry). It sounds like Lieberman did well despite the (obviously) pumped-by-the-left poll on MSNBC. Excerpt:

Update: Lamont says he’s got grassroots support. Lieberman says the Democratic Party is and should be what it was in 1960. Now he’s slamming Lamont for calling him insufficiently Democratic when he votes with the left 90% of the time in the Senate. And he says Lamont’s supporters are poisoning the party. Nice. Now he’s telling Lamont, in an angry tone, to stop spreading untruths about his record.

Update: Lieberman accuses Lamont of voting Republican and using Republican campaign aides. Lamont scores a nice point by noting that he’s not the one who’s threatening to run as an independent if he loses the primary. Liebs says Lamont can’t win the general election and he wants the whole population to have a chance to decide. Lamont responds by hitting him on job loss.

Update: Lieberman says Lamont gave him three campaign contributions — after he took the position he did on Iraq.

I’m trying to be objective. Lamont isn’t bad, but Lieberman’s better.

UPDATE: Greg Tinti, blogging at Outside The Beltway, also live blogged and calls it decisively for Lieberman.

Without much reflection, it’s easy to call this debate for Lieberman. Despite his sometimes overzealous aggressiveness, I think anyone listening carefully would agree that Lieberman defeated Lamont handily with those silly little things called facts with which Lamont was curiously light. As far as I could tell, Lamont promised to be the progressive Santa to liberals but didn’t bother mentioning how he planned to accomplish any of his goals. And this played particularly well into Lieberman’s strategy of painting Lamont as a one-issue candidate which, of course, is arguably true.

101st Blog Of The Day

Today, my seemingly endless journey to visit one member of the fighting 101st each day led me to The Uncooperative Blogger. Brian Bonner has a number of good posts up today, including one on a border operation I had never even heard of.

North Korea Continues Dancing On The Brink

For a while last winter, I had some hopes that Kim Jong Il might actually be thinking abut cooling things off and really negotiating. Then the nonstop shows of political disarray here in the US and the fundamental unseriousness of European politicians kicked into high gear and all that evaporated. Now the rogue regime and it's miniature leader are contemplating more destabilizing moves and being openly defiant about it.

"Our military will continue missile launch drills as part of measures to bolster self-defense capabilities," said the statement carried by the official Korean Central News Agency. North Korea "will have no option but to take stronger physical actions of other forms, should any other country dare take issue with the exercises and put pressure on it."

That appeared to refer to a U.S. and Japanese effort to push for tough penalties against the North at the U.N. Security Council. That effort so far lacks support from veto-wielding members China and Russia.

In Washington, President Bush said the threat posed by Pyongyang will lessen if the United States and its allies "speak with one voice" when dealing with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il.

Which is exactly right. If the West could, for even a short while, pull it's collective head out of it's collective nether regions, a unified front might stop Kim before this situation escalates. But if we continue in disarray war, in several places, becomes more likely, not less.

Whatever You Do, Don’t Call Them Angry

Ann Althouse linked to something over at Firedoglake which is pretty astonishing. Apparently they have a new nickname for Joe Lieberman. Rape Gurney Joe. (You really, really need to read all of Althouse's post to get the full flavor of this). Here's Althouse:

Well, what can I say? The label "Rape Gurney Joe" is so ugly that ordinary citizens will feel quite put off. I support abortion rights, but I dislike the heavyhanded political use of abortion to threaten those who have some moderate position. Surely, a willingness to accommodate the religious scruples of Catholic hospitals is not something that outrages ordinary people, even ordinary abortion rights supporters. Firedoglake says that Catholics — whose religion has caused them to devote so much hard work to providing medical care over the years — need to "get out of the fucking emergency medical business" because they want to follow their religion's teaching about contraception. That's going to sound bizarre and scarily angry to a lot of people.

Not that it's a good flavor. Vitriol doesn't taste so good. But don't call them angry or hateful. It makes them mad. Ann Althouse has it exactly right. Moderates who hear this kind of bile will be put off, and rightly so.

Dishonor Update

The Army has brought formal charges against lieutenant Ehren Watada, the dishonorable, and dishonored,  soldier who refused orders to deploy with his unit to Iraq. The charges are missing movement, contempt toward officials and conduct unbecoming an officer. The missing movement charge carries a possible two year jail sentence. (My original post is here).

"Officers are held to a high moral and legal standard. Acts contrary to this standard may be tried by court-martial," said the Army statement.

If found guilty of all charges, Watada could face several years in confinement, dishonorable discharge and forfeiture of pay, according to the Army. The missing movement charge carries the heaviest punishment of confinement of up to two years.

Watada's lawyer said he expected the missing movement charge, but was somewhat surprised by the decision to charge the officer with contempt toward officials and conduct unbecoming an officer, because it raises free speech issues.

"What he said about the war and the way the war began and the misrepresentations by the Bush administration are all true. Not only does he have a right to make those statements, he has an obligation to make those statements," said Eric Seitz, Watada's Honolulu-based attorney.

"The reasons why they are going after him for the things he said is because they want to muzzle him," Seitz said.

Which only goes to show what a fool Watada has for an attorney. Military officers are not free to speak their minds. There is a very high standard and a very low tolerance for failing to meet those standards. One hopes the lieutenant (soon to be private) feels all warm and fuzzy when his enablers supporters are home in a nice warm house sipping cocktails while he's breaking rocks at Leavenworth. Because they have most assuredly led him down a road to ruin.

When The Chips Are Down

Nothing like a casino shutdown to focus the minds of a group of recalcitrant politicians. New Jersey has reached a budget compromise. Thousands of gamblers irate over the forced casino closings can stop sharpening pitchforks and go back to feeding slot machines.

"They'll be announcing the final elements later this afternoon," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the governor will announce the deal.

The deal includes a sales tax increase that would raise $1.1 billion a year, a different high-ranking Statehouse official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The deal came after a midday meeting between top legislative leaders and Gov. Jon S. Corzine, who has repeatedly urged them to compromise to close the state's $4.5 billion gap. He ordered the government shutdown after they failed to pass a state budget by the July 1 deadline.

UPDATE: Details of the compromise are out now. Surprise! Tax increase!

The deal will increase the state sales tax from 6 percent to 7 percent and use half the $1.1 billion that it will raise to help lower property taxes, which are among the highest in the nation. It allows the possibility that, in future years, the entire increase will go to property tax relief.

UPDATE: A Blog For All: A perfect, perfect capsule analysis:

However, more entertaining are the comments from folks who have friends or relatives who moved to New Jersey from New York. I'm not only someone who used to live in New York, but I used to work in the NYS Assembly for a member's office. As bad as things got in Albany while I was there (never passed an on time budget while I was there), they at least managed to maintain the facade that it was Democrats v. Republicans. New Jersey didn't even bother with that - Democrats were fighting amongst themselves over how much to tax us.

Tax hikes all around!

China At A Crossroads

China is refusing to use it's leverage with North Korea to make the rogue regime back down. Virtually all aid to North Korea flows from China, but they say they will not use aid as a weapon.

For a country that is North Korea's stalwart diplomatic protector and economic lifeline, providing the North with trade, lots of aid and all of its oil, China seemingly has little pull with its neighbor and ally of 55 years.

"China sends oil, grain and other assistance to North Korea. But aid isn't a weapon if it's not used as a weapon," said Zhang Liangui, a North Korea watcher at China's Central Party School, a training academy for the communist elite. "And China doesn't contemplate using aid as a weapon, so its influence is very poor."

As U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill returns to the region Friday and another furious round of regional diplomacy unfolds, pressure is building on China to keep North Korea from destabilizing a region vital to the interests of the United States and its allies.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack on Wednesday urged China "to use that leverage, to apply it and encourage a change of behavior in the North Korean regime."

As the article points out, China and Russia have been teaming up and aligning with nations that are at odds with the United States. This time, it is China alone that has the ability to cause Kim to back down. They appear to be balking completely, though.

Which, of course, puts their whole ultimate objective in doubt.

Behind Beijing's reluctance is a hard-nosed calculation of Chinese interests. Though relations between the Korean War allies have been strained for decades, China feels less threatened by North Korea's behavior than Tokyo and Washington do.

Beijing prefers a weak and unpredictable North Korea to the likely alternatives: an implosion that would send North Koreans streaming into China or a unified Korea under a South Korea allied to the U.S.

Still, Pyongyang's actions put Beijing in a bind between those interests and a pressing need to allay concerns in the U.S. and elsewhere about how an economically strong and rising China will use its new power.

"This is an important test of Chinese diplomacy and whether Beijing is ready to play a responsible role even when its comrade in arms makes bad choices," said Bonnie Glaser, a China specialist at the Center for International and Strategic Studies in Washington.

This, even more than China's position on Iran, will clarify where they really stand. If China hurts it's US trade with it's policies, they may endanger their hard-won economic growth.

Israeli Forces Take Swath Of Gaza

Aiming to provide a buffer zone to prevent Palestinian rockets from landing in Israel, IDF elements have occupied an area of Northern Gaza.

A large contingent of IDF infantry and armor units moved into the ruins of three former settlements in northern Gaza in the early hours of the morning, after Qassam rockets fired from the area hit the southern coastal city of Ashkelon for the second time in two days.

Two IDF soldiers were lightly wounded near Beit Lahia earlier Thursday afternoon, one by Palestinian gunfire and the other when a weapon misfired.

The army aimed to capture a broad swath of territory of about one-and-a-quarter kilometers into Palestinian Authority territory, close to Beit Hanun, in an effort to hinder Qassam rocket launchers from targeting Ashkelon and to push them back toward Gaza City and the Jabalya refugee camp.

In southern Gaza, two militants were killed and five others were wounded Thursday afternoon in an Israel Air Force strike, witnesses said.

The IDF confirmed it had carried out the strike close to the Kissufim crossing, after IDF troops were attacked with anti-tank missiles and a rocket.

Militants gathered around the area after the air strike, taking up positions with grenade launchers.

The kidnappers of Gilad Shalit, meanwhile, continue to try to make demands. They appear to be lowering their expectations though.

Hamas has revised its demands for a prisoner exchange, the Arabic-language newspaper Al Hayat reported on Thursday.

According to the London-based publication, the Islamic militant group is now willing to free Gilad Shalit in return for the release of all Palestinian women detained in Israelis jails, estimated at some 100 prisoners, and a further 30 male inmates who have served terms of over 20 years.

The Al Hayat newspaper says Israel has tentatively agreed, but I have serious doubts about the validity of that report.

Can Do!

In an effort to stay a head of a cash crisis and to keep the streetlights on, an Ohio town has come up with plan. No Johnny-come-lately to creative fund raising, the town has found a way to raise a pot full of money. Those privy to the plan say there is a can do spirit in the village of Chauncey. Ah, the sweet smell of success!

To raise money, they put an outhouse on resident's lawns.

The Chauncey Emergency Management Group places an old-fashioned, wooden outhouse on a resident's lawn with a donation box where the toilet bowl should be and a sign on the door that says "Redneck Wishing Well."

People who find the latrine in their yard have to chip in to get it shipped out. They also get to pick the next home it graces.

The emergency management group's Jerry Dowler, whose phone number is posted inside the outhouse, hauls the privy in his pickup truck.

The money — donations of any size are acceptable — helps cover the southeast Ohio village's $500-a-month bill for street lights. Voters defeated a tax levy last year, and a committee that gets money from local cable TV bingo has paid the bill since then.

In its first two days, the outhouse collected $200, Dowler said. The primary purpose of the emergency management group, which is made up of village officials and citizens, is to keep the lights on.

Can Do, indeed!

New York Judges Reject Judicial Activism

The New York Court of Appeals has rejected arguments that the New York State constitution should provide a right to gay marriage saying that the constitution, "does not compel recognition of marriages between members of the same sex." Instead they said it was a matter for the legislature to address. In rejecting the arguments, the judges also rejected creation of rights by judicial fiat. The New York Times, of course, uses loaded language to discuss the decision:

New York's highest court today turned back an attempt by gay and lesbian couples to win equal treatment under New York State's marriage law, saying that the state constitution "does not compel recognition of marriages between members of the same sex."

The court's ruling combined four different lawsuits by 44 gay and lesbian couples throughout the state, who argued that they had a constitutionally protected right to be married like heterosexual couples, and that to deny them that right violated the due-process and equal-protection clauses of the state constitution.

In a rare fracture, the six judges were split into a plurality of three, who signed the majority opinion; a concurring opinion by one judge, and a strong dissent by the other two.

The majority opinion agreed with lawyers for New York City and New York State that there was a rational basis — grounded in the stability of the family as a child-rearing institution — for limiting marriage to a union of one man and one woman.

But it left open the possibility that the state Legislature could decide to allow same-sex marriages.

"We hold that the New York Constitution does not compel recognition of marriages between members of the same sex," Judge Robert S. Smith wrote in the majority decision. "Whether such marriages should be recognized is a question to be addressed by the Legislature."

Regardless of where one stands on the issue of gay marriage, they should be quite happy to have the court step away from judicial activism. Courts should not be in the social engineering game at all.

(By the way, for those who are not aware of the quirk in the New York court system, the Court of Appeals is the highest court in the state. What is called by the name 'Supreme Court' in New York is actually a lower, trial court.)

UPDATE: And in a related development the outbreak of judicial restraint reaches Georgia where judges issued a ruling reinstating Georgia's voter-mandated ban on gay marriage.

In Georgia, where three-quarters of voters approved a ban on gay marriage when it was on the ballot in 2004, the top court reinstated the ban Thursday, ruling unanimously that it did not violate the state's single-subject rule for ballot measures. Lawyers for the plaintiffs had argued that the ballot language was misleading, asking voters to decide on same-sex marriage and civil unions, separate issues about which many people had different opinions.

Again, regardless of where you stand on the issue itself, the correct way to deal with it is at the ballot box, not by judicial fiat.

Boston Globe Notices TNR/Kos Cage Match

Is it, as the Boston Globe puts it, a battle for political clout? Is it the end of the innocence for the blogosphere? Is it old media dissing the idea of new media?

Or it is just pure entertainment?

WASHINGTON — When a writer for The New Republic, the 92-year-old doyen of elite Washington opinion journals, accused the nation's most prominent political blogger of using his online clout to hush up a potential scandal involving a former business partner, he knew there might be some backlash from the so-called “new media."

But he didn't expect death threats.

“This wasn't meant to be a big fight," a tired-sounding Jason Zengerle, senior editor for The New Republic, said in a telephone interview last week.

Nonetheless, Zengerle's posting has sparked a steadily escalating uproar among scores of liberal bloggers who rushed to their keyboards in defense of Markos “Kos" Moulitsas Zúniga , the founder of the popular blog Daily Kos. But the posting has also prompted “old media" outlets — like the conservative National Review and New York Times columnist David Brooks — to pick up on what some insist is the first scandal to hit the political blogosphere.

Now, as readers of political blogs await the next chapter in an increasingly vituperative online battle — Moulitsas has called The New Republic “Lieberman- worshiping" neocons ' while Zengerle says Moulitsas operates “the digital equivalent of a smoke-filled backroom" — some outside observers believe the dust-up may be a benchmark in the blogosphere's entrance into mainstream politics, as blogs begin to face the same level of scrutiny as traditional media outlets.

“The blogosphere has always been mainly about scrutinizing everybody else and expressing violent opinions about them," said Alex S. Jones , director of Harvard's Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy. “Kos is a very powerful blog, so in that sense it's taken on the vulnerability of one of the [political] leaders."

I've posted several times about this ruckus (here, here, here, here and got some ring girls here) and then about the first round of escalation when Newsweek weighed in. Then posted again! So I guess I fall into the category of treating this as pure entertainment. Or at least good blogging fodder.

But really, there are elements of all of the questions I asked at the start of this post in this dust-up. Zuniga makes no secret of his goal to become a power-broker. He plays to his netroots supporter's fear and loathing and expects that to translate into political clout for himself. With money the innocence is somewhat lost, at least to some degree. And Lord knows the old media detests the blogosphere for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that blogs defeat the old gatekeeper model the media operated on for so long. Oh, and we keep screaming at them when they distort or falsify things (*cough* Dan Rather).

It is entertaining, though, isn't it?