“Saint Jack” vs. The religious right

Via Roy Temple at Fired Up!: Conservative Missouri politicians are squirming in discomfort following retired senator/presidential envoy/UN ambassador Jack Danforth’s criticism of religious influence on the GOP. Danforth’s remarks originally appeared in yesterday’s New York Times:

By adopting religious views as political doctrine and legislation, the Republican Party is leading the country on a dangerous path that could trample the Constitution and lead to bitter division, says former Sen. John C. Danforth, a GOP stalwart.

The political success Republicans have had in harnessing the energy of Christian conservatives doesn’t justify the GOP becoming their voice, Danforth said in an interview Wednesday.

“It becomes extraordinarily divisive and legislatures get themselves entangled with writing religious documents into legislative form,” Danforth said. “It’s exactly what the Constitution says we can’t do and it’s exactly what we can’t do if we want to keep the country glued together.

“I’m surprised people have been so mute about this,” he said. “I thought if nobody was saying this, I should.”

Actually, it’s only those on the right that have been relatively quiet about the pernicious influence of Christian conservatism; the rest of us have been vocally concerned. Danforth believes that he’ll be joined by others in the GOP concerned that the party has “become the political extension of a religious movement.” If reactions like these are the norm, however -

Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt; House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill.; House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas; and several Republican members of Missouri’s congressional delegation declined to comment on the issues Danforth raised.

- the senator formerly known as “Saint Jack” may find himself a lonely man on the GOP bench.

Terri Schiavo, R.I.P.

The Schiavo deathwatch is over.

Bremer’s parting gift to Iraq

Tony Karon of Time has an informative piece out on the discord of the current Iraq government, or current lack-of-government, and how it got that way. In short: we (through former viceroy Paul Bremer and the Transitional Administrative Law he established there) are to blame.

The rules have forced the United Iraqi Alliance, the coalition led by Shiite religious parties that won a narrow majority of Assembly seats in the election, to cut a deal with the Kurdish list that claimed 27 percent of the seats. The Kurds see their once-off kingmaker role as their best opportunity to press for maximum autonomy and oil-revenue share for their independence-minded people. As their price for endorsing a Shiite-led government, they’re demanding not only an extension of their de facto autonomy in their three northern provinces — including the right to retain their own armed forces and prohibit the national army from entering their domain — but also control of the divided oil-rich city of Kirkuk and of Iraq’s oil ministry. That’s a prohibitive price for the Arab majority, both Shiite and Sunni. The Kurds, however, mindful that their 27 percent of the Assembly counts for far more in this one moment when a two-thirds majority is required than it will ever count for again, are digging in their heels. And so, the deadlock persists, and threatens to create a long-term power vacuum.

If Bremer’s Transitional Administrative Law (TAL) looks likely to create a relatively weak central government in Baghdad, that was its intent — restraining any one ethnic or religious group from dominating others on the basis of a simple majority. But the price of that restraint has been to give the Kurdish minority the means to blackmail the majority, which in turn sets the scene for an acrimonious aftermath.

The Bush administration has been quick to take as much credit as possible for the historic election in Iraq; will it also own up to its role in hobbling that country as it struggles to form a new government? Unlikely, and yet Bush may find that American attempts to game the Iraqi system have only undermined the democracy we say we want there, and complicated any withdrawal of American troops.

Watermelon cantaloupe watermelon cantaloupe

I find I’m having some trouble stringing words together lately. Even once strung, those words don’t seem to appeal to me. I’ve made false starts on six or seven entries in the last day or two and have rubbished them all. Part of that is likely some kind of post-illness ennui, but there may be something more to it.

Part of it may have to do with crowd noise.

Sometimes I find myself in a packed venue - never by choice, I hate crowds - and all the many conversations around me merge and flatten into an opaque ambient fog. You’ve heard it, I’m sure: watermelon cantaloupe watermelon cantaloupe watermelon cantaloupe…like that. Background noise. Conversation as melon salad. Any individual meaning gets lost beneath the sussurus.

Well, I look around the web today and all I see is melon salad. Not a lot that seems worthy of comment. So I haven’t had a lot to say.

It’s possible, though, that I just need some sleep. We’ll try that.

Not a lot to say

I’ve a lot of catching up to do after being out last week, so blogging’s on the far back burner until later. Everybody go out and enjoy this marvelous spring weather.

Another disaster in the making?

An 8.2 earthquake was detected this morning off the Indonesian island of Sumatra. Eight-point-two is large. This could be disastrous…but unlike the last time, warnings have been sounded:

A large earthquake was registered Monday off Indonesia’s Sumatra Island, the U.S. Geological Survey reported, describing it as a “great earthquake” with a magnitude of 8.2 on the Richter scale.

The USGS advised officials in the area to move people inland, and Thai officials were among the first to issue a tsunami warning for the Andaman Sea.

No reports of injury or damage had been received from the region. The Dec. 26 quake that launched the massive tsunami was a 9.0, the USGS said.

Monday’s quake epicenter was just off the northern Sumatra coast and between two smaller islands, and located at 18.6 miles underground. It occured at around 11 p.m. local time.

The Dec. 26 quake was also off the coast of Sumatra and just north of Monday’s quake.

Waiting…

First day back on Planet Earth

Uh…I’m back.

Largely back, mostly back. A tad groggy and with a chest full of unidentifiable fluids, but still, you know, up and ambulatory.

I see that not a lot has changed in my absence. Terri Schiavo is still alive; so is the pope. And Matt Blunt is still governor.

Give me a few minutes.

Many thanks for the well-wishes

Yeah, I’m still sick, and making very slow progress. I am extremely grateful for the kind words that you’ve sent my way as I lie complaining on my sickbed.

I hope you will continue to send me good wishes now that I’ve passed my bug on to my beloved wife.

The only healthy lifeforms in the house right now are the four cats. And they are so goddamned smug about it.

Where are the Democrats on Terri Schiavo?

We already know where the Republicans are - issuing subpoenas to women in vegetative states, using Terri Schiavo’s condition for political advantage and political cover, playing with fire by invoking the support of the voracious radical right. The public has overwhelmingly rejected the GOP’s acts in the Schiavo case as intrusive and politically motivated, which has heartened Democrats…particularly as they didn’t have to do much of anything. The Dems essentially stood on the sidelines while the Republicans engaged in overreach.

Was this the right strategy - that is, doing nothing? It’s clear enough that the Republicans are acting out a strategy of their own, whether you agree with it or not. One of the lessons supposedly learned by the Dems in their last electoral defeat was that it wasn’t enough to say “we’re not Republicans.” A party has to stand for something. The Schiavo case was a tailor-made opportunity for a strong Democratic statement advocating the sovereignty of the individual. The polls indicate that the public would have been receptive, but the Dems failed to capitalize. Terry Neal of the Washington Post, writing about political expediency in the Schiavo matter, provides a David Sirota quote that hits it right on the head:

Democratic strategist David Sirota said the Schiavo case creates three impressions. “Firstly, Republicans are zealots,” he said. “Secondly, where the hell are the Democrats? And thirdly, well, at least the zealots believe in something strongly. And that’s the problem for Democrats right now on this issue, and a whole host of others. The party seems unwilling to stand up for anything controversial.”

“The calculus by Democrats is that they don’t want to offend anyone,” Sirota said. “But in trying not to offend anyone, they lose support from everyone. What many Democrats haven’t yet learned from Republicans is that it is better to be loved by some, and hated by others, than try to be liked by everyone. Because when you do that, you are liked by no one.”

Jazz Shaw at Middle Earth Journal picks up the same theme. Shaw first quotes a warning over the one-sided politicization of the Schiavo case issued by Dave Johnson of Seeing the Forest, then adds this:

Dave’s point has the ring of truth to it. It’s far too late to stop this tragic issue from turning into a political juggernaut. It’s being carved in granite in the record books even as we ponder it. The left is busy ooohing and ahhhing over the polls showing the majority of people felt that congress and the president acted unwisely by interfering. Progressives are seeing an opportunity in pointing out the legal details of how this affects federalism, disrupts states’ rights, and pits the legislative branch against the judicial.

But a year from now, long after this is (hopefully) over, what are voters, particularly on the right and in the center going to remember?

Well, it was certainly a foolish way to attempt it, but at least the Republicans’ hearts were in the right place. They were trying to save poor Terri’s life.

And with that, following the laws of reflex and reaction, there is a subliminal message buried alongside that one.

The Democrats were trying to kill poor Terri.

You won’t have to wait a year for that narrative. It’s being framed up even now.

In the WaPo piece, Neal adds this:

The Schiavo case begs the question of whether voters will prefer a party that makes unpopular decisions to one that makes no decisions at all.

We already know the answer to that.

The only way to fight that is for the Democratic party and its progressive allies to frame a large narrative of their own, the right narrative. It’s not about states’ rights or federalism or checks and balances. It’s about honoring, respecting, and protecting the sovereignty of the individual.

And it’s not too late…if the Dems start right now.

Postless

Out sick today - and it took what little strength I have left just to type that.

Back to normal tomorrow, I hope.

Next Page »