NOTE: this blog is no longer active as of 12/07. New one: http://blog.kirchhof.com
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
If you are a supporter of the invasion of Iraq -- and, yes, there are thoughtful people of this opinion -- then I strongly suggest that you read Bradford Plumer's article on why Kerry is the better choice at this place and time. Kevin Drum does a nice Cliff Notes summary of this excellent and dispassionate article:
Plumer acknowledges up front that (a) Iraq is a mess and there aren't very many good options left at this point, and (b) Kerry is highly unlikely to have much success at "internationalizing" the occupation. I agree on both points. Starting from that realistic assessment, though, he argues that Kerry has several modest but important advantages over Bush that could make all the difference between success and failure in Iraq:
First and foremost, he's almost certain to be more competent than Bush, who is unwilling to hold people to account or fire them for incompetence. Kerry's advisors, people like Richard Holbrooke, are fundamentally more grounded than Bush's in facts rather than ideology.
Kerry has a better understanding than Bush of how to deal with the Iraq's various ethnic and political factions. "You can't impose [democracy] on people. You have to bring them to it. You have to invite them to it. You have to nurture the process." It's a lower key approach, but it's more likely to lead to genuine democracy than Bush's.
Although internationalizing the occupation itself is probably a nonstarter, Kerry can make considerable progress by internationalizing the reconstruction in ways that Bush is unwilling to consider. And if there's any chance at all of getting foreign troops into Iraq, it's going to take UN auspices to do it. Kerry is far more likely to get this than Bush.
The Bush administration has been obsessed with economic privatization to the exclusion of practical, short-term job creation strategies. Military commanders, by contrast, understand the necessity of simply creating jobs as quickly as possible. Kerry will listen to them.
Both Iran and the Kurdish north are problems that Bush has almost completely ignored. These are both painfully difficult situations to deal with, but Kerry's willingness to try diplomacy holds out at least a hope of making progress on these fronts.
I do disagree with both on one point. I think that Kerry will have much more success than the current punditry zeitgeist seems to expect in internationalizing the effort. For two reasons. One, there is a lot of money to be made, and an enormous amount of trade in the future in building infrastructure and restoring the Iraqi consumer society. The world sees this clearly. And two, most of the world is eager to show their solidarity with the American People once we depose King George II and regain our sanity. I think that we'll be viewed as a good friend who went through a serious crisis and lost their head, like your buddy who went on a week-long bender after his Dad died.
Nations are, in the final run, a lot like people. Madness comes and goes. If this nation has the horse sense to evict the current occupant of the White House, I think that the wonkery mongers will be surprised at the depth of the well of goodwill that still exists out there. We are not alone in this world. But that goodwill is now flatly denied our country -- and would continue to be -- with Little Caesar at the helm.
I strongly urge my hawkish and/or conservative friends to set aside their cement ideology, turn off Rush and Fox, and to think -- really think -- about the good of their nation in the next four days. If you examine the whole of the quilt, rather than pieces of the patchwork, I believe that you may well join me in voting to change our national leadership.
It's been a hell of a bender. Time to clean up.
Posted at 10:13 by Randy Kirchhof [Permalink] [Reload all] [E-mail]
Over at New Donkey, there's a good article. Here are some excerpts:
The latest political news from Ohio is important and instructive. A federal judge in Columbus blocked Republican efforts to force county election boards to review tens of thousands of new voter registrations. Before the ink was dry on the judge's order, the Ohio GOP's top lawyer said the action meant the GOP would challenge such voters at the polls on November 2. "We wanted to have all these questions resolved this week," said attorney Mark Weaver. "Now they won't be resolved until Tuesday, when all of these people are trying to vote. It can't help but create chaos, longer lines and frustration."In other words, the GOP is using the demise of one prong of its voter supression strategy to pre-justify the other. And I wouldn't be surprised if that's exactly the way they planned it. Now they can can get their "volunteers" out to "create chaos, longer lines and frustration" in minority polling places and sadly say that an "activist judge" who didn't care about voter fraud left them no choice. It's going to get worse, too: mark my words, when Democrats, civil rights attorneys, and voters themselves get visibly angry about this gambit, the GOPers will start whining about "potential violence" at the polls, and even pretend their goons are being intimidated and harassed. If nothing else, it will give them an excuse to go to court to contest Ohio's outcome if the state goes for Kerry.
[...]
He goes on to analyze classic Rove techniques. Very informative, and worth a read. Also worth your attention: this, and a good piece over at Tapped.
Got your cameras ready, brethren and sistren?
Oh, yeah, earlier today yesterday I said below
that the GOP was deploying 3400 "poll watchers" in Ohio. That is
incorrect. They're deploying 8000 in Ohio, and paying them $100.00
each.
Posted at 09:02 by Randy Kirchhof [Permalink] [Reload all] [E-mail]
The ad title?
"Whatever It Takes."
Posted at 01:29 by Randy Kirchhof [Permalink] [Reload all] [E-mail]