The White House recently met with leading Democratic campaigns to talk about Iraq and other issues:

So far, Bush has been encouraged by the fact that Democratic candidates are preserving enough wiggle room in their anti-war rhetoric to enable them to keep at least some troops in Iraq.

“If you listen carefully, there are Democrats that say, ‘Well, there needs to be some kind of presence,’” Bush said.

I don't think the Democrats have the fortitude to withdraw. If they did, why are they still funding the war?

Labels: 2008 Watch, Blame it on Bush, Hillary Clinton, Iraq

Posted by Ryan S. at 12:01 AM | Permalink | |

Katie Couric recently decided to share her thoughts on the conflict in Iraq:

“Everyone in this room would agree that people in this country were misled in terms of the rationale of this war,” said Couric, adding that it is “pretty much accepted” that the war in Iraq was a mistake.

“I’ve never understood why [invading Iraq] was so high on the administration’s agenda when terrorism was going on in Afghanistan and Pakistan and that [Iraq] had no true connection with al Qaeda.”

Now if she truly felt this way during the buildup to war in Iraq, that we were being misled, isn't it her duty as a member of the press to investigate and vet the arguments of the administration?

If so, Katie Couric failed in her duty.

Thomas Ricks states in his book, Fiasco (review), that the media essentially rolled over for the Administration rather than truly acting in the role it claims to play in our democracy.

Ironically, Couric alludes to her failure as a journalist in the same speech:

And I remember feeling, when I was anchoring the ‘Today’ show, this inevitable march towards war and kind of feeling like, ‘Will anybody put the brakes on this?’ And is this really being properly challenged by the right people? And I think, at the time, anyone who questioned the administration was considered unpatriotic and it was a very difficult position to be in.

So much for "courage."

Labels: Iraq, Media

Posted by Ryan S. at 12:35 PM | Permalink | |

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was laughed at during his speech at Columbia University:

Vilified as a Holocaust denier, a supporter of terrorism and a backer of Iraqi insurgents, the president of Iran was actually able to make New Yorkers burst into laughter -- but not at a joke.

"In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country," Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said at Columbia University on Monday in response to a question about the recent execution of two gay men there.

"In Iran we do not have this phenomenon," he continued. "I do not know who has told you we have it."

Loud laughs and boos broke from the audience of about 700 people, mostly students at the Ivy League school whose garb included "Stop Ahmadinejad's Evil" T-shirts.

Ridicule can be an effective weapon.

Michael Barone:

Columbia doesn't host ROTC or (I think) military recruiters on campus, because it would be just too offensive to do so, because the military obeys the law passed by a Democratic Congress and signed by Bill Clinton which bars open homosexuals from serving in the military. OK.

But Columbia does host Ahmedinejad who heads a government which executes homosexuals for the crime of being homosexuals.

So it's obnoxious beyond belief to exclude homosexuals from military service, but it's not obnoxious beyond belief to hang them from the neck until dead.

Labels: Iran

Posted by Ryan S. at 9:47 AM | Permalink | |

I was perusing a couple-weeks-old copy of TIME magazine today because the cover story caught my eye, a 21st century Rosie the Riveter (see right) representing the magazine's call-to-arms that there need to be new national service initiatives.

I'm not necessarily opposed to these initiatives, which range from yet another "Fill-in-the-blank Corps" organization to "baby bonds" to a national service academy patterned after West Point.

I am however, certainly opposed to this kind of service if it is compulsory. We don't live in a society like Starship Troopers, and so compulsory service is highly contrarian to the American Republican idea.

The government has an obvious benefit to itself to support both military and non-military service, and there are ways to encourage that beyond a compulsory system. The most obvious one to me is an entirely revamped GI Bill that not only takes care of our veterans with college education and access to loans to start businesses or purchase homes, but provides similar access to those who elect to serve in the USA Freedom Corps (one of the least-remembered Bush initiatives, and a pretty good one).

Some of the suggestions in the article are asinine at best (like turning national service into a Cabinet-level department), but it is worth reading. The infrastructure is there, but a national campaign, focused on college campuses, would go a long way to encourage my generation to step up in to the plate even more than we already have.

Labels: Education

Posted by Ryan S. at 4:55 PM | Permalink | |

No Hero/Hack this week because I am traveling this weekend sans laptop. Oops.

Posted by Ryan S. at 6:12 AM | Permalink | |

ISI (based in Delaware) released the results from this year's civics quiz. USA Today reports:

The study from the non-profit Intercollegiate Studies Institute shows that less than half of college seniors knew that Yorktown was the battle that ended the American Revolution or that NATO was formed to resist Soviet expansion. Overall, freshmen averaged 50.4% on a wide-ranging civic literacy test; seniors averaged 54.2%, both failing scores if translated to grades.

"One of the things our research demonstrates conclusively is that an increase in what we call civic knowledge almost invariably leads to a use of that knowledge in a beneficial way," says Josiah Bunting, chairman of ISI's National Civic Literacy Board. "This is useful knowledge we are talking about."

You can take the quiz here. I missed one question for a score of 98.33%, but I don't think I learned much of it while being here at the University.

This stuff is important for citizens to know, and it seems colleges are failing us if students can't answer a majority of pretty basic questions.

Labels: college, History, University of Delaware

Posted by Ryan S. at 9:28 AM | Permalink | |

I was talking to an acquaintance of mine who is the computer engineering program here at UD who apparently is a Ron Paul supporter. He's is trying to get Dr. Paul to make an appearance on campus at some point, which would be cool, if only because I don't think any other presidential candidate this cycle will (Joe Biden does not count).

That conversation reminded me of this Wired article from a couple days ago about how there is a lot of geek support for Ron Paul:

"People in the technology industry tend to be more educated, and more intelligent," said Jeffrey Schwartz, a Paul supporter who organized the fundraiser through Meetup. Schwartz is a psychiatrist and a long-time libertarian.

He said Paul appeals to people who like the politician's message of "freedom."

I'm not sure if that first part is true, but if his online support ever materialized into offline support, this could be a glimpse of the future of politics.

Labels: 2008 Watch, Ron Paul

Posted by Ryan S. at 9:00 AM | Permalink | |

My hero this week is White House Press Secretary Tony Snow. Not only does he have a tough job (one of the most intense White House jobs, but he is doing so while undergoing cancer treatment. His perseverance is inspiring, and I will be sad to see him go. Today is his last day as press secretary:

In fact, Snow said, in a way, being diagnosed with cancer is the best thing that has happened to him.

"In a funny way it is," he said. "Boy do you learn to count your blessings. And you get teary eyed about the dumbest little stuff. You get sentimental about things because all the sudden you realize how much you care about things and how much you really love them."

My hack this week is New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick. The Pats were caught cheating the first week of the season, and fined for it. It was a lenient punishment for such a gross act of stupidity. Jay Mariotti writes in the Chicago Sun-Times:

How many of those three Super Bowls were won with the help of illegal video? Has Tom Brady become an American role model and state-of-the-art quarterback because he benefitted from in-game signal theft? Was all that talk about work ethic, pride, unity and The System just a lot of bunk? Shouldn't Belichick's Hall of Fame candidacy, once considered a lock, now be in doubt in the same vein as disgraced baseball names such as Bonds and Mark McGwire?
No different than steroids user

The man is a cheater. And as a coach, he should be held more accountable as an authority figure than even the players who are shaming sports with their off-field indiscretions. Not only did Belichick damage his personal legacy beyond repair, he brings humiliation to the Patriots and embarrassment to the NFL, a league that would love to let millions of football-adoring fans concentrate on the games but can't because too much smut is in the air.

The commissioner with the big hammer, Roger Goodell, didn't come down hard enough on Belichick in announcing penalties Thursday night. If steroids users are slapped with four-game suspensions for trying to gain a competitive advantage, Belichick should have been handed a similar ban for trying to gain his competitive advantage via high tech. By limiting the punishment to an NFL-maximum $500,000 fine for Belichick, a $250,000 fine for the Patriots and the loss of a first-round draft pick if they make the playoffs -- or second- and third-round picks if they don't -- all Goodell has done is create a new mess.

Disgraceful.

Labels: Hero/Hack, Sports

Posted by Ryan S. at 9:41 AM | Permalink | |

I'll try and write a full reaction post later tonight if I get all my homework done.

Liveblog of Democratic Response:

9:24 The Democrats have a plan now? When did that happen? Did I miss the memo?

9:23 The president just said he redefined our mission in Iraq...

9:22 It isn't 9 months into the surge...it is nine months since the announcement of the surge. These things take time.

9:21 I think the president actually did both things. He defined success as much as you really can in a conflict like Iraq, and success means troops come home.

9:20 Jack Reed, D-RI..who? Oh...military. That's why he's on the podium.

Liveblog of Bush:

9:15 Support "the troops levels General Petraeus has asked for..." 'I'm not asking for this...' Bush recognizes a 4-star is much more credible on Iraq at this point.

9:13 Bush is calling for unity on Iraq..."for the first time people on opposite sides of the issue can come together..." I wish I could be more optimistic about tat happening.

9:11 How we handle the transition to more of an oversight role in Iraq is going to be key to this whole venture.

9:09 Sharing of oil profits!

9:08 I'm saddened that his speech isn't happening in 2004 or 2005.

9:07 Bush is really pushing our success in al-Anbar, and for good reason.

9:02 Bush seems really confident. Winning the peace by making the Iraqis feel like they have secure freedom is a sadly obvious point.

Labels: bush Speech, Iraq, liveblogging

Posted by Ryan S. at 9:01 PM | Permalink | |

OK, so Putin has dissolved the Russian government. Now it is extremely newsworthy, don't get me wrong. However, it isn't as big of a deal as people might think.

What Putin has not done is told the government to pack up and go because he is installing himself as a dictator. Nope, not this time.

Putin dissolved the Russian government to have elections. Elections, I tell you! The same way that England has done it longer than this country has been in existence.

What is significant about it really is twofold. One, it shows that no matter what he does that we don't like Putin has some respect for the Russian Constitution. Two, it shows us who might replace him as President when he steps down, which is causing murmurs throughout the Russian elite:

The nomination of Viktor Zubkov, who currently oversees the government's fight against money laundering, appeared to have caught much of the Russian political elite off-guard.

Putin had been expected to announce in December whom he would back to run for president next year—and Russia's two first deputy prime ministers—former Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov and gas giant Gazprom board chairman Dmitry Medvedev—were widely considered to be the leading contenders.

"All expected successors had an awkward moment as Putin again showed that he's a master of disinformation," analyst Stanislav Belkovsky said on Ekho Moskvy radio.

Frankly, I'm just shocked the Russians have someone fighting money laundering.

Labels: Russia

Posted by Ryan S. at 2:19 PM | Permalink | |

For some reason, there are NFL teams in my mind that will always be good or always be bad. No matter what they do on the field, I still think of them as being at some 1990s-abstracted level of performance. For example, the Arizona Cardinals could win the Super Bowl this year and I'd never see it coming. Why? Because they're the Cardinals.

Maybe this is because of the impressions teams made on me in my youth. Or maybe some teams are just that consistent. I don't know, really.

The lists:

"Good" Teams:
Miami Dolphins
Denver Broncos
San Francisco 49ers

"Bad" Teams:
Cleveland Browns
Detroit Lions
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Atlanta Falcons
Arizona Cardinals

Labels: Sports

Posted by Ryan S. at 9:41 AM | Permalink | |

Today is the sixth anniversary of 9/11. This day is not about politics. It is about courage and bravery of those who died trying to save their fellow man. It is about being aware what is happening beyond our borders. It is about how we are all Americans.

That's all I feel I need to say.


Here are some links:
A post from last week about what we should be doing today
Memorial Dedication (Bucks County, PA)
Empty Sky by Bruce Springsteen

Labels: September 11

Posted by Ryan S. at 8:46 AM | Permalink | |

General Petraeus gave his report to Congress today (full text). He reported that the surge is working, and that troop levels can be returned to pre-surge numbers without losing progress already made. This is because the surge was about a change is tactics more than about sheer numbers. Under Petraeus' leadership, we've been fighting the insurgency and not merely killing insurgents, only to have them replaced by others.

Only Iraqis can make their country work, and Petraeus recognizes this:

The most significant development in the past six months likely has been the increasing emergence of tribes and local citizens rejecting Al Qaeda and other extremists. This has, of course, been most visible in Anbar Province. A year ago the province was assessed as “lost” politically. Today, it is a model of what happens when local leaders and citizens decide to oppose Al Qaeda and reject its Taliban-like ideology. While Anbar is unique and the model it provides cannot be replicated everywhere in Iraq, it does demonstrate the dramatic change in security that is possible with the support and participation of local citizens. As this chart shows, other tribes have been inspired by the actions of those in Anbar and have volunteered to fight extremists as well. We have, in coordination with the Iraqi government’s National Reconciliation Committee, been engaging these tribes and groups of local citizens who want to oppose extremists and to contribute to local security. Some 20,000 such individuals are already being hired for the Iraqi Police, thousands of others are being assimilated into the Iraqi Army, and thousands more are vying for a spot in Iraq’s Security Forces.

That is excellent news, and Petraeus also laid out goals for the future:

The operational considerations include recognition that:

• military aspects of the surge have achieved progress and generated momentum;
• Iraqi Security Forces have continued to grow and have slowly been shouldering more of the security burden in Iraq;
• a mission focus on either population security or transition alone will not be adequate to achieve our objectives;
• success against Al Qaeda-Iraq and Iranian-supported militia extremists requires conventional forces as well as special operations forces; and
• the security and local political situations will enable us to draw down the surge forces.

My recommendations also took into account a number of strategic considerations:

• political progress will take place only if sufficient security exists;
• long-term US ground force viability will benefit from force reductions as the surge runs its course;
• regional, global, and cyberspace initiatives are critical to success; and
• Iraqi leaders understandably want to assume greater sovereignty in their country, although, as they recently announced, they do desire continued presence of coalition forces in Iraq in 2008 under a new UN Security Council Resolution and, following that, they want to negotiate a long term security agreement with the United States and other nations.

The "solution" here is not on the military alone, but they play an integral part of a stable and free Iraq.

See also: Fiasco Book Review, The Problem With Bush's War

Labels: Iraq

Posted by Ryan S. at 6:25 PM | Permalink | |

I'll have a post containing my thoughts on Petraeus' report as soon as I get the chance to read and digest his statement, which can be found here.

Should be up this evening sometime.

Posted by Ryan S. at 3:04 PM | Permalink | |

My hero this week is the judge who struck down part of the USA PATRIOT Act:

A federal judge struck down parts of America's top anti-terror law as unconstitutional Thursday, saying courts must be allowed to supervise cases where the government orders Internet providers to turn over records without telling customers.

U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero said the government orders must be subject to meaningful judicial review and that the recently rewritten USA Patriot Act "offends the fundamental constitutional principles of checks and balances and separation of powers."

The law had been challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union, which complained that the revised law allowed the FBI to demand records without the kind of court order required for other government searches.

This is good, and I don't see how having a court involved in ISP record seizures is really all that much of a hindrance to fighting terrorism.

My hack this week is Norman Hsu, former Democratic fundraiser, for becoming a fugitive. If you're going to break the law, at least be prepared to deal with the consequences of getting caught. Sheesh.

Labels: Hero/Hack

Posted by Ryan S. at 9:51 AM | Permalink | |

Just as a programming note of sorts, this blog is now a ripe three years old.

It feels like longer.

Here is the oldest link from the Wayback Machine.

Labels: Anniversaries, blogging

Posted by Ryan S. at 9:13 PM | Permalink | |

L. Paul Bremer, former head of the CPA in Iraq is defending his decision to not recall Saddam's army:

The decision not to recall Saddam Hussein’s army was thoroughly considered by top officials in the American government. At the time, this decision was not controversial. When Mr. Slocombe held a press conference in Baghdad on May 23 to explain the decision, only two reporters showed up — neither of them Americans. The first I heard of doubts about the decision was in the fall of 2003 after the insurgency had picked up speed.

Moreover, we were right to build a new Iraqi Army. Despite all the difficulties encountered, Iraq’s new professional soldiers are the country’s most effective and trusted security force. By contrast, the Baathist-era police force, which we did recall to duty, has proven unreliable and is mistrusted by the very Iraqi people it is supposed to protect.

Interesting, especially the timing with Petraeus' report due Monday.

Labels: Iraq

Posted by Ryan S. at 12:26 PM | Permalink | |

If Obama wins either the Democratic nomination or the presidency, he will owe a large debt to Oprah Winfrey:

Oprah Winfrey has said she's not interested in running for president—but can she help elect one? On Saturday afternoon, Winfrey will throw the flashiest fund-raiser of the 2008 cycle when she welcomes about 1,500 guests to her Montecito, Calif., home to support the candidacy of Democrat Barack Obama. Tickets are sold out at $2,300 each, the legal maximum for primary-campaign giving. Hollywood stars Will Smith, John Travolta, Jamie Foxx and Halle Berry are all on the guest list. Among the musicians who'll perform: Stevie Wonder and gospel singer BeBe Winans, a Winfrey friend.

The $2,300 comes from the "max out" number for the primary, if memory serves.

Labels: 2008 Watch, Barack Obama

Posted by Ryan S. at 1:42 PM | Permalink | |

These are the books I read between the end of exams last spring and the first day of classes last week. Enjoy:

1. Falling Man – Don DeLillo
2. Fallen Dragon – Peter F. Hamilton
3. In the Wake of the Plague – Norman F. Cantor
4. Brave New World – Aldous Huxley
5. Old House of Fear – Russell Kirk
6. The Everlasting Man – G.K. Chesterton
7. Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring – J.R.R. Tolkien
8. Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers – J.R.R. Tolkien
9. A Humane Economy – Wilhelm Roepke
10. Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq – Thomas E. Ricks
11. The Kite Runner – Khaled Hosseini
12. Confessions – St. Augustine
13. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows – J.K. Rowling
14. Sex, Drugs, & Cocoa Puffs – Chuck Klosterman
15. What’s Wrong With the World – G.K. Chesterton
16. Foundation – Isaac Asimov
17. IV – Chuck Klosterman
18. Children of the Mind – Orson Scott Card

Labels: Books

Posted by Ryan S. at 3:07 PM | Permalink | |

Today's New York Times has an interesting article concerning the coming sixth anniversary of 9/11. It will be the first time the anniversary falls on a Tuesday, the same day of the week as in 2001.

The article points out that some people find the amount of tribute "annoying," but others feel the level of the previous five years is still appropriate.

I don't know how I feel. On the one hand, I understand the need to "move on" so to speak; to realize that the past is past, and no amount of anger or mourning will change what happened that day. On the other hand, 9/11 seems to be the watershed event of my lifetime, and more than in the "everyone remembers where they were when in happened" kind of way.

In a single day, our world changed. When Pearl Harbor happened, for example, there had already been fighting in Europe and East Asia for well over a year. On 9/11 we went from a peacetime mentality to a wartime mentality. In a way, the Cold War returned, albeit with a much more ambiguous enemy than the Soviet Union. We faced an enemy with a well-defined ideology with the capacity to kill Americans practically anywhere in the world at any time.

The impact on news reporting was drastic as well. People went from getting most of their national news from Jennings or Brokaw or Rather to being almost afraid of turning away from 24-hour cable news and the "crawl." Blogs really began to rise in prominence. The news gained a sense of immediacy which it had previously lacked.

I think what makes that day stick with us is the supposed randomness of it. Why that day? Why not Wednesday or Thursday? Why not Monday? Did the terrorists not like Mondays either? Why New York? Why again? Why those planes? Then there were the stories of people calling out sick that day, the people running late, or who went out to grab a bagel, and unknowingly saved their own lives. One thing 9/11 does is challenge our notion of fate. Where all those people meant to die? Most of them were doing what a lot of us do; going to work, paying bills. They were just like us, just like the people we work with.

I don't know what is the best way to commemorate those who lost their lives come this anniversary, but I know I carry them in my heart always.

Excuse me while I go listen to The Rising.

More: Book Review of Falling Man by Don DeLillo, Bucks County, PA 9-11 Memorial Dedication

Labels: September 11

Posted by Ryan S. at 10:10 AM | Permalink | |