From Col. Lang – a very interesting post on the structure of the IDF.
Also, lost in all of the moral analysis of the current mess (why must San Diego always get bombed by Tijuana in analogies?) is how Israel benefits from it’s current engagement. The rocket attacks were bearable for quite some time – and no one goes to war out of principle anymore. The explanation of doing it while Bush is still in office doesn’t seem to be that credible, Obama hasn’t said anything different than Bush 43, and he has something to prove, so I imagine he would be even more agreeable to Israeli action than Bush (and as a reminder, Bush stopped the Israelis from bombing Iran a few months ago).
I suppose the War Nerd’s explanation of the attacks being used to weaken Hamas so Fatah could eventually win their civil war has the most credence, but that has problems too.
Via these questions to Obama supporters – basically he attributed McCain’s positions to Obama and the people shown approved of them. Although perhaps there’s some wisdom in this – we have ever fewer ways of gauging the future, and campaign rhetoric is harder to enforce (see Bush’s 2000 foreign policy speeches, and every economic speech he’s ever made) , so choosing on personality doesn’t seem ridiculous…
is made by former Reagan official Bruce Fein on BloggingHeads. And for the record, I still prefer Bush over Kerry. It won’t happen due to the fact that Bush was smart enough to enlarge presidential powers for all subsequent presidents, so no one will have the incentive to give any of them up.
The Bush administration has been like a movie version of a Jimmy Carter book, starring Steven Seagal, and lasting eight years.
As it seems to be the theme for the week, there are odd similarities between Bush and the Ipod. Both are predictable progressions over what came before, people get far too worked up about them, and people use them to talk about themselves.
Has anyone noticed that the descriptions of Barack Obama are similar to the descriptions of George Bush in 1999 and early 2000? The whole people-person, good listener, polite meme that’s been going around the Blogsphere lately was said about Bush as well.
Maybe we’re better off with massive egos who care far too much about their legacy (and Newt’s running in 08!). Food for thought.
I was reading part of the transcript of Rumsfeld vs the heckler (who’s a moderately well known anti-Bush activist, I’ve heard him on Democracy Now before) here in Atlanta last week. I came across this gem:
CHILD: Mom, do you have an Altoid?
MOM: Yes, I think so. Look in my purse.
CHILD: I don’t see any.
MOM: Oh, I thought I had some.
CHILD: LYING BLOODTHIRSTY MONSTER!
I’ve always wondered how is it possible that people can believe the government, particularly this one, is more capable of a grand conspiracy than a grand failure.
Bush hits 33% approval or so says Fox, and the affection isn’t going anywhere else. Why isn’t everyone happier about this? America is essentially having a libertarian perception of it’s government (similar to the mid 90’s actually). I’m thrilled, but the rest of the libertarian blogsphere seems to not notice this at all. It’s odd.
Instapundit on Wal-Mart
You know, to me Wal-Mart is a lot like George W. Bush. It’s not that I’m that big a fan in the abstract, really, it’s just that the viciousness and stupidity revealed in its enemies tends to make me view it more favorably than I otherwise would.
Which says it exactly right. For someone I didn’t vote for and for a place I rarely go (and when I do, it’s usually because of the hours, and not the price) I’ve spent a fair amount of time defending both. Ditto for the pro-lifers. Hmmm.
This sort of makes up for the steel tariffs, assuming he holds to it.
Report: Bush Says Gov’t Might Not Bail Out U.S. Automakers
NEW YORK Â President Bush is offering no encouragement to any U.S. automobile companies that might be thinking about turning to the federal government for a financial bailout.
“I think it’s very important for the market to function,” he said in an interview in the Thursday editions of The Wall Street Journal.
He said companies need to manufacture “a product that’s relevant” and that his administration has discussed new fuel technologies with the nation’s top two auto makers.
“As these automobile manufacturers compete for market share and use technology to try to get consumers to buy their product, they also will be helping America become less dependent on foreign sources of oil,” Bush said.
He repeats this whole foreign oil canard, as did 60 minutes last week (“dependence” is a poor description of our current situation, which is wholly dependent on price anyway, also, we use less foreign oil (as a percentage) as the price increases) but there’s been a lot of corporate welfare in this administration, probably more than Clinton’s and it’s nice to see it NOT happening somewhere.