Ed Offley at Soldiers For the Truth has this good short piece about Rumsfeld’s selection of Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker to be the new Army Chief of Staff.
Whither Hutchins?
Columbia man John Coumarianos raises questions about the state of liberal education in the U.S.
Since Robert Maynard Hutchins was president of the University of Chicago, no major American university, with the possible exception of Boston University under the rule of John Silber, has had a president who has had an inkling of what liberal education is all about. This is staggering to contemplate, but it is the awful truth.
Strong words. It’s been a [cough] while since my own experience at the U of C, so I don’t know how Chicago stacks up today. John’s thoughts are worth reading.
Afghanistan Photos
Here’s a nice site by a young American of Afghan origin who recently returned to the old country. Interesting photos and commentary.
(via J. E. Simmons)
Dangerous Hypocrisy
“Bush condemns Jerusalem bombing ‘in strongest possible terms'” (MSNBC TV). Well of course he does. But he shouldn’t have facilitated the attack by criticizing Israel in a way that made clear he regards cutting a deal as the main goal of his efforts. He shouldn’t have criticized Israel for defending itself — doing on a small scale what the U.S. has done on a large one. He shouldn’t have put the screws on Israel while publicly overlooking continued Arab (except maybe Jordanian) hostility to Israel and sympathy for Palestinian terrorism. He shouldn’t have tolerated the Palestinian leadership’s good-cop/bad-cop game. His inconsistency signals weakness, and it’s no surprise under the circumstances that the Palestinians continue to make terror attacks. For them, it pays.
Hillary redux
Does anyone else see the similarity between H.R.C. and Nixon? Both tainted by scandal, they are also the most polarizing figures from each of their respective parties. The irony is particularly sweet, since H.R.C. revels in her hatred for R.M.N. I think she has a slightly better chance of being elected President than Nixon would have if he were alive today, (and there were no term limits), but not enough of a chance to actually get elected. The intensity of hatred, contempt, and mistrust felt for these two individuals by the body politic is equal at least, and may be skewed higher towards Hillary, with the passage of time having mitigated somewhat the enmity directed at Nixon. Hillary, however, is the true legacy of the Clinton Presidency. Bill Clinton was nothing more than a patsy who achieved his highest goal in life when he ejaculated on a kneeling intern in the hallway of the Oval Office, and a patsy does not merit lasting hatred. All of the baggage of the House of Clinton now falls directly on her head. FWIW, here is my admittedly non-scientific prediction:
Probability of a 2004 Hillary run—1% She will let fellow Dems cut each other up and will wait for a non-incumbent.
2008 Hillary run—95%
2008 Hillary win—5% Have to allow for the Republicans screwing up.