David Brooks and the Bob Dole Fallacy

A mostly political Weblog.
Aug. 16 2005 3:05 AM

Brooks and the Bob Dole Fallacy

Plus--kf's jejune swoon!

(Continued from Page 8)

P.S.: The real explanation, I suspect, is that Huffington's staying near Sag Harbor and the Judy-as-source theory--even though it seems less simple and straightforward than the competing 'Libby-leaked' scenario--is in fact what vacationing media types are buzzing about, as  Huffington herself reports. She gets points for being guided by what solid schmoozalism and old-fashioned sandal leather tells her the story is as opposed to what Democratic frog-marching fantasies (or bloggish deskwork) says the story should be. ...

P.P.S.: She also buries a big potential lede--

But what worries my Times sources the most is that it smells like the straw that could break the Gray Lady's back. A lot hinges on how much of what Judy knows Bill Keller and Arthur Sulzberger also know.

I'm not convinced of the Judy Theory myself, which means I think Keller's in less trouble and Rove's in more trouble than Arianna does. But I'm not in Sag Harbor! ...

Update: Surprisingly, Arianna does not graciously accept the mantle of nonpartisan truthseeker!  Instead, she keeps her left base in line with a cake-and-eat-it-too response that holds out the prospect of nailing both Rove and Judy Miller--because Rove must surely have had "multiple sources" on Plame's CIA status. I don't actually doubt that's Arianna's preferred outcome. But there is a reason why Rove and Libby seem to be promoting the idea that they heard about Plame from reporters. That's because it helps their case--i.e., helps keep them from being indicted, which is pretty much the whole ballgame at this point. Even if they had multiple sources, it's much harder for a prosecutor to prove beyond a reasonable doubt they got the information from Source A (classified memos that should have alerted them to Plame's covert status!) if they can argue they got it from Source B (a journalist like Miller). Matthew Yglesias  at least recognizes that at this point the left faces a wish-fulfillment choice between nailing Miller and nailing Rove. ...  2:15 A.M. link

Bachelors heard: Everyone's saying that welfare causes terrorism! Does polygamy cause terrorismtoo? ... P.S.: William Tucker  writes:

Today polygamy is not practiced widely in Islamic countries, and only accounts for about ten percent of all marriages. The country where the distribution of wives is most unequal—Saudi Arabia—seems to be the best at producing roving jihadists who roam the world in search of conflict.

But if polygamy isn't widely practiced in Islamic countries, can it really be so important that violent jihad is "unlikely to disappear until it is eliminated"? ... 12:40 A.M. link

82_horizontal_rule