Backfill: See Chris Bowers' alternate explanation for Hillary's consistently weak Rasmussen showing. ...
Paul Krugman still knows how to make an unconvincing argument. Here he's railing against the "infiltration of the federal government by large numbers of people seeking to impose a religious agenda--which is very different from simply being people of faith." Seems like an easy target, after the Monica Goodling resignation. I was ready to be alarmed, until Krugman began deploying his killer examples [Emphasis added in boldface, followed by kf commentary in italics]:
For example, The Boston Globe reports on one Regent law school graduate who was interviewed by the Justice Department's civil rights division. Asked what Supreme Court decision of the past 20 years he most disagreed with, he named the decision to strike down a Texas anti-sodomy law.
Isn't there a legitimate, highfalutin' legal argument against what appears to be a "substantive due process" argument in Lawrence v. Texas, the anti-anti-sodomy decision? Why do we assume a Regent law school graduate isn't making that legitimate argument?
Or consider George Deutsch, the presidential appointee at NASA who told a Web site designer to add the word ''theory'' after every mention of the Big Bang, to leave open the possibility of ''intelligent design by a creator.''
The Big Bang isn't a theory?
But did you know that Rachel Paulose, the U.S. attorney in Minnesota -- three of whose deputies recently stepped down, reportedly in protest over her management style -- is, according to a local news report, in the habit of quoting Bible verses in the office?
Quoting Bible verses in the office? Say no more! How crazy can these people get? ... Would Krugman be as exercised if a lawyer quoted the Torah? The Vedas? What's wrong with quoting the Bible? How is this "very different from simply being people of faith"? Could Martin Luther King Jr. get a job in Krugman's administration?
I'm not saying theocratic incompetents from the "700 Club" aren't fanning out through the government. Maybe they are. I'm saying Paul Krugman is not convincing on this issue. He doesn't even seem to be trying to be convincing. Why should he try? There's always been a market for anti-hick editorializing in the New York Times, especially anti-Southern-hick editorializing(see Steve Oney's account of the Times' counterproductive crusade in the Leo Frank case of 1913, which presaged its more recent counterproductive crusade against Augusta National). Krugman's select Times readers aren't exactly going to demand rigor when it comes to attacking Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell. ... 1:42 A.M.
Sunday, Ap ril 15, 2007
Is the Bush administration's Kabuki appease-the-right pre-semi-amnesty show of force on the border already ending? The National Guard's border deployment
has been a success, according to the administration and the Border Patrol, which say the number of people trying to enter the U.S. illegally has fallen dramatically. [ North County Times]
The administraiton's natural reaction to the success of this deployment is, of course, to ... reduce the deployment! 'It was working, so we stopped it!'... There are several possible explanations for this seemingly perverse, risky move: 1) The guardsmen are needed in Iraq and Afghanistan; 2) The Bushies cynically think conservatives won't notice and will stay appeased while Congress passes "comprehensive" reform; 3) The Bushies think they don't need conservatives to pass "comprehensive" reform; 4) The Bushies have given up on "comprehensive" reform; 5) It was working, so they stopped it. Specifically, the reduced flow of illegal immigrants was forcing employers to raise wages to attract unskilled workers. Can't have that. Employers didn't like it, and the GOP is the party of employers. ... It's overdetermined! ... P.S.: My guess is a mix of 1, 2, and 5. ... 11:05 P.M. link
Saturday, Ap ril 14, 2007
L.A.'s Answer to Joel Klein:LAT's Bob Sipchen reports on the latest Los Angeles charter school blowup, in which the city's school board appears to have tried to block charters in black/Latino South Central L.A. that many parents seem to want. Not surprisingly, the local NEA-affiliated union is implicated! Surprisingly, it'snot the usual "union kills charters" story. It's more a "charter entrepreneur tries to work from within with support of new superintendent and learns his lesson" story. ... The moral would seem to be that changing the school system from within is like changing L.A. Times from within: it's hard, almost impossibly hard, much harder than letting market-like competition put the dinosaur-like institution out of business as customers go elsewhere. (Sorry, Bob!) "Exit" beats "voice." It usually does. It's easier to stop going to a restaurant than to talk the chef into learning how to cook. ... 9:00 P.M.