A little while ago I wrote about the tax cut, noting that it would provide some relief for parents. I apologize for being too optimistic. They wound up removing the increased child credit for families making under $26,625. Ooops. (Via CalPundit.)
Category: Politics
Showtime is filming a two hour movie based on Bush’s 9/11 actions. This might be a good time to refer back to the CCR timeline of his movements on that day. I’m suspecting that since the movie is put together by a White House supporter who describes himself as “a member of the administration,” it won’t really touch on the sense of uncertainty one gets from that chronology.
I’m pretty much gobsmacked, here. I’m not big on the “What liberal media?” call, because there are some aspects of our media which are very liberal — and some which are very conservative. However, I can’t believe Showtime is going to air a two hour campaign commercial. You can talk about the media loving Clinton if you like, but man, his movie was Primary Colors.
The Telegraph has partial confirmation of the earlier Gitmo capital punishment story. It seems fairly likely, at this point, that there are plans for a camp that include an execution chamber.
Talking about this is not being alarmist; it’s part of the system. Which is to say, it’s citizens expressing their opinions when (as may well be the case here) some military personnel let their enthusiasm get the better of them. The reason abuses like that don’t happen is because people speak up. It is not sufficient to simply say “Well, we’d never do that.” It’s our job to remind our government that we don’t do that.
The Economist has a very good report on the Congo (via Gary Farber, who would like as many bloggers as possible to raise awareness of the situation). 2.5 million have died in the Congo over the last four years; the death toll makes Saddam look like a piker. If humanitarian motivations suffice to justify the war on Iraq, then the Congo ought to be next in line. If they don’t — we still ought to do something about this.
Kofi Annan has asked for help. There are reports of cannibalism. It’s ugly.
Paul Krugman, fearless economist, explains liquidity traps for the non-economists among us. Interesting stuff. He gets political towards the end, but I happen to think he’s mostly right. The extra few hundred bucks parents get on their taxes may make more of a difference than he claims, though.
Parenthetically, I am a bit baffled as to why more liberal commentators don’t address that aspect of the tax cut. It’s very hard to convince people that the tax cut mostly benefits the rich when you completely ignore the increase in the child credit. 400 bucks per child is not chump change. It is a pretty small percentage of the total cut, but that doesn’t mean middle and lower class parents won’t notice it, and you just look like a complete idiot if you pretend it doesn’t exist.
Back to the liquidity trap. Basically, the liquidity trap is what happens when you run out of room to lower interest rates. Suddenly, you’re short on ways to encourage people to spend money. This makes it hard to kickstart the economy. It happened to Japan, and there are signs we may be close to it; the EU is certainly close to it.
Krugman explains it way better than I do, anyhow.
I’m really hoping this one is wrong. Certainly the term “death camp” is overblown rhetoric. The reality is bad enough. We can’t be executing prisoners without very open due process, and Guantanamo Bay is a closed system. No appeals, no juries. No spectators.
This is not an accusation. I do not say that the proceedings would be unfair; I can’t say that, because I don’t know who the men on the tribunals would be. What I’m saying is this: our system is an open one precisely because our Founding Fathers knew that it was necessary; it is an open system because we are expected not to trust the government’s unsupported word.
Proof of fairness is a burden that lies on the shoulders of the court. They must not refuse to take up that burden.
Bruce R. is just destroying the initial responses to the Jessica Lynch story over on Flit. It’s the kind of impressively completist work that makes blogs look good. Start at the top and work down. Best quote so far, from Rumsfeld:
“We are certainly grateful for the brilliant and courageous rescue of Sergeant, correction PFC Jessica Lynch who was being held by Iraqi forces in, in what they called a ‘hospital.’”
Odd that they’d call it that, considering that’s what it was. Again: when conservatives say “You’re only against this because Bush/Rumsfeld/Ashcroft is doing it,” the appropriate response is often “Exactly.” The trust level is not exactly high here.
Bruce also demolishes various anti-Bush claims about the Lynch rescue, most notably the claim that the entire thing was staged and that the soldiers carried blanks.
The UN Security Council will approve a resolution lifting sanctions on Iraq today. This resolution is the result of a fair bit of negotiation and back and forth; it’s not the resolution the US wanted, and it’s not the resolution France, Germany, and Russia want. But everyone’s fairly happy with it. Lo, the art of compromise.
It gives the UN more of a voice in the post-war reconstruction, and extends the food for oil program for six months. Probably most importantly, from a practical standpoint, it doesn’t give Iraq permanent immunity from claims by creditors, which means that Russia and France have some leverage to encourage Iraq to enforce the pre-war contracts.
In other diplomatic news, NATO will be helping Poland run part of Iraq. The agreement was unanimous; a lot of symbolism there. I’m glad Poland was able to bridge the gap between the coalition and the Franco/German group.
Then:
“I don?t think there is any role for the U.N. in the short term in searching for, or identifying, or securing weapons of mass destruction, but we do not necessarily rule out some kind of U.N. role down the road.” That’d be U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton.
Today, things are different:
“The United States has started discussions with the International Atomic Energy Agency to make arrangements for IAEA teams to return to Iraq to determine what may have been stolen from nuclear sites, a State Department official said yesterday.”
I note this not so much because I don’t think it’s OK to change your mind. I do that all the time. It’s more because I keep seeing people talking about how this Presidency is a straight-shooting Presidency that means what it says. Also because when I point out that a political stance is untenable, and then that political stance changes, I like to crow about how I’m right.
You know, it might be dangerous to let kids play violent videogames. In this case, Washington State just made it illegal to sell videogames to teenagers if they contain violence against police. Good work, y’all! Now let’s take care of those icky books that tell stories in which there’s violence against policemen. Nasty things.