Politics

Day 34: Still no government in Iraq. The problem remains the same as it was the day after the election results were announced; the United Iraqi Alliance doesn’t have a 2/3rds majority by itself, the Kurds aren’t willing to form a coalition unless they get Kirkuk, and Allawi’s faction isn’t big enough to form a majority with the Kurds. Allawi has been pressuring the UIA in an effort to pull away enough votes to get a majority. Sistani, who backs the UIA, is lobbying against that (original) and will probably succeed in holding the line. The Kurds are claiming their issue is with the possibility of an Islamic state; this is a problem for them but Kirkuk is really the key bargaining point. ...

On the other hand, Scalia’s further comments on the display of the Ten Commandments are wrongheaded (original). His appeal to majority opinion is not only Constitutionally unsound — there is no question that the Constitution establishes the country and the laws thereof based upon the consent of the governed, and a strict constructionalist should not assert that the Constitution and our laws are derived from God — but poorly argued (original). He says “The minority should be tolerant of the majority expressing its belief that this government comes from God.” Perhaps so, but the government is not an instrument to express majority views. The majority of the country voted Republican in this last election; that does not mean the government is empowered to place displays extolling the virtues of the Republican Party in courthouses. ...

Helpful hint to the legions of Democratic strategists who read this (I hear I’ve got a huge following in — no, wait, that was my stomach rumbling): When Scalia says that there’s no material difference between legislative proclamations invoking God’s name and putting up the Ten Commandments, he’s (intentionally or not) setting up a trap. He’s absolutely correct, too. I’ve written about this before; Cambridge City Hall has a keystone which explains that the Commandments are the source of the law and which is just as religious as anything Roy Moore did. ...

Speaking of Oscar nominations, here’s the stupidest thing I’ve read today (original): But here’s an interesting dog that isn’t barking… Michael Moore gets passed over for the big award he coveted… and the lefty bloggers aren’t up in arms. In fact, nobody on the left is talking about Moore today. I still strongly believe that no blogger is obligated to write about any topic, but I just find it interesting that web personalities who one would think would be big Michael Moore fans are collectively shrugging their shoulders over this. You know a lot of Christian conservatives are grumbling about the three nominations in technical categories for “The Passion of the Christ,” and Kathryn’s already noted this on the Corner. ...

Final tally: around 58% of eligible Iraqi voters voted. My definition of success was 60%, so that’s a near miss. It’s close enough so that I don’t feel comfortable saying Bush missed that metric, but I wouldn’t say he succeeded either. The ruling coalition needs 184 votes to reach a 2/3rds majority. The United Iraqi Alliance can reach that easily with the Kurdish parties, and fall just short if it teams up with Allawi’s Iraqi List. That means, in practice, that the UIA can form a weak ruling coalition with Allawi and a strong one with the Kurds. The price of doing business with the Kurds is a mostly independent Kurdish north, possibly including Kirkuk. ...

OK, so Guckert got his press pass (original) as a representative of GOPUSA. Apparently GOPUSA is not linked to the Republican Party and thus their reporters can get credentials. Fair enough; I’m inclined to think that we want fairly lax standards for who can get into the press room and ask questions. More people asking questions is good. However, if The Raw Story and BuzzFlash (original) and, hey, even Daily Kos aren’t currently applying for daily press passes under the excitingly loose guidelines for accreditation — well, I don’t know what they’re waiting for.

Hm. Looks like the Iraq election turnout numbers (original) may be somewhat lower than first reported. Apparently the official number is 60%. Developing, as they say.

For some reason, Glenn Reynolds (original) is very interested in the Volcker Report, which implicates the UN in corruption involving Iraq’s food for oil program, but hasn’t said a word about CNN’s report that the US condoned Saddam’s oil smuggling.

About that election — I gotta say, it looks like it went better (original) than I thought it would. The final results won’t be in for another week or two, but the preliminary indications look solid in terms of turnout, and I’m glad for that. In retrospect, I should have specified the necessary turnout for each major ethnic segment of Iraq; the biggest problem I see going forward is that the Sunnis stayed away in droves. I’m hearing 20% turnout. That rekindles my worries about civil war in Iraq; a lot depends on whether or not any Sunni parties are included in the governing coalition. No party won a 2/3rds majority, which is the majority needed in the National Assembly to elect a President, so there will be a coalition. Who will the members be? That’s the big question (original). ...

It’s pretty great that Iraq is getting to have an election. I don’t have a lot of hope for it; I think that we’ve failed to prevent the Sunni/Shia conflict from heating up, and I am not yet convinced we’re going to see any kind of stability in the country over the course of the next five years or more. But I’m glad that Iraq is having a multi-party election. It’s been over fifty years since they’ve had one.