With summer fully and officially upon us, another small collection of non-sequiturs and self-deceptions from current news and events:
Palin's Failin's: Pride of place surely must go to today's disclosure that Sarah Palin will resign as Governor of Alaska in order to....who knows! ... I'm betting on something iffy that may come to light soon. If not, will she try to garner support to run for President? Is it her self-delusion, or am I myself suffering from delusion? Unfortunately, past history demonstrates that lack of qualification is no bar to getting elected President, so perhaps Palin hopes to steal a march on those dirty ol' Democrats and their "national-media" allies by becoming the first woman to run for President. She may want to consider whether the staunchly traditional Republican core can be expected to support a woman for the Big Job.
The Oscarmom: The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has announced that in future, there will be 10 Oscar nominations for Best Picture, rather than just 5. Huh? It's a rare year when Hollywood produces even five excellent movies. Presumably the Academy is responding to critics who have complained the annual Oscar show is not long enough.
Fruits of Health Care: Anyone who may doubt that there's always a way for a creative corporation to find a way around the spirit and letter of a law may want to read "Cherry-Picking" in this week's Forbes, which describes how health insurance companies work hard to select only the healthiest, least costly population to insure, and flatly predicts that even if reform legislation mandates HMOs to cover anyone who applies, it won't happen.
Franken Sense: The Minnesota Supreme Court has finally got around to certifying a winner in last fall's Senate election. It's about time (see "The GOP and Democracy" among my Short Takes about a month ago). Some see this as a milestone because a 60th Democrat in the Senate supposedly makes the party filibuster-proof, but I expect it will mean little in practice.
Republicans to U.S. Public: Buzz Off! For a couple of decades, Republicans have been busy mastering the art of relabeling issues and proposals they don't like but can't defeat with reasoned argument. (Sample: "inheritance tax" becomes "death tax.") The game continues, as this article reports, but I was impressed by the hubris by this attitude attributed to a GOP terminology advisor, who "conceded that the public wants real reform and ... the only way Republicans can defeat Obama's plan is by co-opting the language of reform." So if people want it, the GOP needs to defeat it? Can this be good politics? It worked once; let's see if we the people have sense enough to not allow ourselves to be deceived once again.
Unpopularity Contest: The Washington Post editorializes today for our senior military to provide the President its best advice without trying to second-guess what he wants to hear. Absolutely right. They think the generals should be asking for more troops. Maybe. But the editors get addled when they admit that "a larger American force could prompt a backlash by Afghans," but "that is not the problem at the moment," because most Afghans still support the U.S. presence. So I guess the answer is to increase troop presence until we do get backlash? Let's not forget that no number of troops we could field would allow us to provide absolute security in Afghanistan's rugged hinterlands. The whole premise of the administration's approach is a limited-size force with limited objectives.
Comments