Moving: Still A Bitch

by hilzoy

Had I known that I would be moving tomorrow, I would never have agreed to be a marshal at commencement today. And had I known before yesterday that I would be moving tomorrow, I would have had the nice people come in to pack stuff up earlier. As it was, however, they arrived at 8:30 and were done just in time for me to leap into my cap and gown and arrive at commencement on time, after which I got to stand around for an interminable amount of time while people lined up, etc., and then go to commencement. It was fun, especially when someone produced beach balls that we all batted around while all the names were read. Somehow, this evening, I have to pack everything else up -- "everything else" being all the stuff on various counters, etc., that I told the packers just to leave.

Yikes!

A few notes:

* I am glad that Lay and Skilling were convicted, both because they deserved it and because I gather there was a real question about whether the case would be too complicated for the jury. I'm always glad when the answer to those questions is "no!" -- both intrinsically and because it would be bad for corrupt CEOs to conclude that incredibly complex accounting gave them immunity from conviction.

* Dennis Hastert is under investigation by the FBI.Have we reached the point where it becomes appropriate to prosecute the Republican House membership under RICO?

* As the Republican party implodes before our eyes, I want to remind people of this post by Mark Schmitt, which I think is absolutely right, and one of many reasons why I'm glad my party does not have the kind of discipline the Republicans had. (It might need more discipline, but not that much, or that kind.)

"A command-control system like the White House-led Republican congressional system can be absolutely formidable for a certain period of time. But when it breaks down, it breaks down completely. The collapse is sudden, and total. Signals get crossed, backs get stabbed, the suddenly leaderless pawns in the system start acting for themselves, with no system or structure to coordinate their individual impulses.

Is this happening? I don't know, but it's getting close. I thought I'd seen it before, but each time they've pulled it back together. This time, I think there's too much happening at once.

The irony of all this for conservatives is that if they actually read Hayek and got anything out of it other than "government sucks," they would know this. Hayek's libertarianism was very pragmatic. Centrally controlled systems are flawed above all because they have no mechanism to correct their own errors, unlike distributed, self-organized systems. The Democrats in the Clinton years always operated in chaos, no one followed the party line, and there was a cost to that, but in the chaos and improvisation they found ways to get out of the holes that they had dug for themselves. The Rove/DeLay/Frist system doesn't have any means for correcting its mistakes -- look at the blank, lost looks on the faces of Senators Lugar and Chafee yesterday when they just had no idea what to do with a nomination that had fallen apart and couldn't fulfill their promises.

The Republicans accomplished unimaginable feats through the centralization of power. Three tax cuts, a prescription drug plan that will make Americans hate government, an insane war. But if the goal was long-term power, it is a strategy they will come to regret, if not today, someday."

* The American Prospect has a very interesting article on the history of our refusal to negotiate with Iran. (To those of you who don't read the Prospect, you should. It's really, really good, and its policy articles, while liberal, present the evidence and arguments clearly, without ducking inconvenient objections. It's everything a liberal magazine should be.)

In any case, I don't know whether that article would be available if I weren't a subscriber, so I'm reproducing a key section below the fold.

"As the United States was beginning its military occupation of Iraq in April, the Iranians were at work on a bold and concrete proposal to negotiate with the United States on the full range of issues in the U.S.-Iran conflict. Iran’s then-ambassador to France, Sadegh Kharrazi, the nephew of then–Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi, drafted the document, which was approved by the highest authorities in the Iranian system, including the Supreme National Security Council and Supreme Leader Khamenei himself, according to a letter accompanying the document from the Swiss ambassador in Tehran, Tim Guldimann, who served as an intermediary. Parsi says senior Iranian national security officials confirmed in interviews in August 2004 that Khamenei was “directly involved in the document.”

The proposal, a copy of which is in the author’s possession, offered a dramatic set of specific policy concessions Tehran was prepared to make in the framework of an overall bargain on its nuclear program, its policy toward Israel, and al-Qaeda. It also proposed the establishment of three parallel working groups to negotiate “road maps” on the three main areas of contention -- weapons of mass destruction, “terrorism and regional security,” and “economic cooperation.”

The document was sent to Washington just in time for a meeting between Iran’s U.N. Ambassador Javad Zarif and Khalilzad in Geneva on May 2, 2003. One copy arrived at the State Department by fax, and a second copy was taken to State in person by an American intermediary, according to a source who has discussed the letter with the intermediary.

The proposal offered “decisive action against any terrorists (above all, al-Qaeda) in Iranian territory” and “full cooperation and exchange of all relevant information.” It also indicated, however, that Iran wanted from the United States the “pursuit of anti-Iranian terrorists, above all MKO” -- the Iranian acronym for the Mujihedeen e Khalq (MEK), which had fought alongside Iraqi troops in the war against Iran and was on the U.S. list of terrorist organizations -- “and support for repatriation of their members in Iraq” as well as actions against the organization in the United States.

At the May 2 meeting in Geneva, a separate proposal involving exchange of information about al-Qaeda detainees and the MEK was spelled out by Ambassador Zarif. According to Leverett, Zarif informed Khalilzad that Iran would hand over the names of senior al-Qaeda cadres detained in Iran in return for the names of the MEK cadres and troops who had been captured by U.S. forces in Iraq.

To meet the U.S. concern about an Iranian nuclear weapons program, the document offered to accept much tighter controls by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in exchange for “full access to peaceful nuclear technology.” It proposed “full transparency for security [assurance] that there are no Iranian endeavors to develop or possess WMD” and “full cooperation with IAEA based on Iranian adoption of all relevant instruments (93+2 and all further IAEA protocols).” That was a reference to new IAEA protocols that would guarantee the IAEA access to any facility, whether declared or undeclared, on short notice -- something Iran had been urged to adopt but was resisting in the hope of getting something in return. The adoption of those protocols would have made it significantly more difficult for Iran to carry on a secret nuclear program without the risk of being caught.

The Iranian proposal also offered a sweeping reorientation of Iranian policy toward Israel. In the past, Iran had attacked those Arab governments that had supported the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, and Tehran had supported armed groups that opposed it. But the document offered “acceptance of the Arab League Beirut declaration (Saudi initiative, two-states approach).” The March 2002 declaration had embraced the land-for-peace principle and a comprehensive peace with Israel in return for Israel’s withdrawal to 1967 lines. That position would have aligned Iran’s policy with that of the moderate Arab regimes.

The document also offered a “stop of any material support to Palestinian opposition groups (Hamas, Jihad, etc.) from Iranian territory” and “pressure on these organizations to stop violent actions against civilians within borders of 1967.” Finally it proposed “action on Hizbollah to become a mere political organization within Lebanon.” That package of proposals was a clear bid for removal of Iran from the list of state sponsors of terrorism.

The document appears to have assumed that the United States would be dependent on Iran’s help in stabilizing Iraq. It offered “coordination of Iranian influence for activity supporting political stabilization and the establishment of democratic institutions and a nonreligious government.” In return, the Iranians wanted “democratic and fully representative government in Iraq” (meaning a government chosen by popular election, which would allow its Shiite allies to gain power) and “support for Iranian claims for Iraqi reparations,” referring to Iranian claims against Iraq for having started the Iran-Iraq War.

Finally, its aims included “respect for Iranian national interests in Iraq and religious links to Najaf/Karbal.” Those references suggested that Tehran wanted some formal acknowledgement of its legitimate interests in Iraq as next-door neighbor, and of the historically close relations between the Shiite clergy in Iran and in those Iraqi Shiite centers."

What was this administration's response? Did we think seriously about this, decide which parts were promising and which we couldn't live with, and propose a counteroffer? No:

"Iran’s historic proposal for a broad diplomatic agreement should have prompted high-level discussions over the details of an American response. In fact, however, the issue was quickly closed to further discussion. Leverett believes the document was a “respectable effort” to provide a basis for negotiations. Yet he recalls that there was no interagency meeting to discuss it. “The State Department knew it had no chance at the interagency level of arguing the case for it successfully,” he says. “They weren’t going to waste Powell’s rapidly diminishing capital on something that unlikely.”

The outcome of discussion among the principals -- Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Powell -- was that State was instructed to ignore the proposal and to reprimand Guldimann for having passed it on. “It was literally a few days,” Leverett recalls, between the arrival of the Iranian proposal and the dispatch of the message of displeasure with the Swiss ambassador."

Words fail me.

Comments

[DaveC]

Dennis Hastert is under investigation by the FBI.

Are you sure?

Is the FBI even investigating William Jefferson now?

My what a mess.

[bleh]

Hastert and DoJ are denying the story, and Hastert is calling for a retraction. ABC is standing by it, and quoting sources responding to the denials. A nice little pissing battle. Obviously, time will tell as to who is mistaken, or lying, and who is wronged.

The story of the '03 Iranian overture has bubbled up periodically, and given the detail and sourcing, and the lack of response, one assumes there's some truth to it; however, true or no, I just can't get particularly worked up about it.

It's not news; it's dog-bites-man. We know what motivates this administration, and what doesn't; they've made that clear in deed and word. "You don't negotiate with evil regimes" is not a caricature; it's a quote. Utter obliviousness to, or willful denial of, evidence discovered by independent fact-finders, or the opinions of long-standing and highly credible allies, simply do not figure into their calculus, compared to the economic interests of domestic constituencies, the machinations necessary to maintain domestic political control, or ideological idees fixes (more or less in that order).

What could it have gained their business allies to pursue rapprochement with Iran? How would it have looked to the mouth-breathers to cozy up to a member of the "axis of evil"? Why should we talk with Islamofascists who sponsor terrorism?

It's long since past time, imho, to cease being amazed by the galactic incompetence of the Bush administration (at everything but enriching their buddies, of course). The standard here should be the Grant administration, or perhaps Harding. Anything else is a grevious insult to past presidents.

[lilylily]

Oh Dave, jefferson is a pig but h's just one pig. The Kstreet/Abramof thing has connections all over the REpublican party leadership.

but that aside, I will be moving too, soon. One month, in fact. Before I move I an giving away everything I have made but not sold in the last five years. A great divestiture. I have a whole garage full of ceramic sculptures that I do not want to pack again.
This move is completely unreal to me. Somehow it is mving into paul's life even though we have lived together for five years already. I suppose its because we are moving to an area that has connections for him going back thiry years but is relatively new to me. Anyway I'm experiencing a sense of disorientation. It will be awhile before it is home to me. so I am very conscious of packing my identity to bring it with me and conscious of shedding things, too.
I'll be looking for a new job too, which I regret becaue I love the school where I work now. Only thirteen days and it's goodby to students I've taught for three years.. please excuse the typos. The font on this computer is really pale. (It's always the computer's fault!)

[kvenlander]

Emptywheel parses the various utterances to mean "federal investigators know about the bribe Denny took, but they're not investigating it".

ABC has their source (Junior Throat?) remark: "You guys wrote the story very carefully but they are not reading it very carefully".

Hmm.

[xanax]

European geography anyone?

A fun little educational game.
My best so far?
100% correct in 83 seconds
(but you'll need a really
good mouse to beat that).

[Charles Bird]

First, no doubt that moving sucks.

Second, there are serious doubts as to whether Hastert is being investigated.

Third, I think you're out to lunch on the so-called implosion of the Republican Party. The "command-control" business is just so much hooey, especially for the conservative wing, because it implies that a whole class of Republicans have been ordered to shut up and do as they're told. Delay tried that tack and it helped end his career. The debate between the conservative and Republican elements is a good thing and makes for a stronger party. Also, the conservatives have increasing influence because we're part of the reason why Bush's approval numbers are in the tank, and it's why he went through a recent housecleaning and it's why he hired a conservate in Tony Snow for press secretary, and it's why Alito is Supreme Court justice and not Mystery Date Miers.

Redstate has a series of posts on the "separation of powers" stupidity, the best one being this one. In fact, if the Democrats want to improve the health of their party, more public and spirited and passionate debate would be just the ticket.

As for Iran, that is one but one more reason why Bush is seeing conservatives separate from him. We should have face-to-face talks with the Iranians.

[Anarch]

The debate between the conservative and Republican elements is a good thing and makes for a stronger party.

What's the distinction you're drawing between "conservative" and "Republican" here?

[dutchmarbel]

Xanax: I did it in feruary and to my dismay I only scored 76%...

Moving is really hard. My worst move was when I moved from a one-room appartment to a three-room appartment when I was a student. People would come and help in the afternoon and since I didn't have that many things I would pack the evening before and on the morning of the moving day. This was pretty close to an examination period so I didn't have a lot of time.

Unfortunately I fell really ill and had to be admittend to the hospital. Panicked I called my best friend, who had to do the packing and overseeing for me. I stayed in hospital for three weeks, and came out if it to go to a empty appartment I never lived in before, with a pile of binbags containing my stuff in the middle of the room - including my unwashed dishes of the day I was admitted to the hospital...

In the weird but nice news category:
We have a stork group in one of our animal parcs. The population consists of 9 males and 7 females - and they found that three couples decided to go for same-gender houshoulds :)
Two male couples and one female couples started brooding on eggs and taking care of the young when the eggs hatched.
There is no difference in upbringing between the homosexual and heterosexual couples :)

I guess the anti-gay movement will now claim it is contegious in the Netherlands. Or maybe in the water :)

[cleek]

Delay tried that tack and it helped end his career.

well, it might have helped, but it wasn't the deciding factor.

[Dantheman]

"Delay tried that tack and it helped end his career"

In what world? Delay's career ended solely because of criminal charges brought against him. Had they not been filed, no one was even considering challenging him, and he would still be majority leader, with Hastert still the kindly face fronting the Republican house machine.

[Katherine]

Hastert says the DOJ leak was retaliation for his opposition to the search.

Jack Balkin is delightfully shrill about all this.

[Paul]

Is the FBI even investigating William Jefferson now?

Well, Dave, George W. Bush has sealed files from the Jefferson case for 45 days, so you should address your question to him.

You tell me why a Republican President wants to delay the investigation of a corrupt Democrat.

[trilobite]

Our party really could use more discipline, tho.

Specifically, our Congresscritters need to take more joint stands in favor of some basic principles so that the party as a whole can run on them next election. For example, several Democratic Senators just voted to pass the Hayden nomination out of committee. The Republicans, as always, voted lockstep for Hayden, so not one of those Dem votes was needed. Even if a Dem thought Hayden was a good appointee for CIA head, they could safely have voted against. But by voting 'aye,' they removed the issue from the board for the entire party. The Dems can no longer point fingers at any attacks by Hayden on our rights, the Republicans can point right back and say in all honesty that his appointment was bipartisan.

This vote was myopic and selfish to the point of suicide. Even simple enlightened self-interest should show them the value of a united front -- don't these people ever want to be committee chairs? And this sort of thing happens every day. All I can imagine is that they just aren't thinking in terms of whole-party election strategy. And they should be.

[Slartibartfast]

Slart's theorem of moves:

The miscellaneous stuff that you've promised yourself you'll pack into the two or three carboard cartons you've got left after the packing of all the really important stuff will not, even if packed in garbage bags to make optimum use of trunk space, take less than a half-dozen trips in your car to transport. If there are any houseplants, better rent a U-haul.

[Slartibartfast]

Hastert says the DOJ leak was retaliation for his opposition to the search.

I say that Hastert's opposition to the search is because he's being investigated. With just as much evidence, too.

[Chuchundra]

I moved twice last year. I think I'll be staying put for a while.

The second time, in November, was to move in with my lady love. I had planned to wait until April of this year, since that was when my lease was up, but I'm not a patient man, I'm afraid.

I found out that if I moved into another property managed my the same management company then it would only cost me a five hundred dollar transfer fee, instead of thousands and thousands of dollars in penalties, fees and lost security. There was one complex that was suitable for our needs and I began calling in September to see if they had a two bedroom apartment opening up.

Every week I would call and every week the nice woman would tell me no, she had none available. Then, about the middle of October, she said that there was one. The people had just moved out without warning and it was available immediately. In fact, if I wanted it, I had to move in by November 1st.

This gave me less than two weeks to plan, pack and execute a move encompassing three second-floor apartments (hers, mine and ours), thousands of books, dozens of pieces of furniture, huge amounts of bric-a-brac and god knows what else. Not to mention that my sweetie has a chronic illness and gets sick if she lifts heavy objects, so that I had to do a good part of the packing and stacking for her place as well as mine.

I did get it all done, in time and under budget. I hired movers for the actual move day. It was the first time I'd ever done that. I felt a bit like a slacker letting those guys move all my stuff, but I was totally exhausted when the day actually came and I was very, very happy that I had hired them. It was the best money I ever spent.

As for the Iran thing, I'm experiencing serious outrage fatigue. The administration could post videos on Whitehouse.Gov of W and Cheney taking turns putting kittens in a microwave and I couldn't gin up enough anger for a snippy blog post.

[Katherine]

I'm not saying I believe him...

I always thought people let DeLay's loathesome qualities blind them to how bad Hastert was. He is the Speaker, and yet tended not to get the blame.

[Frank]

kvenlander- Thanks for the link to the emptywheel post.

Republicans take comfort. Hastert isn't being investigated. The FBI merely leaked the fact that they knew he took bribes. Bush is ordering the FBI to stand down anyway so dont fret about Denny he will be fine.

[ScottM]

Yeah, last year we my girlfriend and I moved from individual apartments into a new home. My half of the move wasn't bad... I'd helped with enough bad moves that I was meticulous about having everything boxed, etc. However, Jennifer was a little less prepared...

It started off fine, but we also had too few helpers, and we did both apartments on the same day. As we completed my place, people were beginning to drag, but we wanted to race dark (etc.) By the time we were clearing her place out, there was a lot more scraping furniture against walls, stumbling, and slowness. Not a good way to end-- too much just got tossed in the garage because we were too tired to deal with it. That's made unpacking more difficult over the last year plus...

Still, I'm living with her, so the move was worthwhile in the end. ;)

[Gary Farber]

"What's the distinction you're drawing between 'conservative'and 'Republican' here?"

Anarch, with due respect (which is considerable), you can't know very much about conservatives or conservatism if you have to ask this.

It's the same question as "What's the distinction you're drawing between 'leftist' and 'Democrat' here"?

Neither answer is a mystery.

The differences get talked about constantly, outside the opposing echo chamber, within which if one only stays, the Other Side is homogenous mass led by the most extreme.

[Dantheman]

Gary,

"Conservative" and "leftist" are not opposites. If you changed "leftist" to "liberal" (a far closer antonym for "conservative"), then your complaint about Anarch becomes less obvious.

[cleek]

Bush is ordering the FBI to stand down anyway so dont fret about Denny he will be fine.

sounds like another opportunity for some bold FBI staffers to start whispering to the press. i'm sure the FBI wouldn't like to be shown as being a tool for partisan political purposes.

[cleek]

when my wife and i moved a couple of years ago, we packed for weeks, filling the garage with boxes. then, the day of the move came, and my wife came down with the flu. she could do nothing but sleep. but there was no bed, and the house was wide open, cold, (the week before Christmas) and full of people walking around with heavy things.

so, we drove her to the new house, with a blanker and a pillow. she curled up in an empty bedroom and slept in a ball on the floor the whole day.

the moving company put as much in their truck as they could hold. but they wouldn't take gas-powered things like the lawnmower, weed-eater, etc.. and, i still had to clean the house.

i ended up making ten trips bewteen houses that day (35 mins each way), loading up the car with leftover stuff, cleaning, vacuuming, repairing, etc..

moving is the pits.

[pedro]

Methinks Charles Bird is awfully wrong when he prescribes vigorous and passionate public debate as the means by which the Democratic party can help its political health. He would be right in thinking that it is healthy for society in general to hold vigorous public political debates, but when a party is out of power, it isn't smart to accentuate the differences within. Vigorous, passionate, public debate is a luxury a political party can afford when it is in power, and it is true that when it happens, it *can* lead to a strengthening of its health. The Democratic party should conduct its inner debate in a rather dispassionate and private manner, unless it wishes Charles Bird's Republican friends to opportunistically attack them as a fragmented bunch that offers no unified ideas for effective government.

[IntricateHelix]

3 Things:

1. Moving is still a bitch for me too, especially with the lovely onset of humidity (frown). It has become the task that never ends.

2. My sister works on the Hill and confirmed Dennis Hastert is under intense investigation and that things are sounding (very) bad. But at least corrupt officials are getting what they deserve. Hoorah!

3. Beach balls and commencement were fun.

[Chuchundra]

Quite frankly, I'm not all that interested in prescriptions from Republicans on how the Democrats should act, what policies they should put forward or who they should nominate for various offices. I had a bellyfull of that in '04 when there seemed to be wide agreement that we should nominate Lieberman because he was the candidate they liked best. Not that they would actually vote for him, but they liked him. Most of their "advice" is of similarly useful quality. You see to your party sir and I'll see to mine.

I'll go so far as to say the same thing at this point about anyone still on the fence. I appreciate that it may be very difficult for you to contemplate pulling the D lever when you've been a GOPer all your life. However, if you can't put that aside after all that's gone down in the last five years, if you can't say that, just for an election or two, do all you can to clean out the Augean Stables of our government, if you can't do that, I'm not all that interested in your advice for my party either.

[rilkefan]

A few years ago I wrote a poem about a photograph of me and a young woman standing on a bridge looking in different directions, about my inability to comprehend her decision not to live any longer, and about how I'd lost the picture in a move.

[Pooh]

Methinks Charles Bird is awfully wrong when he prescribes vigorous and passionate public debate as the means by which the Democratic party can help its political health.

Is Charles calling for intra party public debate, or for the Dems to step up and more publicly denounce Jefferson (and probably say 'yes, what the FBI did here was not ideal, but...')?

[Anarch]

Anarch, with due respect (which is considerable), you can't know very much about conservatives or conservatism if you have to ask this.

I know how I'd distinguish between them. I know how many people distinguish between them, many in ways which are mutually incompatible. I don't know how Charles is distinguishing between them, especially in this context, which is why I asked.

This is particularly true of the term "conservative" which, IME, generally means something very specific to the (self-identified) speaker but that specificity can refer to any of a number of different branches of conservativism, e.g. Movement Conservativism, "classical liberalism", economic/free market conservativism, religious conservativism, libertarian conservativism (including lesser variants like the aptly-nicknamed "shmibertarianism"), etc., as well as, for lack of a better term, GOP hack. It's very much unlike "leftist" or "liberal", IME, which tend to be much more amorphous in their descriptive intent.

[Anarch]

OT: holy crap, has anyone seen Crooked Timber's recent thread on incarceration? I knew the statistics but to see them laid out like that...

[dutchmarbel]

This is particularly true of the term "conservative" which, IME, generally means something very specific to the (self-identified) speaker

We have leftists over here, and socialists, and conservatives. We even have democrats - but no republicans :)

[lily]

Does anyone understand what's going on with this fight between Bush and Congress re the Jefferson files? I'm baffled.

Why raid just Jefferson? If the FBI is serious about ivestigating corruption there are all kinds of offices which could conceivably be raided. The White House didn't hand over the complete list of Abramoff vists, for example.
Is the FBI in fact dragging its feet on investigations of Republicans?
Is the raid on Jefferson a stunt to get one Democrat all over the news and thereby lessen the impact of the all of the investigations into all of those Republicans?
Is this a stunt to make it look like the Bush people are the anti-corrution heroes against the corrupt Congress?
Why the hell did Pelosi object to the raid on Jefferson?
It all seems very weird.

[cleek]

Is the raid on Jefferson a stunt to get one Democrat all over the news and thereby lessen the impact of the all of the investigations into all of those Republicans?

smells that way to me. although, no doubt, Jefferson needs some, umm, investigating.

it's also interesting that Abu Gonzalez and the FBI head threatened to resign if they were forced to give the docs back.

[liberal japonicus]

Pure unadulterated leftist tinfoil mindreading here from me, but my feeling is that the resignation threat occurred as a sort of psychological compensation, in that people like Gonzalez have refused to stand up for the right thing so often recently, this offers an opportunity to convince themselves that they are true to their own principles.

[CaseyL]

I don't get why Gonzales et al. threatened to resign over this one. The Bush Admin has been violating the separation of powers principle since it came into office; Gonzales hasn't turned a hair over things like withholding information and defying subpeonas from the Senate; so why go to the mat now?

My distrust of the Bush Admin particularly, and the GOP generally, is such that I suspect the whole thing is Kabuki: meant to enable the GOP to distance itself from Bush, for the sake of the '06 elections, without risking anything that actually matters. (Jefferson, being a Democrat, doesn't matter.)

[Charles Bird]

What's the distinction you're drawing between "conservative" and "Republican" here?

Those Republicans who supported Bush's unconservative acts and initiatives, Anarch. There are quite a few differences between the conservative wing and what Bush has trotted out, spending being a major one. There is some blurring with the immigration legislation. Personally, I believe it is more conservative to have a comprehensive bill than just securing the borders. If national security comes into play on the issue, securing the borders isn't good enough since the 9/11 hijackers came here legally but most had expired visas.

Delay's career ended solely because of criminal charges brought against him.

His career as majority leader was suspended because of criminal charges. His political career became toast in part when it was clear that conservatives refused to back him.

Vigorous, passionate, public debate is a luxury a political party can afford when it is in power, and it is true that when it happens, it *can* lead to a strengthening of its health.

I would say the opposite is true, pedro. When you're out of power, that is the best time to craft your issues, honing them with intense and passionate discussions among fellow members. A losing baseball team is not going to sit on its hands in the post-season. The good teams will analyze why they lost and get the best heads together to figure out how to turn their fortunes around. In politics, words and ideas are the coin of the realm, and there's no better way than to put them out there and let the best ideas come forth. Letting just inner sanctum do it would spell disaster, in my opinion. My so-called Republican friends are going to attack you either way, so why be afraid of putting your best ideas out there and debating them?

[Gary Farber]

"Gonzales hasn't turned a hair over things like withholding information and defying subpeonas from the Senate; so why go to the mat now?"

Because this was defending the institutional rights (as seen by Gonzalez and Mueller and some of their subordinates) of the DOJ and FBI, of course.

[Slartibartfast]

Those Republicans who supported Bush's unconservative acts and initiatives, Anarch.

Amen, Gary.

[Anarch]

Those Republicans who supported Bush's unconservative acts and initiatives, Anarch.

Ok then, how are you defining "conservative"?

[rilkefan]

Didn't CB have an intro post here describing his conservative worldview?

[Anarch]

Didn't CB have an intro post here describing his conservative worldview?

Possibly, but a) I can't (or at least, don't care enough to) find it and b) I'm not interested in the abstract expression so much as I am who the debaters in this supposed debate -- a strengthening debate, at that! -- between "conservatives" and "Republicans" are, especially if Tony Snow counts as the former but not the latter.

[Gary Farber]

Those Republicans who supported Bush's unconservative acts and initiatives, Anarch.

Amen, Gary.

However, that was Charles you're quoting, Slart.