Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

Election Snapshots

Lots happening.

  • Stirling Newberry describes the campaigns' master plans and fears as we enter the home stretch:

    Television rules the day from here on in, it is about, not the doers, the thinkers the talkers – but the watchers. And in recent days those watchers are breaking hard away from Bush, because his message of “Iraq is alright” is not matching what they see from their own lives. In the next few days the mood of the media will also be important – do they stand by their man? Or do they begin to come over to the idea that kicking Bush can play – and that CBS wasn't wrong, just a little to early in shorting Bush with their memo story?

    Bush's reliance on Iraq says he knows that the economy, and even terror are losing messages. Which means he knows he has lost. Kerry pulling back means he knows he is losing.

    Who loses this one first? That is, who says something that can be played and replayed by the media as a sign of being “out of touch”. For those that have counseled aggression, instead there will be conservation – avoiding of any word that can be taken out of context. Both candidates will speak like movie reviews – even one word can kill them, so every word will ooze message. If they attack, they will pan, if they pander, they will gop on the praise in globs and blobs.

    The serious people have made up their mind about this election, now comes the sideshow version of the campaign, where both candidates become caricatures, not from the media, but by and for the media.

  • Rebecca Danner checks in from a stint at a campaign phone bank.

    I dreaded the idea of phone banking and only reluctantly signed up but, to my surprise, it ended up being a lot of fun and I really feel like it makes a difference. When I told people about it the next day, I found that most of them had the same reservations and questions that I had going into it so I thought I’d write up a quick FAQ to encourage everyone out there to give it a try.

  • Randy Paul chortles over the fissures appearing in the previously monolithic South Florida Cuban vote.
  • Robert Sam Anson displays boundless cynicism about the campaign press corps.
Posted in Politics: US: 2004 Election | Comments Off on Election Snapshots

Antiquarian’s Delight

Don't hold your breath, but apparently in the UK, impeachment, a procedure last used in 1805 remains vital today.

Tony Blair could be impeached before the House of Lords for misleading Parliament over the basis for military action against Iraq, two leading lawyers say in advice published today.

They believe there is a case that the Prime Minister is guilty of a serious breach of constitutional principles.

Rabinder Singh, QC, and Prof Conor Gearty say the ancient procedure, under which MPs initiate criminal proceedings for actions that would otherwise go unprosecuted, can still be used to call ministers to account.

There's no chance that the Commons, controlled by the New Labour Party, would ever convict. But I suppose there's a real non-zero chance that the quirky House of Lords might at least debate the issue of voting a bill of impeachment.

Of course here in the US we only impeach people for lying about sex, not for lying to Congress and the nation about why we are going to war.

Posted in UK | 1 Comment

Fearful Asymmetry

Outlet Radio via Daily Kos

Dan Rather, CBS News Anchor

1. given documents he thought were true
2. failed to thoroughly investigate the facts
3. reported documents to the American people as true to make his case
4. when confronted with the facts, apologized and launched an investigation
5. number of Americans dead: 0
6. should be fired as CBS News Anchor

George W. Bush, President of the United States

1. given documents he thought were true
2. failed to thoroughly investigate the facts
3. reported documents to the American people as true to make his case
4. when confronted with the facts, continued to report untruth and stonewalled an investigation
5. number of Americans dead: 1100
6. should be given four more years as President of the United States

Posted in Politics: US: 2004 Election | 2 Comments

What They Bought With Their Lives and Bodies

When you want cost-benefit analysis, go to an economist.

Edward of Obsidian Wings asks a straightforward question: “What have our 1,000 troops died for?”

This question has a straightforward answer. The first 100 died (and the first 500 were maimed) to liberate Iraq from a dreadful tyrant who had no operational ties with Al Qaeda, no weapons of mass destruction, posed no threat to the U.S., and posed little threat to his neighbors.

The next 900 died (and the next 4500 were maimed) because:

  1. Cheney and Rumsfeld wanted to show that we could conquer, occupy, and control Iraq with a small force all by ourselves so that the Syrians and the Iranians would be scared of what we could do with the rest of our army.
  2. Nobody in the White House dared propose any change in policy when it became clear to everybody that Cheney and Rumsfeld were wrong.

Further conclusions to draw from this straightforward answer are left as an exercise for the reader.

Posted in Iraq | 3 Comments

Live Webcast of Dalai Lama’s speech

The University of Miami Libraries and the School of Communications are sponsoring a live Webcast from the UM Convocation Center of His Holiness the Dalai Lama's speech A Human Approach to World Peace beginning at 3 p.m. today. Visit www.miami.edu/dalailama.

Posted in U.Miami | Comments Off on Live Webcast of Dalai Lama’s speech

Juan Cole is *Very* Shrill Today

Juan Cole is so shrill today that we need a new term for it.

Read If America were Iraq, What would it be Like?.

There's really only one thing you can say about this: Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Juan Cole R'lyeh wagn'nagl fhtagn!. (Talk about dumb slogans…)

Oh heck, I'm going to quote the whole thing.

Continue reading

Posted in Iraq | 5 Comments