OK, let’s catch up. First, politics.

ITEM: Karl Rove behind the Valerie Plame leak
I don’t think Rove has a problem here, despite all the gleeful gloating of the Democrats and the left. He isn’t going to jail. But Bush does have a problem. He said that anyone in his administration involved in the leak would be fired. And I know he said that, because I’ve seen it a good 15 times on CNN. Now we know—because he cops to it—that Rove was involved. The pundits on the left are busy making the case that he broke the law and should go to jail. Mistake. He isn’t going to jail, and really, who cares if he does beyond some sense of cosmic tit for tat befalling the king of sleaze ball politics? No, what needs to happen is he gets fired. What the Bushanistas aren’t appreciating is that their core base is comprised of patriots who are zealous about national security. Joe Republican doesn’t care—or even in fact really know—that Rove is the Bush mastermind. No, what they see is that a bureaucrat in the White House ratted out a front line agent, and that is bad. If Bush doesn’t fire the guy, and soon, he is going to lose the hearts and minds of rank and file Republicans who don’t follow Beltway Buzz, but who support our boys (and gals) in the armed forces, and a CIA NOC counts as one of our gals. In Mission: Impossible, Tom Cruise was the good guy.

ITEM: Bush nominates John Roberts
Best line: on the Daily Show the next day, correspondent Ed Helm reported that Bush nominated Roberts yesterday and “The democrats are outraged over the selection… as they have been for weeks!”

Me, I’ve never heard of the guy, but he seems like a good and reasonable choice. Meaning, of course, we get the lunatic when Rehnquist kicks.

ITEM: Terrorists bomb London; US Overreacts
I can't help but note the extent to which the media feeds off of a terrorist attack as if it were nourishment, and how the media subsequently fans the fire of terror that the terrorists desire to inflict. I had CNN on the day after the London bombings-- admittedly only one outlet-- and they had already implemented a feature called "Security Alert" which didn't exist 2 days prior-- sort of like a regular sports report, only instead of sports, its security. Kind of, "Terror on the 1s." Seems someone left a satchel unattended at Washington's Union Station. More at 21 after... And apparently the theme to be taken from the London attack is, maybe we aren't as safe as we all thought. I think that is the bunk. It has not become any easier for a determined perpetrator to, say, build a pipe bomb, get on the subway at Grand Central Station, and set it off. We knew a month ago that this was possible, that the threat of such attacks existed, and that probably we'd be seeing some of them. Indeed if anything I have to wonder that we haven't seen way MORE of the London-type attacks, either here or in Europe. So some terrorists pull off a relatively small operation (about one death for every 70 9/11 deaths) in London. Sure, it’s a bad thing. But does it change the world we live in? I say no; decidedly not. (Wolf Blitzer on CNN, real quote: "Are YOU safe on the subway? Log on now and vote.") I do not believe the mathematical probability of danger on a subway or bus ride has changed for me. There was already a risk; I knew that. There is still a risk. I think it is the same. I made my decision, and it stays made (although at my wife's request I took a taxi home the day of the bombings instead of the Lex; a $15 sop to the missus I didn't mind making.)... Day of the bombings, I was having lunch with my friend Henry at an Irish pub by Grand Central, and we were eating at the bar, and Giuliani comes on the TV. Fucking Giuliani. The unofficial US Secretary of When Bad Shit Happens. Of course Henry (rightfully) pointed out that terrorism was good business for Giuliani’s security consultancy, and he was probably going to make out good as a result of 7/7...

Labels: The politics