| |
 |
Wednesday, August 07, 2002 |
The Age: "American movie, recording and software executives could be prohibited from entering Australia or extradited to face criminal charges if a copyright protection bill before the US Congress passes into law." [Scripting News]
11:05:12 AM 
|
|
NYT. The administration fumbles to find ways to stop the slide in stem cell research due to its restrictions on the number of lines that can be used. The problem is that the ban went into effect well before there were enough stable, abundant lines in place (with prenegotiated intellectual property rights). This gaffe has all but stopped stem cell research that is critical to curing diabetes, Parkinsons, and a huge variety of other diseases. This means the President has just locked-in opposition to his re-election by the millions of families that are impacted by these diseases. They will likely be one issue voters.
For example: my father has Parkinsons. If this ban wasn't in place he would vote Republican, but now he will probably vote in any Democrat that supports lifting the ban. So would my mother. In addition, my daughter has diabetes, so I am absolutely going to vote in any Democrat that would lift the ban. So will my wife. I hope that as the election nears the rest of my immediate family is going to to follow the same pattern. That's another 8 or so votes spread over electoral swing states.
The creation of millions of one-issue voters joined in opposition to you, is like touching the third rail in American politics. You do it, and you won't survive long in office. [John Robb's Radio Weblog]
9:31:17 AM
|
|
Leaks? Quick, get a plumber!
A Rand Corporation analyst came to the Pentagon and suggested that Saudi Arabia is an enemy of the U.S., the Washington Post reported Tuesday. The article points out that this is not the government's policy or view, but rather an independent analyst's perspective; it also suggests that this perspective has growing currency within the Bush administration. I heard Defense Secretary Rumsfeld fulminating on NPR's top-of-the-hour news about this Pentagon leak. "Unprofessional," he fumed. It did not represent the government's point of view. It was obviously "leaked by someone who wants to feel important." The leaker, he concluded, should go to jail. This is the Bush administration's reflex every time there's a leak exposing a policy rift: Which traitor broke ranks? Isn't it time Rumsfeld and his colleagues grew up and admitted that leaks like this happen only when there is genuine disagreement among policymakers, and one of them, vying for position, chooses to send up a flare in the press? (I'm not subscribing here to the darker conspiracy-theory view that these leaks are in fact orchestrated by the administration even as it disavows them. That can happen, but I don't think it happens often, and I don't think it's happening now.) Rumsfeld may not like that way of doing business. It is arguably not a good way of doing business. But it's not about "wanting to feel important." There's a real issue at stake here: How do we deal with the fact that Saudi Arabia's government is both an ally and in many ways a backer of the radical Islamism that we find ourselves fighting? Since we're nominally "at war" and American lives are actually and potentially at stake, those policy conflicts ought to be debated in full public view, not left purely to the "professionals." Instead, the Bush administration's first resort is to demand that leakers go to jail. Which former Republican administration does that remind you of? Right -- one that ended in resignation and disgrace. Rumsfeld knows all about the Nixon crew's way of dealing with leaks, of course; he got his start in politics with them. [Scott Rosenberg's Links & Comment]
7:51:21 AM
|
|
© Copyright 2003 Clarence Westberg.
|
|
|
|
|
This is my blogchalk:
United States, Minnesota, Bloomington, West, English, Clarence, Male, 51-55.
|
|
