Books reviews, current events, and other musings

NPR had a revealing piece about the number of Americans wounded in Iraq. Around 9,000 soldiers in the US Army were injured enough to be medically evacuated out of Iraq (from Eschaton). The military is, naturally enough, reluctant to release statistics of that sort; the reporter couldn't find the analogous figures for the Navy or Marines. The human cost of this unnecessary war is heartbreaking, and the public rarely hears anything about it.

Howard Dean's Blog for America pointed to journalist Matt Taibbi's take on the widespread depiction of Dean as angry. The reporters covering the Dean campaign had a different impression.

With us reporters on the plane, Dean was never anything but congenial and accommodating. And in his speeches and public appearances, he presented the full gamut of emotions. I think I speak for a lot of the reporters in saying that had I not just read the Fineman and Tumulty pieces, I would’nt have been aware that he was any angrier than any other candidate running for office. Christ, Dick Gephardt by comparison is a raving lunatic: waving his finger all the time and screeching, "Bush is a miserable failure!" with that creepy mask-like face of his.

It's frustrating how the media invents character flaws for Democratic, but not Republican, candidates.

posted by Julian at 9:35PM

Stephen Moore, president of the Club for Growth and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, expresses mixed feelings about Howard Dean. A few months ago, he wrote a Weekly Standard article, The Appeal of Howard Dean.

SEVERAL YEARS AGO an obscure Democratic governor from the politically inconsequential state of Vermont was the guest speaker at a Cato Institute lunch. His name was Howard Dean. He had been awarded one of the highest grades among all Democrats (and a better grade than at least half of the Republicans) in the annual Cato Fiscal Report Card on the Governors. We were curious about his views because we had heard that he harbored political ambitions beyond the governorship.

Dean charmed nearly everyone in the boardroom. He came across as erudite, policy savvy, and, believe it or not, a friend of free markets--at least by the standards of the Tom Daschle-Dick Gephardt axis of the Democratic party. Even when challenged on issues like environmentalism, where he favored a large centralized mass of intrusive regulations, Dean remained affable.

"You folks at Cato," he told us, "should really like my views because I'm economically conservative and socially laissez-faire." Then he continued: "Believe me, I'm no big-government liberal. I believe in balanced budgets, markets, and deregulation. Look at my record in Vermont." He was scathing in his indictment of the "hyper-enthusiasm for taxes" among Democrats in Washington.

He left--and I will never forget the nearly hypnotic reaction. The charismatic doctor had made believers of several hardened cynics. Nearly everyone agreed that we had finally found a Democrat we could work with.

On the other hand...

In the ad by the GOP-leaning Club for Growth, an announcer asks a couple leaving a barber shop, "What do you think of Howard Dean's plans to raise taxes on families by $1,900 a year?"

The man responds: "What do I think? Well, I think Howard Dean should take his tax-hiking, government-expanding, latte-drinking, sushi-eating, Volvo-driving, New York Times-reading ...," and the woman continues, "... body-piercing, Hollywood-loving, left-wing freak show back to Vermont where it belongs."

The 30-second ad will begin airing in Iowa on Wednesday, running in the Des Moines media market until the state's precinct caucuses on Jan. 19. It is the group's second ad to hit Dean on the tax issue.

Stephen Moore, president of the group, which helps elect fiscal conservatives, said Dean has "lunatic economic ideas."

Perhaps Moore is trying to establish himself as an authority regarding lunatic ideas. Though Counterspin Central has an alternate theory.

Plus, the ad is so stupid and over the top it actually makes Dean look good.

Hmmm...maybe that was the point?

From that perspective, Stephen Moore is a fifth columnist, working within Cato and the Club for Growth to elect Howard Dean.

posted by Julian at 5:45AM

Nothing Sacred: Women Respond to Religious Fundamentalism and Terror, edited by Betsy Reed, is a feminist take on various post-9/11 concerns, though many of its essays were written before 9/11. Like most anthologies, its essays vary in quality. The most compelling selections dealt with the complex and often violent relations between Hindus, Muslims, and others in India. Other essays on Muslim fundamentalism revealed interesting details about life in specific places: Algeria, Iran, the U.A.E, and Palestine. More general discussions on women's life in the Muslim world and Afghanistan contained material that I've seen elsewhere. The Christianity section went all over the place: Jerry Falwell's pro-life campaign, a history of American fundamentalism, and internal struggles within the Catholic Church. Several of the essays, especially the ones regarding terrorism, were more analytical than informational; unfortunately, their ideas were either obvious or too abstract to grasp. Nothing Sacred is worth reading but not spectacular.

posted by Julian at 10:55PM

It looks like Bill Bradley will endorse Howard Dean, giving Dean 100% support among 2000 Democratic hopefuls. I'm wonder how many voters will be swayed by Gore's and Bradley's endorsements. In any case, the endorsements make it easier for Dean to position himself as a mainstream, centrist candidate.

A UPI analysis of Dean's possible VP choices raises some interesting possibilities, though it's too early to think about it seriously. I hope that Dean doesn't select Dianne Feinstein, who I've never liked and whose dour nature wouldn't mesh with Dean's energy. Bill Bradley is a much more promising choice who would add weight to the ticket and who would attract the many supporters of his 2000 campaign and his basketball career. An African-American running mate like Rep. John Lewis of Georgia would be another exciting possibility.

According to the latest CNN/Time poll, Dean received 46% of the votes vs. 51% for Bush in a match-up between the two of them. And that's after recent news events that have been favorable for Bush (visiting Iraq, capturing Saddam, and a bull market) while Dean has been subject to continual attacks from the Democratic contenders. Also, many political undecideds know little about Dean and may be supporting Bush as "the devil you know". I'm increasingly optimistic about Dean's chances in November.

posted by Julian at 10:15PM

A few books have been sitting by my computer for over a year, waiting to be reviewed. I'll make some brief comments so I can put them away.

Rebecca Blood's The Weblog Handbook provides good ideas about how to maintain a blog and why you might want to. Reading it didn't change my personal blogging style much, partially because I had already picked up many of her ideas and partially because, like most people, I am resistant to change my entrenched way of doing things. Her schoolteacher-like attitude of "Look at all the great things you can do!" ironically made me less motivated, as I realized that I possessed neither the ability nor the dedication necessary to put together a first-rate blog. Putting aside my personal quirks, The Weblog Handbook provides helpful pointers and perspective, making it well worth reading for anyone considering blogging.

In Killing Monsters: Why Children Need Fantasy, Super Heroes, and Make-Believe Violence, author and comic-book writer Gerard Jones argues that fictional violence is good for children's psyches. Violent shows and games provide a release for the anxieties, fears, and aggression that all children feel. He points out the weaknesses in the often-cited studies linking exposure to violence and aggressive behavior. Jones convincingly debunks that conventional wisdom by describing his own observations of children outside the confines of a contrived psychology experiment. As additional evidence, violent crime has been steadily decreasing in the US over the last few decades, and Japan continues to have low crime rates despite its hyper-violent entertainment. Killing Monsters paints a believable and balanced picture of the role of pretend violence in children's lives.

I also read a couple of Jane Austen novels: Pride and Prejudice and Emma. They both involve leisurely mannered courtships among member of the British upper crust. Pride and Prejudice held my attention reasonably well, and I became interested in how the romance between the two main protagonists would unfold. In Emma, the characters seemed to talk incessantly about uninteresting events, and I didn't care what happened to any of them. Both books illustrated the stilted social atmosphere of early 19th century Britain.

posted by Julian at 7:30PM