In today's pages: Sons of Iraq, Joe Biden and gay Republicans
Coming back from a recent visit to Iraq, scholars Shawn Brimley and Colin Kahl warn that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki is endangering the recent progress made by cracking down on the U.S.-financed Sunni forces called the Sons of Iraq:
During our trip, a common theme among U.S. military commanders, intelligence officers, diplomats and Iraqi political leaders we spoke with was the growing hubris of Maliki and his closest advisors. Recent government successes in Basra, Sadr City and Mosul seem to have convinced Maliki's inner circle that Iraq's army does not need American help as much as it used to. A newly emboldened prime minister is now moving out aggressively against his adversaries, including the Sons of Iraq.
Columnist Jonah
Goldberg takes a break from his weekly critiques of Barack Obama's fitness
for the presidency, opining instead on how the choice of Joe Biden reveals the
emptiness of Obama's "new politics." And James Kirchick, an assistant editor of the New Republic, laments how Jonathan Crutchley, the openly gay founder of a dating site for gay men, was hounded by his customers for having donated to John McCain's campaign.
Over on the left-hand page, the editorial board implored the Hollywood studios to resume negotiations with the Screen Actors Guild, and it called on state lawmakers to pass a bill clarifying workers' rights under state law to bring gender-discrimination claims against their employers. Finally, it reflected on the return China earned from its $41 billion investment in the Olympics. For starters, there was a bounty of gold medals.
Yet what planners in Beijing miscalculated is that no matter how well you teach performers to smile, the strain behind the lips is still detectable. The near-hysterical drive by Chinese leaders to put on the biggest, most spectacular sporting event ever, and to engineer a generation of Chinese medalists regardless of the financial or human costs, is rather more disconcerting to the outside world than convincing.
Anxious cartoon by Scott Stantis, USA Today.
Regarding JONAH GOLDBERG and his opinion regarding Joe Biden.
I was glad to see that you at least listed a few weak arguments against the selection of Biden at the end of your rant. I thought it was going to be strictly because the man talks too much. That in itself is an outrage! Can you imagine someone who likes to talk when he could have e-mailed or text messaged the country and saved all of us those precious moments for the utterly crucial work we have to do. Perhaps selecting a new "Power Water" to drink, running on a treadmill or whatever AR habits are in vogue this week. Has anyone else noticed the intolerence to actually speaking to someone in today's world?
Over 50? Then you have little to say worthy of anyone's time or attention so I assumed you would stop there since that is more than enough to support your stand against Biden. You Mr. Goldberg apparently like to talk yourself, just because you type rather than speak does not make you immune to a similar charge. And I hope no one takes your obvious personal opinion seriously, its biased and shallow for one thing and shows you don't have enough to keep yourself busy. I would suggest you fill that spare time collecting opinions from others that just may not think like you do. And its time for you to worry less about how long someone speaks and focus on what they have to say.
Posted by: williepr | August 26, 2008 at 08:52 PM