That’s the title of law professor David Bernstein’s new book, about how anti-discrimination laws adversely affect free speech. He’s a frequent contributor to the Volokh Conspiracy, and he’ll be giving a talk on it in LA on Tuesday night. Christopher Cross has the details.

That’s the title of law professor David Bernstein’s new book, about how anti-discrimination laws adversely affect free speech. He’s a frequent contributor to the Volokh Conspiracy, and he’ll be giving a talk on it in LA on Tuesday night. Christopher Cross has the details.

That’s the title of law professor David Bernstein’s new book, about how anti-discrimination laws adversely affect free speech. He’s a frequent contributor to the Volokh Conspiracy, and he’ll be giving a talk on it in LA on Tuesday night. Christopher Cross has the details.

Mark Steyn skewers (as usual) the pompous and mendacious prisses seeking the Democrat presidential nomination.

What is it that these boys think Bush did wrong? Simple. In his 18-month rush to war with Iraq, he didn’t have a plan. ”When you put American troops in harm’s way, you better not do it without a plan,” says Clark. ”I said at the time that it was critical for us to have a plan,” says Edwards. ”This president has no plan of any kind.”

So presumably Clark, Kerry and Edwards have a plan? You better believe it! Years ago, John Lennon and Paul McCartney said, “There are always two things we do when we sit down and write a song. First we sit down. Then we write a song.” That’s the Democratic plan for Iraq in a nutshell. Their big in-depth plan is to (a) sit down and (b) make a plan. The sitting-down part — with the U.N., the French, the Guinean foreign minister, etc. — could easily have gone on so long they’d never get around to (b).

Under John Kerry’s ”plan,” Saddam would still be in power, the French would still be selling him the 68mm missiles used in the attack on Paul Wolfowitz’s Baghdad hotel last week, and Iraqis would still be being fed feet first into the industrial shredders. Or have I missed something?…

…Driving through a big swathe of western and northern New Hampshire the other day, I saw gazillions of Dean signs and none for any other candidate except one Edwards sign in Hanover. Kerry’s been in the Granite State a lot longer than the Americans have been in Iraq, and he’s getting nowhere, he’s bogged down in a ”quagmire.” Maybe the reason he keeps mentioning Vietnam every 10 minutes in New Hampshire is because for him the parallels between the latter and the former are becoming more and more ominous. Could it be that he and Clark went into this thing without (drum roll, please) a plan?

Maybe it’s time to start thinking about an exit strategy.

Tom Friedman wonders if America and western Europe no longer share the same values.

Well, duh. We still believe in our Constitution and sovereignty, and they have become worshipers of tranzi socialism. I wrote a few months ago, just before we started the Iraqi campaign, that we’re in a new Cold War with France. Nothing has happened in the interim to alter my opinion.

And in rereading that piece from March, this “what-if” game occurs to me. Suppose we had gotten Turkish permission, and had been able to wage a two-front war against the regime? Much of the Sunni Triangle might have fallen much sooner, and much more decisively, Saddam might have found it harder to escape there, being caught in a pincer between two armies, and there might not be as many dead enders there now with grandiose delusions. Much of the difficulties that we’re having now might have been alleviated.

If so, thanks again, France.

[Update on Monday at 3:20 PM PST]

Here’s some more information, based on interrogation from Tariq Aziz, now that his family has been spirited out of the country, and some related commentary from Belgravia Dispatch.

From the MSNBC piece:

Saddam Hussein refused to order a counterattack against U.S. troops when war erupted in March because he misjudged the initial ground thrust as a ruse and had been convinced earlier by Russian and French contacts that he could avoid or survive a land invasion, former Iraqi deputy prime minister Tariq Aziz has told interrogators, according to U.S. officials…

…Aziz has told interrogators that French and Russian intermediaries repeatedly assured Hussein during late 2002 and early this year that they would block a U.S.-led war through delays and vetoes at the U.N. Security Council. Later, according to Aziz, Hussein concluded after private talks with French and Russian contacts that the United States would probably wage a long air war first, as it had done in previous conflicts. By hunkering down and putting up a stiff defense, he might buy enough time to win a cease-fire brokered by Paris and Moscow.

Well, my first response could be, what in the hell would the French know about surviving a ground invasion? But that might be unkind.

If true, it means that Moscow and Paris fooled themselves about their diplomatic ability as much as Saddam did about his military ability. It also means that they were doing everything in their power to avoid pressuring Saddam to meet his UN obligations, by removing the threat of ending his regime, thereby in fact making war even more necessary and certain.

That sounds like aiding and abetting the enemy to me. Regardless of whether Ledeen was right or wrong about France influencing Turkey, it clearly wouldn’t have been out of character. As I said, France is not our friend.

One of the Democrats’ favorite lines is about how the Iraqi people are getting free health care, but the American people don’t. Well, what I want to know is, why can’t we get a flat 15% tax, if they can?

I’m all ready to join a Bremer for President campaign.

Well, actually she’s been doing it for a while, but Lynne Kiesling has a new web site, called Knowledge Problem. I’ve added her to the blogroll in the “Economics/Finance” section. If you’re interested in economic analysis of technology issues from a free-market perspective (energy, bandwidth, etc.) head over there and give the professor a blog warming.

…is up.

Former NASA administrator (and according to many NASA employees, current whack job) Dan Goldin just took a two million dollar severance package as a payoff to not become the next president of Boston University.

He’s slipped back below Dean in the polls, though within the margin of error (look at the CNN/Gallup poll, which is the only one with a trend–he peaked in mid September). He was better off when he didn’t campaign. Or debate.

Barring something completely unforeseen (e.g., Hillary jumping in–an unlikely event given the state of the economy and the polls that show her losing to Bush 50-42), I’m having trouble seeing a scenario in which Dean doesn’t get the nomination at this point, because regardless of what national Democrats think, he’s going to have all the momentum from the early primaries.