Wednesday’s Mini-Report

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* Horrific scene in Nebraska: “A gunman killed eight people and wounded five others Wednesday at the popular Westroads Mall in Omaha, Nebraska, before apparently turning the gun on himself, police said. ‘We do not believe that we have any other shooter,’ said Sgt. Teresa Negron. The shooting took place at the Von Maur store inside the shopping complex, which was locked down, the Nebraska State Patrol said. Shoppers and employees walked out of the building with their hands up. Some described hiding in clothes racks and dressing rooms after hearing the shots.”

* As always, the devil will be in the details: “The Bush administration has hammered out an agreement with industry to freeze interest rates for certain subprime mortgages for five years in an effort to combat a soaring tide of foreclosures, congressional aides said Wednesday. These aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the details have not yet been released, said the five-year moratorium represented a compromise between desires by banking regulators for a longer time frame of as much as seven years and industry arguments that the freeze should only last one to two years.”

* Blackwater to face oversight? “Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top United States commander in Iraq, and Ryan C. Crocker, the American ambassador to Baghdad, have agreed on the details governing the operations of Blackwater and other private security contractors there, American officials said Tuesday. The agreement requires all State Department convoys in Iraq to coordinate their movements with the military’s main operations center in Baghdad, sets minimum standards for training the contractors and outlines when armed guards may use force in self-defense.”

* In light of Mitt Romney’s latest immigration troubles, National Review’s Kathryn Jean Lopez, without a hint of irony, said, “My question is: Do we really have to stake out presidential candidates homes?” John Cole offers Lopez a few compelling thoughts in response.

* The WaPo’s awful piece about Muslim “rumors” and Obama continues to spark controversy. Columbia Journalism Review’s Paul McLeary wrote that the Post’s front-page piece “may be the single worst campaign ‘08 piece to appear in any American newspaper so far this election cycle.” The Post’s Peter Baker mounts a defense, but it doesn’t make a lot of sense.

* Let’s all pause to recognize the sterling success of Republicans’ abstinence-only policies: “In a troubling reversal, the nation’s teen birth rate rose for the first time in 15 years, surprising government health officials who had no immediate explanation. The birth rate had been dropping since its peak in 1991, although the decline had slowed in recent years. On Wednesday, government statisticians said it rose 3 percent from 2005 to 2006.” (thanks to LM for the tip)

* The American Enterprise Institute is not “a nonpartisan group.”

* I’m deeply disappointed that Beliefnet, the best faith/spirituality site on the web, has been purchased by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. What a shame for a terrific resource to get gobbled up by such a malevolent media mogul. (thanks, reader CA)

* On a related note, having Lou Dobbs’ rant against immigrants on CNN seemed like more than enough exposure for the blowhard, but apparently, United Stations Radio Networks doesn’t agree — Dobbs will now have a three-hour daily radio show.

* Whaddaya know, Senate Republicans are whining again. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said yesterday that he wants to pass an AMT reform package, but Bush “is the man that’s pulling the strings on the 49 puppets he has here in the Senate.” Arlen Specter complained today that the GOP caucus do not “take it lightly to be called ‘puppets,'” and suggested Reid may have violated chamber rules that state that no senator “directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another senator or to other senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a senator.”

* And finally, do you have a background in tourism? Well, have I got the opportunity for you. The Bush administration will pay you up to $144,000 — plus a 35% “danger pay” premium — to improve Iraqi tourism, which apparently hasn’t been going well. As Al Kamen explained, “[O]ne of your jobs will be ‘recognizing and reporting on obstacles to business development’ — small-arms fire, roadside bombs, for example — and to be ‘a catalyst for new ideas.'” Applications are due by Dec. 12, so act now.

Anything to add? Consider this an end-of-the-day open thread.

Our whole city is in shock right now.

God be with those families.

  • Let’s all pause to recognize the sterling success of Republicans’ abstinence-only policies: “In a troubling reversal, the nation’s teen birth rate rose for the first time in 15 years, surprising government health officials who had no immediate explanation. The birth rate had been dropping since its peak in 1991, although the decline had slowed in recent years. On Wednesday, government statisticians said it rose 3 percent from 2005 to 2006.”

    I wrote something yesterday about something unrelated, in which I made an analogy about high school and said that you had to be focused more on the impression you make than on being honest to get a date in high school. Actually, I think what I said applies more to America than to human nature- maybe in some other countries, people still have values, and there are a lot of teenagers who look for good character in their earliest beaus. I bet a lot of Mexicans have good values. But I think a lot of American parents (as a reflection of modern American culture) feel too confused about morality to teach their children good values, so a lot of today’s young people just focus on Hollywood virtues when they’re young, and only pick up on “what makes a good person” through a lot of hard experience.

    Teenagers should be taught to have good values, not to be absolutely abstinent. Chastity, restaint, and modesty mean absolutely nothing without a “why” and without an “ends” to which they are the “means.” Conservative parents are just horrified of their kids having sex, or having sex with someone the parents don’t like, so they are getting it all screwed up. That’s the environment that’s leading to these ridiculous “abstinence only” sex-ed programs which produce greater promiscuity than liberal, blue state style sex-ed programs do.

  • “In a troubling reversal, the nation’s teen birth rate rose for the first time in 15 years, surprising government health officials who had no immediate explanation.”

    Government Health Official: “Gawrsh, the President said all them dadgum kids had to do was promise they’d be good and that would be it. What could’a gone wrong?”

    Maybe hiring a bunch of bumbling yahoos to important positions just because they’re mindless robotoids might have something to do with it?

  • Arlen Specter complained today that the GOP caucus do not “take it lightly to be called ‘puppets,’”

    That’s a compliment compared to what they deserve to be called. If they don’t like to be thought of as puppets, perhaps they could stop dancing to Bush’s strings. Barely a one of them ever shows any significant independence from the Bush-Republican machine.

  • OT

    Despite it’s in some ways perhaps being more outrageous (than invading Iraq), clearly a more logical way to get rid of Al Qaeda would have been to invade Saudi Arabia, imprison their entire upper-class, strip them of their assets, and destroy the Saudi military.

    Those people are still giving money to Al Qaeda, last I read.

  • Then we could have gone on, if the Iranians continued to make trouble, to depose the Iranian political and military leadership, and put the country in the (ostensibly interim) control of the young, liberal secularists, giving them “over the horizon” aid to fight religious terrorists who popped up in the aftermath of regime-change.

  • It would have been a lot easier to run a liberated Saudi Arabia than it has been to run a liberated Iraq (which has a slightly smaller population, much smaller domestic (non-migrant worker) population, and much less area of inhabited inhabited territory, than does Iraq).

    Once the Iraqis got wind of what we did in Saudi Arabia and Iran, they probably would have coveted a regime change of their own, and been favorable to it if we lobbed some missiles over at Saddam, all in good time.

    Less looting and resistance, and once we’d freed Iran, re-shaping the boundaries of liberated Iran and Iraq could have softened any Shia-Sunni conflict, similar to what we’ve seen in Iraq since Saddam was removed from power, that occurred.

  • A lot of Saudis hate the Saudi upper-class anyway. Maybe the Saudi man on the street would have been less violent in a post-regime change situation than his Iraqi counterpart has been. For one thing, they don’t have the domestic Shiite population for Iran to foment trouble-making among.

  • Well I do have a background in tourism, however I would only go to Iraq as long as I could get the standard crony package – take the dough and fuck the goal

  • Pingback: ffae7b30f3cc
  • Comments are closed.