Category Archives: Politics
An apology tour…for France
The New Republic‘s David A. Bell contrasts France’s approach to its checkered past with that of the United States:
Is your president a socialist who has repeatedly apologized for his country? If you are an American, the answer to this question is no, despite apoplectic Republican claims to the contrary. If you are French, however, it is most certainly yes. Not only is President François Hollande a proud Socialist; this year he has made two high-profile apologies for France. This summer, on the seventieth anniversary of the notorious “vel d’Hiv” roundup of Jews in Paris. he gave a speech acknowledging the country’s guilt in the deportation of Jews to Nazi death camps, And this past week, he ended official denials that the Parisian police had carried out a massacre of Algerian protestors in 1961, and paid homage to the victims. The two statements say a great deal about French public life today, about the country’s relation to its history, and about its widening differences from the United States.
Both of the incidents for which Hollande apologized, in the name of the French Republic, were long hidden from sight. After the liberation of France in 1944, a battered and demoralized population consoled itself with the myth that all but a few traitors and criminals had resisted the Nazi occupation. The deportation of some 76,000 Jews to the death camps was blamed on the Germans. Only slowly, and in large part thanks to the effort of North American historians (especially Robert Paxton of Columbia) did the full sordid story emerge in the 1970s and 1980s. Most of the French had in fact supported the collaborationist government of Marshal Philippe Pétain for several years. Many had applauded, enthusiastically, anti-Semitic policies modeled on those of the Nazis. And while it was the Germans who demanded the deportation of Jews from France, the job of identifying, arresting and transporting these Jews was carried out entirely by French authorities, including the horrific, days-long incarceration of 13,000 Jews in the “Vel d’Hiv”—an indoor bicycle racetrack—without adequate food, water or ventilation…
In the United States, sentiments of this sort, apropos of the darker episodes in American history, are anything but uncommon in university classrooms. In politics, however, they have become virtually taboo. In the civil rights era, American politicians could speak frankly and eloquently about the ways that slavery and institutionalized racism stained the American past. In the 1980’s, Congress could pass legislation acknowledging the wrong of Japanese-American interment during World War II, and granting compensation to its victims. But in the past quarter-century, conservatives have successfully cast any attempt to discuss the country’s historical record impartially in the political realm as a species of heresy—“blaming America first,” as Jeanne Kirkpatrick put it as far back as 1984. A turning point of sorts came in 1994, when the Smithsonian Institution planned an exhibit of the aircraft that dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima, accompanied by material that highlighted the human toll of the bombing, inviting debate on its morality. The outcry from conservatives and veterans groups was deafening, and few politicians dared to defend the Smithsonian, which eventually canceled the exhibit.
Greetings from the strangest Congressional election of 2012
U.S. Representative Jesse L. Jackson, Jr. of Illinois (son of the reverend) continues to stay in virtual hiding during high campaign season, as he has all summer and into the fall, but appears likely to win reelection anyway:
Since June, Mr. Jackson, a Democrat and the son of the civil rights leader the Rev. Jesse Jackson, has been on medical leave from Congress and has made no official appearances in the district that he represented since 1995, or anywhere else. His office has disclosed that he was treated at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota for bipolar disorder and in recent weeks has been recovering at his home in Washington.
While the recorded call — an effort to talk directly to constituents, Mr. Jackson’s campaign said — was the first clear sign of Mr. Jackson’s involvement as Election Day approaches, few here were expecting a ramp-up of campaigning now. The possibility that Mr. Jackson might yet appear in person on the trail seems remote; recent news reports have suggested that Mr. Jackson might require additional inpatient treatment, and someone close to Mr. Jackson said on Saturday that he was likely to soon return to the Mayo Clinic.
“I am starting to heal,” Mr. Jackson says on the recording. “The good news is my health is improving, but my doctors tell me the road to recovery is a long one. For nearly 18 years I have served the people of the second district, I am anxious to return to work on your behalf, but at this time it is against medical advice, and while I will always give my all to my constituents, I ask for your continued patience as I work to get my health back.”
Even without a real campaign and despite recent revelations that federal authorities were investigating the possible misuse of campaign funds by Mr. Jackson, Mr. Jackson is likely to win re-election, political experts here say. Mr. Jackson is well known, particularly compared with his opponents (a Republican, an Independent and a write-in candidate), and the district leans firmly Democratic.
Violence in your backyard
After yesterday’s horrific bombing in Beirut, just a kilometer or two from where I lived this summer and just two blocks from where I spent several afternoons and evenings, Maya Mikdashi wonders, “What is a Car Bomb?”
It is surreal to wake up to news of a car bomb back home, now thousands of miles away. Immediately, the war shaped body is both numb and preoccupied with images of death and destruction. The mind wanders and sutures the past, present and future seamlessly. Phone calls, emails, and texts begin. The space between a call and its response seems immense, and the time it takes to hear from blood and choice family-particularly when they live or work or frequent the targeted neighborhood-is bloated with the macabre.
But what is a neighborhood? In times of violence, and in places shaped by seemingly unending violence, neighborhoods are always contracting. To put a distance between you and an explosion is to imagine a logic to violence, and a logic to safety. It happened in Lebanon. No, it happened in Beirut. No, it happened in Achrafieh. No, it happened in Sassine. No, it happened on one particular side of Sassine. Finally, it happened on one particular street and near these particular shops. “We are fine,” I hear from my sister. “It was two blocks away so don’t worry.” These are statements we grew up with, when car bombs and regular bombs and snipers and checkpoints mapped our lives. Now we use these same words, passed on from one generation to the next…
A car bomb is not a car bomb. It is a spectacle. It is a statement. It is shock and awe. In Lebanon, it is an incitement to memory-both short and long term. A warning that life is cheaper than TNT, that blood runs faster than fire-extinguishing water, and that car bombs and snipers and checkpoints and bombs are always already here, waiting to break the surface of the present.
As an outsider working in Beirut, I felt as if the city were perpetually on edge, teetering on the precipice of succumbing to the mass violence that has raged on for a seeming eternity, now just 60 miles to the east in Damascus. I hoped then, as I do now, that I was wrong.
Symptoms of Romnesia
President Obama performs a routine checkup:
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNGZil616ug]Does this election even matter?
Frank Rich isn’t at all convinced:
But isn’t the tea party yesterday’s news, receding into the mists of history along with its left-wing doppelgänger, Occupy Wall Street? So it might seem. It draws consistently low poll numbers, earning just a 25 percent approval rating in a Wall Street Journal–NBC News survey in September. The tea-party harbinger from 2008, Sarah Palin, and the bomb throwers who dominated the primary process of 2012, led by the congressional tea-party caucus leader Michele Bachmann, were vanquished and lost whatever national political clout they had, along with much of their visibility (even on Fox News). So toxic is the brand that not one of the 51 prime-time speakers at the GOP convention in Tampa dared speak its name, including such tea-party heartthrobs as Rand Paul and Ted Cruz. Scott Brown, who became an early tea-party hero for unexpectedly taking Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat in 2010, has barely alluded to the affiliation since.
All this evidence is misleading. As one conservative commentator, Doug Mataconis of Outside the Beltway, wrote during the GOP convention, it means nothing that Republican leaders don’t mention the tea party anymore. “In reality, of course the Republican party of 2012 is pretty much the tea party at this point,” he wrote. “One need only look at the party platform and listen to what the speakers are actually saying to recognize that fact.” He saw the tea party as “likely to see its influence increase after the November elections regardless of what happens to the Romney/Ryan ticket”—and rightly so. Though the label itself had to be scrapped—it has been permanently soiled by images of mad-dog protesters waving don’t tread on me flags—its ideology is the ideology of the right in 2012. Its adherents will not back down or fade away, even if Obama regroups and wins the lopsided Electoral College victory that seemed in his grasp before the first debate. If anything, the right will be emboldened to purge the GOP of the small and ideologically deviant Romney claque that blew what it saw as a “historic” opportunity to deny a “socialist” president a second term.
Preparing for the worst
One of the fascinating aspects of the three debates so far (two presidential, and one vice presidential) has been to watch how the candidates have handled their alleged vulnerabilities. In each debate, one or both of the candidates had a significant weakness or flaw that was ripe to be exploited by his opponent.
The thing is, everyone knew this. And that means the candidates — and more importantly, their debate prep teams — knew this even better. So perhaps it should come as no surprise that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, the candidates have had some of their strongest moments on issues that were expected to trip them up.
In the above video, President Obama takes Mitt Romney to task for his criticism regarding the consulate attack in Benghazi, leaving the former Massachusetts governor flailing a bit in his response. This was supposed to be Romney’s trump card, and Obama — who had clearly been waiting to respond to this — instead turned it into perhaps his strongest moment of the night.
We saw similar dynamics during the vice presidential debate. Most expected Joe Biden to dominate Paul Ryan on foreign policy and for the opposite to occur in relation to Medicare. But in truth, something a little closer to the opposite took place: Ryan opened fire very early on regarding the attack in Libya, leaving Biden to issue a less than reassuring rebuttal about America’s resolve. Meanwhile, Biden proved perhaps more convincing on Medicare than Ryan did, never allowing the Congressman to drag the conversation into the weeds.
In the first presidential debate, the largest elephant in the room was Mitt Romney’s 47% comment, which Obama — in his dazed and confused performance that night — never managed to bring up. But assuredly Romney had a response all cued up beforehand for that as well. (Interestingly, Obama managed to work in a reference to the 47% issue on the last question of last night’s debate, a phenomenal tactical move that denied Romney the chance to use a prepackaged and rehearsed rebuttal.)
As the upcoming final debate next Monday is on foreign policy, technically the subject should be moving back onto Obama’s turf. But if there’s anything these first three debates have taught us (other than the enormous versatility of the common binder), it’s that waiting to pounce on your opponent’s weakest point does not always pay dividends.
I suppose this was inevitable.
Binders full of women? This man wants to sign up:

And so it begins: Romney-Obama Part Deux

https://twitter.com/Romneys_Binder/status/258387741010714626 https://twitter.com/TheFix/status/258387804915122178 https://twitter.com/jamespoulos/status/258387269646434304Romney says self deportation is about choice. Huh.
— Andrew Rosenthal (@andyrNYT) October 17, 2012
https://twitter.com/AntDeRosa/status/258386964003307520Twitter #failwhale, first one I've seen of the #debates: http://t.co/4zuTNSyz
— Chris “Law Dork” Geidner (@chrisgeidner) October 17, 2012
Oh really, Mr Romney? Obama doubled the deficit?
— felix salmon (@felixsalmon) October 17, 2012
Favorite guy at the debate. http://t.co/5mZ2Kc4X
— nick kroll (@nickkroll) October 17, 2012
For all the hits that Obama has made at Romney one thing he hasn't touched: 47%
— Sam Stein (@samstein) October 17, 2012
https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedAndrew/status/258384502819287040 https://twitter.com/AntDeRosa/status/258384169997062147Thank God I'm not running for president, because that was the dumbest f***ing question so far.
— Daniel W. Drezner (@dandrezner) October 17, 2012
https://twitter.com/AdamSerwer/status/258383720841637888 https://twitter.com/jaypinho/status/258383629397393409Women don't need contraception if they stay in binders.
— Eric Klinenberg (@EricKlinenberg) October 17, 2012
Ouch! The Bush Question.
— Larry Sabato (@LarrySabato) October 17, 2012
https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/258382281478131713Obama is crushing on this Planned Parenthood issue. Smart politics
— Michael A. Cohen (NOT TRUMP’S FORMER FIXER) (@speechboy71) October 17, 2012
https://twitter.com/max_read/status/258381210584236032Hey girl, I can vouch for Mitt. He always knows how to find the ladies.
— Paul Ryan Gosling (@PaulRyanGosling) October 17, 2012
https://twitter.com/BorowitzReport/status/258380850171883520 https://twitter.com/emilybazelon/status/258380567362535424It is literally impossible for 99% of viewers to figure out the math being discussed. Here's where party ID comes in.
— Larry Sabato (@LarrySabato) October 17, 2012
In 2012, America gets to choose which angry accountant it likes better.
— Matt Stoller (@matthewstoller) October 17, 2012
Every time @BarackObama sits down on me, we become like Voltron.
— Invisible Obama (@InvisibleObama) October 17, 2012
"Fundamentally." Somewhere, Newt Gingrich sheds a tear. A tiny, longwinded tear. #debates
— CC:Indecision (@indecision) October 17, 2012
https://twitter.com/EnFogg/status/258377672420376576Romney seems to think that the news he'd reduce taxes on dividends will come as an enormous relief to us all.
— Amy Davidson Sorkin (@tnyCloseRead) October 17, 2012
https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/258377273823096833Is she related to Rick Perry?
— Bob Cusack (@BobCusack) October 17, 2012
Theme so far: Obama: "It's just not true." Romney: "It's absolutely true."
— Sarah Huisenga (@SarahHuisenga) October 17, 2012
Now they are yelling at each other. This is a much more satisfying #debate.
— Amy Davidson Sorkin (@tnyCloseRead) October 17, 2012
Romney asked that his Jacket be burnt after Coal people grabbed his arms
— Pete Dominick (@PeteDominick) October 17, 2012
https://twitter.com/DavidGrann/status/258374894163734529 https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedAndrew/status/258374685446766592Gas prices are high because Obama is protecting birds?
— Jonathan Chait (@jonathanchait) October 17, 2012
Obama: "Gov. Romney doesn't have a Five Point Plan. He has a One Point Plan." #debates #shotsfired
— Ashley Parker (@AshleyRParker) October 17, 2012
How dare Obama not match Romney and offer Jeremy a job when he graduates in 2014?
— Frank Rich (@frankrichny) October 17, 2012
Someone named Obama appears to have actually had caffeine before this debate. #Debates
— Geoffrey Skelley (@geoffreyvs) October 17, 2012
https://twitter.com/EWErickson/status/258372870462390272 https://twitter.com/TheFix/status/258372255577419776Awkward ending. Im thinking Mitt might not follow thru w young Jason Biggs
— Pete Dominick (@PeteDominick) October 17, 2012
https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedAndrew/status/258371159916175361 https://twitter.com/JeffreyGoldberg/status/258370817132486657 https://twitter.com/AntDeRosa/status/258370370179067904 https://twitter.com/TheFix/status/258370096181952513This is Obama's best moment in either debate so far.
— David Weigel (@daveweigel) October 17, 2012
https://twitter.com/chrisrockoz/status/258363741417123840One thing I'm watching for tonight: Which candidate is better? #punditry
— Blake Hounshell (@blakehounshell) October 17, 2012
https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedAndrew/status/258356063961747456@BarackObama's limo is parked and he is headed into the building at Hofstra University for Round Two with Romney.
— Jeff Mason (@jeffmason1) October 17, 2012
Great footnote: CNN reports Romney practicing sitting on a bar stool -- never been there. How many of us have THAT problem? .#cnndebate
— David Gergen (@David_Gergen) October 16, 2012
I will be trying something new tonight.
Instead of simply live-blogging the presidential debate, I hope to live-tweet it. But they won’t be my tweets (or at least, not primarily): instead, I’ll be updating the blog post with the best tweets from around the Internet (or at least, from my Twitter feed).
I’m doing this because my viewing experience for the vice presidential debate last week was significant enhanced by the collective humor of the Internet hive mind. Thus, why not share that experience with all of you?
(Disclaimer: There’s a very good chance I won’t be able to do this because of work-related or other distractions — in which case please ignore all of the above.)
Let the games begin!