Going Too Far

Pity Debbie Schlussel. She thought she was leading a glorious charge, but she charged into a place so dank and unwholesome even the Nice Doggie wouldn’t follow. And when she looked she saw her rightie brethren not following her. Instead, they were staring. At her. With disgust.

Wow.

This means that somewhere in the confused and nebulous world righties seem to inhabit, there are edges. There are parameters and boundaries and signs that warn to stay on the path and be sure to wear clean, dry socks. This is good to know.

You might have seen this Schlussel post, which accused Jill Carroll of having “anti-American views” and implied that both Carroll “and those who are ‘elated’ about her release” are collaborating with terrorists. A newer post reveals that in Schlussel’s mind, “Islamist” (which is bad) and “Arabic” are synonyms. Schlussel found an article in a Jordanian newspaper (no link provided) that said (boldface is Schlussel’s)

From Arabic food to the Arabic language, Jill has always wanted to know and experience as much as possible about Arab identity, and she is keen on absorbing it, learning, understanding and respecting it.

She doesn’t just “like” Arab culture, she loves it. . . . It is simply unconscionable for any Arab to want to harm a person like her.

There is a direct connection between couscous and Osama bin Laden. Be warned.

But by Schlussel’s logic … the President is a terrorist.

Now Schlussel is snarling and snapping at her brother bloggers like a cornered wolverine, and some righties are wondering whether to back away or fetch a tranquilizer dart. Heh.

Last I checked neither Orrin Judd nor Alexandra the Dim had apologized for implying that Carroll was a terrorist collaborator (Judd) or a coward (the Dimwit), but now it seems they are in the minority even among righties. Jonah Goldberg finally issued a limp apology.

Now, I’m going to apologize to Captain Ed, because I took offense at the title of this post — it struck me as being patronizing — but on the whole the Captain has been fair and reasonable about the Carroll episode. So, Captain, I’m sorry I snapped at you.

Update: See Matt Stoller.

Cynthia McKinney: Victim or Perp?

It may be that news stories are inaccurate, but as near as I can determine this is what happened:

Last Wednesday afternoon Rep. Cynthia McKinney went around metal detectors to enter the Longworth House Office Building in Washington, DC. Members of Congress are not required to pass through the detectors, although the congress critters are supposed to wear ID pins so the security guys will know who they are. And McKinney has admitted she wasn’t wearing her pin. In any event a Capitol police officer who says he did not recognize her and did not see any identification rushed to block her entrance.

After that it gets murkier. The cop says McKinney punched him in the chest. McKinney says the cop didn’t just block her; he also grabbed her, and she reacted to get him to turn her loose. McKinney also says the cop allowed her into the building after she showed him her ID. Allegedly this is all on surveillance tape, so eventually someone will look at the tape and determine who was at fault. Maybe they both were; maybe it was just a misunderstanding.

In any event, by Friday McKinney was claiming she was a victim of “excessive use of force” because she is an African-American woman. Harry Belafonte and Danny Glover stood with her at a press conference to offer their support. The President of NAACP Georgia said “The mistreatment of Cynthia McKinney at the hands of Capitol Hill Police is a tragedy of major proportion and points to the vigor of outright disrespect for women and people of color.”

This was too much for John Aravosis:

Yes, let’s cry racism and sexism and Democratism, I guess you’d call it, because a cop didn’t recognize you and you decided to not even wear your member of Congress pin, or turn around when the cop called out to you while we’re at war. Next time, it’ll be better if the cop lets strangers without their pins just barge into the halls of Congress, bypass security, and oh blow the hell out of the entire building because they’re afraid the person they stop might be – what? – a Democrat?

Today some of us lefties (example) are criticizing John for this post. Kevin Haden has accused John of “an elitism that knows no bounds.” Unfortunately the American Street page won’t build this morning, so I cannot read Kevin’s entire post to comment on it. Maybe later today.

But based on the facts as I understand them, I have to agree with Aravosis on this one. Seems to me it’s McKinney who’s being the elitist by assuming the rules don’t apply to her. Security personnel should not be asked to make judgments about who gets to break the rules and who doesn’t. In order to keep security systems fair and democratic — not to mention secure — everybody must abide by the same set of rules. If people with proper ID can bypass the metal detectors that’s fine; but if Ms. Big Shot forgets her ID, then she goes through the metal detectors. Even if the security people do recognize her. Even if she’s been in the bleeping House of Representatives since the charge up San Juan Hill.

McKinney did the wrong thing. It may be that we’ll learn the cop did use excessive force, but that doesn’t alter the fact that McKinney did the wrong thing by assuming she could sail past security without displaying an ID. This is true even if it turns out the security guys have been letting other people break the rules, in which case the whole operation needs to be tightened up.

We’ve learned the hard way in New York City that security personnel aren’t doing anyone any favors when they wave some people through security without checking them. The nice guy they’ve seen a hundred times, whose name they know, who has legitimate business in the building, could be carrying a .40-caliber Smith & Wesson handgun and have murder on his mind. It happens.

There’s no more effective way to weaken security than to give security personnel conflicting instructions, or to expect them to do a job (check people going into the building) but punish them for trying to do it (checking people who don’t want to be checked).

If you spend time in New York City or Capitol Hill, you get used to security checkpoints. There really are terrorists who would just love to blow up Congress or take out a major landmark. And there are people — they seem to gravitate to cities — who commit irrational acts of violence. This is a reality we must acknowledge, especially in a nation like ours that’s knee-deep in firearms.

I’ve heard the argument that because McKinney has been a good friend to progressive causes we should support her. But I say we don’t do progressivism any good by making excuses for the bad behavior of progressive leaders. When leaders think we’ll support them no matter what they do, they stop listening to us. Washington already is swimming with alleged progressive leaders who don’t listen to us. Our number one job these days is to get them to listen to us; to make them realize that we’re watching them and will hold them accountable. Nobody gets a pass. This is not to say that we won’t support them in the future if they do something good. I’m not saying we should drive someone out of the movement for one mistake.

Giving leaders a pass, on the other hand, is what righties do. Mike Leonard writes for the Indiana Times-Mail:

Former Indiana Rep. David McIntosh once scuffled with airport security guards after he bypassed metal detectors and hurried to board a commercial flight out of Washington. Politicians made that potentially criminal act go away by placing a gag order on airport security.

Former U.S. Rep. J.C. Watts parked in an unattended airport loading zone in a hurry to put his wife on a flight – post Sept. 11 – in Oklahoma City. He berated the attendant who ticketed his vehicle and then stuffed the citation under the officer’s badge and told him to “take care of it.”

It was unclear what made Watts more angry – that the attendant didn’t recognize him as a U.S. Representative or a former Oklahoma football star.

And then there was our own Rep. John Hostettler’s arrival at the Louisville airport with a gun in his attache case. A gun. Inside the airport. The congressman’s explanation was basically, “Oopsie!”

The Ho got probation – and lots of attention from late night comedians.

Are we supposed to be the mirror images of righties? I don’t think so. McKinney did the wrong thing. Let’s be grown-ups and admit it.

Mistakes Were Made

An editorial in today’s New York Times:

Iraq is becoming a country that America should be ashamed to support, let alone occupy. The nation as a whole is sliding closer to open civil war. In its capital, thugs kidnap and torture innocent civilians with impunity, then murder them for their religious beliefs. The rights of women are evaporating. The head of the government is the ally of a radical anti-American cleric who leads a powerful private militia that is behind much of the sectarian terror.

It would be nice if television and radio news explained this clearly, but an editorial is a start.

The Bush administration will not acknowledge the desperate situation. But it is, at least, pushing in the right direction, trying to mobilize all possible leverage in a frantic effort to persuade the leading Shiite parties to embrace more inclusive policies and support a broad-based national government.

Translation: Having screwed around for three years, the Bush Administration may be about to realize they created a monster they can’t control.

One vital goal is to persuade the Shiites to abort their disastrous nomination of Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari. Mr. Jaafari is unable to form a broadly inclusive government and has made no serious effort to rein in police death squads. Even some Shiite leaders are now calling on him to step aside. If his nomination stands and is confirmed by Parliament, civil war will become much harder to head off. And from the American perspective, the Iraqi government will have become something that no parent should be asked to risk a soldier son or daughter to protect.

Unfortunately, after three years of policy blunders in Iraq, Washington may no longer have the political or military capital to prevail. That may be hard for Americans to understand, since it was the United States invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein and helped the Shiite majority to power. Some 140,000 American troops remain in Iraq, more than 2,000 American servicemen and servicewomen have died there so far and hundreds of billions of American dollars have been spent.

I’ve said before that Iraq will be to Gawd Almighty Superpower America what Russia was to Napoleon. Thanks to flaming delusional idiots like Rummy and Cheney, the world now knows what our limits are. Even if some of us haven’t figured it out yet.

Yet Shiite leaders have responded to Washington’s pleas for inclusiveness with bristling hostility, personally vilifying Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and criticizing American military operations in the kind of harsh language previously heard only from Sunni leaders. Meanwhile, Moktada al-Sadr, the radically anti-American cleric and militia leader, has maneuvered himself into the position of kingmaker by providing decisive support for Mr. Jaafari’s candidacy to remain prime minister.

It was chilling to read Edward Wong’s interview with the Iraqi prime minister in The Times last week, during which Mr. Jaafari sat in the palace where he now makes his home, complained about the Americans and predicted that the sectarian militias that are currently terrorizing Iraqi civilians could be incorporated into the army and police. The stories about innocent homeowners and storekeepers who are dragged from their screaming families and killed by those same militias are heartbreaking, as is the thought that the United States, in its hubris, helped bring all this to pass.

Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. — Proverbs 16:18

I hate to say this, but maybe the Bushies should have read their Bibles more closely before the bleeping invasion.

You can read the Edward Wong interview here and here.

It is conceivable that the situation can still be turned around. Mr. Khalilzad should not back off. The kind of broadly inclusive government he is trying to bring about offers the only hope that Iraq can make a successful transition from the terrible mess it is in now to the democracy that we all hoped would emerge after Saddam Hussein’s downfall. It is also the only way to redeem the blood that has been shed by Americans and Iraqis alike.

Every now and then someone who is smart enough to understand what’s happening will issue a statement like we can still win or we can still have a positive outcome in Iraq. Assuming they aren’t just plain lying, it seems to me these people are looking at Iraq as a kind of arithmetic problem. It’s still mathematically possible that we can make this work. Put another way, if we don’t make any more mistakes from this point forward, maybe we can salvage something from this mess. But then there’s the idiot factor — the Bushies are still in charge. So we know more mistakes will be made. The editorial writers need to come to grips with that.

See also Taylor Marsh.