The American Mind

Jonah Goldberg thinks Teddy Roosevelt got a boost in the Reagan White House because of the first volume of Edmund Morris’ biography. Maybe. After reading the fine book I came to a different conclusion that Ronald Pestritto reaffirmed: TR was no conservative. He was certainly a larger-than-live character. Roosevelt was a prolific writer, sportsman, great politician, a legend of American history, and a bull moose personality. But the philosophy and policies he advocated were much closer to the Big Government of the Left than the conservatism of Reagan, Goldwater, Robert Taft, Grover Cleveland (a Democrat), and the Founding Fathers.

Go ahead and read his books and the biographies about TR, but don’t ingest his political views and claim you’re a conservative.

“Theodore Roosevelt Was No Conservative”

We’ll see how history treats President George W. Bush. Nile Gardiner thinks time will do well for him:

Much of the condemnation of his policies though is driven by a venomous hatred of Bush’s personality and leadership style, rather than an objective assessment of his achievements. Ten or twenty years from now, historians will view Bush’s actions on the world stage in a more favourable light. America’s 43rd president did after all directly liberate more people (over 60 million) from tyranny than any leader since Winston Churchill and Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Widely seen as his biggest foreign policy error, the decision to invade Iraq could ultimately prove to have been a masterstroke. Today the world is witnessing the birth of the first truly democratic state in the Middle East outside of Israel. Over eight million voted in Iraq’s parliamentary elections in 2005, and the region’s first free Muslim society may become a reality. Iraq might not be Turkey, but it is a powerful demonstration that freedom can flourish in the embers of the most brutal and barbaric of dictatorships.

The success of the surge in Iraq will go down in history as a turning point in the war against al-Qaeda. The stunning defeat of the insurgency was a major blow both militarily and psychologically for the terror network. The West’s most feared enemy suffered thousands of losses in Iraq, including many of their most senior commanders, such as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Abu Qaswarah. It was the most successful counter-insurgency operation anywhere in the world since the British victory in Malaya in 1960.

The broader war against Islamist terrorism has also been a success. There has not been a single terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11, and for all the global condemnation of pre-emptive strikes, Guantanamo and the use of rendition against terror suspects, the fact remains that Bush’s aggressive strategy actually worked.

Significantly, there have been no successful terrorist attacks in Europe since the July 2005 London bombings, in large part due to the cooperation between U.S., British and other Western intelligence agencies. American intelligence has proved vital in helping prevent an array of planned terror attacks in the UK, a striking demonstration of the value to Britain of its close ties to Washington.

Like the economic situation President-elect Obama is facing there aren’t a lot of good answers. But while Bush stumbled at times he remained focused on the goal: keeping America safe. For that he deserves much credit.

“George W Bush: Winning the War on Terror” [via memeorandum]

I hope all of you are having a great Christmas. For me it started last Friday with a planes, trains, and automobiles adventure from Washington, D.C. to Milwaukee. I’ll save that story for another time. My mother’s side of the family had Christmas last Saturday while I had it with my parents and sister on the 23rd.

Two things I’ve noticed this Christmas. First, since I live far away from family I’ll be driving around visiting and catching up. (Heaven forbid they come to D.C.) Second, I think I stumbled upon a new family Christmas tradition: I make the dinner. Ham, beef, and all the trimmings was the menu. My family knows I like to cook and do a pretty decent job. I’m pretty sure I’ve been assigned that duty from now on.

How has your Christmas been? Any good stories to tell?

[picture via Nicolai Kjærgaard]

As more and more webloggers get involved with politicians, campaigns, and advocacy groups there will be more conflicts between the weblogger’s view and the mission of the organization they’re working for. The only thing that really surprises me about the Matthew Yglesias incident with the Center for American Progress Action Fund is CAPAF’s Jennifer Palmieri made the unwise move of calling out Yglesias on his own weblog.

From what I’ve seen institutions on the Right are more tentative (call it “conservative) with weblogs. They air on the side of caution. On Fred Thompson’s Presidential campaign I had a few ideas for some biting posts. I sent the copy up the leadership chain where it got stalled long enough to make the post no longer relevant.

The Left institutions are less risk averse. But in those situations they’ll end up having to deal with smoothing things over with allied groups. This will be especially important with Democrats controlling the White House and Congress and trying to get their agenda passed. The balance will be on team players more than independent opinion.

If you think even outside, independent views are removed from constraints that let the weblogger be free to write whatever you’re wrong. You’d think magazines like National Review and The American Spectator would have carte blanche to rip on conservatives and Republicans any which way. While both likely don’t make profits they’re still dependent on advertisers. More importantly they rely on their subscribers. They can’t be too out of sync from their readers or donors. Kathleen Parker’s shots at Gov. Sarah Palin and religious conservatives ended her relationship with NRO.

Any weblogger deals with constraints on what they write. Some want to be respected in whatever sphere they’re writing in, they’re concerned about growing traffic and ad revenues, or they’re concerned about future employment (especially if they’re writing under their real name). To think the blogosphere magically changed human nature and interpersonal dynamics is naive.

Fred Thompson will be taking a more vocal role in politics. He’s moving beyond occasional speeches and web videos an into the world of talk radio:

Westwood One is pleased to announce the debut of The Fred Thompson Show on March 2, 2009. The show will replace The Radio Factor with Bill O’Reilly when the program ends its successful six-year run on February 27, 2009. Former U.S. senator and 2008 presidential candidate, Fred Thompson will share his views on politics, topical issues, pop culture and water cooler stories, as well as welcome guest interviews and take listener calls. The Fred Thompson Show will be a two-hour daily talk show and will air live Noon-2pm, Monday - Friday from the Westwood One studios in Washington DC.

“There is no prerequisite for a great talk show host, but if I were going to make one up, senator, presidential candidate, federal prosecutor, radio commentator, film and TV star would be a pretty good start,” said Bart Tessler, EVP Westwood One News & Talk Programming.

“When folks listen to a radio show, they make an appointment with it. It is the ideal way for me to continue my dialog with America about the issues we all face each day,” said Thompson.

“Senator Thompson is a perfect fit for radio,” said Gary Schonfeld, President of Westwood One Networks. “His unique set of qualifications will make him a huge hit with both listeners and advertisers.”

If anyone can make dreary subjects like federalism and the entitlement crisis interesting and can connect them to peoples’ everyday lives it’s Thompson. Can he do that two hours a day for years? It will be a challenge. He filled in for Paul Harvey in the past, but that was a five minute show. Two hours a day is a lot.

One thing Fred could do to get a foothold and find a niche is trying to engage online conservatives. That would be more than Hugh Hewitt jumping on the Twitter fad. Using and acknowledging the blogosphere as the source of his show prep wouldn’t hurt.

More from Allahpundit and Gina Cobb.

[via memeorandum]

Conservative legend (and Wisconsin native) Paul Weyrich passed away yesterday. Since he was a man who was always doing something–writing meeting with conservative leaders, strategizing–he certainly wouldn’t want we the living to mope and partake in endless memorializing, not when there’s much work to be done. So while the conservative movement has lost two great leaders in 2008 (Weyrich along with William F. Buckley) we’re reminded that a healthy movement needs to prepare a new generation for leadership. Jennifer Rubin writes:

The time therefore is ripe for a new generation of conservative leaders who have the ability to organize, invigorate, and give purpose to conservatives outside the Beltway. It is not enough for conservatives to oppose cap-and-trade policies — they need an alternative to left-leaning environmental action groups. It is not enough for pundits to bemoan the lack of Republican appeal to nonwhite voters — they need Hispanic, African-American, and Asian-American conservatives to organize in their communities, support new candidates, and translate the conservative agenda into alternatives to the NAACP and LULAC.

The generation of Ronald Reagan, of which Weyrich was a prominent member, also carried with it a spirit and attitude which is largely absent on the Right today. They were feisty, fun, optimistic, and, yes, cool. The “establishment” was the Left while they were the counterculture, at least the political counterculture.

In short: it’s time to rock ‘n roll!

I know first-hand that a new generation of conservative leaders see an opportunity and want to step forward. How that meshes with the wisdom and experience of current leaders, I don’t know. But we’re living in interesting times.

“Who Will Be the Next Paul Weyrich?” [via Mary Katharine Ham]

What’ more interesting than the Federal Reserve dropping short term interest rates to a range of 0-0.25% is what creative things Ben Bernanke will do next when the Fed finds their latest effort has been ineffective. Right now, the Fed is pushing on a string. More credit and liquidity isn’t instilling confidence in financial markets. Without that banks won’t lend which means business investment is on hold.

Until then the Fed will try things like buying long-term treasury bonds or increase rates on holdings banks have with the Fed.

Confidence builds when a few firms feel comfortable in taking small risks. When those pay off they’ll try bigger risks. Upon those successes the firms and others around them will see money can be made.

[via memeorandum]

Here’s a problem with Big Auto.

“Ever Wondered What a UAW Contract Looks Like?”

I hope the suspicious fire at the Wasilla Bible Church had nothing to do with Gov. Sarah Palin’s place on the Republican national ticket. She hopes that isn’t the case either:

Palin, who was not at the church at the time of the fire, stopped by Saturday. Her spokesman, Bill McAllister, said in a statement that Palin told an assistant pastor she was sorry if the fire was connected to the “undeserved negative attention” the church has received since she became the vice presidential candidate Aug. 29.

“Whatever the motives of the arsonist, the governor has faith in the scriptural passage that what was intended for evil will in some way be used for good,” McAllister said.

Let’s see what investigators turn up.

“Palin’s Church Damaged in Suspicious Fire”

I hope there are no extra-terrestrial movie critics. The earth might not survive.

“One Alien to Another: A Broadcast to the Stars”

Joe Satriani sues Coldplay and stumbles upon a killer mashup. I don’t care much about the lawsuit. But I would disagree with Allahpundit who asks, “Besides, do Coldplay look like they listen to Joe Satriani?” Just because Coldplay doesn’t rock out doesn’t mean they don’t listen to one of the best guitarists in rock history.

Here’s a portion of coldplay’s “Viva La Vida” with Satriani’s “If I Could Fly:”

Can someone mash them both up? Because we’re assured these guys will never get together to perform it.

P.S. Allahpundit, could you never use “The Obligatory…” title post ever again? Instant cliche. Thank you.

“Audio: The Obligatory “Coldplay Rips Off Joe Satriani, Maybe” Clip”

Florida beat Alabama today in an SEC class of the titans. This match that would likely determine one have of college football’s national title game got the Wall Street Journal’s Darren Everson to look at the South’s college football dominance.

Let me point out one thing: the two remaining undefeated teams aren’t in the south, but the Mountain West: Utah and Boise State. But don’t expect them to be playing each other for the national title. Can you say, “playoff?”

“What the Rise of Southern Football Says About America”

[picture via eekim]

The Palm Pistol has been declared a “medical device” by Medicare.

Douglas Rushkoff needs to stick to media studies and being a techno-guru. Because he sure doesn’t have a clue about economics. His “brilliant” idea is for local communities to invent their own currencies:

Promote and research the development of local, complementary currencies to supplement economic activity from the bottom up, allowing communities to create value, and minimizing dependence on centrally directed and centrally biased fiscal policy. Reduce the burden on centrally issued currency to fulfill all the nation’s transaction requirements, and reduce the influence of extraneous Wall Street speculation on Main Street activity.

This comes from the shop/grow/eat local mindset. It comes straight down the erroneous path autarky and mercantilism. Somehow trade with one’s neighbor is good, but trading with a stranger in the next town, state, or *gasp* country is bad.

People become better off economically when they’re allowed to freely trade with others no matter the location. Local currencies only add needless barriers to trade. Can someone get Rushkoff a copy of The Wealth of Nations? Or if he wants to seriously learn about money he needs Mises’ Theory of Money and Credit.