CNN’s post-debate poll, taken solely of debate watchers, has Biden winning 51-36. It’s worth noting that in that sample, whatever it might be, 54 percent believed before the debate that Palin was not an acceptable choice for vice president. That needle moved 5 points in her direction among those polled, 81 percent of whom said she did better than they expected.
May 2013
-
Articles
-
"My Negro Problem-and Ours" at 50
Norman Podhoretz -
Gay Marriage, the Court, and Federalism
Tara Helfman -
The Spirit of '75?
Algis ValiunasAn audacious, and wrong, argument about the American Revolution.
Fiction
-
Onto a Good Thing
Joseph Epstein
Politics & Ideas
-
The Bureaucrat-Driven Life
Heather Wilhelm -
The Making of an Education Reformer
Sohrab Ahmari -
Bork's Watergate
James Rosen -
Dear Prudence
Paul O. Carrese -
Whose Accomplishments?
Mona Charen
Culture & Civilization
-
The Parenting Trap
Dana Mack -
George Saunders, Anti-Minimalist
Fernanda Moore -
A Chekhov in Training
Terry Teachout -
What Ailes the Liberal Media?
Andrew Ferguson
John Podhoretz
-
Taking Obama's Foreign Policy Seriously
John Podhoretz
Threat Assessment
-
More Genocide Threats from Iran
Jonathan S. Tobin
Letters
-
Denying Jewish Peoplehood-and Reality
Our ReadersResponses to Robert S. Wistrich's "The Changing Face of Anti-Semitism"
-
Gun Laws, Crime, and Freedom
Our ReadersResponses to Benjamin Domenech's "The Truth About Mass Shootings and Gun Control"
-
Don't Confuse Principle and Pose
Our ReadersResponses to Matthew Continetti's "Poseur Politics in the Era of Obama"
-
Jews and Sports
Our Readers
Enter Laughing
-










I see no evidence that Obomber has decided to make Bush’s anti-terror policies his own. There is evidence that he has pushed the terror stuff to the back burner while the economy gets priority attention, and so the status quo holds for a bit longer. One result *may* be that Obama’s terror policies, when they are ultimately crafted, may have the benefit of time for reflection and deliberation, something his economic knee-jerk has lacked.
I’ll say before and I’ll say it again: “The vindication of Bush begins with the ascendancy of Obama.” Of course, these idiots are trying to have their cake and eat it too: we see the cow Clinton traipsing all over of the globe trying to mend ties with the Islamic community to appease the Left, but in private they are using the techniques that were employed by the Bush Administration. So much for transparency.
The Times said it today. But Congressional Quarterly’s Tim Starks beat them to the punch over the weekend.
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000003052680
Phil Jackson also beat the NYT to the punch, several weeks ago in fact, over on The Intellectual Conservative
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/01/26/hope-and-change-comes-to-washington/
Greenwald’s grabbing for straws gets more pathetic by the day. The Times story comes no where near accepting that the Obama administration is continuing the Bush admin’s policies on torture. Clearly, the DOJ and the white house counsel’s office are getting their act together, the AG only got confirmed 10 days ago because of stalling tactics, and the admin do have other things on their mind at the moment like the economic meltdown. The way this period of fact finding and analysis is spun as “vindication” for the torture policies of the Bush admin is fairly ridiculous. They’ve already announced a slew of measures aimed at halting the more egregious stuff and rest assured there will be more. For those of course who can’t produce a thought without larding it with personal insults like this:
“Of course, these idiots are trying to have their cake and eat it too: we see the cow Clinton traipsing all over of the globe trying to mend ties with the Islamic community to appease the Left”
They long ago lost any contact with objectivity.