Friday, November 20, 2009

Re: Your Stimulus Dollars at Work   [Veronique de Rugy]

From Oregon’s capitol city, Salem.  $13.5 million to release druggies back into the community against the voter’s expressed wishes to keep them in prison longer.

Award Description: Oregon voters passed Measure 57, a citizen initiative that increased prison sentences for non-violent property and drug offenders. The Oregon Criminal Justice Commission (CJC) will use (these funds) to divert some of the offenders convicted of Measure 57 crimes from prison if they complete intensive drug court type programs. These programs will focus on intensive supervision and treatment, and immediate sanctions and rewards. These programs are expected to serve approximately 720 offenders per year for four years.”  ($4687.39 per offender per year! – Your Reader).

No matter what one's position is on the drug war, it's hard to see how this spending is consistent with the promise of creating jobs that was made by the administration.

11/20 06:40 PMShare

From a $100 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

You had me at "immanentize."

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 06:30 PMShare

'It All Leads Back to Rahm Emanuel'   [Mark Krikorian]

I love it that the Hispanic Caucus hates Rahm so much, in this case because he pushed for the illegal-alien restrictions in the health-care bill. I can't wait to hear what they'll say about him when their comprehensive amnesty bill fails to go anywhere!

11/20 06:07 PMShare

Profile in Courage   [Mark Krikorian]

Carly Fiorina has just started in politics and she's already weaseling out of direct answers:

In a question-and-answer session with reporters, the just-announced Republican candidate for U.S. Senate and former CEO of Hewlett-Packard straddled the fence on issues ranging from climate change to immigration, refusing to give specific answers on the most controversial aspects of those debates.

She deemed climate change a "serious issue" but at the same time suggested the science surrounding global warming is less than conclusive. She said she supports "controlling the border" against illegal immigration and establishing a better temporary worker program, but she declined to say whether she would vote to create a path to citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants now in the country.

English translation: Yes, she would vote to create a path to citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants now in the country.

11/20 06:05 PMShare

You Have to Show Respect and Consideration to Allies? Really?   [Rich Lowry]

The Washington Post has a fascinating and encouraging piece today on the administration's approach to Karzai. Turns out the ham-handed bullying was counterproductive and the administration's hitting "re-set." A snippet:

The U.S. approach to the election had the unintended consequence of strengthening Karzai's hand. "Nobody wanted to coalesce around a single candidate because they each thought they were America's favorite," said Ali Jalali, a former interior minister who briefly considered running.

Karzai was able to pull key opposition figures to his side by promising them positions in the new government. Fear that he no longer had U.S. support also prompted him to name Mohammed Fahim, a prominent former warlord alleged to have been involved in drug smuggling and corruption, as one of his vice presidential candidates.

"We created a political-diplomatic isometric exercise," said Ronald Neumann, a former U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan. "The more we pressed him to remove people, the more he thought we were trying to undercut him, and we drove him back to the worst actors for support."

By the May 8 filing deadline, it was clear to many in Washington that Karzai would almost certainly win a second term. But there was no substantive effort to recalibrate the relationship. Although the administration maintained a neutral stance with regard to the election, Karzai saw it differently, according to his advisers.

"He was sure," one said, "that Washington wanted him to lose."

We've editorialized on what a mistake the administration made in not forging a more cooperative relationship with Karzai. Of course, there's a balance to be struck between holding his hand and pushing him, but the administration — made up of self-styled diplomatic masters — went way too far in pressuring, haranguing, and basically alienating him. From the Post again:

"You have to show him respect and consideration," said Zalmay Khalilzad, a Bush administration envoy to Afghanistan who remains close to Karzai. "You cannot lecture him. You have to listen to his explanations, why he thinks something cannot be done, and then respond to that in a constructive way."

You'd think that'd be obvious, but it's very good news if it's sinking in now.

11/20 06:02 PMShare

From a $50 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Know what I think we need? More NRO-bell!

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 06:00 PMShare

If Only Wishing Made It So   [Rich Lowry]

It's always a peril of political punditry to assume that because we support or oppose something, it's therefore good or bad political strategy respectively (see post below on the interpretation of elections routinely offered by pro-choicers). There's a great example today. Paul Krugman attributes the troubles of the Democrats to their insufficient toughness on Wall Street. That may be a contributing factor, but he wants to look the other way when it comes to the unpopularity of the auto bailouts and the massive spending spree so far. If only Democrats had structured things a little differently, he wants to believe, the public would be clamoring for even more government action and spending. Behold the awesome power of self-delusion.

11/20 05:49 PMShare

The Pro-Lifers Did It!   [Rich Lowry]

After the Republicans lose any election, the explanation is trotted out that the party's social conservatism is responsible. This was less persuasive than ever after 2008, but still we heard it. And now consider: A pro-lifer has just won the governorship of New Jersey; for the first time since Roe, a friend reminds me, there's a fully pro-life governor of Virginia (neither Allen or Gilmore fit that bill); a sweeping pro-life measure passed the House in the form of the Stupak amendment on a strong, bi-partisan vote; and opinion polls show an up-tick in pro-life sentiment. The Republican party had, and still has, plenty of problems, but its support for life isn't one of them.

11/20 05:40 PMShare

Palinism v. McDonnellism   [Rich Lowry]

First Read today mentioned the fight between Palinism and McDonellism. This will be a journalistic trope for a while, so it's worth noting what a false choice it should be. First, if we accept the terms for the sake of argument, Palin was a McDonnellite before McDonnell, since her success in Alaska was based on addressing practical issues of governance with a common-sense conservatism that appealed to the right and the center. Second, you really can't have one without the other. You need both an energized grass roots attached to an indisputably conservative candidate (which I'm guessing is a key part of what First Read would define as Palinism), together with a compelling policy agenda that appeals beyond the conservative base (so-called McDonnellism). McDonnell had the first (he was an unabashed social conservative, indeed I hazard to guess is as conservative as Palin) and added the second in the way winning conservatives have across the decades, from Newt Gingrich to Ronald Reagan. As I wrote earlier this week, I really don't think there's a Palinism per se. And if Palin is going to run for president and succeed as a candidate, she'd need to return to her McDonnellism, advancing a specific agenda and winning over the center as well as the right. The always-impressive Patrick Ruffini was particularly good on this basic question in the immediate wake of McDonnell's victory:

Republicans in Virginia have struggled to make their prescriptions relevant to swing voters. Our issues in local elections have traditionally been issues like taxes and immigration that don't always lend themselves to policy heft. And a lack of policy heft has translated into an intangible sense that there's not enough "there there."

This was the central challenge facing the McDonnell campaign at its outset, and so it systematically sought to dismantle this critique by branding McDonnell as a practical problem solver without compromising his conservative principles.

Republicans can be specific, detailed, and confident in putting forward solutions relevant to the middle class, while also being more conservative than we have been in recent years (especially with the Bush era spending binge). There's not an either/or tradeoff between conservatism and a policy focus, something the McDonnell campaign proved in Virginia this year.

The lesson of the McDonnell campaign: Maintain your conservative principles, but make the election about policy. And whatever the issue, make sure you've got an app for that.

11/20 05:38 PMShare

From a $32 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

I canceled Newsweek after being a subscriber for 10+ years. This was the refund for unmailed issues. Keep up the good work.

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 05:30 PMShare

Whiny Spoiled Brats   [Anthony Dick]

The University of California system took some predictable steps to tighten its belt this week in the face of the state budget crisis, cutting some services and boosting student tuition. Equally predictably, students across the state have responded with a series of self-concerned protests, taking over campus buildings at Berkeley and UCLA.

Perhaps most predictably of all, the New York Times has started in with its faux-poignant protest coverage, as illustrated in this slide show (complete with a don't-tase-me-bro moment). Two things about this mess:

First and foremost, the protests are about privileged kids demanding subsidies from working people. The UC system will continue to be heavily subsidized by taxpayers, and the students who attend are among the most naturally gifted, with the highest future earning potential, in the country. This is especially true at the system's flagship schools of Berkeley and UCLA, where the protests have been most intense. Narcissism and self-absorption are the norm on college campuses, but it really is pushing the limits to throw such a tantrum at the idea that you will be getting a smaller amount of free money taken out of the paychecks of strapped taxpayers, most of whom could never dream of the advantages and opportunities you enjoy.

Second, these protesters claim the mantle of the free-speech movement, but it is a betrayal and a subversion of the principles of free speech to forcibly occupy a school building and block out its rightful owners and occupants (including other tuition-paying students). The very idea of free speech is to facilitate the peaceful exchange of ideas, without allowing the use or threat of force to distort the process. The whole enterprise suffers when thugs begin breaking out the chains and barricades and committing property crimes in order to get their way.  

11/20 05:12 PMShare

Hidden Meanings   [John Derbyshire]

With the long winter nights drawing in, what NRO readers need is a puzzle to while away the hours. I have just the thing.

I subscribe to The Economist, and the November 21–27 issue arrived in the lunchtime post. The Economist has both text and pictures, of course. Most of the pictures are photographs, but some are little drawings meant to illustrate some point or other. Taken out from the surrounding text, these drawings are often very enigmatic — often teetering on the edge of surrealism, in fact.

Here are three from the current issue. You may either (a) try to figure out what news topic they are illustrating, or (b) supply spoof captions in the manner of the New Yorker weekly competition, or (c) just quietly congratulate yourself on being a wide ocean away from this sort of Brit-journalistic whimsy.

First picture

Second picture

Third picture

11/20 05:08 PMShare

From a $50 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

In the recent magazine, Mr. Nordlinger writes: "[H]is words give comfort and heart — plus ammunition — to those bewildered or dismayed by the present period, and unable to express themselves as a Krauthammer can."

I would say the same of all who write for National Review.

God Bless.

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 05:00 PMShare

The Missing Contributor   [Rick Brookhiser]

Any contribution from Lil Cthuhlu yet?

11/20 04:42 PMShare

From a $100 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Ditto Yale, ditto So Cal.  To complete the sad trifecta, I also work in Hollywood.  For my penance, I will now give $100, say 10 Hail Marys, and thank You Know Who for Jack Dunphy.

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 04:30 PMShare

What Does Sarah Palin's Rogue Week Mean?   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

I asked Ralph Reed, who, thinking she's probably not going to run for president in 2012, says: "Unless she runs, not much."

Reed doesn't doubt that Sarah Palin may consider running for president of the United States, but recommends a little space between 2008 and when she does. He adds: "My sense is that she is going to be a major force in the party—-and a force for good, by the way...."

So who in 2012? Reed says:

One thing you can count on in every presidential cycle in the Republican party: There is always a surprise.  That was true for Pat Robertson in 1988, Pat Buchanan in 1996, John McCain in 2000, and Huckabee and Palin in 2008. No matter how many times you chart the primaries, you can't predict the unpredictable, and someone you least expect catches fire. Who will that be in 2012?  By definition, we really don't know. 

11/20 04:25 PMShare

Audit or Arrest?   [Mark Krikorian]

Rep. Lamar Smith, ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee and immigration-enforcement stalwart, wheedled updated statistics out of DHS and found that, in the words of the Washington Times story:

Criminal arrests, administrative arrests, indictments and convictions of illegal immigrants at work sites all fell by more than 50 percent from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2009.

And note that Obama's crowd didn't take over until after the first third of FY 2009, so the numbers are likely to fall even further next year. At a DHS conference on immigration yesterday for employers, J-Nap's comments made it clear that she would permit no illegals to be arrested at worksites — only Americans (employers) would be arrested, if even that.

Keep reading this post . . .

11/20 04:11 PMShare

Kind of a Pattern by Now . . .   [Victor Davis Hanson]

11/20 04:08 PMShare

From a $100 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

I work for Big Pharma, and have recently dropped out of my company's PAC. Please enjoy a portion of my former contribution.

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 04:00 PMShare

Iraqi Detainees Use Favre to Tease Wisconsin Soldiers   [Pete Hegseth]

As a Minnesotan, this is certainly the only time I'll side with Iraqi detainees over U.S. guards.

Click here to read the news article from a Milwaukee news station.

Too funny. Go Vikes!

11/20 03:58 PMShare

A Dirty Word   [NRO Staff]

What to do about ‘Teabagger’? Jay Nordlinger responds in an episode of Off the Page today.

11/20 03:32 PMShare

From a $30 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

I give up surfing the web during Lent every year, although I always grant myself a dispensation to read NRO — giving that up would entail too much suffering.

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 03:30 PMShare

Your Stimulus Dollars at Work   [Veronique de Rugy]

The stimulus money was supposed to be directed to job creation, remember? Well, you will be happy to know that instead the government thought, in this economic context, it would be a good idea to spend $452,000 on "Respiratory Health Impacts of Wildfire Particulate Emissions Under Climate Change," which is basically a study that will likely show that wildfires cause smoke and that smoke can cause respiratory issues.

We are also spending $233,825 on a study that looks at the question "why do Africans vote they way they do?"

To find the waste in your neighborhood, go here.

11/20 03:26 PMShare

Behold, the New National Review   [NRO Staff]

There's Ponnuru (for SCOTUS!). There's Dalyrmple. Jeff Bell. Alex Alexiev. Brookhiser. Nordlinger. Brookhiser. Steyn. Rob Long. Kevin Hassett. And much more.

Subscribe here.

11/20 03:22 PMShare

Speaking of TV   [Jonah Goldberg]

How come seasons 1-4 of the Shield aren't on iTunes?

11/20 03:21 PMShare

Because It's Friday   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Oh happy day! Scarecrow & Mrs. King will finally be available on DVD — the first season is in pre-ordering season here.

11/20 03:17 PMShare

Surtaxes are the New Black   [Veronique de Rugy]

Surtaxes are the new rage this year. Nancy Pelosi wants a 5.4 percent surtax on the rich to pay for half of the health-care-reform costs and now senior House Democrats have introduced legislation that would impose a surtax beginning in 2011 to cover the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Congressional Quarterly has some of the details:

The bill would require the president to set the surtax so that it fully pays for the previous year’s war cost. But it would allow for a one-year delay in the implementation of the tax if the president determines that the economy is too weak to sustain that kind of tax change. It also would exempt military members who have served in combat since Sept. 11, 2001, along with their families, and the families of soldiers killed in combat.

Here is my question: If the Democrats believe that fairness requires that everyone shoulders a piece of the cost of the war, why shouldn't that rule also apply to health-care reform?

11/20 03:13 PMShare

When Harry Met Saturday   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Have you checked in on our Critical Condition health-care blog today? Have you read our editorial? Have you read Bob Costa's Senate state-of-health-care play piece? Have you read everything Stephen Spruiell learned about Demcare from NPR (you'll be surprised). Have you read David Sanders on what Blanche Linoln's going to do? And there's more to read. Just mosey on over to the homepage.

11/20 03:07 PMShare

Re: The EU and Global Governance   [Iain Murray]

It appears I got my transcripts of yesterday's press conference confused. The remarks about global governance were not made by Baroness Ashton — although she doubtless agrees with them — but by the new president of Europe himself, Herman Van Rompuy.

11/20 03:05 PMShare

From a $100 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

I gave earlier this week. Here is another $100. I'm inspired and fired up to take our country back. Keep fighting the good fight.

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 03:00 PMShare

Tantalus Reaches for Amnesty   [Mark Krikorian]

Amnesty keeps receding into the future. Rep. Luis Gutierrez, the amnesty point man in the House, had pledged to introduce a bill in October, then promised it in November, and this week, in a conference call hosted by the Campaign to Reform Immigration for America ("a project of the Tides Advocacy Fund"), announced that he'll be introducing a bill in December. I wouldn't even count on that, given that lawmakers might not want to go home for Christmas break and hold town halls where people complain about both health care and immigration (which is why Chuck Schumer has said his Senate companion bill will be introduced in January, after lawmakers are safely back in Washington).

11/20 02:58 PMShare

Krauthammer's Take   [NRO Staff]

From last night's Fox News All-Stars.

On the Reid health-care bill:

Where do you start? This is a really unbelievable bill.

Because the provisions that the CBO looked at are so jiggered, even though CBO's numbers are real, it's about an unreal assumption.

If you start with 2015, which is essentially where the benefits start, and you go into the future, every ten years you will have a plan that is not [costing] $800 billion. It will be [costing] $1.5 trillion. Which means that except for the early years — in which there are no benefits paid out and a lot of taxes paid in — you're going to have a huge net deficit which will probably be around half a trillion every decade.

Secondly, even if you had the revenue neutrality, which you won't, everybody assumes: Well, that is going to help us economically. In fact, to achieve revenue neutrality, you have to increase taxes, and you're going to have to have spending cuts.

Those increases in taxes, and cuts in spending, are now not available in reducing the other deficits outside of health care which are going to amount to $9 trillion over the next decade.

So you create a new entitlement, you support it with new taxes and spending cuts which you cannot now use in reducing the outside — the other — deficits, which are destroying the dollar and the federal budget.

… Of all the ways in which you can raise revenue, in the Reid bill it's done with raising the payroll tax in the middle of a recession with over 10 percent unemployment — exactly at a time when you want to encourage employment and lower the payroll tax. It's perverse.

On the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force’s mammogram recommendations:

People are reacting as if we never had a panel or a recommendation before. Years before, we had a recommendation from a panel like this who said start at age 40. Every day the FDA is deciding this new drug is a good one or not — and if it's not, you don't ever see it.

So it is not as if these kinds of independent commissions don't exist and determine what we get and what we don't. So the issue here is not panels in general or recommendations in general, it's the recommendation in and of itself.

… And the problem here is a mammogram is extremely inaccurate. One in ten tests which are returned as cancer are not, so you have a 10 percent false positive, which causes not just anxiety and suffering, but new tests, more [diagnostic] radiation, even a [surgical] procedure, and perhaps other harms …

And the balance of this is — how much that is worth [vs.] how many … real cancers are caught.

So when you have inexact tests and inexact screenings, you have to make a determination and decide how to balance them. I think the report is a fairly good recommendation. It's not aimed at saving money. It would, but that's not what its recommendations are based on.

11/20 02:47 PMShare

From a $100 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

NRO was the only thing that got me through the depths of my 2008 political depression — keep up the great work!

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 02:40 PMShare

Mandates   [Ramesh Ponnuru]

In the primaries, Obama distinguished himself from Clinton on health care by opposing an individual mandate. In the general election, he distinguished himself from McCain by opposing taxes on health benefits. So now he is trying to pass bills with both an individual mandate and taxes on health benefits — and his supporters are saying that Congress should go along because he won the election.

11/20 02:23 PMShare

From a $54 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

In honor of the 54th Anniversary of the first issue of NR(ODT). I only regret that I can't donate more. NRO is a bargain at any price!

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 02:20 PMShare

I'm Not Sure I Believe   [Ramesh Ponnuru]

this poll saying that a majority of Republicans believe that ACORN stole the election from McCain last year; I'd like to see some other pollsters ask the same question. But if it is true, it suggests a widespread disconnection from reality that's pretty troubling. It's not as though it was a close election.

On which point let me quote Henry Olsen:

McCain's share of the national popular vote also signaled trouble. On the surface, his total, 45.6%, seemed respectable. Many Republican presidential candidates had received less in recent memory. But all of those candidates save one, Barry Goldwater, had run races with serious third-party candidates. Goldwater aside, McCain's showing was the worst GOP result in a two-party race since Wendell Willkie garnered 44.8% in 1940. To look at it another way, Obama's 52.9% was the second-highest for a non-incumbent Democrat in American history, trailing only FDR's 57.4% in 1932.

11/20 02:16 PMShare

From a $100 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Maine Republican who is a fan of Sarah Palin, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, which means I am pushing the left side of your supporters. Many would consider me a RINO, so "going rogue" here in making a contribution to NRO, but truly appreciate your reasoned thoughtful conservatism. Big fan of Rich, Jonah and Mark.

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 02:00 PMShare

From a $25 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Thanks for your effort, I read and appreciate NRO writers every day. I just today emailed Senator Sherrod Brown asking him to rethink his political future, if he goes against Ohioans on health insurance legislation.

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 01:40 PMShare

Re: Enough   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Like so:

I donated a pittance a day or so ago but felt the need to send this observation.  As an avid reader of NRO generally and The Corner in particular, there is an ethereal sense of union & camaraderie spilling from the various contributor comments being posted by KJL.during this fund drive. It seems to not matter the amount given or from what part of the globe contributions have come; whether the contributors are professional, blue collar, unemployed or stay at home – the certain sense of optimistic urgency threading through so many of the comments is palpable! Keep on fightin’…..

11/20 01:32 PMShare

Enough!   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

An e-mail:

OK, OK, I surrender. I’ll make a contribution simply because you guys are the best. But please, please, please stop this never ending stream of contributor emails deifying your blog. It’s as if NRO were a holy shrine for conservatives and you guys were the high priests and priestesses of the tribe to whom we readers come annually to pay tribute and raise hosannas to the sky in thanks that you deign to bless us with your written word. I don’t mind the tribute part but this adulation crap  does grow tiresome. Where do I pay?

I promise it won't last much longer. The Corner will soon go back to its regularly scheduled programming — and should be hopping tomorrow on the Senate, by the way.

In the meantime, other e-mails suggest to me many of you are enjoying the comments from your fellow readers, and not because you think we're priests and priestesses, but because you enjoy the company of your friends — even the ones you haven't met, but are in the same room with, virtually, day in and day out.

11/20 01:28 PMShare

From a $100 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

After taking Derb's advice and getting a government job (though one that is actually a federal function) I feel it's my duty to make a donation to NRO with my inflated government salary.

Without NRO and its crystal clear ideas and detailed debates to clear my head from hallway conversations at post, I'm sure I'd find my new office much foggier.

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 01:20 PMShare

From a $200 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

A small price to pay for the chance to see my comments published on *the* indispensable conservative blog! <fingers crossed>

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 01:00 PMShare

From a $50 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

From a nobody who's feeling the squeeze of the era in which we live (Obamania?).  Many co-workers here at the office were already let go (a "non-billable", good friend of nearly 10 years was abrubtly and unceremoniously escorted from the building yesterday). Those of us remaining know we're on borrowed time . . . suffice it to say the mood is not particularly jubilant, but we persist because that's what Americans do. I personally draw much strength from the spirit of Mr. Buckley (Nearer my God to Thee) and his legacy on display in the talented group of conservatives there at NRO. We're never giving in and, because you're important as well as entertaining, here's a little donation to see that y'all stay put as well. Blessings . . .

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 12:40 PMShare

From a $500 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Thank you, National Review! We are subscribers to the hold-in-my-hands magazine as well as all-through-the-day readers of The Corner. Quick! Take this money before our government decides it knows better how to spend it than we ourselves do.

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 12:20 PMShare

Over a Thousand   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

We've been doing these online fundraising drives for a few years now and I'm so overwhelmed this year in a special way by the volume of donations at numbers like $15 and $20 from students and the unemployed. From families with not a lot of disposable income. People care about what's happening in their country and see the need now in a critical way for smart debates, good ideas, and somewhere that highlights what works and exposes what doesn't. We'll keep at it — in no small part thanks to your support.

11/20 12:06 PMShare

Conservative Novels Watch   [John J. Miller]

There's an excellent and ongoing response to this morning's post about conservative novels. Looking for some good fiction? Read the comments section at HeyMiller.com. Please feel free to join the conversation, too.

11/20 12:03 PMShare

From a $250 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Thank you for fighting the good fight — a loyal reader in Kandahar.

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 12:00 PMShare

Re: Busted   [John J. Miller]

Here's a creative solution to the D-Day Memorial's Stalin bust conundrum. From an e-mail:

When I visited the DDay memorial last summer, I wished they did have something to acknowledge the USSR's role in WWII. It did have an impact on the Normandy invasion, because the Wehrmacht in June 1944 was a lot weaker than it was on June 22, 1941; and most of the combat that had weakened it was on the Eastern front.  

I would propose instead of a bust of Stalin, a bust of two Red Army soldiers. One poor Ivan Ivanovich (or whatever the Soviet equivalent of GI Joe was) who died fighting the Germans, and his mate, Ivan Denisovich, the Red Army veteran who went off to the Gulag as the war ended because he had been captured by the Germans at one point. (Ivan Denisovich in Solzhenitsyn's novel was in the Gulag for having surrendered to the Germans).

11/20 11:58 AMShare

Amazing   [Rich Lowry]

We've seen a tremendous out-pouring of support in response to the fundraising drive. Kathryn's posts are just the tip of the iceberg. Well over a 1,000 of you have contributed, and I can't tell you how encouraging and inspiring this is. Some of you I've already thanked personally, but just let me say this to everyone else: thank you, thank you, thank you. For the rest of you, it's still not too late to give, and I thank you in advance!

11/20 11:45 AMShare

From a $100 NRO Contributor   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

My conservatism was recently awakened by my graduate work in finance and economics. I now realize that conservative principles not only work but are necessary conditions for freedom. NRO provides a great forum which both challenges and strengthens my beliefs as I try to awaken in others that which I know resides in nearly all Americans.

Contribute to NRO here.

11/20 11:40 AMShare