Entries for September 2008

When can the government search you and seize your belongings—like laptop computers and digital cameras—without any actual evidence to show that you're, you know, a criminal? When you're trying to re-enter the country (even if you're a U.S. citizen, by the way).

As my colleague Alex Kingsbury reports, though, some members of Congress are trying to tighten the laws to protect U.S. citizens from unwarranted government intrusion. Stay tuned.

Sam seems to buy into the GOP talking point that Nancy Pelosi was to blame for the Wall Street bailout flameout on the Hill yesterday. Sam should know better.

Yes, Pelosi's speech was dumb and unnecessary, but the notion that it so wounded GOP legislators' tender feelings that they reversed their vote is insulting to the House Republicans who voted "no." It implies that on an issue of enormous national importance they were willing to either follow their party leaders and vote "yes" on a bill they thought was a politically unpopular and substantively disastrous step down the path toward socialism—or were willing to take down a historic bill that they supported because Nancy Pelosi was mean.

Here's the rub: Maybe I've missed it, but I've yet to see the GOP legislator who says they switched their vote because of Pelosi. Help me out, readers—has any such House member come forward? (Or are they hanging out in the House cloak room with the Yeti, the Loch Ness Monster, and the Muslim Barack Obama?) Post your answers in the response section after the jump.

Do we need a third party? Americans are evenly split on the question, according to Gallup, with 47 percent saying yes and 47 percent saying no. What I find particularly striking is that in the middle of last year, 58 percent favored a third party and 33 percent thought the two parties were doing the job.

It's so very easy to ridicule Sarah Palin's recent Katie Couric-induced pratfalls. Some might say it's cruel. But it would be even crueler to take her seriously, though, since she aspires to the vice presidency, we should.

Take her widely discussed, laugh- or tear-inducing explanation to Couric about why the mere fact of living in Alaska qualifies as foreign policy experience. Break out your Palin-to-English dictionary, cut through the mangled sentences, and try taking her assertions at face value.

At best, she's an absurd self-aggrandizer; at worst, her inability to speak clearly risks an international incident.

Sarah Palin's first interview, with Charles Gibson, was painful. Her latest rounds with Katie Couric build on that discomfort and add mystery. As in: What's she saying?

Here's Couric asking Palin about the bailout:

If you watch the bloviators on the 24-hour news networks, you know that Friday night's debate (if it comes off) will be a game-changer—it's pretty well accepted conventional wisdom at this point.

But it's wrong, according to Gallup. Gallup looked at its polling numbers and found that only 1960 and 2000 were associated with meaningful shifts in public opinion.

Jack wrote yesterday that it's time to admit that the surge has worked (and that John McCain should himself also admit some hard truths). I'm still not convinced.

To wit, I commend to your attention an interesting commentary by Wayne White, a former deputy director of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research. White argues that the security gains in Iraq were rooted in the Sunni Awakening, not the surge—and that these gains are now in serious jeopardy.