Around the blogosphere
•Calpundit moves to Washington
The Washington Monthly, that is. Kevin Drum, the Calpundit, has moved again. Last year, he bid Blogger good-bye for Movable Type. Now, he has a new blog at the Washington Monthly. He says being a part of Big Media (well, middling media, really) will not cramp his style. For readers not familiar with the Calpundit, he focuses on politics, but also probes business and does his share of cat blogging.
Forwarding Address. . . As promised — assuming you take a generous view of "a day or two" — starting today I will be blogging for the Washington Monthly magazine's new blog, Political Animal. Here's the new address:www.washingtonmonthly.comI will probably still post a few personal items here occasionally, but basically my entire blog is being transplanted to the Washington Monthly's site. Nothing much will change, really, at least at first. It will still be me doing the same thing I do here, unedited and unplugged. We may add some guest bloggers in the future, but the details are a bit murky at the moment. We'll work it out as we go.
So please add Political Animal to your bookmark list, and if you're a blogger please add it to your blogroll. See you there!
NOTE: The link above is a direct link to the blog. It will be right smack in the middle of their newly redesigned homepage. It should become active around 7 am Eastern time on Wednesday.
UPDATE: Honest, I really am blogging over there now. Go read all the new posts. Go now!
And add Political Animal to your bookmarks. Just click on the link above with your right mouse button and then click "Add to Favorites. . . ." It's easy!
Long time readers of Mac-a-ro-nies know Kevin is one of the big dogs who led me to become interested in blogging and helped me become a good blogger. His address may have changed, but I am sure the quality of his blogging has not, I have updated my blogroll to follow Kevin to Political Animal. You should, too.
•Wolff has a beat
Phil Wolff has been actually getting out of the house or office and talkingto real live newsworthy people. One of those folks is the drafter of a new constitution for Iran.
Last week I dined with Pedram Moallemian who blogs the eyeranian. He wants a secular Iran. I asked him what he thought America's policy on Iran should be. He answered:
- Respect the right of self-determination for Iran and Iranians.
- Condemn any possible military action against the people who are doing a great job fighting tyranny by themselves.
- Acknowledge big mistakes were made on both sides in the past and choose to move on towards a better relationship.
Tyrants ruled Iraq and Afghanistan. There was no meaningful chance for reform, no hope for self-determination. Do the people of Iran, at home and in diaspora, have enough faith in the current system and the system's ability to change incumbents?
Pedram clearly does. He and others are drafting a new Iranian constitution. This is an ambitious exercise, imagining a new government that fits a whole people. It's an embrace of liberty worthy of Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin.
Now, I'm feeling guilty about not getting out and talking to sources more often myself. The reporter in me wants to. But, the anonymous blogger says no.
Phil's weblog is A Klog Apart.
•Skippy, Condi and the plank
Does Condoleeza Rice's agreement to testify about her role in misleading the public about the invasion of Iraq have you dancing? You might want to sit down for a moment. Skippy the Bush Kangaroo has noticed something about the Bush administration's 'liberality.'
rice and white house make skippy's new poll awol to relevancy
now, we're not saying we had anything to do with it, but. . .
the day after we set up a new poll asking if condoleeza rice should testify before the 911 commission, the white house does the one flip flop we like to hear, and announces that dr. rice (and her uncle ben) will indeed testify publicly, and under oath, too!
however, there is a condition (and we're not talking about awol's skin blotches): the
atjoucon tells us:
the decision was conditioned on the bush administration receiving assurances in writing from the commission that such a step does not set a precedent and that the commission does not request "additional public testimony from any white house official, including dr. rice,'' white house counsel alberto gonzales said in a letter to the panel.
well, one hand, they apparently don't have a dictionary handy, because once you do something the first time, that's the very definition of "precedent."
on the other hand, this administration is never one to worry about precedents.
I have mulled what Rice's testimony would mean a bit. Not so much in regard to information, which she will try to divulge as little of as possible. But, in regard to mind games and group psychology. Rice would make a good sacrificial victim. You know, the person who gets thrown overboard as an offering to the gods when a situation becomes theatening. Her constituency is neglible and her support soft. Of course I am aware that conservatives like to cite her as a Negro they approve of. But, that kind of thing is always dubious. The support can be retracted at the blink of the eye since the supporters perceive the person as only a token. Support from the African-African community? Don't make me laugh. I do need to clarify that I use the term 'sacrificial victim' for convenience. Since Rice, proudly, is as responsible as the other architects of the invasion and occupation of Iraq, she is just as guilty as they are.
Visit Skippy, the blogger who posts big thoughts in small letters. Tell him you are sorry about his poll.
What's the art?
The picture at the top of this entry depicts the path a blog entry takes from its home blog to the broader Internet. John Lebkowsky blogged the topic at Weblogsky. Read his theory there.