C for 'cuckoo'

Really, you can't make up some of this stuff going on as the Bush administration runs out the clock:

Dana 'I'm a man' Milbank in the Post, The Cheese Stands Alone: Vice President Cheney's recent declaration that he is not part of the executive branch has prompted hard questions, and nobody in the White House has a good answer for why Cheney -- who hovered near Bush's desk while the president spoke -- had turned himself into a fourth branch of government. ...

Already under fire for his secretive ways, Cheney refused to comply with an order governing the care of classified documents; his office concluded that the order did not apply because he was not "an entity within the executive branch."

That's quite opposite the argument Cheney made in 2001, when he said that a congressional probe into the workings of his energy task force "would unconstitutionally interfere with the functioning of the executive branch." Cheney has, in effect, declared himself to be neither fish nor fowl but an exotic, extraconstitutional beast who answers to no one. ...

It's not entirely surprising that Cheney would attempt to flee the executive branch, given Bush's sub-30-percent standing in polls. But Democrats in Congress were not welcoming their new transfer. "The vice president's theory seems to be one almost laughable on its face, that he's not part of the executive branch," Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) said in a conference call with reporters from his car. "I think if you ask James Madison or Benjamin Franklin or any of the writers of the Constitution, they'd almost laugh if they heard that."

Madison and Franklin did not return phone calls yesterday.

Maybe Schumer was just jealous. After all, Cheney enjoys perks not available to his colleagues in the legislative branch: the mansion off Massachusetts Avenue, Air Force Two, a West Wing office and a huge staff in the, uh, Executive Office Building next to the White House.

Over on the House side of the Capitol, the chairman of the Democratic caucus, Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), was equally unforgiving. He wants Congress to cut funding for the executive branch to reflect the fact that the Office of the Vice President is no longer part of that branch.

Cruelly, Emanuel said he would also oppose any attempt by Cheney to play in the congressional baseball game, held last night. "He would remake the rules to his liking," the congressman explained.

Photo of Vice President Cheney from whitehouse.gov (not house.gov or senate.gov)

Dancing with a dragon

The Times' second day of articles on Rupert Murdoch takes a look at how he's operating in China. Paragraphs 11 and 12 of Dealings in China: It’s Business, and It’s Personal are particularly interesting, if slightly off-topic:

News Corporation officials in Beijing and Hong Kong declined to comment for this article. After The New York Times began a two-part series on Monday about how Mr. Murdoch operates his company, the News Corporation issued a statement:

“News Corp. has consistently cooperated with The New York Times in its coverage of the company. However, the agenda for this unprecedented series is so blatantly designed to further the Times’s commercial self interests — by undermining a direct competitor poised to become an even more formidable competitor — that it would be reckless of us to participate in their malicious assault. Ironically, The Times, by using its news pages to advance its own corporate business agenda, is doing the precise thing they accuse us of doing without any evidence.”

What about paragraph 13? Well, it's the Times, so:

China has never been a make-or-break proposition for the News Corporation, since its operations here represent a small part of the company, which is valued at $68 billion. But Mr. Murdoch pushed for nearly 15 years to create a satellite television network that would cover every major market in the world, including China.

Heh, heh. Now that's power--or arrogance. Very Chinese, in a way.

The balance of the piece is interesting; obviously, to the extent Murdoch's (third) wife is Chinese, he's got more than a business interest in the country. I've never really liked him, but have generally thought of him as one of the few media executives who actually knows what he's doing. He's like Ted Turner, but on a much larger (and less soft) scale.

Some tidbits from Joseph Kahn's slightly disjointed piece:

Mr. Murdoch’s initial foray into China was disastrous. Shortly after he purchased the satellite broadcaster Star TV in Hong Kong for nearly $1 billion in 1993, he made a speech in London that enraged the Chinese leadership.

He said that modern communications technology had “proved an unambiguous threat to totalitarian regimes everywhere.” Star could beam programming to every corner of China, and Murdoch had paid a big premium for the broadcaster for that reason.

Prime Minister Li Peng promptly outlawed private ownership of satellite dishes, which had once proliferated on rooftops. Star TV faced a threat to its viability.

Chinese leaders rebuffed his attempts to apologize in person — a ban that lasted nearly four years. But he sought to placate them. ...

Mr. Zhu noted that Mr. Murdoch had become an American citizen to comply with television ownership rules in the United States. He joked that if he wanted to broadcast more in China, he should consider becoming Chinese, a person who attended the meeting recalled. ...

The Murdochs often echoed the Chinese government line. In a 1999 interview with Vanity Fair, Mr. Murdoch spoke disparagingly of the Dalai Lama, whom the Chinese condemn as a separatist. “I have heard cynics who say he is a very political old monk shuffling around in Gucci shoes,” he said.

James Murdoch, who ran Star TV from 2000 to 2003, said in a speech in Los Angeles in 2001 that Western reporters in China supported “destabilizing forces” that are “very, very dangerous for the Chinese government.” He lashed out at the Falun Gong spiritual sect, which had just endured brutal repression in China, calling it “dangerous and apocalyptic.” ...

Wendi Murdoch has stepped up her role in China. She plotted a strategy for the News Corporation’s social networking site, MySpace, to enter the Chinese market, people involved with the company said. The News Corporation decided to license the MySpace name to a local consortium of investors organized by Ms. Murdoch.

As a local venture, MySpace China, which began operations in the spring, abides by domestic censorship laws and the “self discipline” regime that governs proprietors of Chinese Web sites. Every page on the site has a link allowing users or monitors to “report inappropriate information” to the authorities. Microsoft, Google and Yahoo have made similar accommodations for their Web sites in China.

The Murdochs will soon be able to call Beijing home. Workers have nearly finished renovating their traditional courtyard-style house in Beijing’s exclusive Beichizi district, a block from the Forbidden City. Beneath the steep-pitched roofs and wooden eaves of freshly coated vermillion and gold, the courtyard has an underground swimming pool and billiard room, according to people who have seen the design.

Plainclothes security officers linger on the street outside. One neighbor is the retired prime minister, Mr. Zhu, who invited Mr. Murdoch to become Chinese.

My guess is at some point Murdoch will indeed take up Chinese citizenship; he's nothing if not opportunistic, and heck--as an Australian, China's practically family.

Reuters photo of Rupert and Wendi Murdoch by Chris Pizzello in the Times.

Poles of insanity

There's a hilarious article in the British press about the twin leaders of Poland, entitled Tweedlenice and Tweedlenasty play a game of Poles apart.

Aside from the unprecedented, in my memory, spectacle of twins running a major nation, it seems there's all sorts of wacky things about them:

Half a century after the European Union was created to forgive and forget the Last Great Misunderstanding, the identical twins who are Poland’s president and prime minister let off a massive stink bomb at last week’s summit by mentioning the war. To cries of horror – and some quiet chortles – Lech and Jaroslaw Kaczynski invoked Nazi atrocities in order to cut Germany down to size.

So Jaroslaw, the prime minister and elder twin by 45 minutes, had no hesitation in invoking the “incomprehensible crimes” against Poland as a means of raising the stakes in its battle with Germany over voting rights. This had become an obstacle to agreeing a revamped EU treaty. “If Poland had not had to live through the years of 1939-45, Poland would today be looking at the demographics of a country of 66m,” he said on Polish radio in an implicit reference to his country’s 6m war dead.

His point was that whereas the EU voting system currently gives Poland disproportionate clout, proposed changes based on population size would give most benefit to Germany’s 82m people while Poland with 38m people could be steamrollered – despite being the largest of the 10 countries that joined the enlarged club in 2004.

The 58-year-old Kaczynski twins had kept the summit guessing about which would turn up – some thought this a bit academic since they are nearly identical, though Jaroslaw plays the Mr Nasty to Lech’s Mr Nice. “Both are small, not very bright, mean-minded and resemble provincial solicitors – which Lech used to be,” said a journalist who has met them. ...

Lech is married to Maria, a tireless charity worker who sometimes acts as his special envoy. Jaroslaw, who has never married and lives with his formidable mother Jadwiga and her cats, is said to have a “dark side”, although the rumour is based on little more than his unaccountable absences. Recently he revealed he had no bank account and deposited his money with his mother. “I don’t want a situation in which someone pays some money into my account without my knowledge,” he said mysteriously. ...

The twins briefly stole the limelight at the age of 12 as stars of the 1962 film The Two Who Stole the Moon, playing a couple of greedy, cruel youths who dream up a plan to steal the moon and sell it.

You can't make this stuff up; it seems ever since Bush vs. Gore, the political world's turned unabashedly Shakespearean.

Uncredited photo of Lech and Jaroslaw Kaczynski from Der Spiegel.

Tail wagging the dog

For some reason, I've never liked John Edwards. It's weird--on paper, I agree with many of his positions, and I think he's a decent person; but there's something about him that's always rubbed me the wrong way.

I could expound, but now there's a YouTube video that captures exactly what I mean.

The video is hilarious, and devestating; the synching of music to action is perfect, and you couldn't ask for a more perfect ending.

I really don't see how Edwards can overcome this--he's clearly deadly earnest in it. If he manages to stick around, at some point one of his opponents can just run this as a commercial in swing states.

It'll play particulary well down South.

Flocked together

If Let's be friends and it's "Touching photos of unusual animal friendships" doesn't bring a smile to your face... you may not be human?

Six dwarves, two nobles

Watching the (eight!) Democratic candidates debate tonight I was struck by what a smug group it was.

Most of them spoke almost-dismissively of President Bush and his policies; there was a sense that if not them personally, someone else on the stage had the obvious fix for Iraq, health care, immigration--just put a Democrat in office, give him/her 67 votes in the Senate, and our problems would be solved.

It all seemed very un-Democratic, this attitude that the winner of the primary was a shoo-in to be the leader of the free world, and rightfully so.

I mean, sure the Bush administration has been a nearly unparalleled disaster (worse since Hoover? Hayes?) But that doesn't mean some ex-Senator from Alaska, or a Midwest representative, should have any sense of entitlement to the office.

Heck, Bush ran and won two national campaigns; with the exception of Sen. Clinton, who remarkably was one of the more down-to-earth members of this group, none of the candidates have anything near that accomplishment.

Besides which, I don't see how it helps Democrats to simplify the problems we face; people associate decisive, straight-forward policies with Republicans (the daddy party). We depend on Democrats to deal with tricky, complicated situations (the mommy party). The post 9/11-world has become more complicated; Pres. Bush hasn't dealt well with it not because he's evil or stupid, but because he's ill-equipped; that doesn't mean the solutions are easy.

That's why it was interesting when Senator Biden lashed out halfway through at how the other candidates were oversimplifying the situation in Iraq, reducing it to pull out, everything will be fine.

It was a good role for him to play, given his stature in the Senate. Biden probably did the most to join what has been a three-person race, coming across as experienced and adult, nearly gruff. And given that he's barely a blip in the polls, he was treated by the other candidates almost as the expert arbiter on Iraq.

By contrast, I had an almost-visceral dislike to Sen. Edwards. Sure, he needed to try and break up the Clinton-Obama logjam at the top; but go after them on legitimate big differences, rather than saying he'd have handled himself differently during the latest vote on Iraq reauthorization.

It didn't help matters that Obama pointed out John, you're 4 1/2 years late on that. Which led to Edwards later going through more contortions, contrasting himself with Clinton by saying he at least has admitted he was wrong for originally voting to go into Iraq but sequeing into praise for Obama for being right, first.

The other oddity of the evening was how much time was spent talking about Bill Clinton, either in comparison or contrast to his policies or, more overtly, in response to moderator Wolf Blitzer's question of what role they'd give the former president in their administration.

I mean, that's like asking Paris Hilton what she'd let Audrey Hepburn do for her.

But this group showed no self-awareness, with most saying they'd send Pres. Clinton around the world as some sortof goodwill ambassador. Only Senator Obama displayed any sense of reality, remarking "obviously Senator Clinton may have something to say about how I use Bill Clinton."

She laughed and appopriately blew off the question, although in the process referencing her "husband" for like the tenth time.

Clinton had an interesting night; Edwards really went after her, and a number of candidates also took cheap and historically incorrect shots at Pres. Clinton's policies (on Bosnia and gays in the military in particular).

She resisted the impulse to slap them down, turned on the charm and in general acted like she was leading the Democrats in a campaign against President Bush.

I was struck at how good she is at sounding presidential and how she managed not to be just one of eight. Her worst moments were when she fake-laughed off attacks on her or her husband.

She's got the classic powerful woman problem of trying to be strong without people invoking the b-word; given her front-runner status, her camp's obviously decided to let her take the shots under the assumption it's only a story if she reacts. I'd advise her to be herself; the American people don't vote for people who come across as inauthentic.

Senator Obama also did well; he started out a bit rough, stumbling over answers and very obviously thinking as he went. I was surprised, based on his rep; but after a while it made him seem more like a normal person and less like the slick politicians a lot of the others came across as.

Hopefully we'll get more of the tough truths than easy glibness as the race unspools.

Reuters photo of Sens. Clinton and Obama by Brian Snyder