The politics of an abortion deal are tricky. Here's how it would work. Pro-life Democrats would vote for health care reform, and then they'd take a subsequent vote sometime later this year to codify the Henry Hyde language ensuring that federal money does not subsidize abortion.
Every now and then a piece of writing captures the mood of the moment and the essence of an ideology so completely that it warrants special attention. This is certainly the case with “An Exceptional Debate: The Obama Administration’s Assault on American Identity,” an essay (and cover story) by Richard Lowry and Ramesh Ponnuru in the March 8 issue of National Review. Lowry and Ponnuru’s thesis—that President Obama is an enemy of “American exceptionalism”—is hardly original. It is so widely held and so frequently asserted on the right, in fact, that it can almost be described as conservative conventional wisdom. Still, NR’s treatment of the subject stands out. Lowry and Ponnuru aim for comprehensiveness, and they maintain a measured, thoughtful tone throughout their essay, marshalling a wide range of historical evidence for their thesis and making well-timed concessions to contrary arguments. It’s hard to imagine this key conservative claim receiving a more cogent and rhetorically effective defense. Which is precisely what makes the essay’s shortcomings so striking. While its authors clearly mean it to stand as a manifesto for a resurgent conservative moment, the essay far more resembles a lullaby—a comforting compilation of consoling pieties set to a soothingly familiar melody. The perfect soundtrack to a peaceful snooze.
Ramesh Ponnuru writes for National Review:
Mori Dinauer goes after Ramesh Ponnuru:
Ramesh Ponnuru comments:
David Brooks, Jan. 9, 2009: "The conventional advice for presidents is: focus your energies on a few big things. Obama just blew the doors off that one. Maybe Obama can pull this off, but I have my worries. By this time next year, he’ll either be a great president or a broken one." Right now I'd say Obama is neither.
In National Review, Ramesh Ponnuru and Yuval Levin wax Churchillian, or perhaps Belushian ("Nothing's over until we decide it is!") over the fate of health care reform:
The conservative defenses of Brit Hume have started to roll in. Hume, of course, upbraided Tiger Woods for his Buddhist faith and urged him to convert to Christianity. (On the air.) Former George W. Bush Minister of Propaganda Peter Wehner writes:
With Republican prospects for 2010, and just maybe 2012, trending upward, it’s worth noting that Mitt Romney, the insiders’ front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination, has announced a publicity tour for his upcoming book, No Apology. He'll begin with two stops in (surprise!) Iowa in March.
Does the Republican Party have any ideas? The query may have a familiar ring. Five years ago, the question of substance was demanded incessantly of the Democrats. Indeed, in one of those intellectual fads that periodically sweep through Washington, the political class became obsessed with the notion that conservatives had unambiguously won what everybody was calling “the war of ideas.”
Readers may have noticed that the "Daily Treatment" isn't really daily. Instead, it's daily when I have time to write it, which isn't as often as I would like. And that's unfortunate.
It means I don't get to chance to highlight many worthy articles--or, more important, to thank, implicitly, the writers and thinkers whose work influences me. So today I'm bringing the Daily Treatment back, but offering an extended holiday version--one in which I can give thanks to...
Julie Appleby, Mary Agnes Carey, Philip Galewitz, and Jordan Rau for asking, and answering, the questions most Americans actually care about
Carrie Budoff Brown for her relentless, indispensable coverage
Brian Beutler for being impervious to spin (and nearly impervious to bullets)
Michael Cannon for keeping me honest
Kevin Drum for staying healthy
TNR’s new editorial – which I did not write but do generally agree with – bemoans the deep factionalism that Republican opposition to health care reform has exposed. National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru objects, "The New Republic's commitment to the idea that minority parties should try to meet majorities halfway is not deep."
Jonathan Cohn and Marc Ambinder add some more points to my contention that August actually was no so bad for health care reform. To me, the key point is that health care will probably pass because it's in Democrats' interest for it to pass. A failed health care plan is a disaster for the entire party.
They don't spell it out in much detail, but I think National Review's editors may have just endorsed Barack Obama's program to reform federal student lending, which I promoted on the Plank a few weeks ago.
(AP)
TNR senior editor Noam Scheiber and National Review senior editor Ramesh Ponnuru set the record straight about what Michael Steele's appointment means for the GOP: Will he guide the party on a more moderate course?
TNR senior editor Noam Scheiber and National Review senior editor Ramesh Ponnuru set the record straight about what Michael Steele's appointment means for the GOP: Will he guide the party on a more moderate course?
More than a decade ago, Michael Kinsley, the journalist and former editor of this magazine, developed Parkinson's disease--a degenerative condition that impairs motor and speech control, producing tremors, rigidity, and eventually severe disability. While the standard regimen of medications helped, he knew that his symptoms were bound to get steadily worse with time. He needed something better--something innovative--before the disease really progressed. In 2006, he got it at the famed Cleveland Clinic in Ohio.
