Weekend Quick Hits: Runoff Edition

The book is about the hyperpartisanship that so permeates the national scene. Eilperin is a Washington Post writer, so there's little state-centric coverage. Plus, if you've read the Post regularly, many sections of the book invoke memories of older articles - so the pages fly by.

Turns out to be a quick read for a few other reasons, though. If you deduct the appendices, it registers all of 137 pages. So it's short as-is. If you're a serious political junkie, the material ought to be fresh enough to skim through it in record time. Despite the serious time crunch, I'm done with a book I bought on Friday and now I need a new book.

I think the book ought to be appreciated by a fair swathe of the political spectrum. There's a reasonalbe amount of coverage to the shift in Democratic rule in the House as Tip O'Neill and Jim Wright saw their margin winnowed and their perceived need for greater autocracy increased. Indiana's "Fighting Eigth" incident is recalled over and over again. And despite the fact that Eilperin acknowledges a uniqueness to the degree to which Republicans in Congress have found a new gear in partisanship, it's within the context that parties out of power are rarely credited for being too autocratic. Perhaps the best coverage of the book is that which covers the various methods of redistricting reform and how the Voting Rights Act makes it more of a challenge for states to borrow from others that use some form of non/bipartisan redistricting. To date, Arizona and Iowa have gotten lots of favorable publicity for their methods. But the example given of New Jersey (not exactly a state that one thinks highly of in "reform politics") is perhaps the most illuminating. I may go off on that tangent some after my own calendar frees up, though.

Adding to the oddness of my time at B&N ... I bump into Herman & Marilyn Litt while shopping and I'm checked out at the register by an officer of the West U. Democrats that I'd not seen in a while. Small world.

The Republicans' dismal performance could shake their grip on power -- much as the gold-ingot episode upset Japan's politics. But the top congressional Democrats seem barely more attractive than the Republicans; they have mastered the art of obstructionism but are light on policy proposals.

Amy Sullivan's recent contribution is as effective a rebuttal to this nonsense as one can possibly write. Mallaby offers a few advantages to Broder that are quite refreshing - he's got more of a post-Vietnam lens aimed at foreign policy, he's perhaps one of the most well versed writers out there on the topic of globalization, and his sense of historical context is far superior to Broder (partially evidenced by this latest column). I'll give him that. But his similar over-reliance on conventional wisdom in favor of critical thought can be just as maddening as it is with regard to Broder.

Hugo Chavez, who is up for reelection as Venezuelan president this year, kicked off his new campaign with an old tactic: criminal trials of his leading opponents. For years Latin America's would-be socialist revolutionary has been nursing along prosecutions of politicians, human rights activists, labor leaders, journalists and election monitors. Some have ended in prison sentences, but many have not: Instead, Chavez toys with his targets, holding the threat of jail over their heads while avoiding the embarrassment it would create for his apologists in Washington and Europe.

That's a far cry from the "But he's democratically elected" nonsense some on the left make apologies for with Chavez. Let's call him what he is - a dictator.

In Darfur, although the public debate has been better, the world has still stood by. In fact, the ugly reality may be that individual culpability and post-hoc prosecution have become the balm the world applies to its conscience for not stopping African slaughter in the first place.

But, while better understanding does not create the will to act, without it there is no hope at all. Reporting on Charles Taylor's arrest, none of the top U.S. newspapers mentioned his tribe. Instead, they described him as the new face of African evil. And they told of progress in Liberia and Sierra Leone, societies that, for the time being, at least, are growing more peaceful, democratic, normal. A good thing, indeed.

Indeed ... progress such as this is good. Beinart's point is butressed by the observation that when genocide is seen in light of the contrast we expect it to be in a given region, we are more or less likely to act accordingly. In other words - genocide in Europe (where it is the aberration) and we've gotten to a point where action is mandated. But genocide in Africa (we violence and tribalism have been viewed as the norm) warrant nothing more than the most meaningless hand-wringing.

There may be progress that underscores the frustration that democratic nations willfully stand by as we watch mass murder, torture, and rape as a means of enforcing caste systems. But that doesn't mean the task is complete for those of us who wish for action truer to our own ideals of freedom, liberty, and justice.

Meanwhile, there are other huge problems with the Bush administration's military policy.

Thomas J. Euteneuer calls El Salvador "an inspiration" with regard to what the legal system allows to be done to women and families in the name of protecting life. It's an amazingly insightful excerpt and for anyone that wants more of Euteneuer's thoughts regarding El Salvador, there's more on his missionary report here.

Meanwhile, the Chron is still up to their old tricks when it comes to giving deference to incumbency. With a story title like "Veteran faces novice Tuesday," one might forget that the editorial board endorsed Borris Miles DESPITE Al Edwards getting the rarely-precedented courtesy of getting a screening with the board separately (the Chron screens all candidates in a race at one time). And true-to-form, Kristen Mack accepts the incumbent's spin. Just as she did with Tom DeLay, she now does with Al Edwards. Curious birds of a feather.

Perhaps if Kristen needed a good story to run on the Sunday before a major election (the early votes in this race are clocking in at nearly 80% of the first round's EV compared to less than 60% in the GOP runoff in HD133), she might point out how the leadership of Wheeler Ave. Baptist Church is split in their endorsments. Rev. Marcus Cosby, the current pastor, is endorsing Borris Miles. Rev. William Lawson, the former pastor, is endorsing Al Edwards. Both are great men and there's no personal animus behind either call. But it underscores a narrative that hasn't gotten enough run - well, NO run out of the Chronicle. That being that this is truly an election where the new guard of Houston's black community is knocking down the door to live out what started off as a dream - economic opportunity, a thriving business environment that allows low income areas to rebuild and prosper. Borris Miles isn't the first candidate in this line - nor is he going to be the last. But I guess a story on Borris' cufflinks is more of interest at stodgy old 801 Texas. Unfortunately, there's a great transformation in Houston politics that's going unreported. Unfortunately, it's not just the Chron that misses the obvious.

With that, blogging will be light till we're done getting Borris Miles elected. I'm off to shop for some Jackson Browne.