Ramesh Ponnuru in the WaPo: All Wrong

For some inexplicable reason, the WaPo has given Corner denizen Ramesh Ponnuru space on its website to editorialize. Here's his latest:

The prevailing media take on Senator Biden has been that he is a wise statesman with the charming if unfortunate habit of committing gaffes. I suspect that if Biden were not a liberal Democrat and had not spent decades in Washington, journalists would be considerably more negative: that they would portray him as something of a buffoon.

During the campaign, Biden's been flying under the national radar, much like Edwards in 2004, giving speeches around the country that the national press has little reason to play up.

Palin's a whole 'nother story, of course: she's the star on the GOP side, right now. If she and McCain appear together, people start leaving once she's done speaking and McCain starts.

If that's a double standard, that's just life in the fast lane. And that's where Ponnuru's going:

His latest gaffe was to say on Monday that some foreign power would "test" Obama early in his term and that people would not, at first, think that Obama had reacted well to that test. The McCain campaign pounced on it, but the press has played it down: The story rated five paragraphs on p. A4 of yesterday's Washington Post.

The wingnuts are trying to play this one up; so is Palin. As a Dem, I'm all for that; I'm still trying to figure out what's so bad about this statement.

Somehow I think it would be a bigger story if Gov. Palin had said something similar--or had said, as Biden has, that "J-O-B-S" is "a three-letter word," and that FDR went on national television after the stock-market crash.

Maybe, Ramesh, you should sum up the national coverage of Troopergate, and be glad the media have been as kind to Palin as they have. Anyway, at this point, Palin's said so many crazy things that such gaffes would be lost in the white noise.

I don't think that the double standard in the coverage is purely a function of liberal-media or inside-Washington bias. But whatever the reasons for it, the double standard exists--and the press ought to be tougher on Senator Biden.

Ramesh, if you want to argue that the press should be paying more attention to Biden, and give more ink to both the good and the bad, you might have an argument. Your real problem there, though, is that you're running against your own candidate's star quality. But Biden's been drawing little coverage, period, so why should his occasional gaffe be any different?

P.S. Biden also proposed sending $200 million, "no strings attached," to Iran after September 11. Ever hear about that? Didn't think so.

Yep, stupid idea. But at the time, Iran was helping us in the War on Terror, as has been well documented. And $200 million is chump change in international relations anyway.

This is the essence of a 'gaffe,' something that sounds bad but really isn't particularly. And it's seven years old. So why should the press be pushing this one? Ramesh, if you think it's a story, you've got the National Review at your disposal, don't you? Go for it.

Another Day, Another Disingenious AEI 'Scholar'

Why, exactly, does the WaPo give op-ed space (and legitimacy) to disingenious nutcases like the AEI's Michael Rubin?

Bush has been a polarizing figure, but most senators realize that partisanship should never trump national security. In early 2007, evidence mounted that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps was planning terrorist activities in Iraq. An August 2007 National Intelligence Estimate found that "Iran has been intensifying aspects of its lethal support for select groups of Iraqi Shia militants" and that "Explosively formed penetrator (EFP) attacks have risen dramatically." The next month, the Senate considered a bipartisan amendment to designate the Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization, an important step to aid nonviolent efforts to deny it funds and financing. Biden was one of only 22 senators to vote against it. "I voted against the amendment to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization because I don't trust this administration," he said. Distrust of the U.S. president is the nature of politics, but skepticism about foreign dictators and their Brown Shirts is the backbone of judgment.

Look, we know what the game was here, Mike. Our military had every bit of authority it needed to respond to terrorists in Iraq. What it didn't have was the authority to hit Iran. The purpose of this designation was to give them Congressional cover if they should choose to do so, but without the public spotlight that a debate over a formal AUMF resolution would have brought with it.

Because either the Revolutionary Guard is an arm of the Iranian government, or it isn't. Presumably it is. If so, then declare Iran itself a terrorist state, not just the Revolutionary Guard, and if you want to bomb-bomb-Iran, have the guts to say so, and push for an AUMF. Don't dump on better men than yourself because they had the guts to say 'no' to such a chickenshit approach. Don't pretend that this was simply about calling a spade a spade, because it damned sure wasn't.

The Obama-Biden Ticket: It's All About The Bitch-Slap

Hope you don't mind if I take a break from the op-eds long enough to say I'm happy with Obama's choice of Biden. Looking at it in terms of Josh Marshall's bitch-slap theory of politics, what we know is that Biden can give as good as he gets. It's often helpful if the veep choice has a bit of attack dog in him, so that the Presidential candidate can float somewhat above the fray. Biden is a fighter, and has a gift for words (he was the originator of the 'noun-verb-9/11' meme that finished Rudy off last fall).

Obama choosing Biden is (for us geezers) like Pat Benatar singing, "Hit Me With Your Best Shot." Bring it, baby, because we can throw it right back atcha.

Game on. :)