Eye on the Watcher’s Council

As you may know the members of the Watcher’s Council each nominate one of his or her own posts and one non-Council post for consideration by the whole Council. The complete list of this week’s Council nominations is here.

The Glittering Eye, “Considering the Big Picture in the War on Terror”

In my submission for this week I muse on the value and fragility of globalization.

Rhymes With Right, “NY Times Comes Out for Dirty Elections”

Greg posts on the good sense of requiring identification of voters.  Perhaps the time has come when we do need some form of national identification card, presumably with biometric information.  I understand the arguments against such a thing.  There is no generalized right to anonymity.

Soccer Dad, “Unhinged or Calculated”

Soccer Dad believes that former president Bill Clinton’s exchange with Chris Wallace on Wallace’s program last week was a calculated political move.  In all probability at least in part it was.  Isn’t one of the “7 Habits of Very Successful People” mental rehearsal?  I suspect that Mr. Clinton had rehearsed a number of statements and this seemed like a good opportunity for using one of them.   I suspect there was a little “Don’t you know who I am?”, too.

Joshuapundit, “A Real Peace Proposal for the Middle East”

Freedom Fighter produces his own proposal for settling the Israel-Palestinian issue.  Presumably, his main objective in this proposal is to separate the sheep from  the goats since nearly everything he proposes has already been rejected at one time or other.  Worth a try, I suppose.

ShrinkWrapped, “A Missed Opportunity”

ShrinkWrapped, too, posts on Bill Clinton’s performance in his interview with Chris Wallace.  Yes, ShrinkWrapped, Clinton could have taken a statesmanlike “above the fray” stance.  And, no, the War on Terror isn’t all about Clinton.  Alice Roosevelt Longworth said of her father, Theodore, “My father always wanted to be the corpse at every funeral, the bride at every wedding, and the baby at every christening”.  I suspect that Mr. Clinton is made in that mold, too.

Right Wing Nut House, “Beware of the Draft and Other October Surprises”

Rick is skeptical of “October Surprises” generally and Gary Hart’s recent prediction of an attack on Iran in particular.  Me, too.  His prediction is that the only surprise is that there will be no surprise.

AbbaGav, “It’s Not Actually ‘Holocaust Denial’”

AbbaGav says that what Iran’s President Ahmadinejad is doing isn’t holocaust denial, it’s holocaust envy.  My own view is that, just as those killed in the United States by the attack on September 11, 2001 were just props, collateral damage, in a play for influence in the Muslim world, so are the Israelis, the Jews, to Ahmadinejad.  The name of the game is political power.  It’s not all about us.  In fact, it isn’t much about us at all.

Done With Mirrors, “Ouch”

Callimachus posts a picture of his friend Kat who worked as a contractor in Iraq (Callimachus has the nicest friends) as a springboard for getting Kat’s reaction to a Dexter Filkins column on the dangers of being a Western reporter in Iraq.

The Education Wonks, “Flag-Burning Teacher Beats the Wrap”

EdWonk updates us on the middle school teacher who burned a couple of American flags as part of a lesson on civil rights.   There are so many goofy things in this story it’s hard to know where to start,  for example, starting a fire and then leaving the classroom to get something to put the fire out with.

Socratic Rhythm Method, “Stifling of Dissent LXXVII”

Matt posts on the Illinois pharmacists’ civil rights lawsuit making its way through the courts.  The problem I have with Matt’s “willing seller/willing buyer” argument is that pharmacists are creatures of the state and when you’re a creature of the state you’re subject to the vagaries of your patron.  I don’t know the details of the pharmacists’ case but I would think that an ex post facto law argument or even an unjust takings argument would lend weight to the freedom of conscience case that most are emphasizing.

Gates of Vienna, “A Sure Cure for Paranoid Hysteria and Stuffed Shirts:  Ridicule”

There’s controversy about everything these days!  In a post on poking fun at the mighty Dymphna notes that there’s a controversy about Benedict XVI’s coat-of-arms.  Since no pope has carried arms into battle in, what, five or six hundred years, I think the entire thing is an absurd affectation, hearkening back to the days when the pope was, as well as being the bishop of Rome, the vicar of Christ, and the leader of the Roman Catholic church, a feudal lord with large estates and the obligation to defend them.  The pope has not always had a coat-of-arms, times have changed, and it’s time the entire idea is relegated to history.

The Sundries Shack, “No Commitment!”

Jimmie Bise asks a very sensible question (which I paraphrase):  is it that we don’t have the courage of our convictions or is it that we have no convictions?

Well, I’ve decided which posts I’ll vote for this week.  Which would get your vote?