Herbert Meyer says that one of the reasons that we don’t have as many jobs is that we punish entrepreneurs.

Is it just me, or does the title of this post seem appropriate for the title of this NYT piece?

This, from the man who thinks that discussions of his voting record, or congressional testimony after Vietnam, are “attacks.”

Here it is.

Having served both the 42nd and 43rd Presidents, Clarke was supposed to be the most authoritative proponent to advance the Democrats’ agreed timeline of the last decade – to whit, from January 1993 to January 2001, Bill Clinton focused like a laser on crafting a brilliant plan to destroy al-Qa’eda, but, alas, just as he had dotted every “i”, crossed every “t” and sent the intern to the photocopier, his eight years was up, so Bill gave it to the new guy as he was showing him the Oval Office – “That carpet under the desk could use replacing. Oh, and here’s my brilliant plan to destroy al-Qa’eda, which you guys really need to implement right away.”

The details of the brilliant plan need not concern us, which is just as well, as there aren’t any. But the broader point, as The New York Times noted, is that “there was at least no question about the Clinton administration’s commitment to combat terrorism”.

Yessir, for eight years the Clinton administration was relentless in its commitment: no sooner did al-Qa’eda bomb the World Trade Center first time round, or blow up an American embassy, or a barracks, or a warship, or turn an entire nation into a terrorist training camp, than the Clinton team would redouble their determination to sit down and talk through the options for a couple more years. Then Bush took over and suddenly the superbly successful fight against terror all went to hell.

Richard Clarke was supposed to be the expert who could make this argument with a straight face.

With Terry Nichols’ trial opening up soon, LA Weekly reporter Jim Crogan remains on the case of linkage between OK City and the Middle East.

And I wasn’t aware that Jayna Davis is coming out with a book on the subject in a couple weeks. This could have unpredictable effects on the presidential race this fall. It certainly won’t do anything for Mr. Clinton’s legacy.

With Terry Nichols’ trial opening up soon, LA Weekly reporter Jim Crogan remains on the case of linkage between OK City and the Middle East.

And I wasn’t aware that Jayna Davis is coming out with a book on the subject in a couple weeks. This could have unpredictable effects on the presidential race this fall. It certainly won’t do anything for Mr. Clinton’s legacy.

With Terry Nichols’ trial opening up soon, LA Weekly reporter Jim Crogan remains on the case of linkage between OK City and the Middle East.

And I wasn’t aware that Jayna Davis is coming out with a book on the subject in a couple weeks. This could have unpredictable effects on the presidential race this fall. It certainly won’t do anything for Mr. Clinton’s legacy.

I wonder if Mr. Clarke has perjured himself? If this is true, it’s hard to come to any other conclusion. He either did it then, or this week.

Can you imagine the howls of outrage from the punditocricy if an RNC head had done this to Bill Clinton?

Just when you think that McAuliffe can’t sink any lower…

I always get irritated when I see opinion polls, particularly on elections. One of the most misleading questions, in my opinion, is the one on “right track, wrong track” or “presidential approval.” There is always a presumption, that I don’t think is necessarily valid, that this translates automatically into prospects for the reelection of the incumbent. This is probably because the people who do the polls tend to think that voters are really as binary as the myth of the two-party system would indicate.

Perhaps I’m atypical, but you would not be able to figure out how I was going to vote on the basis of my answers to those questions.

I think that the country is on the wrong track, and has been so for decades. I disapprove of the president’s performance in many areas. If you asked me those questions, I’d answer, “wrong track” and “disapprove.”

Does that mean that I’m going to vote for John Kerry in November? Many would infer that, but there’s no logical reason to do so. Almost all of the issues on which I think that we’re on the “wrong track,” and of which I disapprove of the administration policy, would be vastly worse in a Democrat administration.

The polls don’t seem to take into account the fact that many (or at least some) voters will be holding their nose in the booth and voting for the lesser of two evils, as the result of the evil of two lessers, which renders those poll questions, if not meaningless, extremely misleading.

Many airports want to return to private security screening.

To gauge how well federal screeners were doing, Congress ordered five commercial airports to use privately employed screeners who are hired, trained, paid and tested to TSA standards. Those airports are in San Francisco; Rochester, N.Y.; Tupelo, Miss.; Jackson, Wyo.; and Kansas City, Mo. A report comparing the performance of both kinds of screeners is due next month.

John Martin, airport director at San Francisco International Airport, said screeners are hired and trained more quickly there than at airports with government screeners.

“Bottom line: we don’t have long lines at San Francisco,” he said.

I’ll look forward to seeing the report.