From the Daily Show to the WH Briefing Room

The absurdity of Obama's positions on the torture photos (He wants to conceal them because their publication might endanger the troops) and Don't Ask Don't Tell (He's okay with qualified Arabic translators getting fired because they're openly gay) hadn't struck me until Jon Stewart and his British sidekick did this bit on it last night:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Dan Choi Is Gay
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

Then today, Robert Gibbs gets the following line of questioning at the daily briefing:

Q: Well, the President says that releasing the detainee photos poses a danger to our troops, but doesn’t dismissing otherwise qualified soldiers also pose a danger? Is it a question of degree?

MR. GIBBS: No, no. What I talked about in terms of “don’t ask, don’t tell” was the President—the President, as you know, supports changing that because he strongly believes that it does not serve our national interest. He agrees with former members of the Joint Chiefs in that determination.

But unlike photos, the only durable solution to “don’t ask, don’t tell” is through a legislative process, and the President is working with Congress and members of the Joint Chiefs to ensure that that happens.

Q: But couldn’t he in the meantime put a moratorium on these discharges until that can be accomplished?

MR. GIBBS: But again, the President has determined that that’s not—that’s not the way to seek any sort of lasting or durable solution to the public policy problem that we have.

Q: Then how would you respond to the criticism, though, that dismissing a qualified linguist endangers the troops?

MR. GIBBS: I think I would respond by saying that the President has long believed that the policy doesn’t serve our national interest.

via

Get over yourself

Behold as Marc Ambinder takes the White House Correspondents dinner, and his own role as its interpreter, more seriously than you can possibly imagine:

I thought the rest of Sykes' routine was quite funny and well thought-out, a mixture of her own modern Carlin-esque form and enough insider references to show us that she did her homework and took her assignment seriously.

Recapitulating all of this is necessary because the post-mortems inevitably become part of our partisan heritage.

Outrageous liberal journalists chose an outrageous liberal who shared their views and who CLEARLY LAUGHED at her libelous joke about Rush Limbaugh... and see, see, see the President smirking? See how coarse Obama has made our political culture? Etc. Etc.

I cringed at least once during each of these short paragraphs, and it's a long post. The patting Wanda Sykes on the head for "doing her homework" was, for me, the most eye-popping.

Don't try this s--- at home

I like Paul Kedrosky's blog. It's a fixture in the old RSS reader, and it isn't in any danger of getting expelled. He just digs up too much interesting stuff to exclude on personality grounds alone. But ohmigod is he capable of heroic feats of wankery. To wit:

I'm tired of behavioral finance. It has become a sort of socio-psychological financial freakshow, the past decade's version of chaos theory. It can go away now.

Uh huh.

Sure, we could tell lots of good stories – availability heuristic! hindsight bias! rational inattention ! etc. -- but what was the real and measurable contribution of behavioral finance to ameliorating the credit crisis. Tell me, because I don't know.

Ummm...

What happens? Well, it's not that we abandon the stuff. Some of behavioral finance gets pulled into finance (whatever that is anymore, and that's a bigger subject). And much of the "oooh, look at the silly humans" behavioral stuff finally bores enough people that it doesn't sell books or get articles published. Then that's it. We just have finance again -- and it's as ex post and generally useless as ever, but at least they can tell better stories.

Paul Kedrosky, ladies and gentlemen. If I ever get like that, I want someone to tell me.

Jonathan Martin

You have to keep your expectations reasonable when you're talking about the Politico's lead correspondent on the McCain campaign. As long as you do, you can find those expectations occasionally exceeded. For example, a few weeks ago, he wrote a piece which included McCain's denial of having criticized the media for their treatment of Hillary Clinton, without noting that he definitely did do that and we know because he was on camera at the time. That was frustrating. This was a classic example of John McCain lying, confident that no one would call him on it or care, and being proved correct. So I, presumably along with lots of other rabid partisans, sent Martin an email pointing this out to him... and not only did he correct the error, he did so in a whole separate post, rather than taking the less embarrassing route of appending an update to the old post where fewer people would see it.

But today Bad Jonathan is back with a vengeance, telling his readers that John McCain doesn't often talk about his experience as a POW (being so reluctant to wring political benefit from it). Carpetbagger has what appears to be the comprehensive response.