Daily News Roundup, 10/26/07: Going It Alone, Again
Fri, 10/26/2007 - 8:46am
The march to war continues, as the Bush administration announces new, tougher sanctions against Iran.
The Bush administrations selling point for the sanctions is that it in fact implies that we are not going to war with Iran, but I'm not sure why we're expected to believe that. Economic sanctions are plenty aggressive and are often a predictor of some kind of future skirmish, but when you go out of your way to declare separate parts of the Iranian military as terrorist organizations or purveyors of WMD. These sanctions, which include state financial institutions in Iran and anyone they do business with, come after a long period of attempts to engineer support for UN sanctions that resemble what we've levied ourselves.
The United States levied sanctions unilaterally because no one would go in on it with us, not even our best pals in the EU. China and Russia have criticized the new sanctions and everyone collectively takes a deep breath and tries to figure it all out.
Something that has caused a stir among legislators in the last few days was the revelation that B2 bombers are, "in response to an urgent operational need from theater commanders," being refitted with armaments to deliver bunker-buster ordinance, specifically the Massive Ordnance Penetrator. I can't think of anything in Iraq or Afghanistan that we would use that for, can you? As we keep hearing about Iran's underground nuclear facilities, my brain wants to connect the two. I could be wrong and jumping to conclusions, but nothing this administration has ever done would lead me to think anything else.
Oh, and from the no-kidding-dept. comes the news that any kind of strike on Iran would cause serious upheaval in world oil markets. That kind of thing might impact Texas business just a tad.
We talked a little yesterday about Texas House Speaker Tom Craddick's assertions that everyone who is against him is also against tort reform, Ronald Reagan, and Jesus. Now one of his likely opponents in the next Speakers race is bristling. Republican State Representative Jim Keffer takes exception:
He said the speaker’s opponents have “had enough of his dictatorial management style and concocted ‘absolute authority’ doctrine.’”
Keffer said that he — along with several other Craddick opponents — supported tort reform.
Well, that settles that. For my money, I'm not sure what either party thinks this fight will accomplish. Most people won't care or won't know enough about the parties involved or the issues at hand to understand (and thus won't care). The people that do care and know enough about the vagaries of the Lege to understand Craddick's argument see it for the posturing that it is. I guess they can spend their time how they like. Plus, every time a story about Republican infighting is published in state media, an angel gets his wings. So carry on, gentlemen.
Speaking of Republicans, the Iowa GOP decided to set the date for their primary activities on January 3. It's been voted on and hammered out, so that should be it for the GOP. That doesn't necessarily mean that Democrats will have their vote on the same day. It is traditional for them to happen at the same time, but Iowa Democrats haven't announced if they will move their date up as well from January 14 to January 3. They probably don't want to seem as if they are being dictated to, but it is not unreasonable to think they will set their caucus for the same day. Now we just have to wait for New Hampshire to tell us they've moved their primary to tomorrow.
Oh, I missed an item from the no-kidding-dept. about Senator Hutchison. It looks like she's running for Governor!
"We have to assume she is running for governor, but if she pulled out two months before the primary, I wouldn't be surprised at that, either," said Rice University political scientist Bob Stein. "The only thing that stops her is a viable Republican opponent."
-snip-
"My take is that she's running," said Bruce Buchanan, a political scientist at the University of Texas at Austin. "She ran it up the flagpole and let's see how many people salute."
I just don't see her being run out this time. Stranger things have happened in politics, and I have no doubt there will be a primary. The fracture in the state party could lead to even lead to one or two credible challenges. But I think that if Hutchison wants that nomination, she'll get it. Whether she can win the general in 2010 is a whole other story.
Finally today, if you're headed to New York, be careful. The alert is out that Dick Cheney is going hunting. You should be especially careful if you are dressed up like a hunter, or an old man.

Sky High
By Patrick M McLeod
Fri, 10/26/2007 - 10:05am
Serious upheaval is the best case scenario, too! With the price per barrel already hovering around $90 (part of that price includes uncertainty over U.S. policy towards Iran), going after Iran will almost certainly lead to significant delays or outright stoppage of oil coming out of the Persian Gulf. It all depends on how successful the Iranians would be in shutting down the Straight of Hormuz. Closing or significantly obstructing traffic through the Straight would, I believe, be Iran's first response to being attacked.
$3.00 gas, anyone? Maybe $4 if the Bush administration handles Iran with the same foresight and success they've handled Iraq and Afghanistan?