So the time has come to take a stand. To make a decision. To step forward and own my decision about this election. And here it is:

Our choices suck. Can’t we get a do-over?

No? Well then, if I must make a decision based on what we have on the ballot (…picture Cleavon Little going “You must! You Must!”) here it is, and here are my reasons why.

I’ve voting for George Bush for President.

Yeah, some surprise, you say.Actually, my decision was a kind of a surprise to me when I realized that I’d made it. Bush, and the contemporary Republican Party trigger a kind of visceral reaction in me; the evangelical connection, the sweetheart corporate deals, the reliance – like Ronald Reagan – on pork to buy peace in the political class combined with fiscally irresponsible tax cuts (it’s not that tax cuts are themselves bad, it’s just that tax cuts combines with insane federal spending isn’t a good thing). The list goes on.

But as I sat down and read everything I could get my hands on about and by Bush and Kerry in the last few days, I tripped over something that made up my mind for me. It was from Kerry’s interview in “Rolling Stone,” and in it he says, as a part of a longer answer regarding Iraq and Vietnam:

“…that’s what I’m trying to offer America right now — a realistic way to get our troops home, with honor, by achieving our goals but by sharing the burden and risk.”

I’ve criticized the specifics of some of his foreign policy comments (re the Kerry speech at UCLA in February), but actually, I’m pretty flexible about specifics. This is a dynamic, iterative process, and whoever is in change is going to learn and change what they do. But there is one thing that I’m not going to be too flexible about, and that is commitment.

Much of my decision making and thinking comes from what are – to me, at least – illuminating parallels between the decision before me and things I know and have seen in my own life. This is no exception.

Last month I had lunch with a dear friend from grad school; he’s a monstrously successful real estate developer and a staunch and senior Kerry supporter here in California. We argued about the election, and the war. He understands the war, but isn’t convinced that Bush is smart enough to pull it off.

“I don’t think that matters as much as you do,” I told him. “I’m probably smarter than you are – in terms of IQ tests and grades in school. You’re a multimillionaire, and I’m not – even though I’ve been in businesses parallel to you for as long as you. Why do you think that is?”

“Because I’m more determined than you are,” he replied.

“Exactly,” I responded.

Success in any enterprise is only partly determined by skill and intelligence. Luck plays a large part. But the largest role, I believe, is played by commitment and determination to reach a goal. My friend wanted to be successful more than I did. He was.

Kerry’s goals, as he consistently expresses them, are defensive in nature. His quote above isn’t about winning, but about bringing the troops home. I genuinely believe that was put first because that’s his priority, when you get down to it.

And it isn’t mine. We are at war, and we need to win this war, or it will be the start of a series of bloody conflicts that will end, I believe, in a holocaust.

We will survive the conflicts, and we will survive the holocaust. But we will be changed by them, and not for the better. I believe that we will be ruined by them, economically, morally, and spiritually.

When I weigh the damage that Bush is likely to do – to gays, to the environment, to the nation’s balance sheet – against the odds and outcome of this worst case, the risks fall on the side of choosing Kerry.

Beyond this, there are four broad topics I want to write about as I explain why I think Bush should be re-elected:

1. Iraq and the War on Islamist Terrorism

2. The Balance of the Issues

3. The Future of the Democratic Party

4. Finding A New Way

This is long enough. I’ll break them up, and I’ll put one of them up each day, starting tomorrow, and we’ll wrap up next week.

UPDATE: Kevin Drum and his readers reply. And from AL: Can I gently suggest to Kevin’s readers that you read the other two related posts before commenting? You may not agree with me any more, but at least you’ll know a bit more about what you’re disagreeing with.

So the Guardian has a self-satisfied column on ‘Operation Clark County’.

What other lessons can we draw from Operation Clark County? I guess we will have to wait till November 3 to find out for sure, but here’s a provisional stab: there are a huge number of people around the world who are profoundly dismayed by the prospect of another four years of a Bush White House and who are desperate for a way to do something about it; Guardian readers are a reassuringly engaged, resourceful and largely charming bunch; parts of America have become so isolationist that even the idea of individuals receiving letters from foreigners is enough to give politicians the collywobbles and, perhaps, in the digital age little acorns can turn into big trees very, very quickly.

In my comment below, I thought it failed the ‘smell test’.

But now I have a better idea.

There are a lot more of us in the U.S. than there are of them in the U.K.

Let’s see what happens when their election comes around…

Any UK readers who can check and see what it takes to get voter rolls from over there?

Winds of Change.NET Regional Briefings run on Tuesdays & Wednesdays, and sometimes Fridays too. This Regional Briefing focuses on Iran, courtesy of Reza Torkzadeh.

TOP TOPIC

* The coming Revolution in Iran. Many believe Iran is next, find out why.

* Why there will be no peace and stability in the Middle East until the regime in Iran is confronted – "Iran, When? by Michael Ledeen

* The Islamic Republic pleads to the International Community for a "no regime change" policy, in exchange for a halt in uranium enrichment, however no progress at the G8 meeting this week.

Other Topics Today Include: Iran processing uranium; Kerry’s campaign connection to the Islamic Republic; Russia completes construction of a nuclear plant in Iran; EU appeases Islamic Republic; Iranian bloggers shut down, arrested; NIAC issues statement on death of Iranian-American Soilder in Iraq; Germany supports Iran’s entrance in the WTO; Armed resistance gains momentum; ActivistChat launches Iran BlogIRAN’S QUEST FOR THE BOMB

* The regime’s rhretoric has increased and is now declaring that it rejects any deals to cease uranium enrichment. Thanks to the many consessions given by the Europeans to the Islamic Republic and its continued failed policies of appeasement, the regime disregards world public opinion, international customs and treaties.

* It doen’t make sense that Russia continues to support Iran in developing its nuclear capabilities.

* Proving once again that the Islamic Republic will object to civilized pressures and world public opinion, while defying international treaties, customs and accords. The regime threatens to ban weapons inspectors if the issue is taken to the UN Security Council.

THE INTERNATIONAL STAGE

* It seems like the only ones who think the regimes human rights record is good, is the regime itself. The regime is "consolidating their powers, and they are stepping up their campaign against any freedom that people have."

* Germany has all but granted the Islamic Republic the keys to the house. In a surprisingly bold move, and unclear why, Germany has supported the regime’s entrance into the WTO. Such a statement will have no effect on Iran’s entrance into the WTO but is a gesture of appeasement and solidarity with the oppressive regime.

* Any avid observer of Middle East affairs will tell you, that you shouldn’t be surprised as to the meddling of Iran’s agents in neighboring countries. Iraqi intelligence officers are faced with bribes and misinformation coming from Tehran, further fueling the dangers against the esablishment of democracy in Iraq.

* Israel argues that its greatest threat in the region comes from Iran and that it holds the right to strike possible nuclear sites if Iran does not stop its weapons program.

IRANIAN VOICES

* Kenneth Timmerman points to possible links between Kerry’s campaign and illegal contributions from Iranians tied to the regime

* SMCCDI reports clashes in Iran and an increase in armed resistance grown out of a frustrated citizenry held under the grips of the oppressive regime

* Our friends at ActivistChat launched a great blog with the latest news on Iran. They have also issued an Urgent Action to stop the execution of a 33-yr old woman who killed her husband for allegedly trying to rape her 15-yr old daughter from a previous marriage.

* From the blogosphere, LGF Watch reports the death sentence by stoning of a 13-yr old girl for being pregnant.

* Iranians fighting for freedom and democracy beyond the system of the Islamic Republic have taken advantage of today’s technology. Internet use has spread throughout Iran and is a main method of communication between those inside Iran and the outside world. Apparently, the regime has realized this and has now cracked down on internet users and bloggers.

* NIAC (National Iranian American Council) pays tribute to the first Iranian-American US Solider killed in Iraq. Army Specialist Omead Razani, a medic, was killed on August 27th 2004.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS

* As the civilized world continues to deal with the threat posed by the regime, there are those who still choose to prolong its existence by cutting oil deals.

* Iran’s unemployment crisis is reaching critical levels. Jahangir Amuzegar discusses in a very detailed report about its effects on society. Lengthy but worth the read…

* Pistachios remain one of Iran’s great exports. It is reported that half way through Iran’s year (beginning March 20) $250M in pistachios has been exported.

ETCETERA

* Great video you should not miss. Nicholas D. Kristof from the NY Times travelled to Iran and put together is amazing video.

On the flip side, here’s Beldar’s appeal to folks just like me:

“What fundamental dilemma?” you ask. Well, look at your fellow Kerry voters. Look at the Democratic Party; look at its congressmen and senators; look at its policy wonks and think-tankers and fundraisers and likely appointees to key posts, on both domestic and foreign/military policy positions. We’ve established already that you’re not a barking moonbat yourself. Surely, though, you can see them around you in the Kerry queue, can’t you?

Then in your best-case scenario, my friend, you’ll be electing another man who’ll be immediately thrust into the position Lyndon Johnson was in as of January 1968 … a man who from the first day of his presidency will be faced by incredible pressures from within his own party, from many of his own advisers and fundraisers and legislators, to do exactly the opposite of what you are counting on Kerry to do.

Check out fling93’s great post on why I shouldn’t even think of voting for Bush.

His outline of points:

• Flip-flopper?
• Cognitive bias
• Blind stubbornness is not resolve
• Ignoring your own people

• Hearing only what you want to hear
• Opportunity cost and threat prioritization
• The Duelfer Report — no WMDs
• The 9/11 Commission report — no ties with Al Qaeda
• The real reason for the war?
• Contrast with other leaders
• What’s a conservative to do?

I’ll go through this point-by-point when I have time. But this is one of the best arguments I’ve seen, and it’s a series of arguments that I have to take seriously.

I’m working on a series on the California initiatives, but wanted to point out some great news that I just saw on Dan Weintraub’s site (you ought to read it all the time if you live in CA):

Schwarzenegger just endorsed Prop. 62, the open primary initiative. But he also took a much more important step for the long run. He offered a full-throated endorsement for reforming the way legislators draw district lines, and taking that power out of the hands of elected officials. He says he will be challenging the Legislature to put a reform initiative on the ballot. He doesn’t say when, but I hope he means next year, in a special election. It’s silly to let legislators pick their voters, when it should be the other way around. If Schwarzenegger can change that, he will truly deserve the reformist governor credentials he seeks.

I think that hyperpartisanship and entrenched incumbency caused in large part by gerrymandering is one of the worst features of our political system – even worse than the way the money gets raised (remember ‘Big Daddy’ Unruh’s quote? “If you can’t eat their food, drink their liquor, [have Biblical knowledge of] their [women of ill-repute] and take their money and STILL vote AGAINST them, you
don’t belong in this business“).

I’ve railed against gerrymandering in the past, and will do so as often and loudly as I can.

Update: moderated language so WoC doesn’t get killed in kiddie filters…

Jeralyn, over at ‘Talk Left’ has a new comments policy in place.

The time has come to limit the “chatter” on TalkLeft–constant comments by those who disagree with TalkLeft’s positions, designed to overtake the discussion. I am receiving emails from TalkLeft’s loyal readers who say that they feel the discussion is no longer valuable because of the constant commenting by three or four of these individuals.

So, here is the new policy. The “chatterers”–and they know who they are –will be limited to four comments of reasonable length during a 24 hour period. All comments over this amount will be deleted without explanation. After the third violation, the chatterer will be banned.

This group includes the relatively new poster “ras” who I notified of this policy last Friday and has ignored it. It does not include Jim (poker player) or Cliff–who although they take the other side, in my opinion stimulate debate. They also are the first to respond every time I put out a call for contributions.

I’m certainly not shy about banning people who I think are here to piss in the punchbowl, as opposed to stimulate argument, but there’s something kind of creepy about this. As I read it, the plan is that those who disagree with the host’s positions are welcome to post three short comments every 24 hours. I’d think it was a bad idea even if they proposed to ban all those who commented more than three times in 24 hours, because in my mind it’s all about conversation here. I – along with the other authors here – may have the loudest voice, because what I write shows up on the site directly; but the contributions of the people who agree, disagree, or are just plan befuddled by what I write are what makes this worthwhile and not just a vast echo chamber for my writer’s narcissism.

I hope I misinterpreted Jeralyn’s intent. I hope the plan gets changed. It’s too bad it is even being considered, or that it has to be.

Via Normblog, we bring you Kofi Annan:

Annan also dismissed any suggestion that France, Russia and China had been prepared to ease sanctions on Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in return for oil contracts.

Iraq tried to manipulate foreign governments by awarding contracts — and bribes — to foreign companies and political figures in countries that showed support for ending sanctions, in particular Russia, France and China, the final report by the U.S.-led Iraq Survey Group said earlier this month.

But Annan said it was “inconceivable” that Saddam’s activities could have influenced policy in the countries concerned.

“I don’t think the Russian or the French or the Chinese government would allow itself to be bought because some of his companies are getting relative contracts from the Iraqi authorities,” Annan said. “I don’t believe that at all.

“I think it’s inconceivable, these are very serious and important governments. You are not dealing with banana republics.”

You don’t get many hanging curveballs like that in your life.

[Vizzini has just cut the rope The Dread Pirate Roberts is climbing up]

Vizzini: HE DIDN’T FALL? INCONCEIVABLE.

Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

As a laigniappe, the L.A. Times today has a long article on the “Emergency Sex” U.N. trio.

Six years later, after stints in Haiti, Somalia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Rwanda and Liberia, the three came to believe that not only is the U.N. unable to keep pace with its grand ideals in the new world order, it actually allowed two genocides. They cope by immersing themselves in their work, alcohol, faith and “emergency sex.”

Thomson, who spent two years pulling bodies out of mass graves in Rwanda and the Bosnian town of Srebrenica — corpses of people who had sought safety with the U.N. — concludes: “If blue-helmeted U.N. peacekeepers show up in your town or village and offer to protect you, run. Or else get weapons. Your lives are worth so much less than theirs.”

— JK UPDATES (LA Times link expired) —

* See Thomson’s colleague and former U.N. human rights lawyer Kenneth Cain in The Guardian Observer, as he recounts his experiences at greater length.

* This Sydney Morning Herald editorial also has excerpts.

* Samizdata reviews trhe resulting book, Emergency Sex and Other Desperate Measures