McGREEVEY. We can almost entirely ignore the pundits' reactions to this, because they are hamstrung by politesse. Indeed, the intemperate Tacitus is having such trouble working this corner that he has spun out of the blogosphere and into the ionosphere, at least:

The coincidence of the rumored harrassment suit -- or imminent social exposure -- is a convenient excuse for an action that was ultimately inevitable. Pace those who feel sorry for him, a victim of society and its mores he is not. Which is not to say he shouldn't be.

(Had to slip that in there, didn't he?)

Second, it's worth pointing out that McGreevey came to office in the fall '01 election season -- part of an incoming class of Democrats that included faux-Republican Michael Bloomberg and Virginia Governor Mark Warner. Some good conservatives went down in that cycle. Why mention this? Because it puts the lie to the Democratic canard -- repeated by no less than John Kerry himself -- that the President has relentlessly used 9/11 for partisan purposes from the get-go. His popularity was assuredly at its peak in the months of that grim fall season, and he refused to use it in the service of electioneering or his own party. Count me among those who thought at the time that he should have -- and were appalled that he did not. Next time you hear this line dragged out for ritual flogging, quash it dead: in the heat of the crisis, the President was President alone. Those who give him no credit for it do so because they, by contrast, are partisans all the time.

What the hell is this guy talking about? normal people might ask. Go to the dictionary and look up "sublimation." McGreevey's resignation and disgrace have nothing to do with Bush, 9/11, and "faux-Republicans" -- unless you live over your head in a murky swamp where homosexuals are senior partners in an imagined tyranny that has been keeping every decent American down, and must use issues of national security and authenticity to give some socially-acceptable form to your inchoate rage.

For source matter, look at the lumpenprole response to the gay side of McGreevey's revelation:

Who is the person he had the affair with? Barney Frank?!?!??!?!

This is probably due to the fact that they have a relationship similiar to the Clintons. A Business relationship.

But where are the NOW people screaming that he placed his wife and child in EXTREME DANGER with AIDS and other STD's!!!! Where was his respect and love for them and their health??

Maybe he should hook up with Marv Albert and Howard Dean! Yeeahahahahhahaa!!!!!!!

Dump your dumocrat legislators in Nov. if they don't force the sodomite to resign this week.

And:

Mind you, the guy didn't say he was bi-sexual, but that he was homo. He looks as though he is a bit on the thinnish side (yes, I am using code for possible aids).

Far from accepting deviance, we should buckle down and reinstate society's stigmas.

We are seeing the groundwork laid for the 'Closet Homo Defense' here.

The sad thing is that there are sick perverts like this in even more powerful and prominent positions. McGreevey is a start -- but we need to flush them all out.

There are many more, but I'm just sick of looking at them, though you may go and find them even in the "respectable" quarters of the Web.

The procurement of a sinecure for McGreevy's inamorato is a matter yet to be dealt with, and it certainly will be, but let us not (pardon the expression) mince words: the national result will be an intensification of the Republican Fags 'n' Flags strategy for the Presidential election. It's a good idea for them, too. I mean, what else have they got?

UPDATE.Mild edits for clarity. As to T's national security angle, I see WorldNetDaily got a copy of the hymnal: "Given that New Jersey was where one of the 9-11 planes originated from... one would think McGreevey would have vetted his security czar closely... According to a sexual harassment lawsuit to be filed shortly by Cipel, perhaps McGreevey did vet him ... a little too closely." Using the same standard by which the President is often judged, though, I'd say McGreevey and Cipel did a great job -- no one has blown up New Jersey on their watch, have they?

WE'RE ONLY IN IT FOR THE MONEY. David Frum on Kerry's plan for government purchase of cheap Candian scrip drugs:

...drug re-importation is a cheap and cynical non-solution to a real problem: the unfairness of asking Americans to pay the whole cost and more of new drugs while the rest of the world pays less. But it’s no kind of answer to cut prices in the US: In that case, innovation could disappear entirely. (emphasis added)

The scene: a high school chem lab in the Midwest.

TEACHER: Congratulations, Timmy, on your acceptance to Stanford! As my best student ever, I'm sure you'll make a great translational pharmacologist.

TIMMY: (exhaling a cloud of cigar smoke) What's in it for me?

TEACHER: I beg your pardon?

TIMMY: You heard me, cloth-ears. This Kerry mug wants to buy drugs on the cheap from Canada. That'll cut into Big Pharma's racket but good -- and then it's bye-bye, fat signing bonus from Eli Lilly.

TEACHER: But surely your interest in medicine grows from a desire to help your fellow man?

TIMMY: What put that in your nut? There just one reason anyone gets into the pharmacology game -- and that's the sweet do-re-mi. You think I spend my nights drawing time-concentration curves just to heal some poor sap in a charity ward? Harvard gave Otto Krayer his own private jet, for Chrissakes. I won't so much as pick up a beaker for less than six figures.

TEACHER: But Timmy, what will you do if not pharmacology?

TIMMY: (shrugs) A little of this, a little of that. I'm pretty handy with a shiv. I've had offers from the Sudanese government and JPMorgan Chase, but I'm keeping my options open. So go tell your highbrow friends to lay off Bush, or us pill-packers will cut off your flow of new life-giving drugs but pronto, get me?

TEACHER: (placing the back of his hand to his brow) My faith in the younger generation is shattered.

TIMMY: (aside) I guess now would be a bad time to tell him all his engineering prodigies are going to work for Halliburton.

(Aaaaaannd... scene.)

AND ALSO I DISAPPROVE OF WHAT I JUST DID. The Vanderbilt student newspaper slots two AP dispatches to humorous effect. First:

A statewide poll last month by Middle Tennessee State University found that only 20 percent of Tennesseans support gay marriages, and about one-third favor gay civil unions... Also, Tennesseans were nearly divided in the poll about whether the U.S. Constitution should be amended to define marriage as a relation only between a man and a woman.

Immediately after:

More than half of adult Tennesseans have trouble reading well enough to understand a street map or to calculate postage, a new study on adult literacy shows.

Professor Reynolds' tenure explained! ad hominahominahomina... (Found via Alice.)

I should take this opportunity to note, in the spirit of Andy Kaufmanesque self-reproval, that my only travels in the Volunteer State centered around Nashville, where I met some of the nicest, brightest people in the world, along with many musicians.

SELF-DETONATING LOGIC BOMB OF THE DAY: "My position against gay marriage is essentially libertarian, although I've never managed to convince my libertarian friends of this." -- Cathy Seipp, NRO.

THEY DON'T MAKE CULTURE WARRIORS LIKE THEY USED TO. Really, I miss Pat Buchanan. At least he could write -- vicious ravings, sure, but well-turned! Sadly, the Right couldn't abide Pat's alleged anti-Semitic stink, and has replaced him with a squad of pablum pukers who, while perhaps even crazier that Buchanan, utterly lack his chops.

One of these is Duncan Maxwell Anderson, last seen in this space comparing Jesus to a Marine. Twelve years ago he was telling America how the nefarious, little-known Securities and Exchange Commission ("The Securities and what Commission? The SEC was founded in 1933 under President Franklin D. Roosevelt...") was going to destroy multi-level marketing. Today Anderson runs something called Faith & Family magazine -- yes, it has a weblog, where you can can read ALL CAPS exhortations to avoid Calvinism, as well as some extremely confused Constitutional theory -- and runs something called High Tor Media, whatever that is (There was once a very fine playwright named Maxwell Anderson, and he wrote a play called High Tor -- if this DMA is in fact his progeny, let us take up a collection to have some spikes driven into his coffin to arrest the poor man's spinning.)

Occasionally, mystifyingly, Anderson writes for the New York Post. Today the Post has published his "A Time for Manhood," which treats the ancient conservative Daddy Party theme (Right is Strong, Left is for Homos, etc). Even poor, crack-brained Peggy Noonan knows that this sort of thing requires an angle, however trite -- but Anderson just combines various cliches as a child might mash together lumps of Play-Doh. And they're not even current cliches -- there's "Let's Roll" again, and when was the last time you saw Alan Alda used as a symbol of liberal emasculinity? On an episode of C.P.O. Sharkey?

Though I must admit, comparing the Democratic Convention to "the Berlin Olympics of 1936" is a new one. Incomprehensible, but new.

Meanwhile we have Jonah Goldberg explaining why feminism is to blame for girls' pants with words on the butt (all the while explaining, as is his increasingly pathetic wont, that he's no prude). And Dennis Prager, defending his right to beat on children ("why should a 12-year-old girl be immune from adult criticism?"). At least he's found an adversary whose stage of intellectual development may not have exceeded his.

Such are the new Shondekommando. Go here, punks, and see how it's done. If you're gonna be nuts, at least be articulate!

HOW MUCH TO MAKE THIS GO AWAY? I'm surprised it hasn't dawned on anyone else: our treatment of Libya basically says you can do whatever you want to innocent civilians as long as you pay for it afterwards:

Libya agreed Tuesday to pay $35 million to some victims of a bloody terror bombing at a Berlin disco nearly two decades ago, making another step in Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's effort to rebuild relations with the West.

The deal, coming after much larger settlements for the bombings of two U.S. and French airliners, does not cover 169 American victims, including two soldiers who died in the blast at the La Belle disco on April 5, 1986. Lawyers are seeking separate compensation for them in U.S. courts.

Agreed to by German lawyers and officials of a Libyan foundation run by Gadhafi's son, the settlement deals with 163 non-U.S. citizens, including Germans who were wounded and the family of a Turkish woman killed by the bomb...

In Washington, State Department spokesman Adam Ereli welcomed the accord, but he emphasized that the claims of U.S. victims also must be met.

Maybe one day Bin Laden will hold a pan-Arab telethon to pay off the vig on the World Trade Center.

LAFFS. This Slate article about the literary efforts of three Maxim associates is so much funnier than I expected that I must, in gratitude and wonder, share. The author, Dan Chiasson, turns some delightful phrases -- e.g., "Itzkoff's promise to 'consider the torturous path that any piece of copy had to follow before it ever appeared in print' might well mark the all-time low-water mark for the quest narrative..." -- and the careers of the authors on view say more about the collapse of literary culture than a thousand Roger Kimball essays ever could.

I am especially grateful to be made aware of Felix Dennis, who has led a fascinating life and now builds a poetry career for himself out of money and balls. Good for him! If his hoary verse fails to raise his literary profile, they will at least damage Tom Wolfe's.

AN ERRAND BOY SENT BY GROCERY CLERKS TO COLLECT A BILL. As to the recent Vietnam-related doings of the VRWC (Vast 'Re-elect W' Committee), I note that the medium seems to have become the message, as the blogosphere congratulates itself on holding the media's feet to the fire. You know you've reached the tertiary stage of scandal-mongering when the subject becomes "Look how much braver we are than CNN."

The Swift Boats Vets For Truth seem a minor annoyance: some of Kerry's comrades like him, some don't; at least we're thus assured he's no Raymond Shaw. The Cambodia story is a little stranger, though.

I find the John McCain's quick defense of Kerry on the Vets' ad, and his disinclination (not to mention Bush's) to leverage the Cambodia story on the stump, very interesting. It may be mere, collegial courtesy on McCain's part, as conventional wisdom has it. It may also be that McCain knows how these boys operate from previous experience -- in fact, some of his opponents are still at it -- and he wanted some of his own back.

But it may also be that both Kerry and McCain know some things about America's operations in Southeast Asia -- no so much through their combat (and McCain's POW) experience as through their work on a Congressional POW/MIA inquiry years ago -- that they're not prepared to get into.

Kerry's and McCain's MIA work was sufficiently shady to arouse the interest of Sydney Schanberg -- the sentinel of My Lai and Abu Ghraib -- who still thinks Kerry and McCain were less devoted to uncovering the truth than they should have been. Given what we do know about Vietnam, I would be shocked if Kerry and McCain didn't have secrets about the War and its aftermath. Whether these secrets are dishonorable, or merely disturbing and (in someone's view) politically or diplomatically necessary to keep, is unknown to me.

But I would say that if Kerry is less than transparent about his service, there many be more than one reason.

Time may tell much more -- there was a lot no one knew about America's Cambodian adventures until someone dug it up, so someone may yet dig up something on Kerry's Cambodian adventure, or lack thereof, too. Or it may be that this thing sinks back into the vast, unexplored backwaters of history, and the political operators will content themselves with working whatever unease its moment in the media sun has stirred up.

DEMOCRACY! WHISKEY! SEXY! Al Jazeera has been closed in Baghdad. Attend the voice of censorship, sounding suspiciously like Elmer Fudd:

"They have been showing a lot of crimes and criminals on TV, and they [send] a bad picture about Iraq and about Iraqis and encourage criminals to increase their activities," Iraq's interior minister, Falah al-Naqib, said.

PM Allawi cited the recent bogus beheading video as part of their reason for the station's 30-day timeout. I guess Reuters and AP will be the next to feel the wrath of the world's newest republic.

If you're waiting for a MORE CRUSHING OF DISSENT item on this from the Ole Perfesser, you will wait a long time indeed.

DO TELL. Ramesh Ponnuru:

...again and again [Wieseltier] suggests that liberals are sadly lowering their standards to match those of conservatives. Right. We had this great, civil, elevated political discourse until Limbaugh and Coulter came along, and it's too bad that liberals are now meeting fire with fire. I don't have the space, time, or patience to go into all the counter-evidence here, which could stretch all the way back to the Goldwater campaign or, for that matter, to William F. Buckley Jr.'s first coming to public attention. Suffice it to say that no right-winger wrote a major book talking about killing Bill Clinton during the 1990s.

I assume that final crack refers to that new Nicholson Baker book, which so sorely vexes some conservatives' understanding of such arcane literary terms as "fiction," "character," etc. But what's the rest of it about?

It's really too bad he doesn't have the patience, because I would love to hear how the Daisy ad stacks up again McCarthyism (both original and throwback varieties), Nixon's plumbers, the various bullshit Clinton prosecutions, and yeah, while we're at it, Limbaugh and She Who Cannot Be Named, and all the other dirty tricks without which modern conservatism is nearly unimaginable.

Maybe they're saving that one for the cruise.

THE QUARRELSOME QUADRENNIAL. Since I have but two topics, myself and politics, and I am sick of both (hey, guess the ref!), y'all have fun with HarpWeek's Presidential Elections 1860-1912.

I have some feelings about these spellbinding horror stories of pride, ignorance, slander, and power madness, but I'll leave that alone for now. I just figured you guys would like it.

HE LIKED YOU BETTER WHEN YOU WERE A PUSSY. After being called traitors again and again and again, liberals got sick of it and started fighting back, which has prompted one "Doverspa" of RedState.org to ask, "Where Are The Reasonable Liberals?"

the center-left and center-right have been able to respect each other despite their differences in the past... I continue to hear the conservative critique of liberal programs... but the liberal critique has changed. The President (and by association all Republicans) are greedy, racist, and terrorism is a political ruse to scare the nation. President Bush probably knew about 9/11 ahead of time, he wants to repeal the Civil Rights Act, and he wants to enrich all of his rich buddies while screwing anyone who works for a living.

Yeah, when Kerry hollered "No blood for oil! Bush lied, people died!" at the Fleet Center, I knew the jig was up.

So conservatives are all sweet reason, are they? Let's see what kind of friendly, collegial criticism they're dishing out at one typical, mainstream right-site -- RedState.org:

Why should any believing Catholic vote for a Democrat, given that the Donkey Party's one sacrament is abortion on demand; and why should any Catholic who takes her faith at all seriously vote for John Kerry?

...it is nonetheless dismaying to watch the Donkeys descend into ahistorical madness... Clearly, the Democrats are either slowly self-destructing or acting out one heck of an ideological spasm. More power to them, I say.

...Osama bin Laden fan [Washington Senator] Patty Murray...

Congratulations, Democrats. You've just nominated for yourself an epistemological zero.

...one wonders if the modern Democrat party might have read too many comic books in its time... John "Kiss Me If You've Seen the Photo of Me Kissing Ortega" Kerry...

That's just in the past week or so, and not to speak of the Comments section.

Let me be clear. As a practitioner, I have nothing again hardcore invective, and I get a kick out of the RedStaters', which employs advanced vocabulary words and, on occasion, wit. But to sigh, at the same time you are using these flammable chemicals, that you are so very disappointed that your once "reasonable" opponents now use such techniques is rather like complaining that the kid you used to bully in third grade came back for the first day of fourth grade with some martial arts lessons under his belt. Nobody likes a bully, much less one that complains about the quarrelsomeness of his former victims.

THE RIGHT HAND DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THE OTHER RIGHT HAND IS DOING. From the Washington Times we get a story about two talk radio hosts who wish to unseat a congresscritter whom "they deem soft on issues such as border security and benefits for undocumented aliens."

We don't know this official's name. Neither do the show's hosts, John Kobylt and Ken Chiampou of KFI-AM in Los Angeles. The unlucky legislator will be chosen by their audience over a long and arduous campaign.

The "winner," as chosen by the listeners, will be announced the day after Labor Day. The hosts then will use the airwaves to pursue the representative's political downfall in November's election -- and have a little fun.

"We've made it like a reality show -- we've got drums beating in the background, stuff like that," Mr. Kobylt said.

Five nominees are named, all, BTW, Republicans who are not hardline enough to suit Kobylt's and Chiampou's taste.

Elsewhere in the same edition of the WashTimes, one Barry Casselman denounces the "self-styled (sic) 'cultural' elite" that seeks to defeat political candidates.

I am not saying that comedians and entertainers are not citizens like everyone else, with the right to express their political opinions. But in our American society, celebrities enjoy many special privileges of fame and wealth. And when these privileges are misused, we are all the poorer for it...

The comedians and entertainers who have hijacked the political debate to publicize themselves are doing no service to their country.

Seasoned readers will not need to be told that Casselman is talking about entertainers who "are conducting a class war against President Bush."

Casselman is described as having "reported on and analyzed national politics since 1972." You'd think that by now someone would have told him about talk radio.

A ONE-WAY TICKET TO OATMEAL, NEBRASKA. NRO's Mark Goldblatt, having recently dismissed black people as "the most hypocritical, most paranoid, most pretentious group of people on the planet" (next to the French, of course), now dumps on my fellow citizens and I, declaring that "New Yorkers, who pride themselves on their sophistication, seem honestly to believe that calling the president names constitutes a compelling argument against his policies."

Goldblatt's defense of his slanderous proposition isn't worth addressing -- he doesn't understand the difference between a reason and an excuse, let alone the difference between righteous indignation and blind rage -- but I note with curiosity that Goldblatt lives in New York, himself, and this gets me to wondering about all these blue-state Republicans who bitch about the evil residents of the blue states. Can you imagine living in Bumfuck, Mississippi -- by choice, not because you had to -- and writing screeds for the Bumfuck Herald-Dispatch about what a bunch of villainous cretins the citizens of Bumfuck were? Forget about the ass-kicking that would surely ensue (Bumfuck has not the culture of toleration our own metroplis enjoys); what would motivate an individual to voluntarily remain in such a self-created hell?

Goldblatt, Brooks, Sullivan, (and on a bad day, Richard Brookhiser) et alia: there are many fine hamlets, villages, gulches, junctions, and corners in this great land of ours to which you may repair to write smack about the City. Why not go to them? Better still, why not go to Hell?

CRAZY JESUS LADY GOES FREELANCE:

I do not think a lot of modern conservatives have taken on their philosophy because they were brought up in it, schooled in it, and swallowed it whole. And I don't think a lot of them became conservatives because they read a book by Hayek or Adam Smith and thought, "Ah ha, this seems sound!" I think a lot of people in our time who have become conservatives did it because they had a certain and particular kind of mind...

...the kind that goes Hey, this is E-Z! I just gots to remember 9-11 and the sancticity of marriage! Such folk will rejoice to know that Peggy Noonan is comin' to inspire them!

...a week ago, while watching the Democratic convention, I made a decision.

I am going to take three months' unpaid leave from The Wall Street Journal and attempt to support the Republican Party in the coming and crucial election... This will take a bite out of my finances but I can do it. Actually most of us, when we die, wind up with a few thousand dollars in the bank. We should have spent it! I am going to spend mine now.

Noonan has been a speechwriter for Reagan and Bush I, a CBS producer, an NYU professor, a Wall Street Journal columnist, an MSNBC and NBC commentator, and author of several books. She also got upwards of 50 grand for services to Enron before they went down in flames. If she only has a "few thousand dollars" in the bank, maybe she had a bad night rolling bones with Bill Bennett.

What the Crazy Jesus Lady will do for the GOP is at present a mystery. All she will reveal is, "I decided it's good to be on TV in whatever venue seems right when you feel you have something important you want to say." Maybe she will stand outside the Today Show studios early in the morning, waving a cardboard placard saying JESUS HATES DEMOCRATS. Maybe she'll replace Dennis Miller's chimp. Or maybe she will get a local public access TV show that features miraculous appearances by the Virgin Mary and denunciations of homosexuals.

I for one will miss her.

REASON WHY WE HATE THE REPUBLICANS #4,751. From NY1:

During the GOP National Convention, which runs from August 30 to September 2, no cars or buses will be allowed on streets from Sixth to Ninth Avenue, between 31st and 33rd streets. In addition, people on foot will have to show identification to get anywhere from 33rd to 31st Street between Seventh and Ninth avenues, and police will escort them to their destination.

“That’s not going to be good,” said one woman who works in the restricted area.

Know what burns my ass most about this? While the neighborhood is in lockdown, Giuliani will be inside the Garden telling the Republicans how much real New Yorkers (i.e., rich, white, vicious, constipated ones) love them.

I GUESS IT'S TRUE -- LIBERTARIANS REALLY ARE JUST CONSERVATIVES WHO SMOKE LOTS OF WEED! Virginia Postrel:

Gay Marriage Is Not the "New Abortion"... The comparison doesn't hold in one, very important respect: Abortions are sad. Weddings are happy. Having an abortion -- or having a friend or relative who has one -- may make you more supportive of abortion rights, but it won't make you celebrate the idea. Abortion won't make you smile.

People support abortion rights out of fear. They support gay marriage out of love. There are, of course, non-emotional arguments on both sides of both issues, but the fundamental feelings are different. That changes the politics, particularly with time and experience.

The same holds true with estate taxes, otherwise known as death taxes. Because death is so sad. So, you see, Republicans are against it. Because they're all dynamistic and shit.

You know what else is a downer: Hospitals. I was in a hospital once and it freaked me right the fuck out. So when I think about health care, I don't go to my happy place.

Dudette! That's some righteous dynamism!

A HERO FOR THE 21st CENTURY. Cathy Sieff goes to an anti-Bush book launch party, to see how the bluer half lives, and to write snide things about them for NRO. This "My Cuh-razy Liberal 'Friends'" scenario is ancient by now, but Sieff distinguishes her script with a fascinating new character, a Spicolli manque called Peter Stuart. Sieff describes Peter as if he were real, but he is really much too good to be true.

Peter used to make punk docs, and retains, his creator tells us, "a taste for the transgressive":

Peter, in fact, has long collected Feral House books, and often used to horrify his wife by hauling out the serial-killer volumes to share with dinner party guests.

Let us hope the soon-to-be-former Mrs. Stuart is not litigious.

But seeing the rise of Islamofascism up close in Europe moved [Peter] hard to the right, and now he always seems to be getting into it with someone.

I'll bet!

When a woman in the audience began reflexively laughing at the mention of "Christian fundamentalists," though, Peter turned to her and snapped, "What's funny about Christian fundamentalists? Are Islamic fundamentalists funny too?"

Pete's a caution. My favorite part is when the evening's author "suggested that military troops are underfunded 'so all the profits can go to Halliburton,' Peter raised his hand and pointed out mildly that 'actually, the $87 billion you're referring to was for rebuilding Iraq. So that's a little different, isn't it?'" I've been going over that sentence with an archaeologist's brush, and I still can't see what the hell Peter is talking about. But I suppose that's the joke, huh? Sort of a "Dude, Where's My Car?" thing.

I look forward to seeing a rough cut.

GIVE UP HOPE -- VOTE BUSH! The New York Post's Nicole Gelinas acknowledged on Monday that selling the voters on his rancid economy was "W's challenge." Whereas Kerry offered a "fuzzy-headed promise to create 'millions of good-paying jobs,'" wrote Gelinas, Dubya can only offer them blood, sweat, and tears, and Gelinas is forced to admit that "after four years of tough times, voters can't be blamed for seeking out a shining economic vision" -- of eventual emergence from crippling debt, one supposes, or of someday sending a child to college.

Despite a weak effort to "blame the fact that Bush has never had a charismatic Treasury or Labor Secretary" -- yes, we all remember how Robert Reich and Lloyd Bentsen set our hearts aflame! -- the article ended on a note of despair.

That was Monday. Did Gelinas get a call from Karl Rove in the middle of the night? Because the next day, she had an answer to W's dilemma. Yes, you guessed it -- 9/11:

...whenever I hear the Democrats' exultant invocations to those years, I feel a retroactive, physical dread. Much of late-1990s growth — that not already purged by early September 2001 by the reality induced by the burst tech bubble — was built on a false bottom: World Peace...

But we can't go back — and the financial markets can't go back, either. After 9/11, institutional and individual investors were forced to re-price for a costly and permanent new peril: al Qaeda's physical and ideological threat to the miracle that is the Western economy.

Gelinas goes on to explain that, because corporations have had to invest in more insurance than before, and "have spent billions renting and outfitting permanent backup sites far from Manhattan to house employees and data in the event of another attack," it's unreasonable to expect the jobs picture to improve, despite what fuzzy-headed Kerry promised and even despite what the President himself says on the stump ("This economy is strong and it's getting stronger").

The old 9/11 "everything has changed" now seems to also mean, no more getting ahead by working hard. It's kind of a grim analysis -- if you take it seriously. But who's that stupid? Certainly not my readers!

The fact is, while you and I are suffering economically, the market -- even with all those poor, brave investors so overtaxed by terrorism-related outlays -- is not doing so bad. Despite today's oil-related jitters, the Dow remains well over 10,000. On September 10, 2001, it closed at 9,605.50 -- having dropped about 2000 points since Bush's inauguration.

If you can't get a job, or can't get one that pays what your last one did, it's not because Morgan Stanley had to build a safe house in Jersey.

It's because the economy responds to things other than terrorism -- like a decline in consumer spending. Greenspan blames this on high oil prices, but the simplest explanation is that people are running short of disposable income, and of faith that they can safely run up their debt till more money materializes.

Also, the rise in productivity that Republicans like to trumpet is not necessarily a good thing for you and me. In the short term at least, it means that businesses large enough to work it right can make more with less -- including less payroll and less personnel.

Greater heads than mine could submit this to further discussion, so let's just cut it short and say that pulling 9/11 out of one's ass to excuse this Administration's lousy economic performance is probably not going to fly. But that may just be my natural optimism and faith in my fellow man talking.