Jackson Diehl
10/25/2010

The technology created by UltraReach and its affiliate, Freegate, works as it is intended: it allows internet users in China, Iran, and other countries where the internet is heavily regulated to breach firewalls and surf the web at will. In fact, millions more internet users under dictatorships worldwide could benefit from UltraReach’s software, but at least $30 million in funding is required. That money actually does exist in the form of $50 million in earmarks in the State Department’s budget. Despite rhetoric supporting freedom of the internet, the money sits unused while the “strategy” for its usage is honed. Diehl suggests that the hesitation to act is partially due to a fear of offending China. Regardless, the State Department has a poor record when it comes to promoting freedom of the internet.

Diehl is deputy editorial page editor of The Post.

Link to full text in primary source.

Ross Douthat
10/25/2010

Rage about the Wall Street bailouts is what fueled the birth of the Tea Party and an anti-Obama movement. Douthat looks at what the bailout cost, however, and says it may actually cost the taxpayer less than $50 billion over all, rather than the $700 billion originally set aside to pay for it. The problem with the bailout wasn’t the end game, which may have saved America from 15 percent unemployment, but how it implicated the government in crony capitalism. Although it was necessary and it worked, it did damage to the credibility of Wall Street and Washington.

Douthat is a New York Times columnist.

Link to full text in primary source.

Anne Applebaum
10/22/2010

It is generally thought that nations are becoming more globalized and therefore more alike, but the response of British and French citizens to their respective country’s economic situation is perfectly in tune with each country’s national character. Historical experience may play a role, as the British remember war-time rationing fondly, while the French have a history of getting much accomplished via street protests. Both country’s political scenes have an effect as well: French authorities spend money on expensive art and travel, while the British have a coalition government with a broad pool of citizenry with varying sympathies. Time will tell, but national character will determine how each nation deals with its problems.

Applebaum is a weekly columnist for The Post, writing on foreign affairs.

Link to full text in primary source.

Bob Livingston
10/22/2010

Why, Livingston wonders, does Congress all too often accept the president’s spending priorities? His advice to Republicans, if they regain the majority, is not to shun the appropriations committees and not to shun good and honorable earmarks, which even in the worst of years accounted for less than 1% of the federal budget. If earmarks have merit, they should be transparent to the public and not snuck through in the dead of night. Republicans, including supporters of the tea party movement, need to keep in mind that the president cannot force Congress to spend money it refuses to spend. And members of Congress have the right, the power, and the duty to appropriate money in accordance with their own responsible judgment of what is in the public interest.

Livingston was a Republican member of Congress from Louisiana and chairman of the House Appropriations Committee from 1995 to 1999.

Link to full text in primary source.

Michael Gerson
10/22/2010

Tea Party supporters and luminaries fashion themselves as constitutional conservatives, but in at least one significant area, their self-assessment betrays a basic lack of familiarity with the Constitution itself. The conception of America as a Christian nation carries profound weight among Tea Party conservatives, but it stands plainly counter to history and the Constitution itself. While an avowed reverence for the rights and dignity of all humanity is firmly rooted in the Christian heritage shared by many in the founding generation, it is precisely because of this that the original posture toward faith was fundamentally anti-institutional.

Gerson writes about politics, global health and development, religion and foreign policy.

Link to full text in primary source.

Dana Milbank
10/21/2010

The NAACP has released a report entitled “Tea Party Nationalism” in which the organization compares the conservative movement with the KKK and Lee Harvey Oswald, among others. While racially charged elements and members have aligned themselves with the Tea Party, they have been recognized and expelled just as quickly. To suggest the presence of a concerted, continuous effort is irresponsible, especially since the charge itself is racially aggressive and divisive. Thus, the NAACP is essentially inhabiting the same space it accuses the Tea Party of occupying, using race as a political wedge.

Milbank writes about political theater in the nation’s capital.

Link to full text in primary source.

Gail Collins
10/21/2010

Our political candidates’ use of undifferentiated anger to create nothing but a feeling of moral superiority on the part of the irate has backfired in political races this election season. Collins illustrates the stories of several candidates across the country who have done so and how it has cost them in the polls.

Collins is a New York Times columnist.

Link to full text in primary source.

Daniel Henninger
10/21/2010

Henninger writes about what he calls a rare chance to defuse the pension bomb. New York, like many other once-important states, is sitting on a public pension debt bomb. If it blows, it will take great swaths of the productive American economy with it for years. Harry Wilson says he can defuse the New York bomb. If Harry Wilson can get the public-pension death spiral under control in New York–and he just might have the professional and intellectual tools to do it–it should be possible to reform pensions in any state. Henninger concludes that it should be possible for a Cuomo-Wilson alliance to fix another failing American state.

Henninger writes ‘Wonder Land’ for the Journal.

Link to full text in primary source.

Zalmay Khalilzad
10/20/2010

Although Pakistan has and continues to do a lot of good in the war on terror, it continues to give only sanctuary and support to the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani terrorist network. This hampers American military efforts while contributing to American and Afghan deaths and has helped to sour relations between the two countries. Current American policy with Pakistan is not working. Washington must offer Pakistan a stark choice between positive incentives and negative consequences. Khalilzad offers a number of examples.

Khalilzad, a counselor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the president of a consulting firm, was the ambassador to Afghanistan, Ira, and the United Nations during the George W. Bush administration.

Link to full text in primary source.