Late Afternoon Links

One of these days I'll actually write something original as opposed to just throwing up links, I swear.

►Bruce Bartlett has an interesting article about the potential relevance of the Libertarians this time around. I may consider voting Libertarian myself, especially since I'll be registered in either MA (if I'm lazy) or DC (if I'm not), two places virtually guaranteed to be spending their electoral votes on the Democrats' nominee, against whom I will most likely be voting. (This is a perfect example of why the electoral college makes no sense! It's outdated! It misrepresents the people! My vote doesn't count!) (Just kidding.) Anyway, it depends on the candidate of course, but for the sake of the statistics, and hopefully, maybe, sending a small message to the GOP, casting a meaningless popular vote for the Libertarian in a place that won't hurt McCain has a chance of not being so meaningless after all.

►Steve Chapman says that Iran is not a threat to attack. I like that he makes some points that are conveniently glossed over by hawks, most notably the logic that may be behind Iran's leadership's approach to international relations. However, I can't help but laugh at his insistence that there is no reason to believe, should Iran acquire or create its own atomic bombs, that they would use them on Israel. He explains this by quoting a Middle East scholar who says that Ahmadinejad is being mistranslated when (as happens every week or so) the press claims that he vows to "wipe Israel off the map," or something equally sinister. Specific mistranslation or not, Ahmadinejad is on record (in multiple languages) as condemning Israel and its existence and has directly and indirectly promised that he would help destroy Israel if he gets the chance. Whether the very real prospect of being turned into a parking lot (one of my favorite expressions) by the United States deters him or not is an entirely separate issue. The point is, his desire is there, and I think that's difficult to dispute.