Sunday morning roundup

I can follow Mr. Brisbane until the (false) analogies at the end. Gulf of Tonkin and lack of WMD were two cases where the government at the time was deliberately misleading people. There is a solid line between deliberate misinformation and diplomatic discretion: there's nothing wrong with keeping things from public consumption, especially in this era of soundbite debate. Do you really want to see US diplomatic efforts subject to the same rhetoric and politicking as the debates over health care, deficit reduction, etc.? Again, I'll acknowledge the silver lining:

While WikiLeaks made the trove available with the intention of exposing United States duplicity, what struck many readers was that American diplomacy looked rather impressive. The day-by-day record showed diplomats trying their hardest behind closed doors to defuse some of the world’s thorniest conflicts, but also assembling a Plan B.

“When dysfunctional does not begin to describe our political system and institutions,” Prof. Stephen Kotkin of Princeton concluded after sampling the cables last week, “something in the government is really working — the State Department — far better than anyone thought.”

By the way, have I exceeded my annual quota of saying that Tom Friedman is right on? It bears pointing out that demand for SUVs is up.

Maureen Dowd gets a shout-out today, too.

Frank Rich makes a sobering point:

We’re now at the brink of a new economic disaster that will eventually yank a chicken out of every pot. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities calculates that the extended Bush-era tax cuts will contribute by far the largest share to the next decade’s deficits — ahead of the recession’s drain on tax revenues, Iraq and Afghanistan war spending, TARP and Obama’s stimulus.

Max Stier addresses myths about the federal workforce.

The recession has apparently toppled the last bastion of self-segregation: the hair salon.

Does it infuriate anyone else that the study in question--on protein and muscle-building was limited to men, but the headline generalized the results?

This question is mostly academic, since I already have quite the reading queue, but should I first read Ian Frazier's book on Siberia--of which I've read some excellent excerpts in the New Yorker--or Stacy Schiff's biography of Cleopatra?

The 92nd Street Y disappoints, in more ways than one.

Portia de Rossi is more awesome than I thought.

Oh, no! I missed the Scottish Christmas Walk in Old Town, kilts and all. Perhaps I ought to set aside my denial that 'tis the season and start working on holiday cards.