A Two-fer

In Slate, Timothy Noah asks the question almost everyone else has been too scared to ask: if some administration apologists want to argue that Bush can't be called a liar because he is unaware that what he is saying is false, then why is he unaware? The answer, it seems, isn't that hard.

In Bush's case, the answer is painfully obvious. It's because Bush is a functionally not-bright man. As Chatterbox has explained elsewhere, it's impossible to tell—and, ultimately, of little interest—whether Bush lacks the necessary mental equipment, or whether he's simply incurious. The end result is the same. Even Bush's allies concede that Bush is strikingly ignorant.

It is clear that Bush has made a lot of recklessly false statements, and for that reason has earned the "liar" label. But there is no need to choose between truthfulness and intelligence. Stupid people lie all the time, just like smart people do. Yet even if you do feel the need to make a choice for epistemological reasons, ignorance of the truth doesn't give Bush moral license to say whatever he wants. It really is shocking the degree to which some commentators will go to exonerate Bush for lying when just three years ago even Gore's exhalations were the subject of a media feeding frenzy. (That's the liberal media for you, I guess.)

Voting Records Online

There is an interesting article in the New York Times today about the dearth of voting record information on Congressional websites.

A New York Times analysis of the Web sites has found that only 11 percent of senators and 40 percent of representatives provided some kind of information about their voting records, either a partial list of their major votes or a link to a vote-listing service. Many list their opinions, the bills they have sponsored and press releases. Only one senator, Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, provides her complete voting record.

Why so little information about the job Congressionals are sent to Washington to do?

[Brad Fitch, deputy director, Congressional Management Foundation] said some members had told him they did not provide quick access to their voting records because they did not want to do the research for their challengers back home.

Mr. Fitch says he responds like this: "I tell these members that I'm letting them in on a little secret — that the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee have computers, and this information is available."

He added: "The only thing a member does by not providing this information is send the wrong message to constituents. You're inviting them to go someplace else, and that's a lost opportunity, from a political and a communication standpoint."

Fitch is exactly right. People can and do expect to find information on votes on Congressional websites. Provide it, or someone else — whose agenda might be antithetical to yours — will.