"I would like to know if one of our big media organizations is at work on one of the most disturbing mysteries of our time--where the billions in UN Oil-for-Food money in Iraq went and how it got there. Why aren't the LAT, the NYT and WaPo on this? If they're afraid of the answers, then shame on them. Until we fully understand the roots and extent of this scandal, the UN will not be able to function as an untainted organization. You would think believers in international government (which I am, with reservations) would want to clear that up." -- Roger Simon
Wednesday, December 31, 2003
"The N.G.O.'s have been a disappointment. Don't get me wrong, the truck bomb at the U.N. headquarters was horrific. But they seemed as if they were very, very quick to bail out of here, compared to the risks they have run in a variety of other missions." -- " Maj. Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of the 101st Division, speaking of nongovernmental organizations, in a New York Times article.
Tuesday, December 30, 2003
Monday, December 29, 2003
Silent Running has something to say about Hillary the Hun
He appears to have acquired the meme from Little Tiny Lies.
Of course I still think that Hillary Clinton is a miserable failure.
As Mr. Reynolds points out "Obviously, the Clinton Administration failed to plan sufficiently for the postwar environment." Thus creating a Balkan Quagmire. Here is the money quote:
In a bitter blow for the politicians who toppled Slobodan Milosevic as Yugoslav president in 2000, the ultra-nationalist Radicals of former paramilitary leader Vojislav Seselj became by far the biggest party with almost 28 percent of the vote.
Their strong showing revealed just how disappointed many Serbs in the impoverished Balkan state are with three years of Western-style economic and political change, plagued by bitter feuding among former reform allies and corruption allegations. . . .
The outcome was also a setback for Western capitals hoping Serbia had turned its back on aggressive nationalism after a decade of wars under Milosevic, like Seselj facing war crimes charges at the U.N. tribunal in The Hague.
The War on Terror has had an unintended, and welcome, side effect; world peace. Since September 11, 2001, and the aggressive American operations against terrorist organizations, several long time wars have ended, or moved sharply in that direction. Many of these wars get little attention in American media, but have killed hundreds of thousands of people over the last decade.
What follows is an interesting story of the Bush Administration's successful multilateral approach to the War On Terror, with this conclusion: "And hardly anyone noticed."
Sunday, December 28, 2003
Let's make some comparisons here...The foreign policies of Bill & Hillary Clinton brought us the nuclear buildup in North Korea and the 9/11 attacks (according to Osama bin Laden, who said that the US was Paper Tiger based on the lack of response to the previous World Trade Center bombing and the attack on the USS Cole, which happened on the Clinton watch).
The results of the Bush doctrine have been Libia giving up it's WMD program and Iran agreeing to surprise weapons inspections after seeing what happened in Afganistan and Iraq.
"The worst human rights abuses in the world - including government engineered famines - are unfolding in North Korea today. Since the US isn't involved, the Chomskyites aren't interested. But the pro-intervention left - if we are serious about human rights - cannot take the same morally blank position." -- Harry
Saturday, December 27, 2003
"I intend to vote for President George W. Bush in the next election, because in my view, he is best able to wage the war against international terrorism."
-- Former NYC Mayor (and democrat) Ed Koch
Friday, December 26, 2003
Andrew Sullivan points out how a liberal "expert" was completely & totally wrong (no surprise there):
"In Baghdad the coalition forces confront a city apparently determined on resistance. They should remember Napoleon in Moscow, Hitler in Stalingrad, the Americans in Mogadishu and the Russians at Grozny. Hostile cities have ways of making life ghastly for aggressors. They are not like countryside. They seldom capitulate, least of all when their backs are to the wall. It took two years after the American withdrawal from Vietnam for Saigon to fall to the Vietcong. Kabul was ceded to the warlords only when the Taleban drove out of town. In the desert, armies fight armies. In cities, armies fight cities. The Iraqis were not stupid. They listened to Western strategists musing about how a desert battle would be a pushover. Things would get 'difficult' only if Saddam played the cad and drew the Americans into Baghdad. Why should he do otherwise?" - Simon Jenkins, the Times of London, in an article called - yes! - "Baghdad Will Be Near Impossible to Conquer," March 28.
How many poor people have progressives starved since 1917? It's a good question and somebody should do the research and publish it.
Russia was the breadbasket of Europe until progressives seized power in that year and started instituting policies to "share the wealth." For the next 70 years until socialism collapsed, Russia was a net importer of food always on the brink of famine. In the 1930s, Stalin instigated a calculated famine in the Ukraine to rid himself of approximately 10 million political enemies.
His crime was protected by the progressives at the New York Times and on the Pulitzer Prize Committee (they control both institutions to this day). Because soft progressives cover for hard-line progressives like Stalin, Castro and other political monsters -- preferring to demonize George Bush and John Ashcroft instead -- these atrocities continue.
The left's inability to understand the most basic economic fact -- that people need an incentive to produce -- has caused the unnecessary deaths of tens of millions of people -- mostly poor -- in the last 75 years. But thanks to a politically corrupted media and educational system, their pig-headed pursuit of socialist fantasies goes on.
Washington, D.C. has some of the strongest so-called "gun control" laws in the country.
They don't even stop criminals from getting firearms in Jail!
Thursday, December 25, 2003
"NBC’s Katie Couric said Saddam’s capture was only 'symbolic.' She’d be proved hopelessly wrong less than 24 hours later, as the 1st Armored Division, acting on intelligence secured from Saddam’s capture, rounded up three former Iraqi generals who are suspected of supporting the terrorist resistance in Iraq." -- Thus says Lt. Colonel Oliver North
Wednesday, December 24, 2003
I'm a semi-conservative (?) boomer, and I don't engage in the "boomer idiocy" you speak of. I'm a U.S. Army veteran. In 197O I was spat upon, and called the standard names, like "baby killer", or a "brain washed dupe of the military industrial complex." My trying to explain that I was in the medical service and 1000 miles away from the fighting made no difference. When I came home in 1971, my pre-draft friends threw a Welcome Home party for me. At one point I was backed into a corner as they jabbed their fingers into my face and made all sorts of idiotic accusations. I started to think they had the party as an excuse just to beat up a veteran. When I got my first apartment it became a place to hide for several other returning vets. At age 23, I was the old guy. I ran into a grade school pal who was known for running laps around St. Cecilia's church in the 1950's doing the stations of the cross. He went to Boston College , joined the SDS, and told me in 1971, that two of our childhood friends, Norm and Richie "deserved it" when they were killed in Viet Nam. I wish I had punched the hell out of him, but instead, I walked away and cried. All I'm saying is that many, many of us are not like these people in the Village bar this young lady was in. Maybe MOST of us are not like them. Guys like me, saw the idiocy of these people at its genesis, and we were the first victims. Now that our side may be slowly winning, it's rough to think we may me lumped in with the people that abused us 30 years ago. I hold my nose and call myself "pro choice". I agree with everything you say regarding gay citizens, and gay marriage. But I cringe over PC thinking, and I'm terrified at the thought of Islamic madmen running around the world on slaughter binges. For this, the boomers of the "idiot" persuasion call me an out and out "Right Wing Madman". Thanks for letting me vent. Richie's father and mine were City Firefighters. I have memories of visting my father at the firehouse as a little boy in the 1950's. Richie was there too. Our big fathers used to hold us in their arms and slide down the poles with us, and we would all laugh. Richie was the first kid from my home town to die in Viet Nam. He died, his father's heart broke and never healed, and then some jerk from the Boomer Left, said he "deserved it". If you want to know who is REALLY mad at that tribe of boomers, look around for the likes of me.
Tuesday, December 23, 2003
U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, praising the former Soviet Union yesterday for its 1979 invasion of Afghanistan, said that the attack helped bring women's rights to the fundamentalist Muslim country.When a socialist (or any other barbarian) state "grants" a "right", is it to sweeten the bitter taste of bondage.
"The Soviets tried to provide more opportunities for women," Clinton told the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, in a speech billed by her office as "her first major foreign policy address as a U.S. senator."
From an email to Andrew Sullivan:
While having a beer at a neighborhood bar/restaurant in NYC's West Village last weekend, I was party to a situation that I think you'll find directly on point.
Three mid-50's liberals were going on about the capture of Saddam; how it was a conspiracy, that the president knew where he was at all times and picked a politically opportune moment to capture him, it was all about the oil, etc.
The mid-20's girl sitting next to them broke from her conversation to chime in with the following, "I wish 60's sensibilities had stayed there. Someone points a gun in your face and you think 'My Fault', when you should be thinking 'You just picked the wrong fight'. Get your heads out of your asses".
They responded with dismissive claims about Republicans and tourists from the midwest.
She replied with, "One, I've grew up in Brooklyn. Two, I voted for Gore -- but I'll sure as hell take W. over someone who thinks the French are the height of moral authority and without ulterior motive."
I asked her out on the spot, and have a date for this Friday. Foxy, Cunning, and Fearless -- wish me luck!
Monday, December 22, 2003
Sunday, December 21, 2003
News Update: Uday Hussian has not raped any children since his mistake of shooting at US troops.
Dick Gephart, one of the few democrat candiates not running to the extreme far left, is on Fox News Sunday this morning. He's grasping for straws, blaming President Bush for not cleaning up Billy Jeff Clintons major screw up in dealing with North Korea.
Let's bottom line this, the far left extremist loopies can blame President Bush all they want, but the root cause is bin Laden getting the impression that US is a Paper Tiger. He viewed the US in that way because Billy Jeff Clinton was more interested in his "War on Ken Starr" than he was in defending the United States from repeated terrorist attacks.
Here is a good one from Andrew Sullivan:
Here's how Canada's National Post describes the CBC's coverage of the capture of Saddam:
To summarize, here are the impressions a casual viewer might have taken from Monday night's CBC news: (1) Iraqis still love Saddam, and so his capture has only enraged them; (2) Despite Mr. Bush's "gloating," things will get worse; (3) Saddam's trial will be a propaganda trick engineered to re-elect a Republican president; (4) To the extent Saddam did anything bad, America was the real villain; and (5) Saddam's capture is meaningless anyway because Osama is still on the loose.
OMG! The New York Times admits President Bush was Right! Time for that snowball fight in Hell!
Saturday, December 20, 2003
Thursday, December 18, 2003
By Jeffrey A. DvorkinAfter all, who wants to listen to a story about how a bunch of capitalist mercenaries oppress a poor helpless socialist savior? (Can I switch off the sarcasm mode now?)
National Public Radio
This may be the column where I differ with the concerns of some listeners.
'Where's My Vivaldi?'
The announcement of the capture of Saddam Hussein by U.S. forces pushed NPR into its "news special" mode. But some listeners found this important news story an intrusion on their usually predictable Sunday morning. Listener Siochain Hall writes:
Are we, as listeners, again to be inundated with numbing news of Saddam Hussein's capture? Will we be flogged with the dastardly deeds of the dictator 24/7, so that we listeners can turn off the NPR radio station altogether till the frenzy wanes?
Wednesday, December 17, 2003
Tuesday, December 16, 2003
So we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Hussein once had and used weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, at the time of the invasion, Saddam either had WMD or planned to acquire them. So all this quibbling over WMD is in a very important sense, irrelevant. Worst case scenario, it's like we stopped a serial killer before he could kill again as opposed to actually catching him with a body in the basement. In any case, sensible people who are concerned about what an anti-American tyrant like Saddam might have done with his WMD should be happy that the Butcher of Baghdad is now permanently out of business.
-- John Hawkins on the Lies About Weapons of Mass Destruction
"It is amazing to see how a powerful guy like him could wind up in a place like this," said Sgt. 1st Class Chris Wallace of the 4th Infantry Division's 442nd Field Artillery Unit, who was guarding the house on Monday.
Monday, December 15, 2003
Great stuff from Andrew Sullivan:
GALLOWAY NOMINEE I (for thinly veiled disappointment at the capture of Saddam): "I can't believe this. I'm crying here. I feel that we now don't have a chance in this election." - poster Carrie B. on Howard Dean's campaign blog. Way to get your priorities straight, Carrie.
The Associated Press has a delightful quote from the Saudi ambassador to Washington:
"It's amazing how people who were doing everything possible to derail the success" of the Iraq war now "feel they have the right" to reconstruction contracts, Prince Bandar Bin Sultan said. "It just takes so much chutzpah."
Now I have to include the followup line from The Wall Street Journal Online:
Did he say "chutzpah"? Who knew Prince Bandar was Jewish?
Try googling "History's Greatest Monster".
Sunday, December 14, 2003
Gee...they can't even War Profiteer properly! They need some more democrats working there.
"Yes, Halliburton is profiteering in Iraq--will apologists finally concede the point, now that a Pentagon audit finds overcharging?"--former Enron adviser Paul Krugman, New York Times, Dec. 12
"The officials said Halliburton did not appear to have profited from overcharging for fuel, but had instead paid a subcontractor too much for the gasoline in the first place."--news story, New York Times, Dec. 12
While he was governor of Vermont, Howard Dean "enacted tax breaks that attracted to the state a 'Who's Who' of corporate America--including Enron--to set up insurance businesses," the Boston Globe reports. "Dean succeeded in turning Vermont into the kingdom of captives"--concerns that help insure their parent companies. "Vermont has more of these companies than the other 49 states combined."
The democrat underground comes clean with the truth for once:
I took a look at my IRA today and see it sitting at a three year high. I admit, for a moment, I felt a moment of glee, then I remembered who this is REALLY helping, big corporations, Bush's supporters, and the sheep who think he really did anything to boost the economy.
Like it or not, people vote with their pocketbooks and when they see these big gains, they will be happy. Couple this with the bigger than ever tax refund checks people we getting (Thanks in no small part to the politically motivated tactic of reducing tax brackets across the board in JULY, and making the bill retroactive, so the first 7 months of overpaid taxes will be INCLUDED in your tax refund...in addition to the doubled child credit and marriage penalty drop...my GOD...I know most of tax cuts help the rich, but this s--- really will help middle America with larger refunds. ALSO, since Dubya dropped the steel tariffs, the price of nearly everything with metal in it will be DROPPING over the next few months...meaning more spending...more demand...more products sold...more corporate revenue...more jobs needed...We need to admit this and prepare for it.
The people are going to be happy.
They like their tax reductions.
They like cheap prices on stuff.
They like their 401k's being up 40% this year.
If the economy keeps this pace, unemployment will likely be down to 5.5% by next November and we better have a damn good argument against Bush's policies. Is there any way we can take credit for helping the economy? We certainly are going to need an argument for this next year.
Bottom line here, what is bad for the average American is good for democrats seeking power.
As pointed out on The Best of the Web Today:
The resolution these gentlemen supported gave warmaking authority to George W. Bush, not to some idealized, all-wise president such as themselves. The resolution did not say, "This authorization to start a war is valid only when used in conjunction with at least two other countries large enough to spot on a medium-sized world map."
If Mike Kinsley can't find Britain, Australia, Spain, Italy or Poland on a medium-sized world map, he's a lot less smart than his reputation.
Senator John F. Kerry (democrat-Taxachusetts) is on Fox News Sunday today. (He did serve in Viet-Nam you know)
Not only does he look French, he starting to sound French too...
He really is grasping as straws:
1. He still making noises about gaining allies in the war/rebuilding of Iraq. There are currently about 12 countries allied with America. The French, Germans & Russians made their own bed, and can now try to sleep in it.
2. He had the big brass ones to mention AIDS funding.
President Clinton at taxpayer expense took 1,200 friends and contributors on a free pleasure trip to Africa. But President Bush, said [founder of Live Aid, Bob] Geldof, has done more to help Africa and its people than any American President since John F. Kennedy.
Iraq's coalition government claims that it has uncovered documentary proof that Mohammed Atta, the al-Qaeda mastermind of the September 11 attacks against the US, was trained in Baghdad by Abu Nidal, the notorious Palestinian terrorist.
Details of Atta's visit to the Iraqi capital in the summer of 2001, just weeks before he launched the most devastating terrorist attack in US history, are contained in a top secret memo written to Saddam Hussein, the then Iraqi president, by Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti, the former head of the Iraqi Intelligence Service.
The handwritten memo, a copy of which has been obtained exclusively by the Telegraph, is dated July 1, 2001 and provides a short resume of a three-day "work programme" Atta had undertaken at Abu Nidal's base in Baghdad.
In the memo, Habbush reports that Atta "displayed extraordinary effort" and demonstrated his ability to lead the team that would be "responsible for attacking the targets that we have agreed to destroy".
Friday, December 12, 2003
Al Gore certainly doesn't know much about history!
While stabbing Joe Liberman in the back, he announced: "That war it is not a minor matter to me. I realize it's only one of the issues, but my friends, this nation has never, in two centuries and more, made a worse foreign policy mistake."
The Wall Street Journal lists the following things that algore seems to have forgotten about.
A year after refusing to renew the charter of the Bank of the United States, the government's sole borrowing mechanism and fiscal agent, Congress declared war on the one country in the world, Great Britain, capable of attacking the United States. By March, 1813, we were dead flat broke and the Secretary of the Treasury, Albert Gallatin, had to go hat in hand to Stephen Girard, the richest man in the country, and beg him to guarantee a bond issue or we'd have lost the war right then for lack of money to pay the army. The following year, the British burned Washington, D.C., the only time foreign troops have occupied a part of the continental United States.
Although the United States was the only Great Power that was strengthened, rather than exhausted, by World War One, and thus the only one capable of providing strong leadership, Woodrow Wilson refused to compromise in order to get the US to join the League of Nations and as a result, we largely withdrew from world affairs, except for sponsoring quixotic treaties like the Washington Naval Treaty and the Kellogg Briand Pact (which outlawed war; Germany and Japan both signed it). The lack of real US leadership in the postwar era, made World War II nearly inevitable.
It seems that like his political foe, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Mr. Gore is a Miserable Failure when it comes to history and foreign policy.
Thursday, December 11, 2003
Wednesday, December 10, 2003
Nice one from Glenn Reynolds:
"THE LIBERAL WHO CRIED WOLF" -- SpinSanity says that MoveOn's claims of Bush dishonesty are bogus, and sufficiently so that they probably do more harm to the credibility of Bush's critics than to Bush: "In short, with The Daily Mislead, MoveOn has become the leader of a new school of liberal criticism that seeks to brand every policy disagreement with President Bush as a broken promise or lie. These loose accusations trivialize charges of dishonesty, reducing them to little more than another partisan spin tactic."
Somewhere, Karl Rove is smiling.
A gun-control group has agreed to pay a $26,000 fine for failing to properly disclose spending on mailings opposing two Republican House candidates, the Federal Election Commission said Thursday.
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence Voter Education Fund didn't report $111,777 in spending to oppose Kentucky Rep. Ernest Fletcher's election, nor did it report $99,731 in spending against Pennsylvania Rep. Pat Toomey, according to the FEC.
The mailings were sent to voters shortly before the 2000 election. The spending was supposed to be reported by the Brady group's Voter Education Fund to the commission within 24 hours.
-- Here is the full story in the LA Times
Tuesday, December 09, 2003
Monday, December 08, 2003
Just when you though you were safe from Qualye style gaffs, here comes Howard Dean (as quoted on Hardball):
Also, we have less-fewer levers much the key, I believe, to Iran is pressure through the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union is supplying much of the equipment that Iran, I believe, most likely is using to set itself along the path of developing nuclear weapons. We need to use that leverage with the Soviet Union and it may require us to buying the equipment the Soviet Union was ultimately going to sell to Iran to prevent Iran from them developing nuclear weapons.
Here's a update on Current Events Mr. Dean: The Soviet Union collapse under its own socialist weight in 1991!
Write-in campaign for Hillary Clinton to run TV ads
Mon Dec 08 2003 16:11:40 ET
Supporters of former First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton will run cable television ads urging Democrats to write in her name during next month's Democratic presidential primary.
The ads start running Tuesday, timed to coincide with the Democratic candidates' debate on WMUR-TV, the local ABC affiliate. The debate also will be televised nationally on C-SPAN.
Bob Kunst, the Florida activist behind the write-in campaign, said the 30-second ads would run for three days on cable stations in Concord, Manchester and Portsmouth.
From the Washington Times:
Here's a holiday gift idea for the antiwar activist who thinks the United States has no business being in Iraq: "The Private Videos of Uday Hussein."
"The girls! The parties! The beatings!" advertises the distributor, which is selling the video online. "While his people were living in poverty, the 'Son of Satan' was enjoying the fruits of the land with unprecedented excess."
The distributor, which provides a video clip showing Uday beating Iraqi youths with a whip, says the footage "is so horrifying, scenes were never shown on U.S. TV ... but we got footage direct from the shops in Baghdad."
Friday, December 05, 2003
During the gasoline shortage that began in 1979, motorists were often waiting in long lines of cars at filling stations -- sometimes for hours -- in hopes of reaching the pump before the gas ran out. The ways that Ted Kennedy and Ronald Reagan proposed to deal with this situation speaks volumes about the difference between the left and the right.Whenever a liberal starts calling for government to "be compassionate" I immediately have a vision of a gun being shoved into my face.
Senator Kennedy said: "We must adopt a system of gasoline rationing without delay," in "a way that demands a fair sacrifice from all Americans."
Ronald Reagan said that we must get rid of price controls on petroleum, so that there won't be a shortage in the first place. One of his first acts after becoming president was to end federal price controls. Lines at filling stations disappeared.
Despite angry outcries from liberals that gas prices would skyrocket as Big Oil "gouged" the public, in reality prices came down within months and continued falling for years. More taxes were piled onto gasoline by the government but the real cost of the gas itself hit a new low by 1993.
Progress in the real world is the movement toward a society where free persons deal with each other on the principle of consent. The false conception of progress that is pushed by the left is nothing more than a reversion to the state on nature where the self-annointed "leaders" deal with their presumed subjects as though they were dumb animals, which is by coercive force. This new style of barbarism is in the present day justified through the use of fraudulent ideologies such as socialism/communism and environmentalism.
Liberals are in my own personal view nothing more than home-grown savages and I'm not sorry to say that someday we will be compelled to deal with them as such.
Thursday, December 04, 2003
Most other conservatives and I certainly do not begrudge rockers and country stars the right to speak their mind (what little of it is actually being exercised) and try to convince others to agree with them. But they do need to be grown-up enough not to whine and pout when other, more mature people disagree with them. They need to be intellectually honest and stop throwing around the "censorship" whip, or at least crack a book (other than the Communist Manifesto, the quotations of Chairman Mao, or Rolling Stone) and learn that censorship is performed with force by governments to silence dissent, not when citizens or privately owned businesses refuse to listen to their Marxist, infantile drivel.
Responsibilty is accepting that there's times when the only person one can count on is yourself, and taking whatever steps are neccessary to protect one's family and loved ones, regardless of personal risk, and regardless if it means getting ones hands dirty or doing things one would rather not do. Responsibility is looking at all of the costs of one's philosophies and actions, and how they affect those around you. responsibilty means thinking things through and deciding ahead of time that there's things one won't stand, there's things one won't accept, and there's actions one won't tolerate... and deciding excactly how far one will go to prevent those things from happening to one's self or loved ones. Or to one's country. And deciding what price one will pay for those decisions, and what prices are unacceptable.
Pacifism is inherently irresponsible: it determines that there's no one and nothing that one will lift a hand to defend with "life, liberty, and sacred honor" even to the death. Anathema to the self-reliant, which is why the communication ends when the two perspectives collide. The self-reliant believe in acceptance of personal responsibilty, the pacifist believes in the abdication of responsibilty to the state, and the states responsibility to protect them and theirs.
That abdication is what ultimately leads to gun control and disarmament, and ultimately leads to tyranny when the inevitable happens, and the state proves an unreliable protector. The extreme end leads to mountains of skulls in Cambodia.
Wednesday, December 03, 2003
"You can't kill America. We're more than a nation. We're a notion. We're an idea. The American Dream. You never heard of the Afghanistani Dream have you. Except by bearded hermetic recluses with a fetish for uneducated women dressed as giant shuttlecocks." -- Will Durst
I saw what the Clintons did to our White House, to employees who worked there, to the military officers unlucky enough to serve there – and I was myself subjected to one of the most hateful smear campaigns ever launched against a Clinton truth-teller. I didn’t hate them then, and I don’t hate them now.
To give in to that emotion would be to admit that I am powerless in the face of their power, which is not true then, now, or ever.
I never hated them, no matter what they did – anymore than I hated the Mafia crook, the kidnapper or the drug dealers I put in prison. I never hated these people, because they only represent human failure, which I do hate. I hate Communism, Socialism and National Socialism (Nazi), because these ideologies represent the worst character flaws in humans. They feed on human failure.
All these collectivist political movements have the same thing in common. In order for them to get and keep power, people must fail – or enough of them must fail to be ready to turn their lives over to people like Hillary on the basis of a lie, on the promise that somehow life will become better.
Except that it never does; it only gets worse. Millions of corpses in thousands of mass graves are silent testimony to the most deadly time on our planet – the last 100 years – when at least 100,000,000 died at the hands of their own governments, all of them Communist or Socialist.
That’s why I truly hate the sickness called Communism – because it is deadly.
Tuesday, December 02, 2003
Patt Morrison writes in the left wing LA Times the following about the Showtime Hit Movie against the Reagans:
"The problem Reagan's admirers and chroniclers will find is that's about all there is here; we get Iran-Contra, but not Reagan's 'Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.' We get the stupefyingly ill-advised visit to a cemetery where Nazi SS troops were buried, but not the Reagans teary-eyed at the memorial for the Challenger astronauts."
David Bauder of the AP writes:
"The Reagans' faults are familiar to those who followed his presidency. What's striking is how they dominate this film compared to Reagan's successes; the Iran-Contra affair is given considerably more time than the Cold War defeat of the Soviet Union, and the economic boom of the 1980s is barely touched upon. The film opens with a befuddled Ronald and tearful Nancy Reagan dealing with the fallout of Iran-Contra, in which the government traded arms to Iran for hostages."
Liberal Tom Shales writes in the Washington Post:
"Nancy Reagan as Cruella De Vil and Ronald Reagan as the nearsighted Mister Magoo? There are those who will probably find the depictions of the former President and First Lady in The Reagans just that simplistic and cartoonish."
"There's enough nastiness and character assassination in the film -- even without the line about AIDS -- to make CBS look wise in pulling it off the network and foolish in having scheduled it in the first place. It's a matter of bad timing as well as bad manners; former President Reagan is not only still alive but seriously and terminally ill, making a drama riddled with slurs unseemly and hugely inappropriate."
Vancouver, BC - Restrictive firearm legislation has failed to reduce gun violence in Australia, Canada, or Great Britain. The policy of confiscating guns has been an expensive failure, according to a new paper The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales, released today by The Fraser Institute. . . .
Disarming the public has not reduced criminal violence in any country examined in this study. In all these cases, disarming the public has been ineffective, expensive, and often counter productive. In all cases, the effort meant setting up expensive bureaucracies that produce no noticeable improvement to public safety or have made the situation worse.
Here's a link to the study itself. Add this to the CDC study mentioned here earlier (which "found no conclusive evidence that gun control laws help to prevent violent crime, suicides and accidental injuries in the United States") and the case for gun control seems to be growing steadily weaker.
Monday, December 01, 2003
The al Qaeda - Iraq Link:
The Associated Press reports that "American forces have captured three members of Osama bin Laden's terrorist network in northern Iraq," all Iraqi nationals.
London's Observer reports that investigators believe Abu Musab al-Zarqawi--an al Qaeda-linked terrorist who was given refuge in Saddam Hussein's Iraq--was involved with last month's terror attacks in Turkey.
The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy Gathers!
HOLLYWOOD DEMS GATHER FOR 'HATE BUSH' MEETING AT HILTON
Laurie David [wife of SEINFELD creator Larry David] has sent out invites to the planned Tuesday evening meeting at the Hilton with the bold heading: 'Hate Bush 12/2 - Event'
The message reads:
"This is the most important meeting you can attend to prevent the advancement of the current extremist right wing agenda. Do not miss this meeting. This will be a high-level briefing to discuss the strategies... to affect what happens next November."
Political heavies Harold Ickes, Former Deputy White House Chief of Staff and Campaign Manager for the '96 Clinton/Gore re-elect, and Ellen Malcolm, Founder of Emily's List, a political action committee that elects pro-choice, Democratic women, will chair the gathering.
For the guest list, check out the Drudge Report.
Rev. Al Livin' Large!
The, ahem, money quotes:
A single July jaunt to the luxury Four Seasons in Los Angeles cost $7,343.27 - more than 5 percent of the total $121,314.60 campaign cash Sharpton raised in the third quarter
Two charges at the city eatery Harry Cipriani ran nearly $700, and the campaign shelled out almost $1,700 for a single limousine service in Chicago.
Sunday, November 30, 2003
James Carville inspires donations (from the Washington Times):
"I saw James Carville on TV a couple of days ago pimping for donations for the Democratic National Committee," writes Mike Becker of Phoenix, Ariz., who promptly picked up his phone and dialed the DNC collection line.
"First, you're told they are taking too many calls from committed Democrats and you'll have to either hold or go to the automated donation line. I held. Then you're offered the opportunity to leave your name and number and they will get back to you. Or you can hold. I held," he says.
"I finally was transferred to a young man who is likely the poster boy for success in Washington, D.C.'s public school system. He read — very haltingly and poorly, with no expression — a script that no self-respecting telemarketer would touch. He asked for $100. I told him I was so inspired by James Carville that I had just mailed a $1,000 check to the Republican National Committee. He thanked me for my concern for national issues and my willingness to help.
"Could I possibly afford $10? I repeated my $1,000 story. He thanked me again and asked me what amount would I feel comfortable donating to the DNC? I asked him if the DNC could please send me money directly, instead of waiting to pass a bill through Congress that the pesky president probably wouldn't sign anyway.
"There was a long pause and he thanked me for listening to his entire script and asked me if I see my way clear to make a $10 donation. With never so much as a peep of inflection in his monotone voice. As a broken glass Republican, I was encouraged that the DNC is so hurting for help they can't even find a decent telemarketing company to collect their cash.
"Give 'em a call if you're having a boring day, it's instructional."
"Spin Sisters: How the Women of the Media Sell Unhappiness and Liberalism to the Women of America" , which when published should be required reading for all the women and girls in this country who've grown tired of not thinking for themselves
Saturday, November 29, 2003
So how many innocent people have not died as a result of the Iraq war?
I get about 13,000 so far.
Thirteen thousand is about the size of a good basketball game. Perhaps we can convince the Lakers to play a charity game against the Spurs, say. Then we can put 13,000 Iraqi men, women and children into the Staples Center, and make Michael Moore and Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Sean Penn, George Clooney, The Dixie Chicks, Janeane Garofalo, end every single person who signed the Not in Our Name petition kill those people in cold blood – electrodes, acid baths or shredders, to get the full effect, although the weak-stomached should be allowed to merely shoot them in the back of the head.
Because that is exactly what would have happened if these people had gotten their way.
Something to think about.
I also have to say that as an ex-soldier I thought that President Bush's visit to the troops in Baghdad on Thanksgiving was simply cool beyond belief.
Friday, November 28, 2003
His surprise visit to Iraq was an excellent move by President Bush! Not only was it an excellent morale booster for the troops, but it also, in a brilliant bit of political one up manship, pushed Senator Hillary Clinton's (democrat - whomever has the cash) visit to Iraq right out of the headlines.
Those on the left who keep insisting that President Bush is stupid are listening to their own spin way too much.
Thursday, November 27, 2003
Wednesday, November 26, 2003
The dismissive notion that conservatives leak to outlets on the right for ideological reasons ignores the fact that liberals often do the same thing with news organizations that are either left-of-center or likely to be sympathetic to the message being peddled.
-- Howard Kurtz, Washington Post
Tuesday, November 25, 2003
Michael Van Winkle says in The Chicago Report:
Clinton left office without giving the Democrats any direction. The party under Clinton existed to serve his presidency, to defend his antics and get him reelected. All the while, Clinton's policies were creating fissures in the party, fissures he had no intention of smoothing over with his leadership. When a party is split between two possible futures it's up to the leader to pick one and raise the sails. Otherwise, the party is left aimlessly afloat and burdened with resolving the structural cracks itself. This is a very difficult process and we're seeing it played out in the Democratic Primaries. The Democrats aren't sure what their party is and where it's going.
Dick Morris points out more Hypocrisy from the Left.
Here is a, ahem, money quotes:
As the campaign-finance-reform bill went through Congress, Democrats demanded a ban on soft money donations to political parties. They succeeded in including it as the reform's centerpiece.
But it turns out that Republicans are raising twice as much as Democrats are in hard money: $158 million for the GOP vs. $66.5 million for the Democrats. So the Democrats have resorted to a loophole in McCain-Feingold and worked to maximize soft money contributions to phony political committees, allegedly independent of the party apparatus and thus not covered by the soft money ban.
Monday, November 24, 2003
The only Republicans you know are President Bush and your deer-hunting uncle in Minnesota, and you hate 'em both.
Pot is legal, and tobacco is illegal.
You tell your daughter sex before marriage is OK, as long as she and her partner don't use your recreational drugs, your boyfriend, your priest or your bed.
You can't decide what to major in at college: astral projections, witchcraft, channeling or hating Republicans.
Every time there's an earthquake, you're under a table praying that the metropolis will finally get to break away from the mainland.
Each morning, while drinking a latte at Starbucks, you review a complete list of companies you need to boycott.
You think the Left is right and the Right is wrong.
This, of course, is not the complete list.
The Big Lie in Hollywood: The Hollywood Ten Were Not Victims But Villains
by Michael Berliner (November 24, 2003)
[www.CapitalismMagazine.com] November 24 marks the anniversary of fifty of Hollywood's leading executives and moguls firing the Hollywood Ten. These ten filmmakers had been cited for contempt of Congress for refusing to divulge their political affiliations to the House Un-American Activities Committee [HUAC] investigation into communist infiltration in Hollywood.
The anniversary of the Hollywood blacklist against the Hollywood Ten and other communists in Hollywood has brought an outpouring of sympathy and apologies to the "victims," along with incessant moral lessons from the media about this "dark" period in American history.
This much is true: Morality and justice are at issue. But the story has been twisted and the characters grossly miscast. The screenplay as written by politically correct Hollywood should be titled "Three Big Lies."
The ten Hollywood Traitors got fired by the studios, ONE HUNDRED MILLION innocent were murdered by all of the branches of the Communist Party that were in power around the world.
Sunday, November 23, 2003
COLUMBUS, Ga. (AP) - Demonstrators gathered outside Fort Benning to protest a military school were hit with a sonic barrage Saturday: patriotic music Army officials had blaring from the main gate.
A crowd estimated by Columbus police at 8,000 gathered to protest the school once known as the School of the Americas, which they blame for Latin American human rights abuses. It appeared to be the largest first-day gathering in the 14-year history of the protest.
Since when does hunting down and killing Communists, the foremost of the "secular" Enemies of Mankind (I'll take a break from discussing Islam), constitute an abuse of human rights?
The Army's loudspeakers, playing "The Army Song" and "God Bless the U.S.A.," were 50 yards away from where protesters were speaking to the crowd.
Leaders of School of Americas Watch, which has protested at Fort Benning every year since the early 1990s, said they planned to sue over the noise tactic and accused the Army of a "psychological operation."
"There's a lot of ill will being caused that's not necessary," said the Rev. Ray Bourgeois, SOA Watch founder. "The closer we get to closing that school down, the meaner they get."
"Those mean army men won't let us feel good about ourselves," cried the whim-worshipping twit, "WAHHHHHH!!!"
Narcissistic whim-worshippers who imagine themselves to be our "betters" almost always throw a fit when we refuse to play the role that they have assigned to us. It is right and proper for the defenders of Civilization to be feel pride for doing their duty. To spit upon the people who have defended one's continued existance as a free human being is an act of absolute depravity.
I was stationed at Fort Benning in the early 1980's when Comrade Bourgeois, a willing collaborator of the enemies of mankind, began striking his OH-SO-HOLY pose outside of the front gates after some graduates of the School of the Americas killed some priests who were collaborating with the Marxist insurgents.
Needless to say, I was throughly disgusted by his depraved spectacle.
In a life or death struggle, those who help the other side are part of the problem, and must ultimately be included in the solution. Those who actively support and seek to protect the enforcers of a doctrine that has run up a bodycount of ONE HUNDRED MILLION have surrendered any and all claim to the moral status of HUMAN, and claim to the inherent Rights of Man. The self-styled "peace movement" has spent the better part of the last century taking the side of despots and murderers against the free and civilized nations.
Traitor and Murderer are the nicest names I have for such individuals.
I believe that we have been way too nice to the thug-huggers, and having their feelings hurt should be the last thing this whim-worshipping trash should be worried about.
James Carville is still slinging fast and furious on Meet the Press. He just tossed out a comment about the lobby groups controlling Congress. I think he's getting history mixed up with current events:
"The period we're in is a lobbyist's dream come true" -- Joan Claybrook, head of the advocacy group Public Citizen, describing the atmosphere of the Clinton Administration.
The new liberal spin: James Carville is on Meet the Press using the term "War Profiteering Congress".
Remember that term. I'm betting you will be hearing it from every democrat who gets in front of a camera.
US President George Bush is “totally at odds” with his media image, Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Menzies Campbell said today.
Mr Campbell, an opponent of the war with Iraq, spoke out on the ePolitix website about his discussions with the President during the state visit.
He said that they discussed directly issues such as Iraq, the Middle East, Guantanamo Bay, Kyoto and trade sanctions.
“He is personally extremely engaging. He has a well-developed sense of humour, is self-deprecating and when he engages in a discussion with you he is warm and concentrates directly on you.
“He looks you straight in the eye and tells you exactly what he thinks.”
Mr Campbell, stressing that the President was “totally at odds” with his media image, went on: “I was not persuaded by what he said, but I was most certainly surprised at the extent to which the caricature of him was inaccurate.”
-- What did they think he is, a chimp? Oh, hold on ...
It's been 40 years since President Kennedy was killed...and 36 years until the evidence collected by the Warren Commission is released. Is that evidence being held so long to protect their stated theory that Lee Harvey Oswald acted on his own or to protect the commission members (of which only President Gerald Ford is stil alive)?
Saturday, November 22, 2003
"Liberal, shmiberal. That should be a new word. Shmiberal: one who is assumed liberal, just because he's a professional whiner in the newspaper. If you'll read the subtext for many of those old strips, you'll find the heart of an old-fashioned Libertarian. And I'd be a Libertarian, if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners." -- Berkeley Breathed
Friday, November 21, 2003
"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty." - President John Fitzgerald Kennedy
Andrew Sullivan's Quote of the Day:
"What people have got to remember is that Sept. 11 happened in 2001 and not in 2003. It was planned under the presidency of Bill Clinton." - British foreign secretary, Jack Straw. The point, of course, is not to blame Clinton for 9/11, but to show that al Qaeda terrorism is not some kind of response to the Bush administration. It predated it, and will probably outlast it.
LONDON - Tens of thousands demonstrators marched through the heart of London on Thursday, toppling a 17-foot tall papier mache statue of President Bush to show their anger for the Iraq war and Prime Minister Tony Blair 's support of the invasion.
This is an act of symbolic magic or what is otherwise called voodoo.
If these stone age mentalities are as they label themselves, progressives, then FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, WAR IS PEACE, ETC., ETC.
“The media, the politicians, etc., they all say Islam is a religion of peace and love,” he said. “It’s almost impossible to say anything different. A new word has appeared in debates: ‘Islamophobia’. It means any critic of Islam is racist. Nobody in France now can criticize Islam or make a joke about it without ending up in jail."
The really sick thing is that valid criticism of Islam would still be perfectly "legal" under Der Fuhererreich.
Thursday, November 20, 2003
Wednesday, November 19, 2003
No reply from the folks at Marketplace yet over this question:
"Exactly how do you justify interviewing George Galloway without mentioning that(a) he was taking money from Sadam Hussein and (b) he was thrown out of the Labour Party as a result?"
A very well put argument from teh folks at Right Wing News:
I know this is going to be hard for some people on the left to accept, especially since the Democratic party is more the party of McGovern than the party of FDR or JFK these days, but George McGovern was a HUGE WIMP on national defense. Does that mean he was unpatriotic? Not at all. In fact, George McGovern is a patriotic man and his brave service to our country should be applauded.
However, having a distinguished service record in combat DOES NOT make you a foreign policy genius. Take Wesley Clark & John Kerry, for example. Both of them should certainly be congratulated for their patriotism & excellent service to our country in the military. However, neither of them comes across as serious about fighting terrorism and neither of them can be counted on to do what it takes to defend America if they become President. That's not questioning their patriotism, it's questioning their judgement, even if the left seems unwilling to make that distinction.
The most charitable interpretation is that the [so-called "assault weapon"] ban's proponents know nothing about guns. The “assault weapon ban” conjures up images of machine guns used by the military, which are surely not very useful in hunting deer. Yet, the 1994 federal assault weapons ban had nothing to do with machine guns, only semi-automatics, which fire one bullet per pull of the trigger. The firing mechanisms in semi-automatic and machine guns are completely different. The entire firing mechanism of a semi-automatic gun has to be gutted and replaced to turn it into a machine gun.
For the full story.
We are living in the heart of things -- in Trafalgar Square -- and, for what it's worth, can report that there is nothing of any substance going on at all. It's quite quiet -- people are going about their business, but the usual buzz of tourist activity has slackened a bit. The first round of scheduled protest events involved a big talk by prominent left-leaning activists, and drew about 2,000 people. Then, about 1,000 marched through Oxford Street to protest the Bush Administration's environmental policies. The thousands who were supposed to greet him at Buckingham did not materialize -- there were maybe 100. Right now (Wednesday afternoon), just after the President's big talk, there are a few hundred people milling around Trafalgar Square, a women's prayer circle, and some people congratulating themselves for putting red-dye in the fountains (get it?). The crowd is a little bigger than the crowd two days ago, who were protesting the ban on feeding the pigeons, but certainly smaller than the crowd last month, who were protesting tuition hikes at universities. The cops were cracking up. There was supposed to be a big "alternative state parade" of cyclists and other folks, but it seems to have fizzled.
1. The Wall Street Journal is read by the people who run the country.
2. The Washington Post is read by people who think they run the country.
3. The New York Times is read by people who think they should run the country, and who are very good at crosswords.
4. USA Today is read by people who think they ought to run the country but don't really understand the Washington Post. They do, however, like their statistics shown in pie charts.
5. The Los Angeles Times is read by people who wouldn't mind running the country, if they could spare the time, and if they didn't have to leave LA to do it.
6. The Boston Globe is read by people whose parents used to run the country and did a far superior job of it, thank you very much.
7. The New York Daily News is read by people who aren't too sure who's running the country, and don't really care as long as they can get a seat on the train.
8. The New York Post is read by people who don't care who's running the country, as long as they do something really scandalous, preferably while intoxicated.
9. The San Francisco Chronicle is read by people who aren't sure there is a country... or that anyone is running it; but whoever it is, they oppose all that they stand for. There are occasional exceptions if the leaders are handicapped minority feminist atheist dwarfs, who also happen to be illegal aliens from ANY country or galaxy as long as they are Democrats.
10. The Miami Herald is read by people who are running another country but need the baseball scores.
11. The National Enquirer is read by people trapped in line at the grocery store.
Andrew Sullivan presents:
PBS WATCH: An emailer writes:
I heard this last night on Marketplace and was stunned (although at this point, I shouldn't be). PBS' business-oriented show did a story on how the British feel about Bush's visit. The two politicians they spoke to: George Galloway and Ken Livingstone. No mention was made of Galloway's past, his expulsion from the Labour Party, his taking money from Saddam, nothing. He was just a member of parliament. Speaking to the mayor of London might have been appropriate, but they never mentioned his quotes calling Bush the greatest danger to the planet. It was a disgusting attempt to present bias as fact.
Disgusting, but for NPR, entirely unsurprising. Quoting Galloway, without mentioning that he was on the take from Saddam and has been expelled from the Labour Party, is beyond belief.
FREDERICK FORSYTH'S LETTER TO GEORGE W. BUSH:
Today you arrive in my country for the first state visit by an American president for many decades, and I bid you welcome.
You will find yourself assailed on every hand by some pretty pretentious characters collectively known as the British left. They traditionally believe they have a monopoly on morality and that your recent actions preclude you from the club. You opposed and destroyed the world's most blood-encrusted dictator. This is quite unforgivable.
I beg you to take no notice. The British left intermittently erupts like a pustule upon the buttock of a rather good country. Seventy years ago it opposed mobilisation against Adolf Hitler and worshipped the other genocide, Josef Stalin.
It has marched for Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Khrushchev, Brezhnev and Andropov. It has slobbered over Ceausescu and Mugabe. It has demonstrated against everything and everyone American for a century. Broadly speaking, it hates your country first, mine second.
Eleven years ago something dreadful happened. Maggie was ousted, Ronald retired, the Berlin wall fell and Gorby abolished communism. All the left's idols fell and its demons retired. For a decade there was nothing really to hate. But thank the Lord for his limitless mercy. Now they can applaud Saddam, Bin Laden, Kim Jong-Il... and hate a God-fearing Texan. So hallelujah and have a good time.
Tuesday, November 18, 2003
Saddam and bin Laden "had an operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for al Qaeda--perhaps even for Mohamed Atta"
-- From a memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It was written in response to a request from the committee as part of its investigation into prewar intelligence claims made by the administration.
For more details...
Mr Bush seems to very much enjoy bombing people and making with the wrath and the vengeance. This offends our sense of fair play.
A clarification here, the vaunted sense of British fair play means fair play just for the British. When ruling the world, we were entirely justified in sending gun ships up Chinese rivers to support the opium trade and would have very miffed if some Yankee upstart had been going around shouting “no blood for dope” at Disraeli. Burger-scoffing surrender baboons in the war against yellowism, John Bull would have said. Jingoism? We invented it.
Mr Bush on the other hand seems to believe in fair play just for the Americans, which is very disturbing and amoral.
No blood for dope? Now there's a quandary for the anti-globalizers.
More Hate Speech from the Left:
Far Left Liberal Icon, Senator Ted Kennedy (democrat-MA) has called recent federal judiciary nominees "Neanderthals".
These "Neanderthals" include: Hispanic lawyer Miguel Estrada and California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown, an African-American.
Let's be honest here, if Senator Trent Lot had said that about minority federal appointees, the democrats (and the majority of the media (NYT, LAT, Boston Globe, CBS, NBC, etc.) would be calling for his head.
I'm not the only one to call this Hate Speech. The Wall Street Journal writes:
Here we are in the 21st century, and a prominent politician is equating members of racial and ethnic minorities with a primitive subspecies of human being. Democrats were once the party of slavery and Jim Crow, but we'd thought they were beyond that.
Intellectual objectivity does not require neutrality, but it does call for accuracy. In dealing with the evils of Soviet Communism and its American partisans, most revisionist historians are simply liars. They not only suppress uncomfortable truths, but also fabricate a sentimental, positive leftist saga that never was.
Monday, November 17, 2003
"The Constitution expressly establishes supermajority voting requirements for authorizing treaties, proposing constitutional amendments, and other specific actions. To confirm judicial nominees, by contrast, the Constitution requires only a majority vote — as the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in United States v. Ballin (1892).
Saturday, November 15, 2003
Found on Ipse Dixit:
So, the environmentalist religious fanatics have taken another series of body blows recently. Now they may well have their very own Michael Bellesiles. New examinations of the data show that "the medieval warm period around the 1500s was warmer than the 20th century.... Stay tuned: the supposed smoking gun of global warming may have been loaded with blanks.
Friday, November 14, 2003
Another wonderful tidbit from the greatest Briton:
Churchill's doctor, Lord Moran, favored continuing the BBC monopoly. When he questioned Churchill about it, the great man exploded. "For eleven years they kept me off the air. They prevented me from expressing views which have proved to be right. Their behavior has been tyrannical. They are honeycombed with Socialists - probably with Communists."
True again today. They no longer have a monopoly - but they still force Brits to pay for propaganda. This nugget can be found in "Diaries of Lord Moran: The Struggle for Survival, 1940-1965," page 417. -- Found on Andrew Sullivan's blog
Found on Instapundit:
COMMERCE CLAUSE NEWS: I haven't read the opinion yet, but Larry Solum reports that the Ninth Circuit has held that the federal government can't ban homemade machine guns under the Commerce Clause, since they're not in interstate commerce. He notes that this has implications for homegrown marijuana, too.
As I say, I haven't read the opinion, but it sounds like a defensible position to me. [Any position is defensible with enough homemade machine guns! -- Ed. I think you've had too many of those brownies. . . .]
UPDATE: Volokh says this is huge.
ANOTHER UPDATE: For some background on these issues, you might want to read this article that Brannon Denning and I wrote in the Wisconsin Law Review on Commerce Clause issues in the lower courts, and this followup piece from the Commerce Clause symposium issue of the Arkansas Law Review. (That symposium was terrific, but as far as I know the whole issue isn't online. Here, however, is Randy Barnett's contribution.) We have a long-term, quasi-empirical project looking at how the Lopez case is percolating through the lower courts, and back through the Supreme Court. This case will surely make the next installment.
A recent CBS “news” program “The Dark Side of Homeschooling” was a frontal assault, by smears and innuendo, against individual freedom and independence. As a coffin was carried into a cemetery, we were told that homeschooling can hide child abuse, which can lead to death. Such drama provided no information about homeschooling. But it offers an important lesson about the power of principled opposition to such attacks—a lesson that businessmen should heed.
In terms of method, the program was a fairly standard assault on anyone who acts independently of government control. It selected an aberration (isolated instances of child abuse), and then extended such deviant cases across the range of its target group. By claiming that child abuse is a “dark secret” of homeschooling, the program linked all those who educate their children at home with abusers, implied some sort of conspiracy among homeschoolers, and equated freedom with death. No facts are used to show any of this. By innuendo, the stage was set for further attacks against all homeschoolers, and for advocacy of government control over children and homes.
Gosh, what a surprise.
Is it any wonder that I don't watch anything they broadcast any more.
Thursday, November 13, 2003
An email to Andrew Sullivan
"To the list of reasons you gave for the increasing extremism on the left, I would like to add one more, and arguably the primary reason. They had grown used to having a total monopoly on the information rationed out to the American people. With control of all network news and entertainment and most big-screen entertainment, the challenges to their opinions were only seen by their most conservative opponents, never by the “mainstream”. I put that work in quotes, because I mean the true center of the population, while the media has consistently used the term to mean the fairly extreme left wing.
Probably that is why they have reacted so strongly to the cancellation of The Reagans. This was an abandonment by their true heartland. It also explains the violence of their language when they talk about Fox News and talk radio. They react as OPEC would react to a new source that started selling 50 million barrels a day of petroleum at $2 per barrel."
Wednesday, November 12, 2003
A blogger serving in the military points out that Tom Tomorrow is a smug hypocrite. Again, not much of a surprise.
Tuesday, November 11, 2003
Theodore Roosevelt on foreign policy
"The steady aim of this Nation, as of all enlightened nations, should be to strive to bring ever nearer the day when there shall prevail throughout the world the peace of justice. There are kinds of peace which are highly undesirable, which are in the long run as destructive as any war. Tyrants and oppressors have many times made a wilderness and called it peace. Many times peoples who were slothful or timid or shortsighted, who had been enervated by ease or by luxury, or misled by false teachings, have shrunk in unmanly fashion from doing duty that was stern and that needed self-sacrifice, and have sought to hide from their own minds their shortcomings, their ignoble motives, by calling them love of peace. The peace of tyrannous terror, the peace of craven weakness, the peace of injustice, all these should be shunned as we shun unrighteous war."
We must be proud of our soldiers, but it is equally true that they should be proud of the cause they fight for. It is terrible to die in war, but there is one thing worse: to die in a war that has no meaning, a war that offers no reason for risking one's life.
The best way we can honor our veterans and give real meaning to Veterans Day—aside from ceremonies honoring their past and present dedication and bravery—is to promise that we will go to war only when America's interests as a free nation are threatened.
The events of 9/11 have made it abundantly clear that there exist Moslem fanatics whose goal is to destroy our country and the values it stands for. It is clearly in our self-interest to use the full power of our military might to destroy those who would destroy us.
Monday, November 10, 2003
Sunday, November 09, 2003
This will drive the far left loonie Dems crazy...Andrew Sullivan compares GWB to JFK
JFK AND GWB: During the primary season (the last go-round) I wrote a speculative (and somewhat hostile) piece comparing then-candidate George W. Bush with former president John F Kennedy. I meant it as a useful mind-exercise, but as time has gone on, I think the analogy strengthens. The backgrounds are similar: unruly scions of political families, young men who got their start in politics through pure nepotism. Their frat-boy garrulousness, their effortless patriotism, their family loyalties - it all works until you get to the moment when GWB gave up the wild life at 40 and JFK kept his going. But on policy, they're also much more similar than either the right or the left is comfortable conceding. They both came into office in a disupted election after a two-term president who presided over a major boom. President Kennedy fought an election on hawkish foreign policy; the current President Bush walked backward into hawkishness through the drastic orientation of 9/11. Both cut taxes and unleashed periods of economic growth. And both argued uncompromisingly for democracy across the world. Some boomers may also see in Iraq the same pattern as president Kennedy's early foray into Vietnam. I'd disagree strongly, but history will surely judge in due course. Perhaps more tellingly, both used powerful and moving rhetoric to assert the exceptionalism of the United States at a time when it was being attacked. President Bush's speech Thursday at the National Endowment for Democracy was perhaps the highpoint of this president's transformation into an old-style Democrat in foreign policy. Too bad the Democrats can neither see this nor profit from it.