Citizen Journal

« October 2005 | Main | December 2005 »

November 30, 2005

It's a war. Get over it.

I'd be surprised and concerned if the U.S. weren't undertaking propaganda in Iraq. It's how you win a war.

Posted by bill at 09:33 PM | Comments (0)

Calculated Miscalculation

In a Weekly Standard piece William Kristol puts forward the theory that Nancy Pelosi, the House Minority Leader, has effectively doomed any chance the Democratic Party had of capturing the House of Representatives in 2006. How does Kristol think she accomplished this? By suggesting a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Kristol then goes on to contradict himself by explaining how Pelosi may have staked out the superior position for her party:

it is possible that the situation in Iraq will worsen over the next year. If that happens, Bush and the GOP are in deep trouble. They would have been if Pelosi had said nothing. But it is much more likely that the situation in Iraq will stay more or less the same, or improve. In either case, Republicans will benefit from being the party of victory.

The ignorance of guerilla conflicts inherent in the claim that Iraq will "stay more or less the same" is mind-blowing. If the Democrats claim the House, the GOP will have its own intelligentsia to blame.

Posted by Audi Partem Alteram at 05:25 PM | Comments (0)

Of course she's running

Hmm, this isn't a bad point.

Now excuse me while I stick my finger down my throat.

Posted by bill at 05:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The way forward

The White House continues to fight back, with its 35-page "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq." I am hoping the good folks at Powerline or Captain Ed will have time for a detailed look but until then, we can rely on the Wash Post. That is a joke, of course. The document is here. Take a look for yourself.

Posted by bill at 09:47 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 29, 2005

Signs of life?

"Integration into our society, notably a grasp of the English language, should be a condition for bringing your family here. That ensures the future of the spouse and of the children but also of society."

Sound like a red state Republican? Not quite; try Dominique de Villepin, France's Prime Minister (saying "French," not "English" language), responding today to the "Paris intifada" by announcing new restrictions on French immigration. The pitiful "root causes" meme seems to have waned, at least for a bit as French politicians, some of whom (including de Villepin) are eyeing a 2007 run for the presidency, seem to recognize France's conservative voters want a meaningful response. It remains to be seen whether this month's battles will mark a turning point in French cultural politics, but de Villepin's Tony Blankley-like rhetoric indicates they may.

Posted by bill at 09:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Lost Times

If you're like me and didn't think TimesSelect was worth your hard-earned dollar, Mickey Kaus says you were right. "Inhibited writers, inhibited linkers, inhibited dialogue," he writes, explaining why NYT's approach to fee-for-content may be doomed.

Posted by bill at 04:30 PM | Comments (0)

DEW Unto Others

Directed-Energy Weapons have arrived -- and, one can surmise, are here to stay. I have covered this topic at length before. The proliferation of these weapons seemed no less inevitable or troublesome this summer, and the asymmetry of warfare that's brought us IEDs and nightmares of dirty bombs in backpacks will only be exacerbated by the possibilities of infinitely-variable handheld lasers. Thank R&D for its own sake, and an industry that puts institutional inertia as top priority. But an open universe eventually includes every problem along with every profit.

Posted by James G. Poulos at 11:37 AM | Comments (0)

Debating McCain

While John McCain's conservative creds are debated, we might take comfort in the agitation he's causing leftists like Nathan Newman. Given Nathan's economic views his consternation is no surprise - presumably he'd be hostile to any candidate right of Greg Pason. But the left's notion that McCain might only be nominally moderate might at least spark an accounting of the Senator's record and what he would bring to the White House.

Posted by bill at 10:21 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

More on the most sensitive war ever

Al-Jazeera went to see its attorneys (of course it did!) after revelations the White House may have considered bombing AJ's headquarters. Color me unsurprised; even though Wadah Khanfar, the station manager, all but acknowledges AJ's strategic importance as a wartime propagandist (it's "not just a TV station," he sapped. "It has become something people are very attached to"), such things are of little importance in this war.

Posted by bill at 09:05 AM | Comments (0)

November 28, 2005

More patriotic dissent from the left

Ted Rall is an anti-American dickhead. His latest (via Newsbusters.org):

Rall exemplifies why, as Tony Blankley writes, President Bush should declare war on radical Islam. Rall might then be censored, even thrown in jail. There exists a point at which dissent becomes sedition, and Rall is breezing past it. Until the government has authority to shut him up, we can only hope that someday, he'll piss off the wrong US veteran.

[UPDATE: I'll acknowledge a mistake -- sloppiness on my part -- the President cannot "declare" war. The president can wage war, acting as Commander-in-chief and in defense of the US but only Congress can declare war.]

Posted by bill at 01:52 PM | Comments (0)

November 27, 2005

Fighting back

This piece is a refreshingly pro-military read at the Christian Science Monitor entitled, "The Iraq story: how troops see it." Better: Bruce Willis is fighting back on behalf of American soldiers:

ANGERED by negative portrayals of the conflict in Iraq, Bruce Willis, the Hollywood star, is to make a pro-war film in which American soldiers will be depicted as brave fighters for freedom and democracy.

He is expected to base the film on the writings of the independent blogger Michael Yon, a former special forces green beret who was embedded with Deuce Four and sent regular dispatches about their heroics.

Excellent! Read about Michael Yon here and listen to Yon's interview with Pundit Review Radio here. (H/T: Michelle Malkin.)

Posted by bill at 10:15 PM | Comments (0)

Consider the alternative

Republicans deserve every bit of criticism they've seen recently from conservatives. Many of us still shake our head at how quickly the White House and Congress squandered last November's mojo. But some perspective is in order and, as usual, Democrats are unwittingly providing it. Today's installment comes by way of New Mexico Governor and former Clinton Energy Secretary Bill Richardson. You may recall Richardson's frightening incompetence in the face of (and leading to) massive security breaches at Los Alamos National Laboratories. Richardson's June 2000 appearance on Meet the Press defending his handling of Chinese espionage (I wish I could find a transcript) was absolutely petrifying.

Richardson will likely run for President in 2008 and so it's fair to wonder why the hell he's in the running. His latest foible, revealed last week, is that his age-old claim that he was drafted by the Oakland Athletics was, at best, more evidence of bumbling incompetence and, at worst, a pitiful lie. It was, of course, a lie, unless we're to believe Richardson was fooled into believing he was drafted, in which case the man is an idiot. That Democrats see Richardson as a viable candidate for anything beyond overseeing a bake sale should be comforting to Republicans.

Tracked here.

Posted by bill at 06:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

More of the same

If you were hoping that ABC's new Nightline would be watchable than Ted Koppel, Media Research Center's Rich Noyes says you'll be disappointed. Noyes takes a look at Nightline's three-headed liberalmonster of Martin Bashir, Cynthia McFadden and Terry Moran. Moran brings his admitted "deep anti-military bias"; Bashir and McFadden have less of a track record but probably won't be much better. Let's watch this train wreck, shall we?

Posted by bill at 05:30 PM | Comments (0)

November 26, 2005

War or not a war?

Evidently President Bush discussed whether to bomb Al Jazeera , a revelation the propgandist network called "both shocking and worrisome" and one from which the WH is already scurrying. As this story develops, most on the left will offer similar outrage, and most of that will be genuine. But the NY Sun's Daniel Johnson says W and Tony Blair wouldn't have been wrong to consider the option:

That shutting down Al Jazeera would be desirable from the Anglo-American point of view is obviously true. And if Qatar, a Gulf state that is nominally an ally of America (on which it relies for its independence), has allowed its capital to become Al Qaeda's principal propaganda base, it has no right to expect America automatically to refrain from punitive action on its territory.

The wider issues raised by the Bush-Blair Al Jazeera exchange are two. First, how far can the West tolerate the dissemination of Islamist propaganda intended to poison the minds of Muslims against Jews and "Crusaders"? Second, how much information are Western governments obliged to give about their internal decision-making process, and are they justified in suppressing sensitive information, even if this means penalizing the press, to protect Western interests?

Read the whole article.

Posted by bill at 06:17 PM | Comments (0)

Shameless

How long does it take for lawyers to attempt to cash in on tragedy? In the case of Chicago's Powers, Rogers & Smith, no more than 3 days.

Posted by bill at 11:16 AM | Comments (0)

November 23, 2005

Chinese Takeout

Insight magazine delivers the lurid, morbid report that the "overwhelming assessment by Asian officials, diplomats and analysts is that the U.S. military simply cannot defeat China. It has been an assessment relayed to U.S. government officials over the past few months by countries such as Australia, Japan and South Korea." We are treated to the knowledge, imparted by Tokyo Governor Shintaro Ishihara, of a built-in killswitch to America's success in any war against the Chinese, its "civic society that must adhere to the value of respecting lives."

Well, maybe, but this is also a man who announced in the same breath that, of all the U.S. armed forces, only the Marines are not "extremely incompetent" -- a silly statement when judged, at least, by his parallel concern that human wave-style attacks carried out by millions of Red soldiers are not only unstoppable but presumably, therefore, evidence as well of an immanent military competence. More...

Posted by James G. Poulos at 01:40 PM | Comments (0)

Thanksgiving Gobble-dly-goo

More stellar reporting from MSM: AFP reports, "Thanksgiving a boom time for US turkey farmers." The article is complete with a fascinating close-up photo of a turkey, which is helpfully captioned, "...Thanksgiving is undisputedly Turkey Day..." Next week, AFP will investigate the recent disappearance of thousands of Balsam Firs from the New England countryside. (H/T: Rob from down the hall. Someone alert James Taranto!)

Then we have real writers (h/t: Powerline): David Gelernter's article, "Abraham Lincoln's Thanksgiving":

In his message proclaiming that November 1864 Thanksgiving, he said that the Lord "has been pleased to animate and inspire our minds and hearts with fortitude, courage and resolution sufficient for the great trial of civil war." And he prayed for the "blessings of Peace, Union and Harmony throughout the land, which it has pleased him to assign as a dwelling-place for ourselves and for our posterity throughout all generations." The Biblical language is typical of Lincoln. Like many Puritan-minded Americans, he thought of his country as a new promised land.

I wonder whether Michael Newdow celebrates Thanksgiving. To whom or what does he give thanks? His yoga instructor?

More Thanksgiving stuff here from Michelle Malkin.

Posted by bill at 09:21 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 22, 2005

Finding Murtha

Congressman Murtha is a war hero, but the left's parlaying of that fact, and Murtha's bad ideas on Iraq, into a call for retreat is anything but heroic. TTLB exposes the myth that "Murtha didn't actually call for an immediate redeployment, and that any statement to that effect is simply a Republican smear tactic." Murtha said "immediately," and he meant "immediately." That liberals are scurrying exposes the folly of the "withdraw now" meme. Even they think it's extreme.

Meanwhile, Captain Ed notes that Murtha "has a history of demanding retreats," citing a Newsmax report that:

After terrorists attacked U.S. troops in Mogadishu, Somalia 12 years ago, anti-Iraq war Democrat, Rep. John Murtha urged then-President Clinton to begin a complete pullout of U.S. troops from the region.

Clinton took the advice and ordered the withdrawal - a decision that Osama bin Laden would later credit with emboldening his terrorist fighters and encouraging him to mount further attacks against the U.S.

Let's face it: As much as we'd like to treat Murtha with kid gloves, because we respect his heroic service, the man shouldn't be insulated. He's a Congressman, he represents the people, and he should be held to account.

Posted by bill at 11:41 PM | Comments (0)

Reading between the lines

The teaser for the WP story on Jose Padilla story sniffs, "Held for three years as an enemy combatant, Padilla has been indicted on charges unrelated to any potential terrorist attack in this country." (Poor guy.) But wait - the charges were related to some sinister stuff - not least of which, notes Counterrorism Blog, is that Padilla "traveled overseas filled out a terrorist training camp application and went to Afghanistan to so train" - one run by OBL.

So back to the WP - "unrelated to any potential terrorist attack"? - sure, until it happened. Padilla wasn't at Fat Camp, for God's sake.

More: with his fellow indictees, Padilla "operated and participated in a North American support cell that sent money, physical assets, and mujahideen recruits to overseas conflicts for the purpose of fighting violent jihad. This North American cell supported and coordinated with other support networks and mujahideen groups waging violent jihad." The defendants' beneficiaries included Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman (of the 1993 WTC bombing).

CTB notes the indictment was made possible by the Patriot Act, which is a postitive spin, but Michelle Malkin wonders if the indictment means the Bush adminstration is reverting to Clintonian stylings on the war on terrorism, namely that it's best fought in courthouses, by lawyers (and isn't really a "war at all, etc.).

Posted by bill at 04:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

CJ View: Technical glitches happen

It didn't surprise me that a "computer bug" caused CNN to broadcast a big, black "X" though Dick Cheney's head during a segment last night:

These things happen. As the proprietor of this fine website, I encounter computer bugs regularly. For instance, I was going to post a diddy about how much I'm looking forward to ABC's face-lifted Nightline, and look what a computer did to the picture I was going to use:

Damn computers.

Posted by bill at 12:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 21, 2005

Just remember: One man's terrorist...

...is another man's freedom fighter. Chris Matthews goes the way of Reuters. "The period between 9-11 and (invading) Iraq was not a good time for America. There wasn't a robust discussion of what we were doing," Matthews told students at the University of Toronto. "If we stop trying to figure out the other side, we've given up. The person on the other side is not evil. They just have a different perspective."

Posted by bill at 09:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Senator Kennedy's Bad Timing

Ted Kennedy's column today over at Huffington Post was typically flaccid rhetoric from the Senator, attacking Wal Mart's "shameful tactics to boost profits at the expense of the families of hard-working men and women." Kennedy complains that the 1990s' "Main Street Merchant of Doom" subjugates women, minorities and hard working Americans and it puts vintage t-shirt companies out of business, and the Senator's had enough. The resulting edict was the "Ten Commandments of Good Corporate Citizenship," which functionally speaking is the domestic policy talking points memo for the post-Moynihan left.

But Kennedy's were at their core purely economic complaints, and one consequence of that and the Senator's poor sense of timing was the laughably ironic coincidence of Kennedy's column and General Motors' announcement, just in time for Thanksgiving, that it would be letting go 30,000 workers. GM's problems represent the nasty truth of the union-enforced welfare system Kennedy espouses. It was in May, and in the midst of GM's decline, that George Will described GM's problems as largely resembling what Kennedy seeks to impose on Wal Mart, ones that transformed GM from a car-maker into a welfare state, hence its Herb Stein moment today.

Posted by bill at 08:41 PM | Comments (0)

On Iraq, Kagan & Kristol Get Getting It Right Wrong

Robert Kagan and Bill Kristol, writing in the Weekly Standard, deploy a set of facts to refute Murtha but, unfortunate as it is, refute themselves instead.

Murtha, of course, claims that the U.S. occupation is the primary problem in Iraq and that "our troops have become the primary target of the insurgency. They are united against U.S. forces, and we have become a catalyst for violence." This is nonsense. For many months now, the insurgents have been shifting their attacks away from U.S. and coalition forces and directing them at Iraqis instead. Iraqis now make up the overwhelming majority of casualties resulting from insurgent attacks. This shift is evidence not only of the effectiveness of our protective measures, but also of the growing vitality of the Iraqi political process, which the insurgents, according to their own statements, fear and hate more than the U.S. military presence.

As one can guess, the emphasis was not Kagan and Kristol's. A belief that our success in protecting Iraqis is measured by how many of them have been blown up instead of American soldiers is not just analytically oxymoronic but a backhanded compliment stunning in its sheer moral autism. More...

Posted by James G. Poulos at 04:31 PM | Comments (0)

Dear Democratic Underground

Readers: My first letter to DU went unanswered. Here's another go.

Dear Democratic Underground,

Please consider me for your "Top Ten Conservative Idiots" list. I support my President and his conduct of the war on terrorism, despite his faults, and I believe in all that free market stuff, America's greatness, and the human spirit. I liked Ronald Reagan, don't think Patrick Buchanan is Satan and have never attended any war protests or NYU, or shouted down Bill O'Reilly at the Fox News studios. I think CNN is more biased than Fox, and I pay $.75 for my coffee every morning. Moreover, I am grateful to be an American citizen and think French people should work harder and take a more showers. I also think Kos and his daddy would benefit from psychiatric help.

In short, I feel I am qualified to be included on your list. Please consider my interest. I am happy to provide more information as needed.

Regards,

Bill Lalor
wlalor@citizen-journal.net

UPDATE: More on DU here.

Posted by bill at 10:45 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 20, 2005

George Galloway, unplugged

I live in New York City so I've been told a number of times that "dissent is patriotic." Same goes, presumably, over in Great Britain, although free speech in the U.K. ain't what it is in the U.S. Anyway, I was thinking about this when I read this post on a recent speech by George Galloway. At some point doesn't dissent morph into treason? (H/T: Alarming News.)

Posted by bill at 02:28 PM | Comments (0)

CJ Miscellany

John Mangun has written a thought-provoking article discussing the Bush Doctrine and why those in Poland, India and the Philippines may understand its necessity better than others. Mr. Mangun is a columnist writing from the Phillipines and his blog is entitled, Third Eye on the Third World. Last week Bernard Chapin reviewed Diane Shader Smith's book, Undressing Infidelity: Why More Wives are Unfaithful. Bernard is a regular contributor for CJ. His blog, Chapin Nation, appears at Mens News Daily.

Also, FYI I'll be re-enabling comments soon. The problem is spam-bots. This Google search demonstrates the problem. Same goes for trackbacks. Addressing this stuff costs money, too, and to date my lottery winnings haven't kept up with site maintenance costs.

Posted by bill at 02:02 PM | Comments (0)

November 18, 2005

The Significance of New Jersey

Terence Samuel at The American Prospect offers an interesting thought piece on the relative importance of the recent NJ and VA gubernatorial elections. In this article Samuel argues that the loss in left-leaning New Jersey, and not conservative Virginia, should be more worrying to the GOP. Considering the New Jersey election, Samuel offers the following about Jon Corzine's victory: "the senator’s big win, with the old Democratic coalition intact and independents flocking to the camp, is very good news for Democrats." He may have a point, but earlier in the same article he offers what is perhaps the greatest hope (after gerrymandered Congressional districts) for the GOP in '06 and '08: "repudiation of one set of ideas and candidates does not lead necessarily to the embrace of other candidates."

The GOP is staggering under the weight of actually governing, but the Democratic party will have to take positive action to seize momentum. This is not 1994 with the parties reversed.

Posted by Audi Partem Alteram at 06:56 PM | Comments (0)

Rubber, meet road

Via Drudge and Daily Kos - Hotline Blog is reporting there will be a HOR vote this evening on the following resolution:

Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately.

According to HB, "Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) rose this a.m. at the House GOP Conference and suggested that they call for a vote to force Dems to show "where they stand to the American people"....Hayworth's call was met with what VanHoose described as "enthusiastic applause" from the rank-and-file GOP." Kos demonstrates why: liberals don't want to take a stand. "...[T]he smartest thing to do would probably be to simply disappear for the vote," Kos says. "A 218-0 vote would be pretty useless as a political weapon for the GOP. No need to give them the satisfaction of a vote."

So let me get this straight - Kos wants Dems to cut and run from a vote on whether to cut and run from Iraq? This vote should prove fascinating, although I have to imagine Dems would seriously consider the response Kos suggests. Their best bet is to downplay the vote as unserious gamesmanship. In the end I think it's a brilliant move that could end up shutting down the withdrawal rhetoric, at least for a while. It will also give the White House a chance to re-take the reins on Iraq.

UPDATE: Watch the debate here.

Posted by bill at 04:17 PM | Comments (0)

November 17, 2005

Pundit Review Radio - Sunday at 9:00 p.m.

Media Alert: My friends at Pundit Review Radio will be joined Sunday night by Michelle Malkin, who will be discussing her new book, Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild. The show will air at 9:00 p.m. Check it out, and let's hope PR remembers us little people when it goes big-time.

Posted by bill at 08:09 PM | Comments (0)

Miscreant U is back

I am old enough to remember the old, Jimmy Jones/Dennis Erickson Miami Hurricanes football teams - the ones that, e.g., before the 1987 Fiesta Bowl wore battle fatigues to what was to be a friendly pre-game steak fry (Penn State won); and the "Convicts" of the Notre Dame/Miami "Catholics vs. Convicts" showdowns. In those days the clarity of it all was glorious; Miami was objectively evil and my guys represented all that was good. But the Hurricanes underwent a makeover and lately the program has had less of a stench. I still loathe them, but the animus isn't what it used to be; the new Hurricanes may have all the appeal of a lipsticked pig, and Joe Paterno would probably be aghast at academic issues and God-knows-what-else, but there's simply no comparison to "Thug U."

Which brings me to this story. The Canes, it seems, may have turned the next corner (meaning, they're going backwards). Evidently some team members recorded a rap album which, wouldn't you know, is pure filth and, wouldn't you know, ended up on the Internet. Reports ESPN's Pat Forde, it is "about their shared All-American past-time of gang bangin' bizzatches. Or, as one member of the 7th Floor Crew so delicately put it, 'We 'bout to run a seven-man train all up in you.’" Forde continues:

Sorry for the crudity, but there's really no other way to convey the subject matter. My tally of the profanities laced throughout this song: 29 F-bombs, 15 references to "hos" and 18 references to "bitches." Plus many other words and phrases unfit even for cyberprint.

Ah yes, that old clarity is back. As it turns out, too, there's a strong possibility Penn State will meet Miami at January's Orange Bowl. On the strength of those predictions (back-up: E-Bay), I scooperd up eight tickets to the game. I hope Pete Giftopolous can be there.

Posted by bill at 02:33 PM | Comments (0)

Harris Polls

Americans, it seems, are pissed at everyone in Washington, and fairly so. President Bush's poll numbers are ugly, but so too are Democrats'. And while the WH can't be pleased with a 34% approval rating (Republicans, either: from 32% to 27% in 3 months)Democrats fare even worse - they're at 25%, down from 31% in August.

Dems can revel all they'd like in the White House's continued poor numbers, but while Bush holds the key to his own resurgence (Democrats seem to think Karl Rove is "back in the saddle", although I'm not sure he ever left it), the same cannot be said for the Democrats because they still have no ideas of their own.

Posted by bill at 11:21 AM | Comments (0)

November 16, 2005

Objectivity alert

Are you watching Law & Order tonight? If so, be prepared for more leftist drivel, which of course is nothing new to that show or the good folks at NBC, this time taking aim at the Minutemen border patrol, portraying them, I'd guess, as ignorant red state types (probably cast as people from Orange County or some such and driving Chevrolets - and better yet, murderers!). (H/T: Michelle Malkin.)

UPDATE 11/17: Debbie Schlussel sums things up:

the show portrayed the Minutemen--unarmed civilians who patrol the border looking for illegal aliens and report sightings to Border Patrol--as bigoted murderers. Of course, to avoid a lawsuit, the show didn't use the name, "Minutemen." But with a name like, "Countrymen Border Watch of America," it's clear whom the L&O scriptwriters were depicting.

(H/T to Bryan Preston of Junkyard Blog, who's guest-blogging at MM.)

Posted by bill at 09:40 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Shameless

President Clinton told Arab students the US invastion of Iraq was a "mistake." Whadda douche.

The Political Teen has Exhibit A and more on Democrats' twisting.

Need to do: Technorati Profile

Posted by bill at 08:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 15, 2005

Objectivity alert

Love this headline: "Bush Escalates Bitter Iraq War Debate." Oh? The White House is, at last, sharpening its talking points and responding to years of vitriol with some much-needed jabs. The AP's story continues, "Bush went on the attack after Democrats accused the president of manipulating and withholding some pre-war intelligence and misleading Americans about the rationale for war." More accurate: "Bush's recent counter-attacks respond to the newest wave of attacks by Democrats, whose view of the Iraq war hasn't changed since late 2003 but has been re-packaged several times since then, most recently following the indictment of Scooter Libby."

That's not objective either but I've never claimed to be a journalist. More to follow from the WH?

Posted by bill at 09:54 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 14, 2005

Alito's Views

I can't wait to see Senate Judiciary Democrats spar with Samuel Alito over his 1985 job application. Republicans want this fight. Do Democrats?

Posted by bill at 07:23 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Sports shorts

- Raise your hand if you're wondering whether A-Rod actually wanted to win the AL MVP. For most NY Yankee fans, any mention of it is sure to be followed with: "...but he sure sucked in the playoffs."

- If the Philadelphia Eagles ever, ever wonder whether they'd done the right thing in suspeding Terrell Owens for the season, this should end any concerns. T-minus how many days until someone drops the "R" stink bomb?

- Penn State is, I think, a Texas upset away from a Rose Bowl matchup with USC for all the marbles. They're #4 in the latest BCS poll, with one-loss Miami ahead by a bit. But there's a human element in the BCS formula - and who wouldn't want to give Joe Paterno a crack at one more national championship?

Posted by bill at 03:36 PM | Comments (0)

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain

Kofi Annan latest claptrap chastises what he calls a "chorus of misinformation" in advance of next month's World Summit on the Information Society, lecturing people like Senator Norm Coleman for raising false fears over the stated wishes of a Kofi-appointed group to put the Internet under UN's functional control. "Trust us," demands the venal Kofi.

Posted by bill at 09:00 AM | Comments (0)

November 13, 2005

Embrace the Delusion

In "Who Is Lying About Iraq?" Norman Podhoretz, apparently driven by the naive assumption that the truth is a valuable asset in politics, leaps to the aid of the Bush administration and seeks to completely discredit the claim that President Bush and those in his administration lied about the war in Iraq. For his work Podhoretz should be banned from Republican functions for at least a year, because he is diligently attacking a claim that is of only minor annoyance to Republicans now, and could be of considerable benefit to them in the future.

Before we know the Democratic and Republican nominees for 2008, we already know that 1/3 of the electorate will vote for each party, either out of party loyalty or in agreement with a basic ideological view that party supports. The remaining 1/3 of the electorate, the swing voters, will determine who is sworn in in January 2009. This reminder of the basic facts of national politics in the U.S. is necessary, because Podhoretz seems to have forgotten that the audience for claims of Bush Administration dishonesty surrounding the Iraq War are not going to vote Republican anyway. Republicans don't buy the claims, and I think it is fair to say that neither do independents such as myself. All Norman Podhoretz has done in his exhaustive essay is seek to abolish a claim that could sow the seeds for swing voter disillusionment with the Democratic Party. I can't stand Bush, and I thank Podhoretz for the gift he has given my former party, but those who want another Republican in the White House when Bush leaves should tell Norman to shut up.

Posted by Audi Partem Alteram at 10:14 PM | Comments (0)

Peter Drucker, RIP

This isn't a business blog, but I should note the passing of Peter Drucker Friday at the age of 95. A native of Austria, Drucker fled Europe for the US in 1939 and went on to become the Godfather of modern management. Drucker held (and earned the right to) contrarian views on the Information Age, and once famouslysaid, "Almost everybody today believes that nothing in economic history has ever moved as fast as, or had a greater impact than, the Information Revolution. But the Industrial Revolution moved at least as fast in the same time span, and had probably an equal impact if not a greater one." Mickey Kaus recounts:

I once telephoned Peter Drucker, sometime in the early 90s, to try to pick his brain. Of all the experts and wonks I called when I was writing a magazine column, he's the only one who had the honesty to politely say (roughly) "I'm sorry, but why should I give my ideas to you?" I had no answer for that. I've respected him ever since.

Posted by bill at 08:21 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

On dilettante sex fiends and Huffington populism

Mark Steyn's latest is a look at Warren Beatty's recent doings. LOL entertainment as usual.

Posted by bill at 08:11 PM | Comments (0)

November 11, 2005

Veterans Day

The NH Union Leader says it best:

No matter what one believes about the administration, the service personnel carrying out its orders deserve everyone's respect and admiration. These men and women are risking their lives to fight America's enemies. Many of them believe so firmly in the mission that they have signed up multiple times, at great personal danger, rather than leave the job of securing Iraq and Afghanistan to others.

On Veterans Day it is customary to honor the deserving heroes of past wars. While we do that let us also not forget the many heroes of today's War on Terror. We believe this war is a just one, as do most of the men and women fighting it. Whether you think it just or unjust, don't forget that those conducting it do so because they believe they are keeping you safe. For that, they deserve your thanks.

Here's a story of one Iraq veteran who's standing up to the wingnuts.

Posted by bill at 05:40 PM | Comments (0)

Politics and sausage

Charles Krauthammer observes that somehow, despite the country's having been at "knife's edge" paying $3.50/gallon for gas, the US remains "criminally unserious" about energy policy.

Posted by bill at 05:05 PM | Comments (0)

November 10, 2005

Dispatch from World War III

This is absurd. This morning I walked past a Marriott in lower Manhattan - one of no real significance to anything or anyone - and there were 1,2,3,4,5,6 - 7 - NYPD standing around, drinking coffee etc., no doubt thwarting the next terrorist attack. Or maybe the terrorists would just walk down the street to another hotel, or wait until tomorrow. I probably shouldn't ridicule the police, but if we didn't laugh at the NYPD's approach we might all cry.

Posted by bill at 03:42 PM | Comments (0)

Sobriety

Pat Buchanan delivers some tough love for the GOP. He dismisses last year's giddiness:

Where Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan rolled up 49-state landslides in re-election runs, Bush won 31 states, losing every state north of the Potomac and east of Ohio, two of the three great industrial states of the Midwest, Michigan and Illinois, and he was skunked on the Pacific rim. Had Kerry hammered him on trade and lost jobs in Ohio, Bush would be a one-term president.

What killed the first Bush presidency and is ruining the second is the abandonment of Reaganism and his embrace of the twin heresies of neoconservatism and Big Government Conservatism, as preached by the resident ideologues at The Weekly Standard and Wall Street Journal.

Hmm. This sounds familiar.

Posted by bill at 02:40 PM | Comments (0)

Where have you gone, Newt Gingrich?

Michelle Malkin has the skinny on conservatives' reaction to the GOP cave-in on ANWR drilling. It's now up to the Senate to keep the issue, another crumbling piece of President Bush's second-term agenda, alive.

Posted by bill at 01:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 09, 2005

Reclaiming France

In June, after the EU constitution met its demise at the hands of France's "red state" regions, John Hinderaker offered a friend's analysis of France's own red state/blue state map, which concluded that "most of the 'OUI' vote was the elite, transnational, wealthier urban areas, plus Brittany, etc. with its own agenda. The 'NON' areas were rural/industrial socialist/anti-globalists. In addition to the economic motivation I would guess that the 'NON' areas, especially the northeast and Marseilles, included a large anti-immigrant, specifically anti-Muslim vote." Hinderaker himself concluded gloomily that "there really isn't much of a movement in Europe that corresponds to American conservatism." This was, and is probably true. But with France's own demise now measured (and charitably so) by reference to how many hundreds of cars are torched each night, there are indications France's National Front party - its deep red conservative party - may be rallying. The "flashpoints" of violence outside of Paris paint a complicated picture, but if Le Pen and French nativism are indeed gathering steam, France's future may hold some promise.

Posted by bill at 08:37 PM | Comments (0)

Paristine?

Joseph Farah says it's time for France to consider its own advice and create "Paristine":

...if France has these kinds of systemic problems with its Muslim population, then it is time to partition France. It's time for an independent Muslim state to be created. After all, isn't that what France and other European nations have determined is the proper solution for Israel?

(H/T: American Thinker)

Posted by bill at 09:12 AM | Comments (0)

November 08, 2005

Oh merde alors!

Hurt pride is reported in France. May as well spread this:

(Source: here H/T: Mike S. in Chicago.)

Posted by bill at 07:32 PM | Comments (0)

A Republican fighting a Republican fight

Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN) has taken on the role of Paul Revere in exposing the "grave threat" posed by U.N.-ization of the Internet:

It sounds like a Tom Clancy plot. An anonymous group of international technocrats holds secretive meetings in Geneva. Their cover story: devising a blueprint to help the developing world more fully participate in the digital revolution. Their real mission: strategizing to take over management of the Internet from the U.S. and enable the United Nations to dominate and politicize the World Wide Web. Does it sound too bizarre to be true? Regrettably, much of what emanates these days from the U.N. does.

...

The low point...was the European Union's shameful endorsement of a plan favored by China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Cuba that would terminate the historic U.S. role in Internet government oversight, relegate both private enterprise and non-governmental organizations to the sidelines, and place a U.N.-dominated group in charge of the Internet's operation and future. The EU's declaration was a "political coup," according to London's Guardian newspaper, which predicted that once the world's governments awarded themselves control of the Internet, the U.S. would be able to do little but acquiesce.

This issue validates, I think, suspicions many hold about internationalists who seek to cede Ameriacn sovereignty to unaccountable, non-governments. The U.S., we're asked to believe, is no more moral than the "international community" and thus, no more capable of responsibly regulating the Internet (or waging war, etc.). And what to make of the fact that among the American left, despite plenty of opposition (much of it fair) to Washington's regulation of Internet speech, there's been virtually no dissent from the UN's plans to impose a system that wouldn't care a whit about, much less be accountable to the 1st Amendment.

Posted by bill at 03:54 PM | Comments (0)

Some of them want to be abused

Via Drudge Report: A Democratic Congressman evidently plagiarized a blogger's snittering over Samuel Alito, but the blogger says it's just the same to him because it's only a "bullshit meta-story": "what about the real victims, the workers denied minimum wage, family leave, or a day in court to challenge racial and gender discrimination because of Alito's decisions?"

What to say.

Posted by bill at 03:25 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 07, 2005

South Park Conservatives annexing Hollywood?

Brian Anderson, author of South Park Conservatives, says that with Hollywood reeling from its self-inflicted wounds, conservatives are experiencing a renewal in Tinsel Town. (H/T: Tech Central Station). It's essentially the next chapter in South Park Conservatives. Bernard Chapin's interview with Anderson about his book is here.

Posted by bill at 03:47 PM | Comments (0)

November 06, 2005

Sunday melange

James Poulos' latest piece for CJ is to your right, or here. James discusses "the new mayhem," "the translation of generalized upset among certain groups into wanton, indiscriminate, nihilist violence." Mark Steyn's latest is titled, "Wake up, Europe, you've a war on your hands."

On Saturday my article, a touch off-topic for a politics site, was nonetheless published over at American Thinker. Take a gander.

Are you a New Jersey voter? Don't miss George Will's article, "Corzine & Corruption."

Posted by bill at 10:22 PM | Comments (0)

And the U.N. beat goes on....

Never an organization to show any gumption, the United Nations, and more specifically the Security Council, once again showed its toothlessness despite the swirl of criticism surrounding the institution over the oil for food fiasco in Iraq. The former implacable enemies, China and Russia, which more and more resemble the China and the U.S.S.R. of the good old days of the Cold War, joined together to deny even using the word "sanctions" against the murderous Syrian regime.

No surprise here, really, since both China and Russia were knee-deep in dealing, indeed cheating--illegally and against U.N. resolutions-- with Iraq. This U.N. pusillanimity is reminiscent of the many resolutions passed and ignored by Saddam Hussein. It emboldens not only Syria but Iran which now knows, if it hadn't before, that the U.N. won't interfere with its march toward nuclear weapons in the Mideast. It's common knowledge that Israel has long been in the nuclear club but Israel at least has demonstrated some forbearance in the use of such weaponry. Iran is quite another matter. Iranian President Ahamadenejad has already threatened Israel with annihilation and what better method is there than a mushroom cloud or two to accomplish this goal? When the conflagration comes--as it no doubt will and maybe as a pre-emptive Israeli attack, once can be certain Kofi Annan will be aghast, but he shouldn't be. The U.N. will once again have failed.

Posted by Gene Blogger at 10:03 AM | Comments (0)

November 04, 2005

Royal Farce

Prince Charles and Camilla missed a stop on their New York visit. They toured Ground Zero--she in a totally inappropriate dress for the occasion, he dressed as the fop that he is--but skipped a tour of a near-by memorial. One would think that, since England was largely responsible for the untold deaths that resulted from the Irish famine--not for the failure of the potato crop, of course-- but because of the "Irish Poor Law" introduced by Sir William Gregory. England had an iron grip on Ireland in the mid-nineteenth century and when the famine struck should have provided aid for the starving Irish, but the Poor Law obviated that necessity by decreeing that any Irish farmer who owned over half an acre would get no aid. The fact was that virtually every farm WAS over half an acre. Indeed, the fact that England was exporting other Irish produce as well as livestock certainly didn't help the Irish who were starving in the streets, either. Many were forced to emigrate to America. Ireland's loss, America's gain. But, wasn't it incumbent on Charles to hoof it the short distance to the Irish Famine Memorial, a stark yet moving exhibit--appropriately situated on half an acre--to pay his respects? Irish Americans don't seek reparations but they were at least entitled to British admission of their inhumanity.

Posted by Gene Blogger at 04:06 PM | Comments (0)

Le realite et toi, vous ne vous entendez pas, n'est-ce pas?

The NY Sun delivers a great piece today on L'Eurabia. Karol at Alarming News has some notes, too, about Jacques Chirac's unwillingness to acknowledge the toxic soup of socialism's dysfunction and militant Islamism consuming gay Paris.

UPDATE: French politicians are looking for root causes:
"The young people are angry, what they are doing is to be condemned but as elected officials we can understand the reasons for their anger," says Bondy Mayor Sylvine Thomassin. "They have no work and live in stigmatised areas."

Posted by bill at 12:54 PM | Comments (0)

November 03, 2005

Tyra Bank's: America's Next Bore?

Earlier this week I had the misfortune of stumbling upon Tyra Banks and her insipid "America's Next Top Model." It was usual network fare, with wannabes showing off thick skin by trudging through a mock-up training course and getting out of breath and muddy. I must be getting older, because it was a bore. Anyway, today I see Tyra went undercover recently as a hideously obese woman, presumably because her publicist felt Tyra needed to shore up her following among the fat set and demonstrate some sensitivity. Or maybe I am a cynic.

It occurs to me, though, that Tyra (may I call her Tyra?), whatever her motivation, might be the least qualified person imaginable to gauge "disparate" treatment. The word implies two points, and consider Tyra's starting point -- America's favorite poster girl. I can't imagine that she wouldn't be shocked at how the rest of the world carries on ("you mean, like, you have to see one of those little Asian manicurists? On a Saturday morning!?"). How would Tyra feel if she put on bland looking/insecure/imperfect teeth/short/bad skin/etc. costume? ("Three guys walked by and they didn't even look at me. And then I couldn't have foie gras. How humiliating!"). Probably just as shocked.

Banks is fast becoming an insufferable twit, despite her looks. Later this month, for example, she'll air a segment on The Tyra Banks Show "on pursuing 'a beautiful booty.'" Yikes. With any more success, and armed with newfound insights and compassion someone tells Tyra she's armed with it's a certainty Tyra will have brash political opinions somewhat soon, and I'll venture she'll wind up fitting in just right in over at Huffington Post. Until then I'll be hoping she sticks with the self-help, which I can avoid altogether, and perhaps her bread and butter: skimpy bikinis.

Posted by bill at 03:39 PM | Comments (0)

Religious assault on the GOP

Having studied history as an undergrad, I always felt that Karl Rove's goal of an enduring Republican majority was the product of an active imagination and a misreading of political history more than anything else. In a Slate article today, Jacob Weisberg takes aim at Rove's dying dream, and elaborates on just how misguided it was. Perhaps the core asset that Regan had which Bush has been deprived of is the willingness of religious conservatives to accept gestures and defer their more radical goals. As Weisberg observes: "James Dobson and Pat Robertson don't understand that they would do their cause the most good by keeping their mouths shut and not scaring everyone witless." Admittedly, the Democratic Party is a veritable hotbed of political ineptitude, but the dominance of the religious right within the GOP seems destined to sabotage the party's chances for long-term politcal dominance.

Posted by Audi Partem Alteram at 03:35 PM | Comments (0)

Paper Tigers and Bogeymen

Steven Malanga, in "The Conspiracy Against the Taxpayers" seems to think that the crushing municipal and state pension obligations due to teachers, firemen, and various government functionaries have been forced on an unwitting public. I disagree.

In a perfect world, maybe taxpayers would have demanded fairness from the beginning, but this is not a perfect world, and we are not perfect individuals. Sadly, all taxpayers are complicit in the long history of simply paying off workers in the public sector. Teachers unions may be powerful, but so is the pervasive fear among parents of teacher quality (which, sadly can lead parents to support higher teacher salaries even as they agitate for the right to remove inferior teachers from the classroom).

Despite the many flaws of taxpayers, and the nearly crushing burdens (well summarized in Steven Malanga's article) of our long-standing willingness to bribe the public sector, a simple truth remains: the unions are dying. The greater the discrepancy between the benefits and security afforded public sector vs. private sector employees, the harder it will be to justify those differences. Taxpayers are only now beginning to feel the true weight of our collective largess to the public sector, and as the scope of the obligations becomes clear, we will find a way to relieve ourselves of these burdens or punish the organizations that championed them, or both.

Steven Malanga needs to calm down, he is awed by the strength of paper tigers, and frightened by union bogeymen.

Posted by Audi Partem Alteram at 01:13 AM | Comments (0)

November 02, 2005

What is it good for, anyway?

John Podhoretz says there will be no "all-out political war" over Samuel Alito, just a lot of ugliness. Citing Alito's "complicated" record on abortion, Podhoretz says filibustering Alito won't be a viable option for Democratis since they'd stand to lose a lot more should the "nuclear option" be invoked. "Barring some shocking revelation," Podhoretz predicts, "Alito is in by Christmas."

Posted by bill at 01:39 PM | Comments (0)

Dems try to stay on message, even in the absence of one.

Yesterday Bill Frist complained that Democrats had hijacked the Senate, but it's probably as accurate for Democrats to complain Harry Reid and the wingnuts who love him so had hijacked the Democratic Party. This isn't anything new, but yesterday may well have marked the demise of Daniel Patrick Moynihan liberalism. Reid and his compadres, for whom Plame-gate had become a proxy fight over pre-war WMD intelligence, must've been bitterly disappointed last week when Karl Rove, whom they've never learned to defeat in an election, wasn't indicted. They'd also hoped Dick Cheney-burton, their other anti-Christ, would find himself wearing a grocery bag hat, but that won't happen either. Last week was indeed a bad one for them, and October a terrible month.

It's absurd to believe the White House would't use the Alito announcement to draw attention from Libby's indictment and its residual chatter. But Reid, too, hated losing momentum in the headlines. The Senate's Rule 22 permits two Senators to close the American public out of deliberations, and history suggests it is to be reserved for monumental, even grave issues facing the Republic. That Reid had the capital to invoke Rule 22 to advance a brainless vendetta suggests the demise of the Democratic Party is all but complete.

Posted by bill at 10:49 AM | Comments (0)

Take The Key And Lock Them Up: Not That Easy

One can read the Washington Post and conclude that thirty detainees can probably be handled in a less counterproductive way than keeping them locked in a Romanian dungeon supervised only by CIA phantoms.

But then one can move on to the New York Times and grasp fairly quickly that the linchpin of the question of detention and interrogation is the legal matter of specificity in standards.

Detainee policy is policy not because a cabal of sadists enjoy the bedtime fantasy of America's swarthy captives taking the lash halfway around the world. The CIA holds its victims in "secret prisons" because it's unclear what else to do with them, and detainee policy "sharply divides" administration lawyers and staff because the necessity of clear guiding language is as elusive as it is paramount. State Department officials, military top brass, Pentagon staff, and even White House loyalists understand the stakes and dilemmas...

Posted by James G. Poulos at 09:46 AM | Comments (0)

November 01, 2005

Eurabia?

My, oh my! Whatever is happening in France? Could it be that Tony Blankley is correct in his new book, The West's Last Chance...Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations? Blankley contends the crush of Muslim immigration in Western Europe could very well be its downfall since the new immigrants have little or no interest in assimilation and are intent on creating a "Eurabia" in Europe. The recent riots in Paris and its environs could very well be a reflection of the future.

Posted by Gene Blogger at 10:35 AM | Comments (0)

Opening volleys on Alito

Blanton at Red State reports that Democratic Senators may be backing off yesterday's bluster by Barbara Boxer et al. over a potential filbuster of Alito:

The Democrat strategy that is shaping up appears to be delay, stall, and pray for a silver bullet. The Democrats already realize a filibuster is not going to be successful and Alito will get confirmed without something very damaging coming out.

Meanwhile, the Associated Press breaks the following news: "Abortion emerged as a potential fault line," adding that Alito's mother "shed some light" [note: on what?] with this revelation: "'Of course, he's against abortion,' 90-year-old Rose Alito said of her son, a Catholic." So what? Hillary Clinton would say the same thing, and the abortion industry would claim to agree, too. Who on earth would admit to being "pro-"abortion? Margaret Sanger, perhaps?

One thing is assured as the battle ensues: the debate will sink to depths we'd rather not contemplate. With Ted Kennedy on the case, that much is a "metaphysical certitude," to borrow a phrase from John McLaughlin.

Posted by bill at 09:56 AM | Comments (0)