Good Speech!

Thanks to digital recorders (I have the DishNetwork PVR) I was able to watch the President's speech tonight.

ANNAPOLIS, Md. - President Bush gave an unflinching defense of his war strategy on Wednesday, refusing to set a timetable for U.S. troop withdrawals and asserting that once-shaky Iraqi troops are proving increasingly capable. Democrats dismissed his words as a stay-the-course speech with no real strategy for success.

1) Quagmire? No. Significant progress in the political, economic, and security fronts. Quantitative analysis of the training of Iraqis.

2) No Plan? He's put one on the web if you don't get it. Ten points to Senator Lieberman for saying that there is a plan and it is working. I wish we had ten more Joe Lieberman's in the Democratic Senate.

3) Stubborn refusal to adapt? No, several examples of things we have changed -- no teary mea culpas, but examples of adaptation to field exigencies.

4) Pull-out? Timetables? No. Victory. Achieve our goals and bring the troops home to heroes' welcome.

Well done, Mr. President! The Democratic rebuttals seem hollow and defeatist. Leader Pelosi has endorsed Rep. John Murtha's pullout. Do they really want to be the party of defeat?

Pravda

The Interweb continues to amaze.

Behold the latest example.

The Hand In The Cookie Jar

Before pstupidonymous closed, I blogged quite a bit about Pennsylvania's legislature's shenanigans.

You might recall that they gave themselves a 16 to 34% pay raise, attempted to take the raise before re-election (unconstitutionally), stuck with it for months of voter rage, and then bravely repealed it. Oh, and a Supreme Court Justice lost a retention election as part of the angst.

Anyway, because that pay raise was just too big, a lot of people are looking into other legislative activities.

Like this one.

A Team 4 investigation by Jim Parsons finds that Pennsylvania taxpayers have spent more than $2 million since 2002 on the use of two state passenger planes.

You knew state lawmakers gave themselves a pay raise. But Team 4 has learned some of them are flying around in the official state plane -- sometimes to go to resorts, and sometimes to fly home for the weekend.

Parsons: "Why do you fly on the state planes?"

House Minority Leader Bill DeWeese: "I think, notwithstanding the fact that you're a perfect gentleman, the question borders on vacuity."

It's not like trains from Pittsburgh or Philadelphia aren't available either.

What a waste of money. Nevermind the abuse vacations and commuting, for which they also get $600/monthly for a car lease and a per diem travel expense.

But Alex, it's only two million dollars. Yes. But it's another symptom of the problem.

Rs and Ds in Harrisburg just don't care anymore. They're in. That's all that matters to them... and the power that position gives them.

Internet Tele

I think Sugarchuck will forgive me if I call him a luddite He'd drive 300 miles to get a pair of EV34 tubes or some original 1948 wire to wrap pickups, but wasn't sure about computers and such.

He confessed that he has finally joined been assimilated into the iPod culture. It's a slippery slope, friend. It starts with an iPod, but then descends to a Fender Telecaster with an "Intel Equipped" logo:

18 November 2005 - Intel has created probably the world’s first super-charged guitar that will allow you to surf the web in-between songs.

The company has teamed up with Fender to create a concept guitar that explores the possibilities and redefines the term ‘music on the move’ – an internet-enabled super guitar.

Beginning with the iconic FENDER Telecaster - made famous by legends from Bruce Springsteen to Franz Ferdinand – the ‘surf guitar’ is the world’s first to allow you to download and playback your favourite riffs from the Internet without touching the strings, so you can sound like Bo Diddley while doing diddly-squat.

Long Tail in TV

Instapundit links to a New York Magazine article that captures my belief that the "Long Tail" is coming to TV. Adam Sternbergh takes the disparate occurrences of iPod video with iTunes TV shows, the Serenity movie, and fan reaction to a hiatus in FOX's "Prison Break."

I wish he'd use the term "Long Tail" because I think that is what is really significant here but he captures my ideas and predictably writes them more clearly and cleanly than I could.

He joins me as well is dreaming of a DVD only second season of Firefly. Sternbergh suggests that a million Firefly fans are out there and willing to pay $39.95 for a season (If you're listening, Joss, I'm in for $50).

Alas, Firefly, Season 2 is not likely. But the broader point of a huge shift in programming and marketing holds:

What do we know about TV? Here’s the basic model: Networks air particular shows at particular times on particular nights; say, Commander in Chief on ABC, every Tuesday at nine. These shows are available to viewers for free, subsidized by intrusive blocks of ads—a leftover from the days when TV was magically plucked from the air by your rooftop antennae, like radio with pictures. A TV show’s ratings determines both its sustainability (on the network schedule) and its profitability (in terms of how much its advertisers can be charged). These ratings are calculated by following the habits of a small number of representative viewers, tracked by the Nielsen company, whose preferences are then extrapolated for the entire audience. The prime economic directive of TV, therefore, has always been, TV doesn’t sell shows to viewers: It sells viewers to advertisers.

It's coming and I think it will offer more and better choice. If I add the money I spend on Satellite (~$600/year) to my DVD purchases ($600 worth of Buffy/Angel/Firefly, tons more on British Comedy), I have a large amount of entertainment dollars I could throw at getting what I want.

An Immigration Win for the G.O.P.

You read that right, I'm the only one calling it and I'll be collecting I-told-you-sos next November.

The Conventional Wisdom states that immigration is a portentous train wreck for the GOP. Tommy Tancredo will split off the populists, Bill O'Reilly will stir up the pot, and the WSJ Ed Page crowd will splinter and the Grand Ol' Party is to be rend in twain. Until last night, I believed it. We cover the whole spectrum here at ThreeSources and it seems unlikely to pull us all together.

Sure, there is hand-wringing today after the president’s speech yesterday. Pat Buchanan was unhappy last night (there goes the Palm-Beach-County Vote!), Michelle Malkin is displeased this morning, Glenn Reynolds has a list of P-oh'd bloggers.

The limb
The immigration debate will close successfully because the two sides' desires are not mutually exclusive. You can't raise and lower taxes, can't pull the troops home and send more -- but you can strengthen border security and institute a guest worker program. In fact the two are complimentary and I cannot see either working without the other.

The President sends the House troops in to craft a Tancredo-esque enforcement bill. The Senate opens debate on McCain-Kennedy (Love the bill, hate the name), and (I am borrowing from Fred Barnes here) the final compromise is crafted in committee.

The President, to my dismay, has shown that he will sign anything, so an immigration bill with security and legality will be passed. The Wall Street Journal folk and I will wish it went further to provide labor, and the isolationists will wish there were more emphasis on mines for the Rio Grande. But both sides will shrug their shoulders, be glad they got a Republican bill, and move on to the next election.

Review Corner: Batman Begins

I blogged favorably about "Charlie & The Chocolate Factory's" displaying good, Schumpeterian economics.

Well, I saw "Batman Begins" this weekend and parity is conserved. The movie has good narrative, texture, and acting. It's well worth a look (I could not say the same for "Wart of the Worlds" but these are admittedly not my genre!).

But the Hollywood twaddle that was espoused in "Batman" is grating. The comic-book dystopia of Gotham clearly suffers from corrupt government. We are told every judge and cop is on the take -- only a brave (and cute of course) D.A. will fight crime and corruption.

Yet we are assured that people are poor and the depression continues because rich folks, unlike Bruce Wayne's altruistic dad, are too greedy and won't give to the poor. Dad rejected business to practice medicine; he gave a monorail to the city so that poor folk would have good public transportation; he begged to get the other rich people to do their part...

Good movie, bad economics, jk gives it 2.5 stars.

It strikes me that they offer DVD's in a "Director's Cut." How about an "Economists' Cut?" You would offer "Seabiscuit" with the sad bolt-on New Deal nonsense stripped out. I'd buy that. "Michael Douglas's "Wall Street" would be stripped to nine minutes.

Review Corner: Why Buffy Matters

I'm frequently accused of taking Buffy, The Vampire Slayer and Angel too seriously, but there is a growing body of scholarship on "The Buffyverse."

A good entry point to it would be Robin Wilcox's "Why Buffy Matters." Wilcox is a serious Dickensian scholar (she studied Charles; she isn't a hundred years old) and a more serious Buffy fan. She has promoted some of her college lectures to a book of literary criticism. She quotes from this growing body of work and makes quite a few associations and finds allusions that I would never have caught in a million viewings.

The language is academic and she brings her own biases. For instance she quotes some that hold the DoubleMeat Palace episodes reflect anti-globalism, though, to be fair, she doesn't quite line up for this. Every object that is not completely spherical is a phallic symbol to her (well, Ms. Wilcox, the network did not want guns on a teen show, they pretty much have to have some knives and swords...)

Anybody who can overlook some of that will enjoy it, I certainly did.

The jk Still Loves The Manolo

Most of you know me, and know that fashion is not a huge priority for "the jk."

Virginia Postrel's "The Substance of Style" changed my business attitudes sharply. And made me realize that I should change my slovenly nature.

More importantly, I have always belittled the vain. While the shallowly vain deserve it, I now realize that part of my over-arching philosophy is to accept the bounty of this great earth, and the affluence that our freedom has provided.

Who says it best? Today, it's definitely The Manolo as he covers Black Friday:

1) Everyone has the right to be super fantastic. The Manolo he is the proud and strong believer in the personal freedoms, in the ability of the autonomous individual to dress in manner he or she desires (even if the manner chosen it is awful).

2) Manolo loves the Capitalism! Nothing is more worthy of the ridicule than the fashion sense of the dictators, politburos, autocrats, and tyrants. For the example, the most horrible, deadening, life-sucking piece of the fashion ever invented, it is the Mao suit, for it reduces the individual to the mere cog in the ideological machine. Happily we live in the system in which the marketplace it is free to deliver to the peoples the beautiful clothes, enabling each individual to dress in the manner he or she chooses.

Hat-tip: Insty

Biased Economic Reporting

Rather than hijack AlexC's post onto a tangent, let me offer my own post.

Every decline in the stock market, every piece of bad economic news is tied to the President. Every good bit of news is ignored, downplayed, or attributed to sunspots.

Tigerhawk grabs this in a great post, "The rally in the stock market: It's Bush's fault."

The stock market hit a 4 1/2 year high on Friday (Pajamas Media round-up here). The fall rally reflects the muscular American economy, which managed to produce economic growth in the third quarter at almost triple the rate of the Euro zone. The comparative American strength was particularly impressive in light of the hurricanes: As I wrote a few weeks ago, not a single European city was destroyed this year (although I suppose Paris had a close call).

Today's news also forces me to remember -- against my will, to be sure -- the tradition at the New York Times of linking short term swings in the financial markets -- at least when they are negative -- to the policies of the Bush administration. On April 16, 2005, for example, the Times ran a front page story with the headline "Stocks plunge to lowest point since election," suggesting that it was the election that had something to do with the "plunge."

We eagerly await the front page story with this headline: "Stocks soar to highest point since before September 11, 2001". We're fairly sure, however, that we won't see it in the Times.

But to admit it, as I tried to spin the comment, would be to imply that tax cuts might have worked and we can't have that. We must raise taxes and return to Rubenomics immediately -- only then will good news make the front page.

Perhaps I am over-sensitive, but this AP headline blew me away: "Big Sales Lure Reluctant Holiday Shoppers." The implication is that consumers are "reluctant" to spend money in such turbulent times, and that steep discounts are required to pry these recalcitrant wallets open.

Clear implication, yes But the story is not about that at all. The lede is about some guy who didn't want to go shopping because of the crowds, a guy who just went to an outdoors store and bought a few presents.

[Richard] Lane didn't pick up a new iPod, laptop or plasma screen TV, but he knocked off a chunk of his shopping list with one visit to the Orvis outdoor store.

"When Orvis has a 50-percent-off sale, you can't ignore it," said Lane, who otherwise would likely have stayed home. "I never shop on this day."

By the end of lunch hour Friday, Lane stood outside and waited for his wife to pick him up. On the ground next him sat a new fly fishing rod, hip waders and a collar for his bird dog.

The sixth paragraph carries the buried lede; "Today, things look really good."

UPDATE: Irwin Stetzer's piece in the Weekly Standard is good as well:

THE WASHINGTON POST doubted that Americans would enjoy the Thanksgiving holiday, announcing on the morning of turkey day that 61 percent of Americans are "anxious about money." So anxious, in fact, that the very next day between 130 million and 150 million headed to the malls to spend a sum that exceeds the GDP of three quarters of the world's countries. Wal-Mart alone racked up some $2 billion in sales.

Syrian Incursions

UK Telegraph

Syria has accused the United States of launching lethal military raids into its territory from Iraq, escalating the diplomatic crisis between the two countries as the Bush administration seeks to step up pressure on President Bashar Assad's regime.

Major General Amid Suleiman, a Syrian officer, said that American cross-border attacks into Syria had killed at least two border guards, wounded several more and prompted an official complaint to the American embassy in Damascus.

The Dark Side of Capitalism

The Black Friday hype.

The deep discounts Black Friday is known for and a shortage of those items turned people ugly Friday morning at two New Jersey stores.

"It was a brawl, a little brawl. It was terrible," witness John Knight said.

At the Wal-Mart in Hamilton Township, Atlantic County, witnesses said Black Friday became "Black Eye" Friday among shoppers early Friday morning.

"Pushing, hitting, everything," shopper Yolanda Williams said.

"It was a big crowd, like 50 people, crowded in," shopper Ivanessa Rosado said.

Merchandise in short supply triggered very short tempers.

"They were fighting over the laptop or the Xbox, and they ran out of both of them. I think the store should have had more on them. They knew there was going to be a big dash like that," Knight said.

Authorities said it took a dozen police officers to control a disorderly crowd in the store's electronics department after shoppers began forcibly removing items from the area and forcing their way past other people at cash registers. It was all part of a violent and chaotic morning that required police from two communities to descend on the Wal-Mart and a nearby Circuit City, after crowds of more than 1,000 people at each store engaged in what police describe as mob-like behavior, which began with a rush to get inside around 6 a.m.

I must admit, I once waited in line at 5am in front of a mall inorder to participate in the mad Furby rush of '98. It got pretty heated as the toy store was in the mall kind of between two entrances. When the doors opened, it was a mad dash for the Kay-Bee. It was ugly. But I scored two Furbies which I promptly flipped for a handsome proft.

Capitalism ain't all bad, after all.

Here Come Da Judge

I may be Threesources.com first elected official.

On election day, last November 8th, my wife wrote my name in for Judge of Elections. A position for which not a soul was running.

As luck would have it, I tied for the win with someone else. As mandated by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, a drawing was held today where the winners had to pull numbers out of a hat. (Not really a hat, more of a box... it might have been some sort of a candy box).

The lowest number between one and ten wins.

And I drew a one!

So what does Judge of Elections do?

The Judge of Elections heads the election board for a given division and supervises the conduct of the polling place. He or she ensures that voters are registered within the division, prevents fraud and other errors, and accurately tabulates the votes at the end of election day. It is the responsibility of the Judge of Elections to to protect an honest election by making sure that only properly registered citizens are permitted to vote, that fraud and mistakes are prevented, and that a true and correct report of the returns is made to the county’s Board of Elections at the end of the day.

But seriously, if I could be the Judge of Elections for a precinct in Philadelphia, it'd be really neat. There are rumours of some amazing election chicanery. It'd be interesting to be a judge in the polling place that's a bar.

But where I live, there really isn't much (any?) electoral hanky-panky. It's pretty orderly, though the MoveOn.org crowd was kind of close to the fire-house polling place back in aught-four.

Equally amazing is that my wife also tied, (no, not for Judge of Elections), but for Inspector of Elections.

But Rachael didn't not draw the lowest number. (A ten actually).

HOWEVER, there are two Inspectors of Elections.

Two Inspectors are elected for each polling place. In the municipal election (1997, 2001, 2005, etc), the candidate receiving the highest number of votes becomes the "Majority" Inspector. The candidate receiving the second highest vote total assumes the position of "Minority" Inspector. The Inspectors form a bipartisan board under the Judge of Elections. On election day, typically one Inspector checks voters' registration documents while the other Inspector prepares the certificates authorizing voters to cast their ballots.

Go fig.

Amazingly, we weren't the only tied elections in the county this time. There were at least ten other races. Most seemed to be for these two positions, and I suspect they were all write-ins. There was a kid (obviously 18) there with his parents who were probably wondering what he got himself into.

In conclusion.
The write-in still works.

Every vote counts. Especially when there is only one.

Your wife will always vote for you, even if you don't. ;)

Kaplan in TNR

Lawrence Kaplan gives the Democrats a little harsh medicine -- in their own book! Here's the start of his TNR article:

The war in Iraq has generated, among other things, a new tradition in the media. Every time former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft criticizes the war--and he has done so on nearly a dozen occasions--the press advertises his latest gripe as evidence of a split in conservative ranks. Not surprisingly, then, his latest fusillade, delivered a few weeks ago in a New Yorker article by Jeffrey Goldberg, was once more touted as breaking news. It wasn't. Far more telling was the chorus of leading Democrats, liberal columnists, and left-leaning bloggers--that is, voices that once could be counted on to condemn Scowcroft as the second-rate Kissinger he is--who emerged to applaud the octogenarian devotee of realpolitik for his candor. Which brings us to a second tradition produced by the war: liberals against liberalism.

Lest there be any confusion about the inclinations of the former general with whom so many "progressive" voices have found common cause, his approach to foreign policy resembles that of a man who, on seeing an elderly woman being bludgeoned on the sidewalk, crosses to the other side of the street. This is the man, after all, who toasted the architects of the Tiananmen Square massacre not six months after they perpetrated it. Who found it "painful to watch Yeltsin rip the Soviet Union brick by brick away from Gorbachev." Who counseled sitting on the sidelines as Saddam Hussein massacred the very Shia his administration had encouraged to rise up. Who says that "some people really don't want to be free." And who rightly calls himself "a cynic about human nature.'

Cynicism, alas, is enjoying a vogue in the party of Woodrow Wilson. "Just as Scowcroft is doing," Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen points out, "it is the Democrats who often speak the language of realism that seems downright uncaring."

What we have in their place is a crude and cheap version of realism, which, although ostensibly a method of analysis that eschews ideology, is rapidly becoming an ideology of its own. Unfortunately, its key tenets as laid out by the Gary Harts and Paul Krugmans of this world--non-interference, narrowly defined vital interests, a foreign policy scrubbed of idealism--provide no adequate response to the war of ideas in which we're presently engaged and will be long after the war in Iraq draws to a close. Nor do its proponents factor in the steep moral price bound to be exacted by trading in Woodrow Wilson for Brent Scowcroft. Is it really necessary to point out how deeply amoral U.S. foreign policy was during the Kissinger and Scowcroft years? If idealism has failed in Iraq, the solution lies in the realm of means, not in abandoning idealism--and certainly not in the cynicism of Brent Scowcroft.

Be Thankful!

The WSJ Ed Page is! Finding five things to appreciate at the end of 2005. My favorite is the first:

Eliot Spitzer's campaign for Governor. Now that the New York Attorney General is running for higher office, especially one that would make him responsible for the state's economic progress, he seems to be rethinking his Lord High Executioner reputation. This week he dropped his case against another bit player in the mutual fund timing scandal, his second retreat in a month. If we had known his candidacy would do this much to stop overzealous prosecution, we might even have encouraged him.

The Timetable

Iraq Withdrawal Timetable Set

This is a watershed moment: The timetable for withdrawal of coalition forces has now been set by the only entity capable of doing so: the Iraqi government.

Sunni leaders have been pressing the Shiite-majority government to agree to a timetable for the withdrawal of all foreign troops. The statement recognized that goal, but did not lay down a specific time -- reflecting instead the government's stance that Iraqi security forces must be built up first. [emphasis mine]

(...)

"By the middle of next year we will be 75 percent done in building our forces and by the end of next year it will be fully ready," he [Iraqi Interior Minister Bayan Jabr] told the Arabic-language satellite station Al-Jazeera.

Whether or not this move was prompted by or even orchestrated by the Bush administration, it is a necessary step for progress in the region. Iraqis are taking responsibility for themselves.

Another One Bites The Dust

To be fair, like Rep Murtha, I am not changing my position. I continue to hope that the GOP does not run a senator for president in 2008.

Senator Allen of Virginia was a darling of Conservatives and I saw him deliver a pretty good speech. He was on C-SPAN speaking to a Republican group somewhere (I know, I know, I am Mr. Excitement incarnate).

But I think he is off the list today. The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page has exposed him as a protectionist: hanging with Senator Byrd to protect insane anti-dumping laws with perverse incentives (corporations can keep the fines if they get the government to sue).

Not pretty:

We're not surprised to see the signatures of Ohio Senators Mike DeWine and George Voinovich or Georgia's Saxby Chambliss on that letter. They're flacking for their home-state companies (see above) and no one will mistake them as Presidential timber. The really surprising name on the list, however, is George Allen, the Virginia Republican who has become the darling of some conservatives as they contemplate life after President Bush.

We wonder if Mr. Allen really knows what he's doing here. Byrd distributions in Virginia in 2004 totaled a mere $5.5 million. About $4.6 million went to Lafarge North America, and $924,000 to Titan America LLC -- both building material suppliers that stand to benefit from such protectionism as the 55% anti-dumping duty levied on Mexican cement.

In return for doing their bidding, Mr. Allen is cementing his own reputation as an opponent of free trade. No avowed protectionist has won the White House since Herbert Hoover in 1928 (and we know how that turned out), so backing Byrd doesn't look like a smart political strategy. Worse, it raises doubts about Mr. Allen's grasp of economic policy.

Modern Presidents of both parties have been ardent free-traders because they realize it is in the national interest. That's why Mr. Bush is now devoting a great deal of his time and diplomacy to advancing the Doha round of global trade talks. Byrd contradicts that policy, which is why a growing number of national business groups -- from home builders and construction companies to food processors and retailers -- are organizing to fight Byrd. They see both U.S. exports and consumers losing under Byrd to a handful of inefficient U.S. companies and their savvy Beltway lawyers. Which side are Mr. Allen and his GOP colleagues on?

Credibility

I was reading a white-phosphorus related post on Protein Wisdom this morning, and read the following in a citation from DailyKos.

Saddam tortured, we torture. Saddam used WP chemical weapons against insurgents and civilians, we use WP chemical weapons against insurgents and civilians.

Like torture, the apologists try to justify our use of such abhorrent techniques, oblivious to the fact that our moral standing is in tatters and our crediblity beyond repair. We aren’t just losing the war in Iraq, we are losing our credibility in the world.

I say "losing," but by the metric of the chicken-little "falling credibility" crowd, we've actually been hemorraging it. And hemorraging it for years.

Which begs the question, "How much more credibility do we have left to lose, if we haven't lost it all?"

Either we're the nation-state equivalent of the Black Knight from Monty Python's Quest for the Holy Grail, or we have not really lost any.

I would venture to suppose that there are nations out there saying, "Gosh, those Americans are really paying for doing the right thing." Those nations are providing any kind of support they can to the Global War on Terror. Nations like Mongolia. Once a giant in terms of warring, now a very minor international player are pledging support... as are the nations of new Europe.

Those nations remind of the parable I once heard while sitting in a pew. (Luke 21, if you're interested) The rich man tithes a lot to the Church because he has it, the poor widow tithes to the Church because that's all she has. It's sacrifices like those from nations that don't have it to sacrifice, who understand credibility.

Credibility from those nations is important... and worthwhile.

Included in that list are our steadfast friends the British and the Australians. With whom we share a common cultural bond.

Where it has been lost, what did it matter? Those nations likely did not share common interests with us *cough*le France*cough*)... or they see advantages to staying friendly with us. (ahem, China)

Our Republic's credibility has not been lost. Not to any nation that matters. On the contrary, we have gained it in the eyes of those people who understand the fight and the sacrifices at hand.

GOP Wins One

Yes, I've been hard the GOP Senate. But I must salute them when they win:

WASHINGTON -- Bruce Springsteen famously was "born in the USA," but he's getting scorned in the U.S. Senate.

An effort by New Jersey's two Democratic senators to honor the veteran rocker was shot down Friday by Republicans who are apparently still miffed a year after the Boss lent his voice to the campaign of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.
The chamber's GOP leaders refused to bring up for consideration a resolution, introduced by Sens. Frank Lautenberg and Jon Corzine, that honored Springsteen's long career and the 1975 release of his iconic album, "Born to Run."

No reason was given, said Lautenberg spokesman Alex Formuzis. "Resolutions like this pass all the time in the U.S. Senate, usually by unanimous consent," he said.

Telephone calls to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's office seeking comment were not immediately returned.

Hat-tip: The Corner [K-Lo]

Santorum Blog

AlexC, shrinking violet that he is, is too humble to post about his new project. He is listed as "Senior Writer" to SantorumBlog.com. You gotta check it out!

A Pragmatist Plea

Hugh Hewitt links to a Byron York Corner post today that is germane to our current discussions. The Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee is getting its ass kicked in fund raising, though neither Hewitt nor York tend to use the word "ass" in their writings.

Receipts 10/1/05 to 10/31/05:
Republican Natl Cmte $7,576,417
Democratic Natl Cmte $5,224,453

National Republican Congressional Cmte $4,210,410
Democratic Congressional Campaign Cmte $1,582,746

National Republican Senatorial Campaign Cmte $2,350,853
National Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte $3,030,580

Now, I just cannot fathom giving perfectly good dollars that will find their way to people whose thinking is politically orthogonal to mine. I'm not going to give to the Congressional GOP Cmte and have them funnel it to the 25 losers who killed ANWR.

And the Senate? As Andrew Sullivan would say, puh-leeze! Ted Stevens’s dedication to small government, George Voinovich's dedication to cutting taxes, Olympia Snowe's devotion to energy production, the cut-and-run-lite brigade, Bill Frist's and Chuck Grassley's concept of "bold leadership.." I gotta stop, I'm in physical pain here...

I don't want Harry Reid crowned "Mr. Leader." I call myself a pragmatist and a fan of the big tent. But I have never before felt that a large swath of the party does not believe what I do.

So, ThreeSources sages, what do I do in '06? Give only to individual candidates and risk losing the Senate and House? Hold my nose and give to the national party? I don't give large amounts, but I have tried to give because I believe it to create a better country.

The Long Tail Comes to TV

After all the early jokes about "500 channels and nothing to watch," even the detractors must admit that choice has been great for TV quality. No, the sitcoms haven't gotten any better but they are sure easy to avoid. I watch clips during football games, which is just enough to remind me how bad they are.

Cable was the first Schumpeterian gale. Everybody paid attention. But the effect of TiVo has been underplayed. I now select from all the channels all week: a huge increase in choice.

When I watch a broadcast show, it's usually on DVD. People are talking about "Lost" and I just learned that David Fury is a writer; he was one of my favorite "Buffy" writers (dude wrote "Fool For Love" in Season Five!). If I watch, I'll probably just buy the DVDs (like everyone else seems to). I caught "Buffy" and "Firefly" long after they were off. Even though "Angel" was still on, I just waited for DVDs so that I could watch in order and uninterrupted.

This is "Long Tail" TV watching and the drawback is expense. Twelve seasons of Buffy and Angel at $45 or so, a rack of British Comedies and I have quite an investment in my entertainment cocoon. But this is going to bring individual control and choice without expense:

TiVo Plans to Allow Unlimited TV-Show Downloads to iPods (paid site, sorry!)
Since Apple introduced a new iPod that plays video last month, users of the device have been able to buy episodes from only five television series produced by just one media company, Walt Disney Co. Soon, virtually any show that airs on TV will be available for watching on an iPod, courtesy of TiVo Inc.

TiVo Monday announced a plan to let users of its popular digital video recorders download any TV show stored on their TiVo boxes onto iPods. The move, which TiVo is making without Apple Computer Inc.'s involvement, has the potential to greatly expand the selection of shows iPod users can watch on their devices beyond such fare as "Desperate Housewives" and "Lost," the two hit series from Disney's ABC network that Apple is selling for $1.99 an episode through its iTunes Music Store. TiVo's plan is rankling some TV executives as the networks seek to habituate users to pay to download shows, beyond what they may already pay for cable or satellite-TV service.

Shares of TiVo rose Monday on the news, up 5.7% to $5.57 in morning trading on the Nasdaq Stock Market.

Windows XP "N" Not Selling

Thie outcome would come as no surprise to Threesources regulars.

Three of the largest PC vendors worldwide and a major UK retail store still have no plans to sell Microsoft's media player-free version of Windows, almost six months after it was released.

Microsoft started offering a version of Windows without a bundled media-player, known as Windows XP N, in June this year, to comply with last year's antitrust ruling by the European Commission.

Given that the differential cost between Windows XP with WMP installed and Windows XP N (WMP not installed) is ZERO, and you end up having to download WMP anyway, what's the point?

It's not like Microsoft was making any money on selling you the media player.

Such stupidity can only spring from the loins of government.

A European Commission spokesman refused to comment on the Microsoft antitrust case on Thursday. In June, when ZDNet UK questioned the EC about the lack of interest in Windows XP N, a spokesman said it was "too early to start drawing conclusions".

The continuing reluctance of PC vendors to sell Windows XP N raises serious questions over the effectiveness of the EU's antitrust ruling, particularly as Microsoft has been allowed to offer Windows XP N for the same price as the standard version of Windows XP.

Am I losing my mind? I'm not an economist, but this doesn't strike me as that complicated.

Cheap Politics?

Most of the Republicans around here were so happy to see a little spine in the GOP House, we may have cheered prematurely. Larry Kudlow makes a great point:

It is not serious. It demeans the House. It totally politicizes the debate. It is a ploy and a rather weak one at that.

"Calling their bluff," as so many Republicans are arguing to embarrass Murtha and the Democrats, is an exceedingly ham-handed way to make a point. Duncan Hunter is also a good man, but this is not the way to do it.

Why not state the resolution in the affirmative? " We pledge to deploy troops in Iraq until the mission of liberation, freedom and democracy is satisfactorily completed." And why not seek to gain as much bi-partisan political support as possible? This would truly help the mission, and the troops.

Capatalism Under Fire

I blogged before about medical tourism in India. It's a great example of comparative advantage: a highly-educated sector of a developing nation creates and sells something of real value.

They make money, educated Indian medical professionals don't have to emigrate to the UK or USA, patients save money and get a renewed appreciation for Indian people and culture beyond Chicken Marsala -- it's great! Who could object?

Well, Indian socialists and the BBC. The Steel Deal links to just such complaints.

"It is time for the government to pay more attention to improving the health of Indians rather than to enticing foreigners from affluent countries with offers of low cost operations and convalescent visits to the Taj Mahal "

Truth in Advertising

Who said there's no more truth in advertising?

Two Florida lawyers are in the judicial doghouse for billing themselves as "pit bulls."

John Pape and Marc Chandler of Fort Lauderdale drew the ire of the Florida Supreme Court with an ad that featured a mean-looking, spike-collared pit bull and told potential customers to call "1-800-PIT-BULL."

Afterall, all hell might break loose.

The court ruled the ads and phone number violate bar rules that ban ads describing the quality of the legal work offered.

Chief Justice Barbara Pariente said the ad, if allowed to stand, would open the door to images of "sharks, wolves, crocodiles and piranhas" to advertise services.

(tip to The Steel Deal)

Voting to Leave Iraq

What has happened to the GOP leadership lately?

House Republicans, sensing an opportunity for political advantage, maneuvered for a quick vote and swift rejection Friday of a Democratic lawmaker's call for an immediate troop withdrawal from Iraq.

"We want to make sure that we support our troops that are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan," said Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill. "We will not retreat."

Are the Republicans going to start acting like a majority?

The Dems might regret this vote. If they vote "wrong" they will be labelled a) pro-war by the left or b) "cut and runners" by the right.

The final count won't be close. We'll stay in Iraq to finish the job.

Elephants Memories

I'm really enjoying the ClubForGrowth Blog. I saw this article over there.

An enraged Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) confronted Reps. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colo.) last week, excoriating them for lampooning his notorious “Bridge to Nowhere” as a multibillion-dollar boondoggle.

The chairman of the Transportation Committee had caught wind that the $223 million bridge was indeed going nowhere — and most House members learned yesterday that the project, which has caused Republicans acute embarrassment for two months, is being killed. So is another span, the $229 million “Don Young Way.”

According to witnesses, Young warned Flake and Musgrave that he planned to stay in Congress a long time and would not forget the stinging defeat.

Republicans are the party of fiscal restraint. Not a reigning (aka eternally re-elected) monarchy to re-distribute the treasures of the nation.

Is that too much to ask?

Heightened Security

Iain Murray shares a funny email on the NRO Corner:

The British are feeling the pinch in relation to recent bombings and have raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved." Soon though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." Londoners have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies all but ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorised from "Tiresome" to a "Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was during the great fire of 1666.

Also, the French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide". The only two higher levels in France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate." The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively paralysing the country's military capability.

It's not only the English and French that are on a heightened level of alert. Italy has increased the alert level from "shout loudly and excitedly" to "elaborate military posturing". Two more levels remain, "ineffective combat operations" and "change sides".

The Germans also increased their alert state from "disdainful arrogance" to "dress in uniform and sing marching songs". They also have two higher levels: "invade a neighbour" and "lose".

Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual and the only threat they worry about is NATO pulling out of Brussels.

Osama & B.P.

Now here's an oil company that deserves to pay extra taxes.

I can handle almost every stripe of idiocy in Advertising: triteness, bad humor, abstruseness, snobbery -- I'm tough; I watch cable.

But these BP commercials that snivel and apologize for the business it’s in are too much. "BP: We're sorry we're in the oil biz, but kiddie-porn on the Internet was too crowded."

Sorry to those who have not seen these. The stock template is asking some "soccer mom" what an oil company should be doing, listening to her diatribe about how "they've got to make the air better for our children" and "they have to explore renewable energy..." Then the narrator says that they have invested in solar and hydrogen technology. Then the double tag line "it's a start" (we're trying to put ourselves out of business!) and bp: beyond petroleum (ohmigod! we've got "Petroleum" right in our name, we can't fool anybody!)

Yesterday, Taranto links to a Telegraph story with a menu of Osama's fiats: America must "convert to Islam, ditch its constitution, abolish banks, jail homosexuals and sign the Kyoto climate change treaty." Taranto highlights this as "Great Minds Think Alike" because VP Al Gore says that climate change is more important than terrorism.

I follow the link. Somebody's done a compendium of Osama's Greatest Hits.

Alcohol and gambling would be barred and there would be an end to women's photos in newspapers or advertising.

Any woman serving "passengers, visitors and strangers", presumably anyone from air stewardesses to waitresses, would also be out of a job.

The West must "stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you" and has become the "worst civilisation witnessed in the history of mankind".

Osama and BP -- together again live!

Windfall Profits Failure

Hard to believe!

The amendment failed 35 - 64 (Corzine didn’t vote). Call me slightly surprised. All Republicans voted NO along with 8 Democrats. Two theories for this: 1) The tax reconciliation bill already has a “stealth” windfall profits tax on oil companies that might be enough to assuage moderates, and 2) the whole idea of a windfall profits tax was politically popular to various constituents, but overall, not a very good idea.

The Exit Strategies

Chris Muir cracks me up.

Boogie to Baghdad

Remember Richard Clarke? [who? -ed]
Byron York does.

In case you don’t remember, “Boogie to Baghdad” is the phrase that Richard Clarke, when he was the top White House counterterrorism official during the Clinton administration, used to express his fear that if American forces pushed Osama bin Laden too hard at his hideout in Afghanistan, bin Laden might move to Iraq, where he could stay in the protection of Saddam Hussein.

Clarke’s opinion was based on intelligence indicating a number of contacts between al Qaeda and Iraq, including word that Saddam had offered bin Laden safe haven.

It’s all laid out in the Sept. 11 commission report. “Boogie to Baghdad” is on Page 134.

Don't destroy my carefully media/DNC/leftie crafted worldview!

So what's the "Boogie to Baghdad?"

In 1996, after bin Laden moved from Sudan to Afghanistan, he wasn’t sure if he would be able to get along with his new Taliban hosts. So he made inquiries about moving to Iraq.

Saddam wasn’t interested. At the time, he was trying to have better relations with his neighbors — and bin Laden’s enemy — the Saudis.

But a bit later, Saddam apparently changed his mind. According to the report:


“In March 1998, after bin Laden’s public fatwa against the United States, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with bin Laden.”

Still nothing happened. But later:

“Similar meetings between Iraqi officials and bin Laden or his aides may have occurred in 1999 during a period of some reported strains with the Taliban. According to the [intelligence] reporting, Iraqi officials offered bin Laden a safe haven in Iraq. Bin Laden declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative.”

It was in that context that Clarke believed that if the United States made bin Laden’s situation too hot in Afghanistan, then, in Clarke’s non-famous words, “old wily Osama will likely boogie to Baghdad.”

Now, that doesn’t at all suggest that Iraq had a role in Sept. 11, but it certainly does suggest a relationship between Saddam and al Qaeda.

Victory II

Perhaps we just needed honest debate. The calls for cut-and-run are solidifying and stirring the resolve of those who understand. A new site, NoEndButVictory.com, recalls previous American ignominy:

Within living memory, we have seen what happens when America abandons its national commitments, and deserts the brave people who stood tall and believed its promises. The faint-hearted and the wavering painted our commitment to the people of Indochina as a cause in itself of the bloodshed and grief there — and then stood mute when they achieved their objective, forced America’s retreat, and years of genocide followed in its wake.

A generation later, they’re trying to do the same in Iraq. For the sake of an Iraqi people only now grasping the responsibilities, perils, and blessings of liberty, we cannot let them force America to shrink from the awesome responsibility it has shouldered. For the sake of American honor — and those who have died in this cause — we cannot repeat the mistakes of 1991, when the cost of our reluctance was counted in Kurdish and Shi’a dead.

This is not a partisan issue. This is not a left- or right-wing issue. This is an American and Iraqi issue, and all men of good faith must now come together to remind our leadership that whatever our politics, and whatever we thought of the decision to go to war, there can be only one end:

Victory.

The anti-war, cut-and-run crowd, which fears not defeat, nor dishonor, nor an Iraq under the terrorist heel, is well-organized. Its online haunts are well-known enough: Daily Kos, Atrios, and the rest have a massive readership, and they present the appearance of representing a substantial segement of public opinion in the United States.

Victory

I have rarely considered Senator McCain to be an ally.

But he has come through in a strident defense of the President against the "Bush Lied" crowd, and he blasts his compatriots in today in a guest piece for The New York Post.

The Senate has responded to the millions who braved bombs and threats to vote, who put their faith and trust in America and their government, by suggesting that our No. 1 priority is to bring our people home.

We have told insurgents that their violence does grind us down, that their horrific acts might be successful. But these are precisely the wrong messages. Our exit strategy in Iraq is not the withdrawal of our troops, it is victory.

Americans may not have been of one mind when it came to the decision to topple Saddam Hussein. But, though some disagreed, I believe that nearly all now wish us to prevail.

Because the stakes there are so high — higher even than those in Vietnam — our friends and our enemies need to hear one message: America is committed to success, and we will win this war.

Hat-tip: Insty

Defending Oil Profits

While I may work for an oil company (well, technically sub-contracted) I make this post, not in defense of big oil and my livelyhood (though my pay rate stayed the same since Jan 1), but I make this post in defense of capitalism.

The American Petroleum Institute, an oil trade association, posts a defense of "big oils" evil profits.

The energy Americans consume today is brought to us by investments made years or even decades ago. Today’s oil and natural gas industry earnings are invested in new technology, new production, and environmental and product quality improvements to meet tomorrow’s energy needs.

The industry's earnings are very much in line with other industries and often they are lower. This fact is not well understood, in part, because reports typically focus on only half the story-the profits earned. Profits reflect the size of an industry, but they're not necessarily a good reflection of financial performance. Profit margins or earnings per dollar of sales (measured as net income divided by sales) provide a more relevant and accurate measure of a company or an industry's health, and also provide a useful way of comparing financial performance between industries large and small.

The top profit maker?

Banks. There's a lot of money in money. 19.6 cents on the dollar in fact.

Pharmaceuticals. 18.6 cents. Once you develop the drug the incremental cost is low. Of course those exhorbitant profits go towards more research, but look!

Software. 17 cents/dollar. Same deal as pharm. Maintenance and mass production of existing software is cheaper than developing it.

All of US Industry.... 7.9 cents.

Oil and natural gas are actually below average! 7.6 cents return for every dollar spent.

ExxonMobil has a similar document (PDF), entitled cleverly "Oil and Apples" in it's own defense.

Last year alone, our new capital investments approached $15 billion, primarily in new exploration and production, but also in refining capacity and new energy-saving and environmental technologies.

While earnings rise and fall with oil prices, our investments do not. That $15 billion was invested in a year when the oil price averaged just below $40 and earnings were high. But we also invested $15 billion in 1998, when oil dipped to $10 a barrel and annual earnings — at $8 billion — were far lower. In fact, averaged over the last ten years our annual capital investments for the future of the company exceed our earnings.

Ours is a capital-intensive business where investments can take many years to develop.

Also today, the Senate finance committee decided to impose a windfall tax on oil companies!

The measure amounts to a one-year windfall profits tax, a concept that most Republicans had until recently denounced as a discredited idea from the 1970s. It was added to a larger bill that would cut taxes by about $61 billion over the next five years.

Conservative Senate Republicans who support the oil industry bitterly protested the measure, noting that Congress had just approved billions in new tax breaks to encourage oil and gas exploration. But every Republican on the panel voted fo