The Sky is Falling! Not

Someone I respect greatly and love dearly has been spreading MSM-like "end times" stories about the state of GOP leadership in Congress come November. And who can blame him, with polls like these on the "Generic Congressional Vote" showing Democrats leading Republicans 50 points to 38. But we don't elect legislators that way, kids. We send folks to Washington from distinct geographical areas that must be considered individually and specifically. Type in house races 2006 polling map on Google and click I'm Feeling Lucky. You'll get Election Projection - 2006 Edition, an admitted GOP leaning site that breaks them all down using objective data. The result? GOP loses 4 in the Senate and Dems gain 8 in the house. Still Republican control all around.

And this doesn't even count my, "Oh crap, Democrats really DO want to lose the war" bounce on election eve.

CEOs Hate Me!

I'm obviously bored in the morning, as I've taken to listening to the local Air America affiliate on my morning commute. (This station cracks me up. It's called "Progressive Talk" and they also have "Progressive News, Progressive Weather, and Progressive Traffic." Just what is "Progressive Traffic" for people who hate cars? Traffic jams everywhere?) Anyway, this morning Jay Marvin interviewed Barbara Ehrenreich, author of 'Bait and Switch - The (Futile) Pursuit of the American Dream' (Amazon sales rank #5,347). The premise of the book is that unemployed white collar workers can't get jobs because of the "magisterial indifference of the corporate world" which is a euphemism for "nobody worries about me." The line that tingled my spine this morning was when Barbara said, "It really is criminal the way corporations use and abuse their employees." Apparently the unemployment rate is low only because white collar workers take "survival jobs" with low pay and no "benefits" (read: full-boat health insurance). Barbara was describing how what is needed is for white collar workers to organize for collective bargaining with corporations. Well, I thought, at least she's offering a plan. That's more than the "anybody but Bush" anti-war crowd (of which she's clearly a member) has done in the 5 years since 9/11.

As I considered whether to blog this I imagined how enjoyable it would be to read what JK does with Ehrenreich's hanging curve ball that "corporations don't care about their employees." It'll be much more enjoyable than watching what the Mets did to (Colorado Rockies') Josh Fogg's pitching at home last night!

Quite the Pair

It's official. Sens. Byrd and Stevens both had holds on the earmark-transparency database.

Confirming what we already knew, Senator Robert Byrd admitted today that he's the other secret holder.

What are the odds it would be those two? I'm going with 94%

Recycling as Gris-Gris

Penn and Teller crush the myth of recycling. Funny stuff (salty language, if that disturbs you).

Hat-tip: White Lighting Axiom: Redux

A Democratic 110th

I'm not going to excerpt. It's free, read it all. The Wall Street Journal highlights the luminaries that will likely chair committees in a Dem 110th.

Scared yet?

Saturday Was Climate Change

Yet nobody told Samizdata. Or maybe it's the time difference.

In The Church of Global Warming Robert Clayton Dean offers some fun for the skeptics:

How can you tell who someone's god is? You look to see whose name they invoke as the cause of all things, good or bad. By that standard, the god of the devout Left is Global Warming; here is the Psalm of Al, from which the faithful constantly quote (King James Version):

1. Great storms ravage our cities, and the wise man saith: Global Warming hath done this.

2. Drought keepeth all storms at bay, and the wise man saith: This also hath Global Warming done.

3. Global Warming maketh the oceans rise; it maketh deep snow to fall;

4. Flood and fire, feast and famine, typhoon and tornado, hail and lightning, all things good and bad that come from sky or sea, Global Warming hath made them all.

5. And when our homes are beneath the waves, we shall know that Global Warming in its wrath hath seen our sins.

6. For our vehicles that glut themselves on oil, for the trees we cut and land we clear,

7. For the cooling and heating of our houses, for the plowing and harvesting of our fields, we are punished.

8. Whenever we burn carbon and release it into the air, we shall know that Global Warming seeth it, and is wroth.

9. O man! Thou hast flouted the great god of the sky, and by three degrees of temperature we shall be burned,

10. For Global Warming is a jealous god, and small and annoying is man.

In the comments, one Perry E. Metzger, offers a thoughtful libertarian view of global warming that brother Silence might enjoy:

I'm about as radical a libertarian as one can find, but I'm also educated in the sciences, and so far as I can tell, global warming is not a myth.

I don't see how the usual batch of knee jerk socialist responses are going to fix the issue. I'm also not exactly a fan of the "everyone drive less and use more efficient lightbulbs!" pabulum.

However, it is stupid to deny scientific facts. Yes, you can find plenty of web sites that will cite very biased information and claim global warming is a myth, just as you can find web sites that claim that evolution is a myth and provide "evidence" for it, but at this point, there is a mountain of reproducable studies that say the issue is real.

What do I think should be done about it? "Leave the market alone."

Let the market switch us to solar and nuclear power as the price of fossil fuels goes up and as the price of other technologies go down. My biggest worry is that insane greens who have a completely irrational hatred of nuclear power (burning coal pollutes the world far worse) will block it.

Libertarians should not be denying scientific fact. We should instead spend our time combating the religious impulse of people to think the modern world is evil and that we must repent for our sins by living cruddy lives and waiting for (in their minds) our inevitable and justified doom at the hands of a wronged Gaia.

I'm a bit more skeptical than Metzger, but his words are consistent with the new jk manifesto: believe or don’t, but don't use it to stop modernity.

UPDATE: The comments, as usual in the Samizdata post are superb. They run heavily skeptical, but they are bright and informed.

UPDATE II: Except for mine, I tried to bring Dr. Popper inito it, as his "Open Society and its Enemies" appears in their logo. But I muffed the html. Harrumph.

I'm a Cat-4!

My wife has been keeping an eye on hurricane John in the Pacific, and informs me that I am a Category Four now. I don't know how I feel about my eponymous storm, but I had this idea a few days before I knew about it.

Let's create a national auction site for hurricane names. What do you buy the guy who has everything? Why, bid up his name (or his worst enemy's) on eyeBay! Unlike eBay, multiple people can bid on a single entry on eyeBay. Give the money to hurricane relief, it's all in good fun. A side benefit is that it gets the racial lobbies out. If you want Hurricane Shaniqua, Rep Waters, get out your Visa card.

Hurricane John, out!

The Shame of General Powell

Just when you thought l'Affaire Plame could not get any stranger, Michael "Spikey" Isikoff and The Nation's David Corn release a book with the miscreants finally identified. Whodunit? The State Department.

Thankfully, Christopher Hitchens and the Wall Street Journal have read the book so you don't have to. Hitch casually mentions that

What does emerge from Hubris is further confirmation of what we knew all along: the extraordinary venom of the interdepartmental rivalry that has characterized this administration. In particular, the bureaucracy at the State Department and the CIA appear to have used the indiscretion of Armitage to revenge themselves on the "neoconservatives" who had been advocating the removal of Saddam Hussein. Armitage identified himself to Colin Powell as Novak's source before the Fitzgerald inquiry had even been set on foot. The whole thing could—and should—have ended right there. But now read this and rub your eyes: William Howard Taft, the State Department's lawyer who had been told about Armitage (and who had passed on the name to the Justice Department)

also felt obligated to inform White House counsel Alberto Gonzales. But Powell and his aides feared the White House would then leak that Armitage had been Novak's source—possibly to embarrass State Department officials who had been unenthusiastic about Bush's Iraq policy. So Taft told Gonzales the bare minimum: that the State Department had passed some information about the case to Justice. He didn't mention Armitage. Taft asked if Gonzales wanted to know the details. The president's lawyer, playing the case by the book, said no, and Taft told him nothing more.

Corn himself, Hitch reminds us, had portrayed the affair a little differently:

The Wilson smear was a thuggish act. Bush and his crew abused and misused intelligence to make their case for war. Now there is evidence Bushies used classified information and put the nation's counter-proliferation efforts at risk merely to settle a score. It is a sign that with this gang politics trumps national security.

The Wall Street Journal Ed page, even less a friend to the Powell State Department points out the mendacity and insubordination of the President's cabinet.

At a minimum, there appears to be a serious question of disloyalty here. By keeping silent, Messrs. Powell and Armitage let the President take political heat for the case, while also letting Mr. Rove, Mr. Libby and other White House officials twist in the wind for more than two years. We also know that it was the folks in Mr. Powell's shop--including his former chief of staff Lawrence Wilkerson and intelligence officer Carl Ford Jr.--who did so much to trash John Bolton's nomination to be Ambassador to the U.N. in 2005. The State Department clique that Mr. Bush tolerated for so long did tremendous damage to his Administration.

As for Justice, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft recused himself from the case in an act of political abdication. That left then-Deputy Attorney General James Comey in charge, and he also presumably knew about Mr. Armitage's role as the leaker who started it all. Yet if the book's account is correct, he too misled the White House with his silence. Mr. Comey is also the official who let Mr. Fitzgerald alter his mandate from its initial find-the-leaker charge to the obstruction and perjury raps against Mr. Libby that are all this case has come down to. Remind us never to get in a foxhole with either Mr. Comey or the Powell crowd.

I enjoyed Colin Powell's autobiography and have total respect for his service to country. I've always considered him a McCain-type guy who appreciates accolades from Washington society a little more than his principles.

This episode, however, places him in a different light. He sat back and watched the administration suffer a PR nightmare and key staff be subjected to expensive and grueling legal troubles. Secretary Powell was clearly out of line here. My respect has held up through many things, but not this. He is just another unprincipled politician walking the streets of our nation's capital. More disappointing that he knows the importance of freedom yet will not fight for it.

UPDATE: Investors Business Daily (Hat-tip: Insty) has some harsh words for Prosecutor Fitzgerald:

But it's hard to see anything but politics as the motivation for Fitzgerald's handling of the Plame affair. The facts indicate that Fitzgerald knew early on that the original leaker was State Department official Richard Armitage. So why did Fitzgerald let a cloud hang over White House adviser Karl Rove's head for so long? And why is Fitzgerald continuing to hound Libby, the former vice presidential chief of staff?

The answer seems to be that Armitage, who is charged with nothing and brags that he hasn't even consulted a lawyer, was former Secretary of State Colin Powell's right-hand man and a critic of pre-emptive war in Iraq. Libby, on the other hand, was an architect of that war strategy. Do doves get a pass in Fitzgerald's book, while hawks get an indictment?

Where's Bono?

The U2 star made points with me when he befriended Senator Jesse Helms and President Bush as allies in his quest to help Africa. He showed a far greater understanding than most, looking at debt and trade, instead of just aid.

Lately, he seems to fallen right back in the celebrity pit. We have a bracelet now (two guys in my band wear them) but bracelets are not going to fix Africa. Freedom is required to fix Africa and trade is an important component of freedom.

The Wall Street Journal asks (paid site, sorry) if helping isn't all talk.

Senator Bill Frist is trying to renew part of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), which since 2000 has provided duty-free access to the U.S. market for substantially all products from most sub-Saharan countries. The full act doesn't expire until 2015 but its textile provisions are set to expire in 2007. These let sub-Saharan-assembled clothing that uses fabric purchased from any third country enter the American market duty-free. If this provision lapses, Africa could lose 150,000 jobs.

Mr. Frist has said he wants to extend the third-country textile provision so that goods sown in Africa will retain their duty-free access to the U.S. But to do that, he'll need Democratic support. Incredibly, it's not a sure thing.

Rep. Rangel has not signaled that he will support this bill, and without support, it won't get done in a short session.

Better than bracelets, guys. Better than bracelets.

Colorado sheep dip

A few weeks back I celebrated Rep. Marilyn Musgrave's (R-CO) position on Club for Growth's legislative pork scorecard. She voted fifteen times in nineteen chances to kill a pork bill in Congress. So imagine my surprise when my wife receives a political mailing that claims Musgrave "never saw a pork barrel project she didn't like." A prior mailing also charged, essentially, that Marilyn Musgrave and Tom Delay are the same person!

So who is making these charges? A Republican group! They're called "Coloradoans for Life." Yeah, they're Republicans. Right? Aren't they? Well, it's hard to tell with this shadowy bunch but it ain't bloody likely. In addition to slamming Musgrave they've also mailed us to say what a louse Bob Beauprez (R for CO governor) is, and run radio spots to say just how peachy Angie Paccione (D for Musgrave's seat) is. But they've chosen "Coloradoans for Life" as their official name. Why? Because rural Coloradoans and country radio listeners are predominantly Republican and will ignore every word CFL says if they know who is saying it. And CFL sure isn't saying who they are anywhere on their web site.

Ah, politics. Reminds me of the feed lot down the road.

Wage Disparity

The Good people at the Economic Policy Institute have written a report on The State of Working America. Thankfully, Tim Worstall at TCS has read it so you don't have to.

Of the EPI, Worstall says "They are, as you may know, the people who urge that the USA become more like the European countries, most especially the Scandinavian ones. Less income inequality, more leisure time, stronger unions and so on."

Worstall points out that they have manipulated the data in a way that favors the EU economies in the chart, to get this damning chart:



Now don't you feel bad living here! Look at that chart -- something must be done!

How we're supposed to read this is that the USA has a very uneven income distribution, that the poorest 10% only get 39% of the median income, that the richest 10% get 210%. Compare and contrast that with the most egalitarian society amongst those studied, Finland, where the rich get 111% and the poor get 38%. Shown this undoubted fact we are therefore to don sackcloth and ashes, promise to do better and tax the heck out of everybody to rectify this appalling situation.

But hang on a minute, that's not quite what is being shown. In the USA the poor get 39% of the US median income and in Finland (and Sweden) the poor get 38% of the US median income. It's not worth quibbling over 1% so let's take it as read that the poor in America have exactly the same standard of living as the poor in Finland (and Sweden). Which is really a rather revealing number don't you think? All those punitive tax rates, all that redistribution, that blessed egalitarianism, the flatter distribution of income, leads to a change in the living standards of the poor of precisely ... nothing.

After they manipulate the data so it does not show how badly we are kicking EU asses, the disparity the find is that we have richer people.

Political Abduction

The son of a lawmaker was recently kidnapped from a city street and his mother and sister were shot the following day.

Iraq is a terrible place.

Too bad it happened in Philadelphia.

The adult son of a state lawmaker was abducted from a Philadelphia street at gunpoint, and his mother and sister were shot by intruders a day later, officials said Monday.

Shamari Taylor, 26, remained missing for the second day Monday, while his 56-year-old mother remained hospitalized in critical but stable condition after being shot in the head. The sister, 21, had been treated and released Sunday evening.

Taylor is the son of Rep. John Myers, a Philadelphia Democrat who has been a vocal advocate for gun-control legislation.

The motive is unclear.

Unfinished in New Orleans

Kim Strassel was on Kudlow & Company last night and made several valid points on post Katrina New Orleans. The first is that the major lesson is to distrust government. Wal*Mart had generators, FedEx and UPS were there before USPS -- private enterprise outperformed government at every level.

Sadly, she also reminded viewers of the missed opportunities to harness the private sector in rebuilding. There was much hope on her employer's editorial page of enterprise zones, tax incentives, repeal of Davis-Bacon, and the President's promised urban homestead plan to privatize some government land.

Her employers are just a bit kinder in the lead editorial today (free site).

The post-Katrina spend-fest in Louisiana will be remembered as one of the greatest taxpayer wastes in U.S. history. First came the FEMA $2,000 debit-cards fiasco intended to pay for necessities that were used for things like flat-panel TVs and tattoos. Then came the purchase of thousands of mobile homes that cost as much as $400,000 per family housed; the $200 million for renting the Carnival Cruise Ship; millions more in payments that went for season football tickets, luxury vacation resorts, even divorce lawyers. Federal flood insurance policies surely will encourage many to rebuild in the same flood plains and at the same height as before.

They do document some successes but try not to get too excited out there:

Some of the tax incentives were enacted and have spurred more business investment. And charter schools will serve thousands of the kids still residing in New Orleans this fall. But Congress and Louisiana's pols have ignored most of the promising free-market reforms, opting instead for red tape as usual.

Even Bush 41 suspended Davis Bacon in the Andrew cleanup. The Democrats are in full dudgeon that only $125 Billion has been allocated. At the risk of piling on, I am disgusted that no conservative leadership or political courage was shown. "Just shovel money so we look compassionate" is not a Republican value.

Internecine -- The Home Game

I had a spirited discussion with my brother-in-law yesterday. He and I agree on much, but not on immigration. I got a little cranky and thought I should share it with all of you.

We have argued the merits and the economics around here but the politics are now becoming clear. I'd like to ask my more restrictionist blog brothers if they have buyer’s remorse on their intransigence, which is a rhetorical device for me to suggest that they should.

Congress will come back from an August recess for a short session before heading home to campaign for the midterms. My nine months of optimism are coming to a close. The idea of a conference committee hammering out a bill of this size and divergence in a month -- two months before an election -- is preposterous. Ain't gonna happen. That, my brother-in-law and I can agree on.

A few months ago, Bill Kristol at the Weekly Standard asked the House GOP members if they were going to follow [Rep.] Tom Tancredo over a cliff by insisting on an enforcement-only solution, against the wishes of business, free-traders,, minority groups, and high-ranking party politicians. The answer, many weeks later is a resounding "well, gee, I guess so...the water down at the bottom of those rocks looks pretty warm."

By refusing to compromise, the Tancredo wing of the party has prevented an immigration bill and helped make the party look feckless right before a six-year midterm which is historically difficult for the President's party. So my questions to the Tancredoites around here are:

• By preventing any bill, you have kept the status quo on immigration for at least another year, more likely many depending on the vicissitudes of elections and public opinion. Do you believe the status quo is better than a compromise security + guest worker + citizenship path that might have some elements you don't like? Are your interests better served with no bill?


• Failure and intransigence will clearly hurt the GOP in the November elections and contribute to the severe risk of losing at least the House. Do you believe you'll get a better bill out of a Democratic -- or at least less Republican -- House?


• Chances are slim, but perhaps not yet none. Seeing the real danger, would any of you get behind the Pence compromise (which includes much we both hate) just to get something done to give the GOP an achievement to run on and not wait for the Democratic 110th to write?

Rep Tancredo is one of 535 legislators. Let him influence a compromise but don't let him derail the train.

Capabilities vs Rights

al Reuters

Iran's president launched a new phase in the Arak heavy-water reactor project on Saturday, saying Tehran would not give up its right to nuclear technology despite Western fears it aims to make atomic bombs.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was speaking just days before an August 31 deadline set by the U.N. Security Council for Iran to halt uranium enrichment -- the West's biggest worry in Iran's atomic program -- or face possible sanctions.

"No one can deprive a nation of its rights based on its capabilities," Ahmadinejad said in his speech to inaugurate the heavy water project.

I did not know that rights were capability based. I'll make sure to remember that next time Israel retaliates (invoking it's right of self-defense) in a way which makes the liberal comentariat complain that there is no proportionality.

Good WaPo Research

Samuel H. Preston and Emily Buzzell at the Washington Post answer a question that has been in the back of my mind but that I have been too lazy to research.

In short, there are a lot of young men and women serving our nation in Iraq. Every death is regrettable, but how many would die if they stayed home or went on spring break in Aruba?

Kudos to Preston and Buzzell for a nifty piece.

Between March 21, 2003, when the first military death was recorded in Iraq, and March 31, 2006, there were 2,321 deaths among American troops in Iraq. Seventy-nine percent were a result of action by hostile forces. Troops spent a total of 592,002 "person-years" in Iraq during this period. The ratio of deaths to person-years, .00392, or 3.92 deaths per 1,000 person-years, is the death rate of military personnel in Iraq.

To give away the ending, that’s half the US average. But wait, that includes 95 year olds and people not in the good health of our men and women in uniform.

U.S. men 18-39 only face 39% of the risk, which seems closer to an intuitive estimate. But -- insert your own W.C. Fields joke here -- on the whole, it's better to be in Iraq than be an African-American in Philadelphia; the latter is 11% more risky.

"The death rate of American troops in Vietnam was 5.6 times that observed in Iraq. " (I blogged that we lost well over twice as many in a short while in WWII fighting for eight square miles of Iwo Jima).

In short, to post the number dead is specious. Kudos to Professor Preston and Ms. Buzzell for the perspective, and to the WaPo for printing it.

Hat-tip: Insty

Warmer... Cooler.... etc.

Saturday has apparently degenerated into global warming climate change day here at ThreeSources.com

UPI

Abdusamatov and his colleagues at the Russian Academy of Sciences astronomical observatory said the prediction is based on measurement of solar emissions, Novosti reported. They expect the cooling to begin within a few years and to reach its peak between 2055 and 2060.

"The Kyoto initiatives to save the planet from the greenhouse effect should be put off until better times," he said. "The global temperature maximum has been reached on Earth, and Earth's global temperature will decline to a climatic minimum even without the Kyoto protocol."

Can we settle on a direction here?

Global Cooling

Blog brother AlexC sends me a link to a Q and O blog post on global warming.

Written by Dale Franks (neither a Q nor and O), the post captures my position very well. Silence and I have talked past each other on these pages about whether global warming exists. While I remain skeptical, I am going to change my pattern. The point is not to argue against its existence, the point is to argue that we don't know enough to make policy decisions.

Franks nails this:

The Argo data on ocean cooling over the past few years merely highlights that problem. Over the past few years, about 20% of the warming of the past 50 years has simply disappeared. Apparently, it just radiated away back into space, since we can't seem to find any of that heat down here.

Why did the cooling occur?

By what mechanism was the heat transported away?

Will this current cooling trend continue, or reverse itself?

What are the global climate implications if the cooling continues, or conversely, the implications if it reverses itself, and begins warming again?

Aren't these questions important? Or should we dismiss them because they don't conform to the orthodoxy?

Franks, as it happens, does indeed believe in global warming and he believes that it is to some extent man-made.

I'm skeptical of both those assertions but agree with Franks that until we can codify and quantify what is happening and what causes it, we cannot "fix" it. If we are causing global warming by using so much battery power, those damn hybrid drivers will have to answer up.

I'm a big fan (I know I've bored you before) on the epistemology of Dr. Karl Popper. I don't know how much he created and how much he documented, but he defines the procedures where scientific theory progresses to acceptance or is discarded.

The first step is predictive power. Einstein’s Special Relativity made several predictions that were not testable at the time of its creation. Over time, experiments have been done, and they all support the predictions of Special Relativity. Ergo, it is commonly accepted (though Popper points out theories can only be disproven, never really proven).

The original global warming theorists made predictions based on computer modeling. It would start at the poles, reduce the length of the cold season in the cold climes, and proceed at a steady rate. Facts have not supported this prediction at all. warming has started at higher elevations, warmer climes, and has not been steady: CSU climate scientists point out two years of ocean cooling.

This is a very important observational study of changes in climate system heat content. While the models predict a general montonic increase in ocean heat content (e.g. see (Figure 1) ), the new observations in Lyman et al 2006 show an important decrease. The explanation of this temporal change in the radiative imbalance of the Earth’s climate system is a challenge to the climate science community. It does indicate that we know less about natural- and human-climate forcings and feedbacks than concluded in the IPCC Reports.

More research. We are all in agreement.

He Stole My Headline

Dan Henninger has a superb column today on l'affaire Cruise:

Depending on where you're standing, August has not been a good month.

If you're Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, it has not been a good month. If you were feeling worn down by a world overstocked with Islamic bombers, the news out of unmerry olde England did not make for a good month. And if you are a Boston Red Sox fan and have just witnessed a statistically improbable five-game sweep at home by your mortal enemy, it has assuredly not been a good month.

Then, of a sudden, the clouds parted and delivered unto us, courtesy of a scoop on this paper's front page, Paramount's Sumner Redstone firing Tom Cruise. It doesn't get any better than this, and this deserves some elaboration.

Now if we could just get rid of the Dixie Chicks...

Even Christopher Shays

It seems likely that we won't have Senator Lincoln Chafee to kick around any more. If he survives his primary bid, there is a good chance the deeply azure Ocean State will turn him out for a real Democrat.

Of course, we might still have Rep Christopher Shays next door in Connecticut. I think it was Peggy Noonan who said that his first name should be "even" because Democrats would say "Even Christopher Shays said..."

Well, today the WaPo reports that Even Christopher "Urges Iraq Withdrawal."

Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), once an ardent supporter of the war in Iraq, said yesterday that the Bush administration should set a time frame for withdrawing U.S. troops. He added that most of the withdrawal could take place next year.

Shays, who faces a tough reelection campaign because of his previous support for President Bush's war policies, made his comments after completing his 14th trip to Iraq this week.

Even Christopher Shays. It's not a partisan thing. He's a Republican.

Amazon Recommends

I have teased the good folks at Amazon for some recommendations which I thought missed the mark. I am still a Long-tailer and Amazon recommendations are a part of that. How can you find new stuff you’ll like on an infinite shelf?

One of their recommendations caught my eye last week. "We've found that folks who purchase Diana Krall also purchase Tommy Emmanuel." So pony up, bud, it's $13 for his DVD Live at Her Majesty's Theatre.

I read some reviews and consulted Sugarchuck who knows every guitar player ever. Found out that this guy is known for instruction books. The reviews intrigued me just enough. I bought one for me and one for SC

I'll give it some serious stars. Tommy is an Aussie, he comes onstage in a small theater with a few battered acoustic guitars. He is a brilliant player, playing different styles but his foundation is the Chet Atkins/Merle Travis style. We have different tastes around here, but I can't imagine anybody's not liking this on some level. The honesty of the music and the virtuosity are something to see.

I'll share Sugarchuck's review (without his permission) "Remember the old arguments about flatpicking vs. fingerpicking and the incompatibility of the two. I guess that guy settled that for all time. Great, great stuff."

I have no idea what that means, but I think he liked it too.

Be Good Back There!

or I'm turning this plane around!

Dutch police arrested 12 passengers on a U.S. Northwest Airlines plane bound for India which was forced to turn back to Amsterdam's Schiphol airport on Wednesday, news agency ANP reported.

ANP said a police spokesman said 12 were arrested, but declined to give further details due to the ongoing investigation. Dutch police were not immediately available to comment on the report.

The Dutch defense ministry said earlier the pilot decided to turn back after the crew said several of the 149 passengers on flight 42 to Mumbai were behaving suspiciously.

No indication is given of any of the passengers' description or behaviour.

Which means they can only be ________________.

Buyers' Regret

As many has predicted, Ned Lamont's narrow victory over Joe Lieberman in Connecticut is causing liberals and Democrats some heartburn.

Especially when Republican candidates take advantage of it.

From Rick Santorum's campaign...

Bob Casey, Jr. has traveled across the Commonwealth claiming that he is independent and stands outside of Democrat party lines on important issues. He also continues to criticize Senator Santorum for working with President Bush on important issues -- issues like protecting Israel and efforts to stabilize the Middle East.

Recently, U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman, a well-known supporter of Israel and the Jewish community, lost a narrow Democratic primary election in Connecticut against challenger Ned Lamont. As you may know, Lieberman has decided to run as an Independent in the upcoming general election. You may not be shocked to find out that Bobby Casey, Jr. DOES NOT SUPPORT Senator Lieberman in the upcoming election.

LamontBlog responds....

This is just part of Newhouse's likely expansive efforts to use Lieberman in races throughout the country to try to keep Republicans in control of Congress. Newhouse is also working for Gov. Rell (R) and Rep. Simmons (R) in Connecticut. Anything he does for Lieberman will be to help out his other clients.

Democrats, wake up.

Neil Newhouse is the Republican pollster now shared by both Senators Santorum and Lieberman.

Rudderless FDA

Y'all think I make this stuff up. Our government is endangering lives by bureaucratically keeping pharmaceutical innovation down. Dr. Henry Miller, a physician and former FDA official, points out in TCS today that the agency has had a confirmed commissioner for only 20 months of the Bush presidency ( I gave kudos to Dr. McClellan in May of 2003).

The acting head is facing a tough challenge in Senate hearings because all of government is really about abortion, and two Democratic Senators have a hold on his nomination. Even if Emily's list is placated, Miller is not excited that nominee Andrew von Eschenbach will champion the necessary reforms.

The lack of leadership makes the agency more risk averse than usual. And Miller reports that the innovation-suppressing is taking its toll.

In spite of increasingly more powerful and precise technologies for drug discovery, purification and production, during the past twenty years development costs have skyrocketed, with direct and indirect expenses now exceeding $800 million to bring an average drug to market. And the trends are ominous: the length of clinical testing for the average drug is increasing, fewer drugs are being approved, and the number of applications to FDA by industry for marketing approval has been decreasing for a decade.

FDA is largely responsible for these worrisome trends. Regulators keep raising the bar for approval, especially for innovative, high-tech products. Human gene therapy and other treatments tailored to individual patients have been hit especially hard, and the agency has made it more difficult for badly needed new antibiotics to be licensed. FDA's demands for post-marketing clinical trials have proliferated wildly, and "risk management" plans for newly approved drugs have been punitive and designed more to protect regulators' derrieres than patients.

Nope. Nobody sick out here and in need of new medications. Take your time.

The country -- and ThreeSources -- has focused much attention on whether or not the Federal government should subsidize Embryonic Stem Cell (ESC) research, and it is a valid, political question. At the same time, I wish that half of the effort directed at promoting more Federal $$ to ESC could be directed at the things which truly prevent miracle drugs: FDA bureaucracy and a rapacious tort bar.

Read the whole thing. It seems Europe has a largely private sector system for drug and device approvals. Oh well, they always lead the way in freedom...

Risky Business

A Hollywood celebrity is actually, financially punished for moonbatism. Mirabile dictu!

The Wall Street Journal (Kind of like E!, but with a conservative editorial page) reports Sumner Redstone Gives Tom Cruise His Walking Papers

In an unusually public rebuke, Viacom Inc. Chairman Sumner Redstone said that his company's movie studio, Paramount Pictures, plans to end its 14-year relationship with the 44-year-old Mr. Cruise and his film-production company. In an interview, Mr. Redstone, who is 83, was clear about the reason: Mr. Cruise's public antics and incessant stumping for personal causes, notably Scientology, have become intolerable and have been a drag on ticket sales for films like "Mission: Impossible III."

"It's nothing to do with his acting ability, he's a terrific actor," said Mr. Redstone. "But we don't think that someone who effectuates creative suicide and costs the company revenue should be on the lot."

As a consequence, Paramount will not renew the expensive deal that has made the studio home to Cruise/Wagner Productions, the company Mr. Cruise owns with partner Paula Wagner. That deal in recent years paid Mr. Cruise and Ms. Wagner up to $10 million a year to develop films and operate an office on the Paramount lot. Mr. Cruise's representatives had indicated in recent weeks that the star might be willing to discuss a less-lucrative deal to stay at the studio. But now they are parting ways.

It seems "His recent conduct has not been acceptable to Paramount."

You can take on the US Military, Christians, and the concept of freedom. But don't -- DON'T -- mess with South Park.

A Day for Headlines

I was ready to give Professor Reynolds the prize for "Ham on Pork"

...then, I saw TNR's story on the masturbating judge: "The Long Arm of the Law."

Sharansky Lives!

I rarely link to Taranto, because I assume that every ThreeSources reader reads Best Of The Web everyday.

But an item today is so perfect, I have to highlight it. He links to a Thomas Friedman column about Iranians who are displeased that their government is giving 500 million to Hezbollah, when their nation is still damaged by war and earthquakes. Taranto adds:

This is one reason why democratizing the Middle East is such an important goal. It's very unlikely that a democratic Iran would be waging war on Lebanon. Democracy is a check on unnecessary war. Indeed, a drawback of democracy is that it's sometimes a check on necessary war; just look at Old Europe and its approach to Iraq, Hezbollah, etc.

My idealism has been bruised and beaten these days. Republicans are distancing themselves from the President on Iraq, the Israel/Hezbollah war in Lebanon did not end as well as it could (that understates but captures ThreeSources opinion).

I turned in my neo-Wilsonian merit badge awhile back, but Mr. Taranto has put a little fight back in my Sharansky side. Why we fight. What's at stake. Thanks to ALL who serve!

Blood for Oil

Bloomberg

Iran attacked and seized control of a Romanian oil rig working in its Persian Gulf waters this morning one week after the Iranian government accused the European drilling company of ``hijacking'' another rig.

An Iranian naval vessel fired on the rig owned by Romania's Grup Servicii Petroliere (GSP) in the Salman field and took control of its radio room at about 7:00 a.m. local time, Lulu Tabanesku, Grup's representative in the United Arab Emirates said in a phone interview from Dubai today.

``The Iranians fired at the rig's crane with machine guns,'' Tabanesku said. ``They are in control now and we can't contact the rig.'' The Romanian company has 26 workers on the platform, he said.

Iran, which holds the world's second-largest oil and gas reserves, is due to respond today to a European Union-led offer of incentives aimed at persuading it to halt uranium enrichment activities that are crucial to its nuclear program.

Wonderful. Let's continue diplomacy.

The Dark Side of Valuing Life

Okay, I've written my provocative headline for the year.

We do value life. People complain that we live in a "disposable society" because we replace instead of repair things."We value human labor and thought more than a television set!" retorts I, "This is a good thing."

Kids wearing bicycle helmets strikes old- schoolers as "wussification." I'm concerned that we pamper youth, but much of it is valuing life highly. The same can be said for lawsuits. Life is not cheap anymore.

The dark side is that the investment in war and freedom is now much more costly. Edward Luttwak of the Jerusalem Post (hat-tip Mickey, via Insty) compares eight IDF forces lost to WWII:

When an IDF company attacked the mountain town of Bint Jbail, losing eight men in one night, that number was perceived in Israel - and broadcast around the world - as a disastrous loss.

Many a surviving veteran of the 1943-1945 Italian campaign must have been amazed by this reaction. There too it was one stone-built village and hilltop town after another, and though the Germans were outnumbered, outgunned and poorly supplied, a company that went against them would consider the loss of only eight men as very fortunate, because attacking forces could suffer a 150% or even 300% casualty rates - that mathematical impossibility being explained by the need for a second, third or fourth assault wave to take a small village.

Even that was not much as compared to the 6,821 Americans who died to conquer the eight square miles of Iwo Jima.

As Patton said "thank God that such men lived." They still live. Is not Iraq worth as much as eight square miles?

Ambassador Young's Gaffe

I teased Ambassador Andrew Young, in a post last week, for his racial slurs. It's always fun to hear a civil rights icon blasting other minorities.

I got to thinking, however, that Wal*Mart really comes out well in this. Michael Kinsley said "A gaffe is when a politician tells the truth," and there is a bit of truth in Yong's comments. The small urban grocers, irrespective of race, did not provide good prices or service to their customers. There is also verisimilitude in Young's assertion that differences in race exacerbated this tension.

The WSJ Ed Page defends these shopkeepers.

To his credit, Mr. Young has distinguished himself from much of the black left by not siding with Big Labor, environmentalists and other liberals who would happily deny minorities the jobs and low-price goods that big-box stores have to offer. Which makes it all the more unfortunate that Mr. Young's economic analysis is so off-base.

Businesses charge more in low-income, high-crime areas in part because it costs more to deliver goods and services in those areas. Inner-city grocery stores have higher operating costs and tend to be smaller than their big-box suburban counterparts. Taking advantage of economies of scale, the latter are able to offer more brands and sizes at lower prices. Urban supermarkets also typically have less competition, which allows them to charge more than they otherwise could. Wal-Mart's ability to offer more selection and lower prices is due to scale and efficiency, not virtue.

Fair enough. But a Wal*Mart would provide far more to the community. Young essentially made a point that Wal*Mart never could have, and highlighted the fact a Wal*Mart would do a lot more for a community that the beloved mom and pop shop.

Freedom On Retreat

I will agree with The Wall Street Journal (free link) that the United States, Israel, and the cause of freedom have suffered a serious setback in Lebanon. The French have sandbagged us, the U.N. itself has shown its indifference to freedom, and the Bush/Rice promise that the region will not return to "the status quo ante" has been broken.

On Thursday, Jacques Chirac confirmed a Le Monde report that his government was prepared to offer only some 200 combat engineers (in addition to the 200 French troops already in Lebanon) to what is supposed to be the resolution's centerpiece: A 15,000-man U.N. force that will help the Lebanese army patrol their southern border and ensure that Hezbollah will no longer use the area as a staging ground for future attacks against Israel.

Given that the French contingent was supposed to be at the vanguard of this enhanced force, it's unclear whether other nations will be willing to chip in with troops of their own. All of this after the French used the promise of a robust, French-led international force to get the U.S. and Israel to agree to a cease-fire and withdrawal. Even less reassuring is the insistence by French Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie that her troops will remain in the lead only until February, after which, apparently, it's salaam and adieu.

I will not join them in ascribing blame to the Secretary of State.

The person who should really be furious here is Secretary of State Rice. She midwifed this cease-fire in the name of Lebanese democracy and as a way to use diplomacy, and the U.N., to tame Hezbollah and frustrate its patrons. She also believed French promises, so it'd be good to know if she now feels she was lied to. If this U.N. exercise turns out to be as feckless as it increasingly appears, U.S. credibility will also be a loser.

As I commented before, I think the Secretary has been charged by the President to pursue the diplomatic tack. I don't think French perfidy is a surprise to her nor is the lesson is hers. The lesson here should be for the "multilateralists who believe that Kofi Annan's crew can solve problems in a difficult and dangerous world. Ned Lamont says we should negotiate with Iran and Syria. Sadly, Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) agrees.

Yet another failure of diplomacy, as Iran tests ten missiles and continues development of nuclear weapons. And the lesson remains unlearned.

Damn the Torpedoes

Why do we bother with these people? They're a perfect example of why diplomacy without muscle to back it up, is worthless.

Iran said on Sunday it would not suspend uranium enrichment, ruling out the main demand in a nuclear package backed by six world powers that aims to allay Western fears Tehran is seeking to build atomic bombs.

Iran says it will formally respond by Tuesday to proposals made by the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany. The six have offered incentives for Iran to suspend enrichment, a process that has both military and civilian uses.

Tehran, which insists its nuclear aims are purely civilian, shows no sign of accepting the package.

"We are not going to suspend (enrichment). The issue was that everything should come out of negotiations, but suspension of uranium enrichment is not on our agenda," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told a weekly news conference.

They're not going to stop.

At that point, why don't the diplomats hang it up?

Free Market Airline Security

UK's Daily Mail

The extraordinary scenes happened after some of the 150 passengers on a Malaga-Manchester flight overheard two men of Asian appearance apparently talking Arabic.

Passengers told cabin crew they feared for their safety and demanded police action. Some stormed off the Monarch Airlines Airbus A320 minutes before it was due to leave the Costa del Sol at 3am. Others waiting for Flight ZB 613 in the departure lounge refused to board it.

The incident fuels the row over airport security following the arrest of more than 20 people [what kind of "people"? -AlexC] allegedly planning the suicide-bombing of transatlantic jets from the UK to America. It comes amid growing demands for passenger-profiling and selective security checks.

It also raised fears that more travellers will take the law into their own hands - effectively conducting their own 'passenger profiles'.

Here's a crazy idea. TSA and airport security do their job (ie not-profiling), and encourage the passengers do the final round of security. Like this flight.

These two passengers raised enough concern (right or wrong) that the other passengers held the plane up. The passengers (and the crew, natch) have their own safety intimately in mind. Let them make the call.

The logistics of it might be tricky. (Does each seat have a "protest a passenger" button?)

Thoughts?

Sunday Morning Fare

For bloggers in one of those square states out west, the fifth Rocky Mountain Bloggers bash is nigh.

Friday, August 25th

A ThreeSources favorite, BlondeSagacity is this week's Powerline blog of the week.
Woo-hoo!

Bumper Sticker

Spotted by an alert ThreeSources reader in the great State of Nebraska:

George W. Bush... saving your ass whether you like it or not!

UPDATE: I'm corrected, it is a hat-tip to Jay Nordliner at NRO. I like the Nebraska story better, but we are all about the truth here at ThreeSources.

The Carter Years

My post yesterday was meant to remind people that the effects of elected bodies last longer than their terms.

President Carter served one term between 1977 and 1981. I trace a lot of terrorism back to his decision to not seriously pursue the Iranians who took American hostages.

Is it me, or are the Carter Years back? Grab your 8-tracks and start up the Pacer. Our 39th President himself made news yesterday with Arabist prattle and partisan attacks on the current Administration.

Jimmy Carter says he's concerned that Arab hatred of the United States will only continue to grow given the Bush administration's support for what he calls Israel's "unjustified attack" on Lebanese civilians.

Carter tells Germany's Der Spiegel: "I don't think Israel has any legal or moral justification for their massive bombing of the entire nation of Lebanon."

Then Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, whom he appointed, made what appears to be a patently political rebuke of the NSA surveillance program (Carter's people have a freakin' gift for timing, don't they?)

Now Andrew Young, Carter's UN Ambassador and civil rights icon is stepping down from a position because he made racial remarks. The Wall Street Journal News Page reports that "Civil-rights leader Andrew Young, who was hired to help Wal-Mart Stores Inc. improve its public image, said early Friday he was stepping down from his position as head of an outside support group amid criticism for remarks seen as racially offensive."

When asked about whether Wal*Mart should be faulted for pushing local retailers out, Young had a reply which does not come from the Wal*Mart PR playbook:

"Well, I think they should; they ran the 'mom and pop' stores out of my neighborhood," the paper quoted Mr. Young as saying. "But you see, those are the people who have been overcharging us, selling us stale bread and bad meat and wilted vegetables. And they sold out and moved to Florida. I think they've ripped off our communities enough. First it was Jews, then it was Koreans and now it's Arabs; very few black people own these stores."

I don't think he's out of a gig for long. The DNC will hire him to come up to Sausalito, Westchester county and the Hamptons to blast Wal*Mart. He'll probably get a raise.

All this from a single term. Just say no to a Democratic 110th.

UPDATE: I changed the link on the Judge Taylor Item to a free WSJ Editorial that better captures my accusation of partisanship. The editorial makes the point I've been crying to hear somebody else say about the NSA surveillance:

Judge Taylor sees an analogy here, but she manages to forget or overlook that no one is being denied his liberty and no evidence is being brought in criminal proceedings based on what the NSA might learn through listening to al Qaeda communications. The wiretapping program is an intelligence operation, not a law-enforcement proceeding.

That's the biggest argument in favor of the program (well, until 8/10).

Freedom Lovers in Hollywood

I completely missed this. Insty had a link yesterday, I am still reeling. It seems Nicole Kidman and some high-profile pals took out an ad in the LATimes to -- mirabile dictu -- oppose terrorism.

The actress, joined by 84 other high-profile Hollywood stars, directors, studio bosses and media moguls, has taken out a powerfully-worded full page advertisement in today's Los Angeles Times newspaper.

It specifically targets "terrorist organisations" such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine.

"We the undersigned are pained and devastated by the civilian casualties in Israel and Lebanon caused by terrorist actions initiated by terrorist organisations such as Hezbollah and Hamas," the ad reads.

"If we do not succeed in stopping terrorism around the world, chaos will rule and innocent people will continue to die.

"We need to support democratic societies and stop terrorism at all costs."

The Flaw in "Give Them Two Years"

An emailer today suggests that Democrats' taking charge in 2006 would force them to get serious about the war or show the country that they are not. A lot of Republicans (I'm pretty sure this guy would call himself one) are saying that. "Show the country what fools they are" I hear from less thoughtful people than my emailer.

No. And here's why. I'll recommend a great book: It's My Party: A Republican's Messy Love Affair with the GOP by Peter Robinson. He has this great riff in there about "If they don't win, they don't eat." He claims that Republican candidates can more frequently return to the private sector and make more than they would had they won (cf. Pete Coors). Democratic candidates may be wealthy but their staff members need the gig, and activists need victorious Democrats to give them work.

Two years of Pelosi-Reid rule will rejuvenate and reactivate the base of Democratic staffers. The WaPo reports Democrats' Stock Is Rising on K Street

Washington lobbying firms, trade associations and corporate offices are moving to hire more well-connected Democrats in response to rising prospects that the opposition party will wrest control of at least one chamber of Congress from Republicans in the November elections.

In what lobbyists are calling a harbinger of possible upheaval on Capitol Hill, many who make a living influencing government have gone from mostly shunning Democrats to aggressively recruiting them as lobbyists over the past six months or so.

Two years will cause much harm on K Street, remove any chance of another excellent SCOTUS nomination from President Bush, and will set back the war on terror. All of this lasts longer than two years.

Bring Back The Poll Tax

Noooooooooooo!

An Arizona Democrat is pursuing, by referendum, an initiative to give one lucky voter $1,000,000 [Insert your pinky in your mouth and use you Dr. Evil voice, if it helps] to increase voter turnout.

A WSL guest ed (free link) explains the ballot initiative and some past measures by its champion, including public funding of elections (boo!) and anti-gerrymandering (yay!). He addresses my complaint but misses:

One complaint that earns a scowl from the twinkle-eyed Mr. Osterloh is that "bad voters" will jam into polling places. "Bad voters?" he harrumphs, claiming just the opposite: that voters who stand to win $1 million will at long last take a personal interest in upcoming elections.

Certainly Mr. Osterloh's past measures have not always turned out as advertised. The effort to stop gerrymandering, although bringing sanity to the process, has not created very many politically mixed voting districts, nor ended "safe seats" for incumbents. Likewise, the Clean Elections law hasn't ended gridlock or stopped lobbyists from ghost-writing legislation. Arizona's post-reform statehouse is mostly business as usual.

While all of that is true, there's something exhilarating about the idea of dramatically shaking things up. Arizonans have jumped on fresh reform ideas like "clean elections" that are now spreading to other states. If the state launches another trend, it could catch on and lead to sweeping changes in U.S. elections. And with the odds of getting rich just for voting said to be about one in two million--long odds, but far better than most lotteries--Arizona elections might become more riveting even than Powerball.

I wouldn't use the term "bad voters" but the Bush v. Gore decision referenced a quote suggesting voters act with "the solemnity the occasion deserves." My trouble is that the million bucks will not make anybody more informed. Increasing the body count is important to some, but not me.

To not vote is a vote. In an economic light, you say that you have more valuable uses for your time. Maybe things are fine, or you don't like the candidates, or don't think they differ, whatever. It is your choice.

This will dent the "none of the above" vote that stays home and also increase fraud.

Mideast Conflict

I have been having a long email discussion with a close relative who votes Republican and supports the War on Terror, yet thinks Israel has no right to exist, that it never should have been put there, and that her citizens should apologize and leave.

This relative is blessed with great humor and sends this today as a denoment to our discussion:

A fleeing al-Qaida guerrilla, desperate for water, was plodding through the desert when he saw something far off in the distance.

Hoping to find water, he walked toward the object, only to find a little old Jewish man at a small stand selling neckties.
.
The Arab asked, "Do you have water?"
.
The Jewish man replied, "I have no water. Would you like to buy a tie? They are only 5 shekels."
.
The Arab shouted, "Idiot Jew! Israel should not exist! I do not need an overpriced tie. I need water! I should kill you, BUT I must find water first."
.
"OK," said the old Jew, "it does not matter that you do not want to buy a tie and that you hate me. I will show you that I am bigger than that. If you continue over that hill to the east for about five kilometers, you will find a lovely restaurant. It has all the water you need. Shalom."
.
Muttering, the Arab staggered away over the hill. Several hours later he staggered back, near collapse -
.
"Your brother won't let me in without a tie."

I'll have another cup

Who says there's no good news? Or that the NYTimes cannot be trusted?

A comprehensive, demonstrably true, well-reasoned and unbiased article sums up the positive effects of coffee. Studies suggest that coffee "reduces the risk of several serious ailments, including diabetes, heart disease and cirrhosis of the liver"

Nobody knows why, but it is suggested that:

Coffee contains antioxidants that help control the cell damage that can contribute to the development of the disease. It is also a source of chlorogenic acid, which has been shown in animal experiments to reduce glucose concentrations.

The more you drink, the better, although after six cups per day, the effects level off. I'm a big guy, I better have eight just to be safe.

I might sign up for TimesSelect, and Home delivery. The yuppies on the TV commercials look kinda wired.

XM vs Sirius

The Washington Post weighs in.

And the answer?

"Depends what you're looking for."

Myself, I got Sirius with a car I bought in 2004. Never really planned on getting either, since most of my (admittedly little) car time was spent listening to CDs or talk radio. But I gave it a shot and quickly discovered "First Wave" ... a station which plays New Wave bands of the late 70s and 80s. Perfect.

And "Hairnation"... 80's hair bands..... but my latest love. "Super Shuffle"

It plays random music from a variety of genres.... Hank Williams to Weezer and everything in between.

I thought I'd be listening to Howard Stern more, but I'm not exactly a morning person, either.

JK, your thoughts on XM?

One Trick Pony

People who have come to ThreeSources for reasoned debate and rational political dialogue might want to click on the blogroll or scroll down quickly. I've just read a disingenuous piece and I cannot guarantee politeness.

In the past week, my victory in the Connecticut Senate primary has been labeled everything from the death knell of the Democratic Party to the signal of our party's rebirth. Beneath all of this punditry is a question that I want to face directly: how the experience I will bring to the U.S. Senate will help Connecticut and the Democratic Party during this time of testing for our country.

So opens Democratic Senate Nominee for Co