July 16, 2008New Communist ManifestoThere's a problem with Reagan's bloodless victory in the Cold War - all of the communists were free to go elsewhere and carry on their life's work. Their latest manifesto (that I'm aware of) is called: Agenda 21. To wit: The 27 Principles of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. A few examples: Principle 1 - Think none of this will ever effect you? My brother learned differently when he applied for a building permit in Boulder County. Sustainability in Land Use in Boulder County What is sustainability? (Notice that Boulder County now has a second web presence, in the .org domain.) Oy.
Posted by JohnGalt at 3:18 PM
| Comments (5)
But jk thinks:
And how is your brother's sweatshop assault weapons facility coming along? I think it's a great idea. Love this from the Boulder site: But a truly "sustainable" community goes far beyond basic energy efficiency and pollution reduction. A sustainable community provides for all the needs of its inhabitants (including people, animals and habitats). This includes protecting open spaces, natural habitats and landscapes; ensuring access to basic human needs such as food, housing and health care; encouraging an active community involvement in social, political and community activities; and providing the every-day services that make daily tasks possible - services such as maintaining transportation routes and ensuring fair, accurate, democratic elections. Who needs life, liberty, and the pursuit of happines when you got all that? Posted by: jk at July 16, 2008 5:14 PM
But jk thinks:
As to your main point, the problem is not the bloodless destruction of Communism, Jay Nordlinger at National Review has frequently said that the problem is that there was no Nuremberg. There should have been war crime trials and a few folks hung. Posted by: jk at July 16, 2008 5:18 PM
But Perry Eidelbus thinks:
Don't you wish for the days when we ostracized communists at home, and shot (at) them abroad? Good thing you didn't go through the whole thing. Onion is blocked at work, and I would have vomited had I read them all. "shall therefore respect international law providing protection for the environment in times of armed conflict" IOW words, scorched earth for me, but not for thee! Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at July 17, 2008 8:48 AM
But Boulder Refugee thinks:
Now you know why I'm a Boulder refugee. Posted by: Boulder Refugee at July 17, 2008 2:31 PM
But johngalt thinks:
This helps everyone else understand BR, but I already knew. I'm a Boulder refugee myself, now living in Weld County after 17 years (plus 4 more years of college) living in not just the county, but the city of Boulder. With a Longmont mailing address my brother held out longer than we did, but he'll be next. Posted by: johngalt at July 17, 2008 3:26 PMMay 17, 2008Quote of the DayInstapundit links to a San Diego Christian leader who wants to organize a boycott of Starbucks over its new (old) logo. "According to Mr. Dice, the new image 'has a naked woman on it with her legs spread like a prostitute. Need I say more? It's extremely poor taste, and the company might as well call themselves Slutbucks.'" Commenters on the Amazon Al Dente blog point out that it is the original logo, that the slut is actually a mermaid, et cetera. But this comment really hit home: Vile Starbucks Siren, wafting forth her burnt caffeine aroma, luring poor hipsters to their overpriced doom. UPDATE: This Internet Thingy might really take off. Here's an informative history of the Starbucks logo.
Posted by jk at 7:46 PM
October 3, 2007Former President Raises VoicePresident James Earl Carter has a reputation as a pacifist, but the Wall Street Journal reports that he shouted during an "Elders" KABKABIYA, Sudan -- Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter got in a shouting match Wednesday with Sudanese security services who blocked him from a town in Darfur where he was trying to meet representatives of ethnic African refugees from the ongoing conflict. A friend of ThreeSources sends a free link to a Yahoo/AP story on this, and suggests "The obvious lesson is that Carter and symbolism, along with .50, might get you a cup of coffee. Marines will get you results."
Posted by jk at 10:17 AM
| Comments (2)
But mdmhvonpa thinks:
This is an evil thought, but ExPres Carter could have done A LOT for the oppressed people of Darfur by getting shot. Posted by: mdmhvonpa at October 3, 2007 11:53 AM
But Perry Eidelbus thinks:
Similarly, I was thinking "Too bad it didn't happen to him." Benefits: we won't have Jimmy Carter to listen to anymore, and it'll give us an excuse to go in and kick Sudanese Muslim ass. Cons: can anyone think of any? We won't have Jimmy Carter to kick around anymore, but he's getting awfully tiring. Evil thoughts? Damn right. Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at October 3, 2007 1:42 PMSeptember 11, 2007Off-Grid LivingFor lunch in her modest apartment, Madeline Nelson tossed a salad made with shaved carrots and lettuce she dug out of a Whole Foods dumpster. She flavored the dressing with miso powder she found in a trash bag on a curb in Chinatown. She baked bread made with yeast plucked from the garbage of a Middle Eastern grocery store. In the country I grew up in, if Ms Nelson had kids, they would take away them away. Now she's celebrated. Freeganism was born out of environmental justice and anti-globalization movements dating to the 1980s. The concept was inspired in part by groups like "Food Not Bombs," an international organization that feeds the homeless with surplus food that's often donated by businesses. I work with a guy, still very liberal, who lived on a commune in the Seattle area in the seventies. They tried this. It's not new. I'm not quite sure why Marty left but "not really working out" seems to be a plausable reason. Read the whole, sad sad thing.
Posted by AlexC at 2:15 PM
| Comments (6)
But jk thinks:
More transparency: this is what life is like if you "opt out of capitalism." Posted by: jk at September 11, 2007 3:34 PM
But AlexC thinks:
... by living off of it's refuse. One of the quotes from captions... "She concedes that she was somewhat surprised once when she did not not get sick after eating salmon retrieved from a trash container." Perhaps it's a miracle... a sign from Our Lady of Perpetual Squalor. Posted by: AlexC at September 11, 2007 3:41 PM
But Perry Eidelbus thinks:
I had written a while back on starving Kenyans refusing food out of pride, and Freegans' misguided economics. http://eidelblog.blogspot.com/2006/02/beggars-being-choosers.html Putting aside the safety issues (never mind garbage cans, if something's left on the street corner, you can bet it's for a goddamn good reason!), for most of us, it's just not economically practical to search for hours to find scraps of food. It's better to spend those hours actually working, then go to the grocery store that helps minimize our search costs. Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at September 12, 2007 10:22 AM
But jk thinks:
I'll try and play JohnGalt here (he's probably on a cattle drive or something). It's a philosophy problem. This is what happens when you give up your individual interests to pursue a nebulous public good. This woman has a college education and had a decent career. She allowed herself to believe that this is somehow better for the planet. Where jg would likely not join me, is that I would point out that the world is really much better off having her work and create wealth and innovation. Let the professional trash removal crew do the job; they have a distinct comparative advantage.
But johngalt thinks:
I would join you in that assessment, JK: The "world" is much better off when every individual refuses to give up his individual interests. I wasn't on a cattle drive yesterday. I was on sick leave. Damn salmon. Posted by: johngalt at September 12, 2007 2:57 PM
But jk thinks:
The Salmon Moussssssse! Gets 'em everytime. Posted by: jk at September 12, 2007 3:52 PMSeptember 10, 2007More TransparencyDon Luskin links to The World Without Us website. Be sure to watch the animation that shows how, in 370 years or so, nature can completely reclaim your house. What an improvement. I appreciate these people sharing their true goals. A good friend who is both a moonbat and an honest interlocutor, sends a link to George Carlin's take on global warming: in a nutshell, "Nothing wrong with the planet. The planet is fine. The PEOPLE are fucked." The planet'll be here and we'll be long gone. Just another failed mutation. Just another closed-end biological mistake. An evolutionary cul-de-sac. The planet'll shake us off like a bad case of fleas. A surface nuisance. For my part, you can put me down as pro-people. I'm willing to go on a limb.
Posted by jk at 12:01 PM
August 20, 2007Bill Maher, Profile in CourageJonathan Last at Galley Slaves is extremely impressed. It seems that Bill Maher is releasing a movie called "Religious," next Easter. And Maher is going to risk Hollywood ostracism by actually criticizing religion. I hope he does not crack under the pressure. Last says “This is why we have artists--to speak truth to the powerful." Anyway, Maher had this to say about the movie, "We talked to everybody. We went everywhere. We went to every place where there is religion. We went to Vatican City. We went to Jerusalem. We went to Salt Lake City. And I think I’ve insulted everybody!"
Posted by jk at 4:53 PM
| Comments (1)
But Perry Eidelbus thinks:
For some time, I've wanted to organize a "Koran Pooper Scooper Day": when you walk your dog, bring a copy of the Koran and rip out a few pages as necessary. Personally, I'd love having a fatwa issued against me, but there would probably be a big backlash against me at my job. Not that any of my superiors are saying I can't express myself privately on my own time, but publicity may follow me to the office and interfere with my work. Remember, some guy named Jesus offended a whole bunch of Sanhedrin, Pharisees and scribes. Considering the political power they wielded, they were more like mullahs. Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at August 21, 2007 1:50 PMJuly 7, 2007A Toast to LiberalsNo, not Mises-Hayek-Friedman liberals. Real, progressive, Paul Wellstone, Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale liberals -- are they all from Minnesota? First, an atta-boy to Garrison Keillor. Lileks tells us: In other old news: <keillorvoice> It’s the birthday of the Prairie Home Companion. </keillorvoice> The first live broadcast of this Minnesota institution happened today in 1974, and buzz.mn extends its congrats to Garrison Keillor and all the folks at PHC for thirty-three years of keeping the traditions of old radio alive. I listened to Keillor every Saturday until the 104th Congress was seated and I could no longer stand his cruel and unfunny political chatter. But he remains a singular talent. I watched the Prairie Home Companion Movie during a visit with Sugarchuck. It was good, but I watched a July 4th show on PBS that I found even more entertaining than the fictional portrayal (oddly enough, Meryl Streep starred in both). There's never been anything like it before of since. Boulder is full of bumper stickers that their owners think to be the height of comedy. They're all sanctimonious and are almost entirely unamusing. A good friend has a Volvo (natch!) with "God is NOT a Republican!" But last week,. I saw a funny bumper sticker. On the back of a Subaru Forrester (double natch!): "I'll be post-feminist in the post-patriarchy!" Can't say I'd agree with this young woman's view of life and society, but I at least got a good laugh.
Posted by jk at 11:54 AM
| Comments (1)
But johngalt thinks:
"Post-patriarchy." That's when Hillary Clinton of the mommy party becomes president and tries to make the government EVERYBODY'S mommy. Right? If that happens I predict that all of the government's patriarchal "life partners" (i.e. taxpayers) will seek a divorce. Failing that they'll quit their jobs and become "deadbeat patriarchs." July 2, 2007Quote of the DayWe're plagued with an every-man-for-himself attitude. That attitude may have been good in helping us build this country and helping us become the innovators that we are. But we won't make it through the 21st century intact as a great country if we don't adopt a different ethos that says we're all in the same boat. We sink or swim together. We have to help each other. -- Michael Moore, interviewed in US News and World ReportHat-tip: Don Luskin I'm not going to say a word. I just post this for your enjoyment. UPDATE: Austan Goolsbee reviews Sicko in Slate. This very bright economist is advising Senator Obama. Hat-tip: Greg Mankiw, who is advising Gov. Romney. When somebody hires Art Laffer, let me know.
Posted by jk at 4:00 PM
| Comments (3)
But Perry Eidelbus thinks:
Were I in the same boat as Michael Moore, I'd be afraid that he'd eat me. Or make us capsize. The latter is the more appropriate analogy, because it's disgusting slobs like him, and their I-don't-give-a-**** attitude that the rest of us should pay for their poor lifestyles. Such slugs expect the rest of us to share the costs of health care equally, when it's their morbid gluttony that makes them a burden on us. By the way, after losing 35 pounds, I'm stronger and in better shape than in my teens, when I was 30 pounds lighter than now. My heart rate went from 70-80 per minute to the low 60s. Some might consider 70s to be normal, but it's too high for a decent level of fitness. Also, think about it: a heart that pumps less but more efficiently won't give out after only 60 years. All this because I chose to give a damn about my own health. My friend Jackie Passey was right all along: fat is a choice. Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at July 2, 2007 4:39 PM
But johngalt thinks:
"Plagued?" Psh-awwww. Perry, Michael Moore would ask the government to make your heart help pump his blood if he thought there was a way to do so. Posted by: johngalt at July 3, 2007 3:02 PM
But johngalt thinks:
We are "plagued" Michael, with an every-other-man-is-for-me attitude. Now you tell me, who is the selfish one? Posted by: johngalt at July 3, 2007 3:17 PMApril 16, 2007501c3sOn this dark day (well tomorrow) where does your tax dollar go?
Posted by AlexC at 5:27 PM
| Comments (5)
But jk thinks:
Talk about an abused law. It's bad enough that all these execrable groups are tax free, it also puts the government in charge of deciding who's good and good not. Steve Forbes was on Kudlow the other night calling for a flat tax of 17% with a family of four's first 45,000 being exempt. I was weeping as I thought of the economic explosion that would ignite in this country. As Silence would say, only 535 reasons we won't do it...
But AlexC thinks:
Actually, Senator Arlen Specter (i'm not really a fan).... is introducing a 20% flat tax. Posted by: AlexC at April 17, 2007 5:50 PM
But jk thinks:
Okay, 534. Sadly, I cannot imagine the Senior Senator from Pennsylvania would vote for a Senatorial-power-reducing flat tax if it were poised to succeed. Posted by: jk at April 17, 2007 6:17 PM
But dagny thinks:
As JG notes below, a flat, "percentage," tax is not a flat tax. Nor is it a fair tax. It is, I must admit, a big improvement on the current situation. Why don't we have more proposals out there for consumption based taxation. Think how much the government could save by eliminating the IRS. Posted by: dagny at April 18, 2007 10:24 AM
But jk thinks:
Consumption based taxation is far and away my first choice, but I think that you need to repeal the 16th Amendment. lest you end up with a British-style hybrid. Removing Congressional power and social engineering from the tax code is so daunting a challenge, I will take it in any form. Consumption tax is the best idea but the hardest to get. The appeal of Forbes’s suggestion was that it is explainable, defensible (the exemption blunts regressivity concerns) and could be put in place by a single Congress that rode to power on the idea. November 27, 2006Kerry Without The HumorI watched Rep. Rangel yesterday on Fox News Sunday and my jaw dropped to the floor. He said the exact same thing Senator Kerry did in his "botched joke." Nobody made too big a deal of it and my mind went on to other things. Taranto hit it today; Hot-air has the video up; and Instapundit linked to the Hot-Air post. I don't know, does anybody care that an incoming committee chair said this: If a young fella has an option of having a decent career or joining the army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq. or No young, bright individual wants to fight just because of a bonus and just because of educational benefits. I hope that's true, Congressman. The ones I have had the privilege of meeting do it for far more important reasons, and it frightens me that you do not understand.
Posted by jk at 2:31 PM
| Comments (1)
But TrekMedic251 thinks:
The last humorous thing Kerry did was order a cheesesteak w/ Swiss Cheese at Pat's Steaks in '04! Posted by: TrekMedic251 at November 28, 2006 11:06 PMNovember 26, 2006They Wuz Robbed!Rove's operatives at Diebold were unable to steal a Congressional majority, but a Democratic Club in Pennsylvania (where else?) felt the stinging bite of crime last week. Dr. Rick at The American Check-Up reports: According to Bethlehem police, thieves ransacked the Edgeboro Democratic Club, 1427 Marvine St., after kicking a hole in a side door between 4 p.m. Thursday and 6 p.m. Monday. Once inside, police said, they stole a round beer clock, 12 to 14 whiskey bottles, two cases of assorted beer, two speakers, a stereo, a touch-screen video game, 11/2 kegs of beer, a case of malt liquor and 500 packs of cigarettes. Malt Liquor and cigarettes, No wonder we lost. Doctor Rick wonders "what else would you expect the local Dems to have? Hookers?" I wonder what might have been taken that they perhaps did not mention to the police. In related news, I am considering changing parties.
Posted by jk at 6:38 PM
| Comments (2)
But AlexC thinks:
Why in the world would the Dems need 10,000 cigarettes on hand? It's not like any one or 10 people could smoke those quickly. Were they buying votes? Crazier things have happened. Posted by: AlexC at November 26, 2006 11:17 PM
But mdmhvonpa thinks:
If I know the dems, I'd think they were trying to influence the Native American vote. Not that I'm saying that Native Americans drink and smoke alot. Maybe it was the Italian vote .... Posted by: mdmhvonpa at November 27, 2006 1:06 PMNovember 17, 2006Senator Edwards and the PS3I was gonna link to this, but I didn't have the right hook. Wal-Mart issued a press release this afternoon saying that an aide to John Edwards, the former Democratic vice presidential candidate and North Carolina senator, contacted a Wal-Mart store in Raleigh, N.C., in search of a Sony PlayStation3 “on behalf of the senator’s family.” The coveted game console, available in limited quantities, goes on sale at midnight tonight. ThreeSources friend Sugarchuck rides to my rescue. "Two Americas," says sc in an email, "the one where people wait their turn in line and play by the rules and the second where fat cat trial lawyers try to use influence and power to jump to the front of the line and get theirs while the regular guy waits."
Posted by jk at 12:13 PM
November 9, 2006Yeah, Death Camps!
The question, asks Progressive magazine editor Ruth Conniff, "is what is the government planning to do with mass roundups of people?" After all, Bush and other Republican leaders have spent five years calling Democrats and others who disagree with them traitors and terrorists. Following so much hateful rhetoric, you can't blame liberals for wondering whether they too are about to be declared "enemy combatants." They're not paranoid; they're just paying attention. And Now, Martial Law About a week ago some left-wing bloggers began circulating rumors that Bush had secretly signed something called the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" that "allows the president to declare a 'public emergency' and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to 'suppress public disorder.'" I couldn't find the text of the law at the time, formerly H.R. 5122, or a reliable media account, so I decided not to report on it. I can now confirm the bloggers' account. Bush signed the JWDAA hours after the MCA, in a furtive closed-door White House ceremony. There is, buried deep down in Title V, Subtitle B, Part II, Section 525(a) of the JWDAA, a coup. The Bush Administration has quietly stolen the National Guard away from the states. Just a reminder that winning an election doesn't make the undo the insanity.
Posted by AlexC at 4:48 PM
November 4, 2006GOTV 3Here's how not to write a get out the vote letter. First, advice to blog readers.
With that in mind, let's get to the letter.
This is an extremely important election and it is crucial that we all come out and vote. Ed Rendell, Bob Brady and Babbette Joseph are all running for reelection and deserve our support. Voting date. Check. Sort of. Voting Place. Check. Candidates. Check. Well... except her name is Babette Josephs. Office they're running for? I have no idea. Oh, we forgot Bob Casey, he's running for something. Well, Bob Casey is mentioned twice. That's a lot right? Wrong. Because Rick Santorum is mentioned 11 times. After saying vote for Bob Casey, they enumerate the reasons for voting AGAINST Rick Santorum. Apparently, they are legion. The post is titled "Vote Against Hate", but I fail to see anything but for Santorum. Anyway... this is not the best part. That's this part.
and
Emphasis added. This blogger distributed the letter to voters in his precinct. Let's hope he got them all. ;) If the Democrats lose in Philadelphia, it's 'cause they did it to themselves.
Posted by AlexC at 10:42 PM
| Comments (3)
But TrekMedic251 thinks:
I got the EXACT same letter for my voting poll location. Except I'm up in the 34th Ward and they want me to vote for Bob Brady, (PA-01). Why bother? He ran unopposed in the primary and he's unopposed now. That means he already has the job. Dumbasses! Posted by: TrekMedic251 at November 5, 2006 1:17 PM
But jk thinks:
Wow. I can't believe that you have come out as pro-hate. Posted by: jk at November 5, 2006 1:26 PM
But johngalt thinks:
The real question here is, who's dumber: Democrat voters or Democrat candidates and their operatives? It looks like a dead heat from Palm Beach county. Posted by: johngalt at November 6, 2006 2:57 PMNovember 3, 2006Academia and HalloweenWonderful. From the Ivory Towers.
An obvious question: would Gutmann have posed with a guest--or even allowed him into her house--if he'd dressed as Adolf Hitler or a Nazi SS officer? A KKK member? Follow the link for pictures.
Posted by AlexC at 12:23 AM
| Comments (2)
But jk thinks:
I dunno, maybe it’s my turn to defend the tower inhabitants. The guy has MidEastern features. He's in college. He came dressed as a terrorist. All the things wrong with academia, I have to say this doesn't bother me very much. I'll concede the point of a double standard but the terrorist is topical and relevant. A Nazi or a Klansman or a Senior Senator from West Virginia would be importune but irrelevant.
But johngalt thinks:
JK has a point that the costumes (there was more than one) were topical, but they were certainly in bad taste. The interesting observation being made is that they're not in bad taste to ALL Americans, only to those who think the enemy is a danger to us. Not coincidentally, a vast majority of people on college campii are not in that camp. Last week's episode of the CBS (of all places) soldier drama "The Unit" included some scenes of an army wife interacting with war protesters. I'll blog it shortly, but the relevant passage was when she was asked by a dirty hippie, "What side are you on?" She replied, "I'm on the American side." Posted by: johngalt at November 4, 2006 12:15 PMOctober 31, 2006Supporting the TroopsDon't forget, these guys support the troops. Update: Signs of a meltdown?
Posted by AlexC at 2:09 PM
| Comments (3)
But jk thinks:
John Kerry, supporting the troops since 1970! Posted by: jk at October 31, 2006 2:19 PM
But jk thinks:
A Kerry press release: "Washington – Senator John Kerry issued the following statement in response to White House Press Secretary Tony Snow, assorted right wing nut-jobs, and right wing talk show hosts desperately distorting Kerry’s comments about President Bush to divert attention from their disastrous record" Fair to point out that AlexC is neither Tony Snow nor a talk show host. Posted by: jk at October 31, 2006 4:10 PM
But AlexC thinks:
I prefer "digital brownshirt", just ask Al. http://lileks.com/bleats/archive/04/0604/062504.html Posted by: AlexC at October 31, 2006 8:09 PMOctober 18, 2006Chevy Truck AdIt's not just me. In a previous life I was a VP (that stands for Boss's kid) of an advertising agency. I won't say that makes me an intelligent critic of advertising but it did teach me to look past entertainment value and try to judge its efficacy. The Chevy Silverado ad with John Mellencamp makes me stop to watch it every time -- just to see if it's really that bad. Seth Stevenson thinks it is. Writing for Slate Magazine, he gives it a "D" (I'd've gone for D+). This ad makes me—and, judging by my e-mail, some of you—very angry. It's not OK to use images of Rosa Parks, MLK, the Vietnam War, the Katrina disaster, and 9/11 to sell pickup trucks. It's wrong. These images demand a little reverence and quiet contemplation. They are not meant to be backed with a crappy music track and then mushed together in a glib swirl of emotion tied to a product launch. Please, Chevy, have a modicum of shame next time. So it's me, and Stevenson, and Jonathan Last at Galley Slaves. Stevenson goes on to compare it to President Carter's Malaise speech and ends with this: Automotive blog Jalopnik reports that an early version of the ad included footage of a nuclear mushroom cloud. Well, that would have brightened things up. I wonder if they could squeeze in the Rodney King beating and the Abu Ghraib photos, too. Edgy. I give them the D+ for edgy. This could be a series, next the Dixie Chicks then Neil Young.
Posted by jk at 8:09 PM
| Comments (2)
But mdmhvonpa thinks:
Anybody have Cat Steven's cell phone number? I lost his old one when he changed his name and got barred from US flights. Posted by: mdmhvonpa at October 19, 2006 9:44 AM
But AlexC thinks:
Why would you want to call him? Aren't his phones tapped? Posted by: AlexC at October 19, 2006 4:40 PMOctober 10, 2006BabsBarbara Streisand speaks truth to power, I guess.
Though most of the crowd offered polite applause during the slightly humorous routine, it got a bit too long, especially for a few in the audience who just wanted to hear Streisand sing like she had been doing for the past hour. "Come on, be polite!" the well-known liberal implored during the sketch as she and "Bush" exchanged zingers. But one heckler wouldn't let up. And finally, Streisand let him have it. "Shut the (expletive) up!" Streisand bellowed, drawing wild applause. "Shut up if you can't take a joke!" With that one F-word, the jeers ended. And the message was delivered _ no one gets away with trying to upstage Barbra Streisand, especially not in her hometown. Once the outburst (which Streisand later apologized for) was over, Streisand noted that "the artist's role is to disturb," and delivered a message of tolerance before launching into a serenely beautiful rendition of "Somewhere." That put the focus back on what the audience came for _ her voice, one of the greatest female instruments of her generation. If her role is to disturb, I for one eagerly anticipate the skit featuring witty repartee with Mohammed.
Posted by AlexC at 11:36 AM
| Comments (3)
But Rick Tennesen thinks:
No one listens to Babs..... Or the Baldwins. Posted by: Rick Tennesen at October 10, 2006 1:27 PM
But jk thinks:
If her role is to disturb, I hope she graced the audience with "Sam, You Made the Pants Too Long" Posted by: jk at October 10, 2006 1:27 PM
But TrekMedic251 thinks:
Give her the Ditzy Chicks treatment! Posted by: TrekMedic251 at October 12, 2006 10:50 PMOctober 8, 2006PerspectiveI saw this tonight...
What would you call me? An idiot at the least, perhaps ill-syntaxed. No matter what, it really begs the question of what the ideal would be. A white guy? At which point I'm a bigot, or really really really clumsy with English. Anyway, here's what it really said.
On the front page of DailyKos, it's ok. They're liberals. Nothing to see here.
Posted by AlexC at 10:24 PM
| Comments (1)
But TrekMedic251 thinks:
OK,..then what does that make Lynn Swann up here in PA? He's a black conservative in a VERY red state with two big blue blotches on the edges. Seems black voters ARE color-blind, because Fast Eddie Rendell, the D incumbent, is killing Swann by 20+ points in the polls. Posted by: TrekMedic251 at October 9, 2006 9:35 PMAugust 23, 2006Risky BusinessA 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 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.
Posted by jk at 12:06 PM
| Comments (2)
But AlexC thinks:
I believe the proper term is "moon-battery." Moon-battery. Posted by: AlexC at August 23, 2006 1:33 PM
But jk thinks:
Surprised MS Word didn't suggest that, thanks. Posted by: jk at August 23, 2006 3:27 PMAugust 18, 2006The Carter YearsMy 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.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).
Posted by jk at 10:39 AM
| Comments (1)
But jk thinks:
I have a dream in which every American, without regard to the color of his skin, can overcharge his brothers and sisters and sell stale bread, bad meat, and wilted vegetables! Posted by: jk at August 18, 2006 8:31 PMAugust 11, 2006Smoke 'em if you got 'emI quit smoking about 15 years ago. Unlike poor President Johnson, I lost the cravings over the course of several years. I could even have an occasional one (in Ireland, everybody smokes) but I am a cured man. That is, until I read Clay Risen's column in TNR online. Now I think it may be my duty to take it up. Risen is upset at people who call themselves liberal and advance a liberal agenda (We're talking Humphrey liberals here, not von Mises), yet, gasp-cough-cough, smoke! Not only do they contribute to pollution and give their money to evil tobacco companies, but they express solidarity with bete noir Ayn Rand! Among Ayn Rand's stranger quirks was her insistence that smoking was not just a right, but a moral obligation. To her, the burning cigarette was nothing less than the physical embodiment of the individual spirit: "When a man thinks, there is a spot of fire alive in his mind--and it is proper that he should have the burning point of a cigarette as his one expression," she wrote in her propaganda tract-cum-novel Atlas Shrugged. These people are such scolds. They decry Puritanism, but they want to bring back the stocks for smokers, and SUV drivers, and Wal*Mart shoppers, and people who don't listen to NPR. For Rand, while the personal consequences of smoking proved ultimately compelling (she gave up once she developed lung cancer), it's highly unlikely that the environmental or public health arguments would have mattered much; after all, under her philosophy of radical selfishness, her desires were absolute trumps over any construction of the "greater good." This says a lot more about Mr. Risen than it says about Ms. Rand.
Posted by jk at 2:43 PM
| Comments (4)
But johngalt thinks:
This Risen is an angry young man, isn't he? The contemporary resurgence of Rand's ideas must really be getting under his skin. Though the Atlas Shrugged quote is accurate, Rand considered smoking emblematic of man's dominion over nature, not a "moral obligation." This was in 1957 mind you, long before objective scientific evidence of smoking's health consequences was known. "Lung cancer?" What's he smoking? Rand died of heart failure. (I know, I know, not enough tofu.) http://www.nndb.com/people/097/000030007/ Here's the real outrage, though: Attributing her mere "desires" as absolute trumps over the "greater good" evidencing her philosophy of "radical selfishness." What RATIONAL selfishness holds is that every man is an end in himself and is morally free to choose his own course in life so long as he refrains from the initiation of force against other men. (What could be more liberal, Clay?) This essay is black and white proof that Ann Coulter is right: These people are religious followers of the deity called "public good." Rand and I? Atheists.
But johngalt thinks:
P.S. Thanks for the hanging curveball, JK. Posted by: johngalt at August 12, 2006 6:02 PM
But jk thinks:
Wasn't sure you'd swing. I remember your being very anti-smoking. The Ayn Rand Biographical FAQ says "A few authors, apparently careless with their research, have stated that Rand died of lung cancer. Rand was diagnosed with lung cancer in 1974, but she underwent surgery, which she reported to be "a complete success." She also stopped smoking at this time. There is no evidence that she experienced any recurrence of the cancer or that it was directly involved in her death, which did not come until 1982." I was a smoker when I read Atlas Shrugged and I remember that quote vividly. I completely agree with your interpretation. It's about having such complete control of fire that you carry it in your hand when uncontrolled fire had bedeviled man for millennia.
But johngalt thinks:
Kudos for the research, friend. I could find nothing about it in my brief attempt. As for my opposition to smoking, your memory is correct. I still revulse at the smell of cigarette smoke (cigars are a different matter) but I've learned that the right of private property trumps my personal preferences. As long as I'm free to avoid an establishment, 'tis the owner's right to choose smoking or non. So there you have it: Two deeply held and principled beliefs coexisting. Ain't it a beautiful thing this consistent, integrated philosophy! Posted by: johngalt at August 13, 2006 1:41 PMJuly 25, 2006Life Imitates "Night Court"(Apologies to James Taranto for the headline...) There was a great line in the old TV show "Night Court." Ambitious lawyer Dan Fielding (John Larroquette), hears discussion of the Nobel Peace Prize. He says "I'd kill for one of those." Fast forward a couple decades, and life has caught up: Peace prize winner 'could kill' Bush Hat-tip Everyday Economist
Posted by jk at 11:18 AM
July 12, 2006Beyond LileksI think James Lileks is one of the greatest writers of our time. I have a bunch of his books and I've given many away for gifts. His "screedy" stuff rings with joy. He displays an easy patriotism to which I relate. But even the great man comes up short today. His Bleat becomes a takedown of Joel Stein's Eek! A flag on my lawn! in the Los Angeles Times. Lileks is in good form: That’s the key line, right there. Not because he admits to looking down on people who put up a flag on the Fourth; that’s hardly unusual in the thin moist demographic stratum he occupies. It’s not that they don’t like the flag, necessarily, and it’s not that they don’t enjoy the Fourth, but put the two together and people might get the wrong idea. No, what amused me was the sight of a writer who’d burrowed so far up the aperture of his warm narcissistic cocoon he has no idea how he comes across. I have liberal friends who fly flags without apology or worry, because they’re Americans, because it’s the Fourth, because they love their country, and because they don’t believe that trinity is the property of the other side. Which it isn’t. When it comes to struggling to get the flag on the pole just right, we’re all in this together. But to Mr. Stein, these are people to be looked down upon. Places deserving of a sniff and a snort. Cringe, O Banner-deck’d exurb jingo-huts, at the withering Looking Down Upon, exacted with bone-dry scorn by a professional thinkerator. But when you read the original column, you get the feeling James went too easy on him. Stein is "in a tizzy" because a Realtor has -- sit down for this -- put a small American Flag on his lawn. The subhead asks "When a realtor sticks the Stars and Stripes in your front yard, do you trash it or stash it?" So the reason I didn't want to put a flag outside wasn't because I disapprove of our international policies. It was because I didn't want to associate myself with the other people who put them up, and with their unquestioning, tribal, us-versus-them, arrogant mentality. Though I love being American, I don't want to proclaim it as the sole basis of my identity.Flying it proudly is not an option for Joel Stein. Eek. He's in a tizzy. poor chap.
Posted by jk at 8:23 PM
June 18, 2006I thought Sen. Frist bothered meI cannot get this out of my mind. James Waterton at Samizdata posts on the Weirdest father-daughter relationship ever. Being an Aussie, he has possibly never been to Arkansas, but the post refers to a serial Kos commenter by the handle of CheChe (I do not make this stuff up!). CheChe takes the Kos Cause of Disapprobation for the day and puts it, MadLibs style, into the following tender parental anecdote: I don't think I've ever seen such a look of misery and dejection on the face of my daughter as I just did a moment ago. Always the daughter, always a new apogee in misery and dejection: I don't think I've ever seen such a look of misery and dejection on the face of my daughter as I just did a moment ago. She just couldn't understand why the President would be spying on everyone. "Even my Grandma?" she asked pitifully. [...] When I finished her lower lip started to tremble and her eyes began to fill with tears, "Daddy" she said, "why are the Republicans doing this to the country?" Well, that was it for me: I finally fell apart. She just fell into my arms and we both began sobbing for several minutes. Poor kid! I don't think I've ever seen such a look of misery and dejection on the face of my daughter as I just did a moment ago. She just couldn't understand why the President would be going to Iraq when so many things are wrong in this country. "Doesn’t Mr. Bush care about us anymore?" she asked pitifully. Reading this post, I don't think my wife has ever seen such a look of misery and dejection as...
Posted by jk at 6:41 PM
| Comments (1)
But AlexC thinks:
May 31, 2006Philosophy of the Nugeln an interview, Ted Nugent made some funny comments. (Warning! Coarse language!!) I confess to a grudging respect for the system by which he governs his land, though I’m not sure I’d like to see his reign extended to the state of Michigan. HT: LGF
Posted by Cyrano at 1:46 AM
April 10, 2006The State of the LeftJonah Goldberg at NRO thinks that the riots in France are telling for what they're rioting about: "These rabid rebels smashing their way through people and property alike, shouting revolutionary slogans and playing Robespierre in a FCUK hoodie are demanding . . . continued job security with paid vacations. Gone are the days of tearing down the system. Now is the time to burn a car for better dental benefits." In typical Jonah fashion, he is funny with an underlying message. The Republicans may have atrophied as a governing power in the previous ten years (cf. ThreeSources blog), but the left always seems to be fighting to not tamper with Social Security (1935) or not change the Great Society (1965). Goldberg points out that it's now the left who have stolen his old boss's mantra and are "standing athwart history yelling stop!" The smartest and most passionate thinkers of American liberalism are more actuary than revolutionary. Scan the pages of The New Republic or The American Prospect and you will learn that the sunny uplands of history can be reached not by sticking it to the man but by expanding the earned income tax credit and jiggling around some obscure provision of Medicare Part B. They're the rebels with a clause. I suppose they have big ideas over at "The Nation." But the mainstream left and Democratic party and the left-of0center think tanks seem a little thin on the ideas side. The rest of this article is worthy of discussion as well. He discusses a new book from Charles Murray called "In Our Hands: A Plan to Replace the Welfare State." He's going to replace welfare with a direct payment to every American. I'm gonna have to think about that one, but the point is that an idea is out there. UPDATE: The statist left wins in France: WSJ: PARIS – French President Jacques Chirac scrapped a controversial labor-contract law aimed at boosting youth employment, in a major about-face following weeks of strikes and mass protests by students and workers.
Posted by jk at 11:49 AM
March 31, 2006Faster Please.How about this idea from Ronald Aronson at the Nation?
I can hear tongues clucking the conventional wisdom that the "S" word is the kiss of death for any American political initiative. Since the collapse of Communism, hasn't "socialism"--even the democratic kind--reeked of everything obsolete and discredited? Isn't it sheer absurdity to ask today's mainstream to pay attention to this nineteenth-century idea? Didn't Tony Blair reshape "New Labour" into a force capable of winning an unprecedented string of victories in Britain only by first defeating socialism and socialists in his party? And for a generation haven't we on the American left declared socialist ideology irrelevant time and again in the process of shaping our feminist, antiwar, progay, antiracist, multicultural, ecological and community-oriented identities?
Posted by AlexC at 3:19 PM
| Comments (1)
But jk thinks:
Doggies! I don't want to step on anybody's "feminist, antiwar, progay, antiracist, multicultural, ecological and community-oriented identit[y]," but let me offer a positive reflection. One of my favorite articles in many moons is Michael Strong's call for divorce of leftism from liberalism (See my D-I-V-O-R-C-E post at http://www.threesources.com/archives/002456.html) How about a realignment? Let the Socialists all get together and make their best pitch for collectivism -- I'll take that argument any day of the week. Then let a few responsible "liberals" abandon leftism and socialism to join me in the fight for classical liberalism. March 30, 2006Howdy!Hello Comrades! Ooops! Hello fellow bloggers. Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Trip Segars. I was invited to participate by JK with whom I've worked and played hockey with in the past. JohnGalt is another ex-Mambo King (our hockey team). I'm exposing my true identity as insurance - if I am ever so foolish as to run for office, I'm hoping that I will be confronted with my posts here and forced to withdraw from the Political Correctness Czar contest. I'm forty-one, have a six year old son, and am divorced but getting married in June. I work as a software developer. My moniker is LatteSipper because latte-sipping, Volvo-driving, sushi-eating liberal takes too long to type. I'm a liberal (if you haven't figured it out yet) and wonder why the richest nation in the world chooses a military budget that dwarfs that of the rest of the world yet trails much of the developed world in areas such as poverty and infant mortality. I do believe that government can be used as a tool to improve the general quality of life and standard of living, but agree with Silence Dogood that many of our social programs are inefficient or don't produce results at all. The same could be said of our military expenditures, agriculture subsidies, tax loopholes; the list goes on and on. I do not, however, believe that simply shrinking the government is the answer. I think a new approach is called for, one that involves evaluation of what our collective, national priorities are and evaluating which investments, if any, move us towards our goals. It would require wiping the slate clean and starting anew, with no guarantees for any special interest groups, neither welfare mothers, retirees, farmers, CEOs, defense contractors or our elected representatives. Perhaps I am flailing at windmills, but I am not yet so pessimistic or cynical to believe that things can't change for the better. I've come here on JK's recommendation looking for good discussion and hoping to challenge my beliefs and broaden my understanding ... and to find out if Dick Cheney really is a baby-eating cyborg. Cheers!
Posted by LatteSipper at 4:10 PM
| Comments (7)
But jk thinks:
Nope. Can't wait. The "richest nation in the world" is the richest precisely because we have allowed individuals to prosper unimpeded for most of our history. There is a clear, Constitutional purview to defend ourselves collectively. Military spending, by free people with votes to choose the level of support for a civilian-headed military is a very good thing. Protecting our way of life is a very good thing. These nations we trail in your stats all seem to be full of people trying everything to get here -- nothing is more popular than American poverty. The infant mortality stat is the most specious and bogus argument since boasts of Castro’s free health care. Our rate is higher because we attempt to save sub-two pound infants who are months premature as a standard practice. Those who exceed us all inflate their numbers by allowing more babies to die. If you don't try to save it, it doesn't go against your average. I have never once struck out in a major league baseball game. Ever. The trouble with your government spending for good is that government has no money. They spend our money and, with microscopic exceptions, we can always spend it better.
But Silence Dogood thinks:
I suddenly feel less outnumbered, a great big welcome from me LatteSipper! Posted by: Silence Dogood at March 30, 2006 6:31 PM
But LatteSipper thinks:
I knew the hospitality wouldn't last for long! ;) I agree with you and your smaller government brethren, defending our nation and way of life is a legitimate use of our money. My issue is with a defense budget that's more tuned to exerting our will, i.e. getting our way any where on the globe than it is in defending our country. My bad on poverty and infant mortality - I forgot that other countries lie about those things and we don't. Posted by: LatteSipper at March 30, 2006 6:43 PM
But johngalt thinks:
How about LSVDSEL instead? Seriously though, I look forward to many opportunities to tell you just how and why you're wrong that I always had to pass up because I couldn't afford to spend an entire day in debate. I'll lay off the criticism of your misty eyed idealism for now, but one bit of advice seems apropos in response to your sarcastic "I forgot that other countries lie about those things and we don't" comment. If you never acknowledge when the other guy has made a point he'll just judge you a bore and quit trying to engage you. Here's where that clean slate thing comes in! (Others may find this advice amusing coming from me but hey, I've done it! At least once or twice!) Congratulations on the pending nuptials. The second time was the charm for me, as I hope it is for you. Posted by: johngalt at March 31, 2006 12:39 AM
But jk thinks:
I was gonna suggest "Volvo." We're all coffee fanatics around here I don't about others but I'm a big sushi fan. But yes, I think you're the only one who'd be caught dead in a Volvo! Posted by: jk at March 31, 2006 9:30 AM
But AlexC thinks:
As long as you don't like Uni.... Posted by: AlexC at March 31, 2006 12:28 PMFebruary 27, 2006Bereft of IdeasI'm gonna beat up on a good friend who is a committed liberal. He keeps me on his e-mail list, which has some intelligent commentary and interesting articles from time to time. Today, it was a poem called "Make the pie higher" assembled entirely from supposed W malapropisms (click "Continue..." if you really want to read it). It struck me that "his side" has had several important victories this week, He could have sent me a link to the Fukuyama piece in the NYTimes, he could have sent me a link to Bill Buckley's article which claims the war is lost, he could have pointed to the Dubai port contretemps to highlight GOP rifts and signal what FOXNews commentators called "creeping lame-duckism," et cetera, et cetera... Instead they have made the discovery -- five years into his presidency -- that the President is not a skilled orator, and ask the question whether this might indicate a lack of intelligence. Just one guy who is not a moonbat but runs with them from time to time. But I think it shows the lack of seriousness from their camp. Even when the president is in real political difficulties, they come out blasting with 3rd-grade humor. MAKE THE PIE HIGHER I think we all agree, the past is over. Rarely is the question asked Will the highways of the Internet How many hands have I shaked? I know that the human being Put food on your family! Pass this on.
Posted by jk at 10:52 AM
February 26, 2006Self-ImmolationEverytime I read DailyKos, I have to ask myself why I do it.
"We find an organization that is deeply troubled by bad management, by sex and corruption and by a growing lack of confidence in its ability to carry out missions that are given to them," Bolton told an audience at a Columbia Law School symposium held by the Federalist Society, a conservative law organization. What is the bizarre preoccupation these guys have with sex? Really? Sex is one of the UN's primary problems? I'd think it might have something to do with the fact that the world's greatest power refuses to participate in a meaningful way in any international effort or to recognize international law or the Geneva Conventions or to sign onto critical international treaties. But maybe that's just me. Well, I cant hold being completely uninformed against someone. Hint: It's the molestations of boys and girls in Africa by blue helmeted men. ABCNews But then it gets worse.
Ok. so it's corrected, yet that makes it worse? Worse because why exactly? Bolton is not equating them, he's listing them. Oy.
Posted by AlexC at 12:32 PM
February 10, 2006Getting to the bottom of that Plame thing..Yawn. I really cannot take any more of the Fitzgerald case. But it has heated up again as Fitzgerald tries to get a frightened Libby to rat on superiors. Yahoo/AP thinks it might be working. I cannot dive back into the muck today, but I did want to share some indignation from the Senior Senator of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts: "These charges, if true, represent a new low in the already sordid case of partisan interests being placed above national security," Kennedy said. "The vice president's vindictiveness in defending the misguided war in Iraq is obvious. If he used classified information to defend it, he should be prepared to take full responsibility." I hope you all read that aloud in your best Ted Kennedy voice.
Posted by jk at 11:43 AM
| Comments (3)
But AlexC thinks:
Make sure you slur your voice, and soften the "r" "These chaaaages, if true.... (HIC)....." Posted by: AlexC at February 10, 2006 12:00 PM
But jk thinks:
Save those unused R's, you'll need them to say idear! Posted by: jk at February 10, 2006 12:12 PM
But AlexC thinks:
Texas stole them. February 6, 2006FreegansKojinshugi has a link to the new craze all the cool kids will pursue this year: Freeganism, or getting your free vegan food out of the dumpster so you don't support any of those evil corporations. Sam is rather hard on the movement, daring to point out that this only works because they are living in a rich society with surplus food, else they would have to "grow their own garbage." He confronts his new countrymen who claim that there is hunger in Canada and does a nice riff on what these people say they want: We've already tried a system where everyone gets a 'fair' share of the pie. It's called communism, and it doesn't work for the blindingly obvious reason that if given the choice between $1000 a month for mountain-climbing or yodeling which takes 0 years of education, and $1000 a month for 12 years of medical training preceding the grueling and high-responsibility profession of trauma surgeon, most everyone will pick the former, and we end up with a society full of yodeling paraplegics.
Posted by jk at 5:25 PM
| Comments (2)
But johngalt thinks:
Peter Boyles (whose name is not supposed to be uttered on these pages) interviewed a Freegan on his radio show this morning. The guy lives "at home" with "his family," which we found meant his grandparents and his dad. For breakfast he had "not much in the way of breakfast, just a cup of tea." The tea came from a supermarket dumpster - Christmas seasonal tea, you see. They had to pitch it when the calendar flipped over. And the hot water came, "straight from the tap." Riiight. Piping hot, no "discarded electricity" or "out of date natural gas" was required to bring the "hey, look at this shit that just comes out of this pipe for free!" water to the required temperature for brewing. Hell, why doesn't he just plug grandpa's Prius into the perpetual motion machine some dumbass threw in the trash and drive around the country trying to find out just where in the hell his mother and sisters went, anyway? Freddie frackin' freeloader Freegan needs some quality time in "hard America." Posted by: johngalt at February 7, 2006 11:21 PM
But jk thinks:
1) Heh! I nominate this for best ThreeSources comment ever. 2) No, Voldemort Boyles can be named, I was just name-dropping. 3) I was in a band with a guy who loved "tap water coffee:" instant out of the "H." Yum. January 24, 2006Mrs. Sheehan Heads SouthBOTW runs the Political Diary today as Mr. Taranto is off. For what it's worth, I really enjoyed Political Diary and pleaded with the good folks at Dow Jones to make it web based. Alas, you can only get it by email and their systems are extremely unreliable. I cancelled some time ago. Today, Latin America reporter Mary Anastasia O'Grady highlights the inconsistencies in Cindy Sheehan's "Peace Activism" and her decision to attend a possibly violent, anti-globalization moonbat fest in Caracas: Indeed, the Sheehan tour to Caracas belongs in the "you-can't-make-it-up" category: A bitterly outspoken American citizen who has made a career of lambasting her president, she travels abroad to celebrate with a dictator who has thrown his own critics out of work and even put them in prison, stripped the press of its freedom, destroyed property rights and militarized the government. His political supporters are known to be armed and dangerous and many Venezuelans in poor neighborhoods have reported that they are afraid to dissent from the Chavez agenda. Venezuela's arms build-up is frightening his neighbors and threatening regional stability.
Posted by jk at 5:40 PM
January 4, 2006Call Jesse Jackson!I cannot imagine how people can equate requiring a photo ID for voting with poll-tax-style disenfranchisement. A vote stolen by fraud is as much of a theft as stopping another from voting. You need an ID to board a plane or buy beer. Well, much as I have celebrated TNR as a responsible voice from the other side, today's web article by John B. Judis is insane. Ballot Blocks: The Republican Bid to Suppress Minority Turnout. Republicans have been working hard to nullify Democratic support from blacks and Hispanics. But instead of promoting programs that might appeal to these voters, they are trying to pass legislation that, while ostensibly aimed at reducing voting fraud, is in fact intended to depress turnout among minorities. Imagine! The executive branch actively trying to reduce voter fraud! All the diatribes are in there: no DMV offices in Atlanta, a $20 fee, percent of drivers' licenses by ethnicity. Voter fraud is a huge problem in this country and the race card is played against any effort to fix it. Maybe we should just go to purple fingers...
Posted by jk at 12:02 PM
| Comments (1)
But AlexC thinks:
In Pa, a card for the purposes of voting would be free, yet they complain. http://youngphillypolitics.com/node/489 The bill passed both the house and senate and awaits the Dem governor's veto. Posted by: AlexC at January 4, 2006 7:30 PMDecember 21, 2005Not in MY name!A couple years ago, I signed a "Not In My Name" petition under the name "Hadda V Shininoz" (as in Rudolph...) Taranto put me up to it. It was juvenile. I'm not proud. But it did get me on the email list. I don't browse MoveOn.org or read Kos or read The Nation, but my semi-monthly emails from "Not In Our Name Statement of Conscience" keep my ties to the moonbat community alive. I know you can see all of this stuff you want on the net, but I thought I would share my mail today. You're welcome! They are raising $50,000 for a war crimes trial, because "These Commission hearings will make a profound difference on today’s political terrain, where all too often Bush’s actions are viewed as blunders, not crimes, and the full scope of his administration’s criminality is obscured. Please contribute immediately and contact your friends to contribute. Mail checks made out to “Not In Our Name” to..."
Dear friends and signers of the Not In Our Name statements of conscience,
Posted by jk at 12:41 PM
November 7, 2005Good Clean FunSome folks have differing concepts of "fun." A friend suggests this Naomi Wolf column in The Guardian saying that "[he] 'd forgotten how much fun it is to read left wing wacko stuff." On planet Naomi, Al Gore looks really good in earth tomes and the Washington Press Corps has been on its knees to W, and, and, well just dig it: We Americans are like recovering addicts after a four-year bender Not reading The Guardian enough, I had not noticed how bad things had gotten around here, but Ms. Wolf wouldn't lie, would she? They could not have had more fortunate timing. During an era when US prestige abroad had already been declining, when US schools were turning out subliterates, when the US economy was being crippled by competition from harder-working south-east Asians and Chinese, Americans - and especially American men - were feeling the sinking self-regard characteristic of those losing prestige in once-great empires in decline. 'course, I feel pretty potent in my crotch-strapped flight suit with my FDNY T-shirt on, even as I watch the bodies wash up the street -- but fear not, Wolf thinks that a rekindled democracy will save us just like Alabama in the 60s: I don't see Cheney being shamed into dropping his Halliburton cronies now carving up Iraq. But I do see a renewed citizen interest in wind power, in driving petrol-electric hybrid cars, in reading about the short lives of the war dead - who, only six months ago, were spirited home away from the cameras in their body bags, when protest was considered unseemly. Today on the AOL homepage there is a headline about Bush being jeered by a foreign leader: that story would never have made it out of the land of blogs six months ago. And they say there's no optimism on the left...
Posted by jk at 4:26 PM
| Comments (2)
But johngalt thinks:
"Obstreperousness?" My "woman" isn't obstreperous. Is yours? Oh, she must mean this from http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/parody.guest.html "We're Fierce! We're Feminists! And We're in Your Face!" (Sorry, I can't link to the audio bite since it's "members only" and I aren't one.) Posted by: johngalt at November 8, 2005 2:33 PM
But jk thinks:
Obstreperous: if this were a Buffy episode, I would stare at Ms. Wolf and say "project much?" Posted by: jk at November 8, 2005 3:23 PMOctober 28, 2005Scooter Goin' Down?Tucker Carlson has opened about every show this week by breathlessly intoning a new development in l’Affaire Plame courtesy of the NYTimes. Being on live at 11 gives him a head start that is interesting, he can be first to discuss "tomorrow's" Times. Oddly enough, none of these leaks (on a leak investigation) have seemed to be real stories with any legs. Last night's was that Scooter Libby was to be indicted for perjury but not for outing Valerie Plame. The headline I see today is the superior "Rove Not Expected to be Indicted Today." So, two years and $22 million (starting to sound like a 90's Democrat) and Fitzgerald may drop the hammer on a Vice President's Chief-of-staff -- not for outing a CIA operative -- but for lying about it. I'm not the only one who thinks this is sad, Jason at G e n e r a t i o n W h y ? agrees. Just one problem... the corruption conspiracy never existed. And the indictment that's expected today will show that... or rather the lack of any indictment for revealing an undercover agent's identity will show it. Sure, the Left is likely to cheer gleefully when an indictment comes down today against Scooter Libby, but the absence of an indictment for actually outing an undercover agent will reveal that this was never a story to begin with. We still, of course, are punditing on punditry of speculation of anonymous leaks. Carlson thinks there has to be some hidden bomb in there somewhere, that this cannot be all there is. Can it? Hat-tip: Insty
Posted by jk at 12:41 PM
| Comments (4)
But Silence Dogood thinks:
The more interesting question to me is if there are no indictments did we waste $22 million? I am especially looking forward to the pundits views on this. Tempting as it is to say yes, you are in effect saying that something should be found. The sticky wicket here is that I am sure Fitzgerald (and others before him) felt pressure to come up with something, something for the $22 million. This begs the question of whether just appointing a special prosecutor pre-judges the case really both against the subjects and the prosecutor themselves. If a failure to bring an indictment is a failure of the investigation and of the special prosecutor themselves then you have biased the outcome from the start. Posted by: Silence Dogood at October 28, 2005 1:03 PM
But jk thinks:
The special prosecutor is a bad idea but certainly tempting to political opponents. Judge Starr has been maligned (rightly i some instances) but his tenure brought down a sitting Governor and resulted in many indictments. Fitzgerald seems to be coming up short.
But johngalt thinks:
Silence makes a very good point: Does the mere appointment of a special prosecutor NECESSITATE an indictment of some sort? Senator Schmucky Chumer of NY said on O'Reilly last night that "the only explanation" for why Libby would lie about something that wasn't a crime is that there really was a crime (a conspiracy to damage Plame and Wilson) and he's thrown himself on his sword to protect higher ups. I'll posit another possible explanation for what, by all accounts, seems a stupid mistake on Scooter's part. Being beltway insiders, the administration realized the axiom that Silence just enlightened us about from the very beginning, and Scooter volunteered to be the fall guy. It's at least as plausable as Chumer's "there really was a crime" hypothesis. Posted by: johngalt at October 29, 2005 10:44 AM
But jk thinks:
Just this once, jg, have a little pity on the Senior Senator from New York. Not only is he overshadowed every day by the dadgummed JUNIOR Senator form New York, but he is also feeling the disappointment not unlike “a dagger in his heart.” The anti-W camp pinned their hopes on the Fitzgerald star and all they get is Scooter. Poor Senator Schumer… October 10, 2005Electric GuitarsI signed up for a Dave Barry email from the Miami Herald, like I don't get enough email. But I do like Dave Barry, and I think that all the ThreeSources cats would dig today's "classic" rerun of a 1998 column: Guys and electric guitars go together At some point or another, almost every guy wants an electric guitar. It would not surprise me to learn that, late at night, in the Vatican, the pope picks one up and plays ''Hang On, Sloopy.'' Electric guitars exert a strong appeal for guys, because they combine two critical elements: Geopolitics, Brother Dave tells us, is just like a band: As a member of that band, my artistic dream was essentially the same dream that inspired legendary musicians such as Bach, Beethoven, Mozart and The Dave Clark Five: The dream of getting a bigger amplifier. This was important because of the musical dynamics of a rock band, which are very similar to the political dynamics of the Asian subcontinent. Let's say that India is the drummer, and Pakistan is the lead guitar player. There is always tension between these two instruments, because they both want to be the loudest. Good stuff.
Posted by jk at 1:13 PM
August 31, 2005Kill This Meme EarlyI see this getting out of hand. Like President GHW Bush's amazement seeing the supermarket scanner, it will soon be accepted as fact that hurricane Katrina is the result of "global warming." It is already being promoted as such by the Independant, Boston Globe and some others. Jim Glassman makes a trenchant case for nipping this in the bud, but it ain't gonna be easy. My daughter, her husband and their little baby managed to get out of the city ahead of the flood on Sunday, driving 14 hours into Texas with the few belongings they could stuff into their car. They have no idea what has become of their house and their possessions, not to mention their friends, their pets, their jobs, their way of life. Kudos to the New York Times (I love typing that phrase!) for this bit of honest reporting: "Because hurricanes form over warm ocean water, it is easy to assume that the recent rise in their number and ferocity is because of global warming. But that is not the case, scientists say. Instead, the severity of hurricane seasons changes with cycles of temperatures of several decades in the Atlantic Ocean. The recent onslaught 'is very much natural,' said William M. Gray, a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado State University who issues forecasts for the hurricane season.'" 'Course, the NYTimes is just another corporate organ, hopelessly in the pocket of the Bush Administration -- of course they'd say that. UPDATE: Jonah Goldberg writes, in The Corner: I've decided that every nice, cool, breezy day which happens to come along until the day I die, I'm going to credit global warming. Absent other data, it makes exactly as much sense to blame weather we don't like on global warming as it does to credit global warming for the weather we do like.
Posted by jk at 4:32 PM
| Comments (3)
But johngalt thinks:
Good post, but I'll take issue with the line, "the inability of humans, even the most brilliant engineers, to tame these forces." If this refers to engineers not being "brilliant" enough to create massive levees that are fully financed by bake sales, then I'd agree. The reason the Big Easy flooded is that the single line of levees that protect the city from hurricanes was designed to withstand a category 3 hurricane, but no more. Why on earth would this be, given that we could have built it stronger? For the same reason building codes require 110 mph wind resistance, but not 120. The line has to be drawn somewhere. Now in the case of hurricanes and a major American city, one might make the case that the potential loss is so great that the levee should be designed for the strongest hurricane ever known. And that back-up levees be built as was done in Holland. And that federal subsidization of these projects is warranted, given that the savings to federally subsidized flood insurance and FEMA obligations would offset it. But when the decision was made to build them, in 1927 so far as I can tell, America was far less wealthy. Judging from recent history of federal involvement with natural disasters, I suspect that New Orleans is about to get that new, triple-layer category 5 levee system. Posted by: johngalt at August 31, 2005 9:38 PM
But Silence Dogood thinks:
|