Calling Muggins

Congress richly deserves our thanks

2011-12-23T08:30:00.000-08:00

Within this most recent little spat in Congress over the 2 month tax cut, the largest "fail" was by the press. They failed to recognize that the citizens did not see much of anything in this bill, whether it passed or not. It was an event that was significant only to the ruling elite and their circle of news mongers and pundits. It was an exercise in not dealing with our real and pressing issues. Congress and the press merit a bitter and reproachful "Bundy" thanks. tha-anks

Christie on Obama and the SuperCommittee

2011-11-28T23:43:00.000-08:00

A short comment on uTube by Chris Christie (Rep, Gov. NJ) about the failure of the Super Committee and President Obama. Christie said,
"I was angry this weekend, listening to the spin coming out of the administration about the failure of the super committee, and that the president knew it was doomed for failure, so he didn’t get involved. Well, then, what the hell are we paying you for? 'It’s doomed for failure so I’m not getting involved?' Well, what have you been doing, exactly?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=byvb5nrvPXU

Failure to make the tough decision

2011-11-22T00:19:00.000-08:00

It won't be long before the world faces nuclear blackmail from Iran. There will be a nuclear arms race between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Possibly nuclear war between Israel and Iran. And the U.S. is using sanctions? Obama and Clinton should realize that they will be alive when Iran goes nuclear, and they'll have to live with themselves. If they have any shred of conscience, they will not sleep easy, nor will people stop asking them, why only sanctions?

When the press says Al Davis defied the league

2011-10-09T01:34:00.000-07:00

When the press says "...defied the league..", what is reality is that Pete Roselle saw Davis as competition, and it was war between the 2 since the merger of the AFL and NFL. Roselle knew Davis was a keen negotiator. Roselle bypassed Davis when Davis was commissioner of the AFL, and did a secret deal with some owners to merge the leagues. This set up a rivalry between the two. Now skip to 1980. Davis had an understanding with the City of Oakland to improve the stadium. Pete Roselle went behind Davis' back again to assure that the City that the league would block the Raiders from leaving the city, and the city could negotiate a sweeter deal with the Raiders. Finding this out, Davis moved the team to L.A.. The press ain't about to tell you about that. Davis finally won the anti-trust lawsuits between the league (Roselle) and the Raiders (Davis). Now skip to the Raiders coming back to Oakland. Oakland promised him a good deal, but screwed the team with exorbitantly priced seating. And then it was Jerry Brown, who was pitted against Davis. Brown refused to negotiate a more realistic deal with the Raiders for lower seat prices. Even today, as the Calif. Guv, Jerry Brown opposes any help with a new stadium for the Raiders and 49's. Both teams play in the worst stadiums in the NFL. Yes, there have been many lawsuits, but that's how big money settles grievances. And Davis was not somebody to shrink away from a fight, and I defy anybody to tell us why he should have been a wilting flower. He stood up for his team like a man, even as the press was trashing him.

Enough already with higher taxes

2011-08-27T09:40:00.000-07:00

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/23470.html

Grow Jobs Not Government

2011-08-04T14:14:00.000-07:00

~Bullet Points~
Obama has been killing jobs in America and helping our enemies in OPEC -
--By not promoting a nat gas pipeline down from Canada.
--By not allowing drilling in ANWR
--By not allowing drilling in the Gulf, and off the coasts of Florida and California.
--By not promoting LNG ports on the east and west coasts.
--By not promoting conversion of our truck fleets over to nat gas.
--By not promoting an upgrade of the electrical grid to enable wind farm electrical generation in the windy states.

Mad Magazine Online

Socialism as a government operating system

2011-08-02T07:26:00.000-07:00

Socialism bolts out of the starting gate with 3 incorrect assumptions. Socialists don't understand about the inherent wisdom of a capitalism, which makes an incalculable amount of distinct localized decisions far more accurately than any group of elitist bureaucratic central planners. Socialism hopes and assumes that people will act with something other than their own interests in mind. If the do-gooders had a better understanding of human nature, they'd understand that people have to be appropriately motivated. Socialists refuse to understand the greater benefit to society of invested money as compared to government revenues.

This is not to say that there isn't need for unemployment insurance, social security and other programs. But, when government grows and gains power, we must push back against that expansion.

Why not raise taxes?

2011-07-18T13:16:00.000-07:00

My answer to the question posed by NPR’s Michael Krasny this morning, about why Republicans are against raising taxes on the rich.

Higher taxes have unintended consequences. Raising taxes, beyond a certain 'sweet spot', lowers revenues for more than one reason. Generally, the people who are supposedly helped by raising taxes on the rich, namely the poor and the middle class, are the ones most hurt by the tax.

If you ask an adult whether they'd rather be on unemployment insurance or working, the overwhelming answer would be working. If your intention is to help the downtrodden and the lower classes, you would naturally promote an economy that provided jobs. The more jobs to choose from, the happier the worker. But when jobs are scarce, the selection of jobs is low, and there is downward pressure on both wages and conditions. Money runs out for the long term unemployed and they become desperate. I know because I experienced extended unemployment, when I got out of the army in 1972, again in 1991 and in 2005.

But why would revenues decrease if we raise taxes on the rich? One reason is the rich don't want to pay increased taxes, so they hire tax consultants to help them avoid taxes. I lived next door to a tax consultant, who explained that he found ways for rich people and businesses to invest their money to avoid taxation. The result is that the rich avoid taxes as much as possible by investing their resources in businesses they are not familiar with. It results in a decrease of efficiency. To the extent that elevated taxes does sting the rich, that much money is taken out of the private sector. It's money that is not being put at risk, by investing in factories or new small businesses. Less factories and fewer start ups means fewer jobs. And because there are fewer jobs, revenues fall short of expectations.

Obama not the worst President

2011-04-02T15:09:00.000-07:00

Obama the worst President ever?

In Obama's defense, there are 4 POTUS who were worse. The worst were:
Andrew Johnson (1885-69) - for his botching Reconstruction that led to 90 years of Jim Crow America.
James Buchanan (1857-61) - was a traitor for arming the South before Lincoln could assume office.
LBJ (1963-69) - For his disastrous and far reaching failures, both in Vietnam and his Great Society programs.
Tricky Dick Nixon (1969-74) - for drafting me in 1971, for his war on drugs and creating the DEA, for price fixing, and for his Watergate coverup.

One can argue that Herbert Hoover and/or FDR were also failed Presidents, but I have to give them the benefit of the doubt because they were up against a powerful depression that economists were still grappling with as what was the best policies. They both raised taxes, spending, and Hoover raised the tariffs, as Roosevelt was regulation crazy, and with hindsight, we can conclude they made grave mistakes. It's something future leaders should have learned from.

Obama (2009-13) has trumped Jimmy Carter (1977-81) to gain control of the number 5 spot on the list of worst POTUS. Both of them prolonged a bad recession and lowered U.S. influence around the world, as well as lowering U.S. morale at home. I give the tip to Obama for allowing Pelosi and Reid to drive the U.S. so deep in debt. Then there's Obama's incompetent energy policy, which he has time to fix, but I doubt he can ever understand why his Green energy policy is a non-starter. And what a failure of leadership with Obama not pressing for the Simpson-Bowles recommendations. Obama has 2 more years left and he might just add another failure to his legacy if the Muslim Brotherhood gains control of Libya.

Lieberman calls for moritorium on nukes

2011-03-13T11:05:00.000-07:00

In light of the nuclear meltdowns in Japan, Lieberman has called for a moratorium on nukes.
That is not the only reason to re-think nuclear energy. Due to technological advances and discoveries of vast stores of natural gas, it is now our cheapest source of energy. The fact is that the U.S. is rich in natural gas. It would cost half as much to power our trucks and fleets, compared to diesel. The present administration has green energy blinders on and would wish natural gas just go away, even though natural gas is the cleanest by far of the fossil fuels. It is the duty of the press to begin to ask, if not badger, the Obama Administration why they are ignoring this great resource, which is environmentally friendly, very cheap and could go a long ways to making the U.S. energy independent... not to mention increase employment.

Chileans use violence on Easter Island

2010-12-30T08:30:00.000-08:00

BREAKING NEWS - PRESS RELEASE FROM RAPA NUI
December 29, 2010

Today, December 29th just before 7 PM, an contingency of 200 armed police began violently dislodging the Rapanui Parliament from their headquarters in the

enter of the town of Hanga Roa, Rapa Nui. The police have beaten dozens of Rapa Nui with clubs, including children and women. They have arrested at least

two dozen people.

This action was a unilateral decision made by the Regional Indendent, Raul Celis. The operation was directed by the Police Commander,

Oscar Salazar who confirmed, "Celis gave the order."

Lola Tuki, who was there said that it was "unbelievable to see the degree of violence and inhuman treatment and prejudice. The police were

cursing at the women calling them, "Goddamn indian bitches", and grabbing them violently.

Many of the people taken from the Tuki and HIto clan were defending the President of the Rapa Nui Parliament, Leviante Araki.

This is a developing story.

CONTACT:

Lola Tuki 011 569 62144264

Santi Hitorangi 845 596 5402

NPR Ends Williams' Contract

2010-10-21T06:24:00.000-07:00

NPR Ends Williams' Contract After Muslim Remarks
by David Folkenflik
October 21, 2010

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130712737

-The brief article starts with:

NPR News has terminated the contract of longtime news analyst Juan Williams
after remarks he made on the Fox News Channel about Muslims.

Williams appeared Monday on The O'Reilly Factor, and host Bill O'Reilly asked
him to comment on the idea that the U.S. is facing a dilemma with Muslims.

O'Reilly has been looking for support for his own remarks on a recent episode
of ABC's The View in which he directly blamed Muslims for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
Co-hosts Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg walked off the set in the middle of his appearance.

Williams responded: "Look, Bill, I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about
the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see
people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and
foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."

Williams also warned O'Reilly against blaming all Muslims for "extremists," saying Christians
shouldn't be blamed for Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh.

But strong criticism followed Williams' comments.

-Go here for the rest of the article.

My view is that NPR is leftist. Leftists generally believe in cultural relativism, meaning all cultures, except in the U.S., are equally valid. With this foundation on the left, it's unacceptable to them, to consider that Muslims could possibly be more of a threat than any other group. Leftists are in denial that organized Muslims, led by religious leaders, are in a violent expansionary mode, at war with the world including Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, secular Westerners, and esp. Jews. These Muslim expansionists are not all of the same ilk. The Sunnis are at odds with the Shiites, who are at odds with the Baathists, who are at odds with the Wahhabis...which doesn't preclude temporary cooperation between these groups against a common enemy. And one tactic of these groups is suicide bombing, especially utilizing public transportation. So, Juan Williams is rational in his fear of Muslims on planes.

Hiroshima, 65 years later

2010-08-10T09:08:00.001-07:00

Critics claim that intercepted communiques indicated
that Japan was considering surrender. But were the
Allies supposed to assume that the diplomatic communiques
spoke also for the military? Because it's doubtful
they did, and the military held the power.
The Kamikazees were sinking U.S. shipping, with
sailors dying, while Japanese civilians (including
women and children) were being trained to
fight to the death. How long was President Truman
supposed to wait for Japan to decide to surrender?
Weeks? Months? And after weeks or
months the Japanese did not surrender, then what?
Invasion**, and millions of military and civilian
casualties. While Truman was weighing these factors,
he had to worry about the Soviets moving in to claim
Japanese territory. Atomic bombs are horrible, but
so is death in a fire storm which took more lives,
yet there's not the outcry against fire bombing that
the atomic bombs have. Keep in mind that in 1945, the
destruction caused by atomic bombs did not hold the
horror and condemnation it rightly gained after their
use. There is something haunting about one bomb causing
such devastation and human suffering due to burning
and radiation. If the U.S. had fire bombed Hiroshima
and Nagasaki, perhaps more people would have burned to
death, and also, the Japanese may not have been convinced
to surrender. Even with hindsight, we don't know. And
Truman did not have the advantage of any hindsight.

----------

** Excerpt from:
August 11, 2010
A Rather Angry America
by Victor Davis Hanson
Pajamas Media
http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson081110.html

History Is Negotiable

We sent our first delegation to the services marking the bombing of Hiroshima. Fine, but will we do the same with the Philippines, Manchuria, South Korea, and all the other places^^ where the Imperial Japanese Army by early 1945 was killing on average well over 5,000 a day in its occupied co-prosperity sphere? To understand why Hiroshima, understand 50,000 American casualties, 100,000 Japanese dead, and 100,000 Okinawan dead at the conclusion of Okinawa ten weeks earlier, and then multiply it by a factor of 10 for the upcoming Japanese homeland invasion.

------------

^^Add to that list:
The Rape of Nanking, of which the Japanese still do not recognize.
Do not teach their children about.
Recommended reading or listening

More analysis on the commando boarding off of Gaza

2010-06-03T22:00:00.000-07:00

Excerpt from The Local, a Swedish online news source.

"Who actually profited from what happened?
Well, most analysts agree that the biggest beneficiaries
are the radical Islamists of the Middle East, notably Hamas,
the terrorist organization which currently rules Gaza.
Hamas won a major PR victory and gained valuable
international legitimacy at the expense of moderate
Palestinians and the Fatah leadership of the West Bank.
Politically this is a boost for those Palestinians who
object to peace negotiations with Israel, and prefer
the more violent path of jihad, the so-called holy war
against Israel and the non-Muslim world.

In Turkey, Islamist extremists are milking the incident
to win easy points against secular and modernising forces.
Iran is delighted that the world’s attention is being
diverted away from its nuclear programme and arms deals
with Hezbollah and Syria. As so often before in the
Middle-East, the rhetoric of peace and freedom becomes
a tool to strengthen despotic, terror-sponsoring regimes
which scoff at both. This happened largely because,
as Israeli author David Grossman put it, Israel acted
like a puppet on strings pulled by a small fanatical
Turkish organization.

It's hard to tell if this is what the Swedish activists
on the flotilla were hoping to achieve. If it wasn't,
and their only aim was to deliver humanitarian aid to
Gaza and protest against Israel's blockade, they must
be extremely naïve if they call the flotilla a success.
Assuming their intentions were good, they might want
to consider a few changes next time they embark on
Middle East mission.

First, it's always good to know who your partners are.
In this case, the IHH, the Turkish movement behind the
Mavi Marmara, has proven links to terrorist organizations
and global Jihad. It is now obvious that their aim wasn't
only humanitarian aid: they have boasted that they were
looking for violent confrontation and sadly Israel gave
them more than they needed to make their point. Now they
have their martyrs.

In reality, the flotilla was an unfortunate alliance of
idealistic peace activists and hard-core Islamic extremists."

Israeli commando raid on flotilla

2010-06-02T21:10:00.000-07:00

Excerpt from an OpEd piece in the ChiTribune online,
about the Israeli commando raid on the Turkish flotilla:

"The Israelis tried to avoid a lethal confrontation.
Israeli officials reportedly offered the vessel the
same deal that was accepted by at least one previous
flotilla — divert to the Israeli port of Ashdod and
unload the cargo for inspection. As long as the cargo
doesn't contain weaponry, it will be shipped into the
Gaza Strip by land."

Nobel-winning Elders deplore Gaza flotilla attack

2010-06-01T09:53:00.001-07:00

Re: "Nobel-winning Elders deplore Gaza flotilla attack"
in the THE HINDU, Johannesburg, May 31, 2010 online edition

Dear Editor,

I am a concerned that the article did not mention that there
were other boats in that flotilla that did not fight the Israeli commandos,
and in those boats, there were no casualties. The men on that one ship,
armed with steel clubs, hammers, knives and other crude weapons,
initiated hand-to-hand combat with the commandos, and so I'm concerned that the
article did not mention that. Why omit that? Other questions arise,
such as why was there an armed resistance on that one ship
in the flotilla? Who, exactly, organized them? Who was the leader
of those men? Was it the captain of the ship, or a sailor, or was it a
passenger? What organization plotted this violence?
I'm certain that the editors of the THE HINDU are curious about
those same issues and more, and I would appreciate it if THE HINDU
would look into these questions and report to the public.

In support of the 2 party system, as bad as it is.

2010-05-08T06:16:00.000-07:00

I'm sorry George Washington and John Quincy Adams, politics inevitably divides into parties.
But, I do not understand why every new form of democratic government on this planet embraces the Parliamentary model. Is it because they think that multi-parties are a good thing? A party for the communists, one or two for the socialists, a party for the reactionaries, one for the conservatives, perhaps one for the middle of the road voters, plus the environmentalist's Green party. Not to forget a party for every religious sect, every race and ethnic group, because they represent the highest potential for violence in society. But democracy is about something higher than pandering to the eternally squabbling hard heads. It is about liberty, both economic and political. So the issues are, roughly, big government versus small government and the dynamic tension between those opposites, boiling down the multi-parties into the 2 party system. The separate factions resolving their differences in the caucus of each party, instead of on the ballot, where, as seen in Britain and in Iraq, a compromise is not up to the people, but up to the power players in Parliament and the reining Prime Minister.

Illegal Aliens

2010-04-30T08:08:00.000-07:00

The liberals are shooting themselves in the foot on this issue. Illegal aliens are putting downward pressure on the wages of the lowest tier of workers. How is that good for the worker? It's good for the corporate farmer and consumer as it helps keep prices down on crops. The groups of illegals that mill around in the parking lots of hardware stores are actually a temporary labor resource for individual homeowners. If we eliminate the alien worker, then homeowners will have to resort to legal temp worker outlets. Are we a nation that upholds the law or do we favor illegal labor and a 2-tiered society?

And please note Shakira (I love her, BTW), with the high school drop out rate being incredibly high among Hispanics, the illegal aliens are robbing jobs from the Hispanic community.

After the Surge, judging the Iraq Invasion

2010-04-07T09:16:00.000-07:00

A discussion of whether the Surge worked in Iraq. Abu Muqawama argues that the Surge
did work, contrary to blogists like Andy Sullivan and Thomas E. Ricks. Muqawama says the
war was stupid, but the Surge worked.
http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2010/04/just-admit-it-surge-worked.html

I can understand the conclusion that the Iraq invasion was stupid, and the cost in lives
high, but....
We don't know how many Iraqis would have died if Saddam Hussein were still in power.
Or how many children would be deprived of medical care. How many Iraqis would die in
prison and be tortured (and I'm not talking of panties on the head). We don't know
how long the U.S. would have maintained the No Fly Zone, protecting the Kurds in the
North and Shia in the South from hellfire from above. We don't know if Saddam Hussein
would activate his chemical factories and possibly nuclear technology after the inspectors
left the country. We don't know what terrorism outside the borders of Iraq that Hussein
would bankroll. We don't know the numbers of UN officials Hussein would have bribed.
We don't know the extent to which nations and their industries would have dealt with
Hussein's dictatorship. And we don't know how long Hussein could have maintained
his dictatorship and how many deaths would happen with his downfall. And we don't know
what organization would take control after Hussein. Al Qaeda? Iran? More Baathists?
Or if Iraq's neighbors would have invaded. We don't know yet if establishing a democracy
in Iraq was a turning point in the war against al Qaeda, the Wahabis and the Ayatollah.
This drama is still unfolding, and the historians will have a different view than the majority
of contemporaries in media.

Disrespect and lack of empathy in politics

2010-03-30T06:30:00.000-07:00

Helen Smith talks about the problem of the entrenched party politics
in her article at Pajamas Media
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/how-should-conservatives-deal-with-the-lefts-disrespect-and-lack-of-empathy/

I left the comment: there are people on both sides of the spectrum who hold little empathy and are intolerant, after all politics involves millions of people. But, as a centrist and it’s my experience that the left has this affliction in spades. Helen Smith has some good ideas there, and I like her approach to the topic. I’d like to add that like the dog whisperer, political intercourse should be calm and assertive. There are the important political issue such as taxes, regulation, national defense, education and so forth. But there are minor issues, which the press emphasize, that are soap opera-like, melodramatic, including personality destruction which derail our attention from the important issues. These side dramas have to be commented upon, of course, but it’s critical not to dwell on them and be caught up in the emotional maelstrom. We must calmly steer political intercourse back on track of the important issues.

Gays in the Military

2010-02-22T09:09:00.001-08:00

[1] There will be violence. Most men don't want to be "eye"ed by another man who is attracted to other men. I witness such violence when I was in the military.

[2] Disciplinary action on enlisted men will rise, costing the military good men and curtailing the potential careers of those who would otherwise stay in for the long haul. It's too costly to send men through basic training and advanced schooling to squander it on the battle of sexuality in the barracks.

[3] The reputation of the military will suffer and people will think twice about joining. Parents will be concerned that their teenage son will be subjected to close quarters with homosexuals at an impressionable age.

[4] It sets up yet another identity group for soldiers to "belong" (it's bad enough with the races and religions...now sex?).
It will be just another stab at core cohesion, and American citizens owe it to the enlisted men to improve conditions, not make it worse.

If the majority insists that gays be out in the open in the military, gays should be segregated just like the females, from the living quarters of our normal enlisted men. It's essential to keep sex out of the barracks.

U.S. & Europe grossly ineffective towards Iran

2010-02-08T06:52:00.000-08:00

I have zero faith in the Obama Administration for dealing with Iran. Zero faith in Europe for dealing with Iran. Sanctions are ineffective because of China and Russia. The best we can come up with is hold more talks or negotiations while Iran continues on it's unobstructed path to nuclear capability and a subsequent arms race in the Middle East. Islamic radicals with nukes will result in nuclear blackmail and a new Dark Age worldwide, and that's on the bright side. The grim likelihood with Iran having nuclear weapons is cities bombed with dirty nukes delivered anonymously via public transportation and a nuclear exchange between Israel and Iran.

Pleasant exchange of ideas at uTube

2010-01-23T15:28:00.000-08:00

dinardo1910 has posted a comment on your profile:
you're no different than the christian zealots who denied that the Earth revolves
around our star, the Sun. you have no training in sciences, no doctorate, no experience,
and yet you have the gull to tell thousands of experts that they are wrong? piss off.
dumb ass american

My email response to dinardo110-
I am very different from christian zealots, and I am not decided on global warming.
There is controversy on the topic of global warming, and scientists do not all agree
that the human generated CO2 has a significant effect on the warming trend. But,
since scientists do disagree on this topic, then it is you that has the "gull" to tell
experts that they are wrong. Myself, I don't believe in either side of the controversy.
But, from your accusations and childish insults, am I wrong in thinking that you
believe in human generated global warming? If so, then you are more like the
christian zealots, since you are closed minded, and caught up in a belief.

In the USA

2010-01-21T17:48:00.000-08:00

All politics aside, I would encourage both U.S. Congress and the White House to make it their number one domestic agenda to create an environment conducive to increased hiring at both the big corporate level and the small business level. We need less pork, less spending and lower taxes...specifically as far as tax cuts go, a temporary curtailment of payrolls taxes and the capital gains tax which will kick start hiring. An across the board 5% spending cut would boost the economy. I'm also in favor of extending unemployment benefits. This is a competitive world, and the nation which comes out of this recession the quickest and strongest will have the head start to meet the demands of the changing world going forward.

KSM in New York Civil Court

2009-11-16T05:09:00.000-08:00

It can be argued that trying KSM in civilian court is a blunder.
Presidents do blunder. Legally, the problem lies with the fact
that there's no nation to associate KSM with. No national leader
to take the responsibility of the attack.

The organization to blame is al Qaeda, and that org is more akin
to a mafia than a nation state. Free nations find themselves
fighting the radical elements of a major religion and don't know
how to deal with it. National leaders and political leaders don't
want to come to terms with the ultimate goals of al Qaeda, or
the Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia, or Iran and it's proxy terrorist orgs
like Hezbollah. The MSM seems not to have a clue.

It's a fluid and complex situation, with 3 major orgs competing
against one another, as Hitchens describes it, a civil war in Islam.
In the free world, on the left, they do not want to recognize that
there is such a struggle going on, and insist that the violence is
a reaction to the imperialism of the West.

Obama is a leftist President, and he finds himself having to approach
these problems in denial of what is really going on.

Chavez rattling sabres

2009-11-09T11:01:00.000-08:00

copy 'n' pasted from Bloomberg online
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aZuAU4StKAQY

Chavez Says Venezuela to Prepare for War as Deterrent (Update3)

By Daniel Cancel

Nov. 8 (Bloomberg) -- Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez told the military
and civil militias today to prepare for war as a deterrent to a U.S.-led attack
after American troops gained access to military bases in neighboring Colombia.

Chavez said a recently signed agreement that gives American troops access
to seven Colombian bases is a direct threat to his oil-exporting country.
Colombia has handed over its sovereignty to the U.S. with the deal, he said.

“Generals of the armed forces, the best way to avoid a war is to prepare for one,”
Chavez said in comments on state television during his weekly “Alo Presidente”
program. “Colombia handed over their country and is now another state of the
union. Don’t make the mistake of attacking: Venezuela is willing to do anything.”

Another report: Overview by Megan McArdle on Chavez and his motivation to aggress towards Columbia.

Google map
(trimmed, with names of Brazil and Guyana added, red underlined)

2009-08-26T01:44:00.000-07:00

How long will it be until Chavez crosses the border into Columbia?
Chavez arming his proxy military, FARC, with shoulder-fired anti-tank weapons. With U.S. military in Columbia to fight FARC, Chavez makes it clear that to fight FARC is to threaten Chavez.

2009-08-02T07:54:00.000-07:00

Venezuela has the communist disease. Not yet communist, but on the short road to it. Sean Penn, Danny Glover, Kevin Spacey and other celebs can take a good look at their support for Hugo Chavez, whose newest thrust is to "regulate" freedom of expression in Venezuela, by shutting down 34 opposition radio stations.

"It is necessary to legislate on this matter; it is necessary that the Venezuelan State regulates freedom of expression," said Attorney General Luisa Ortega Díaz

I highly recommend watching this unfold in El Universal, an online news source out of Caracas, as it reports on the transition of Venezuela into a one party state.

New development: Motor cycle gang, goons from Chavez, entered a TV station by force
and threw tear gas. "Approximately 30 motorcycle drivers led by Lina Ron burst in the premises of the TV channel, broke the gate in a brute force attack, opened the main door, and put down the staff with firearms..." If this would have happened in Canada, the press would be all over it. But it's in Venezuela. Still I find it interesting that the U.S. press does not cover Venezuela, considering that Chavez is consolidating power using the "demon" U.S. as his rationale, plus Chavez's blaming the U.S. for the Honduras coup. Venezuela should not be off the map for more reasons than that. There's the cooperation with Iran, for example, and the arms deals with Russia. Why so many arms? What does Chavez intend to do?

Sarah Palin Resigns

2009-07-03T15:01:00.000-07:00

Palin has become the anode for the left's aggression, in media and in the courts. Palin's practical ability to serve her state, has been successfully attenuated by a number of frivolous lawsuits by her opponents. She's not a Kennedy nor married to Heinz Ketchup fortune, and has to raise money to pay for her defense, reducing her time to be governor. It makes sense for her to resign, and leave her office to her lieutenant gov., who can then devote the governor's office full time to the business of Alaska. Recognizing that her role as governor was severely limited by mounting defenses to the charges as well as raising money to pay the court costs, it is the higher moral road to resign. Her resignation puts at risk her ambition to run for POTUS, but then that makes her resignation even that much more the high road. Alaska, like any state, deserves more than an absentee governor. Sarah Palin is not politics as usual, where the typical politician would stay in office to the detriment of their state just to further their career. The obvious loose end is the frivolous lawsuits, and how it has grown to become a tool to destroy our elected officials.

Oratory skill versus leadership skill

2009-03-29T10:43:00.000-07:00

President Obama has had a bumpy ride so far as President
of the United States. I wish him good luck, and hope that he
will hit his stride and become a great President. I agree with
some of his politics, as I am pro-union, and think the educational
system,as well as the health care system needs improving. I also think
that in times of recession,there is a need for increased spending.

But there is such a thing as too much spending, and unwise spending, which is what I think is happening. The world faces the threat of war in Asia and the Middle East very soon, and I hope Obama makes the correct choices. I think McCain would have been a better choice for the violent times we face, but he lost. McCain was too old and short. People prefer taller leaders who give good oratory. Not everybody, mind you, as there are people who vote according to issues. But in enough cases to make those few percentage points to swing a close election, the criteria for any Presidential candidate lies in the irrational. As has been demonstrated by Obama's first few weeks as President, a good speaker does not necessarily make a good President. Sadly, human nature is stubborn, and the Republicans should learn the lesson that they need to run good orators.

2009-03-20T07:59:00.000-07:00

Excerpts from:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/19/AR2009031903041.html

Bonfire of the Trivialities
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, March 20, 2009; Page A19

A $14 trillion economy hangs by a thread composed of (a) a comically cynical, pitchfork-wielding Congress, (b) a hopelessly understaffed, stumbling Obama administration, and (c) $165 million. That's $165 million in bonus money handed out to AIG debt manipulators who may be the only ones who know how to defuse the bomb they themselves built.

For this we are going to poison the well for any further financial rescues, face the prospect of letting AIG go under (which would make the Lehman Brothers collapse look trivial) and risk a run on the entire world financial system?

And there is such a thing as law. The way to break a contract legally is Chapter 11. Short of that, a contract is a contract. The AIG bonuses were agreed to before the government takeover and are perfectly legal. Is the rule now that when public anger is kindled, Congress will summarily cancel contracts?

The shotgun approach - energy transition

2008-08-17T10:01:00.000-07:00

Another of my responses from the Don Surber site:

There's something ‘wrong’ with every source of energy. There are people and interests against any and all of them. If you fly across the U.S., you can easily see that it is mostly uninhabited land, and plenty of space for wind, solar, nuclear, various & sundry refineries, mining and drilling. We need them all to reduce our dependency on dictatorial regimes like the House of Saud, the Ayatollah, Chavez and Putin. It’s not only an economic issue (oil ain’t cheap anymore), it’s a national security issue. It’s time the world stop empowering Putin and the rest of those thugs.

In defense of the corn to ethanol refineries

2008-04-15T12:08:00.000-07:00

I would argue that the high price of food is due, in part, to the high price of fuel. I have a hunch that when the price of food goes up, so it follows that there develops an incentive to produce more food, because supply and demand is a strong force. Perhaps the Mexican corn farmer who was ruined by U.S. agribusiness and govt. subsidies might find it once again profitable to grow corn. With the slow and painful switch from petroleum to alternative sources of energy, it's a good idea to have these new corn digesting refineries already built, poised to quickly retrofit over to the cellulosic processes, as the local permit process is slow and often political.

Firing Line

2008-02-29T12:57:00.000-08:00

The following (in color) is an exchange in a string of responses
concerning William F. Buckley at Lucianne.com

Reply 16 - Posted by: Muggins, 2/29/2008 8:31:45 AM
I've admired Buckley since I watched his Firing Line program
in the 1960's. The Hoover Institute seems to own the Firing Line
programs and offer a few, abbreviated, low-fidelity clips that
can be downloaded in Real Media, as some sort of tease,
as frustrating as that is. They intend to digitalize selected
Firing Line tapes and ask the public to suggest which programs
they should choose to digitalize. Apparently, they intend to
charge money. I feel the conservative message, and what
better than Buckley's Firing Line, should be broadcast over
the TV airwaves, once again, to a much broader audience than
would be the small set of people who would purchase the programs
from the Hoover Institute.

Reply 23 - Posted by: Liberty7, 2/29/2008 9:45:16 AM
Re #16; Firing Line started out on commercial TV but moved to
public broadcasting after about 5 years. I always thought it a
little weird that this conservative icon should be socialist TV star.
But now some appear to want the program nationalized again and
made available to the masses on some subsidized basis. Weird.

Reply 45 - Posted by: Muggins, 2/29/2008 2:14:34 PM
#23
Surely you can recognize the difference between commercial TV
in 1966, and commercial TV now. Not only do we have to pay for
our cable TV programming, nowadays, but we have to watch
commercials. Does that make oldtime commercial TV socialistic
and weird? It seems to me that today's commercial TV is weird,
since we have to pay to watch commercials. Anyhow, I was a teenager
when I first started watching Buckley. There was a wider audience
for his message, something that I'd like to see happen again.
If they want to show that on cable, fine, but if it's to be limited
to a purchase item from Hoover, I think it would limit the scope and
size of the audience. We want to get the word out, not preach to an
exclusive group. I want the conservative movement to grow and Buckley
is just the ticket.

Bobby Fischer R.I.P.

2008-01-20T06:06:00.001-08:00

"Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the
things that are God's". Mark 12:17
As an American who has a token understanding of the conflict
between patriotism and the religious life (personified by Cardinal Richielieu's top diplomat, Francois Leclerc du Tremblay, in Aldous Huxley's "Grey Eminence"), I recognize that Fischer refused to
give up what was Caeser's. But perhaps this could be understood
in his troubled upbringing.
He was psychologically unprepared for adult life.
But he was the world's best chess player in his time, possibly
for all time. His games are a must study for any chess player,
and even the slackest among them, myself a strong candidate,
can enjoy the beauty of his genius in his recorded games
we can "click thru" move by move on the internet.
I recommend an interesting DVD by Susan Polgar,
"...Bobby Fischer's Most Brilliant Games".

Benazir Bhutto R.I.P.

2007-12-27T09:18:00.000-08:00

Excerpted (in purple) from the NRO online

Thursday, December 27, 2007
Benazir Bhutto [Mark Steyn]

The State Department geniuses thought they had it all figured out. They'd arranged a shotgun marriage between the Bhutto and Sharif factions as a "united" "democratic" "movement" and were pushing Musharraf to reach a deal with them. That's what diplomats do:
They find guys in suits and get 'em round a table. But none of those representatives
represents the rapidly evolving reality of Pakistan.
...she was everything we in the west would like a Muslim leader to be. We should be
modest enough to acknowledge when reality conflicts with our illusions.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTYyZDM1ZTJiYTEzMzM2ZDZjNTAxZWQ3MzMzODBmOTg=

People think we can talk to these extremist Islamics.
It's naive to think child killing, snuff film making, assassins
can be dealt with like civilized people. As far as Bhutto is
concerned, she was reckless and much was lost with her
assassination. I would hope that the leaders of the world
would scrupulously attend to their personal security in these
times of suicide bombers and assassins.

Sins of the father onto the son

2007-11-27T00:22:00.000-08:00

Below (in blue) are excerpts from a particularly well
written article on the Age of Apology, by Gorman Beauchamp

We live amid a veritable tsunami of apology. The Catholic Church,
which, of course, has much to apologize for, has, of late, offered
mea culpas to Galileo, the Jews, the gypsies, Jan Hus, whom it
burned at the stake in 1415, even to Constantinople (now Istanbul)
for its sacking 800 years ago by the knights of the Fourth Crusade,
an event for which the late John Paul II expressed deep regret.
No wonder that a group in England, claiming descent from the
medieval Knights Templars, is asking the Vatican to apologize
for the violent suppression of the order and for torturing to death
its Grand Master Jacques de Molay in 1314, an apology timed to
commemorate the 700th anniversary of that fell deed.
[...]
The reparations-for-slavery movement in the United States,
inchoate and sputtering as it is, provides a paradigm of our
apologizing-for-history syndrome. Slavery today is, of course,
widely if not universally condemned as an evil practice, its
presence in our nation’s early days a blot on our history.
Americans practiced and profited from slavery for more than
200 years, and so we should, the argument runs, however
belatedly, have to pay for it. But pay whom, and how?
All those who endured slavery are generations dead and
cannot, like the Nazi slave laborers, be compensated.
Does their exploitation, however, constitute something like
a historical IOU? Is their suffering heritable, like property
that can be passed down through generations?
[...]
...but one sees the point: they want a price put on the suffering
of slaves, and they want it paid. To them. And when their
grandchildren raise the issue of slavery and its relevance
to them, what will they be told? See your grandfather.
He cashed the check. The bill’s been paid.

http://www.theamericanscholar.org/au07/apologies-beauchamp.html

2007-11-22T11:28:00.000-08:00

Analysis: A Mideast nuclear war?

This brief Middle East Times article speculates in rough
figures the destruction from a nuclear war between Iran
and Israel. Certainly, with Iran capable of making nuclear
weapons and having the ICBMs to deliver them, such a war
would be a constant threat. Even if the world were lucky
enough that this war would be contained in the Middle East,
the economic disaster, worldwide, would be unavoidable.
I reckon that neither the U.S., nor any European powers
will set a serious ultimatum to Iran, and it will be Israel who
will initiate the next Gulf War with air strikes on Iranian
nuclear facilities.

2007-11-07T11:07:00.000-08:00

Yet another excerpt from the city-journal.org

The Anti-Neocon Fervor
Parsing the new political discourse
by James Kirchick
6 November 2007

http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-11-06jk.html

(excerpt)
The term "neoconservatism" has undergone a number of shifts in meaning.
It was coined in 1973 by the socialist intellectual Michael Harrington to
deride liberal thinkers such as Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Nathan Glazer,
who had begun to criticize the welfare state’s excesses. By the 1980s,
its meaning expanded to include a small group of former liberal intellectuals
who hewed to a strong anti-Soviet line and had defected from the Democratic
Party to support Ronald Reagan. They were motivated in part by an increased
awareness of, and distinctive moral clarity about, human rights in international
affairs, a worthy tradition whose liberal incarnation found embodiment in
figures such as Senator Scoop Jackson, labor leaders George Meaney,
Lane Kirkland, and Al Shanker, and intellectuals Bayard Rustin and Michael
Walzer. None of these people held traditionally movement conservative views
on economics or social issues far from it; some of them were outright socialists.
Neoconservatives had not been content with the détente policies of Richard Nixon,
because they wanted not to coexist with communism, but to end it...a more
ambitious goal that Reagan shared.

After September 11, the "neocon" label, which had fallen into disuse, came
back into vogue as a way to categorize the intellectual godfathers behind
the Bush Doctrine, which of course has advocated both military responses
to terrorist threats and promoting liberty around the world via "regime change"
(not all necessarily through military means). According to the leftist narrative,
the neocons got us into the Iraq war...never mind the widespread assumption
among intelligence services around the world that Saddam Hussein did have
WMDs, or that large segments of the Democratic Party and liberal opinion
leaders supported the invasion of Iraq, etc., etc.

By now, "neocon" has mutated into a political curse word to discredit not just
those who happily accept their status as neoconservatives, but also anyone
who merely believes that the West should respond in muscular fashion to
national security threats, such as those posed by the cooperation of Iran,
Syria, and North Korea on nuclear weapons technology and the equipping of
terrorist groups around the world. The chief purpose of this emergent rhetorical
style is to cast aspersions on anyone who believes, say, that Iran must not attain
nuclear weapons, even if it requires war.

Somalization of the world

2007-11-02T23:49:00.001-07:00

The 21st Century's War on Civilians is
explained in this well written article in
the City-Journal.org, entitled...

"From the H-Bomb to the Human Bomb"
by André Glucksmann
translated from the French by
Ralph C. Hancock and John C. Hancock

[Below is an excerpt from that article in black]

What threatens Iraqi society is not Vietnamization but Somalization.
Recall Operation Restore Hope, in which an international force, led
by Americans, disembarked in Mogadishu in 1993, seeking to ensure
the survival of a population that was starving and being massacred
by rival clans. After losing 19 in a horrific trap, the GIs left. The rest
is well known. An angry President Clinton swore never again, and a
year later refused to intervene in Rwanda, where 5,000 blue helmets
would have been enough to interrupt the genocide that wiped out as
many as 1 million Tutsi in three months.

The Somalian model has spread across the planet, from the Congo
to chaotic East Timor to Afghanistan, where the Taliban have violently
resurfaced, to Iraq. Populations are taken hostage, terrorized, and
sacrificed, the spoils of wars by local gangsters. Under various
pretexts religion, ethnicity, makeshift racist or nationalist ideology
commandos contend for power at the point of AK-47s. They fight
against unarmed populations; most of their victims are women and
children. Terrorism is not the prerogative of Islamists alone: the
targeting of civilians has been used by a regular army and by militias
under the command of the Kremlin in Chechnya, where the capital
city of Grozny was razed to the ground. Where the killers appeal to
the Koran, it is still primarily Muslim passersby who suffer. Algeria,
Somalia, and Darfur (at least 200,000 dead and millions of refugees
in just a few years, with the Sudanese government, protected by
China and Russia, acting with impunity) are live laboratories of the
abomination of abominations: war against civilians.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/17_4_modern_terrorism.html

2007-10-02T11:17:00.001-07:00

Below is an excerpt from an article
by Christopher Hitchens in Slate.com
on China and it's support of heinous regimes.

Maintained in China
BURMA'S FOUL REGIME DEPENDS ON BEIJING
by Christopher Hitchens
[excerpt]
Oct. 1, 2007

I thought President Bush was quite correct
in listing his least favorite regimes during
his address to the United Nations last week
and in trying to ramp up the international
pressure on the goons in Rangoon. The
governments that he singled out were the
uniquely repellent ones that consider the
citizen to be the property of the state and
the uniquely boring ones that have remained
in power until their citizens are positively
screaming for release. I do not need to
specify these senescent gangster systems
individually, except that they all have one
thing in common. They are all defended,
from Cuba to Zimbabwe, by the Chinese
vote at the United Nations.

Those who care or purport to care about
human rights must start to discuss this
problem in plain words. Is there an
initiative to save the un-massacred remains
of the people of Darfur? It will be met by
a Chinese veto. Does anyone care about
Robert Mugabe treating his desperate
population as if it belonged to him personally?
China is always ready to help him out. Are
the North Koreans starved and isolated so
that a demented playboy can posture with
nuclear weapons? Beijing will give the
demented playboy a guarantee. How long
can Southeast Asia bear the shame and
misery of the Burmese junta? As long as
the embrace of China persists.

http://www.slate.com/id/2175047/fr/flyout

The problem with the Left

2007-07-16T10:00:00.000-07:00

I watched as Senator Webb (D-VA) stated on Meet the Press
(Sunday, July 15, '07), that there is no war in Iraq, only a
botched occuption.
I realized that right there we have the essential problem of
the Left. They fail to recognize, or refuse to consider, the
ambitions of al Qaeda and the Ayatollah, and why both
are waging war in Iraq. Leftists don't want to hear that
those two orgs intend to unify the Middle East, no matter
who they murder, children included, or how much blood flows.
The terrorists know the West will leave the Middle East soon.
One has only to read what the Democrats are doing.
All the terrorists have to do is play to the well publicized deadlines
the Leftists are pushing. But the Left doesn't realize that Europe
as well as Africa is in the sights of the Islamist extremists.
In 2007, the 2nd most popular baby name in Britain was Mohammed.

Clean coal

2007-07-09T22:32:00.000-07:00

source

--------

Below is my email to Charles Krauthammer in response to
his article about Congress' approach to energy efficiency.

letters@charleskrauthammer.com
Re: The Tax-Free Lunch,

Dear Mr. Krauthammer,

I am on your side. as far as the Chinese model for our energy needs goes.
But, I balk at higher gasoline taxes because I'm on a fixed income. I think
there are more than just 2 sides to this topic.

Hi-grade diesel fuel can be made from coal using the Fischer-Tropsch process
which was invented prior to WWII in Germany. It's been used by South Africa
and is slowly venturing out worldwide. It's competitive to petroleum in today's
market, theoretically, but I think distribution, i.e. gas stations, could be a major
hang up. Most stations are owned, or controlled, by Big Oil.

Parallel with this resource, Europe and Asia are producing clean burning, fuel
efficient diesel cars, and have been for years, but these cars are not allowed in
the U.S..

I'm for the free market to solve our energy problems, but the market is not free
if the world can buy fuel efficient diesels, except in the U.S.. Plus, Big Oil was
granted mergers for the last few decades, only to use it's virtual monopoly
to retard the transition to other sources for energy.

-Muggins
San Jose, CA

Media and the war

2007-06-30T08:37:00.000-07:00

A short complaint about the media coverage on the war
against the terrorists. Media loves the negative because
it sells.What we won't see in mainstream media is the telling
of the whole story.
For example, they don't ever mention the ultimate aims
of either al Qaeda, or the Ayatollah's Islamic Revolution.
They don't want to remind us how much these groups
hate Jews and admire the Nazis. They don't tell us how
many civilians these 2 groups kill. They don't ask the self-
serving politicians, who are calling for retreat (withdrawal),
just what will happen if the U.S. does retreat.

Rushdie knighthood 'justifies suicide attacks'...?

2007-06-18T12:02:00.000-07:00

Earlier today Pakistani MPs demanded Britain
withdraw Rushdie's knighthood.

A government-backed resolution condemning
the author's knighthood was passed unanimously
by the lower house of the Pakistani parliament
amid angry protests across the country.

MPs said the honour was an insult to the religious
sentiments of Muslims. In the eastern city of
Multan, hardline Muslim students burned effigies
of the Queen and Rushdie, chanting "Kill him! Kill him!"
The above is excerpted from the UK Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/pakistan/Story/0,,2105748,00.html

========

Here's a link to Marc Steyn's article about Rushdie and the Fatwa.

========

Here's my frustration with the situation...

These Pakis wouldn't know religion if it sneaked up and
bit 'em on the caboodle. Being insulted, which ultimately
is a product of fear, is not religious activity. Fear, pride,
and hatred, not to mention murder, are what religion is
to teach against, not encourage.

And certainly this Fatwa business is misguided. How
much of the Islamic world is influenced by profoundly
uninspired leaders & institutions? I don't know, but
it has everything to do with why there is blood running
in the streets in the Middle East and around the world.
These Pakistanis, who combine religion & politics, are
armed with nuclear weapons. Paki politicians might be
posturing for their constituents, but over in Iran,
the Ayatollah is not posturing.

Rogue Special Prosecutor

2007-06-07T09:01:00.000-07:00

"This time it was a pro-war Republican caught in the snare,
which is why many liberals are cheering. But what goes
around comes around, and I wonder if my friends would
feel the same way if this technique were used to indict,
convict and imprison one of our friends. As it might have
been, during the Clinton years."

"The whole phenomenon of special prosecutors turns the
usual rules of investigating on their head. Instead of
focusing on crimes, special prosecutors tend to focus
on people themselves. Dig deep enough, ask enough
questions, particularly under oath, and only those most
experienced with the criminal justice system are likely
to escape unscathed. Hardened criminals know enough
to shut up."
source
http://www.creators.com/opinion/susan-estrich.html
------------

Pulitzer Prize winning auther Dorothy Rabinwitz' take on this case, here.

C. Hitchens: the moral eclipse of the secular left

2007-06-06T16:52:00.000-07:00

The following is my effort at transcribing
a portion of a YouTube clip, which is itself
just a portion of a debate, from this site:
http://www.zombietime.com/hitchens-hedges_debate/
From the debate between Christopher Hitchens
and Chris Hedges in at Berkeley Univ.:

Hitchens: The decline, not to say the moral eclipse,
of the secular left has just been illustrated on this
very platform by someone, who makes excuses for
suicide murder and tries to trace them to a second-
rate sociology. But, to the hidden agenda to the
question, 'Is George Bush on a Christian Crusade
in Iraq and Afganistan'? Obviously not. Obviously
not. Anyone who's studied what's happening in
either of those two countries now, knows the whole
of American policy...and by the way a lot of your
own future, ladies and gentlemen, is staked on the
hope that federal, secular democrats can emerge
from this terrible combat, and that we can protect
them and offer them help while they do so. I've
met them. I love them. They're our friends.
Every member of the 82nd Airborne Division could be
a snake handling congregationalist, for all I know but,
these men and women, though you sneer and jeer at
them, and snigger when you hear applause and excuses
for suicide bombers and you have to live with the shame
of having done that, these people are guarding you while
you sleep, whether you know it or not. And they're
also creating space for secularism to emerge and you'd
better hope that they are successful.

Hedges: I feel that I should be reading Kipling's "White
Man's Burden."

Hitchens: What you mean is you wish you had read it.
(This) is the exact equivelent of the evil, nonsense talk
by Hedges and friends of his who say the suicide bombers
in Palestine are driven to it by despair. Have you read
the manifestos of these sucide bombers? Have you
seen the videos they make? Have you seen the manifestos
they put out? The propaganda that they generate?
These are not people in despair, these are people in
religious exaltation who are promised everything, who
are in a state of hope, who are in a state of adoration
for their evil mullahs and for their filthy religion.
It's this that makes them think they have the right
to kill others, while taking their own lives. If despair
among Palestinians was enough to creat psychopathic,
criminal behavior, there's been enough despair for a
long time, and enough misery to go around.
It is...it is to excuse the vicious, filthy forces of
Islamic Jihad to offer any other explanation for this,
their own evil preaching, their own vile religion, their
own racism, their own apocalyptic ideology that
makes them think they have the right to kill everyone
in this room and go to paradise as a reward. I won't
listen, nor should you, anyone who euphimizes or excuses
this evil, wicked thing.

Katrina and the press

2007-05-30T08:09:00.000-07:00

Pic Source

We recall the female reporter sitting in a rowboat
making her televised report as two men walk past
her in rubber boots in less than a foot of water.
We might also remember the reports of lawlessness,
including rape, that the press quietly acknowledged
later as rumor. Below, in purple, is a an accounting of
what the government got right, which the press missed.

The National Guard had its headquarters for Katrina,
not just a few peacekeeping troops, in what the media
portrayed as the pit of Hell. Hell was one of the safest
places to be in New Orleans, smelly as it was.
The situation was always under control, not surprisingly
because the people in control were always there.

From the Dome, the Louisiana Guard's main command
ran at least 2,500 troops who rode out the storm inside
the city, a dozen emergency shelters, 200-plus boats,
dozens of high-water vehicles, 150 helicopters, and a
triage and medical center that handled up to 5,000
patients (and delivered 7 babies). The Guard command
headquarters also coordinated efforts of the police,
firefighters and scores of volunteers after the storm
knocked out local radio, as well as other regular military
and other state Guard units.

Jack Harrison, a spokesman for the National Guard
Bureau in Arlington, Virginia, cited "10,244 sorties
flown, 88,181 passengers moved, 18,834 cargo tons
hauled, 17,411 saves" by air. Unlike the politicians,
they had a working chain of command that
commandeered more relief aid from other Guard units
outside the state. From day one.

There were problems, true: FEMA melted down.
Political leaders, from the Mayor to Governor to the
White House, showed "A Failure of Initiative", as a
recent House report put it. That report, along with
sharply critical studies by the White House and the
Senate, delve into the myriad of breakdowns, shortages
and miscommunications that hampered relief efforts.

Still, by focusing on the part of the glass that was
half-empty, the national media imposed a near total
blackout on the nerve center of what may have been
the largest, most successful aerial search and rescue
operation in history. Source
------------

Katrina compared to Galvatsten and other storms.

Arab anger misdirected

2007-05-29T06:08:00.000-07:00

Tony Blair

Below (in blue) is an excerpt from a Daily Telegraph article
by Tony Blair. May 29, 2007

I was stopped by someone the other week who said
it was not surprising there was so much terrorism
in the world when we invaded their countries
(meaning Afghanistan and Iraq). No wonder Muslims
felt angry.

I said to him: tell me exactly what they feel angry
about. We remove two utterly brutal and dictatorial
regimes; we replace them with a UN-supervised
democratic process.

And the only reason it is difficult still is because
other Muslims are using terrorism to try to destroy
the fledgling democracy and, in doing so, are killing
fellow Muslims.

Why aren't they angry about the people doing the
killing? The odd thing about the conversation is
I could tell it was the first time he'd heard this argument.

=========

Meanwhile, the children are programmed

Expensive Gas - More Competition Needed

2007-05-25T07:20:00.001-07:00

The petroleum corporations are pricing gasoline
so that their supply of gas is sufficient for the
demand. If demand were greater than their
supply of gas, then they would run low of gasoline,
and gas stations would either close down, waiting
to be re-supplied,...

...or avoid closing down by limiting the amount
gallons people could purchase with each visit.
This is rationing, and that creates long lines at
gas stations which happened during the oil crunches
in the 1970's.

The capacity of the refineries is at a low ebb
due to repair and ultimately because they haven't
built a new refinery in the U.S. since Carter
was President. Summer is coming on and they
raised prices so that their low supply was adequate
for the demand rather than run out of gas.
In other words, the corporations lowered
demand by raising prices.

Until big money invests in competition to the
petroleum industry (cellulosic fuel refineries),
and gas stations independent from big oil,
We will remain hostage to the petroleum corporations
strategy of not building refineries to meet the
demand. The media can advise us how to
get more out of our high priced gasoline, and the
Senators can hold their hearings and pass meaningless
laws, but supply and demand rule. We need more
competition in our energy sector.

Breathing in Buckyball Carbon

2007-05-24T11:08:00.000-07:00

pic source

The following is excerpted (in green fonts) from an article
in the The New Atlantis.

Nanoethics as a Discipline?
by Adam Keiper

Rice University nanotechnologist Vicki Colvin, the director
of the university’s Center for Biological and Environmental
Nanotechnology, described in 2002 how, “in a field with
more than 12,000 citations a year,” her team had been
“stunned to discover no prior research in developing
nanomaterials risk assessment models and no toxicology
studies devoted to synthetic nanomaterials.”
In the years since then, dozens of studies have begun
to examine those problems, including a widely reported
study showing that buckyballs—a type of manmade
carbon molecule—could cause brain damage in fish.
But the research done so far has only scratched the
surface of potential nanotoxicology questions.
Many unanswered questions remain. Which nanomaterials
are biodegradable and which persist in the body or the
environment? Some nanoparticles kill microorganisms;
could their increased production and eventual dispersal
disrupt food chains? How can factory workers best be
protected from exposure to nanomaterials that could
damage their lungs or other organs? In a recent lecture
at the National Academy of Sciences, Harvard
researcher George Whitesides pointed to the deliciously
convoluted acronym ADME/Tox/PK/PD—for adsorption,
distribution, metabolism, excretion, toxicology,
pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics—and warned,
“We don’t know anything about that. We don’t know
about any of those things for nanoparticles.”
Such questions would be complex enough if just one
kind of substance were involved, but the variety and
many different applications of nanoparticles and
nanomaterials make the study of their health and
environmental effects bewilderingly complicated.

Trust Democrats with Foreign Policy?

2007-05-22T06:31:00.000-07:00

Excerpted from article by Bob Kerrey in the WSJ

"The critics who bother me the most are those who
ordinarily would not be on the side of supporting
dictatorships, who are arguing today that only
military intervention can prevent the genocide of
Darfur, or who argued yesterday for military
intervention in Bosnia, Somalia and Rwanda to ease
the sectarian violence that was tearing those
places apart. . . .American liberals need to face
these truths: The demand for self-government
was and remains strong in Iraq despite all our
mistakes and the violent efforts of al Qaeda,
Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias to disrupt it.
Al Qaeda in particular has targeted for abduction
and murder those who are essential to a functioning
democracy: school teachers, aid workers, private
contractors working to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure,
police officers and anyone who cooperates with
the Iraqi government. Much of Iraq's middle class
has fled the country in fear."

"With these facts on the scales, what does your
conscience tell you to do? If the answer is nothing,
that it is not our responsibility or that this is all
about oil, then no wonder today we Democrats are
not trusted with the reins of power."

Climate change

2007-05-06T13:26:00.000-07:00

Source of pic

The following is excerpted from article by Dave Hoopman for the
Wisconson Energy Cooperative:

Bryson describes the navigational instructions provided
for Norse mariners making their way from Europe to
their settlements in Greenland. The place was named
for a reason: The Norse farmed there from the 10th
century to the 13th, a somewhat longer period than
the United States has existed. But around 1200 the
mariners’ instructions changed in a big way. Ice became
a major navigational reference. Today, old Viking
farmsteads are covered by glaciers.
Bryson mentions the retreat of Alpine glaciers, common
grist for current headlines. “What do they find when
the ice sheets retreat, in the Alps?”

We recall the two-year-old report saying a mature
forest and agricultural water-management structures
had been discovered emerging from the ice, seeing
sunlight for the first time in thousands of years.
Bryson interrupts excitedly.

“A silver mine! The guys had stacked up their tools
because they were going to be back the next spring
to mine more silver, only the snow never went,” he says.
“There used to be less ice than now. It’s just getting
back to normal.”

==================

Climate change models

Wolfowitz

2007-05-02T00:49:00.000-07:00

The following excerpt (in red) is from the
WSJ Opinion pageon the web.

World Bank Justice
Wolfowitz's resignation offers
a window into a corrupt institution.

Friday, May 18, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

So after weeks of nasty leaks and media smears,
the World Bank's board of executive directors
yesterday cleared President Paul Wolfowitz of
ethical misconduct for following the board's own
advice on how to handle a conflict of interest
involving his girlfriend. And Mr. Wolfowitz in turn
will resign from the bank at the end of June.
Run that by us again?

We've said from the beginning that the charges
against Mr. Wolfowitz were bogus, and that the
effort to unseat him amounted to a political
grudge by those who opposed his role in the
Bush Administration and a bureaucratic vendetta
by those who opposed his anti-corruption agenda
at the bank. That view was vindicated by
yesterday's statement, which showed how little
the merits of the case against Mr. Wolfowitz
had to do with the final result.

Mr. Wolfowitz "assured us that he acted
ethically and in good faith in what he believed
were the best interests of the institution,
and we accept that," the directors said,
thus rejecting the findings of a rigged
investigating committee that had ignored key
evidence. The most damning judgment the
directors could muster is that "a number of
mistakes were made," including by the bank's
own ethics committee that had refused to let
Mr. Wolfowitz recuse himself from matters
involving his girlfriend, Shaha Riza.

In other words, this was all about politics.
And all that mattered to Mr. Wolfowitz's
accusers was to be rid of him, whatever
the pretext or methods. The least they
can do now is restore Ms. Riza to her job,
assuming she wants to be part of an
organization that treated her so shabbily.

------------

Cogent and Compelling statements concerning what appears
to be a partisan attack at the World Bank, submitted by Paul
Wolfowitz and Shaha Riza.

-----------

Christopher Hitchens' say

Legalize it like beer

2007-05-01T00:08:00.000-07:00

The reason why they made pot illegal was that it was mistakenly
associated with Mexican and Black violence. People bought into
that hoakie tale hook, line, & sinker. And also, hemp fiber was a
competitor to DuPont's new plastic, nylon.
Since then, the government has spent millions of dollars on
propaganda to make people believe that pot was evil and a killer.
Even as recently as Clinton's Administration, his drug Czar
General Barry McCaffrey told the press that he had names of
people who died from pot. While watching that press conference,
I wished that the press had the courage to ask him for the names
of those people who died, but they took it silently. There is a strong
taboo against pot. Legalization has been recommended by conservatives
like William F. Buckley, George Shultz former Sect. of State for
Ronald Reagon, and Milton Friedman.
Here is a discussion between me (as 2oonz) and someone calling
himself the Alpha Male at a football forum.
http://www.topix.net/forum/nfl/oakland-raiders/TH9F4QROL22SI54GQ#lastPost

EU will not stand by the UK

2007-04-01T13:44:00.000-07:00

In a National Review article, Victor Hanson sums up the dynamics of
the hostage standoff. The following is excerpted from the above linked article:

Houses of Straw
March 30, 2007 5:00 AM

The rationalizations are limitless, but essential, since no one in Europe
— again, understandably — wishes a confrontation that might require
a cessation of lucrative trade with Iran, or an embarrassing military engagement without sufficient assets, or any overt allegiance with
the United States. Pundits talk of a military option, but there
really is none, since neither Britain nor Europe at large
possesses a military.

2007-03-16T10:19:00.000-07:00

I'm calling "Muggins" on Valerie Plame's little chit-chat
with congress. Valerie, you had no cover because you
drove to CIA headquarters everyday. That's self-outing.

Plus, your husband, flaunting his credentials including his
CIA connection to establish his credibility, attacked the
President of the United States, doing his best to undermine
a key point in his inaugural address. Naturally everyone is
going to ask, "Who is this guy?".

And yes, Wilson was richly deserving of being discredited
because he was a deceiving, self-serving, attention hungry...

(see pic above),

political attack dog. Do you think anyone can enter the
arena of national politics with blockbuster accusations like
that and not be scrutinized?

Plus, this from the National Review following Plame's denial
of her influence in the CIA to send her husband to Niger.
"In response to an inquiry from National Review, Senator Christopher
Bond, vice chairman of the Intelligence Committee, released the
following statement:"
[...][...]
"We have also checked the memorandum written by Ms. Wilson
suggesting her husband to look into the Niger reporting. I also
stand by the Committee’s finding that this memorandum indicates
Ms. Wilson did suggest her husband for a Niger inquiry.
Because the quote [the portion of the memo quoted in the Senate report]
obviously does not represent the entirety of the memorandum,
I suggest that the House Government Reform Committee request
and examine this memorandum themselves. I am confident that
they will come to the same conclusion as our bipartisan membership did."

The full memo

Unions, Corporations and Taxes

2007-03-12T12:42:00.000-07:00

I disagree with the Right that unions are their enemy,
since unions help the keep workers on the job with the up to date
technological education, and since the unions negotiate for wages
and benefits, the worker not only approaches his work as a
professional, since he or she will be making a living wage, but
overall, adds to the middle class, which benefits the corporations.
If the corporate philosophy of lowering wages and benefits were
not to meet resistance from the unions, the middle class would
shrink and the consumer base weaken. To the extent that unions
have been excluded from today's economy, that has already happened.

I disagree with the Left that corporations are their enemy.
Corporations create good jobs. And so do small and medium
sized businesses. They all have to make a profit, and the popular
idea that a corporation could make too high a profit, as in the
recent petrol conglomeration's windfall profits, is ludicrous, esp.
since their profit history shows cyclical high's and low's.
Our economy would benefit by teamwork between workers and
business. We need to grow the unions and lower taxes.

Federal taxes should be lowered to generate higher revenues
and more jobs.

Quoting from Kudlow's Blog (in black fonts)
From today's Wall Street Journal***:
"...The benefits of low taxes are on full display in Iceland, which provides an almost perfect demonstration of the Laffer Curve. From 1991 to 2001, as the corporate-tax rate fell gradually to 18% from 45%, tax revenues tripled to 9.1 billion kronas ($134 million in today's exchange rate) from just above 3 billion kronas. Revenues have more than tripled again since 2001 to an estimated 33 billion kronas last year. Personal income-tax rates were cut gradually as well, to a flat rate of 22.75% this year from 33% in 1995. Meanwhile, the economy has averaged annual growth of about 4% over the past decade...."

To top it off, Iceland's government is now considering a reduction
of its corporate-tax rate to ten percent. That would beat Ireland's
low corporate tax rate by over 2 percent.

Meanwhile, the prevailing 35 percent corporate tax rate here
in the U.S. continues to take monster bites from all U.S. businesses.

As I've written before:

"Corporate profits are a vital form of capital and capital is the key ingredient in capitalism. If the latter is to work and expand prosperity, then the former must be saved. In fact, corporate profits shouldn’t be taxed at all...Profits are the seed corn of economic growth. Eliminating the tax burden on profits will reap a record harvest of jobs and prosperity."

*** "Iceland's 300,000 citizens have become some of the world's
wealthiest people by opening up their economy and cutting taxes,
and now they're contemplating another dose of the same economic
tonic."

"The government convened a special task force in 2005 to look into
ways of transforming Iceland into a financial hub. Headed by Sigurdur
Einarsson, ..."
(THE FULL WSJ.com ARTICLE IS ONLY AVAILABLE TO SUBSCRIBERS)

2007-03-03T10:25:00.000-08:00

Responding to the conversation between
the Rev. Al Sharpton and Jon Stewart...

Reparations is a non-starter. Slavery happened too long ago,
in the century before last. But because reconstruction was a failure,
and racism in America was so rampant and damaging, those of
African American ancestry deserved a break. They got it in LBJ's
Great Society programs. Of which, Affirmative Action, still exists.

Those programs had varying degrees of success and failure.
Some have blamed those programs with the destruction of the
family structure and work ethic in much of the African American
community. This has some truth in it. It's a problem that requires
a solution from within the African American community.

There are things society can do, today, to help the poorer
neighborhoods, regardless of race or ethnicity. They can provide
better public transportation, better K through 12 education,
legalize marijuana, and decriminalize cocaine and heroin,
the latter of which would reduce the power and influence of
the gangs.

2007-03-02T21:24:00.000-08:00

Responding to Lorraine Ali's article defending Islam in her review
(of sorts) of Ayaan Hirsi Ali's new book, "Infidel".

Everyday, women in the Islamic world are involuntarily circumcised.
"Circumcised" isn't the correct term, because these young women,
in their early teens, are brutally mutilated, typically jumped from
behind in their homes by members of their own family.
They pin her down and cut her clitoris off. While most Muslim women
enjoy a life free of this type of mutilation, one hopes they can find
the courage to denounce these criminal acts by Islamic extremists
who continue to mutilate women. We have to understand that they
risk their lives if they dare speak out. 03/02/07

--------

http://www.guernicamag.com/interviews/283/infidel/
The above URL is to an interview with Ayaan by the leftist
magazine, Guernica. Preceeding the interview is a quick bio
of Ayaan.

Against the charge that the U.S. invaded Iraq for oil,
Ayaan would disagree. She points out that the U.S.
invaded Iraq and did not seize oil, but set up a
democracy.

I contend that oil is part of the equation, but there
are many elements. The tendency to list but one
reason for this or that in contemparary politics is
no longer useful. One of these elements in Iraq
was that Hussein was no longer contained in the
aftermath of 9/11. He knew that, and the U.S.
govt. knew that, but the media can't quite recognize
it. It's about asymmetrical warfare. This they
did not consider in their analysis. Plus the fact
that the U.S. was committed to maintaining a
no-fly zone over Iraq to prevent a continuance
of the mass murder of Hussein. For this reason,
if the U.S. were to pull out, the murdering would
continue.

Another factor not in their analysis of the Iraq
invasion is what's at stake for al Qaeda and the
Iranian Revolution.

There was bound to be strife and retributions
between the Sunni and Shia communities, but
a democracy in Iraq is a major setback or blockade
that both al Qaeda and Iran must oppose. People,
pundits, and political parties have to realize someday
soon that there is a struggle to set up a caliphate in
the Middle East. It's not non-sensical or paranoid,
it's a reality.

It is also a reality that popular opinion in the West
is to withdraw totally from the Middle East.
The terrorists know this and are waiting for the day
it happens. Ayaan argues that it would be wiser if the
West decide instead to stay in the Middle East
to support the democracies. With this I fervantly agree.

Instead, we seem to want to surrender the Middle East
to the terrorists, and as soon as possible. The simple
question is, are we willing to cede Iraq, and country after
country to the terrorists? 03/13/07