A Second Hand Conjecture

I thought it might be fun to cruise around the internets and highlight what some people will be wearing as a costume for Halloween this year.

To start off, it looks like slutty Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz is popular amongst the pre-teen girls.

And of course, Lions, and Tigers, and , Oh My!

Apparently, Karl Rove is dressing up as John Kerry. It’s a good make-up job, but a little over the top on the antics, don’t you think, Karl?

Let’s see what else we have … I think Lynne Cheney is going as a President, but I’m not sure which one. I’m guessing Jackson. (more…)

2 Comments »

I am not the most tech savvy blogger on the internet, but I do spend a fair amount of time on the web. So I have been waiting for my beloved Firefox’s latest upgrade. I also had the chance over the last week to work a bit with Microsoft’s latest entry, Internet Explorer 7. So what are my first impressions?

Microsoft in the first significant overhaul of Explorer has made a pretty good effort. Tabbed browsing is finally available and it is far more web savvy than previously. Firefox however still maintains its lead. Fans of Opera will have to look elsewhere, I have little to no experience with it. For those still using Internet Explorer it is time to make the switch.

Firefox is still leaner and faster than IE. My first negative impression was in comparing the installation. Like everything from Microsoft it took well over a half hour just to install and reboot. In my case I had to reboot several times, but that seems to not be most peoples experience. The time however was excessive when I was up and running on Firefox within three or four minutes and I didn’t have to reboot. Luckily I was not greatly inconvenienced, but be aware, if you are going to upgrade to IE 7 don’t do it when you will need the computer. I think it would be a sign of progress if software providers gave users an estimated time for installation, especially if it is going to take more than five minutes.

So what is new in Firefox 2.0. The tabbed browsing capabilities have been improved. You can open as many tabs as you wish arrange them in any sequence you wish and reopen tabs you have closed using hot keys (Ctrl-Shift-T.) One of my favorite time savers is the ability to save an entire set of open tabs as a bookmark which can then be reopened as a group. As a blogger you can also save active tabs as a bookmark so that you can open the entire set of tabs at a later time. As a blogger and web surfer who often will follow or research a large number of posts or websites it is an invaluable feature. I find it very frustrating to have twenty tabs open and have my wife ask for the computer, accidentally close my window and leave me trying to remember where I was. In addition I can save all my favorites to open with one click and create packages depending on what I want to do. All real timesavers. (more…)

5 Comments »

Old joke:

A mathematician, an accountant and an economist apply for the same job.

The interviewer calls in the mathematician and asks “What do two plus two equal?” The mathematician replies “Four.” The interviewer asks “Four, exactly?” The mathematician looks at the interviewer incredulously and says “Yes, four, exactly.”

Then the interviewer calls in the accountant and asks the same question “What do two plus two equal?” The accountant says “On average, four – give or take ten percent, but on average, four.”

Then the interviewer calls in the economist and poses the same question “What do two plus two equal?” The economist gets up, locks the door, closes the shade, sits down next to the interviewer and says “What do you want it to equal?”

As a lawyer, I am quite familiar with the power that “experts” can hold over a jury of one’s peers or even a judge. Subjects of a technical nature encourage abdication of thought and analysis to those dedicated to said subjects. Consequently, conclusory reports based entirely on unsupported assumptions are passed off as unassailable pronouncements as if shouted from the heights of Mt. Olympus by Zeus himself. Unfortunately, the failure to regard such reports with skepticism and scrutiny enables propaganda masquerading as science to be heralded without proper questioning about the agenda being advanced. The “Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change” is just such a report that demands our skepticism and scrutiny. (more…)

2 Comments »

Tom Maguire notices this item from the New York Times:

“This notion that elections are stolen and that elections are rigged is so common in the public sphere that we’re having to go out of our way to counter them this year,” said Donna Brazile, a Democratic strategist.

This will be the first midterm election in which the Democratic Party is mobilizing teams of lawyers and poll watchers, to check for irregularities including suppression of the black vote, in at least a
dozen of the closest districts, Ms. Brazile said.

Democrats’ worries are backed up by a Pew Research Center report that found that blacks were twice as likely now than they were in 2004 to say they had little or no confidence in the voting system, rising to 29 percent from 15 percent.

And more than three times as many blacks as whites — 29 percent versus 8 percent — say they do not believe that their vote will be accurately tallied.

So, many in the Democratic Party have spent the last few years doing everything they can to make people feel that our elections are rigged, most specifically against minorities and now it may be coming back to bite them. Ironically voter fraud is a real issue in this country (take it from me, I live in Louisiana and the Democratic Party stll is able to get out the fictitious vote in many areas) and some people are trying to do something about it with new laws designed to make it more difficult, but that seems to be discouraging as well: (more…)

2 Comments »

Political consultants are notorious for the colorful categories created to characterize various groups of voters that are then precisely targeted with carefully crafted campaign messages. Who can forget “Soccer Moms” and “NASCAR Dads“? These monikers, often overly cute, are derived from all that voter research that goes on prior to elections, yielding the demographic most likely to tip the balance towards one candidate or another. This year, and most likely for the Presidential election in 2008, the target demographic appears to be libertarians:

One answer, so I read, is that an important part of the uncommitted vote has “liberal” values in the traditional English sense of that term. In the United States such people have to be called “libertarians” or “classical liberals” — words uncommon in current political discourse, which is revealing in itself. These are citizens who favor limited government in economic affairs (unlike the Democratic base) but also in social and cultural matters (unlike the Republican base). They are instinctively pro-market, wary of big government, and no more than moderately egalitarian, which inclines them to vote Republican — or it used to, anyway, when Republicans cared about curbing public spending. But at the same time, they are offended by what happens when politics meets evangelical religion. They take a generally permissive view of private morality, are not much devoted to tradition, and are broadly welcoming of technological and cultural innovation, rather than anxious about it. These views incline them to vote Democratic. (more…)

8 Comments »

I heard an interview late last night on Washington Post Radio (which, for me, is fast becoming a preferable alternative to NPR) with author Timothy Carney discussing his new book, “The Big Ripoff: How Big Business and Big Government Steal Your Money” (available at Amazon and through Laissez Faire Books). Tim ponders the question of just how much of a free market do we really have when businesses actively collude with government to regulate competition, thus solidifying their own position in the marketplace and drowning any potential entrants.

For example, in the interview Tim discussed what he called the “pulling up the ladder” strategy where businesses use the free market to grow and prosper, and then once they reach a certain point turn to government to regulate away the competition. He used the actions of California oil company Unocal to illustrate his point. Unocal made great gains in the refining business only to see President Nixon relax rules for new refineries during the 1970’s. The result was that many small, family operated refineries sprung up and created a small boom. That ate into Unocal’s profits so it went to the state regulators to do something about it. Lo and behold, next thing you know every process for refining oil into gasoline was so heavily regulated or forbidden outright that just one process was left for anyone to profitably use; you’ll never guess who just happened to hold the patent on that process. That’s right! It was Unocal, who then charged a rent on every gallon of gas sold or refined in the great state of California. (more…)

1 Comment »

Without being finger printed and monitored by the state that is. Having made my way over to Samizdata I came across a post which has one of my favorite Lewis quotes:

Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies, The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

Now what could require such an intro?

Revellers in the Somerset town of Yeovil, often seen as Britain’s answer to the Wild West on a Friday and Saturday night, were this weekend getting to grips with a unique scheme which is more science fiction than Wild West. Customers entering the town’s six main late-night drinking and dancing joints were being asked to register their personal details, have their photograph taken and submit to a biometric finger scan.

As the Pogue designated heathen of our little blog (I am sure Robby is feeling slighted in the heathen category, so post more bud!) I am here to say that the thought of going to England and having to be fingerprinted to enjoy my pint or two or, well I doubt it would be only two, but any way, back to the subject, this is truly awful. I remember arguing against the anti-smoking Nazi’s ( You mentioned Nazis, you lose the argument! -ed. Damn!) by pointing out that eventually the logic of such a position meant they would go after fatty foods, MacDonald’s and other such health threats. That was treated as a preposterous notion that showed my inability to be reasonable, and so it was. Yet, it has still happened and the world has still not ceased being unreasonable. (more…)

27 Comments »

***Update*** A point I neglected to mention is that distributism, like Marxism, seems overly concerned with labor and production of concrete goods. It does not adequately address what could broadly be considered the “service sector,” which could be said to include anyone who does not directly produce a concrete product (bankers, financial professionals, lawyers, doctors and medical personnel, educators, researchers, etc.).

Lance’s recent post on usury and a discussion of the recent Nobel Prize in Economics here and elsewhere prompted me to revisit my old views on economic theory which were essentially summed up by the twentieth century economic philosophy called distributism. For those of you unfamiliar with distributism (and it’s pretty obscure unless you happen to be either a religious studies specialist or an economic historian), several solid descriptions exist here. Although an overtly Catholic system, I found much of what is proposed to be thoroughly compatible with Islamic views, especially as concerns usury. The biggest difference on the usury issue being that Muslims are not allowed to charge any interest, whereas distributism proposes a fixed and “fair” limit on interest. For several years, I considered myself at least a mild distributist and looked to G.K. Chesterton and Hillaire Belloc for wisdom. Eventually, the utter impracticality of implementing such a system and some very good pro-capitalist papers emerged which convinced me of the folly of distributism. (more…)

2 Comments »

You may have heard the other day that the cause célèbre of terrorist sympathizers everywhere :

NEW YORK (Reuters) – A New York attorney convicted of aiding terrorism by helping an imprisoned Egyptian client smuggle messages to militant followers was sentenced on Monday to 28 months in prison.

Lynne Stewart, 67, was convicted in February 2005 of helping her client, Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, to contact the Islamic Group, which the U.S. government lists as a terrorist organization.

[...]

“We will claim victory here. We are happy and humbled to be going home today,” Stewart told a crowd of 150 supporters and media outside the courthouse.

She has supporters? Someone who openly aided and abetted enemies of our country, and who flouted the law in doing so? It gets worse (emphasis mine):

Since her 2002 indictment, Stewart has spoken at rallies, undergone treatment for breast cancer and become the subject of a documentary called “Who’s Afraid of Lynne Stewart?“

So support terrorism and then go on a speaking tour, have a movie written about you, and get a slap on the wrist from the judiciary. (more…)

4 Comments »

While I was at Division of Labor today I noticed this post referencing a John Tierney article asking who had done more to reduce poverty, Muhammad Yunus and his Grameen Bank or __________? Go see the answer and the rest of the question.

Technorati Tags: Muhammad Yunus, Grameen Bank, poverty

No Comments »

[UPDATED: Links corrected, per Kav in the comments; I had inadvertantly left out one link (to FDL), and misplaced another (to Greenwald).  Now corrected.]

It is often amazing to me just how seriously some people can take themselves, how they can get so caught up in their own rhetoric so as to forget to look at the logic of their arguments. Recently, amidst the hue and cry over the Foley Follies, there emerged a threat to expose gay Republicans (no, not the “happy” kind) via “the List.” This, of course, led to the inevitable debate as to whether outing anyone was ever kosher or whether gay Republicans have it coming because they’re hypocrites.

On the one hand, I can see the pro-outing argument that those who actively hold theselves out as straight to the public certainly set themselves up to be exposed as being hypocritical. It comes with the territory of being a public figure, I suppose. I’m not sure that makes it right to do so, but I see the argument nonetheless (although, the outing of staffers does not seem to fit neatly into this rubric). But while the pro-outing crowd (or at least, those who believe that Republicans do this sort of thing too, so goose, gander, etc.) asserts that those being outed are hypocritical, it’s not being in the closet that makes them so, but the fact that those outed are Republicans. The logic I have seen presented is that the Republican party en masse routinely pursues policies that harm gays, highlighting two policies in particular: (i) anti-sodomy laws, and (ii) anti-Gay-Marriage initiatives.

With respect to the first, anti-sodomy laws, I don’t think there is any question that such policies are inimical to freedom in general and specifically harms gays. However, I am aware of no such law being proposed in federal legislation, and am confident that any such law would be unconstitutional. Furthermore, anti-sodomy laws at the state level have all but been entirely eliminated by Lawrence v. Texas. Therefore, resting the mantle of hypocrisy on gay Republicans based on support for such laws is misplaced at best, and downright dishonest at worst. (more…)

23 Comments »

While at the University of Oklahoma I was subjected to a course on the History of England taught by a professor of Womens Studies. The course, and the professor, was economically illiterate which was unfortunate since the course covered the period of time, and was most concerned with, the Industrial Revolution through the 1960’s. I spent the entire course supplementing my reading with books on economic history and thought to counterbalance the crude Marxism and mercantilist thought. I was required to read the Hunt’s, the Webb’s, and most irritatingly in the end E.P. Thompsons “The Making of the English Working Class.” A book so mind bogglingly wrongheaded as to defy any description, regardless of its real contribution in compiling primary sources on the lives of working people.

So I retaliated with papers on the repeal of the English Corn Laws and other such reactionary concerns. It was in one of these forays into the History of Science collection that I came upon the letters of Jeremy Bentham which included a series of letters to a friend, which was also addressed to Adam Smith, which he titled, Defence of Usury. Bentham took Smith to task for endorsing the restrictions on interest rates in existence at the time. I have no memory of whether Mr. Smith was persuaded, but he should have been. My professor gave me a very high grade for the paper, but her distaste was palpable.

What makes me bring up this topic today? Well Michael recently dscussed Kiva, a micro-credit program very similar to that set up by Muhammad Yunus and his Grameen Bank which won this years Nobel Peace Prize. One feature of micro-credit programs are their high interest rates. From their website we learn why:

I’ve heard that MFIs charge a high rate of interest for the loans. Is that so?

Like other financial institutions, microfinance institutions (MFIs) charge interest for the loans they make to their clients. The interest covers the high cost of making very small loans and personally servicing each client every week. It also covers the cost of managing the “center meetings”; the peer support group process; and providing information on social services, personal development, health and other critical information that helps clients improve their lives and the future of their families. Their rates are also affected by the rates MFIs themselves pay for borrowing the funds that they in turn lend to their clients. MFI interest rates can range from 15 to 35 percent, depending on the conditions in each MFI’s service area. Without microfinance programs, the only alternative for very poor people is often borrowing from local “money lenders,” who regularly charge between 120 and 300 percent.

That makes sense to me, though a simple point can be made. If these people could profitably be lent to at lower rates then somebody would. If these people could easily get the credit they desire or need at lower rates they undoubtedly would. In fact, the dedication of the people running these things is the only explanation I can find for even the highest rates being sustainable.

Okay, but that program is recognized as a success. “What is your concern,” you might reasonbably ask? (more…)

1 Comment »

I almost didn’t blog about this, and for petty reasons. Basically I don’t want to appear to be giving equal time just because Glasnost has spewed links all over my comment section showing Republicans are just as bad (good?) as Democrats in using sex as an issue;^) (more…)

9 Comments »

It seems like Queen Hilary I may be in for more of a nomination fight than may have initially been thought. Recent Democratic party golden boy Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. has just indicated that he is seriously considering throwing his hat into the ring. While I’m thrilled to see a minority candidate for the Oval Office, I’m not so thrilled about it being Obama. Democrats in favor of Obama are going to play up the idea that Obama is overtly religious, as opposed to Hillary’s persona of being religious only at election time. While this may be technically correct, I anticipate a somewhat major speedbump on the road to the nomination if Obama chooses to go with this strategy : he’s an apostate Muslim. (more…)

8 Comments »

I know, I know.  This is one of the signs of the Apocalypse.  Actually, believe it or not, I find that this happens more often than you’d think.  The specific issue that I’m referring to here is the idea that corporate welfare needs to end.  This is a great piece on how the American Smelting and Refining Company (Asarco) is using legal loopholes to avoid paying for the messes that it is making.  Notice a few key points :

   Reorganization under the Bankruptcy Code’s Chapter 11 helps companies wipe the slate clean of environmental liabilities, giving them a fresh start.

Blatant abuse of the bankruptcy code. When private citizens do this kind of thing, we get smacked around; when corporations do it, they get a wink and a nod.

Asarco’s parent company, Grupo México, is benefiting too. A few months after Asarco filed for bankruptcy, Grupo México announced that net profits had doubled–largely because Asarco’s environmental liabilities had been removed from its books. Of course, the liabilities remain, but now they are borne by U.S. taxpayers.

As usual, guess who winds up paying for corporate malfeasance?  That’s right, you and me.

There are United States v. Asarco rulings unfavorable to the company in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Texas, Utah, and Washington. When Asarco filed for bankruptcy, more than 100 civil environmental cases were pending against it.

Ok, I’m no expert, but doesn’t the company’s board of directors monitor this kind of thing?  When you have over a hundred cases of a similar type pending against you, it’s time to start doing more than just meeting in Tahiti once a year.

In 2002, Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) was concerned enough about corporate shell games and other legal evasions to ask the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to see if corporate polluters were avoiding their responsibility under existing laws.

Well, at least someone in Congress isn’t asleep at the wheel on this, however…

Once, Tacoma could have depended on the federal Superfund program to force the parties responsible to bear the cost of cleaning up contaminated sites. Most of the costs of restoring “orphaned” properties–many created through bankruptcy–were paid by a tax on crude oil and certain chemicals and an environmental tax on corporations. Not anymore. When authority to collect these taxes expired in 1995, Congress did not renew it, and now the program’s “polluter pays” fund is depleted. Cleanup dollars have to be pulled from general funds, meaning out of the public’s pockets.

And why didn’t Congress renew this?  Also, remind me who occupied the Oval Office in 1995?  Seems like the blame gets spred pretty evenly here between R’s and D’s.

No one knows just how widespread the problem is. According to the GAO report, “While more than 231,000 businesses operating in the United States filed for bankruptcy in fiscal years 1998 through 2003, the extent to which these businesses had environmental liabilities is not known because neither the federal government nor other sources collect this information.”

More examples of your federal government in action.  And remind me why we would ever support people who put their faith in big government?

Andrea Madigan is the chair of the EPA’s national bankruptcy work group and an enforcement attorney based in Denver’s Region 8 office…”The bankruptcy laws specify that companies have to give notice to their creditors, and if we are a creditor, we should be identified,” says Madigan. But is the EPA notified so it can collect? “Debtors can sometimes be pretty sloppy.”

Uh, yeah, and apparently so can the government.  Perfect example of government versus business.  Government yo-yo says,”Eh well, a lot of people owe us money.  Uh, I guess we’re going to try to find out who owes and how much.  Maybe we’ll even try to get some of that back.”  On the other hand, private businessowner Joe Capitalist does not go to bed at night without knowing who owes him money, how much, where they live, their shoe size, and their kids’ pet Golden Retriever’s name.  Government yo-yo has neither the personal motivation nor accountability to keep track of who owes the government money (it’s not his money, right?).  Joe Capitalist’s future depends on making sure that he gets paid when someone purchases a product or service from him or is issued a line of credit.  Personal responsibility, accountability, and motivation.  Hmmm… maybe this capitalism thing isn’t that bad.

Corporations have a responsibility to clean up their messes.  This is part of the idea of personal accountability (you make a mess, you are ultimately responsible for making sure that it gets cleaned up).  Don’t get me wrong, I’m not advocating a war against business here, but when a corporation uses the bankruptcy codes to dodge reponsibility to its creditors, it needs to be shut down for good.  Regulatory agencies need to be a lot smarter about watching what corporations are doing and predicting the results of corporate actions.  If a company is on shaky grounds financially and suddenly starts transferring its assets to a holding company or other such entity, the regulatory folks need to make the logical jump here, realize what’s happening, and do their jobs in making sure that existing laws are enforced.  In the case of Asarco, since they have essentially stolen taxpayer money (we’re paying for their messes and legal liabilities), there is no way that they should be allowed to return to operation in the United States until they have paid back every dollar.  Further, their parent company should be held accountable for this debt as well and should be monitored to guarantee that they don’t just use a new start-up company or holding company to pick up right where Asarco left off.  This kind of parasitic behavior by corporations needs to end.  When Asarco returns to the US (as it inevitably will), they will pick up where they left off, debt-free (thanks, taxpayers).  Their competition, meanwhile, may well be honest businesses who take responsibility and pay for their debts rather than using legal maneuverings to avoid them.  What sort of message does this send to them?  Are we simply incentivizing bad behavior?  We talk a good game about the free-market and capitalism, but how free is the market if some companies get to leech off of the taxpayer and some don’t?

5 Comments »

Like many other people who find themselves slightly to the right of the Hollywood crowd (both politically and geographically speaking), I find myself constantly baffled by the fact that despite the legions of potential conservative or libertarian movie fans out there, very few conservative or libertarian films every appear at our local twelve screener.  In the past, I’ve attributed this to the fact that the Hollywood crowd, being essentially narcissistic, only likes to play to itself.  They don’t like people who disagree with their conceptions of the world.  After having a quick read of this article, however, I’m beginning to question my assumptions about the lack of existence of a bona-fide right or at least right-leaning counterpart to Hollywood. 

Ross Douthat makes some very good points here.  Until very recently, the Right in America has essentially ignored the culture war.  We’ve decided that Hollywood is basically a bunch of pinko degenerates that we want nothing to do with.  Which is sad given the fact that more and more Americans today take the silver screen seriously.  Textbook examples would be Michael Moore’s “documentaries,” Al Gore’s “documentary,” and “psycho-political thriller” The Manchurian Candidate (2004 version, not the original).  When it comes to influencing people via popular entertainment, the Right is not only asleep at the wheel, but drifting off the road into the woods.  It’s about time that we revived our presence in this critical battlefront of the culture wars.  Hollywood has been far, far too successful at spreading beliefs and attitudes that are antithetical to our own.  Folk marxism?  Been there, done that.  Bush-bashing?  Old news.  Free advertising for leftists?  Better believe it.

For the libertarian and conservative movers and shakers, however, it’s going to take more than just the occasional indy-film documentary to get audiences’ attention.  We need real actors, real directors, and, for crying out loud, talented writers.  Remeber that the competition is good.  Very good.  They have been doing this for almost a century and we are playing on their turf.   If the libertarian conservative film industry is ever to get off the ground, they are going to have some tough battles ahead that they are going to have to win.  Not that I consider it to be a particularly “conservative” or “libertarian” film, but remember the Hollywood crowd’s reaction to The Passion of the Christ?  Just imagine what it’s going to be when someone actually releases a serious, die-hard libertarian movie.  Get ready for this fight, guys.  And you know what?  It’s about time we had it.

38 Comments »

Since I picked on Andrew this week, it is only fair that I praise him for this.

“The maintenance of a free society is a very difficult and complicated thing. And it requires a self-denying ordinance of the most extreme kind. It requires a willingness to put up with temporary evils on the basis of the subtle and sophisticated understanding that if you step in to try to do them, you not only may make them … worse, but you will spread your tentacles and get bad results elsewhere …

The argument for collectivism, for government doing something is simple. Anybody can understand it. If there’s something wrong, pass a law. If somebody is in trouble, get Mr. X to help him out. The argument for a free – for voluntary cooperation, for a free market is not nearly so simple. It says, you know, if you allow people to cooperate voluntarily and don’t interfere with them, indirectly through the operation of the market, they will improve matters more than you can improve it directly by appointing somebody. That’s a subtle argument, and it’s hard for people to understand,” – Milton Friedman, back in 1975.

I cannot imagine what he thinks of a president who said: “We have a responsibility that when somebody hurts, government has got to move.” But then there are many things that this president seems to find hard to understand.

In a world where Kos is making a pitch to small government types of all stripes it pays to remember he doesn’t understand Friedman either. What are we to do?

While I am on a roll here are the types of things that I can really appreciate about Andrew. I wish I saw it more.

There is a link and discussion of Max Boot’s latest. A link to the Belmont Club. A fantastic and hopeful statement on Islam, Reason and War. A wonderful, and in a change from recent tendencies, humble discussion on marriage and the Catholic Church based on C.S. Lewis.

Finally, Andrew weighs in on the gay witch hunt and does so briefly and eloquently. Please read.

I owe Pejman a hat tip.

Speaking of Pejman, he has read my post on Mona and Greenwald. He is really happy to have her favoring his proposal now;^)

Technorati Tags: Andrew Sullivan, gays, Iraq, Milton Friedman, Bush

1 Comment »

Most everyone knows, although a suprisingly large number of us ignore, the admonishment to “take all of your medicine.” Any doctor will tell you that if you fail to take the full course of anti-biotics prescribed for you ailment (say, a sinus infection) that you risk the cause of the infection coming back in a stronger, more treatment-resistent form. This is fairly common knowledge.

Well, apparently the same thing is true of a war. Once you start it, you must finish it, or face the nasty consequences.

War is, by its very nature, a complete reversal of the status quo. We send our troops out to smash, conquer and kill the enemy. To blow up and destroy. And we’ve learned that the faster and better we do that the faster we end the war. We also know from past experience that overwhelming force and firepower along with a will to do what is necessary to completely and utterly defeat and demoralize the enemy is how you end wars and win the peace.

[...]

While sensitivity in many areas (even in some areas of war) is proper and important, war is not the place in which to pull punches. Obviously wanton barbarism (like that of our enemies) isn’t what I’m talking about. But doing what is necessary and all that is necessary to completely and utterly destroy your enemy is.

[...]

This is war, not a tea-dance. This is combat, not a debate. There is no partial victory in war. There is only winning or losing. When you commit to war, you have to commit to being the biggest, meanest, most ferocious and terrifying dog in the fight. You have to overwhelm and completely and utterly destroy your enemy. And should, after you’ve done that, he again attempt to regroup, you again do what you just did. You stomp him flat.

Technorati Tags: war, winning a war, QandO, McQ, Bruce McQuain, Ralph Peters, war strategy, defeating an enemy

11 Comments »

It is Eric Scheie who finally filled me in. Go and see what an evil man the blogfadduh really is. While you are at it, you can find out more about the sexual McCarthyism in our era as well. I just hope Eric will be the one who helps me figure this out as well?

Update:On a more serious note I think Captain Ed expresses many of my feelings quite well. I am glad that my anger, and of Michael as well, is hitting a wider audience. I am also glad that the effort is, as we thought, not working. I hope down the road we’ll seem prescient.

I especially like this from Eric, and please click through the link he provides as well:

The reason they are made to live in fear while their Democrat counterparts are not is because gay Republicans are said to be self hating hypocrites. According to this argument, because the Republican Party does not support same sex marriage, any gay Republican is by definition betraying himself — even if he disagrees with the Republican Party on that issue. For that, it is fair to invade his privacy and make his identity and sexuality known to the world, in the hope that he’ll be fired by bigoted Republicans.

Of course, as we have noted the effort seems to be falling flat. Even Santorum hasn’t taken the bait. I don’t know if it makes it better or worse, but we will have no way of knowing if the charge of being gay is even accurate in many cases.

Technorati Tags: Classical values, Homosexual, McCarthyism, Glenn Reynolds, Glenn Greenwald, illegal immigration

7 Comments »

There is much exortation from Democrats and the Left to join them this November in vanquishing the Republican majority, and from Republicians and the Right for their supporters not to stay home when said vanquishing begins. It occurs to me that what the severely political set is missing about the average voter is that, to these voters, the franchise has a value. If you contemplate a person’s vote as a sort of commodity one that can only be sold in the political market,* you may recognize that in order for someone to part with that vote, their minimum price must be met.

For a typical Democrat voter that may mean a candidate who is reliably pro-abortion or one who will fight to raise the federal minimum wage. Perhaps either one or a combination of those traits is not enough. This average Democrat voter may also insist on getting an investigation of the President, or a bill to withdraw the troops from Iraq. For the typical Republican, the minimum price may be passage of a Gay Marriage Amendment to the Constitution, or cuts to capital gains taxes, or a committment to more troops in Iraq.

Indeed, some voters may insist on the candidate refraining from certain activities in order to part with that precious vote, such as any of the affirmative actions set forth above, or maybe if the candidate will just promise not to bugger the help. Whatever the price may be for each individual voter, the candidate must decide which voters he will accomodate with his promises, and which he will not. Once he has doled enough promises, and received enough votes, he can then go on to Congress where he may then quickly set about to breaking the promises, blaming his transgression on the other party, and, of course, bugger the help.

This time around, however, the voters seem to have a higher minimum price than the candidates are either willing and or able to meet. Or it may just be (as in my case) the promises just aren’t worth anything anymore. Either way, there does not seem to be a lot of candidates willing to meet the minimum price.

But, your vote will just be wasted if you don’t vote for anybody!

Will it? The way I see it, my vote is being wasted by selling for promises that I either don’t want or know won’t be kept. I find more value in saving my vote, than in spending it on a candidate that I don’t want. This goes doubly so when my vote will definitely be misconstrued as support for the platform of that particular candidate. If there were, as McQ has suggested, a NOTA option available, that would meet my minimum price. But since there is no such option, I’ll keep my vote to myself as a sort of pocket veto.

* [edited for internal consistency]

Technorati Tags: politics, Congressional races, NOTA, voting, voter apathy

9 Comments »

I recently had a chance to read this very interesting post dealing with Stephen Browne’s Observations on Arabs.  Woody M. at GM’s Corner blog has dissected Browne’s analysis and offered up a few observations and questions. It’s actually quite a good post and I recommend having a look at it. The original post from Stephen Browne may be found here.I’d like to take a more detailed look at Woody’s post as well and maybe add a few things to it. Firstly, I’ll take Browne’s original twelve observations. (more…)

18 Comments »

****Welcome readers of Instapundit and Jonah Goldberg. The main discussion of Greenwald’s bad faith is here and previously dissected in more detail here. Jonah Goldberg fans can find an interview with his friend Michael Ledeen, which touches on Greenwald as well, here.

Michael Wade had our last Newsflash on the Sock Puppet king here.

**********************

My previous post on Greenwald and Reynolds was actually written a few days ago, so as I was checking my links I noticed that Glenn Greenwald is now claiming Glenn Reynolds is anti-gay! Unbelieveable! Here is Reynolds discussion of Harold Ford (who he has generally given positive coverage.) I’ll highlight the key “offensive” passage. (more…)

30 Comments »

Let me make a disclaimer right now, and one I have made before, but it seems to be necessary, bad faith is a bipartisan exercise, no let me say it is a multipartisan exercise. Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter are famous examples on the right, today I am discussing libertarians for the most part, but for those keeping score, I don’t care if I am lopsided.

So what do I mean by bad faith? It can take many forms, often it is just unconscious and deserves no special mention, other times it is willful misrepresentation, the erection of straw men or a lack of any real basis for criticism other than they are the other side. Any argument will do, no matter that it has no basis or belief behind it, all that matters is destroying the other side or whoever you have decided to disagree with. (more…)

39 Comments »

I wandered over to the Conjecturer where Joshua was lamenting the decline of Andrew Sullivan, and so of course I had to go over and take a look since I hadn’t been to Andrew’s in a few days. I came across this post. Go on over and watch the video.

Are you back? Good. Now I am asking, and I would like it explained to me without any bashing, because sometimes we all miss something, so please indulge me if I am being clueless. What is “all but racist” about the ad? Is it that opposing immigration is automatically racist? Is it that the measures being implicitly endorsed are automatically racist? Is it the juxtaposition of the illegal immigrants with a white family? Would substituting a black or Hispanic family make the ad not “all but racist?” How exactly are illegal immigrants supposed to be portrayed that is not “all but racist?” Should the producer of the ad have cast a bunch of Irish immigrants climbing over the fence? Uh, I think that would have caused a row from all quarters, but I don’t think that is what he means.

What exactly does “all but racist” mean anyway? Is it that it is not really racist, but that we know it would appeal to racists so therefore it is inappropriate anyway? Is it just a smear without any real thought put into it in the first place? Thanks for helping me out on this.

For something really offensive I give you the self aggrandizing schtick of Robert Byrd as he brags about his prowess in gathering pork. Thanks to Instapundit.

Technorati Tags: Andrew Sullivan, illegal immigration, Illinois, Tammy Duckworth, Robert Byrd, Pork

7 Comments »

I should clarify what I meant by saying the IBC critique is dead on. I do not mean that Iraq Body Count has proved its case, or disproved the Lancet study. What I do mean is that they have shown some of the things the Lancet authors or others have to explain in order to make such an estimate appear credible.

The response has of course been predictable in the analysis of both the lancet study and the IBC response. The response of war partisans on the right has been more understandable. The lancet study defies everything we read and hear about the actual death rates. In addition both hard core partisans and those less so have pointed out why the number of over 600,000 from war related violence seems likely to be false. I’ll quote something many of you have already read, but from Jane Galt we get why the initial numbers have to be viewed with skepticism (actually studies should generally be treated with skepticism, especially ones where they have not been independently tested or confirmed): (more…)

12 Comments »

Early this morning, North Korea issued a statement indicating that the UN Security Council resolution calling for sanctions and an end to it’s nuclear weapons program was tantamount to a declaration of war. http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1161079746602&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&t=TS_Home also covered here http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/17/world/main2096678.shtml (with slightly more amusing graphic of Kim Jong-Il). (more…)

10 Comments »

PACs and incumbents: [Based on the year 2000 statistics] PACs continue to give more to incumbents than challengers, and to House Members more than to Senators. The numbers have stayed remarkably steady: typically more than 40% of the money House members raise comes from PACs, compared to 20-25% for Senators. Overall, more than three-fourths of all PAC contributions went to incumbents.

The above analysis is from The Campaign Finance Institute regarding campaign financing from 1978 through 2000 (related chart here).

While listening to Washington Post Radio this afternoon I heard a brief snippet of conversation with reporter Jeff Birnbaum regarding spending by political action committees (”PACs”) in which he remarked upon the habit of most PACs to give overwhelmingly to incumbents. Indeed, his article in today’s paper says as much (emphasis added): (more…)

9 Comments »

I was going to write an extensive post on the problems I saw with the Lancet study, and I will expand this post later, but Iraq Body Count has pointed out the issue that first hit me.

I was reading Jane Galt when I noticed this:

insecurity during this survey could have introduced bias by restricting the size of teams, the number of supervisors, and the length of time that could be prudently spent in all locations, which in turn affected the size and nature of questionnaires. Further, calling back to households not available on the initial visit was felt to be too dangerous. Families, especially in households with combatants killed, could have hidden deaths. Under-reporting of infant deaths is a wide-spread concern in surveys of this type.29,30 Entire households could have been killed, leading to a survivor bias. The population data used for cluster selection were at least 2 years old, and if populations subsequently migrated from areas of high mortality to those with low mortality, the sample might have over-represented the high-mortality areas. The miscommunication that resulted in no clusters being interviewed in Duhuk and Muthanna resulted in our assuming that no excess deaths occurred in those provinces (with 5% of the population), which probably resulted in an underestimate of total deaths. Families could have reported deaths that did not occur, although this seems unlikely, since most reported deaths could be corroborated with a certificate. However, certificates might not be issued for young children, and in some places death certificates had stopped being issued; our 92% confirmation rate was therefore deemed to be reasonable. (more…)

7 Comments »

In the last several weeks, many of the blogs that I’ve visited (including ours) have been enmeshed in the ongoing debate over how to vote in the coming elections. The hard-cores of the group advise that we adopt what I’ll call Plan A and vote a straight Democrat ticket in order to throw the Republicans from power. The objective of this being that an out-of-power Republican party will abandon the neo-cons and religious conservatives and embrace pure libertarian bliss. Not likely, IMHO, but what are you gonna say to these guys? Plan B is to vote a mixed ticket, with the idea of electing a divided government (D’s controlling one chamber and R’s the other [with theories on which one Senate or the House varying from blog to blog]). Also a neat idea, but with no consensus on whether to vote for R’s for the House or Senate, I see this as self-defeating. Plan C (and probably the one I favor) involves angry libertarians actually voting for Libertarians. I know that L’s aren’t likely to win many elections, but if you really are angry at the R’s for “betraying liberty” and want to punish them, voting for D’s is like cutting your nose off to spite your face. Vote for actual Libertarian candidates. You know where they stand on issues. Plan D has been embraced by more than a few people, and although I sympathize with it, I find that it too resembles cutting off the old nose. This involves simply refusing to vote. Plan D being the unconsciously favored plan of more than 50% of Americans (in mid-term elections anyway), I daresay that it will enjoy the largest degree of participation. (more…)

16 Comments »

I happened to be browsing the net this afternoon when lo and behold, look what I stumbled upon : http://www.schoolandstate.org/home.htm

Now while I admit that some of the solutions presented here are, at best, naively optimistic, the overall theme is one that I agree with completely. Here it is presented far more eloquently than I could paraphrase : http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/harris-sharon1.html (more…)

15 Comments »

I’m done. Politics will continue to fascinate me, but the major parties have lost what pale shine they still retained prior to this season’s dirty and shameful tactics. I have voted in every election for which I was legally registered since I turned eighteen, and this year I will refrain. Why? Because between the candidates being fungible in terms of honesty, ability and statesmanship, and the media being either unwilling or incapable of comprehending the facts of any particular matter (God forbid there be any numbers involved), candidates are not evaluated or elected based upon the actual issues. Instead, battle lines are drawn between and “left” and “right” (or, in my parlance, “not-quite-as-left”), sides are chosen, enemies are demonized and the proxy for violence (i.e. voting) lets slip the hounds of war. All based entirely on partisan rhetoric, false promises and fraudulent reporting. The Machiavellian machinations are certainly entertaining to watch, but I’m done participating. (more…)

23 Comments »

***Update X2 See comments in response to glasnost for further elaboration on timing.

Granted, it is a minor irritant, but I am going to scratch anyway. Yesterday our government charged Adam Gadahn with treason. Andrew Cohen of the Washington Post is perturbed about this, as he is often perturbed. Andrew does some good work, though his analysis of the legal landscape is occasionally rather shallow and shows little interest in understanding why other people believe what they do. He in the recent silly Scalia/tequila controversy was of course quick to jump in for condemning Scalia, which in my mind proves one is more interested in attacking someone than analyzing what they do or say. It is an argument in bad faith. Orin Kerr analyzed that little kerfluffle and Parable Man goes at it as well, so I’ll leave it at noting he is a somewhat crude partisan at times, but I’ll move on rather than pointing out every instance and give him some props for covering some under covered subjects in a reasonable if one sided manner.This however sticks in my craw. Maybe it shouldn’t, but it does. Andrew writes a post entitled The Making of a Terror Rock Star: (more…)

4 Comments »

This is yet another taste of the self-appointed king of the world, George Soros.  http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/2006/10/11/soros-fighting-the-zionazis/

It’s not enough that the man is a self-hating Jew; no he has to actually support those who favor the dismantling of the Jewish state itself.  Let’s not forget that unlike some of the random anti-Israel wackos out there, Soros actually has the power to accomplish his goals (remember when he demolished the British pound back in 1992?).   As if it hasn’t been said often enough : Soros is a man to keep both eyes on.

35 Comments »

I must confess gentle reader (and don’t think badly of me for this) that I am an MMORPG’er.  There, I’ve said it and that, I’m told, is the first step on the path to recovery.  Being relatively stable, married (but with no children yet), with a reasonable amount of free time on my hands, and being a technophile by nature, it was inevitable that I would fall for the temptation that MMORPG’s offer.  If you don’t know what an MMORPG is, stop reading now.  Look it up on wikiepedia or google or something and officially declare to all of your friends, family, co-workers, pets, etc. that you are over the hill.

For those of us who aren’t antedeluvian fogeys, the MMORPG world has been growing in leaps and bounds since at least the late 1990’s.  Early developments included the old-school MUD’s, 2-D entries like Twinion on the now defunct Sierra Network, and Neverwinter Nights on AOL.  The modern MMORPG can probably count its original recognizable ancestor as being Ultima Online, a creation of EA/Origin in the late 90’s.  Still running after several years, UO is constantly tinkering with stats, storylines, and improvements.  The first king of the hill, however, had to be 1999’s Everquest (currently owned by Sony Online).  EQ is still enormously popular, however despite a sequel (EQ II), the current reigning champ (and 500 lb gorilla) is Blizzard’s World of Warcraft (over 5 million subscribers, some of whom I’m told aren’t Korean).  Which brings me to the whole point of my post here (which actually wasn’t to give an in-depth history of the genre).  If you are a WOW’er (and I am) and even if you aren’t, you have to take a look at this link (http://www.blizzard.com/press/061002.shtml).  I actually watched the tenth season premiere and I laughed like I haven’t laughed at South Park in a long time.  For further details, see the WOW Community site (http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/index.xml;jsessionid=7334CE23467BBD981D1DC470B891F012.08_app03).  If you open the article on the South Park-WOW crossover, you can see the pictures of Cartman, Kyle, Stan, and Kenny’s WOW characters.  Gotta love it.

8 Comments »

Following up on my previous post (”The Bomb Heard ‘Round The World“), in which I proposed no solution, a rather insane idea occurred to me last night that I will now share with you.

First Premise: The generous giving of private individuals in the aftermath of a crisis is truly astounding, and often surpasses even the most optimistic of expectations. For example, when the Indian Ocean earthquake and resultant tsunami struck just after Christmas 2004, an amazing outpouring of relief funds quickly accumulated to the tune of approximately $10 Billion in actual dollars, which does not include such volunteer efforts as those of the United States military and various relief organizations. Private individuals accounted for approximately $3 Billion (as far as I can tell; the total numbers are difficult to come by). Americans alone accounted for over $400 Million in private donations (reaching almost $1.9 Billion by December 23, 2005). When Hurricaines Katrina and Rita struck the Gulf Coast, private donations soared into the $3.5 Billion range by February 20, 2006. (more…)

1 Comment »

**Update: via Instapundit:More rantings from Ahmadinejad.
MEMRI has just translated an address given by Irainian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. I’ll leave my remarks for the end, but I think it is important to understand who and what we are facing, and I think too many of us from all points of the ideological compass read into other peoples beliefs what we want them to be rather than what they are. Emphasis mine: (more…)

5 Comments »

Recently, one of our regular readers and commenters, Don, suggested that I post some deconstructions of some of the more popular critics of Islam.  I thought that would be a great idea and I may do some detailed rebuttals at a later point.  For now, however, please have a look at some others who have offered deconstructions of Ibn Warraq (http://www.city-net.com/~alimhaq/text/warraq.htm), Robert Spencer (http://watchjihadwatch.blogspot.com/), Daniel Pipes (http://www.aaiusa.org/press-room/999/pr121702a, http://www.aaiusa.org/press-room/928/pr081403, http://www.slate.com/id/2086844/) and Steven Emerson.  (more…)

9 Comments »

Gentle readers, I am sure that none of you (being avid fans of professional football, and, of course, well versed in recent history and statistics) were as surprised as I was to see the standings at the end of Week 5 of our glorious NFL season.  Taking a quick peek at the top of the ladder, we see, unsurprisingly, Indianapolis undefeated with a perfect 5-0 record.  Shockingly, however, the only other undefeated team so far is … Chicago?!? When did the Bears suddenly wake up and become a serious contended for postseason glory?  I mean, outside of Brian Urlacher and maybe Olin Kreutz, could anybody even name one of their starters before this season (excluding people who actually live in Chicago)?  I say more power to them.  Although I still have nightmares about the Superbowl Shuffle, it’s about time we saw Da Bears in the big game again.  The best of luck to them for a smooth ride down the stretch. (more…)

12 Comments »

Politics is unscrupulous, short sighted and hypocritical as often as not, so the revelations that various left wing and liberal front groups and some Democratic politicians have known about Mark Foleys inappropriate conduct for some time is unsurprising. That once they had the incriminating messages that some of these groups sat on them hoping to time them to effect the election is pretty much par for the course in politics. However, as Michael pointed out it puts to shame any high minded notions that Democrats play ball any differently than Karl Rove, though why that should surprise anybody familiar with just the Clinton era is beyond me. My teeth still grate over the James Byrd ads in 2000 and the cross and church burning ads that were a staple in the 1996 and 2000 elections.

Once again, as Michael also pointed out, it should be no surprise that many on the left are all too willing to direct special ire at minorities, including gays, who do not toe the liberal line. That is a long standing tendency. That many leftists and liberals (including those in the media) would either unthinkingly or knowingly feed the frenzy, which we all must conclude given the actual revelations is mostly about Foley being gay, is deplorable. Deplorable as well is the constant conflating of his behavior with pedophilia and the intimations that gay men deserve special attention as well as the occasional out and out claims that this is so. The hypocrisy given the Democrats own history in matters such as this is palpable, though of course hypocrisy in politics is awfully cheap currency. This would not be as big a scandal if Foley had been straight, had been overly friendly with pages and later on had actually slept with a former female page of legal age. Has anyone seen a Senator Kennedy pool party over the years? (more…)

14 Comments »

The release of atomic energy has not created a new problem. It has merely made more urgent the necessity of solving an existing one.

– Albert Einstein

Einstein was, of course, referring to the pre-existing problem of nations willing to use war as a means of addressing political problems, but the sentiment applies to the North Korean crisis presently upon us. The nuclear test did not create the problem that is North Korea; it mere created the urgency to deal with that problem. (more…)

5 Comments »

Daniel Drezner has pointed me to an interesting blog that those of us with an interest in democratic change should take note of during its likely short lifespan. The 21st Century Trust in collaboration with the John Smith Memorial Trust and in partnership with Asquith and Granovski Associates organized a study tour of the Ukraine and the various applicants who they chose have decided to devote a blog to their travels and adventures. The writers seem to have a broad range of interests so far with posts touching on religious, historic, economic and political subjects. It is well worth checking out. On the economy Alistair Nicolson peeks behind the data which is available: (more…)

1 Comment »

The Hill gives us this rather unfortunate line via Dale Carpenter:

Hastert and Boehner need to get on the same page or Republican troubles will continue to mount.

Meanwhile thanks to Alex at Marginal Revolution I have come across some classic insults listed over at Reluctant Nomad, including some I had not previously heard from one of the great and literate hurlers of well turned invective to walk this earth, Winston Churchill: (more…)

5 Comments »

Searching our archives you will note how highly I rate the work of Michael Totten, especially in covering the Middle East and North Africa. I have even suggested going to his site for no reason other than hitting the pay pal button to help fund his travels and reporting. Some of you however may want to get something that isn’t available free for your money, and I can understand that. If so, now is your lucky day. Michael and Steven Schwartz have released three pamphlets which cover various aspects of the recent Lebanon-Israeli conflict:

The first is a collection of essays written by me, here on the blog and elsewhere, filed from Lebanon and Israel before and during the war. (more…)

2 Comments »

Just posting my usual Friday Q&A on Islamic beliefs.  We’ve had some great discussions so far, please keep the questions coming.  Also, have a look at my post on religious hypocrisy below, especially the section covering OBL.

Usual ground rules for questions on this post:  

1.  Please keep your questions general.  This isn’t a blog focused on Islamic beliefs and theology, so asking questions like, “Well, the Maliki school of jurisprudence says xyz,” are really well outside the scope of what I’m trying to do here.

2.  Remember that although I have some professional experience and training in comparative religion and theology, and can draw on my personal knowledge of Islam as a practicing Muslim, I’m not a legitimate religious authority.  I am neither an Imam nor one of the Ulema.  In Western terms, I haven’t been to seminary.  I’m not a priest, minister, or rabbi.  I’m just the guy in the pew, not the guy on the altar.

Alright, the forum is open.  Who’d like to get the ball rolling?

6 Comments »

The UN is angry at Sudan for sending a letter urging African nations not to send troops to help out with the peackeeping mission in Sudan:

The president of the Security Council for October, Japanese Ambassador Kenzo Oshima, said some members felt “the language [in the letter] was inappropriate and offensive”.

Mr Oshima said a resolution condemning the letter had been considered, but it was decided to concentrate on how to restore peace in the troubled region.

Sudan’s letter said that contributing to a proposed UN peacekeeping force would be seen as “a hostile act”.

Sudan does not want the UN to take control of the peacekeeping force from the AU, saying that would be an attack on its sovereignty.

The council has approved plans to send a 20,000-strong force with a tough mandate but says it will only do so if Sudan agrees.

Britain’s ambassador to the UN, Emyr Jones Parry, told the BBC that the letter was “unacceptable”.

US envoy John Bolton said it demanded “a strong response”.

Mr Bolton added that if Khartoum was allowed “to intimidate troop contributing countries”, this would mean the failure of UN plans to deploy a robust UN force in Darfur.

Well, we’ll step in to stop the depradations of the Sudanese government as long as they agree to us stopping their depradations. Furthermore we need to debate whether to send a strong response to a letter. Maybe a fax will get them shaking.

Meanwhile Russia is turning up the heat on Georgia: (more…)

2 Comments »

A couple of posts back I updated my post on the Kurds with a link to Alex over at Inactivist. Alex made a good point in a comment there:

FWIW, I actually admire the Kurds, for the most part. Or at least the Iraqi Kurds. They found a way to build a more or less liberal society in a very rough neighborhood. They are also one of the few real success stories of American intervention: Without our protection their enclave of self-rule would not exist.

What’s instructive, however, is the limited scope of our intervention. We didn’t send ground troops, we didn’t topple a govenment, we didn’t seize territory, we didn’t even defeat an army. All we did is declare that Saddam Hussein could not use his air force in northern Iraq, and we enforced it with our air power. The Kurds managed it from their, they won their own independence, they had their own civil war (regrettably), and they reached a situation that might not be genuine peace but is surely more peaceful, more stable, more liberal, and more prosperous than the situation in the rest of Iraq.

Now, I would be quite willing to believe that we gave them more support under the table, but the fact remains that it was a very minimal intervention, and a very successful one. I think there are lessons to learn there.

Along those same lines via Instapundit I found this:

Meanwhile, the north is so peaceful that Western journalists, and just about anyone else, can move about freely, without fear of attack. How can this be? Well, for one thing, the Kurds have tight controls on their borders, and any Arabs entering are checked carefully. Arab Iraqis are welcome to visit, and many do, for vacations from the violence in the south. When asked, Kurds attribute their peaceful neighborhood to the fact that Kurds are not Arabs. But this is not the main reason, for the Kurds have, in the past, been as factious and violent as the Iraqi Arabs are now. But during the 1990s, when the U.S. and Britain agreed to keep Saddam’s forces out of the north (to prevent another large scale massacre of Kurds), the Kurds sorted out their differences and learned the benefits of cooperation and law and order. In effect, the Kurds had a ten year head start on the rest of Iraq, in the “how to create peace and democracy” department. The Iraqi Arabs, Sunni and Shia, who come north on business, or for a vacation, note this. The Arabs believe they are superior to the Kurds (”a bunch of hillbillies,” to most Arabs), and find it irritating that the Kurds have made things work, while down south, especially in central Iraq, things are still a mess. Given another seven years, the Iraqi Arabs will probably catch up. But this is not a popular solution to the “Iraq problem,” and no career-conscious journalist is going to talk about it.

Please read the rest.

This leads to two points worth considering, not that they are the answer or a prediction, just worth considering. (more…)

6 Comments »

The recent firestorm over the Foley controversy convinced me to postpone my previous idea for Friday’s post (the doctrinal differences affecting relations between different Christian sects and Islam) and instead post something of more immediate concern. The issue I would like to raise is religious hypocrisy. Before everyone rolls their eyes and thinks that this will be nothing more than a (insert name of favorite religion)-bashing post, I assure you that is not my intent. Instead, I would like to examine exactly what constitutes religious hypocrisy, who some of the more prominent guilty parties are, and how we are dealing with it. (more…)

5 Comments »

If you haven’t been reading Eric Schie (Classical Values) you are missing out. Lately I find myself visiting there more and more often, not just for Eric’s views (which are recognizably his own), but also for the elegant way that he describes them. Because he tends to focus on media events and the appalling way in which the media tends to frame things, I am drawn to his analyses. Eric has a way of cutting through the nonsense, grabbing the heart of the matter with the intense ferocity of Mola Ram, and yet the smoothness of a snifter’s worth of Balvenie DoubleWood.

Eric currently has several posts regarding the Foley mess, as well as others on less scandalous matters, which you may find enlightening.  As the Blog Father has been known to say, “just keep scrolling.”

Technorati Tags: Eric Schie, Classical Values

4 Comments »

A few days ago I came across a Virginia blogger by the name of Shaun Kenney who issued this challenge:

ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 5th, I propose that all interested bloggers post what’s best about Virginia, especially in your neck of the woods. It should be something particularly Virginian, something that makes home what it is.

I first visited Virginia in the Spring of 1984 to play in a soccer tournament in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Having grown up in Wilmington, DE, the first thing I noticed was how lush and verdant everything was, including all along the highways. I ended up going to college in the mountains and then, after graduating, lived in south and central Virginia for about eight years. From there I moved to Northern Virginia to go to law school, and that is where I ultimately have settled.

Since the first time I visited Virginia I thought of it as “God’s own little acre” and to this day, after having travelled all over the world, I still find it to be one of the most beautiful places on Earth. Living in and around Charlottesville, Staunton and Lexington, straddling the Blue Ridge mountains was truly invigorating. Even today, here in the Northern Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C., the foliage is still quite thick in spite of neverending residential and commercial expansion. As I type this from my Tyson’s Corner office, I have a perfect view down Route 7 West towards Great Falls, Reston, Dulles, through Loudoun County and all the way to the Blue Ridge mountains.

Another thing that I have always loved about the Commonwealth is the friendliness I find everywhere. Most of Virginia is essentially a patchwork of small towns, but even the big metropolitan areas (NOVA, Richmond, Virginia Beach/Norfolk/Hampton Roads) have a small-town feel to them. What I’ve found is that once you meet someone from, say, Danville, you end up knowing everybody from Danville. To be sure, Northern Virginia differs greatly from the rest of the state, but even here people are generally laid back and easy to connect with. And, of course, once they learn that you lived for a spell in Farmville (or Charlottesville, or Richmond, or Winchester, or Harrisonburg, etc., etc.) then the name-game begins and sooner or later you all hit upon a common friend or acquaintance and a favorite corner store and restaurant. Having lived all over Virginia, I am guaranteed hours upon hours of delightfully meaningless conversation. And I enjoy every minute of it.

Finally, I love that Virginia is central to just about everywhere I want to go and everything that I want to do. Not only am I at the epicenter of the free world, I can be at numerous beaches (although I’m partial to the Outer Banks) within just a few hours, New York City is a short train ride away, the mountains are just down the road, and I have access to three major airports and from there the world is my oyster. Moreover, my kids can have their pick of of several top-notch universities and colleges, including state schools such as University of Virginia, William & Mary, George Mason University and Virginia Tech.  All of this in a low-tax, high-income, low crime, highly educated and culturally diverse area, smack dab in the middle of the Atlantic Coast.
So there you have it. The things I love most about good ole’ Vir-gin-ee-a. If you come once, you might just stay awhile.

No Comments »

Two potential new developments in Central America could have a huge long term impact on the region and world trade. Panama is set to expand and improve its canal zone and Nicaragua is stirring the pot by proposing to build their own canal:

If built, the Inter-Oceanic Nicaragua Canal would cut time and several hundred miles off the route from China to Europe or North America.

It would also carry super-ships of up to 250,000 tonnes, significantly bigger than the vessels that currently pass through Panama.

Nicaragua has long held dreams of its own canal and was considered a potential route before the Panama waterway was constructed.

Panamanians will vote in a referendum on 22 October on whether to upgrade their canal, in what would be the biggest expansion since it opened in 1914.

Some modern ships are now too wide to go through the canal, and those ships that can pass have to queue for hours.

Under the proposals, wider locks and deeper and wider access canals would enable the canal to take ships carrying up to 10,000 containers. At present the limit is 4,000 containers.

However, critics argue that when the work is finished in 2014-15, the Panama Canal will still be inadequate, causing it to miss out on business.

The 80km (50-mile) waterway, which is used mainly by the US, Japan, China and Chile, currently handles nearly 5% of global trade.

Meanwhile in the former Soviet Union tensions are building between Moscow and the government of Georgia: (more…)

2 Comments »