A Second Hand Conjecture

I am planning as soon as I have six or seven hours to do it right to do a series of posts going into depth on foreign policy. I know, my posts are too long as a rule anyway but they are easy to skip over. I will however give you a short one today.

I am not one who demonizes the realist school of foreign policy, or neo-cons or all the shades in between. One aspect of Realpolitik which is disturbing (though because something is disturbing is no reason to dismiss it out of hand) is its willingness to not only cut deals, but cut deals for which third parties pay the price. I don’t just mean suggestions such as returning Saddam Hussein to power (how exactly should one describe Jonathan Chait anyway?) but for something more chillingly plausible I give you this from Matthew Yglesias: (more…)

8 Comments »

For those of you with young children, this is potentially devastating news.

The hugely popular children’s group The Wiggles is expected this week to announce the departure of its lead singer because of a serious illness, media reports said Wednesday.

[...]

The reports said the group was likely to announce the departure of the “Yellow Wiggle,” Greg Page, who has been frequently absent from touring since undergoing a double hernia operation in December.

The 34-year-old known for his bright yellow T-shirt has been undergoing medical treatment since June after experiencing fainting spells and lethargy, the reports said.

My oldest son dressed as Greg Wiggle this year for Halloween, complete with yellow shirt, magic hat, rabbit and wand (Greg is the Wiggle who wants to be a magician). Luckily, my son is only three, and with subtle prodding from Mommy and Daddy will only “remember” either a three-man group or the equivalent of Darrin being replaced on Bewitched.

In any case, Godspeed, Greg. We wish you well.

P.S. For those of you who have no idea what this is all about, see , and ponder this factoid:

The Wiggles were Australia’s top-earning entertainers last year, ahead of No. 2 AC/DC and No. 3 Nicole Kidman.

Technorati Tags: The Wiggles, Australia, Disney Channel, kids shows

2 Comments »

Click play below to see and hear what apparently passes for acceptable social commentary for some (via Insty). (more…)

4 Comments »

Via email (name withheld), I’ve learned of a site where you can send a card to soldiers currently serving in Iraq:

If you go to this web site, www.letssaythanks.com you can pick out a thank you card and Xerox will print it and it will be sent to a soldier that is currently serving in Iraq . You can’t pick out who gets it, but it will go to some member of the armed services.

It is FREE and it only takes a second.

Whether you are for or against the war, our guys and gals over there need to know we are behind them.

So take a moment to send a “Thank You” to the brave men and women of our Armed Forces.

And, if you’re feeling particularly generous, why not go ahead and donate to Project Valor-IT. We here at ASHC are sponsoring the Army in honor of Lance’s brother, but you can pick any team to which to donate:

Technorati Tags: Let’s Say Thanks, Valour-IT, Veterans, disabled veterans, disabled, computers, donate, Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force

3 Comments »

Over at The Volokh Conspiracy, Jim Lindgren posts about a statistical analysis he’s done regarding the correlation between pro-redistributionist and traditionally racist views. According to Prof. Lindgren, while the opposite correlation is accepted “fact” in the social science cannons, facts on the ground reveal such received wisdom to be unfounded:

In the field of social psychology, it is commonly believed that people support capitalism and oppose greater income redistribution because they are racist or want to dominate other people or groups. Indeed, a study of college students in the United States and secondary students in Sweden found that attitudes supporting capitalism were positively associated with racism and an orientation toward social dominance (Sidanius & RPratto, 1993, cited in my manuscript).

[...]

I begin by showing [in his paper on the topic] that respondents who express traditionally racist views (on segregation, interracial marriage, and inborn racial abilities) tend to support greater income redistribution. All nine spearman correlations between the three racism variables and the three redistribution variables are significant, with coefficients ranging from .067 to .142.

[...]

The data are broadly inconsistent with the standard belief in the social psychology literature that anti-redistributionist views are positively associated with racism. The results are a problem for the academic assumption that opposing income redistribution indicates hostility toward other groups and a desire to dominate them. Indeed, many social psychologists believe that the link between opposing redistribution and social dominance is so strong and clear that opposing redistribution can be treated as a measure of social dominance orientation.

Lindgren’s analysis is interesting in and of itself, especially in light of the commonly accepted association between capitalism and racism (and/or a prevalence for social dominance) it seems to refute. In addition, his study seems to support something I have long thought regarding some of the reasons underlying anti-capitalism in general, i.e. that there is an elitist Weltanschung whereby each individual has a preordained station in life, which station should be maintained for the good of all (but most especially the elitists).

Re-distributionism, and anti-capitalism in general, are essentially all about buying off those who are in the lower stations so that they are happy with their plight, or at least happy enough to keep from revolting and seeking to toss the elitists from their cozy perch. Elitists tend to get very upset with the middle class types (the bourgeoisie) for upsetting this “natural” balance between the unwashed, the middle men, and the upper echelon. The bourgeoisie, tending towards capitalist endeavors, threaten that balance by their creation of wealth and expansion of individual liberties, which has the effect of making the stratifications both irreparably permeable and wholly unnecessary. The elitists seek to retard the political and social advance of the bourgeoisie into their ruling territory by simultaneously (i) offering up the bourgeoisie to the poorest classes as the cause of all their woes, and (ii) buying off the poorest classes with bourgeoisie’s money (e.g. income redistribution). The tension between “rich” and “poor” is really between the “bourgeoisie capitalists” and the “working stiffs” that is egged on by the elitists in order to maintain their status.

Consider this simplified illustration of the already generalized opinion above:

• There are basically three Classes – (1) the Elite, (2) the Bourgeoisie, and (3) the Poor.
• The Elite attempt to convince the Poor that the stratification of society is caused by the greed of the capitalists (i.e. the Bourgeoisie) and the only way to defeat that stratification is to hold the Bourgeoisie in check.
• By constantly pointing out elements of class stratification, such as things that the Bourgeoisie have that the Poor do not (or, at least, have in smaller, less definite amounts), the Elite create the impression that the Bourgeoisie are oppressing the Poor.
• When the Bourgeoisie complain about being overly burdened by the state-imposed weight of buying off the Poor, the Elite can point to the greediness of the Bourgeoisie and advocate for continued class struggle against them.
• The result of the tension created by the Elite is that it is harder for the Poor and the Bourgeoisie to be upwardly mobile, and thus stratification (or at the least the impression of it) continues, and the status of the Elite is maintained.

Accordingly, it does not strike me as far-fetched that racist/social dominance views would find a strong correlation with pro-redistributionist views, since IMHO both are prefaced on the idea that classes (racial, socio-economic, or otherwise) are preordained and should not be upset in any way, much less should there be any movement between them. To be sure, Prof. Lindgren’s statistical analysis does not necessarily mean that there is any causal link between the correlated values, only that it is much more likely than not that someone with one view will also espouse the other. Each may have different reasons for holding both views. I just found it interesting that my very rudimentary and inchoate “theory” seems to be supported by his analysis, and that my explanation may provide a reason as to why the correlation Prof. Lindgren illuminates might exist.

Technorati Tags: capitalism, socialism, correlation between redistribution and racism, Jim Lindgren, Volokh, socio-economic theory

54 Comments »

Although the world is certainly a darker place without the presence of champion of Libertarian ideals, Milton Friedman, I always felt that my libertarian leanings were more a product of the late Robert Nozick than more traditional authors like Friedman or F.A. Hayek. For an example of one of Nozick’s pieces for CATO, see here. It’s a very interesting take on the idea that many so-called “intellectuals,” are rabid opponents of capitalism. I find a great deal to agree with in this article and I believe that this is an important issue to consider. The leftist bias on university campuses is well documented and well known (except to university faculty and administrators). Much like global warming, it’s time to stop arguing about whether this problem exists or not and start looking at the actual effects on our society and the potential causes and solutions. Nozick’s article is a great starting point.

No Comments »

Keith sent this very interesting link to Michael awhile back and he forwarded it to me. This is a great example of a moderate Muslim voice trying to offer a little fragment of the positive relationship that Jews and Muslims have enjoyed in the past. Mansur also offers advice for the future and the very necessary step of reconciling these two great world religions.

Having said that, the comments posted under the article remind me of the fact that the “war of hearts and minds” is not only being waged in the Islamic world. It’s also very much being waged in the “West.” Many, many Westerners, both Christian and secular are absolutely intent on rebuilding the spirit of the old Crusades. They are absolutely, unalterably convinced that Islam is the devil’s own religion and until every Muslim is butchered or converted (to either Christianity or secular humanism), the world will not be safe for “the righteous.” I invite you, gentle readers, to examine the comments in some detail and ask yourselves if you have not heard similar language before. The same rhetoric is broadcast daily by Islamic fundamentalists, yet here it comes from “enlightened” Westerners. Ironic, is it not, that those so intent on “saving” us from the fundamentalist terrorists are, themselves, unashemedly using the rhetoric of those like Iran’s President and OBL.

In particular, please focus on the position taken by the opponents of Islam in this comment section. Muslims are all heathen butchers. We understand your theology, laws, and holy scriptures better than you do. Our understanding of those things is the only true one (sound familiar?). We have a version of history which Muslims must accept or else be branded hypocrites or fanatic apologists. Either accept our vision of Islam and renounce it, or be squashed under the heel of “righteousness” like the fundamentalist terrorist that we consider you to be.

Until the “West” itself decides what its position on Islam is, then I can’t really see how any progress is to be made in interactions between the Muslim world and the western world. I can only hope that cooler, more rational heads will prevail in both camps and that this ridiculous alarmism will end soon.

7 Comments »

Radley Balko has a short article decrying the latest YouTube enabling of the Office of National Drug Policy (via Insty).

A couple of months ago, the Office of National Drug Policy apparently decided that a “with it” kinda’ thing to do would be to upload the agency’s awful anti-drug videos up to YouTube. Naturally, you aren’t permitted to comment on the commercials, keeping with the drug warriors general approach to dissent. Once several hundred people had given the videos poor ratings, they disabled the rating function, too.

What’s disappointing is that the agency persuaded YouTube to give it its own little corner of the site, complete with unique formatting and a unique URL. Not cool, YouTubers.

While I agree that the Drug War is a colassal failure, and that it is not the proper place of the government to tell people how to live their lives, I don’t mind PSA’s such as the one featured by Balko — — with its tagline of “When you give up the ability to decide for yourself…You give up what makes you, you.” Radley’s right of course that the tagline is quite ironic coming from a government entity decidedly in the business of telling people what they should and should not decide for themselves. And the fact that YouTube went to such lengths to appease the ONDP is awfully lame for a supposedly independent organization.

But the message itself is not offensive. In fact, it’s pretty libertarian, isn’t it? Maybe having grown up with “Just Say No” and the myriad false facts perpetrated pursuant to the Drug War, a message that puts the power back in the hands of the individual to make an informed choice just seems refreshing.

Drugs are abused quite frequently, and they can be dangerous, especially when used by kids who have poor decision-making skills as it is. Encouraging them to take a step back and think about what they are doing before choosing to do something dangerous seems like a good message, IMHO. If this is what the Drug War were reduced to (and only this), I for one would be happy to leave such busybodies alone. There will always be greater battles to be fought when it comes to government intrusion into our lives.

Alas, as it stands now, the Drug War is overly intrusive, and is directly responsible for things like no-knock raids that wreak havoc on innocent people, and the distortions in the market for drugs that incentivizes providers to enter the trade. Nevertheless, as far as this one particular message goes (which, it should be noted, Balko does not attack), I think its relatively innocuous, and if anything may have a beneficial effect. As Balko does note, however, YouTube’s pandering to the ONDP is pathetic.

Technorati Tags: Drug War, Office of National Drug Policy, YouTube, Radley Balko, drug war economics, propaganda, no-knock raids, “Just Say No”

No Comments »

My wife teaches at very fine private school (Government and AP European History) and often remarks that the main disciplinary issue is reminding the kids to tuck in their shirts. If only I had known: (more…)

1 Comment »

In New Mexico it is illegal to call yourself an interior designer unless you have obtained an expensive and difficult to obtain government license. You can actually design interiors, and you can charge the fees you wish, but you cannot call yourself an interior designer. That would imply that when you choose the color of the cushions and pick out the most attractive drapes to go with the carpet it has been established that you are qualified to do this. Who decides this? If you want to call yourself an interior designer in New Mexico it is the National Council for Interior Design Qualification.

I want to assure my readers that I do not consider Interior Design a frivolous or simple job. It most certainly is not. The technical knowledge and aesthetic sensibility are valuable, reflecting both experience and talent. Frankly, I could never be an interior designer no matter how many hours I studied. That being said, it is also not a skill or ability a written test or any particular set of credentialing activities is likely to be of much benefit, except as a barrier to entry for established firms filled with Design School graduates.

Who suffers at the hands of regulations such as these? How about people such as Sherry Franzoy:

Working in interior design had long been Sherry Franzoy’s dream. But it wasn’t until after a divorce, when she was suddenly thrust in the position of having to provide for herself, that she finally pursued that dream. With the nearest design school more than 200 miles away, however, even if the Las Cruces native could have afforded the time and expense of attending school, her dream still seemed out of reach. Thankfully, Sherry learned of a franchising opportunity with Interiors by Decorating Den, an international company with more than 500 franchises in operation. (more…)

6 Comments »

Listening Notes: “Reva’s House,” Los Lobos, Kiko (1992)

Another police “No-Knock” raid, and another tragic ending (via Insty):

Police in Altanta have apparently shot and killed a 92-year-old woman Tuesday night during a drug raid. Details are sketchy, but unless a nonagenerian was pushing dope and using lethal force to protect her supply, the most likely explanation here is that someone sent the tactical team to kick down the wrong door after a bad tip from an informant. Again. Only this time, the spunky old broad inside met the intruders with gunfire:

The woman’s niece, Sarah Dozier, says that she bought her aunt a gun to protect herself and that her aunt had a permit for the gun. Relatives believe Johnston was frightened by the officers and opened fire.”They kicked her door down talking about drugs, there’s no drugs in that house. And they realize now, they’ve got the wrong house,” Dozier said. “I’m mad as hell.”

Police insist the warrant was legit, and the house was correct — which is why I’m guessing the problem originated with the informant.

Dale Franks has had about enough of these over-the-top tactics, and even though he’s spent a considerable amount of time in law-enforcement, his tolerance for the police is waning:

Frankly, I’m surprised that we haven’t yet seen police reports containing the term “shot while escaping”. We are using Gestapo tactics to make midnight, surprise raids, kitted out in full military regalia, to serve warrants on suspects of non-violent offenses. In the course of doing so, they are killing citizens whose only offense is, when woken up suddenly at night by men breaking into their homes, having the temerity to defend themselves. This is simply outrageous, and if it doesn’t shock your conscience, then you are a moral cripple.

After having spent half of my adult life as a sworn law enforcement officer, I find I am becoming more anti-police every day.

To be fair to the police officers themselves, they are essentially the same as troops in theater, and I suppose there is the equivalent argument to be made that the problem is with the commanders not the soldiers. However, law enforcement as whole needs to address this problem quickly and with respect for individual rights. It is beyond the pale to expect that “a man’s home is his castle” except when the police decide its not. I won’t venture a definition if tyranny here, but certainly the foregoing behavior is a clear symptom and perhaps a necessary element.

What I really don’t understand is why the police insist on capturing such dangerous criminals in their homes, where the potential for bloodshed seems to be greatest. Surely these nefarious thugs exit the premises on occasion. Wouldn’t that be a better time to nab a suspect, when the apprehending officers can clearly and accurately identify him/her and ascertain whether the suspect is armed? I think they used call this “getting the drop” on someone. Given the potentially dire consequences of executing a no-knock warrant, even if the police do it correctly on and on the right person/dwelling, I’m not sure what the real value of such warrants is. On the contrary, the cost is painfully obvious and, as should be obvious by now (see also, here), should be deemed as outweighing any benefits at this point.

Technorati Tags: No-knock warrants, Cory Maye, Radley Balko, QandO, law enforcement

2 Comments »

In an apparent fit of irony, the Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) is :

Americans would have to sign up for a new military draft after turning 18 under a bill the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee says he will introduce next year.

“There’s no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded
Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm’s way,” Rangel said.

Right off, the cynical use of this legislation is the equivalent of Charlie Rangel holding a gun to your kid’s head and saying “govern my way or else.” Rangel admits as much. Nevermind the fact that, because we have an all-volunteer force, parents don’t make these sorts of decisions for their children, but instead young adults make the choice to join the service on their own. And further ignore the fact that the various socioeconomic classes are represented about the same in the civilian and military populations, as opposed to the trope upon which Rangel relies (and perhaps, Sen. John Kerry believes) — i.e. that it is the poor and stupid who join the military. Indeed, why let little things like “facts” get in the way of exercising that Congressional muscle, especially when (as Rangel sees it) you can hold American sons and daughters ransom in an effort to exact your own political will? How very “democratic” of you, Rep. Rangel. In a word, you are pathetic.

The more academic question about the draft is whether or not it is even legal. The Thirteenth Amendment states: (more…)

33 Comments »

The FDA which has finally decided to allow silicone breast implants back onto the market:

The decision appeared to end a controversy over the safety of silicone implants that lasted more than two decades and resulted in thousands of lawsuits by women who claimed the implants leaked and caused a number of diseases, including cancer and rheumatoid arthritis. The dispute led to the bankruptcy of the manufacturer Dow Corning, a federal moratorium on the use of the implants, and, finally, findings by both the Institute of Medicine and the Food and Drug Administration that the devices do not cause major illnesses.

Surveying the sparse reaction in the blog world I noticed Fersboo in the comments at Bitsblog asks a good question:

Will Dow get their money back?

Heh! I wouldn’t hold my breath, but in all seriousness the human cost of this has been quite large, and not just because of breast implants proven utility as an auto safety device:

A Bulgarian car crash victim was saved by her huge breast implants – which acted as airbags to absorb the impact.

It has been in all the major papers, but has resulted in surprisingly little commentary, though I believe it is a story with far more resonance when it comes to our actual liberty and our future as a free society than almost anything else we will read or discuss over the next few months. Why is it important? Two statements can give us a hint. From Breitbart:

The US federal government has given the beauty industry a long-sought push-up as it lifted a 14-year-old ban on women’s silicone breast implants, despite concerns by some experts they might not be safe.

And from Dr. Daniel G. Schultz, director of the F.D.A.’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health:

We have been looking at this data continuously for the last 10 years. We have been watching as data had been collected, we have been watching as data has accumulated. We believe that from a scientific standpoint, the decision that we’re making tonight is, in fact, in the best interest of American women.

Those two statements are pregnant with meaning. Both should worry all of us because of the mind set they represent. The first for the belief of many that because something might not be safe by some persons standard, which applies to every object or activity known to man, that our government has the right to decide whether we can have the object or engage in the activity. The second because Dr. Schulz, despite doing the right thing in rejecting the unscientific assault on a product millions of women want and by some standards even need, does believe it is his role to decide what is in the best interest of women. To really understand this issue I think we need to go into greater detail about what breast implants and the controversy surrounding them really represent?
(more…)

63 Comments »

Last Updated at 5:03 PM CST

For all of our coverage of the passing of Milton Friedman, and all the links you could ever want, go to our Milton Friedman Memorial page.

The government solution to a problem is usually as bad as the problem.

– Milton Friedman

This is day two of us scouring the web for peoples thoughts and opinions on the passing of Milton Friedman. Much more to come, scroll down for our earlier posts filled with links to videos, commentary, interviews and more. We will be updating as time permits.

Over at Division of Labor Robert Lawson and others give their thoughts including the forward to the book that described the research behind the Economic Freedom Index:

For many of us, freedom-economic, political, civil-is an end in itself not a means to other ends-it is what makes life worthwhile. We would prefer to live in a free country even if it did not provide us and our fellow citizens with a higher standard of life than an alternative regime. But I am firmly persuaded that a free society could never survive under such circumstances. A free society is a delicate balance, constantly under attack, even by many who profess to be its partisans. I believe that free societies have arisen and persisted only because economic freedom is so much more productive economically than other methods of controlling economic activity………….

To achieve these advantages, it was essential that the measure of economic freedom not beg any questions by depending on outcomes; it was essential that it depend only on objective characteristics of an economy. This may seem obvious but I assure you that it is not. After all, the rate of economic growth or the level of living may be an excellent proxy for economic freedom, just as an auto’s maximum speed may be an excellent proxy for the power of its motor. But any such connections must be demonstrated not assumed or taken for granted. There is nothing in the way the indexes are calculated that would prevent them from having no correlation whatsoever with such completely independent numbers as per capita GDP and the rate of growth of GDP. Yet the actual correlation between the indexes and the level and rate of economic growth documented in some of the extraordinarily informative graphs in the book (e.g., Exhibit S-2) is most impressive. No qualitative verbal description can match the power of that graph.

You can read more about this incredible effort he inspired here.

(more…)

No Comments »

Update:

For all of our coverage of the passing of Milton Friedman, and all the links you could ever want, go to our Milton Friedman Memorial page.

One of the more downbeat assessments of Milton Friedman’s legacy comes from the Guardian. Richard Adams suggests that Milton left little impact upon public policy:

Milton Friedman, who has died aged 94, was not the most important economist of the post-war era – that title belongs to the brilliant Paul Samuelson- but he was certainly the most controversial. Yet despite his views being championed by so many politicians on the right, it may come as a surprise that Friedman’s career as a policymaker largely ended in failure.

Given his status as a long-standing hate figure, the assumption by many of the left is that his agenda was cemented into place during the Reagan and Thatcher administrations in the early 1980s, especially Friedman’s well-known view that inflation is solely influenced by changes in the money supply. But very few of Friedman’s most cherished proposals were ever put in to practice. Of those that where – such as monetarism- almost all turned into failure.

The great irony for Friedman’s fans is that the one piece of public policy he was responsible for that was widely and internationally adopted was one that greatly increased the ability of central governments to collect taxes – a policy he later repudiated in disgust.

Obituaries of Friedman will doubtlessly sing of his successes. But close examination will show them to be few, and none unalloyed. For all his high public profile – thanks to his regular column in Newsweek and series on US television, , which made him into something of a star – today no mainstream academic economist is a monetarist and Friedman left no lasting school of academic heirs. Even the “Chicago school” at the University of Chicago has waned in influence, eclipsed by the mighty MIT army of economists that followed Samuelson.

Read the whole thing.

Given all the comments we have gathered here and here I am interested in the thoughts of our readers as to the impact of Friedman. Feel free to discuss at length.

powered by performancing firefox

3 Comments »

Last Updated at 10:23PM Central Time

For all of our coverage of the passing of Milton Friedman, and all the links you could ever want, go to our Milton Friedman Memorial page.

From Pejman,”That’s right. A lecture concerning a mundane topic like the creation of a pencil was made dazzling and fascinating by Milton Friedman. Imagine what he could do with questions and debate regarding matters of great import and consequence.”

Reuters

The BBC

Tyler Cowen who, like me, started with Friedman:”I believe Capitalism and Freedom was the second or third book I ever read on economics and it definitely shaped my life. I knew Milton only a bit but he was always gracious and of course razor sharp and a lover of liberty and prosperity. He was one of the most important minds of the second half of the twentieth century and his influence remains felt all around the world. In purely academic terms, he easily could have won two or three Nobel Prizes from the quality and quantity of his work.”

The New York Times has a long piece on his life.

Steve Levitt makes a wonderful point: “He was truly a revolutionary thinker. People do not realize how revolutionary because so many of his ideas that were thought to be crazy when he suggested them eventually came to be seen as obvious: school choice, a volunteer army, etc.”

Jane Galt pretending to be Economist Magazine: “An economics giant, he not only revolutionised monetary theory, but singlehandedly did more than almost any economist in history to advance the cause of free markets. He was not merely an accomplished economist, but an accomplished popular writer; his Newsweek columns remain gems of clarity and brilliance decades later. We will not soon see his like again.”

The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that’s why it’s so essential to preserving individual freedom. ~ Milton Friedman

Brian Doherty of Reason magazine needless to say has a lot to say:

Undoubtedly the most successful and influential proponent of libertarian thought in the 20th century, Milton Friedman, died last night at age 94. His successes as both a technical economist and libertarian polemicist are enormous. We can thank him, in large part, for happy events from the elimination of the draft to the conquest of inflation. Just a quick note now–his impact was staggering, and there could never be enough words said in praise of him.

My 1995 Reason interview with him.

A 2005 Reason interview, with Nick Gillespie, on his legacy of fighting for school choice.

His most recent Reason interview, with me, in our November issue, as part of a roundtable on the Federal Reserve.

Jacob Sullum’s celebration of Friedman’s 90th birthday.

(more…)

1 Comment »

Update:

For all of our coverage of the passing of Milton Friedman, and all the links you could ever want, go to our Milton Friedman Memorial page.

The long struggle for true human freedom lost its most influential and humane intellectual voice today. The great Milton Friedman has passed from this life.

When I was just awakening politically I remember sitting in my fathers room watching the landmark television series “Free To Choose” based on his best selling book and getting my first real introduction to the ideas and ideals behind what is now called libertarianism. Later it was the centerpiece (at least for me) of my high school course on Free Enterprise. I had read “Free to Choose” and “Capitalism and Freedom” before I ever left high school and have remained committed to the great passion of his later years, allowing every child and parent the chance to attend the educational institution of their choice. I am sure it is hard for many to understand the emotional impact this sad event has on me. All I can say, is that whatever your ideological background, understanding Milton Friedman is a necessity to grappling with the world. His arguments are what need to be faced or embraced.

I, and anyone of my co-conspirators here who wish to, will be updating this obituary throughout the day. Please send any links or stories you think would be appropriate to gather together and remember him with to us.

Laissez Faire Books has a fine tribute here with a link to a 1992 piece at the end which analyzes Milton and Rose’s success. I especially like point number 8:

8. Be nice.
The most basic lesson of salesmanship is that customers buy from those whom they like. Your ideas might be correct, and your research might be solid, but if you come across as a disagreeable sourpuss, an audience will probably favor your nicer opponent. A major asset of the Friedmans is that they are such nice, decent, outgoing people who don’t engage in factional fighting or personal attacks. As Milton says engagingly of his opponents: “I object not to the softness of their hearts but the softness of their heads.”
Too few in the political and ideological struggles of today have taken that lesson to heart.

From the Financial Times: (more…)

1 Comment »

Inspired by our newest member, Keith_Indy, I decided to retake the political compass questionnaire regarding political ideology. I’m not terribly confident about the accuracy of this questionnaire, but it is interesting to see the results nonetheless. Based on my answers I fall right on top of Milton Friedman in the lower right quadrant (Economic axis = 6.50; Social axis = -1.95). The questionnaire most likely ranks me a bit higher on the “Authoritarian” axis than is warranted due to the questions regarding religion. However, Milton Friedman is certainly a big informer of my own political philosophy.

I also once took the Ludwig von Mises Institute quiz entitled “Are You an Austrian?” on which I scored an 83 out of 100. According to the Mises Institute, that score places me somewhere comfortably on the cusp of Chicago School and Austrian economic policy.

So what does all that mean? Nothing really, except that I know the libertarian answers to quizzes. To be sure, I gave honest answers, but as with all multiple choice tests those answers often were not as nuanced as I would have liked. In any case, accepting the tests for what they are, and the idea that such things are even measurable, there are my rankings as a libertarian. If you don’t like it, just remember … Keith started it.

7 Comments »

I would like to announce for everyone who is paying attention, that the previous post reflects a brand spanking new addition to our little blogging family. For those of you who are already familiar with Keith I am sure you will agree that he gives another unique voice to our lineup. Please take a moment to leave your good wishes. We are all glad that he has accepted our invitation and we think he will bring both new topics and help us be better bloggers as well. Keith has a real talent for combing through the news and is generous in sharing.

Welcome aboard Keith, we really appreciate the opportunity to work together.

You can find out a bit about Keith by scrolling down to our Pages section, or just connect directly here.

1 Comment »

This story has all the elements of a Tom Clancy novel. Mysterious narco-linked cash, info on nuclear materials and cyanide (great for causing mass panic,) and an unemployed man traveling through mysterious destination to a major US city.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/16/D8LE7F981.html

A man was arrested at Detroit Metropolitan Airport after officials say they found him carrying more than $78,000 in cash and a laptop computer containing information about nuclear materials and cyanide.

Sisayehiticha Dinssa, an unemployed U.S. citizen, was arrested Tuesday after a dog caught the scent of narcotics on cash he was carrying, according to an affidavit filed in court.

When agents asked him if he had any cash to declare, he said he had $18,000, authorities said. But when agents checked his luggage, they found an additional $59,000. When they scrolled through his laptop, they said they found the mysterious files.

…

Dinssa, who is from Dallas, arrived in Detroit from Nigeria by way of Amsterdam and was headed for Phoenix, Feller said. He is charged with concealing more than $10,000 in his luggage, which carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison, the Detroit Free Press reported.

Maybe “they” are wrong and we really do have something to fear from terrorists in this country. I continually hear from some quarters that if you have a genuine fear of terrorism, or approve of some of the methods the administration uses to catch terrorists, then you’re just a “bed wetter.” You know, because statistically, the average American has a greater chance of dying from say, slipping in the tub then they do from a terrorist attack.

Now, I may not like all the restrictions on boarding an airplane, or agree with every single thing the government does in it’s pursuit of terrorist suspects. But, I’d rather they treat the matter seriously, then not consider it at all. Privacy, civil-rights and security, the pendulum swings back and forth between more and less restrictions or permissions. The same has been true of executive, legislative and judicial power. The checks and balances work, but it takes time, effort, and attention that can span generations, and doesn’t fit well in the 24/7 news-tainment machine.

I’m all for a vigorous, civil debate on the merits of this or that policy, but to brush of concern over terrorism as bed-wetting, is a bad place to start the debate.

You do have to wonder how many guys like this fall through the cracks?

Or maybe this guys uncle really did have millions of dollars that he couldn’t get safely out of Nigeria, and he didn’t know what was on this laptop, which he’s just delivering for a “friend.”

BTW I would like to thank Lance, Omar and Michael for inviting me to post on their blog. I’ll do my best to meet their expectations, and will get a biographical post up here shortly.

4 Comments »

If this was Jeopardy, that’s what the “question” would be.  The “answer” is “Republicans.”

*** UPDATE ***

Ok, I guess “O.J. Simpson” would be an acceptable answer as well.

powered by performancing firefox

4 Comments »

It is axiomatic in libertarian circles that government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers. The mantra is most often heard in laments regarding the sclerotic and overbearing regulatory state (here, in Europe, etc.). One concrete example of the truth behind this axiom, one that is not so obvious, is in the area of health care.

Glenn Reynolds highlights a Betsy McCaughey op-ed in the NYT that points to a leading cause of death in the United States, which cause simmers on the perpetual back burner of our collective conscious:

WHAT kills more than five times as many Americans as AIDS? Hospital infections, which account for an estimated 100,000 deaths every year. (more…)

17 Comments »

All of the talk lately around the blogsphere tends to drift toward the Iraq War and how it will be handled in the very near future. Some bloggers have also discussed the plans that the incoming Democrat leadership will be putting in place (or trying to) come next session. Given the extremely serious (and, at times, dull) nature of these discussions, I thought I’d lighten the mood a bit with my own parody of national events and personalities.

Iraq : send in these guys or maybe these guys instead.

Iran and North Korea : ditto.

The 110th Congress : this is about what you’d expect. Perhaps a little less restrained. We’ll have to see about that whole bipartisanship thing.

Howard Dean and the Kos Kids : just as precocious as ever. Howard would be the star, of course, with Kos and Kompany the hangers-on. The little scamps.

President Bush and VP Cheney : oblivious to reality as ever. Tell me they don’t remind you of these guys.

Denny Hastert and Bill Frist : is it any wonder that your party drives off a cliff when led by the real-life equivalents of these two guys?

Nancy Pelosi : Buffy the Republican Slayer

The future hope for the Republican party : tell me this wouldn’t scare the heck out of opponents.

Steny Hoyer and Harry Reid : guess who’s who.

Alcee Hastings : the man who gives him the inspiration to wake up every morning.

More coming soon.

3 Comments »

Of all the comments I’ve seen on the results of last week’s election, I think Pat Sajak really does sum it up best. Yes, that Pat Sajak.

1 Comment »

Update:The campaign has gone well, but if you haven’t given yet, please do so.

I don’t have a lot to say, just give. If you want more visit here.

Project Valour-IT, in memory of SFC William V. Ziegenfuss, provides voice-controlled laptop computers to wounded Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines recovering from hand and arm injuries or amputations at home or in military hospitals. Operating laptops by speaking into a microphone, our wounded heroes are able to send and receive messages from friends and loved ones, surf the ‘Net, and communicate with buddies still in the field without having to press a key or move a mouse. The experience of CPT Charles “Chuck” Ziegenfuss, a partner in the project who suffered severe hand wounds while serving in Iraq, illustrates how important this voice-controlled software can be to a wounded servicemember’s recovery.

Pick your team and donate. In honor of my brother A Second Hand Conjecture is part of the Army.

Technorati Tags: Valour-IT, Veterans, disabled veterans, disabled, computers, donate, Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force

No Comments »

One of the aspects of the controversy over the NSA surveillance program that is routinely ignored is the program was reported to the relevant members of both the Republican and Democratic leadership. Whatever the merits of the program it does seem to me that if a protest over its existence should have been raised it should have been by our representatives rather than the New York Times. Yet the Democrats who at least tacitly approved of the program have gotten little scrutiny. Should they have been re-elected by their liberal constituents if the program was the unique affront we are often told it is? I don’t know and I don’t know enough of the program to say with any confidence. What I do know is that those who are guilt of this sin have not been called to account by their party, until now.

Jane Harman is set to be bypassed for the chairmanship of the House Intelligence committee in favor of the ethically challenged Alcee hastings. Amongst concerns about other leadership positions Radley Balko weighs in:

Several readers have written to point out that Pelosi is set to pass over Rep. Jane Harman to make Rep. Alcee Hastings chair of the Intelligence Committee. Hastings is of course a formal federal judge who was impeached and removed from the bench by a Democratic Congress in 1989 for taking bribes. Apparently, the Congressional Black Caucus is demanding a chairmanship for Hastings to compensate for the loss of influence caused by Rep. William Jefferson’s removal from the Appropriations Committee — also due to corruption.

This, within 72 hours of the election. Meet the new boss…

What is one of the factors weighing against her? She is one of those who were briefed about the NSA program and didn’t leak it? Obviously people can disagree about which sin is worse, but why is Hastings the second string anyway?

Read the rest from Radley, but the left blogosphere should take his challenge seriously. They have spent the last few years pointing out the sins of the Republican Party, both real and imagined (and in fairness the right leaning blogosphere has done a fair bit of muckraking about the Republicans as well.) If all the talk of the Democrats being different on matters of ethics and transparency (a difference wholly absent when they were in the majority, under any fair accounting) as opposed to pushing policies you agree with is to be true, then the most effective cleanser will be the left blogosphere. It is time to step up to the plate and force for the first time our politics to be different. If the task is accomplished, even if you fall from power in the future the precedent will serve both parties, and thus our nation well. I expect that is a vain hope, but maybe the netroots can be an asset for the nation. I am keeping score. This at least is encouraging:

Democrats aim to open the next Congress in January with a new rule that identifies lawmakers who use legislative “earmarks” to help special interests — a change Republicans promised but didn’t implement.

I will be interested to see what the vote breakdown on this is should it ever see the light of day. I agree with Jon that the Republican leadership should be embarrassed they didn’t push this through themselves. However, when push came to shove, it was the Republicans who voted overwhelmingly in favor of transparency the last time around and the Democrats who did not. If that happens again, regardless of the outcome of the overall vote I would hope the netroots would make it an issue. I certainly think ads showing the vote totals on the two bills should be widely aired by the Republicans if it happens again and vice versa should it be the other way around.

Technorati Tags: Pork barrel spending, Alcee Hastings, NSA surveillance, Jane Harman, Nancy Pelosi, earmarks, intelligence committee

13 Comments »

In The Math Behind the Sin of Profligacy I discussed the reasons why spending has increased so much, and therefore why I am pessimistic about the likelihood of spending restraint in the immediate future absent a significant change on the part of Republicans, or leadership by the President through the use of the veto. To put it bluntly, as bad as the Republican Party has been, they are vastly superior to the Democrats when it comes to spending. In discussing this I made a point that should be looked at more closely, which is that even if tax rates had been held steady, had the Democratic minority gotten its way on spending matters the deficit would be at least as large, and that we should therefore hope for gridlock, not any mythical fiscal responsibility by the Democrats.

I am sure that many find that claim a bit of a stretch. I’ll put forward exhibit B on this today [hat tip Greg Mankiw]:

(more…)

3 Comments »

I love Europe, I even love France. Therefore, as Europe moves in halting fits and starts to empower the bureaucrats in Brussels to turn itself into a sclerotic federal state I am concerned for what may come of that. Then I read something like this and feel that maybe there is hope yet. I introduce you to Frits Bolkestein, former Dutch representative to the European Commission.

Referring to commission plans to fight obesity, he said at a liberal meeting in Brussels “I also believe that people should watch their weight. But is this a European task?”

In fact why don’t we bring him in to speak to Mayor Bloomberg and Michael Spurlock. (more…)

1 Comment »

Why? Because sometimes amidst the venting of his spleen he links you to some real common sense reasons about why the Republicans lost.

Heh.

Technorati Tags: the Onion, Republicans, Democrats

2 Comments »

Russell Roberts tells us why. Here is what he is talking about.

“The orderly part comes from the visual image that emerges and the implications of that images. Each flight is represented as an animated path of light between the departure city and the destination city. The visual image that results is an illuminated map of the United States. The borders of the country emerge and then cities even though no boundary or city is shown explicitly. The animation also evolves over time. At first, you see only darkness. Then the East Coast becomes illuminated and the light moves west as the sun rises across the country. Then Hawaii is lit up with planes going and leaving there. And at the end of the day, the last red-eye flights head westward from California.

The flights around the country aren’t random. They spring out of population density and the routes people want to travel. These are the source of the order and its visual representation. What you’re seeing is a visual representation of the market for air travel and its service of its customers.”

Technorati Tags: spontaneous order, air traffic, Russell Roberts

2 Comments »

A puritan is a person who pours righteous indignation into the wrong things.

– Gilbert K. Chesterton

Character assassinations are not pretty things, especially when they go awry. Michael Ledeen, who apparently attracts this sort of attention, is undergoing a full-scale broadside from the King and Queen of Righteous Indignation, based upon Ledeen’s remark (emphasis mine):

I do not feel “remorseful,” since I had and have no involvement with our Iraq policy. I opposed the military invasion of Iraq before it took place and I advocated—as I still do—support for political revolution in Iran as the logical and necessary first step in the war against the terror masters.

Ledeen’s moral betters, Greenwald and Mona, have gotten themselves worked up into an awful lather, you see, because the bolded statement above is, in their words, “an outright lie,” with which Ledeen is “brazenly denying the truth about his own pre-invasion views.” To their credit, this time the Righteous Indignation Twins have managed to marshall some evidence (emphasis GG):

But as Mona pointed out last night, Ledeen wrote a scathing August, 2002 article in National Review, the sole purpose of which was to argue for what he called “the desperately-needed and long overdue war against Saddam Hussein and the rest of the terror masters.”

[...]

Following up on mine and Mona’s post from last night about Ledeen’s lie, Meteor Blades over at Daily Kos found an August, 2002 interview Ledeen gave to Jamie Glazov at David Horowitz’s Front Page. Ledeen was part of a panel of other war-mongers such as Richard Pipes and Fred Barnes, and he repeatedly and umambiguously argued in favor of invading Iraq. Meteor Blades excerpted many of the relevant examples, but here is just one sample:

Question #2: Okay, well if we are all so certain about the dire need to invade Iraq, then when do we do so?

Ledeen: Yesterday.

Nevermind for now the general frothiness, distortions and mischaracterizations. Instead focus on the actual charge — Michael Ledeen lied when he claimed that he did not support the military invasion of Iraq prior to the war. If all you knew of Ledeen were from the two quotes above, it sure does look as if the RI Twins are right, and that Ledeen did indeed lie. At best, just judging from the “Yesterday” comment, Ledeen certainly looks to be on the untruthiness end of things. In fact, I’ll do one better than the RI Twins here and point out that the entire interview could easily be construed as Ledeen arguing for a military invasion of Iraq … if that’s all there was to the story. But, as usual with these two, there is much more to the story. I challenge you now to read the remainder of this post and decide for yourselves who is being deceitful. (more…)

36 Comments »

Lest we get too caught up in our little world here in America, let’s not forget that elections are slated to occur elsewhere real soon, specifically in Australia.  In the Aussie states of Queensland and New South Wales, for example, there is a battle for preselection next month:

The retirement of several Coalition MPs at the next election
combined with the recent electoral redistribution has opened the
door for a spate of three-cornered contests in NSW and Queensland
in which the Nationals and Liberals will compete.

The battle in Queensland, in particular, boasts a young, Israeli-born, Presbyterian practicing candidate named Hajnal Ban:

The 28-year-old barrister and local councillor is part of the
Nationals’ bid to wrest a key seat from the Liberals as the party
seeks to reverse its decline at next year’s federal election.

“It’s really going to come down to the candidate and how hard
they work,” … “I’m going to give it everything I’ve got.
I’ll work like a dog for 12 months.”

That last statement may take on a whole new meaning once you read Iowahawk’s endorsement of the candidate: (more…)

1 Comment »

5 Comments »

I have weighed in a few times here on the overemphasis many libertarians have made on issues that have been arbitrarily labeled as Civil Liberties as opposed to liberty as a whole. Like many I have advocated supporting those who are most interested in protecting our liberty on the whole, which at this point means a few Republicans, libertarians and other independents and essentially no Democrats to send a message that the profligacy of our government and its expanding tentacles is fervently opposed by many of us. So I am in no way upset the Republicans lost so many seats, they deserved to lose them as a party. Why does that not mean we should support the Democrats? That we in fact should fear them, and why I believe that gridlock is not a sure thing in reducing spending without a change of heart from the Republican party?

There are a lot of reasons that this arbitrary distinction between civil liberty and economic liberty should be resisted, but before we delve further into that, and why the siren song of the “libertarian Democrat” and other flim flams should be resisted, maybe we should start by quantifying how large is the difference between the two major parties on spending, regulation and taxes. We have all heard the question “how much worse than the Republicans can the Democrats be?” Surprisingly given the evidence of the increased spending of the last six years, a lot worse. Mind bogglingly worse. Let me show you what I am talking about, from Senator Schumer: (more…)

8 Comments »

Slate has pointed me towards information that we have never before had access to on the political class. The Center For Responsible Politics has been crunching the financial disclosure forms of our dear leaders. One interesting aspect to me (go figure) was the composition of the assets in their portfolios:

The nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics recently performed the Herculean task of determining which members of Congress own what stocks. Its reports, which you can browse here, are an enthralling psychofinancial portrait of political America. For example, it turns out that oil giants BP and ExxonMobil as well as tobacco/food company Altria are overwhelmingly favored by Republicans, while Democrats are heavily into tech stocks such as Sun Microsystems, Texas Instruments, and Vodafone, the British-based mobile-phone giant.

People can make of that what they will. My only comment is that the Republicans are likely to do much better in terms of their portfolio’s over the next several years than the Democrats if these investment preferences hold up.

Technorati Tags: Investing, Republicans, Democrats, Center for Responsive Politics

powered by performancing firefox

No Comments »

After negotiations with SF mayor Gavin Newsom, yes that Gavin Newsom, broke down, the team announced it’s decision to pack up and move. Theoretically, this could be as soon as 2008 when their lease runs up, although they could always renew it for another few years if need be. So, now the great debate starts. Do they go to LA, Anaheim, or leave California altogether? If they do decide to relocate to, say San Antonio (which wants a team), do they keep the 49′ers name and legacy or do they retire it and become something else entirely? This is Roger Goodell’s first big challenge as commish. Let’s see how well he handles it.

3 Comments »

This little charmer from the AP appeared on Fox News’ website today. Although I haven’t done a lot of “fisking” in the past, I’m going to attempt to do so now as this article is pure garbage and deserves to be treated as such and placed in the appropriate receptacle.

MADRID, Spain — The shift that midterm elections brought to Washington’s political landscape was welcomed Wednesday by many across the world who oppose the war in Iraq and methods used by the U.S. in the fight against terrorism.

Here’s the tagline. Pretty amazing stuff, huh? Wow, so people who oppose the war around the world and, as a rule don’t like Americans in general are thrilled by a Democrat victory. Gee, I really needed a professional news service to relay this information to me. Goodness knows I’d never have figured this out on my own. (more…)

No Comments »

That’s what brought the Dems control of the United States Congress (they have the House clearly and will probably get the Senate). Of course, given the ineptness of the Republican leadership, it was the Dems’ race to lose. Let me be on record here as congratulating the Dem leadership for running a great campaign and also on record as having saved and printed every post on every blog that I regularly read about how great a Dem Congress (or a divided Congress) is going to be. We have two years to see if you cheerleaders for the Dems were right or wrong. And if you were wrong, well let’s just say that I’ve got the evidence needed to take you down when you start backtracking in ‘08. So enjoy the lame duck period, folks. You’re in for a LOT of work come next session.

PS Special thanks to all the Republicans in Texas who, rather than support a solidly Republican-aligned Libertarian, Bob Smither, decided to stay home, put their fingers in their ears and hum real loudly or else write-in a name that’s darned near impossible to remember to say nothing of spelling. Hope you enjoy the next few years under Nick Lampson and the Dem Congress. You earned it!

13 Comments »

According to AP reports, Donald Rumsfeld will step down as Secretary of Defense and Robert Gates will be nominated to replace him.

WASHINGTON – Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, architect of an unpopular war in Iraq, intends to resign after six stormy years at the Pentagon, Republican officials said today.

Officials said Robert Gates, former head of the CIA, would replace Rumsfeld.

The development occurred one day after midterm elections that cost Republicans control of the House, and possibly the Senate, as well. Surveys of voters at polling places said opposition to the war was a significant contributor to the Democratic victory.

President Bush was expected to announce Rumsfeld’s departure and Gates’ nomination at an afternoon news conference. Administration officials notified congressional officials in advance.

I honestly don’t know what difference it will make in the prosecution of the War, but I think the political message is obvious — i.e., Pres. Bush is sacrificing Rumsfeld as a peace offering to the victorious Democrats. Of course, Gates will have to be confirmed by the Senate, and I have no reason to suspect that will go smoothly. If anything, it seems like giving the newly minted Democrat majority the say-so with respect to a (the?) key figure in the War in Iraq is, in effect, punting them the ball and trusting in your defense. If the Democrats really want to cut and run, they are being handed a golden opportunity to do so.

Technorati Tags: Rumsfeld, War in Iraq, War on Terror, Democratic majority, Senate confirmation hearings, Robert Gates

7 Comments »

When I decided to start writing about rock lyrics, I promised myself I wasn’t going to talk about the Beatles or Bob Dylan, because forests have already been harvested to provide the paper for musings on their lyrics, and I don’t really have anything further to add. At least not without breaking out some Marxist/feminist/Lacanian theory, and nobody wants that. (”Everybody run! I’ve got a Derrida and I’m not afraid to use it.”) But I’m going to break my rule, just a little, because a Beatles lyric that is both petite and grand (and that likes to think it’s full of great wisdom and import, and maybe it is after all) provides a nice jumping-off point for some sort-of related topics.

The lyric, “And in the end / The love you take / Is equal to the love you make” is from “The End,” which fittingly completes the Beatles’ final album Abbey Road. If you imagine the entirety of The Beatles’ work as one great piece of art, a giant gift to the world, then “The End” is a big red bow on that present. As endings to works of high modernist pop go, it hardly rises to the level of a Gatsby-esque “boats against the current” finale, and perhaps bears a whiff of Hallmark sentimentality, but as a simple evocation of a moral truth, it works.

Whether or not that claim is actually true seems less important than actually wanting it to be true, which has the happy real-world effect of making its truth-value more real. If everybody lives as if McCartney’s claim is true, then it is. (Game theorists, chime in with “prisoner’s dilemma” commentary now.) And maybe it is anyway; after all, we are talking about love here, not power. The Beatles were on this case early in their career, observing that money can’t buy it (love, that is; apparently money can buy other things, which must be why they were not reluctant to accumulate it). In any case, I find it amusing that decades passed before someone asked Sir Paul if the lyric from “The End” was true, and even more amusing that the questioner was Chris Farley, in his clumsiest and most innocent persona. (more…)

No Comments »

Well I feel special. I received a warm thank you from Hillary Clinton in an email with the subject line: “This is your victory.”

From : Hillary Rodham Clinton
Reply-To : [email protected]
Sent : Wednesday, November 8, 2006 11:09 AM
To : [email protected]
Subject : This is your victory

Dear Friend,

I want to thank you for all the wonderful efforts you made to bring me and so many other Democrats to victory on Election Day. I am so grateful to the people of New York for their support and confidence. And I know this would not have been possible without the strong commitment of my supporters online.

Today I’m celebrating not just my victory, but victories for other Democrats in New York and all over the country. Americans chose a new direction for the nation when they elected a Democratic majority in the House and quite possibly the Senate, and now I’m looking forward to working with my colleagues in Congress to get those changes underway. (more…)

No Comments »

Democrats win the House for the first time in twelve years, and in a surprise to many, quite possibly the Senate as well. So congratulations to the Democrats. Please govern well.

How did my predictions do? Not so good.

I called the Santorum vs. Casey race, but that was an easy one, and there does not appear to be any litigation as I had predicted. So call that a half-win. It appears that Jim Webb will emerge as the victor in Virginia provided that a recount does not change anything, and that uncounted absentee ballots break for Webb in roughly the same proportion as the regular vote. I’ll call this one a win, giving me 1.5 correct.

Now for the “Blew it Big” section. (more…)

1 Comment »

I have no oracle, I can’t see the future, I am privy to absolutely no inside information, and I have zero qualifications for assessing the validity and worth of any polls. So, naturally, I am the perfect candidate to make the following predictions (all links to RCP):

SENATE RACES

Allen vs. Webb (VA) – This is my home state, and the victor will be my Senator for the next six years. I predict a narrow loss for Allen who ran a truly awful campaign, and I think that people in Virginia understand that Webb is really a Republican anyway. I’m calling this one for Webb, 51-49. That being said, I do think there will be some sort of lawsuit that hampers the ultimate outcome of this race. (more…)

2 Comments »

I’ve been reading quite a bit lately (big surprise, I know). In addition to re-reading TME mentioned below, I’ve also been reading a much more pop history type book (although a pretty darn good one), Team of Rivals : The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln by Doris Kearns Goodwin. Although a bit light on sources, footnotes, etc., it’s very well researched for a general interest type of history. ToR reminds us of the seemingly lost art of statesmanship and the brilliance of often underrated and villified President Abraham Lincoln. It’s quite an ironic read when you consider the utter imbeciles and hacks that will be elected come the morn. I’m not sure what happened between 1860 and 2006 to have put America so badly off track in terms of leadership and forward progress, but this is definitely a great primer on the glory days of old and perhaps a blueprint for aspiring young up-and-coming statesmen and stateswomen. If nothing else, read it to avoid being one of Jay Leno’s “Jaywalkers.”

No Comments »

I’m not really one to do book reviews. Frankly, I’m considered by colleagues to be overly critical. Almost every biography I’ve been asked to review I’ve rejected as shameless hagiography; every theology or comparative religious work incorrectly formatted for the target market (do not discuss the differences between the existentialist theories of Paul Tillich and Soren Kierkegaard or St. Boniface’s Frisian sermons or the nature of Elisha ben Abuyah’s heresy in a book targeted at the general interest market). Every now and then, however, I find a solid work which balances points of view, academic v. popular history, and provides highly detailed source material. I’ve recently been rereading one of the better works on Middle Eastern (a very broad term as in this case it includes SE Europe, southern Russia, North Africa, and Spain) history. Currently in its sixth edition, The Middle East : A History by Sydney Nettleton Fisher (and updated by William Ochsenwald) is one of those rare books that really makes you want to read and re-read it time and time again. Originally published in 1959 and updated by Professor Fisher until his death in 1987, TME is, for the most part, a history of Islam and its various dynasties and empires. The late professor gives an excellent review of the founding of Islam and its early players, plus overlooked information on the roots of Islamic sectarianism. Later, he explains the critical history of the rise and fall of the Ottoman and Safavid Empires, including the much ignored role of the Qizilbash, the Uzbegs, the Kurds, and the Azerbaijanis. The late professor, like all of the best scholars, does not guide the reader to any particular conclusions or judgements. Any biases that he may have possessed are not visible in this work. He merely relates the facts, devoid of editorial analysis, pre-judgement, or strawman arguments. This is the kind of scholarly tradition that I’m afraid has died out in today’s highly politicized academic world. (more…)

No Comments »

If you had gone into a coma a couple of weeks ago, and were just awaking now, you would probably believe that the Democrats were the verge of a blow-out victory in the House races, and potential victory in the Senate races, all of which conclude tomorrow. The media has all but handed the elections to the Donkey Party, and the (other) cheering fans have been all too eager to accept the mantle of “Majority Party” once again after a twelve-year hiatus. But what if the assumptions of the “reality based’ community are wrong? Could the showboating of the left lead to a “Leon Lett Moment” for the Democrats on election day? (more…)

9 Comments »

Over at QandO, McQ has posted an interesting take on the old US is a paper tiger debate. While he makes some excellent points, I consider that the “paper tiger” issue misses the more important point about the American people as a whole. See my comments there (near the bottom) for more on my take on this issue.

No Comments »

I inveighed against the “Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change” earlier this week, and now its Bjorn Lomborg* (via Pajamas Media) who weighs in:

The report on climate change by Nicholas Stern and the U.K. government has sparked publicity and scary headlines around the world. Much attention has been devoted to Mr. Stern’s core argument that the price of inaction would be extraordinary and the cost of action modest.

Unfortunately, this claim falls apart when one actually reads the 700-page tome. Despite using many good references, the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change is selective and its conclusion flawed. Its fear-mongering arguments have been sensationalized, which is ultimately only likely to make the world worse off.

Lomborg goes on to point specific errors and grand-scale weighting of opinion in favor of the proposed taxes and governmental controls advocated by Sir Stern. As they say, read the whole thing.

* author of “The Skeptical Environmentalist”

Technorati Tags: Global Warming, Climate Change, Stern Review, junk science, Bjorn Lomborg, Skeptical Environmentalist

No Comments »

How the Democrats went from a candidate like Bill Clinton, a political powerhouse and quite possibly the best politician of the last sixty years, to John Kerry, a complete dud in terms of political acumen and media grace, will be a story pondered in political science classes for years to come. John Kerry is such a bad politician that he could actually lose races in which he isn’t even a candidate (A Democratic congressman told ABC News Tuesday, “I guess Kerry wasn’t content blowing 2004, now he wants to blow 2006, too.”)(via Insty).

The really sad thing is how Kerry is enabled by an increasingly irresponsible media: (more…)

14 Comments »

Although it looked as though John Kerry was going to win the race for “America’s Biggest Dolt” in a walk, a new contender just jumped out into lead in striking fashion:

Oscar winner Reese Witherspoon and “Flags of Our Fathers” star Ryan Phillippe are separating after more than seven years of marriage, their representatives said Monday.

[...]

“We are saddened to announce that Reese and Ryan have decided to formally separate,” their publicists said in a joint statement. “They remain committed to their family and we ask that you please respect their privacy and the safety of their children at this time.”

Witherspoon, 30, and Phillippe, 32, reportedly met at her 21st birthday party before working together on the 1999 film “Cruel Intentions.” They married in June of that year and have two children, 7-year-old daughter Ava and 3-year-old son Deacon.

[...]

TMZ quoted one unidentified source as saying the breakup was not triggered by any single event but rather by “cumulative” circumstances.

Those “cumulative” circumstances apparently have something to do with a certain Aussie actress, a co-star of Phillipe’s:

Now comes word that the couple, who have two children, are calling it quits, amid rumors that Phillippe has found a new flame in a younger version of his wife, an Aussie actress named Abbie Cornish.

The reports in such reputable rags as US Weekly (ha) state that Witherspoon found saucy e-mails from the little honey on Phillippe’s BlackBerry. Cornish’s rep refuted the claim, releasing a statement Tuesday saying, “It’s not true. They are co-stars and that is it.”

But the timing of these reports is curious, especially after reading our own entertainment guru Roger Friedman’s eyewitness account of a fight between Witherspoon and Phillippe at the premiere for “Flags of Our Fathers.”

While I don’t normally pay any attention to, nor take much interest in, the Hollywood relationship merry-go-round, but it just so happens that my wife and I were commenting recently on the fact that Reese and Ryan had seemed to buck the trend. They genuinely seemed like the fairy tale, happy couple (and I suppose they were, with an emphasis on “fairy tale”). The idea that anyone would leave America’s Sweetheart for a hussy down under just struck me as absurd. And, indeed, it may not be true, but after 7 years, and two kids, wouldn’t you think that he’d try to stick it out?

Anyway, it is what it is. I guess, in Hollywood at least, sometimes having it all just isn’t enough.

2 Comments »