WSJ.com - Round Figures

WSJ.com - Round Figures:

"Earlier this year the House of Representatives passed the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act, which would shield food vendors from civil claims premised on weight gain. Like a lot of other tort reform legislation, however, Senate Democrats blocked it. Perhaps the bill will meet a different fate next year. We hope so, because allowing trial lawyers to exploit the obesity epidemic -- and encouraging Americans to blame their dietary excesses on someone else -- isn't going to make anyone healthier."

What a sad commentary that we need our Representatives to actually attempt to pass laws that protect us from ourselves. I don't mean keeping us from eating too much and getting fat, I mean blaming others and suing them for something we did to ourselves. Shame on us!

Red Cross Finds Detainee Abuse in Guantanamo - No kidding!

It should be pretty clear in this NYT's story, that the International Committee of the Red Cross has an agenda that supports ALL prisoner rights and gives little credence to the efforts by those that hold prisoners in any positive terms. I believe that the ICRC would find abuse if the US gave each detainee their own home, brought their families over, and never spoke with them except to ask if there was anything else they needed to make their stay more comfortable:

"Ms. Megevand-Roggo, the committee's delegate-general for Europe and the Americas, acknowledged that the issue of confidentiality was a chronic and vexing one for the organization. 'Many people do not understand why we have these bilateral agreements about confidentiality,' she said. 'People are led to believe that we are a fig leaf or worse, that we are complicit with the detaining authorities.'

She added, 'It's a daily dilemma for us to put in the balance the positive effects our visits have for detainees against the confidentiality.'"

UPDATE: This editorial from the WSJ describes the evolution of the ICRC and the current state of their political agenda quite nicely.

Budget Trap - Really?

This WSJ.com op-ed piece discusses the current budget process and run-away spending practices of Congress. In it, they attempt to defend the Republicans by pointing out changes made by the then-majority Democrats under the Nixon administration and used successfully during the Reagan years. It isn't until the close of the editorial that they call for new changes. The answer is not to use the earlier changes as an excuse, but to change the process again now that the Republicans control both houses. After all, a Republican is no different than a Democrat if government over-spends and over-reaches. They are all, just politicians - not that that's a surprise:

"Democrats have also learned to skewer Republicans for their individual 'earmarks,' which by one account total 18,000 this year and add up to $22 billion. These pork-barrel classics -- e.g., $1 million for a 'Wild American Shrimp Initiative' -- obscure the larger truth that this year's spending bill is actually the first in years to show some restraint. Domestic non-defense
discretionary spending will rise by less than 2% in Fiscal Year 2005. But what many voters will remember instead is that Republican incumbents are as spendthrift as Democratic incumbents.

A solution here is for Republicans to change the current budget rules, which were passed by Democrats in 1974 over a Watergate-weakened President Nixon. Those rules were deliberately designed to obscure the budget process to make it easier to spend, and to reduce Presidential leverage over spending decisions. Republicans denounced them throughout the 1980s, but now they embrace them as tools of incumbent protection."

The knife's message - The Washington Times: Commentary

This commentary makes some strong points. They aren't points that the politically correct wish to hear or discuss. Radicalism - especially that based on religious belief - is dangerous. In today's world, the most radical - and therefore dangerous - are Muslims. It's just a fact:

"It is perfectly obvious to all but the most obtuse observer, which of course includes the editorial board of the New York Times, that an excess of tolerance is what got the Netherlands and the rest of Europe into this mess in the first place. The Netherlands has leaned over backward to welcome immigrants from the former Dutch colony of Indonesia - to the point where a majority of children under age 14 in the four largest Dutch cities are Muslims. Muslims now comprise 6 percent of the population, but their numbers are surging through large families and continued immigration (about 30,000 yearly).

Some 300,000 of the 1 million Muslims in the Netherlands fervently support the radical imams and mosques that preach jihad against the Jews, the West and all infidels. The Dutch have prided themselves on tolerating everything from legal prostitution, to euthanasia, to freely available marijuana and other drugs. But in tolerating the intolerant Muslims, they have swallowed a serpent. "

There are Christian radicals as well. The fundamentalists who, in recent years bombed abortion clinics in the "name of God", are as guilty as any when it comes to crimes against the general population. Those crimes, however, pale in comparison in terms of numbers and deaths.

All Muslims, as all Christians, are not radical. The problem is, the majority of Muslims are not condemning - at least publicly - the actions of the radicals. This was, and is not, the case with the Christians. Those that committed the violent attacks on the abortion clinics were loudly criticized by fellow Christians and others. The question for the majority of Muslims is, "Where's the outrage?"

Required reading?

While ScrappleFace is parody, it sure makes more sense than reality sometimes:

"'If we actually read these bills, then we would know the specifics about billions of dollars of pork barrel projects for all of our districts,' she said. 'And of course some unnamed Congressman would start leaking this to the media and, before you know it, Americans would start believing that the federal budget is just an elaborate scheme to defraud taxpayers of their hard-earned money in order to fund local projects that local citizens have already decided aren't worth the money. Our whole system of power...or rather, of democracy, would collapse.'"

Maybe our own Senator, Russ Feingold, could be a co-sponsor. He continually said he read the entire Patriot Act, so I'm sure he reads every bill. Right?

Lincoln's Thanksgiving Proclamation

Lincoln's Thanksgiving Proclamation:

"No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. "

Wow, read the whole thing and imagine the furor from the Church & State separatists if Bush gave this proclamation today!

Happy Thanksgiving to all.

Values - we know them when we see them

Many Who Voted for 'Values' Still Like Their Television Sin:

"'Desperate Housewives' on ABC is the big new hit of the television season, ranked second over all in the country, behind only 'C.S.I.' on CBS. This satire of suburbia and modern relationships features, among other morally challenged characters, a married woman in her 30's having an affair with a high-school-age gardener, and has prompted several advertisers, including Lowe's, to pull their advertisements.

In the greater Atlanta market, reaching more than two million households, 'Desperate Housewives' is the top-rated show. Nearly 58 percent of the voters in those counties voted for President Bush. "

It seems like every armchair psychologist and political pundit is out there trying to explain the 'values' issue in America. How can Bush voters say they voted on values one day, and then watch "Desperate Housewives" the next day? Isn't that hypocritical? Ummm, no.

Not everyone who feels that values are being attacked in this country are puritanical. As with most things, so-called experts tend to over analyze based on observations of the fringes rather than the fabric. Most of my friends, family and acquaintances are fairly well grounded. We tend to see the same boundaries and know when they are crossed - without being told by an expert.

"Desperate Housewives" is just the latest 'over analyzed' example. For the majority of us out here in normal-land, we get it. The show actually has some level of freshness. The plot lines - for the most part - are interesting and the writing is comparatively good. The problem that most of us have isn't the content of the show, as much as the when and how it is promoted. In addition, the time slot is a problem for some in the Midwest since it airs at 8:00pm - still a time for some children to be awake.

The show follows another that is very family-friendly: "Extreme Makeover-Home Edition." Families can watch the makeover show very comfortably with kids of any age. The underlying messages of helping your neighbor and volunteering your time are good 'values' that appeal to many. Then, just when you're waiting for the conclusion, the promo's start for "Housewives". And of course, the promo's aren't the witty dialogue or the subtle sub-plots of who the mysterious neighbor really is, it is one of them falling into bed with the underage gardener or another exposing herself in lingerie and fur. Add to this, the insulting promo prior to a football game, and you start to see why we are getting tired of messengers. [Here's something else - the show could probably be pretty good with NO sex.]

As an adult, I have no problem with other adults making their own decisions as to what they do or don't watch. As a parent, and someone who would rather continue to choose what I watch, I am appalled by the content of ads and promo's thrown in our faces. I understand advertising and marketing. I realize that to make more money, either more people have to buy your product or you have to raise your prices. [I may address the pulling of ads facet of the story in a later post]

The 'easy' answer, we're told, is turn off the television. The easy question right back is, "Why should we have to?" There are still many entertaining programs on television - not to mention the educational ones. In addition, even the programs being analyzed - "Housewives", "CSI", etc. - have entertainment value for many, and if people want to watch them, they should be able to. The difficulty is keeping children from being exposed to things that parents decide are inappropriate. The V-chip is all but useless. It may keep most programs from being viewed, but does nothing for promo's. Besides, almost any kid between 5 and up can de-program the thing if they want.

Perhaps more sophisticated folks in the blue recesses of this country see nothing wrong with this exposure. Maybe they believe that kids should mature more quickly. Learn the ropes of the real world as soon as possible. That's their choice, if they so desire. It just shouldn't be thrust upon the rest of us if we choose to let kids be kids.

The Polar Express

My wife and I took the kids (11, 9 and 6) to The Polar Express yesterday. The book is one of our favorite Christmas stories and the film did not disappoint anyone in our family. This despite the fact that I had read a number of reviews that were very unflattering (see below) and heard some of the story line - musical numbers, in Polar Express?

It was hard to imagine taking a 32 page children's book - mostly filled with illustration - and turning it into a full length feature that wouldn't travel too far from the authors theme. The movie, with the exception of the hobo and the 'ticket imagery', stayed pretty close.

Most of the negative reviews at Rottentomatoes address the 'lifeless' characters and the technology details. I find that somewhat ironic, because the I think the artwork of the movie came very close to the illustration in the book. The characters in the book always seemed 'lifeless' and surreal. Maybe like in a dream - not reality? In addition, the 'darkness' of the North Pole and other images - including the 'theme-park roller coaster' the film adds, presents the message of the story: The struggle between 'believing' and not.

One of the oddest reviews is the NYT's review. This excerpt is way over the top:

It's likely, I imagine, that most moviegoers will be more concerned by the eerie listlessness of those characters' faces and the grim vision of Santa Claus's North Pole compound, with interiors that look like a munitions factory and facades that seem conceived along the same oppressive lines as Coketown, the red-brick town of "machinery and tall chimneys" in Dickens's "Hard Times." Tots surely won't recognize that Santa's big entrance in front of the throngs of frenzied elves and awe-struck children directly evokes, however unconsciously, one of Hitler's Nuremberg rally entrances in Leni Riefenstahl's "Triumph of the Will." But their parents may marvel that when Santa's big red sack of toys is hoisted from factory floor to sleigh it resembles nothing so much as an airborne scrotum.

'Munitions factories', 'Hitler's Nuremberg' from Riefenstahl and 'scrotums'? This guy needs to get a grip. He must have had a very troubling childhood! If he expresses the east-coast intelligentsia point of view, there really are two Americas!

Later in the review, he suggests that an 8 year old (age of the boy in the story) is a little old to be 'pinning his hopes' on Santa. As a 43 year old, I take offense to that statement. My oldest kids are starting to make the transition from believing in Santa, to - what I think is even better - believing in the spirit of Santa. Maybe the world would be a little better place if we all lightened up, looked for the good in others instead of the bad, and acknowledged that sometimes, it's okay to BELIEVE!

UPDATE: I apologize to the NYTs reviewer. She is a woman, not a man. She is still wrong in her opinion of the movie, but I was incorrect when I suggested "he get a grip" and that "he must have had a troubling childhood". Please replace he with she!
Also, while the readers of the Times have a more favorable opinion of the movie and by and large feel the same spirit of the movie as I, there are still a few who obsess on the fact that the animation is lifeless and doesn't stand up to Gollum in LOTR. Let me say this: It's not suppose to!

Is this a surprise to anyone?

Can anyone really claim the melee in the NBA game over the weekend is a surprise? I think the surprise is that it didn't happen sooner. In fact, incidents have happened sooner - just not to this level. That's the way things happen in a culture. Small events (and this is still a small event in the big picture) happen and are rationalized and swept under the rug. Remember the 'fans' that attacked the umpire in a Chicago baseball game and the pitcher who threw the chair into the stands this summer?

We are not alone in the US. European football (soccer) has been dealing with hooligans for years. Melees' between fans and players - while not common - are certainly not rare. Also, it's not just professional sports or between fans and athletes. How many stories do you hear about the parents at high school or club events getting into fights in the stands?

The rationalization takes many forms. From the fans, "We paid good money for these seats so we can say and do almost anything we want!" to the players who have been treated like gods for most of their lives and have been never held responsible for much of anything. Add to the fact that they are younger and younger (drafted out of high school), is it any wonder the maturity level and basic responsibility is lacking?

For their part, the NBA benches 9 players in brawl has responded:

"'We have to do everything possible to redefine the covenant between players and fans - and fans and fans - and to make sure that we can play our games in a very welcoming and peaceful setting,' NBA commissioner David Stern said during a news conference Sunday afternoon at Madison Square Garden in New York.

'We'll do whatever is necessary to ensure that we exemplify the best of sports and not the worst. . . ."

Which is only a start. The real measure will be what else they do "to ensure that we exemplify the best of sports and not the worst. . . " and what other leagues learn from this experience. It will also be important for the rest of us to take responsibility. We didn't get to this point overnight. We've watched and allowed fellow 'fans' to push the limits more and more - because we've been intimidated, we chose not to get involved, or we buy into the 'rights' of individuals to express themselves. It's time to get over it.

Yeah. This is a good idea.

Fury over JFK assassin game:

"CYBER assassins can put themselves in Lee Harvey Oswald's shoes and attempt to kill John F. Kennedy in a global internet competition, with $128,000 going to the winner."

Does the winner then get to be shot by the 'winner' of the Jack Ruby Lottery?

I'm sure somewhere, some enlightened individual can provide brilliant insight into why this is OK.

Comments from the Left XVII

This article in the NY Observer was forwarded by a niece with the comment "for those of us in the middle". I think it does a good job of defining the 'middle' on a number of issues. I think if the Republican party moves too far to the right (too many on the left already scream that it has), especially toward evangelical causes, there will be letters from Republicans that look a lot like this Democrat's:

"Lest this sound like gloating, I confess to having a pronoun problem here, and will hereby switch from 'you' to 'we.' I voted for John Kerry. As a liberal separation-of-church-and-state type, I don't like the idea of a President who owes his political life to a conservative religious base. I can't fathom George Bush's policies on the economy and the environment. As for Iraq, while I find nothing of genius in the Democrats' prescriptions at this point, I find astonishing the idea that the administration's performance there is, on balance, something to reward rather than something to punish.

Curiously, then, it is not the party I voted against that is driving me nuts right now. It is the party I voted for. It's the same feeling that I got about the Democrats after 2000: I agree with them, but I can't stand them, in the exact same way I can't stand anyone who would rather whine than shine."'

Humans Ran Into Evolution

Yeah. Every day I'm on that damn treadmill, I think to myself, "I've evolved to this!":

"But new research suggests that developing the ability to run - especially long distances -- was actually more of an instrumental step in the evolution of humans. "

If we 'evolved' through running, why did we domesticate animals to ride and pull our wagons - which we rode in? Why did we invent the bicycle, the motorcycle, the car and the airplane? And what about the escalator and the elevator? Apparently our ancestors would be pretty disappointed in us, huh?

Well, I guess we invented the treadmill too - and without it, I'd just be a lump of clay in the evolution of man I guess.

This is too good! Bravo, good chaps!

OpinionJournal - Taste:

INSULT ART: Can anything top a British snub? Consider the reception planned for French President Jacques Chirac on his arrival yesterday in London: After alighting at Waterloo station, the Toronto Globe and Mail tittered earlier this week, Mr. Chirac was to watch 'Les Miserables,' the 'musical adaptation of the Victor Hugo novel so disliked by French elites.' The venue? Windsor Castle's Waterloo Chamber, 'specially built by King George IV as a secular shrine to the defeat of the French, where large portraits of the Duke of Wellington and other British victors will glare down at the French President.' "

How good is that college - really?

In a WSJ article, Hidden Knowledge, college rankings are taken to task. Not only doe the author suggest that higher education may be passing the buck:

"For instance, a majority of students spend less time studying than their teachers say they should, and 44% reported that they crack the books no more than 10 hours a week. But their grades aren't suffering: More than 80% earn mostly A's or B's. (Looks like grade inflation is alive and well.)"

But later in the article, he points out that the study cited - the NSSE - doesn't list results by college. Wouldn't want to give parents or students anything substantial on which to base their decision, now would we?

Actually, avoiding certain cold facts is the name of the entire game. Think about it: If colleges wanted us to make fully informed choices, they wouldn't just publish data on how their freshman class did in high school. They'd also tell us how seniors fare as they leave, on tests for law school, for instance, or in getting jobs. Until that time comes, one can only hope that a survey like Nessie helps colleges and universities make improvements on the sly.

We are not the "same as terrorists"

Excerpt from an article in Slate via Instapundit:

"Yet it is the differences between these two killings that reveal the most important truths about the Marine shooting in Fallujah. Hassan was, in every sense of the word, a noncombatant. She worked for more than 20 years to help Iraqis obtain basic necessities: food, running water, medical care, electricity, and education. The Iraqi insurgents kidnapped her and murdered her in order to terrorize the Iraqi population and the aid workers trying to help them.

By contrast, the Marines entered a building in Fallujah and found several men who, until moments before, had been enemy insurgents engaged in mortal combat. A hidden grenade would have changed everything, and the Marine would have been lauded. As it turned out, the Iraqi was entitled to mercy, but Hassan was truly innocent. There is no legitimate moral equivalence between a soldier asking for quarter and a noncombatant like Hassan."

In addition, besides the motives of the two killings, the response and ultimate fate of the people responsible will be decidedly different. The Marine will face potential charges and discipline if found in violation of military and international law by his own commanders while the people who carried out the execution of Ms. Hassan will be rewarded by their 'commanders'. The only justice that will come to them is when the Marines track them down and kill them. If that means they are shot like their commrade, 'unarmed' on the floor of their hideout after a firefight, so be it.

Democrat warns on CIA changes

Once again, the Democrats have a problem with results. While they were/are very comfortable making claims that the intelligence agency was failing and in need of reform, as soon as that reform actually started, they got concerned. Again, it's easier to maintain problems and keep them in the open for discussion and policy statements - in fact, I'll argue that it's a political strategy. Getting your face on the Sunday morning news programs and the prime-time cable shows, demonstrates to your constituency that you're on top of things. You're in the fray. For a party so proud of it's progressive roots, they sure like to keep things the same.

If problems go away, what would we have to talk about? How would we earn our keep?

I'm not saying that what Goss is doing at the CIA will solve all the problems. In addition, it may create new ones. But, it may not. It most likely will improve things. And it will be better than maintaining the status quo.

This excerpt from an e-mail, among other things, has Sen. Feinstein all upset:

"''We do not identify with, support, or champion opposition to the administration or its policies. We provide the intelligence as we see it -- and let the facts alone speak to the policy maker.'"

In other words, do your job and stop looking for the get-rich book deal.

Mark this date: Peace in Sudan?

I'm posting this as a reminder. It will be very interesting to see if this 'peace accord' comes to fruition. FromReuters:

"Sudan's government and southern rebels vowed on Friday to end Africa's longest civil war by Dec. 31, signing a pledge in front of 15 U.N. Security Council envoys who flew in from New York to demand the fighting stop."

First, there's no guarantee that when the UNSC gets back on their jet to scamper back to New York, the two parties will even complete the pledge to end fighting by December 31. The fighting has been going on for 21 years.

Second, IF this should happen to work, why did the UNSC wait so long to take the junket and swoosh in to be the hero? As mentioned, the fighting has been going on for 21 years. There have been numerous, public accounts of the atrocities for the last several months. I'm sure that some intelligence agency has brought this to the UN's attention long before the general public was fully made aware. Have the casualties (in the millions) reached a point where the UN feels that there aren't enough people left to carry on the fight, so the chance for success is greater?

I'm not holding my breath.

The continued hypocrisy of the left

Bad-Mouthing the President (directly from Best of the Web)
USA Today is trying to start a kerfuffle by accusing President Bush of being too affectionate toward some of his cabinet appointees:

Bush has bussed two women in public in the past two days. First, Condoleezza Rice, whom he kissed on the cheek twice when he nominated her for secretary of State on Tuesday. He went even further with Margaret Spellings, whom he smacked on the lips when he nominated her as secretary of Education on Wednesday. . . .

Risky business, says Amy Oppenheimer, a California business consultant on workplace harassment issues. Powerful men kissing their subordinates in public can be misconstrued by the kissee or people watching the kiss.

And there's the whole male-female thing, too: Bush didn't kiss his close pal Alberto Gonzales when he nominated him for attorney general last week.

"Kissing is social behavior, not professional behavior, and people have different boundaries about it," says Oppenheimer. "The only person who would know if (a woman is) uncomfortable with it is her--and why would she say anything if she weren't?"

We wondered if Oppenheimer had anything to say about Bill Clinton's behavior toward his female subordinates, and we weren't disappointed. In 1998, when Judge Susan Wright dismissed Paula Jones's sexual-harassment lawsuit, she was quoted in the Houston Chronicle:

Attorney Amy Oppenheimer, an expert on sexual harassment lawsuits, said no one should be shocked by Wright's decision. "It's not surprising that the court would find a one-time incident that was obnoxious and inappropriate wasn't enough to deprive her of her constitutional rights even if it could be proven," Oppenheimer said.

Of course, Clinton didn't actually kiss Jones; he just (allegedly) ordered her to "kiss it." On the other hand, when Kathleen Willey accused Clinton of groping her and the White House tried to discredit her by releasing friendly letters she'd subsequently written to him, Oppenheimer seemed to side with Willey in an interview with the Los Angeles Times:

"On the one hand, she wants to make it clear that she finds the behavior unacceptable," said Amy Oppenheimer, an attorney in Berkeley, Calif., who trains employers and employees and testifies as an expert in sexual harassment cases. "But on the other hand, she needs to make it clear that she's not going to betray him, she's not going to cut off the relationship, and she still wants the advantages of knowing him.

"I think that's a really understandable reaction."

Don't underestimate a good education

Apparently Bill Clinton learned something while studying in Russia during his formative years:

"Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge where there is no river."

~Nikita Khrushchev

"He has also said that he wanted it built on the bridge to symbolize his philosophy of bridging differences, and that the building's modern design represented his philosophy of looking toward the future."

~Bill Clinton

The Power of the Internet

Those crafty internet marketers use abandoned campaign sites to draw traffic to their sometimes, less-than-flattering products. For those of us in Wisconsin, we have link in this story:

"Dozens of recent candidates have seen their dormant Web addresses snapped up by everyone from cybersquatters to purveyors of pornography. The new owners hope to capitalize on traffic still flowing to the sites, or are looking to resell the addresses -- possibly back to the candidates who abandoned them.

Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano's site for the 2002 election, gojanet.org, now advertises an herbal formula for penis enlargement. RayClatworthy.com, the erstwhile site of losing Delaware senatorial candidate Ray Clatworthy, features links for music by Stevie Ray Vaughan and books by Ray Bradbury. One of the strangest sites, Doyle2002.com, once promoted Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle but now intersperses advertising links like 'Madonna nude' and 'premium cigars' into the text of a children's story."

Monday Night Football

OK. Call me naive. Call me a prude. Call me over the hill and out of touch with the 'real' world. I understand that football is entertainment. I love football. It is, and has been, my favorite sport to watch for most of my life. But I enjoy football for football - not the 'entertainment' that has grown around it. I admit it. I don't get it.

Plenty of Blame to Go Around in Monday Night Meltdown:

"The league constantly talks about its so-called 'partnership' with its network and cable carriers. But with partners who keep trying to mix sex and football, perhaps the league ought to think about keeping a far more wary eye on the product. This is not about censorship, it's simply about good sense, which at least two of its 'partners' haven't seemed to demonstrate on a national stage within the last nine months. "

UN-OFF Scam Update

The plot thickens (or sickens):

"Congressional diggers have found that much more oil was smuggled out of Iraq from 1991 to 2003 than previously thought. They also report that Saddam pocketed some $2.1 billion more than anyone thought by buying imported goods at inflated prices. Saddam's Iraq signed deals to import rotting food and other damaged goods as if they were top quality; the vendors then kicked back much of the difference to the Iraqi government.

Oil for Food was designed to help feed poor Iraqis who were suffering under international sanctions."

The UN needs more than a facelift - it needs liposuction.

LILEKS: America is still the land of opportunity

LILEKS:The Bleat:

"Remarkable, but the best thing perhaps is that it's unremarkable: you walk into a hair salon, meet a stranger, and hear this tale by chance. Either she's unique, and this was a one-in-a-million story, or it's a fairly common example of the immigrant experience. How you answer that question depends on your view of the country, I suppose. Panglossian Polyanna that I am, I tend to think it says something good. Would you rather be dropped in America at 16 not knowing the lingo, or sent to Thailand alone in your teens unfamiliar with the local tongue? No question. I'm not saying this says EVERYTHING about America, but it explains why I am so instantly bored by those who insist that it really says nothing. By those who think the rest of the world has flaws, but we alone have sins. "

As always, read it all.

We are at War

There's been a decent amount of hand-wringing over this. I'm guessing that had this happened prior to the election, we'd have far more outrage:

The blacked out portion of the videotape, provided later to Associated Press Television News and other members of the network pool, showed the bullet striking the man in the upper body, possibly the head. His blood splatters on the wall behind him and his body goes limp.

Mr. Sites reported that a marine in the same unit had been killed just a day earlier when he tended to the booby-trapped dead body of an insurgent.

Interesting that the last line in the excerpt above [bold] was buried near the end of the article. Is it any wonder that the troops are uneasy and distrustful of the enemy? I don't defend murder or indiscriminate killings, but I also give the benefit of the doubt to our soldiers who are put in volatile situations with their lives on the lines at the hands of an enemy who has demonstrated that 'life' isn't their highest priority.

Perhaps it's telling how politics plays into war strategy. Had President Bush been assured that conducting the war would have been 'hands-off' in the campaign, we could have cleaned out Fallujah months ago and been in a much better situation in Iraq today.

UPDATE: From Althouse, here's more on the importance of Fallujah - from an Iraqi soldier's perspective - as well as more praise of what our soldiers are accomplishing.

Joe Klein: The Values Gap

This is one of the better "morals" analysis from the left:

"But they have also been enthralled by the most intolerant of their interest groups. The liberal hostility to funding faith-based social programs - which are provided mostly by poor black and Latino congregations who need the financial help - is a witlessly secularist reaction against some of the most successful antipoverty efforts in the U.S. The liberals' defense of abortion beyond the first trimester has no moral rationale unless the life of the mother is at risk.

Their full-throated embrace of freedom of speech ignores the social pollution caused by the arrant commercialization of the culture. If Democrats cannot concede even these points and show a real appreciation for the values of faith, they will have a hard time winning national elections anytime soon."

A big problem with the Democrats has been their insistence on government policy solving all that is wrong with the country and the world. It's as if they have no faith in the people despite the overwhelming evidence of success. Only the educated elite in Washington are capable of solving 'our' problems. This is what middle-America said no to. We still believe that the United States is a government "of the people, by the people" and we will not let it be taken by those who discard that principle.

McCarthyism Watch: The Progressive Magazine

Can we agree, regardless of the target, the act is deplorable? I think it terribly important to present both sides - at least now and then:

Anti-Bush sign lit on fire - from Progressive Magazine

Swastika burned into Madison family's lawn - from earlier post via JS Online

Unfortunately, for every example of "McCarthyism" the Progressive Magazine chooses to report, there is an equally disturbing example of tactics from the progressive left. I link to the Progressive in my blogroll for a couple of reasons: one, they are published in Madison, WI - my home state and the city where I graduated college; and two, I think it's important to read opinions from various perspectives.

Peterson verdict: Guilty

At least Scott Peterson won't have to spend the rest of his life tracking down the murderer of his wife and unborn child!

Our colleague and friend Andrew is moving on to a new venture. Returning to his roots in Iowa, he will be missed but not forgotten - especially when the Badgers defeat the Hawkeyes for their final "1-and-Oh" week! I'm sure Andy will keep in touch and we will do the same. Make sure you check in at his blog often. {by-the-way, it was nice to hit 'ignore' when "Hawkeyes" came up in the spell checker! Hah.}

Comments from the Left XVI

From WisOpinion Quotes of the Week:

"This is what it felt like three years ago, the day after 9/11."

--Cheese maker Willi Lehner, at the Wednesday Dane County Farmers' Market commenting on Madison's post-election hangover.

This provides little to comment on. Incredulous and shameful at the same time.

Comments from the Left XV

This letter to the editor at the NYTs is a piece of work:

To the Editor:
There is nothing utopian about the exurbs. They are without public space save the shopping mall parking lot, their people do not saunter, the landscape is uninspiring, neighborhoods are often gated, and there is no place to assemble for protest.

The exurbs are isolated from diversity, removed from the conversations of the world community and free from the sight of poverty, homelessness and class division.

Michael Oman-Reagan
New York,
Nov. 9, 2004

I always understood that a 'goal' of the enlightened left was to eliminate "poverty, homelessness, and class division." Not to have it available, for 'observation', so their own lives become validated? And, wouldn't Utopia be a place where there wouldn't be a need for a "place to assemble for protest"?

There is sooo much else to comment on within this letter, but I leave it to you.

Here's David Brooks original article: Take a Ride to Exurbia

The New York Times Editorial: The Bush Record on Civil Rights

The 'forest for the trees' analogy of this editorial is almost comical:

"The report, which is still available online, is a scathing 166-page assessment of an administration that has, at best, neglected core civil rights issues. It cites numerous examples of administration attempts to replace affirmative action with 'race neutral' alternatives, to focus on voter fraud rather than the more insidious problem of voter disenfranchisement and to recast taxpayers' support for religious institutions as a civil right for people of faith, rather than as a constitutional issue involving the separation of church and state. "

Again, the left is more concerned about the language and policy of government, rather than the actions and results. In the paragraph prior to above, there's this:

"...the apparent aim of the Bush administration is to break with long-established civil rights tactics and priorities. This question takes on a new urgency with the appointment of the White House counsel, Alberto Gonzales, as the next attorney general because he was deeply involved in the formulation of administration policy on these issues in the first term."

Forgive me, but isn't Alberto Gonzales an Hispanic. In fact, if approved, he would become the first Hispanic, Attorney General in US history! Was Colin Powell not the first African-American Secretary of State. And what about Condoleezza Rice, Linda Chavez, Norm Mineta, et al?

Are these appointments because George Bush wishes to have an affirmative action cabinet? Or is it because he really sees things as race neutral (i.e. equality) and selects the best candidates he can?

Politician admits to being a Politician

WisPolitics.com:

"'That's wrong, that's a lie on my part,' she said."

Winners and Losers

Daniel Henninger, in today's WSJ.com discusses the fallout of this year's election on one of the traditional 'winners' in politics - "the media":

"Large media institutions, such as CBS or the New York Times, have been regarded as nothing if not authoritative. In the Information Age, authority is a priceless franchise. But it is this franchise that Big Media, incredibly, has just thrown away. It did so by choosing to go into overt opposition to one party's candidate, a sitting president. It stooped to conquer."

He goes on to suggest - and I agree - that in the long run, this is a bad thing for the national conversation:

"In fact, it's too bad this abdication has occurred just as political opinions have become overheated by the kind of electronic technology deployed in the 2004 election. We really could use some neutral ground, a space one could enter without having to suspect that "what we know" about X or Y was being manipulated. The problem with being spun day after day by newspapers or newscasts is that it gets tiresome, no matter your politics. You end up having to Google every subject in the news (Guantanamo, gay marriage statutes, Tora Bora, the Patriot Act) to find out what's been left out or buried at the bottom."

In his conclusion, he offers a suggestion that may make sense and provide an alternative to formerly 'neutral' media reporting:

"Here's a low-tech solution to a high-tech problem. Why don't we finally institute an American version of the parliamentary question period common around the U.K.? If the likes of Messrs. Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Powell, Snow, Cheney and Bush had to appear before the House in this tightly regulated question-and-answer format, broadcast on C-Span, surely the public over time would acquire a clearer sense of which ideas are competing for their support and vote. Let's get to them, before they get to us."

My only disagreement with Mr. Henninger is that the public distrust of the media has been present far longer than he suggests. I think the advent of new technology has finally made it possible for the disgruntled to voice this distrust to a larger audience than their family, friends and colleagues.

Election day tire-slashing update

Police arrest ex-mayor's and newly-elected Congress woman's sons and in tire-slashing:

"Pratt and Sowande Ajumoke Omokunde, 25, the son of U.S. Rep.-elect Gwen Moore, are among six men who have been arrested and released. No charges have been filed. The district attorney's office said the case remains under review.

Federal authorities launched their own investigation this week. FBI agents are to interview potential witnesses who were in Wisconsin for the election but have returned to their home states. There were hundreds of out-of-state paid and volunteer staffers in Wisconsin for the election."

Proposal increases fees for vehicles in WI

Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle is proposing an increase in vehicle registration and licensing fees. The argument used is an old one. "Even with the $15 increase (from $55 to $70), residents in Wisconsin still pay less than in neighboring states." And that's suppose to make us feel good?

Vehicle fees are but a small component of the taxes and fees we pay to support a state government that has done little or nothing to control it's spending. The $15 increase amounts to a 27% increase. When combined with the $10 increase just one short year ago (October 2003), we're talking about a total increase of 55% in two years! With an average annual inflation rate below 3%, one might wonder why costs have risen so drastically? Other than a $150,000 'mistake' alluded to in the article, there is no mention of the reasons for this increase. Go figure!:

"'I hope we can do it for somewhat less' than what the department proposes, 'but we have to look ultimately at what the dollars are and what the real needs are,' Doyle said Thursday."

Gunfire Greets Arafat's Coffin Upon Arrival in Ramallah

Apparently some people STILL aren't convinced he's dead!

The Bill of Rights: Amendment I

The Bill of Rights:

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I am not a lawyer, nor a legal scholar. The above is the text of the first amendment in the Bill of Rights from the US Constitution. This is the famous 'separation of church and state' amendment.

As you can plainly see, the amendment does not contain the words "separation of church and state".

My interpretation is that the framers of the Constitution wanted to make sure that the government of the United States did not advocate any single religion, as Great Britain at the time advocated the Church of England. Nor did the framers wish the US to be a theocracy based on any single religion.

I don't believe, however, that this amendment suggests that participation in government required leaving your beliefs on the doorstep (see Article VI). The fact that some advocate all separation, contradicts the second half of the religion standard written in the amendment: "...shall make no law... prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

For further reading, you can start here.

Blue 'people' insight at Althouse

Ann Althouse asks some pretty damning questions of celebrities who said they'd leave the country if Bush won. Once again, facts and rational thought are lost on these people.

Generosity Index 2003

This report adds some insight into the make-up of Red and Blue states. The highest ranking Blue state is New York (25th). That means 24 Red states have a higher 'Generosity' ranking than New York - including number one - Mississippi. I'm a little ashamed of where we in Wisconsin fall (46th). Of course, we are a Blue state.

The New York Times Obituary: Yasir Arafat

The New York Times Obituary: Yasir Arafat, Father and Leader of Palestinian Nationalism, Is Dead {a regular George Washington, he was!}:

"No other individual so embodied the Palestinians' plight: their dispersal, their statelessness, their hunger for a return to a homeland lost to Israel. Mr. Arafat was once seen as a romantic hero and praised as a statesman, but his luster and reputation faded over time. A brilliant navigator of political currents in opposition, once in power he proved more tactician than strategist, and a leader who rejected crucial opportunities to achieve his declared goal."

Declared goal? You mean the complete destruction of Israel and the elimination of all Jews on the planet?

"In the 1960's, he pioneered what became known as "television terrorism" - air piracy and innovative forms of mayhem staged for maximum propaganda value. Among the more startling deeds he ordered was the kidnapping that led to the massacre of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. In 1986, a group linked to Mr. Arafat but apparently acting independently seized the Achille Lauro cruise ship and threw overboard an elderly American Jew in a wheelchair."

Does changing the names: "air piracy" = hijacking; "innovative forms of mayhem" = suicide bombers; make the acts less revolting? Apparently they are to be admired. So says Judith Miller and the New York Times. After all, they refer to these deeds as "pioneered". I always thought of pioneers in a positive, optimistic light as in: open up an area or prepare a way; "She pioneered a graduate program for women students". Perhaps I need to adjust my definition.

In addition, Arafat only ordered the "kidnapping" of Israeli athletes? The fact that it "led" to the massacre of said athletes is not directly attributed to his order? Neither is the group "linked" to, but "apparently acting independently", that threw Leon Klinghoffer, overboard? Oh, by the way, the "obituary" fails to include the fact that they shot him first, in front of his wife!

Excuse the overuse, and improper use, of question marks, but I really do have a lot of questions - about all of this! And these comments are only based on the first six paragraphs of a seven page (online) lovefest!

UPDATE: The NRO is reporting that the UN and Kofi Annan, have ordered their flags flown at half mast. One can only imagine the ceremony they would have had for Hitler, Lenin, and Stalin? Or what they will have when Saddam and Osama are finally brought to justice!

Gerrymandering - the other election fraud!

Follow this link through Instapundit's site to David Broder's article discussing the impact partisan gerrymandering is having on democracy. Tom Delay's tactics in Texas are not unique to him or the Republicans, but rather than allowing a "wink-wink", tit-for-tat campaign to 'divide up the country', we the people, should call for an end to this practice. Regardless of which side of the aisle you're on!

The political genius of George W. Bush

Hat tip to Andy for this CNN analysis of W's political abilities:

"Instead of just crediting his family name or Rove, Bush's extraordinary political success is probably owed to at least five key things: (1) great political fundamentals, including an ability and willingness to raise large sums of money; (2) an ability to propose a clear, coherent and easily understandable policy agenda (e.g., 'compassionate conservatism'); (3) an ability to attract, manage and retain a strong team of advisers (e.g., Rove, Ken Mehlman, Ed Gillespie, Karen Hughes, Matthew Dowd and others); (4) a willingness to go for the jugular -- repeatedly and without remorse (e.g., the 'flip-flopper' label, gay marriage issue, South Carolina primary in 2000); and perhaps most important (5) a willingness to take a risk repeatedly (e.g., targeting Democratic Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle for defeat, offering a Social Security overhaul plan proposal, relying and counting on an evangelical turnout plan)."

WMD Update

NPR's Anne Garrels (audio link) is reporting that sarin nerve gas has been found in Fallujah. Considering it was found in a briefcase - four packages with 10 vials in each package - it will be viewed with some skepticism. When did it get in to the country, who brought it in, etc?

It does raise and support opinions about WMDs - they are easily transported and small amounts can be - and are - lethal. Whatever WMDs were in Iraq prior to the war on terror, they easily could have been buried or transported to other countries. Because they weren't immediately found in Iraq, does not mean they didn't exist: i.e. Bush lied.

A change of heart at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel?

It appears that the editors at the Journal-Sentinel have finally come to their senses regarding the Kyoto Treaty:

This does not mean that the ridiculous scenarios in the movie “The Day After Tomorrow” or that the most alarmist warnings of some environmentalists are true after all (although the melting of the Greenland ice sheet could have some serious consequences). Nor does it necessarily argue for adoption of the flawed Kyoto treaty on global warming, which was rejected overwhelmingly by the Senate for good reason.

Despite earlier arguments for President Bush to move forward with Kyoto. I guess now that the election is over - and their guy lost - they no longer feel compelled to blame everything on President Bush. Oh, oh - not so quick:

The Bush administration promised to come up with its own plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It has yet to come up with something that will do the job. Now that Bush has won a second term, it’s time for him to fulfill that promise. Getting behind the McCain-Lieberman bill would be a good way of meeting that obligation.

At least they haven't tied this around the President's neck - yet.

(hat tip to: CynicalB for the JS editorial)

Hypocracy of the French...

Read this article to see yet another example of France's global diplomacy views:

"Last Saturday, France's president Jacque Chirac ordered French fighter jets to destroy the entire Ivorian Air Force, including the official plane of the Ivorian president. The attack came in retaliation for a government air strike on the rebel-held north, which killed nine French peacekeepers and an American aid worker."

A unilateral decision mind you. But they, of course, are justified:

"French Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie said, 'We deplore the deaths of the French soldiers and the American.' "

The 'other side', has another view. Where's the call for sanctions? Where's the call for UN resolutions to 'solve' this disagreement?

"But Ivorian president Laurent Gbagbo said the bombing was a mistake. In an exclusive interview by phone with CBN News from his presidential palace, Gbagbo accused Paris of trying to destabilize his nation. He said, 'The French are trying to derail democracy in my country. What the French have done is unbelievable.' "

I'm no expert regarding the political environemt in the Ivory Coast. For all I know, Gbagdo could be a Saddam Hussein-lite. Regardless, it's ironic that his argument is based on France's own international diplomacy concerns they raised about the US!

"Gbagbo also finds it unbelievable that the French did not even ask the UN Security Council for permission to intervene."

Yasser Arafat dead

Yasser Arafat dead, say Palestinian sources- The Times of India - this seems to be validated by MSNBC. They are reporting, as of 10:20pm CST, confirmation that he has died. Looks like 'Miracle Max' didn't come through. Then again, he'd only be 'on the job' for a noble cause! I don't think directing terrorist activities can be considered 'noble'!!!

Comments from the Right I

I received this e-mail from a colleague. I think he makes a point that continues to go unnoticed in the MSM - divisiveness cuts both ways and so does fence-mending. I, like Andy, continue to here that President Bush MUST reach out to the other side to bring the country together. What about the Democrats, don't they have ANY responsibility?

John,

I think one of the biggest reasons it seems that we are so divided is that one side in the political debate has decided to quite playing the game.

We have ALWAYS had differences of opinion. That is one of the great things about America, we can agree to disagree. We can also disagree and still do business with each other, still talk, argue, etc. But lately it seems as though it MUST be one way or nothing. If the republicans don’t do it our way we aren’t going to play along. “Those republicans are so divisive; can you believe they want to do what they promised during the campaign?” So instead of allowing a vote on judicial nominees they decide to filibuster. In fact, Daschel just decided to obstruct everything he could. It reminded me of a small child taking their ball home because they didn’t get to bat all the time.

Well sorry, but you didn’t win in 2000. You lost more seats in 2002, and now you’ve lost a third time. The country is sending you a message. We have been trying to get along, (Bush reached out to Kennedy during no child left behind; Bush added prescription drug coverage for seniors) but when you get your hand bitten each time you reach out you tend to get gun shy. If you worry so much about stem cell research, work with the Republicans to create a compromise. I know it will look like Bush is achieving something, and you hate that, but it is time for the other side of the isle to do some of the compromising.

Another piece of liberal CW quashed

Harvard Gazette: Freedom squelches terrorist violence:

"'In the past, we heard people refer to the strong link between terrorism and poverty, but in fact when you look at the data, it's not there. This is true not only for events of international terrorism, as previous studies have shown, but perhaps more surprisingly also for the overall level of terrorism, both of domestic and of foreign origin,' Abadie said.
Instead, Abadie detected a peculiar relationship between the levels of political freedom a nation affords and the severity of terrorism. Though terrorism declined among nations with high levels of political freedom, it was the intermediate nations that seemed most vulnerable."

This topic came up in pre-election discussion at the office. It was suggested that we need to understand the 'root cause' of terrorism before we can condemn or stop it. It was also implied that poverty and living conditions - as the CW once stated - were the root cause. Well, maybe not. Now what? Had we only discussed the 'root cause' and not DONE anything, we'd find ourselves today with evidence that contradicts the CW and potentially more terrorists and possibly have had more terrorists attacks outside Iraq and the Middle East. It's difficult to prove a negative. As shown here, it's also difficult to prove CW.

The U.S. is not the only 'divided' country

WSJ.com - The Wall Within:

"In conversation, former East Germans always emphasize how important 'equality' was to them, much more important than 'freedom.' In the past, equality meant 'I have just as little as my neighbor.' Now it means, 'I don't want to have less than my neighbor.' In the past, East Germans were all equally poor; now they all want to be equally rich. But now there are intra-societal distinctions, and this is a situation they can't stand. Most of them have it better than ever before, but the price of prosperity is a loss of equality. So they react like spoiled children, getting more dissatisfied the better off they are, just because the neighbor's children have two more designer jackets than they do. And they take their anger out on their parents. The psychoanalyst Hans-Joachim Maaz says the East Germans feel 'slighted,' while former Protestant minister Joachim Gauck talks about a 'transitional society' whose citizens want 'someone to take care of them, because they never learned to take responsibility.'"

This sounds vaguely familiar, but I'll not go there.

Supreme Court Strategy

This editorial from the WSJ makes some great points. Now that the Republicans have 55 votes in the Senate and an electorate that is engaged, it's time to get some things done. One of those things is filling judicial vacancies - something the Democrats blocked with extreme vigor in the last four years utilizing the previously little-used, filibuster:

"To set the proper tone, Mr. Bush could begin his new term by re-nominating every candidate who was filibustered and is willing to go through the process again. All 10 nominees were highly qualified and had enough Democratic support to be confirmed if they hadn't been blocked by a liberal minority from receiving a full Senate vote. They include three women, an hispanic, an African-American and an Arab-American."

The Democrats went well beyond their 'advise and consent' role in judicial appointments. It's time to spend some capital.

UN - What is it good for?

Anne Bayefsky on the continuing need to question the value of the UN:

"The differences between the president's and the U.N.'s agenda should no longer be papered over. Success in the war against terrorism requires identifying the enemy. The U.N. has no definition of terrorism. Close to a third of its members actively participate in the Organization of the Islamic Conference and stand in the way of a comprehensive convention against terrorism or any resolution that would unequivocally condemn the use of all available means in the name of a struggle for self-determination."

"NEWS FROM THE WORLD OF SCIENCE" [John Derbyshire]

I tried getting a perma-link for this but was unable. Too good not to post in it's entirety:

This one's doing the rounds: 'A major research institution has recently announced the discovery of the heaviest chemical element yet known to science. The new element has been tentatively named 'Governmentium.' Governmentium has 1 neutron, 12 assistant neutrons, 75 deputy neutrons, and 11 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312. These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. Since governmentium has no electrons, it is inert. However, it can be detected as it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A minute amount of governmentium causes one reaction to take over 4 days to complete when it would normally take less than a second. 'Governmentium has a normal half-life of 3 years; it does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places. In fact, governmentium's mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will cause some morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes. This characteristic of moron-promotion leads some scientists to speculate that governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as 'Critical Morass.' You will know it when you see it.' "

Instapundit 'collects' some thoughts from the Left

For your reading pleasure Instapundit has a collection of thought provoking analysis regarding the election results. It seems that the dust is settling a bit and more rational thought is breaking through the cobwebs. Good reads.

Who needs religion when you've got Government?

Jonah Goldberg in National Review takes a hard look at the competition between church and state in the eyes of the liberal left. Again, they don't so much want to maintain a wall between religion and government - that would suggest they participate in religion and 'believe' - as they would be happy to see religion replaced. We no longer need to believe in a God because we have governments to look toward for guidance and belonging:

"But what offends them so much about religion is that it is a source of authority outside - and prior to - politics. What has offended the Left since Marx, and American liberalism since Dewey, is the notion that moral authority should be derived from anyplace other than the state or 'the people' (conveniently defined as citizens who vote liberal). Voting on values not sanctified by secular priests is how they define 'ignorance.' This was the real goal of Hillary Clinton's 'politics of meaning' - to replace traditional religion with a secular one that derived its authority not from ancient texts and 'superstitions' but from the good intentions of an activist state and its anointed priests."

Comments from the Left XIV

For these comments you need to look across the ocean and into the Fatherland.

"...Had George W. Bush stood for election in Europe, he would have been blown out of office with drums and trumpets.... "

One more reason to be happy with the results. Why would George Bush ever stand for election in Europe? We would never expect Gerhard Schroeder or Jacques Chirac to stand for election in the U.S. Of course, they'd never make it out of the primary, but that's beside the point.

BONUS: For you high school language students out there, the comments are repeated in deutsche. Enjoy!

Thomas Sowell: The oldest fraud

A little history lesson about 'Political Parties of the poor' by Thomas Sowell:

"When Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote the Communist Manifesto, they were a couple of spoiled young men from rich families. All their talk about the working class was just talk, but it appealed to other such young men who liked heady talk."

There's more recent examples in the article.

Is this really that hard to figure out?

This article [at least this topic] gets printed in the NYTs every few months:

"The continuing increase in the prison population, despite a drop or leveling off in the crime rate in the past few years, is a result of laws passed n the 1990's that led to more prison sentences and longer terms, said Allen J. Beck, chief of corrections statistics for the department's Bureau of Justice Statistics and an author of the report. "

I know I voted as a "Red-Stater" - so I must be ignorant - but is it so unthinkable that: If you take -and keep - criminals off the street, crime will drop?

A Letter to America

A letter from French foreign minister Michel Barnier:

"More generally, I'm concerned to see both Americans and Europeans expressing doubts over the future of transatlantic relations, and I'm troubled to see that Europe is misunderstood, if not scorned, in the U.S. The European Union is changing. It has opened to the East. Soon, I hope, it will have a Constitution that will make its institutions more effective and legitimate. It is in America's interest that Europe asserts itself as a powerful, reliable partner. As President Kennedy once said, the U.S. should see 'in such a Europe a partner with whom we could deal on a basis of full equality.'"

Of course, the U.S. is not scorned in Europe. This is merely their way of reaching out to...

..."The self-righteous, gun-totin', military lovin', sister marryin', abortion-hatin', gay-loathin', foreigner-despisin', non-passport ownin' red-necks, who believe God gave America the biggest dick in the world so it could urinate on the rest of us and make their land "free and strong".

"State site registers lackluster drug sales" - JS Online

Oh. Not THOSE drugs.

Basic economics: Supply and Demand. Apparently the Demand side of this equation doesn't need the benevolent 'arm' of government. Perhaps the state should consider changing the kinds of drugs the site sells. Based on the concern of at least one quoted party - below - law enforcement would have all they'd need to make some arrests:

"Larry Knetzger of Wauwatosa checked out the state Web site when refilling his prescription for a three-month supply of Lipitor, a drug he takes to lower his cholesterol.

But the 64-year-old general contractor decided the Wisconsin site required too many forms - users must fax their prescriptions to the pharmacy and complete a 'customer agreement.'

'It's unnecessary paperwork,' Knetzger said. 'I started reading everything over, and they're digging in your life too much.'"

Isn't that what government always does?

The New York Times Editorial: New Standards for Elections

I agree that election reform is necessary. I'm not sure I agree with The New York Times on all their suggestions. Mostly, I'm not in favor of uniform, federal standards. I believe in states rights and powers. I also strongly disagree with the two below. I may accused of being racist, but it's preposterous to believe that people can't get ID's that are uniform within a state and the way to reduce "voter suppression" of minorities on the basis of being former felons is to reduce the number of people committing felonies in the first place!:

"10. Fair and uniform voter ID rules. No voter should lose his right to vote because he is required to produce identification he does not have. ID requirements should allow for an expansive array of acceptable identification. The rules should be posted at every polling place, and poll workers should be carefully trained so no one is turned away, as happened repeatedly this year, for not having ID that was not legally required.

11. An end to minority vote suppression. Protections need to be put in place to prevent Election Day challengers from turning away qualified minority voters or slowing down voting in minority precincts. More must be done to stop the sort of dirty tricks that are aimed at minority voters every year, like fliers distributed in poor neighborhoods warning that people with outstanding traffic tickets are ineligible to vote. Laws barring former felons from voting, which
disproportionately disenfranchise minorities, should be rescinded."

Maybe they didn't want to affect the election?

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel finally sees some GOOD economic news:

"From September 2003 to September 2004, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the four-county metropolitan area added 21,500 jobs.

That's more than were added in Chicago, Atlanta, Los Angeles, Dallas or Minneapolis-St. Paul. It's more, in fact, than were added in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa or Minnesota.

'Basically,' said Marc Levine, director of the Center for Economic Development at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 'I think the bottom line is it's good news.'"

I'm surprised by the dates in this article. No, it isn't November 2 to November 7. It's September 2003 to September 2004! Apparently the JS chose not to report on ANY economic news (worst economy since Hoover notwithstanding) so as not to impact the election.

Brooks: The Values-Vote Myth

David Brooks in the NYTs:

"Here are the facts. As Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center points out, there was no disproportionate surge in the evangelical vote this year. Evangelicals made up the same share of the electorate this year as they did in 2000. There was no increase in the percentage of voters who are pro-life. Sixteen percent of voters said abortions should be illegal in all circumstances. There was no increase in the percentage of voters who say they pray daily."

More

But the same insularity that caused many liberals to lose touch with the rest of the country now causes them to simplify, misunderstand and condescend to the people who voted for Bush. If you want to understand why Democrats keep losing elections, just listen to some coastal and university town liberals talk about how conformist and intolerant people in Red America are. It makes you wonder: why is it that people who are completely closed-minded talk endlessly about how open-minded they are?

A MUST read for ALL Americans

Open Letter To The Democratic Party: How You Could Have Had My Vote:

"So, if you want my vote next time, and the vote of all my close friends, and the millions more like us that you refuse to believe exists, it's pretty simple: take positions and don't waffle on them. Stand up for America, especially with regard to terrorism. Shut up about what Germany and France think. Stop pretending that the only way to become wealthy in America is to cheat, for the sake of those of us who still want to get there. Treat the President with at least as much civility, if not respect, as you would've wanted right-wingers to give a President Kerry. Most importantly, please, please please, please, please, please stop abusing me. No more verbal and psychological and emotional savagery. Treat me like a voter whose vote you would actually appreciate getting, and you will get it."

I encourage you to follow the link and read the whole letter.

This is a voice of a person on the edge of the Democratic roof. Her profile: educated; single; late 20's; hard-working; has career goals; has religious beliefs but not evangelical; believes in the human spirit; has a healthy skepticism; etc.

I see a person at the proverbial age of 'awakening' or American 'enlightenment'. I don't like these words, but I hope you get my point. As we mature, we move from idealism and self-absorption, to responsibility and realism. We often marry and have children. Our self-absorption expands to include a spouse and children. Our parents start looking like real people - when did they get so smart? We work and pay for things we not only want - but need.

The challenge in this example: As a Democrat - save her. Keep her from jumping. As a Republican - call her home and make sure the landing is soft. The party that doesn't drive off to the extremes of their party, will have the better chance.

What? Not again.

Just when the American electorate restored my faith in the people, the jury in the Scott Peterson murder trial waver:

"After a third day of deliberations, jurors in Scott Peterson's murder trial retired to a hotel where they are prohibited from discussing the case and are not allowed visitors. "

There's no evidence that the jury won't do the right thing - other than the O.J. verdict.

Arafat updates

Arafat's condition remains: Mostly dead.

Tell me the MSM isn't in love with this guy. I wonder if the old Generalissimo Franco joke from SNL will ever change to Arafat? Of coarse not. Arafat is a Nobel Peace Prize recipient!?

One more reason not to visit Europe

WSJ.com - Euro Surges to New Record:

"The 12-nation common currency reached more than $1.2940 in afternoon European trading, up from a 4 p.m. Eastern, or 'closing,' high of $1.2878 the day before. The euro reached its previous intraday peak of $1.2927 in February."

This is good news, in some ways, given the recent election results. It seems there are many areas of THIS country that are foreign to us. Perhaps we could spend some tourists dollars right here in the good old U.S. of A. Get out of your blue state and come get to know us in red America! {for those that remember, I'm stuck in a blue state - however - in a red county!}

Ahhh. The debate continues...

The following is an e-mail exchange between a colleague and a newspaper editor in Madison, WI. My colleague knows the editor personally, so there's a bit of 'friendly' banter here (edited):

Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 2:10 PM

Subject: RE: We'll Know!
Kurt: The Europeans also visited several other states/cities, not among the most liberal. You assume too much, like your assumption your hero now has a mandate. Be aware, Kurt, that this was hardly a landslide. You did get the majority, but more Americans -- in fact, a heluva lot more Americans -- voted for John Kerry, the villified Massachusetts "liberal" than voted for Ronald Reagan in either of his two terms. So I wouldn't assume that liberalism is dead.

In fact, I'll make you a bet. For years from now your guys will have run this country so far in the ground that even you will come running for some help. Kerry was far from a joke. The real joke, my friend, is on you.
Dave Z

-----Original

11/05/2004 1:31 PM
To: Dave Z
Subject: We'll Know!

Mr. Z,
I find it amusing that you and many other liberal Democrats continue to find fault with our President. When are you going to wake up and quit pretending to believe the John 'I have a plan' Kerry would have been a better leader. He was a joke! There are many issues that need to be addressed but this President will not only lead this country to prosperity, but will bring both peace and economic stability to the world. Instead of the constant badgering, find a way to work with him.

I also find it amusing, that your European visitors went to the East coast, west coast and the most liberal state in the Midwest to find out what makes America click. I take it these visitors are much like you and probably in the same occupation, because like you, they know nothing about what the reality of the world is. Plus, the assumption that their countries won't work with us is already obsolete.

In time we will all know!

PS- It is the liberal media that 52,000,000 Americans are sick of.

The 'more votes against a sitting president' is straight from the Howard Dean letter. Good to see the press is still getting their internal memos!

Comments from the Left XIII

Why Americans Hate Democrats..., by Jane Smiley:

"I say forget introspection. It's time to be honest about our antagonists. My predecessors in this conversation are thoughtful men, and I honor their ideas, but let's try something else. I grew up in Missouri and most of my family voted for Bush, so I am going to be the one to say it: The election results reflect the decision of the right wing to cultivate and exploit ignorance in the citizenry. I suppose the good news is that 55 million Americans have evaded the ignorance-inducing machine. But 58 million have not. (Well, almost 58 million-my relatives are not ignorant, they are just greedy and full of classic Republican feelings of superiority.)"

I said when I started this series I didn't know how long it would last. It appears, with help from the left, it may go on for some time. I encourage it. Was it Napoleon who said something like, "When the enemy is trying to hang themselves, don't interrupt them."?

Stock Market Extends Rally

As of my posting this article, the Dow was up 88.20 (3:43pm EST). The market has risen nearly 400 pts this week!

"Nonfarm payrolls grew by a robust 337,000 last month, more than twice the increase recorded in September and the fastest pace of hiring in six months. The unemployment rate rose a tenth of a percentage point to 5.5%, signaling more Americans are returning to the labor force to look for work."

The last line is interesting. Unemployment going up is reported as GOOD news! What a difference an election makes.

Shannen Coffin at NRO has a great insight: "Isn't it nice to have an economic report released without John Kerry saying that he can do better?"

UPDATE: Great point by Andrew in our office: "Maybe the unemployment rate went up because all those 'volunteers' at MoveOn, ActUp, etc are looking for jobs!"

Comments from the Left XII

Photos from the rally in SF on November 3, 2004:

"The rage and frustration of another Bush victory was more than many San Franciscans could take. As soon as Bush's re-election was confirmed in the middle of Wednesday, November 3, people started gathering at Powell and Market streets. By 5pm the crowd had swelled to several thousand.

The photographs below were taken at the rally and at the march that followed. Captions are provided only where needed. "

As much as you may want to believe...

Believe me, I am ecstatic that John Edwards is NOT our Vice President. His condescension of the electorate and his questionable actions while a trial attorney makes me sick. This however is not true.

We, as conservatives should do our best to stick with facts. It's easy enough to make fun and satire out of the left's agenda without having to resort to these types of attacks.

By the way, our prayers should also be with Elizabeth Edwards and her battle with breast cancer.

Comments from the Left XI

Howard Dean:

"And a record number of us voted to change course - more Americans voted against George Bush than any sitting president in history."

Yeee Haaaaa!!!!

Of course, this loses a little of it's luster when you consider more people voted FOR George Bush than any other president in history as well! Sorry to rain on your little parade Howard.

Is this really a divided nation?

2004 Election results by county. Click on image to enlarge.

Comments from the Left X

The New Republic Online: What Went Wrong?:

"The other side may be euphoric, but the intensity of their happiness can't match the intensity of our despair. Honest conservatives, even those who admire President Bush, know he didn't earn a second term. They know he staked his presidency on a catastrophe, and that, by all rights, Iraq should be his political epitaph. Their victory, while sweet, can't be fully enjoyed because it isn't fully deserved. "

To quote a more famous conservative, "There you go again", telling us what we must believe!

Sorry Pete, President Bush more than earned a second term. Considering all that the left and a complicit media placed before him to block his efforts, the phenominal fact that President Bush was able to exceed 50% of the popular vote, demonstrates how wrong the left and the media were about the pulse of this great country. George Bush represents this country - because he believes in this country!

Reaction of Europe

Sorry to disappoint you:

"The European elites had spent much of Tuesday evening dreaming about how a President Kerry would ratify the Kyoto accords, sign on to the International Criminal Court, cut and run in Iraq, send flowers to Yasser Arafat and, perhaps, open a dialogue with Osama bin Laden. When it became clear that the American voters wanted none of that, the chattering classes in Europe were left speechless. One Paris TV anchor was literally struck dumb mometarily when, after hours of crowing over Kerry's victory and the American people's supposed liberation from Bushist tyranny, he had to admit that things had gone differently. "

Not!

Comments from the Left IX

The Capital Times (Madison, WI):

"A large part of the American population does not want to be asked specifically which policy choices they prefer. I am becoming persuaded a large part of the population does not want to focus on the nuances, the details of policy choices. They would much prefer to be able to simply develop an instinct about a particular candidate and the direction he's likely to go when given these complex policy choices.

They want to be able to delegate. Maybe that's where we have not yet done our job."

Or, they don't want to delegate much of anything - especially to someone who thinks they know better than "a large part of the population."

Comments from the Left VIII

The Village Voice:

"The Republicans fight dirty - No shit, Sherlock. This is politics not a tickle-fight. Buckle your chin-strap and go out there and hit somebody.

Democratic positions are too complex for the electorate. This is the moral equivalent of blaming the refs. It manages to, at once, demean Americans - the very people we need to vote for us - while conveniently absolving the Dems of blame. Even if we accept the line, hey, that's the task ahead. We all know it. Doesn't make the losses any less real"

Comments from the Left VII

Letters to the Editor: The New York Times:

"First, it is apparent that 9/11 had a profound effect on those who are less educated and less economically secure in ways we did not fully appreciate. They felt that their values and way of life were fundamentally threatened and responded to President Bush's values argument."

More reality!

Comments from the Left VI

Still another from The Gadflyer: Fly Trap - again, different auther. Better hide the razor blades over at their place!:

"Having said that, President Bush will now lead with a mandate and with an increased majority in both the House and Senate. That means we don't have the luxury of trading recriminations or indulging in despair. We are the only thing between this administration and unprecedented environmental damage, an expansion of American imperialism, privatization of essential government services and 'faith-based' policy-making. Our activism is more important now than at any time in history. So let's shelve the navel-gazing and get to the hard work."

Who cares if the 51% majority don't agree with us. We'll do it anyway!

Comments from the Left V

Another from The Gadflyer: Where Do We Go From Here? - different author:

"I hesitate to aim barbs at John Kerry, an honorable, thoughtful man who has served his country well throughout his life. And Democratic primary voters have no one but themselves to blame for nominating him. But he couldn't beat a president who lied to the American people to start an unpopular war; who has the worst jobs record since the Depression; who hasn't done a thing about the most pressing domestic concern (health care); and who wasn't legitimately elected in the first place. Pathetic."

But how do you really feel?

Comments from the Left IV

The Gadflyer: Yes, Virginia, There is a Silver Lining:

"Finally, there is this. At the end of the day Republicans won close Senate races and the presidency principally by appealing to fear, hate, and prejudice. Well-meaning, non-homophobic Republicans may rationalize this by saying that it's a small price to pay for a strong leader who will keep them safe. (Ahem.) But they know better. They know better when they avoid the subject with their gay friends, and they know better when they hear the bile coming from the religious leaders and everyday bigots they depend on for votes but wouldn't be caught dead associating with. Deep down they know a tax cut isn't worth a soul, and security without principles is meaningless. They fought, and won, dirty. And they know it. Democrats may not be entirely clean on the subject - if one is not homophobic it doesn't make much sense to be against gay marriage - but the bottom line is we didn't try and get a president elected by pandering to hate. I'd rather lose every god damn election in my lifetime than win their way. But the beauty is, we can win without doing that. We did in 2000, and we came within a whisker of doing so this year. Remember that when the DLC tells us that we need to sell out gays (after telling us to sell out unions, and blacks, and the poor, and all the other, well, Democrats out there) to win the support of Bible-thumping bigots in Alabama that are never going to vote for us anyway. That's wrong, on every level."

Speaking of reality, "...but the bottom line is we didn't try and get a president elected by pandering to hate." What was "Bush is a Nazi!"; "Bush will bring back the draft!"; "All the Bushies are evil!"; "Bush will steal the elderly's Social Security!"; and, oh - by the way - most of the content of this post from the Gadflyer! It sure looks like hate to me. But I forgot, the left is immune to hypocrisy.

Comments from the Left III

DonkeyRising (weblog):

"Given this sense of cultural alienation, it must be questioned whether candidates like Gore or Kerry can ever really be viable with these voters. Democrats may have to choose candidates in the future who do not so easily evoke this sense of cultural alienation and who can connect in a genuine fashion with these voters. I come to this conclusion reluctantly because I had hoped that an effective campaign could overcome this obstacle by, in effect, using wedge Democratic issues like health care or jobs to build support among this group. But the messenger appears to matter a great deal, just as having a message does (see point number two, above). The Democrats in the future will have to pay attention to both, I think."

Bush's "Attack" on the Environment

When will this end?

Comments from the Left II

Eric Alterman (MSNBC):

"The problem is just this: Slightly more than half of the citizens of this country simply do not care about what those of us in the "reality-based community" say or believe about anything. "

Reality? Really? Can you say "Fahrenheit 911" and still claim you live in reality?

Comments from the Left I

I have a series of these comments. I'm not sure how long they will last, but given the anger during the election, I'd imagine they'll surface for some time. The election results give the Left just one more reason to HATE America!

Joshua Micah Marshall:

"It would almost be comical if it weren't for the seriousness of what it portends. This election cut the nation in two. A single percentage point over 50% is not broad. A victory that carried no states in the Northeast, close to none in the Industrial midwest is not nationwide, and none on the west coast is not nationwide."

A 'single' percentage point is still 100% more over 50%, than Bill Clinton ever received. Can you say 43% (1992)?

WI: Election reform

Yeah, this will fix the problem:

"McCann suggested two reforms: better funding for election officials so that well-trained poll inspectors can be hired and voter lists that are regularly updated."

Spending more money on poll workers will stop fraud - no doubt about it.

Media "How did this happen?"

Last night on a number of analysis panels (MSNBC, CNN, Fox, etc), the question came up with great frequency: "What's going on with the Democratic Party? Why don't they get it?"

This year was pretty clear from a Presidential candidate - they didn't have one that STOOD for anything. The theme of this candidate's campaign was, "Bush is wrong", but little substance on why "I'm right".

The other area of angst among the panels was the 'morals' and 'values' issue that came through in the results. They trumped personal economic needs which the Democrats relied on in '92 - "it's the economy stupid". They also didn't understand the 'tie' into security and the war on terror. These are moral issues as well as security issues. In addition, to my point above, Americans respect someone who believes in something - even if they don't necessarily agree with them.