Q: I'm at a loss for words.

A: What is, something John Pilger at the New Statesman has never said! What a bunch of self-righteous drivel. Here's a sample:

"In Santa's Grotto, there is no place for Howard Zinn's honest People's History of the United States, or I F Stone's revelation of the truth of what the museum calls 'the forgotten war' in Korea, or Mark Twain's definition of patriotism as the need to keep 'multitudinous uniformed assassins on hand at heavy expense to grab slices of other people's countries'. Moreover, at the Price of Freedom Shop, you can buy US Army Monopoly, and a 'grateful nation blanket' for just $200. The exhibition's corporate sponsors include Sears, Roebuck, the mammoth retailer. The point is taken."

Read the rest if you like. It's full of egotistical, patronizing, whining, name-dropping, self-important, incoherent statements that make little sense. It's obvious the man is well read in the classics of liberalism, socialism and sarcastic commentary. But please, man. Make a point.

The other side of the blade...

...that gets overlooked by Republicans (Bloomberg):

"Still, the report also reveals a serious issue: While tax cuts may generate future growth, they can only do so if the government spends less."

And since the Republicans have gained power, they have quickly assimilated into the practice they blasted the Democrats for: overspending! At least in Reagan's day, it truly was the Democrats who helped spend the windfall. Not today.

Principles and Politics - Scientists

This TCS Daily piece asks the proverbial question related to "global warming": "How is politics involved?":

"Climatologist Hans von Storch of Germany, no global warming contrarian, had his own concerns about Schakowsky's question when his panel appeared:

'I was a bit disappointed about the comment from the lady from Illinois who said, aren't you afraid if you say this, that this would have negative implications on the policy process. I was kind of shocked. Should we really adapt what we say if that's useful for the policy process? Is that what you expect from science? If we give advice, must we first think, is it useful for something? I think that is not the way we should operate.'"

Seems like Mr. von Storch has the right approach to scientific exploration. I would hope that other scientists hold the same standards.

Turn elections into a lottery?

An Arizona politician has a referendum on the ballot calling for a 'lottery' to be attached to the voting process - you vote, you are entered for the chance to win a $1M! - or something like that. I agree with Jonah Goldberg:

"The push to make voting much easier has been considerably less controversial. Weekend voting, voting by mail and online voting are constantly greeted as vital reforms of our electoral system. And although some of these reforms are probably benign, all assume that even the slightest inconvenience in voting is an outrage because democratic health is purely a numbers game: More voters equals a healthier society. My own view is that voting should be more difficult because things of value usually require a little work. That goes for citizenship too."

Let's not turn our election process into some online, popularity poll. What's next, a rip-off of "American Idol": "American President" where we have a bunch of teenie-boppers on cells phones hitting re-dial for their favorite candidate? Yeah. That'll work.

Principles and Politics - Republicans

A survey by NPR, via Salon.com, suggests that the pandering some (and more are falling into line) in the Republican party partake in, is turning the voters off:

"People reject the 'moral values' demagoguery. Most voters in the contested districts say that they trust Democrats, not Republicans, on such issues as stem cell research, flag burning and gay rights. Those responses indicate that the summer strategy of setting up phony floor votes on right-wing constitutional amendments -- and the president's first veto -- may have backfired. Fifty-two percent say that the recent stem cell debate made them more inclined to vote for Democrats, and 49 percent said the same about flag burning, gay marriage and other 'values issues.' Only 29 percent -- essentially the conservative base -- said those debates would motivate them to vote for Republicans."

Again, as a Conservative, this troubles me as well. I am not a proponent of governments controlling social agendas - in either direction (despite Salon's attempt to brand conservatives in this way). Perhaps this is more of a Libertarian approach, but the bottom-line is, there are more important things for federal governments to do that worry about someone burning a flag or if a state has enough citizens who vote to allow two men to marry. [On the other hand, I don't trust that if Democrats took control, they wouldn't pander to the other side and propose bills that would "protect" these "rights" either.]

Republicans need to uphold the Constitution, reduce federal spending (and by default the need for increased taxation) - especially social and pork - and ensure for the defense of the nation. Period.

Principles and Politics - Democrats

Peter Beinart suggests the Democrats have their strategy: Pander and Run:

"Privately, some Democrats, while admitting that they haven't exactly been taking the high road, say they have no choice, that in a competition with Karl Rove, nice guys finish last. But even politically, that's probably wrong. The Democratic Party's single biggest foreign policy liability is not that Americans think Democrats are soft. It is that Americans think Democrats stand for nothing, that they have no principles beyond political expedience. And given the party's behavior over the past several months, it is not hard to understand why."

As a conservative and most often Republican voter, you'd think this would be a good thing for me. It's not.

I want leadership and decisiveness in public office. I want people to DO THEIR JOB, not PROTECT THEIR JOB. It isn't about being a Republican or a Democrat. Be an American and serve the public.

Proportionate Response?

From Best of the Web Today:

"BB 'C' No Evil

When Hezbollah kidnapped two Israeli soldiers two weeks ago, provoking the current conflagration, the Shiite terrorist outfit apparently intended to use them as bargaining chips to demand the release of prisoners. Press reports often discuss this as if there were an equivalence between the Israeli soldiers, who committed no crimes but were simply defending their own country within its borders, and Arab terrorists. So it's worth pointing out just who the "prisoners" in Israeli hands are.

According to the BBC "the prisoner Hezbollah wants most" is Samir Qantar. On April 22, 1979, Qantar murdered 28-year-old Danny Haran and his 4-year-old daughter and caused the death of another Haran daughter, age 2. Haran's widow, Smadar Haran Kaiser, describes the crime (she transliterates the murderer's name as "Kuntar"):

It had been a peaceful Sabbath day. My husband, Danny, and I had picnicked with our little girls, Einat, 4, and Yael, 2, on the beach not far from our home in Nahariya, a city on the northern coast of Israel, about six miles south of the Lebanese border.

Around midnight, we were asleep in our apartment when four terrorists, sent by Abu Abbas from Lebanon, landed in a rubber boat on the beach two blocks away. Gunfire and exploding grenades awakened us as the terrorists burst into our building. They had already killed a police officer.

As they charged up to the floor above ours, I opened the door to our apartment. In the moment before the hall light went off, they turned and saw me. As they moved on, our neighbor from the upper floor came running down the stairs. I grabbed her and pushed her inside our apartment and slammed the door.

Outside, we could hear the men storming about. Desperately, we sought to hide. Danny helped our neighbor climb into a crawl space above our bedroom; I went in behind her with Yael in my arms. Then Danny grabbed Einat and was dashing out the front door to take refuge in an underground shelter when the terrorists came crashing into our flat.

They held Danny and Einat while they searched for me and Yael, knowing there were more people in the apartment. I will never forget the joy and the hatred in their voices as they swaggered about hunting for us, firing their guns and throwing grenades. I knew that if Yael cried out, the terrorists would toss a grenade into the crawl space and we would be killed. So I kept my hand over her mouth, hoping she could breathe. As I lay there, I remembered my mother telling me how she had hidden from the Nazis during the Holocaust. "This is just like what happened to my mother," I thought.

As police began to arrive, the terrorists took Danny and Einat down to the beach. There, according to eyewitnesses, one of them shot Danny in front of Einat so that his death would be the last sight she would ever see. Then he smashed my little girl's skull in against a rock with his rifle butt. That terrorist was Samir Kuntar.

By the time we were rescued from the crawl space, hours later, Yael, too, was dead. In trying to save all our lives, I had smothered her.

The BBC gives a rather more sanitized account of the crime: "Qantar . . . attacked a block of flats in Nahariha in 1979, killing a father and his daughter."

How's that for a "proportionate" report!?

Will Venezuela become the "American" N. Korea?

This is troubling news:

"Chavez, who has become an increasing thorn in Washington's side because of his anti-U.S. policies, is also hoping to set up Kalashnikov weapons and ammunition plants in Venezuela.

The Venezuelan leader spoke Thursday of the 'astonishing progress in military-technical cooperation' -- a euphemism for arms sales -- and repeated his thanks to Putin for supplying Caracas with weaponry."

He has already co-opted a major oil producer, Citgo, and openly shares his admiration and respect to Fidel. I have yet to read or hear of any military threat to Venezuela, other than potential internal coups to remove him from his dictatorship.

This is worth watching.