| |
Saturday, December 31, 2005
The Year In Military HeroismRiehl World View has a calendar.
More Fascism From the White HouseTurns out they're "spying" on people who visit their website. The White House said Friday its Web tracking technology is consistent with federal rules because it only counts the number of visitors anonymously and doesn't record personal information.
The White House's site uses what's known as a Web bug — a tiny graphic image that's virtually invisible — to anonymously keep track of the number and time of visits. The bug is sent by a server maintained by an outside contractor, WebTrends Inc., and lets the traffic-analysis company know that another person has visited a specific page on the site.And I'm "spying" on my visitors as well; if you click on the sitemeter icon at the bottom of the page, you'll see stats on who's visited here, how they came, and where they're from. Another non-story from the lamestream media.
Friday, December 30, 2005
Oh Canada!Hmmm, this is rather a grabber of an opening paragraph: On Wednesday last week, the Supreme Court decided to legalize "swingers" clubs, where people go for orgies with consenting adults as young as 14.
A Dialogue Is Not Really What They Have In MindAs Charlotte Hays notes: But let's say students do want to talk about same-sex relationships or religious differences. Who wants to discuss these matters with total strangers? Let alone the kinds of strangers who would attend such sessions. One imagines that participants here are self-selected--those who plan to go on at length about various forms of oppression they may have endured and those who enjoy being on the receiving end of such flagellation. If anyone departs from either of those assigned roles, a shouting match will most likely ensue. Instead of Difficult Dialogues the Ford Foundation might have considered creating Excellent Etiquette grants to inculcate the good manners necessary for living in a diverse society.
Thursday, December 29, 2005
Anecdotal Evidence Borne OutI mentioned the other day that none of the liberals in my family were expressing outrage over the story about the government eavesdropping on international phone calls. Turns out that they're pretty typical: Sixty-four percent (64%) of Americans believe the National Security Agency (NSA) should be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that just 23% disagree.Hat Tip: Ace, via Michelle Malkin
Renditions Began Under ClintonActually this is not news. I covered this way back in February. Nice to see the MSM is catching up, though. The US Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) controversial "rendition" program was launched under US president Bill Clinton, a former US counter-terrorism agent has told a German newspaper.
Michael Scheuer, a 22-year veteran of the CIA who resigned from the agency in 2004, has told Die Zeit that the US administration had been looking in the mid-1990s for a way to combat the terrorist threat and circumvent the cumbersome US legal system.
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
Minimal Updates Next Few DaysI'll be doing some visiting of friends and family the next couple of days; posting should return to a normal level after New Year's Day.
What Credibility on National Security?From the Washington Times: Some centrist Democrats say attacks by their party leaders on the Bush administration's eavesdropping on suspected terrorist conversations will further weaken the party's credibility on national security.
That concern arises from recent moves by liberal Democrats to block the extension of parts of the USA Patriot Act in the Senate and denunciations of President Bush amid concerns that these initiatives could violate the civil liberties of innocent Americans.
"I think when you suggest that civil liberties are just as much at risk today as the country is from terrorism, you've gone too far if you leave that impression. I don't believe that's true," said Michael O'Hanlon, a national-security analyst at the Brookings Institution who advises Democrats on defense issues.Yep. I have gotten zero impression that anybody other than the usual gang of idiots is outraged over the eavesdropping issue.
Tuesday, December 27, 2005
NY Times Comes Out In Favor of Not Counting the Slaves as PersonsThis should get them in trouble with their PC base: The first Constitution took for granted that enslaved people could not vote, but counted each slave as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning representation in Congress. This inflated the voting power of slaveholders and gave them much more influence in legislative matters than their actual numbers warranted. No American would knowingly tolerate such an arrangement today.So apparently the Times thinks that slaves should not have counted as people at all? As an aside, Captain Ed (talking mostly about the real subject of the editorial, which is that prisoners should be counted as citizens of the area where they resided when they committed their crimes, rather than citizens of the area where they are incarcerated) repeats the canard that the three-fifths compromise was somehow shameful. I don't buy it. As in most things solved by compromise, there were valid arguments on both sides. Not counting the slaves at all would have been undercounting, but counting them as complete persons would have given more power to the slaveholding states.
I've Said It Before....Eugene Robinson, writing in the WaPo: Even in a thought experiment, we can't forgive the way he snowed the country into believing there was some connection between Iraq and the Sept. 11 attacks....The only people who were duped into believing this are those who opposed the war. Update: In the comments, John writes: Are you kidding? The President cited the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force as his Congressional approval for the Iraq War (an approval required under both the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution). The AUMF authorizes the President to use force ONLY when confronting those responsible for 9.11. The connection was not only urged by the White House; it is required to make this war legal. Even the AG memos by Yoo and Delahunty recognize this.Obviously John is not a lawyer, he just plays one on blogs. First of all, the AUMF does not ONLY authorize military force for those responsible for 9-11. Here's the passage John refers to: That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.Harbored of course is the key phrase here. But there was also an Iraq War Powers Resolution, which cites about a dozen reasons for going to war with Iraq, only a few of which touch on 9-11: Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;
Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;
Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;
Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;
Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;
Monday, December 26, 2005
The Chronicles of Narnia: Two Thumbs Way UpI took my nephew to see this movie tonight and was thoroughly entertained and spellbound by the gorgeous scenery, terrific acting, and exciting plot. The children stars of the film were perfect, especially the little girl who played Lucy. Many of the reviews have focused on the Christian subtext. Let me say that it was not obvious except for one sequence, and not overbearing even there.
Good NewsToday's soldiers are being treated better than the Vietnam generation. There's a diner called Peggy Sue's about eight miles outside of Barstow, and as hard as Lt. Col. Kenneth Parks tries, he can never seem to pay his bill.
He orders a burger and a chocolate shake. But before he's finished, the waitress informs him the tab has been taken care of by yet another stranger who prefers to remain anonymous but who wants to do something for a soldier in uniform.:) I was lucky on Veteran's Day. A friend of mine and I went out golfing and got paired up with a former Navy guy who'd been in Vietnam. We invited him out for a quick beer after our round and I was pleased to treat.
Here's a Novel ThoughtThere are two common arguments that liberals make in the war on terror: First, that there is no shared sacrifice; that is, that our armed forces sacrifice a great deal, so the rest of us should sacrifice something as well. They usually have higher taxes in mind. The second argument usually takes the form of Ben Franklin's nostrum: They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Here's the thought: Perhaps we could share the sacrifice by giving up a little of our non-essential liberty? Do I really need to be free to make international phone calls without fear of government eavesdropping? No, so it's a non-essential liberty. In fact, it's a sacrifice I'm happy to make. This post was inspired by this one.
Occasional ChristianCenk Uygur does the "turn the other cheek bit": It doesn’t take courage to throw a punch. It takes courage to take a punch.
We got hit on September 11th. And what was our reaction? Courage under fire? Grace through trying times? No, blind, angry, purposeless vengeance. Not just at our enemy, but at ourselves.Of course, for Cenk's purposes, it helps to completely ignore Afghanistan, and so there is no mention of that aspect of the war, which Leftists have just about convinced themselves that they supported all along. What would have taken courage is a measured, just response. What took easy cowardice was fire in all directions. For the love of God, we attacked the wrong Middle Eastern country – and we’re not even sorry.Can you imagine the reaction from the Cenks of the world if we had attacked the "right" Middle Eastern country? We'll assume that's Saudi Arabia; the response would have been that we were creating more jihadis (which would be true), that the government of Saudi Arabia was not anti-American (which would be largely true), and, of course, that it was a war for oil (which would be false).
Teach the ChildrenJamie Allman posts a wonderful Christmas email (link will probably expire tomorrow): "Teach the children that the pure green color of the stately fir tree remains green all year round, depicting the everlasting hope of mankind, all the needles point heavenward, making it a symbol of man's thoughts turning toward heaven." He again reached into his bag and pulled out a brilliant STAR. "Teach the children that the star was the heavenly sign of promises long ago. God promised a Savior for the world, and the star was the sign of fulfillment of His promise."
Barone on the InterceptsThe dean of American politics: Earlier this month, a Newsweek cover story depicted George W. Bush as living inside a bubble, isolated from knowledge of the real world. Many of the news stories about the NSA intercepts show that it is mainstream media that are living inside a bubble, carefully insulating themselves and their readers and viewers from knowledge of applicable law and recent historical precedent, determined to pursue an agenda of undermining the Bush administration regardless of any damage to national security.This is just anecdotal, obiously, but my family includes some pretty liberal people, and nobody over the holidays has been up in arms over the story. The reaction seems to be that if Americans have known ties to Al Qaeda, the government should be monitoring their phone calls.
Sunday, December 25, 2005
Has He Considered the South of France?Kos is looking for a new place to live. He's not picky: Lots of sun. At least 60% of the year.
Mild winters. No more than a couple of weeks below freezing
Lots of culture. Great non-chain restaurants, theater, local arts community, etc.
Near hub airport. I travel a lot. The more direct flights I can take to places around the country, the better my life.
Near hilly/mountainous terrain.
Away from hurricane paths.
Easy access to outdoor activities -- hiking, mountain and road biking, canoing, etc.
Some additional bonus considerations:
Bearable summers. I hate 100 degree weather. Even the "dry heat" kind.
Good public transportation.
Ethnically and raciall (sic) diverse.Phoenix would qualify without the summers; San Diego is probably the closest climate-wise, but the public transportation and hub airport probably rules it out.
Moron the Lying StudentInstapundit wonders, as I did, why the student's identity is still being withheld. And get this from the professor who pushed the story into the newspapers: ''I feel as if I was lied to, and I have no idea why," said Williams, an associate professor of Islamic history.As if? Professor, you were lied to.
Merrrrrrryyyyyy Christmas!Got good loot again this year, although regrettably no Red Ryder BB-guns with the compass in the stock and this thing that tells time. Ah, well, something to hope for next time. Hat Tip: Our old buddy Tom the River Rat.
Saturday, December 24, 2005
NFL Week 16The playoff seeds filled in a little better on Saturday. The Chargers saw their bid to make the playoffs get stuck in the mud in Kansas City, while the Redskins moved one step closer to a guaranteed wild card and the possibility of a divisional title. Seeds: AFC #1--Indianapolis (locked in) #2--Denver (locked in) #3--Cincinnati (could drop to #4 with a loss at KC and two wins by New England) #4--New England (cannot drop) #5--Jacksonville (locked in) #6--Pittsburgh (not locked in but would need to lose to Detroit at home and Kansas City to win at home against Cincinnati to miss the playoffs) NFC #1--Seattle (locked in) #2--Chicago (not locked in, but need only a win in the next two games, against Green Bay or Minnesota in the final game) It's still something of a jumble from here, with the Giants, Cowboys, Redskins, Bucs, Panthers and Vikings duking it out for the final four spots. Tampa Bay looks in the best spot, needing only to win at home against the New Orleans Saints, while Dallas and Minnesota need to win and get lots of help from other teams.
Hoaxer Getting Helped by Journalists?This story ticks me off. Not the hoax itself; that's a typical antiwar college student being an idiot. But get this bit: At the request of the two professors and the university, The Standard-Times has agreed to withhold his name.That's absurd. He's not a child, he's 22 years old, which indicates he's probably a senior in college. He tried to become a hero to the left wing, but he's been exposed as a fraud. His name is part of the story.
Actually It Means the "Minutemen" Are LosingAntiwar kooks are celebrating the withdrawal of some US troops from Iraq as a victory for their "movement". Pat Salomon with Peace Action told Cybercast News Service that the announcement "really is a result of the unpopularity of the war and the unpopularity of this president." She added that the planned troop cut is "a wonderful victory for the people who are pushing towards peace."Actually Bush's job approval rating is moving well up; Rasmussen shows him at 49%. Yesterday he was at 50%.
Friday, December 23, 2005
A Contrarian View on the Transit StrikeOur buddy Chris checks in with a union man's perspective. I don't have a position on the strike myself, other than to be relieved that I'm not working in New York anymore, so I don't have to deal with the hassle.
Dr K On the Impeachment TalkLike George Will, he believes that the better approach would have been to work with Congress to change the law. But his contempt for the impeachment chatter is pretty evident: Administration critics, political and media, charge that by ordering surveillance on communications of suspected al Qaeda agents in the United States, the president clearly violated the law. Some even suggest that Bush has thereby so trampled the Constitution that impeachment should now be considered. (Barbara Boxer, Jonathan Alter, John Dean and various luminaries of the left have already begun floating the idea.) The braying herds have already concluded, Tenet-like, that the president's actions were slam-dunk illegal. It takes a superior mix of partisanship, animus and ignorance to say that.
A Tribute to the PoguesOur buddy and fellow Mick, Patrick Hynes remembers the greatest rock band that most of you never heard of. Check out the picture here, which goes a long way towards explaining why they were unable to capitalize fully on their incredible talents. You can download the song that Patrick rhapsodizes about here; it is every bit as wonderful as he says. Another tribute to the Pogues and Fairytale of New York at Bright (B)light Cafe.
Book Report: What's the Matter with Kansas?I borrowed this from the library for the trip back east to visit my family. The author, Thomas Frank, sets out to explain why Kansas, which demographically he sees as a natural Democratic bastion, has become a solid red state. The book is mostly descriptive, rather than prescriptive. Democrats looking for a way to break the Republican stranglehold on the state will find it only by implication. Frank believes that the reason for Kansas voting Republican is that the Democrats have abandoned economic populism (i.e., redistributionist policies). The problem with this explanation is that Kansas has been Republican for a lot longer than the Democrats have renounced redistributionism. He admits that no Democrat has been elected to the US Senate from Kansas since 1932. Frank gets around this by the usual Leftist claim that somehow modern Republicans are much more conservative than the brand that applied up until the early 1990s. There is some validity to this argument in that Republicans feel free to be more conservative than they used to be when they were the minority party. But to a large degree, Republicans are more conservative because the country is more conservative. The book is replete with undiscovered and undocumented assumptions. Throughout, Frank states that by voting Republican, the people of Kansas are committing economic suicide. Why? Obviously it is because he believes that the Democrats' policies are far better for the working and middle class, but nowhere does he explain why. It is so self-evident to him that he ignores that this is far from settled. The book is also suffused with ill-concealed disgust with Kansas and Kansans. Frank himself grew up in Kansas, although he now lives in Chicago. He apparently believes that Kansas was in a golden age when he lived there, but it has gone completely to seed since. His thesis is essentially that there are two types of Republicans, which he calls the Mods and the Cons. The Mods are the wealthy moderates, who are uncomfortable with the Con positions on abortion and homosexuality, but go along with the program because the Cons deliver goodies for them in the form of tax cuts. The Cons don't get much for their support of the party other than lip service to their positions. Perhaps the most revealing part of the book is when Frank describes his conversion to liberalism. Frank claims to have been a solid conservative as a youth, participating in the high school debate team as a free-trade, pro-capitalist firebrand. But then he went to college and wasn't selected for any of the exclusive fraternities. This awakened his class consciousness and he realized that he was not a member of the elite. The book also contains numerous contradictions. For example, in one early passage he notes that in the past, colleges weren't known as hotbeds of liberalism in the past; they were considered finishing schools for the rich. But later, when he decries the attempt by modern conservatives to see themselves as similar to the abolitionists of the 1850s, he notes that the hotbeds of anti-slavery sentiment were the colleges and universities of the time. Frank appears to believe that if the Democrats were to embrace a more populist and redistributionist policy, that many of the Cons would be forced to choose between their wallet and their beliefs. I don't buy it. Redistribution did not work in the Soviet Union to improve the living conditions of the working class, and it is not working in Western Europe today. In American politics, because of the two party system, if an issue arises we can usually count on one party to take one side of the issue, and one party to take the other side. But if the issue becomes largely settled (take for example, free trade) then both sides deemphasize the issue and it becomes a fringe issue. The problem for the American Left, and Frank himself, is that the issue of redistribution has been taken off the table. He may want the Democrats to bring it back, but it sure doesn't look like that's a winning approach to me.
Thursday, December 22, 2005
Transit Strike BloggingOur buddy the Man at GOP & the City is on the scene. My one transit strike story: When I was working in New York City, there was a strike on the PATH trains that took us from Hoboken to Manhattan, so I couldn't take the train to Hoboken, I had to take the bus. Back then there were smoking cars on the trains, so I had never sat next to a smoker. On the bus of course, there was no smoking section, so I often sat next to smokers. The aroma of tobacco smoke from their clothes was gag-worthy in the morning.
Important StuffOur buddy Chris catches a Brit journalist making a mistake while trying to embarrass President Bush for making another mistake. But he misses the real scoop in the story: the president's IPOD includes a song by the Archies? Of course, there is only one song that could be; Sugar Sugar! Gaaaaahhhhhh!
Tony Dungy's Son DiesStunning news obviously. It's tempting (and responsible) to ignore the aspects of this on the NFL season, but it's obvious that with that kind of grief going on he won't be able to concentrate on the task at hand.
Patriot Act Extended--UpdatedSome good news here, but a six-month extension is just a bandaid. I have yet to hear of any real abuses of the Patriot Act; most of the complaints concern the provision regarding checking the books borrowed from the library by suspected terrorists, but that part of the act has rarely been used. Update: As PCD points out in the comments, the Patriot Act has not been extended yet. However, as the Senate was the roadblock, I am hopeful that we will at least get the extension done.
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
Sorry For the Lack of Posts TodayI had the Christmas shopping day from hell. :( Good news is it's over! Next year, I'm doing all my shopping early. (Yeah, right!)
LA Times: Rock and the Hard PlaceI'm amused by this post about how the "progressives" (code for the far Left) are trying to get more of their voices in the LA Times. Republicans and conservatives have criticized the Times in the past, particularly over their crusade against the election of Arnold Schwarzenegger. But I will admit, they are at least making an attempt to rectify their past sins. I get regular emails from their editorial page highlighting their columns for the day; I assume many other bloggers are seeing the same thing. They finally canned the odious Robert Scheer, whose firing seems to have angered the progressives described in the post. We don't ask or desire that the LA Times become a right-wing publication. All we ask is that our ideas get debated honestly. We're happy to battle it out intellectually. The Left, of course, can't stand the addition of mainstream conservatives like Jonah Goldberg to the paper's roster; they would prefer out-of-the-mainstream moonbats like Tom Hayden and Airiheadda Huffington.
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
How Can You Tell John Kerry's LyingHis lips are moving. Old joke, of course, but apropos today: The Massachusetts Democrat, who lost to Bush in the 2004 presidential election, also said the alleged White House leak of a CIA agent's identity was more serious than the media's disclosure of the spying program.
Bush said Monday that it was "a shameful act" for someone to have leaked details of the program to The New York Times, and he suggested the Justice Department is investigating the leak.
Though leaking any classified information is against the law, "there is a world of difference between what the president's engaged in and what was leaked out of the White House," Kerry told reporters after addressing ironworkers at a local labor hall.
"The leak in the White House was an effort to destroy somebody and his family and attack them for telling the truth," the senator said, referring to former ambassador Joe Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame. Her identity as a CIA analyst was exposed in July 2003 after Wilson challenged an administration justification for the Iraqi war.It consistently amazes me that anybody pretends that Joe Wilson was telling the truth. The media covered the story of Wilson's lies after the Senate Intelligence Committee issued its report, and Wilson faded into the woodwork for awhile. But when it looked like Plamegate might result in an indictment of Karl Rove, the media cheerfully forgot that Wilson had been disgraced.
SGT Michael "Mike" James Stokely, HeroHere's a moving tribute to a fallen soldier, by his dad. My response is that Mike didn't die for a "just cause", he died JUST BECAUSE - just because he loved his country enough to want to serve it since the time he was in middle school; just because he loved his family enough to want to protect them; just because he loved his friends enough that he would rather fight a war "there" than here; just because he believed in our order of government whereby the civilian government rules and the military obeys, and when the President, with lawful authority, calls upon soldiers to go and fight, he believed it was not only his duty, but his honor to go; just because he wouldn't let his fellow soldiers - his guys - go it alone; and just because he wanted to do for others - the Iraqi people - what he would do for his own country.Hat Tip: Instapundit.
NY Times Piles It Higher and DeeperMichelle Malkin links to this article in the NY Times that tries mightily to stir up more indignation over the federal government spying on US citizens. Counterterrorism agents at the Federal Bureau of Investigation have conducted numerous surveillance and intelligence-gathering operations that involved, at least indirectly, groups active in causes as diverse as the environment, animal cruelty and poverty relief, newly disclosed agency records show.Obvious question: what do they mean by "involved, at least indirectly"? After the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, John Ashcroft, who was then attorney general, loosened restrictions on the F.B.I.'s investigative powers, giving the bureau greater ability to visit and monitor Web sites, mosques and other public entities in developing terrorism leads. The bureau has used that authority to investigate not only groups with suspected ties to foreign terrorists, but also protest groups suspected of having links to violent or disruptive activities.Ohmigosh, they're monitoring websites? And protest groups suspected of having links to violent activities? The horror! The latest batch of documents, parts of which the A.C.L.U. plans to release publicly on Tuesday, totals more than 2,300 pages and centers on references in internal files to a handful of groups, including PETA, the environmental group Greenpeace and the Catholic Workers group, which promotes antipoverty efforts and social causes.PETA, of course, has donated to terrorist groups like the North American Earth Liberation Front (ELF), which is an FBI-declared terrorist organization. ELF caused some $54 million in damage during August and September alone in a series of arson attacks. Greenpeace has also donated to groups with terrorist ties. The Times and the ACLU attempt to laugh at the spying on the Catholic Workers' group: "You look at these documents," Ms. Beeson said, "and you think, wow, we have really returned to the days of J. Edgar Hoover, when you see in F.B.I. files that they're talking about a group like the Catholic Workers league as having a communist ideology."Yes, how silly of us to think that the Catholic Workers has a communist ideology just because they say: In economics, private and state capitalism bring about an unjust distribution of wealth, for the profit motive guides decisions. Those in power live off the sweat of others' brows, while those without power are robbed of a just return for their work. Usury (the charging of interest above administrative costs) is a major contributor to the wrongdoing intrinsic to this system. We note, especially, how the world debt crisis leads poor countries into greater deprivation and a dependency from which there is no foreseeable escape. Here at home, the number of hungry and homeless and unemployed people rises in the midst of increasing affluence.They advocate: A "green revolution," so that it is possible to rediscover the proper meaning of our labor and/or true bonds with the land; a distributist communitarianism, self-sufficient through farming, crafting and appropriate technology; a radically new society where people will rely on the fruits of their own toil and labor; associations of mutuality, and a sense of fairness to resolve conflicts.Of course, you know the Times' article is really just intended to do one thing: stop President Bush's poll numbers from rising. See also Ankle-Biting Pundit's take on this story.
Byron York On the Eavesdropping IssueThe current meme of the Left on this is that the FISA Court has only denied something like five out of 17,000 requests, so why not go to the court? Byron York points out the reason this is not a legitimate criticism. People familiar with the process say the problem is not so much with the court itself as with the process required to bring a case before the court. "It takes days, sometimes weeks, to get the application for FISA together," says one source. "It's not so much that the court doesn't grant them quickly, it's that it takes a long time to get to the court. Even after the Patriot Act, it's still a very cumbersome process. It is not built for speed, it is not built to be efficient. It is built with an eye to keeping [investigators] in check." And even though the attorney general has the authority in some cases to undertake surveillance immediately, and then seek an emergency warrant, that process is just as cumbersome as the normal way of doing things.
Lawmakers of both parties recognized the problem in the months after the September 11 terrorist attacks. They pointed to the case of Coleen Rowley, the FBI agent who ran up against a number roadblocks in her effort to secure a FISA warrant in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui, the al Qaeda operative who had taken flight training in preparation for the hijackings. Investigators wanted to study the contents of Moussaoui's laptop computer, but the FBI bureaucracy involved in applying for a FISA warrant was stifling, and there were real questions about whether investigators could meet the FISA court's probable-cause standard for granting a warrant. FBI agents became so frustrated that they considered flying Moussaoui to France, where his computer could be examined. But then the attacks came, and it was too late.
Rowley wrote up her concerns in a famous 13-page memo to FBI Director Robert Mueller, and then elaborated on them in testimony to Congress. "Rowley depicted the legal mechanism for security warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, as burdensome and restrictive, a virtual roadblock to effective law enforcement," Legal Times reported in September 2002.Thanks to Allman and Smash in the Morning for having me on the show today to talk about this subject.
First Gay Cowboys, Next Gay Hockey Players?This amusing panel comes to us from Action Comics #36, May 1941 issue, in the Pep Morgan story. Pep was kind of a cross between Chip Hilton and the Hardy Boys; the star athlete who also solves crimes. 
Monday, December 19, 2005
This Sounds Like a Comic Book from the Early 1960sStalin tried to breed a race of half-man, half-ape warriors,
Here's a Cause for Mike FarrellHe can save a young man from execution, and all it will cost him is money: According to the court statement, the relatives of the deceased have agreed to spare Fawaz’s life on the condition that blood money is given by a March 2006 deadline. The other condition was that Fawaz be banished from the area should the blood money be collected.
The convicted murderer is currently being held at the Dar Al-Ahdath Juvenile Center in Riyadh. Asked if he thought the huge amount of blood money was a way of seizing the opportunity for financial gain, Owayid told Arab News that he was thankful that the victim’s family even agreed to blood money for a chance to spare his brother’s life.
“The original amount demanded was SR5 million. But with the intervention of good people, the deceased boy’s family agreed to lower the blood money to SR3.5 million,” he said. “I cannot say for sure what is in the mind of the deceased boy’s father, but we are thankful that he gave us a chance to spare my brother’s life.”
More Moonbattery Than You Can HandleJohn Hawkins has his third annual "Worst Quotes from the Democratic Underground" up.
An Easy PredictionThere will be no calls from the HuffPo for treason prosecutions in this leak case. U.S. President George W. Bush said on Monday he presumed a Justice Department leak investigation was underway into who disclosed a secret NSA eavesdropping operation.
"My personal opinion is it was a shameful act for someone to disclose this very important program in a time of war," Bush told a news conference at which he was questioned repeatedly about the controversial operation disclosed on Friday by The new York Times.
"There's a process that goes on inside the Justice Department about leaks. I presume that process is moving forward," Bush added.Of course, that's an easy prediction; you might call it a "gimme", for the simple reason that the Valerie Plame case represents the very first time liberals have seemed interested in pursuing a treason investigation.
Death of the Original Green BeretNice tribute to General William Yarborough here. Yarborough was a gutsy combat leader, an indefatigable planner, and a rare military visionary. One of the more famous stories involving Yarborough came in the early 1960s, when he was a three-star general in change of the newly forming Special Forces at Ft. Bragg. In those days the whole concept of Special Forces was still a tough sell, particularly to the more conservative, traditional Army leadership who viewed elite units with suspicion. Some, like chief of staff of the Army General Johnson, commented that it was “inefficient to have that much talent aggregated into one unit,” and that the Army would be better served by “distributing the men among the regular Army.”
How to Write About Democrats and Republicans for the Mainstream MediaTime Magazine's "People Who Mattered" in 2005 provides a perfect example. When writing about Republicans, always note that while they have won in the past, they have done a terrible job and are bound to lose in the future: After winning re-election and claiming a mandate, the President and his No. 2 quickly squandered their political capital. Social Security reform, Iraq, Harriet Miers, Hurricane Katrina, the CIA-leak case, torture—on issue after issue, Bush and Cheney stumbled and saw their popularity drop. Although the team's numbers are improving somewhat, Republicans are facing next fall's midterm congressional elections with trepidation.When writing about incompetent Democrats, like New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, hint at the incompetence, but find a way to forgive them: Could he have done more to get his people out before Katrina hit? Probably. But once the levees broke, the mayor of New Orleans embodied the pain and frustration of his city, even cursing on the radio as he joined thousands of stranded residents in wondering why their government had failed them.Praise Republicans only for criticizing other Republicans. As President Bush tried to find his footing this year, these two Senators often proved to be more influential. McCain badgered Bush into backing his proposal to bar U.S. officials from torturing suspects abroad....When discussing moonbats like Cindy Sheehan, undercut opposition to her by mischaracterizing it: Who would have thought that this mother of a soldier killed in Iraq could spoil the President's vacation—and become spiritual leader of the antiwar camp? Keeping vigil outside Bush's Crawford, Texas, ranch for nearly a month, Sheehan became a folksy celebrity: a hero to some and a villain to others.I don't know anybody who considers her a villain. An idiot, yes. Far-Left moonbat, certainly.
Sunday, December 18, 2005
Is This The End of the Era of the Black Quarterback?--UpdatedThat may seem like a startling thing to say considering that the NFL has an abundance of starting quarterbacks who are African-American. At least, it has an abundance of black quarterbacks who would be starting if they weren't injured. Looking at the NFL's top 30 QBs in passer rating here, there are seven black quarterbacks listed. Three are on injured reserve (Culpepper, McNabb, and Leftwich). One's been benched (Anthony Wright of Baltimore) and the others are Steve McNair, Michael Vick and Aaron Brooks. Overall, these 30 QBs have a passer rating of about 83.4. The white players grade out at about 85.8, and the black players at about 78.6. And it's not like the black QBs are slipping behind in just one statistic; it's across the board. White QBs complete 61.1% of their passes, compared to 59.2% for the black QBs. Whites throw for an average of 6.81 yards per attempt as compared to 6.73 yards per attempt for black QBs (which is not a significant difference). But white QBs have thrown 4.3% of their passes for touchdowns, versus 3.6% for black QBs and only been intercepted 2.69% of the time as compared to 3.08% for black QBs. What's going on? I suspect that black quarterbacks have reached their natural saturation in the NFL, and perhaps even exceeded it. There is a natural tendency to assume that blacks should make up a high percentage of starting NFL QBs the way they make up an extremely high percentage of running backs, wide receivers and defensive players. If this were the case there would not be six black starting quarterbacks but more like 23. Well, you can see the problem with that, right? The notion that there are 17 black men who are not starting for NFL teams because of racism is ridiculous. And the fact that black quarterbacks overall are underperforming compared to white QBs indicates that perhaps black QBs are getting more opportunities, not less. Don't get me wrong here; I am not arguing that blacks cannot play the quarterback position. Donovan McNabb and Daunte Culpepper have been great players, as has McNair. Vick can't be measured solely by his passer rating and is an astonishing athlete, clearly the fastest player I have ever seen. Warren Moon was a great QB. But the notion that we are entering the era where black quarterbacks will dominate the position seems over. Indeed if you look at it, most of the good, young QBs in the league right now are white--Roethlisberger, Palmer, Brees. Leftwich looks like the good young black quarterback right now; he looks like a much better passer than Vick. I'm not sold on Eli Manning or Chris Simms yet. I should mention here too that one of the reasons I come to the conclusion that black QBs may have exceeded their natural saturation at the QB position is because the question of racism at the position was a hot one in the early 1990s and so I began tracking the white/black passer ratings and was astonished to find that there was virtually no difference in passing statistics by race over a three year period. Indeed the statistics of black quarterbacks and white QBs were eerily similar in quality back then. Update: An anonymous commenter asks, "Why even make an issue of it? Are you on Rush's vitamins?" Answer: First of all, Rush was right on his major point, that the media are eager to annoint the "Great Black Hope" at quarterback. He was wrong on his minor point, that Donovan McNabb was never all that good. McNabb is a fine player who has had some excellent seasons, and anybody looking at McNabb's first three seasons (which were in the book when Rush made his comments), would have no trouble projecting McNabb as likely to develop into one of the best players in the league, which he certainly was in 2004. He's thrown more than two touchdowns for every interception in his career, a ratio that if maintained will be an excellent argument for his induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. He's now won seven postseason games as a starting quarterback, which is four more than Peyton Manning at this point in their respective careers. But I write about it because it interests me. Your results may vary.
NFL Week 15 Sunday GamesAnd then there were none--no undefeated teams, that is. I was watching the Indy-SD game and was stunned that the Colts kept Manning in the game after first couple series of downs; that was a risky choice for Dungy. You know how it is; if the Colts go on to win the Super Bowl nobody would have criticized him for resting Manning after the first half, but for sure they would have criticized him brutally if Peyton had gotten hurt. The Cardinals once again lived down to expectations, losing to the hapless Houston Texans (who may have blown their chances for the first pick in the draft). Last year the worst team in the league was San Francisco, and the Cardinals gave them their only two wins. SF is still one of the worst teams in the league but they gave Jacksonville quite a tussle today. Washington flattened the Cowboys in the afternoon game, putting the 'Skins in decent position for the playoffs. They win any tie-breakers over Dallas and the Bears based on head-to-head wins and have a great 8-2 conference record which should serve them well against some of the other teams. They lost to Tampa Bay, so they don't want to be tied with the Bucs for the last slot. It would help them greatly if Chicago could beat Atlanta in the late game tonight. Here's the playoff picture as it appears now: AFC Playoff Seeds 1. Indianapolis (locked in) 2/3. Denver/Cincinnati Right now Denver has the better W/L percentage in the conference at 8-2. 4. New England. Cannot move down; unlikely to move up. 5. Jacksonville (virtually certain; they are a game ahead of the other teams contending for wild card spots and still have about as easy a schedule as can be imagined, despite their lackluster performance today). 6. Pittsburgh/San Diego/KC. The Steelers beat the Chargers in San Diego, so they have the edge. They also have a comparatively easy schedule, at Cleveland and home versus the Lions. The Bolts have to travel to KC and then host Denver. Kansas City is a game behind, but they could slip in if they win out and Pittsburgh loses a game. NFC Playoff Seeds 1. Seattle: (virtually locked in; they need a win or a Chicago loss). Still a scrum for the rest of the five playoff spots; nobody's in and a whole lotta teams are contending for five spots. The Giants and Carolina have 10 wins, which puts them in a much better position than Tampa Bay with 9 and Dallas, Washington, Minnesota and Atlanta (pending tonight) with 8. Chicago will have either 9 or 10 after tonight. Controlling their own destiny: Chicago would take the #2 seed by winning out. As I write this though, that's a harder prospect for them because they have to win tonight's game as well. New York and Carolina look like they could get down to something called "Strength of Victory" which the tiebreaker rules shown here don't define. Washington looks in good shape if Chicago beats Atlanta; otherwise they need help. If Chicago loses tonight, then Minnesota would be still alive for as high as the #4 seed. Update: Chicago seems to be winning, so Washington now controls its own destiny; if they win out they will be in the playoffs.
NFL Week 15 SaturdayThe NFL's playoff contenders all must have shuddered as they watched New England thoroughly demolish Tampa Bay yesterday. Tom Brady looked like postseason Tom, the defense did not allow a point. Tampa Bay's longest drive in terms of distance was 30 yards, in terms of time 4:50, and in terms of plays was 9. Their furthest penetration into Patriots' territory was the New England 33. The scary thing for Indianapolis is that if things go the way they look, they will be hosting Brady and Company on Divisional Weekend. The positioning of the teams did not change much yesterday. The Giants look a little more secure for the NFC East and the Chiefs a little shakier for the final wild card spot. The intriguing matchup today is San Diego at Indianapolis. This might be the last time the Colts play a team with something to fight for before the postseason. Next week's opponent, Seattle, could have home field advantage wrapped up after today with a win at Tennessee and a Bears' loss to the Falcons. The Steelers and Vikings play what looks likely to be an elimination game for the losers, with the Steelers having a slightly better chance of surviving a defeat.
Steyn: Defeaticrats or Zarqawi? Hard to Tell Them ApartAt the top of his game: One day Iraq will be a G7 member hosting the Olympics in the world's No. 1 luxury vacation resort of Fallujah, and the Defeaticrat Party will still be running around screaming it's a quagmire. It's not just that Iraq is going better than expected, but that it's a huge success that's being very deftly managed: The timeframe imposed on the democratic process turns out to have worked very well -- the transfer of sovereignty, the vote on a constitutional assembly, the ratification of the constitution, the vote for a legislature -- and, with the benefit of hindsight, it now looks like an ingeniously constructed way to bring the various parties on board in the right order: first the Kurds, then the Shia, now the Sunni. That doesn't leave many folks over on the other side except Zarqawi and Dean. What do the two have in common? They're both foreigners, neither of whom have the slightest interest in the Iraqi people.
Saturday, December 17, 2005
Powell: CIA Hid Doubts on WMD IntelligenceThis is not going to please the idiot chorus: THE US administration was never told of doubts about the secret intelligence used to justify war with Iraq, former secretary of state Colin Powell told the BBC in an interview to be broadcast on Sunday night.
Mr Powell, who argued the case for military action against Saddam Hussein in the UN in 2003, told BBC News 24 television he was "deeply disappointed in what the intelligence community had presented to me and to the rest of us."
"What really upset me more than anything else was that there were people in the intelligence community that had doubts about some of this sourcing, but those doubts never surfaced to us," he said.
Mr Powell's comments follow US President George W. Bush's acceptance earlier this week of responsibility for going to war on intelligence, much of which "turned out to be wrong".
Why Anti-Globalists?--Updated!The subject comes up in this interesting article: And then we get to the inevitable question-and-answer session. The most awkward and difficult question comes from a young lady: “If it seems so obvious to everyone that globalisation is a force for the good, why is there so much opposition to it in rich as well as poor countries?” This remains a puzzle. The protestors in Hong Kong, the disrupters in Seattle, their fellow marchers elsewhere, claim to talk on behalf of the poor.
Yet without free trade, the foundation of globalisation, China’s poor would have remained poor and India would have easily acquired sub-Saharan status. The overwhelming beneficiaries of free trade are poor people. This is not in dispute. And yet there seems to be some persistent fear, some inchoate anxiety that will not go away. Not all the shrill anti-globalisation types are loonies. What exactly is their concern?
Rajiv Dubey from the audience may have got it right. There is a lobby in rich countries that pretends to be pro-poor, but in fact is elitist. They are cosy and comfortable. Wal-Mart, seen as an egregious symbol of globalisation, upsets their refined upper class sensitivities. That Wal-Mart may be enriching poor Chinese and making erstwhile luxuries affordable to poor Americans is dismissed with all the disdain that privileged intellectuals can summon!
What is puzzling is why the intellectual “poshocracy” of poor countries going along with this anti-globalisation posture knowing full well that opting out of world trade flows would remove the slim hope that we will dig ourselves out of poverty in our lifetimes. Clearly, this has something to do not with absolute improvements in economies, but with relative shares of the pie. It is the basic law of capitalism that a pot-bellied pan-chewing businessman who wears safari suits and who is in the “import-export” business will on average take more risk and on average will make a lot more money than a PhD in multi-cultural anthropology from JNU. And this is from the perspective of the left-wing intellectual both unpalatable and unjust.
The intellectuals of communist China don’t seem to have a problem with this. It is only the leftist elites of the West and their counterparts in India who seem to feel this way!In the US and other modern economies the problem with globalization is the implication for socialism. Socialism for the American Left always stops at the Rio Grande, because it is easier to convince people they should believe in a system that would redistribute the wealth of America to working class Americans. The minute you extend that system elsewhere, it become apparent to the working class that some of their wealth will be redistributed to the poor of other countries. Update: The antiglobalization nuts rioted in Hong Kong today. Hundreds of protesters broke through police lines and came close to storming into the WTO's meeting today, but security forces scattered the crowd with tear gas in central Hong Kong.
It was the worst street violence the city has experienced in decades, and police quickly locked the doors to the convention center, where trade ministers from around the world were in the final hours of a six-day negotiation. Apparently most of the protestors are from South Korea, and many of them are described as farmers.
Friday, December 16, 2005
Senate Declines to Reauthorize Patriot Act-UpdatedNice to see the Democrats aren't even pretending to be patriots anymore. Five Republicans voted against the reauthorization: Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, John Sununu of New Hampshire, Craig and Frist. Two Democrats voted to extend the provisions: Sens. Tim Johnson of South Dakota and Ben Nelson of Nebraska.
Frist, R-Tenn., changed his vote at the last moment after seeing the critics would win. He decided to vote with the prevailing side so he could call for a new vote at any time. He immediately objected to an offer of a short term extension from Democrats, saying the House won't approve it and the president won't sign it.Update: Captain Ed live-blogged the president's weekly broadcast, which concerned the filibuster of the Patriot Act. Surprise! Bush went on the offensive on the NSA leak -- he stresses that the NSA only worked on international communications, not domestic. He called the leak "illegal", and he took complete responsibility for the program.It may seem hard to remember, but in the immediate aftermath of John Kerry's defeat in 2004, Michael Moore and the idiots at Moo-On were chastened by the experience. Moore even showed up on TV in a business suit (okay, a business tent). Peter Beinart, citing the post-WWII decision by the liberals to oppose communism and expel the communists in their midst, called for a similar purge of Moore and Move-On. Beinart referred to them as "the softs", and pointed out that they believe that terrorism and radical Islam do not pose a threat to the United States, just as Henry Wallace and many "progressives" did not believe in the Soviet threat in the late 1940s. Beinart has lost that battle. It is now apparent that "the softs" have taken over the Democrats. As an aside regarding Henry Wallace, check out this post by Sheldon Drobny at the HuffPo. It couldn't be more plain that Drobny believes that the Soviets were no threat to America: Wallace was a liberal in the tradition of FDR because he supported an unproven yet reasonable idea that good relations with the post war Soviet Union was a good idea, something that conservatives abhorred. The Soviet system was perceived as a threat to capitalism in the minds of the conservatives. However, the reality was that the Russians had sacrificed dearly during the war and were entitled to a chance for a cooperative relationship.Of course, Wallace himself later repented his softness on communism in his 1952 book, Why I Was Wrong.
A Caption Contest With (Gasp!) A Prize!There are lots of terrific caption contests out there, but Punch is upping the ante. They are giving away a copy of Michelle Malkin's new book, Unhinged, as the prize.
RFK Jr., Explains Why Wind Power Will Never WorkIt's refreshing to hear a liberal admit that wind power is not quite ready for primetime: Environmental groups have been enticed by Cape Wind, but they should be wary of lending support to energy companies that are trying to privatize the commons - in this case 24 square miles of a heavily used waterway. And because offshore wind costs twice as much as gas-fired electricity and significantly more than onshore wind, the project is financially feasible only because the federal and state governments have promised $241 million in subsidies.
Cape Wind's proposal involves construction of 130 giant turbines whose windmill arms will reach 417 feet above the water and be visible for up to 26 miles. These turbines are less than six miles from shore and would be seen from Cape Cod, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket. Hundreds of flashing lights to warn airplanes away from the turbines will steal the stars and nighttime views. The noise of the turbines will be audible onshore. A transformer substation rising 100 feet above the sound would house giant helicopter pads and 40,000 gallons of potentially hazardous oil.
According to the Massachusetts Historical Commission, the project will damage the views from 16 historic sites and lighthouses on the cape and nearby islands. The Humane Society estimates the whirling turbines could every year kill thousands of migrating songbirds and sea ducks.Of course, Kennedy isn't really saying that wind power in general won't work; just the project proposed for near his family compound. Cape Wind responds to Kennedy here. Captain's Ed has his take here, including a hilarious title. Hat Tip: Ankle-Biters
Saint Howard of DeanOur buddy Chris does a great photoshop for this contest.
News Flash: US Government Spying on Americans?Michelle Malkin has a huge post on this today. Those who actually read the piece will note that the paper must grudgingly acknowledge that it is talking about the NSA's monitoring of international communications (e-mails, cellphone calls, etc.) only; the agency still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.Of course, those of us who've been getting those insistent little emails from the FBI and CIA about how "You Visit Illegal Websites" have known the feds have been spying on them for a long time. Now, if you'll excuse me, I want to download those Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie videos with the special download manager. ;)
Thursday, December 15, 2005
The Reality-Based Community? Part LXIIRasmussen Polling reports that 32% of the American people support impeachment of President Bush. Ah, but the devil is in the details. Get this: However, just 30% of Americans would be more likely to vote for a Congressional candidate who promised to work for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney. Fifty-two percent (52%) would be less likely to vote for such a candidate.The poll was commissioned by the After Downing Street jokers. Moron Impeachment from DYKWIA himself. Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin
I'm Glad I'm a ConservativeIt saves me from moral dilemmas like this: The choice between real and not real is especially painful for some environmentalists. Either they desecrate the Earth and chop down a tree or buy a fake one that's full of landfill-clogging polyvinyl chloride, which is kryptonite to greenies.
Salting a tree with pesticides, then chopping it down for a mere two weeks of display time isn't a great option. Ask San Francisco forest activist Kristi Chester Vance. When she invited friends to a party at her place this month, she warned her environmentalist pals on the guest list:
There will be a tree here.
"I'm a forest activist, and there's a dead tree in the middle of my house," she said. "Geez, if I have a tree, why not nail the last snow leopard to the wall, too?"Mmmm, snow leopards! I hear they taste just like chicken!
Ryan McGlothlin, Hero And he didn't vote for Bush: Ryan McGlothlin was set for life: a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the College of William & Mary, a doctoral research fellowship in chemistry at Stanford University, a bright future on the cutting edge of science.
He gave it all up to join the Marines. On Nov. 16, at age 26, he was killed in Iraq.This is a terrific story on several levels. First, it debunks the "ignorant and taken advantage of by military recruiters" meme that the Left spreads about the members of our armed forces. Second, it shows an honest young man, who despite voting against Bush clearly believed in the Iraq mission: "I know this war is not the most popular one back home, but people must understand that to pull out before the Iraqi army is fully ready to assume responsibility for the security of their own country is not only irresponsible of us but would ensure the persistence of terrorism," Ryan wrote. "If you walk through these cities and see how terrified the Iraqi citizens are of the terrorists and how thankful they are that we finally came to their cities, you could not possibly consider doing this job incompletely."Obviously, the story would be improved if Ryan had lived. But it is young men like him who represent the best this country has to offer.
Dead People Have The Right To Vote Too!GOP & the City apparently wants to disenfrancise those who have shuffled off the mortal coil.
Moron the Huffington PostI'm beginning to get Arianna's vision. Collect all the fish in one comfined, circular area, so that we conservatives can get out our shotguns and start blasting. Today's first fish is Emily Weinstein, who explains why she never stands for the National Anthem. I first refused to pledge to the flag during the first Gulf War. In my seventh-grade heart I felt no allegience to the flag of the United States of America, nor to the republic for which it stands, because I did not believe it had ever provided liberty and justice for all. The last thirteen years have provided very little evidence to encourage me that the American flag is one I should stand for, as it increasingly becomes one the world needs to stand up to.
Some say that America has been hijacked by the current administration, that its actions defy the spirit and the law of what is truly American. That may be true, but when a bomb falls on a family in Iraq, the United States flag is on it. When a human being is publicly executed in a prison, the United States flag flies proudly outside it. And when a human being is secretly tortured in a prison, the United States flag flies outside it, too.
I won't stand for the American flag because I won't stand for what is done in its name. I won't stand for the current war in Iraq, I won't stand for the last war in Iraq. I won't stand for all the wars before that. I won't stand for its selectively faulty elecotral process and I won't stand for its unelected, renegade government. I won't stand for its medieval attitude towards sexuality and privacy, for its violent misinterpretation of Christianity, for its refusal to deal sanely with AIDS and all other global health crises, for its environmentally suicidal stance on climate change, for the hypocrisy of its practices, for the torture of its prisoners, for its executions and its drug wars and its oil wars. I won't stand for any of these things, and I won't stand for the United States of America, or its flag or its anthem, until they change.Amazingly, the responses to her diatribe are virtually all positive. Tom Bevan has more on this ridiculous post. The second fish in the barrel is an old nemesis, Mr Jane Fonda himself, Tom Hayden. Tom wants us to know about the nobility of Tookie Williams: Tookie Williams went to his death with all the dignity and serenity that is possible in an execution process that is meant to terrify and degrade. There are many possible reasons for his inner strength. To deny his tormenters any satisfaction could be one. But I think he believed that if he had to die, it was a meaningful martyrdom that sent a lasting message to the world.Also catch Hayden's idiotic title: Tookie Williams, R.I.P. (Revolution in Progress). One would think that even a dolt like Hayden would know that talking about "The Revolution" at this point is cornball and trite, not hip and edgy like it was circa 1968. Hayden repeats several lies about Williams' conviction, like the "all-white" jury that supposedly convicted him. In fact, a black man was on the jury, whom Tookie claimed looked Filipino to him. Even if we accept Williams' characterization of the man, that's not "all-white". Hayden also claims that no physical evidence tied Tookie to the crime. Except, of course, that his shotgun was used to commit the crimes.
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Live Election Coverage from Pajamas MediaWhile others are mocking PJM, the big guys have been busy setting up live coverage from eight different regions of Iraq. Early posts are already trickling in from Omar at Iraq the Model. Stay tuned to Pajamas Media for updates!
A Bad Argument Against Capital PunishmentSteve Anderson, writing in the HuffPo: When I asked the same guy about the Commandment: Thou shalt not kill, he responded that that was not the right translation. It should say 'murder'. When I pointed out that the Bible on the pulpit of his own church used the word 'kill', he quickly changed the subject.It's kind of refreshing to see a liberal suggesting that government ought to pay attention to the Bible, but you know how it is: when the Bible is convenient for the argument, pull it out; when it's inconvenient, shriek about the need for separation of church and state. But it's a bad argument for other reasons. First, and most obviously is the argument that killing is acceptable in some instances. We all accept that killing in self-defense is justified. If a policeman sees a chance to shoot a suicide bomber, we acknowledge his right to do so. And if a soldier is fighting in a war, no church would say he has committed a sin by killing the enemy. There is another problem, and this reveals a central flaw in liberalism. It's that they see the Bible and its teachings as prescriptive to society, but not individuals. We hear this all the time from the "Jesus was a liberal" crowd. But in fact the Bible is prescriptive to the individual. The commandments read "Thou shalt not...", and not "The state shalt not...." We all understand that society has to do the dirty work for us in a lot of ways. If I were to decide that my neighbor had stolen my car, nobody would defend my right to kidnap him and hold him in my cellar so that he wouldn't steal from me again. However, if society decides that my neighbor had stolen the car, we all understand they have the right to lock him up so he won't do it again. La Shawn Barber has some related thoughts, of course expressed more eloquently than I can manage. The Bible makes distinctions between individual moral responsibility and governmental responsibility. To believers Christ says, “If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also….Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” The Sermon on the Mount, from which these words come, is a presentation of Christian discipleship, not a call to pacifism. Jesus was referring to our individual persecution as believers. We’re to pray for those who mock or harass us for our beliefs, but we are not prohibited from defending ourselves or others against the threat of robbers, rapists, murderers, etc., as permitted by law.
NFL Playoffs LookThought I'd take a look at the postseason picture this morning. There are six playoff spots in each conference, with four division winners and two wild cards. Here's how the picture looks as of now: AFC 1. Indianapolis (clinched #1 seed and home field advantage throughout the playoffs). 2/3. Denver/Cincinnati (have not clinched anything, but each is two games up for the division lead) 4. New England (have not clinched but appear to be solidly set for the #4 seed; they are up two for the division and have beaten Buffalo twice, so the Bills would need to win out and for New England to lose out. They appear to be unlikely to catch Denver or Cincinnati for the #3 seed, as they are two games behind and have four conference losses to the Broncos' two and the Bengals three AFC defeats. They would also lose a tie-breaker to the Broncos on head-to-head. 5. Jacksonville. Appears to be sitting tight in the first wildcard position. They're a game ahead of the other wc contenders and have a very easy schedule coming up: San Francisco and Tennessee at home, and Houston on the road. Those teams are a combined 7-32 for the year. 6. Pittsburgh/Kansas City/San Diego. All are 8-5, but the Steelers need some help. They have not and will not play KC or SD, so the tie-breaker for them will come down to conference games, where they are 6-5, while the Chiefs are 7-3 and the Chargers 6-3. Fortunately, the Steelers have an easier schedule ahead, and can look forward to either KC or SD losing in the next to last game, as those teams face each other. A lot will be determined this weekend as all three face tests: Pittsburgh at Minnesota, KC at the NY Giants, and San Diego at Indianapolis. NFC 1. Seattle. The Seahawks have clinched at least a Division title and cannot be lower than a fourth seed. They look reasonably good for the #1 seed as they are two games in front and have beaten the Giants, Falcons and Cowboys, three of the teams that could tie them. They will have a conference record edge over Carolina and Tampa Bay. Chicago is the only team that has a realistic chance of nosing them out without the Seahawks losing all three remaining games. After that, the NFC is a complete scrum. Nobody is safe, and a lot of teams are in the mix. The Giants, Chicago, Tampa Bay and Carolina all have 9-4 records, while Dallas, Minnesota and Atlanta can't be counted out at 8-5. Washington still has a shot at 7-6, although they clearly need to run the table. Three of those teams will not be playing in the Super Bowl Tournament. This weekend will tell the story for a lot of those teams. Carolina seems to have the easiest game, visiting the 3-10 Saints, but the rest of them have tough tests. Atlanta at Chicago will be a key NFC matchup, as will Dallas at Washington. Atlanta has the toughest schedule, as all of their remaining games are against teams that are 9-4 currently. Of course, if they win out, they'll be picking up some tie-breakers as well Nobody has a cakewalk like Jacksonville's remaining schedule; all the other NFC contenders will face two teams with winning records in their remaining three games.
Iran Participates in Democratic ElectionUnfortunately, it's in Iraq's election. Less than two days before nationwide elections, the Iraqi border police seized a tanker on Tuesday that had just crossed from Iran filled with thousands of forged ballots, an official at the Interior Ministry said.
The tanker was seized in the evening by agents with the American-trained border protection force at the Iraqi town of Badra, after crossing at Munthirya on the Iraqi border, the official said. According to the Iraqi official, the border police found several thousand partly completed ballots inside.Reuters and Iraq's head of border security deny the story though. "This is all a lie," said Lieutenant General Ahmed al-Khafaji, the chief of the U.S.-trained force which has responsibility for all Iraq's borders.
"I heard this yesterday and I checked all the border crossings right away. The borders are all closed anyway," he told Reuters.
Iraq's frontiers are closed for the period of the election.
"I contacted all the border crossing points and there was no report of any such incident," Khafaji said.
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
The Amazing Race Family Edition FinaleFrom the ranch where the last Pit Stop was, the families have to make their way to Montreal. They are given tickets but are also free to change their reservations if they see another route. The Bransons apparently steal a march on everybody by getting a flight that arrives ten minutes earlier, at 5:00. But the Linzes and Weavers do better, with a flight that gets them in at 4:10. Then it turns out that the Branson flight is way behind schedule, and will get in at 5:25, over an hour after the other teams. They are travel to the underground city in Montreal, where they have to search the CDP tunnel for a cluebox. The Weavers manage somehow to commandeer a cab, while the Linzes are waiting in a line. They quickly find the cluebox, which is concealed from the obvious direction, but right out in the open if the teams double back. The Linzes and the Bransons both miss it the first time and have to retrace their steps. Detour: Slide It or Roll It. In Slide It, each member of the the teams has to slide a curling stone into a scoring zone. The Weavers are in love with their cab driver, Ted, even though he at first misses the location of the arena where they are to attempt Slide It. However, apparently this is a common mistake as the Linzes end up in the same place. The Weavers handle Slide It well, and leave the arena before the Linzes arrive. Meanwhile, the Bransons have chosen Roll It, which requires them to roll a log along some wooden rails with the help of a special tool. Next stop: the American Pavillion at the Montreal Expo. I visited the Expo around 1976, and the American Pavillion at the time was considered too dangerous for people to approach or enter; apparently it was falling apart. However, somebody must have fixed it up, because the teams have to enter it and climb five flights of stairs to the top. The Weavers arrive first, followed by the Linzes and Bransons. From there, the teams head to an industrial building and enter through Porte J. Of course, being fluent en Francaise, I know that Porte J is a door. Sadly, this does not seem to confuse anybody, so I wouldn't pick up any time on them. Porte J turns out to lead to a trapeze artist academy, where one member of each team must do a little aerial maneuver to be caught by a professional trapezist. Of course, here is where Brainster would say to somebody else in the family, "Why don't you do it?" Not afraid of heights, but I am a big man and this calls for somebody lighter. The Weavers pick Rollie and he aces it, completing the maneuver in one attempt. He really has performed terrifically in this race, handling everything with apparent ease. The Linzes pick somebody else (Alex?) and we hear numerous discussions of how fat his ass is. Sure enough he can complete the maneuver, but never quite gets caught. The Bransons catch up, but unfortunately they are watching as the trapezist and Alex finally get it right. The youngest Branson daughter tries and apparently aces it. Next stop: the Stad Olympique, which is (I believe) where the Montreal Expos used to play before they moved to Washington. Teams must drive golf carts around the stadium to find the only entrance that a vehicle can make it through. Once again the order is Weavers, Linzes, Bransons. But the clue here is very tough; find the three departure times scattered throughout a 55,000 seat stadium. The teams spend some time searching, then realize that this is going to be a long effort and they need to pay off their cabbies. The Linzes find their departure time first: 5:45. The Bransons find theirs: 5:50. The Weavers appear to have given up in discouragement, but that's just to carry us through the break. Sure enough, when they come back the mother gets up and the family starts looking again and Rollie (you da man!) finds their time: 5:55. They get on little commuter airplanes leaving at those times, and head to Toronto, where they must find the CN Building. This is one of the most distinctive buildings in the world, a tall, elongated pyramid building with a bulge near the top:  Very reminiscent of the Space Needle in Seattle. Once there, the teams must search the city below for the next Pit Stop. The Linzes and Bransons leave simultaneously, while the Weavers are a little behind at this point. Next stop is a waterfront cluebox. Detour: Ship or Shoe. In ship, teams sail (with the help of a sailor) to a ship, where they must climb the rigging to the top to get a pennant. In Shoe, they visit a shoe museum where they must try to find the one barefooted woman out of a hundred in the museum whose foot will fit the shoe they have picked. Phil emphasizes that Ship should be faster, but for teams without nerve the Shoe might work out. The Linzes and Weavers pick Ship, while the Bransons pick shoe. We see the Linzes and Weavers making good time; at one point the sailor says that the Weavers have done perfectly. The Bransons meanwhile are despairing of ever finding the woman they're looking for. Could they have made a mistake? No, it's just another psyche to get us through a commercial. The Linzes get their pennnant and the next clue. The Bransons finally find the right woman and get their clue. And the Weavers apparently drop off the radar screen for no apparent reason. After being reasonably close on the sail to the ship, suddenly they're far behind. Rollie (great job kid) climbs the rigging and drops the pennant. Fortunately it lands on the dock and there's no penalty (apparently). They're off to Queenston, where they board extremely fast boats that take them to the penultimate cluebox. There's no real challenge here, and teams arrive and depart in pretty much the same relative time situation, but it is apparent that the Weavers have fallen far behind. Next stop: Lewiston, New York, the final location in this race. The Linzes and Bransons appear to be neck and neck. The final Road Block is to assemble a map of North America. Wally goes against one of the Linz boys. It appears very close, but Wally leaves one piece out and must run back. Meanwhile the Linzes make their victory run to the grand prize. I'd have to look back at the previous recaps, but I don't think they ever won a leg before this. I am disappointed; I really thought the Weavers had overcome a lot. The Linzes still seem like ciphers to me; I could walk down the street past them and not realize who I was looking at. I liked the Bransons; the girls were cute and old Wally came through when he was called upon. Still it was a terrific season and an entertaining trip around North America. It was cool that they hit upon so many areas where I had been; I really don't consider myself much of a traveler, but my mom loved to visit new places and I occasionally joined up with her and my dad for the trip to Monument Valley, for example. As always, check out Viking Pundit's race recap for more. Eric was rooting for the Linzes, but even he says "Who Dey?" And kris at Dummocrats apparently saw the unrated DVD edition: Megan Linz balling at the finish line.
On Faith, Logic, and Other IssuesI don't usually blog on religion or religious topics, but I couldn't resist taking a poke at this argument: When we have reasons for what we believe, we have no need of faith; when we have no reasons, or bad ones, we have lost our connection to the world and to one another. Atheism is nothing more than a commitment to the most basic standard of intellectual honesty: One’s convictions should be proportional to one’s evidence. Pretending to be certain when one isn’t—indeed, pretending to be certain about propositions for which no evidence is even conceivable—is both an intellectual and a moral failing. Only the atheist has realized this. The atheist is simply a person who has perceived the lies of religion and refused to make them his own.Now, I am not a terribly religious person myself, but that strikes me as a bunch of self-congratulatory nonsense. Why? Because it seems obvious to me that there is less evidence for the absence of God than there is for his existence. Let's leave aside the question of whether individual religions are actually attuned to His thinking. What is the evidence for the non-existence of some creator? Ask an atheist and they will bring up the existence of evil. Somewhere in the world a man has abducted a little girl. Soon he will rape, torture and kill her. If an atrocity of this kind is not occurring at precisely this moment, it will happen in a few hours, or days at most. Such is the confidence we can draw from the statistical laws that govern the lives of 6 billion human beings. The same statistics also suggest that this girl’s parents believe—at this very moment—that an all-powerful and all-loving God is watching over them and their family. Are they right to believe this? Is it good that they believe this?Of course there are multiple arguments against this. The mostly commonly used one is that evil exists because God created us with the free will to choose good or evil. One could also argue, as did The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, that Earth was created by a couple of white mice to be a giant computer, and that effectively we are referring to the white mice when we say God, and that the mice included evil because it was necessary for the program to work. Okay, say the doubters, what about evolution! Hah! It exists, and therefore your God never made man in his image. But of course this doesn't rule out the white mice version of God; it was just a lot more sophisticated computer that slowly built itself from the building blocks of life. And many believers in religion have been able to accept evolution as fact without becoming atheists. One can believe in Genesis as being an allegory. Or one can throw out the entire Old Testament and just go from the teachings of Christ. Indeed, if you look hard at the arguments against God, they mostly amount to arguments against particular religions. Hindus won't eat beef, while Jews won't eat pork; hence religion must be bunkum. But of course proving contradictions between individual religions doesn't disprove God. We could easily argue that they both have it wrong, as a Christian could do when ordering a bacon cheeseburger, or that one has it right and the other wrong, or even that God makes different rules for different people. Arguments in favor of God, however, are not so easily dismissed. There is the first cause argument. Suppose we accept evolution and thus trace our ancestry back to single-celled amoebas swimming in the primordial soup, and that the Earth along with the rest of the universe, was created as a result of the Big Bang. Who or what caused the Big Bang? What existed before that? What caused that to exist? Keep tracking it back and eventually the atheist will say, "Nothing!" or "We can't fathom it." But that's not terribly logical. You don't get something (and the universe is a rather large something) out of nothing. And if you believe in a purely mechanistic universe where everything has a logical cause, you can't suddenly abandon that logic at a certain point and say "We can't fathom it". As pointed out by several of the commenters here, Atheism amounts to a faith itself--a faith in the non-existence of God. As such it has similar aspects to organized religions. First, it attempts to recruit new converts to the faith. That the referenced article is called "The Atheist Manifesto", should be clear evidence that recruitment is going on. There was a funny tune back in the 1960s by Tom Lehrer called National Brotherhood Week: Oh, the Protestants hate the Catholics
And the Catholics hate the Protestants,
And the Hindus hate the Muslims,
And everybody hates the Jews.To which I would add, "And the Atheists hate them all!" We can all agree that in the past there has been too much intolerance between religions. But, like those religions, Atheists express their intolerance at any mention of other religions. We see it all the time in current public life, but the Atheist Manifesto conveniently spells it out: It seems profoundly unlikely that we will heal the divisions in our world simply by multiplying the opportunities for interfaith dialogue. The endgame for civilization cannot be mutual tolerance of patent irrationality.Hat Tip to News Bump, which is a UK-based news service that bumps good stories and posts by blogs up to the top. It's an interesting concept; time will tell how it works out in practice.
|
|
